Skip to main content

Full text of "The private character of Queen Elizabeth"

See other formats






Digitized by Microsoft® 

Cornell University Library 
DA 356.C44 1922 

The private character of Queen Elizabeth 

3 1924 021 148 857 

Date Due 

— K[ftY -H"^'^!^ If ^ 




bbUCW. ■' 





: , :"-^ 




Digitized by Microsoft® 

This book was digitized by Microsoft Corporation in 

cooperation witli Cornell University Libraries, 2007. 

You may use and print this copy in limited quantity 

for your personal purposes, but may not distribute or 

provide access to it (or modified or partial versions of it) 

for revenue-generating or other commercial purposes. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Untouched enlargement fjomthe original miniature by Nicholas Hilliard in ilie Duke of Buccleuch's 
Collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



LL.B,, M.R.I., F.R.H.S., F-S-aTf^R-CS., F.R.A.S. 






Digitized by Microsoft® 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


WHEN, eight years ago, I set aside all other a£Fairs 
to write a biography of Queen Elizabeth, I 
planned the usual chronological work ' that, 
volume by volume, would unfold her career 
from her birth to her death — this despite the warning of Sir 
Anthony Weldon, who, in A Brief History of the Kings of 
England (1652), omitted all particulars of the reign of Elizabeth 
with this cryptic explanation : " If why I omit . . . Queen 
Elizabeth, I answer I have nothing to do with women, and I wish 
I never had." 

I have, however, never been able to control the MS. of this 
publication. The material for it, as it gradually came to light, 
demanded a treatment other than that provided by the original 
scheme ; and in the end I have had to submit to the most radical 
alterations of it. The same will probably be said of the succeed- 
ing volume. 

At the outset I was led to a most critical reading of Froude 
and Lingard — a comparison of their more important statements 
with the facts, and a weighing of their interpretation and treat- 
ment of them. 

In this I made the usual error of approaching Froude's twelve 
volumes from the standpoint of the ordinary reader — that is, as a 
continuous story of the Reformation period. Taken in this 
fashion, Froude is irresistible. He has had few equals as a writer 
of attractive English prose, and as an alluring historian none at all, 
except Macaulay. His many thousand pages are as fascinating as 
the best of romances. But even his one biographer admits that if 
history be the story of things as they were, Froude was not an 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


historian.* His basic theme — the attempted sanctification of 
Henry VIII., probably the most despised monarch of all the ages 
— is grotesque ; and when he is driven by his task to demonstrate 
that Anne Boleyn was destroyed by an equitable, justifiable, 
civilized process, at a time when the Government selected the 
juries, when Prime Ministers of England — although then under 
other title — left in their own handwriting minutes ordering the 
" trial and execution " of inconvenient gentlemen, when heads 
were falling by mere Act of Parliament whose members were 
Government minions, he involves himself in a very morass of 
illusion ; and when Froude's erroneous characterization of the 
mother was employed by him, and others, to attack the daughter 
Elizabeth, even fantasy was carried too far. 

Moreover, I could not admit a solid basis for Froude's unique 
theory that Elizabeth was not to be credited with her successes, 
but only with her failures ; that Cecil was the Great Queen, and 
Elizabeth merely a figurehead. The fact that everybody the 
world over among her contemporaries had gathered an exactly 
contrary impression had not the slightest influence upon Froude. 
His reasoning powers were as unable to save him from this as 
from applauding the decapitation of Anne Boleyn mainly, if not 
wholly, for adultery committed while married to Henry VIII. by 
a ceremony which he had declared void ab initio ! 

I am of the opinion that what misled Froude was his inherent 
belief that — ^just because she was such — no woman could possibly 
do what all her contemporaries and all posterity had always said 
Elizabeth accomplished. When she did the right thing against 
Burghley's advice and intense, prolonged opposition, as she did in 
her Scottish policy, which made Great Britain and was one of the 
greatest glories of her career — and time acknowledges she was 
indubitably and always correct and Burghley mistaken — Froude, 

' " < It has not yet become auperfluous to insist,' said the Regius Professor of 
Modern History in the University of Cambridge . . . 'that history is a science, no 
less and no more,' If this view is correct and exclusive, Froude was no historian. . . . 
A mere chronicler of events he would hardly have cared to be. He had a doctrine to 
propound, a gospel to preach." — Life of Froude, Herbert Paul, p. 72. 

To the same effect is the dictum of Prof. A F. Bollard : " Froude , . . has failed to 
convince students of the fidelity of his pictures or the truth of his conclusions ; ... he 
compares the facts of history to the letters of the alphabet, which by selection and 
arrangement can be made to spell anything. He derided the claims of history to be 
treated as a science, and concerned himself exclusively with its dramatic aspect. . . . 
Froude himself admits that the dramatic poet is not bound when it is inconvenient to 
what may be called the accidents of facts." — D.N.B,, Suppl. vol, ii. p. z6i. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


unable — because he had already detailed Burghley's enmity 
thereto — to ascribe the victory to that minister, has to say that 
her policy " was no result of any far-sighted or generous calcula- 
tion " or " wisdom," but " the fortune which stood her friend so 

Anybody, anything, so long as it be not a woman, would serve 
Froude. He could have denied the ability of any ruler who ever 
lived, by such pettiness. I cannot find the trace of a modern idea 
in him. 

The unexpected thing is that, while making Elizabeth out to 
be a fool, he makes her out to be chaste — a choice which, to his 
astonishment, might not have met with much enthusiasm from 
the lady most concerned. " The attacks," he says, " of Lingard 
and others upon her personal purity I believe to be gratuitous 
and unjust. I intended, as briefly as I could, to undertake her 
vindication." * 

Froude's theory that Cecil was the real queen had, however, 
one advantage. Other historians were content to account for 
Leicester's prominence and overpowering success as the result of 
licentious relations with the Queen ; but, as we have just seen, 
Froude not being of this opinion, had to find another explanation ; 
and so, after suppressing, belittling, and misrepresenting every- 
thing that Leicester did, Froude accounts for Leicester's astound- 
ingly successful career by making out Elizabeth so devoid of 
ability as always to have been deceived by him whom everybody 
else despised and saw through. 

If Henry VIII. is to be canonized, Anne Boleyn has to be 
sacrificed. If Cecil is to be exalted, Elizabeth must be torn 
down ; and one way of effecting it is to tear down Leicester — an 
easy task, for Leicester seems never to have cared to justify him- 
self, nor to have been in the least concerned as to what his con- 
temporaries or posterity would say of him. In any case, he has 
come down to us as a man of little, if any, talent, who secured 
and maintained his lofty place solely by a iiaison with his 

The fact that for thirty years Leicester and Cecil were respec- 
tively the leaders of the two parties which alternately divided the 
control of the Queen's Council, and that it was Leicester's per- 
sonal triumph over both Cecil and the Queen which, after a 

• Froude, Preface, vol. i. (1858 ed.). So bad a uic of " gratuitous " it rare in Froude. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


steady fight lasting for more than twenty-five years, at last forced 
the break with Spain, and transferred from that country to 
England the leadership of the world, is, I can positively assert, 
unknown to the great mass of his countrymen. And that this 
Leicester, &r-sighted, powerful, patriotic, and adventurous, is at 
last on the way to regaining that high place in history which was 
not, save by envy, impugned in his lifetime, is portended by the 
following statement in the recent life of Cecil by M. A. S. 

"Lord Burghley was thus, after a quarter of a century of 
striving to keep on friendly relations with Spain, forced by the 
policy of Leicester, Walsingham, and the strong Protestants, into 
the contest which he had hoped to avoid." * Mr. Hume is the 
first man sufficiently courageous to make such an announcement. 

Even more convincing confirmation is the following, from the 
pen of one of the ablest of the living Cecils, Algernon Cecil : 

"In desire, perhaps, the Queen adhered to the old English 
tradition ... of an understanding . . . with ... the Nether- 
lands, which had passed into the hands of Philip of Spain. This 
was the policy to which Burghley's cautious and conservative 
disposition naturally inclined, for it was a policy essentially 
peaceful and diplomatic, was clear of religious fanaticism. . . . 

" Over against this policy lay one infinitely more congenial 
to the spirit of the age, because infinitely more daring and in- 
finitely more religious. Almost all th6 names which have made 
the Elizabethan age remembered can be cited in its support. 
Leicester and Walsingham, Essex and Ralegh, Drake and all the 
host of seamen who followed in his train, were from their stand- 
points for a policy that was Protestant, bellicose, imperial, pro- 
ductive of spoils and honours, quick in results and boundless in 
possibilities. The Cecils held back, doubting whether England 
was yet strong enough, or enough at one with herself, to seize an 
empire. . . . 

" Each year that Elizabeth reigned caused Burghley's policy 
to appear less necessary and the other more alluring. The fall of 
Mary Stuart, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, the gathering 
flood in the Netherlands, the tardiness of Philip, the theological 
affinities of James, tempted Elizabeth little by little to bolder 
and more definite courses, which culminated in Drake's ever- 
memorable attack on Cadiz. . . . Burghley, however, who had 
been in real or affected disgrace since the execution of the Queen 

♦ T/it Grial Lord Burghliy, p. 386. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


ot Scots in the February of that same year, had recovered his 
ascendancy over the Queen so soon as Leicester retired to Buxton 
to be treated for the gout. He was indeed too late to stop Drake 
from starting, but from that moment the country which had been 
sailing merrily into conflict returned to its normal path of equi- 
vocal negotiation. For a few months it seemed possible that his 
counsels might once again avail to leash the dogs of war, though 
he himself cherished no illusions as to the grave state of public 
affairs. The situation, as he pointed out, had been profoundly 
modified by two acts, the wisdom of which he considered very 
doubtful. Mary's execution had provoked her son to adopt an 
attitude of dangerous hostility, whilst in the attack on Cadiz the 
King of Spain had suffered an insult which even a lesser monarch 
could not have afforded to leave unavenged. There lay a fearful 
peril in the possibility of an alliance between Spain and Scotland. 
The Queen ought therefore to abandon her temporizing policy 
in respect of James and give him that assurance of the English 
succession which alone could make him her loyal supporter." * 

There is the truth. In no other written sentences, I believe, 
has there been compressed so much that is indicative of the 
relative places which Burghley and Leicester should occupy in 
the minds of their later countrymen — yet has history been so 
written that their respective positions have been exactly reversed. 

Burghley is not only credited with all that Leicester and his 
enthusiastic adherents secured for England, but Burghley now 
enjoys credit for all that even his Queen accomplished — when, 
as a matter of fact, Burghley opposed with all his might every- 
thing that brought about the break with Spain and transferred 
the Crown of the World from her brow to that of England. 
Leicester impelled Elizabeth to send Drake to attack Spain, 
Burghley did everything he could to keep Drake at home. 
Leicester told the Queen again and again that England needed 
no friends, that she could take care of herself. Burghley tried his 
best to make the Queen believe that this was untrue. Burghley 
tried to get Elizabeth to secure James's co-operation in her plans 
for joining the two kingdoms by promising him the succession. 
Elizabeth believed — and she proved correct — that the way to 
secure James was to promise him nothing, but to threaten him 
from time to time with loss of the succession if he did not behave 
himself. Burghley believed the execution of Mary a great error. 

• A Life of Robert Cecil, pp. 19 et set/,, by Algernon Cecil, London, 1915. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


Leicester had urged it for years ; and the results show that this 
course was the only right one. Yet Froude has the hardihood to 

" She (Elizabeth) never modified a course recommended to her 
by Burghley without injury both to the realm and to herself. 
She never chose an opposite course without plunging into em- 
barrassments, from which his skill and Walsingham's were barely 
able to extricate her. The great results of her reign were the 
fruits of a policy which was not her own, and which she starved 
and mutilated when energy and completeness were needed." * 

If Froude had said that "the great results of her reign were 
the fruits of a policy" which was opposed at every step by 
Burghley, he would have been much nearer the truth. Every- 
thing in England's policy that was venturesome, that was daring, 
that was new, was opposed by Burghley all his life ; everything 
in England's policy that was venturesome, that was daring, 
that was new, was fought for by Leicester all his life — and it was 
the venturesome, daring new policies that during the time of 
Elizabeth raised England from a third-rate power to the first 
power of the globe, and enabled the Great Queen, with that 
vision which was one of the most characteristic marks of her 
genius, to prophesy that James VI. " would, one day, become 
King of Great Britain," her tongue for the first time, I believe, 
thus calling the mighty empire that she was founding and leaving 
to her people — a fact which three hundred years later seems 
unknown to every one of them. 

Leicester's overpowering figure has been encountered at every 
turn by every historian of the Golden Age. They all praise 
without stint the remarkable penetration of Elizabeth when 
choosing her chief colleagues in the Government. Yet with all 
her ability in this direction, Leicester deceived her as to his talents 
for thirty consecutive years ! 

All historians agree that she loved her country and passion- 
ately maintained its interests. Yet, worthless fop that Leicester 
was, it is to him that she entrusts the direction of the most 
important effort she ever made on foreign soil— when she sends 
him to command in the Low Countries ; and when, several 
years later, the Armada was on its way, and she and England 

• Froude, Hitt. ff England, vol. xii, p. 559 (1870 ed.). 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


were in hourly danger of utter destruction, it was the worthless 
Leicester whom she placed in supreme command of her army 
at Tilbury — upon which, if the invaders landed, she and the 
kingdom must alone depend for their very existence. And when 
she did this she was fifty-five years of age ! 

We see her on horseback — an immortal picture — riding, with 
Leicester beside her, up and down the lines of the great English 
army ; and when she addresses the men she has the hardihood, 
at this most historical, solemn, and sacred moment of all her long 
life, to tell them orally : " My Lieutenant-General shall be in 
my stead, than whom never Prince commanded a more noble or 
worthy subject " — this Leicester who was reputed brainless, whose 
mistress she was said to have been for more than thirty years ! 

A woman of mature years who, in her high place, could have 
acted thus could have had no sense of dignity, nor of pride, nor 
of public opinion. We recall no parallel for such shamelessness. 
Can a more pitiful, ridiculous position for a queen be imagined ? 

Yet all historians agree that Elizabeth was entirely dependent 
for her power upon public opinion, that she had a most remarkable 
knowledge of its currents, that she was very proud, ever most 
careful to cultivate and preserve her dignity and the respect and 
affection of her subjects ; and more, that she succeeded in all 
these aims to an unprecedented degree. And yet, when the 
danger from the Armada was averted, she planned that her 
greatest reward for the victory should go to Leicester, despite 
the fact that none of the historians shows that he had played any 
important part in bringing about the happy outcome ! She had 
ordered letters patent made, conferring on this good-for-nothing 
scapegrace the Lieutenant-Generalship of England and Ireland, 
thus giving him more power than had previously been delegated 
to any subject by any English monarch. Truly, if this be 
history, Elizabeth was an old fool ! 

But this anomalous and, indeed, impossible position gives 
little disquiet to the historians. They handle it by not handling 
it at all. So far as the Tilbury speech is concerned, it is either 
suppressed in its entirety, or given in the phrases already quoted. 
Froude, of course, omits the whole text ; but by misdating it he 
is able to use the incident of its delivery as the basis of a striking 
phrase which cannot be made to coincide with the known facts. 
Still, we have the striking phrase. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


So, going their way, the historians leave Leicester in his 
resplendent position ; and, after all that" can be done by neglect, 
misrepresentation or detraction, there he stands, growing greater 
and greater the more the world learns of the details of Elizabeth's 

Leicester is the very heart of its mystery, and I hope to see 
my biography of him reinstate him in the incomparable place he 
occupied during his lifetime. If for any reason I be not permitted 
to complete the volume, the work will still be done, for neither 
the history of Elizabeth nor of her times can be adequate until 
the life of the chief man of her Court and councils has been 
probed and completely written. The task should be easily done 
even by one new to it, for nothing that pretends to be a life of 
him has yet been printed. He has had, with scarcely a line 
published in his defence, to submit to three centuries of continuous 

Oxford has had its share in this — Oxford which, at the most 
critical period in all its history, when (to quote its first historian, 
Anthony a Wood) it "became empty," helpless, and gasping 
for very life, was resuscitated and set upon its feet once more 
by that Leicester to whom in its agony it had appealed, and who 
for the remainder of his life, twenty-four years, was its one and 
most powerful patron and Chancellor. It is that University 
which inflicts on its preserver the deepest stab of all through the 
pen of its graduate and teacher of history, Froude, in his Protestant 
history of a time when Leicester was the best sword and buckler 
that the Puritan and Protestant had at Court. 

If Leicester could have known this, surely we might say : 

" Keen were his pangs, but keener far to feel. 
He nursed the pinion which impelled the steel." 

To the ample evidence as to Leicester's true position set 
forth in the coming volume, I shall now add : that of all the 
historical scholars who have dealt with Leicester, only two, 
except Mr. Hume, as already mentioned, appear to have seen 
the first glimmering of the truth. The names of these two will 
be unknown to most of my readers. They are Richard Congreve 
and Professor Edward Spencer Beesly, late Professor of History 
at University College, London, both of whom have since passed 
away. These three alone appear to have been capable of approach- 
ing Leicester with common sense and an unprejudiced mind. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


It is rare to find an English historian who, unbiassed by the 
religious controversies of the Reformation period, can take an 
impartial view of its actual facts, for church controversy is still 
a militant factor in English national life ; learned men spend 
their lives in insisting that the points of ecclesiastical difference 
shall be even more sharply defined or insisted upon ; the ancestors 
of most English families risked their lives for their Protestantism 
or Catholicism, and the wrongs committed by both sides are even 
to-day too poignant to permit of an unprejudiced view by either 
party. A simple inquiry to-day of any Catholic priest as to the 
character of Queen Elizabeth, or of any Protestant priest as to 
that of Mary Stuart, will elicit a response, if he speak freely, 
which will probably require considerable expurgation. 

So, when we find Froude carefully omitting — to cite only one 
typical example of his bias — the story of the martyrdom of the 
eleven English Catholic bishops (all there were when the Refor- 
mation began), we cannot be surprised — he was a 'Protestant 
clergyman. When Lingard — to take a typical example of his 
bias — omits to say that in the last letter of Mary Stuart to the 
Pope (just before her execution) she urged him to foment an 
armed revolution and invasion of England with the object of 
dethroning Elizabeth, we cannot be surprised — he was a Catholic 
clergyman. He did not, however, in this case certainly violate 
his principle of telling what was sure to be discovered ; for up 
to that time the Vatican, which then had possession of the MS., 
would not permit its publication. 

It is much to be regretted that by such practices these famous 
writers should have impugned the reliability of their works and 
thus made it impossible in the true and discriminating sense of 
the term, to refer to either of them unqualifiedly as an historian. 
Lingard should always be designated as the Catholic historian, 
and Froude as the Protestant historian. Each wrote for only one 
object — to glorify his own side of a life and death controversy* — 
and woe will be the part of the student who does not make due 
allowance for this fact ! 

Lingard, to give him his due, was by far the fairer of the 
couple. He was willing to state, ^is a rule, as we have just 

* " In my account of the reformation I must say much to shock protestant preju- 
dices ; Whatever I have said or purposely omitted has been through a motive of 
serving religion." Lingard to Rev. J, Kirk, December, 1819, from MS. at St, 
Cuthbert's, Ushaw, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


observed, those facts against the Catholics which could not be 
hidden from the other side.* No such spirit ever touched the 
dogmatic Froude. To him an incident inconsistent with his 
theory of what the facts ought to be had no existence at all, and 
he had no sense of humour to save him. Only Froude could 
have maintained a straight face as, despite his intimate know- 
ledge of his hero's entire history, he set down such a sentence as 
this : 

" It was a cruel fortune which imposed on Henry VIII., in 
addition to his other burdens, the labour, to him so arduous, of 
finding heirs to strengthen the (his) succession." t 

Even Lingard's cat, whose physical troubles so worried his 
master, could have enjoyed the old gentleman's shout of glee 
when he first saw this solemn pronouncement. 

No attempt has been made to challenge Lingard's supremacy 
as historian on the Catholic side. No rival has contended for the 
similar leadership of the Protestant faction. The result of this 
is, that, as many books of travel are written by people whose 
acquaintance with foreign lands is confined to the Reading Room 
of the British Museum, so any diligent student may produce an 
average history of sixteenth-century England merely by taking 
Froude and Lingard and striking a balance between the two. 

This lack of rivalry where Froude and Lingard are concerned 
leaves the field clear for what claims to be the first study of the 
private character of her who is, I believe, by far the greatest 
woman of history ; not only the greatest monarch who has ever 
occupied the throne of England, but, with the exceptions of 
Alexander, Napoleon, and Caesar, the greatest monarch who has 
ever occupied any throne. 

* In refuting a complaint that he had recited " the arguments against the religious 
(Monks), but never /or diem," Dr. Lingard says ; "I cannot possibly conceive to what 
passages he (the complainant) alludes, unless it be to pp. 229 and z6o, where I do 
mention the charges against them ; and I should have been a fool not to do it, since it 
has been done by every protestant historian before me. . . . Perhaps he (the complainant) 
would have had me deny the whole charge altogether. I did, indeed, begin by doing 
so. . , . The very attempt convinced me that in many instances the charge was 
founded. , . . To have met the charge by denying it (would haVe been) contrary to 
lound policy because it might have provoked some one to lay before the public eye in a 
famphletarevieioof that mass of -whoredom and immorality containedin the M.S,,Cleop 1 If," 
Letter to Rev. J. Kirk, November 25, i8zo, from Gillow transcript at St. Cuthbert's, 
Ushaw. The italicized words are crossed out in the transcript, 

t froude, vol. iii, p. 461 (1858 ed.). 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


As already indicated, I was, at the beginning, in the attitude 
of the average individual toward the morals of Elizabeth. I 
hope that dignity will not suffer if I illustrate this by the com- 
position of the little English girl, who ended her compulsory 
impressions of the monarch in this style : " Queen Elizabeth was 
a very improper person ; but by reason of great tact she succeeded 
in being called a Virgin Queen after she was dead." 

I had never doubted that Elizabeth was the mistress of 
Leicester, of Essex, of Ralegh, of Hatton, etc. ; and such is at 
the present moment the practically unanimous opinion of man- 
kind. Such it has been since the death of Elizabeth's contem- 
poraries, and their immediate posterity 5 and, as we shall see, 
no other verdict could have been expected in the light of the 
existing histories. 

It was but a little thing which excited my suspicion that the 
world might have been misled in this matter. Had I not practised 
law for many years, I suppose that the significance of the incident 
would have escaped me, as it seems to have escaped my prede- 
cessors. The prosecutor, if we may so call him, was too eager 
to convict — a frame of mind few prosecutors can avoid. 

I do not here anticipate particulars, which will be found in 
the text, but content myself with the statement that the acci- 
dental notice of the questionable use of a single word excited 
my wonder to such a degree that I spent some days in pursuing 
the clue to its ultimate source, only to find that my suspicions 
had been more than justified, and that the entire question of 
Elizabeth's morals must be examined de novo — nay, that, strictly 
speaking, it had never been examined at all. Even the first steps 
made it obvious that my first volume on Elizabeth was to be 
very different from the work that had been planned. 

Herein will be found the first collection attempted of all the 
contemporary evidence for and against the morality of Elizabeth. 
Most of the evidence will be new to all readers ; and much, of 
the highest significance, has never previously appeared. 

Every public and private library that offered hope of harbour- 
ing new material has been searched. Not a paper in Rome has 
been left unseen ; my sole aim has been to exhaust the subject 
upon both sides, and I can confidently assert that this has been 
done, so far as regards every probable source of information in 
this and in every other country. Should other evidence hereafter 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


appear, it can only be in stray documents hidden in unsuspected 
places. The existence of such documents is not impossible, but 
can certainly not be considered probable. 

As to the volume in general, there is but one more word to 
be said. After my Royal Institution lectures in 1920, when I 
first announced some of my discoveries, a well-known historical 
scholar said that I had developed a new way of writing history. 
If it be so, it is, I believe, because my main aim has been to 
set before the reader the evidence itself rather than what I 
think about it. The solution of the historical problem is 
thus left altogether to the reader rather than, as hitherto, to the 

This effort necessarily results in a book quite different from 
any that has yet appeared ; but I hope that this will be con- 
sidered its greatest fault. 

I cannot close this page without recording my great indebted- 
ness to Mr. Robert Farquharson Sharp, when Superintendent of 
the Reading Room of the British Museum, for an unique oppor- 
tunity of uninterrupted, secluded work ; to his assistant, Mr. 
A. I. Ellis, and to H. Dyer of the desk in the North Library, 
who has saved me many hours of the most exasperating labour. 
Especial acknowledgment is due to Dr. Aksel Andersson, Director 
of the Kungl. Universitetets Bibliotek, Uppsala, Sweden ; to Dr. 
Isak CoUijn, Director of the Foreign Department of the Royal 
Library, Stockholm ; to Dr. Charles Bratli, the distinguished 
historical student of Copenhagen ; to Dr. Juan Montero, Jefe of 
the Archivo General de Simancas, Spain ; and to Edwin Bonney, 
Librarian of St. Cuthbert's, Ushaw. 

But most chiefly am I indebted to the medical experts, Messrs. 
Osier, Allbutt, Doran, Keith, and Howard, who in the midst of 
most insistent demands connected with the Great War, and in 
more than one instance when well-nigh overwhelmed with the 
loss of their first-born in that struggle, have given to the world 
the benefit of their opinions upon the most significant inquiry 
that can be raised concerning the life of Elizabeth. To that 
great medical and historical authority. Sir Arthur Keith, who 
alone made possible these contributions of his distinguished col- 
leagues, I beg to offer this separate statement of gratitude and 
admiration. Every student of Elizabeth will always owe him 
a heavy obligation. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Finally, I indite my most profound gratitude to Miss E. M. 
Smith-Dampier for her critical reading of the MS. — as severe a 
demand as could be made upon a valued friendship; to Dr. 
G. C. Williamson, another friend, whose active aid and sound 
advice have been a continuous inspiration ; and to Major George 
G. WhifEn, late of The Queen's, who has given me many days 
of his time to save my own, 

F. C. 

Villa Bella Vista, 
El Terreno, Palma de Mallorca, 
June zStA, 1920. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 




I. The Seymour Affair. Scandal at Thirteen 

II. Elizabeth's highly trained Mind 

III. Health for ever wrecked by Seymour Affair 

IV. The Medical Record of Elizabeth . 

V. Medical Experts on the Medical Record 

VI. Last Words on Queen's Health 

VII. The Seymour Affair to the Throne 

VIII. The Direct Charges against Elizabeth 

IX. The Direct Charges cross-examined 

X. The Indirect Charges against Elizabeth . 

XI. The Queen's Defence .... 

XII. How Elizabeth was convicted . 










1. Family History of Elizabeth 285 

2. The Earliest Writing of Elizabeth . . . 286 

3. Elizabeth's Letter to Katherine Parr . . . 290 
Why Posterity is ignorant of Queen's Ill-health . 295 
The Story of Arthur Dudley .... 309 

A Lewde Pasquyle of 8 Eliz 318 

Roger ffawnes talke had wth me John Guntor 

UPPON XPMAS day,,. 1 578 322 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Sir Arthur Keith's Chart of Medical Record of Elizabeth 99 

Scandal Letter from Mary Queen of Scots . . . 208 

BuRGHLEY to MuNDT . . f 25$ 

Autograph Report of Nils Gyllenstierna on Chastity of 

Elizabeth 264 



The Real Queen Elizabeth ..... Frontispiece 

facing page 
Autograph Letter to Somerset, ^t. 15 . . . . 5 

Autograph Letter to Somerset. ^Et. 15 (Double Page) . 18 

Autograph Prayer by Elizabeth. Mt. 64 . . . .18 

Facsimile from Elizabeth's Fair Copy of her Translation 
OF the " Miroir de l'ame pecheresse." ^Et. ii . 

Facsimile from Elizabeth's Fair Copy of her Translation 


Latin, ^t. 14 . 

Elizabeth in her Youth. Portrait i . . . . 

The Earl of Radnor Portrait. Portrait 2 . 

Queen Mary's Portrait of Elizabeth. Portrait 3 

Elizabeth in Fancy Dress. Portrait 4 . 

The Real Queen Elizabeth. Portrait 5 . . . 

Elizabeth's Portrait in her Praye? Book. Portrait 6 . 

The only Authentic Portraits of Elizabeth 



Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 





"^HE chastity of Elizabeth seems to have been the 
subject of gossip when she was only thirteen 
years of age, and, while it would appear that no 
charge was seriously made by any one adequately 
informed, still we are not at liberty to omit the occurrence, 
accompanied by a necessary word of her previous history. 
Further, as the Seymour Affair, as we term it, was the first 
great turning point of the girl's life, and discovers, as nothing 
else can in so confined a space, her mind, training, character 
and the very foundations of her success as a sovereign, the 
reader will not regret the pages devoted to it — ^indeed, he cannot 
understand the Great Queen at all if he omit these details. 

In the Sejrmour Affair, fate made Elizabeth the leading 
character in one of the most daring intrigues ever recorded, with 
no less than her reputation for personal purity, the throne of 
England and the very life of herself and the first man she could 
have loved, for the stakes. We shall look in vain through all 
the pages of history for the record of so educative an experience 
in the life of any other girl of thirteen. She was two years 
older when the headsman put an end to the story, and it had 
made her from a girl into a woman who knew men, and women, 
and the world. 

It will be recalled that when Elizabeth was only two years 
of age, her mother, Anne Boleyn (pronounced Bullin) was 

I B 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


beheaded by her husband, Henry VIII., and that he had for a 
long time been paying court to Jane Seymour, whom he married 
within twenty-four hours after he had killed her predecessor. 
At about the same time he had Elizabeth declared illegitimate, 
and, thus disqualified, unable to succeed to the throne. Hence- 
forth, so far as Henry and his Court were concerned, Elizabeth 
was an outcast, without even sufficient clothing, banished to a 
relative of her mother some thirty miles from London. 

We do not know that Jane Seymour ever showed interest 
in the forlorn, motherless girl ; but more may be said in favour 
of Jane's three successors in the affections of Henry VIIL, 
Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard, and Katherine Parr, and 
especially of the last, who became Queen when Elizabeth was 
nine. A year later, however, the little girl was in the deepest 
discredit, for what reason we cannot discover, and for twelve 
months she was altogether forbidden the Court and the sight 
of her father or of his sixth queen. 

On the 28th of January, 1547 — Elizabeth was thirteen the 
previous 7th of September — ^her father died, and she became 
a member of the household of the widowed Queen, Katherine 
Parr. Jane Seymour's son, a lad of ten, ascended the throne 
as Edward VI., dominated by his mother's people, chief among 
whom were her brothers, Edward and Thomas Seymour. 

Edward made himself Duke of Somerset, chief controller 
alike of the State, and, as Lord Protector, of the person of the 
young monarch. Thomas became a baron and Lord High 
Admiral. Both suddenly became very wealthy, but quarrelled 
over the spoils, and Thomas devised a scheme that he hoped 
would redress the balance : to marry the King's sister, the 
thirteen-year-(dd Elizabeth. 

From this vantage point he had every chance of success, 
especially if Elizabeth, whose rights to the succession had been 
restored, should come to the throne — a very probable event. 
So the Admiral proposed to Elizabeth, some thirty days after 
her father's death. That by thus bringing her into his con- 
spiracy he endangered her life was nothing to him. His 
ultimate intentions are made clear by the fact that some four 
days after he was rejected by Henry's daughter, he was paying 
addresses to Henry's widow, to whom he proposed with such 
charm and ardour that Katherine, who had already buried 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


three husbands, seems to have been led to the altar thirty-four 
days after the death of her last ! The bridegroom proceeded 
to celebrate this success by renewing his attentions to the girl 
who had so recently refused him, and who was now a guest in 
his house at Chelsea. 

Se3rmour has come down to us with the reputation of 
exceptional beauty, and from what we know of his character we 
cannot doubt that he proposed to take full advantage of his 
attractions and the opportunities of continuous propinquity to 
get Elizabeth irretrievably into his power. He habitually ran 
into her room in the morning, whether or not she were still in 
bed. Upon these occasions he might be in his night apparel or 
dressing-gown. If she were about the room, he seems to have 
slapped her playfully, or, if she had not left her couch, he would 
pretend to get under the covers. At other times, when she 
heard him coming, she would run to her women, and then 
return with them to engage in a sort of hide-and-seek. 

It seems clear that the girl was never alone with Seymour 
upon any of these occasions, and that her attendants saw to it 
that there was no real danger for her. Her governess, however, 
Katherine Ashley, determined to forestall any misunderstand- 
ings, and threatened to inform the Council. 

Se3niiour laughed and acted the part of the innocent big 
brother, which might have disposed of the matter for all time 
had his character not been notorious ; but the agitated gover- 
ness, who well knew the danger she herself would run in the 
event of any contretemps, took the story to the lady most 
interested, the Admiral's new wife, who, while saying that she 
saw no harm in the proceedings, thereafter accompanied her 
spouse upon these pleasant visits, except upon one occasion 
when she appears to have been too tardy, for by the time she 
reached Elizabeth's apartment, Katherine, to quote her own 
words, found her husband " having her (Elizabeth) in his arms." 
There was, however, no greater guilt than these words exactly 
state ; but the young lady went to live elsewhere, although she 
and her former hostess remained upon the best of terms until 
the death of the latter, three months later. 

Thus freed, the Admiral again sought marriage with the 
princess, whose aflfections would appear to have been really 
intrigued ; but she was now more wary and circumspect, and 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


although he had gained the active aid of her- cofferer (steward) 
Parry, of Katherine Ashley, her governess, who was a distant 
relative through her husband who was of the Boleyn family, 
and of some others of Elizabeth's household, he seems to have 
been unable even to see her before the Protector threw him, 
his chief supporters, and all of his friends in the entourage of 
Elizabeth, including Ashley and Parry, into the Tower, while 
the princess, treated as one of the conspirators, was confined to 
Hatfield, under the charge of a representative of the King's 
Council, Sir Robert Tyrwhit, and his wife. 

The surest legal machinery in the control of the Throne was 
set in motion against the Lord High Admiral, namely a Bill of 
Attainder, one of Henry VIII.'s murderous inventions. The 
proceeding was for the Throne to introduce a Bill in Parliament 
declaring the accused guilty. After three readings the Bill was 
declared passed, and the axe completed the incident. There 
was no trial of any description. The accused was not per- 
mitted to make any defence, and the arrangement worked so 
smoothly that in two years alone its author had little difiiculty in 
applying it with entire success to at least thirty gentlemen whom 
the bluff monarch decided should no longer be of the earth 

In the case of the Lord High Admiral, the House of Lords 
passed the Bill the day it was presented, the attempted alliance 
with Elizabeth being one of its most prominent clauses support- 
ing the charge of High Treason. 

Then, having deprived Elizabeth of every friend and adviser, 
Somerset sought to entrap her into testimony that would 
incriminate the Admiral by proving a contract of marriage with 
her. The task was delegated to Tyrwhit, under the constant 
direction of the Protector, and they were not lacking in diligence. 
Every conceivable device was adopted ; Tyrwhit threatened 
and cajoled ; a formal commission took her evidence and put 
her under severe cross-examination ; but all in vain. 

Then Tyrwhit tried a false letter. It was to be shown to the 
princess with great apparent danger to himself which might 
induce her to confide further in him as a true friend. We have 
his report of his success. The first sentence covers the matter : 
" Plesyth 3rt yowr Grace to be advertysed, that I hav shewed 
my Lady your Letter, with a grett Protestacyone that I wold 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


not for a 1000/. to be knowne off yt ; . . . notwythstandyng, 
I canne not frame her to all Ponets, as I wold wych yt to be." * 
But Elizabeth expressed to Tyrwhit her appreciation of this 
great favour ! 

It was a contest between the craftiest and most unscrupulous 
men in the Kingdom, their wits sharpened by the knowledge 
that failure might mean their death, and a maid who had passed 
her fifteenth birthday four months before. So far the Pro- 
tector had been unsuccessful. But he had one more card in 
reserve — ^usually a winning card when the opponent is a woman 
— Tyrwhit informed Elizabeth it was common rumour that she 
was with child by the Admiral. 

There they overplayed their hand. The young girl saw it 
and at once wrote the following very remarkable letter to the 
Protector, part of which we reproduce in exact facsimile.-j- 
To facilitate reading, the spelling is usually modernized : 

" My Lord, Your great Gentleness and good Will towards 
me, as well in this Thing as in other Things, I do understand, 
for the which, even as I ought, so do I give you most humble 
Thanks ; and whereas your Lordship willeth and counselleth 
me, as an earnest Friend, to declare what I know in this Matter, 
and also to write what I have declared to Master Tyrwhit, I 
shall most wilUngly do it. I declared unto him first, that, after 
the Cofferer had declared unto me what my Lord Admiral 
answered for Allen's Matter, and for Durham Place, (that it 
was appointed to be a Mint,) he told me that my Lord Admiral 
did offer me his House for my Time being with the King's 
Majestic ; and further said, and asked me, whether if the 
Council did consent that I should have my Lord Admiral, 
whether I would consent to it or no : I answered that I would 
not tell him what my Mind was. And I inquired further of 
him what he meant to ask me that question, or who bade him 
say so : He answered me and said nobody bade him say so, 
but that he perceived (as he thought) by my Lord Admiral's 
inquiring whether my Patent were sealed or no, and debating 
what he spent in his House, and inquiring what was spent in 
my House, that he was given that way rather than otherwise. 
And as concerning Kate Ashley, she never advised me unto it, 
but said always (when any talked of my Marriage) that she 

• Tyrwhit to the Protector, Haynes, State Papers, i. 88. 
t HatGeld MS. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


would never have me marry, neither in Inglande nor out of 
Inglande, without the Consent of the Kinge's Majestie, your 
Grace's, and the Council's. And after the Quene was departed, 
when I asked of her what News she heard from London, she 
answered merrily, ' They say there that your Grace shall have 
my Lord Admiral, and that he will come shortly to woo you.* 
And moreover I said unto him, (Tyrwhit), that the Cofferer 
sent a letter hither, that my Lord said that he would come this 
Way, as he went down to the Coimtry. Then I bade her write 
as she thought best, and bade her sheWe it to me when she had 
done ; so she wrote that she thought it not best, for fear of 
suspicion, and so it went forth, ^d my Lord Admiral, after 
he had heard that, asked of the Cofferer why he might not come 
as well to me as to my Sister : And then I desired Kate 
Ashley to write again (lest my Lord might think that she knew 
more in it than he) that she knew nothing in it, but suspicion. 
And also I told Master Tyrwhit that to the Effect of the Matter 
I never consented unto any such Thing, without the Council's 
Consent thereunto. And as for Kate Ashley or the Cofferer, 
they never told me that they would practice it. These be the 
Things which I both declared to Master Tyrwhit, and also 
whereof my Conscience beareth me Witness, which I would 
not for all earthly Things offend in any Thing ; for I know that 
I have a Soul to save, as well as other Folks have, wherefore I 
will above all Things have Respect unto this same. If there 
be any more Things which I can remember, I will either write 
it myself, or cause Master Tyrwhit to write it. Master Tjrrwhit 
and others have told me that there goeth rumours Abroad 
which be greatly both against my Honor and Honestie (which 
above all other things I esteem), which be these ; that I am in 
the Tower ; and with Child by my Lord Admiral. My Lord, 
these are shameful Schandlers, for the which, besides the great 
Desire I have to see the King's Majestie, I shall most heartily 
desire your Lordship that I may come to the Court after your 
first Determination ; that I may show myself there as I am. 
Written in haste, from Hatfield this 28th of January. (1549.) 
" Your assured Friend to my little Power, 

" Elizabeth." 

Here is nothing of the innocent, yielding, fearful child. 
The letter is plainly the work of a mature mind, a logical 
thinker and a shrewd controversialist, as good in attack as in 
defence. The writer, her age considered, was a genius. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Who could improve her opening ? — First, Thanks for his 
expressed goodwill ; second, since in the guise of her friend 
he had urged her to write to him what she knew in this matter, 
she was most willing to do so. 

The Protector, when he read thus far, knew that he would 
need all his skill to overreach this young girl. She was not 
hastening to write any explanations or excuses. She only wrote 
when he advised it, and what is of greater importance, she told 
him so. And then, without a wasted word, she puts before 
him her version of what she had told Tyrwhit — and the 
Protector found himself touched with his own blade. He had 
opened the correspondence when he would have been justified 
in proceeding upon the basis of Tyrwhit's report. This 
avenue was now closed to him, and he himself had supplied her 
with the opportunity to bar it. 

Her cofferer asked her, she writes, whether, if the council 
did consent, would she marry the Lord Admiral ? She replied 
that she would not tell him, but she did want to know what 
he meant by asking her such a question — and Who bade him 
ask it ? The only reply he dared make was that he " thought " 
this out of his own head because the Admiral had asked him 
how much Elizabeth's income was. 

As for her governess, Kate Ashley, not only had she never 
advised the match, but always said " that she would never 
have me marry, neither in Inglande nor out of Inglande, 
without the consent of the Kinge's Majestie, your Grace's, 
and the Council's." There is the fine hand of woman in 
that crafty answer ; in those few words she defended Kate, 
declared for the second time on the same page that the necessity 
of the Council's consent was before her when it was a question 
of her marriage, and then, by adding that Kate had asseverated 
that the consent of the Protector was also a condition precedent 
to any such ceremony, the young princess made a bid for 
his favour by implying that his individual consent was required, 
although she knew that it was not. Could more adroitness be 
shown in the same number of words ? 

Then she describes how her cofiferer sent word that the 
Admiral would come to see her, whereupon she told her 
governess to write such a reply as she thought best, but to 
shorn it to Elizabeth before it went I Here we see caution 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and canniness which seems no mere girl's, but that of a man 
long experienced in affairs who had been betrayed by friend 
and subordinate until at last he would trust nobody. By 
forty, men and women have mostly arrived at this state — but 
what other example of such precautions at fifteen ? And 
then there is the further point that Elizabeth requests Mistress 
Kate to compose the letter. Here is the working of the mind 
of the natural or trained administrator — ^the principal gains 
the help of the assistant's ideas, while learning the real tendencies 
of the latter when not influenced by instructions ; and when the 
Admiral persists, she herself dictates the letter that ends the 
proposal. Could a monarch who had been reigning for half 
a century have shown more understanding ? 

Now she adds again, making the third occasion upon one 
sheet, that she would never give any consideration to a marriage 
toithout the Council's consent ! Wise young lady ! That — the 
Council's consent — ^was the danger-point, for by her father's 
will failure to procure it precluded her from succeeding.* 

This brings us to the most remarkable portion of this most 
remarkable letter — ^the single sentence in which Elizabeth 
calls attention to the rumours against her honour : " that I 
am in the Tower, and with child by my Lord Admiral," 

In the six succeeding words — " My Lord, these are shameful 
Schandlers," she denies the charge, and then only adds, " for 
the which, besides the great Desire I have to see the Kinge's 
Majestic, I shall most heartily desire your Lordship that I may 
come to the Court after your first Determination ; that I may 
show myself there as I am." 

Could such a charge, whether made justly or not, have been 
better handled ? This is eminently a practical person. There 
is not a superfluous word — ^not a word wasted in lamentation, 
in protestation, in denunciation, in justification. There are 
no hysterics, no appeals to heaven, no panic, no false modesty ; 

• Henry's will contained this provision : [In default of issue to Mary, 
then] " the said Imperial Crowne, and other the Premisses shall holly remayn 
and cum to our sayd Doughter Elizabeth, and to the Heires of her Body 
lawfully begotten, upon Condition that our sayd Doughter Elizabeth, after 
our Deceasse, shall not mary, nor take any Personne to (be) her Husbande, 
without the assent and Consent of the Privy-Counsaillers, and others 
appointed by us to be of Counsaill with our sayd dearest Sonne Prince 
Edward. . . ." — Hereditary Right of the Crown, etc. — Gentleman, London, 
713, Appendix, p. xlviii. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and all will perceive the fine employment of the address for 
emphasis immediately she states the infamous charges : " My 
Lord, these are shameful Schandlers." The effect is almost 
that of an oath. 

But there is no reliance upon her mere assertion. She is 
already a woman. " So they say I am with child, do they ? — 
well, let me come to Court at the first possible moment, where 
all can see me and watch me. That is the answer I have to 
make to these slanderers." There spoke the mind of the brave, 
fearless girl who had been betrayed by her friends. She asked 
for nothing but that the truth be made known beyond any 
cavil. She would not shrink from meeting the Court every day 
during her residence, even though well aware that the ladies 
knew why she came and knew that she knew it. 

Her response and challenge was brave indeed, but it will 
escape no reader's attention that the most significant thing is 
that she ever made it — ^that she had the requisite knowledge to 
make it, for she was only just past her fifteenth birthday — 
and used it boldly, openly, and confidently, at an age when 
most English maidens of her years know nothing of physical 
fundamental facts. What is more, Elizabeth possessed this 
knowledge even at an earlier period. 

The following letter, written in July, 1548, will sufiiciently 
demonstrate the fact. Elizabeth is addressing Katherine Parr 
about a month before that lady's death from the confinement 
to which the girl of fourteen so nonchalantly refers. The 
letter, partly burned, is now published exactly for the first 
time. Although the valedictory clause and signature are 
wanting, the hand that wrote the letter is indisputably that of 
Elizabeth, at fourteen years of age ! 

* " Although your hithnys letters be most joyfuU to me in 
absens, yet consyderinge what paine hit ys to you to write your 
grace beinge so great with childe, and so sikely your comen- 
dacyon wer ynough in my Lordes lettar. I muche rejoyce at 
your helthe with the wel likinge of the country, with my humbel 
thankes that your grace wisshed me with you til I ware wery of 
that cuntrye, your hithnys were like to be combered if I shulde 
not depart tyl I were w . . . (weary) beinge with you, although 

• Otho C. X. 336 verio. Cf. Heame's Sylloge Epist., etc., i6s ; Strick- 
land, Katherine Parr, 456 of Bohn's Hist, Lib. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


hit were in the worst soile in the wor . . . (world) your presence 
wolde make it pleasant. I can not reprove my Lo . . (Lord 
for) not doinge your comendacyons in his lettar for he did hit : 
and al . . . (although) he had not, yet I wil not coplaine on 
him for that he shalbe dilige . . . (diligent to) give me knolege 
from time to time how his busy childe dothe, a . . . (and if) 
I were at his birth no dowt I wolde se him beaton for the 
trobe . . . (trobel he has) put you to. Master Denny and my 
Lady with humbel th . . , (thanks) prayeth most intirely for 
your grace prainge the almyghtty God to sende . . . (you a 
most) lucky deliverance. Aiid my mystres wisseth no les 
giv . . . (giving your hithnys) most humbel thankes for her 
comendacions. Wri . . . (Written with little) leysor this 
last day of July." * 

. . . (Your humble daughter), 
. . . (Elizabeth). 

But Elizabeth's offer to come to Court where it could be 
seen whether she were or were not with child, was not accepted, 
and the inquiry shifts to her steward and governess. 

The steward soon lost confidence and confessed all he had 
heard ; and then Kate Ashley, confronted with his admissions, 
succumbed too ; and the tale was out. Thus armed, the 
hunters turned upon the prey with these signed statements ; 
but Elizabeth was not to be stampeded into losing her head, 
and TYrwhit had to report : "At the redynge off Mestrys 
Acshlay's Letter, she was mych abashed, and halffe Brethles, 
or she could rede yt to a ende ; and parussed all ther Namys 
partsyly, and knewe both Mrs. Aschlay's Hand, and the 
Cofferer's with halff a Seygt ; . . ." f 

There Elizabeth exhibited all the caution and device of the 
man of fifty ! She would spend time on the signatures while 
she reflected, and regained the control that was upset when 
these terribly humiliating confessions were thrust into her face 
in the sight of the two spies ! They should not see her lips 
tremble or hear her voice shake — not a word did she utter until 
the elaborate by-play had enabled her to benefit by the delay ; 
and then she trusts herself only to denounce the hapless 
steward :%" . . . she seynge that she called hym false Wretche, 

• For further particulars of this letter, see Appendix, note 3. 

t Tyrwhit to Protector, sth January, 1549. Haynes, vol. i. pp. 94-5. 

X Tyrwhit to Protector, Haynes, vol. i. p. 102. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and syd that he had promyssed he wold never confesse yt to 
Deyth. . . ." " I wyll," Tyrwhit continued, " tomorrow 
travell all I cane, to frame her for her owne surty, and to utter 
the Trowth," 

He did " travell " to his limits, but nothing transpired, and 
he sends this new document with the report that he regrets 
that it * "... ys not so full of Matter as I wold yt war. . . . 
They (Kate and the cofferer) all synge onne Songe, and so I 
thynke they wuld not do unles they had sett the Nott befor . . . 
or ells they could not so well agree." 

The Protector was beaten, but he persisted — against the most 
vehement protestations of Elizabeth — ^in the supercession of 
Ashley by Mrs. Tyrwhit, as the next document we quote will 
intimate. It is from Elizabeth to the Protector, and dated a 
month later than that of the above report from Tyrwhit. 

To facilitate reading, the spelling is modernized : f 

" My Lord Having received your lordship's letters, I 
perceive in them your good will towards me, because you 
declare to me plainly your mind in this thing, and again for 
that you would not wish that I should do anything that should 
not seem good unto the council, for the which thing I give you 
my most hearty thanks. And whereas, I do understand, that 
you do take in evil part the letters that I did write unto your 
lordship, I am very sorry that you should take them so, for my 
mind was to declare unto you plainly, as I thought, in that thing 
which I did, also the more willingly, because (as I write to you) 
you desired me to be plain with you in all things. And as 
concerning that point diat you vmte, that I seem to stand in 
mine own wit, it being so well assured of mine own self, I did 
assure me of myself no more than I trust the truth shall try ; 
and to say that which I know of myself I did not think should 
have displeased the counsel or your Grace. And, surely, the 
cause why that I was sorry that there should be any such about 
me, was because that I thought the people will say that I 
deserved, through my lewd demeanour, to have such a one, 
[As Lady Tyrwhit as governess] and not that I mislike anything 
that your lordship, or the council, shall think good, for I know 
that you and the council are charged with me, or that I take upon 

* Confession of the Lady Elezabeyth's Grace, idem, p. loa. 
t The letter is partly reproduced in facsimile opposite, p. i8, postea, 
in Chapter II. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


me to rule myself, for I know that they are most deceived that 
trusteth most in themselves, wherefore I trust that you shall 
never find that fault in me, to the which thing I do not see that 
your Grace has made any direct answer at this time, and seeing 
they make so evil reports already shall be but an increasing of 
these evil tongues. Hdwbeit, you did write ' that if I would 
bring forth any that had reported it,you and the council would see 
it redressed,' which thing, though I can easily do it, I would 
be loth to do, because it is mine own cause ; and, again, that 
it should be but abridging of an evil name of me that am glad to 
punish them, and so get the evil will of the people, which thing 
I would be loth to have. But if it might seem good to your 
lordship, and the rest of the council, to send forth a proclama- 
tion into the countries that they refrain their tongues, declaring 
how the tales be but lies, it should make both the people think 
that you and the council have great regard that no such rumours 
should be spread of any of the king's majesty's sisters, (as I am, 
though unworthy,) and also that I should think myself to 
receive such friendship at your hands as you have promised me, 
although your lordship hath shewed me great already. How- 
beit, I am ashamed to ask it any more, because I see you are not 
so well minded thereunto. And as concerning that you say 
that I give folks occasion to think, in refusing the good to uphold 
the evil, I am not of so simple understanding, nor I would that 
your Grace should have so evil an opinion of me that I have so 
little respect of my own honesty, that I would maintain it if I 
had sufficient promise of the same, and so your Grace shall 
prove me when it comes to the point. And thus I bid you 
farewell, desiring God always to assist you in all your affairs. 
Written in haste. From Hatfelde, this 21st of February. 
" Your assured friend, to my little power, 

" Elizabeth." • 

This letter may be said to conclude the correspondence. 
The end of the Affair was the cutting off of the Admiral's head, 
and the issue of the proclamation requested by Elizabeth which 
formally denied the truth of the scandal. There appears no 
evidence that anybody then, or subsequently, really thought 
Elizabeth guilty of more than has been described, and, so far 
as her morals are concerned, we may now disregard the 
occurrence. One thought, however, cannot fail to present 
itself— that the truly awful experience with Seymour was a 

* Lansd. MS., 1236, fol. 33, B.M. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


profound factor in fostering in Elizabeth that intense dislike 
and distrust of the marriage state, which she denounced even 
at the age of eight, and which never abated. This most 
dangerous scandal, the fate of her mother, that of Lady Jane 
Grey, the consequences of her sister Mary's marriage to 
Philip II., and the life of her father, may well lead us to the 
belief that matrimony was of all institutions the one most 
justly feared by Elizabeth both as an individual and as a queen. 
In leaving the Seymour Affair, it should be said that there 
are several documents which we have not quoted ; but we 
believe nothing of importance has been omitted, except perhaps 
the following in the memoir of the Duchess of Feria, a con- 
temporary, and one of the bitterest enemies Elizabeth as queen 
ever had : 

" In King Edward's time what passed between the Lord 
Admiral, Sir Thomas Seymour, and her Doctor Latimer 
preached in a sermon, and was a chief cause that the Parliament 
condemned the Admiral. There was a bruit of a child born and 
miserably destroyed, but could not be discovered whose it was ; 
only the report of the mid-wife, who was brought from her 
house blindjfold thither, and so returned, saw nothing in the 
house while she was there, but candle Ught ; only, she said, it 
was the child of a very fair young lady. There was a muttering 
of the Admiral and this lady, who was then between fifteen and 
sixteen years of age. If it were so, it was the judgment of God 
upon the Admiral ; and upon her, to make her ever after 
incapable of children. . . . The reason why I write this is to 
answer the voice of my countrymen in so strangely exalting the 
lady Elizabeth, and so basely depressing Queen Mary." * 

It is hardly necessary to refer further to this account. 
Everybody will at once recognize, with only the variation of 
the unfortunate victim's identity, probably the most ancient 
tradition with which children in all countries have alternately 
been made to shudder and marvel. The promulgator of this 
version, apparently one of its latest appearances, should, 
however, have been a little more careful before ascribing it 
to Elizabeth, for that lady has left it on record that the story 
was that she was with child, not that she had had one. We may 
safely leave these two versions to those responsible for them, 

• Life of Jane Dormer, Duchess of Feria (ascribed to Henry Clifford, a 
member of her household), London, 1887, p. 86. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


as did Napoleon at St. Helena when confronted with two 
English journals, one of which stated that he had seduced his 
sister, while the other charged him with being incompetent. 
Napoleon could not discover that he himself was really 

But to recur to the letter of 21st of February, 1549,* just 
printed in extenso. We contend that it shows signs of greater 
ability than anything written by any other person of similar 
age in all the records of history. It can only be compared 
with the previous letter of 28th January, which we have already 
examined in detail. 

This later letter exhibits the profoundest aptitude for, and 
practice in, the technicalities of the science of logic. To its 
careful analysis we commend every reader, only now calling 
his attention to one phrase : 

" I would be loth to have the ill will of the people." Why ? 
What difference would that make to this young girl of fifteen ? 

We can have little doubt of what was in her mind. She was 
looking to the future when she might ascend the throne of her 
brother ; and not that alone ; she was even at this early day so 
ordering her life as to remove every obstacle (no matter how 
insignificant) in her path to that goal ! These words admit of 
no other construction. Do we not know that it was said that 
once Katherine Parr had told her, " I believe that you are 
destined by heaven to be the Queen of England " ? Probably 
she repeated it again and again, as almost certainly did scores of 
others. It was the common belief. 

Above all, it was the common hope. She represented the 
aspirations of her people — and we may be sure that they did not 
fail to tell her so — she who was reputed to be endowed with 
inherent genius, profound knowledge, and an insatiable avidity 
for its acquisition — ^between whom and the throne stood only 
an invalid boy and a spinster sister of bad health, fragile, un- 
attractive, and nearly double her own age. Can there be any 
doubt of the eventual effect of these statements upon such a 
receptive, calculating, reflective, ambitious mind as that 
possessed by Elizabeth ? Are we to suppose that after having 
these prophecies and circumstances dinned into her ears from 
every side — by every Protestant who already looked to her to 
* MS. Lansd,, Brit, Mus., 1236, fol. 33. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


restore his faith which it was foreseen would suffer when 
Catholic Mary succeeded Protestant Edward ; and by every 
Catholic who hoped that she, when Mary came to die, would 
be the bulwark of his faith — are we to suppose that in the face 
of all these constant suggestions, this precocious girl did not 
weigh the chances of their fulfilment ? — ^this girl who (to quote 
Wriothesley, the future Lord Chancellor) at six years of age 
appeared and conducted herself " with as great a gravitie, as 
she had been 40 years old " ; * this girl, who, several years 
later — ^five years or so before she came to the throne — according 
to Chapuys, the Imperial ambassador, " almost governed 
everything " in England. Do we think for a moment that she 
did not notice that Edward was not strong and very likely soon 
to die ? Do we think her so heedless as not to observe that 
Mary, who would succeed Edward, was already nearly thirty- 
five, broken in health, unmarried, and with no suitor for whom 
she seemed to care ? Are we to suppose that the younger girl 
did not go further, and, possessed as we know she was of the 
most intimate facts of life and of the physical condition of her 
sister, the full particulars of which the reader will soon master, 
conclude that the chances were that Mary even if she were to 
marry would probably never have children ? 

We are forced to determine in the face of these letters that 
even at this early period nothing escaped their author that 
concerned her present or her future, Elizabeth was ordering 
her daily life with the one object of obtaining and retaining the 

• Hearne's Sylloge Epistolarum, 149. Wriothesley visited Mary and 
Elizabeth in December, 1539, three months after Elizabeth's sixth birthday, 
at Hertford Castle. The part of Wriothesley's report dealing with Elizabedi 
is as follows : " I went then to my lady Elizabeth's Grace, and to the same 
made the King's Majestie's most hearty commendations, declaring that his 
Highnes desired to hear of her health, and sent her his blessing. She gave 
htmible thanks, enquiring after his Majestie's welfare, and that with as great 
a gravitie, as she had been 40 years old. If she be no worse educated than 
she now appeareth to me, she wiU prove of no less honor and womanhood 
ttwn shall beseem her father's daughter. . . ." [This is probably the exact 
wording of Wriothesley. Certainly it is the wording of Heame, the authority 
upon which all the later versions apparendy have had to be based, owing to 
the burning of so much of the original as contained the reference to Elizabeth ; 
and nobody has ever cast any doubts upon Heame'S exactness in copying. 
The MS. fragment — ^part of one page — still in existence — is Otho C. X., 
272 old number, 274 present nimiber, B.M. MS. R. Miss Strickland's 
Elizabeth (Everyman Ed., p. 11), quoting for sole authority State Papers, 
30th Henry VIII. as authority, makes the last clause read " she will prove 
of no less honour than beseemeth her father's daughter," while her authority 
gives the phrase as " she will be an honour to womankind."] 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


throne of her fathers. In a word, she entered the whirlpool 
of politics at fifteen. Had we time to linger, we should see 
her daily playing her hand in that tremendous game. 

Deeply, however, as she was involved in it by the Seymour 
Affair, the severest trials of her whole life, its most dangerous 
situations and most delicate decisions, ensued in the ten years 
or so which were yet to elapse before she became Queen. 

All through liiose long years, from her fifteenth to her 
twenty-fifth year, the most formulative and impressionable of 
her career, she was in the very centre of English politics, and 
for the greater part of that period was the very hub about which 
the entire governmental system revolved. 

We must give due weight to these tremendous factors, for 
only by their comprehension can we realize that, altogether 
apart from Elizabeth's education through books, it was a most 
astute and successful politician, schooled by long years of 
danger to her succession and to her life itself, exercised in 
almost daily negotiations with the most ambitious and most 
unscrupulous men and women, who at the age of twenty-five 
ascended the throne. 

If great events were dependent upon the personality of the 
head of England, surely no other country at such a time of 
crisis ever had a monarch so well endowed and trained in the 
art of statecraft by actual experience to enter upon the scene 
with nearly fifty years of life yet remaining to institute and 
complete that which Providence had decreed. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Elizabeth's highly trained mind 

THE contention that Elizabeth was the most potent 
human instrument that ever wielded the forces of 
England is supported by the knowledge that she 
was not only a genius, but, as we shall directly see, 
a highly-trained one, as well. 

As to the former, if we had no more than her letters to the 
Protector, it would be evident that the girl was possessed of this 
rarest of qualities which is vouchsafed to the world in its rulers 
no oftener than once or twice in a thousand years. From 
Alexander there is none to Caesar, from Cassar we must leap to 
Constantine, from him to EUzabeth, and from Elizabeth to 
Napoleon — and from Napoleon to — ^whom ? It will probably 
be at least five hundred years before the world will learn his 

There can be no more doubt that Elizabeth was a youthful 
prodigy than of the truth of such a description of William 
Wootton, Newton's friend and Swift's doughty antagonist, who 
was reading Greek and Latin at five, Hebrew at six, and had by 
then mastered Homer, Virgil, Pythagoras, Terence, and 
Corderius — ^who had his B A. from Cambridge at twelve, was a 
Fellow of St. John's, Cambridge, at fifteen, and a F.R.S. before 
he was twenty-one ; of John Stuart Mill who had mastered the 
chief Greek authors by eight, the Latin ones by twelve, had 
written, at that age, a history of the government of Rome, and 
other histories before he was seven, not to mention a knowledge 
of higher mathematics, logic, classical literature, and political 
economy by thirteen. 

Yet none of the early works of these masters shows greater 
range of ability, or more variety of power — indeed, they utterly 
lack the executive, administrative, combative, practical sense 
so prominent in the princess's — ^than shines out so forcibly in 

17 c 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


these epistles of Elizabeth, although they were written under 
the greatest mental stress and with the greatest responsibility 
attaching to every word. It cannot be too often repeated that 
no more desperate, shameful, cruel, malicious, and critical 
situation ever faced Elizabeth at any time in her long life than 
in the case we have considered — and the most important fact 
of all is this : that there was not a friend to advise her. The 
only guides available were hostile gaolers who were doing their 
utmost to force her to write some word that would bring herself 
and her most intimate friends to the direst punishment. 

But before leaving this question of Elizabeth's possession of 
the most extraordinary native mental equipment, let us glance 
once again at these letters of Elizabeth, to observe something to 
which historians have only incidentally referred, namely, to 
their handwriting. To consider it more closely, we recur to the 
very remarkable communication to the Protector of the 21st of 
February, 1549, in Chapter I. We reproduce the first and 
last of it, in the exact size of chirography as it was set down. 

Elizabeth was then fifteen and a half years of age. How 
many of our readers have ever known any one so young who 
could turn out such a piece of penmanship ? 

Any student of handwriting, even the most casual, will at 
once notice that, looked at as a whole, the extract is beautiful. 
There is not even one letter standing out to attract the eye. 
The same character is repeated in every detail, even in slant or 
angle from the perpendicular. In particular, there is the 
uniform construction of the w by two strokes, a fact that almost 
escapes one. Then, too, with what great care and uniformity 
the cross of the t never passes the perpendicular, but is always 
confined to the right of it 1 — a supreme test in the view of the 
handwriting expert. There is also the ornamentation of 
certain letters in graceful and pretty scroll-work, complete 
uniformity of distance between the diiferent lines, their straight- 
ness, and the undeviating margin to the left in the absence of 
any guiding marks. 

There is little room for variation in judgment in interpreting 
the character indications of such graphology.* There is no 

• An exceptionally authoritative, simple, and practical work which we 
have often employed, is How to read Character in Hatidtmtitig, by Henry 
Frith, London, 1890. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


escape from the conclusion that a girl of under sixteen who could 
produce such a manuscript was exceedingly painstaking, even to 
the smallest detail, that she was remarkably methodical, 
confident, conscientious, calm, and persevering, that she was 
capable of complete concentration to the task immediately in 
hand, and that her character tended to firmness, evenness, 
placidity, and steady, strong, determined action. Everywhere 
is the unmistakable stamp of the individual who has learned 
the great lesson of successful work — to do with all might what is 
next to be done. 

The large flourishing signature — never altered thereafter — 
closing the document, discovers the pronounced egotist, the 
firm believer in her position, in herself, and in her exalted rank 
— and it is of the very greatest and most definite importance 
that to the very last decade of her life, Elizabeth could and 
did write MS. not only as beautiful as this one, but as plainly 
and unmistakably showing every trait displayed in it — ^this, 
although her late MSS. are usually undecipherable scrawls. 
A glance at the facsimile, a prayer written at the time of the 
threatened Spanish invasion of 1597, nine years after the 
Armada, and half a century after the letter to the Lord Pro- 
tector, despite its slight trembling, proves the point ; and the 
first sentence could well have been adopted by all the Allies 
in the days of the Great War, the third great crisis in England's 

But if these conclusions are important with respect to the 
letter to the Lord Protector, how much more do they become so 
when applied to the next facsimile, a representative page (31) 
of the hundred and twenty-eight in the bound volume wholly in 
her handwriting of her prose translation of the French poem by 
Margaret of Navarre, entitled " The Mirror of the Sinful Soul," 
which Elizabeth offers to Queen Katherine Parr as a New Year's 
gift " From asherige the laste daye of the yeare of our lord god, 
1544 " — ^when Elizabeth was of the age of eleven and three 
months ! 

Every trait of character and indication of mental develop- 
ment that so indubitably stands out in the handwriting of the 
Lord Protector letter is present, with substantially equivalent 
force, in the earlier volume — ^with the single exception of the 
artistic element, which, although evident, is less conspicuous. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


The elaborate scroll-work of the later composition is altogether 
missing — ^but the tendency to such things is clearly apparent 
in the devices employed to fill out the spaces unoccupied by 
letters at the end of nearly half the lines. In the other pages 
of the work, the use of the pear-shaped figure for this purpose 
is much more frequent. 

This priceless volume is, so far as anybody has discovered, 
Elizabeth's first literary work, and, with the possible exception 
of a one-sheet letter * in Italian from her to Katherine Parr, 
is also the first handwriting of Elizabeth known to be in existence. 
The Italian letter is dated 31st of July, 1544, but as the larger 
work must have consumed many weeks, it is very probable that 
among its pages there are many written before that date.f 

We are, apparently, the first historian or biographer of 
Elizabeth who has ever seen this volume, or even known of its 
survival, and yet it has been resting safely in the Bodleian since 


The pages are contained in their original binding, which is 

canvas worked over in large silk thread, so carefully done that 

at first sight the surface has the appearance of a piece of woven 

cloth. Embossed upon this on the front cover is an elaborate 

scroll in gold and silver braid, in the midst of which are the 

initials of Katherine Parr. The edges are bound vrith gold 

braid, and there is a thin line in red silk at the top and bottom ; 

while there is a heartsease embroidered in coloured silk, three 

of the petals of each flower being in purple, and two in yellow, 

with small gold thread interwoven, and a little green leaf 

between each two. The entire back cover is devoted to similar 

flowers, now so worn, however, as to be indistinct. As a piece 

of needlecraft the production is of the highest excellence of 

this or of any age — ^but its great and lasting importance is that 

it is entirely the sole work of the little Elizabeth.^ 

On the eve of the New Year of 1545, one year later than 

* B.M. MS., Otho C. X. 231 o.n. or 23s n.n. Mumby, in The Girlhood 
oj Queen Elizabeth, p. z2, says : " The letter, which is written in elegant 
Italian, and preserved in the Bodleian Library. . . ." The original has 
never been at the Bodleian. Miss Strickland makes the same error — vide 
p. 12, vol. iii., Bohn's Hist. Lib. ed. 

t The search for the first writing of the Queen became exciting. It is 
fully detailed in Appendix, note 2. 

X Heywood's England's Elisabeth, circa 1630, especially notes the 
princess's skill in this art. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

[ ■W MW 

w i yjuuu' »""'w >i >j< y* 

' "j w rnp" 




Digitized by Microsoft® 


the date of the book just considered, the little girl presented 
another embroidered volume all of her own penmanship and 
needlework to Katherine Parr, the volume of prayers mentioned 
as being in the British Museum — a work of 233 pages, some 
14,000 words. In penmanship it shows an improvement on 
the similar production of the preceding year, and it consists of 
Elizabeth's translations into Latin, French, and Italian of some 
prayers composed in English by Katherine. 

Two years later, on the eve of 1548, the girl offered a third 
volume of her handwriting to her brother, the King : a trans- 
lation from an Italian sermon into Latin, a most beautiful piece 
of penmanship, with elaborate scrolled capitals in red ink — a 
highly artistic work in every particular, two characteristic pages 
of which we exactly reproduce. 

And it may be added that all through her life, whenever free 
from the tremendous responsibilities of her position, until she 
was more than sixty-five, she made translations, a number of 
which have been preserved, from the best Greek and Latin 
authors ; and when, in her sixty-fourth year, an inexperienced 
Polish Ambassador made her a slighting speech, she turned on 
him with a long, angry, extempore torrent of Latin that not only 
took away his breath, but that of the listening Court ; while 
she — ^how like a woman ! — as soon as the gale had passed, 
burst out laughing with the remark " God's death, my Lords ! 
I have been enforced this day to scour up my old Latin." 

Having thus (we may claim) estabUshed her genius, we 
proceed to a brief consideration of our previous statement — 
that Elizabeth was not only deserving of these encomiums, but, 
at this early age, had, besides, received what even to-day would 
be designated as a first-class education, including the very 
best training ever devised for the development of the native 
faculties of the brain. 

The simple fact is that Henry VIII., a very learned man, a 
very cultured man — ^and again we speak in the twentieth- 
century sense of the terms — a master of four modern languages, 
as well as the classical, a musician, a composer, an author, a 
student of the best in ancient and modern literature, an historical 
scholar and an enthusiastic promoter of learning and its 
institutions, had decreed that his three legitimate children 
should have the best education that the world could then 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


afford ; and when we examine the steps he took to see that 
this determination be carried into practice, we can but conclude 
that they were admirably chosen. 

The best teachers in England were Elizabeth's tutors, and 
the slightest study of their methods demonstrates that there 
are none to-day to excel them. Greek, Latin, French, and 
Italian — ^the two latter by those to whom those tongues were 
native — were mainly taught to Elizabeth by translations from 
each into English, then back into the original, and then often- 
times from each of the four into the remaining three ; a method 
of study which we have already described as the best ever 
devised for the development of the thinking and reasoning 
faculties. The most instructive of the classics were treated in 
this fashion, and their relative importance explained. 

Correspondence between Elizabeth and Edward was 
conducted in Latin, French, and Italian, and they habitually 
spoke these tongues. The Queen, indeed, when an old woman, 
confided to. one of the French Ambassadors that when she 
came to the throne she knew six foreign languages better than 
she did her own.* 

History, astronomy, mathematics, logic, philosophy, archi- 
tecture, music, poetry, were pursued indefatigably, all day long, 
for she was fascinated by learning ; but the particular bent of 
her mind is shown in the fact that it was her habit to spend 
at least three hours each day upon history. That was her 
favourite subject, for was she not to be the Queen ? She was 
just as certain of it when reading of the reigns of her pre- 
decessors as she was during her first serious illness when she 
adopted the demeanour and dress of a nun — all a part of the 
play, all a step to regain her lost reputation, all preparation for 
the time which was to come. 

Surely it is evident that no other personage in history began 
so early in life to work for a throne. It was her one tliought, 
her one ambition, her one passion long before she was fifteen 
years of age ; and we shall see that this fierce determination 

• Vide Baschet Transcripts, Bundle No. 30, Journal of M. de Maisse. 
French Ambassador at London, 1597-8, at p. 241 verso — " She . . . said 
that when she came to the throne, she knew six languages better than her 
own, and because I said that that was a great virtue in a princess she said 
that there was no marvel in a woman learning to speak, but there would be 
in teaching her to hold her tongue." — ^P. R. O. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


never faltered in the decade that was to intervene between the 
Seymour Affair and the moment when her great aim came to 
fruition, and she was in fact the Queen ! 

We leave the subject of her studies with an extract from a 
letter dated from St. John's College, Cambridge, the 4th of 
April, 1550, almost exactly a year jrfter the death of Seymour. 
The writer is Roger Ascham, who appears to have had, in 
company with John Cheke, the superintendence of Elizabeth's 
education, and is addressed to John Sturm, a lifelong friend, 
and rector of the Protestant college at Strasburg. There can 
be no doubt as to the worth of the information thus trans- 
mitted. There can be no suspicion of any ulterior motive in 
this private communication, no expectation of favours from its 
subject — ^it is the confidence of one schoolmaster to his fellow. 

* " There are many honourable ladies now who surpass 
Thomas More's daughters in all kinds of learning ; but among 
all of them the brightest star is my illustrious Lady Elizabeth, 
the king's sister ; so that I have no difficulty in finding subject 
for writing in her praise, but only in setting bounds to what I 
write. I will write nothing however which I have not myself 
witnessed. She had me for her tutor in Greek and Latin two 
years, but the foundations of her knowledge in both languages 
were laid by the diligent instruction of William Grindall, my 
late beloved friend, and seven years my pupil in classical 
learning at Cambridge. From this university he was summoned 
by John Cheke to court, where he soon received the appoint- 
ment of tutor to this lady. 

" After some years, when through her native genius, aided 
by the efforts of so excellent a master, she had made a great 
progress in learning, and Grindall, by his merit and the favour 
of his mistress, might have aspired to high dignities, he was 
snatched away by a sudden illness. I was appointed to succeed 
him in his office, and the work which he had so happily begun, 
without my assistance, indeed, but not without some counsels 
of mine, I diligently laboured to complete. Now, however, 
released from the Court and restored to my old literary leisure 
here, where by her beneficence I hold an honest place in this 
University. It is difficult to say whether the gifts of nature 
or of fortune are most to be admired in that illustrious lady. 
The qualities praised by Aristotle meet altogether in her — 

* Cf. Letter ^CIX., p. Izii. of vol. i., Ascham, Works, Giles, London, 
1865, and die original Latin on p. 191, idem. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


beauty of person, greatness of niind, prudence and industry, all 
in the highest degree. She has just passed her sixteenth 
birthday, and exhibits such seriousness and gentility as are 
unheard of in one of her age and rank. Her study of true 
religion and learning is most energetic. Her mind has no 
womanly weakness, her perseverance is equal to that of a man, 
and her memory long retains that which it readily grasps. She 
talks French and Italian as well as English : she has often 
talked to me readily and well in Latin, and moderately so in 
Greek. When she writes Greek and Latin, nothing is more 
beautiful than her handwriting. She is as much delighted 
with music as she is skilful in that art. In adornment of person 
she aims at elegance rather than show, and by her contempt 
of gold and elaborate headdress she suggests Hippolyte rather 
than Phaedra. She read with me almost all of Cicero and a 
great part of Titus Livius, drawing all her knowledge of Latin 
from these authors. It was her habit to devote the morning to 
the reading of the Greek Testament, later reading select 
orations of Isocrates and the tragedies of Sophocles. My idea 
in having her pursue this course was that thereby she might gain 
purity of style, and her mind derive instruction that would be 
of value to her in confronting any contingency that might arise 
in life. To these I added Saint Cyprian and Melanchthon's 
Common Places, etc., as seemed to me to be best, next to the 
Holy Scriptures, to teach her at once elegant language, sound 
learning and the foundations of religion. In anything she 
reads she at once notices any obscure or wrong word. She 
cannot put up with those foolish followers of Erasmus who 
have encumbered the Latin tongue with miserable proverbs. 
She likes a style that grows out of the subject-matter — ^free from 
barbarisms because it is suitable, and beautiful because it is 
clear. She very much admires metaphors when they are not 
too strained, and the use of antithesis when it is warranted and 
may be employed with good effect. Her attention is so 
practiced in the discrimination of all these things, and her 
judgment is so sound, that in all Greek, Latin, or English prose 
or verse there is nothing loose on the one hand or concise upon 
the other that she does not at once notice it and condemn it 
strongly or praise it earnestly, as the case may be. I am not 
inventing anything, my dear Sturm ; it is all true : I am only 
seeking to give you an outline of her most remarkable genius 
and assiduity." * 

* Nihil jingo, ml Sturm, nee opus est : sed adumbrare tantum voM tSii 
sptciem ejus exceUmtis ingenil et ttudii. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


And the smallest understanding of Ascham indubitably 
convinces any careful inquirer that there was not then, and is 
not now, a person more competent than he to judge not only 
of ability, learning, and accomplishments, but of greatness of 
mind and soul. He was easily the first teacher of his time in 
England. He ranks with More, Chaucer, and Philip Sidney. 
He was the first to make known by his writings (if indeed he 
was not their inventor) modern methods of instruction. The 
world has added little if anything substantial to his methods 
of teaching, because the centuries in their passing have only 
served to prove that he was fundamentally correct. 

To this tribute of Ascham's to Elizabeth, many might be 
added of similar import by other contemporaries, but this 
would seem tautological. We therefore hasten to lay before 
the reader, as briefly as possible, some salient and pregnant 
features of the girl's history during, and immediately following, 
the Seymour Affair, features which must be comprehended if 
we are intelligently to weigh the evidence, pro and com, for the 
subsequent charges against her morality. We must be enabled 
to picture her psychologically and historically, exactly as she 
appeared at twenty-five years of age, when the death of Mary 
broke the barriers that had kept Elizabeth from the fulfilment 
of that great ambition, so long the chief object of her life. 
We must know exactly what manner of woman she was, what 
her dominating, controlling inclinations and ambitions, her 
views of life, of her prerogative, and her obligations as ruler. 
We must, in short, know the real Elizabeth ; for she, like all 
other human creatures, was an entity, a complete being, made 
up of many diverse traits, yet subject inexorably to the laws of 
psychology. We must have the whole story of Elizabeth — and 
we have it, at least in substance. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



IT must be fully realized that so tragic an episode as the 
Seymour AiFair, with its prolonged mental strain, its 
mortal dangers, its shame and mortification, must have 
had a most powerful effect upon Elizabeth ; but we 
believe that there was a still more cogent element at work 
upon her character — one whose influence and aspect would 
vary with each new year of her life, a sinister influence which 
could never be forgotten from the day when its presence was 
first perceived. To this we have so far only incidentally 
referred ; but it is deserving of more detailed consideration. 

We allude to the history of her parents, first of all in their 
relations to each other. We have no records to tell us when 
Elizabeth discovered that there had been trouble between her 
father and mother. We do not even know that she, who was 
but two years and eight months of age when her mother was 
killed, recollected anything about her. Nor do we know that 
Elizabeth ever had any affection for her or she for her daughter ; 
nor that Elizabeth ever mentioned her mother, although this 
cannot be surprising, for she could not, of course, refer to the 
tragedy of the mother without reflecting upon the conduct of 
her father ; and whatever else Elizabeth might and did do, 
there is one thing that she never was tempted into betraying, 
and that is any disrespectful or critical attitude towards any of 
her predecessors upon the throne. 

She was aware that the throne depended altogether upon 
the consent of the people. She had no army except when 
actually at war ; and speaking generally, there was never a 
time when five hundred trained soldiers could not have seized 
London and the Queen. A country peasant rabble had sacked 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


the city in 1381 — and Elizabeth guarded the sanctity of her 
order with the most scrupulous fidelity. 

This, however, cannot mean that she did not think, that she 
did not know, about her parents. We must believe that the 
story of Anne Boleyn, and the other marital details of Henry's 
life, came very early to the precocious girl. So much we all 
know from our own observation. 

Let us try to put ourselves in the place of Elizabeth when 
first she encountered this troubling thought. Save for some 
overwhelming, shocking scene of farewell (of which there is no 
record) it is probable that Elizabeth never recollected seeing 
her mother. She was, however, a practical little body who 

/ thought for herself, and had an independent way ; when only 
six years of age she made a cambric shirt for her brother, and 

] presented it to him as her oflFering upon his second birthday, 
while all the rest of the world overloaded him with gold, silver, 
and precious stones. No governess or servant suggested that 
a princess should give that sort of present. That was the 
original thought of a girl child. 

At any rate, we cannot believe but that the girl very early 
made inquiries, and very embarrassing ones. And we may be 
sure that she probed the mystery to the bottom. How far we 
are from appreciating the awful shock to which she was 
subjected when she was told that her mother's head had been 
cut oflF ! And then she learns that her father had ordered the 
execution ! Whose imagination can comprehend what flew 
through the little girl's mind at such a blow ? She is told 
that her father married the next day ; and she notices that he 
never speaks of her mother, and that nobody else wanted to 
do so. Everybody she asked to tell her of Anne Boleyn 
seemed to lose the power of speech at the mention of her name ; 
and then her father did not seem to care very much about her 
— ^the little Elizabeth — ^for it was only rarely that they met. 
For months at a stretch she was not allowed in the palace where 
he lived. At times she had been left even without sufficient 

What sort of a man was her father ? She would see if 
she could find out. There is always somebody not far distant 
in the guise of the candid, helpful friend to tell us the unkind 
truths, and we may feel certain that before very long after the 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


little mind had begun to be suspicious of a skeleton in the 
closet, Elizabeth saw it for herself. 

So her father had cast aside Catherine of Aragon, after she 
had been compelled to see him making love to Anne Boleyn 
for six or seven years, much of it under the single roof that 
sheltered the three ; and then before he had got rid of Anne, 
he had fallen in love with Jane Seymour, whom he had likewise 
moved into the palace before their nuptials. Next he had 
cut off Anne's head and married his Jane the following morning ; 
on her death a year later he had married Catherine Howard, 
cut off her head, and married and divorced Anne of Cleves 
within six months, and ended by marrying Katherine Parr 
whom, apparently, he had also designed to behead — ^truly a 
story with no parallel in all the ample page of time. 

If it seems so to us who, nearly four hundred years after- 
ward, read of it with no more poignant sensation than that of 
disgust or derision, what must have been the impressions of 
the daughter of this man who had murdered her mother ? — a 
daughter, as somebody has said, not only motherless but worse 
than fatherless. 

The effect must indeed have been tremendous. The 
shock of it must for ever have altered the whole outlook of the 
child. It must have sobered and saddened Elizabeth all 
through her youth, and could not have been long absent from 
her mind at any time in her after-life. These sad truths 
undoubtedly played a prominent part among the forces which 
now assailed and beat her down into what is most formative 
of character, protracted ill-health — ^with its introspection, its 
demand on patience, its melancholy, its disillusionment, its 
discovery of forces beyond human control ; to which we may 
add in the case of Elizabeth, a deep sense of shame, of wrong, 
and of mortification. We may be certain that a child who had 
such a history could not have been like an average child of 
average parentage. We are compelled to expect something 

As we reflect upon these early trials, and add to them the 
circumstances of the Seymour Affair, wherein her life, her 
reputation, her future, her hopes of the throne, hung for 
months upon a single word from her, we are not surprised that 
long before her suitor paid with his head for his folly, Elizabeth 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


fell desperately ill. During the succeeding four years, she 
was, if not continuously, certainly for much of this time, in 
the most miserable physical and mental condition. There is 
besides ample evidence that for four or five years more she was 
subject to frequent recurrences of all its most acute physical 
symptoms ; and then her physique, in its turn, would react 
upon the brain — a vicious circle that in older people often 
becomes insupportable. 

Elizabeth's illness at this time appears to have been a 
complete breakdown of nerves and body. There seems little 
room for doubt that in these days of the early twentieth century 
we should be told that one so afflicted had, besides pronounced 
physical illness, nervous prostration — one of the most terrible 
diseases to which man is exposed. 

Elizabeth's melancholia, with her weepings, her continuous 
headaches, her inability, real or imaginary, even to write a 
letter, the shortness of breath, the vehemence, etc., are all 
sjrmptomatic of this trouble — and yet in her case, as will be 
later apparent, they may all have originated from certain 
physical diseases. 

In these days we have much more medical knowledge than 
was at Elizabeth's service ; yet it is almost impossible for the 
average reader to measure the ravages of diseased nerves in 
this practically unaided girl. Those who have suffered such 
tortures may alone approximate to an understanding of what 
Elizabeth endured. All through her after-life we may, in one 
symptom or another, trace the recurrences of the original 
attack. To take one instance ; what we have always believed 
in, and joked about, as Elizabeth's violent temper, was not 
really temper at all. The famous occasions upon which she 
raved were but the manifestations of nerves that would no 
longer be restrained. There is not the slightest evidence that 
Elizabeth was naturally ill-tempered. The evidence is dis- 
tinctly to the contrary. A gentler, sweeter, kindlier child was 
uncommon — so rare that contemporaries particularly noted it. 
But from the time of this first prolonged illness, Elizabeth was 
a different being. Ever after, her nerves were almost beyond 
her control. 

From that time, too, her physical health was gone. It 
may be that the overwrought, diseased nerves broke down the 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


physique, and so exposed it to the specific infections which 
wrecked it, as is often the case. Our medical experts, however, 
would seem to incline to the view that it was a weak, sickly, 
anaemic physique and certain diseases and infections that 
compelled the nerves to give way — ^but whichever version be 
correct, there is, we beUeve, no difference of opinion upon the 
point that at this time Elizabeth's constitution was wrecked ; 
and while at times she was later capable of withstanding — ^but 
for brief periods only — considerable bodily fatigue, it is 
evident that it was her spirit that supplied the motive power ; 
and, we may add, the compelling influence, most frequently, 
was her love and ambition for England. 

After this first attack, and usually when some fresh mental 
strain arose, there always followed relapse, reaction, and new 
illness. In a number of instances, these later illnesses were of 
the most desperate description, any one of which would lessen 
the vital force of any human frame. 

She was never, during the last year of the Seymour AfFair, 
nor subsequently, a strong girl or woman — but she never 
spared herself when there was anything to be done for 

These first four years of her illness, 1548 to 1552, were the 
greatest crisis of her career, but we must be thankful for 
them ; as we are sure that she was, in after-life ; for, as we 
glance back at her, and consider what England was when she 
reached the throne and what it was when she surrendered it, 
we cannot escape the conclusion that it was for the advance- 
ment of civilization that the young girl had to undergo these 
hard days. 

God, as we all see now, was about to bring forward the new 
Power that should take the first place in the world, and He was 
fashioning the human instruments which the task would 

The chief of these was Elizabeth. With our little know- 
ledge, we cannot say with certainty that Elizabeth was the only 
person who could have brought England to its world-leadership. 
But we know that the work was done ; we believe that it was 
the will of God that it should be done at that time ; and 
materials are available to demonstrate that, so far as human 
agencies are involved, Elizabeth did more than all the rest of 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


her contemporaries to bring about this gigantic turn in the 
world's course. Hers waslJie directing mind. 

The Spaniard of to-day may possibly believe that the 
world would be better if Spain had remained in the hegemony 
of creation — as she undoubtedly was until challenged by 
Elizabeth. We of other blood believe that the Spain of to-day 
is the best evidence that our way is the right one, and that of 
Spain the wrong. 

This is our faith ; and as we contemplate, at this distance 
of time, the woman who occupied the throne of England while 
the twenty-year struggle with Spain filled the eyes of the 
earth, we see that her childhood and youth were all a training 
for her gigantic task — ^that the desperation, the shame, the 
humiliation, the long sufiFering to which slander subjected her, 
the necessity of relying absolutely upon herself — a terrifying 
task at the time — ^were but the fire in which her faculties could 
be shaped. 

We are well aware that this view of the great Queen's 
health will come as a surprise to our readers. Many an 
historical scholar will have grave doubts when these words 
first come to his sight. But we are content to await the out- 
come after he has perused the evidence that we have to offer. 

One thing at least is certain — ^that his first surprise will 
not be greater than was our own when the truth unfolded 
itself. For we had, of course, implicit faith in everything we 
had read of Elizabeth's physique and nerves, as there was 
never the slightest controversy about it. 

The real explanation is that we have had the time and the 
opportunity to pursue new lines of inquiry with no necessity 
for hurry, and that only one full, detailed life of Elizabeth 
has ever been written — ^that of Miss Strickland, a truly marvel- 
lous product of Vidde investigation.* It is, however, nearly a 
century since she wrote ; now the field has broadened, and 
much more extensive and intensive investigation of the matter 
is possible. She had to write the lives of many people ; was, 

• We do not classify Dr. Creighton's small Life of Queen Elizabeth with 
the work of Miss Strickland, nor did its author ever intend that that should 
be done. The limits of Creighton's work are indicated by his preface : 
" It was impossible within my lunits to do more than sketch a rough outline 
of a very complex personality. . . ." Professor Beesly's even snuller work 
is still more restricted in scope. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


moreover, dependent upon her historical work for her liveli- 
hood, and therefore compelled rapidly to produce it. So 
there is no especial merit in adding to the information which 
Miss Strickland set forth. 

Nor is there any need of conflict with other writers, living or 
dead. They have dealt with the political history of Elizabeth's 
reign, not with her personal history — a very different matter. 
This work is strictly confined to the person of the Queen ; a 
task in which our only competitor can be Miss Strickland. 

The prevailing and, we may say confidently, the universal 
view of Elizabeth by the world at large is substantially com- 
prehended in the following excerpt from the sketch of Elizabeth 
in the Dictionary of National Biography : 

" In person," says the D.N.B., " Elizabeth was a little 
over middle height, and when she came to the throne she 
must have been a beautiful young woman, with a profusion 
of auburn hair, a broad conmianding brow, and regular 
features. . . . Queen Elizabeth was emphatically her father's 
child. From him she got her immense physical vigour, her 
magnificent constitution, . . . a frame which seemed incapable of 
fatigue, and a nervous system that rendered her almost insensible 
to fear or pain. Her life was the life of a man, not a woman ; 
she could hunt all day, dance or watch masques and pageants all 
night, till the knees of strong men trembled under them as they 
wearily watched in attendance upon her person ; yet she never 
seemed to suffer from the immense tension at which she lived. . . . 
It is not till February, 1602, that we first hear of her health 
beginning to fail ; when a correspondent of Sir Dudley Carleton 
expresses his regret at the queen's ' craziness.' " 

A moment's reflection will demonstrate to any reader his 
agreement with these conclusions. We might multiply them 
ad infinitum by proceeding to quote from our various pre- 
decessors, ancient, modern, and contemporary, who have 
referred to Elizabeth's health ; but it would only lead to 
useless redundancy. We therefore refer alone to the leaders 
among them. 

Two may be taken first — one English and one French, both 
contemporaries of the Queen, for it has been by them, broadly 
speaking, that the whole world, all historians especially included, 
has been misled for more than three hundred years. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Camden writes : 

" 1572 — The Queene also herself e, which hitherto had enjoyed 
very perfect health, {for shee never eate tneate but when her 
appetite served her, nor dranke Wine without alaying,) fell sick, 
of the small poxe at Hampton Court. But shee recovered again, 
before it was heard abroad that she was sicke." * 

And subsequently adds : 

" 1603 — The Queen, which hitherto enjoyed her sound health 
by reason of her abstinence from wine, and most temperate diet 
(which she often said was the noblest part ofphysicke,) being now in 
her Climatericall yeere, to wit, the seventyeth yeere of her age, 
began to be assayled with some weakenesse both of health and old 
age. . . ."t 

Without exception all English historical writers have 
respected this pronouncement as if it were Gospel. 

De Thou, writing later than Camden and often quoting 
him, says : 

" She enjoyed perfect health up to her old age, of which she 
never felt any inconvenience, and she terminated, like Augustus, 
a very happy life with a peaceable and tranquil death." % 

This is the foundation upon which all French authorities 
have since joined in swelling the chorus that Elizabeth was a 
physical Amazon, and in truth more of a man than of a woman. 
Of similar import are the following authorities : 
Francis Bacon — In felicem Memoriam Elizabethce : 

" Elizabeth was endowed valetudo maxime prospera." 
(Elizabeth was endowed " with the most excellent health ") 
(p. 392 of vol. ii. of Opera Omnia, 1730 ed. Londoni). 

E. S. Beesly — Life of Queen Elizabeth : 

" Elizabeth had always enjoyed good health. In her 
capacity for resisting bodily fatigue and freedom from nervous 
ailments, she was like a man. It was not until the beginning 
of 1 602 that those about her noticed any signs of failing strength ' ' 
(p. 23s (1903))- 

* Book Hi p. 52, 1630 ed. f Book IV. idem, p. 221. 

J Vol. xiv. p. 146. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


Carte — Hist, of England : 

" The queen had always enjoyed a good state of health " 
(vol, iii. p. 696). 

Pollard— rA« Political Hist, of England, vol. vi. (1910). 
The History of England from the Accession of Edward VI. to 
the Death of Elizabeth : 

" A splendid physique, abstemiousness, and careful habits, 
enabled her to survive by many years the usual span of royal 
lives, and her health did not begin to fail till the end of 1602 " 
(P- 479)- 

York Powell, Regius Professor of Modem History, Oxford, 
and T. P. Tout, Professor of History, Victoria University, in 
their History of England (1900) : 

" She had a magnificent constitution, and seemed almost 
incapable of fatigue. ... In 1602 even her robust constitution 
began to fail " (p. 444). 

Green : 

" Personally she had much of her mother's charm with 
more than her mother's beauty. . . . She (was) a bold horse- 
woman, a good shot, a graceful dancer. . . ." (He appears to 
make no other reference to her physique ) (vol. ii. p. 286). 

Nichols's Prog. : 

" In September, 1572, the Queen, who had hitherto been 
very healthy (never eating without an appetite, nor drinking 
without some allay) fell sick of the small-pox . . ." (vol. i. ann. 

Froude : 

" At this time, Elizabeth was beautiful ; . . . The magnifi- 
cent girl . . . must have presented an emphatic contrast with 
the lean, childless, haggard, forlorn Mary " ( pp. 359-60. 
Refers to 1555). 

Creighton— Lz/is of Elizabeth : 

" Mary must have known that the graceful figure and 
youthful vivacity of Elizabeth threw into the shade her own 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


careworn face, grown old before its time " (p. 21. Refers to 

Richardson— 2%c Lover of Queen Elizabeth : 

" Elizabeth was twenty-five years of age, handsome, 
vigorous . , ." (p. 40. Refers to 1558). 

Hume — The Courtships of Queen Elizabeth : 

" Elizabeth was now in the very prime of her beauty and 
powers. Her complexion was of that peculiar transparence 
which is only seen in golden blonds, her figure was fine and 
graceful . . ." (p. 60, referring to Elizabeth's appearance 
when she ascended the throne in 1558). 

Mile, de Keralio— flw^oirc d'Elizabeth (1787) : 

" She had enjoyed up to this (1603) perfect health, despite 
her seventy years ; she could hunt still with expertness and 
swiftness ; she could ride horseback, dance, and sing with as 
much gaiety as in the first years of her reign . . ." (vol iv. 
p. 956). 

Tytler — Tudor Queens and Princesses : 

" Elizabeth's temperate habits, and her fondness for out- 
of-door exercise, had caused her to enjoy, for the most part, 
robust health " (p. 135). 

With the writers on Elizabeth in this accord, how could 
any one reach a contrary opinion except after travelling the 
long road that lies behind the present writer ? 

As before indicated, we believe the hitherto accepted view 
demonstrably a mistaken one — and as proof thereof we shall 
submit in a few minutes a Medical Record of the entire life of 
the Queen. The chronological order of the narrative is thereby 
somewhat interrupted, but we are of the opinion that only by 
this method can the reader be prepared intelligently to weigh 
the evidence presented later for and against Elizabeth's 

To the Medical Record are appended opinions thereon 
from the most eminent medical men — the result of the first 
medical study ever made of the Great Queen ; but before 
presenting it, we think it best to offer a few general observations 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


upon its first two or three pages, those under the sub-title 
" A— Elizabeth's Family History." 

As already said, Elizabeth's first important illness began 
in 1548, before the Seymour Affair had arrived at its most 
dangerous period, when she was not yet fifteen years of age, 
and was a complete breakdown, mentally and physically. Her 
constitution and nervous system gave way at the first intense 
strain. Why ? 

Why ? The query does not appear ever to have been 
made. It is quite time that it were done. 

In searching for the explanation, a physician would at the 
very outset demand to know the medical record of Elizabeth's 
family. We shall therefore proceed in similar order. The 
exact information will be found in the Appendix, note i. 

With respect to its contents, let us first glance at the progeny 
of Henry VIII.'s marriages, apart from Elizabeth, that is at 
Mary and Edward, and at a boy whom Henry had in 1519 by 
one of his wife's ladies-in-wdting, the young man known in 
history as Duke of Richmond. There also appears to have 
been an illegitimate daughter, Etheldreda, brought up by 
Henry's tailor ; but of her we know too little for the purpose 
of this inquiry, except that she died soon after marriage and 
without issue. 

The main fact concerning the Duke of Richmond with 
which we have to deal is this — that he died when seventeen, 
having apparently been in failing health for a long period. 

The constitution and disposition of Mary, Catharine's 
daughter, was wrecked at about the same age and in much the 
same manner as those of Elizabeth. Henry's treatment of 
Mary's mother, the tearing apart of mother and daughter even 
to keeping them asunder when the former was smitten by her 
prolonged fatal illness, the insults and persecution from the 
King's mistress — Anne Boleyn — ^whom Henry insisted upon 
keeping under his wife's roof, the continued danger to the 
girl's and mother's life and liberty on account of their religion, 
Mary's deposition from her position of Princess, the breaking 
up of her household, her consigiunent to poverty, the declaration 
of her illegitimacy, and finally the forcing of her to commit 
perjury by acknowledging her father as supreme head of the 
Church in addition to signing a statement that she was 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


illegitimate because her mother was never legally married to the 
King — all which things, especially terrible ror a girl of her 
strong religious principles, she had to do in order to save her 
liberty if not her life — gave Mary's constitution a succession of 
shocks that threw her at the age of sixteen into a most severe 
illness. This was succeeded by others, until, before she was 
out of her teens, she had become a chronic invalid. 

Thus was a saintly, frank, and lovable girl altered and 
warped into a hard, suspicious, embittered woman, prematurely 
aged and infirm, eventually driven to an early death. 

Of all Henry's crimes, these are the worst — his treatment of 
Catherine of Aragon, who gave every drop of her blood to 
advance him and his people, and his harshness and callousness 
to their daughter, crimes by which he tortured one to her grave 
and one to incurable disease, two of the best and noblest women 
who ever came into the pages of history. The beheading of 
Anne Boleyn and of Catherine Howard, preceded by perhaps 
a month of anxiety between sentence and the fall of the axe, 
was as nothing compared with the years and years of slow 
agony and outrage to which the helpless Catherine and Mary 
were subjected. 

The medical indices of Mary's decline may be seen from 
the following : — 

For many years she was never free from headache and 
palpitation of the heart ; she was habitually afflicted with the 
most abject melancholy ; she was anaemic to a notable degree ; 
there was a general weakness of frame. Her colour was bad ; 
her periods were irregular, scanty, painful, and in the main 
suppressed, a complaint treated, according to the Venetian 
ambassador, by " frequent blood-letting," or, as put by another 
and higher authority, " her strength was further reduced by 
frequent bleedings ordered by her physicians." * 

In an address delivered before the British Medical Society 
in 1877, Spencer Wells, than whom there can be no higher 
authority, expressed the opinion that her disease was ovarian 
dropsy, adding, " and her bodily ailments were doubtless 
aggravated by mental suffering." 

We now arrive at that pitiful figure, Edward. If we have 
had any uncertainty, here we must lay it aside, for a further 

* Brit. Med. your., 1910, vol, i, p. 1303, " Some Royal Death-Beds." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


transcript from the last-mentioned authority states : 
" Edward VI. died at the age of sixteen, apparently of con- 
sumption ... in addition to the symptoms of pulmonary 
disease, eruptions on his skin came out ; his hair fell off, and 
then his nails, and afterwards the joints of his toes and fingers." 

And now we shall have a word to say as to the author of 
this horrible sequence of disaster. 

In the Annals of the Barber Surgeons we find this minute : 
" Henry VIII. suffered many years before his death from a 
' sorre legge,' . . ." 

In the above article from the Medical Journal, we also find : 
" In 1546 the life of Henry VIII. was coming to an end. From 
a handsome, athletic man he had become a mass of loathsome 
infirmities," etc. 

Such, we trust, is a strictly modest suggestion of the 
contents of our Family History of Elizabeth. It is from that 
ancestry, that father, that she had to inherit whatever consti- 
tution she ever had — and the bald truth would appear to be 
that that inheritance was a particularly unfortunate one. She 
was given but a feeble machine with which to enter such 
battles of life as are the fate of but very few — a machine alto- 
gether inadequate to withstand the ordinary demands of the 
average uneventful life — and still less equal to the frequent 
and prolonged terrific strains and stress to which this girl and 
monarch was to be subjected — strains and stress which would 
have tried to the very brealdng point the strongest combination 
of nerve and physique that can be imagined. 

This is one point upon which all of the great experts who 
have honoured us with their co-operation are, we believe, in 
entire accord — i.e. that Elizabeth never had a strong constitu- 
tion and that consequently she started life with a heavy handicap, 
and never recovered from it. 

No one of the experts, however, is prepared positively to 
say that Henry VIII.'s disease was the cause of the ill-health 
which dogged the great Queen all through her life, at least after 
she was fifteen. Their position, as we understand it, is that 
they do not find in her the specific symptoms which they agree 
denote congenital disease, such as, among others, early fits, 
paralysis, epilepsy, bone, skin, or visceral lesions. 

With great deference and after studying the chief writings 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


upon the disease involved, we beg to advance the proposition 
that the pronounced anaemia, the decaying teeth, the bad heart, 
the weak constitution, with its long train of consequences, may 
very well be the sequela of that lack of a strong constitution, and 
that lack itself be due to a diseased father. 

The disease involved is a constitutional disease. It is a 
blood disease, and few if any corpuscles in the veins can be 
altogether immune from its virus. There can be no reason- 
able doubt, after considering the experience of Catherine of 
Aragon as it is set out in the Family History, that her husband 
had a most dread infection more than twenty years before 
Elizabeth was born ; and he never recovered from it ; and 
it killed him. 

We have seen what happened to Henry's other children, 
Mary, the Duke of Richmond, and Edward ; and while the 
medical text-books assert that healthy children may occur after 
the birth of the tainted one, the proof as offered is not con- 
vincing in this respect, viz.. They merely say that the un- 
tainted child was healthy, and therefore untainted.* 

It would appear to us that more is required. It seems 
that the conclusive test is the nature and amount of strain, 
mental and physical, to which a child or man is subjected — 
and that is something incapable of exact measurement. 

It appears logical that of two children congenitally infected 
by such a disease, one, by reason of a life of ease, freedom from 
responsibility, from misfortune, from other contagions, from 
accidents, grief, or prolonged mental anguish and distress, or 
from long continued danger, may never disclose any pronounced 
weakness — and the physicians would offer him as a healthy 
child bom subsequent to the second one, who, like Elizabeth, 
may break just because, so far as can be ascertained, he was not 
free from some or all of these very misfortunes. 

But the exact comparison does not arise in the case of 
Henry's children, for all four permanently broke down before, 
or when, fourteen or sixteen, all at or about puberty. Yet the 
medical men decide that Edward — who alone had the positive, 
visible sjrmptoms with which we are all familiar — ^is the only 
one of the four who was infected by his father. Those medical 
authorities will not say, however, at least unanimously, that 
* For authority, cf. Proceeds, of Roy. Soc. Med., 1912, voU v. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Elizabeth and Mary were not infected, and in several instances 
they expressly admit the possibility if not probability of such 
an origin of their misfortunes. 

But we are getting beyond our depth, we are well aware, 
when adventuring thus far into the medical world, and we 
endeavour to escape whole with assent to this proposal — That 
the chances are against such a father as Henry VIII. having a 
child untainted, and for that reason as much as for the protection 
of the mother, every physician would have opposed a marriage 
to that monarch. 

In the following chapter, we now offer the formal Medical 
Record of the life of Elizabeth. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



(Exactly as presented to the Five Medical Experts, 
except for the eighteen items marked in the margin 



A. — Family History 

HE text under this heading can only be 
seen in the Appendix, note i. 

B. — Elizabeth's History 

(Items numbered consecutively, accompanied by 
Elizabeth's age and the date of each. It is attempted 
to confine each disease or illness to one Group.) 

Group I. — ^t. 14 to 19 (1548 to 1553) 

No.i.iEt. 14 "She was furst syk about mydsomer." — ^Mrs. 

andiomos. ^jjjgy^ February 4, 1549, referring to the preceding 

1548?' Midsummer. (5. P. Dom. Edw. VI. vol. vi. No. 20.) 

No.2, " Incontinent after the death of the quene at 

Sept.7,is48. Cheston, when the said lady Elizabeth was seke." 

— Mrs. Ashley, February 2, 1549, referring back to 

some time subsequent but immediately after September 

7, 1548. (Idem, No. 19.) 

No.3, " Sche be3mg seke yn hyr bed." — Mrs. Ashley, 

Sept. 1548. February 12, 1549, referring back to some period soon 

after September 7, 1548. {Idem, No. 22.) 
No.4, " Many lines will not serve to render the least 
Oct. 1548. part of the thanks that your Grace hath deserved of 
me, most especially for that you have been careful of 
my health ; and sending unto me not only your 
comfortable letters, but also physicians, as Doctor 
Bill, whose diligence and pain has been a great part 
of my recovery. , . , And although I be most bounden 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


to you in this time of my sickness ; yet I may not be 
unthankful for that your Grace hath made expedition 
for my patent." — Elizabeth to Somerset, October 
(?i548). (S. P. Dom. 3d. vi., bottom paging 9.) 

No.s, In a letter to Edward, Elizabeth twice implies that 

Nov. 5, 1548. her health continues bad, but promises more frequent 
letters to him " if God grant vigourous health." She 
refers to a translation she may send to him. (Wood, 
Letters of Roy. and III. Lad., vol. iii. p. 232.) 

No_ ja, " She saith she cam to London as she thynketh 

^t. is. about III wekes or a moneth before Christmas. She 

NEW spake with no persone there but onely with . . . Parry. 

'1548.**^* '' . . . She saith she dyd not speak at that tyme nether 

with the Lord Admirall nor no one of his men, nor 

was never one myle owt of the lady Elizabeths hows 

syth she was furst syk about mydsomer." — ^Mrs. 

Ashley, February 4, 1549, referring to events of the 

preceding year, showing that she meant that she was 

not a mile from Elizabeth between Midsummer 

(June 24) or about that time, and approximately 

December i. {S. P. Dom. Edtv. VI., vol. vi. No. 20.) 

No.6,^ In a letter of January 2, 1549, Elizabeth writes to 

Jan. a, iS49- Edward excusing herself for being unable to send him 
her usual New Year present, something of her own 
writing. Her first excuse is as follows : " Every 
description of learning . . . has been either so wasted 
by the long duration of my illness, or so hindered by 
the infirm state of my health, that my old custom of 
bringing something or other out of my scanty literary 
store-house . . . has been now altogether taken from 
me. And, even though I had not been quite an 
invalid. . . ." {Idem, p. 221.) 

No. 6a, " Plesyth yowr Grace to be advertysed that after 

Mt. IS. my Lady's Grace had sene a Letter (wych I devysed 

Jan^2^S49 *° Mestrys Blanche frome a Frend of hers,) that boyth 
"Mestrys Aschlay and her Cofferer was put into the 
Tower, she was mervelous abashede, and ded weype 
very tenderly a long Tyme, . . ." — Tyrwhyt to Pro- 
tector, January 22, 1549. (Haynes, p. 70.) 

No.7, In re the supersession of Mrs. Ashley by Mrs. 

Feb. 19, Tyrwhyt at the command of the Council, as Elizabeth's 
^ governess, Tyrwhyt writes to Somerset : " She took 

the Matter so hevely, that she wepte all Nyght, and 
lowred all the next Day. . . ." (Haynes, p. 108.) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 8, No exact year can be assigned to this letter, but it 

■St. IS. 17. evidently refers to the same period as the remainder of 

July al,' Group I. " O King ... the reason that you have 
1549'? not, for so long a time, seen any letters from me is . . . 
because the pain in my head precluded all modes of 
writing. . . . Truly, I am both ashamed and grieved 
that I must so often make excuses of this kind. ... I 
am somewhat restored to health. ... I think I ought 
now to resume my long interrupted duty of writing." 
— ^Elizabeth to Edward. (Wood, Letters of Roy. and 
III. Lad., vol. iii. p. 327.) 

No. 9, This undated letter also belongs plainly to Group i. 

^t. i6-i7 ? " Whereas before this time, most serene and illustrious 
jJ.o'''j king, I have given no letter to your Majesty, and 
returned no thank for the singular kindness and 
brotherly love that you have shown me, I beg that 
you will not think this should be attributed to forget- 
fulness of benefits, far from it — ^nor to slothfulness 
which is most unbecoming to me — ^but to other very 
just causes. For whilst I often attempted to write to 
your majesty, some ill health of body especially 
headache recalled me from the attempt. For which 
reason I hope that your Highness will accept my 
feeling towards you instead of letters." — Elizabeth to 
Edward. (Harl. MS. 6986, Art. la.) 

No. 10, "I had forgotten to say to you that her Grace 

JEt. 17. commanded me to say to you, for the excuse of her 

I550' hand, that it is not now as good as she trusts it shall 

be ; her Grace's unhealth hath made it weaker, and 

so unsteady, and that is the cause." — Thos. Parry to 

Cecil. (Mumby, The Girl, of Q. EL p. 75.) 

No. II, " Her Grace hath been long troubled with rheums 

^t. 17. (a term evidently used both for colds and rheumatism. 

Sept. 22, Pqj. ygg jjj ^j^g latter sense, vide item No. 157, infra) 
but now, thanks be the Lord ! meetly well again, and 
shortly ye shall hear from her Grace again." — ^Thos. 
Parry to Cecil, at command of Elizabeth. (Tytler, 
Eng. under Edw. VI. and Mary, vol. i. p. 322.) 

No. 12, " I commit your Majesty to His hands, most 

Ap^*2i^^ humbly craving pardon of your Grace that I did write 

1552. ' no sooner ; desiring you to attribute the fault to my 

evil head, and not to my slothful hand." — ^Elizabeth to 

Edward. (Wood, Letters of Roy. and III. Lad., 

vol. iv. p. 225.) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 13, "I hope, most illustrious King, that I shall readily 

JEt. 19. obtain pardon that for such a long interval of time 
Tss8°' y°" '^^^^ received from me so few letters either 
returning thanks for your benefits or at least bearing 
witness to my due regard for you, especially as no 
kind of forgetfulness of you whom I never can or 
ought to forget has been the cause of the delay." — 
Elizabeth to Edward. (Wood, Letters of Roy. and 
III. Lad., vol. iii. p. 230.) 

No. 14, The exact date is conjectural, except that it is 

^t. 15-19- clear that it belongs to this same Group i. " Although 
I would study nothing so much as to escape • . , even 
the slightest suspicion of ingratitude, I nevertheless 
fear that I may seem to have fallen into it ; because, 
having ever received so many favours from your 
majesty, I yet have, in so long an interval, sent no 
letters, whereby you might discern at least, the signs 
of a grateful heart ; for which omission, as there are 
just and necessary causes, I hope and am likewise 
assured that your majesty will readily absolve me from 
every charge of ingratitude ; for a disease of the head 
and eyes has come upon me, which has so grievously 
troubled me ever since my coming to this abode, that, 
although I often attempted to write your majesty, I 
have, even to this day, ever been recalled from my 
purpose and resolution. As this affection, by the aid 
and assistance of the great and good God, has now 
somewhat abated, I have considered that I ought no 
longer to defer the duty of writing." — Elizabeth to 
Edward. (Wood, Letters of Roy. and III. Lad., 
vol. iii. p. 234.) 

Group 2. — 2ist and 22nd years (1553-4-5) 

No. 14a, Elizabeth reported ill, but contemporary authority 

■^^- not discovered. — Cf. Mumby, p. 81, and Strickland's 

Circa July 6, Elizabeth, p. 66, 1842 ed. 
ISS3- Elizabeth quitted the Court on December 6 for 

No. i4aa, Ashridge ; but before she reached it she was taken so 

Dec'*6^°5 ^^ *^** ®^® ^^^ *° ^^^'^ ^^^ ^^'^ Queen's horse litter ; we 

1553, ' find no statement of the nature of this illness, except 

that it may be connected with the swelling in No. 15 

infra, which is dated some two months later. — (Renard 

to Charles V., from London, December 17, 1553.) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 14&, In answer to a letter from Mary summoning her to 

^t. ao. Court, which letter is of January 26, Elizabeth sent 

ISS4- ^^ ^'■^^ message " that she was too ill at present to 

travel ; that as soon as she was able she would come, 

and prayed her majesty's forbearance for a few days." 

(Strype, Mem. iii., Part I. p. 127.) 

No. 14c, Besides the above oral message, the high officials 

Ja^z-^f' deputed by Mary to guard and watch Elizabeth, for 
1554, she was under the strictest surveillance, being suspected 
of complicity in the Wiatt rebellion, sent a letter to 
the Lord Chancellor on their own behalf stating : 
" That ... we attend on my Lady Elizabeth's Grace 
our mistress, in hope of her amendment to repair 
towards the Queen's Highness, whereof we have as yet 
no apparent likelihood of health." (Idem.) 

No. i4d, Elizabeth sent word to the Queen to send her own 

JEt. ao. physician to Ashridge so that she might see that 

*"■*'' Elizabeth was ill. — (Renard, Imperial Ambassador, 
to Charles V.) 

No. i4e. At 10 in the evening of Saturday, February 10, 

^t. 20. three high officials of England reached Ashridge under 
^SsV.' positive orders to bring Elizabeth to Court at once, if 
it could be done without endangering her life. By the 
first clause of the following quotation and from the 
second clause from the last, it is quite certain that 
Mary sent her own physicians as Elizabeth requested 
or demanded some days previous to the arrival of the 
aforesaid officials. In view of the very grave suspicions 
against Elizabeth in the mind of her sister, the chances 
are that Mary lost no time in finding out whether or 
not Elizabeth was really ill ; and we must therefore 
believe that Mary's physicians reached Ashridge about 
January 28. The errand of the commissioners was so 
urgent that they compelled Elizabeth at once to admit 
them, " being before advertised of her state by your 
highness's physicians, by whom we did perceive the 
state of her body to be such, that without danger 
to her person, we might well proceed to require her . . . 
to repair to your highness . . . she much feared her 
weakness to be so great that she should not be able to 
travel, and to endure the journey without peril of life, 
and liierefore desired some longer respite until she 
had better recovered her strength ; but in conclusion, 
upon the persuasion, as much of us as of her own 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


council and servants, . . . she is resolved to remove 
hence to-morrow towards your highness, with such 
journeys as by a paper, herein enclosed, yoiu: highness 
shall perceive ; (the itinerary was 6 miles for the 
first day, and 8, 7, 7, and 5 miles for the succeeding 
days) . . . her grace much desireth . . . that she 
may have a lodging, at her coming to court, somewhat 
further from the water (the Thames) than she had 
at her last being there ; which your physicians, con- 
sidering the state of her body, thinketh very meet, 
who have travailed very earnestly with her grace, both 
before our coming, and after, in this matter." — ^The 
Lord Admiral W. Howard, Sir Edw. Hastings, and 
Sir Thos. Comwallis to the Queen. (The Queen sent 
her horse litter to fetch the princess, another proof of 
her real condition.) 
No. 14/, The Commissioners " found hir at the same time 

Same date as ^° ^^'^'^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^' ^'^^ ^^"^ feeble and weake of 

last above, bodie. . . On the next (the 2nd morning after their 

Feb. II, arrival) they had hir forth as she was, verie faint and 

I554- feeble, and in such case that she was readie to swound 

(swoon) three or foure times between them. . . . 

(She was) all sicke in the litter . . . (At St. Albans she 

was) feeble in body . . . (At Highgate she) being 

verie sicke, tarried. . . ." — ^Holinshed, iii. p. 1153. 

Fox Acts and Mans,, iii. p. 792, ed. 1684 to same 

effect. Here at Highgate she remained an entire week, 

for the reason and in- the condition described in the 

next item, before she could be brought the last five 

miles to Westminster. 

No. 15, " The most beautiful spectacles one may see in 

F^*2r°^* ^^ *^'*y ^^^ ^^ ^'^ *^® countryside are the gibbets, 
1554/ hung with the heads of the bravest and most valiant 
men of the kingdom. . . . The princess Elizabeth for 
whom no better fate is forseen, is about seven or eight 
miles from here, so very ill that nobody longer antici- 
pates anything except her death . . . she is so swollen 
and weakened that she is a pitiful sight." — De Noailles, 
French Ambassador at London, to Paris. (De Noailles, 
vol. iii. p. 77.) 
No^i6, " Madame Elizabeth, sister of the said lady, 

FeK 84. arrived Thursday in this city (London), so ill with 
ISS4.' dropsy or some swelling which has attacked her whole 
body and even her face, that those who have seen her 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


do not promise her long to live, I believe that on 
account of this illness she will not be able to accompany 
her sister, but will remain here, if she live that long." 
— De Noailles to Paris. {De Noailles, vol. iii. 
pp. 86 and 87.) 

No. 17, " Her coimtenance was pale." — Renard to Chas. V. 

Mt. zoj. "^ 

Feb.24,iss4. «« They tell me that Madame Elizabeth, sister of 
^t. 20*. *^^ queen, will be soon thrust into the Tower, no 

March iz, matter how ill she may be ; and she almost entirely 
ISS4' swollen." — De Noailles to Paris. (De Noailles, vol. 
iii. p. 125.) 

No. 19, " My lady Elizabeth's grace continually in helthe 

■**• *° *"^ accustomed with thonelye swell3mg in the visage at 
Jtme9,is'54. certayn tjrmes excepted." — Bediri^jield Papers , p. 174. 

No. ao, " Doctour owens letter to me. Plesyth yt that I 

^t. 20 and have understonde by my 1. off the quenys highnes 

Tuneaa** most honorabyll counseU, that my ladye Elizabeths 
ISS4'' grace ys trobled wth ye swelljoig In hir face, & 
also of her armes and hands. Syr, the occasion off 
theis affects ys oflF that hyr gracs bodye ys replenyshed 
with mannye colde and waterysh humors, wch wyll 
not be taken awaye but by pergacons mete & con- 
venient for that prpose. But for as moche as thys 
tyme off the yere, and speciallye the distemp^raunce 
off the wether, doth not permitte to minister purgacons, 
her grace must have sum pacience untyll the tyme off 
the jrere shall bee more meter for medisyns. . . ." — 
Bedingfield Papers. (Dr. Owen's letter to Beding- 

No.2i,iEt.2o Elizabeth wants a " phesician " sent to her. — 
andiomos. Council's letter to Bedingfield. 

June2S,iS54- *" 

No. 22, " First . . . that my 1. Elizabeth's grace ys daylye 

^*- ^^"""^ vexed wth the swellyng in the face and other parts off 

June 25-29, her bodye, & graunte that shee maye have doctour 

XSS4- Huycke, accompanied wth doctour Wendye or doctour 

Owen, the queues maiesties phesicons, Immediatelye 

to repare unto hir, whoese counsell she velouslye 

desjrreth, to devise remedie for swellyng in her face 

and other parts off hir bodye, wch I dooe see hir 

grace often vexed wth all. . . ." — Bedingfield to 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 83. " Uppon saturdaye, her gracs face in the mornyng 

n*mosf" ^^^ somewhat swolyne ; the same night, as she sayed 

July 16, ISS4- her self, she was verye evell at ease. . . ." — Bedingfield 

to the Council. 

^^?.^ ai. " -^t *e after noone (On Monday.— F. C), on hir 

NEW gracs goyng to walke, I harde hir saye she hadde 

Sept. 20, suche payne In hir hedde that she colde wryte nooe 

'^^'*' moore that daye. Tewsdaye, in the mornyng, as I 

lerned off mastresse Morton, she washed hir hedde." 

— Bedingfield to the Council. 

No. 24, Elizabeth commands Bedingfield to send to the 

Oct. 21^1534, Council to ask the Queen to send her the Queen's 

physicians " for to mynister unto hir physyke, brynginge 

of their owne chose oon exparte Surgion to let hir 

gracs blode, yf the saide doctors or twoe of them shall 

thinke yt so good, uppon the vewe of hyr sewte at 

their comynge ; to whych thre persons, or two of 

them, hyr grace sayethe she wyll comytte all the 

privities of hir bodye, or else to no cretures alyve, 

withoute the Quenes hyghnes especiall commaunde- 

ment to the contrarye, which she trustethe hyr Majesty 

wyll not dooe. Hyr grace desyerethe that thys hyr 

sewte may have spede answer, whereby she maye 

inioye thys tyme of the yere apte for thys purpose 

afforesaide. . . ." — Bedingfield to Council. 

N^2s, The physicians arrived at Woodstock on October 29 

Oct. 30, ' with a surgeon, and bled Elizabeth the following 

1554. morning through the arm, and, in the afternoon, 

through the foot. "... since wch tyme, thanks be 

to god, as far as I see or here, she doethe resonablye 

well. . . ." — Bedingfield to Council. 

^^t^22 " ■^°* ^°^^ ^^^^^ (sometime in 1555) her Grace 

1555.' ' fell sicke and the Queen's doctors again journeyed to 

Elizabeth and bled her." — Bohun, Character of Q. El. 

But no contemporary authority has been found. 

Group 3. — ^t. 23-25 {December, 1556, to December, 


^"mfz' " ^^' beauty perhaps had no great share in these 

,556.' *■'' acquisitions ; (of friends at Court where Elizabeth was 

from November 28 to December 3) such as it was, it 

still retained some traces of sickness, and some shades 

of melancholy, contracted in her late severe but useful 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


school of afHiction." — Nichols' Prog, i, p. 30, ist ed. 
1788. Not contemporary. 

No. z7, " The poor Dame (Elizabeth) is so bad in health 

Dec.*is^ that they do not hope that she will live long, as much 
1556.' on account of the jaundice and the yellow sickness 
which she has as for a shortness of breath with which 
she has been continuously suffering ever since the 
time when her sister began to maltreat her, a condition 
which still continues. . . ." — Report from some secret 
agent, contained in letter from Evesque d'Acqs to 
King of France. (Baschet, Trans., P. R. O., Bundle 
No. 22.) 

No. 28, " Swarthy " or " olive " is the adjective used to 

^t.24. describe EHzabeth's colour by Michiel, Venetian 

1557.' Ambassador at London, in addressing the Doge and 

Senate. The Italian word is " olivastra." {Cal. St. P. 

Ven., vol. vi. Part II. 1556-7, pp. 1043 et seq.) 

No. 29, " She was . . . slender . . . and . . . short-sighted." 

^t. 25. _sit. John Hayward, Annals of Q. El, p. 7, ed. of 

'" 1840. 

No. 29a, "She was . . . slender. . . ." — Sir Richard Baker, 

•^*- J5~^'' a contemporary who passed his life in London, and 

was at Court for much of the time. He is here 

speaking of her appearance throughout her life. 

— {Chronicle, p. 118.) 

Elizabeth ascended the Throne November, 1558, 
aged 25 and 2 months. 

Group 4. — Mt. 25-28 {December, 1558, to August, 1561) 

No. 30, "... prophecies are now saying that she (Eliza- 

^t. 25. beth) will reign a very short time. . . . The people 

^iss^' ^^^ already beginning to gossip about her lacking in 

depth " (liviana). — Duke de Feria to Madrid from 


No. 31, " She (Elizabeth) has not been very well lately 

^t. 25. and the opening of Parliament was postponed in 

•'^"•3'' '^^'"consequence from the 23rd to the 25th . . . she was 

suffering from a bad cold when I saw her, and has been 

almost ever since." — Duke de Feria at London to 


No. 32, " The Queen calls Lady Catherine (Robt. Dudley's 

lEx^ft. sister) her daughter . • . the Queen has thought best 

^"560." to put her in her chamber, and makes much of her in 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


order to keep her quiet. She even talks about formally 
adopting her. On the other hand, Cecil tells me that 
neither she nor any other woman will succeed in 
excluding the Countess of Lennox, whose son if he 
were taken to France might disagree with their 
stomachs. They signify that Hastings would succeed." 
— De Quadra, Spanish Ambassador in London, to 

No, 33, Duke de Feria. 
^t. 26i. " I understand that if any disaster happens to the 

Mardi 7, Queen's life . . . the Catholics will raise to the throne 
a son of the countess of Lennox. . . . The Queen 
signifies her intention of declaring Lord Hastings as 
her successor, but he himself is quite of a different 
opinion and goes in constant dread of being sent to the 
Tower,"— De Quadra to Madrid. 

No. 34, "... he had heard they were devising a very 

Ort i/is6o ™Portai^t plan for the maintenance of their heresies, 

' namely, to make the Earl of Huntington King in case 

the Queen should die without issue, and that Cecil 

has told the Bishop (de Quadra) that the succession 

belonged to the Earl. . . ." 

" They fear that if the Queen were to die your 
Majesty would get the kingdom into your family by 
means of lady Catherine. . . . The Bishop asked him 
if . . . the Queen would declare her heiress to the 
Crown. Cecil answered, * Certainly not, because, as 
the saying is, the English run after the heir to the 
Crown more than after the present wearer of it.' " — 
Minute of a letter from De Quadra to Madrid from 

No. 35, " The design of Cecil and the heretics is to make 

Mt. 27. the earl of Huntington King . . ." — De Quadra from 
"1560?' London to Madrid. 

No. 36, "I must not omit to say also that the common 

JEt. 27. opinion, confirmed by certain physicians, is that this 

Jan. 22, 15 »-^onj3Q (Elizabeth) is unhealthy, and it is believed 
certain tiiat she will not have children. . . . This 
being the state of things, perhaps some step may be 
taken in your Majesty's interests towards declaring as 
successor of the Queen, after her death, whoever may 
be most desirable for your Majesty." — De Quadra 
from London to Madrid. 

No. 37, " Was told by Lady Willoughby . . . that while 

^t. 28; jjef Majesty was at Ipswich, she looked like one lately 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Aug. 6-IO, come out of child-bed. . . . Heard Lady Willoughby 

'^ '' say that Her Majesty looked very pale, — ^like a woman 

out of child-bed." — Examination of Robt. Garrerd, 

his wife and Mannell, her servant, on January 19, 1563, 

referring to August, 1561. 

Group 5. — Mt. 28-9 {September, 1561, to July, 1562) 

N<^38, "What is of most importance now is that the 

Sept!'i3 , Queen (according to what I hear) is becoming dropsical, 
1561. and has already began to swell extraordinarily. I have 
been advised of this from three different sources and 
by a person who has the opportunity of being an eye 
witness. To all appearances she is failing, and is 
extremely thin and the colour of a corpse. . , . That 
the Marchioness (of Northampton) who is in a better 
position to judge than any one else . . . and Lady 
Cobham consider the Queen in a dangerous condition 
is beyond doubt, and if they are mistaken I am mis- 
taken also. I can obtain no more precise intelligence 
. . ." — De Quadra from London to Madrid. 
No. 39, There was a plot of the Pole brothers to set Mary 

Feb *a7 Stuart on the throne through landing troops in Wales. 
1562.' Upon prosecution the brothers' ..." only defence 
was that they ment to attempte nothing in the Quene's 
life tyme who by conjuration they had fownde should 
not lyve passinge the nexte spring." — ^An Astrologer 
named Prestal, who had cast Elizabeth's nativity, 
predicted that she would die the ensuing March. — 
Letter of Mason to Chaloner. 
No. 40, " She (Mary Stuart) said to me that Lethington 

m. nearly ^^y ^^^ ^^att morning, that the Queen's Majesty 
Julyis.is6a. (Elizabeth) had been ' for a space evle dysposed,' . . . 
She asked me further of the ' habilitie ' of her body 
in time of health, of her exercise, diet, and many more 
questions, that I could not answer, save by report." 
— Randolphe to Cecil. 

Group 6. — Mt. 29 {October, 1562, to November, 1562) 

No. 41, " The Queen has been ill of fever at Kingston, 

■ffit. 2Q. and the malady has now turned to small-pox. The 

Oct. 16, 1562. eruption cannot come out and she is in great danger. 
If tiie Queen die it will be very soon, within a few 
days at the latest, and now all talk is who is to be her 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


successor." — De Quadra to Duchess of Parma from 

No. 42, "... she was all but gone." — De Quadra to 

Oct. 17^1562. Duchess of Parma from London. 

No. 42a, " Our Queen is now ill with the smallpox, and 

^EW before this broke out she was in the greatest danger of 

Oct.2o, 1562. her life, so that her whole Council was in constant 
session for three days ; on the third day she was some- 
what better, but she is yet not free from symptomatic 
fever, as part of the poison {materia) is still between 
the flesh and the skin." — Martin Kyernbek, Medicus, 
from London to Nicholas Guilderstern, the Swedish 

No. 426, " I advised your Highness of the Queen's illness 

JEt. 29. and convalescence. She is now out of bed and is 
ct.2s,is 2. Qjjjy attending to the marks on her face to avoid dis- 
figurement. In her extremity of the i6th her Council 
were almost as much troubled as she, for out of the 
15 or 16 of them that there are there were nearly as 
many different opinions about the succession to the 
Crown." (There is much more on this last matter.) — 
De Quadra from London to Duchess of Parma, ist 
letter of this date. 

No. 43, "... on the seventh day she was given up. . . . 

Ort 25*1562 There was great excitement that day in the place, and 
' if her improvement had not come soon some hidden 
thoughts would have become manifest. The Council 
discussed the succession twice. . . . During this dis- 
cussion the Queen inaproved, and on recovering from 
the crisis which had kept her unconscious and speech- 
less for two hours, the first thing she said was to beg 
her Council . . . (etc., etc.) . . . The various grants were 
made in fear that another crisis might prove fatal. . . ." 
— De Quadra to Madrid from London. 

No. 44, " The Queen's improvement continues, and it is 

o 1^*' 6^" ^^^ considered certain that Parliament will be sum- 
"^ ■ '^ ^' moned, although if the nobles whom the Queen has 
ordered to be called together will privately advance 
her some money, as is the custom here, iJie Queen 
will be glad to avoid having a parliament, as she knows 
they would like to discuss the question of the succession 
and she has not the least wish that it should be opened. 
Public feeling, however, is so disturbed that I do not 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


see how she can avoid it, and I am told by persons of 
position that they believe the matter Avill be dealt with 
whether the Queen wishes it or not. It would be well 
that I should be instructed without delay what action 
his Majesty wishes me to take in this business. . . ." 
— De Quadra to Duchess of Parma from London. 
Scottish records confirm this, and there is other evidence 
to same elFect. Twelve days later De Quadra asks 
again for such instructions. 
No. 45, Parliament was summoned, and on November 5 

iEt. 29. the Speaker presented to the Queen a petition of the 
ov. IS 3. fjouse praying her to marry. After remarking that 
Heaven " to our great terror and dreadful warning 
lately touched your highness, with some danger of 
your most noble person by sickness," he proceeds to 
elaborate the danger to the country were she to die 
" without a known heir," from civil wars, invasion 
from foreigners, etc. 

Group 7. — Mt. 29I to 31 {November, 1562, to December, 

No. 4s«, " The other day a meeting of gentlemen was held 

Nov^ao' at the earl of Arundel's. . . . The question of the 
1562.' succession was discussed. . . . The meeting lasted 
until two in the morning, and when the news of it 
came to the Queen's ears they say she wept with rage, 
and sent for the Earl and upbraided him greatly about 
it." (Much detail given of various claimants.) — De 
Quadra to Philip II. from London. 
No. 46, " When I say that things here are looking threaten- 

Feb^T^ite^ ing I refer to the fact, now known publicly, that the 
* nobles are divided on the subject of the succession. 
(Takes up diflFerent claimants and then proceeds.) 
When the opportunity arrives I think they will confine 
themselves to excluding Huntingdon, and after that 
is done each one will follow his own bent. They have 
become so excited over his pretensions that they cannot 
turn back or shut their eyes to them. The attorneys 
(members) for the towns proposed this question of 
the succession to the Queen (who told them) that the 
matter required further consideration, and, with that, 
turned her back on them and entered her own apart- 
ment. The lords afterwards went to her and proposed 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the same, whereat she was extremely angry with 
them, and told them that the marks they saw on her 
face were not wrinkles, but pits of smallpox, and that 
although she might be old God could send her children 
as He did to Saint Elizabeth, and they (the Lords) had 
better consider well what they were asking, as, if she 
declared a successor, it would cost much blood to 
England. . . , The knights and commoners of lower 
rank are very much perplexed about the business as, 
on the one hand they see the danger of the country in 
its being left to the chance of a sickly woman's life 
without any understanding as to who should succeed. 
. . ." — De Quadra from London to Philip II, 

No. 46a, ..." the cold here hath so assailed us, that the 

^EW Queene's Majestic hath bene much troubled, and is 

Dec. 89, yet not free from the same that I had in November, 
1563. which they call a pooss, and now this Christmass to 
keep her Majestie company, I have newly so possessed 
with it that as I cold not see, but with somewhat ado 
I wryte this. I have made four several letters for her 
Majestie to wryte to you, but nether hath she had 
commodite to sign one, nor now doth the contents 
remayne to be signed. But I hope within two days 
her Majestie will be able to signe. . . . Her Majestie 
is only combred with payne in her nose and eyes, 
otherwise she is, thanked be God ! in good and perfect 
helth." — Burghley to Sir Thomas Smith from 

Ni^47, (Elizabeth had been at Cambridge on progress.) 

Aug. 12,' " • • . she is much in fear of falling ill, which I do not 
1564.' wonder at if they tell her the prophecies that are 
current about her short life. Everybody is talking of 
them. Much is thought here of the Scotch affairs, 
owing to the chance of the succession." — De Silva, 
Spanish Ambass. in London, to Madrid. 

No. 48, The matter of the succession still the paramount 

s ^*' ^'"6 ^""'J^'^* ^* ^^ opening of the new Parliament. " In 

ep .4i IS 4- (.ggg anything fatal should happen to this Queen I will 

prepare and send Your Majesty a statement of the 

rights of the various claimants. . . ." — De Silva from 

London to Madrid. 

No. 49, Melville, Scottish Ambassador, in his memoirs, 

/Et. 31. writing of this time, refers to the fact that Elizabeth 
ct. IS 4. tj^gjj Ijj^j j^gj Q^jj ]^j^jj._ There does not appear to be 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


any later reference to indicate that she thereafter wore 
her own hair, and all subsequent references refer to 
her wigs. All her later portraits, it is believed, indicate 
that it was soon after this date that she became bald. 
No. so, Elizabeth tells Melville that she was in the habit of 

Q^\?i^J playing the virginals " when sche was solitary . . . till 
(to) eschew melancholy." — ^Melville Memoirs. 

Group 8. — iznd, 23rd, and 24tk years {December, 1564, 
to June, 1566) 

No^si, " The Queue's Maistie fell perilously sick on 

Dec. 8,^1564. Saturday last. The accident came to that which they 

call diarrhoea. We feared a flux. She is somewhat 

weakened . . . for the time she made us sore afraid. 

. . ." — Cecil to Sir Thos. Smith, December 15. 

No- sa. " On the 9th of December she was ' sore sick of 

De?9.'Is64.t»^e fl"'^-' "-Cecil's Diary. 

N^sao.^ "... About this tyme the Q. Majesty was sick at 

NEW* Westminster." — Cecil's Diary. 


N^S3i " About 10 o'clock before dinner, I received your 

Dec.i"6^is64. °^^^ Packet, before Murray and the rest came, and as 

■ he was to be ' merrie ' I would not till after dinner give 

him occasion of sorrow. Then I told him and Lething- 

ton what lettre I had received from you that daye not 

two howers before. I abashed them not a little; 

apparent sorrowe was seen in their faces let by (besides) 

their wordes. For the veritie and maner of the 

disease, I showed them your letter, which satisfied 

them, as they trusted the danger was not great. . . ." 

— Thos. Randolph from Edinburgh to Cecil. 

No. S4i " This Queen was attacked with a fever ten days 

0^18^1564 ^*°*^^ which was so severe as to cause her household 

■ ' * *' some uneasiness."— De Silva from London to Madrid. 

No. ss, " On the i8fh and 23rd ult. I wrote your Majesty 

iEt. 31. that this Queen had suffered from fever and had been 

Jan. a, IS s- very ill but was now recovered. I was with her on 

the 24th, and she complained of pains in the stomach 

and all over the body, and she has since been indisposed 

with a very bad catarrh with some fever. She is now 

better again and has come out into the presence 

chamber, b t Leicester tells me she is very thin. The 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


changes o weather have been such that ... it is 
very trying for the weak. It has found out the Queen, 
whose constitution cannot be very strong," — De Silva 
from London to Madrid. 
No. s6, " Although I have written that this Queen has 

Jan 2 Vs6s. ^^^^ *^^ ^*^ catarrh she has also had an attack of pains 
in the head to which she is subject. They inform me 
that the Physicians who attend her consider her con- 
stitution a weak and unhealthy one. It is true young 
people can get over anything, but your Majesty should 
note that she is not considered likely to have a long 
life. ... I have been waiting some days for a Catholic 
who is very diligent in affairs here to give me a state- 
ment about the succession in case of the Queen's 
death. As he still delays I have read authorities on 
the subject, and consulted learned persons and now 
enclose the statement. . . ." — De Silva from London 
to Madrid. 
No. 57, De Foix, French Ambassador, put off a week when 

p-^*-g3'- asking audience, and references to the Queen's taking 
' ' medicine discloses that she has been ill. " The 
Friday she had taken medicine, she had allotted 
Saturday. ..." 

No. s8, Elizabeth ill from the 6th to the 9th.— De Silva 

Se^I'M. ^'^°^ London to Madrid. 

No. 59. "... she is well but thin." — De Silva from 

Se^!'i7^ London to Madrid. 

^^^J' In re "consultations with witches, what invoca- 

JEt. 38. tions, conjurations and prophecies have been of late 

Oct. 4, 1565. made in some parts of the world ' to knowe tymes and 

yeres of some folkes lyves,' I hear enough, and have 

cause to believe part ; . . ." — Thos. Randolph from 

Scotland to Leicester. 
No. 61, Elizabeth ill on ist of month but recovered on 5th. 

N^.*'sf?s6s.~^® Silva from London to Madrid. 
No. 62, Elizabeth " somewhat lame and thin." She falls 

T ^\^\te. downstairs. — De Silva from London to Madrid, 
j^o gj^ " The Queen is still at Greenwich. I have not 

iEx. 32}. seen her since she left here, as she has been unwell ; 
^"fiV'' "'"* although she is better now, she is so thin that a 

doctor who has seen her tells me that her bones may 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



be counted, and that a stone is forming in her kidneys. 

He thinks that she is going into a consumption. . . ." 

— De Silva from London to Madrid. 

No. 64, " The Queen is well, although she had a fever four 

^t. 32i. days since which gave her some trouble." — De Silva 

i^g"' from London to Madrid. 

No, 65, " About this tj'm the Quen of England was sa sair 

iEt. 32 and vesit with a het feur, that na man beleud any vther 

May^°*' ^°^ '^^^^^ *° ^® *^ ^^^ °f '*' ^'^ England being 

June I, is66.therthrow in a gret perplexite. . . . My brother Sir 

Robert Melvill was then Ambassadour ther resident 

for the tym, and I serued in stead of secretaire heir 

at hame. . . ." — Melville, Memoirs. 

Group 9. — ^t. 33 (1566) 

No. 66, " The next day I sent to ask after the Queen, who 

JEt. 33. J heard had been unwell, and to know when I could 
1566.' see her. The Lord Chamberlain sent word that she 
was better. . . . On the following morning the earl 
of Leicester . . . and Secretary Cecil came together 
to see me. They told me that the Queen was better, 
and the next day would go to hunt. . . . That night 
she was so troubled with her indisposition, which is 
an issue on the shoulder, that she could not go to the 
chase. . . . She is rather thin. . . ." — De Silva to 
the King of Spain, from some place near Oxford. 

Group 10. — ^t. 34, 35 and 36 (December, 1567, to 
December, 1568) 

No. 67, " The Queen entered London the 23rd instant in 

Mt. 34. good health, although she had not been well some 

1567.' ^^ys before and had suffered from toothache and a 

fever which lasted forty hours and greatly weakened 

her." — De Silva to Madrid from London. 

No. 68 " "^h*® Queen has been ill for four or five days, 

^t. 34. but is now well. . . ." — De Silva from London to 

Jan. 10, is68. Madrid. 

No. 69, " The Queen is ill in bed with a great excess of 

Aphlgflfes. bile. . . ."— De Silva to Madrid from London. 

No. 70, Elizabeth being ill, the Spanish Ambassador saw 

^t. 34i. her doctor and others, and refrained from seeing her 

May 1, 1568. Qj^ account of their description of her condition, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


although she sent word that she would make an effort 
to see him, as he had an appointment with her. — De 
Silva from London to Madrid. 

No. 71, The French Ambassador says : " I went to find 

■ffit. 3s. this Queen at Antoncourt, whom, although still in 

Dec. s, isoo. gQjjjg indisposition of her health, I found nevertheless 
well disposed to see me in her private chamber. . . ." 
— F^ndon, French Ambassador at London, to the 
Queen of France. 

No. 71a, " 1568. — ^The Queen was this year (but at what 

■^•35. time of it I cannot tell) suddenly taken with a terrible 

, j68 fit of sickness, that threatened her hfe, and was brought 

even to the very point of death, in human appearance. 
This put the court and whole realm into a great con- 
sternation : and, together with her bodily distemper, 
she was under great conflicts and terrors of mind for 
her sins ; . . ." — Annals, Strype, vol. i. Part II. p. 267. 
Not contemporary. 

Group II. — ^t. 36 (jfuly, 1569, to August, 1570) 

No. 72, Elizabeth, " with bad health and an aflliction which 

JEt. 36. she has in her legs, will not be of long life. . ." — 
July 27. 1569. F6n^lon from London to Paris. 

No. 73, Elizabeth had not been well for 5-6 days. — Fendlon 

Xt. 36. from London to Paris. 

Oct. 13,1569. 

No. 74, " Elizabeth became so angry that she fainted, and 

^t. 36. they ran for vinegar and other remedies to revive her." 
Oct.28,is69._F^n61on from London to Paris. 
No- 7S, " Divers have demanded of me of the Quene our 

w mos mistress' healthe. . . ."—Randolph from Edinburgh 
June 13,1570. to Earl of Sussex. 

No. 76, It was at this period that the Duke of Anjou declared 

■*^t. 36-37. «« that he would not marry her, for she was not only 

an old creature, but had a sore leg." 

N^77, " Cecille . . . replied to me that she must not 

june'ss!' overdo, on account of her being ill, as in truth she was, 

1570.' in her leg. . . ." — F^n^lon from London to Paris. 

NcM'S, "... having had me called into her private 

JuM 29,'' chamber, in which she was, dressed like an invalid, 

1570.' having her leg en repoz, after having recounted to me 

the particulars of the affliction, and made her excuses 

for not having been able to hear me as soon as I had 

desired, I went over with her the matters before agreed 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


upon by us. . . ." In this interview she twice 

describes herself as lame. — Pension from London to 


^^'''7 " "^^^ Queen has been three days without leaving 

June 30, her room." — ^Antonio de Guaras to Zayas, from 

1570- London. 
No. 80, " The illness of the Queen is caused by an open 

July *i ^1570 ^^^^'^ i^^^ Uaga) above the ankle, which prevents her 
■ from walking." — De Spes to Madrid from London. 

No. 81, Elizabeth made her progress this year in July and 

Xt. 37. August in a coach because of her lameness due to the 
July and jf 

Aug. 1570. "^'-ci- 

No. Sia, " Sire, the Queen of England having herself per- 

■^•37- ceived that the trouble in her foot (tnal de son pied) 

July 30, would grow worse through the hardships of her pro- 
1570.' gress, although she has only made it in a coach, she 
has stopped at Cheyneys, the house of the Count of 
Betford, where I advised you by my last she was 
going to remain all of the xxv and xxvi of this month ; 
but she has remained here longer, and will not stir for 
some days yet." — F^nelon, in the country with Eliza- 
beth on progress, to the King of France, July 30, 1570. 
" We went, on the 4th inst. (August, 1570) to find the 
said Lady (Elizabeth) at Cheyneys, where she still is." 
— Idem to same, August 6, 1570. " The said lady 
pursues her progress toward Oxford." — Idem to idem, 
August II, 1570. There is also a letter from Cheneys 
written by Leicester on the 8th. — Cal. S. P. For., p. 
310, vol. 1569-71. It is, then, certain that the Queen 
was detained by the ulcer in her leg for at least two 
weeks at Cheneys, and probably longer, by several days. 

No. 8i6, " The Queen is in poor health with her malady in 

•^•37. the leg." — De Gueras from London to Zayas, Cal. 

Aug.i6,is7o. '^- P-y Simancas, vol. ii. p. 270. 

No. 81C, "... she sent three gentlemen to conduct me 

^t. 37. ... to an arbour which had been prepared for her to 
_??^— shoot with the crossbow does which were confined in 
a net ; to this she came soon, grandly accompanied, 
where, having very favourably received me before 
descending from her coach and after getting down 
from it, . . . she asked for news of Your Majesty." 
— F^ndlon to the King of France from near Oxford 
Corrlesp. Dip., vol. iii. p. 290. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Sept. s. 1570. 


Group 12. — 37J to 38 {February, 1571, to June, 1571) 

No. 8a, " As you hold your determination for your progress 

^t. 37i. this week, I pray for fair weather. . . . Nothing is 
"jj^','' better for your health than exercise, and no one thing 
has been a greater hindrance thereto than your over- 
long abode in that corrupt air about the city ; but you 
have so earnestly promised remedy as I hope to see 
you in time this year put it in practice respecting 
yourself before others. . . . Wishing for you, above 
all earthly treasures, good health and long life, I take 
my leave, rejoicing in your postscript that you have 
felt no more of your wonted pangs." — Leicester to 
No. 83, "... she (Elizabeth) vnshed to complain to me 

^t. 37|. tjjjjt a young man who was in the highest place had said 
ay 2. 1571- jj^^^ Monsieur would do well to come to marry this old 
woman, who had had, the past year so much of a sore 
(Tant de mal) in one of her legs that she was not yet 
cured of it, nor would it ever be possible to cure 
it. . . ." — Fendlon from London to Paris. 
No. 84, ( " But as regards France . . . and considering the 

iEt. 37-38. great disparity of age, the poor health of the lady, and 
"^"aSeft^ |e very W hope'of offspring, one may well surmise 
this period that when Elizabeth dies, and the general opinion is 
by best tj^^t she will not live long, it would be an easy matter," 
onty. ^ ^ ^ ^^^^ ^^^ — Rodolfi to Philip II. 
No. 8s, On the loth of May, 1571, as he reports to his 

■®t- 37?. sovereign, Elizabeth said to F6n61on, " that notwith- 
157V' standing the evil report that had been made of her leg, 
she had not neglected to dance, on the preceding 
Sunday, at the Marquis of Northampton's wedding, 
so she hoped that monsieur would not find himself 
cheated into marrying a cripple, instead of a lady of 
proper paces." 

No. 850, " She has neither youth nor health to have children* 

"^EW °^ *° ^'^^ long." — Duke de Feria to Zayas. 

N^^sV^ ' Leicester tells Fdnilon that "he had never seen 

^t. 37 and (Elizabeth) in better health or spirits ; and that she 

10 mo3. would not go out in her coach any more to the chase, 

June zi, but on a fine large horse." — F6n61on to Paris. 
1571. ^ 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Group 13.— 37 to 37I (July, 1571, to December, 1571) 

No. 87, " Their audience was ' difFerrit ' because the Queen 

w mJs was sick."— Diary of Bishop Ross. 

N %8^'' "... in truth, she (Elizabeth) feared very nauch 

^t. 37 and t^^t this young prince would dislike her, and that she 

10 mos. would not find herself sufficiently healthy or suitable 

July 9. IS7I- for a young husband, and she would like to 

postpone the proposal until she felt better." — F^nelon 

to the French Queen. 

No 8g^ " Has received his letter of the 3d, sent by the 

Mt. 37 and Provost Marshal. . . . Has received no small comfort 

10 mos. tQ understand of the Queen's majesty's restoration to 
juiy ». 1571. pgj.fgj,^ health."— Drury to Burghley. 

j^ "... The Queen is not able to go to * progress.' " 

iEt.37 and She finally went on the 10th after a delay of five days. 

11 mos. — Fenelon to Queen of France from London. 

Aug. s, IS7I. « I found her (Elizabeth) ill in bed, where she is 

^t'38 ®*^^'» ^^^ without danger, and daily mending." — Du 
Sept. 1571. Foix, French Ambassador at London, to Paris. 
No. 92, " It was also bruited she (Elizabeth) was sore sick, 

!E,t. 38. and had lain speechless three days, at which the rebels 
Year queried, niuch rejoiced." — Examination of Henry Simpson. 
No. 93, " . . .he had been at Court (in France) and told 

Oct. 21^ them of the Queen's sickness. . . ." — Examination of 

1571 '? Henry Simpson. 
Year queried. 
No. 94, " Other news we have none worth writing, but of 

iSx. 38. her Majesties good estate, which surely is such as I 
Dec. 6, 1571. j^yg jjQ^ known been these many years." — Leicester 
to Walsingham. 

Group 14. — ^t. 38J to 39 {March, 1572, to August, 


No .5 "... The night after the arrival (of the courier of 

iEt.38i. the King of France) there took place such a great 

March 25, iUness and such a great twisting (torcion) of the Queen's 

'^^*' stomach, on account, they say, of her eating some fish ; 

and there has been such heavy and vehement pain 

(douleur) that the entire court has been in the greatest 

consternation ; and Leicestre and Burleigh have 

watched three entire nights beside her bed. . . ." — 

Findlon to Paris. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 96, This last illness, Elizabeth's physicians declared. 

■ffit.38i. " was occasioned by her contempt for physic, and 
iS72*^ utter neglect of such potions as they considered neces- 
sary to keep her in health." — Strickland quotes this, 
but we have not seen the contemporary authority from 
which she appears to quote. 

No. 97, " Sire, immediately the Queen of England, with the 

Mm* o^^ permission of her physicians, has been able to come 
1373.' out of her private chamber, she has permitted me . . . 
to see her ; and she has recounted the extreme pain 
which for five days had so shortened her breath and 
had so clutched her heart, that she verily believed she 
was going to die of it, and some judged that she had 
already done so . . . and that she believed that this 
attack had not come from eating fish, as some said, for 
she often ate it, but rather had come from the fact 
that, for three or four years, she had found herself so 
well that she had disregarded all the strict discipline 
which her physicians formerly had been accustomed 
to impose upon her by purging her and drawing a bit 
of her blood from time to time . . . but no traces 
now remained of the attack except a little sick appear- 
ance and a very little fever. . . ." — F6n61on from 
London to Paris. 

No. 98, " It has been rumoured by the Italians that the 

/Et.sSJ. Queen is very sick and in great danger, which causes 

April 3, IS73- Papists in the Low Countries to triumph not a little, 
and to substitute the Queen of Scots, without contra- 
diction, in the place. . . ." — ^John Lee from Antwerp 
to Burghley. 

No. 99, "... as your Excellency will learn. Parliament 

•^t.sSJ, is to be opened here on the 12th of May, it 

IS?"' *^ believed, for the sole purpose of appointing a 

successor in case of the Queen's death without 

children." — ^A. de Guaras from London to Duke of 


No. 990, " News from England is that the Queen has 

jjg^' entirely recovered her health. . . ," — Guerau de Spes 
;^ril 15, to the King of Spain, from Brussels. 


No 100 " '^^^ night after our audience, the Queen of 

iEt. 39. England became very ill on account of walking too 

Aug. 7, 1573. late in the night air when it was very cold ; and 

because of having hunted too much on the preceding 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


days ; but to-day (two days later) she is very well. . . . 

— Fenelon to Paris. 
No. loi, " Sire, because of a little stomach trouble which 

^t. 39, seized the Queen of England the day she gave us 
"j^V"' audience . . . she has been two days without leaving 

her chamber. . . . And on the third day, the said Lady, 

yet not at all completely recovered, permitted us to 

see her. . . ." — Fenelon to Paris. 
No. 102, " It is said that she was dangerously ill for one or 

Mt. 39. tyyo nights but is now recovered." — De Guaras to 
^J-^f/ Duke of Alba. 

Group 15. — ^t. 39 {September, 1572, to October, 27, 

No. 103, " "^^^ Queene also herselfe, which hitherto had 

Mt. 39. enjoyed very perfect health, (for shee never eate meate 
»573. but when her Appetite served her, nor dranke Wine 

without alaying,) fell sicke of the small poxe at Hampton 
Court. But shee recovered againe before it was 
heard abroad that she was sicke." — Camden, Booke II. 
p. 52, ed. 1630. 
No. 103a, " In September, 1572, the Queen, who had hitherto 

Mt. 39. been very healthy (never eating without an appetite, 
ept. 1572- jjQj. drinking without some allay) fell sick of the small- 
pox at Hampton Court. But she recovered before 
there was any news of her being sick." — ^Nichols' 
Prog. Not contemporary. 
No. 104, The French Ambassador asked for an audience on 

Mt. 39. the and of October ; but Elizabeth sent word to him 
ct. 3, 1573. Qjj ^jjg jg^ « tQ request that she might be excused for 
the 2nd as she had intended to take medicine, and that 
she might also be excused for the entire day of the 3d, 
as she would not be well ; but that he might see her 
on the 4th, or, if the matter were pressing, she would 
put off her medicine to another time." — F6n61on to 
No. 104a, " The Queen's Majesty appeared to have the 

■^- 39- Small-poxs at Hampton-court ; but she recovered 
Oct. 4, IS78. spedely."— Cecil's Diary. 

No. los, " (Cecil) told me that if it were not for the illness 

\!^^i. ^?',-, of the Queen he would at once have led me to her. . . . 
People who come from the Court to-day say that the 
Queen is not so well. As she has an issue {una fuente) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Qct. 6, 1572. 


in the leg there is always some fear of her health. . . ." 
— De Guaras from London to Duke of Alba. 
No. losfl, " Four days since the Queen fell ill at Kingston and 

jit. 39. is still in bed." — Letter of Intelligence from London 
Oct. 7, IS72. (unsigned) to the Duke of Alba. 
No. 106, " The Queen has been unwell, and her illness 

■iEt. 39. turned out to be small-pox. She is now much better." 
Oct. 12. 1572. _De Guaras to Alba. 

No. 107, " Elizabeth ill with chicken- or small-pox." — 

Mt. 39. Y6n6lon to Paris. 

Oct. i3,iS7a- 

No. 108, " On Thursday night last, Monsieur de Crocque 

Mt. 39. ^^ jjgj-g (Windsor) and had audience given him by 

c.i3iiS7 -^j^g Lord Treasurer, my Lord Chamberlain, and my 

Lord of Leicester, because the Queen's Majesty was 

not at that time perfectly whole of the small pox, as 

the Physicians say, although her Majesty and a great 

sort more, will not have it so, now it makes no matter 

what it was, thanks be to God she is perfectly whole, 

and no sign thereof left in her face . . ." — Sir Thos. 

Smith to Walsingham. 

No. 109, "... Her majestie hathe bene very sick this last 

^t. 39. night, so that my Lord of Leicester did watche with 

c .1S11572. j^gj. ^jj night. This morning, thanks be to God ! she 

is very well. It was but a soden pang. I pray God 

long to preserve her. These be shrewde alarmes." — 

Sir Thos. Smith to Burghley. 

No. 109a, "... it is spoken the Queue's Matie hathe bene 

^t. 39. lately syke of the smalle pockes, & as yett no sartenty 

Oct.i6,is72.jg here of hur Mate's recovere, or pftt helth."— Earl 

of Shrewsbury to Burghley. 

No. 110, " He (the messenger going to Paris) can also tell 

iEt. 39. you of a sudden alarm specially yesternight, by her 

Oct.2o,is7a-]y[ajestie being suddenly sick in her stomach, and as 

suddenly relieved by a vomit. You must think such 

a matter would drive men to the end of their wits, 

but God is the stay of all that put their trust in Him." 

— Burghley to Walsingham. 

No. Ill, "... we perceave that you had hard of som late 

Mt. 39. siljnes wherewith we weare visited ; . . . True it is 

' ' that we were about XIII dayes paste distempered as 

commonly happenith in the begynning of a fever ; 

but after twoo or three dales, without any great inward 

siknes, ther began to appere certain red spotts in som 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


parte of our face, likely to proove the small pox ; but, 
thanked be God, contrary to the expectation of our 
phisycians, & all others about us, the same so vanished 
awaye as within foure or fyve dayes passed no token 
almost appeered ; and at this day, we thank God, 
we are so free from any token or marke of any 
suche disease that none can conjecture any suche 
thing. So as by this you may perceave what war 
our siknes, and in what good estate we be ; . . ." 
Elizabeth to Earl of Shrewsbury, Lodge's III., vol. ii. 
p. 79. 
No. ma, " The Queen has been very ill and the malady 

o ^^6^ proved to be small-pox. Before the eruption declared 
' 'itself, the earl of Leicester, the Treasurer, and the 
Earl of Bedford were closteted together several times 
to arrange in case the Queen died, to proclaim as King 
one of the two sons of the earl of Hertford by Lady 
Catherine . . ." — Unsigned letter of intelligence 
from London to Duke of Alba. 

Group 16. — ^t. 39 {October, 1572, to January, 1573) 

No. 112, Elizabeth tells Fdnelon that the last time he was at 

Mt. 39. Windsor, she was unable to see him " because she had 

Oct.27,is72. j^ ijgji stomach owing to her having taken a little 
mithridate." — Fendon to Paris. 

No. 113, " We have no news here, only that her Majestie is in 

iEt. 39. good health ; and though you may hear of brutes of 
the contrary, I assure you it is not as hath been reported. 
Somewhat her Majestie hath been troubled with a 
spice or show of Mother, but indeed not so : The 
fits that she hath had hath not been above a quarter 
of an hour, but yet this little thing in her hath 
bred strange brutes here at home. God send her, 
I beseech Him, a long life. . . ." — Leicester to 

No. 114, " Her Majestie ys at this present, and hath byn all 

^t- 39- this last Night veary well, and tooke not so good Rest 

Nov. 4, 1572. ^yg great while . . ."—Leicester to Burghley (2nd 
letter of same date). 

No. 115. "My Lord, yesternight about six a Clock, I 

iEt. 39. receaved your Letres, and could not have present 

Nov 4, IS72- Occasione to deall with her Majestie touching the 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


contents of them, for she was at her wonted repose. 

— Leicester to Burghley. (Murdin, 230.) 
No. 116, The rebels against James in Scotland who held 

JEt.zg. Edinburgh Castle would not make any compromise, 
Jan. 7, IS73- «« alleging ... the Queen of England to be in great 

danger of her life, (and) they looked daily for men and 

money out of France. . . ." — Henry Killigrew to Sir 

Thos. Smith from Berwick. 

Group 17. — ^t. 41 {December, 1574) 

No. 117, " The Queen has been very unwell last week, and 

iCt. 41. the secret murmurs in Court, and amongst all over 

Dec. s, 1574. t}jg country, as to what will become of the country in 
case of the Queen's death were very remarkable. God 
grant her health, for upon the hfe of such depends the 
welfare of this realm. The Catholics wish ... to 
proclaim the queen of Scots, and the heretics to take 
up arms against her and proclaim the son of the Earl 
of Hartford . . . the people threaten, in the event 
of the above happening, to kill all foreigners ; but God 
preserve the life of the Queen for many happy years." 
— De Guaras from Lond. to Zayas. 

Group 18. — ^t. 42 (June, 1575) 

No. 118, " Her Majestic, God be thanked, is better since 

^t. 42, her fyrst coming hither, and this day was once about 

iS7S°' *° ^^^^ taken physick, but fjmding herself very well, 

deferred it. God send her no nede to take any 

these many yeres ! I cannot send your Lordship 

certen word of her remove, neyther yet is she resolved 

whether to go to York or no ; her desire is great that 

way, I perceive, and it is lyke, if she find her health 

well, that she will go thither. It wyl be these three or 

four days ere she wyl determyne it ; . . ." — Leicester 

to Burghley. (She did not go on to York.) 

No. iig, " I will lett your Lordship understand such newes 

JEt. 42. as we have, which is only and chiefly of her Majestie's 

"s75' ' ^°°^ health, which, God be thanked, is as good as I 

have knowen it. . . . And since her coming hither, as 

oft as weather serves, she hathe not bene within dores. 

. . ." — Leicester to Burghley, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 




Group 19. — ^i. 44 (1577) 

No. 120, "... The said Queen of Scotland had replied 

.ffit. 44. ^jj^t g]jg ^2^g better than the Queen, (Elizabeth), and 
that she knew well that the Queen was subject to a 
failure of the heart which returned every month, so 
that the Queen of Scotland was hoping a better fortune 
in this country." — ^Anonymous letter, Scottish Series, 
Dom, S. P. 1577. (The Queen of Scots was never 
well after her 19th year.) 
No. 120a, " The queen was in some part of this year under 

jEt. 44. excessive anguish by pains of her teeth ; in so much 
^NEW ^j^^^ gj^g tQQ^ jjQ ^ggt £q^ divers nights, and endured 

very great torment night and day." — Strype. Not 

Group 20. — ^t. 44I to 45 (January to October, 

No. 121, " By persons that have some knowledge of the 

^t. 44i. Court of England I am apprised that the said Queen's 

Jan. , IS7 • pijygicians deem her life in danger. They say that she 
has hardly ever had the purgations proper to all women, 
but that instead nature has come to the rescue by 
establishing an issue in one of her legs, which has never 
been scanty of flow. But the Queen has fallen ill, and 
at present seems to be quite dried up, nor know the 
physicians how to find a remedy for this mishap." — 
Enclosure in a letter from Salviati, Nuncio in France, 
to the Cardinal of Como. 

No_ 122, " The; Queen has been marvellous ill many days 

^t. 4s. vvith a pain in her cheek." — Leicester to Burghley. 

Oct. 17, 1578. (._ gygf p^p 2)om. 1547-1580, p. 601, 

Group 21 . — ^t. 46,47,48-51 {April, 1580, to November, 

No 123, " The Queen . . . has also been a little ill and has 

Mt.4fi. almost always kept to her chamber since I saw her, 

April 22, because of a headache and a nervous headache." — De 

'^ "■ Castelnau to Paris from London. The context shows 

that Elizabeth had been afflicted as described for more 

than a fortnight, and we only know that at the end of 

that period she was not recovered. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 134, " The Quene, our Soveraigne, beinge perswaded 

Xt.^e. by her physitions, did enter into a bathe on Sonday 

Ju y I, IS o. j^gj. . ^ eyther by takinge colde, or other accident, did 
presentlye fall sicke, & so did continewe two dayes, 
but nowe is very well recovered againe." — ^Thos. 
Bawdewn to Earl of Shrewsbury. 

No. 12S, " Assures himself of the affection and good zeal 

iEt. 46. which he bears to the Queen of England, and during 

JU y 1, 15 o, gQj^g discourse which he had lately with her, he let her 
know the great regard he had for her health, in sending 
so often by his people to know how she was in her last 
sickness, and the desire that he had for her good 
convalescence . . ." — Burghley to French Ambassa* 
dor. This must refer to some illness prior to the last 
mentioned, and subsequent to the one before that, and 
plainly indicates that it was an illness of some con- 
siderable duration and intensity. 

No. 126, " The day following the said audience, the Queen 

^t. 46. your good sister fell ill with the whooping cough 

July s, 1580. accompanied with a high fever . . ." — Mauvissiere, 
French Ambassa dor to Lond., to Paris. 

No. 127, " The Queen is quite recovered." — ^Walsingham to 

JEt. 47. Burghley. 

June2S,is8i. " ^ 

No. 128, " Her Majesty had deferred signing certain papers 

iEt. so. till next day on account of her headache . • ." — Robt. 

^jcsZ' Beale to Walsingham from Windsor. 

No. 129, " Illness of Her Majesty through eating, for 

JE't. SI. breakfast, a confection of barley . . ." — ^Hatton to 

""f^i^: Burghley. 

No. 130, " About four or five years ago you (Elizabeth) 

^t. 51. being ill and I also at the same time, she (the Countess 
Nov.— ,1584 p£ Shrewsbiuy) told me that your malady came from 
the closing of a fistula that you had in one leg ; and 
that coming to lose your monthly period, you would 
very soon die . . ." — Mary Queen of Scots to 

Group 22. — ^L 52 (September, 1585) 

„ "I find her Ma'" very desirous to stey me she makes 

.fft.^S2- ^^^ cause only the doubtfuUnes of her own self, by 

Sept. 21 (?), reason of her often decease taking her of late & this 

'58S' last night worst of all, she used very pittyfull words to 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


me of her fear she shall not lyve, & wold not have me 
fr° hir. Ye can consider what man" of persuasion this 
must be to me fro her and therefore I wold not say 
much for any matter but did comfort her as much as 
I could only I did lett her know how farr I had gon in 
preperacon. I doe think for all this yf she is well to 
night she wyll lett me goe, for she wold not have me 
speake of yt to the contrary to any boddy. This much 
I thought good to lett ye know . . ." — Leicester to 

Group 2'x,.—JEt. 52 {February, 1586, to July, 1586) 

^%t^^2 " ^"^'^^ ^ ^^°*® ^^^ ^^°"' England (on Feb. i) 

Feb. 17, t'^^ Queen-mother has received news from there that 
1586. the Queen had been for four hours speechless, and as 
if dead, in a swoon, this being an indisposition to which 
she is occasionably liable." — Mendoza to Madrid from 
No. 133, " When the Queen was going to chapel the other 

T M* o* ^^^' ^ usual in full magnificence, she was suddenly 
1586.' overcome with a shock of fear, which affected her to 
such an extent that she at once returned to her apart- 
mept, greatly to the wonder of those present." — ^Un- 
signed advices from London to the King of Spain. 
N^i33a, " That Queen (Elizabeth) going of late to her 

NEW Churche, was in the Way sodanelye stricken with some 
July 9, 1586. great Fear, that she retorned to her Chamber, to the 
Admiration of all that were present." — Thos. Morgan 
from Paris to Mary Stuart, Murdin, p. 529. 

Group 2^—m. S3 (1587) 

No. 134, " The latter (Cecil) writes (apparently to the 

May*2o^ English Ambassador in Paris) that ... it was feared 
1587.' she would not live long." — Mendoza from Paris to 

Group 25. — j^t. 55 (1588 — Armada year) 

No. 13s, " The Queen is much aged and spent, and is very 

Nov.*s^is88 ii^elancholy. Her intimates say that this is caused by 

' the death of the earl of Leicester ; but it is very 

evident that it is rather the fear she underwent and 

the burden she has upon her." — Marco Antonio 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Miscea, of Genoa, to King of Spain, entitled " Advices 
from England," 

Note. — No records have been discovered of any 
ill health subsequent to the last item above, when 
Elizabeth was two months past her 56th year, and prior 
to March, 1596, a period of 7 J years, which ended 
when she was 62J. 

Group 26. — ^t. 624, 63 (1596) 

N^»36. " I know you are, as we all here have been, in 

March IS,' melancholy and pensive cogitation. This aun-nia, or 

1596. sleepless indisposition of her majesty, is now ceased, 
which, being joined with inflammation from the breast 
upward, did more than terrify us all, especially the last 
Friday in the morning. Which moved the lods of the 
Council, when they had providently caused all the 
vagrants hereabouts to be taken up and shipped for 
the Low Countries, to draw some munition to the 
court ; and the great horses from Reading, to guard 
the receipt at Westminster ; to take order for the navy 
to lie in the narrow seas ; and to commit some gentle- 
men, hunger-starved for innovations, as sir Edward 
Bainham, Catesby, Tresham, two Wrights, &c., and 
afterward the count Arundel, to a gentleman's house, 
for speeches used by the foresaid turbulent spirits as 
concerning him ; or for that he hath lately made some 
provision of armor." — Camden to Sir Robt. Cotton. 

No. 137, " I was advertised this evening . . . that her 

^t. 63. Majestie deferred her remove unto Wednesday . . . 
,5*96.' being right sorry for the cause . . . lett her Majesty 
know that I do send to heare of her Majesty's amend- 
ment . . ." — ^Wm. Burghley to Sir Robt. Cecil. 

Group 27. — ^t. 64 to 65 (1597, 1598) 
No. 138, " The Queen hath a desperate ache in her right 

AuB*o^(?) tliunib> but will not be known of it, nor the gout it 

1597. ' cannot be nor dare not be, but to sign will not be in- 

dured. If, therefore, I find that unlikely before your 
departure, I will write in her name . . ." — Sec. Cecil 
to Essex. 

No. 139, Elizabeth sent word " that the night before she was 

Mt.64. attacked by such a catarrh of the teeth that she could 

Dec. 8, 1597. j^Q^ ggg jjjg to-day and perhaps not to-morrow . . . 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


(But he was finally seen upon that date, when she 
remarked to him) that the day previous she had been 
very ill with inflammation on the right side of her face 
. . . (and) that she could not recollect when she had 
found herself so ill, . . . Her throat shows itself very 
wrinkled as far as one may see above the necklace which 
she wears at the neck, but lower down she still has a 
very white and fine skin. ... As to her countenance 
it is very much aged, and is long and thin in comparison 
with what it was formerly, according to what they say. 
She has very yellow teeUi that are uneven in com- 
parison with what she formerly had according to what 
they say, and on the left side less than on the right. 
She lacks many of them, as the result of which one 
cannot understand her readily when she speaks 
quickly . . ."—Journal of M. de Maisse, French 
Ambassador, of his visit to London. 
No. 140, Hentzner describes her at this time "... her 

15^*' ^^ ^^^^ oblong, fair, but wrinkled ; her Eyes small, yet 
black and pleasant ; her Nose a little Hooked ; her 
Lips narrow, and her Teeth black . . . she wore 
false Hair, and that red ; . . . Her Bosom was un- 
covered, as all the English ladies have it, till they 
marry ; . . . her Hands were small, her Fingers long, 
and her Stature neither tall nor low ; . . ." — Hentz- 
ner's Travels, pp. 48 and 49. 

Group z^.—Mt. 65 to 66 (1599) 
No. 141, 
^t. 65. " Elizabeth ill." — French Ambassador. 

Jan.i2, IS99- 

^°mt%. " Elizabeth ill."— French Ambassador. 

Jan. 25,1599- 

No. 143, " The health of the Queen seems to me much di- 

Mt. 6si. minished, and if God were to call her, and the King 

5j ' ' of Spain had an army ready, England would soon 

come to grief . . ." — French Ambassador to Paris. 

N<^i44. " Her Majesty, God be thanked, is in good health, 

Aug. 29, ' 2nd likes well Nonsuch Ayre. Here hath many 

1599. Rumore bene bruted of her, very strange, without 

any Reason, which troubled her Majestic a little ; for 

she wold say, ' Mortua sed non sepulta.' " — Rowland 

Whyte to Robt. Sydney. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Sept. — , 


No. 14s, " At her majesty's returning from Hampton Court, 

^t.^6. the day being passing foul, she would (as her custom 
is) go on horseback, although she is scarce able to sit 
upright, and my lord Hundson said, ' It was not meet 
for one of her majesty's years to ride in such a storm.' 
She answered, in great anger, ' My years ! Maids, to 
your horses quickly ' ; and so rode all the way, not 
vouchsafing any gracious countenance to him for two 
days." — Lord Semple of Beltreis, Scottish Ambassador 
in London, to James VI. 

Group 29. — ^t. 67 (1600) 

No. 146, " In the Late Convencion the K[ing] gave it out 

July 9 1600 ^^"7 constantly but in secrettt and indirectly that her 

'Majestic was sick and in perill ; " — Geo. Nichols to 

Sir Robt. Cecil from Edinburgh. 

No. 147, I do see the Queen often ; she doth wax weak since 

July(?) *^® ^^*^ troubles, and Burleigh's death often draws 

1600. ' tears from her goodly cheeks ; she walketh out but 

little, meditates much alone, and sometimes writes in 

private to her best friends. Her Highness hath done 

honour to my poor house by visiting me ... at 

going up stairs she called for a staff, and was much 

wearied in walking about the house, and said she 

wished to come another day . ." — Sir Robt. Sydney 

to Sir John Harrington. 

No. 148, "... she being now an old woman, was no lesse 

Late'itoo crooked in minde than in body." — Camden, 172, 

quoting Essex. 

Group 2,0.— Mt. 68 (1601) 

^^1*^68 Henry IV. of France laying definite plans for the 

May, 1601. situation to arise on death of Elizabeth. 

N^i49|. " She (Elizabeth) is quite disfavored (That is, 

NJ^" changed in countenance. — F. C.) and unattired ; and 

Oct. 9, 1601 . these troubles waste her much. She disregardeth every 
costly cover (Dish. — F. C) that cometh to the table ; 
and taketh little but manchet and succory pottage. . . . 
She walks much in her privy chamber ; and stamps 
with her feet at ill news ; and thrusts her rusty sword 
at times into the arras (Tapestry that covered the walls. 
— F. C.) in great rage ... the dangers (Of Essex's 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


rebellion. — F. C.) are over, and yet she always keeps a 
sword by her table ... so disordered is all order 
that her highness hath worn but one change of raiment 
for many days ; and swears much at those that cause 
her griefs in such wise . . ." — ^Letter from Elizabeth's 
godson, Sir John Harrington, to Sir Hugh Portman, in 
Ntigee Antiquee, vol. i. p. 46, ed. 1769. 

No. 150, " The Queen in all her robes had fallen the first 

•'^- 68« day of the parliament, if some gentlemen had not 

Oct. :^, suddently cast themselves under that side that tottered, 

1601.' and supported her." — Lord Henry Howard (acting 

for Sir Robert Cecil) to the Earl of Marr (actingfor James 

VI.), Secret Corresp. of Cecil and James, by Haile, p. 26. 

No. 151, " Whilst the duke of Lennox was on his embassy 

iEt. 68. jjj France, news came that the Queen was dangerously 
i6oi.' iU- The King of France being with some of the 
princes, one of them said that once upon a time on a 
similar occasion a bastard of Normandy conquered 
England ; . . ." — Statement of a Spy of the Adelan- 
tado of Castile. He left Bristol November 22. 

Group 31. — ^t. 68 J to 69 and 5 mos. (1602) 

No. 152, " Elizabeth has had three or four days of pain in 

jEt. 68i. her left arm." — French Ambassador to Paris. 
Jan. 39, 1002. 

No. 153, " I was sorry to hear of the Queen's ' craziness,' 

^t. 68i. and pray for her long and perfect health as the main 

%6o°.' pillar of our general good." — Geo. Gilpin from The 


No. 154, Her arm still troubles her. "... she (Elizabeth) 

A ^18^^ 6* ^^ ^ ^^^ good health, but taking this year less exercise 

' * than she is used to, for her arm still troubles her and 

prevents her riding on horseback." — M. de Beaumont, 

French Ambassador, to his King. 

No. 15s, Elizabeth tells French Ambassador at London 

w'mos*"'* " *** ^^® ^^® a-weary of life " and with sighs and 

June, i6o2. tears bemoans Essex and explains why she beheaded 


No. 156, " Wednesday night the Queen was not well, but 

^t. 69. would not be known of it, for the next day she walked 

ug. , I 02. abroad in the park, lest any should take notice of it. . . . 

The day of the remove. Her Majesty rode on horseback 

all the way, which was ten miles, and also hunted, and 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


whether she was weary or not I leave to your censure." 
— Earl of Northumberland to Lord Cobham. 
^*^*S7. " Our queen is troubled with a rheum in her arm, 

Uncerta?n ; which vexeth her very much. . . . She sleepeth not so 
Easex d. much by day as she used, neither taketh rest by night.,i6oiijjgf delight is to sit in the dark, and sometimes with 
shedding tears to bewail Essex." — Rept. of unknown 
correspondent of James VI. from London, Advocates' 
Lib., Edinb., Ai, 34, n. 35. 
No 158, "... she can do no more, and her strength is so 

Nwae' exhausted that when she has been on horseback for 
160Z. ' an hour she has to rest for two days." — French Ambas- 
sador to Paris. 
No. 159, Our dear Queen . . . doth bear show of human 

De^'av' infirmity, too fast for that evil which we shall get by 
1602.' her death, and too slow for that good which we shall 
get by her releasement from pain and misery. It 
was not many days since I was bidden to her presence 
. . . I . . . found in her a most pitiable state ... I 
replied that I had seen him (Tyrone, for whom she 
inquired) with my Lord Deputy (Essex). She looked 
up with much choler and grief in her countenance . . . 
and hereat she dropped a tear and smote her bosom. 
She held in her hand a golden cup which she often 
put to her lips ; but in sooth her heart seemeth too 
full to lack more filling. (Later the same day she said 
to him) ' Thou seest my bodily meat doth not suit me 
well ; I have eaten but one ill-tasted cake since yester- 
night. She rated most grievously at noon at some 
who minded not to brung certain matters of account. 
Several men had been sent to, and when ready at 
hand, Her Highness hath dismissed them in anger." 
— Sir John Harrington to his wife. 

Group 32. — Mt. 69-4>«. to 69-8OT. (1603) 

No. 160, She took cold on the 12th January, 1603, and on 

fmm "'**' *^® ^^^^ moved to Richmond, but before this had begun 

Jan. 12 to to see visions. The French Ambassador states 3iat 

Feb. 20, she complained of " her left arm, which had pained 

*°°3. her for three or four days . . ." This was on 

January 29th. She appears to have conquered the 

cold, but on the 20th of February she began to fail 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


No. 161, "... for although she hath good appetite, hath 

^t. 69 and neither cough nor fever, distemper nor inordinate 

March°9 desyre to drincke, yet she is troubled with heat in her 

1603. ' brestes and drynes in her mouth and tongue, which 

keepes her from sleepe every night greatly to her 

disquiet. And this is all, whatsoever you hear 

otherwise ; for which she never keept her bedd, but 

was within theise three dayes in the garden." — Robt. 

Cecil to James VI. 

No. 162, The almonds of her throat swelled, and apparently 

^i t' *"^ an abscess broke there. Dr. James Rae concludes that 

Mar. 10^4, influenza carried her off at last. With the sore throat 

1603. came loss of appetite, complete melancholy and great 

weakness. She gradually wasted away until the 24th 

of March when the end came. 

General Notes on her Physique 

No; 163. No contemporary appears to have spoken of any 

colour in her face, that is, red colour. The whites of 
her eyes were gray in the last years, there is a lack 
of eyebrows and lashes in her portraits, considered 
as a whole, and there was a thick net of blue veins 
apparent about the temples. Robt. Johnston, a con- 
temporary, says that " her skin was of pure white." 
He also said, " A pleasing face, dignified form, were not 
even missing in middle age. With the advance of 
years and the approach of old age [she was] deformed 
with wrinkles, emaciated, with hollow cheeks ; so that 
her fine features and beauty could not be recognized." 
— Historia Britannicarum, p. 346. 

Note by the Compiler. — (i) With respect to the 
ulcer on the leg ; it is first mentioned in July, 1569. 
Nearly nine years later it is reported (Item 121, in Jan. 
1578) to be then dried up ; and by Item 130 referring 
substantially to the time of Item 121, it would seem 
fairly evident that this affection endured for about 
nine years. (2) By Item 97 it would appear that 
Elizabeth had been regularly bled. She was then in 
her 39th year ; and the inference from her statement 
is that she admitted she had been wrong in discon- 
tinuing the bleedings and would resume them. By 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


p. 286 we know that her sister Mary was bled for 
amenorrhcEa. For what other cause could Elizabeth 
be regularly bled ? Is it not extremely probable that 
her apparently better health from her 55th to her 63rd 
year is largely due to the discontinuance of the regular 
bleedings when she was 54, as the reason for them had 
ceased to exist ? 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



jA S said in the headnote preceding the Medical Record 

/ ^ comprised in the last chapter, that document as 
r — m printed (except for additions designated " New,") 
•^ -^- was presented to five gentlemen, four of whom 
the medical profession of all countries acknowledge to be at 
least the equals of any living authorities. Moreover, all of 
them are also historical students and writers of the first rank. 

A fifth copy was submitted to Doctor Howard, who is a 
good example of the combined physician and surgeon actually 
engaged in everyday practice with its bewildering demands 
upon the most varied knowledge that medical science has 
acquired. We felt that the opinion of such a man, between 
forty and fifty years of age, was necessary to supplement that 
of the four older men whose days of actual practice are ended ; 
who now occupy those positions as teachers and guides which 
are the greatest prizes of their profession. 

With only one of these gentlemen, Doctor Howard, had 
we any personal acquaintance. To all of them, vidth the 
exception of Doctor Doran, whose Opinion had previously 
been received. Ten Questions were submitted. As, however. 
Doctor Doran's conclusions are substantial replies to the 
Questions, it was thought best to leave his Opinion as it was 
handed to us. 

The Ten Questions were preceded by this 

Preliminary Note 

The following contemporary references to the ill-health 
of Queen Elizabeth have been brought together by a layman 
as a result of more than five years' research, with a new life of 
her as its object. The compiler now seeks to obtain for the 
purpose of publication the opinion of the best medical autho- 
rities upon the pathological significance of the accompanying 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


data. The opinions submitted by these medical scholars will be 
published in extenso under their names. Their collaboration 
to the extent indicated should produce an historical document 
of the Brst importance ; the points raised should require no 
further examination, but be accepted as scientifically disposed 
of for all time. 

The compiler begs to submit several specific inquiries 
to which he would like replies as specific as the diagnosis will 
permit ; but he begs each expert not to confine his response 
to these questions, if there be others which appear to him to 
arise ; in other words, it is requested that each medical man 
will make his reply as extensive and broad as he thinks necessary 
for a proper treatment of the matter. 

The Ten Questions 

Upon the data herewith submitted — 

Q. I. — ^Was Elizabeth, speaking of her life as a whole, 
probably a woman of exceptionally strong physique ? 

Q. 2. — ^Was she a woman, speaking of her life as a whole, 
who could properly be described as one of good health ? 

Q. 3. — ^Was she afflicted habitually with ill-health, except 
possibly during the years in the following data for which there 
are no references to any sickness ? 

Q. 4. — ^What was her probable health during the years for 
which there are no data supplied ? 

(Note. — ^With reference to the missing years between 1588 
and 1596, it should be stated that the chief diplomatic sources 
which had been in existence for the most of the remainder of 
her career are not open, nor is there any indication of what 
they might reveal, for there was neither Austrian, Spanish, 
nor Venetian Ambassador at London, and the records of the 
French Ambassadors are substantially lacking for the entire 
period mentioned.) 

Q. 5. — Did she or did she not probably have a strong 
constitution ? 

Q. 6. — ^Would it, or would it not, be too much to say that 
she was practically an invalid ever after her fifteenth year, with 
the possible exception of the years for which no data are supplied 
directly or indirectly ? 

Q. 7. — Is any of her ill-health due to her father's disease, 
and if so, in what particulars ? 

Q. 8. — ^What diseases did she have in your judgment based 
upon the data submitted, and what were their reactions upon 
her physique ? 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Q. 9. — ^What would be the natural effect of such diseases 
upon the nervous system of a woman with her medical record ? 
Upon her temper ? Upon her patience ? 

Q. 10. — ^Will you please describe her general health through- 
out her career ? — ^if you have not already done so in answering 
previous questions. 

The five Opinions to which we shall now call attention 
represent the deliberate judgment of their authors given upon 
the Medical Record alone. All the opinions were given gratui- 
tously, and there is no possibility that any of these experts 
could be guided by any motive except that of discovering the 
true physical and mental condition of the Great Queen. 

Opinion of Sir William Osler, Bart. 

M.D., LLD., M'Gill, Toronto, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Yale, Harvard, 
Johns Hopkins ; D.Sc. Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, Liverpool, and Leeds ; 
D.C.L. Durham, Trinity Univ. Toronto ; M.D. Christiana ; F.R.S., 
F.R.C.P. ; Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford ; late Professor of 
Medicine at Johns Hopjdns Univ. ; late Professor of the Institutes of Medi- 
cine at M'Gill Univ. ; late Professor of Clinical Medicine at Univ. of 
Penn. ; late Presid. of The Bibliographical Soc. ; Publications — Cerebrtd 
Palsies of Children: Chorea and Choreiform Affection; The Principles and 
Practice of Medicine, 8th ed. ; Lectures on Abdominal Tumours, on Angina 
Pectoris and Allied States : Monograph on Cancer of the Stomach : Science and 
Immortality : JEquinimitas and Other Addresses : Counsels and Ideals : Ed. of 
A System of Medicine ; Thomas Linacre : An Alabama Student, and other 
biographical essays ; A Way of Life (1914). 

Q. 1. — ^Was Elizabeth, speaking of her life as a whole, 
probably a woman of exceptionally strong physique. — No. 

Q. 2. — ^Was she a woman, speaking of her life as a whole, 
who could properly be described as one of good health ? — 

Q. 3. — ^Was she afflicted habitually with ill-health, except 
possibly during the years in the following data for which there 
are no references to any sickness ? — Impossible to say. 

Q. 4. — ^What was her probable health during the years for 
which there are no data supplied ? — Impossible to say. 

Q. 5. — Did she or did she not probably have a strong 
constitution ? — A strongly neurotic one.* 

* That is, one vfith strongly diseased nerves. — F. C. I take it that a 
rough similarity in sound has led to the present tendency to confusion among 
the general public of erotic, neurotic, and neuropathic. So far has this curious 
tendency prevailed that substantially all except purists in our tongue and 
medical men understand the three terms to be interchangeable, and neurotic 
is the favourite term for the meaning of the other two. Osier, of course, 
speaks with the exactness of the medical man. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Q. 6. — ^Would it, or would it not, be too much to say that 
she was practically an invaUd ever after her fifteenth year, with 
the possible exception of the years for which no data are supplied 
directly or indirectly ? — No. Probably far too much was made 
of her illnesses. Many attacks were nothing but " a spice or show 
of the Mother." V.P. 19. 

Q. 7. — Is any of her ill-health due to her father's disease, 
and if so, in what particulars ? — The ulcer is the only suspicious 

Q. 8. — ^What diseases did she have in your judgment based 
upon the data submitted, and what were their reactions upon 
her physique ? — Apart from the dropsy, which may have been 
nephritis, and the small-pox, the descriptions are too indefinite 
to base any opinion of much value. She had the " vapours " 
(i.e. spleen, hypochondriasis, and hysteria) all her life, and 
considering the way she must have been bedieted by the doctors and 
politicians it is remarkable that there is such a record to her credit. 

Q. 9. — Unanswered. 

Q. 10. — Unanswered. 

Opinion of Sir Clifford Allbutt 

K.C.B., M.A., M.D., D.Sc. Oxford, D.C.L.,LL.D., F.R.C.P., FeUow and 
V.-Pres. of The Royal Society ; Regius Professor of Physic in the University 
of Cambridge ; F.S.A., F.L.S., Dep.-Lieut. West Riding, Yorks. ; J.P. 
Cambs. ; Consulting Physician Leeds Gen. Infirmary, Belgrave Hosp. for 
Children and King Edward VII. Sanatorium, Midhurst ; Physician Adden- 
brookes Hosp. Camb. ; Commissioner in Lunacy ; Member of Committee 
of Home Office on Trade Diseases, on Nat. Med. Research, etc., etc. 
Publications — The Opthalmoscope in Medicine ; Goulstonian Lectures on Vis- 
ceral Neuroses, and on Scrofula : Lane Lectures on Diseases of the Heart ; 
Science and Medieval Thought; The Historical Relations of Medicine and 
Surgery ; Editor of A System of Medicine and Gytuecology : Fitzpatrick 
Lectures on Greek Medicine in Rome, 1909-10 ; Diseases of the Arteries and 
Angina Pectoris, 1915. Inventor of the short clinical thermometer. 

Q. I. — ^Was Elizabeth, speaking of her life as a whole, 
probably a woman of exceptionally strong physique ? — No. 

Q. 2. — ^Was she a woman, speaking of her life as a whole, 
who could properly be described as one of good health ? — No. 

Q. 3. — Was she afflicted habitually with ill-health, except 
possibly during the years in the following data for which there 
are no references to any sickness ? — Yes. 

Q. 4. — ^What was her probable health during the years 
for which there are no data supplied ? — Probably fair, or the 
rumours would have found their way into the documentary 
evidence. {But here see saving note p. 2). (The saving note 
plainly refers to the note following Q. 4 in the MSS., on p, 2 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


thereof, stating that all usual diplomatic sources were lacking 
between 1588 and 1596.) 

Q. 5. — ^Did she or did she not probably have a strong 
constitution i—As i andz. (That is " No."—F. C). 

Q. 6. — ^Would it, or would it not, be too much to say that 
she was practically an invaUd ever after her fifteenth year, 
with the possible exception of the years for which no data is 
supplied directly or indirectly ? — It would be too much. 

Q. 7. — Is any of her ill-health due to her father's disease 
and if so, in what particulars ? — No evidence. 

Q. 8. — ^What diseases did she have, in your judgment 
based upon the data submitted, and what were their reactions 
upon her physique ? — See letter herevnth. (The letter is as 
follows.— F. C.) :— 

" St. Radegvnd's, 

" Cambridge. 

" I have read the MS. with much interest but in quite an 
uncritical way. I am no authority on the Med. Hist, of i6th 
cent. — if on any period it is Greek and Gr. Latin. My impres- 
sion is that in England XVI"* cent. Medicine was below con- 
tempt. In Queen E.'s time Clowes did somewhat, and possibly 
Lowe ; but really all the medicine of value (anatomy esp.) 
was in Italy ; and only by studying in Italy cd. our doctors 
then have known anything. Some few did, of course. The 
rest were hard-shell Galenish & quacks. 

" I shd. guess that the first period of Qu. E.'s series of sick- 
nesses was a renal dropsy (acute nephritis) * probably due to 
an infection ; e.g. Scarlet Fever — then undifferentiated. 
From this she made a recovery. The more one reads of the 
history of Med. up to, say, 150 yrs ago, the more one is amazed 
at the ill-health, and short lives of many or most of the people. 
The conditions of life were abominable, & the doctors did 
their best to intensify the evil, and indeed to add evil to 
evil. I should guess the repeated fevers of the Queen 
which issued with no obvious result, may have been due to 

" I suspect moreover that the tittle-tattle of Courts, the sub- 
tility of embassies, much exaggerated the symptoms of many of 
the indispositions ; not to mention the nimia cura f of the 
Court doctors, with their venesections | in an ansmic 

• Acute nephritis — acute dropsy of the kidneys. — F. C. 
t The too great care. — F. C. 
i Blood-letting.— F. C. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


(amenorrhoea) * woman & so forth. There is no conclusive 
evidence of syphilis (inherited). 

" The ulcer of the leg was presumably common ulcer. 
*' She may have been subject to migraine f but not I think 
to a syphilitic periostitis.^ (Mary may have had Interstitial 
Keratitis).§ (Sight very bad.) 

" Yours very truly, 

" Clifford Allbutt." 

Q. 9. — ^What would be the natural effect of such diseases 
upon the nervous system of a woman with her medical record ? 
— Presumably to affect temper rather than judgment. 

Q. 10. — ^Will you please describe her general health 
throughout her career ? — if you have not already done so in 
answering previous questions. — See letter. 

Opinion of Alban Doran 

F.R.C.S. ; formerly House Phys. St. Bartholomew's Hosp., London ; 
formerly House Surg. idem. ; Asst. to Mus. Roy. Coll. Surgs. ; Presid. 
Obstetrical Soc. of London ; Surg, to Samaritan Free Hosp. for Women, 
1877-1909 ; probably greatest living authority on diseases of women ; 
author of Clinical and Pathological Observations on Tumours of the Ovary, 
Fallopian Tubes and Broad Ligament, of Handbook of Gynacological 
Operations ; author of chapter on Medicine in Shakespeare's Ei^land, 
etc., etc. 

Notes on the Weak Health of Queen Elizabeth 

The records of this essay show that though Queen Elizabeth 
lived to be an old woman, she was always ailing and never 
robust. A glance at the Index will aid us greatly in under- 
standing how often she was ailing, yet managed to recover. 
On the ulcers, dropsy, and gout, it is not profitable to dwell ; 
the nature of the first is mysterious ; perhaps the Queen's 
clothes were faultily arranged ; perhaps they represented some 
skin-disease due to errors of diet, or possibly tiiey were really 
symptoms of syphilitic taint. " Blain," " ulcer," " sore," 
" abscess," " boil," and " imposthume " are confounded in 
sixteenth-century writings, especially in second-hand reports 
not written by doctors, and the same may be said of dropsy 
and gout. The catamenia were no doubt disturbed at times, 

* Amenorrhoea — stoppage of the monthly periods. — F. C. 
t Sick headache. — F. C. 

% Inflammation of the membrane surrounding the bones. — F. C. 
§ Interstitial keratitis " is a chronic malady which is seen chiefly, 
perhaps exclusively, in the subjects of inherited syphilis." — F. C. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


but the most robust women may suffer badly from dysmenor- 
rhoea, menorrhagia, or amenorrhoea. 

A fair idea can, on the other hand, be obtained by a review 
of certain facts in association with Queen Elizabeth, which 
show us that she ailed all through her life, and that she was 
subjected to evils which often cause and always keep up ill- 
health. We will consider, then, her family history, her youth 
and exposure to eye-strain, her attire which impeded respira- 
tion and constricted the body, her doubtful fits, and, especially, 
her carious teeth. In conclusion, the two reported attacks of 
small-pox will be briefly discussed. 

The " family history," as doctors would say, must be 
carefully considered in the case of Elizabeth. Henry VIII. was 
forty-two years old when she was born. At forty, men were 
quite middle-aged in those days, and Henry had not led a 
very sober life. Too much stress must not be laid on the 
question of syphilis. Sir James Paget used to teach that when 
the subject was well-fed and lived free from the discomforts 
of poverty, his children rarely inherited syphilis. That Henry 
had intractable ulcers on his legs, there seems no doubt and 
they might have been " specific," * but it is more likely that 
they were associated with varicose veins (common in men 
who wore garters), especially as the tissues of the limb were 
probably anasarcous or dropsical through visceral diseases 
to which a man of Henry's self-indulgent habits would be 
very liable. These visceral disorders were but imperfectly 
understood in the sixteenth century. Elizabeth may have 
inherited syphilis, but on the whole her feebleness, if really 
inherited, was more likely such as is not rarely observed in 
persons born of fathers in middle life and of impaired 

The Princess Elizabeth was exposed to many influences 
likely to cause her great anxiety early in life, and still more 
during the regency of her brother, 1547-1553, and the reign of 
her sister, 1553 to 1558. In King Edward's reign she was but 
fourteen at his accession and twenty when he died. At that 
highly critical age the illness and death of her stepmother, 
Queen Katherine Parr, and the conduct of the Protector 
Somerset, must have caused her much physical and mental 
disturbance. It is quite impossible to determine, however, 
how far these bad iiiiuences led up to the princess's illness, 

• That is, syphilitic. The euphemism is one universally employed by 
the English surgeon or physician in converse with laymen. It is one of the 
chief bulwarks of English morality. — F. C. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and how far they prevented her convalescence. In the first 
place, it is not possible to diagnose the illness or chronic indispo- 
sition which set in about midsununer, 1548. Queen Katherine 
had been married to the Protector's brother ; she died, and 
then Admiral Seymour tried to seize the King, and to marry 
Elizabeth, to whom he behaved in a most scandalous manner. 
Seymour was beheaded in March, 1549. In the meantime, 
Elizabeth declared to her brother that she was " quite an 
invalid." She may have been badly lodged, hence the 
" rheums." The disease of the head and eyes associated with 
her declaration that " every description of learning " had been 
" wasted " on her might most reasonably be ascribed to defec- 
tive sight. The print of books of learning in the sixteenth 
century, sometimes big and clear, was more frequently small 
and crabbed ; and black-letter type, then much in vogue, is, 
as all students of old volumes know, very trying to the eyesight. 
Dr. George Gould in Biographical Clinics : the Origin of 
the Ill-Health of De Quincey, Carfyle, Darwin, Huxley, and 
Browning (London, 1903), though he overstates his case, 
has shown how very gravely health and comfort may be upset 
by defective sight. " Disease of the head and eyes " is there- 
fore not suggestive. Myopia, hypermetropia, and astigmatism 
set up pains in the fore part of the head, aching of the eyeballs, 
and redness of the conjunctiva, and though the patient with any 
one of these defects has weak eyes, he or she is by no means 
doomed to blindness, which is due to causes different from such 
as produce defective " accommodation " — short eye, long eye, 
or irregular convexity of the crystalline lens. Elizabeth certainly 
studied hard, and Sir Edward Maunde Thompson states that 
she was " well versed in Italian calligraphy, and could, when 
required, produce a very handsome letter so written, although 
her handwriting in later years degenerated into the well- 
known straggling scrawl that confronts us in her letters written 
as queen" {Shakespeare's England, vol. i. p. 233). This 
deterioration of handwriting is often seen in association with 
failing eyesight. " Faulty accommodation," unrelieved by 
suitable glasses, may have played a prominent share in main- 
taining debility and low spirits. 

When we look at the full-length portraits of Queen Eliza- 
beth, it is clear that she must have suffered from tight-lacing. 
Corsets were very faultily constructed in her time, and the 
supports of the petticoats involved further impediments to 
free respiration Shakespeare makes two of his ladies admit 
that they were victims to fashion. When the Lady Anne is 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


informed that she must come and be crowned with her wicked 
husband, she exclaims : 

" Ah, cut my lace asunder. 
That my pent heart may have some scope to beat 
Or else I swoon with this dead-killing news." 
Richard III., IV. 6. 

Again, when Paulinia acquaints Leontes with the report 
of Hermione's death, she breaks down and cries : 

" O, cut my lace, least my heart cracking it, 
Break too I " 

Winter's Tale, III., 2. 

These ladies, symbolic of the Queen and of women of 
fashion of the time, were all the worse, even when not the subject 
of shock due to bad news, for going about with heart and 
lungs not ready for emergencies Sir Lauder Brunton (Col- 
lected Papers on Circulation and Respiration, Second Series, 
1916, pp. 99, loi, 107-8, and 200) showed quite recently that 
anassthetics, unknown in Elizabeth's days, have proved this 
fact. In one instance where death occurred, during anaes- 
thesia from nitrous oxide (laughing-gas) supposed to be abso- 
lutely free from danger, the fatal result was, it seems, not due 
to the anaesthetic, but to asphyxia from tight-lacing. Queen 
Elizabeth was exposed to numerous emotional influences taxing 
her respiration and circulation, gravely impeded by constriction 
and dragging at the waist. The same compression displaces 
the important organs below the floor of the thorax, a source 
of several ills the least of which is severe discomfort, but its 
cause was, and certainly still is, often overlooked. Hour- 
glass constriction of the stomach is another well-known result 
of tight-lacing, which involves dyspepsia, and makes that 
organ intolerant of distension after meals, a frequent complica- 
tion now, which must have been common in the sixteenth 
century, when diet involved a harder task on digestion than 
in these days of refined cookery, better quality in butcher's 
meat, and no small-beer on Royal tables. In short. Queen 
Elizabeth's health was, it is evident, much prejudiced by faulty 

The fits which attacked her in 1572 are not clearly defined. 
The Queen, it was reported, was " troubled with a spice 
or show of Mother, but indeed not so : the fits that she 
hath had hath not been above a quarter of an hour, but yet this 
little (Italics mine. — ^A. D.) thing in her hath bred strange brutes 
here at home." The first words in this quotation suggest 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


menstrual disorder, but the word " Mother " was well under- 
stood to mean hysterics. Dr. Needham in Medela Medi- 
cina, 1665, speaks of " Hysterica-passio or the Mother, be- 
cause it seizeth upon women, though men too have sometimes 
something like it." Shakespeare makes Exeter admit an 
attack when relating to King Henry V. the death of York and 
Suffolk on the field of honour : 

" And all my mother came into mine eyes, 
And gave me up to tears." 

Henry V., IV. 6. 

Lear's hysteria is better remembered : 

" Oh, how this mother swells up towards my heart I 
Hysterica passio ! Down thou climbing sorrow. 
Thy element's below." 

Lear, II. 4. 

The report adds a qualification the force of which is myste- 
rious. It reads as though the Queen had been attacked by some- 
thing less serious than hysterical fits. Epilepsy would be 
much worse, and just as real dropsy (ascites) or general anasarca 
in youth could hardly have troubled a woman who lived into 
her seventieth year, so true epilepsy at thirty-nine would have 
probably entailed grave mental symptoms and death long 
before 1603. Mild epileptic attacks associated with menstrua- 
tion might possibly have occurred. It has been suggested 
that Elizabeth's last illness was general paralysis of the insane, 
usually due to s)rphiUs ; but the evidence is not in favour of 
that theory. Nerve diseases were greatly misunderstood even 
down to the middle of the last century and these " cUnical 
histories " of the Queen are obscured by medical terms often 
misapplied by the doctors of the day, and more often misin- 
terpreted by modern medical writers. Just as " let " and 
" presently " were employed in a different sense to what they 
signify in modern English, so " fits," " apoplexy," and 
" lethargy " did not mean what modern medicine understands 
by these words. 

In short. Queen Elizabeth does not seem to have had grave 
disorders of her nervous system, fatal even to the robust. 
She was rather, it appears, a weak woman easily shaken by 
minor ailments which simulated serious diseases. 

One of the more common causes of impaired health very 
likely to be overlooked, is decay of the teeth. M. de Maisse, 
the French Ambassador, said in 1597 that the Queen had 
" very yellow teeth that are uneven in comparison with what 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


she formerly had . . . and on the left side less than on the 
right. She lacks many of them as the result of which one 
cannot understand her readily when she speaks quickly " ; 
and a year later Hentzner says that then, when she was sixty- 
five years of age, her teeth were " black (a defect the English 
seem subject to, from their too great use of sugar)," Shake- 
speare makes Mercutio declare that the angry Mab plagues 
ladies' lips with blisters " because their breatihs with sweet- 
meats tainted are," * and the bard himself most unchivalrously 
admits in Sonnet CXXX. that " in some perfumes is 
there more delight than in the breath that from my 
mistress reeks." Sour breath, except when the tonsils are 
ulcerated, or certain other very definite local conditions are 
present, implies either decayed teeth or dyspeptic complica- 
tions which lead to dental caries. Without doubt Elizabeth 
partook of sweetmeats with one result painfully evident to 
reliable witnesses ; that she damaged her digestion, which must 
have entailed other complications than decay of the teeth, 
now admitted to be in turn a standing source of mischief. 
Foetid germs reach the lungs, or get into the circulation, and 
set up morbid conditions in organs far from the mouth, A 
hollow carious tooth is also what pathologists call a good 
cultivating medium for specific germs of prevalent maladies. 
The extensive and conspicuous decay manifest in the Queen's 
old age meant that the process was of long standing. Hence 
the condition of the teeth was one of the clearest evidences 
that Elizabeth had for many years been far from strong ; 
indeed she could not possibly have been healthy even had that 
condition alone troubled her. 

The record of two attacks of small-pox must be taken as 
more than doubtful. That disease was by no means new or 
unfamiliar to the profession in the sixteenth century. Variola 
was known as " small pokkes " as early as 1518, and Simon 
Kelling or Kellwaye wrote the first English work on small- 
pox in 1503. (McCombie Allbutt's System of Medicine, 1597, 
vol. ii. p. 224.) It must have been known that " natural " 
small-pox, the only kind then in existence, long before 
inoculation was practised, gives prolonged, if not complete, 
immunity to the patient. 

Yet Elizabeth, it is reported, had one attack of small-pox, 

when at Kingston, in October, 1562, and a second, when at 

Hampton Court, in September, 1572, after an incredibly short 

interval for re-infection. On October 25, 1562, the date of 

* Rom. and Jul., 1. 4. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the first attack, De Quadra writes from London to the Duchess 
of Parma — " I advised your Highness of the Queen's illness. 
She is now out of bed, and is only attending to the marks on her 
face to avoid disfigurement." On the seventh of the following 
February, De Quadra writes from London to Philip II. reporting 
that, during a discussion with the lords about the succession, 
Elizabeth " was extremely angry with them, and told them 
that the marks which they saw upon her face were not wrinkles, 
but pits of small-pox, and that tiiough she might be old, God 
could send her children as He did to St. Elizabeth, and they 
(the lords) had better consider well what they were asking, as 
if she declared a successor it would cost much blood to England." 

This dread of disfigurement which led the Queen to attend 
to the marks on her face was perfectly natural, and seems to 
prove that she really had an attack of true small-pox in 1562. 
Allusions to its effects on the face are not absent from sixteenth- 
century literature, though far more frequent in later ages. 
Not only does De Quadra refer to pitting of the face in the 
above quotation, but Shakespeare introduces a personal 
remark on that subject in Love's Labour Lost, to which, 
according to the opinion of so high an authority as Sir Sidney 
Lee, may reasonably be assigned priority in point of time of 
all Shakespeare's dramatic productions.* Rosalind says : 
" O that your face was not so full of O's ! " and Katharine 
replies : " A pox upon that jest," f 

The alleged second attack took place when the Queen was 
at Hampton Court in 1572. The illness was so severe that she 
never liked to go there afterwards. Fenelon's letter, written 
on October 13, 1572, does not clearly state that the disease was 
small-pox. A letter bearing the same date, written by Sir 
Thomas Smith to Walsingham, reports that the Queen was 
" perfectly whole, and no sign whatever left on her face." 
It is upon Camden, Elizabeth's contemporary, and Nichols, 
who writes some two centuries later and plainly relies alto- 
gether upon the former for substance and words even, that 
rests the diagnosis of the attack as small-pox. Camden says : 
" The Queene also herselfe, which hitherto had enjoyed very 
perfect health, (for shee never eate meate but when her Appetite 
served her, nor dranke Wine without alaying,) fell sicke of 
the small poxe at Hampton Court. But shee recovered againe 

* A Life of Shakespeare, ed. 191 5, pp. 102 and 196. Lov't Labour 
Lost was written about 1591, performed a year or two later, revised in 
IS97 for a Court performance, and published by Cutbbert Burbie in 1598. 

t Act. V. Sc. II. 45, 46. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


before it was heard abroad that she was sicke " ; — and Nichols 
writes, " The Queen, who had hitherto been very healthy 
(never eating without an appetite, nor drinking without soame 
allay,) fell sick of the small-pox at Hampton Court. But she 
recovered before there was any news of her being sick." 
Camden is usually high authority, but the accuracy of his 
diagnosis of the second acute illness seems doubtful, especially 
as the Queen herself referred to pitting of her face at the time 
of the first attack and " will not have it so " (i.e. She would 
not believe that it was small-pox) in the case of the second one 
(Smith to Walsingham, Oct. 13, 1572) ; and, what is still more 
important and conclusive, she expressly says in her letter to 
Shrewsbury of Oct. 22, 1572, with reference to this second 
illness, writing some v/eeks after her recovery, " we are so 
free from any token or marke of any suche disease that none 
can conjecture any suche thing." The gravity of both attacks, 
whatever disease the second may really have been, is evident, 
and both must have impaired the Queen's health ; but the wish 
was doubtless father to the thought when the Spaniard professed 
to dread the prospect of the patient's death. Elizabeth, in 
the case of these two illnesses as at other periods of her life, 
seems to have been a sickly subject who was much reduced in 
strength by a febrile malady. Recovery did not prove that she 
was a strong woman, since weaklings attacked by epidemic 
diseases may weather the storm, whilst strong subjects succumb. 

Opinion of J. A. Howard, M.D., London 
Medical History of Queen Elizabeth 

I. — ^Was Elizabeth, speaking of her Ufe as a whole, a 
woman of exceptionally strong physique ? — No. 

2. — ^Was she a woman, speaking of her life as a whole, who 
could properly be described as one of good health ? — No. 

3. — ^Was she afflicted habitually with ill-health, except 
possibly during the years, in the following data, for which 
there are no references to any sickness ? — Yes. 

4. — ^What was her probable health during the years for 
which there are no data supplied ? — In the absence of evidence 
it is of course impossible to make any definite statement ; but 
as I consider that she was never in good health from her illness 
in the twenties up to 1588 and then after 1596 we find her a broken 
woman, it seems quite permissible to surmise that her health was 
of the same bad quality during the missing years. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


5. — Did she or did she not probably have a strong constitu- 
tion ? — This question has no medical meaning and should be 
deleted. Anyway it is covered by 1,2, and 7. 

6. — ^Would it, or would it not, be too much to say that she 
was practically an invalid ever after her fifteenth year, with 
the possible exception of the years for which no data are 
supplied directly or indirectly ? — This question is an unnecessary 
elaboration of No. 3, 

7. — Is any of her ill-health due to her father's disease, and 
if so, in what particulars ? — See my extended note. 

8. — ^What diseases did she have in your judgment based 
upon the data submitted, and what were their reactions upon 
her physique ? — See my extended note. 

9 and 10. Answered as last two above. 

A. Are there any evidences of Elizabeth having Hereditary 
Syphilis ? 

1. There is just a possibility that the illness which lasted, 

with intermissions, from 15-19 years of age was a 
manifestation of Congenital Syphilis, The illness 
was characterized by anaemia, headaches, and some 
eye affection which might possibly have been a mild 
Interstitial Keratitis. 

2. Ulcers : In 1566, age 33, No. 66, " She was so troubled 

with her indisposition, which is an issue on the 

In 1570, age 37, occurs the first reference to an 
intractable ulcer of the leg which gave great trouble, 
lameness, etc., for nine years. This may, of course, 
have been a " Common " or varicose ulcer ; but taken 
in conjunction with the " issue on the shoulder " 
four years earlier, is strongly suspicious of a Specific 

3. Alopecia : In No. 49, the author indicates that she 

became bald at about 31 years of age and remained 
so for the rest of her life. This is of doubtful value 
as evidence of Congenital Syphilis. 

B, Her state of health from 15-19 has already been referred 
to. The references point to rather more serious ill-health 
than one would expect to find in an anaemic growing girl. 
Her headaches were evidently very severe and connected 
with some eye trouble. She says herself " a disease of the 
head and eyes has come upon me," and also refers to " the 
long duration of my illness " ; and again to " the infirm state 
of my health." Also Thos. Parry, writing in excuse of her 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


illegible writing says that " her Grace's unhealth hath made 
it weaker and so unsteady." On the other hand she was 
subjected to such great mental strain about this period, on 
account of her importance in the disturbed politics of the time, 
that her health may well have been bad. 

Then little more than a year later she has the most serious 
illness of her life. 

C. On Dec. 6, 1553, she is taken suddenly ill while on a 
journey to Ashridge. There is no description of this illness, 
but we find two months later a Royal Commission sent by 
Queen Mary to examine into her state of health. The members 
of this Commission are evidently greatly impressed by the 
severity of the illness, and a little later she is described as 
having her whole body and even her face swollen with dropsy. 
This illness with dropsy at intervals, and also accompanied 
by jaundice and continuous shortness of breath, lasted for three 
or more years. Again, eight years later (aged 28) she is 
described as " dropsical and swollen extraordinarily." 

Such an illness points to primary disease of the kidneys 
or heart. The dropsy of the face is rather in favour of kidney 
disease, but it seems hardly possible that the subject of a 
nephritis of so severe a type (note the recurrence eight years 
later) would live to nearly seventy. Again, the jaundice is 
more in favour of failing compensation from heart disease, 
and although the same objection as to longevity may be raised 
to a diagnosis of Acute Endocarditis and Mitral regurgitation, 
there is a greater probability of this being correct. On either 
supposition one would expect the subject of such an illness 
to be liable to breakdowns in health such as we subsequently 
find : viz. attacks of vomiting and diarrhoea, the attack in 
March, 1572, when she recounted " the extreme pain which 
for five days had so shortened her breath and had so clutched 
her heart that she verily believed she was going to die of it ; " 
and later in Feb. 1586, when " the Queen had been four hours 
speechless and as if dead, in a swoon, this being an indisposition 
to which she is occasionally liable." 

D. Other items of interest in her medical history are : 

a. Small-Pox. From the evidence it would appear most 
probable that the first attack in 1562 was a genuine 
attack of Small-Pox, and that the Queen was perma- 
nently " pitted " therefrom, and that the second attack 
ten years later (1572) was either an abortive attack 
(on account of the almost complete protection afforded 
by the first) or more probably Chicken-Pox. (No. 107.) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


b. Teeth : Many references to bad teeth, frequent tooth- 

ache with abscesses, discoloured teeth (description 
and portraits), ? pyorrhoea alveolaris. 

c. Amenorrhoea (No. 121, aged 44) ; the Queen's physicians 

say " she has hardly ever had the purgations proper 
to all women," and go on to give the ulcer in the leg 
the credit of performing vicarious menstruation. 
This taken with No. 130 seems to point to the meno- 
pause occurring at about the age of 44-46. 

d. Attacks of Fever ; possibly Rheumatic or Malarial. 

e. Nervous attacks ; Hysteria (No. 113) " Spice or show of 

/. Gout ? Various references to pain in arm and thumb 

in late life. 
To sum up : Here we have a woman of Syphilitic heredity 
with a delicate girlhood (15-19 yrs. of age)— a very serious 
illness from 20-23 vnth sequelae lasting for many years more and 
numerous minor ailments and illnesses — ^with an indomitable 
will which enabled her to fulfil her duties and play her part 
as an autocratic sovereign in a very turbulent period. Whether 
she should be termed " Neurotic " would need a fuller study 
of evidence than the extracts before us, which I do not thii^ 
point particularly in that direction. 

J. A. Howard. 
Dec. 29, 1917. 

Opinion of Sir Arthur Keith 

M.D., LL.D., F.R.S., F.R.C.S. ; Conservator of the Museum and Hunterian 
Professor of the Royal Coll. of Surgeons of England ; Fullerian Professor of 
Physiology in the Royal Institution of Gt. Britain ; late Presid. Royal 
Anthropological Inst. ; for thirteen years Lecturer on Anatomy at London 
Hosp. Specialty: Anatomy and Anthropology. Publications — Introduction 
to the Study of Anthropoid Apes: Human Embryology and Morphology; 
Editor Hughes's Practical Anatomy; Asst. Ed. of Treoe's Surgical and 
Applied Anatomy; Ancient Types of Man (191 1) ; The Human Body 
(1912) ; Antiquity of Man (1914). 

{Preliminary Opinion) 

Royal College of Surgeons of England, 
Lincoln's Iim Fields, 

London, W.C.z. 


Dear Mr. Chamberlin, — 

You have produced a most interesting study for 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


medical men, viz. the possibility of making a diagnosis of the 
ailments of Queen Elizabeth from the data and symptoms you 
have collected and made available for easy study. 

The results of my reading of the symptoms are these : 
(i) There can be no doubt that Elizabeth was a fully and 
completely formed woman ; we have mention of her breasts 
and menstrual periods. 

(2) There is no evidence that she inherited the virus of 
syphilis, nor any that she manifested syphilitic symptoms. 

(3) Her chief complaint is best explained by supposing 
that she suffered from anaemia coming on just after — or, rather, 
in — the opening years of her sexual life — ^the swelling of the 
face and body — the pallor — ^the giddiness — ^the swoons, seem 
all to point to such a diagnosis. 

(4) Then follows a period of stomach-liver derangements. 

(5) In the same period occurred ulceration of the leg and 
a vicariousness in the discharge from her ulcer and from her 

(6) Later still, there was a period with a septic condition 
of her mouth — particularly of her teeth. She was apparently 
a martyr to pyorrhoea. She seems to have died from a septic 
condition arising from the condition of the mouth. 

(7) The pain in her left arm may have been rheumatism. 
I think all who suffer from pyorrhoea also suffer from chronic 
rheumatism. But it may also have been angina pectoris — ^for 
there are signs which suggest that her arteries may have been 
diseased. . . . 

Yours sincerely, 

A. Keith. 

{Formal Opinion) 

Royal College of Surgeons of England, 

Lincoln's Inn Fields, 

London, W.C.3. 

Part I. — ^Notes on the Portraits of Queen 

Of the six portraits submitted,* the one which seems to 

* In order to bring the task within practicable dimensions, I first 
examined what appeared to be all the possible authentic portraits of Elizabeth. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


me the truest transcript of a living and real face is that numbered 
5 — Nicholas Hilliard's portrait. I should suppose the woman 
portrayed to be sixty years of age or more. There are no 
wrinkles, to be sure — ^but the skin is stretched like thin parch- 
ment, the face is lean, and the eyelids, although conventional, 
are less so than in the other portraits. The nose at once arrests 
attention — a " beaky " nose — somewhat of the parrot-beak 
type. The mouth is peculiar — ^the upper lip is drawn in 
tightly, stretching from angle to angle of the mouth — ^while 
the lower lip is full in the middle part, and a little pouting. 
The forehead is expansive and rounded, with a hairless region 
reaching high into the crown. The face is short, the chin 
fairly prominent. The sinking in of the upper lip may be due 
to an absence of the upper teeth. The eyes are big, widely 
opened, and give the impression of being of a dark tint. The 
face as a whole has a vinegarish expression. The eyebrows 
are peculiarly thin. The lobule of the ear is joined to the 
cheek — stretching downwards as a drawn-out fold. The 
face is that of a nervous person, lean, highly-strung, and perhaps 

Turning now to Portrait No. i — ^The first question one asks 
is : Could Siis, the face of a sedate, modest damsel of seventeen 
or under — I should be surprised to find her, as represented 
by the note on the back of the picture, a woman of twenty 
— could the features here presented become those seen in 
No. 5 ? 

I think they could. She is portrayed as a madonna, with 
full, rounded, wide forehead, the hair ceasing high up, and 
exposing an uncommon frontal height. The forehead of 
No. I could easily become the forehead of No. 5. The eyes 
in No. I are full and wide, set in ample sockets ; the eyebrows 

With the help of various expert friends, the list was gradually reduced until 
only the six submitted to Dr. Keith for final decision remained as probable 
portraits. They also represent as many classes or types into which, roughly 
of course, all reputed portraits may be divided. 

One more thing must be said, because of the surrounding circumstances 
which are peculiarly likely to continue the Amazon theory of Elizabedi — 
that the reputed funereal effigy in Westminster Abbey (which I myself have 
heard officially described therein as such) is apocryphal, and a fraud of the 
most glaring character so long as it be so pictured and money collected for 
so designating it. Literally millions must have paid sixpences to hear this 
story, and even the greatest scholars have been befooled by it. One 
glaring instance recurs to me — that of a very learned historical scholar 
who had been employed by a prospective publisher, who opined that my 
views of the true appearance of Elizabeth must be erroneous because 
they were altogether at variance with this specious effigy at the Abbey. 
— F. C. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


In the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle- 

Reproduced by gracious poinission of the King 

From Messrs. Goupil &• Co.'s engraving in Creighton's Queen Elizaleth 

Digitized by Microsoft© 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



Reproduced by kind permission of the Earl of Radnor, the owner 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



In the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle 

Reproduced by gracious permission o/tfte King 

(From Messrs. Goupil &* Co.^s engraving in Creigkton's Queen Elizabeth) 

Digitized by Microsoft© 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


In the Royal Collection at Hampton Court 

Reproduced by gracious permission oj tke King 

{From Messrs. Goupil &» Co.^s engraving in CreightotCs Queen Elizabeth) 

Digitized by Microsoft© 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Untouched enlargement from the original miniature by Nicholas Hilliard in the Duke of 
Buccleuch's Collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum 

Digitized by Microsoft© 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Untouched enlargement of an exact phoiosraphiccopyofthe original Nicholas Hilliard minialure 
bound in Queen Elizabeth's prayer book which was all in her own hand. 

Reproduced by kind permission of Miss Whitehead, ivhose father, the late great collector oj 
?niniatures, is the last known owner of the prayer book, which has disappeared since iSgz 

Digitized by Microsoft© 

Digitized by Microsoft® 




are present across the whole width of the supra-orlritai region. 
The eyes of No. i could become those of No. 5. The nose, 
however, of No. i seems at first sight to differ materially from 
that of No. 5. The damsel is represented in No, i with a 
particularly long nose. We have to judge its exact shape in 
an almost full-faced portrait ; whereas in No. 5 we have the 
nose partially in profile. The nose certainly does change in 
the 3rd, 4th, and 5th decades of life — particularly in women after 
the menopause. There is a suspicion of the hook in the 
damsel's nose ; I would not deny that a nose portrayed as 
in No. I at seventeen may not become the nose in No. 5 at 
sixty. The lips and mouth of No. i could become the lips 
and mouth of No. 5. The long oval face of the girl may become 
shortened by the loss of teeth. The fat which smooths and 
fills the cheeks of youth does disappear ; and we may get the 
shortened, sunken jowls of the older woman represented in 
No. 5. She is portrayed as a girl with particularly long, 
delicate, nervous fingers. In both portraits we have an abun- 
dant' representation of finery. The girl portrayed in No. i 
is not an uncommon English type. With a bodice such as the 
artist has depicted, the organs of the body must have worked 
under great stress and difficulty. 

In Portrait No. 6 — an enlargement 6f another of Hilliard's 
miniatures — we have the same ample forehead. The eyes are 
worked in quite differently, but, I dare to think, more truthfully, 
than in the two portraits just discussed. We have here, I 
should guess, a portrait of an intermediate stage in life — a 
woman near her thirtieth year. We notice a trace of the same 
ear-cheek fold as in No. 5. The nose, too, in its shape seems 
to represent an inter-stage between Nos. i and 5. The mouth 
is narrow and pouting. The change is in the upper lip, which 
is shapeless and swollen. The chin, however, is the chin of 
No. 5. I have no difficulty in believing this to be a portrait 
of the same person as Nos. i and 5. The upper eyelids are 
puffy. There is the same rich array of finery as in the other 
two portraits. 

In Portrait No, 4 — an allegorical picture of Elizabeth's 
youth — we have one which is difficult to harmonize with the 
three discussed above. It is true we have the same wide, 
full forehead, retreating amongst the hair on the crown. The 
eyes are round and otherwise different, the cheeks are particu- 
larly high and prominent, the nose is almost straight — certainly 
not aquiline. The upper lip is long, the chin narrow and 
prominent. I cannot believe this to be a portrait of the same 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


person as painted in Nos, i, 5, and 6.* The woman portrayed 
seems to me to be about thirty-five or forty years of age. 

No. 3 — ^We have here a woman whom I deem to be some 
sixty years of age, vnth a long face — a long oval face. One 
notes at once the remarkable lower jaw — ^its depth at the chin, 
and the long gradual sweep of its lower border from the ear 
downwards and forwards. There is the usual expansive 
forehead, and the nose is long and aquiline, with a well-modelled 
Dantesque tip. It may be intended for Queen Elizabeth — but 
it is not a portrait drawn from the person represented in No, 5. 

Then we come to the highly-finished and apparently truth- 
ful portrait represented in No. 2. One has only to look at the 
ear to see how carefully and accurately this artist worked ; 
that ear was copied from a real ear, whether it was Elizabeth's 
or not. We have the usual forehead represented, but even 
more expansively than in the others. The modelling of the 
eyebrows, eye-sockets, and eyelids is very careful and yet 
conventional. We have the same full and really beautiful 
eyes. The nose is long and almost straight — just a suspicion 
of aquiline. Here, as in No. 3, the lower jaw is represented 
as sweeping in a gentle curve from ear to chin ; the lower part 
of the face is long and tapers to a point at the chin — very 
unlike the face represented in No. 5. Look at the modelling 
of the mouth — ^particularly of the upper lip ! The sharply 
marked lines of youth are preserved : that is very apparent in 
the upper lip. Yet this beautiful woman in No. 2 is no longer 
young ; she is a woman of at least forty-five. Were I shown 
the portrait of the girl represented in No. i and asked if she 
might grow into a woman having the severe, clearly-cut 
features of No. 2, I should say " Yes, certainly." But if I 
am told that the lady represented in No. 5 is certainly the 
authentic Elizabeth, then I see no possibility of No. 2 becoming 
No. 5, and therefore dismiss No. 2 as an idealistic, not a real 
sketch, of the great Elizabeth. 

It is not easy to set out the six portraits in the order of the 
sitter's age with any degree of certainty. No. 1 is the youngest 
— seventeen at the utmost. I think No. 6 should come next, 
then No. 4, then No. 2, then No. 3, and, finally, No. 5. When 
I search for any appearance which may indicate bodily ailment, 

• Prof. Keith is correct. Although ascribed to Elizabeth by Creighton 
and others, it is now known that the portrait is of Arabella Stuart, and it is 
so labelled at Hampton Court. Creigtston devotes a very sentimental page 
to it, unfortunately. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


or temperament, or quality of mind, I must own I cannot find 
any certain basis on which a profitable opinion can be founded. 
The guesses I am prepared to make have been set down in 
the descriptions given of the individual portraits. 

Part II. — ^Notes on the Health of Qxjeen 

Having thus attempted to obtain the personal appearance 
of Queen Elizabeth from a study of her portraits, I turn to 
the written testimony of her contemporaries, in the hope that 
I may be able to obtain a more substantial picture of the central 
figure of one of the greatest periods in England's history. In 
Mr. Chamberlin's records I find only one mention of her height 
— that of Hentzner, made when the Queen was in her sixty- 
fifth year — and then, according to report, somewhat bent. 
" Crooked as her carcase " is an expression attributed to Essex. 
Hentzner 's description is : " Her stature neither tall nor low." 
She was an average height for Englishwomen ; so her height 
may be placed at 5 ft. 3 in. or at 5 ft. 4 in. (about i "6 m.). Every 
record indicates a thin woman — often emaciated. As already 
mentioned, she became somewhat bent in her 7th decade. 
But from her portrait as a young girl, one judges that she had 
rather a slender, upright figure ; and I presume she was a 
lightly, not heavily, built woman. But of that character there 
is no mention in the records set before me. Hentzner says her 
face " was oblong." The French Ambassador, writing at the 
same period — when Elizabeth was in her 65th year, says : 
" her countenance is long and thin in comparison with what it 
was formerly, according to what they say." We have thus 
contemporary testimony of two witnesses that she had a long 
face, which is not the impression conveyed by Hilliard's 
Portrait (No. 5) ; andyet in the two other portraits, Nos. 2 and 3, 
which I have hesitated to accept as authentic likenesses, a 
long, narrow face appears. As a maiden she is also depicted 
as of the long-faced type. Hentzner says her nose was *' a 
little hooked." Hilliard's No. 5 shows a pronounced hook, 
but none of the other portraits bring out this feature. 
" Hooked " noses are rarely seen on long faces. Her com- 
plexion, one has to infer, for there is no direct record, was 
that of a dark brunette with a pale white skin which was 
destitute of any ruddiness — even in the face. Hentzner also 
mentions that her eyes (irides) were black ; as to her hair, 
there is no mention at the close of her first dropsical illness ; 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


about the end of her third decade, after her second dropsical 
illness, she would appear to have become bald ; the wig she 
adopted was red, and it is possible that her natural hair was 
also red — for a pale white skin and almost black eyes do often 
accompany a certain tint of red hair.* Hentzner says her 
eyes were small and pleasant ; but in all her portraits her eyes 
are depicted as large rather than small. Her lips were " nar- 
row," says Hentzner, viz. a thin-lipped woman — ^that descrip- 
tion also tallies with Hilliard's No. 5. We have already noted 
her long, delicate, nervous fingers in her youthful portrait ; 
Hentzner also observed that feature. It is strange that there 
should be such a dearth of personal details of Queen Elizabeth ; 
she must have been the most discussed personality in England 
during the forty-five years of her reign. 

Elizabeth's Medical History 

I will preface what I am going to say regarding Elizabeth's 
medical history by insisting on the difficulty which confronts 
a medical man when he seeks to make a diagnosis of her various 
illnesses. It is an axiom in medical practice never to hazard 
a diagnosis, nor enter upon a course of treatment, unless a 
personal examination of the patient has been made. In certain 
diseases the symptoms may be so characteristic, and their 
manifestation so accurately described, that the physician has 
no difficulty in making a satisfactory diagnosis. There are, 
however, a great number of illnesses that may baffie the most 
acute physician, even if notes of the case have been made by 
a trained colleague. There are conditions of illness, the 
exact nature of which, in the present state of our knowledge, 
cannot be diagnosed, even if the physician has an opportunity 
of personally examining the patient, and of applying tfie whole 
armamentarium of diagnostic methods at the disposal of the 
modern physician. In the case of Queen Elizabeth, the modem 
physician is separated from his patient by more than three 
centuries ; he has to attempt a diagnosis on historical data, 
not set down by expert observers, but by men and women 
who, in our sense, were not acquainted with the elements of 
medicine. There is not a single record in Mr. Chamberlin's 
list which was set down by a physician while in attendance on 
her Majesty. The politicians were interested in her illnesses, 

• " Elizabeth had hair reder than yellow, curlit apparently of nature."— 
Melville, Memoirs, p. 122, in October, 1564. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


not from a medical point of view, but in so far as her death 
affected the outlook of their colleagues or masters. On such a 
basis it is impossible for even the most skilled physician to 
reach incontrovertible conclusions as to her health, illnesses, 
and bodily condition. But, seeing she was the central figure 
of that great company which gave England a predominant 
place in the affairs of the world, it is well worth while to examine 
the data brought together by Mr. Chamberlin and see if addi- 
tional light can be thrown on the life and behaviour of the great 

The writer's training is not that of a practical physician, 
and therefore he has no qualification to pass an opinion on the 
nature of Queen Elizabeth's illnesses. Nor is there any need 
for him to touch on such matters, for Mr. Chamberlin has 
obtained the opinions of four eminent men who have at their 
disposal the best knowledge and experience of our time. But 
there are certain general problems relating to her health which 
we may be permitted to review very briefly. So, taking up 
Mr. Chamberlin's questions in the order he has placed them 
before us — 

" Was Elizabeth of exceptionally strong physique ? " 

She was a slender woman of medium height, and not 
strong in a muscular sense, nor in the sense that she had 
abundance of bodily vigour and animal spirits ; but in the 
sense of strength of will, in determination to compel her body 
to obey her will, and to compel men and things to submit to 
her dictation, she was a woman of great tenacity and strength. 

"Was her health good?" 

On an adjoining sheet I have marked out her ten septennary 
periods — Septems they are called there, setting down year by 
year, by a species of shading, her various periods of ailment. 
The first and second Septems are clean ; we have no records 
of childish ailings. But with the third Septem, from puberty 
onwards, begins a continuous record of ill-health. The nature 
of that illness has been discussed already by physicians. We 
simply note that there is a continuous record of complainings 
all through the 3rd Septem and through the 4th, except just 
prior to her coronation, and for a year or so after that event. 
In the 6th, 7th, and 8th Septems there is hardly a clear year, 
except a brief series at the end of the 6th and commencement 
of the 7th. Of the 9th Septem there is no record, but the 10th 
is marked by a continuous succession of complaints. With 
such a record no one could say Queen Elizabeth enjoyed good 
health. She was really ill, or, what is quite as hard to bear, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


imagined she was ill for a large number of days in every year. 
If we take the records for the year 1571, when she was in the 
38th year, we note she defers an audience on account of her 
health in July, and then about a month later again makes her 
health an excuse for putting off another interview. I have a 
suspicion that a minute examination will show that her times 
of illness are closely connected with her menstrual life. Mary 
Queen of Scots evidently thought so ; Elizabeth's illness began 
with puberty ; there are records which leave us in no doubt 
that her uterine functions were irregular ; there were times 
when her menstrual discharge dried up ; there are those 
records of discharge from an ulcer of her leg, which was most 
abundant when the monthly discharge from the womb was 
dried up. Her 8th Septem, the period of her climacteric, 
is marked by headaches, swoons, ebullitions of temper, melan- 
choly and gastric crises. Like so many women of a nervous 
temperament and commanding brain, she was crippled at the 
acute phase of each menstrual period. She had undoubtedly 
other ailments than those which spring from a derangement 
of uterine function, but the womb, I think, was the chief 
source of her continued suffering and ill-health. 

I may here interpolate the observation that continued 
' ill-health is not incompatible with a sound judgment and the 
highest manifestations of the powers of the mind. We should 
^ never guess from Darwin's writings that he was continuously 
• ailing ; he might be described, on his own showing, and from 
the records of those who were closely associated with him, 
as a confirmed invalid. Yet he accomplished more than any 
other man of his time. So far as I know, although he had the 
benefit of the best medical talent of his period, the exact nature 
of his illness was never definitely determined. Huxley had 
long spells of ill-health. I have no doubt that an intimate 
study of the lives of our more celebrated modern women — 
George Elliot, Charlotte Bronti, Mrs. Browning, etc. — ^would 
reveal a continuous series of bodily and mental disturbances, 
not unlike those to which Queen Elizabeth was subject. Thus 
when it is admitted that Queen Elizabeth did not enjoy good 
health, we must add that it was of that kind which did not 
preclude an active and full use of her brain. Nay — much of 
it may have resulted from an over-use of her brain. 

Questions 3 and 4 refer to the period for which there is no 
record ; it is unlikely that her health in her 9th Septem differed 
from the tenour it held in the preceding and succeeding 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Question s refers to her constitution. Now there is no 
more indefinite word than this in our medical vocabulary. 
By constitution we mean, I think, the multitude of quaUties 
with which a living body is endowed. It includes suscepti- 
bility to disease — to disease of various kinds — ^it includes 
qualities of the nervous system, the make and build of the 
skeleton and muscles, the power of the stomach, heart, and 
lungs to react to the burdens which we place on them. Clearly 
we have not the data to assess the nature of Queen Elizabeth's 
constitution — except by noting the reaction of her brain and 
body to the changing conditions in which they were placed. 
But if we may use expressions as they are habitually employed 
in ordinary speech, we should certainly say she was of a nervous 
constitution. Her immunity was not good ; she had small- 
pox, chicken-pox, and the disease of which she died was a septic 
or infectious disease of the throat. She suffered from gumboils, 
and had that septic condition of the teeth which is described 
as pyorrhoea. Twice she had apparently disease of the kidneys ; 
she was jaundiced at different times. Her uterine functions 
were disordered — of her appetite and feeding we know little. 
She was apparently irregular in her times of feeding — sitting 
down to a meal only when hungry, and drinking only when 
thirsty. She evidently rested or slept late in the afternoon. 
She had bouts of sleeplessness. But she lived almost to 
complete her 70th year. Like the curate's egg, her constitu- 
tion was good in parts. It was not a strong constitution in the 
ordinary sense of the word ; it was often disordered, but 
although it kept the lamp of her brain well alight, would it 
be too much to say she was an invalid from her 15th year 
onwards ? If we use the term " invalid " in its usual sense, 
as indicating a person confined to room or bed on account of 
chronic ill-health, then it would be too much. She was not a 
confirmed, but a recurrent or intermittent invalid ; she practi- 
cally never had the satisfied and comfortable sense that vege- 
tative, healthy people enjoy. 

As to her inheriting syphilis ; there is no congenital sign 
of that inheritance in her facial features ; nor is there any fact 
that indicates any syphilitic taint in her childhood. Three 
of her particular complaints have to be considered in this 
connection. There is the loss of her hair and also, I think, of 
her eyebrows about the end of her 3rd decade — ^when, for the 
second time, she had suffered from swelling and dropsy, 
which the best advice bids us assign to disease of the kidney. 
She was deeply jaundiced in the second phase of that illness. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


We know that women at or after the age of 30 may suddenly 
become bald as Elizabeth did. It is sometimes associated with 
childbirth. Its direct cause we do not know, but the accompany- 
ing letter from my friend Dr. J. H. Sequeira, a leading authority 
on diseases of the skin, will put at your disposal the best 
knowledge we have of the subject. Men, too, may lose 
their hair in their 3rd decade. Always the loss of the hair 
is accompanied by a peculiar change in the colour and texture 
of the skin. Now that portrait (No. 5) of Hilliard's does give 
Elizabeth a tightly stretched, parchment-like skin ; the French 
Ambassador noted that the skin of her face — but she was in her 
65th year at the time — was very wrinkled. We may state with 
a degree of confidence that Elizabeth was the unhappy subject 
of this unfortunate condition that occasionally overtadkes both 
young women and men — a condition which does react on their 
mentality. We have no reason to suppose it as due to syphilis. 
Syphilis may cause the hair to fall out — but the condition is 
different to the one described. The second condition which 
must be discussed in connection with syphilis is the ulcer 
which she had on her leg, just above the ankle — ^which appa- 
rently remained unhealed for about 8 years, from her 37^1 to 
45th year. She had been the subject of an extreme dropsical 
condition in which her legs and feet became greatly swollen. 
That condition would predispose to ulceration of the leg, 
independently of any syphilitic taint. The third condition 
is the " issue " of her shoulder which kept her from hunting. 
The word " issue " is used here, I think, in its medical sense. 
She was often bilious — suffered as people of her complexion 
and constitution often do — from derangements of the liver, 
which, as we know, are often attended by a pain in the shoulder. 
The treatment was to insert a seton and bring about an " issue " 
in the shoulder, and permit the evil humour to escape. Eliza- 
beth was unable to go hunting because — as I suppose — she 
had an issue just established in her shoulder. 

I am not going to enter into Question 8 — a diagnosis of 
the Queen's various illnesses; her s3miptoms have been 
analysed by more practised minds than mine. But as to 
Question 9 — ^the effect of the Queen's bodily condition on her 
actions and deportment, I should like to set down one or two 
notes. Elizabeth had inherited a very active brain ; the 
progress of her scholarship, her penmanship and needlework, 
in quite early life, shows that it was a brain of exceptional 
power. From her 15th year until her 26th it was the acuteness 
of her brain which kept her head on her body. Was ever any 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


other girl's life spent in such a school for playing for safety ? — 
of playing one party off against another ? Then when she 
got a crown she had to keep that poised on her head by balancing 
one power against another — ^protestant and catholic ; aristocrat 
and plebeian ; king^ of Spain and France, not to speak of Ire- 
land, Scotland, the Low Countries, and one politician against 
another. The very conditions of her body which gave her a 
feeling of ill-being actually assisted her brain to play its imperial 
game. A healthy sexual life, a womb and ovaries in perfect 
health, a body that glows in full perfection of womanly beauty 
are handicaps to a woman who has to steer a course amidst the 
shoals and narrows of the Sea of State ; with such a full endow- 
ment she cannot but be the slave of the qualities with which 
nature has so richly dowered her. Elizabeth had the advantage 
of her defects as a stateswoman ; she paid the penalty for her 
defects in a feeling of ill-being and often positive ill-health. 
In a medical sense her sexual system was blasted ; she had 
neither the instinct of sweetheart nor mother — ^for these 
instincts are impossible in such a frame as hers. How she 
treated women I do not know ; but I should suspect she could 
not stand to see near her those whom nature had fitted out 
with her finest paraphernalia, while she had lost her hair and 
her good looks. We know more about her treatment of men : 
she liked them young, she liked them handsome — but only 
in so far as they served her purpose. I think her selfishness — 
for her crown and her kingdom as much as for herself — must 
be sought in her really sexless condition. Even the sexless 
individual has an attenuated faculty of playing on the surface 
of love — of sniffing the fruit which they have not the capacity 
of tasting. Elizabeth toyed with her young men, but one 
cannot conceive more than that. Her condition freed her 
from the bonds which bind most women ; but in exchange 
she had to bear other bonds — ^the misery of disturbed health 
and ill-being. If a study of Elizabeth's health and illnesses 
can throw a light on her character and through her on the 
history of her period, it will be found not in a study of her 
dropsies, fevers, small-pox, spice of mother, etc., but in the 
disordered condition of her sexual system. 

Royal College of Surgeons of England, 
Lincoln's Inn Fields, 
London, W.C.a. 

24th day of June, 1918. 

My dear Chamberlin, — 

. . . You may take it that Elizabeth's loss of hair 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


was subsequent to an infection — ^the one which gave her dropsy, 
jaundice, etc. She must have had scarlet fever — or some such 
illness — falling on her kidneys. But when I don't know. I 
still think all that post-puberty bout was directly connected 
with the assumption of uterine function. . . . 

Yours sincerely, 

A. Keith. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



SUCH was the health of the Princess and of the Queen 
Elizabeth, and it will not have to be urged that as a 
consequence of this discovery all present opinions 
upon her character, accomplishments, and career 
must be revised and rewritten. 

The reader can but wonder how such a disastrous history 
could so long have remained unknown. The detailed explana- 
tion, although absorbing and almost romantic, is largely 
technical, and, as it has little concern with the thread of our 
argument, is inserted hereafter as note 4 in the Appendix ; but 
no matter how much we may elucidiate and conjecture, the 
vitality for more than three centuries of the Amazon-blond- 
giantess theory of Elizabeth will always remain one of the most 
curious literary misunderstandings of all historical writings. 

There are, however, two outstanding statements in the 
original documents which undoubtedly have weighed heavily 
in favour of this Amazon theory — ^namely, that she hunted and 
danced almost to the end of her life. 

Even on the occasion of her last remove but one from 
London, only eight months before her death, she rode on 
horseback all the way to Hampton Court — ten miles — and 
" also hunted." 

As late as April 28, 1602, eleven months prior to her death, 
she opened a ball with the French royal duke of Nevers, 
dancing a galliard " with a disposition admirable for her age," 
as the French Ambassador puts it.* Two months later, that 
is about July 1, 1602, she arranges to send the pleasing news 
in great detail to her wearily waiting successor, James, in 
Edinburgh, that she is a long way from being dead. Her 

• P. R, 0., Baschet MSS., Bundle 33, purp. p. 360. 
Digitized by Microsoft® 


method was to have the Scottish Ambassador, when he called 
to see her on appointment, led into a room adjoining her own, 
and seated where, by peering around a drapery carefully turned 
back for the purpose, he could see Elizabeth dancing to a lively 
tune from a small fiddle ; and of course she was much abashed, 
surprised, and ashamed when she caught him enjoying her 
indiscretion ! The only remarkable thing about this story is 
that it does not relate to the day of her death — ^for it would have 
been exactly like her to have played this prank when at her last 
gasp ! 

She came as near to this as she dared, for this was the last 
time she ever danced ! * It was the final effort, the last fling 
in the face of the craven Stuart, whose one aim and ambition 
for many years had been her death. It was the last gesture 
of challenge to Death itself. She looked the Dread Monster 
in the face ; and with a toss of the head, a smile, and a jest, 
she danced the last dance of her long life in defiance of the one 
force which could beat dozon that " unconquerable soul " which 
was her predominant characteristic. It was no mere coincidence 
that she never danced again. She had her eye on posterity. 

It was English. It was a sublime manifestation of that 
jaunty, fearless, or apparently fearless spirit, which Englishmen 
love to think of as theirs alone. 

In this dance with Death, typical of the nation, we have the 
quintessence of the soul and heart of the Great Queen. Were 
a psychologist to be found who knew nothing of this woman 
except the sole circumstance of this dance, her age and her 
health, and all the efforts James had made to oust her from the 

• Miss Strickland, to be sure, ascribes the last dances to the following 
September, a fortnight after the Queen had begun her seventieth year, 
giving as authority the letter of the Earl of Worcester to the Earl of Shrews- 
bury under date of Sept. 19, 1602. But an examination of the letter does 
not support Miss Strickland's conclusion. The passage in question reads : 
" We are frolic here at Court : much danceing, in the privy-chamber, of 
Country-dances before the queen's majesty, who is exceedingly pleased 
therewith. Irish tunes are at this time most liked, but in winter, Lullaby, 
an old song of Mr. Bird's, will be more in request, as I think." — Lodge's 
Illust. iii. p. 147. This is the flimsiest, yet the only, foundation tor Miss 
Strickland's observation — " This was the opinion of the earl of Worcester 
. . , who thought that a refreshing nap, lulled by the soft sounds of Bird's 
exquisite melody, would better suit his royal mistress than her usual after- 
dinner diversions of frisking, beneath the burthen of seventy years, to some 
of the spirit-stirring Irish tunes newly imported to the English court." 
Not only does the letter not say that the Queen danced, but it explicitly 
states that the dancing was " before the queen's majesty." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


throne so that he might occupy it, he could hardly fail to recon- 
struct Elizabeth so far as her predominant qualities were 
concerned ; and the result would be a thorough woman. Yet 
we have always been told, and have believed, that Elizabeth 
was more man than woman, entirely lacking in feminine 
characteristics ! 

A more typical woman than Elizabeth never lived. She 
was, moreover, a woman confronted with the greatest tasks 
that have ever confronted a monarch ; and when we reflect 
that she was overwhelmingly successful, and usually by methods 
strictly feminine, it is probably true that only a woman could 
have triumphed upon so desperate a field. 

Elizabeth's dancing and hunting seem, at first sight, very 
strong, almost conclusive, evidence of an exceptional physique. 
But the slightest examination of the facts quickly leads to a 
modification of that view. 

The spectacle that at once comes to the mind of the average 
person when he reads of a hunt by Elizabeth is that of a pack, 
madly dashing across country after a wild buck, followed by 
a bevy of scarlet-coated gentlemen and ladies, led by the Great 
Queen herself, at sixty-nine. That is what a hunt in England 
to-day means. 

The term in the time of Elizabeth signified the driving 
of tame deer rumiing in the park of some private estate into a 
net, and then driving them out of it one by one through a 
narrow opening, beside which the hunters stood, and shot 
them with crossbows as they emerged. The only common 
variation of this procedure was the spectacle of the doomed 
beasts, worn down and mauled to death by the deerhounds 
which sprang at them as they were let out of the opening. If 
the game did not at once succumb, it could continue the 
struggle within a larger enclosure, so arranged that the quarry 
was never beyond sight of the beautifully-gowned spectators, 
who, seated in a bower of leafy branches, hoped that the dogs 
would drive the panting deer near them, so that they might 
bring him down themselves with their crossbows.* In all 

* Among the many authorities establishing the view just given of 
Elizabeth's hunting, we cite these as typical : 

" . . . as I was already near the said Vuynck (Probably Woodstock near 
Oxford. — F. C.) she (Elizabeth) sent three gentlemen to conductme ; not to 
the house where she was stopping, but to an arbour which had been prepared 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the life of Elizabeth, we can discover but one account of any 
possible variation from this fashion of hunting. 

for her where she could shoot her crossbow at does imprisoned in toils ; 
to this place she came soon after, grandly accompanied, where both before 
and after she had alighted from her coach, she received me very favour- 
ably . . . (They argued about state affairs for a long time, and then the 
Ambassador continues) The hour having come for the hunt, she took her 
crossbow and killed six does, of which she did me the honour to give me a 
large proportion." — Fteelon to the King of France, Sept. s, 1570. 

" In Queen Elizabeth's day, and after, we read little of the great stag 
being harboured in his forest haunts, but being seen in the park herd, he 
was singled out by means of hounds, who ' teased him forth,' or even by a 
sportsman on horseback riding after him, and thus severing him from the 
herd. Coursing and shooting within parks was the most favoured sport 
(And of course the shooting was then widiout the assistance of gunpowder. — 
F. C.) in this Queen's reign, and wild deer hunting was completely neglected, 
at least at Court." — British Hunting, A. W. Coaten, 1909, Lond., p. ix. 

By 1588 " the grand old style of hunting at force had given place to the 
indolent method of driving the deer to ' stands,' from which the Queen and 
her courtiers fired as the quarry fled by." — History of the Royal Buckhounds, 
J. P. Hore, p.73. 

The French Due de Biron visited England with several hundred retamers 
in i6oi. " Queen Elizabeth being then at the Vine in Hampshire, Biron 
followed her thither and had the pleasure of seeing Her Majesty hunt, 
attended by more than fifty ladies, all mounted on hackneys." Idem. 
Stowe thus refers to this hunt : " And one day he (the Duke) attended her 
at Basing Park at hunting . . . and did there see her in such Royalty and 
80 attended by the nobility, so costly furnished and mounted, as the like 
had seldom been seen." Now of what did the hunting consist ? That is 
indubitably seen in the returns of the Lord Chamberlain for that time : 
" To Richard Conningesby for the allowance of himself (and 9 others) for 
makeinge readie a standinge in the P'ke at Windsor against ye huntinge 
there, for two dales, mense Augusti 1601, xxxix^ iii''. . . . For makinge 
readie the Lord Marques (of Winchester) his house at Basynge by the space 
of xiiij°" dayes mense Septembris 1601, xiij" x^ iiij''. For makeinge 
ready the Lord Sandes house at the Vyne for the french Ambassadors by 
like tyme mense pred', co xiij" etc. For makinge readie a standinge in 
Basynge P'ke for two dayes dco mense co xxiv^." — Accounts of the Treasurer 
of the Chamber of the Household, E. L. T. R. Series i. Box F, Bundle 3, 
m. 67d. MS. P. R. O. 

Invited to a hunt at Windsor (by Leicester at the request of the Queen), 
the French Ambassador attended and writes this description of what he saw 
in Windsor Park " where she had great sport hunting . . . and as fro the 
pleasure of the said hunt, it could not possibly have been greater. For after 
having seen sixty to eighty great bucks confined in a net passing and repassing 
incessantly before a Uttle scaffold where the Queen was, and where he saw 
her kill several of them with the crossbow, those which were only wounded 
were caught by bloodhounds ; the others were worn out at intervals within 
a plain of some six or seven miles in the midst of the forest where, on a little 
hill from which the entire plain could be seen and at the exit from the net, 
there had been erected a well-screened butt or blind (feuillade) to which the 
Queen went ; and, at once and for all the remainder of the day up to evening, 
one, two, three, and at different times several great bucks came out of the 
net, and passing by the blind, began two or three miles of chase with the 
best dogs of the nation, of which one, two, or three, brought down a great 
stag ; at times also after running for two or three miles, one would retrace 
its track to regain the forest, only to be brought down near the blind ; and 
as there were some good bucks as well as good dogs, both in great number, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


This is in a letter • of 1572, when, at the age of thirty-eight, 
she " pursued a stag all day and until the middle of the night, 
but had to rest in her chamber all the next day." There can 
be little doubt that this means that Elizabeth saw among the 
tame deer about the estate a particular buck which she deter- 
mined to kill. Her retainers cut him off from the herd, but 
he would not permit her to get near enough for a shot from 
the crossbow which a servant bore. The animal moved about 
the park, always succeeding in keeping beyond range, until 
darkness gave him the needed security at " the middle of the 
night." The latter circumstance shows, of course, that there 
was no rapid or rough riding, so that this exceptional day only 
serves to prove the rule. 

To recur to the dancing, the final record of her enjoying 
this exercise with anybody is that already cited of the French 
Ambassador de Beaumont f in a letter to his King under date 
of April 21, 1602, eleven months before the Queen's death, 
when, as the report reads : " after dinner she had a ball when 
she danced with him (the due de Nevers) la gaillarde with a 
disposition admirable for her age, not having paid this honour 
to any foreign prince since the late d'Alengon." 

There appears to be no testimony establishing her dancing 
with any man for the twenty years between these two French 
princes, and but one record of her so honouring any woman 
within that period. This last was in June, 1600, when she 
attended the wedding of Lord Herbert at Blackfriars. On 

the hunt, through the nature of the place and the careful preparations which 
had been made by the Count^of Leicestre, gave great pleasure to his sove- 
reign and to the company at large." — Marie Stuart et Cath. de Medicis, 
Chereul, p. 327, Sept. 18, 1584, de Castelnau to Henri III. 

" Lord Leicestre gave Queen Elizabeth the first watch bracelet in 
history ; I suppose for her hunting days. Once when she and he went to 
stay at Berkeley Castle, they had a day with the toils (Nets, etc., as described 
above) in the park in Lord Berkeley's absence, and killed twenty-seven 
prime stags, again having resort to screens and arblasts (Crossbows)." — 
The Queen's Hounds, Lord Ribblesdale, M.B.H., p. 230. 

On Aug. 15, 1591, when Elizabeth was at Cowdray, she killed a 
number of deer with a crossbow, and shot at a herd of tlurty imprisoned 
in a paddock for her entertainment. Later in the day she saw sixteen of 
them pulled down by greyhounds on the lawn ; quite a full day of hunting. 

In March, 1593, Elizabeth was at Theobalds, and Robert Carey in his 
Memoirs (Nichols's Prog., vol. ii. for that year) says : " the Queen went 
that day to ditmer to Enfield House, and had toiles (Nets. — F. C.) set up 
in the parke to shoot at buckes after dinner ... I tooke her by the arme, 
and led her to her standing." 

* CorTesp.Dip. de Finilon, torn. v. p. 83, Aug. 7, 1572. 

t P. R. 0., Baschet MSS., Bundle 33, purple p. 360. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the 1 6th of May Rowland Whyte writes to Sir Robert 
Sidney : 

" Her Majestic is in very good healthe, and purposes to 
honor Mrs. Anne Russell's marriage with her presence. • . . 
There is to be a memorable maske of eight ladies. They have 
a straunge dawnce newly invented ; their attire is this ; each 
hath a skirt of cloth of silver, a rich waistcoat w^rought with 
silkes and gold and silver, a mantell of carnacion taffeta cast 
under the arms, and their haire loose about their shoulders 
curiously knotted and interlaced." 

On the 14th of June, Whyte writes to describe the dance 
itsdf, which has just taken place. 

" These eight (the eight ladies spoken of in the preceding 
letter above) dawnce to the music Apollo bringes ; and there 
is a fine speach that makes mention of a ninth, much to her 
honor and praise. . . . After supper the masks came in, as 
I vnrit in my last ; and delicate it was to see eight ladies so 
pretily and richly attired. . . . Mrs. Felton went to the 
Queen, and woed her to dawnce. Her Majesty asked what she 
was ? ' Affection,' she said. * Affection,' said the Queen, 
' is false.' Yet her Majestic rose and dawnced : . . ." 

A year previous, in September, 1599, the Scottish Am- 
bassador, Semplc of Beltreis, reported * to James that some 
other person (whose name cannot be deciphered in the MS.) 
saw " the queen through a window . . . dance the Spanish 
Panic to a whistle and tamboureur, none being with her but 
my lady Warwick." 

Between November, 1598 and February, 1599, M. de 
Maisse, the French Ambassador, writes f that Elizabeth took 
him to see one of her balls. She put him beside her aind " took 
great pleasure in the ball and music . . . (and said) that in 
her youth she danced very well . . . when her girls arc dancing 
she follows the time with her head, hand, and foot. She 
reproves them if they do not dance to her pleasure, and without 
doubt she is a past-mistress (in the art). She says that she 
used to dance very well when young ; after the Italian manner 
of dancing high ; . . ." 

* Strickland, 1851 ed, p. 710. 

t Journal of M. 'de Maisse, Baschet MSS., P. R. O., Bundle 30, p. 335. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Here, we feel, must be the truth. It is the familiar picture 
of the old lady we have all seen so many, many times at balls, 
unable to take part in the dancing, but nodding her head, 
waving her hand, and tapping her foot to the time, while she 
criticizes the decadence of the new generation's enjoyments 
in comparison with those of her own, and dilates on the good 
old days. 

That was at the opening of 1599. Between that date and 
1589 — ten years — ^we find no record of the Queen's dancing 
in any style ; but on the 22nd of December in that year (1589) 
one of the gentlemen of the Court writes : " The Q. is so well 
as I assure you VI or VII gallyards in a momynge, besides 
musycke & syngynge, is her ordinary exercyse." * Elizabeth 
was then fifty-six years of age. 

Looking back over her life before and after this period, we 
gather that the Queen danced when she felt able to do so, just 
as she walked or rode on horseback, no matter what the weather 
might be — ^probably for the same reason as that which induced 
her to refuse the prescriptions of the doctors then inflicted 
upon her — ^namely, for the sake of health. But once her 
youth was passed, as she told de Maisse, she did not pretend 
to dance well, or in any violent fashion. It is to the gaillarde f 
that she has recourse, with its many curtesies, its stately, 
moderate step and mien, the forerunner of the minuet of the 
succeeding century — or to the ceremonial dance of Lord 
Herbert's wedding already described, where Apollo brings in 
the music, each lady moves with a cloak on her arm and her 
hair down her back, and there is a " fine speech ; " — evidently 
very like the minuet, but even more elaborate, a vehicle for 

If other evidence be desired of the degree of physical strength 
required by these dances of Elizabeth in her old age — ^upon 
only four occasions in the last twelve years of her life 
— attention may be directed to the costume with which the 
Queen was afflicted. It is substantially described in the follow- 
ing extract from the leading authority on ancient dancing. 
He is speaking of that in the Elizathan period : 

* Sir John Stanhope to Lord Talbot from Richmond, 22 Dec, 1589, 
Lodge, Illust., vol. ii. p. 386. 

t " One of the precursors of the minuet." — Cent, Diet. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


" Majestic measures were adapted to the requirements of 
the performers, decked in all the dignity of brave apparel ; 
high head-dresses with towers of hair ; coifs overloaded with 
jewels, with osprey, and other plumes, to which brisk move- 
ments would have brought destruction ; rigid and elongated 
stomachers ; starched ruifs of several stories ; buckramed 
sleeves and skirts ; hoops both high and inflexible ; extravagant 
trains and stiff shoes, also stiifer with jewels, and with very 
high heels, all adornments necessitating dance-measures 
suitable to the constrained and stately deportment of the 
wearers ; hence the favour in which was held the ' grave 
Pavane,' admirably designed to harmonize with stately sur- 
roundings, evidently the precursor of the equally courtly 
minuet." • 

Clearly, then, Elizabeth's efforts to dance at sixty-eight 
implied no physical exertion or strength inconsistent with 
what we now know of her general health. If she were able to 
walk at all, she could have stepped the dances then in vogue 
at her Court — just as she could have attended her so-called 

With one further observation, we may close this subject. 
It has been, and would be now, impossible for any biographer 
of Elizabeth to appreciate the significance of the various items 
in our Medical Record, as he reads them in the detached and 
casual fashion in which they appear in the bibliography. It 
is the coTtjunction of them that carries conviction and signifi- 
cance ; and that conjunction with the necessary verifications, 
and the necessary arrangement of details in chronological 
order, is a task that demands many months of ceaseless labour. 

It took twelve months more to secure the Opinions of the 
experts. Five years in all were consumed by the researches 
into this one feature of Elizabeth's life, and its statement ; 
and — a more suggestive fact to the working historian — ^when 
we planned our biography of the Queen, in successive volumes, 
we had not the slightest suspicion that this matter of Elizabeth's 
health would require any more time than that consumed in 
stating that she had " immense physical vigour," a " magnificent 
constitution ... a frame which seemed incapable of fatigue " 
. . . and that " it is not till February, 1602, that we first hear 
of her health beginning to fail." 

• Gaston Vuiller, History of Dancing, vol. ii. p. 384, Jap. veil. ed. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



j^ T the end of Chapter I,, we stated that the severest 
/^ trials of Elizabeth's whole life, its most dangerous 
r — ^ situations and most delicate decisions, came upon 
Jl JL, her in the nine years between the close of the 
Sejrmour Affair in 1549 and her accession in November, 1558, 
that is between her fifteenth and twenty-fifth years, and that 
for the most part of this period she was the very hub of the 
political system, with the result that when she mounted the 
throne she was already a most skilful, well-trained, and ex- 
perienced politician, who knew life, and men, and women as 
they really are. 

This we propose to demonstrate in a rapid survey of these 
nine years, and then, with a complete understanding of the 
woman Elizabeth, we can proceed directly to an examination 
of the charges of immorality which her contemporaries have 
left to us. 

As already said, the Seymours — ^the Admiral and his brother, 
usually known as the Protector, Somerset — had secured pos- 
session of their nephew, the little ten-year-old King, Edward VI. 
The Protector had brought his brother to the block, only to 
find himself confronted by another rival in the person of the 
head of the Dudley family, the Duke of Northumberland, 
who had been but lately the Earl of Warwick, and was the father 
of Leicester. The contest was so fierce between them that 
Somerset was a fugitive within six months of his brother's 
death, and no long time elapsed before he lost his head on that 
very block to which he had sent the admiral ; and the Dudleys 
were in the ascendant, with the boy-king in their hands. 
Northumberland's scheme had two main branches : 
Firstly, to induce Edward to deprive his sisters, Mary and 

"3 I 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Elizabeth, of the succession ; and, secondly, to induce Edward 
to will that great prize to Northumberland's daughter-in-law, 
Lady Jane Grey, daughter of Henry VHI/s niece,* whom 
Somerset had tried to gain for his own son ; and whose person 
Admiral Seymour had had charge of by arrangement with her 
ambitious parents . In this struggle for Lady Jane, Northumber- 
land triumphed two months before Edward died, and, since 
Elizabeth and Mary were prevented from seeing Edward, 
whose mind was sedulously poisoned against them, the boy 
acquiesced in Northumberland's plans, and signed every paper 
that was presented to him. When the King breathed his 
last the ducal conspirator had in his possession all documents 
necessary for putting his whole plan into operation. This 
was in July, 1553. 

Against this intrigue Elizabeth and Mary were helpless. 
The former was at Hatfield, as she had been, except for short 
intervals of visit to other palaces in the vicinity, ever since the 
Seymour Affair. In deference to the Protestant fashion, she 
dressed with absolute simplicity, and soon became the hope 
and symbol of all the hopes of that party, for in her alone could 
they expect a safe future. The accession of Mary, the con- 
firmed Catholic, meant their ruin, if not persecution and death. 
Elizabeth's accession meant the same to the Catholics ; and 
the entire nation, split in twain by the deadly hatred and fear 
between what in those days they termed true religion and 
heresy, hovered anxiously over the bed of little Edward, and 
forced Catholic Mary and Protestant Elizabeth, in spite of 
themselves, into mutual enmity and rivalry. 

Northumberland had seduced all the great families ; he 
had the army (such as it was), the navy, the money — all the 
trump cards, as he thought, except two — the persons of the 
two princesses ; and hardly had Edward ceased to breathe 
when letters in his name, and ordered by the King's Council, 
were forwarded to them bidding them hasten to his bedside. 

The future of England depended upon the fate of those 

• Lady Jane Grey's grandmother was that Mary, second sister of 
Henry VIII., who had played such pranks as Queen of France with her old 
spouse Louis XII. until his death restored her to her real lover, Charles 
Brandon, whom she married, to whom she came with her hair still down. 
At any rate it was so said, and all the world hopes that it is true. This story 
was the foundation of one of the most successful historical romances. When 
Knighthood was in Flower, by Charles Major, the American writer. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


false messages. With the bodies of Mary and Elizabeth in 
his hands, and the girl Jane Grey married to his son, Northum- 
berland was master of England's destiny. The Dudleys would 
be the real kings of England. It was a tremendous game, 
with the lives of every participant for the stakes. The future 
history of the world lay in the hands of those two swift groups 
of horsemen who rode through the English countryside wdth 
the spurious summons from the dead brother, for Elizabeth 
at Hatfield, and Mary at Himsdon. Mary fell into the trap, 
and hurried along the road to Greenwich, whither the summons 
called her, riding straight toward the band of conspirators, 
headed by Robert Dudley, who had been sent out to apprehend 
her ; but Elizabeth was more wary, and could not be induced 
to quit her palace. The conspirators therefore went to Eliza- 
beth in the guise of a Commission, who announced that her 
brother was no more, and that the Lady Jane Grey was his 
successor ; while they offered the yoimg Princess, now twenty 
years of age, a large sum of money if she would acquiesce in 
the arrangement, and resign all claims to the throne. 

She was completely in the dark as to the degree of success 
at that moment of Northumberland's scheme. She could not 
know Mary's fate, her plans, or her whereabouts : and Eliza- 
beth wanted to be Queen, Her very life was at stake, as well 
as all her future. If she made this bargain offered her by these 
vwly statesmen from London, she would be throwing in her 
lot with Lady Jane and the Dudleys, against her sister Mary ; 
and what were Mary and her friends doing in the matter ? 
Were they going to fight, or were they actually fighting at that 
moment ? Had the contest already been decided ? Perhaps 
the Dudleys had sent Mary a spurious summons, as they had 
to her, Elizabeth ; perhaps Mary had been deceived, put 
her neck into the noose, started for London and been made 

The decision amounted to this — If she were to join with 
the Dudleys, and they proved unsuccessful, she would be 
destroyed by Mary ; If she were to join with Mary, and the 
Dudleys proved the stronger, she would be destroyed by the 
Dudleys — and she had no assurance that these Commissioners 
would give her, should she reject their proposals, any oppor- 
tunity to join or help Mary. Perhaps, having failed either to 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


bribe her or get her to Greenwich, they might forcibly remove 
her to the Tower. 

It was a terrible moment for Elizabeth. It would have 
been a terrible moment for anybody. Yet she met it with a 
sureness of touch that exhibits her ingenuity and soundness 
of judgment, for it is impossible to think of any other reply 
that would have saved her, at the moment and in the future. 
" Why do you seek to make any agreement with me ? My 
sister is the only one with whom you need any agreement, for 
as long as she is alive I have no claim or title to the throne to 
assign." Such was the substance of her answer — and it was 
final. The Commission could only withdraw, since it is 
evident that they did not dare to seize the Princess in view of 
the long journey to London, or for some other equally sound 
reason. As Protestants, they may have had among their 
numbers some who would not participate in such an outrage 
on one who must be the mainstay of all the hopes of their 
faith if Northumberland's scheme should go awry. 

And then, when the Commissioners had departed, Elizabeth 
became ill * and unable to be moved to London — if such an 
attempt were made. The good news, however, that Mary 
not only had escaped from the snare, but that the country had 
risen, and, with her at their head, was marching on London, 
and that the conspirators were in despair, brought the delicate 
girl on to her feet in time to meet Mary when she made her 
triumphal entry into the capital ; and the sisters rode side by 
side from Aldgate to the Tower, less than a month after Edward 
had ceased to live. 

As soon as it became clear that Mary would be triumphant, 
Catholics and Protestants manoeuvred for points d'appuis. 
The Powers supporting the old religion ranged themselves 
behind Mary, while endeavouring to checkmate each other in 
the struggle for predominance in her councils. Every Protest- 
ant in England and on the Continent became a staunch and 
militant supporter of Elizabeth — and the Protestant faith was 
just beginning to gather into that irresistible wave so soon to 
sweep all before it. Elizabeth was on the very crest of the 
oncoming tide. She represented, embodied, personified, the 
hopes and aspirations of the great majority of the English 

• Med. Rec. No. 14a. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


people ; and even the Pope himself, commenting upon the 
reports from his London agent, stated it as a fact that it was 
Elizabeth who was in the " heart and mouth of every one." • 
We have no need to seek confirmation of such a remarkable 
admission from a source so antagonistic. 

With the highest ambitions and interests of each sister so 
radically opposed, it was inevitable that the two should clash — 
their respective adherents would see to that — and within thirty 
days of Mary's ascension she had thrown down the gauntlet 
to her Protestant sister. She ordered the restoration of the 
mass. Elizabeth took up the challenge by declining to attend 
such a ceremonial. There would have been an immediate 
crisis had she not perceived that her position was incompatible 
with her security, and was a danger to the ultimate success 
of the Protestant cause — ^the one thing to be kept in mind. 
She had been too hasty ; and, after some days, she yielded so 
far as to attend the state masses, and to admit that perhaps she 
was too prejudiced against Rome, which could not be held 
strange considering that she had been brought up a Protestant. 
She would, therefore, study the matter, and the Queen might 
appoint an instructor who would assist her in the task. 

This voluntary surrender was characteristic of Elizabeth 
at all stages of her career. She was always prepared to renounce 
anything, if its loss would strengthen her hold upon some 
other thing that she valued more ; and it is clear that she often 
made more friends by her surrenders to public opinion than 
by her victories over it. The lack of this quality in Mary her 
predecessor, and in James her own successor, goes far to explain 
their comparative failure. 

To all appearances, then, she withdrew her opposition ; 
but she continued it secretly, as all her friends and all the 
Protestants knew well, and so lost the support of none of them. 
She lost, indeed, nothing at all, if we do not charge her with 
being chagrined at having to yield where she had proclaimed 
herself as adamant. But probably chagrin for such reasons was 
not a heavy cross, especially when we consider that by her 
action she induced Mary to treat her before all the Court as 
heir apparent. This attitude was maintained for some three 
months, when the Queen affronted her by passing through 

* Letters of Pope Julius III. p. iia ; September 20th, 1553. 
Digitized by Microsoft® 


Parliament — for that institution was as yet only an instrument 
of the throne — a statute re-affirming the validity of the marriage 
of Mary's father and mother, the necessary corollary to which 
was that Elizabeth once more was legally within that euphonious 
term by which the Catholic ambassadors usually designated 
her when corresponding with their masters — " The young 
bastard." Elizabeth at once requested to be allowed to retire 
from the Court. But, as Mary was not prepared to loosen her 
control over the daily actions of the strong-minded girl, per- 
mission was refused ; and the Catholic ambassadors continued 
to storm Mary's ears with their charge — ^which was perfectly 
true — ^that Elizabeth had only surrendered in form, and with 
their demand that she should be rendered harmless. But 
they were dealing with a very firm woman in Mary — ^the type 
of which martyrs are made — ^as she had demonstrated not 
long before, when she replied to her brother's representatives 
who tried to force her into conformity with the Protestant 
faith, that she would rather place her head on the block than 
consent. Such had been her mother, and such her father, 
although probably obstinacy, and not principle, was the 
quality that forbade him to give way. Mary as yet refused to 
imprison Elizabeth. She would await the next step of the 
younger woman, or of her followers. 

Of course the great object that these Catholics had in mind 
in pressing for Elizabeth's elimination, was the probability 
of the Queen's death — ^for probability is the proper word. 
That event would bring the Protestants once more into supreme 
power ; and that, with a resourceful, ambitious, and determined 
character like Elizabeth at the helm, would be a very different 
situation from that which confronted them with a sickly boy 
like Edward on the throne. All of this Mary knew and realized 
— but she would not lift her hand so long as Elizabeth would 
attend mass and refrain from active opposition to her queen ; 
or, at any rate, so long as her followers pursued that course. 

France was working for the elimination of Elizabeth, and 
of the Spanish influence in England. The first step was to 
be the corruption of Elizabeth through offers of assistance to 
finance and conclude a revolt against Mary ; and if and when 
Elizabeth fell into the trap, the proffered assistance was to be 
withdrawn, and everything done to bring about the dupe's 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


defeat and absolute destruction. Then would come the 
second step — ^the definite defeat of Spain in its efforts to become 
supreme in England. France was to declare Mary Stuart — 
later Mary Queen of Scots, now about to become Dauphiness 
of France — ^the heir apparent of the English throne, as well as 
of the French, or actually Queen of England, according to 

That the grandiose scheme involved the probable death of 
Elizabeth if not that of her sister, of thousands of others during 
the coming conflict, and that bribery, deceit, and treachery 
were the necessary implements for its success, were not detri- 
ments according to the code in those days of international 
politics— a fact that should always be borne in mind. Despite 
all the progress that followed the introduction and spread of 
the Christian religion, every nation (with the single exception of 
the Scottish) was still ready to condone any crime that man 
might commit as the successful pretender to its throne. 
Massacre, assassination, arson, theft, falsehood, betrayal, 
bribery, parricide, fratricide, rape, abduction, seduction, 
treason — ^all and more had been forgotten and fojrgiven times 
beyond number in the vidld revelry of success. Might was still 
right. To win a throne was to succeed. To lose one was to 
fail. Those words summed up the code. Those words 
contained every principle of this greatest of all earthly games. 

The French monarch made his proposals to Elizabeth, 
and to her friends. His ambassador was in daily contact with 
her, as were the representatives of Spain and Austria, with the 
Venetian emissary watching all from the background. The 
Queen herself did not occupy the attention of these gentlemen 
and their respective masters as did the scheming Elizabeth. 
That Elizabeth actually promoted the rebellion which followed, 
with her name as its rallying cry, was never proven. Had 
it been manifest to her contemporaries, there is no doubt but 
that her head would have paid the penalty ; the existence of 
opportunity for doubt was her salvation. " Not proven " 
is the most convinciag case we have to present. 

There can, on the other hand, be little doubt that she was 
an assenting party. There were certainly no moral principles 
then existent that would have restrained her from taking the 
field, if her judgment had told her that by so doing she would 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


have been victorious. For she knew that the prize was her 
life or that of Mary. The two could not long exist together. 
And the compelling and incontrovertible reason, no matter 
how much the sisters endeavoured to obviate it, was that their 
followers would not permit any agreement. The leaders 
themselves might desire it, indeed order it, but there were too 
many bigots and fanatics, too many fools and lunatics, to admit 
of any discipline on either side. There was bound to be a 
terrible explosion sooner or later. 

The situation was remarkably like the contest nearly 
a quarter of a century later between that other Mary and Eliza- 
beth, when events came to such a pass that only one could 
remain if there was to be any peace in England, or, indeed, upon 
the Continent. There was really little or no dangerous quarrel 
between the two Queens — we mean no quarrel that had not 
been sufficiently composed and controlled, so far as the two 
principals were concerned. The fatal controversy was in the 
situation. The Catholics in England, France, Italy, Spain, and 
Austria, for reasons purely selfish, wanted the breach widened, 
worked for it, bribed for it, fomented rebellion for it. In their 
view, the way to succeed was to assassinate Elizabeth or drive 
her from her throne, and replace her with Mary Queen of 
Scots. The counter-object of the Protestants was to induce 
Elizabeth to kill Mary — and Elizabeth's consent was only 
extorted when, as we now see, there was no other possible 
solution. The last barrier to Elizabeth's assent was broken 
down when Mary's followers failed to control themselves after 
Elizabeth had passed the statute declaring that the individual 
on behalf of whom rebellion were raised should be deemed as 
guilty as the actual promotors. If the turbulent elements 
among the Catholics would not keep the peace after that law 
took effect, then nothing would avail except Mary's execution — 
and when they formed the Babington conspiracy, they, and 
not Elizabeth, signed Mary's death warrant. 

Elizabeth's conception of her duty as Queen — the only 
earthly guide and standard she ever acknowledged — ^was to 
provide that England should have repose no matter whose 
head it cost, if there were no other way. The peace that fol- 
lowed Mary's death shows, as no other argument can, that 
Elizabeth was right, and that she had been right in refusing 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


her consent until she deemed it necessary, in spite of the ceaseless 
urgings to the contrary from many of her most powerful 
advisers for nearly twenty-five years. It was only another 
demonstration of that almost marvellous faculty possessed by 
Elizabeth of seeing the best time to do a thing. 

Her conduct of the struggle with her sister Mary shows 
this gift in perfection, when she was only twenty. She would 
not head a rebellion against Mary. She did not think that 
the time was ripe. It would be easy enough to head a rebellion ; 
but that alone was not what Elizabeth desired. It was only 
a successful rebellion that she wanted to lead — ^which, in her 
judgment, could not be done — and while she would listen to 
those who thought otherwise, and would not betray them, 
that was all she would do. They should not have a line of 
writing from her as evidence of her co-operation, nor would 
she see their leaders. 

It was never Mary's habit to temporize with anybody, 
when she was convinced that she was in the right. After 
gaining her throne by her own efforts, and her correct gauging 
of public opinion, without even a skirmish, she was not in- 
clined to placate her adversaries, especially those who founded 
their opposition upon what she deemed to be heresy ; and she 
took every step to place England once more under the sway of 
Rome. To the Catholic Emperor, Charles V., then the most 
powerful monarch on earth, she promised to marry whomever 
he chose — and he selected his own son, Philip, Prince of Spain, 
afterward Philip II., a most devout Catholic. 

Such a match was a heavy blow to France, and, moreover, 
for the partisans of Elizabeth, who comprised nearly every 
Protestant in the realm. Nor was the prospect altogether 
rosy in the eyes of the rest of the nation. The latter were glad 
to see the reinstatement of the old faith, for which they had 
prayed and fought for years. But that was but a relatively 
insignificant feature of the proposal. The crucial point lay in 
the fact that this was a match, not only with a foreign prince, 
but with one who was a mortal enemy of France ; a condition 
which, in such times, meant that if England's queen were to 
espouse Philip, England would almost inevitably find herself 
involved in the contest between Spain and France. That was 
a condition which many Catholic Englishmen violently opposed, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


for in the long and relatively quiet reign of Mary's father they 
had begun to see the blessedness of peace, a lesson which 
Englishmen were learning for the first time. 

These considerations were undoubtedly laid before Eliza- 
beth, and when we learn how nearly successful the rising was, 
we wonder that she was able to foresee the outcome, and refuse 
her overt support. As we now ponder over her problem, we 
incline to the opinion that the deciding factor in her mind was 
this — ^that she would only have to remain quiet, retain her 
present vantage as acknowledged heir apparent, and the course 
of nature would place her on the throne, in four or five years 
at most. She knew her sister's physical ailments. Considering 
that Elizabeth had been striving for the succession for a decade 
or more, that she had worked night and day in mental prepara- 
tion for it, and that she was now only twenty, it was not too 
much to wait several years more, when the prize would almost 
certainly be hers automatically ; especially as an attempt to 
shorten that period would involve the risk of all, even life 
itself. There can be no doubt of the answer Elizabeth would 
have made to such a problem, at any time during her seventy 
years. She habitually played the waiting game, the game 
with the largest stakes, and never permitted her attention to 
wander from the card that would eventually win them. 

So did she play her hand now. But the enthusiasts could 
not wait. They looked for large reinforcements from the 
Catholics who objected to being ruled by a foreigner — and go 
on they would, if not with Elizabeth for an oriflamme, then 
without her. Abetted by money and promises from the 
French king, who only planned to destroy them at the right 
moment, they stepped into the trap which his ambassador 
had so carefully baited, and both Mary and Elizabeth were in 
the gravest danger. 

It is unnecessary for our purpose to go into all the details. 
Suffice it to say that neither Mary, nor Gardiner, her Lord 
Chancellor, the head of the Government, would yield to the 
demands of the Austrian Ambassador that Elizabeth be sent to 
the Tower, even although rumours of the great plot involved 
her to some extent. Nevertheless, Mary's attitude toward 
her grew colder and more suspicious, until Elizabeth perceived 
that the entire entourage of the Queen had been rendered 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


hostile ; and — ^what is more likely to have convinced Elizabeth 
that she must at all costs get away into the country while she 
had the liberty to do so — ^the girl knew that Sir Thomas Wyatt 
was ready to launch a full-fledged armed rebellion to place 
her on her sister's throne. Were she at Court when it broke 
out, she would certainly be confined on the instant ; and she 
had no intention of being caught there, so long as she had the 
means and the strength to travel. Thereupon she renewed 
her demand to be permitted to leave — at first with no more 
success than before. This time, however, Elizabeth would not 
be denied, although she was probably in the first throes of that 
serious illness of which we shall speak more at length, for hardly 
was she outside London (which she left on the 6th of December, 
^553)> than she became so sick that she had to interrupt the 
journey of some thirty miles to her house at Ashridge, in 
Buckinghamshire, and send back to the Queen for the latter's 
horse-litter to overtake and convey her the remainder of the 
distance.* She was not, however, too ill to scheme, for no 
sooner was she in her own house than she despatched a messenger 
to Mary requesting her to forward all the ornaments and 
paraphernalia required to enable the Princess to set up in her 
house a complete chapel for the celebration of masses ! 

It would appear that the mental stress and positive dangers 
of the last weeks at Court had once more broken Elizabeth's 
health,! if indeed she possessed any after the long illness 

• Med. Rec. No. 1400. 

t For more details of the intrigues surrounding Elizabeth in these last 
weeks at Court, the following excerpts may be consulted — " Madame 
Elizabeth has left for St. Albans. . . . She took a friendly leave of the Queen, 
and the Queen, too, on her side has dissembled very well. . . . On the day 
of her departure I visited the Queen, and made use of my interview to bring 
to her knowledge much concerning the French plots (To put Elizabeth on 
the throne, as we have lately detailedi — F. C), which she was very glad to 
know. Instructions have been given that the Princess's movements are to 
be 'closely watched, as much suspicion has been aroused by the French 
ambassador, having set posts on the Scottish road, intending by this means 
to aid and abet the Lady Elizabeth in her schemes. Two days before she 
went away the Lords Arundel and Paget spoke very frankly to her, and 
warned her that if she refused to follow the path of duty, and persisted in 
concerning herself with French and heretical conspiracies, she would bitterly 
repent it. . . . When she was leaving she entreated the Lady Queen not 
to put faith in bad reports of her without hearing her defence . . . for these 
stories were merely lies on the part of those who desired her ruin. . . .All 
which has confirmed Ae Queen in her opinion.that Madame Elizabeth might 
become a great danger, unless some remedy can be found." — ^Renard to 
Charles V., Dec. 8, 1553. 

" I must not forget to tell you that at least four days ago I was warned 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


we have already considered so carefully — ^which we know to 
have been still going on in the last week of September, 1552. 
Any real convalescence is very doubtful, considering what must 
have been her very ansmic condition thereafter, her relapse 
in the following July when Edward died, and this new outbreak 
which, five months later, strikes her helpless on the road to 

But if this theory be incorrect — and it is admittedly uncertain 
— then it is quite clear that this last attack was the beginning 
of that second illness, intermittent if not continuous, which 
lasted for several years. It was only six or seven weeks after 
its commencement that we learn that she had been ill for some 
time, that she was swollen from head to foot, face and all, 
beyond recognition, and was expected to die at any moment. 
These conditions were followed rapidly by other similar attacks, 
and by the great weakness, jaundice, shortness of breath, 
bad colour, etc., etc., which endured continuously for more 
than three years* according to positive affirmative evidence, 
and probably for far longer — some of these symptoms, indeed, 
never leaving their victim except at her death. 

With her health in the condition stated, Wyatt began his 
rebellion on the 25th of January, 1554, a little earlier than he 
had intended, his hand being forced by traitors. A letter from 

that this ambassador (Renard. — F. C.) . . . made a complaint to this 
Queen . . . that he knew most certainly that I had been three or four times 
at night to her apartment in order to contrive another marriage with her, 
according to your instructions. It was also said that the Counts Arundel 
and Paget went as well to converse with her, and gave her much admonition 
and advice. This plot was so ill-founded and so improbable that the Lady 
Elizabeth easily cleared herself to the Queen ; and left the said lady entreating 
her not to put faith in stories to the disadvantage of the Princess vrithout 
giving her a hearing, and the two sisters were completely reconciled. Never- 
theless, Sire, I would have you believe that this said Lady Elizabeth is very 
closely watched ; which is not done without some reason, for I can assure 
you, Sire, that she is most desirous of freeing herself from control . . . and 
from what I hear it only requires that my Lord Courtney should marry her, 
that they should go together to the counties of Devonshire and Cornwall. 
Here it can easily be believed that they would find many adherents, and they 
could then make a strong claim to the crown, and the Emperor and Prince 
of Spain would find it difficult to suppress this rising." — De Noailles, the 
French Ambassador at London, to his King, Dec. 14, 1553. 

* The complete account of this long illness is included in Nos. 1400, 
Dec. 1553, to 28, in May, 1557, of the Med. Rec. It is the begiiming of this 
illness that Mumby refers to (The Girlhood of Queen EUxabeth, p. 99) when 
he says : ". . . she (Elizabeth) called one of her ever-ready illnesses to 
her rescue . . ." — and this he does in face of the knowledge contained in 
the Med. Rec. Nos. just cited, for he prints substantially all of them. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


him to Elizabeth, advising her to retire even further into the 
country as soon as the storm broke, fell into the hands of Mary, 
who, the next day, January 26, fearing that Elizabeth vrould 
fly, sent her an urgent message to come to Court. Elizabeth 
replied that she was too ill to comply, and that if Mary did not 
believe it, she should send down her own physician to see what 
the fact was. This proposal was accepted, Elizabeth in the 
interim fortifying her residence, and filling it with troops. 

At first Wyatt met with uniform success, and in a week's 
time was even in possession of Southwark, Mary's ministers 
were panic-stricken, and all seemed lost — as it would have 
been except for two individuals, Mary and Renard, the Austrian 
Ambassador. Advised by the head of her own Government, 
Gardiner, the Bishop of Winchester, that her barge was ready 
at the water-gate to take her to Windsor, she had the good sense 
to reject the suggestion, and send for Renard. He saw the 
real situation, and told her that if she wished to remain Queen 
she must under no consideration flee from her palace. And 
she — for Mary was no coward — ^followed the counsel, with the 
single proviso that those to whom she had entrusted the leader- 
ship of her cause should fight it out. This instruction was 
obeyed, and the insurrection was finally conquered right under 
the walls of Whitehall itself, at the end of two weeks. The 
principal credit for the success belongs to Mary herself. 

She then reversed the policy she had pursued towards 
those who had set Jane on the throne for nine days, when she 
had beheaded only the three chief conspirators. She had 
believed that her leniency would meet with appreciation and 
loyalty ; but her only return was this fresh rebellion, organized 
in the main by the same guilty leaders to whom she had then 
extended pardon ; and Mary Tudor for ever abandoned her 
former mercy. The heads of Lady Jane and her husband 
fell on the block within a week after Wyatt was defeated. The 
day after this latter event Renard advised Mary to destroy 
Elizabeth, and another, " as it was notorious they were criminals 
and deserved death." Charles V. sent a special ambassador 
to the Queen to urge this course ; and Mary acted at once, 
hurrying a commission to Elizabeth under positive orders to 
bring her to Court, if she could be moved without actually 
endangering her life. Arriving at Ashridge at ten at night, they 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


burst in upon her although she was sick in bed and delivered 
their orders, informing her that the Queen's physicians had 
already told them that she could make the journey without 
positive danger. She asked for a little respite to gain strength. 
This, however, was denied, except that the departure was 
postponed for a single day — ^the day when Lady Jane Grey 
and her boy-husband, both but sixteen years of age, were 
beheaded, an omen which must have weighed upon Elizabeth's 
heart like Death itself. 

Elizabeth could only walk with assistance to the horse- 
litter in which she was to be conveyed, and before entering it 
she barely escaped swooning several times. The journey 
was planned at the rate of six, eight, seven, seven, and five 
miles per diem respectively, but the scheme could not be 
carried out, as she broke down on the fourth stage, and had to 
remain a whole week at Highgate before she could continue. 
De NoailIes,the FrenchAmbassador, writes of her here as facing 
no better fate upon her arrival in London than that of the 
" bravest and most valiant men of the kingdom " whose heads 
hung from gibbets on every hand, although she is " so very 
ill that nobody longer anticipates anything except her death 
. . . she is so swollen and weakened that she is a pitiful sight." 
Three days later he writes : " Madame Elizabeth . . . arrived 
... so ill with dropsy or some swelling which has attacked 
her whole body and even her face, that those who have seen 
her do not promise her long to live." Yet it was in this 
condition that she had been dragged about the country in a 
horse-litter for nearly a week ! And when we read of the 
terrible events which now overtook Elizabeth, we find that this 
swelling, whatever it was, is continuously reported for more 
than seven months ; and there is no record that it ended even 

Elizabeth, in the terrible condition described, was carried 
into Whitehall palace, a prisoner who was denied access to 
the Queen. 

Then Renard began a campaign to secure the prompt 
execution of the invalid, and, aided by the treachery of con- 
spirators who hoped thus to secure their own acquittal, a sufE- 

* The Medical Record gives a consecutive account of these facts in 
Nos. 14c to 26, inclusive. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


cient case was made out against her to result in her continued 
confinement under the strictest guards. In a month's time, 
Mary had decided to throw her into the Tower, as de Noailles 
had prophesied a week earlier, when he wrote to Paris : " They 
tell me that Madame Elizabeth . . . will be soon thrust 
into the Tower, no matter how ill she may be ; and she almost 
entirely swollen." This move came as a tremendous shock 
to Elizabeth, and she spent in prayer the night before she was 
to enter the most dreaded prison in Europe, with a new guard 
in the next room, and another pacing up and down beneath 
her window. Early the next morning, those who were to 
oversee her journey came to summon her, only to be met with 
the request that she be allowed to write to the Queen. Upon 
receiving assent, she penned the following desperate letter, 
which well discloses her view of her true situation : 

" If ever any one did try this old saying, that a king's word 
was more than another man's oath, I must humbly beseech your 
Majesty to verify it in me, and to remember your last promise 
and my last demand, that I be not condemned without answer 
and due proof, which it seems that I now am ; for that without 
cause proved I am, by your Council, from you commanded to 
go into the Tower, a place more wanted for a false traitor than 
a true subject ; which, though I know I deserve it not, yet in 
the face of all this realm appear that it is proved, which I pray 
God that I may die the shamefuUest death that any died, afore 
I may mean any such thing ; and to this present hour I protest 
afore God, who shall judge my truth, whatsoever malice shall 
devise, that I never practised, counselled, nor consented to 
anything that might be prejudicial to your person any way, or 
dangerous to the State by any means. And I therefore humbly 
beseech Your Majesty to let me answer afore yourself, and not 
suffer me to trust to your Councillors ; yea, and that afore I 
go to the Tower, if it is possible, if not, afore I be further 
condemned. Howbeit, I trust assuredly your Highness will 
give me leave to do it afore I go, for that thus shamefully I may 
not be cried out on, as now I shall be, yea, and without cause. 
Let conscience move your Highness to take some better way 
with me than to make me be condemned in all men's sight afore 
my desert known. Also, I most humbly beseech your Highness 
to pardon this my boldness, which innocency procures me to do, 
together with hope of your natural kindness, which, I trust will 
not see me cast away without desert, which, what it is, I would 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


desire no more of God than that you truly knew ; which thing, 
I think and believe, you shall never by report know, unless by 
yourself you hear. I have heard in my time of many cast away 
for want of coming to their prince ; and in late days I heard 
my Lord of Somerset say that, if his brother had been suffered 
to speak with him, he had never suffered ; but persuasions were 
made to him so great that he was brought in belief he could 
not live safely if the Admiral lived, and that made him consent 
to his death. Though these persons are not to be compared 
with Your Majesty, yet I pray God, as evil persuasions persuade 
not one sister against the other, and all for that thay have heard 
false reports, and not hearken to the truth known ; therefore, 
once again kneeling with all humbleness of my heart, because 
I am not suffered to bow the knees of my body, I humbly crave 
to speak with your Highness, which I would not be so bold to 
desire, if I knew not myself most clear as I know myself most 
true. And as for the traitor Wyatt, he might, peradventure, 
write me a letter, but on my faith I never received any from him ; 
and as for the copy of my letter sent to the French King, I pray 
God confound me eternally if ever I sent him word, message, 
token, or letter by any means ; and to this my truth I will 
stand to my death your Highness's most faithful subject that 
hath been from the beginning, and will be to the end, 

" Elizabeth. 

" I humbly crave but one word of answer from yourself." 

No response, however, came to this pitiful appeal, and at 
nine on the following day, Palm Sunday, March i8, 1554 — 
a strange choice of a date for such a deed — she was rowed down 
the Thames through the rain and cold wind of the worst 
weather of the year ; for the authorities had no notion of 
permitting the people of London to witness so moving a spectacle 
as that passage through their streets would have supplied. 
Indeed, further to obviate any such danger, the city was 
specially enjoined by the Council to attend church at the 
hour when Elizabeth was to be smuggled down the river into 
the grim fortress, from whose battlements, as from the towers 
of the bridge which faced it, hung the bodies of scores of 
traitors drying in the sun. The heads of many another grinned 
at the passerby from the pikes on which they were stuck 
upright along the tops of the walls, food for the carrion birds 
that fought for their possession till only a whitened, glistening 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


skull remained. A descent into Avemus itself could have 
presented no more horror to the poor invalid girl approaching 
the dread fortress that Palm Sunday than these sights and 
the memory of all the murders that had taken place there, 
including that of her own mother, of Seymour, of the young 
Princes, and only a day or two before of her sixteen-year-old 
relative. Lady Jane, and her boy husband ! No other place 
in all the world had such gruesome portent for Englishmen — 
and for Elizabeth, more than all others. 

To add to her terrors, the tide had been miscalculated ; 
Elizabeth's craft dashed against a buttress of the bridge, and 
stuck fast in the very cauldron of the falls that were then such 
a danger to navigation. But the boatmen at last got free and 
brought their precious passenger to the Traitors' Gate, anpther 
shock to Elizabeth, who flatly refused to enter by any place 
with such a name. On being informed, however, that there 
was no other course open, she acquiesced. One of the guard 
offered her his cloak to protect her from the storm, but she 
threw it scornfully aside, and, standing beneath the arch of 
the gate said : " Here lands as true a subject as ever landed 
at these stairs. Before thee, O God, I speak it, having no other 
friend but thee alone ! " Yet she could not bring herself 
to go further. Strength failed her altogether, and sick as she 
was, she sat down on a wet stone exposed to the wind and the 
rain, chilled to the very marrow, and refused to proceed. To 
the urginp of the commander of the Tower she only replied : 
" Better sit here than in a worse place, for God knoweth, not 
I, whither you will bring me." None among the guards dared 
touch her ; and the impasse was only broken at last by the 
man-servant accompansdng her, who so lost control of himself 
as to burst into tears at the sight of that friendless girl, perhaps 
already condemned, sitting there in the rain, surrounded only 
by the guards, who may have been even then under orders to 
cut oflF her head the moment she was within the frowning 

What a scene ! It was the lowest depth to which Elizabeth 
was ever called to descend. Only the sight of her one attendant 
in tears drew out in her that undying courage and pride which 
whispered that she must show herself a real Princess and a real 
Tudor. She proved it by rebuking him for weakness when 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


she needed his strength ; and arising, with head erect, she 
swept within. 

So far the Emperor had triumphed. He and his fellow 
Catholics had induced Mary to throw Elizabeth into the Tower. 
That was the first great step ; now they must cause her to be 
beheaded. No risks were taken. She was not allowed to 
leave the one room to which she was first conducted. She was 
to hear Mass whether she wished it or not. A generation later, 
Elizabeth confided to the French Ambassador, Castelnau, that, 
believing she was doomed, she had decided to make but one 
request of Mary, and that was that the execution might be 
done with a sword instead of an axe, and that a Frenchman be 
sent for to do the deed. 

Within a week of her imprisonment she was cross-examined 
by ten of the Council. They confronted her with hostile 
witnesses, and every art was employed to entrap her into some 
admission that she had had a part in the rebellion ; but she held 
her own against every man. They could not outwit her, nor 
catch her off her guard. Yet she was always in imminent 
danger. Out in the streets of the city the Protestants were 
trying to raise the people to protect her, and they could have 
adopted no course more perilous to the prisoner. The French 
Ambassador, having done everything he could to dethrone 
Mary, formally assured her of his congratulations upon her 
escape from her wicked enemies — although Mary knew, even 
while he was speaking, the entire history of his intrigues ; 
and this further h5rpocrisy gained nothing for the prisoner that 
it was intended to aid. The Emperor's representatives quoted 
from all history to demonstrate the need for the utmost severity 
toward Elizabeth. The great argument they used was, that 
mercy for this leader of the Protestants meant the downfall 
of the Reformation from their point of view — ^that is, one 
exactly opposed to what the Protestants designated by that 
term. Another argument with an especial appeal to Mary 
was, that Philip, whose betrothal ring was now on her finger, 
would not be safe for a moment with Elizabeth alive, to serve 
as a rallying-point for every bigoted Protestant. 

In the meantime awful scenes were enacted all about the 
room occupied by Elizabeth. One by one the conspirators 
who crowded the great edifice were dragged forth, some to 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the rack, others to the Green and the block. Wyatt himself 
was beheaded some three weeks after Elizabeth entered the 
Traitors' Gate ; yet she still survived, despite the incriminating 
testimony which the rack had caused the despairing witnesses 
to invent, hoping to save themselves from further punishment 
by implicating her. Something had to be done ; and the 
bigoted Gardiner, acting on his own account, sent an irregularly 
signed order to the commander of the Tower to cut oflF Eliza- 
beth's head. The order should have been signed by Mary ; 
and, as the commander well knew from many similar events 
in English history, the man who obeyed such an irregular 
command was risking his life, he refused to comply without 
the requisite signature — and once more Death passed Elizabeth 
by. This attempt may very well have brought new friends to 
her banner. It is the sort of thing that the English always 
stigmatize with their worst epithet — " So un-English." 

At any rate, the Council, from this time onwards, gradually 
turned from hostility to clemency. By the close of the first 
month of Elizabeth's imprisonment, when she complained 
that confinement to one room was retarding her recovery, she 
was permitted to take exercise in other rooms of the Tower, 
but only in the presence of some half-dozen officials, and with 
no possibility of looking out of the vrindows. Later on, she 
was permitted to walk in a little garden ; and Mary replaced 
Elizabeth's portrait in her boudoir, whence it had been removed 
when her guilt was first believed. 

The fact seems to be that the Council could not make up 
its mind what it was best to do with Elizabeth. If it had been 
clear that England would have profited by her death, it would 
undoubtedly have been compassed ; but there were many 
uncertainties. A princess in those days often meant an alliance, 
and nobody could say what alliance might be advantageous to 

Then there was the doubt as to what this coming Spanish 
marriage of Mary was likely to involve. Many Catholics did 
not like it. They were those to whom England always came 
first ; and Philip was continually endeavouring to force the 
Council into war in support of his schemes for Continental 
domination. Undoubtedly that was his main motive for 
espousing Mary, as it was the main motive of his father, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Charles V., in arranging the match. Nobody could say how 
the alliance would work out, and a royal princess might prove 
a great asset for both English Protestant and English Catholic. 
After two months, then, of endeavour so to incriminate 
Elizabeth that she would be condemned by the Council, that 
body decided to let her out of the Tower, and confine her in 
some place more remote from her most militant followers. 
The intention, however, had been kept from all except those 
most deeply concerned, and Elizabeth could not but be startled 
when, on May 4th, she found herself confronted with a company 
of one hundred soldiers, under the command of Sir Henry 
Bedingfield, a rampant Catholic, who had just become Constable 
of the Tower. The first ejaculation of Elizabeth was : " Is 
Lady Jane's scaffold removed ? " That it had been removed 
was something ; but was Bedingfield a man who would commit 
a secret assassination if he were so commanded ? Some 
reassurance was given her on this point ; she was also informed 
that she would be given greater liberty to walk in the Tower, 
and that in other particulars she would find her imprisonment 
made less irksome. 

These, on the surface, were favourable portents, but she 
was by no means easy or confident when, two weeks later, on 
the 19th of May, she found herself once more on the Thames, 
for Mary would not allow her to pass through the city, nor 
would she teceive her. She was taken straight to Richmond,' 
where her guards were doubled, and her servants removed, 
the very first night. 

That seemed the end to Elizabeth. They had taken her 
down into the country, where she had no friends, in order to 
kill her. " This night I think to die," * was her view ; but the 
morning came with new orders for her to proceed at once to 
Windsor, since she had refused to buy her liberty from Mary by 
marrying the Duke of Savoy — a proposal which, as she saw 
at once, was only a subterfuge by which she could be got out 
of the kingdom.f 

On " passing over the water at Richmond, going tovrard 

• Foxe, iii. 947. 

t Before she had left the Tower, an attempt had been made, with the 
same purpose, to procure her consent to a marriage with Don Louis of 
Portugal, brother of the King of that country ; but Elizabeth could not be 
brought to the point of marriage with anybody, even if it seemed the only 
means of saving her life. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Windsor, her Grace espied certaine of her poore servants 
standing on the other side, which were very desirous to see her ; 
whom when she beheld, turning to one of her men standing 
by, she said : ' Yonder I see certaine of my men ; goe to them 
and say these words from me, Tanquem ovis, like a sheep to 
the slaughter.' " * No wonder that the girl was unable to 
regain strength enough to ride on this occasion or on any day 
of the journey to Woodstock which began on the morrow, but 
had to be carried the entire distance in a litter ! — Nor is it 
more surprising that upon reaching the appointed nightly 
halt she went straight from the litter to her bed.f or to rest. 

At Woodstock — which lay in the grounds of Blenheim Castle 
— Elizabeth was confined as a prisoner of state, from the 23rd 
of May, 1554, to the last week of May, 1555, being guarded 
night and day by some hundred men, under Bedingfield or his 
brother. As the royal palace was uninhabitable, Elizabeth 
was quartered in the gate-house, a dilapidated building. She 
was allowed six servants. No books, pens or ink or paper were 
permitted. She could only leave the house to walk in its garden, 
and that in her gaoler's company. She could confer with 
nobody except in his sight and hearing, nor could she receive 

• Foxe, iii. 947. 

t There is a detailed account of the journey in the papers of Sir Henry 
Bedingfield in Norfolk Archceology, vol. iv., beginning on page 148. 
Pertinent extracts are as follows : " My Ladye Elizabeths grace dydde use 
the lytter which your highnesse (Queen Mary. — F. C.) sent hyr ; wherein 
she was ryght werye to my iudgement, the occasion rysyng off the starll off 
the same lytter beeng warpen and cast. Thys presente daye she hath not 
been verye well at ease . . . and yette at the aftemoone she required to 
walke and see an other lodgyng in the house. . . . (Her true condition is 
plain from the fact that although the litter was painful to ride in, she must 
have been too ill to ride on a horse, or else this expedient would have been 
adopted. — F. C.) hyr Grace cam to the Castell (Windsor. — F. C.) gate to 
take hyr lytter ... at West Wyckham (Sir William Dormer's ladies) 
followed the lytter unto the doore where hir Grace alighted and wente out 
off hyr lytter, and so by them receyved into the house, and so hyr grace went 
into her chamber, from whense shee desyred not to sturre, beeng thereto 
moved by werynesse, as yt was to be judged. . . . (The next is the story of 
the stage from Dormer's to the estate of Lord Williams, at Ricot, in Oxford- 
shire.) Ffyrst, hir grace entered the lytter at the halle doore . . . thus hir 
grace passed to the lorde Wylliams house . . . into the chambers in the iimer 
Courte, and alighted oute off hyr lytter at the hall doore . . . firm whence 
she passed directlye to hyr lodgyng, from the which she sturred not untyll 
she had supped ... at fair gracs departing from the lorde Wylliams, 
hyr grace . . . passed thorough the hall, and at the doore off the same tooke 
hyr lytter. . . . (On entering the house gate at the end of her journey, she) 
passed towards hyr lodgyng after hyr lyghtyng oute off the lytter, after whycb 
tyme she sturred notte that nyght." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


or send any message from or to anybody whatsoever. These 
instructions were in writing signed by Mary herself. Over 
their details there were frequent trials of strength between 
Elizabeth, her gaoler, and Mary, during the ensuing year, with 
alternate relaxations and tightenings. 

On the 9th of June, some twenty days after Elizabeth'sarrival, 
Bedingfield reports to the Council that Elizabeth is afflicted 
with " swellyng in the visage at certayn tymes." — (Med. Rec. 
No. 19). Upon thezznd of June, a letter isforwarded to himfrom 
one of the Queen's physicians, Owen, stating that the Council 
has informed him " that my ladye Elizabeths grace ys trobled 
with ye swellyng In hir face, & also of her armes and hands " 
and that it is impossible to give her remedies at that time of 
the year. This Item of the Med. Rec. No. 20, discovers that 
the affliction from which Elizabeth was suffering was much 
more than the mere swelling of the face which Bedingfield had 
reported afortnightprevious. Upontheasth of June the Council 
writes that Elizabeth is still applying for a " phesician ; " and 
on the same day Bedingfield reinforces the demand by a letter 
to Gage saying " that my 1. Elizabeth's grace ys dayle vexed 
with the swellyng in the face and other parts off her bodye, 
& graunte that shee maye have . . . the queues maiesties 
phesicons Immediatelye to repare unto hir, whose counsell 
she velouslye desyreth, to devise remedie for swellyng in her 
face and other parts off hir bodye, wch I dooe see hir grace often 
vexed wth all . . ." (Med. Rec. No. 22). Some weeks later, 
on July 16, Bedingfield writes to the Council that the swelling 
continues and that " she was verye evell at ease." 

Mary never ceased her endeavours to get the girl out of the 
kingdom. Two favourite schemes aimed at inducing her to 
live either in Brussels, or in Hungary, where she would be 
cared for by its Queen, Mary, the sister of the Emperor. But 
Elizabeth would not assent to any proposal that would take 
her, the leading Protestant and the heir to the throne, out of 
her own country. 

In these hard days, she worked with her needle as her health 
permitted, and the Bodleian now contains her ornamentation 
of a beautiful copy of St. Paul's Epistles, produced while she 
was still under restraint. The work is signed " E. C," that 
is Elizabeth captiva, after the statement " I walk many times 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


into the pleasant fields of the Holy Scriptures . . . and lay 
them up at length in the high seat of memorie." And ever 
after, throughout her career, she could quote the Scriptures 
impromptu, and, like Lincoln, employ them in the solution of 
her daily problems of statecraft, although the world at large 
has forgotten that such was the habit of this great woman. It 
is, however, well aware that she swore, a practice not at all 
censurable in her day. She continuously acknowledged her 
dependance upon, and belief in. Almighty God, and as she had 
done her best to fulfil her duty to her people, she said that He 
who had placed her in such exalted state would defend her in 
it ; and who would like to deny that He did so ? 

Into the contention between the two sisters now entered 
a new element. Mary was married to Philip II. of Spain 
on the 25th of July, 1554. Philip favoured Elizabeth, design- 
ing to use her as an ofiset to the French scheme for 
placing Mary Stuart on the English throne should the 
present Queen die ; but this portentous influence was long 
in bearing fruit. At the outset, the marriage only proved 
to the prisoner an additional cross, for the first result of the 
alliance between the two thrones was the supplanting of 
Protestantism by Catholicism as the state religion. This came 
to Elizabeth in the guise of an order that no prayers might 
any more be said in English, but only in Latin ; and Beding- 
field was especially warned to report upon how his charge 
accepted the reform. He was obliged to say that she evaded 
the issue, and added that, do his best, he could not hear her 
read that portion of the amended prayers which called for a 
blessing upon the King and Queen, although she did command 
her priest to comply with the new order. Twice a week Eliza- 
beth had to attend Mass, and always to refrain from any act of 

Upon the 21st of October, 1554, Bedingfield wrote that Eliza- 
beth wished the Queen now to send the physicians asked for in 
the preceding June, when she was swollen in the face, arms, 
hands, and parts of the body. This letter begs that the Queen's 
doctors may be sent down " for to mynister unto hir physyke, 
brynginge of their owne chose oon exparte Surgion to let hir 
gracs blode, yf the saide doctors or twoe of them shall thinke 
yt so good, uppon the vewe of hyr sewte at their comsmge ; 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


to whych thre persons, or two of them, hyr grace sayethe she 
wyll comytte all the privities of hir bodye, or else to no cretures 
alyve, withoute the Quenes hyghnes especiall commaundement 
to the contrarye, which she trustethe hyr Majesty wyll not dooe. 
Hyr grace desyrethe that thys hyr sewte may have spede 
answer, whereby she maye inioye thys tyme of the yere apte 
for thys purpose afforesaide." (Med. Rec. No. 24.) 

He closes the letter with these words : " (She says I) 
lake the knowlege, experience, and all other accidents in such 
a service requysytte, whych I must needs confesse, the helpe 
only hereof restyth in god, & the quenes majestie, with your 
honorable advysys. fFrom whence to receyve the dyscharge 
of thys my service, withowte offence to the Quenes majestie 
or yow, my good L., were the Joyfulleste tydyngs that ever 
came to me, as our L. almyghty knowethe, to whome all secrets 
be hydden " ; and we now know that he had been intriguing 
long before this to be released from his disagreeable position. 
There can be no doubt that Elizabeth made his life miserable. 
It was her only hope ; and a more disagreeable place than his 
cannot be imagined, standing between these two angry sisters, 
the stalking-horse and scapegoat for both. We can well under- 
stand that release would indeed come to him as the " Joyfulleste 
tydings," with the superlative and its capital, that he could 
receive ; but he was not to be so fortunate. 

The physicians came on the 29th of October, 1554, and bled 
Elizabeth twice on the next day, in the morning through the 
arm, in the afternoon through the foot, " since wych tyme," 
writes Bedingfield, " she doethe resonablye well " (Med. Rec. 
No, 25). Of course nothing worse for so weak and anaemic 
a patient as was Elizabeth could have been devised, short of 
killing her outright. With this report of Bedingfield's we have 
the last statement as to any treatment of this illness ; or indeed, 
as to any symptom of it, except that contained in the general 
note made over two years later, namely on the 15th of December, 
1556, by the Bishop of Aix to the French King (Med. Rec. No. 
27), wherein it is reported that Elizabeth is " so bad in health that 
they do not hope that she will live long, as much on account of 
the jaundice and the yellow sickness which she has, as for a 
shortness of breath with which she has been continuously 
suffering ever since the time when her sister began to maltreat 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


her, a condition which still continues." As the " maltreat- 
ment " of Elizabeth by Mary began in the autumn of 1553, 
we know that the shortness of breath, which was esteemed so 
dangerous a symptom three years later, had lasted for the 
whole of that period ; and (with the jaundice, and the yellow 
sickness, whatever that may have been) was still afflicting her 
even at its close. 

We also know that some six months later, that is in May, 
1557, only about eighteen months before she came to the throne, 
Michiel, the Venetian ambassador, described Elizabeth as 
possessing an olive complexion, which would seem to indicate 
that she was then still in the throes of the disease (Med. Rec. 
No. 28). Finally, there are the records of the general belief 
upon her accession that her career was bound to be short, an 
opinion supported by the successive illnesses during the first 
dozen years of her reign, illnesses which followed one another 
so rapidly, and so overlapped, that it is very doubtful if they 
can be separated from one another, or from those of the ten 
preceding years. 

Mary made one more desperate effort to send Elizabeth 
out of the kingdom, an attempt probably influenced by the 
fact that Mary expected soon to be confined. The birth of 
a son to her and Philip would almost certainly establish the 
Catholic sway over England for a long period, and the view 
of the bigots who supported that position was that the hope 
of the opposition — namely, Elizabeth — ought to be safely 
marooned on the Continent, as it had been found unsafe to 
behead her upon the paltry evidence of her complicity with 

The danger to the latest plan was twofold, i.e. firstly, that 
Elizabeth would flatly refuse ; and, secondly, that even if she 
did consent, she, or the hope of the throne of England, would 
convert any husband she might accept to the Protestant faith. 
The Duke of Savoy was the only prince on whom Philip and 
Mary could agree as certain to withstand these combined 
considerations ; and they made him present himself at Court 
in the last week of 1554. But Elizabeth stopped the scheme 
by peremptorily refusing to have an)rthing to do with it ; and 
so, after several weeks of courting in the dark — for he never 
even saw the young woman he had hoped to impress — the Duke 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


returned to his native land. Elizabeth seems to have been no 
worse treated for her refusal — nor does she appear to have 
received any punishment for serving as the object of another 
of those sporadic revolutions, which her friends would, in 
spite of her, insist upon raising, in order to dethrone the 
Catholic sister, and enthrone the Protestant one. 

This time the rising occurred in the eastern counties, but 
was soon suppressed — ^in February, 1555. The only result, 
as far as we can see, was the renewal of the attempt to induce 
Elizabeth to go abroad, even though she would not marry. 
The place once more was to be Flanders, where the Emperor 
and the Queen of Hungary would see that she was not able to 
escape, and return to her own land. On this occasion, the man 
selected by the Queen to negotiate with Elizabeth appears to 
have gone over to her side ; to have told her, moreover, that 
her friends were awake, and would match every plot against 
her by another in her favour. The Howards, her mother's 
relatives, were her chief and constant support, and they kept 
the Protestant flag flying so high that nobody in England dared 
pull it down — especially since so many Catholics were dubious 
as to the advantages of an alliance with Spain, which was in a 
life and death struggle with France where dwelt so many of 
their friends in the faith. The English councillors had made 
it very plain to Philip that they would not persuade English- 
men to agree to follow his troops all over Europe in his wars, 
and they further told him that these men would not go if they 
did extract such a promise. That was the one thing English- 
men would not do — and if there were attempts to coerce them, 
they preferred to be killed at home, at once, rather than suffer 
the same fate abroad, later on. 

In short, the situation was too complicated for so slow a 
man as Philip, whose dominant characteristic, like that of 
Burghley, was caution ; and, as usual in such circumstances, 
Philip did nothing radical, and Elizabeth triumphed. Time 
had fought for her, and on the 17th of April, 1555. eleven 
months after leaving the Tower, Mary sent for her to come 
to Hampton Court, where the Queen was expecting that child 
who was destined never to exist. 

Upon the journey to Hampton Court, every precaution was 
taken to prevent any approach to Elizabeth, and, on her arrival, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


communication with the outer world was strictly forbidden. 
This went on for two weeks, when officials came from the 
King and Queen to say that before Elizabeth could hope for 
release, or for any reduction of rigour in her imprisonment, 
she would first have to confess her guilt to the Queen. If 
she would do this, they could promise her a favourable hearing. 

The response was inevitable and inunediate. She would 
die in prison before she would confess that of which she was 
not guilty ; it was not mercy she sought, but justice. The 
following day the officials returned to the charge. The plan 
they now adopted was to try to force Elizabeth into confession, 
in order that the idea might not be spread abroad that she had 
been wrongly imprisoned. 

That was a specious plea, if shrewdly made ; but it would 
not serve. Elizabeth saw in the change of front a weakening 
attack, and she became more vehement than ever in her deter- 
mination that she would never admit she had been in the wrong. 
Once again there was a trial of strength between the two 
sisters. For a whole week neither side moved ; and then, 
at ten at night, Elizabeth was suddenly summoned to see the 
Queen, upon whose face she had not looked for a year and a 
half. The lateness of the hour frightened Elizabeth, and she 
requested the prayers of her little court. She told them that 
she might never see them again, and she bade them farewell 
as if her fears were to prove well founded. As she stepped 
out with Bedingfield into the dark garden, with no light but 
that of the smoking torch he carried to guide their way, Eliza- 
beth's thoughts must, indeed, have been fearful. She could 
be made to disappear at any instant into captivity, exile, or 
death out there in the blackness, for she was only a frail young 
woman fighting the Queen of the country. 

But nothing happened, and she soon found herself in the 
presence of that woman, her sister, who had kept her in the 
Tower and other prisons for over a year. Theirs was no 
sisterly display of affection. There was no sister, no woman 
even, on the throne, for Mary had so arranged the mise-en-scene 
as to appear a monarch dispensing justice. After the three 
prescribed bows and kneelings, the suppliant prayed for release 
on the ground of innocence. Mary responded angrily that 
Elizabeth made a great mistake by not acknowledging the truth. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Further recriminations followed when Elizabeth maintained 
that it was the truth only that had been uttered. Finally, 
Mary declared that Elizabeth would always aver that she had 
been wrongly imprisoned ; but this EUzabeth promised not to 
do, although she would not admit that wrong had not been 
done. It was, we can see, a struggle for an admission from the 
one, in so many words, that she had been in the wrong, and 
the other in the right. The effort were not worth the time 
spent upon it. No Tudor would make such an admission ; 
and least of all, either one of these two women. One might 
give way, when she could no longer hold out — ^but say so she 
never would. 

The interview ended with Elizabeth's promise not to 
say that she had been wrongly imprisoned. She arose from 
her knees, made three more bows, and retired, still facing that 
short, grim, wizened, sallow figure so soon to pass off the scene, 
and be replaced by the younger woman whom she had so 
cruelly confined. As Mary's eyes followed that retreating 
figure she must have thought that her own time for quitting 
the stage could not be very far distant, since she was well aware 
of her physical weakness. 

No sign was vouchsafed Elizabeth for a week as to Mary's 
decision after their interview ; but at the expiration of that 
period Bedingfield and his soldiers departed, and Elizabeth 
was free of a visible armed guard for the first time for many 
months although she could not leave her apartment. Friends 
could be received, and she could again have her own retainers ; 
but here her freedom ceased, for the entire country was one 
seething cauldron of discontent, from the fumes of which 
Elizabeth could not possibly escape. 

The advent of Philip, and the brilliant retinue he had 
brought to add to his dignity, only served the more to increase 
that hatred always felt by Englishmen for anything smacking 
of foreign rule. The more they saw of Philip and his friends 
the less the Londoners liked them ; indeed, it was unsafe for 
the Spaniards to move about the town ; and of course the bulk 
of the blame for their presence was laid at the feet of Mary. 

Any chance that the King and Queen ever had of retaining 
the respect or affection of the English people was forfeited 
within some two months of their marriage, when they set up 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


that terrible Spanish institution, the Inquisition, the most 
awful instrument of intolerance and cruelty. The executions 
began in January, 1555, several months before Elizabeth came 
to Hampton Court ; and by the barbaric flames of Smithfield 
the bigot on the throne earned that sobriquet of" Bloody Mary " 
which time can never efface. Nothing more was required to 
turn the Protestant wave into an irresistible flood. Men 
became militant Protestants who had had no religion, or at 
most were indifferent to the two schools. Opposition to the 
monarchs became the fashion. All, even the Catholics them- 
selves, could see that the royal pair were playing a losing game. 
The stars fought against them — ^yet they would not jrield. They 
meant to make as good a fight as they could ; and they would 
not let go their hold on the leader of the Protestants, Elizabeth. 
With affairs in this condition, it was more than ever inevit- 
able that whatever happened unfavourable to Mary only served 
to add to the prestige of Elizabeth. With a million or more 
Catholics scheming to strengthen Mary's position, and an 
even larger number of Protestants scheming to weaken and 
discredit her, the entire Court was like a powder-magazine 
surrounded by a raging fire. This frail, sickly girl, Elizabeth, 
weakened with years of illness and of the most terrible anxiety 
and danger, was in the centre, was the centre itself, of this 
magazine. Both sides now waited to see the effect of an 
expected event — ^the birth of an heir to Philip and Mary ; 
but it did not take place. The Protestants at once declared 
that the whole idea was a fraud, that Mary was not and never 
could be pregnant — for her sexual troubles were common 
knowledge — and that the plan was to make the people believe 
her in the hoped-for condition as a preliminary to the sudden 
production as hers of somebody else's child. 

In this inferno, the French King never ceased to foment 
armed rebellions, and the country lived in apprehension of 
them. They broke out in all directions, but fate seems to 
have been against their success. They were often near it, but 
always failed at the crucial moment. Yet new ones continually 
arose. Every discontented man was at the task. All up and 
down the country the restless Protestants encouraged the 
fainthearted by the distribution of horoscopes setting forth 
how the stars decreed that Philip and Mary had but little 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


longer to reign. One of the authors of these horoscopes was 
a member of Elizabeth's own household. Waxen statuettes 
of the King and Queen, stuck full of pins (a device believed 
to effect the death of those represented), were to be found in 
many a house. Even at this present day we have seen the 
vnthered heart of a sheep hanging in an English home, bristling 
•with pins inserted for the purpose of securing revenge upon the 
man who has wronged one of its inmates. 

Trapped in Mary's castle, Elizabeth had but one earthly 
refuge, the goodwill of Philip and Mary. She attended Mass 
daily with Mary, and, when the inquisitors tried to ensnare 
her into admissions that would cast a slur upon her Catholicism, 
she proved herself master of them all. Cecil, later Lord 
Burghley, had to adopt similar tactics, and so far as profession 
went and outward show nobody was a more devout Catholic. 
Roger Ascham, who, as we have seen, had long been Elizabeth's 
tutor, and who was soon to rejoin her, changed from Protestant 
to Catholic, as did others of her household. They must not 
be blamed. It was merely a surrender in form, in order to 
save their heads from the block, or their bodies from the flames. 

Where Elizabeth was concerned, the fanatics of Rome 
could not believe in the sincerity of her conversion ; probably 
because it was not sincere ; and soon Catholic priests were 
openly preaching that destroying only the branches of the 
false religion was not the way to destroy the tree. Burn the 
trunk ! — that is, Elizabeth ! Yet Philip, it would seem, 
always stood at her side ; she was passed by, while others fed 
the fires. 

Philip, in the meanwhile, was negotiating with her regarding 
her marriage with his son, Don Carlos, then a boy of ten. 
This aflFair went on for six months or more, Philip's emissaries 
visiting Elizabeth every day for long periods. Of course 
such a scheme, if consummated, would have been of the 
greatest benefit to Spain and the Catholics. It would have 
counterbalanced the loss that they had met with through the 
failure of progeny to Philip and Mary, now apparent to all ; 
and here no doubt we have one explanation of Philip's constant 
protection of Elizabeth. Yet another is that he offered marriage 
himself to Elizabeth after she became Queen. In short, we may 
conclude that Philip's habit of procrastinating until delay could 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


no longer be permitted, was the real saviour of Elizabeth. 
Philip knew that she might at some time be of service by 
marriage with some one approved by him, and that she must 
th^efore be preserved. 

Elizabeth, for her part, while resolved on no account to 
leave England, was also playing for what time might bring 
forth. She knew how the tide was setting. Her game was 
to move with that current, and see whither it would lead her. 
So, when Philip urged his boy upon her, Elizabeth did not 
decline him out of hand, but led the ambassadors on, protracting 
the proposal for months ; and, incidentally, by appearing 
pliable to Mary and Philip, she improved her own position. 
For one thing, she obtained permission to leave the Court, 
where she was little more than a prisoner, surroimded by 
spies and gossips who reported the smallest details of her life ; 
and in October, 1555, she returned to Hatfield with Ascham, 
with whom she now read several of the Greek classics. 

Mary, fearing that the negotiations for Elizabeth's marriage 
vnth Don Carlos would go the way of all their predecessors, 
and confronted with the established fact that she herself must 
always be childless, upon meeting the new Parliament which she 
opened on the 21st of October, 1555, decided to urge that body to 
declare Elizabeth a bastard, and deprived of any right to ascend 
the throne. The French Ambassador organized the Protestants 
in the House against such a measure, and it was apparent that 
if it were persisted in a most desperate struggle would be 
precipitated ; and that was precisely what Philip wished to 
avoid. Mary withdrew the Act, and this surrender marked 
the decline of her power. From that time onwards the 
Protestants were in the ascendant. The old sun was setting 
and the new one was in sight. Mary did not even dare urge 
the coronation of her husband. 

Of course some heads were turned by the victory. The 
French King could not wait, and one of the most formidable 
revolutions broke out that Elizabeth's friends had succeeded 
in raising. The plot had ramifications extending all over 
England. The pretext was that Philip was using all the country's 
resources to help Spain on the Continent. London was to be 
set on fire in diflferent places as the conspirators approached, 
and, upon paper, success appeared almost certain ; but treachery 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


led to the sudden arrest of all the ringleaders, including two of 
the chief officers of Elizabeth's household. All were executed 
out of hand. Kate Ashley, three others of Elizabeth's ladies, 
and her Italian teacher, were sent to the Tower, and their 
rooms and effects searched — not in vain, for Protestant books 
inveighing against the true faith were discovered, and libels 
on the King and Queen. Hatfield was at once filled with 
soldiers, and the Council deliberated on sending Elizabeth to 
Spain, to the Tower, or to the Court. This was in March, 
1556 ; and only a few weeks later Michiel reported to Venice 
that Mary was very anxious to get Elizabeth out of the Kingdom 
by marriage, but the latter had always said that she would not 
marry even the son of a king, or of any other great prince. 

The Council ultimately decided to leave Elizabeth where 
she was. The truth is, that that body could no longer be 
relied upon by Philip and Mary to do anything against Elizabeth. 
Its control had passed to her and her friends. All they would 
do was to consent that the troops should remain in control at 
Hatfield — but Philip, always in favour of the suaviter in modo, 
and bearing in mind that Elizabeth might be of use to him, 
preferred to keep her in his debt rather than have her enmity. 
He therefore sent word from Brussels that he wished her to be 
treated leniently. Mary at once (8th June, 1556) ordered the 
withdrawal of the garrison from Hatfield, after it had been in 
occupation for some three months. This command was 
accompanied by an oral message from Mary, that she would 
not believe any of the confessions implicating Elizabeth made 
by the guilty among the rebels, and that henceforth she was to 
be treated with absolute confidence. The speaker suggested 
that it was Elizabeth's part to proceed in all haste to Mary, 
to thank her for her graciousness and mercy. Needless to say, 
Elizabeth did not comply with this hint, as Mary had hoped. 
It was another contest between the sisters to see which would 
surrender. When Elizabeth did not come, Mary observed 
that such stubbornness proved that Elizabeth was supported 
by the nobility or by some foreign Power : in fact, it was by 

It was, however, no part of Mary's plan that Elizabeth 
should be free. The chief officers of her household, and her 
governess, were appointed by the Council ; and the outbreak 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


of a fresh rebellion in July, again supported by France, did not 
improve her chances of complete restoration to liberty, although 
on this occasion nobody among her entourage was implicated. 
Kate Ashley was let out of the Tower, but forbidden to show 
herself at Hatfield. 

On the 28th of November, 1556, two years before Mary's 
death, Elizabeth came to Court for the winter, at Mary's invita- 
tion. On the 3rd of December, the visit was cut short by 
Elizabeth's refusal to marry the Duke of Savoy, Philip having 
decided to support this old project rather than continue the effort 
of persuading Elizabeth to espouse his boy ^on, Don Carlos. 
Elizabeth, however, remained unmoved ; and, having tried 
clemency for six months, after trying threats and imprisonment 
for several years, each with utter lack of success, Mary lost 
her temper, and revived the plan to have Elizabeth declared 
illegitimate, and so unable to inherit the throne. The threat 
this time must have been very real, and Elizabeth have perceived 
extraordinary danger in the air, for not only did she hasten into 
the country but, for the first time in all the critical years follow- 
ing the Seymour Affair, she deliberately set about laying 
detailed plans for an escape to the Continent. She applied to 
the French Ambassador to smuggle her to France. 

Elizabeth's entire future hung on this proposed flight. 
She was eager to go. Few Englishmen will doubt that she 
refrained from so fatal a step because it was the Divine Plan 
that she should remain in England, to perform those great 
deeds for which she is so justly celebrated. 

It was the French Ambassador de Noailles who kept Eliza- 
beth's course true upon this one occasion in her whole life 
when she showed any inclination to run away from a threatening 

There is a limit to every one's power ; the weakening of the 
physical body will ultimately compel the mind to surrender ; 
and with her health in the state already described, made worse 
by the terrible anxieties of her daily life, with death always by 
her side, we cannot wonder that after three years of such mental 
strain, without a day of relief, Elizabeth's judgment was at 
last, for the first and only time in all her seventy years, shaken 
out of its steadiness until she became untrue to herself. She 
had reached the limits of her power of resistance, and she was 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


prepared to risk the loss of throne to obtain her personal 

It was the second great crisis in the life of Elizabeth. Who 
would willingly contemplate what would have happened in 
England had Elizabeth been in France when Mary died, with 
Mary Stuart already married to the heir to the French throne, 
which she ascended within six months of the vacancy in 
England ? There would be a fascinating study, with Elizabeth 
prisoner of Mary Queen of Scots ! 

As we have said, however, de Noailles kept Elizabeth true 
to herself. He told her bluntly that if she wanted to become 
Queen of England she could not leave. What would happen if, 
with her in Europe, Mary were to die ? or, if Philip were to 
be badly defeated by France, and Mary were to attempt to 
send liim reinforcements ? In the former case, Elizabeth knew 
that many might try to seize the supreme power before she could 
return ; and the ambassador urged that any attempt by Mary 
to send more Englishmen to be slaughtered in Philip's armies 
would arouse a storm that would sweep her off the throne. 
Elizabeth would need then to be on the spot just as much as 
if death were to make the throne vacant. Elizabeth's ambition 
and conunon sense reasserted control of her judgment; she 
was saved, and so was England, Great Britain, and the British 

Parliament, however, could not be brought to legislate 
against Elizabeth, and Philip wrote sharply to Mary that he 
wanted the Princess married to the Duke of Savoy, apparently 
declaring that the Queen had not put sufficient pressure upon 
Parliament to get its consent to such a marriage. In reply Mary 
wrote that she had done all she could, and that it was useless 
for her further to urge the matter until he himself could come 
over and try his power. On this, he reached England in March, 
1557, bringing two great ladies to exert their influence upon 
Elizabeth. She defeated him by refusing to receive or see 
these ladies, and by a formal declaration that she would die 
before she would either go to Flanders, or marry the Duke of 

That was checkmate ; and when a fresh rebellion, financed 
by France, burst upon the kingdom within a month after his 
arrival, Philip abandoned the effort against Elizabeth, in order 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


to coax Parliament into granting him the armed assistance he 
and Mary hoped to secure for him in his own war against 
France. In this Philip was successful. The French by this 
new provocation had played into his hand ; and England, while 
it did not want to help Philip, was ready to fight France, so 
long as that country persisted in invading England with armed 

England undoubtedly hoped to see Mary dethroned, but 
it wanted to do its own dethroning. Strangely enough. English- 
men like to govern themselves. They want no foreign inter- 
vention ; and their reply to France in this instance on the 7th 
of June, 1557, was a declaration of war. Philip had attained his 
great object, military assistance from England. It had taken 
him nearly four years to procure it, but he had won in the end ; 
and when, on the 3rd of July, 1557, he bade adieu for ever to his 
Queen, and set sail for the battlefields of France, he must have 
felt well satisfied with his marriage. From no point of view 
could his wife reciprocate in her estimate of their joint venture. 
It had brought naught but a continuous train of disappoint- 
ment, disillusion, and pain. Her power, once absolute, was 
gone for ever. Her reputation as a Christian woman was gone 
also ; she was dubbed with the nickname that made and makes 
her name the most awful of all names among the monarchs of 

She had sought with all her might to enhance the power 
of Rome in England. She had for ever reduced it to insig- 
nificant proportions. To found a Catholic dynasty she had 
risked her throne and the loyalty of her people ; she had 
weakened the former and forfeited the latter ; and she was a 
doomed woman ! In but little over a year she was to face her 
Maker, and answer for more mistakes than are made by most, 
and seek mercy for some of the most hideous crimes recorded 
in history. We are glad to believe that the little we have 
written of her pathological history shows that she was only 
partly accountable for the terrible alteration of her character 
as she approached her death. 

The war with France dragged wearily on, at first successfully ; 
but in January, 1558, the last year of Mary's life, a loss befell 
that is a landmark in English history, for it for ever put an end 
to Britain's dominion across the seas — ^that dominion which 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


had been greater than France itself. Calais was retaken by 
the French ; and Mary after that time merely lay down and 
died. She could only hang her head, and cry that if her 
heart were opened after her death they would find "Calais " 
written upon it. 

The city fell in the first week of January, 1558, and, over- 
whelmed with this last shipwreck of all the argosies she had 
sent out on the sea of fate — oppressed by the continuous ill- 
health that had been her portion for so many years, Mary 
instinctively turned toward the sister she had so deeply wronged, 
and sought reconciliation. The outward manifestation of their 
drawing together first appears in Elizabeth's arrival at Court 
on the 25th of February, where she remained a week. Mary 
then made it known that Elizabeth was to be the heir to the 

The long night was past. From the beheading of Seymour 
to this lifting of the shadows, nine years had elapsed, all but a 
month ; nine years of such dangers, anxieties, and mental 
suffering as cannot, so far as we are aware, be matched in all 
the annals of history concerning one so young — from fifteen to 

The Queen was now dying, and the sycophants hurried to 
Hatfield to pay their respects to her successor. Since no 
more was to be got out of Mary, she was deserted by all 
except her paid attendants. The Great North Road which led 
to Hatfield was crowded with the place-seekers, fighting to 
present their respective claims. 

This spectacle EUzabeth never forgot. It showed her 
indelibly — ^when very old she spoke of it in this fashion — the 
real spirit of the courtier. She saw that if the monarch is 
to rule, he must as far as possible keep the identity of his 
successor secret, otherwise, as he himself grows old, the Court 
will turn more and more toward the coming king. 

Here is the foundation of that policy which Elizabeth 
pursued with reference to James up to the last ten days of her 
reign — one of the profoundest and most successful of her many 
triumphs • — and Froude ascribes this success to good fortune 1 

• " They aay for certain that the Queen on no account desires the 
declaration of a successor, and tells those who speak to her about it that she 
does not want anyone to whom her subjects could go secretly and offer 
their devotion as they came to her when she was a prisoner." — The Spanish 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


In August, 1558, Mary, finding her strength failing rapidly, 
moved up to St. James's Palace to meet Death. It was three 
months in coming, but it came at last, as the dawn broke on the 
17th of November, 1558, when with the responses " Miserere 
nobis. Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem," for her last words 
to the priest who held the Crucifix before her, she lowered 
her eyelids, and was no more. The Woman of Sorrows, as 
she might well be called, was dead. History has besmirched 
her as Bloody Mary, and like that of her father, her name has 
come down to us weighted with centuries of continuous 
execration. She does not deserve such a fate. She never had 
a chance to be a normal woman. Her misfortunes may be 
properly ascribed to her father, and for Mary there should be 
only pity, for she was helpless. The shackles that bound 
her were too heavy for her to burst, and they were riveted upon 
her when she was born. 

At Hatfield, surrounded by a brilliant assembly, Elizabeth 
was seated imder the spreading branches of a great oak (which 
is still standing) when the news came that she was Queen. She 
fell upon her knees and repeated these words from the Psalms : 
" A Domino factum est istud, et est mirabile oculis nostris." (' ' It 
is the doing of the Lord, and it is marvellous in our eyes." ) 

The British Empire was born. 

When Elizabeth ascended the throne, she was two months 
beyond her twenty-fifth birthday ; and, except for her physical 
weakness, no woman or man can be imagined better qualified 
for the gigantic tasks that confronted her for the next forty- 
five years. She was as learned as anybody could be then or can 
be now. She knew modern languages well enough to speak 
and write them perfectly and fluently. She knew Latin equally 
well ; and Greek she had thoroughly mastered. History, 
especially political history, she had reflected upon and studied 
unweariedly. She had pursued every prominent branch of 
learning until there remained little more that could be taught 

More than all this, however, she had been educated in the 
actual conduct of the most nerve-shaking, the most dangerous, 

Ambassador De Silya to Philip, 7th of August, 1564, Co/, 5.P,, 5»»ianc<?s, 
P' 373- 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the most critical affairs of life. She had been humbled by 
disgrace, by slander, and by libel, to which she could oflFer no 
effective defence, from which she could only suflFer as she waited 
for the truth to emerge. She had passed an entire decade, 
several months of it in the most dreaded prison in Europe, 
with the sword of death suspended above her by a mere thread, 
night and day. She had suflFered the shock of the violent 
death of some among her nearest and dearest. She had 
learned patience and sympathy by ten years of continuous 
ill-health and terrible suffering. Before she was twenty she 
had seen her youth fade, until she had become a thin, sallow, 
anaemic woman, old before her time. 

She had had it burnt into her soul that men would pretend 
love so as to gain worldly promotion ; that they would use 
women in any way that would advance their own interests — 
and that those once attained or lost, they cared not what fate 
they brought upon the helpless beings who had believed in their 
professions of undying affection. She had learned that the 
greatest ambassadors, and the greatest monarchs, would pretend 
loving friendship, while in reality they intended hateful wrong ; 
that the spoken and even written word was nothing, but the 
action everything. 

She had measured dialectic swords with the best brains of 
France, of Spain, of Austria, of Venice, of Rome and of England 
— and she had found that she was as acute as any of them, 
often more so. She had been betrayed time and again by the 
very people that she had trusted most. She had learned that 
no man and no woman could be depended on to retain a secret, 
if sufficient pressure were exerted from the right quarter, 
and at the right time, to discover it. She knew how to gain 
popular approval, and how easily it was forfeited. She had 
experienced poverty. 

In a word, she knew life as it really is. None can suggest 
any alteration in her training or in her experience that could 
have made her a more competent monarch at the age of twenty- 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



WE are now in a position to judge correctly what 
manner of woman Elizabeth was at the time 
of her accession, but let us recur to one 
fact, that mentioned by Dr. Keith in the 
closing words of his Opinion, namely : 

" In a medical sense her sexual system was blasted ; she 
had neither the instinct of sweetheart nor mother— for these 
instincts are impossible in such a frame as hers. . , . I think her 
selfishness— for her crown and her kingdom as much as for her- 
self — must be sought in her really sexless condition. Even the 
sexless individual has an attenuated faculty of playing on the 
surface of love — of sniffing the fruit which they have not the 
capacity of tasting. Elizabeth toyed with her young men, but one 
cannot conceive more than that." 

There is also a corollary to this dictum of Dr. Keith — that 
if he be wrong in believing that Elizabeth lacked sexual feelings 
because she had no sexual system, there are two other state- 
ments as axiomatic, namely : That ordinarily and generally 
a woman who is anaemic, or in chronic ill-health, has less inclina- 
tion for sexual indulgence than one of that super-abundant 
health which Elizabeth has always been credited with possessing, 
or than those of normal health — just as the anaemic woman is 
less inclined than the normal one to doing anything whatever. 
The second axiom is this : That the great majority of women, 
unlike men, never feel any sexual inclination before marriage. 
The only authority we quote is below.* The truth is too gene- 
rally known for any labouring of the point. 

• " There is not the slightest doubt that a large proportion of women 
do not experience the slightest desire before marriage." — Differences in the 
Nervous Organisation of Man and Woman, Campbell, M.D,, B.S., p. 200. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


There is only one word more to be said before we detail 
the specific charges against Elizabeth. The great pride of her 
life was that she was The Queen. She brooked no opposition 
from any source, foreign or domestic. She was the personifica- 
tion of the Tudors, the most autocratic monarchs who ever 
occupied an occidental throne. 

She was the last monarch of England. Complete and 
absolute domination, she insisted upon to the end of life, 
because she believed that it was best for her country, the love 
of which was the only passion that ever possessed her. England, 
England and the welfare of her people were the undying aims 
of her career. A Queen, boasting of her virginity, and taking 
great pride in it, who, to advance England's interests, sends 
agents into a foreign country and directs her ambassadors to 
proclaim her a wanton, loves that England more than herself 
or any man.* We shall recur later to this in greater detail. 

Every thing, and every man, and every woman, standing in 
the way of England, had to go down. She used men for 
England, and when they were unable longer to serve England 
they were displaced with absolute ruthlessness. After she had 
beheaded Essex for his traitorous rebellion against her, she 
told the French Ambassador that : 

" having well judged that his impatience and ambitious designs 
would bring misfortune on him, she had warned the said 
Count more than two years before that since he took every 
occasion of displeasing her and insolently despising her person, 
he should be careful not to touch her sceptre, so that she would 
be compelled to punish him according to the laws of England 
and not according to her own, which he had found too gentle 
and favourable to fear that they would ever do him harm." f 

All men belonged to the State ; and she, placed in her 
exalted station, as she firmly believed, by Almighty God for 
that purpose, represented the State. 

We find the great Spanish envoy, the Duke de Feria, writing 
to Philip, less than a month after the beginning of her reign, 
" She gives her orders and has her way as absolutely as her 

• De Quadra to Philip, 7th Feb., 1563 : Cal. of S.P.,Simancas, vol. i. 
p. 299. Vat. Arch. Nunt. di Spagna, vol. viii. fol. 601 . 

t M. de Beaumont au Roi, loth June, i6o8. Baschet Trans, P.R.O. , 
Bundle No. 33. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


father did." When Leicester, puffed up by his great place in 
her court, attempts to push by a sentry who has been ordered 
by Elizabeth to permit nobody to pass, she blazes out at him : 
" God's death, my Lord, I have wished you well, but my 
favour is not so locked up for you, that others shall not partici- 
pate thereof, for I have many servants . . . and if you think 
to rule here, I will take course to see you forth coming : I will 
have here but one Mistress and no Master." 

She imprisoned ambassadors of the Great Powers as freely 
as she would her own subjects. She had their houses and 
papers searched at will. She seized bullion by the million 
belonging to a friendly Power — at least there was no declared 
war — that a passing chance had driven into her port, and 
deflected it into her own treasury. Upon meeting a great 
embassy from France, along the road, she masked her face and 
would not permit its head to greet her until he had turned and 
followed her hat in hand for hundreds of yards before his 
400 retainers, and so paid tribute to her country. 

When the House of Commons sent her a deputation, headed 
by the Speaker and the Duke of Norfolk, to urge her to name a 
successor, she turned on them with : 

" My lords ! do yourselves what you choose ; but as to myself, 
I will only act as I think proper. All the Orders you may make 
can have no force without my consent and authority, What 
you desire is of too great importance to be declared to a collection 
of brains so light. It well deserves that I should take the counsel 
of men who understand the rules of public right and the laws, 
as I am determined to do. I shall select half a dozen of the 
most competent which can be found in my kingdom to consult 
with them, and after such a conference I will communicate to 
you my will." 

To a later Parliament she made her Lord Keeper, Bacon, 
declare in her name that " she enjoined them not to meddle 
with any matters of state." She summons a leader of the House 
before her Council for introducing a bill to reform the liturgy, 
and prohibits him from appearing in the Commons at all. To 
other members who offend, she sends word that she will correct 
them for their " audacious, arrogant, and presumptions folly, 
by which they are thus led to meddle with what nowise belongs 
to them, and what is beyond the compass of their understanding." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

154 PRIVATE CHARACT jj/iV KJL - s^UUll^lS i:<J-i izjrirjjx:<xxr 

Upon a later occasion, when the Speaker of the House 
appeared before her to make the usual requests upon its behalf 
that its members be free from arrest, have access to her person, 
and liberty of speech, she replied that liberty of speech was 
granted to the House : 

" but they must know what liberty they were entitled to ; 
not a liberty for every one to speak what he listeth, or what 
Cometh in his brain to utter ; their privilege extended no farther 
than a liberty of Aye or No : That she enjoined the Speaker, 
if he perceived any idle hands so negligent of their own safety, 
as to attempt reforming the church, or innovating in the 
commonwealth, that he should refuse the bills exhibited for 
that purpose, till they were examined by such as were fitter 
to consider of these things, and could better judge of them." 

When a worthy gentleman presented a petition trans- 
gressing this admonition, he soon found himself in the Tower, 
while his three seconders went to Fleet prison, and the Queen 
put the offending bill in her own pocket, after having required 
the Speaker to deliver it into her hands. As he kneeled before 
her, she said that she had " enjoined them already ... to 
meddle neither with matters of state nor of religion ; . . . and 
took the present opportunity to reiterate the commands ... to 
require that no bill regarding either state affairs or reformation 
in causes ecclesiastical be exhibited in the House : And in 
particular she charged the Speaker upon his allegiance if any 
such bills were offered, absolutely to refuse them a reading, and 
not so much as permit them to be debated by the members." 
The bold man who had caused this outburst was dragged out 
of the House of Commons, " discharged from his office of 
chancellor of the dutchy, incapacitated from any practice 
in his profession as a common lawyer, and kept some years 
in Tilbury castle."* 

To a Dutch delegation she said that any promise she might 
make was not to be taken literally, but as meaning that she 
would do what she thought was for their interests ; for " princes 
. . . transact business in a princely way and with a princely 
understanding such as private persons cannot have." 

The Crown really chose every member of Parliament, and 

• Heylin'a History of the Presbyteriam, p. 3ao. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


woe to the man who did not vote as it wished ! He was often 
thrown into gaol. Jurors were treated in the same fashion, 
who did not render the verdicts the judges wished for, and the 
judges were told by the Government what verdicts it required. 

ReHgion fared no better. The bishop who preached Mary's 
(her sister's) funeral sermon found himself under arrest for 
suggesting that the dead " had chosen the better part " ; that 
is, in being a Catholic. When a bishop married against Eliza- 
beth's expressed rule that Churchmen should not enter that 
estate, he found his see deprived for ninety-nine years of its 
main sources of income. When she did not like the political 
sermons fulminated from St. Paul's Cross, she had its pulpit 
locked. When the Dean of St. Paul's at a public sermon 
enunciated some observations that displeased her, she threw 
open the window of her private closet, in which she always 
worshipped, and shouted to him, " Leave that ungodly digres- 
sion, and return to your text." 

Burghley, Walsingham, Leicester, Essex, and all the rest 
were no more than head clerks, or personal secretaries of the 
Queen. They did nothing except what they were told to do. 
Their correspondence is full of things they cannot deal with 
until they are brought to the attention of the Queen, Their 
daily custom was to prepare a list of the things to be done, and 
each morning before beginning work to submit it to the Queen 
for her decision. In time of stress the entire Council, and all 
the high officers of State, were confined to the castle then 
inhabited by the Queen, and there they remained till she was 
done vidth them. Night after night she had them summoned 
at two, three, and four in the morning to sit with her at the 
Council table. Her standing orders were to be awakened the 
instant important news arrived. There were no week-ends. 
She worked night and day, and every night and every day, and 
so did those she had chosen to assist her, or they did not assist 
her longer. 

The western world has never seen such another absolute 
monarchy ; and no view that Elizabeth was not the real power, 
driving force, and brain of her Government ever obtained 
among her contemporaries. 

Every monarch in Europe so considered her. The Pope 
said that he and she were the only rulers capable of their tasks. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


The Spanish Ambassador, thwarted and overreached by the 
same double dealing he had employed to ruin Elizabeth, and 
defeated by an acuteness even beyond his own, cried, " She is 
possessed by the devil, who is dragging her to his own place." 
Within a year of her accession he bursts out that she " must 
have a hundred thousand devils in her body." " The Queen 
of England, I know not how, penetrates everything," complains 
the Nuncio in Flanders ; being merely a man, how could he 
know how she did it ? Against HER — and never against 
Burghley or any other man in Elizabeth's entourage — ^is directed 
all the hatred of the baffled diplomats at her Court. Another 
of the Spanish Ambassadors calls her " a putrid member cut 
off and eradicated from the mystical body of Jesus Christ." 
" Jezebel," and " English Virago " were favourite terms 
employed by the emissaries of the Vatican in reporting her 
doings and their failures. The Duke de Feria shouts " She 
is the daughter of the devil ! " when she has fooled him instead 
of his fooling her, as had been his elaborate and unscrupulous 
plan. Henry III. calls her " the most acute (fine) woman in 
the world." Cromwell speaks of her as " that great Queen " ; 
and Cromwell knew many men who had well known her. The 
secretary of the French embassy says of her that " She is a 
great princess who is ignorant of nothing." The French 
Ambassador remarks that " The Government depends entirely 
upon the Queen." Burghley himself says that she is " The 
wisest woman that ever was ; for she understood the interests 
and dispositions of all the princes in her time, and was so perfect 
in the knowledge of her own realm, that no counsellor could 
tell her anything she did not know before." At another time 
he said : " No one of her Councillors could tell her what she 
knewe not ; and when her Council had said all they could, 
she could find out a wise counsel beyond theirs ; and that there 
never was anie great consultation about her country at which 
she was not present ..." A French Ambassador not yet 
quoted, writing to his sovereign, exclaims : " She is one of the 
wonders of the world." The Venetian Ambassador reports 
that " Her intellect and understanding {spirito et ingegno) are 
wonderful." Four years after Elizabeth's death, another 
Venetian Ambassador to London, Molin, reports of her to his 
Court : " She was the most remarkable princess that has 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


appeared in the world for these many centuries. In all her 
actions she displayed the greatest prudence. ... I say, in 
conclusion, she was the most prudent in governing, the most 
active in all business, the most clear-sighted in seeing events, 
and the most resolute in seeing her resolutions carried into 
effect ... in a word, [she] possessed, in the highest degree, 
all the qualities which are required in a great prince." * De 
Thou, the great contemporary historian, writes : " In all the 
centuries that have passed,, there has never been seen a woman 
who could be considered the equal of this great Queen." 
The Duke de Sully, the principal minister of Henry the Great, 
and contemporary, this time one who had had long years of 
negotiations with her, and speaking after a prolonged inter- 
view with her, writes thus : " I acquiesce in the eulogy bestowed 
upon her by Thuanus, who concludes his enumeration of her 
great abilities by saying that she had those of a king, not merely 
as such, but of a very great king. I cannot bestow praises upon 
the Queen of England equal to the abilities which I discovered 
in her in this short time, both as tp the qualitijes of her heart 
and _ of ,hex:— understandin g." The Swedish Ambassador in 
London, after m^ny months of negotiations with her, reports, 
three years after her accession : . . . " She is of a curious and 
perspicacious mind, deep and very prudent, so that she learns 
from one sentence and word many and various things on account 
of her past evils and experience in many matters , . . she is 
of great and high ability." The greatest of all the Popes, a 
contemporary of Elizabeth, exclaimed in admiration for her — 
and himself — ^that if he and she could have a child, that off- 
spring would rule the universe. The followers of Froude may 
if they like — ^and they must, to be consistent — ^think that the 
Pope was referring to Burghley, but that hardly seems 

We could fill page after page with similar tributes, but they 
would be merely cumulative. The contemporary judgments, 
the only ones that count, paid to Elizabeth by those best 
qualified to know her worth and ability, form a unanimous 
chorus of unstinted praise. Nobody for centuries before 
Froude ever advanced the theory that Elizabeth was only the 

* Harl. Lib., Venetian, No. i ; no. respecting England in 1607, Cf: 
C.S.P: Venetian, vol. 10, p. 510. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


figurehead of her Ship of State — and nobody has since followed 
him. To do so would be, in the face of the evidence, too 
foolish ; and let us repeat that this absolute monarchy was in 
the hands of one who whole-heartedly believed that God had 
placed her in that situation because He could, with her as an 
instrument, accomplish more for England and for her people 
than by any other agent. 

• * * • * 

In the month of March, 191 5, some research, the exact 
object of which is now forgotten, led us to re-read — not for 
the first time — the first edition of Lingard's final volume, 
wherein he epitomizes his study of the Great Queen. He says : 

" To her first parliament she had expressed a wish that on 
her tomb might be inscribed the title of ' the virgin queen.* 
But the woman who despises the safeguards, must be content 
to forfeit the reputation, of chastity. It was not long before 
her familiarity with Dudley provoked dishonourable reports. 
At first they gave her pain : but her feelings were soon blunted 
by passion : in the face of the whole court she assigned to her 
supposed paramour an apartment contiguous to her own bed- 
chamber : and by this indecent act proved that she was become 
regardless of her character, and callous to every sense of shame." 

The last word was followed by a reference to the following 
footnote — which, by pure mischance, we had never read before 
— ^which Lingard offers as authority for the statement. (We 
here begin to number consecutively all the items of the accusa- 
tions against Elizabeth.) 

Charge i — 

" Quadra, bishop of Aquila, the Spanish ambassador, in the 
beginning of 1561, informs the king, that according to common 
belief, the Queen ' lived with Dudley ' : that in one of his 
audiences Elizabeth spoke to him respecting this report, and, 
in proof of its improbability, shewed him the situation of her 
room and bed-chamber : la dispocition de su camera y alcoba. 
But in a short time she deprived herself of this plea. Under 
the pretext that Dudley's apartment in the lower story of the 
palace was unwholesome, she removed him to another, con- 
tiguous to her own chamber : una habitacion aha junto a su 
camera, pretestendo que la que tenia era mat sana. The original 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


despatches are at Simancas, with several letters from an English 
lady, formerly known to Philip (probably the marchioness of 
Winchester), describing in strong colours the dissolute manners 
both of Elizabeth and her court. I may here add that, although 
some writers have refused to give any credit to the celebrated 
letter from Mary (Queen of Scots.— F, C), m Murdin, 558, 
yet almost every statement in it has been confirmed by other 
documents." (This letter we shall usually refer to as " The 
Scandal Letter."— F. C.) 

To our amazement we saw that the footnote said nothing 
that could be taken as conclusive, as readers will discern. They 
will also find that Lingard translated camera y alcobat in the 
first Spanish quotation, as " room and bed-chamber," using 
camera for a room as distinguished from a bed-chamber. 
Yet, in his second Spanish excerpt he uses camera not as 
" room " but as " chamber " ; and as he spoke of a room and 
bed-chamber in the first place, and only of a " chamber " in 
the second, the ordinary reader would conclude that what 
Lingard sought to convey was, that, according to the report of 
the Spanish Ambassador, Elizabeth and Dudley occupied 
adjoining bed-chambers ; an impression endorsed by the 
main text, where the assertion is made in so many words. 
The mere statement as to such a contiguity of bed-chambers, 
accompanied by no explanatory statement, would very generally 
be taken as an indication of criminal relations between the young 
Queen and the young man, for whom she plainly showed 

The discrepancy between the contents of this footnote and 
the statements for which it was quoted as authority suggested 
to us that Lingard was endeavouring to instil into his readers 
a belief for which he felt he had too little real evidence. 

The matter was relatively unimportant, yet our suspicions 
were aroused, and that for the first time ; for, as said in the 
Introduction, we began to study Elizabeth in the belief that if 
there were one thing known about her beyond cavil it was her 
immorality. It was only after three years and more of constant 
research into her career that the first doubt as to the soundness 
of this position came upon us. 

We could not, however, in any report of correspondence 
at Simancas, find a letter from the Spanish Ambassador stating 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


that " according to common belief the Queen lived with Dudley ; 
that in one of his audiences Elizabeth spoke to him respecting 
this report ; and, in proof of its improbability, shewed him the 
situation of her room and bed-chamber : " la dispocition de su 
camera y alcoba." 

The only thing we could discover suggesting it was the 
resumi at Simancas of a letter or letters — ^it is uncertain which — 
printed in Spanish at Madrid, in 1832, by Don Tomas Gonzales 
Carvajal. There we discovered this : " The rumours that 
Elizabeth now indulged in illicit relations with Leicester became 
so prevalent that in one of the audiences which she gave the 
ambassador Quadra, she tried to exculpate herself by showing 
him the arrangement of her apartment and bed-chamber, 
seeking to persuade him that the reports were unfounded and 
calumnious." * So that, while we could not find the letter 
itself, we had something to support the story. The investiga- 
tion into the other part of this tale of Lingard's, namely — " in 
a short time she deprived herself of this plea. Under the 
pretext that Dudley's apartment in the lower story of the 
palace was unwholesome, she removed him to another, con- 
tiguous to her own chamber : una habitacion aha junto a su 
camera, pretestendo que la que tenia era mal sana " — very soon 
developed a different aspect, and one much more suspicious ; 
for while Lingard said that Leicester was given una habitacton, 
Froude cited the original Spanish as un aposentOyf Carvajal gave 
un cuarto, and the Spanish official publication of the phrase 
agreed with Froude's un aposento.X Moreover, Froude's 
Transcripts in his own hand, made at Simancas, gave un 
aposento. There were, besides, other variations. Lingard 
says that Elizabeth made this change pretestendo que la que 
tenia era mal sana — that is, " pretending that the one he had 
was bad for his health." Carvajal says, " pretestando que era 
mal sano el que tenia abajo." Froude reads " par ser mds sana 
que el que tiene abajo " ; while the official Spanish text reads 

* " Era tan piiblica la vos de que Isabel tenia relaciones estrechisimas con 
Robert, que en una de las audiendas que did ella al embajador Cuadra, tratd de 
sincerarse manifestdndole toda le disposidon de su Camara y alcoba, persuadi- 
endole que eran calumnias infundadas todos aquellos rumores.'^-^Memorial de 
la Real Academia de la Historia, vol. vii. p. 284. 

I Froude, vol. vii. ed. 1863, note on p. 338. 
Coleccion de Documentos Iniditos Para J.a Historia De Espafia, tomo 
Ixixvii. p. 339- 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


" por ser mas sano que el que el tenia abajo." In other words, 
Lingard, in quoting a phrase of ten words, had inserted three 
altogether new, had failed to copy five that were in the original, 
and had misquoted one other. 

Now we knew that Carvajal's work, the first in point of 
time to refer to this matter, was not printed until nine years 
after Lingard published his version. Froude worked at 
Simancas twenty-five years later than the date of Lingard's 
volume, and the official Spanish reading did not appear until 
nearly half a century after the publication of Froude's. We 
had seen no statement that Lingard had ever been to Spain ; 
and besides the discrepancies in this quotation, there was the 
fact that neither Froude nor M. A. S. Hume, nor the editors 
of the Spanish official reproduction of the Simancas documents, 
nor anybody else who had worked at that famous library, had 
ever found therein any letter resembling that which Lingard 
says was there, mentioning the Spanish ambassador's report 
that " according to common belief, the Queen * lived with 
Dudley ' : that in one of his audiences she spoke to him respect- 
ing this report, and, in proof of its improbability, shewed him 
the situation of her room and bed-chamber." 

It was evident that there was something radically wrong in 
Lingard's information, as indeed proved to be the case. The 
solution will be given later when we come to cross-examine 
Lingard. In the meantime, the reader is informed that the 
Ambassador de Quadra did actually, on the 12th of April, 1561, 
write a letter to Philip, in which these words occur : " Lord 
Robert's discontent has ended in her giving him an apart- 
ment in the story near her own, as it is healthier than the one 
he had beneath. He is most content." * 

Charge 2 — 

A study of Lingard's assertion that there are at Simancas 
" several letters from an English lady, formerly known to 
Philip (probably the marchioness of Winchester), describing 
in strong colours the dissolute manners both of Elizabeth, and 
her court," did not yield any more satisfactory evidence than 

• El descontenio de Milord Roberto de los dias pasados ha parado en que 
le ha mandado la Reina dar un aposento en lo altojunto al suyo, por ser mds 
sano que el que H tenia abajo, y estd contentlsimo. This is the correct version. 
V. Coll, de Doc, Inid, tomo Ixxzvii. p. 339. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


that which we have already considered. Lingard, in short, 
is the only authority for the existence of any such letters, either 
now or in the time of Philip ; but any statement explaining 
Lingard's position must be postponed until his charges are 
subjected to closer scrutiny. We may, however, indicate that 
the difficulty lies once more in the source of his information. 
* • * * * 

Nor was our suspicion lessened by reading the sentence in 
which Lingard says, ante, " But the woman who despises 
the safeguards, must be content to forfeit the reputation, of 
chastity ... in the face of the whole court she assigned to her 
supposed paramour an apartment contiguous to her own bed- 
chamber : and by this indecent act proved that she was become 
regardless of her character, and callous to every sense of shame." 

It is not too much to say that this is nonsense. Yet, imbued 
with belief in the Queen's immorality, we had read these 
extraordinary conclusions many times without realizing the 
insecurity of their foundation. Suspicion once excited, how- 
ever, we saw at last the speciousness of the words. We con- 
cluded that, if this be a specimen of the strongest statement 
that a Catholic historian — one who by reason of his training 
must start Tiis wor£ wifli a prejudice towards Elizabeth — can 
cite against Elizabeth, and if he is further forced to emphasize 
his evidence as he does in this footnote, the case against her is 
very weak ; and we determined on further experiment. 

The next obvious step was to see if Lingard had altered his 
views. We sent for his last edition, the fifth, printed in 1849, 
and revised by Lingard himself, twenty-six years later than the 
date of his first edition, already quoted. It discovered that 
Lingard had remained up to the very close of his life in the same 
mind, and that in the score of years between these two editions 
he had brought forward what he conceived to be more damning 
evidence to support his contention. He had inserted these 
words in the first note, ante, after the second Spanish quotation 
— ^which he said meant that Dudley had his room next to Eliza- 
beth's bed-chamber : 

Charge 3 — 

" In September of the same year these rumours derived 
additional credit from the change in the queen's appearance. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


' La reigna (a h que entiendo) se hace hydroptca, y cotnienza ya a 
htncharse notablemente . . . lo que se parece es que anda discarda 
(Should be descaecida. — F. C.)yflaca en extremo,y con un color 
de tnuerta . . , que la marquesa di Noramton y milady Cohan 
tengan a la reyna par pelegrosa y hydroptca, no hay duda.' . . . 
See note (E£) at the end for an account of a supposed son 
of Elizabeth and Leicester." 

Our readers will at once recognize that they are not reading 
anything new. They recall Item No. 38 in the Med. Rec. 
which we repeat in full so that we may have before us not only 
the abbreviated version of Lingard, but the entire statement 
as originally written. 

" What is of most importance now is that the Queen is 
becoming dropsical, and has already began to swell extraordi- 
narily. I have been advised of this from three different sources, 
and by a person who has the opportunity of being an eye- 
witness. To all appearances she is failing, and is extremely 
thin and the colour of a corpse. . . . That the Marchioness 
(of Northampton) who is in a better position to judge than 
anyone else . . . and Lady Cobham consider the Queen in a 
dangerous condition is beyond doubt, and if they are mistaken 
I am mistaken also. I can obtain no more precise intelli- 
gence. . . ." — De Quadra from London to Madrid, 13th of 
September, 1561. 

The assertion that this recurrence of the terrible illness 
from which, as we know, Elizabeth had been suffering for many 
years, was the source from which " these rumours (of Eliza- 
beth's illicit relations with Leicester) derived additional credit " 
was certainly not supported by his quotation. His authority 
contains no hint that the illness was regarded by the Spanish 
Ambassador as connected in the slightest degree with the 
scandals, and we knew of no authority except Lingard who 
advanced any such interpretation. We could not escape the 
conclusion that once again Lingard was emphasizing his 
evidence in order to support a cause of which he did not feel 

Examination of the remainder of Lingard's case for the 
prosecution only served to confirm this impression. After 
the quotation ending with his statement that her assigning to 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Dudley " an apartment contiguous to her own bed-chamber : 
and by this indecent act proved that she was become regardless 
of her character, and callous to every sense of shame," Lingard 
goes on to say : " But Dudley, though the most favoured, was 
not considered as her only lover : among his rivals were num- 
bered Hatton and Raleigh, and Oxford and Blount, and Simier 
and Anjou " : 

Charge 4 — 

" and it was afterwards believed that her licentious habits 
survived, even when the fires of wantonness had been quenched 
by the chill of age. The court imitated the manners of the 
sovereign. It was a place in which, according to Faunt, ' all 
enormities reigned in the highest degree,' or according to 
Harrington, ' where there was no love, but that of the lusty 
god of gallantry, Asmodeus.' " 

The only authorities given for any of these statements 
appear in the last sentence, and in a footnote offered to support 
the belief that " her licentious habits survived, even when the 
fires of wantonness had been quenched by the chill of age." 
That footnote merely says : 

" Osbom, Memoirs, 33," referring to Francis Osborne, 
who was ten years of age when Elizabeth died. Osborne says 
at the point indicated : " [The duel between Essex and Blunt] 
grew from the stock of honour of which then they were very 
tender, and some mean expressions Essex used of Blunt, about 
his being imployed in Ireland, and not her amorous caresses, 
which age and in a manner an universal distribution of them 
had by this time rendered tedious if not loathsome ; intimated 
in a most modest expression uttered in my hearing by Sir 
Walter Rawley, none of her least respected servants, who upon 
some discourse of the Duke of Buckingham, said to this purpose, 
That Minions were not so happy as vulgar judgments thought 
them, being frequently commanded to uncomely and sometimes 
unnaturall imployments." 

This was very poor proof of the Queen's immorality. Nor 
could we think more of the other authorities quoted by Lingard, 
which are only three in number, i.e. i , A second letter from 
Faunt published in Birch, i. 25, from which Lingard quotes 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


this extract : " ... the only discontent I have, is to live where 
there is so little godliness and exercise of religion, so dissolute 
manners and corrupt conversation generally, which I find to 
be worse than when I knew the place first " (ist August, 1582) ; 
2. That document which we have already quoted Lingard as 
calling " the celebrated letter from Mary, in Murdin, 558." 

The epistle referred to is certainly not " celebrated " in 
our understanding of the term, and we very much question 
if anybody except an historian has read it. It appears in no 
history, and no biography, and, furthermore, is in the French 
of the day ; while, so far as we are aware, no English translation 
has ever appeared. 

We take it that the reason for this extraordinary state of 
affairs — for the letter is the most important ever written by 
Mary Stuart (if she wrote it) from the point of view of self- 
revelation — is only another illustration of that national modesty 
to which we have already referred ; which permits, for example, 
Lingard to tell his readers that this letter is strong proof 
of Elizabeth's lightness, while at the same time he finds the 
contents too plain-spoken for him to quote. No true inquiry 
into a matter like this can be conducted upon any such lines. 

It can be no more immodest, nor inunoral, to set forth 
verbatim the letter relied on to prove her lightness, than to 
assert her guilt on the strength of that document, without 
printing it. Elizabeth has had to suffer more than three 
centuries of such innuendo. She could with all propriety 
demand to-day that the entire evidence be published. 

We propose to do just that. We believe that that modesty 
which has permitted the world at large to judge Elizabeth 
guilty either upon ex-parte statements, or in ignorance of the 
testimony for her defence, will do her the justice to read all 
the documents — not only those for her but those (gainst her. 
We submit that so much is due to the woman who founded the 
British Empire — and she has a r^ht to demand at least this 
much from her countrymen, who have been her chief detractors. 

We now present the Scandal Letter exactly as it was 
written, translating it into our own tongue. We have compared 
it with the original, which is at Hatfield House, and a facsimile 
of part of it is herewith reproduced. 

It should be borne in mind that Lingard says of it, as 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


already quoted, " almost every statement in it has been con- 
firmed by other documents " ; a dictum which must be 
construed as his contention that he accepts the accusations which 
it contains as true, although he goes no further in asserting this 
in so many words. His entire treatment of the letter, however, 
admits of no other supposition. The capitalization and other 
punctuation in our translation come as near to that of the original 
as we can determine. Labanoff * has seen fit to amend the 
original by emplojring proper capitals, stops, and paragraphs. 
He has even altogether changed the first word, supplying an 
addressee where none appeared in the copy. The version in 
Murdin has also been extensivdy altered in capitals and 
punctuation, and is otherwise incorrect. Labanoff dates the 
letter in 1584. Murdin gives it as of 1586. 

Charge 5 — 

" According to what I promised you and you have since 
desired I declare to you now with regret that such things should 
be brought into question but very sincerely and without any anger 
which I call my God to witness that the countess of Schrews- 
bury said to me about you what follows as nearly as possible 
in these terms to the greater part of which I protest that I 
answered rebuking the said lady for believing or speaking so 
licentiously of you as a thing which I did not at all believe 
and do not now believe knowing the disposition of the Countess 
and by what spirit she was then urged on against you : Firstly 
that one to whom she said you had made a promise of marriage 
before a lady of your chamber had lain many times with you 
with all the licence and familiarity which husband and wife 
can use to one another But that undoubtedly you were not as 
other women and for this reason all those who desired your 
marriage with the duke of anjou, considering that it could not 
be consummated were foolish and that you would never wish 
to lose the liberty of making love and gratifying yourself with 
new lovers regretting this said she that you would not content 
yourself with master baton and another of this Kingdom but 
on account of the honour of the country that which vexed her 
the most was that you had not only compromised your honour 
with a foreigner named Simier going to find him at night in 
the chamber of a lady whom the said Countess greatly blamed 
in this affair, where you kissed him and indulged in divers 
* Lettres de Marie Stuart, Prince Labanoff, tome 6, p. 50: 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


unseemly familiarities with him But also you revealed to 
him the secrets of the Kingdom betra)dng your own Counsellors 
to him. That you had disported yourself with the same 
dissoluteness with the Duke his master who had been to find 
you one night at the door of your chamber where you had met 
him with only your nightdress and dressing gown on and that 
afterwards you had let him enter and that he remained with 
you nearly three hours. As for the said baton that you ran 
him hard showing so publicly the love that you bore him that 
he himself was constrained to withdraw from it and that you 
gave a box on the ear to kiligrew for not having brought back 
the said baton to you after he had been sent to recall him having 
departed in anger from you for some insulting words you had 
said to him because of certain gold buttons which he had on his 
coat. That she had worked to bring about a marriage between 
the said baton and the late countess of lennox her daughter but 
that for fear of you he dared not consent that even the count of 
Oxfort dared not reconcile himself with his wife for fear of 
losing the favour which he hoped to receive by becoming your 
lover That you were lavish towards all such people and those 
who lent themselves to such practices As to one of your chamber 
Gorge to whom you had given three hundred pounds a year 
for having brought you the news of the return of halton that 
to all others you were very ungrateful and niggardly and that 
there were only three or four in your kingdom to whom you 
had ever been generous advising Me while laughing unre- 
strainedly to place my son in the ranks of your lovers as a thing 
that would be of very great advantage to me and would put 
Monsieur the duke out of the running in which he would be 
very disadvantageous to me if he continued And answering to 
her that that would be taken for unfeigned mockery she replied 
to me that you were as vain and thought as highly of your 
beauty as if you were a goddess of heaven that she would become 
responsible for making you believe it readily and for receiving 
my son in that humour. That you took such great pleasure 
in flatteries beyond all reason that you were told for example 
that at times one dared not look full at you because your face 
shone like the sun that she and all the other ladies of the court 
were constrained to use such flatteries and that in her last visit 
to you she and the late Countess of lenox while speaking to you 
dared not look at one another for fear of bursting out lauglung 
at the tricks she was pla3dng on you begging me on her return 
to rebuke her daughter whom she had never been able to do the 
same and as for her daughter talbot she was sure that she would 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


never fail to laugh in your face the said lady talbot when she 
went to make her curtesy to you and to take her oath as one of 
your attendants immediately on her return relating it to me as 
a thing done in mockery begged me to allow a similar ceremony 
as she has more feeling and fealty for me which I for a long 
time refused but in the end influenced by her tears I let her 
have her way saying that she would not for anything in the 
world be in your service near your person seeing that she would 
be afraid that when you were angry you would do to her as you 
did to her cousin Shedmur whose finger you had broken making 
those of the court believe that it was a candlestick which had 
fallen on it and that to another who was serving you at table 
you had given a violent blow on the hand with a knife and in a 
word as to these last points and common gossip you were 
played and imitated by them as in a comedy amongst my women 
themselves perceiving which I swear to you I forbade my women 
to take part any more Further the said countess warned me 
formerly that you wished to order Rolson to make love to me 
and try to dishonour me either in reality or by evil report 
about which he had instructions from your own mouth that 
Ruxby came here about eight years ago to attempt my life after 
having spoken to you who had told him that he should do what 
Walsingham would command and direct him : When the said 
Countess was promoting the marriage of her son Charles with 
one of the nieces of Lord Paget and you on the other hand wished 
to keep him by complete and absolute authority for one of the 
Knoles because he was related to you she complained bitterly 
against you and said that it was nothing but tyranny your wishing 
at your caprice to carry off all the heiresses of the country and 
that you had treated the said paget disgracefully with insulting 
words but that finally the nobility of this kingdom would not 
permit it to be repeated to the same degree if you addressed 
yourself to certain others whom she knew well : About four 
or five years ago when you and she were ill at about the same 
time she told me that your malady came from the closing of a 
fistula that you had in one leg. and that no doubt losing your 
monthly period you would very soon die rejoicing in a vain 
fancy which she has long had through the predictions of a 
certain Jon Lenton ; and of an old book which predicted your 
death by violence and the succession of another Queen whom she 
interpreted to be me regretting only that by the said book it 
was predicted that the Queen who would succeed you would 
reign only three years and would die like you by violence which 
was represented in a painting in the said book In which there 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


was a last leaf the contents of which she never would tell me. 
She herself knows that I have always held this as pure folly 
but she laid her plans well to be the first of those about me and 
even that my son should marry my niece arbela to end with I 
swear to you once more on my faith and honour that what is 
above is quite true and that as to what concerns your honour 
it has never come into my mind to wrong you by revealing it 
and that it will never be known through me holding it as quite 
false If I can have that good fortune of speaking vnth you I 
will tell you more particularly the names times places and other 
circumstances to let you know the truth both about this and 
about other things which I reserve when I am quite assured of 
your friendship which as I desire more than ever also if I can 
this time obtain it you never had relative friend nor even subject 
more faithful and loving than I shall be to you For God be 
certain of her who wishes to serve you and can do so from my 
bed compelling my arm and my suiferings to satisfy and obey 

Marie R." 

Lingard's final accusation is that contained in his Note (EE) 
at the close of his volume, wherein he says that there is at 
Simancas " an account of a supposed son of Elizabeth and 
Leicester." This note reads as follows : 

Charge 6 — 

" Though it was frequently reported that the queen had 
borne children to Leicester, the only individual known to have 
appeared publicly in that character was an Englishman at 
Madrid, who assumed the name of Arthur Dudley. Mr. Ellis 
has published a letter about him from an English spy to Lord 
Burghley, written on May 28, 1588. — Ellis, 2nd Ser. iii, 136. 
I may add a few more particulars, gleaned from the documents 
preserved at Simancas. 

" This adventurer arrived at Madrid about the end of 1586, 
and pretended that he was going to perform a vow at Mont- 
serrate ; but some jealousy was excited respecting him by his 
frequent visits to the French ambassador. When the news 
arrived of the execution of Mary queen of Scots, he disappeared, 
but was taken at Pasage, as he attempted to escape to a ship at 
a small distance from that port. In consequence of his answers 
before the governor of Guispuscoa, he was sent to Madrid, 
where he received an order to write an account of himself in 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


English. On the 17th of June, 1587, this memoir was translated 
into Spanish by Sir Francis Englefield, who informed Philip 
that it contained ' el discorso de su education, y los argutnentos, 
y razones que le han enducido a tenersey llamarse hijo de la reyna.' 
(An account of his education, with llie reasons and arguments 
which have led him to believe that he is the son of the Queen. — 
F. C.) The English original cannot be found, but the Spanish 
translation states that he (Arthur Dudley) is the reputed son of 
Robert Sotheron, once a servant of Mrs. Ashley, residing at 
Evesham, in Worcestershire. By order of Mrs. Ashley, 
Sotheron went to Hampton Court, where he was met by 
N. Haryngton, and told by her that a lady at court had been 
delivered of a child, that the queen was desirous to conceal 
her dishonour, and that Mrs. Ashley wished him to provide a 
nurse for it, and to take it under his care. Being led into the 
gallery near the royal closet, he received the infant from her 
with directions to call it Arthur, intrusted it to the vnfe of the 
miller at Moulsey on the opposite bank of the Thames, and 
afterwards conveyed it to his own house. Some years later 
Sotheron conducted the boy to a school in London : thence 
he was sent to travel on the continent, and in 1583 he returned 
to his reputed father at Evesham. He now concluded that there 
was some mystery respecting his birth, from the different 
manner in which he and his supposed brothers and sisters 
had been educated, but could not draw the secret from Sotheron 
till a few days before the old man's death ; when he learned 
from him that he was the son of Queen Elizabeth and of the 
earl of Leicester. He then consulted Sir John Ashley and 
Sir Drew Drury, who advised him to keep it secret, and to 
return to the continent. This he had done ; but not before he 
had obtained an interview with the secretary of Leicester, and 
afterwards with Leicester himself. What passed between him 
and Leicester is not stated ; but that Philip did not consider 
him an imposter, appears from this, that we find him, even a 
year after his apprehension, treated as a person of distinction, 
being ' very solemnly warded and served, with an expense to 
the king of vi crownes (almost £2) a daye. He was of xxvii 
yeares of age or thereabout.' — Ellis, ibid." 

The above is not a fair rSsumi of the Simancas documents 
respecting this incident, being, as it stands, a much stronger 
accusation than any that they warrant ; but we leave the incident 
for the present, with the observation that every word in Spain 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


or elsewhere relating to this Charge is quoted in note 5 of the 

All of this foregoing was, to our mind, whether considered 
in detail or en bloc, very questionable, regarded as proof of the 
Queen's immorality ; and if Lingard, of all men, encouraged 
I and assisted as we shall see by eveiy Catholic in Christendom, 
(after a lifetime of endeavour to^besmirch Elizabeth, had in the 
vend no more convincing accusations than these to offer, there 
I was much need for original research into the real facts. This 
lis the story of the germination of this volume. 

We may now proceed to cite all the evidence which, with 
the foregoing six charges adduced by Lingard — all others are 
classified as Indirect Charges — can be classified as Direct 
Charges by contemporaries of the Great Queen ; for, of course, 
if she be convicted at all, it must be upon such a showing. 
No other testimony is of the slightest value. Opinions which 
are not contemporaneous, or are based upon scantier informa- 
tion than is to be found in this volume, are apocryphal. 

It may be that we have been unable to include every con- 
temporaneous direct charge. We can say, however, that we 
have made every endeavour to do so, and that no other historical 
work in the bibliography of Elizabeth contains so many attacks 
upon her as does this one — and no other contains any direct 
charge which will not be found herein. If any fresh imputa- 
tions arise, they must come from sources now unknown to 

It must be observed that, for over four centuries, every 
Catholic has been intensely desirous of presenting conclusive 
evidence that Elizabeth was immoral. No other Protestant 
who has ever Uved, has been or is — and, be it admitted, 
with such sound cause — so anathematized by the Catholics — 
and all that they (to make no mention of others) can produce 
against Elizabeth in addition to the above six accusations are 
the following contemporary allusions, arranged, as far as may 
be, in chronological order. In this Chapter we shall do no 
more than so to state these various criminations, in order 
that the reader may be freed from any exterior influence. 
We believe this to be the fairest and most satisfactory method 
of presenting the entire problem to the reader, for we feel that 
he is entitled to such a bald statement of the entire question 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


at issue. We are of the opinion that with the evidence itself 
before him, he is as competent as anybody to reach a true 
verdict, and that in these days no public will accept the dicta 
of anybody upon anything. The present generation — and 
much more so that to come — must be shown all the evidence 
supporting any theory or contention before it will accept it. 
In meeting this requirement, some repetition will now and 
then be necessary, but we believe that that is more than com- 
pensated by additional clarity. 

Charge 7 — 

" The last few days Lord Robert has come so much into 
favour that he does whatever he likes with affairs and it is even 
said that her Majesty visits him in his chamber day and night." 
— Count de Feria to Philip, i8th of April, 1559, from London. 
Cal. S. P., Simancas, vol. i. p. 55. 

Charge 8 — 

The papers upon which this accusation is apparently based 
constitute the record of one among several prosecutions by 
the legal authorities of persons who slandered the Queen. 
These prosecutions would appear to be eight in number, seven 
of which we discuss. The papers of the remaining one are 
undiscoverable, but there seems to be no reason to suspect that 
it differs in character from those we are able to detail. Since 
these prosecutions have been brought forward by Elizabeth's 
detractors as so many evidences of her guilt — but never with the 
documents themselves — ^we cannot escape presenting here 
and imder Charges 10 and 1 1 hereafter the exact records ; but 
even their most cursory examination, fortunately, will reveal 
their lack of foundation, so the reader may run through them 

" After our most hartie commendacions, you shall receyve 
herein enclosed thexamynacions of certen persones of this 
Shire of Essex, towchinge wordes spoken and sprede abrode 
here against the Quenes Majestic. The pryncypall offender 
and rayser whereof, whoes name ys Anne Dove, as we perceyve 
by thexaminacion, we have committed to the comen gayle 
of the Shyre, and such other as she hath accused, who in our 
opynyons are not culpable therein, we have, neverthelesse, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


put under suerties to be ffourth commynge to aunswere there- 
unto at all tymes. And although by specyall statute lawe made 
in that parte we mought precede botii to thenquyre and also 
to the tryall of suche malefactors, yet forasmuche as we under- 
stodde of the commynge downe this waye of the Lorde Reaper 
of the broade Scale, and specyallye for that the wordes moche 
touched her Majesties honor, whiche wordes we thought not 
mette to be devulged amongest the comen people no further to 
procede untill we had eyther spoken with his lordeship therein 
or geven advertysement thereof to her Maiesties most honorable 
councell. And his Lordeshipp at his comm3mge understond- 
inge by us the state therof and lykinge well our opynyons for 
the staye of our procedinge, accordinge to the lawe, advised 
us to wright unto you specyallye herein, so as uppon your 
consideracion and the rest of her Maiesties mose honorable 
councell, order mought be geven for her punyshement, whiche 
as well his Lordeshipp as we wolde wyshe rather for dyverse 
respectes to be by order from her Maiesties councell then by 
thexecucion of the saied statute, by some letter, comprysinge 
generall wordes of slaunder of the Queues Majestic without 
recytinge any specyall cause. And yet yf yt shall seeme to their 
honors and yow that tryall shalbe herein hadd, accordinge to 
the lawe, uppon their pleasures therein knowen, whiche we 
desire may be knowen to us with such expedicion as shall 
seeme to them convenyent, we will be redye with dylygence 
to see the same accomplysshed and donne accordinglye. And 
so levinge any further to troble yow at this tyme, we commytte 
yow to God, ffrom Lyes this XIII"' of this August 1560. 
" Your owne most assuredlye 

" R. Ryche 

" Tho. Mildmay." 

XVII"" die Julii anno secundo 
Regine nostre Elizabeth. 

Essex. — ^The saying of Aime Dowe of Burndwood wydew 
of thage of threscore and eight yeres examyned before Thomas 
Myldmay esquyre one of the quenes Majesties Justices of the 
peace within the sayd Countie as followeth 

ffyrst she sayeth that abowte fyve weykes last past she was 
att Rocheford, and there being in the howse of one [blank in 
MS.] dwelling uppon Rocheford grene beyond the parsonage, 
the wyffe of the saide howse sayed openly in the presens of 
this examynat and others there being that Dudley hadd given 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the quene a new petycote which cost twentie nobles. To 
which womman this examynat sayd the quene hadd no nede 
of his cotte for she was able to by one her self. Item she 
sayeth furder that within three dayes then next after she went 
out of the sayd towne, and in a Bromefelde within the same 
paryshe she mett with one M' Coke rydyng uppon a horse, 
And at their meting to gether the sayd Mr Coke asked her 
and sayd, what newes mother Dow, and she sayd that she 
new no other newes but that she sayd a woman told her that 
Dudley hadd geven the quene a new petycote thatt cost twente 
nobles. And the sayd Coke sayd to the sayd examynat, 
thynkes thow that is was a petiecote no no he gave her a chylde 
I warrant the. And the sayd Coke havyng a botell of wyne 
att his sadle bowe gave her drynke of the sayd bottell and so 
they departyd. 

Item she furder sayth that she commyng to Dombery the 
syxtene daye of July passyng throwgh the strete of the same 
towne came to the howse of John Kyng taylour, and there 
before hym and his wyffe sayd that she herd newes but a body 
may say nothing, neverthelesse she sayd she herd saye that 
Dudley hadd yeven the quene a new petycot that bothe he 
and she shoold rewe, and so departyd tyll she was apre- 
hendyd by the sheryff dwellyng within the sayd towne of 

John Kyng of Danbye aforesayd examyned sayth that the 
syxtene daye of July aforesayd abowt eight of the clock in the 
fore none of the same daye one mother Dowe of Brentwood 
came unto his shopp when he was syttyng att his worke, and 
sayd there was thinges now adayes that she might say nothing of. 
Why so quod this examynate. Mary sayth she, there is one 
now they call hym Dudley that beareth more Rome then ever 
dyd his father, ffor sayd the sayd mother Dow we hadd a quene 
whose name was Elizabeth, soo have we styll quod this examynat 
as I trust, then she sayd that Dudley and the quene hadd playd 
by legerdemayne to gether, that is not so sayd this examynat, 
is quod she for he hathe geven her a chyld, why quod this 
examynat she hathe no chylde yett, no sayd Mother Dow if 
she have nott he hath putt one to makyng, and that greter 
fooles then he or she dyd talke of that matter. And thereuppon 
he badd her hold her pece for althowgh she was dronke as he 
then thowght she was, she woold repent her wordes hereafter 
and so he left her. 

per Tho. Mildmay. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


[The Rocheford woman mentioned being examined, denied 
having spoken the slanderous words or having heard them 
spoken at any time. She admitted that " Anne Dove " came 
to her house and mended a fan, for which she was paid gd.] 

XVIII""" die Julii anno secundo 
domine Elizabeth Regine nunc. 
The sayng of Betterys Kyng the wyfFe of (sic) John Kyng 
taylour examyned as foUoweth ffyrst she sayth that the syxtene 
day of July abought eight of the Clock in the fore none of the 
same daye one Mother Dow of Brentwood came unto the (sic) 
shopp of the sayd Kyng, he sythyng att his worke, and sayd 
there be thinges now adayes but we may say nothing, why so 
quod the sayed King, Mary quod she, there is a Dudley which 
bereth more Rule then ever dyd his father and that shall bothe 
thow and I rew, why so quod the sayd Kyng, taked heed what 
thou sayest, yes quod she, he hathe geven the quene a petycot 
And they too have played legerdemayne, why so quod the sayd 
Kyng, Marye quod she, he hathe geven here a chyld, nay sayd 
Kyng she hathe no chyld yett, no quod she, they have put 
one to makyng, that is as good, wylt thou byde by that quod 
Kyng, ye ye quod she, there be greter fooles then thou and I 
will say so, well quod he (sic) take heyd what thou sayst thowgh 
thou be dronke now thow wylt repent theis words when thow 
art sober, and so she went her waye, all theis words this examynat 
satt by and herd as she will Justefye. 

Endorsed. — ^To the right honorable Sir William Cecill 
xnight, Secretarye to the Queues most excellent Majestic. 

And in Cecil's hand 
14 Augusti 1560. 
L. Rich Sir Tho. Mildmay 

(In different hand and ink) : 

touching Mother Dowes slanders against the Queene 
and L. Robt. Dudley. 

{State Papers Domest. Elig. 1 547-1 580, vol. xiii. No. 21, 
21. I, and 21. 2.) 

Charge 9 — 

" After this I had an opportunity of talking to Cecil, who, 
I understand, was in disgrace ; and Robert was trying to turn 
him out of his place. After exacting many pledges of strict 
secresy, he said that the Queen was conducting herself in such 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


a way that he thought of retiring. He said it was a bad sailor 
who did not enter port if he could when he saw a storm coming 
on, and he clearly foresaw the ruin of the realm through Robert's 
intimacy (y que elveya laperdicion de la Reyna manifiesta causada 
desta privanf a de Milor Roberto) with the Queen, who surrendered 
all affairs to him, and meant to marry him. He said he did 
not know how the country put up with it, and he should ask 
leave to go home, although he thought they would cast him 
into the Tower first. He ended by begging me in God's name 
to point out to the Queen the effect of her misconduct (desdr- 
denes), and persuade her not to abandon business entirely but 
to look to her realm ; and then he repeated twice over to me that 
Lord Robert would be better in Paradise than here." — De 
Quadra to the Duchess of Parma, from London, nth Sept., 

1560. Cal. S. P., Simancas, vol. i. p. 174. 

Charge 10 — 

" Thexamynacon of John Whyte, barbor, taken by the 
Mayor of Totnes and his brotherun, the 27th of Februarie 
Ao 1560, &C. 

" The said John Whyte saieth that the daie and yeare 
aforesaid being in the howse of one John Leche in Totnes, and 
then and there being in compagnie in the same howse one 
John Saiger, shomaker, the said John Leche and one Robert 
Hendley, servant to the said Leche, the said Whight reported 
and said that Thomas Burley, knowen by the name of the 
drunken Burley, hadde said to hym in his own howse that the 
Lord Robert Dudley dyd swyve the Queene, etc." (All 
parties were bound over to the next sessions at Exeter. En- 
dorsed by Cecil " Drunken burlegh of Totness, Februar, 
1560." The foregoing is all the record that can be found of 
this incident.— F. C.).—Hat. Cal. Pt. I, p. 277, § 821, 27th Feb. 

1561, N. S. 

Charge n — 

a. " Our duties in humble maner promised, thies maye 
be to advertise your honours that whereas at our nowe beinge 
at Salisburye, at the Assises, there was presented unto us, by 
ten Justices of the peace of the said Countie, certayne examyna- 
tions concerninge most odious and faulse slannderous tales 
against the Queues majestie, the copie whereof you shall 
receyve here enclosed. . . . [We] have committed the offenders 
to the Gayle, there to be and remayne, untill they receyve 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


punishment for their said faultes as by your letre pf annswere 
hereof the said Justices shall be directed . . . ffrom Salis- 
burye the Xth daye of this present monethe of Julye ao 1563. 

Your honours humble 
to comannde 
Rychard Weston 
Rychard Harpur. 

(Justice Weston & Sgtpeace Harpur, to ye Lords of ye Queens 
privy Councel, from ye Assizes) — B.M., Harl. 6990, fol. 49. 
b. " The Declaracon of Barthelmewe Auger, baylye of 
husbondry, and serjennte to Mr, Berwike before John Enneley 
and John Berwike in the Countie of Wilteshire Esquiers the 
xixth of June in the fyfte yere of the Raign of our most dreade 
soveraign Ladye Elyzabeth. . . . 

" The sayd Barthelmewe sayethe that vppon thursdaye 
the xviii"^ of this moneth he was at the Devyzes market about 
his m"^ busynes, and theare dyd sett his horses at one Robtc 
Brookes howse, wheare he dothe comonly vse to hoste, and 
abought three of the clocke in the afternone of the same daye 
the sayd RoBte Broke declared, and sayed to hym this wordes 
fdllowinge in the psence of Peter Stronnge of manlngford 
bruece and others to hym onknowen (viz) what newes doe yo" 
heare/ he answered/ what newse sholde wee heare/ he sayd 
agayne/ do"' yo/ M"^ heare no newes from London, he answered 
and sayd no/ what newes sholde he heare/. whearuppon he 
sayd, saye nothinge, it ys sayd my lorde Robte ys fled owte of 
the realme/ he answered why so ? Then sayd Robte Brooke, 
saye nothinge/ hit ys tolde me that he hathe gotten the quene 
w"' childe, and therefore he ys fled/ and so ended, no wordes, 
saye nothinge/ And farther the sayd Robte Brooke sayd, yf 
yo" m' dyd knowe yt, he wolde make another maner of sturre/ 
and so they pted 

John Ernele 
John Berwyke 

The sayd Peter Stronge, beinge examyned before the said 
John Ernele and John Barwike, doth confesse and aflyrme 
all and euy thinge as Barthelmewe Anger before hathe sayd 

Thexamynacon of Robte Brooke, at 

beryffylde, of the Devizes taken 

before vs the sayd John Ernele, 

and John Barwike the xx"" of June. 

The sayd RoBte Brooke confesseth all the sayd woordes 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


and talke betwen hym and Bartholomewe Anger, aforesayd, 
but he sayethe, he harde the same, and yt was declared vnto 
hym on wensdaye the xviii"* of this moneth by one [ ] 

wykes, dwellinge at Rowde in the sayd Countie of Wiltes*, 
at the Devizes in the sayd Brookes howse 

John Ernele 
John Berwyke 

The examynacon of Wyllfli wikes, 
taken the xx"" of June before 
vs John Ernele and John Barwike, 
Wiltes" . — ^Jtm, he sayeth that the xviii"' of this moneth of 
June he was at the Devizes at Brookes house/ and ther declared 
vnto hym, that hit was spoken in a place wher he lately was/ 
that my lorde Ro£te was fiedde oute of the Realme, and that 
he had gotten the quene w"" childe. And that hit was tyme 
he were gone, yf yt weare so./ And farder sayeth, that he 
harde this talke at a place, wher he was, appon trynytie 
sonndaye, neare vnto Romsey/ And the man he dothe well 
knowe and his dwellinge howse, but his name he knoweth 
not, vntyll he have inquyered farther, 
contra f«rma_statut John Ernele 

a° pmo et sedo John Berwike 

Phi et Marie Cap" iii^'" 

(B.M., Harl. 6990 fol. 49 et seq.) 

Charge 12 — 

While urging the marriage of Elizabeth with the Archduke 
Charles of Austria, the Spanish Ambassador de Silva writes : 

" I also pointed out to her how many important friends and 
connections she would gain by such a marriage, to which she 
answered, ' I quite understand how much the King wishes me 
to marry the Archduke if I marry outside of my own country.' 
I only replied that Your Majesty considered him as your own 
son, without referring to her remark about marrying outside 
the kingdom, as I understand her object was simply to keep 
Leicester's matter afoot. It is generally agreed that die Queen 
will never marry him, and that he himself is well aware of it 
and has abandoned hope, yet nevertheless I do not think they 
are quite certain, because when I was pressing her to announce 
her decision on the Archduke's matter she said * How can I 
take such a step as you say, for if after all the Archduke should 
not consent it will look as if I was obliged to marry whoever 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


would have me, he having rejected me, and this is a very delicate 
thing for a husband.' By this she meant that her marriage 
with him (Leicester) would be looked upon rather as a matter 
of necessity than of choice, and I could well believe it would 
be so if what the French Ambassador swore to me were true, 
narnely, that he had been assured by a person who was in a 
position to know that he (Leicester) had passed New Year's 
night with the Queen. The author, however, is a Frenchman, 
and so strongly adverse to the Archduke's marriage, that he 
cannot conceal it, and even, as I am told by a person of position, 
informed the Queen and her Council that if the match were 
carried through it would interrupt the friendship with his 
King, as it would indicate a complete surrender to the house 
of Austria and Bergundy, and an identification with the interests 
of your Majesty with whom his King could not maintain per- 
petual peace." — De Silva to PhiUp, 4th Feb., 1566, from 
London. Cal. S. P., vol. i. p. 5 17 

Charge 13 — 

" Thei had set out a proclamation, and had iiii provisies ; 
one was touching the wantenes of the Court, . . . There was 
meny in troble for speaking of seditious wordes. Thomas 
Sicell sayd that . . . his cosen Sicell was the Quene's darling, 
who was the cause of the Duke of Norfolke's imprisonment. . . . 
Metcalfe said he wolde helpe the Duke of Alva into Yermouthe, 
and to washe his handes in the Protestantes' bloud. Marshame 
said that my Lord of Lecester had ii childerne by the Queue ; 
and for that he is condemned to lowse bothe his eares, or ells 
pay a c li presently. Chipline said he hoped to see the Duke 
of Norfolke to be King before Mihelmas next ; . . . " — Letter 
from an unknown from London " the last of August, 1570," to 
the Countess of Shrewsbury, giving particulars of the recent 
rebellion headed by Appelyerde, Througmorton, Redman et 
als. Lodge's Illtist. vol, ii. ed. 1791, p. 47. 

Charge 14 — 

Deposition of Kenelme Berneye. One inquiry submitted 
to him was : " What evill Speaches used he (Mather. — F. C.) 
of the Queene's Majestic, and upon what Occasion, in what 
Place, and when ? " The reply is : 

"... he (Mather.— F, C.) . . . sayd. That yf she 
(Elizabeth. — F. C) weare not kylled, or made awaye, ther was 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


no Waye but Deathe with the Duke (Norfolk, who was soon 
beheaded. — F. C.) ; and what Pjrttye weare yt, sayd he, that so 
noble a Man as he should dye now in so vyle a Woman her 
Dayes, that desyrethe nothinge but to fede her owne lewd 
Fantasye, and to cut off such of her Nobylite, as weare not 
perfumed, and courtelyeke to please her delycate Eye, and place 
suche as weare for her Tourne, meaning Daunsers, and meaning 
you, my Lord of Lecester, and one Mr. Hatten, whom he 
sayd had more Recourse unto her Majestie in her Pryvye 
Chamber, than Reason would suffre, yf she weare so vertuouse 
and well inclined, as some naysythe (maketh ?) her ; with other 
suche vyle Words as I ame ashamed to speake, much more to 
wrytt ; but when yt shalbe my Chaunce ageyne to wayte upon 
your Lordship, I wyll imparte yt unto your Lordships bothe . . . 
he followed me contynewally everye Nyght, as yt weare a 
Man madd or lunytycke, sayeinge. His Mynd was troubled, 
sometimes speakeinge of the Duke, sometymes of my Lord 
Burleyghe." — Murdin, p. 203, 29th Jan., 1572. 

Charge 15 — 

" For a certain person was taken at Dover, who had used 
very dangerous speeches concerning a massacre to be shortly 
in England, and most malicious and shameful words against the 
Queen herself. As, that the Earl of Leicester, and Mr. Hatton, 
should be such towards her, as the matter was so horrible, 
that the examiners would not write down the words. I cite 
' this relation from the very words of a letter from the Archbishop 
By the way, hence it may appear that the Papists firstjiutabrrad 
that infamous report of that excellentlQueenTtbo muchfMniir- 
arity with some of her subjects : which nowadays is become 
almost credited by many unwary Protestants." — Strype, Life 
of Matthew Parker, vol, ii. p. 127, referring to 1572. Parker 
to Burghley. 

Charge 16 — 

(a) " To come to the point, my son (Anjou) has let me know 
by the King that he never wishes to marry her (Elizabeth. — 
F. C.) even if she vnshes it ; so much has he heard against her 
honour, and seen of it in the letters of all the ambassadors who 
have been there (In England. — F. C.) that he considers he would 
be dishonoured and lose all the reputation he thinks he had 
acquired." — Catherine de Medici, to F6n61on, the French 
Ambassador in London, 2nd Feb., 1571. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


(6) "I bare him (Anjou) in hand (for it grieved me not a 
little, and the King, my Son, as you know) that of all evil 
rumours and tales of naughty persons, such as would break the 
matter, and were spread abroad of the Queen, that those he did 
believe and that made him so backward ; " — Catherine de 
Medici to Walsingham and Smith. Sir Thomas Smith from 
Paris to Burleigh, 22nd March, 1572. Digges, Comp. Ambass., 
P- 193- 

Charge 17 — 

Mr. Dyer to Mr. Hatton 

" Sir, After my departure from you, thinking upon your 
case as my dear friend, I thought good to lay before you mine 
opinion in writing somewhat more at large than at my last 
conference I did speak. . . . First of all, you must consider 
with whom you have to deal, and what we be towards her ; 
who though she do descend very much in her sex as a woman, 
yet we may not forget her place, and the nature of it as our 
Sovereign. Now if a man, of secret cause known to himself, 
might in common reason challenge it, yet if the Queen mislike 
thereof, the world foUoweth the sway of her inclination ; and 
never fall they in consideration of reason, as between private 
persons they do. And if it be after that rate for the most part 
in causes that may be justified, then much more will it be so in 
causes not to be avouched. A thing to be had in regard ; for 
it is not good for any man straitly to weigh a general disallowance 
of her doings. 

" That the Queen will mislike of such a course, this is my 
reason : she will imagine that you go about to imprison her 
fancy, and to warp her grace within your disposition ; and that 
will breed despite and hatred in her towards you : and so you 
may be cast forth to the malice of every envious person, 
flatterer, and enemy of yours ; out of which you shall never 
recover yourself clearly, neither your friends, so long as they 
show themselves your friends. 

" But if you will make a proof (par ver vramo, as Spanish 
phrase is) to see how the Queen and he will yield to it, and it 
prosper, go through withal ; if not, to change your course 
suddenly into another more agreeable to her Majesty, I can like 
indifferently of that. But then you must observe this, that it 
be upon a by-occasion, for else it were not convenient for divers 
reasons that you cannot but think upon. 

" But the best and soundest way in mine opinion is, to put 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


on another mind ; to use your suits towards her Majesty in 
words, behaviour, and deeds ; to acknowledge your duty, 
declaring the reverence which in heart you bear, and never 
seem deeply to condemn her frailties, but rather joyfully to 
commend such things as should be in her, as though they were 
in her indeed ; hating my Lord of Ctm in the Queen's under- 
standing for affection's sake, and blaming him openly for seeking 
the Queen's favour. For though in the begirming when her 
Majesty sought you (after her good manner), she did bear with 
rugged dealing of yours, until she had what she fancied, yet 
now, after satiety and fulness, it will rather hurt than help 
you ; whereas, behaving yourself as I said before, your place 
shall keep you in worship, your presence in favour, your 
followers will stand to you, at the least you shall have no bold 
enemies, and you shall dwell in the ways to take all advantages 
wisely, and honestly to serve your turn at times. Marry thus 
much I would advise you to remember, that you use no words 
of disgrace or reproach towards him to any ; that he, being the 
less provoked, may sleep, thinking all safe, while you do awake 
and attend your advantages. 

" Otherwise you shall, as it were, warden him and keep him 
in order ; and he will make the Queen think that he beareth 
all for her sake, which will be as a merit in her sight ; and the 
pursuing of his revenge shall be just in all men's opinions, by 
what means soever he and his friends shall ever be able. 

" You may perchance be advised and encouraged to the 
other way by some kind of friends that will be glad to see whether 
the Queen will make an apple or a crab of you, which, as they 
find, will deal accordingly with you ; following if fortune be 
good ; if not, leave, and go to your enemy : for such kind of 
friends have no commodity by hanging in suspense, but set 
you a fire to do off or on — all is one to them ; rather liking to 
have you in any extremity than in any good mean. 

" But beware not too late of such friends, and of such as 
make themselves glewe between them and you, whether it be 
of ignorance or practice. Well, not to trouble you any further, 
it is very necessary for you to impart the effect of this with 
your best and most accounted friends, and most worthy to be 
so ; for then you shall have their assistance every way ; who, 
being made privy of your council, will and ought in honour to 
be partners of your fortune, which God grant to be of the best. 
The 9th of October 1572. Your assured poor friend to com- 

" Edw. Dyer." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Harl. MSS., 787, fol. 88, Brit. Mus. (Hereafter we often 
refer to this as the Dyer-Hatton Letter.— F. C.) 

Charge 18 — 

" If I could express my feelings of your gracious letters, I 
should utter unto you matter of strange effect In reading of 
them, with my tears I blot them. . . , Death had been much 
more my advantage than to win health and life by so loathsome 
a pilgrimage . . . Madam, I find the greatest lack that ever 
poor wretch sustained. No death, no, not hell, no fear of 
death shall ever win of me my consent so far to wrong myself 
again as to be absent from you one day. God grant my return. 
I will perform this vow. I lack that I live by. . . . My spirit 
and soul (I feel) agreeth with my body and life, that to serve 
you is a heaven, but to lack you is more than hell's torment 
unto them. My heart is full of woe ... I will wash away the 
faults of these letters with the drops from your poor Lydds and 
so inclose them. Would God I were with you but for one hour. 
My wits are overwrought with thoughts. I find myself 
amazed. Bear vidth me, my most dear sweet Lady. Passion 
overcometh me. I can write no more. Love me ; for I 
love you. God, I beseech thee witness the same on the behalf 
of thy poor servant. Live for ever. Shall I utter this familiar 
term (farewell) ? yea, ten thousand thousand farewells. He 
speaketh it that most dearly loveth you. . . . June 5, 1573. 
" Your bondman everlastingly tied. 

" Ch. Hatton." 

Nicolas, Life of Hatton, p. 25. 

Charge 19 — 

" Document headed ' Substance of Letters from Antonio 
de Guaras from London, 12th, 19th, and 26th December, 1574 
and I St January, 1575 . . .' : 

" The queen of Scots has also been ordered to be brought 
to the Tower of London ... the object being to obtain 
possession of the Prince (James. — F. C.) if possible, and put 
an end both to him and his mother. They would then raise 
to power the son of the earl of Hertford whom they would 
marry to a daughter of Leicester and the queen of England, 
who it is said, is kept hidden, although there are bishops to 
witness that she is legitimate. They think this will shut the 
door to all other claimants. This intrigue is said to be arranged 
very secretly." — Dec, 1574. Cal. S. P., Simancas vol. ii. 
p. 491. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Charge ao — 

" I am assured that he (The English Ambassador. — F. C.) 
has let it be known that the pretended Queen (Elizabeth. — 
F. C.) has a daughter thirteen years of age, and that she would 
bestow her in marriage on some one acceptable to his Catholic 
Majesty. I have heard talk before of this daughter, but the 
English here say they know nought of such a matter." — Nicholas 
Ormanetto, Bishop of Padua, Nuncio in Spain, to Ptolemey 
Galli, Cardinal of Como, from Madrid 9 Dec, 1575 ; Vat. 
Arch. Nunt. di Spagna, vol. viii. fol. 601. 

Charge 21 — 

" Roger ffawnes talke had with me John Guntor uppon 
Christma Day & St. Stephins day ... of December 1578. 

"... he (Fawne. — F. C.) hard his master saye ... he 
wold be the first man himself that with his owne hande wold 
dispatche my L. Treasourer, and diverse oother vile wordes 
he hard his master at (that ?) tyme speak of the Queene and of 
the Cownsell, as that her Grace was very unmete to gouverne, 
and that she was a dronckard and a naughtie woman of her bodie, 
with such odious wordes as his eares did ake to here. . . . This 
was spoken about that tyme he laye at Mr. Comptrollers which 
he reconeth to be 4 or 5 yeres past, or thereaboutes. 

" Itm. he sayde that John Pynnock sayde to him, that when 
the Queenes majestie was at Wilton last, his master . . . sayde 
unto him that the Queene was once mynded to ryde a hunting, 
but after dynner she was so dronck, that she could not ryde, 
and much more talke he had at that tyme with the sayd Pynnock, 
as towching her majestie & Cownsell." — Information of John 
Guntor, Brit. Mus. Lansd. MS. 29. (The entire record of the 
proceedings is in the Appendix, note 7. It shows that many 
others besides Elizabeth were attacked by the accused with 
crimes, from forgery to murder and burning.) 

Charge 22 — 

All that we are able to learn of this Charge is to be found in 
the accusations brought forward by Mr. Walter Rye, who says 
in his pamphlet * " . . . about the same time (1578), Francis 
Edderman of Chester is reported to have said that ' the Earl had 
two children by the Queen.* " This pamphlet appeared in 

• The Murder of Amy Robsart, by Walter Rye, London, Elliot Stock, 
188s, pp. 31-2. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


1885, and it unfortunately cites no authority for the words, 
and it is not surprising that when appealed to nearly thirty-five 
years later for the missing citation Mr, Rye finds that it has 
escaped him. As he says no more in his work than we have 
already quoted of this incident, we may, it would appear, safely 
treat it as no more important than the other seven prosecutions 
for slander which we have detailed. 

Charge 23 — 

" In conversation likewise recently with the French Ambas- 
sador, she set forth the many reasons which would force her to 
marry, whereupon he replied that, besides the reasons she 
stated, she had forgotten one, which was of more importance 
than any, namely, that it was said that he (Alengon) had had 
illicit relations with her. She replied that she could disregard 
such a rumour, to which he answered that she might well do 
so in her own country, but not elsewhere, where it had been 
publicly stated. She was extremely angry, and retorted that a 
clear and innocent conscience feared nothing, and that the 
letters which Alenfon had written to his brother and his 
mother were written before the existence of the rumour, which 
she would silence by marrying." — de Mendoza to the King of 
Spain, from London, 26 April, 1582. Cal. S. P., Simancas, 
vol. iii,, at p. 348. 

Charge 24 — 

"... when she (Elizabeth. — F. C.) is abroad nobody 
is near her but my Lord of Essex, and at night my Lord is at 
cards, or at one game or another with her, that he cometh 
not to his own lodging till bird sing in the morning." — ^Anthony 
Bagot to his father Richard Bagot, Hist. MSS.Comm. Report 4, 
b. of p. 337, 2nd col., with date offered as of 1581 or 1587. 

Charge 25 — 

"... she (Elizabeth. — F. C.) hath exalted one speciall 
extorsioner, whom she tooke up first of a Traitor & worse then 
naughte, only to serve her filthy luste, wherof to have the more 
fredom and intrest ; he (as may be presumed, by her consent) 
caused his owne wife cruelly to be murthered, as afterwarde 
for the accomplishement of his like brutishe pleasures with an 
other noble dame it is openly knowne he made awaie her 
husband ; who now of an amorous minion advaunsed to highe 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


office, degree, Sc excessive welthe, is becum her cheife leader 
in all her wicked and unwonted course of regiment . . . 
livinge only of briberie, spoile, and roberie. . . . 

" With the forsaid person and divers others she hathe abused 
her bodie, against Gods lawes, to the disgrace of princely 
maiestie & the whole nations reproche, by unspeakable and 
incredible variety of luste, which modesty suffereth not to be 
remembred, neyther were it to chaste eares to be uttered how 
shamefully she hath defiled and infamed her person and cuntry, 
and made her Courte as a trappe, by this damnable and detest- 
able arte, to intangle in sinne and overthrowe the yonger sorte 
of the nobilitye and gentlemen of the lande, whereby she is 
become notorious to the worlde, & in other cuntryes a comon 
fable for this her turpitude, which in so highe degre namely 
in a woman and a Queene, deservethe not onelie deposition, but 
all vengeaunce bothe of God and man, and cannot be toUerated 
with out the eternal infamie of our whole cuntrie, the whole 
world deriding our effeminate dastardie that have sufFred suche 
a creature almost thirtie yeares together, to raigne bothe over 
our bodies and soules, and to have the cheif regiment of all our 
affaires aswel spirituall as temporal, to the extinguishinge not 
onely of religion but of all chaste livinge and honesty. 

" She coulde never be restrained from this incontinence 
thoughe the principall peers of the realme and others of high 
authority as deputies from the whole parliament and estates, 
made humble sute and supplicacion to her, that for pittie and 
compassion of their desolate case, and of the daunger that the 
whole realme, and specially the nobility should be in, yf she 
deceased without lawful issue, in suche a number of competitors 
of the croune, she wold therfore marrie and procure (yf yt were 
Gods pleasure) lawfuU heires of her bodie to itJierite her 
dominions after her : to whom sumtimes she merely and 
mockingly answered, that she wold die a maiden Queene, 
but afterwards in contempte and rebuke of all the states of the 
realme, and to the condemnation of chaste and lawfuU mariage 
(wherunto as to a bridle of her licentiousness, she ys enemie), 
she forced the verie parliament it self to give consent and to 
provide by a pretended lawe, not tollerable (nor ever I trow 
hearde of before in a Christian free people) that none should 
so muche as be named for her sucessor duringe her life, 
savinge the naturall, that ys to sale bastard borne childe of her 
owne bodie. A wonderfuU thraldome, a lamentable case, 
that this highe courte of olde so renoumed for fredome and 
justice, should now be at the devotion of one woman so farr, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


as to authorize both her shamefull incontinency & pemitious 
obstinacy against the honor and good of the whole realme : 
havinge no cause in the worlde why the next lawful! heire may 
not better beare the naminge, then her unlawfull longe con- 
cealded or fained yssue, saving that yt might be prejudicial! 
to her private & present peace, which she ever preferretiti before 
the publike. . . . 

" She, all this notwithstandinge, in the meane season, as 
often before and afterward, promised mariage to sum of the 
nobility at home, makinge many of them in single lyfe to the 
danger of their soules, and decay of their famelies, to attend 
her pleasure : " — Admonition to the Nobility and People of 
England and Ireland, &c., a.d. 1588, pp. xviii. et seq. ; by 
Cardinal Ali en, to be d istributed to the people of those countries 
JustlSeJoreme'saning of the Armada to subdue them, urging 
them to rise and assist the invaders. 

Charge 26 — 

Under this head we comprehend all the remaining accusa- 
tions that, so far as we can learn, are, or are quoted as being, 
contemporary with the Queen. They are put forward as 
evidences of the Queen's guilt by Mr. Walter Rye * in the 
pamphlet before mentioned, entitled The Murder of Amy 
Robsart. A Brief for the Prosecution. 

{a) " It is said that there is an entry in a well-kept, ' partially 
illuminated MS.,' preserved at the Free School at Shrewsbury, 
as to an illegitimate son of the Queen by Dudley having been 
educated there. . . . See Antiquary, iii. p. 250. 

" As to this child, ' Arthur Dudley,* see Lingard, vi. 659, 
and note E. E. 718." 

* A noted antiquarian of Norwich, where he still resides at the good age 
of seventy-six. His versatility is well indicated by the following extract 
from Who's Who: " Bom 1843 ; Educ. King's College Evening Classes : 
Fonnerly a London Solicitor . . . ex-amateur champion walker, 1868 
(then holding all-world records from i mile to 7) ; winner of many open races 
at walking, running . . . and tricycling ; Founder and President of the 
Thames Hare and Hoimds . . . formerly Hon. Sec. of the London Athletic 
Club ; Mayor of Norwich, 1908, and a co-opted member of its Library 
Committee. PubUcations : Ninety antiquarian pubUcations. . . . Recrea- 
tions : critical investigation of genealogical and historical myths . . i 
indexing (score to date, over 900,000 items) ; tricycling, wool-gathering, 

Mr. Rye's pamphlet is stated to have been " of great value " to Dr. 
Ernst Bekker in writing his Elizabeth und Leicester, Giessen, 1890. Fore- 
word, p. vi. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


The authorities to which Mr. Rye makes reference with 
respect to his indictment are ; 

" The Maiden Queen's Son. — An entry in a well-kept, 
partially illuminated MS., preserved in the free school at 
Shrewsbury, runs as follows : — ' Henry Roido Dudley Luther 
Plantagenet, filius Q. E. reg. et Robt. comitis Leicestr.' Are any 
other facts in existence relating to this son of the ' Maiden 
Queen,' beyond the tradition preserved at Shrewsbury regarding 
his having been brought up at this school ? The MS. in ques- 
tion was the parish church book, and the entry is supposed to 
be in the handwriting of Sir John Dychar, who was then Vicar 
of Shrewsbury. — Antiquary, iii., May 24, 1873, p. 250." 

The sentence about Arthur Dudley refers only to those 
extracts from Lingard, which we have already quoted and 
expanded. It will be recalled at once that according to Arthur 
Dudley's own statement, he was educated in London ; whereas 
the reputed Shrewsbury offspring got his schooling at the 
latter place. It should not escape us that although Mr. Rye 
says that Arthif Dudley and Henry Dudley were one and the 
same, we know that Arthur says that his name was Arthur^ 
while the only existing evidence that Henry ever lived at all 
gives him the latter designation. 

{b) " Gonzales [Documents from Simancas relating to the 
Reign of Elizabeth, p. 89), under date nth April, 1564, says, 
' there was now a rumour that from Richmond Elizabeth went 
to Werwich. (Gonzales's editor suggests Barwick, but surely 
the idea was Warwick. — ^W. R.) Some said it was to rid herself 
of the result of an indiscretion.' " 

(c) " ' A lewde Pasquyle sette forthe by certeen of the 
Parlyament men in 8th Elizabeth,' may also be consulted." 

We must at once say that there is nothing at all in this 
document referring in even the remotest fashion to the Queen. 
Mr. Rye must have been misled in this matter. Those who 
desire proof of our contention, may secure it by a study of the 
transcription of the MS. in the Appendix, note 6. 

• • w « « 

Such is, so far as we have been able to learn and so far as 
the painstaking research for more than three centuries of the 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


most relentless enemies of the Great Queen has disclosed, all 
the contemporary evidence which can be considered as specifi- 
cally accusing her with sexual immorality. The next task is, 
plainly, critically to examine these twenty-six direct Charges, 
to see if all or any of them are so authentic as to warrant us in 
convicting Elizabeth ; that is, of convicting her beyond a 
reasonable doubt, as is the legal phrase ; and the task, we 
hasten to reassure the reader, is not a prolonged or an involved 
one, at least as unfolded in the following chapter. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



IN opening our cross-examination of the foregoing direct 
testimony against Elizabeth, we proceed upon the 
assumption that the reader, by this time, will have 
arrived at the conclusion that a number of the twenty- 
six Charges are unworthy of detailed refutation. 

Among them we place the eight prosecutions of country 
gossips for slander. The conclusion is irresistible that the 
mere reading of the documents accompan3n[ng them has 
convinced most students that they contain their own confutation. 
Of the remaining eighteen charges, we believe there will 
be common agreement that ten are entitled to little more 
serious consideration. These ten we now examine. 

I. Charge 2. — Lingard's assertion that there are at 
Simancas : 

" several letters from an English lady, formerly known to 
Philip (probably the Marchioness of Winchester), describing 
in strong colours the dissolute manners both of Elizabeth, 
and her court." 

As already pointed out, " Lingard is the only authority 

for the existence of any such letters, either now or in the time 

of Philip." The explanation is this : that Lingard, during 

( the years he was writing his work, had a number of Catholic 

I priests at the English Catholic College at Valladolid, some 

seven miles from Simancas, who were continually searching 

\ the archives in the latter place for materials to aid the first 

\ Catholic historian of the Reformation. The Protestants for 

', two centuries had offered their side of the story of the schism 

\ with Rome — but at last the Catholic standpoint was to be 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


published by a learned priest, and all the Catholic world assisted 
him. The whole story may be learned at Ushaw, the great 
institution near Durham, where the Catholic historian lies in 
his last sleep ; where may also be found his literary remains, 
all of which were placed at our disposition. 

The clue is found in a letter in the springtime of 1823, just 
as Lingard's volumes are about to go into print. He writes 
to his publisher, Mawman : 

" Perhaps I should observe to you that in quoting the records 
of Simancas, I do not mention the n°. or the page, etc., as in 
quoting other documents. This arises from the jealousy of the 
Spaniards, or rather the standing orders of the place. The 
officials will not allow my friend to take any notes. He can 
only read them, and write down what he remembers, when he 

Now this sort of thing must lead to misquotations ; and it 
offered opportunity for what is worse, i.e. reputed quotations 
from documents which did not exist. Of this latter, we are 
certain that we have an example in this Charge 2. This first 
comes into Lingard's papers through a letter from Sherburne 
at ValladoUd, dated the 19th of February, 1823, stating that 
Mr. Cameron has been making notes at Simancas, which 
Sherburne now copies and encloses. Therein it is stated : 

" Elizabeth's Camerera mayor was in his (Philip's. — F. C.) 
pay, she communicated the secrets of the Court to him, and 
among many other things Elizabeth's criminal intrigues with 
the Earl of Leicester. From the correspondence it appears 
that she was familiarized with assassination & stuck at no crime 
when it suited her interest. She engaged the Prince Dn Carlos 
to assassinate his father. . . . The camerera mayor I take to 
be the first Lady of honor, her name is in the correspondence, 
but they did not tell it me because they did not know how to 
pronounce it. . . . To make up the deficiency I will take a 
ride westward tomorrow, and see if something cannot be 
extorted. I know how delicate a matter it is and shall not be 
astonished if I return as I went. . . . Returned. I could 
not meet the name of the Camerera mayor, but am promised 
it shall be found for next post." 

On the 28th of February, nine days later, Sherburne reports 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


to Lingard that he has not found the name of the Camerera 
mayor, and on the i6th of April he writes : 

" The unfortunate absence of the commissioner of the 
archives, has put it out of my power to meet with the corre- 
spondence of Elizabeth's maid of honour, who communicated 
to Philip many particulars concerning her Mistress, & to which 
the commissioner was unable to direct me, at the distance to 
which he is removed. What I learned from him, in general, 
was, that the details placed Eliz : in the lowest place of dissolute- 
ness & infamy." 

That is the last time but one that this affair appears in 
Lingard's papers ; and there Lingard left it, except with the 
addition, as we have seen, of the name of the lady he deemed 
was referred to as " the first Lady of honor " of Elizabeth. 

The explanation becomes clear when we know that the 
gentleman to whom Sherburne refers as " the commissioner " 
of Simancas in charge of its archives, was that Don Tomas 
Gonzalez Carvajal who, in 1832, published the first collection 
ever made of the Simancas documents under the title " Memorias 
de la Real Academia de la Historia. " In a letter from Valladolid 
dated the 26th of November, 1833, ten years after Lingard's 
first edition had appeared, Mr. Cameron writes : 

" I am as anxious, as he (Lingard) can be, to discover the 
practices of Elizabeth, por el mucho amor que la, for she was, 

as the Irishman said, the most d d b that ever p ; 

but as Dr. Tomas no longer presides over the department I 
was obliged to request of a friend to introduce me to his suc- 
cessor . . . could discover no trace of the letters, which con- 
firms me in the opinion emitted in my last." 

On the back of this letter, which Sherburne is transmitting 
from Cameron to Lingard, Sherburne adds : 

" When I visited Simancas I recollect Dr. Tomas saying : 
' that bundle has furnished my materials,' pointing to the papers 
on a particular shelf" — and the important fact for us is that 
Carvajal makes no reference in his volume to the " Camerera 
mayor," nor is she mentioned by any scholar who was ever at 
Simancas before or since Sherhume ; nor is any correspondence 
or trace of her to be found in the official publication of the Spanish 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Government containing the Simancas documents issued half a 
century later. 

We must offer our version of what took place. We believe 
that there was an effort of some person or persons to get 
Lingard to insert charges in his book for which there was no 
true authority, and that the attempt, to a limited extent, was 
successful. We do not think that the onus of this should be 
longer borne by Lingard alone. 

The other seven Charges may be very shortly disposed of. 

2. Charge 3. — Lingard's effort to connect the Queen's 1 561 
swelling (from a recurrence of the dropsy which had afflicted 
her for so many years) with the story that Elizabeth lived 
with Dudley and had a child by him, Arthur Dudley, who 
appeared in Spain at Philip's court twenty-seven years later. 

Two years after Lingard first publishes, he is still endeavour- 
ing to establish this point. In a letter from Sherburne at 
Valladolid, to Lingard, of the i6th of April, 1825, the former 
says : 

" The original English remitted to him (To Englefield by 
the so-called Arthur Dudley. — F. C.) by orders of the King, 
has not been found. ... I have to regret that I cannot dis- 
cover the age of the pretender in order to see if his birth 
corresponded with the time of the dropsy of Q : Elizabeth 
mentioned to Philip 2° by his ambassador Quadras." 

We who have the Medical Record of the Queen do not need 
to pursue this m3rth further. 

3. Charge 4. — " and it was afterwards believed that her 
licentious habits survived, even when the fires of wantonness 
had been quenched by the chill of age." — Lingard ; referring 
only for authority to Osborne, who was ten years of age 
when Elizabeth died. Osborne says : 

" (The duel between Essex and Blunt) grew from the stock 
of honour of which then they were very tender . . . and not 
her amorous caresses, which age and in a manner an universal 
distribution of them had by this time rendered tedious if not 
loathsome ; intimated in a most modest expression uttered 
in my hearing by Sir Walter Rawley . . . who said to this 
purpose. That Minions were not so happy as vulgar judgments 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


thought them, being frequently commanded to uncomely 
and sometimes unnaturall imployments." 

In no other part of Osborne's works is there anything that 
could be construed as a reflection upon Elizabeth. The 
phrase " amorous caresses," is susceptible of the meaning to 
which we in the nineteenth century began to Umit it, i.e. to 
sexual indulgence. It was not so Umited in the beginning of 
the sixteenth century ; and we know that men and women 
caressed in an innocent though loving manner in the time of the 
Great Queen. The manners of the period permitted men and 
women to kiss upon the most casual meeting and acquaintance, 
almost as we now shake hands ; and they were often described 
then as " amorous caresses." But even more convincing is 
our knowledge that Osborne did not consider that there was 
proof that Elizabeth was guilty. The following excerpts from 
his writings make that clear : 

" Her sex did beare out many impertinences in her words 
and actions, as her making Latine speeches in the Universities* 
and professing her selfe in pubUque a Muse, then thought 
something too Theatrical for a virgine Prince, but especially 
in her Treatie relating to Marriage ; Towards which some 
thought her incapable by nature, others too prepense, as may 
be found in the black relations of the Jesuits, and some Spanish 
Pasquilers That pretend to be more learned in the Art of 
Inspection, then wise Henry the fourth their King, who in a 
joviall humour told a Scotish Marques, There were three things 
inscrutable to intelligence : i. Whether Maurice then Prince 
of Orange (who never fought battaille, as he said) was valiant 
in his person. 2. What Religion himself was of. 3. Whether 
Queene Elizabeth was a maid or no : which may render all 
reports dubious that come from meaner Men ; yet it may be 
true that the Ladies of her bed chamber denied to her body 
the ceremony of searching and imbalming, due to dead 
Monarchs : But that she had a Son bred in the State of Venice, 
and a Daughter I know not where or when, vtdth other strange 
tales that went on her, I neglect to insert, as better for a Romance, 
then to mingle with so much truth and integrity as I professe." 
— Osborne, Memoirs, 1658 ed. p. 60. 

Again, on p. 31, itfm, Osborne says : 

" Now because the generality of such as desired his (Essex's) 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


ruine might think that the favour his Mistress shewed him 
proceeded from a nearer familiarity then I have been informed 
it did, by such as reported her apter both in her selfe and others 
to kindle the flames of Love, than quench them, They placed 
Blunt ... in the ball of her eye." 

As to the remark of Osborne that there was : 

" a most modest expression uttered in my hearing by Sir 
Walter Rawley . . . who said to this purpose, That Minions 
were not so happy as vulgar judgments bought them, being 
frequently commanded to uncomely and sometimes unnaturall 
imployments : " 

it must be noted that there is nothing said by Ralegh — to give 
his own spelling of his name — ^which would indicate that he 
had the Queen in mind when he spoke as Osborne says he did ; 
that we now know that Ralegh's written word, even, was 
entirely worthless,* that he was exceedingly embittered against 
Elizabeth during the latter years of his life ; and that the chance 
of his saying exactly what Osborne reports at least forty years 
after the conversation occurred is very remote, as, indeed, 
is the likelihood that there ever was any such incident — and for 
this reason : That Osborne certainly could not recollect such 
an event, at any rate word for word, when he was ten years of 
age, as was the case when Ralegh began his fourteen years of 
imprisonment in the Tower. The only period during the 
remainder of his life when he was at liberty in England was 
between March, 1616, and June, 1617, when Osborne was 
between thirteen and fourteen. It should also be mentioned 
that this is the only instance (so far as we know) of any refer- 
ence to any such practices of the Queen as might be inferred 
from this language of Osborne's, even if one be convinced that 
it refers to the Queen. Even the Catholics could not bring 
themselves to duplicate this in anything that has come down 
to us. 

4. Charge 7. — " The last few days Lord Robert has come 
so much into favour that he does whatever he likes with affairs 

• Speaking of Ralegh's " Apology " for the actions which led to his 
execution, Gardiner says " to all who knew what the facts were it stamped 
him as a Uar convicted by his own admissions."— iii. p. T41. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and it is even said that her Majesty visits him in his chamber 
day and night." — Count de Feria, Philip's representative in 
London, in a letter to that monarch dated i8th April, 1559. 

De Feria was a very able man, and one of Elizabeth's most 
implacable foes. The following month he writes that she is 
" a woman who is the daughter of the devil." * At another 
defeat of his schemes he shouts, " She is possessed by the devil, 
who is dragging her to his own place." " That Medea," is 
another of his pleasant characterizations of her, and he swears 
that the devil may have his soul if that fiend will only dethrone 
her. Yet he cannot say that she and Dudley are guilty. He 
will go no further than to say that " it is even said that her 
Majesty visits him in his chamber day and night." It is not 
clear that he even implies immorality. He was not a man to 
hold his hand if he were desirous of striking a hard blow. 
Nobody could be more impetuous ; yet he makes no definite 
charge. His statement, however, calls attention to the fact 
that so personal a monarch as was Elizabeth would often, 
necessarily and properly, be alone with many men for many 
hours on end, night and day. The sceptre was never laid down 
with any assurance that it would not be seized again at any 
moment — and in times of great anxiety Elizabeth knew not 
night from day, nor did she allow more freedom to any of her 
immediate assistants. She made them rich, yes — but she 
demanded every ounce of their strength in return. England 
still pursues the same policy. She exacts ; but she gives. 

It must also be observed that the woman has never lived 
who can be long alone with any man in one apartment without 
becoming a target for scandal — ^yet every man and every woman 
knows how often it is unjustified. When success depended 
upon secrecy, Elizabeth had to exclude everybody except the 
one whom she had decided was most worthy of confidence. 
Half of her very household was probably composed of spies. 
Every foreign government had its paid followers in her palaces, 
some, no doubt, even in her very bedchamber. Elizabeth 
had her spies in every foreign palace. The system is in full 
vigour to-day. In addition, however, to these enemies, Eliza- 
beth was surrounded by more embittered opponents — ^by 
countrymen and countrywomen of her own, fanatically believing 
• The loth of /May, 1559, Ced. S. P., Simancas, vol. i. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


( that it was the will of God that she should be destroyed because 

she had rejected Rome. Mary Stuart had her adherents 

( among the highest officers of Elizabeth's palaces. The yery 

( high steward of Whitehall Palace itself was caught red-handed 

^ in the conspiracy that was to place Mary on England's throne 

( as soon as Elizabeth could be assassinated, with the connivance 

j of the Pope, who promised that heaven would not punish the 

) dastard deed. On the other hand, Elizabeth had a spy acting 

as the private secretary of Mary, and it was his testimony that 

made her execution inevitable. 

Yet those two women, who, by reason of their tasks and 
their dangers, had to see men in absolute seclusion, and be 
closeted alone with them for many hours, could not and did not 
escape accusation. No queen of any coimtry has ever escaped 
it or ever will do so — and the more prominent and exclusive 
she is, the less her opportunity of freedom from these loath- 
some charges. Her very prominence and seclusion are the 
most tempting bait for every vain being to pretend to intimacy 
with her, and to the possession of exclusive intelligence only 
to be known by those nearest her person. The temptation 
is too great for many. They strut their Uttle hour, provide 
the one interesting topic of the evening, enhance tremendously, 
as they believe, their own importance, and then disappear, 
leaving only muddy footsteps to show that they ever passed 
across the stage ; and yet the disfigurement may endure for 
centuries ! A woman's purity is never an interesting subject 
in a London drawing-room ; but the guest who has a new 
scandal to retail will leap at a bound into the most prominent 
place among the company. 

5. Charge 12. — The Spanish Ambassador de Silva writes, 
that while he was endeavouring to persuade Elizabeth to a 
marriage with the Austrian Archduke, a project fought fiercely 
by the French Ambassador as antagonistic to France, the latter 
" swore to me . . . that he had been assured by a person who 
was in a position to know that he (Leicester. — F. C.) had passed 
New Year's night with the Queen." 

The words immediately following the above seem to us a 
complete response, in the absence of any further reference to 
this particular incident in any other contemporary document 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


— ^"The author" (De Silva continues), "however, is a 
Frenchman, and so strongly adverse to the Archduke's marriage, 
that he cannot conceal it." It is plain that de Silva believes 
that the report was only an effort to induce the Archduke to 
believe Elizabeth in carnal relations with Dudley, in the hope 
that he would refuse to marry her on that account. 

6. Charge 19. — ^The accusation is contained in a r6sum6 of 
four letters from a Spanish agent in London to Madrid. The 
letters themselves are not to be found. They are given as of 
the date of December, 1574, and January, 1575. The Charge 
is that Mary Stuart has been ordered to the Tower, and that 
her son and she are to be murdered. When this had been 
done : 

" They would then raise to power (Presumably to the 
Throne of Scotland. — F. C), the son of tiie earl of Hertford 
whom they would marry to a daughter of Leicester and the 
queen of England, who it is said, is kept hidden, although 
there are bishops to witness that she is legitimate. They think 
this will shut the door to all other claimants. This intrigue 
is said to be arranged very secretly." 

Mary Stuart was not ordered to the Tower, and nobody 
except this Spaniard has ever known of the plot of the English 
Government to assassinate her and her son. Such a scheme 
was exactly the opposite of Elizabeth's true plan, which was to 
keep Mary in confinement, and maintain James on his throne 
until her own death, when he would succeed to the two king- 
doms, and so make Great Britain, the goal of Elizabeth^s 

The resum6 dares go no further than to say that " it is said " 
there is this daughter of Elizabeth " who, it is said " again, 
" is kept hidden, although there are bishops to witness that she 
is legitimate." Certainly this Spaniard is not very sure of the 
worth of his report ; and what does he mean by the last phrase 
" there are bishops to witness that she is legitimate " ? Are the 
bishops perjurers, or are Elizabeth and Leicester married ? 
One or l^e other is necessarily inferred, and there is nothing 
to tell us which. 

There is nothing known in confirmation of this tale, and we 
cannot give it serious weight. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


7. Charge 20. — ^The Bishop of Padua, Papal nuncio in 
Spain, writes from Madrid to the Cardinal of Como, who was 
then handling the foreign affairs of the Vatican : 

" I am assured that he (The English Ambassador at Madrid. 
— F. C.) has let it be known that the pretended Queen (Eliza- 
beth. — F. C.) has a daughter thirteen years of age, and that she 
would bestow her in marriage on some one acceptable to his 
Catholic Majesty. I have heard talk before of this daughter, 
but the English here say that they know nought of such a 
matter," • 

The Vatican answers this letter on the following month 
with this observation : 

" Were it true that the pretended Queen had a daughter, 
his Holiness deems that it would enable his Majesty (Philip II. 
of Spain. — F. C.) to dispense with war, which of its own nature 
is so hazardous, and think of some accord by way of a marriage, 
which in the end might bring the realm back to the Catholic 
faith." — Ptolemy GaUi, Card, of Como, to Ormanetto, Bishop 
of Padua, Nuncio in Spain, Rome, 29th January, iS76.-|- 

So the English Ambassador at Madrid was spreading about 
the report that his sovereign*' had an illegitimate daughter, 
whom she would marry to a Catholic chosen by the King of 
Spain ; the idea being, of course, that the couple would 
succeed to the throne of England upon Elizabeth's demise ! 
The Pope sees that if there were only some foimdation — i.e. 
some daughter — ^for the scheme, it would be far better to take 
advantage of it than to promote so dangerous a plan as a war 
upon Elizabeth in order to effect the very thing that the English 
Queen was willing to bring about by peaceful methods. But 
the Vatican never wrote further about the policy. That is 
the end of it so far as history is concerned. 

It appears to us that this is, clearly, an instance where 
Elizabeth deliberately slanders herself in a foreign country, 
the country most relentless among her enemies, who would 
pass the record down to all posterity. 

It is unreasonable to suppose that the Queen's own Ambas- 
sador was slandering his mistress except with the knowledge and 
by the command of Elizabeth herself. By some error of 

* Vat, Arch. Nunt. di Spagna, vol. viii. fol. 6oi. 
t /*«. vol. ix. fol. 81. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


judgment she might, it may be thought, have sent an enemy to 
Madrid as her representative — ^but if she did, we may be sure 
that he would not have remained there an hour after she learned 
of his slandering her in earnest ; and all will admit that she 
would have learned of it. It might even be supposed that he 
gave the information in confidence, were it not that he is 
proposing a scheme of action for uniting the two countries 
(even then on the brink of war), and for the further fact that 
the other English people of Madrid were asked about it. 
There could be no secret of that character under such circum- 
stances. It is undoubtedly, we contend, a deliberate attempt 
of Elizabeth to deceive Philip and the Pope into making peace, 
and so averting that life and death struggle which was to break 
upon England and Spain within the next decade. We see the 
attitude of the Pope toward the acute plan of the English 
Ambassador. He was plainly in favour of it. Can we doubt 
that Philip, by far the more cautious of the two men, would 
have eagerly accepted the scheme if there had been any sub- 
stance in it ? Why, then, did neither try to push it through ? 
The answer must be that the daughter could not be found. 

We regard this occurrence as one of the most signal evi- 
dences of that immeasurable love Elizabeth had for her country. 
No greater sacrifice could be asked of any human being than of 
a good woman deliberately to fill literally the whole world, not 
only for the moment but — as she well knew — certainly for all 
posterity, with stories of her own immorality in order to help 
her people. 

Yet Elizabeth, according to the most informed opinion, 
did this very thing for a second time when she sent the so-called 
Arthur Dudley to Spain to pose before Philip as her son. In 
that case — vide postea 3. Charge 6, and Appendix, note 5 — 
Philip's chief authority on English affairs twice asserted that 
he believed Elizabeth originated the tale. 

Elizabeth did it a third time when she sent an agent into 
Sweden at an occasion which suited her to make the king of 
that country, who had tried to marry her, believe she was not 
a good woman, for he had become a nuisance to her. 

The main facts are contained in the following : 

" The King of Sweden, angry that Lord Robert (Leicester. 
— F. C.) has always had a double spy both on hia ambassador 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


here and latterly upon hinaself in Sweden who was always 
frustrating the coming of the King hither and his marriage 
(To Elizabeth. — F. C), has now sent to the Queen all the letters 
this spy wrote, containing much evil about her. The King 
asks, since this spy has impugned her honour, that he shall be 
punished or else that he shall be sent to Sweden for the King 
to punish, or otherwise he cannot avoid thinking that the Queen 
has been a consenting party to the trick that has been played 
upon him. The man was advised of what the King wrote, and 
fled to Antwerp, but I know that before he went he secretly 
took leave of the Queen and went with her good graces. I 
fear he is up to no better work in Antwerp." * 

This time, as in Spain, an acute monarch saw through the 
ruse and was able exactly to weigh the slander — ^which is more 
than can be said of many, for not only are we the first to mention 
the Swedish instance but the other two occasions as well. 
Yet these are among the most informing things Elizabeth ever 
did, when we try to read her real self. 

8. Charge 23. — The Spanish ambassador in London reports 
to Philip II. that the French Ambassador had recently said to 
Elizabeth that " it was said that he (Alengon. — F. C.) had had 
illicit relations with her," and " that she might well do so 
(Disregard the rumour. — F. C.) in her own country, but not 
elsewhere, where it had been publicly stated." 1582. 

Here we have more diplomacy. It was at a time, April, 
1582, when Elizabeth wished to renew the proposals that the 
French prince had laid at her feet in his own person, only 
three months before. Her game was to make the King of 
France so sure of her marriage with Alen^on, his brother, that 
that monarch would not join a proposed coalition of nations 
against her. Castelnau de Mauvissi^re, the French Ambassador, 
received Elizabeth's proposals, and apparently informed the 
Spanish enemy that he told the Queen that she had forgotten 
to enumerate among her reasons for marrying Alen9on " one 
which was of more importance than any, namely, that it was 
said that he (AJengon. — F. C.) had had illicit relations with her." 
Mauvissi^re's exact purpose in saying this to Spain we cannot 
certainly decide — but, as we shall see, Mauvissi^re did not 

• De Quadra to the King of Spain, from London, 7th Feb., 1563, C^SJ'., 
Simancas, toI. i. 1558-1567, p. 399, No. 211. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


believe that such illicit relations had occurred. We have his 
words exactly to this effect ; but we must here leave the reader 
with this assurance, as the evidence is dealt with in another 

In addition to this knowledge of the ambassador's belief 
that Elizabeth was innocent, we are quite justified in dismissing 
this particular charge, because Mauvissi^re himself, even 
according to Elizabeth's bitterest enemy, Mendoza, did no 
more than assert that it was said that immoral relations had 

g. Charge 24. — ^Anthony Bagot's letter to his father to the 
effect that " when she (Elizabe^. — F. C.) is abroad nobody 
is near her but my Lord of Essex, and at night my Lord is at 
cards, or at one game or another with her, that he cometh not 
to his own lodging till bird sing in the morning." Date 
uncertain, given by some as 1581, by others as 1587. In the 
former year, the Queen was forty-seven ; in 1587 she was 

We have already referred to the danger of accepting mere 
opportunity to commit wrongdoing as any proof of it. Essex 
was one of her closest advisers, although thirty-four years her 
junior. He was like a son to her, and her attitude toward him 
was ever that of a loving, anxious mother to a kinsman, grand- 
son of one of her dearest friends. She encouraged and chided 
him, as seemed best for his headstrong character ; but he got 
out of hand at last, and, having completely lost his sense of 
proportion, rebelled against the hand that had fed him, and 
ended a stormy but brilliant career on the block when only 
thirty-four years of age. 

10. Charge 26. — a. " It is said that there is an entry in a 
. . . MS. ... at the Free School at Shrewsbury, as to an 
illegitimate son of the Queen by Dudley having been educated 
there. . . . (That) entry . . . runs • Henry Roido Dudley Luther 
Plantagenet, filius Q. E. reg. et Robt. comitis Leicestr.' . . . The 
MS. in question was the parish church book, and the entry 
is supposed to be in the handwriting of Sir John Dychar, who 
was then Vicar of Shrewsbury." 

The above extract is from Mr. Walter Rye, and for his 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


authority he quotes from the Antiquary, of the 24th of May, 
1873, p. 250. 

It is most unfortunate for Mr. Rye that he did not consult 
the same publication two weeks later for an answer to the 
inquiry for information which appeared in the number he 
mentions, for he would not then have offered this matter as a 
proof of the Queen's immorality. 

The Antiquary for the 7th of June, 1873, p. 283, has this 
comment : 

" The ' Maiden Queen's ' Son— The MS. in which the 
entry mentioned is found is thus referred to in the list of Bene- 
factions : — ' 1606. John Dicher, Clerk, Vicar of Shabury, in 
the county of Salop his gifte, Biblia Latina manuscripta in 
folio.' On the third p. of this book, on the margin, is scribbled 
the entry quoted by your correspondent. This appears to have 
been written merely as a piece of passing scandal in the book, 
just as we see many things scribbled in modern books, and 
also in this one in other places. It is erased by a hand in a 
later ink which is faded. There is nothing official in this 
entry as your correspondent denotes, and the book is not the 
parish book in the ordinary sense of the word. The hand- 
writing is not that of John Dicher, Vicar of Shabury, as his 
name appears on the first p., ' Johannis Dycher verus huius 
libri possessor ; ' consequently there is here nothing authori- 
tative ; and besides that, there is no entry or mention of such 
a person. 

"H.W. M."» 

This note expresses the facts, but not all of them. Not 
one book alone at The Schools contains an entry of this cha- 
racter, but eleven printed works, besides the Dicher MS. All 
of these entries are in the same hand, and all have been wholly 
or partly erased, usually with ink, in one case with a knife, 
in another by cutting out altogether. The writer of these 
eleven notes has a hand differing from that of the different 
owners or inscribers of the volumes. Not one of the volumes 
is of any official character. No two of the notes agree in word- 
ing. It is evident that some schoolboy spent an exceedingly 

• J. B. Oldham, Esq., MA., present Librarian of The Schools, Shrews- 
bury, iiaforms us tiiat H. W. M. who signs this comment " is obviously 
Mr. Moss, die late Headmaster. Mr. Oldham adds, " No one here, as far 
as I can find out, has ever heard of the alleged tradition that the mythical 
boy was at school here." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


idle hour at some unknown period among the books of the 
Library of The Schools. 

b. "Gonzales . . . says ' there was now a rumour that 
from Richmond Elizabeth went to Werwich. . . . Some 
said it was to rid herself of the result of an indiscretion.' " — 
nth April, 1564. 

This is also brought forward in the indictment by Mr. Rye. 
It seems to us that it is important that attention be called to the 
fact that the latter sentence in the above quotation is not 
exactly given. The period given at its close should be a semi- 
colon, and additions, for they exist in the original, should be 
made until the sentence reads : 

" Some said it was to rid herself of the result of an indiscre- 
tion ; others, that it related to the marriage of the Queen of 

To our mind, that completely alters the weight of the accusa- 
tion. It at once recedes into a most unlikely rumour. Had 
the Spanish Ambassador deemed it as founded, would he have 
left it in this fashion ? 

We believe there vidll be general agreement that the eighteen 
Charges we have now examined contain nothing that should 
convict Elizabeth of immorality, or are even worthy of serious 

Of the remaining eight Charges, however, the same cannot 
be said. At first sight, they constitute, to the average reader, 
a formidable indictment, as does every ex parte case until it 
be met by rigid cross-examination. One Charge in particular 
is likely at one reading to convince the student that Elizabeth 
was guilty. It has probably done 'that already. We refer to 
the Dyer-Hatton letter. Charge 17. It certainly made that 
impression upon us, and, in itself, with no explanation or 
counterbalancing testimony, would probably convict Elizabeth 
before the jury of mankind ; yet it is practically unknown to 
the world at large. It has appeared in none of the lives of the 
Queen, nor in any general history of her times. We shall 
soon consider it in all its bearings. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


We shall now examine these eight Charges which we have 
said to be serious : 

I. Charge i. — Lingard's statement that " Quadra ... the 
Spanish ambassador, . . . informs the king that according 
to common belief, the Queen lived with Dudley ; " that she 
showed Quadra the situation of her rooms to isprove the 
rumour, but later " under the pretext that Dudley's apartment 
in the lower story of the palace was unwholesome, ... re- 
moved him to another, contiguous to her own chamber. The 
original despatches are at Simancas." 

As we are already aware, there is no document at Simancas 
to the effect that Quadra told the King of Spain, or anybody 
else, that " according to common belief, the Queen lived with 
Dudley, and, in proof of its improbability, shewed him the 
situation of her room and bed-chamber." 

Were this all, however, we could safely put the accusation 
aside ; but, as already indicated, the librarian of Simancas 
published in 1832 a resumd of the papers under his charge, and 
in that volume he makes a statement substantially on all fours 
with that of Lingard. To be sure, Carvajal does not say that 
" according to common belief the Queen lived with Dudley," 
as Lingard says the Spanish author writes ; Carvajal says 
quite another thing. I.e. " the rumours . . . became so prevalent 
that she now indulged in illicit relations with Leicester." Lingard 
asserts that Quadra reported that the common opinion was that 
she lived with Dudley. Carvajal actually says that the report 
became so common that she took measures to show him that it was 
not true. 

The variation between the phrase " lived with " and 
" indulged in illicit relations with," is not important for us. 
The only thing of moment is that there is no such document at 
Simancas, although Lingard and Carvajal say that there is, or 
was. As for Lingard, we know where he secured his information. 
We have read the original letter which conveyed it to him. It is 
dated from Valladolid, the 28th of February, 1823, and is from 
Sherburne to Lingard. When we turn to Carvajal, however, 
we are confronted with a different state of affairs. Would 
he, the librarian of Simancas, and that at a time when he had 
retired, or was about to retire, from that institution — he left it 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


in the year when his book was published, 183a — ^have prevari- 
cated upon so controversial a point, knowing that he was giving 
to the world a new accusation against the woman most hated 
by his people ? 

We cannot believe him guilty. We are of opinion that there 
was some document at Simancas which was a substantial 
foundation for the epitome given by Carvajal. But it must 
be insisted upon that Carvajal does not give quotations in his 
work. The volume is a collection of his general reports of 
documents which he says he found at Simancas — and his 
compression of the originals is extreme. For example, he 
covers the documents of 1561, the year of those we are consider- 
ing, in five pages, while it takes eight times as many to give 
them entire — so far as we have them. A still greater number 
are available, while the later official Spanish calendar of them 
occupies 60 pages. In other words, until and unless — and 
we have searched in vain for it at Simancas — ^this missing 
despatch appears we shall not know what de Quadra wrote. 

Yet we prefer to meet the charge as it stands. It has been 
spread broadcast as if it were sacrosanct, and has been so 
accepted ; and what does it amount to ? — ^merely that it was 
commonly reported about London that the Queen and Robert 
were too intimate. Does the ambassador believe it ? There 
is not a word to indicate as much ; and had he considered it 
even probable, he could have had no more important message 
to transmit. 

It was the one thing that the Catholics needed to weigh 
the scales down on their side. The fanatical Protestants of 
those days would never have supported a guilty Queen. Mary 
Stuart lost her throne and her most powerful supporter, the 
Pope, when, in disgust at her intrigue with Bothwell, he threw 
up his hands, and despairingly said that " as regards this 
particular question of the Queen of Scotland, it is his intention 
to have no further relations with her, unless by and by he 
shall discover in her some sign of improvement in life and 
religion upon what he has observed in the past." * 

The man who had illicit relations with Elizabeth was the 
person who had to be dealt with by foreign Powers — not the 

• Card. Alessandrino to Vincent Lauri, Bishop of Mondovi, NunciQ 
for Scotland, from Rome, 2nd July, 1567. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


woman. She had surrendered to him. He was the master 
of England, not she ; and that is exactly, we submit, why 
no ambassador can be found to say flatly that Elisabeth was 
immoral — and it is why de Quadra does not say it in this despatch. 
Neither he nor any one of his colleagues was going to say that 
Elizabeth was immoral, unless he knew it to be true — and as he 
never knew it, so he never reported it. He would not have occu- 
pied his position for a single day after making an erroneous report 
to that effect. He was willing at any time to send anything that 
" he said," or " she said," or " they said," — but that was very 
different from what de Quadra himself had to say. 

He very well knew that a good-looking young man of the 
Queen's age, whom she had rapidly promoted to the highest 
places in her gift, displacing scores of other candidates for 
each honour, could not escape the charge that he was succeeding 
by means of an illicit hold over her. In no kingdom on earth 
could such a thing occur without similar charges — and it is not 
the slightest proof of the guilt of either accused. 

The second part of this Charge remains to be examined, 
that which states that Elizabeth " under the pretext that 
Dudley's apartment in the lower story of the palace was un- 
wholesome, . . . removed him to another, contiguous to her 
own chamber." We have already pointed out that the official 
Spanish document says nothing about any " pretext." Lingard 
receives this from his Valladolid friends — and once more 
Carvajal agrees with him. Yet in this instance both are wrong. 
So both Lingard and Carvajal have imported into the original 
an element of suspicion which that report never contained. 

As to the change of his apartments, we have already seen 
that there were proper, imperative reasons why the Great 
Queen should insist that her most trusted friends should occupy 
apartments as close as possible to her own. We may be sure 
that from time immemorial, no unmarried woman-monarch 
of England — even for one night — ^had ever occupied a sleeping 
apartment without one or more lady companions. 

Well might Elizabeth, when the candid friend told her of 
the gossip about her, say : 

"There is a strong idea in the world that a woman cannot 
live unless she is married, or at all events if she refrain from 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


marriage, she does so from some bad reason, as they said of 
me that I did not marry because I was fond of the Earl of 
Leicester, and that I would not marry him because he had a 
wife already. Although he has no mfe alive now, I still do 
not marry. . . ." 

That throws a light upon Elizabeth's dilemma. She was 
helpless. In no way could she escape accusations of immoral 
relations — even with Burghley ! — ^and it should be recalled that 
the country was filled with men who would have deemed it 
the thing in their world to be thought paramours of the Queen. 

2. Charge 5. — Here we have the Scandal Letter imputed 
to Mary Queen of Scots, of which Lingard says " almost 
every statement in it has been confirmed by other documents," 
He thus leaves us to infer that he believes the document and its 
charges to be authentic, although he will not commit himself 
in so many words. Our own opinion is that he did not so 
believe, but hoped that his readers would do so, and believed that 
they would from the manner in which he left his observations. 

The first remark to be made is, that if this letter is genuine — 
and all we know about its history is that it was found at Hatfield 
among Burghley's papers, endorsed in a hand ascribed by the 
Public Record Ofiice to Burghley's son, Robert Cecil, with 
this single word " readde," — it is of the first importance to 
our inquiry. 

As to the handwriting, it is either that of Mary, or so good 
a forgery that nothing except external evidence will indicate 
the writer ; but, in any event, we do not deem the handwriting 
of much importance, because the counterfeiting of it was easily 
to be done. Anybody with any sense of line could produce a 
copy of the Scandal Letter, which, in the absence of the original, 
would be taken as in the handwriting of the Scottish Queen. 
The deception is made easier still by very rough paper, and an 
uncertain instrument. LabanofF, a very great authority upon 
anything attached to Mary Stuart, says that he examined the 
original at Hatfield and is convinced that it is authentic. If 
it be so, it is the most remarkable letter ever penned by Mary ; 
and, what is more, it is in two particulars diflferent from her 
other productions, i.e. There is no address to open it, and there 
is no formal conclusion — features which we believe to be 

Digitized by Microsoft® 












Digitized by Microsoft® 


unique, either separately or combined, in any letter left to us 
in Mary's hand. We have examined the 145 letters written 
by Mary to Elizabeth, and believe that this is the only one of 
them not opened and closed in the manner indicated. Nor can 
we discover any other letter to anybody whomsoever, begun or 
ended with this lack of formality, among the other 591 known 
letters of Mary. We cannot, moreover, fail to be impressed 
by the fact that Prince Labanoff must have been cognizant of 
these omissions, although he says nothing to this effect ; for, 
as we have already noted, he supplies the address of " Madam." 
Why he should do such a thing, and not mention it, can only 
be conjectured. 

Furthermore, there is the fact that no other undisputed 
letter of Mary's contains anything approaching scandal. The 
style is different from any other of Mary's letters. She was 
a most accomplished and elegant writer of French. Much of 
this letter is in very poor and even uncertain French. The 
paper upon which it appears is not of the kind she used in any 
other letter at Hatfield. This cannot be accepted as a proven 
letter of Mary Stuart. Yet we must consider it with some 
care, for it may be hers. We first deal with Lingard's assertion 
that " almost every statement in it has been confirmed by other 
documents." To say that " almost every statement " in a 
letter containing hundreds of them " is confirmed by other 
documents," is a very shrewd method of attack, because there 
is no way of meeting it except by an exhaustive examination 
of each one — and that is impossible. Lingard has further 
protected himself by refraining to indicate any of the 
" other documents " by which, he says, " almost every 
statement in it has been confirmed." Thus, there is no 
means of pinning Lingard down to anything, except his general 

As to that, he is in the greatest difficulty, because his 
authority, Mary Stuart, expressly states in the opening sentence 
of the letter that " the greater part " of its charges " / did not 
at all believe, knowing the disposition of the Countess and by what 
spirit she was then urged on against you." Nor is this all. 
There is the omnibus denial of all the charges of the MS., as 
the reader will have noted, contained in its last lines, i.e. — " I 
swear to you once more on my faith and honour that . . . what 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


concerns your honour . . . vnll never be knovm through me 
holding it as quite false" 

In the face of these two denials of the slanders, Lingard's 
contention is plainly untenable. He is in the position of 
the prosecuting attorney wanting to use testimony of one of 
his witnesses, who expressly repudiates it. There are only 
three ways of surmounting this difficulty — ^to prove the man 
incapable of realizing that he has repudiated most of the charges ; 
to prove that he has poor judgment as to the value of evidence, 
or to prove that he is a liar. As the prosecutor has no evidence 
to submit except that of this witness, his position is not enviable. 
Either course is fatal to the credibility of the witness, and the 
case must fail. 

In this instance, if we admit Mary as author, the verdict 
against the prosecution is doubly certain — ^for Mary Stuart 
knew if anybody knew, whether or not Elizabeth was immoral. 
So did her spies at Whitehall, and all the other palaces. Practi- 
cally one in every two Englishmen was then a Catholic — ^and no 
other living person had so great a stake as Mary Stuart depend- 
ent upon proving the guilt of her great rival. With proof in 
her hands, Mary would possibly have unseated Elizabeth. 
Every Catholic was for Mary. The great majority of the 
Protestants would not have supported a dissolute woman as 
their ruler. There were as many John Knox-like fanatics in 
England as in Scotland. It was they who drove out Mary, and 
they drove her out because her moral guilt was too plain to be 
denied. Their English prototypes might have done the same 
thing to their queen had her moral guilt been too plain to be 
denied. As it was not too plain to be denied, she died The 
Queen. As we have said, the contest between these cousins 
was, in its essence, one of character alone — ^and she who, in 
the judgment of the majority of her people, retained it, defeated 
her who, in the judgment of the majority of her people, lost it. 

There is also to be considered the authority quoted by 
the author of the letter — the sole authority, the Countess of 
Shrewsbury. Had her name been spelt only with its first 
five letters, the description would be unimpeachable. She 
has come down to us across the centuries as one of the very 
worst of viragos. We have her own testimony that she was a 
liar and a slanderer, for, after spreading abroad all over England 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


that her husband had been intimate with his prisoner Mary 
Stuart, the termagant at a later period retracted the charge under 
oath. She intrigued first with Elizabeth, and then with Mary, 
one against the other. Neither her contemporaries nor posterity 
has a good word for her. 

She employed every and any weapon to gain her ends, and 
no better example of the unscrupulous woman can be discovered. 
When she was sought in marriage by Shrewsbury, the greatest 
and richest subject of the realm, she, who had already been a 
widow three times, and had succeeded in spite of issue in 
inheriting every shilling possessed by each husband, now made 
the most extraordinary bargain in the history of marital settle- 
ments. She would not marry until she saw her youngest 
daughter married to Shrewsbury's second son, and his daughter 
married to her eldest son — ^and all of them were in their teens ! 
The story is capped by the fact that she survived the fourth 
spouse, and got all his money as well. 

Thrown into the Tower by Elizabeth for conspiring with 
Mary, the Countess never forgave the English monarch. 
During the remainder of her life, which extended a generation 
beyond that of the Queen, she seemed to have no other object 
than to injure her memory, and that of her own husband, who 
had always stood in the very front rank of those most trusted 
by Elizabeth. Her animus was so strong that it defeated her 
own purpose, as the testimony of the Scandal Letter discovers. 
Even Mary Stuart, desirous as she must have been to find the 
accusations true, could not believe them. Had Mary Stuart 
believed in these or in any other stories to the same effect, 
she would have informed the Pope, Philip 11. , and the Catholic 
monarchs of France. There is not, however, and never has been, 
so far as anybody is able to determine, the slightest evidence that 
Mary ever did anything of the sort ; and once again we repeat 
that Mary Stuart KNEW. 

The matter, then, comes to this — ^that Lingard believes 
the charges, and Mary Stuart does not, for she says so twice, 
in so many words. Such is the real position of Lingard ; 
and it is needless to pursue his case further, except to reiterate 
that there are no documents proving these charges. Had 
there been, he would have quoted them, instead of employing 
such general statements as " The woman who despises the 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


safeguards, must be content to forfeit the reputation, of 

So far, then, as documents are concerned, we may dismiss 
the charges. If the letter be one of Mary Stuart's, she dismisses 
them. If the letter be not by Mary Stuart, it dismisses itself. 
The reader is left to his choice. 

3. Charge 6. — ^The supposed son of Elizabeth called Arthur 
Dudley. The complete record of all known documents dealing 
with this alleged offspring is in the Appendix, note 5. 

From the perusal of these documents we note the resem- 
blance of the tale to one of the oldest in legendary lore. The 
facts that the hero stole from his protector, that he was willing 
to write a book " to any effect that might be considered desir- 
able " by his Spanish friends, if they would only support 
him, and that he was " a very feigned Catholic," are, however, 
unique. The tale is, plainly, too much for the Spaniards, and 
their spy, or, rather, traitor. Sir Francis Englefield, Philip's 
English secretary— too much, we mean, for them, writing 
among themselves, to make a pretence of accepting it without 
closer investigation. The record of the young man according 
to his own story is as severe an indictment as could be drawn : 
he was a thief from his benefactor, whom he supposed to be his 
own father ; he was willing to sell his convictions for board 
and bed ; and he was willing to deny his religion before God 

Considering that no other document mentioning him is 
known, we might say that he was a mere adventurer trying to 
befool Philip II. with the most Hkely tale he could invent at 
the time — ^were it not that Englefield, a very acute man, says 
twice that he believes Elizabeth knows, and originates, the 
tale the young fellow tells. As to her designs in this, he cannot 
be certain — but that it is so he appears to be more convinced 
than of any other fact. 

Further discussion of this charge is unnecessary — especially 
as we shall later produce direct testimony that the Queen never 
had children. 

4. Charge 9. — The letter from the Spanish Ambassador in 
London to the Duchess of Parma, containing language which 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


to Englishmen might suggest actual " misconduct " — ^that is, 
as the word is now used in England, actual cohabitation— 
between Elizabeth and Dudley. 

De Quadra says that Cecil was in disgrace with the Queen 
and that Dudley was : 

" trying to turn him out of his place ... he clearly foresaw 
the ruin of the realm through Robert's intimacy with the 
Queen, who surrendered all affairs to him. ... He said he 
did not know how the country put up with it. . . . He ended 
by begging me in God's name to point out to the Queen the 
effect of her misconduct, and persuade her not to abandon 
business entirely but to look to her realm ; and then he repeated 
twice over to me that Lord Robert would be better in Paradise 
than here." 

That is the translation of the original document, with which 
the English-speaking public may be familiar, for it is that of 
the Calendar of State Papers, the official publication of the 
English Government, the sine qua. non of the average English 
historical writer. There are two things about this official 
translation which have conmionly misled EngUsh readers. 
We refer to the employment of the words " intimacy " and 
" misconduct." To the mind of the average EngUshman 
these two terms mean nothing except illicit relations between 
man and woman. In England these words can no more be 
restored to their true meanings than could the word " seduce," 
or the title " mistress." 

Examination of the original * of this Spanish letter discloses 
that the Spanish word translated as " intimacy " is privanca, 
which can properly only be translated as " intimacy " so long as 
illicit relations are KOf indicated in one of two ways, i.e. i, by 
specific, definite accompanying words ; or, 2, by the context. 
In other words, privanca means innocent relationship unless 
it is clear that the contrary is stated.-f- It is only in the secondary 

• Consult Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 26,056 a, log. 

t Privanza, sf. Favour, protection, fanuliar intercourse between a 
prince or great personage and a person of inferior rank. — Neumann and 
Baretti, revised by Seoane of the Univ. of Salamanca. 

Privanza, f. Favour, protection ; familiar intercourse between a prince 
or great personage and a person of inferior rank. — Cadena. 

Privanza, f. Favour, protection. — ^Jorba. 

/Vjvojiza, sf. Favour ; protection; intimacy. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


or tertiary use of the word that an immoral sense can be given 
to it. 

So it is with the original Spanish word upon which alone 
can be based the Calendar's translation " misconduct " — 
desdrdenes ; unless it be qualified by modification, or governed 
by context, no sense of the illicit or immoral can be given to it.* 

The true test, then, is the context, for there are no qualifying 
words attached to either expression. Is there anything in the 
balance of this despatch to alter these two words from their 
usual innocent meaning when used by an educated Spaniard, 
and impart to them their unusual guilty meaning ? 

First, let us see what the entire passage conveys when these 
disputable words are omitted. That should tell us what kind 
of relationship, what kind of conduct it is, that Cecil fears will 
ruin the realm, and that the people will not stand. 

" After this I had an opportunity of talking to Cecil, who, 
I understand, was in disgrace ; and Robert was trying to turn 
him out of his place. After exacting many pledges of strict 
secresy, he said that the Queen was conducting herself in such 
a way that he thought of retiring. He said it was a bad sailor 
who did not enter port if he could when he saw a storm coming 
on, and he clearly foresaw the ruin of the realm through Robert's 

with the Queen, who surrendered all affairs to him, and 

meant to marry him. He said he did not know how the country 
put up with it, and he should ask leave to go home, although he 
thought they would cast him into the Tower first. He ended 
by begging me in God's name to point out to the Queen the 

effect of her , and persuade her not to abandon business 

entirely but to look to her realm ; . . . " 

What warrant is there for leading us to suppose that de 
Quadra meant to suggest illicit relatiotts in those two blank 
spaces above ? If, however, it be done, the logic of the entire 
excerpt becomes incoherent and involved. Cecil is made to 

* Desordenes, m. i. Disorder, confusion, irregularity, misorder. 
2. Disorder, tumult, misrule, hurry. 3. Lawlessness, licence, excess, abuse. 
— Neumann and Baretti. 

Desordenes, m. i. Disorder, confusion, irregularity. 2. Lawlessness, 
licence, excess, abuse. 3. Lack of symmetry of connection, in which lyric 
poetry commonly offends ; in the phrase BeUo desorden. — Cadena. 

Desordenes, m. Disorder, confusion. 2. Tumult. — Jorba. 

Desordenes, sm. Disorder ; confusion ; excess ; abuse.— Meadows, of 
the Univ. of Paris. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


say that while it is the criminal intimacy that is ruining the 
country, what he wants most is, not that the criminal intimacy 
should stop, but only her handing over of the country's business 
to Robert. To our mind, such a reading is impossible for that 
reason alone — ^yet that is far less cogent than the complete 
absence, except in these two words, of anjrthing in the entire 
passage that clearly or even remotely denotes that criminal 
relations are its subject. 

We cannot, therefore, consider that the Calendar version 
is supportable — and how the difficulties disappear if, in the 
above two blanks we insert the usual and ordinary meaning of 
the Spanish words, i.e. for " intimacy," " great fanuliarity " : 
and for " misconduct," " bad policy " ! Then the letter becomes 
a logical entity, and not till then. 

We see in it then an attempt by Cecil to save his place, 
persuade the Spanish diplomat to see Elizabeth, and warn her 
not to entrust so much state business to Dudley, not to marry 
him and abandon business herself. There is a further reason 
for this contention, i,e. that from all we know of Burghley's 
references to these stories of Elizabeth's immorality — and he 
knew the truth — he always maintained, as we shall soon see, 
that she was entirely innocent. The only citation from 
Burghley to the contrary effect ever made by anybody is con- 
tained in the above misquotation and perversion of the original 
Spanish. Practically all of the Queen's detractors have used 
this de Quadra-Cecil report for the defamation of a woman 
whom Cecil, certainly, and de Quadra, probably, would have 

Froude reads nothing into the original letter of an illicit 
character ; and, what is more, his reading exhibits many other 
glaring faults in the Calendar work, not only of omission but 
of positive commission : 

" After my conversation with the Queen, I met the Secre- 
tary Cecil whom I knew to be in disgrace. Lord Robert I 
was aware was endeavouring to deprive him of his place. 

" With little difficulty I led him to the subject ; and, after 

* Vide Cambridge Modern History for a typical example of ho ir historians 
have been misled by this Calendar translation : " Cecil, it (the de Quadra 
letter) asserts, desired the ambassador to intervene and reduce his mistress 
to the path of virtue."— Vol. ii. p. 582. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


many protestations and entreaties that I would keep secret 
what he was about to tell me, he said that the Queen was going 
on so strangely that he was about to withdraw from her service. 
It was a bad sailor, he said, who did not make for port when 
he saw a storm coming ; and for himself he perceived the most 
manifest ruin impending over the Queen, through her inti- 
macy wdth Lord Robert. The Lord Robert had made himself 
master of the business of the State and of the person of the 
Queen, to the extreme injury of the realm, with the intention 
of marrying her ; and she herself was shutting herself up in 
the palace, to the peril of her health and life. That the realm 
would tolerate the marriage he said he did not believe ; he 
was therefore determined to retire into the country, although 
he supposed they would send him to the Tower before they 
would let him go. 

" He implored me for the love of God to remonstrate with 
the Queen ; to persuade her not utterly to throw herself away 
as she was doing, but to remember what she owed to herself 
and to her subjects." — Froude, vol. vii., 1863 ed., p. 278. 

5. Charge 16. — ^That the royal prince of France, Anjou, told 
Cadierine de Medici, his mother, that " he never wishes to 
marry her (Elizabeth. — F. C.) even if she wishes it ; so much 
has he heard against her honour, and seen of it in the letters 
of all the ambassadors who have been there, that he considers 
he would be dishonoured and lose all the reputation he thinks 
he had acquired." 

The date of the above is the 2nd of February, 1571, and the 
speaker is Catherine de Medici, writing to Fendon, French Am- 
bassador in London. Catherine, mother of the King, Charles IX., 
and of Anjou (afterward Henry III.) and Alen9on, his brothers, 
was the real ruler of France. Anjou was just twenty years of 
age when the marriage negotiations were opened by the French 
in the autumn of 1570. Elizabeth was his senior by seventeen 
years. Some six months afterward, on the 2nd of February, 
1 571, the prince made the above declaration to his mother, 
through his brother the King. At least, that is what she says 
took place, and we see no reason to doubt her statement ; 
although, of course, we have to reckon with the fact that this 
message or statement had already passed through the hands 
of Charles and his mother. So it is improbable that we have 
Anjou 's exact words. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


We are further handicapped by the loss of much of the 
correspondence of the various French ambassadors to London 
during the first decade of Elizabeth's reign. The first year's 
letters we have ; then there is an absolute blank of more than 
two years ; while the remaining seven years or so are woefully 
incomplete. For the succeeding seven years, however, 
November, 1568, to September, 1575, when Fendon served 
continuously, we have a complete record, which, it will be 
observed, begins two years before the Anjou proposals were 
initiated. In none of the Fenelon correspondence is there 
anything from him reflecting upon Elizabeth's honour. In 
none of that of his predecessors, so far as we have it, is there 

We shall never know what the missing despatches contained 
that served as basis for the decision of Anjou. He does not 
state that anybody ever said she was guilty — ^he says that he has 
heard so much " against her honour, and seen of it in the letters 
of all the ambassadors who have been there that he considers 
he would be dishonoured " should he marry her. That is a 
very different thing. There are many men who will not 
marry a woman because she has been talked about, even if they 
believe she is innocent, as did Anjou in the case of Elizabeth. 

Upon the 22nd of March, 1572, thirteen months after the 
prince had declared he would never marry Elizabeth on account 
of what he had read about her honour, Catherine had a talk 
with Walsingham and Smith in her garden at Blois concerning 
this decision of her son. Under Charge 16 ante, we cited this 
much of what she then said : 

" I bare him (Anjou. — F. C.) in hand (for it grieved me not 
a little, and the King, my Son, as you know) that of all evil 
rumours and tales of naughty persons, such as would break 
the matter, and were spread abroad of the Queen, that those 
he did believe, and that made him so backward." • 

This is quite good evidence that neither the King of France, 
nor his mother, the great Catherine, believed the tales appar- 
ently reported by the various ambassadors to Elizabeth's Court. 
This conclusion may seem rash ; but it is supported by the 
concluding clauses of Catherine's sentence : 

• Fenelon, Corresp, Dip., torn, 7, p. 183, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


" and I told him it is all the hurt that evil men can do to noble 
women and princes, to spread abroad Ues and dishonourable 
tales of them ; and that we of all princes that be women are 
subject to be slandered wrongfully of them that be our adver- 
saries. Other hurt they cannot do us. He said and swore to 
me he gave no credit to them. He knew that she had so virtu- 
ously governed her realm this long time, that she must needs 
be a good and virtuous princess, and full of honour ; and other 
opinion of her he could not have, but that his conscience and 
his religion did trouble him, and nothing else." 

We carmot leam what had altered Anjou's decision not to 
marry Elizabeth because of the things said about her — ^we only 
know that in the year between his two declarations alter it he 
did. Nor is the matter important. The thing of moment for 
us is that " he said and swore," and his mother flatly said 
that neither of them believed Elizabeth iiQmoral. These 
statements, from these sources, decided and direct as they are, 
are of very great weight. 

6. Charge 17. — ^The Dyer-Hatton letter. We now come to 
the consideration of that which, when read oiJy once — after 
the usual manner of the great majority of readers — consti- 
tutes the strongest known piece of evidence against Elizabeth ; 
and this in spite of the fact that we have nothing to prove 
its authenticity. It is not an original. Most authorities would 
probably discard it because all testimony is lacking as to its 
authorship. That is the view of so great an authority as the 
editor of Notes and Queries, wherein he says that what we 
call The Dyer-Hatton Letter was " extracted from the Hatl. 
MSS. . . . being a collection of transcripts of many letters and 
papers said to have been found in the study of Mr. Dell, secre- 
tary to Archbishop Laud ; its authenticity, therefore, may be 
fairly questioned." * That, to be sure, is not a pedigree of very 
good quality, for the most telling bit of evidence extant against 
Elizabeth — but we are unable to better it, although we have 
left no stone unturned. 

A perfectly fair epitome of the attendant facts, and of the 
letter itself, would appear to be as follows : 

Dyer was the son of a country knight, a courtier by profession . 
Apparently bom about seven years later than his sovereign, 
* Notes and Queriet, vol. vii. and Ser., p. 283, number of and April, 1859. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


he spent some time at Oxford, but did not obtain a degree. 
He then spent several years on the Continent, appearing at 
Court for the first time about 1566, when some twenty-five years 
of age. Burghley and Leicester were his patrons, and he appears, 
as his letters show, to have been entirely dependent upon them 
for any advancement.* He was a respectable poet, and a 
close friend of Philip Sidney, the one Englishman who seems 
to have been accepted as the embodiment of all that a man 
should be. Half of Sidney's books were left in his will to 
Dyer. Dyer was sent on numerous minor diplomatic errands, 
and, from all accounts, we may consider him a gentleman of 
good character. His possibilities appear in the following extract 
from a letter of Gilbert Talbot's dated the nth of May, 1573, 
written to his father, the Earl of Shrewsbury : 

" Hatton is sick still : it is thought he will very hardly 
recover his disease, for it is doubted it is in his kidneys. The 
Queen goeth almost every day to see how he doth. Now is 
there devices (chefely by Lecester, as I suppose, and not with- 
oute Burghley his knowledge) how to make Mr. Edward Dier 
as great as ever was Hatton ; for now, in this tyme of Hatton's 
sicknes, the tyme is convenient : It is brought thus to passe ; 
Dier lately was sicke of a consumcion, in great daunger ; and, 
as your Lo. knoweth he hathe bene in displeasure thes 11 
yeares, it was made the Queue beleve that his sicknes came 
because of ye continiaunce of hir displeasure towardes him, 
so that unles she would forgjrve him he was licke not to recover ; 
& heruppon hir Majestie hathe forgyven him, and sente unto 
him a very comfortable message ; now he is recovered agayne, 
and this is the beginninge of this device. Theise thinges I 
lerne of suche younge fellowes as my selfe." f 

The Dyer-Hatton Letter, taking it at its face value, shows 
that Hatton is out of favour with Elizabeth, and this as a result 
of an enemy's displacing him in her regard. It is plain that 
Hatton has been consulting Dyer as to the course he had best 
take to regain his prestige, and to displace the rival. 

In the opening paragraph. Dyer warns him that a dispute 
involving a monarch is a very different affair from one between 

• The Poetical Rhapsody, by Francis Davison ; vide Dyer's biography 
in Introduction, by Nicholas Harris Nicolas, F.S.A. 
t Lodge, III., vol. ii. p. loi. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


two of her subjects, even " though she do descend very much in 
her sex as a woman " ; that if he be so foolish as to challenge her 
decision in the matter, the public will follow her nod, no matter 
whether she be right or not. 

" If," says he in substance, " you are disposed publicly 
to air your grievance and thus try to prove her in the wrong, 
she will not be pleased, for it will amount to a threat that you 
are going to try to stir up public opinion in your favour to such 
an extent that she vnll not dare persist in her present unfriendly 
attitude ; that course would lead to her hating you. Still, 
if you will try these means, and you seem to be winning, push 
it to the end ; and if it appears to be going wrong before success 
arrives, suddenly change your tactics to something the Queen 
will like better. 

" But I believe that this is not the best course. I think the 
thing for you to do is to be agreeable and subordinate in word 
and deed. Do everything you can think of that she would like 
done. Help her in every way you can, ' and never seem to 
condemn her ' conduct or bearing toward you ; but confine 
yourself to praising, as though she had all the great qualities 
she ought to have, whether she has them or not ; for though, 
when she first ' sought you, she did bear with rugged dealir^ of 
yours, until she had what she fancied, yet now, after satiety and 
fulness, it {i.e. ' rugged dealing.* — F. C.) will rather hurt than 
kelp you.' Whereas, if you adopt my plan, and stop all 
pubUc opposition to the course which she now pursues, you will 
retain the place you have, you will be welcome at Court, your 
friends will stand by you, you will have no visible enemies, 
and you will be well-placed to take advantage of anything that 
may turn up in your favour. Especially do I advise you to 
say no word against * him,' for by keeping your moulji shut 
he will conclude that you have forgotten your grievance and 
become careless, and will cease to spy on you — ^when, as a 
matter of fact, you will only be watching your chance to rush 
in and defeat him. 

" If, however, you persist in reviling him, you will find that 
you have only warned him of your real object, with the result 
that he will be just as much on the watch against you as you 
are against him — and the Queen will only turn more and more 
to him, for he will then be in the attitude of a martyr, simply 
because she has given him precedence over you. This will 
gradually turn others to his side ; and they will support him 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


in foiling you by any means in his power. . . ' It is very 
necessary for you to impart the effect of this with your best and 
most accounted friends, and most worthy to be so ; for then 
you shall have their assistance every way ; who, being made 
privy of your council, will be and ought in honour to be, partners 
of your fortune.* . . ." 

Such is our reading of this letter, omitting only our 
interpretation of the phrases italicized, in which alone the purity 
of Elizabeth would at first sight seem involved. 

Let us now consider further the origin of this remarkable 
letter, remarkable for far more than its bearing upon our 
main Quest. It gives, as does no other single document, the 
atmosphere of a Court in those days. The only code was that 
of success — everything and anything that would toin was in 
the highest repute. Has there been much change ? 

The letter fills less than two sides of a quarto sheet of paper, 
inserted in a volume in the British Museum. All that is 
known of the authorship is to be found in these words written 
on the flyleaf : " Severall papers found in Mr. Dells Study 
Secretary to Bishop Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury," in 
a hand different from, and probably about a century later than, 
any other in the volume. There are 128 pages, numbered 
only upon one side, while often written on both. There is 
no printing to be seen, and the contents purport to be copies in 
a single hand — except in one instance — of scores of state papers 
of England and several other countries. It would appear that 
when found, these documents were not bound in any fashion, 
but were entirely separate. If the description quoted is correct, 
we know that the work was done prior to 1664, when Dell died. 
We do not know that the hand is that of Dell. There is no 
doubt as to the correctness of many and probably all of the 
transcriptions, except the one that we are examining. That 
fact is in favour of its authenticity, and we are inclined to admit 
it as what it pretends to be. That Dell would collect such 
documents, or have a copy of them seems very likely, for he 
was a somewhat profuse writer and pamphleteer. He should 
be remembered for the fact that he urged strenuously — and we 
believe he is the first man who did so in print— that university 
education should be open to everybody in every large town in 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Let us proceed to examine the expressions in this letter 
which are so critical for Elizabeth's reputation. 

The first is that which has been generally taken as meaning 
that Elizabeth has by her conduct lowered herself" very much " 
below women of good repute. We confess that our first reading 
of this phrase — " she do descend very much in her sex 
as a woman " — gave us the impression stated ; but we are now 
confident that we were mistaken. To our mind, what Dyer 
intended to convey was : that a dispute by a subject with his 
monarch is a very different matter from a dispute between two 
private persons, even when, as in this case, the monarch in- 
volved is a woman, and so, because of her sex alone, of less 
power and prestige than a man in the same position. 

The remaining phrases are less susceptible of sure inter- 
pretation. Dyer is urging his new policy upon Hatton ; 
that of conciliation and helpfulness, free from the scowls, 
regrets, and reproaches of the man with a grievance ; " For 
though in the beginning when her Majesty sought you (after 
her good manner), she did bear with rugged dealing of yours, 
until she had what she fancied, yet now, after satiety and ful- 
ness, it will rather hurt than help you ; " whereas, behaving 
himself as said before (that is, in the conciliatory manner just 
recommended) Hatton would be still welcomed at Court, his 
friends would stand by him, and he would be in a position to 
keep close watch on the man who had caused his discomfiture. 

These are the words that seem the most damning to the 
reputation of Elizabeth. At first sight, and with no other expla- 
nation at hand than that indicated by our restricted use of these 
expressions, we are almost certain to leap to a verdict of guilty 
beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Is there any innocent explanation ? We must consider 
the Court of Elizabeth. We must as far as possible transport 
ourselves across the centuries to a Court in which one person, 
and that a woman, was sole authority, so far as the selection of 
her advisers, counsellors, and officials was concerned. 

We in these days may see something of disgusting intrigues 
for place. Yet it is nothing to what occurred at the Court of 
Elizabeth, where all the struggle for advancement was concen- 
trated upon one person. By scarcely more than a nod Elizabeth 
could, and often did, place a man unknown to fame upon the 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


road that, if he proved worthy, would bring him to the highest 
place in her service. 

At times she bestowed these opportunities upon a total 
stranger. Some among the greatest of her statesmen, soldiers, 
and sailors, were thus selected. The first time she saw Blount 
— later Earl of Devonshire and Lord Mountjoy — he was a lad 
of twenty, and she a woman of fifty. " Fail not to come to 
Court, and I will bethink myself how to doe you good " — such 
was her offer to him. He developed into one of the greatest 
men of the age. 

Can any one acquainted with the political world have any 
doubt as to what the losers said of tiieir successful rivals at 
Elizabeth's Court ? — or doubt as to what motives would be 
ascribed to the Queen, leading to their discomfiture ? If the 
successful man had the ill-luck to be young and good looking, 
how much more vitriolic and reckless would be the charges ! 

The disappointed accused Elizabeth of making a man Lord 
Chancellor because he danced well ; and the quip is still 
repeated. There have been worse ways of choosing occupants 
of that once respected office, and there have been very many 
worse Lord Chancellors than Hatton. She could very likely 
have selected from a room full of dancing lawyers — they were 
then obliged to be dancers * — whom she had never seen before, 
the man who would best have filled that post. She would never 
have been the Great Queen if she could not have come very 
near doing it. 

Take this case of Hatton that will always be cited to her 
discredit. His place in her Government, besides that of social 
arbiter as Chamberlain, was that of the compromiser, the man 
to bring contentious men into accord. When Mary Stuart 
was to be arraigned, she denied the power of an English 
tribunal to try a reigning Queen of a foreign nation. The point 
was so well taken that it could not be met. What was to be 
done ? Could not Mary be led to acknowledge the court's 
jurisdiction ? That course would solve the difficulty — ^but 
who should induce her to make so important a concession ? 
There was only one man in the Government for that task — 
Hatton — ^he set about it, and succeeded. 

Is the contention possible that Elizabeth could not see from 
• Dugdale's Orig.Jurid., ed. 1680, p. 346. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Hatton's manners at the ball that he was urbane, soft-spoken, 
considerate, free of swagger, modest, ingratiating (and yet 
one of the best lances in England), magnetic, well-liked both 
by men and women — and that such a man would be of great use 
to her and to his country ? She would have been a very 
ordinary person — and she was never that — if she could not have 
perceived such qualities, and many others, merely from watching 
him upon such an occasion. Be that as it may, it is not the 
important point to recollect, although it is all that the world 
has recollected of him — except what we may term the Proud 
Prelate Story, one of the most famous tales of the Queen. 
It has been told as truth by nearly all historians : 

" Between 1574 and 1577 Hatton obtained possession of 
the Bishop of Ely's house in Holborn, after an effort by the 
latter to fly from a contract made between them, which was 
speedily silenced by the interference of the queen in the follow- 
ing well-known letter : 

" ' Proud Prelate." I understand you are backward in 
complying with your agreement ; but I would have you 
know that I who made you what you are can unmake you ; 
and if you do not forthwith fulfil your engagement, by God I 
will immediately unfrock you.' " * 

It is a very telling anecdote, and one not out of character ; 
but it has no other foundation. 

The important point to recollect about Hatton's progress 
is, that Elizabeth tested him for eight years as one of her fifty 
Gentlemen Pensioners, who were continually at Court, before 
she gave him his first promotion, when he was raised to be 
Captain of her Guard. It was only after five years' more ser- 
vice that she knighted him, made him Vice-Chamberlain of 
her Household, and a Privy Councillor, in which capacity he 
would sit as a judge in the most powerful court of the realm, 
the Star Chamber. It was only after ten years of continuous 
experience in this position that he was raised to be Lord Chan- 
cellor. The money she lent him had to be repaid, even when 
it impoverished him. 

The general belief is that Elizabeth saw him dance, and was 
so pleased with his grace that she at once made him Lord 
Chancellor. The intervening twenty-three years of trial and 

• Judges of England, Edward Foss, F.S.A., sub " Hatton." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


preparation under her own eyes, and his eminent position in all 
state affairs, are of little moment when romance is to be served.* 

Such was Ralegh's history — ^who, like Essex, was a prot^g6 
of Leicester's — if, for the sake of argument, we admit the cloak 
story as true, which it is not — that is, we have no proof of it. 
But if it were, are there many readers of these pages who would 
not have known from the incident that this extravagant young 
blood was an adventurer by nature, a natural gambler with 
life, romantic, audacious, reckless, with an eye to the dramatic, 
a man who would always try to do great and striking things ? 
That is precisely why the story has survived — because the 
action was so characteristic of the man. That is how the 
story originated — and we defy any reader to deny that he is 
sorry that there is no other foundation for it. That Ralegh 
owed his opportunity, however, to some such trivial incident 
we have little doubt. 

These lightning judgments of men so characteristic of 
Elizabeth were invariably marked by an unerring instinct. 
It is a womanly gift. She could read a man at a glance, and she 
supported her decision without reservation. 

Knowing this habit of hers, can we wonder that there was 
the fiercest rivalry to be received by her even for a minute among 
the thousands of men who depended upon her and her alone 
for all their success in life ? Hatton had been successful only 
in a moderate degree at the time of this letter. He was out of 
favour with Elizabeth when the Dyer-Hatton letter was penned, 
was no better off six months later, and had not been so for the 
preceding ten years or more, if we believe Gilbert Talbot. 
Somebody (the letter offers no clue to his identity) had obtained 
some position that Hatton had had or wanted to have, which 
we cannot say. Is there a word in this entire letter, beyond the 
one sentence which we are examining, to suggest that the position for 
which these two men were fighting was that of the Queen's 

* " The fortune of Hatton, created Lord Chancellor, was most extra- 
ordinary ; he was a simple student at Oxford. In the middle of a charming 
ball which the students had given with much splendour to the Queen, 
Elizabeth marked a very young man who by his stature and figure surpassed 
all others ; he called himself Christopher Hatton ; he had danced with 
so much grace that the Queen made him come to her ; that evening he was 
named Lord Chamberlain, then, Captain of the Guards and finally Lord 
Chancellor."— ia Reine Vierge Elixabeth d'Angleterre, p. i6i, M. Capefigue 
Paris, 1863. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


paramour ? Is there any word elsewhere in the letter which could 
not be consistent with a struggle between these men for many offices 
in the State ? It appears to us that the answer to both inquiries 
is in the negative. 

What, then, has led the world, or will lead it, to interpret 
the letter as confined to sexual intrigues ? We believe that it 
is entirely due to two other escamples of the euphemism so 
dear to the English-speaking public. The almost invariable 
expression among us for illicit relations is " what she wanted," 
or " what he wanted." In this letter it is said that Elizabeth 
bore with opposition from Hatton " until she had what she 

The expressions are too much alike to escape confusion, 
especially in view of the situation exposed by the entire sentence, 
which relates that she put up with opposition until she had what 
she fancied, but now that " satiety and fulnes " have come, she 
will no longer be thwarted. That is, to common knowledge, 
the usual story of sexual passion. The thing to be remembered 
by us is this — that it is quite as common a story of about every- 
thing else that men and women seek eagerly from one another. 

" Satiety and fulness " did not three centuries ago mean 
what we mean by it to-day. We seldom employ it except to 
signify sexual fatigue or disgust. In the old days of Elizabeth 
it was seldom used in that sense. At that time it might mean 
many other things — ^weariness from being so much in each 
other's company, from similarity of tastes, the uneventfulness 
of their lives together, realization that they were utterly un- 
suited to be daily companions, and so on ed infinitufn. In 
other words, " satiety " in those days meant exactly what it 
meant in the preceding centuries, " a state of being satisfied " 
by anything that would produce that condition. 

Now, the Dyer-Hatton letter plainly shows that when 
Elizabeth " sought " Hatton, she " did bear with . . , rugged 
dealing " (opposition, obstruction) from him, " until she had 
what she fancied." What it was that Elizabeth sought from 
Hatton and he opposed is only to be conjectured. We shall 
never know ; but whatever it was — this " what she fancied " 
— ^no more " rugged dealing " would she stand from him now 
that she had had it — and, Dyer goes on to say, rugged dealing 
by you " will rather hurt than help you." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Is it clear that they are talking of sexual relations ? It 
seems to us that, irrespective of what we shall presently point 
out — and which we deem decisive — ^it is extremely doubtful. 
We see that sdl this opposition from Hatton could have referred 
to some course she wished him to adopt in political matters ; 
we can see among the quoted words not one that plainly indi- 
cates the contrary. 

Is there a word in the rest that forbids us to read it as 
meaning that after Hatton had met her political wishes, he 
will only hurt his standing with her by beginning another 
campaign of opposition against her present favour to somebody 
else ? — ^because, as she does not now need to ask his assistance, 
she would not view his opposition with an indulgent eye ? It 
seems to us that that is a very natural position for Dyer to assume. 

" Do not oppose her when she wants nothing from you. 
Save your fish until she throws a hook into your pool. Then, 
when you know she needs you, bargain vnth her — ^what you 
want against what she wants. Only ask favours of her when she 
asks them of you. In the meantime, make her think you are 
so good a subordinate that you will swallow your present 
disappointment, and do everything in your power to help her 
in her great task." 

That is our reading of this entire matter, on the reasoning 
advanced. But there is, to our mind, even more conclusive 
evidence in support of this view. We refer to the position that, 
if sexual relations be referred to, the fact is established that 
Hatton ruggedly resisted the overtures made by the Queen ! 

Any woman of the world will read these words with a smile. 
She will scarcely believe any such story of a man whose greatest 
claim in history (as it has been written) is that he was Elizabeth's 
paramour. Much has been written of Hatton, true and untrue 
— ^but nobody has yet suggested that he was a second Joseph. 
Had that been the case, it could hardly have escaped notice 
at a time when the widow was jokingly referred to as the only 
woman who was guiltless. 

We leave this Charge with one more incident. It will 
show the extent to which the Dyer-Hatton letter has been 
stretched, and how far those who zoill find Elizabeth guilty are 
prepared to go. 

The first man to publish the Dyer-Hatton letter was 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Nicholas Harris Nicolas, F.S.A. (afterward Sir Harris Nicolas), 
in a memoir of Dyer (1826). In this was the extract already 
quoted from Gilbert Talbot's letter to his father, the Earl of 
Shrewsbury, dated nth of May, 1560. Therein it is said : 

" Now is there devices (chefely by Lecester, as I suppose, 
and not withoute Burghley his knowledge) how to make 
Mr. Edward Dier as great as ever was Hatton ; for now, in 
this tyme of Hatton's sicknes, the tyme is convenient, . . . 
Theise thinges I lerne of suche younge fellowes as my selfe." 

This writer was then less than twenty years of age, and we 
suspect that the more important part of the entire production 
is in the last sentence thereof. We all know something of the 
state secrets of the young blades of nineteen hanging about a 
Court. We must decide for ourselves how much to believe of 
what a beardless youth at Whitehall says of the most secret 
policy of the two leading men at Court ; but let us take it as 
it stands, for that is the way Nicolas treated of it. He says : • 

" There can be little doubt that Elizabeth was generally 
attached to some personal favourite. As she changed the objects 
of her regard, Burleigh and Leicester endeavoured to attract 
her affections towards one of their own dependants ; and, if 
the construction put upon the preceding letter (The Dyer- 
Hatton letter, which Nicolas has accepted as proof that Eliza- 
beth was guilty. — F. C.) be well founded, it would be difficult 
to find any other motive for her favour than a sexual one. 
Hatton we know to have been extremely handsome, and to 
have excelled in many accomplishments ; but neither he nor 
Dyer had ever performed any public service worthy of the 
applause or countenance of their Sovereign. If Elizabeth's 
virtue, with respect to Hatton, be rendered extremely doubtful 
by the contents of Dyer's letter to him, it may be inferred, that 
the attempt of Leicester and Burleigh to make Dyer " as great 
as ever " the Chamberlain had been, was to have been accom- 
plished in a similar manner." 

En passant, we comment on the statement " that neither 
he (Hatton. — F. C.) nor Dyer had ever performed any public 
service worthy of the applause or countenance of their sover- 

* The Poetical Rhaptody, by Francis Davison ; vidt Dyer's biography 
by Nicolas, p. Ixxv. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


eign." Rather, we shall let the writer of the words comment 
upon them. First, as to Hatton's public service : 

" Hatton took a prominent part in all State affairs ; and his 
opinion on public transactions received great consideration 
from Lord Burghley, Leicester, Walsingham, and all the 
other Ministers. He was for many years what is now termed 
the Leader of the House of Commons ; and if he did not adorn 
the Woolsack, to which he was unexpectedly raised, by great 
legal learning, he had the modesty and good sense to consult 
eminent lawyers in cases of magnitude, and obtained the respect 
of the pubUc by the equity and impartiality of his decisions. 
Unlike that of many great legal luminaries of his age, his own 
conduct was pure with respect to bribes. ..." * 

This last was written nineteen years after the first con- 
clusion that Hatton was not worthy of any recognition by Eliza- 
beth, and therefore that his preferment was due to his sexual 
attractions. Certainly it was not Nicolas's mental attractions 
that led to his preferment by his lady sovereign ! We refrain, 
as he was a member of the Society of Antiquaries, from imputing 
another motive for his advancement. 

No less biting a comment can be reserved for what he says 
of Dyer on the last page of the very biography in which he states 
that Dyer was unworthy of Elizabeths applause or countenance : 

" It is not too much to attribute to him a superior under- 
standing ; for he was evidently shrewd, calculating, and prudent. 
His judgment appears to have been sound and penetrating ; 
and the perspicuity with which he conveys to others the 
opinions he had formed, as well as the reasons upon which they 
were founded, display no common ability. His advice to 
Hatton on the subject of his conduct towards the Queen, is 
not overrated, if it be described as a master-piece of policy. 
With proofs then, that Dyer possessed the favour of his sover- 
eign, and the good opinion of her two most powerful ministers ; 
that he was esteemed by Sir Philip Sydney, . . . that he was 
considered in a respectable light as a poet ; that he occasionally 
filled confidential offices, and was in every respect looked upon 
as deserving of all which he acquired, it is not too high ... to 
conclude this account of him by saying, that he was equal in 

• Memoirs of the Life and Times of Sir Christopher Hatton, K.G^ by 
Sir Harry Nicolas, C.C.M.G. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


talents, attainments, and moral worth, to most, and superior 
to many of his contemporaries." 

After this astonishing exhibition, we must apologize for 
further troubling the reader with anything advanced by this 
writer ; but we must revert to his statement beginning : 
" There can be little doubt that Elizabeth was generally attached 
to some personal favourite." Nicolas says that if we believe 
his interpretation of the Dyer-Hatton letter — i.e. that Eliza- 
beth was guilty — ^then this letter from Gilbert Talbot can only 
mean that Burleigh and Leicester, as Elizabeth " changed the 
objects of her regard," " endeavoured " to attract her affections 
through a sexual motive to one of their own dependants ; as 
Dyer and Hatton had never done anything worthy of Elizabeth's 
regard, the conclusion is obvious ; and as the Dyer-Hatton 
letter shows that Hatton's position was due to his sexual rela- 
tions with the Queen, so " it may be inferred that the attempt 
of Leicester and Burleigh to make Dyer as great as ever the 
Chamberlain (Hatton. — F. C.) had be6n, was to have been 
accomplished in a similar manner." 

As to this, it may be observed that Nicolas's argument has 
a shifting foundation, for this Gilbert letter, dated May, 1573, 
says " as your Lordship knoweth, he (Hatton. — F. C.) hath 
been in displeasure these eleven years." Now this letter cannot 
be employed both ways by Nicolas. It is worthy of credit 
or it is not. It certainly cannot be used to prove that Dyer 
was to be advanced through his sexua^ attraction to the Queen, 
when that proof is dependent upon the Dyer-Hatton letter as 
a precedent showing that Hatton had only attained his success 
in that maimer — ^because the former letter says that Hatton 
" hath been in displeasure these eleven years." If this is true, 
the Queen and Hatton certainly had not been illicitly intimate 
for that length of time. Eleven years would take us back to 
1562, two years before Hatton came to Court as one of the fifty 
Gentlemen Pensioners of the sovereign. It follows that Hatton 
had never been in carnal relations with the Queen Vhen either 
the Dyer-Hatton letter or the Gilbert Talbot letter was written 
— and so the entire case of not only Dyer but Hatton also falls 
to the ground. 

Yet Nicolas presses his outlandish accusation against 
Leicester and Burghley. It is projected in all seriousness, in 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


face of the fact that Leicester was closer to the Queen than was 
any other man from the time when they were both eight years 
of age imtil his death when they were fifty-five. He is supposed 
to be one of two procureurs, he whose single alleged ckim to 
Elizabeth's regard, and therefore the only means by which 
he maintained his place as the most splendid figure of her 
Court, lay in his illicit relationship with her ; he, we say, is 
now solemnly accused of finding other men to enjoy what he 
had had for so long and still possessed ! Yet the crowning 
gem is a similar reflection upon Burghley ! He, of all men, 
who has come unscathed through all contemporary and subse- 
quent records so far as women are concerned — and we cannot 
say the same of many — ^is also aprocureur ! 

7. Charge 18. — A love letter from Hatton, 5th June, 1573, 
written from the Continent, whither he had gone for conva- 
lescence from the illness mentioned in the Gilbert Talbot 
letter, written less than a month before. The following shows 
to what an extent Hatton adopted the course of conciliation 
toward the Queen that Dyer had recommended to him in the 
Dyer-Hatton Letter. That advice had been " to use your 
suits towards her Majesty in words . . . acknowledge your 
duty, declaring the reverence which in heart you bear, and . . . 
jo3rfully ... to commend such things as should be in her, as 
though they were in her indeed." Certainly Dyer could not 
complain that he had not an apt pupil, if he ever saw the letter 
containing these words : 

" If I could express my feelings of your gracious letters, I 
should utter unto you matter of strange effect. In reading of 
them, with my tears I blot them. . . . Death had been much 
more my advantage than to win health and life by so loath- 
some a pilgrimage. . . . Madam, I find the greatest lack that 
ever poor wretch sustained. No death, no, not hell, no fear 
of death shall ever win of me my consent so far to wrong myself 
again as to be absent from you one day ... I lack that I live 
by ... to serve you is a heaven, but to lack you is more than 
hell's torment unto them. My heart is full of woe. ... I 
will wash away the faults of these letters with the drops from 
your poor Lydds and so inclose them. Would God I were 
with you but for one hour. My wits are overwrought with 
thoughts. I find myself amazed. Bear with me, my most 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


dear sweet Lady. Passion overcometh me. I can write no 
more. Love me ; for I love you. . . . Live for ever. Shall I 
utter this familiar term (farewell) ? yea, ten thousand thousand 
farewells. He speaketh it that most dearly loveth you. . . , 
"Your bondman everlastingly tied." 

This letter has been strenuously insisted upon as proof that 
Elizabeth and its author were guilty of carnal relations. It is 
advanced that its expressions cannot possibly refer to an inno- 
cent affection. 

As we read it, it certainly seems a letter that Hatton would 
wish to have destroyed. All that can be said in his excuse 
is, that he had for months before been dangerously ill, that 
he was not persona grata to the fountain of all success, and that 
he had been suddenly forgiven his fault, whatever it was, and 
sent to the Continent, accompanied by the Queen's physician, 
to get well. The chances are, too, that she paid all the bills, 
for soon afterwards we find her paying debts of his. 

In weighing this letter, we must note that it should not 
stand alone, for we have three others written by Hatton to 
Elizabeth while he was abroad on this search for health, during 
some months. The first of these three is dated twelve days 
after the one already quoted. The only passages of affection 
are these : » 

" The time is (as it were) hallowed with me, wherein I may 
in this sort exercise my devotion towards you and ease the 
travails of my mind, which I continually find too much over- 
burdened with the fears and cares that affection layeth upon it. 
Let it not, therefore, with you. Madam, be labour and trouble to 
read these rude lines, that proceed from me with so pure and 
noble a thought. I fear you will be offended with my boldness, 
but I know you will excuse me in your goodness. I fear you 
will mislike that I find no other matter to discourse unto you : 
in good faith, if I could find a more worthy action, I would 
deliver it unto you ; but accept this. Madam, for in the world 
(above this) there is nothing. This is the twelfth day since I 
saw the brightness of that Sun that giveth light unto my sense 
and soul. I wax an amazed creature. Give me leave. Madam, 
to remove myself out of this irksome shadow, so far as my 
imagination with these good means may lead me towards you, 
and let me thus salute you : Live for ever, most excellent 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


creature ; and love some man, to shew yourself thankful for 
God's high labour in you, . . . But, Madam, forget not your 
Lidds that are so often bathed with tears for your s^e. A more 
wise man may seek you, but a more faithful and worthy can 
never have you. . . . 

" Yours all and ever yours." 

" Live forever . . . and love some man. ... A more wise 
man may seek you, but a more faithful and worthy can never 
have you." Is this the language of a man who has been 
criminally intimate with the woman to whom it is addressed ? 
" I fear you will be offended with my boldness," he writes — ^his 
boldness in telling her of his affection. Would a man who had 
carnally known a woman ever think, much less write, that after 
such intimacy she would be " offended with my boldness " 
at telling her that he had an affection for her ? 

The only sensible conclusion to which an unprejudiced 
mind can arrive is, that Hatton's cry to her to " love some 
man. . . , A more wise man may seek you, but a more faithful 
and worthy can never have you," is almost certain evidence that 
Elizabeth never had loved any man, that Hatton was seeking 
to make her love him, but without success. " Love some man " 
— ^would Hatton, who had been at Court for nearly ten years 
as one of Elizabeth's most immediate entourage, have written 
such an appeal if she had ever loved before, or loved any man 
then ? It is inconceivable. 

The third of these letters contains no phrases to guide us 
except these : 

. "I pray God, you may believe my faith. It is the testa- 
ment of your greatest excellencies. It might glad you (I speak 
without presumption), that you live so dearly loved with all 
sincerity of heart and singleness of choice. I love yourself. 
I cannot lack you . . . you are the true felicity that in this 
world I know or find. 

" Your slave and EveR your own." 

The fourth and last letter is dated the loth of August, and 
only the following is important to us : 

" I trust with discretion to correct all frail humour. Give 
your pardon of things bypast, and I will even it by amendments 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


to follow. The contentment of mind you give me doth most 
of all re-cure me. By your great bounty and most liberal 
charge I purchase life and health withal. By your oft mes- 
sengers, carriers of your endless cares for my recovery's sake, 
I enjoy so great a comfort in life as never God hath blessed man 
withal before. . . . God save your life for ever, and bless you 
with His glorious thanks for your divine merits towards me 
your so poor and discomforted despairing servant. My dear 
Lady, I amend. ... I find cause to think that much greater 
effects will follow. . . . Upon the knees of my heart I most 
humbly commend my most faithful love and service unto you. 
Adieu, most dear sweet Lady. . . . 

" All and EveR yours, your most happy bondman, 

" Lyddes." • 

We find no suggestion of immorality here. We interpret 
the extracts as demonstrating that Elizabeth is doing all she 
can to make this sick servant well. She sends him frequent 
messengers, she sees that he has enough money, and she assures 
him that she will care for his future. Elizabeth invariably did 
this for all who gave their entire time to the State. It is an 
example that is pursued by nearly all the great families of 
England toward those who have given similar devotion to them 
and theirs. That is one of the chief glories of England. It 
is, also, one of the chief incentives through which unselfish 
service may be secured by those in high place. 

8. Charge 25. — ^We are now to examine the last of these 
eight accusations, which we think worthy of detailed analysis. 
It is that of Cardinal Allen, the treacherous English Catholic 
who fled to the Continent, and spent thirty-five years of his 
life in endeavouring to bring England back to the fold of Rome, 
even by its subjection to a foreign Power. 

It is needless to repeat the monstrous crimes detailed against 
Elizabeth by this most bitter of her Catholic enemies, in diis 
appeal to his Catholic countrymen urging them to rise against 
her when the Armada landed its armies on English soil. All 
the Catholic world was engaged in the attempt ; and to Allen 
was allotted the character he had played for a lifetime, that 
of the traitor who would egg on Elizabeth's countrjrmen to 
stab her in the back while she met the foe in front. 

* All these letters are in Hatton's biography by Nicolas, pp. 26-30. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Allen made the mistake that so many others have made 
before and since, i.e. of not knowing that the time when Eng- 
land is attacked is the only time when Englishmen will attain 
some measure of cohesion — ^to be abandoned the moment the 
danger is past. The violence of the language they hurl at 
one another over petty matters in time of peace, is something 
that the foreigner cannot comprehend. He is sure that they 
hate one another ; and perhaps they do ; until they find in 
danger the country which allows them this freedom of speech. 
Then they become the best of friends. 

Allen, English though he was, was entirely mistaken. 
For him to abuse their Queen when she was being attacked — ^for 
SHE stood for England — was to drive them into her ranks, 
exactly in proportion to the violence of his invective. Not a 
Catholic in the realm — and Heaven knows they had reason 
enough to rebel — rose in response to Allen's renegade trumpet. 
They only put on their armour to support Elizabeth. England 
against the world ! 

This pamphlet of Allen's is a sink of filth. We refrain from 
descending into it. It is not worth a line of refutation. If our 
readers do not agree, there is no use in presenting to them any 
evidence whatever that tends to establish the iimocence of 
Elizabeth. Evidence is of no value to people whose minds are 
capable of such conclusions. If they condemn Elizabeth upon 
Allen's testimony as he delivers it, condemned she must remain. 

Such is the case against Elizabeth, as history shows it, so 
far as any direct and specific charges are concerned. If direct 
testimony be demanded before we convict, it is all in the fore* 
going pages. We know no other — ^nor does any other his- 
torian^ so far as he has disclosed it. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



WE now approach the secondary charges against 
Elizabeth. They are very important, perhaps 
more important than the direct accusations, for, 
since the case against the Queen is lacking in 
convincing evidence of her guilt, the world has always been 
greatly biased by general statements. The nature of these 
deadly, but illusive, weapons we have already indicated, and 
answered to some extent — but they deserve a fuller statement. 
The roundabout attack upon Elizabeth is, in sum, through 
men whom she honoured. It is now generally believed — and 
the public, as we shall show, could not possibly have arrived 
at any other verdict — ^that they were unworthy to fill the places 
to which she raised them. Even to-day the attack goes on. 
Leicester is only " a pleasant plaything " * of Elizabeth. 
Upon another page of as pretentious an historical work as 
Englishmen have produced during the last fifty years, Leicester 
is stigmatized as " worthless," f and this in the very face of 
the author's own mention, elsewhere in the same volume, that 
Mendoza, the Spanish ambassador, characterized Leicester as 
the " manager of affairs " of the Court, and that undisputedly 
great minister, Walsingham, as Leicester's " spirit." J Other 
ambassadors reported that Leicester and not Burghley managed 

As a rule, if those who have written in this vein do not 
actually say so, they leave their readers to infer what they 
must infer, i.e., that incompetents and nincompoops held high 

• The Political History of England, vol. vi., p. 240. 
t Idem, p. 237. 
t Idem, p. 344. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


positions through their Queen's inordinate affection for them — 
and the large majority of men and all women have become 
convinced that this affection was not of an innocent character. 
Those who have not been so convinced have adopted the only 
possible alternative — that she thought too highly of these 
incompetents to dismiss them. 

I am not certain which, from a moral point of view, is the 
worse of the two accusations — but I have no doubt at all that 
Elizabeth would much more hotly have resented the latter, 
for she was used to the former charge, like all women who 
ever ruled ; but had it reached her ears that she failed in her 
duty to England, there would have been such an explosion as 
her history fails to record. 

It is, however, precisely to this that both these charges 
amount ; and all history is unanimous in praise of Elizabeth's 
love for her country and her people. History cannot have it 
both ways. If she put incompetent men into positions of the 
greatest responsibility, she loved those men more than she did 
England or its people. If Leicester was the man history 
represents him to be, if she, a woman of fifty-two, placed him, 
a man of the same age, in command of the most important 
expedition she ever sent out, that to the Low Countries — and 
three years later placed him at the head of the only defence 
England had on shore if the Armada could land its armies — 
then she loved Leicester more than she loved England, and it 
is useless to call her strong, and she did not really care for her 
people. There is no escape from this conclusion. 

Yet the explanation is at hand — as it has always been at 
hand. There can be no two opinions about it when the 
documents are presented. 

The whole misconception lies, primarily, in the fact that 
there has been no life of Leicester. He has had no defence, 
and for three hundred years has been the target of ex parte 

The explanation is, of course, that Leicester was no fool. 
The same explanation applies to the other gentlemen who 
have come dovra to posterity as utterly dependent on Elizabeth's 
affections, legitimate or illegitimate. No one of them was a 
fool. Each of them was of exceptional ability, and quite 
worthy of every place entrusted to hdm by his monarch. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


I. Leicester. — Let us consider in some particular the 
closest friend Elizabeth ever had ; he who, with the sole 
exception of Burghley, was for the longest time in her most 
intimate counsels. Leicester was tall, distinguished-boking, 
magnificent in dress, a huntsman, a noted horseman, one of 
the most skilful lances in the kingdom, a most learned man, 
and a renowned soldier before he was twenty-five, when he 
was master of ordnance in Philip's army in Picardy. He was 
Master of the Royal Buckhounds at eighteen, under Edward VI., 
and from 1572 to his death sixteen years later. In him was the 
blood of the first families of England, the Beauchamps, Talbots, 
Greys, Berkeleys, and Lisles. He was the son of the most 
powerful duke in the country in the reign of King Edward, 
that Northumberland who went to the block for placing his 
daughter-in-law, Lady Jane Grey, on the throne. 

The entire family was thrown into the Tower, and sentenced 
to death, besides being attainted, but, as their Uberty was 
restored, Robert and his brother Henry redeemed the family 
name in Flanders at the siege of St. Quentin, the former with 
his bravery, the latter with his life ; and the survivors were 
restored. Robert and Queen Elizabeth were of the same age, 
some say even to the day and hour. 

He was a man of great energy and activity. He would also 
appear to have been the greatest business man of his time. 
He owned mines and mills and great forests. He alone could 
export woollens. He had the monopoly of all sweet wines. 
He was a patriot of that rare kind who are always ready to 
contribute large sums of money to advance the fortunes of 
England. He was the leader of that band of great soldiers 
and sailors who believed that England could defeat the world. 
He gave himself for a lifetime to the affairs of Elizabeth. In 
return, she gave him great wealth, many times as much as she 
ever allotted to another ; but sooner or later the greater part 
of it returned to her service ; any loans she made him had to 
come back to her, even after his death. 

Upon him devolved the expensive and important duty of 
entertaining the great visitors to Elizabeth's Court. When she 
was ill, it was to him, as a rule, that the ambassadors came for 
audience. He and the Duke of Norfolk were the only English- 
men to receive the French Order of St. Michael, and he was 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


France's chief friend at Elizabeth's Court during his whole 
career. Proud, perhaps vain, and enthusiastic, he could still 
be subordinate, and work with a will to carry out a policy he 
did not approve, if ordered by the proper authority. 

He was sumptuous in his generosity. He founded and 
endowed a hospital which exists unto this day. When Elizabeth 
would not pay the troops she had sent him to command in the 
Low Countries, he took nearly all the money he had in the 
world (about the equivalent of £100,000 in money of to-day) 
and devoted it to that purpose. He offered to pay the expenses 
of an expedition to Holland. He gave the Low Countries 
thousands more to keep them going in their life and death 
struggle with Spain. 

Who sent Drake round the world ? The war party in 
Elizabeth's cabinet. Who headed that party for over twenty- 
five years before it could drive Elizabeth and Burghley into 
opening a fight on Spain ? Leicester was that man. Who 
provided the money for Drake's voyage ? Leicester and the 
Queen were the heaviest contributors. Leicester's party gave 
the balance. From whom was the knowledge of the coming 
voyage most carefully kept so that he could not try to frustrate 
it ? Burghley, whose whole efforts were directed to keeping 
peace with Spain.* 

Who got the Queen at last to make that open break with 
Spain which even Philip could not afford to take lying down, 
i.e. the expedition of a great army to Flanders to aid the Pro- 
testant rebels ? Leicester. It was then that the Spanish 
Ambassador in his rage describes him as " the manager of 
affairs," t and Walsingham as his " spirit." 

Who above all others was the power that had the execution 
of Mary Stuart for its object ? — one of the most successful 
strokes of Elizabeth's policy — Leicester — and he was the sole 

• " Drake ... on December 13, 1577, started on his famous voyage 
round the world with the secret connivance of the war party in Elizabeth's 
cabinet. The circumnavigation of the globe was in fact incidental to the 
main object of breaking up the Spanish monopoly of the Pacific. . . . There 
was also a sinister motive behind. . . . According to Drake's own state- 
ment, the queen had forbidden any revelation of the voyage to Burghley, who 
wished to avoid the risk of an open breach with Spain ; and Drake felt that 
he had been encouraged by Leicester and Walsingham in order that his 
aggression might frastrate Burghley's efforts for peace."— Po/it. Hist, of 
England, vol. vi. p. 319, by Prof. A. F. Pollard, Univ. Coll., Lond. 

t The Political History of England, vol. vi. p. 344. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


originator of the famous Association (1SS4) of the nobility and 
gentry of England sworn to defend Elizabeth's person against 
the Catholic party's new policy, whose chief principle was the 
assassination of the Queen of England. To this device of 
Leicester's Elizabeth probably owed her life. The Association 
also gave the death-blow to Catholicism as a powerful force 
in England, for every Catholic could read what lay behind the 
phrases which bound the best blood of England to " withstand 
and revenge to the uttermost all such maUcious actions . . . 
and never (to) desist from all manner of forcible pursuit of 
such persons to the utter destruction of such persons, their 
counsellors, aiders, and abettors." Camden says flatly that 
Leicester founded the Association.* The language and style 
of the document itself is almost certainly that of Leicester 
himself. Burghley never wrote so plain-spoken, ferocious a 
document in his life. The style and words are different from 
anjrthing we know him to have penned. Yet Froude ascribes 
to Burghley not only the forming of the Association, but the 
very language in which it appears ! 

Will anybody to-day question the wisdom or the success of 
Leicester's view ? 

Who was the leading Protestant in the Queen's counsels ? — 
Leicester. Who was the leading Puritan at her Court ? — 

Did Burghley ever promote any policy except that of con- 
tinuing to hold that which was .already in hand ? There are 
times when that is good statesmanship ; and there are other 
occasions when it is folly. Such a time, for England, was the 
latter half of the sixteenth century. 

The whole world was in a ferment. The old Powers were 
in the eclipse. There was only one with its face set toward 
the sunrise — England. To pursue the Burghley policy was to 
keep England for ever the insignificant country she had always 
been up to that time. 

Leicester, Walsingham, Ralegh, Drake, and his great com- 
panions, were not satisfied with that. They were imbued viith 

• " . . . very many of all degrees of men throughout England, by 
Leicester's means, . . . bound themselves in a certain association by their 
mutuall vowes, subscriptions and scales, to prosecute with their whole might 
even to death, those that should attempt anything against the Queen." — 
Camden, 1630 ed., p. 36, under 1585. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the belief that the English could beat Spain, then the leader 
of the world. They believed that the new ships of England, 
her first navy, with their greater celerity and ease of handling, 
could conquer any ships afloat, irrespective of numbers. 

Burghley was the drag on the wheel of this progressive 
poUcy. It was risky. There he was right. It was safer to 
play the game in his way. There again he was right. He 
believed England would disappear if she did not secure allies. 
Leicester, Walsingham, and Drake believed that England would 
disappear if she did secure allies. They believed that England 
could stand alone. Burghley was wrong, if England was to 
become the leading Power of the world when she had the 
chance. Were Leicester and his fellow adventurers — free- 
booters and pirates, if you will — mistaken in their judgment, 
England would go down in the struggle into which they were 
trying to push their sovereign and her conservative minister. 
These hot bloods were prepared to take the risk. 

Again and again Leicester, Walsingham, Ralegh, and all 
the rest of the swashbucklers, succeeded in inducing the most 
frugal monarch England ever had to advance money to help 
them in equipping naval attacks on Spain, and her rich 
argosies from the New World. The ventures were usually 
successful, and most richly rewarded with booty. Those 
who financed Drake received back their original investment, 
with a dividend of one hundred per cent. On his voyage 
round the world, he collected the equivalent of over ;;£5,ooo,ooo 
in modern money, the great bulk of which went into Elizabeth's 

No wonder that Leicester and Drake found their influence 
with Elizabeth on the increase ! One desperate contest after 
another ended in British victory — and profit — ^until the Queen 
began to believe the enthusiastic assertion of that wild, cheering 
crowd which had almost compelled her to help them against 
her will, that nothing could beat the English sailor in an 
English ship. 

Burghley never once contributed a shilling to one of the 
great dashes across the seas. Leicester and his shouting 
followers advanced their fortunes — sometimes mortgaging their 
estates to secure the money. Leicester did this to help Eliza- 
beth begin the Netherlands expedition. Elizabeth could not 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


fail to see that men who would go to such lengths time after 
time were in earnest, were confident, were competent — ^for 
they had been successful. 

At the wrong time, Leicester and Drake would have ruined 
England ; but they were acting at the right time, and with 
the assistance and countenance of the Queen they made England 
— against the steady opposition of Buighley. He fought every 
step of their programme.* Yet, thanks to Froude, it is to him 
that all the praise is attributed of what his opponents accom- 
plished. There the matter, however, should not be permitted 
to rest. We have no doubt that Burghley, with his over- 
cautious, timorous, conservative temperament, was placed 
exactly where he was to delay the Leicester-Drake combina- 
tion until the right time came. We have so much faith in 

There is another side of Leicester's life to unfold. Who 
was the first man to receive a licence for the performance of 
plays in England ? Can one of our readers answer ? 
Leicester. His band of players was organized the year after 
Elizabeth was enthroned, and he maintained them all his life. 
Who was at the head of that band ? — ^the first stock company 
in English history — James Burbage, the first man to build a 
theatre in England. It was, indeed, for that reason, called 
merely " The Theatre." That was twenty years before he 
built the Blackfriars and the Globe. " Many famous men had 
been enabled to pursue their studies through Leicester's 
beneficance." f 

Roger Ascham — and there is no higher authority — often 
spoke of the remarkable literary ability of Leicester. The 
letters of Leicester bear witness to it, and to the man's tre- 
mendous driving-power. They are the most forcible letters 
of his time. 

He was the patron of Philip Sidney, of Ralegh, of Essex, 
of Dyer, et ah. Writers and poets sang of him more than 
of any other man. Here is Spenser's tribute : 

* " Leicester . . . Paulet . . . Mildmay . . . and Walsinsham . . . had 
favoured aggression, and had championed Drake against the more conserva- 
tive school of politicians represented by Burghley." — PoUt. Hist, of England, 
vol vi. P- 4ii> by Prof. A. F. Pollard, Univ. Coll., Lond. 

t Geoffrey-Whitney (1386) in his dedication to LciceBtw of his CMci 
of EmbUmei. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


A mightie prince, of most renowned race. 
Whom England high in count of honour held, 
And greatest ones did sue to gain his grace. 
Of greatest ones, he greatest in his place. 
Sate in the bosome of his soveraine. 
And right and loyale did his word maintaine. 

Who saved Oxford University v^hen it had been wrecked 
by the Reformations of Religion v?hich had followed one 
another so rapidly that no man dared proclaim his faith until 
he had looked at the calendar ? Leicester,* who was its 
chancellor for a quarter of a century, until his death, only a 
month after he had witnessed in the destruction of the Armada 
the justification of the opinions and struggles of a lifetime. 
He lived just long enough to see his dreams come true, England 
leading the world, and his Faerie Queene leading England. 
He must have died with great thankfulness that he had lived 
unto that glorious day. Every hope he had held out to 
Elizabeth had been fulfilled. 

Who gave Oxford University its first printing press ? 
Leicester.! Where would this country have been if Leicester's 
great rival, Burghley, the typical Cecil, then as now, had had 
his ideas about learning adopted ? The reader, we believe, 
has not heretofore had the benefit of reading this view of the 

• In the first book ever printed at Oxford University, according to 
Strype, the author. Case, gives this among several reasons advanced for 
dedicating the work to Leicester : 

"... Secondly, Another reason of this dedication was, that extra- 
ordinary love towards the university, which his coming to them had greatly 
confirmed. , . . And then he bringeth the founders of the colleges making 
their congratulatory speeches to the earl, as the great restorer and preserver 
of their foundations ; ' Thanking him for his well deserving toward that 
University. That he had twice or thrice preserved all things there going 
to decay, immortal thanks for that : and that the same being preserved, he 
had confirmed with many and great privileges obtained, they rendered him 
still greater thanks.' " 

Anthony k Wood, Oxford's first historian, after relating how the Fellows 
and scholars had left, or been driven away by the persecutions of the various 
Reformations, says, of 1561, "The University became empty. . . . Exercises 
also were seldom performed, and Proceeders consequently were few. In 
the Act last year was none (z) in Divinity and but one in the Civil Law, 
three in Physic and eight in Arts, and in the Act this year not one, (3) in 
Divinity, Law or Physic." Of the year 1563 " This year a violent Plague 
broke out, being the dregs of last year's mischief, dispersing those that were 
remaining in the University. . . " In 1564, the chronicler writes : " Such 
means were now and the year after used by the care of the new Chancellor, 
the Earl of Leycester, that nothing was wanting to the recovery of the 
University, now and of late fell into great decay." 

t Cf. Oxford Books, by F. Madan, Bodley's Librarian : "... it (the 
Oxford University Press) was placed on a permanent footing by the Earl 
of Leicester." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


man who has been credited with all Elizabeth's brains. In 
1575 Burghley wrote to our old friend, the Earl of Shrewsbury, 
to say that he hoped the Earl's son would not develop " any 
curiosity of human learning . . . which I see doeth great hurt 
to all youth in this time and age." * Nothing could more 
clearly betray the unbridgable gulf between Leicester and 
Burghley, and between the men whom they respectively repre- 
sented. It was the New against the Old. Burghley should 
not be blamed. He could be no different from what he was. 
Nor have the most of his descendants changed to any great 
extent. Only lately, during the Great War, a Cecil informed 
the Commons that a labouring man is fitted neither by tempera- 
ment nor training to handle foreign affairs, and that govern- 
ment cannot be carried on except by people of leisure. Such 
ignorance of what is everywhere taking place to disprove such 
sentiments is inconceivable, except in those brought up to 
believe that God has set aside for children of the titled a special 
class of soul. 

With one word more, we may dismiss Leicester. This 
word is important, because of its source. It is from that 
remarkable publication, the Cambridge Modem History : 

" The conservative nobles, with whom Burghley usually, 
though not invariably, acted, and the party of Leicester and 
the growing Puritan element, had alternately gained the upper 
hand in the English counsels, as Elizabeth's fears of Catholic 
solidarity waxed and waned." t 

We have further amplified this new point in the Intro- 
duction, quoting very important authorities who should not 
be ignored. 

That is a fair statement of what took place. Elizabeth 
carried on her Government by the party system. We have 
developed no improvement thereupon. The boldness of 
Leicester needed the check of Burghley's caution. The caution 
of Burghley required the boldness of Leicester. It was an 
organized warfare between the two parties, a contest deliberately 
promoted by their common sovereign. If a conservative died, 
a conservative replaced him, by the Queen's command. If 

• Talbot Papers, vol. P., fol. 745. 

t Camb. Mod. Hist., vol, iii. p, 491. Cf, Algernon Cecil in Intro- 
duction, antt. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


a radical of the Leicester type disappeared, one of his belief 
filled his shoes, by the royal decree. Elizabeth needed the 
strength of them all. Her position was above both. In their 
zeal to triumph one over the other she knew that the truth 
would be made manifest, and it was the truth that she sought 
to learn. 

Yet Leicester has come down to us as a fool. The verdict 
can no longer stand investigation. To those who think other- 
wise we commend the following from Congreve and Professor 
Beesley. England has had no better historical scholars. 

" Connected with these personal relations of Elizabeth," 
says Congreve,* " much has been written, and the general 
result has been to obscure and lower her character. When 
the assaults have not been made openly on the Queen herself, 
her favourites have been attacked, so that the blame thrown 
on them must in some measure rebound on her. I will, there- 
fore, take two of the names that have been put forward with 
the greatest prominence, with the indirect consequence of 
damaging Elizabeth. ... It seems almost the unanimous 
judgment of history, that Leicester was a bad and incompetent 
man, the disgrace of the mistress he served. It is very difBcult, 
at least I have as yet found it so, to arrive at a satisfactory 
result in estimating Leicester. He was nearly thirty years a 
leading member of Elizabeth's Council ; he was employed by 
her as her lieutenant in the Low Countries, and on his return 
from thence as lieutenant-general of the army of defence, he 
was selected by her as the husband of the Queen of Scots. 
To this political he added great personal favour. If Leicester 
was such as he has been generally painted, it must be a slur 
on the Queen's judgment. The general presumption is in 
favour of the soundness of her judgment, so that there is a 
primary ground for distrust of the traditional view. Again, 
she was quick-eared in catching the voice of popular opinion. 
It seems to me difEcult to reconcile with this the language 
she used when addressing her troops at Tilbury. Had he been 
so generally despised, such language would have made her 
ridiculous. He had known her since she was eight years old ; 
he had interested her deeply. ' She ever loved his virtues, but 
she could not take a subject for her husband.' This explains 
her partiality ; and records of the time so far as I have seen 
them, and speaking under correction when the documents shall 
• Historical Lectures, Richard Congreve, p. 350. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


have beeti fully searched, do not furnish any ground for thinking 
that Burghley or Walsingham thought her partiality misplaced 
or absurd. I find Walsingham writing to him as to one whose 
opinion he vSlued, and whose political influence was used 
entirely aright for the service of their common country. I find, 
what is more, Burghley anxious that Leicester should take the 
command in the Netherlands, the most important trust com- 
mitted to any subject of Elizabeth abroad. It is answered to 
this, that Burghley was Leicester's enemy, and planned this 
command to disgrace him, knowing him incompetent. But 
when Elizabeth was thoroughly angry with Leicester's accept- 
ance of the sovereignty offered to him by the States, the Council 
of England supported him and tried to appease her anger. 
There are no traces of this enmity of Burghley to which the 
general interest of the State is assumed to be sacrificed. Lastly, 
I find a letter of Lord North's to Lord Burghley, in the year 
1588, the following language, which might well make us 
hesitate to subscribe to the common judgment : — ' The un- 
timely death of that noble Earle of Lester is a great and generale 
loss to the whole land, and cannot but be generally and greatly 
lamented of the good and best sorte. In his life he advanced 
the glory of God, and loyally served his sovereign ; he lived 
and died with honour, in speciale grace and favor of her 
Majestic and the good subject.' I will not go further than a 
negative judgment. I will not endeavour to make out that he 
was a great statesman and man ; but I have said enough, I 
think, to show that it is probable that he was not the reverse. 
He is, unless I mistake, another instance of the success of 
unsparing abuse. He waa^^gbnoxious to the^^tholica. in^ 

He was also, apparently, as a Puritan leader, obnoxious to the 
church party, and from them also he has suffered. There are 
instances also of a violent and overbearing assertion of his 
personal feelings which have justly exposed him to reproach. 
But more than this, I cannot thinJj proved. As a whole, the 
common judgment bears to me the stamp of improbability. If 
I must choose one or other of the conflicting opinions, I should 
range myself with most confidence on the side of Elizabeth." 

Professor Beesly, the typical university professor, will be 
unknown to posterity because teaching his subject and not 
writing it was his vocation. He appears to have done every- 
thing to avoid advertisement. Although he had occupied so 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


high a position — second to none — in English university circles 
— his only description upon the title-page of his life of Elizabeth 
is his name. He was then Professor Emeritus of History at 
University College, London, following thirty-three years in 
the chair. There could be no higher forum from which to 
put forth his work. 

" Elizabeth," says he, " it is my firm conviction, never loved 
Dudley or any other man in any sense of the word, high or 
low. She had neither a tender heart nor a sensuous tempera- 
ment. ... I have said that he (Leicester) was not a man of 
great ability. But neither was he the empty-headed, incapable 
trifler that some writers have depicted him. He was not so 
judged by his contemporaries. That Elizabeth, because she 
liked him, would have selected a man of notorious incapacity 
to command her armies, both in the Netherlands and when 
the Armada was expected, is one of those hypotheses that do 
not become more credible by being often repeated. Cecil 
himself, when it was not a question of the marriage — of which 
he was a determined opponent — regarded him as a useful 
servant of the Queen." * 

It is also an interesting fact that he and his successor, 
Professor Pollard, are no more in accord about one of the 
most important episodes of Leicester's career, i.e. his being 
offered by Elizabeth to Mary Queen of Scots as a husband who 
would be entirely satisfactory from the former's point of view. 
Professor Pollard f says of this : 

" The plan can hardly have been serious." 
Pollard's predecessor in the great chair of University. 
College says J : 

" [Elizabeth] formally recommended Lord Robert Dudley. 

" This has often been treated as if it was a sorry joke per- 
petrated by Elizabeth, who never had any intention of further- 
ing or even permitting such a match. But nothing is more 
certain than that Elizabeth was most anxious to bring it about ; 
and it affords a decisive proof that her feeling for Dudley, 
whatever name she herself may have put to it, was not what is 
usually called love. Cecil and all her intimate advisers enter- 
tained no doubt that she was sincere. She undertook, if Mary 

• Queen Elisabeth, Edward Spencer Beesly, p. 41. 

t Polit. Hist, of England, vol. vi. p. 329. 

X Queen Elizabeth, Edward Spencer Beesly, p. 50. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


would accept Dudley, to make him a duke ; and, in the mean- 
time, she created him Earl of Leicester. She regarded him, 
so she told Mary's envoy Melville, as her brother and her 
friend ; if he was Mary's husband she would have no suspicion 
or fear of any usurpation before her death, being assured that 
he was so loving and trusty that he would never permit anything 
to be attempted during her time." 

An illuminative sidelight upon these contending views is 
the following extract from a letter of Burghley to his closest 
friend Sir Thomas Smith, then ambassador in Paris : 

"... she (Elizabeth) contynueth hir desyre to have my 
L. of Lecicester preferred that waye (to marry Mary) for which 
purpoos ther was this last month a metyng at Barwyk with my 
Lord of Murray and the Lord of Ledyngton, but yet coverered 
with other matters : and now of late it is from thence renewed, 
to know with what conditions the Queens Majesty will preferr 
hym : . . . 

"I see the Qn. Maty, very desyroos to have my L. of 
Lecester placed in this high degree to be the Scottish Queen's 
husband, ..." * 

We can only observe that if the mass of documents per- 
taining to this negotiation do not show that Elizabeth was 
" serious," she never can be proved " serious " about anything. 

2. Hatton. — ^We have but little to add to what we have 
said concerning this man. The story that he was made Lord 
Chancellor of England because he danced well survives with 
the other legends, which, as we have said before, are practically 
all that the great reading pubUc knows of Elizabeth. That the 
only authority for the story is, upon examination, found to be 
no authority for it, is unavailing. The tale will go marching 
down the ages. It is too late to stop it. It is in too many 
histories and other works. It is quoted in dramas, it appears 
on the cinemetagraph screen, it is told in novels and in the 
classroom. It cannot be effectively denied. 

Yet all that the chroniclers of the time said was, that Hatton 
first came to Court through having attracted the Queen by 
his dancing or other social qualities. By the end of the 

• Orig. Lett., Ellis, 2nd Ser., vol. ii. p. 294. Cecil to Smith, 30th 
Dec, 1564. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


nineteenth century they were universally quoted as having 
said that Elizabeth saw him dance, and made him Lord Chan- 
cellor ; and, for the sake of consistency, he has been libelled 
and belittled upon every hand. 

Now all that Naunton said is this : 

" Sir Christopher Hatton came to the court as his opposit : 
(That is, opponent. — F. C.) Sir John Perrot was wont to say 
by the Galliard, for he came thither as a private gentleman of 
the Innes of Court in a maske ; and for his activity, and 
person, which was tall, and proportionable, taken into her 
favor :..."* 

Camden writes as follows : 

" Born he was of a Family more ancient then wealthy in 
Northamptonshire. Being young, and of a comely Talness of 
Body and amiable Countenance, he got into such Favour with 
the Queen, that she took him into her Band of 50 Gentlemen 
Pensioners, and, afterwards, for his modest sweetness of 
Conditions, into the number of the Gentlemen of her Privy 
Chamber, made him Captain of her Guard, Vice-Chamberlain, 
and one of her Privy Councill, and lastly made him Lord 
Chancellour of England, and honoured him with the Order 
of Saint George." f 

On this authority alone, Hatton has been held up to 
obloquy ; but they who enjoyed doing so should have called 
to the attention of their readers further statements of these two 
famous chroniclers. 

Naunton went on : 

" . . .he was first made vice Chamberlaine, and shortly 
after, advanced to the place of Lord Chancellor ; a gentleman 
that besides the graces of his person, and dancing, had also the 
endowments of a strong and subtile capacitie, and that could 
soone learne the discipline and garbe, both of the times and 
court, and the truth is, hee had a large proportion of guifts and 
endowments. . . ." 

While Camden's account of him proceeds : 

" A man he was of a pious nature, a great Reliever of the 

* Fragmenta Regalia, Naunton, ed. 1814, p. 66. 
t Camden, Elizabeth, Book IV., p. 458, ed. 1675. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Poor, of singular Bounty and Munificence to Students and 
Learned men, (for which Reason those of Oxford chose him 
Chancellour of their University,) and one who, in the Execution 
of that high and weighty Office of Lord Chancellour of England, 
could satisfy his Conscience in the constant Integrity of his 
Endeavours to doe all with Right and Equity. 

Under the year 1587, Camden writes of Hatton's elevation 
to his great office : 

" Hatton was advanced to it by the cunning Court-Arts of 
some that by his Absence from Court, and the troublesome 
Discharge of so great a Place, which they thought him not to 
be able to undergoe, his Favour with the Queen might flag 
and grow less. Yet executed he the Place with the greatest 
State and Splendour of any that ever we saw, and what he 
wanted in Knowledge of the Law, he laboured to make good 
by Equity and Justice." * 

David Lloyd, born less than fifty years after Hatton's death, 
says of him : 

" The chancellorship was above his law, but not his parts ; 
so pregnant and comprehensive that he could command other 
men's knowledge to as good purpose as his own. Such his 
humility, that he did nothing without two lawyers ; such his 
ability, that the queen did nothing without him. . . . Seldom 
were his orders reversed in Chancery ; and seldomer his 
advice opposed in council. So just he was, that his sentence 
was law with the subject ; so wise, that his opinion was oracle 
with the sovereign." f 

When Burghley was made a peer, it was upon Hatton, 
elected to the Commons the previous year, that devolved the 
Leadership of the House, a place which he filled uninterruptedly 
for sixteen years, when he became Lord Chancellor. Elizabeth 
and Burghley were not in the habit of leaving the House to be 
managed by brainless idiots, even if they were good dancers. 
Hatton was on both the Commissions that tried the Babington 
conspirators. We have spoken of his success in getting Mary 
Stuart to acknowledge the jurisdiction of an English tribunal. 
More than that, Hatton was one of her judges ; and it was his 

* Camden, Elizabeth, ed. 1675, Book III, p. 401. 
t State Worthies, p. 522. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


energetic action that led to the final despatch of the warrant 
for the execution. He was the author of masques, and acted 
in them. Numerous writers dedicated their productions to 
him. Spenser wrote a sonnet to him. Oxford chose him 
from all the scholars of the realm for Leicester's successor as 
its Chancellor. Scores of letters from Burghley, Walsingham, 
Leicester, and the other leaders of the time, show him in all 
matters of state as prominent as they themselves. Nobody's 
opinion was more sought by those in the highest places. Yet, 
history as it has been written, says he was a fool. The verdict 
will not stand. 

3. Essex. — This young man was the grandson of one of 
Elizabeth's dearest friends. He was the son of one of her 
followers, the first Earl of Essex, who never wavered in his 
allegiance. The boy was born thirty-four years later than the 
Queen. His grandmother was Elizabeth's first cousin. He was 
one of her nearest kinsmen. 

The family fortunes had disappeared in his father's ill- 
starred efforts to make Ireland a happy country, something, 
apparently, its inhabitants did not then and do not now wish. 
To prove his earnestness and sincerity he asked no money of 
the Queen. That he was prepared to supply, and supply it 
he did as long as he had any. It was a wild, romantic offer, 
worthy of the best days of chivalry. The boy was his father's 
true son ; and when he was eighteen (and already a graduate of 
Cambridge) Leicester, who eight years before had married his 
widowed mother, brought the handsome, spirited fellow to 
EUzabeth, then fifty-two, and recommended him. Burghley, 
the young man's guardian, was his other sponsor ; but neither 
could outweigh the dead father's approbation of him ; and no 
young gentleman ever started with fairer prospects to retrieve 
the inheritance which his father had so lightly thrown on 
Fortune's gaming table for the honour of his Queen. 

This was in 1585, three years before the Armada, and no 
sooner had Leicester showed Essex to the Queen, than the 
older man took the younger with him to the Low Countries 
to fight the Spaniard, creating him General of Horse ! The 
boy, true to his pedigree, spent all the money he possessed, 
and some to which he could not lay as good a claim, in equipping 
himself and his attendants until they were the best turned-out 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


in all the great army. Here he spent two years, achieving 
great reputation for personal gallantry. Arms were his voca- 

In 1587 he returned, not yet quite twenty, while Elizabeth 
was past fifty-four, and at Leicester's solicitation, was made 
his successor as Master of the Horse, a post which Leicester 
had filled continuously for over a quarter of a century. He 
soon became quarrelsome, for he had the quickest of tempers — 
was vain, arrogant, spoiling for a fight. 

A sneer at Blount brought one on, for they were of much 
the same temperament, and, when Essex was beaten, the two 
became friends for life. Elizabeth's comment on this encounter 
was : " By God's death, it were fitting some one should take 
him down and teach him better manners, or there were no rule 
with him." 

Leicester made him one of his principal commanders at 
Tilbury when the Armada was abroad — ^June, 1588. The 
following December, he challenged Ralegh, but there was a 
compromise. Several months later, he ran away to take part 
in Drake's expedition to Portugal, was the first man to wade 
ashore, and, pounding on the gates of Lisbon, dared anybody 
within to come out and fight — and nobody came. A year 
later he was back at Court, where he married Walsingham's 
daughter, Philip Sidney's widow. 

The next year he commanded an expedition to assist 
Henry of Navarre against the Holy League, hawked through 
the enemy country, and at the siege of Rouen challenged the 
enemy commander to personal combat — ^but in vain. By the 
beginning of the next year, 1592, he was back at Court ; and 
for four years he worked to make himself the master of the 
foreign affairs of the kingdom. 

At twenty-five (1593) he was a Privy Councillor, and soon 
overshadowed the Cecils, father and son, whose hostility, 
therefore, never ceased working against him. Essex employed 
the great Bacon brothers, Francis and Anthony, to assist him, 
and they devised an incomparable foreign service of their own. 
They discovered the Lopez plot against Elizabeth's life. The 
Queen's habit was to consult them before she talked with the 

In a word, Essex had stepped into the place of Leicester, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


his step-father and sponsor, and, in many ways, his proto- 
type ; although Essex lacked that caution and ability to be 
subordinate even when in disagreement with the commander, 
which saved Leicester, where the younger man failed. 

Early in 1596 he persuaded the Queen to let him lead an 
expedition to attack Spain, before Spain could launch an 
enterprise against England. On arrival off the hostile coast, 
Essex's ship was in the van, and he was so elated that he threw 
his plumed hat into the sea before he led the successful landing, 
stormed Cadiz — and then protected the inhabitants from harm. 
Interference from a Council of War prevented him from reaping 
the stupendous success which, we now know, was within his 

He returned to find that, while he had been facing death 
for the glory of his Queen, the carpet knights at home had been 
more fortunate — Cecil the father had secured the Queen's 
consent to his scheme for Cecil the son to succeed him. 

The following June, Essex headed another attack on the 
Spanish, but again the Fates thwarted him, and he returned to 
learn once more that the courtier at home had been more 
powerful than the soldier who had gone abroad. One of his 
co-commanders in the former Spanish venture, who had done 
nothing in comparison with Essex's achievements, had been 
advanced until he had precedence over every other earl in 
England. Essex's first reply to that was a challenge to fight 
the new Earl, or his son. The Cecils had beaten him again, 
but he beat them when he won the Queen's consent to his 
policy of supporting the Dutch against Philip. 

Cambridge now made him its Chancellor and the younger 
Cecil, Robert, made him commander in Ireland, a gift almost 
certain to ruin any man. Yet Essex would not decline the 
challenge. Six months afterward he returned against orders — 
and that the Queen never forgave. He found his place at 
Court gone, as well as his fortune. 

The younger Cecil — Burghley had died — ^brought him down 
at last, and Essex now only needed to be given the rope with 
which to complete his destruction. He gathered heads about 
him as hot and as sore as his own, and, breaking into open 
rebellion, they tried to carry London. Those of the towns- 
people who had shouted the loudest for him left him 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


unsupported when it was time for the swords to be out, and 
Essex was beheaded on a warrant signed by the Queen who 
had given him such a chance to rise as she had never given to 
another. She had done her best for him, but she could not 
save or spare him and retain her authority. Nobody could 
have opposed and saved him. His only answer to opposition 
was a blow — which in those days was not conducive to a long 
career. He was only thirty-three at his death. Elizabeth was 
then sixty-seven. 

Essex had the traits that catch the crowd. Showy yet 
brave, gentle yet strong ; with hands as delicate as a woman's, 
and yet the best of all England with the lance ; a good writer 
of sonnets, a composer of masques, the friend of men of science 
of all lands, one of the foremost patrons of the drama and 
literature. Sir Thomas Bodley was one of his most intimate 
friends. Spenser prefixed to The Faery Queene a sonnet in 
his praise. Numberless books were dedicated to him. He 
was the last of the Knights of England. 

He was not a fool. 

It is interesting, and illuminative of Elizabeth's character, 
that Leicester, Hatton, and Essex, her chief men-friends, were 
all of one pattern — all of honourable birth, all leaders in society, 
all men of arms, all most highly educated, all writers, actors, 
patrons of the drama, and of every other branch of learning. 
To them may be added Ralegh and Blount. They had all 
the qualities of the first three, except that, while he was a great 
student, Blount alone never wrote. 

All came with empty hands to Elizabeth, all rose to great 
and deserved positions in her Government. They all per- 
formed important services, and some of them great services to 
the lady who, while they were mere boys, saw what they were 
capable of doing for their country if they only had the oppor- 

That opportunity she supplied. In return they gave their 
entire lives to the service of the State and the nation. 

England has repaid them with obloquy, and, because of 
them, repaid Elizabeth with the vilest insinuations that can be 
made against a woman. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

' rs' s O T T ? 


1 ^-^^^xi^ ^ ^ S- 


























Digitized by Microsoft® 


THE queen's defence 

WE shall now put in for the defence such positive 
and circumstantial evidence as we consider con- 
clusive. Of the latter class we shall have but 
little new to offer, as much of it has already 
been considered in other connections. 

Let us first weigh the attitude of Burghley, that most 
indefatigable of men, who knew all that was to be known of 
the happenings at Elizabeth's Court. He was not a man to be 
easily deceived. He was Elizabeth's principal minister for 
the most of the first decade of her reign, and for the following 
quarter of a century a counsellor upon whom she placed the 
most confident reliance. 

What is the value of his opinion upon our inquiry ? Is it 
as good as that of any subsequent or contemporary historian ? 
Is it as good an opinion as can be obtained, and is it one upon 
which we are justified in placing absolute reliance ? We are 
bound to record that we would beUeve Burghley on any matter 
of fact as against all other testimony ; and upon a matter in 
which his opinion would not be palpably influenced by his 
too cautious nature — too cautious, we mean, for daring enter- 
prises — we know of no man of his time in whose judgment so 
much confidence can be placed. 

Readers will, probably, be surprised when they learn that 
Burghley bears witness as to this question on a number of 
occasions, for no historian has mentioned his testimony in a 
prominent manner, and usually it has been altogether missing 
from accounts of the Queen. No predecessor has printed the 
larger part of it. 

I. Writing in his own hand — ^see the opposite facsimile — 
upon the 8th of September, 1564, to Sir Christopher Mundt, 
^ ' 255 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Lli.D., long Elizabeth's political agent in Germany, Burghley 
uses these words in referring to the proposal that Elizabeth 
should marry the Austrian Archduke Charles : 

" I . . . can write nothing more certain than what I myself 
perceive, that she would rather marry some foreign Prince than 
a native one and that the more distinguished and illustrious in 
family, power, and person the suitor is, the more sure will be 
his hopes of winning her. Nevertheless I cannot deny that 
that noble of our own concerning whom there is no inconsider- 
able expectation amongst us, Lord Robert forsooth, is worthy 
of such honour that he may deservedly be husband of the 
Queen ; but this is his sole impediment, that he is by birth 
the Queen's subject, and only for that reason alone does he 
seem to the Queen as not worthy to be her husband. Yet on 
account of his virtues, on account of his eminent endowments 
of mind and body he is so dear to the Queen by reason of his 
merits that she could not love a real brother more. And from 
this, they who do not know the Queen as she really is are often 
wont to conclude too hastily that he will be her husband. But 
I see and understand that she only takes pleasure in him on 
account of his most excellent and rare qualities, and that there 
is nothing more in their relations than that which is consistent 
with virtue, and most foreign to the baser sort of love. And 
this I write to you in good faith so that you may surely under- 
stand from me what the truth is ; and this I wish you to believe 
and to assert boldly amongst all when the occasions demand 
it. Farewell, 8 Sept., 1564. 

" Your most loving 

" G. Cecilius. 

" To the most renowned Lord Christopher, etc., the Queen 
of England's most trusty agent, etc. 

" I beg you to send me back this letter safely, and so do me 
a favour." • 

• MSS. at Hatfield House, 154/86, the original letter, all in Cecil's 
hand, including the endorsement " 8 Sept. 1564 W. Cecill. Chrof. Motin." 
with seal " W. C." and device. 

Accompanying the original letter is a copy of it, also entirely in Cecil's 
hand, including an endorsement. The two MSS. agree, except in respect 
to the postscriptum, the endorsement, and use of sed. In the original the 
postscript is " I beg you to send me back this letter safely and so do me a 
favour.' In the copy, the postscript reads " Please hand the enclosed letter 
as quickly as you can to mr. Sturm. Please send back the letter to me for 
I am very anxious not to have published what I write in this affair." The 
endorsement reads " Copy of letter written to Mr. Mundt by order of the 
Queen, 8 Sept. 1564." There is no seal. The copy is Hat. MSS. 154/85. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Cecil was not a man to indulge in fulsome phrases. When 
he signs himself as " Your most loving William Cecil," we may 
be sure that he meant every word, and our judgment on the 
truth of the passages relating to Elizabeth and Leicester should 
be formed only from this point of view. Cecil was writing to 
one of his closest friends. 

2. Complete accord with the above will be found in the 
report of the French Ambassador M. de Foix in the succeeding 
February (i8th, 1565), upon his negotiations for the marriage 
of Elizabeth and Charles IX., then on the throne : 

" The said Cecil assured him with many oaths that the 
Queen his mistress had no desire to marry the Count of Leicester 
or any one else in this country, and he was quite sure of this, 
and he would wage his head it would not happen. It was true 
she loved the said Count, for his virtues and merits, not as 
a subject but as a brother, and desired his welfare and grandeur, 
and she would be well pleased if he should be preferred and 
advanced "* 

Is it at all likely that Burghley, if Elizabeth had been the 
notoriously loose woman we have been led to believe her, 
would have had the hardihood to say a thing like this to an 
Ambassador resident in London, where nothing could take place 
in the Queen's life that would be unknown to him ? But, 
aside from this, we know that these were Burghley's real 
sentiments. The letter to Mundt alone shows that beyond 
peradventure — as does the letter we are now to present. 

3. A year later Cecil writes to Sir Thomas Smith, one of 
his oldest and closest friends, and one of the most important 
men of the period. He succeeded Cecil as principal secretary 
in 1572. At the time of this letter, 26th March, 1566, Smith 

The presence of these two MSS. at Hatfield has never before been noted 
by any author. Haynes published and mentioned only the original — p. 420. 
Lingard, the only authority to mention in the slightest manner that there 
had ever been such a letter, cites the original embellished with a paraphrase 
of the endorsement on the copy, although leaving out the letter's postscript. 
His statement that Elizabeth saw the letter before Cecil wrote the postscript 
asking for the return of the document, is, of course, purely imaginary. His 
argument that because the letter was written at Elizabeth's order, and 
because Cecil desired the document returned, it is therefore evident that 
Cecil did not believe what he had indited, is too silly to warrant further 
attention. Cf. Lingard, vol. vi. pp. 113-114, and note i, of the 3th ed. 
* Baschet Transc, P. R. O., Bundle No. 25, Discours. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


was special ambassador to France, in order to negotiate a 
marriage between Elizabeth and Charles IX. 

" Of my Lord of Leicester's absence, and of his return of 
favour to others here, if your man tell you the tales of court or 
citie, they be fond (Foolish. — F. C.) and many untrue. Briefly 
I affirm, that the Queene's Majesty may be, by malicious tongs, 
not well reported, but in truth she herself is blameless, and 
hath no spot of evill intent. Marry, there may lack specially 
in so busy a world circumspections to avoyde all occasions." * 

4. The following month, April, 1566, Cecil wrote out the 
famous document comparing the merits of Leicester and the 
Austrian Archduke as husband for Elizabeth. His second 
article under the heading " Reasons against the Earl of 
Leicester " reads thus : 

" It will be thought that the slanderous speeches of the 
Queen with the Earl have been true." f 

Is it possible to infer an3rthing from these words except 
that " the slanderous speeches of the Queen with the Earl 
have " not been true ? 

5. And when we turn back five years we find Burghley 
writing again, in one of those chatty paragraphs he so often 
indulged in : 

" Here is a great resort of wooers and controversy among 
lovers. Would to God the Queen had one, and the rest 
honourably satisfied." % 

Would he have written these words if Elizabeth had had a 
lover ? We take it that Burghley was the last man so to stultify 

It would appear that Biurghley felt confident that there was 
nothing illicit in the relations between Elizabeth and Leicester 
or anybody else. Is the judgment of Burghley to be set aside 
for that of some historian who never saw Elizabeth, nor saw 
anybody who had seen her ? For over forty years Burghley 
was in daily contact with Elizabeth ; every prominent man who 
ever appeared at her Court was thoroughly known to him ; and 

• Wright, vol. i. p. 234. t Froude, ed. 1863, vol. viii, p. 286, note. 
t Creighton, p. 57. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


he was a very wise, shrewd, deep-thinking man of untiring 

6. We next put in the testimony of the Spanish Ambassador 
De Silva, who was for years in the London Court. In 1565 
he writes to Philip 11. from London : 

" I keep Leicester in hand in the best way I can, as I am 
still firm in my idea, that if any marriage at all is to result 
from all this, it will be his. The Emperor's man, also, sees a 
good many signs tending to this, although certainly notiiing 
wrong. . . ."* 

This is the formal communication from the Spanish Ambassador 
to his sovereign. Could anything be written under weightier 
responsibility ? 

7. Another Spanish Ambassador, speaking with reference 
to the coming of the Austrian Archduke, as a suitor, reports 
to his King, Philip 11. : 

" In my last interview viith the Queen, whilst I was urging 
and persuading her to consent to the Archduke's visit, . . . she 
replied that he (The Archduke. — F. C.) might not be dissatisfied 
with what he saw but with what he heard about her, as I knew 
there were people in the country who took pleasure in saying 
anything that came into their heads about her. This she said 
with some signs of shame, and I answered that we who were 
treating of the Emperor's business were not so badly informed 
that we did not know something of what was necessary in 
deciding the affair, and Her Majesty might be sure that if there 
were anything which the Archduke should not hear or learn, 
the idea of his coming would not have been entertained 
by us. . . ." t 

We can conceive nothing more probable than De Quadra's 
position as he states it ; and this brings us to a point which 
all our predecessors must have observed had they made 
exhaustive study of the subject of this investigation, namely : 
that it would be almost inconceivable that any Prince of the 
House of Spain, of France, of Austria, of Sweden, of Denmark, 
would have sought marriage with EHzabeth if she had been a 
guilty woman, even with one man alone. It is much more 

• Sim. Doc, vol. i. p. 466, 13th Aug., 1565. 

t De Quadra to Philip II., Sim, Doc, vol. i. No. 65, Sth Oct., 1559. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


inconceivable that princes of all these houses, and more than 
one from each — except only Denmark — should in each case 
have been willing to become the husband of a notoriously light 

There are few men who will marry a bad woman. No man 
ever did it who did not regret it. No monarch could do it 
without endangering his throne. No monarch could do it, 
and retain at his Court a single decent person. Even a King 
cannot flout decency to such an extent. What a position a 
great Prince of Catholic Spain would have had to face in 
marrying Elizabeth, if the whole world regarded her as one 
who had been the mistress of many men ! The couple would 
have been jeered off their thrones. Does anybody seriously 
propose to suggest that all the princes of the Great European 
Powers were willing to enter an alliance that would have brought 
them face to face with that situation ? The bare supposition 
is absurd. Yet that is the very position in which nearly all 
our forerunners have unwittingly placed themselves. They 
could not have deeply thought out the question at all. 

8. We now come to a piece of evidence which to our mind 
is very strong, yet there may be some who will sneer at it, as 
they sneer at everjrthing favourable to Elizabeth. The witness 
is the Queen herself. She supposed, and everybody about 
her supposed, that she was in extremis, with the small-pox, in 
1562. De Quadra, the Spanish Ambassador, reports to 
Philip II. : 

" The Queen protested at the time that although she loved 
and had always loved Lord Robert dearly, as God was her 
witness, nothing improper had ever passed between them." * 

It is the custom to gibe at Elizabeth's religion ; but it is a 
course in which we cannot join. We have too much sympathy 
with her point of view. She could never identify much about 
the Church with Religion. The majority of mankind have by 
this time followed her lead. It was the essentials alone that 
interested her. The contentions of sect and form, school and 
precedence, did not impress her as things at all concerned 
with Religion or with God. Yet we are bound to record our 
profound impression that few monarchs have more depended 
• Sim, Docs., vol. i. p. 190, zsth Oct., 1562. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


upon God than did Elizabeth. We cannot think that she would 
blaspheme Him in what she believed to be the very hour when 
she must present herself before Him. 

9. The logical attitude of so great an authority upon the 
matter that concerns us as Catherine de Medici, the Queen- 
Mother of France, and one of the most able rulers in any 
country, adds great weight to the favourable evidence for 
Elizabeth. Like Burghley and all the ambassadors at the 
London Court, we may be certain that if Elizabeth were guilty, 
Catherine knew it. Had she believed the calumnies, would 
she have said to the English Ambassador what we have already 
quoted in 5. Charge 16, of Chapter IX. ? Those who recall 
that there the Queen-Mother and both of her sons, the King 
and Anjou, were agreed that Ehzabeth was innocent, need not 
read more hereunder, as it is but repetition. Catherine is 
negotiating in her garden at Blois with the two English Ambas- 
sadors, Walsingham and Thomas Smith, than whom England 
possessed no abler men. The subject is a marriage between 
Elizabeth and one of Catherine's sons, who had sent word to 
her through her other son, the King, that he would not marry 
Elizabeth because of the scandal he had heard of her. We 
may be sure that he had heard nothing, and seen nothing, 
from any French Ambassador or from any other reliable source 
that had not also reached her ears or eyes — and what is her 
observation on his point of view ? 

" I bare him in hand (for it grieved me not a little, and the 
King, my son, as you know) that of all evil rumours and tales 
of naughty persons, such as would break the matter (That is, 
prevent the marriage. — F. C.) and were spread abroad of the 
Queen, that those he did believe . . . and I told him it is 
all the hurt that evil men can do to noble men and princes, 
to spread abroad lies and dishonourable tales of them ; and 
that we of all princes that be women are subject to be slandered 
wrongfully of them that be our adversaries. Other hurt they 
cannot do us. He said and swore to me he gave no credit to 
them. He knew that she had so virtuously governed her realm 
this long time, that she must needs be a good and virtuous 
princess, and full of honour ; and other opinion of her he could 
not have. ..." * 

• Diggts, Smith to Burghley, sand March, 1572. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


The French prince had previously said that " he considers 
he would be dishonoured " if he married her, so much had he 
heard " against her honour." It is plain that he had altered 
his mind, not about her innocence, belief in which he had 
sworn, but about marrying her ; and that such is the case 
is further demonstrated by Catherine's writing to her London 
Ambassador, F6n61on, eleven months previously, and sixteen 
days subsequent to the date of Anjou's aspersions, that he then 
" desires it (The marriage. — F. C.) at this hour, infinitely." * 
What had caused him to make this volte-face in so short a time 
we can only infer from the Queen Mother's statement in the 
same letter that " I have done so much that my said son 
d'Anjou is willing to marry her (Elizabeth. — F. C.)." But what 
is even more conclusive and significant is the fact that Anjou 
was thereafter for many months in pursuit of the match. 
Catherine's belief in Elizabeth's purity is established. Her 
son swore that he gave " no credit " to the slanders. They 
two are very competent authorities. 

10. As long as Sir Thomas Chaloner was alive, he and 
Burghley were the closest friends. They were within a year 
of being the same age, Chaloner is one of the first men of the 
period. He seems to have been educated both at Oxford and 
Cambridge. Before he was twenty, he was abroad in the 
diplomatic service, which he never left. He was sent to Vienna, 
to Algiers, to Scotland, to France, to Flanders, to negotiate 
with Emperor Ferdinand, and then to Brussels, where he 
remained for several years as Ambassador to Philip II. He 
was a most competent and brave soldier, and received his 
knighthood on the field of battle. He was a noted literary 
man, a poet in French and Latin. All the learned men of 
his time were his friends. He left four printed works, to one 
of which Cecil prefixed verses in praise of the author. 
In his diary, Cecil records : "Sir Thomas Challoner dyed, 
and was buryed in Paules Church, wher Sir William Cecill 
was the chief Mourner." Cecil was also one of his executors. 
Upon the 6th of December, 1559, when the scandals about 
Leicester and Elizabeth were at their zenith, Chaloner sent 
from Brussels a letter to Burghley, from the postscript of which 
we excerpt the following : 

* F£n61on, Corretp. Dip., i8th Feb., 1571, torn. 7, p. 183. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


" I assure you, Sir, thies Folks ar brode Mowthed, where 
I spake of oon to muche in Favour, as they esteme. I thincke 
ye gesse whome they named ; if ye do not, I will apon my net 
Letters write furder. To tell you what I conceyve ; as I 
count the Slawnder most false, so a young Princesse canne not 
be to ware, what Countenance or familiar Demonstration she 
maketh, more to oon, then an other. 

" I judge no oon Mannes Service in the Realme woorthe 
the Enterteignement with suche a Tayle of Obloquie, or 
Occasion of Speeche to suche Men as of evill Will ar ready to 
fynde Faults. This delaye of rype tyme for Maryage, besides 
the Losse of the Realme (for without posterite of her Highnes 
what hope is lefte unto us) mynistreth Matter to theis lewde 
Towngs to descant apon, and breedith Contempt. I would 
I had but oon Howres talke with you. Thincke, if I trusted 
not your good Nature, I woulde not write thus muche ; which 
nevertheles I humbly praye you to reserve as written to 
yourself." * 

Does anybody wish to set himself against the undoubted 
opinion of Chaloner ? He had been away from England since 
Elizabeth mounted the throne ; but had anybody better 
sources of information than he ? Would the opinion of any- 
body at a later time be worth so much concerning this question ? 
" I count the Slawnder most false " is his verdict. 

II. We shall now present a piece of evidence which has 
never been in print, or known, or mentioned, by any historian. 
It has lain for more than three centuries in the Royal Library 
of Stockholm, where it may now be seen. It is of the greatest 
importance because of the man who wrote it, and the circum- 
stances under which it was prepared. 

In the winter of 1561, King Erick of Sweden, who had 
sought Elizabeth's hand while he was yet Crown Prince, 
renewed his suit which had been begun by his brother John, 
Duke of Finland, in 1559, when he spent some six months 
in London. Regular Ambassadors had followed with the 
same errand, but, finding their progress ineflfective, Erick 
determined to make a last effort vrith. a bigger man. If he 
too failed the Queen should see the northern monarch in 
propria persona. He chose for this most delicate work Nils 

• Haynes, p. 212. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Gyllenstjerna, whose name usually appears in English State 
Papers as Nicholas Guilderstern, or with slight variations. 

He was Chancellor of Sweden, one of its most prominent 
and most experienced statesmen. He it was who horrified 
the assembled guests at his master's coronation by dropping 
the crown as he was about to place it upon the new monarch's 
brow — an omen that did not disappoint those who believed in 
the terrible fate it portended. In the middle of December, 
1560, the Chancellor left Sweden, and on the 4th of the follow- 
ing April forwarded to his royal master the letter, part of the 
last page of which we reproduce. It is all in Latin. The 
portion which concerns us begins with De minus, in the 5th 
line and ends with the first two words, quidem indtcio, of the 
I ith line, the entire passage reading : 

" De minus pudica vita eius nullum signum, castitatis autem 
et virginitatis et vere pudicitiee perplurima vidi, ita ut vitam 
ipsam deponere ausim ipsam esse castissimam, pulchra est et 
eloquens et plane digna V.S.M. si qua est in tota Europa meo 
qutdem indicia." 

" I saw no signs of an immodest life, but I did see many 
signs of chastity, of virginity, and of true modesty ; so that 
I would stake my life itself that she is most chaste. She is 
beautiful and eloquent, and wholly worthy your Majesty, in 
my judgment at least, if there is any in all Europe who is." * 

There would appear little doubt that one of the specific 
things which the Chancellor was instructed by his master to 
study on his visit to London was the character of Elizabeth, 
to whom Erick was proposing marriage. There would seem 
to be no other reasonable explanation for the Chancellor's 
breaking out in the middle of a long letter to say, without a 
preceding word on the subject, that he saw nothing of any 
immodest life in the Queen, but did see many signs that she 
was most chaste ; and it would be most surprising if Erick did 
not want a fresh opinion on the subject, in view of the tales 
that as we have seen, and shall see, were flying all about 
Europe, even if, as we have also seen, they were often insti- 
gated by Elizabeth herself. 

12. We have already (under No. i) quoted a letter from 

• Anglica Legaten N. GyldensHemas Bref. till Kongl. Maj'. 1561-62, 
p. 18, Kungl, Biblioteket, Stockholm. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

MUOi- AMiw>> t-K^M «»♦ f \f^4fUcfir 17, t+w*^v»^y,i»y 
; ft^^ 6/ Vi'rf' I'll ty»t-v>v<t ifr4fU»r-M+t<» Vi<»<. . vf« 

• For. 5t. Pop., is6i,"Nb. 88 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

a^^t>^■ AMtK** l»rt/-«» *>♦ f ^>« ^<" ^1 1 ^IJ- "T ■» »**'^-^»«' ^♦>f^ 

' f ■ ^/ ■' 

^nV, a-^l^J Mh**- 'f*^' »""r-^ '*«->^^''^*'^ y**"*^ **^^ 

^/lt«4 ^♦i» V4'««'^»» Qi^** /li't' ^♦^ /t#< Milgf^vn^V 
''.if ~fi-,:i^i^: ^-p hill ■:'>•■! -/.«-• <?<•<'-«*< ti<:r-</i.»Y-i»f Ct*i f >/'l 

i-Mt <' Z^-"'*^' '^«-** Xf /v**/*!***-^ VsfQ*' Jt^i^i ^»«- 

I f <r» 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


— Nicholas Guildei'Stcrn, S^vedi.vh Avihassada7- to Hlizahetfi 


Burghley to Sir Christopher Mundt, Elizabeth's political agent 
in Germany, wherein the writer says that Elizabeth and 
Leicester were guiltless in their relations. That was written 
in 1 564. More than three years before that, Mundt had written 
to Burghley to similar effect, if more briefly, about the same 
scandal. Curiously enough, his letter is dated on the very day 
when Guilderstern's letter, just quoted, was penned, the 4th of 
April, 1561. It was at a time when the possibilities of the 
Austrian marriage were at their highest. As we read Mundt's 
letter, we can see how Elizabeth's reputation had to suffer, 
when to attack it would serve the purposes of first one nation 
and then another. Mundt writes from Frankfort : 

" Most horrid lies have been written from the French 
Court, Brussels, and Lorraine, by certain important but most 
impudent personages to the German princes concerning the 
Queen and her Master of the Horse (Leicester. — F. C). It 
would be well that these evil reports should be removed from 
the mind of the Elector Palatine, as the writer knows most 
scandalous letters have been sent to him from Lower 
Germany." * 

We can easily read from these lines that, in order to defeat 
the Austrian match, and increase the power of the Catholics, 
a deliberate and widespread campaign was being carried on, 
with the defamation of Elizabeth, the chief hope of all the 
Protestants, as its principal weapon. The Elector Palatine 
was one of the leading men of that faith on the Continent, and 
he had a son about to sue for Elizabeth's hand. Any such 
project the CathoUcs must defeat if they could — and the way 
to defeat it most effectively with strong Calvinists like these 
princes of the Palatinate was to make Elizabeth out a bad 
woman. No doubt the slanderers considered themselves 
Christians, and the helpless woman they maligned a pagan. 
But a little while ago, the reader's attention was called to a 
statement of the Spanish Ambassador in London, saying that 
the French Ambassador had just been to him to say that 
Elizabeth had passed the night with Leicester (Chakge 12, 
Chapter VIII.). At that time the Austrian marriage was 
most imminent ; and the French Ambassador was simply 

• For. St. Pap., 1561, No. 88. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and unconscionably slandering Elizabeth in order to stop the 
marriage, which his master feared above everything else. The 
Spaniard says that this is the case. 

Can a more pitiful situation for a woman be imagined ? 
Elizabeth was perfectly helpless against these attacks. Every 
time that any monarch or prince offered marriage, every 
opponent of the match would use slander to prevent it. That 
is a plain statement of the true position. Under these circum- 
stances, is it not remarkable that the most exhaustive researches 
during three centuries have revealed no more direct accusations 
against Elizabeth than those detailed in Chapter VIII. ? We 
can only conclude that those who knew were well aware that 
there were no facts to warrant others. 

13. In 1565 there was a most determined eflFort by the 
Austrian Emperor to bring the negotiations for the marriage of 
his son and Elizabeth to a successful conclusion. Maximilian 
selected one of the most able men of his diplomatic service, 
the Baron Mitterburg, Adam Swetkowitz, to come to London 
and take charge of the affair, which the resident Ambassador 
had brought to a promising condition. Swetkowitz reached 
England in the first week of May, 1565, and left on his return 
journey three months later. Upon the 4th of June, after he 
had been about a month in London, he wrote his imperial 
master a Latin letter, from which we reprint the following : 

" Et cum totius huius negotii maximus autor et promoter 
sit et erit illustrissimus dominus comes Lecestrensis Maiestati 
Vestre Caesaree et serenissimo archiduci Carolo ac tote domui 
Austrace affectionatissimus et deditissimus et qui a serenissima 
regina sincero ac castissimo atque honestissimo amore tanquam 
frater germanus amatur, sununopore conducere meo iuditio 
videretur, ut Maiestas Vestra Caesarea et serenissimus archi- 
dux Carolus praefatum illustrissimum comitem dominum 
fraternis literis salutarent et gratificarent." • 

" And since the principal author and promoter of all this 
business is and will be the most illustrious lord the Earl of 
Leicester who is most aflfectionately disposed and devoted to 
your Imperial Majesty, and to the Archduke Charles, and to 
the whole house of Austria, and who is ever loved by the 
most serene Queen with sincere and most chaste and most 

* Vienna Archives Hausarchiv, Familienakten, Faszikel 15. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


honourable love as a true brother, it would seem in my judg- 
ment to be of the greatest advantage if your Imperial Majesty 
and the most serene Archduke Charles would salute and gratify 
with fraternal letters the aforesaid most illustrious Earl." 

Can you, reader, find this letter in any history ? And 
could there be better evidence ? This Ambassador was on the 
spot, he had the regular Austrian Ambassadors to consult, he 
had the Spanish Ambassador to consult, he had every Catholic 
in England to advise him. He was not a young man. He was 
not inexperienced. If any man was competent to judge of 
and report on a matter so intimately connected vnth the honour 
of the House of Austria, he was that man. What is the con- 
trary opinion of anybody, one, two, or three centuries afterward, 
worth in comparison ? 

14. Another Ambassador, this time a Frenchman, has left 
his testimony to similar effect, upon two separate occasions. 
Bertrand de Salignac de la Mothe F6ndon was one of the most 
prominent men of the France of his day. Born in 1523, ten 
years before Elizabeth, he served with great distinction in the 
army until 1568, when he came to Elizabeth's Court as Ambas- 
sador, just ten years after her ascension. He remained con- 
tinuously seven years. Six years later he returned with the 
Prince Dauphin de Montpensier, to negotiate with Elizabeth 
for her marriage with the royal prince, Alen9on. He was a 
Catholic and fought in the armies against the Protestants in 
France. A year after he came with the Dauphin, he was back 
in London for twelve months, and his diplomatic career only 
ended with his death when he had attained the age of sixty- 
six. He left a number of important works upon war, history, 
and travel. The three large volumes of his diplomatic dis- 
patches during his seven years' residence at the Court of 
Elizabeth are a lasting monument to his great ability in the 
highest art of peace, in which, however, he reached no more 
prominent place than he did in the field of arms. 

We can conceive of no more competent man to form a 
judgment as to the truth of the scandals about Elizabeth. 
No man could have been better placed to obtain accurate 
information upon such a matter. Nobody could have known 
facts unknown to him. He is a witness of the utmost probity. 

He had been in London about two and a half years when 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


he addressed an official despatch to the Queen-Mother, 
Catherine de Medicis, in which occur these words with reference 
to the negotiation then being carried on for the marriage of 
EHzabeth with Anjou, the brother of the French monarch and 
the son of Catherine : 

" D'aultres m'ont mand6 que les quatre principauk, qui 
guydent les intentions de la dicte Dame, se sont assemblez 
pour r&ouldre qu'est ce qu'ilz luy en conseilleroient. Je vous 
manderay bientost leur conseil, et vous adjouxteray cependant, 
Madame, cestuy cy du mien, qu'encor que ceste princesse 
soit bonne et vertueuse, je ne la tiens toutesfois esloignde du 
naturel de celles qui veulent monstrer de fouyr, lorsque plus 
elles sont recerchdes ;..."* 

The translation of this is : 

" Others have told me that the four principal people who 
affect the intentions of the said Lady, have gathered to decide 
what they will advise her to do. I will tell you soon their 
decision, and will add, moreover, Madame, my own opinion, 
which is that though this princess is good and virtuous, she 
is not always different from the nature of those who balk the 
more they are sought." 

A month later, writing to the same Queen, F^nelon says : 

" L'on a peu diversement escripre et parler de ceste prin- 
cesse sur I'oyr dire des gens, qui quelquefoys ne pardonnent 
k ceulx mesmes qui sont les meilleurs, mais, de tant qu'en sa 
court Ton ne vojrt que ung bon ordre, et elle y estre bien fort 
honnor^e et ententive en ses affaires, et que les plus grandz 
de son royaulme et toutz ses subjectz la craignent et r6v^rent, 
et elle ordonne d'eubc et sur eulx avec pleyne authority, j'ay 
estimd que cella ne pouvoit proceder de personne mal fam^e, 
et oii il n'y eust de la vertu ; et ndantmoins ce que je S9avois 
que vous en aviez ouy dire, et I'opinion qu'on a qu'elle n'aura 
point d'enfans, les dures conditions qui se peuvent proposer en 
telz contractz. . . ." j- 

The English of the above reads : 

" They write and speak very differently of this princess from 

• Corresp. Dip., F£n41on to the Queen, 31st Jan. 1571, vol. iii. p. 456. 

t Correspond. Dip., F£n61on ; F^n^lon to the Queen, 6th March, IS7> ". 
vol.iv.p. II. Cf.letterof 2nd March, i57i,fromCath. deMed. toFe'nelon, 
ibid. vol. vit. p. 189. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the hearsay of men who sometimes camiot forgive the great 
qualities of their betters ; but in her own Court they would 
see nothing irregular, and that she is very greatly honoured 
therein, and understands her affairs so well that the mightiest 
and the lowliest of her subjects fear and revere her, and she 
rules them with complete authority. I conceive that this could 
not proceed from a person of evil fame, or who was lacking 
in virtue. Nevertheless, I know what you have heard said, 
and that there is the opinion that she will never have children." 

15. There is also that letter of Hatton to Elizabeth quoted 
as the second letter under 7. Charge 18, in Chapter IX., 
wherein Hatton cried out : 

" Live for ever . . . and love some man. ... A more wise 
man may seek you, but a more faithful and worthy can never 
have you." 

Hatton had then been at Court ten years. He certainly 
knew what went on there. Is this language that he would 
have used if Elizabeth had had, or had then, a lover, or if there 
had been, or was then, any man whom she loved ? It seems 
impossible to imagine his doing so. 

Note, — The frequency with which one meets with hints as" to children 
of Elizabeth's must have mention. We shall only present three authorities 
— ^but two were contemporary and the third substantially so, and all were 
well informed. Few will fail to be of opinion that they should for ever have 
settled the matter. That they have not done so is a matter that those who 
spread such tales must explain. 

a. This first authority has been heretofore mentioned in Chapter IX. 
under 7. Charge 20. The English Ambassador at Madrid had been 
spreading the report that Elizabeth had a daughter, whom the Queen would 
marry to some Catholic selected by Philip II. — at least, this was the report 
to the Vatican. Upon the 29th of January, 1576, the Papal Secretary of 
State, Galli, replies to this : 

" Were it true that the pretended Queen had a daughter, his Holiness 
deems that it would enable his Majesty (Philip II. of Spain. — F.C.) to dispense 
with war, which of its own nature is so hazardous, and think of some accord 
by way of marriage, which in the end might bring the realm back to the 
Catholic faith." — Vat. Arch. Nunt. di Spagna, vol. ix. fol. 81. 

What did the Vatican think of the truth of the rumour ? 

b. The great de Quadra, Philip II.'s Ambassador to EUzabeth's Court 
and who died at his post, writes to his master from London in January, 
1561 : 

"... there is no lack of people who say she has already had some 
(children), but of this I have seen no trace and do not believe it." — Sim. 
Docs., vol. i. letter 122, 22nd Jan., 1561, de Quadra to Philip II. 

Nobody will dispute that de Quadra was a diligent Ainbassador, even 
for an ungrateful monarch who withheld his pay, and saw the old man's 
body seized in London for debts contracted in Philip's service. 

c. There remains the testimony of Osborne, who was ten years of age 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


i6. One of the greatest historians was a contemporary of 
the Queen, He was her junior by a score of years. He spent 
his whole life in writing that marvellous Latin production now 
generally known as Histoire universelle. The greater part of 
it was written before Elizabeth died. Yet it is as magnificent 
in style as the work of Froude. What a tremendous distance 
there was between the English historians of that time and this 
Frenchman, Jacques Auguste de Thou, may be appreciated by 
comparing a page of Froude with one of Camden or Naunton. 
There is almost as much difference as between the Englishman 
of to-day and his hairy ancestor dressed in a wolfhide, and 
armed with a stone hammer. The work covers the years 
1546 to 1607, in sixteen quarto volumes, each of some 470 
pages. He was a most erudite scholar, trained for the law, 
for diplomacy, and the Church, and widely travelled. The 
Encychpeedia Britannica says of this history : " De Thou was 
treated as a classic, an honour which he deserved. His history 
is a model of exact research, drawn from the best sources. . . ." 
The greatest excellence of the work is its reliability, which three 
centuries of study has never shaken. 

De Thou was certainly in daily touch vpith the leading men 
of his time. He was a member of the French Parliament, a 
conseiller d'etat, and he had spent several years on a diplomatic 
mission vpith Paul de Foix, who, seven years before, had 
completed four years of service as French Ambassador at the 
Court of Elizabeth. 

He deals with this matter of Elizabeth's morals in these 
words : 

" The hatred of her religion has caused much evil to be 
said against her : but her long life, and the good fortune, 

when Elizabeth died. He seems soon after to have come to Court, and 
there remained in some ofiBce or other for the next thirty or forty years. 
He was one of the most popular literary men of his age, a thing very difficult 
to comprehend by those who peruse his works. There is no doubt that he 
had close companionship yiith many men and women who had known 
the intimate side of Elizabeth's life during its later years. As already 
quoted, under 3, Charge 4, in Chapter IX., Osborne writes in his Memoiu, 
p. 60, 1658 ed. : 

"... that she (Elizabeth. — F. C.) had a Son bred in the Sute of 
Venice, and a Daughter I know not where or when, with other strange 
tales that went on her, I neglect to insert, as better for a Romance, then to 
mingle with so much truth and integrity as I professe, . . ." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


never wavering, which accompanied her clear up to her death 
with the favour of heaven as constant as impenetrable, has 
sufficiently refuted the greatest part of it. She had the weak- 
ness to like to be courted and loved for her beauty ; and even 
when she was no longer young, she yet affected to have lovers. 
It seemed as if she made it a diversion to herself to renew the 
remembrance of those fabulous islands, where noblemen and 
famous knights formerly wandered and piqued themselves on 
loving — ^but in a noble and virtuous manner, and into which 
there entered no impurity. If these amusements did some 
hurt to her reputation, they never injured the majesty of her 
state." * 

17. Under 3, Charge 4, in Chapter IX., we have reprinted 
extracts from the Memoirs of Francis Osborne which show 
clearly that he had little faith in the accusations against the 
Queen. There Osborne says that the remark of Henry the 
Great of France that one of the " three things inscrutable to 
intelligence [was] Whether Queen Elizabeth was a maid or no," 
" may render reports dubious that come from meaner men." 
We know that Osborne disbelieved the tales that Elizabeth 
had had children. He also said that the favour shown to 
Essex did not come " from a nearer familiarity then I have been 
informed it did " ; and, giving his last comment upon this 
matter in general, he thus sums up : f 

*' Now whether these Amorosities were naturall, or meerely 
poetical and personated, I leave to conjecture." 

18. Bacon, we take it, will be deemed of much importance 
to our inquiry. He was a contemporary of Elizabeth. He 
was at Court. He was for years the chief adviser of Essex. 
For long, he was almost as much as that to the Queen herself. 
There must have been no man better informed of the inner 
doings of the Court during the greater part of her reign. In 
his essay upon the Queen he writes : % 

" Some of the graver sort may, perhaps, aggravate her 
levities ; in loving to be admired and courted, nay, and to have 
love poems made on her ; and continuing this humour longer 

• Histoire universelle, vol. Jciv. p. 146. 

t Memoirs, p. 73 of the ed. 1658. , , „ ^ 

j Essays, Queen Elizabeth, Ward, Lock & Co. ed. p. 117. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


than was decent for her years ; yet to take even these matters 
in a milder sense, they claim a due admiration ; being often 
found in fabulous narrations ; as that of ' a certain queen in 
the fortunate islands, in whose court love was allowed, but 
lust banished.' . . . This queen was certainly good and moral ; 
and as such she desired to appear." 

19. We have now reached the final piece of testimony. It 
is from the pen of one of the most celebrated, most experienced, 
most learned, and most respected men of the Elizabethan era, 
Michel de Castelnau, Sieur de la Mauvissi^re. Thirteen years 
older than Elizabeth, he was very carefully educated and then 
travelled in Italy, staying long at Rome. He then went to 
Malta, and then into the army in the war vidth Italy. At the 
age of thirty-seven he held a command in the navy, but returned 
to the army and fought in Picardy. He was sent on various 
delicate diplomatic missions, including one to Mary Stuart 
before she married the Dauphin. In 1559, a year after Eliza- 
beth came on the throne, he was sent to negotiate with her for 
the restoration of Calais, when began that intimate acquaintance 
with the English Court which was to endure for a quarter of 
a century. An embassy to Germany, to Margaret of Parma, 
to Savoy, and yet another to Rome followed. Then he accom- 
panied Mary Stuart on her fatal return to her own country, 
after she had ceased to be Queen of France. For a year he 
was then in Scotland, except when at the London Court in his 
efforts to reconcile the two queens. His wise and moderate 
advice to Mary, his fellow Catholic, however, was unheeded, 
and she plunged into the abyss. Upon returning to France 
he fought the Protestants in Brittany, and then followed ten 
years of more embassies to different Courts, including that of 
Elizabeth and of Alba in the Netherlands. 

In 1572 he was hurried over to Elizabeth to try to alleviate 
the effect of St. Bartholomew. Next he was sent to Germany, 
to Switzerland — and then, in 1574, he came to Elizabeth's 
Court as regular Ambassador, to remain continuously for ten 
years. With this service completed, he returned to France 
to be further entrusted with other missions until his death in 
1592, eleven years before the Great Queen left the scene. The 
Encychpeedia Britannica says of his MSmoires : " They rank 
very high among the original authorities for the period they 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


cover. . . . They were written during his last embassy in 
England (i 574-1 584.— F. C.) for the benefit of his son, and they 
possess the merits of clearness, veracity and impartiality." 

We now offer this great man's verdict upon the scandalous 
charges against Elizabeth that have come down to us through 
the centuries, until we have come to believe them. After a 
quarter of a century of the closest possible acquaintance with 
Elizabeth and all the men and women of her Court, he solemnly 
leaves this message to his boy : 

" Et si Ton I'a voulu taxer faussement d'avoir de I'amour, 
je diray avec verity que ce sont inventions forgoes de ses 
mal-veillans, & ^s cabinets des Ambassadeurs, pour d^goiiter 
de son alliance ceux auxquels elle eut est6 utile." • 

An exact translation is : 

" And if some persons have wished to tax her falsely with 
having amorous attachments, I shall say with truth that these 
are inventions forged by the malevolent, and from the cabinets 
of some Ambassadors, to prevent those to whom it would have 
been most useful from making an alliance with her." 

Such is the case for Elizabeth. The forthcoming and final 
chapter will demonstrate the principal reason why, in spite of 
the many positive and overwhelming evidences of Elizabeth's 
purity, all posterity has regarded her as unchaste. No other 
verdict has been possible. 

* Mimoires, vol. i, p. 62, ed. 1731. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



WE are now nearing the end of the road we have 
been so long travelling. 
A glance at the follomng tables will demon- 
strate to the reader better than any other state- 
ment why it is that the public at large in every country has 
been almost unanimously of the opinion that there was no 
reasonable doubt of the immorality of " that Great Queen," to 
adopt Cromwell's description of her. 

These tables comprise all the biographies of the Queen, 
all the important histories of England, and all other authorities 
whose scope comprehends a consideration of her character. 
We believe that every book of this classification is included in 
this list. We believe it comprises every volume which has 
had considerable effect upon Elizabeth's personal history. 
It is intended to present a complete list, and, as just said, it 
is believed that that has been done. The opinion of the 
world upon the chastity of Elizabeth must have been formed 
upon its reading of some of these fifty-three works, for there 
are, substantially at any rate, no others dealing importantly 
with the Queen for it to have read. 

It is desired to show the reader how the public for three 
centuries has not been able to learn of the nineteen Defences 
which have been presented upon the Queen's behalf in the 
preceding chapter. 

The fifty-three authorities are as follows, with the authors 
arranged alphabetically : 

AiKiN, The Court and Times of Queen Elizabeth. 
Beesly, E. S., Queen Elizabeth. 
Bekker, Ernst, Elizabeth and Leicester. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


BoHUN, The Character of Queen Elizabeth. 

Bright, A History of England, 

Cambridge Modern History. 

Capefigue, M., La Reine Vierge Elizabeth d'Angleterre. 

Carte, Thos., A General History of England. 

Cassell's History of England. 

CoNGREVE, Richard, Historical Lectures. 

Creighton, Mandell, Queen Elizabeth. 

Dargaud, J. M., Histoire d'filizabeth d'Angleterre. 

Dictionary of National Biography. 

Encyclopaedia Britannica. 

Echard, Laurence, History of England. 

Ellis, Original Letters Illustrative of English History, 

Series i, 2, 3. 
Froude, History of England. 
Gardiner, S. R., A Student's History of England. 
Gardiner, S. R., and J. Bass Mullinger, Introduction to the 

Study of English History. 
Green, A History of the English People. 
Hallam, The Constitutional History of England. 
Hume, David, The History of England. 
Hume, M. A. S,, The Courtships of Queen Elizabeth. 
Innes, a. D., England under the Tudors. 
Jameson, Memoirs of Female Sovereigns. 
Keralio, Mlle. de, Histoire d'filizabeth Reine d'Angleterre. 
Leti, Gregorio, Historia overo vita di Elisabetta. 
Lingard, a History of England. 
Locke, Gladys E., Queen Elizabeth. 
Mackintosh, The History of England. 
Marcks, Erich, Konigin Elizabeth von England und ihre 

Martin, Frederick, The National History of England. 
Montgomery, The Leading Facts of English History. 
Oldmixon, John, The History of England. 
Oman, A History of England. 
Orr, Lyndon, Famous Affinities of History. 
People's History of England. 
Pollard, A. F., The Political History of England, vol. vi.— 

The History of England from the Accession of 

Edward VI. to the Death of Elizabeth (1910). 
Powell, F. York, and Tout, T. F., History of England. 
Ranke, Leopold Von, A History of England. 
Rapin, Thoyras de. The History of England. 
Raumer, Frederick von. The Political History of England. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Raumer, Contributions to Modern History. 

Richardson, Mrs. Aubrey, The Lover of Queen Elizabeth. 

Robertson, William, The History of Scotland, 

Smollett, A Complete History of England. 

Strickland, Agnes, Life of Elizabeth. 

Strype, Works of, 

ToMLiNS, A History of England. 

Turner, Sharon, History of England. 

Tytler, Tudor Queens and Princesses. 

Wallace, W., The History of England. 

Wright, Thomas, Queen Elizabeth and her Times. 

Of the above fifty-three authorities, only the eleven in the 
follovidng table have presented any of the nineteen defences 
cited in this work : 

AiKiN. Richardson. 

Creighton. Strickland. 

Froude. Strype. 

Hume, M. A. S. Turner. 

Lingard. Wright. 


The following table shows which of the nineteen defences 
these eleven authorities have and have not presented to their 
readers : 

Defence Cited only by 

No. I. Cecil's letter to Mundt stating" that there is Lingard 
nothing more in their (Elizabeth and (In a very 
Dudley's) relations than that which is incomplete 
consistent with virtue and most foreign paraphrase) 
to the baser sort of love. . . . She could 
not love a real brother more." 

No. a. The French Ambassador de Foix says that 

Cecil " assured him with many oaths that 
. . . she loved the said Count ... as 
a brother." 

No. 3, Cecil writes to Sir Thomas Smith " Of my Lingard 

Lord of Leicester's absence ... if your Strickland 
man tell you the tales of court or citie, they Strype 
be fond (Foolish. — F.C.)andmany untrue. Wright 
Briefly I afGrm, that the Queene's Majesty 
may be, by malicious tongs, not well 
reported, but in truth she herself is blame- 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Defence Cited only by 

less, and hath no spot of evill intent. 
Marry, there may lack specially in so 
busy a world circumspections to avoyde 
all occasions." 

No. 4. Cecil's comparative table stating that if the Froude 
Queen marry Leicester " It will be Lingahd 
thought that the slanderous speeches of Strickland 
the Queen with the Earl have been true." 

No. 5. Cecil writing " Here is a great resort of Creighton 
wooers . . . among lovers. Wovdd to 
God the Queen had one." 

No. 6. The Spanish Ambassador, de Silva, reports 

to Philip II. that his colleague the Austrian 
Ambassador " sees a good many signs 
tending to this (That Leicester will marry 
the Queen. — F. C.) although certainly 
nothing wrong." 

No. 7. De Quadra, the Spanish Ambassador reports Frocdb 
to Philip II. that he told Elizabeth that 
" Her Majesty might be sure that if there 
were anything which the Archduke should 
not hear (Were he to come to London. — 
F.C.) or learn, the idea of his coming 
would not have been entertained by 
us. . . ." 

No. 8. Elizabeth's declaration when she was be- Hume, 
lieved to be in extremis, " that although M. A. S. 
she loved and had always loved Lord Pollard 
Robert dearly, as God was her witness, Richardson 
nothing improper had ever passed between 

No. 9. The statement of Catherine de Medicis that 

her son Anjou " said and swore to me he 
gave no credit to them (the tales he had 
heard against Elizabeth). He knew that 
she had so virtuously governed her realm 
this long time, that she must needs be a 
good and virtuous princess, and full of 
honour ; and other opinion of her he 
could not have." 

To the above is added her own testi- 
mony that she disbelieved the slanders, 
that they were set abroad by those op- 
posing the match, and that of all princes 
" we women are subject to be slandered 
wrongfully of them that be our adver- 

Digitized by Microsoft® 





Cited only by 



Chaloner to Cecil, saying of the tales about 
Elizabeth spread about on the Continent 
" I count the Slawnder most false." 

No. II. The Swedish Ambassador, Gyllenstjerna, 

writing to the King of Sweden who lus 

sent mm to negotiate a marriage for him 
with Elizabeth, says of her, " I saw no 
signs of an immodest life, but I did see 
many signs of chastity, of virginity, and of 
true modesty ; so that I would stake my 
life itself that she is most chaste." 

No. 12. Mundt, the English diplomatic agent in 

Germany, writes to Cecil, " Most horrid 
lies have been written from the French 
Court, Brussels, and Lorraine, by certain 
important but most impudent personages 
to the German princes concerning the 
Queen and her Master of the Horse 
(Leicester. — F. C.) . . . the writer knows 
most scandalous letters have been sent to 
him (The Elector Palatine. — F. C), from 
Lower Germany." 

No. 13. The Emperor Maximilian's Ambassador at 

London sent especially to negotiate a mar- 
riage between his son and Elizabeth, 
writes to his master that he finds Leicester 
" ever loved by the most serene Queen 
with sincere and most chaste and most 
honourable love as a true brother." 

No. 14. The French Ambassador at London, F6n61on, Strickland 
writes to Catherine de Medicis when he 
had been continuously more than two 
years in London, that in Elizabeth's Court 
one " would see nothing irregular . . . 
and that . . . she rules . . . with com- 
plete authority. I conceive that this 
could not proceed from a person of evil 
fame or who was lacking in virtue." 

No. 15. Hatton's letter to Elizabeth urging her Froude 

" Love some man." Richardson 

No. 16. The great historian, de Thou, a contem- Turner 
porary of Elizabeth, writes of her " The 
hatred of her religion has caused much 
evil to be said against her : but her long 
life . . . has sufficiently refuted the 
greatest part of it. ... It seemed as if 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Defence Cited only by 

she made it a diversion . . . to renew the 
remembrance of those fabulous islands, 
where noblemen and famous knights . . , 
wandered and piqued themselves on 
loving — but in a noble and virtuous 
manner, and into which there entered no 

No. 17. Francis Osborne, who was about the Court Richardson 
at London for many years beginning with- Turner 
in ten years after the death of Elizabeth, 
after citing that Henry the Great of 
France had said that it was " inscrutable 
to intelligence Whether Queen Elizabeth 
was a maid or no," and declaring that 
Essex was not upon inunoral terms with 
Elizabeth, concludes his treatment of the 
question : " Now whether these Amoro- 
sities were naturell, or meerely poetical 
and personated, I leave to conjecture." 

No. 18. Bacon, always at Elizabeth's Court and one Turner 
of die closest to her daily life, says that 
Elizabeth's love of being courted longer 
than " was decent for her years " was 
" often found in fabulous narrations ; as 
that of ' a certain queen in the fortunate 
isles, in whose court love was allowed, 
but lust banished.' . . . This queen was 
certainly good and moral." 

No. 19. Mauvissi^re, the exceedingly informed Strickland 
Frenchman who for ten years was his Turner 
country's Ambassador at Elizabeth's 
Court, says in his Mimoires : 

" If some persons have wished to tax 
her falsely with having amourous attach- 
ments, I shall say with truth that these 
are inventions forged by the malevolent, 
and from the cabinets of some Ambas- 
sadors, to prevent those to whom it would 
have been most useful from making an 
alliance with her." 

It will be noted that of the eleven authorities who have 
cited any of the nineteen defences, only one has as many as 
five of them, only three have four, only five have three of 
them, while six of the eleven authorities have only one. 

The following table shows which of the nineteen 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


defences each of the eleven authorities has exhibited to its 
readers : 





Defence offered 
. Our Number lo 
. ,, ,, 5 
• „ » 4 

f) . . . . • • 

Hume, M. A. S 


■ ,, „ 7 

• „ ., 15 

• ,, „ 8 

i» • ■ • • 



• ., ., 3 

• ,, ., 4 
.. » 10 

■ ,, „ 8 

• » ,, 8 

)t • • • ■ • • ■ 

• ,, ,. IS 

• ,. » 17 

• ,. ., 3 

ft • • 
II • • 




• » » 4 
» »i 10 

• » » 14 
. ,, » 19 

• » » 3 

II • ■ . • ■ • 
II • • • • ■ > 
II • • 

). .1 17 

» » 18 

. ,, „ 19 


Since substantially all the books dealing at length with 
Elizabeth which have been written since her death did not 
print the defences of the Queen and did print everything that 
could incriminate her, how could the world fail to conclude 
that she was guilty ? 

The Great Queen has something now to say to you, across 
the centuries. Let her close this book : 

" I am young, and he (Dudley. — F. C.) is young, and there- 
fore we have been slandered. God knows, they do us grievous 
wrong, and the time will come when the world will know it 
also. My life is in the open, and I have so many witnesses 
that I cannot understand how so bad a judgment can have been 
formed of me. But what can we do ? We cannot cover 
every one's mouth, but must content ourselves with doing our 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


duty and trust in God, for the truth will at last be made manifest. 
He knows my heart, which is very different from what people 
think, as you will see some day." 

Is not her prophecy now fulfilled ? Do you not now know 
that the world has done her grievous wrong ? Is not the truth 
at last made manifest ? — and do you not now know her 
heart ? 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Digitized by Microsoft® 



Note I.— Family History of Elizabeth 285 

Note 2. — ^The Earliest Writing of Elizabeth 286 

Note 3. — Elizabeth's Letter to Katherine Parr . . . . 290 

Note 4. — ^Why Posterity is Ignorant of Queen's Ill-Health . . 295 

Note 5. — The Story of Arthur Dudley 309 

Note 6. — A Lewde Pasquyle of 8 Eliz. 318 

Note 7. — Roger ffawnes talke had wth me John Guntor 

uppon ^mas day . . . 1578 322 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Note i 

(Born, 7th Sept., 1533 ; Died, 24th March, 1603) 

A. — Family History of Elizabeth 

IN January, 15 10, Catherine of Aragon, who had married 
Henry VIII. in the preceding year, gave birth to a stillborn 
child. A year later she had a son, who died the following 
month. A year and a half afterward there was another son 
stillborn, or dying immediately. Less than a year after that, in 
November, 15 14, there was another son, who died as soon as 
christened. Mary, who later became queen, was born in 15 16; 
there was certainly one miscarriage in 15 17, and Prof. Pollard says 
at p. 177 of his life of Henry VIII., " it is probable that about this 
time the Queen had various miscarriages." In 15 18 there was a 
stillborn daughter. 

Heiuy took Aime Boleyn for his next wife, and about nine 
months afterward Elizabeth was bom. In 1534, in the second 
year of their married life, Anne had a miscarriage, and in the 
beginning of 1536 she gave birth to a stillborn infant. Her imme- 
diate successor, Jane Seymour, died the following year in giving 
birth to King Edward, the last of Henry's progeny. 

In 1519 Henry had the illegitimate Duke of Richmond by one 
of his wife's ladies-in-waiting. He died when seventeen, having 
apparently been in poor health, gradually failing for some time. 

Edward's health broke down at fifteen, and then, according to 
the Brit. Med. Jour., 1910, vol. i. p. 1303, under the title " Some 
Royal Death-Beds," " eruptions on his skin came out ; his hair fell 
off, and then his nails, and afterwards the joints of his toes and 
fingers." Then he died, three months before he reached sixteen. 

When Mary arrived at sixteen, she broke dovni with a prolonged 
illness, and never had good health thereafter. Her colour was 
invariably sallow, and for many years she was never free from 
headache and palpitation of the heart. {Venetian Cat. 1553-4, 532.) 

" Some personal infirmities under which she labours are the 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


causes to her of both public and private affliction ; to remedy these 
recourse is had to frequent blood-letting, and this is the real cause 
of her paleness and the general weakness of her frame." — Rept. Ven. 
Ambass. in 1557, Ellis, a Ser. II. 236. The above-quoted article 
in the Bld.J. says this of Mary :".... her strength was further 
reduced by frequent bleedings ordered by her physicians. She had 
long suffered from a disease which she called her ' old guest.' The 
chief symptom was amenorrhoea. Spencer Wells, in an address 
delivered before the Brit. Med. Assn. at Manchester in 1877, 
expressed the opinion that the disease was ovarian dropsy. Wells 
believed that she aborted early in her first and only real pregnancy. 
The disappointment no doubt weighed heavily on her mind. She 
became cachectic, and a subsequent enlargement of the abdomen 
gave rise to false hopes. For years before the end her health had 
been bad. As a girl she had suffered from scanty and painful 
menstruation, the result, it may be conjectured, of overstudy. In 
more advanced life, she was seldom free from headaches and pal- 
pitation of the heart, and her bodily ailments were doubtless 
aggravated by mental suffering." She was a great sufferer from 
melancholy, and was so short-sighted that she could not read or 
study anything clearly without placing her eyes quite close to the 

"Henry VIII. suffered many years before his death from a 
' sorre legge,' . . ." — Armak of the Barber Surg. 

" In 1546 the life of Henry VIII. was coming to an end. From 
a handsome, athletic man he had become a mass of loathsome 
infirmities. He was bloated in face, and so unwieldy in body that 
he could not pass through an ordinary door, and could be moved 
from one room to another only by help of machinery, and a number 
of attendants. His legs were swollen and ulcerated, the festering 
sores causing an unbearable stench. Towards the end he could 
neither walk nor stand." Above article in B.M.J. 

" Deaths due primarily to syphlis. Henry VIII. Edward VI." 
Deaths of the Kings of England, p. 6, by James Rae, M.A., M.D. 

Note 2 

The Earliest Writing of Elizabeth 

The search for the first writing of Elizabeth became exciting 
when we read in the second edition of Miss Strickland's Life of 
Elizabeth (Colburn, 1851) at p. 17, note 2 : " Her (Elizabeth's) 
Italian exercise-book, written on fine vellum, is shown at the 
British Museum. Some of the tenses of the verbs, which 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


she perhaps wrote from memory, are incorrect, and are left 
so, having escaped the examination of her Italian master." Long 
before this came to our attention we had supposed that we had 
seen all the early specimens of Elizabeth's hand, no one of which 
appeared to conform to Miss Strickland's detailed description. 
At any rate, the search was most exhaustive, and it can be affirmed 
that there is not now and never has been any such book — that is, 
at the B.M. The remaining difficulty is to explain how so pains- 
taking an author as Miss Strickland could have fallen into such an 

Miss Strickland first published in 1842. At p. 18 of that 
edition is the following : " Among the royal manuscripts in the 
British Museum is a small volume, in an embroidered binding, 
consisting of prayers and meditations, selected from different 
English writers by Queen Katharine Parr, and translated and copied 
by the Princess Elizabeth, in Latin, French, and Italian. The 
volume is dedicated to Queen Katharine, and her initials, R.K.P., 
are introduced in the binding, between those of the Saviour, wrought 
in blue silk and silver thread by the hand of Elizabeth. The 
volume is dated Hertford, December 20, 1545." But there is no 
mention of any exercise-book. Upon taking up the third edition, 
1864, we find no mention at all of the prayer-book, while there is 
this shorter mention of the exercise-book : " Her Italian exercise- 
book, written on fine vellum, is shown at the British Museum." 
Note 2, p. 12. In the abbreviated edition of 1867, the last in the 
life of the author, there is mentioned neither prayer-book nor exercise- 
book. Some quarter of a century after Miss Strickland had passed 
away, however, came the Everyman edition of her Elizabeth, which 
reverts to her first edition, describing the prayer-book, but omitting 
any reference to the exercise-book. 

Under these circumstances the conclusion was forced that Miss 
Strickland had confused the prayer-book, part of which is in Italian, 
and a supposed Italian exercise-book which strictly speaking had 
no existence. Yet so elaborate an error is altogether unexampled 
in the work of Miss Strickland, and the same may be said of that of 
her sister Elizabeth, whose volumes were published in Agnes's 
name. Before leaving them, I wish to say that, considered from the 
point of view of research, reliability and range of their work, the 
Misses Strickland are in the first rank of English historians. Had 
they been men, they would have ranked with Gibbon for the solidity 
and indestructibility of their writings ; in the estimation, that is 
to say, of the general public. Had they had the literary style of 
Froude or Macaulay and been born men, the sisters would have been 
acclaimed by all. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


The only possible explanation with regard to the exercise-book 
might be disclosed could we secure the MSS. of Miss Strickland's 
work ; but here again we are baffled, for they are not to be found. 
They appear to have passed to Messrs, Macmillan many years ago, 
through Messrs. Bentley & Son when the latter business was taken 
over, and Messrs. Macmillan now write that they have lost all trace 
of the originals. 

There are several theories upon which to explain the rather 
astonishing fact that despite the continuous presence of The Mirror 
of the pitiful Soul at the Bodleian since 1729, we are the first historian 
who appears ever to have seen it : one being that the British Museum 
and not the Bodleian was the chief working place of the writers 
involved. But the chief reason for the neglect of this volume, the 
most important, because it is by a full year the earliest and there- 
fore the most pregnant with significance, of all the tangible evidences 
of the little girl's development, undoubtedly lies in the fact that 
Hearne in 1716 pubhshed in his book SyUoge Epistolarum (the first 
collection of English State Letters) — in the form of an ordirutry 
letter zvith nothing to distinguish it as being otherwise — ^the dedication 
of the book to Katherine Parr ; and as this dedication recited that 
Elizabeth sent therewith her translation of the " lytell boke . . . 
intytled or named ye miroir or glasse of the synnefull soule," and 
there was nothing in print to indicate the existence of the book 
itself, the dedication has always passed as an early letter of Elizabeth 
that accompanied a book sent by her to the Queen which had dis- 
appeared, whereas the dedication was an integral part of the volume 
itself. This oversight, taken with the undisputed view that Hearne 
was of the very highest authority and accuracy, would of itself, 
indeed, probably have continued to deflect writers from the truth. 
Miss Strickland, for example, confines her detailed description of 
the early literary efforts of Elizabeth to the book of prayers — referred 
to in the preceding note — at the British Museum, and dismisses 
the earlier work at the Bodleian by a mere " The dedication by this 
princess of her elegant translation from the Italian (1) of the devotional 
treatise The Glasse of Synnefull Soule, to Queen Katharine, was 
doubtless an offering of gratitude no less than respect from Eliza- 
beth to her royal step-mother." (1851 ed. p. 17.) Wiesener, at 
p. 19, vol. i., note, of his The Youth of Queen Elizabeth, refers to 
J. Stevenson's Cal. State Pap., 1558-9, as his sole authority for the 
fact that Elizabeth at one time wrote the earlier translation, and we 
find Mr. Stevenson for his sole authority refers to Hearne. Mumby, 
in The Girlhood of Queen Elizabeth, at p. 24, follows Heame's 
example, and merely prints the dedication in the guise of a separate 
letter, referring for his authority only to Miss Wood's Letters »f 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Royal and Illustrious Ladies— and the latter refers as her solitary 
source to p. 51 of a MS. in the Bodleian ; so that it is evident that 
neither Miss Strickland— the only general biographer of Elizabeth 
who has ever mentioned that there had been such a book — nor 
Wiesener nor Mumby, two special biographers, nor Miss Wood, 
knew that such a book could now be seen ; and no general historian 
has made even the remotest reference to the translation. 

But besides this carelessness of Hearne, there is another accident 
in the history of this MS. that is extraordinary, and one that 
undoubtedly has had much to do with the obscurity in which it 
has been wrapped for over three hundred and fifty years. The 
occurrence is brought sharply forward by this sentence from Miss 
Strickland, 1851 ed. p. 17 : " Camden mentions A Godly Meditation 
of the Soule, concerning Love towardes Christe our Lorde ; trans- 
lated by Elizabeth from the French." We are entirely unable to 
discover any such reference in Camden, but that is relatively unim- 
portant when we say that the work thus mentioned by Miss Strickland 
is the published, printed volume from the Bodleian MS. whose proper 
title is, not " A Godly Medytacyon of the christen Soule," but the 
title toritten in the original MS. in the hand of Elizabeth, " Ye 
Miroir of the Synnefull Soule." (Cf. first edition of original French 
work, published at Alenfon, 1531, where the title is Le miroir de 
lame pecheresse.) The entirely unauthorized title of the published 
translation appears to have misled Miss Strickland and everybody 
else ; and curiously enough, the latest and most important victim 
of this error is the last authority of whom it should be expected ; 
we refer to Mr. H. H. E. Craster, Bodley's assistant librarian. In 
The English Historical Revieto for October, 1914, we find at pp. 722-3 
a bibliography of Queen Elizabeth's translations by Mr. Craster, 
in which the error is persisted in, the Miroir being given as No. i 
of the list of " Published Translations of which the Originals are 
extant," while the Medytacyon, as No. 5, " translated from the 
French by the Princess Elizabeth in 1547 " heads the list of " Pub- 
lished Translations of which the originals have not been traced " ; 
and a letter from Mr. Craster in 1916 shows that he had not become 
aware of his error until we called it to his attention. His placing 
the translation in 1547 is of course three years too late. 

The Miroir, then, all in Elizabeth's hand, is not only of great 
value as the first known specimen of her handwriting — with only 
the possible exception of the Italian half-sheet letter of 31st July, 
ij^ — but its 128 pages are the complete MS. of the only book 
she wrote that has ever appeared in print. This appeared in volume 
form when Elizabeth was fifteen, being printed probably in 1548, 
at Marburg. That there are verbal differences between the MS. 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


and the printed volume has no more significance than the difference 
that may usually be found between the MS. of any author and its 
printed version. 

We wish that we might pose as the discoverer of the identity 
of the Miroir and the Medytacyon, but we have been anticipated 
by twenty years by Percy W. Ames, F.S.A., who perceived the 
truth when editing a facsimile of The Miroir for the Royal Society 
of Literature of the United Bongdom, in 1897 (Asher and Co., 
London), and we are glad of the opportunity to congratulate him 
upon apparently being the first to discover so important a fact that 
had escaped everybody for so many centuries. We ecpect, however, 
that he will be surprised to learn most of the above circumstances, 
as he makes no mention of them except in the remark (p. 11), " It 
is rather remarkable that this, her first literary work, should have 
received so little attention. It is not even mentioned by the majority 
of her numerous biographers," etc. There he drops the subject, 
evidently puzzled by the situation. (We regret to interpolate that 
Mr. Ames died before these words are printed.) 

Note 3 

Elizabeth's Letter to Katherine Parr 

There is one fact about this letter which furnishes an instructive 
commentary upon the obligations imposed upon themselves by 
various historians, and upon the dangers to which exact interpreters 
of history are subjected if they choose to quote from any except 
original sources. Miss Agnes Strickland saw fit when she quoted 
this epistle — ^probably from motives of modesty — to alter the dauses 
" Your Grace being so great with child, and so sickly " (which is 
the text in Hearne's Sylloge, p. 165, the only authority quoted by 
the Misses Strickland), to " Your Grace being so sickly," a substi- 
tution which destroys the value of the letter as an index of the 
development, character and knowledge of Elizabeth at the time of 
its date. 

Its antiquated orthography — note the use of " hit " for " it '' — 
makes the document one of the most delightfully quaint that we 
have seen — ^while the phrase in which she asks for " knowledge 
from time to time how his busy childe dothe," a child who was not 
expected for thirty days, and her observation that " if I were at his 
birth no dowt I wolde se him beaton for the trobel he has put you 
to," is the first recorded exhibition of that playfuhiess in which the 
Queen often indulged. 

And there is another circumstance to which attention must be 
called. Miss Strickland, as we have already noted, refers to Hearne 
as her sole authority for the text, making it evident that she neither 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


saw the original nor knew where it was— in the British Museum 
MSS. A more modern writer, Mumby, in The Girlhood of Quern 
Elizabeth (1909), at p. 37, prints a version of the letter, with the 
preface that " We have taken our text from Miss Strickland, after 
collating it with Hearne ... as weU'as with the manuscript in the 
Smith collection now preserved in the Bodleian Library at Oxford. 
. . . There is nothing in this manuscript, however, to indicate 
its source : it merely states : ' From an original ' " : 

July 31 {1S48). 
Although your Highness's letters be most joyful to me in absence, 
yet, considering what pain it is to you to write, your Grace being 
so great with child, and so sickly, your commendation were enough 
in my lord's letter, I much rejoice at your health, with the well 
Uking of the country, with my humble thanks that your Grace 
wished me with you^till I were weary of that country. Your High- 
ness were like to be cumbered, if I should not depart till I were 
weary of being with you ; although it were the worst soil in the 
world, your presence would make it pleasant. I cannot reprove 
my lord for not doing your commendations in his letter, for he did 
it ; and although he had not, yet I will not complain on him, for 
he shall be diligent to give me knowledge from time to time how 
his busy child doth ; and if I were at his birth, no doubt I would see 
him beaten, for the trouble he hath put you to. Master Denny and 
my lady, with humble thanks, prayeth most entirely for your Grace, 
praying the Almighty God to send you a most lucky deliverance ; 
and my mistresses wisheth no less, giving your Highness most 
humble thanks for her commendations. Written with very little 
leisure, this last day of July. Your humble daughter, Elizabeth. 

Mr. Mumby then becomes involved in an apparent problem 
precipitated by his discovery that a letter of almost the same phrase- 
ology is printed in the Historia Overo Vita Di EUsabetta, by the 
Italian, Gregorio Leti, ascribed by him to a period when Elizabeth 
was not four years of age, i.e. July 31, 15^7. This may be seen on 
p. 19 of Mr. Mumby's work, where he prints an English transla- 
tion of the letter from the French translation of 1694 from the original 
Italian issued at Amsterdam in 1693, which latter is, by more than a 
century, the first life of the Queen. Mr, Mumby's translation is as 
follows : 

July 31, 1S37- 

Madame, — Although the letter which your Majesty has been 
good enough to write to me has consoled me very much for your 
absence, yet, knowing how it must trouble you to write in your 
present state of hedth, I should havfe accounted myself happy in 
learning news of you from the letters of the King, my father. I feel 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the greatest pleasure in learning that your Majesty is well and that 
the country pleases you. I also thatdc your Majesty very humbly 
for the honour you do me in wishing to have me with you. I 
should think myself so happy to be there that I should never go far 
while I had the pleasure of being near your Majesty, and I should 
certainly overwhelm you with constant importunities, for the 
honour of your company would make the dullest place the most 
delightful in the world. I am under a great obligation to the King, 
my father, for so often giving me news of your health, but if he 
should forget to inform me I should not take it ill, provided he will 
let me hear from time to time of the child who is so soon to be bom 
to him. If I should be there when he comes into the world, I do 
not know how I should keep myself from giving him a good beating 
in revenge for the pain he has made you suffer. Mr. and Mrs. 
Denny very humbly thank your Majesty for your kind remembrance 
of them, and pray to God for your happy delivery. My governess 
also thanks you and offers the same prayers for your Majesty. 
Written in haste on the last day of July, 1537. Your very humble 
servant and daughter, Elizabeth. 

On p. 19, Mr. Mumby says : " The question as to the origin 
of this letter (The last quoted above. — F. C.) is complicated by its 
striking similarity to one printed on p. 37, dated July 31 (1548), 
and addressed to Catherine Parr. There appears to be little 
room for doubt that both letters had a common origin, but in the 
absence of the document itself it is impossible to say whether, in 
the version just printed, Leti added the two important points in 
which it differs from the other — the reference to ' the King my father,' 
and the year ' 1537.' " 

It must first be observed that the slight difference between the 
two documents of Mr. Mumby would have been still less had he 
made a real translation of Leti himself for the 1^7 letter. That 
he did not do so (although he refers only to Leti for authority for 
its text) is surprising, although there is still the excuse — that of 
great modesty — that we made for Miss Strickland for exactly the 
same liberty with the sentence. Miss Strickland reads — against 
her oiJy source, Hearne, as infra — " your grace being so sickly," 
which Mumby with even greater reserve softens into " yoiu: present 
state of health," referring to Leti's French translation for his sole 
authority. How unjustified this is may be disclosed by noting p. 
125 of the 1694 Amsterdam French translation of Leti, the edition 
to which Mumby makes reference. The expression is " . . . I'^tat 
d'une grossesse aussi avanc^e," while the original Italian, printed 
at the same city one year before, which Mr. Mumby does not say 
that he ever consulted, is this, at p. 133 : nello stato dove si trova, 
cost avanmata nella gravidanza. Thus there is not the slightest 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


foundation for the reading either of Miss Strickland or of 
Mr. Mumby. 

It is apparent that, irrespective of the varying dates of the two 
missives, they cannot both be originals. But even the dates are 
sufEcient condemnation of the 1^7 one, for it is scarcely vyorth 
while to assert that Elizabeth, prodigy as she was, wrote such a 
production at the age of four — ^less than that, in fact, by some five 
weeks. The world has never seen the child who at that time in 
her development could have obtained either the necessary ability 
or knowledge for such a task. 

But we anticipate that there will be little difference as to tne 
correct explanation of the situation, especially now that we have 
discovered the original. Leti was the historiographer of Charles II. 
(Mr. Mumby, p. 20, says that Leti did not occupy this position, but 
the fact that he is in error is too well established for dispute. Vide 
Nouvelle Biog. Gen., Grand Diet. Univ., La Grande Ency., etc.) 
To quote Mrs. Everett Green, as thorough and reliable a student 
of history as England has produced : " Leti, in writing his life 
of Elizabeth, had evidently access to many valuable original letters, 
some of which have now perished ; but as those which remain 
prove, on comparison, to have been faithfully, though freely, trans- 
lated by him, there is no reason whatever to doubt the authenticity 
of the remainder, though the originals are not known to be in 
existence." — ^Wood, Letters of Roy. and Ilbtst. Ladies, vol. iii. p. 191, 
prefix to Letter No. LXXXVIII. 

At the same time, we must record that Leti had two great faults, 
either of which is almost distracting to a careful worker, faults 
which deprived him of that fame which was within his grasp— for 
if he had combined strict accuracy with his enormous and undeniable 
industry, he could, with the facilities open to him only half a century 
or so after Elizabeth's death, have become the foundation of all the 
later histories of the EUzabethan era. The first fatal fault is an 
eagerness to translate — for all his work was in his Italian native 
tongue — the documents he discovered into the phrases in which 
they would have been written had their authors been his own 
contemporaries. But the substance, purpose, and arrangement of 
the original documents he respects. His other error—equally 
serious — is in his method of connecting documents, dates, and facts. 
His idea of history-writing was to quote as many facts, documents, 
and dates as he could collect, and join these together by the narrative 
calculated to produce the only result at which he aimed, namely, 
to write an entertaining and romantic story. The consequence is 
that he has been utterly discredited, so much so that as a rule 
historical writers do not accept as truth one word that he has com- 
piled, and he is either ignored or condemned out of hand in all the 
usual authorities. For example, Lowndes's Bib. Manual dismisses 
him with this : " Leti was a voluminous writer, as may be seen in 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


the Biographie Vnivmelle. His histories are nothing more than 
amusing romances." 

Professor Pollard, University College, London, thus disposes 
of him : 

" The earliest life of Queen Elizabeth is Gregorio Leti's . . . 
it is a romance garnished with a number of imaginary letters." — 
Political Hist, of England, vol. vi. p. 493. It virould appear too 
severe to stigmatize " a number of letters " as " imaginary " because 
we no longer have the originals, and have no other account of 
them ; and the verdict as a whole is unfair since we hnow — because 
we have the originals — ^that many of the letters given by Leti are 
not " imaginary." 

Now Leti discovered the original letter we are studying which 
was intended for Katherine Parr, and actually written 31st July, 
1548, about a month before she was to give birth to the child of 
her latest spouse ; but the year does not appear specifically in the 
text, nor does the name of the addressee. So here we see Leti widi 
this autograph letter — probably signed by Elizabeth, but certainly 
in her hand — seeking to settle for whom it was intended. It is 
evident that it is for some wife of Henry, and for some wife about 
to become a mother. The earliest of the eligible candidates, having 
some regard for the date of Elizabeth's birth, was indubitably the 
very lady upon whom Leti alights — Jane Seymour, the immediate 
successor of the little princess's mother. She was carrying 
Edward VI. on a " last day of Jidy," for he was bom upon the 
following i2th October, 1537 ; and Jane was the only one of Henry's 
wives who while in that relation to him furnished what appeared to 
Leti all the facts he required. The extreme youth of Elizabeth at 
that time was not in his eyes an obstacle to her authorship of the 
document, but only one more evidence of the great genius which 
he ascribes to her. There is also the possible view th^t Leti knew 
the real facts and was carried off his feet by a striving after startling 
effect. But his view we reject in favour of the first theory, because 
Leti did not know that Katherine Parr on a" last day of Jidy " — as 
well as Jane Seymour — was big with child, although not by Henry but 
by the Admiral. The author's predicament, then, was this— that he 
had this astonishing letter from a child who could not have been 
four years of age when she penned it, because the only woman to 
whom it could have been addressed died less than three months 
later. Leti, therefore, had to ascribe the letter to 1537, and swallow 
his incredulity, and fall back upon his only resource for an explana- 
tion, namely, Elizabeth's precocity and genius. That our explana- 
tion is correct is quite evident from the fact that Leti nowhere 
mentions that Katherine was ever with child by the Admiral, or that 
she died at its birth ; he records her death {Elisabetta, tom. i. 
p. 189, 1693 ed.) with the simple remark that " she fell ill, and 
died Uie zotix of September, to the great regret of her husband." 
(The exact date of Katherine's demise was, however, thirteen days 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



earlier. Leti corrects it in the succeeding French edition which 
appeared in 1694.) 

The rest, then, becomes simple, for having determined beyond 
cavil the date of the letter (at least to his own satisfaction), Leti saw 
no harm in replacing EUzabeth's expression " my Lordes lettar " 
with " the letters of the King, my father," and in altering a later 
" my Lord " to " the King, my father," for according to Leti's 
information the " Lord " referred to was " the King, my father." 
And, as the true date of the letter according to Leti's knowledge was 
1537, he saw not the least harm in adding that to the original expres- 
sion, " this last day of July." 

Note 4 
Why Posterity is ignorant of Queen's Ill-Health 

One of the principal reasons is quickly seen. It lies in the failure 
of our predecessors to comprehend the gravity of the complete 
breakdown in the Princess's fifteenth year, at " about mydsomer " 
(24th June, 1548). This misapprehension, we take it, is due to the 
fact that the historians lacked the knowledge of two circumstances : 
The existence of Items Nos. i, 2, and 3 — all confessions of Mrs. 
Ashley — and the dates of Nos. 4, 5, 6, 12, and 13, ante, in the Medical 
Record ; 4, 5, and 6 carrying the aforesaid " mydsomer " illness to 
January, 1549, while 12 and 13 extend the same attack to September, 
1552. The failure to discover Nos. i, 2, and 3 — the confessions of 
Ashley — was due merely to misfortune. Those once read, all 
writers would have gone on until they had unearthed the whole 
story. As we are considering the tiurning-point of Elizabeth's 
whole life, when almost in a day she changed from a strong girl 
into a weak, anaemic one, who was never robust again except for 
short periods, we are under obligation to oflFer the evidence in the 
fullest detail, especially as we have produced facts hitherto unknown. 

We must first endeavour to make plain the difficulty in which 
the historians found themselves, not huming of the existence of these 
confessions of Mrs. Ashley. 

Miss Strickland, Wiesener, Mumby, Wood, etc., etc., had all the 
14 first numbers of the Medical Record, except Nos. i, 2, and 3 — 
the three Ashley statements. All of these items bore dates except 
Nos. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 14— all letters of Elizabeth herself. 
This left these students only vdth two dated letters or statements 
referring to this illness, namely, Nos. 10 and 11, both dated within 
a week of one another, in September, 1550 ; and they knew of no 
other mention of illness thereafter for more than three years, when 
came No. 14a, December, 1553. This gave them an approximate 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


date (September, 1550) for the termination of this severe sickness. 
But what of its beginning ? There they despaired. Miss Strickland 
met the difBculty in this fashion : 

" The severe illness which attacked her soon after the execution 
of the Admiral (He was beheaded 20th March, 1549. — F. C.) was, in 
all probability, caused by the severe mental sufferings she had 
undergone at that distressing period. . . . Her malady appears to 
have been so dangerous as to cause some alarm to the protector 
Somerset, who not only dispatched all the royal physicians to her 
aid, but shrewdly suspecting perhaps, that uneasiness about her 
pecuniary affairs and prospects might have something to do with 
her indisposition, he expedited the long-delayed sealing of her 
letters patent, and sent them to her with many kind messages both 
from himself and his wife. These courtesies elicited the following 
letter of acknowledgment from the royal invalid (No. 4). . . . 
Elizabeth was removed from Cheshunt to her house at Hatfield for 
change of air, but continued to languish and droop in pining sickness 
for many months. The opening of the new year 1550 found her 
still so much of an invalid as to be precluded from resimiing her 
studies, which she had been compelled to abandon on accoimt of 
her perilous state of health. She writes to the young king her 
brother, January 2 (No. 6), a pretty and pathetic letter in Latin, 
lamenting that she has not been able, according to her usual custom, 
to prepare some litde token of her love as an offering of the season 
for his highness." * 

Note that she thus dates No. 6 as 2nd January, 1550. The 
remainder of the undated letters and the two dated ones in 
September, 1550 (Nos. 10 and 11), she ignores. 

Miss Aikin makes no reference to any illness in 1548-1552.! 

Wood says : 

" The following letters are inserted as specimens of the epistolary 
correspondence between the Princess Elusabeth and her brother. 
They are all translated from the Latin. ... As they contain no 
points of internal evidence by which their dates can be clearly 
identified, they are, for the sake of connection, classed together." :{ 

Wood then prints Nos. 6, 5, 12, 13, and 14, dating, however, 
No. 13 as of 1550, leaving the remaining four with no dates. 

Wiesener, coming next in order of time, some thirty years later, 
in The Youth of Queen Elizabeth, saw the letters, but prints only 

* Strickland, ed. 1851, pp. 47, 48. 
t The Court and Times of Queen Elizabeth. 

i Letters of Roy, and Illust. Ladies, vol. iii. p. 221. Note preliminary 
to Letter No. CIL 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


one of them, No. 6, dating it, like Strickland, 2nd January, 1550, All 
the others he ignores ; he neither quotes from them nor refers to 
them specifically. But his interpretation of them as a whole may 
be seen in the following : 

" It must be said . . . that if . . . she was not shaken by the 
fall of him whom she loved, yet she received so painful and deep 
a wound that its effect upon her strength soon became visible. 
(As the Admiral was beheaded on the 20th of March, 1549, it 
becomes clear that Wiesener ascribes her illness as after and due to 
that death.) She nearly died of an illness caused by depression. 
The Protector sent her the King's physicians ; he despatched the 
letters-patent that had been delayed till then, and had taken so 
much of the Admiral's attention. (Wiesener here, of course, shows 
us that he is familiar with No. 4.) . . . But it was not till the end 
of a year, that at last her youth gained the victory. . . . During 
the remainder of this terrible year the studies wherein she sought 
peace and solace were retarded by her want of strength. . . . But 
the disgrace she laboured under did not yet draw near its conclusion. 
More than ever did study serve her as a refuge. In proportion to 
her sensations of returning strength, she threw herself into it with 
increasing delight. . . . This was ajso the very time of the cruel 
trials she encountered, and the depression that followed them. . . . 
About the month of January, 1550, he (Roger Ascham, her tutor) 
slightly emancipated himself, as he afterwards stated, and he went 
to Cambridge to resume his interrupted studies. . . . However, 
in two years his lessons had completed and matured the lessons of 
Grindall, and made Elizabeth quite familiar with ancient Greek 
and Latin." 

There Wiesener drops the undated letters and their contents. 

The next important biographer is Bishop Creighton — called by 
the Encyclopedia Britannica the writer of her " best biography," * 
and Creighton makes no reference at all to any of these letters or 
to any illness during the period covered by them. He altogether 
ignores the letters and the sickness, and says of the Seymour Affair 
(p. 15) — after stating " On March 20, 1549, Seymour's head fell 
on the scaffold," — " This was a crushing experience for a girl of 
sbrteen. It was undoubtedly the great crisis of Elizabeth's life, 
and did more than anything else to form her character." En passant, 

• All the others are disposed of by these words : "... there are 
others by E. S. Beesly, Lucy Aikin, and T. Wright. (The latter is only a 
collection of letters — " A Series of Original Letters " as the title has it. — 
F.C.). See also A. Jessopp's article in the Diet. Nat. Biog." — Article on 
Elizabeth in Ency. Brit., nth ed. Miss Strick|and's work, the only one 
ever written, witih the possible exception of Aikin's, that even pretends to 
be complete, or that by any stretch of the imagination could be so considered, 
is not mentioned at all ! — F.C. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


I must also refer to a most significant error on the part of the same 
author, on p. i8, where he says " before the end of 1550 the Pro- 
tector's power had fallen before the superior craft of John Dudley, 
Earl of Warwick." The Protector fell in the autumn of 1549. 

Professor Beesly is the next biographer of the Queen (1903). 
He covers her whole career in 240 duodecimo pages and her entire 
life as Princess in four. He makes no reference whatever to any 
ill-health before her accession. 

This leaves but one biographer to consider, although, properly 
speaking, he hardly lays claim to such a designation ; for, as his title 
explains. The Girlhood of Queen Elizabeth. A Narrative in Con- 
temporary Letters, he has merely made up a volume of reprints of 
letters, here and there accompanied by his observations thereon 

This author, Mr. Mumby, notices the undated letters, and thus' 
treats them on p. 63 : 

" The following examples of the affectionate correspondence 
which passed between the young King and his favourite sister are 
all translated from the Latin, and are here reprinted from Mrs. 
Everett Green's Letters of Royal and Illustrious Ladies. Most of 
the originals are in the Bodleian Library. As they contain no 
points of internal evidence by which their full date can be deter- 
mined, they are classed together for the sake of convenience." * 

Mr. Mumby thereupon prints Nos. 6, 12, and 8, having pre- 
viously used No. 4 as though dating from 1549. Like all his 
predecessors, he ignores the two dated letters, Nos. 11 and iz, 
which in so many words show that Elizabeth was still in bad health 
and very weak, in September, 1550, some months after all these 
authorities concluded that she had recovered — or, to be more 
exact, some months after the date they decided to state as that of 
the termination of this illness — for they had before them the two 
dated letters Nos. 10 and 12, both of September, 1550. More— 
they had Roger Ascham's statement that he remained two years 

* How closely the minds of some historians work together is shown 
by a comparison of Mr. Mumby's introduction (p. 61) to No. 4, with Miss 
Strickland's remarks concerning the same letter. Mr. Mumby says : 
" the Protector also sent the royal physicians to her aid, and forwarded, 
with many kind messages both from himself and his wife, her long-delayed 
letters patent, shrewdly suspecting perhaps — as Miss Strickland suggests — 
that uneasiness about her pecuniary affairs might have something to do with 
her indisposition." Strickland wrote, as we have shown : " . . . Protector 
Somerset, who not only dispatched all the royal physicians to her aid, but 
shrewdly suspecting perhaps, that uneasiness about her pecuniary aJEEairs 
and prospects might have something to do with her indisposition, he ex- 
pedited the long-delayed seaUng of her letters-patent, and sent them to her 
with many kind messages both from himself and his wife." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


with Elizabeth, that he left her service as early as January, 1550, 
and that in those " two years she pursued the study of Greek and 
Latin under my tuition. . . . She read with me almost the whole of 
Cicero, and a great part of Livy : . . . " They noted, too, that 
Ascham did not mention that she suffered from ill-health during 
1548 and 1549, when he said he had been with her. There was, 
furthermore, that letter of 2nd January (No. 6), referring to " my 
Lord Protector " and to her learning as " so wasted by the long 
duration of my illness," etc. They could not, as we have seen, 
agree on any date for that letter ; they all let it severely alone, 
except Miss Strickland and Wiesener, who date it 1550 ; this 
despite the fact which they must have known, that for long before 
that date there had been no Protector. He had ceased to be in 
power by the sth of the preceding October ; the next day he was 
a fugitive ; and it is inconceivable that Elizabeth, who, even at that 
early period, displayed the utmost exactitude in the use of titles, 
would have called Somerset after his fall by one which he had 
ceased to bear. And when we add the following extract from 
Miunby,* it vnll be seen that all the authorities who have mentioned 
this illness have placed it as occurring in, and lasting throughout, 
1549 — " She fell so seriously ill with depression during the ensuing 
year that her life was in danger." 

With their data in this hopeless condition, the historians were 
in a sad quandary as to how to describe Elizabeth's life from the 
time she left the roof of Katherine Parr (During the week after 
Whitsuntide, 1548— say the middle of May.— F. C.) to March, 1551, 
when the girl came to Court. Miss Strickland was the first to 
grapple with the difiiculty, and all her successors have followed her 
lead. Her interpretation is purely imaginary ; yet without exact 
knowledge of the duration of Elizabeth's illness, it is probably as 
good a guess as could be foimd. It may be illustrated by this 
quotation : 

" The disastrous termination of Elizabeth's first love-affair, 
appears to have had the salutary effect of inclining her to habits of 
a studious and reflective character. She was for a time under a 
cloud, and during the profound retirement in which she was doomed 
to remain, for at least a year, after the execution of the lord admiral 
(He was beheaded on 20th March, 1549.— F. C), the energies of her 
active mind found employment and solace in the pursuits of learning. 
She assumed a grave and sedate demeanour. . . . Not in vain did 
Elizabeth labour to efface the memory of her early indiscretion, by 
establishing a reputation for learning and piety . . . Elizabeth . . . 
affected extreme simplicity of dress, in conformity to the mode 

• P. 61J 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


which the rigid rules of the Calvinistic church of Geneva was 
rendering general among the stricter portion of those noble ladies 
who professed the doctrines of the Reformation. ... On the 
17th of March, 1551, she emerged from the profound retirement 
in which she had remained since her disgrace in 1549, and came 
in state to visit the king her brother." • 

Miss Aikin follows immediately with this : 

" The fall of Seymour and the disgrace and danger in which 
she had herself been involved, afforded Elizabeth a severe but 
useful lesson ; and the almost total silence of history respecting 
her during the remainder of her brother's reign (Seymour died 
20th March, 1549, and Edward in July, 1553) furnishes a satisfactory 
indication of the extreme caution with which she now conducted 
herself." f 

Wiesener, the next in chronological order, says : 

" Elizabeth was called from her two years' banishment, and made 
a solemn entry into London, the 17th of March, 1551." % 

Creighton writes : 

" When she recovered from the shock of Seymour's death and 
could look around her, she saw that it was necessary to recover 
her character and restore her reputation. . . . Under her care 
(That of Lady Tyrwhit. — F. C) Elizabeth once more lived a quiet 
and studious life . . . her love of simplicity soon passed away. 
Indeed it was never real. . . . She had been detected as a shameless 
coquette ; she adopted the attitude of a modest and pious maiden. 
. . . Elizabeth was summoned to Court (March, 1551) . • . 
Elizabeth appeared with studious simplicity . . . Elizabeth had 
achieved her end. She had established her character. Her 
' maidenly apparel . . . made the noblemen's wives and daughters 
ashamed to be dressed and painted like peacocks.' " § 

" And last of all this strange eventful history " we come to 
Mumby : 

" With Admiral Seymour's blot on her escutcheon it was clearly 
Elizabeth's policy, if not her inclination, to cultivate a taste and 
reputation for piety and sedateness, and it is remarkable how soon 
she became a pattern of all the virtues. . . . Elizabeth's new r6le 
appears to have answered its purpose admirably. The young King, 

* Strickland, 1851 ed., pp. 49-53. 

t The Court and Timet of Queen ElistAeth, Aikin, p. 56. 

t The Youth of Queen EUzabeih, vol. i. p. 121. 

§ Queen Elizabeth, Creighton, p. 17. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


delighted to hear such good accounts of his former plajrmate, wrote 
for her portrait. . . . Ten months later (subsequent to 15th May, 
1550) Elizabeth was permitted to leave the solitude of Hatfield, to 
which she had been restricted since her disgrace with Seymour, 
and to make a public entry into London. . . ." • 

The reader will at once understand that there is not the slightest 
foundation in any contemporary document for these suggestions 
as to why Elizabeth was not oftener at Court, or abroad elsewhere. 
The only facts to be found, or that were then found, were that 
Elizabeth did not come to Court for nearly three years, and that 
she did love the apparel of a nun. 

It was evident that there was something wrong, something 
wanting in these explanations. Our attention was first directed 
to the undated letters from Elizabeth describing or referring to her 
long illness. Being in her own hand, or signed by her or at her 
order, their contents could not be of higher authority. 

We began, therefore, by a critical study of these letters. No 
previous statements as to their contents could be accepted. Every 
line of the letters themselves had to be examined, and the first clue 
came to light when we saw the original of No. 4, in the Public 
Record Office. Upon this letter, and in the hand of Mr. Robert 
Lemon who many years ago edited the Calendar of State Papers 
(Domestic), 1547-1590, is this note : " When the Queen Dowager 
died Sept. '48 Elizabeth was very ill — see Ashley's confession 
2 Feb., 1549." 

Here was something altogether new. No book states such a 
fact — and no book has ever yet quoted from, or referred to, any 
such confession of Ashley's. All citations of any Ashley confession 
are to Haynes, thus locating the documents at Hatfield House. 
Either Mr. Lemon was in error, which was improbable, or else he 
had unearthed a paper heretofore unseen or at best unnoted by 
any writer during the last three centuries. 

For long the hiding place of this dociunent remained concealed. 
In vain were all possible sources in the writings of my predecessors 
sifted and sifted again— and then the confession (No. 2) appeared 
in the Record Ofiice itself I " Incontinent after the death of the 
queue at Cheston," it says, " when the said lady Elizabeth was 
seke." That showed us that she was ill on or about the 7th of 
September, 1548, for it was on that date that Katherine Parr died. 
Then, among the same bundle of MSS., and immediately after this 
first discovery, there came to light two more confessions that had 
escaped all previous historians— Nos. i and 3 ; by the first of which 
• The Girlhood of Queen EUxabeth, Mumby, pp. 63, 72 and 73. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Mrs. Ashley says on 4th February, 1549, speaking of Elizabeth, " She 
was furst syk about mydsomer " ; and by the second, No. 3, 
on i2th February, 1549, referring to Elizabeth : " Sche beyng 
seke yn hyr bed," the context showing that she was talking about 
some period soon after the death of Katherine Parr (7th September), 
and certainly before the opening of 1549, when Seymour was about 
to be apprehended. 

Here, then, we have the date of the commencement of the 
prolonged illness to which the undated letters refer — " about 
mydsomer " (24th June, 1548), and we have sworn evidence that 
Elizabeth was still " seke " and even was " seke yn hyr bed " after 
the death of the late queen on the ensuing 7th September. 

We now have these two certain dates in 1548, and two others 
as certain two years later, i.e. the dated letters Nos. 10 and 11, of 
15th and 22nd September, 1550, the former being that in which 
Elizabeth asks that Cecil will excuse " her hand . . . her . . . 
unhealth hath made it weaker, and so unsteady," and the latter. 
No. II, that where she is said to have " been long troubled with 
rheums." (Probably rheumatism in this instance, as common 
colds — generally then referred to as " rheums " — could not have 
weakened her hand and made it unsteady, as described in No. 10, 
just mentioned.) 

Can we procure other certain dates concerning this illness, 
which, as we have already shown, had lasted, if not continuously 
at least intermittently, for two years ? The reply is in the affirma- 
tive. We can fix the dates of Nos. 12 and 13 beyond any question ; 
and the result is that these letters, dated respectively 15th September 
and 22nd September, add two years to this period of illness. Here, 
then, we have a patient first taken ill in June, 1548, still abed in the 
following September, with a hand too weak to write firmly in 1550, 
two years after that September. Last of all comes her own testi- 
mony in April, two years later still {in 1552), that the same " evil 
head," to which during the earlier periods of this illness she had 
often referred, had kept her from writing for nearly three weeks — 
this at a time when Edward was most desperately ill with the 
" measels and the small pokkes." The record therefore covers a 
period of three years and ten months ; and to this we may add the 
almost necessary inference from No. 13, which carries the disease 
nearly half a year further I 

On what authority do we make these statements ? On that of 
the letters themselves. The contention will be found proved as 
soon as we lay before you one bit of evidence which they do not 
contain, which happens to be the only fact that the historians 
required to solve their difficulty, so far as these two letters, Nos. 12 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


and 13, are concerned. With this little additional knowledge, they 
would have discovered all about this illness and so been able— 
instead of having to fall back upon pure conjecture — to give the real 
reason why Elizabeth lived a retired life in these four years. 

Let us read, with unimportant abridgment, these two most 
important letters, taking first No. 12 : 

" What cause I had of sorrow, when I first heard of your 
Majesty's sickness, all men might guess. . . But, as the sorrow could 
not be little ... so is the joy great to hear of your good escape out 
of the perilous diseases. And, that I am fuUy satisfied and well 
assured of the same by your Grace's own hand, I must need give 
my most humble thanks. . . . For now do I say with Saint Austin, 
that a disease is to be accounted no sickness, that shall cause a 
better health when it is past, than was assured afore it came. For 
afore you had them, every man thought that that should not be 
eschewed of you that was not escaped of many. But since you have 
had them doubt of them is past, and hope is given to all men, that 
it was a purgation by these means for other worse diseases, which 
might happen this year. Moreover, I consider that, as a good 
father, that loves his child dearly, doth punish him sharply, so God 
favouring your Majesty greatly, hath chastened you straitly ; and, 
as a father doth it for the further good of his child, so hath God prepared 
this for the better health of your Grace. 

" And, in this hope, I commit your Majesty to His hands, most 
humbly craving pardon of your Grace that I did write no sooner ; 
desiring you to attribute the fault to my evil head, and not to my 
slothful hand. From Hatfield, this 21st of April. 

" Your majesty's most humble sister to command, 

" Elizabeth." 

It will at once occur to the reader that the obvious clue to the 
year in which this letter was written must be found in the ill-health 
of Edward at some time not far prior to soTne 21st April. This 
must have come to the minds of the former historians, and it would 
make a fascinating story had we the reasons why they did not pursue 
the hint so plainly suppUed. 

We took up the clue that they neglected, and now lay before 
the world " the best evidence " (to use the legal term) which can 
unlock this secret, although there is other ample testimony to the 
same effect in the common knowledge of all students of the period. 
The state of Edward VI.'s health after his ascension * is definitely 

• Henry VIII. died on the aSth of January, 1547— strangely ascribed 
by Creighton on p. 8 to 1546 ; and his failure to use the Old Style in all 
other instances in his work cannot afford him protection in this particular 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


stated in a number of documents other than those we propose to 

The chief vvitness we shall call for " the best evidence " is the 
best that could be found in Edward VI.'s own time — Edward VI. 
himself; and the document containing the evidence is his own 
diary, all in his own hand, a paper folio volume of 68 leaves of 
12 J ins. by 8 J ins.* This book covers his entire career up to the 
end of November, 1552, when he was just entering upon that fatal 
illness, that, seven months later, was to carry him to his grave. 
The last entry of all in the book is at the top of a page in the centre 
of which, several inches below, he writes in a large hand which, 
wher^ penmanship is concerned, shows a great deterioration from 
all that precedes, these prophetic words : " Laus deo FINIS." One 
cannot but feel that the poor little fellow, condemned from his 
birth to the most avrful of deaths, must have known when he added 
those scrawling words to his pitifidly short story that he was near 
to his own Finis. If he did know of it, what must have been his 
thoughts ! 

Now what we must do, in order to be absolutely certain of the 
year of the 2ist April letter, is to find some April in which no less 
than four things occur, namely : (i) Elizabeth at Hatfield on the 
2ist ; (z) Edward ill, and ill vtdth (3) more than one serious disease 
(for the letter says " diseses " and twice refers to such afflictions 
as " them ") ; and (4) that he was much improved by the 21st. 

We may eliminate rapidly several of the possible years, which, 
observe, must be confined to 1547, 1548, 1549, 1550, I55i> 15521 
and 1553, that is,from the opening of Edward's reign on 28th January, 

1547, to his death in July, 1553. At no time in 1547 after 
the death of Henry VIII. was Elizabeth at Hatfield. In the pre- 
ceding December she had been made to take up her residence at 
Enfield, and she was not again at Hatfield until the late autumn of 

1548. She remained at Enfield until her father's death, and thence- 
forth, until after Whitsuntide, in May, 1548, was in the household 
of Katherine Parr, whose husband, the Admiral, as we have seen, 
made love to the princess. These facts in themselves dispose of 
1547 and 1548, even if there were no other evidence ; but there is, 
indeed, a plethora, if the reader will look for it. But we mention 
only two details ; first, that there is no mention in Edward's diary 
of illness in these two years, and, that there is no mention in any 
contemporary document yet discovered of any illness of his in 
1547 or 1548, while the official documents of the time show his 
continuous activity. We now come to 1549 ; in April of that year 

• Brit. Mus. MS. Cott. Nero, C. X. 
Digitized by Microsoft® 


Elizabeth was at Hatfield, and probably there with an " evil head," 
but we find no reference in Edward's diary to any ilhiess of his own. 
No contemporary or other evidence that suggests such an illness — 
and again all the official documents discover his continuous and 
normal activity. 

In the following year, 1550, when on 24th March the diary 
becomes a day to day one, and so continues throughout the MS., 
we have more detailed accounts of the boy's life, and from then 
until the last entry, late in November, 1552, we need not look 
elsewhere for information. 

In this March of 1550, there is an entry on the 24th, the 2Sth, 
the 29th, the 30th, and the 31st. In April there is a daily entry up 
to the 2ist, except upon the ist, 4th, 13th, 14th, 15th, and 17th. 
No illness is referred to ; the days omitted do not give time for any 
serious affection ; and all the extraneous evidence, official or con- 
temporary, discloses the boy to be in good health. 

In 1551, the diary has entries in April for every day except the 
2nd, 4th, 13th, 14th, 17th, i8th, and 19th up to the 21st, the date 
of our letter, and still no hint of sickness, and all the other contem- 
poraneous documents show the boy still well. 

Let us first dispose of 1553, the last April of Edward's life. 
There will be no dispute that for several months before that, he 
had been growing steadily worse with his fatal illness, which, as we 
have already shown, was of a progressive nature So there is no 
chance that in April he could have been recovering from any two 
or more illnesses ; and all the contemporaneous documents show 
his desperate state at the period concerned. 

This, then, leaves us 1552 as the only possible year that will 
fulfil our four requirements ; and now as we turn the pages of 
Edward's diary for April of that year, we find on page 58 verso, 
et seq., these entries : 


2. I fell sike of the mesels and the small pokkes. 

15, The parliment brake up, and bicause I was sike, and not 
able to goe wel abrode as then, I signed a bil conteining the names 
of the actes wich I wold have passe. . . . 

30. Removing to Greenwich. 

Now there remains but one fact to be established, namely, that 
Elizabeth was then at Hatfield. There are several ways of doing 
so— but the fact is sufficient that then, and for years before and 


Digitized by Microsoft® 


afterward, she made her home nowhere else, and there is no record 
suggesting her temporary absence on this date, and her presence 
elsewhere would inevitably have been chronicled. But we can do 
better than this rather negative evidence, through the MS. House- 
hold Account of Elizabeth's establishment for the year ist October, 

1551, to 1st October, 1552.* This shows that on the 2oih of April, 

1552, the day before the date of Elizabeth's letter, " Beamonde, the 
King's servaunte," was paid at Hatfield by Parry, Elizabeth's 
cofferer, " for his boies which plaied before her grace — ^X.s." — and 
the item immediately following shows a payment to " Mrs. Carrye, 
at her departing from Hatfelde, IHI. li." Scores of other items 
show further payments day by day for the several months following — 
80 we are certain that this 21st April letter is of 1552 ; for we have 
shown not only that in no other year could it hose been written, but 
also that in 1552 a// the four things we had to prove are demonstrated : 
I. Elizabeth was at Hatfield on the day of the month upon which 
the letter was dated ; 2. Edward for several weeks prior thereto 
had been ill ; and, 3, ill with two or more diseases ; and from the 
fact that he moved to Greenwich, some ten miles, on the 30th, we 
must admit, 4, that he was improving as recently as the 2i8t. 

* Camden Miscellany, vol. ii. p. 39, 2nd item. Miss Strickland and the 
famous antiquarian, Thomas Astle, F.R.S. and F.A.S. (the latter now 
F.S.A.),have fallen into a curious error with respect to this MS. In 1807, 
Astle, one of the two chief compilers of the Antiquarian Repertory, com- 
municates thereto an article covering this account, giving the date in his 
heading as 1553 ; and in his text he states that the items are " for one year 
ending Oct. 30th in the 6th year of the ceign of her brother Edward VI. 
A.D. 1553. . . . The MS. . . - was in the possession of Gustavus 
Brander, Esq." 

Miss Strickland, writing nearly half a century later, comes across Astle's 
article, and quotes copiously from it, adopting his dates, namely, Oct. 1552 
to Oct. 1553. She also prints extracts from what she styles a similar MS. 
" in the possession of lord Strangford " covering the household expenses 
"... from Oct. ist, sth of Edward VI. to the last day of September in 
the 6tfa year of that prince." In her haste. Miss Strickland unquestioningly 
adopts Astle's dates for the Brander book, namely, for the period Oct. 1552 
to Oct, 1553, and at the same time adopts Strangford's date for his book, 
i.e. Oct. 1551 to Oct. 1552, thus giving apparently two successive books 
covering two successive years — Oct. 1551 to Oct. 1553. 

The fact is that there has never been more than one book. Miss Strick- 
land is first misled by Astle into the chronological error of placing his 
Brander MS. a whole year too late. The MS. itself says on its first page 
that it is " From the first daie of October in the fifte yere of the r^igne of . . . 
Edward the sizte . . . unto the last daye of September of the Vj"* yere of 
his Ma"" moste prosperouse raigne." 

Mr. Astle says that October, 1552, is in the 5th year of Edward VI., 
and that October in the 6th of that monarch is in 1553. Mr. Astle, of 
course, is a year too late in each case ; and Miss Strickland had not learned 
that Brander had sold his MSS. to Strangford, with several intermediate 
transactions. There is, moreover, no foundation for Mr. Astle's statement 
that the account closed upon any Oct, 30th — he should have said S^t. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


And we may now give a date to our No. 13, which, by ahnost 
necessary inference, carries her own invalidism five months further 
still— /oar months into its fifth consecutive year. This letter is as 
follows : 

" I hope, most iLlustrious King, that I shall readily obtain pardon 
that for such a long interval of time you have received from me so 
few letters either returning thanks for your benefits or at least 
bearing witness to my due regard for you, especially as no kind 
of forgetfulness of you whom I never can or ought to forget has 
been the cause of the delay. Now, however, as I understand your 
majesty is sojourning in places not far from London, I have thought 
I ought to break silence. . . . While I recount severally the blessings 
of the great and good God, I indeed judge this one to be the greatest 
of all — that he hath quickly and mercifully restored you again to 
London, after your late disease ; into which I think you had fallen 
by God's especial providence {as in my last letter I wrote to your 
majesty), in order that, the cause of the diseases having been now 
removed, you may be preserved, to the greatest length of years, to 
handle the reins of Government. . . . Since, then, the life of every 
one is not merely exposed to, but is overcome by, so many and so great 
accidents, we judge that your last disease has been removed by the 
special mercy <tf Divine Providence ; and in all those so frequent 
changes of air and of places (which I know have been not entirely 
free from diseases) that you have been preserved, by a miracle, 
from any peril of infection. . . . 

" At Ashridge, aoth of September. 

" To the most illustrious and noble Your majesty's very humble 
sister king Edward the Sixtx. 

" Elizabeth." 

From the first italicized words in this letter we know that 
Edward " is sojourning in places not far from London ; " and from 
the last words italicized we learn that the King has lately made 
" all those so frequent changes of air and of places." The letter 
is of some September 20th, and we must place Edward so as to 
fulfil the requirements of these two quotations. His diary is again 
decisive. We need turn no further back than to 1550. In the 
three months preceding 20th September of that year, Edward was 
at Greenwich on 25th June, at Windsor on 23rd June, at Guildford 
on I2th August, at Woking on 20th August, on 8th September at 
Nonesuch, and on the 15th at Oteland. Plainly 1550 will not apply. 

The year 1551 is even more remotely improbable. In the three 
months preceding 20th September, Edward moved only to Hampton 
Court on nth July, to Windsor on 22nd August, to Farnham on 
loth September, and on the i8th to Windsor. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


In 1552, however, Edward went on Progress, leaving London 
on the 27th of June, and not returning to the vicinity of London 
until 1 2th September, when he came to Reading from Donnington 
Castle, finally completing his visits three days later, when he went 
to Windsor, He visited 23 places on this journey, on the way to 
and from Southampton, by way of Portsmouth. The last month 
of the trip is consumed by the return from the latter city. He left 
it on the i6th, when Beaulieu was reached, two days later Christ- 
church, three later Woodlands, three later Salisbury, five later 
Wilton, four later Motisfont, three later Winchester, two later 
Basing, thence in three days to Doimington Castle. As already 
stated, Reading was reached in two days, on i2th September, and 
the trip came to its close with the arrival at Windsor on the 15th, 
five days before Elizabeth wrote her letter. Plainly 1552 satisfies 
the conditions demanded. 

The reader, however, will not have failed to notice in the remain- 
ing italicized portion of the letter phrases which seem familiar ; for 
it was only a few moments ago that he read in the 21st April letter 
(No. 12) quoted in extenso : 

" For now do I say with Saint Austin that a disease is to be 
accounted no sickness, that shall cause a better health when it is 
past, than was assured afore it came. For afore you had them, 
every man thought that that should not be eschewed of you that 
was not escaped of many. But since you have had them doubt 
of them is past, and hope is given to all men, that it was a purgation 
by these means for other worse diseases, which might happen this 
year. Moreover, I consider that, as a good father, that loves his 
child dearly, doth punish him sharply, so God, favouring your 
Majesty greatly, hath chastened you straitly ; and, as a father doth 
it for the further good of his child, so hath God prepared this for 
the better health of your Grace." 

That is patently the sentiment referred to in the letter (No. 13) 
from Ashridge on 2otb September, when Elizabeth refers to 
Edward's " late disease ; into which I think you had fallen by 
God's especial providence ... in order that, the cause of the 
diseases having been now removed, you may be preserved. . . ." 

There can, therefore, be little reasonable doubt that this letter 
(No. 13, of 2oth September) dates from 1552 ; and it seems almost 
certain that Elizabeth can have in mind only an illness of hers 
already well known to the King when she writes : " I hope . . . that 
I shall readily obtain pardon for that such a long interval of time 
you have received from me so few letters . . . especially as no 
kind of forgetfulness of you ... has been the cause of the delay." 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


We know, by No. I2. that on 21st April, five months before, Eliza- 
beth writes craving pardon " that I did write no sooner ; desiring 
you to attribute the fault to my evil head." If she did not know 
that Edward was aware of her continuous illness when she wrote 
the September letter, or, if she had had any other excuse for her 
seeming neglect, she would doubtless have said so much. The 
weight of the evidence, surely, is that she was still afflicted with 
that same " evil head " late in September, 1552. If the inference 
be sound, we may be practically certain that Elizabeth was in the 
ansemic state already described, for more than four consecutive 
years ; we know, moreover, that she had not recovered even when 
four years and four months had elapsed — that is, by 20th September, 
1552. As a most desperate illness began fourteen months later 
(December, 1553, Med. Rec. No. 14A), and as the entire interim 
had been filled with the greatest anxieties (the fatal illness of 
Edward, her prevention from seeing him, the conspiracy to dis- 
inherit her when she could not be got out of the country, or bribed 
or frightened into compliance with the scheme of the Dudleys to 
seize the throne through Lady Jane Gray, and the contest of Mary 
for her rights), it seems most likely that these two illnesses over- 
lapped. If so, we must conclude that the Princess Elizabeth was 
never well from the middle of 1548 up to at least April, 1557 (Med. 
Rec. Nos. 14A to 29). 

Most of the items in the Medical Record were known to all 
writers on Elizabeth, but, lacking the particulars of the first illness, 
the starting point of all her life struggle with disease, nearly all of them 
confined themselves to the political aspects of her time. Confronted 
besides zvith a bibliography unanimous in opinion that Elizabeth teas 
a physical giant without nerves, they failed to pursue to their logical 
conclusion scores of significant indications as to frequent ill-health ; 
not to mention most desperate illnesses, any one of which, even had she 
been of the most exceptional physique, would have ruined her health 
for life. 

Such are the best reasons we can devise for the misunderstand- 
ing that has so long persisted ; and yet its long Ufe is still astounding. 
It must always rank as one of the most remarkable phenomena in 
historical writing. 

Note 5 

The Story of Arthxjr Dudley 

The following is all the evidence known concerning that Arthur 
Dudley who claimed to be a son of Leicester and Elizabeth. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


(a) In Spain 

" Relation made to Sir Francis Et^kfield by an Englishman 
named Arthur Dudley, claiming to be the son of Queen Elizabeth. 

" Imprimis, he said that a man named Robert Southern, a 
servant of Catharine Ashley (who had been governess to the Queen 
in her youth, and was for ever afterwards one of her most beloved 
and intimate ladies), which Southern was married, and lived twenty 
leagues from London, was summoned to Hampton Court. When 
he arrived, another lady of the Queen's court, named Harrington, 
asked him to obtain a nurse for a new-born child of a lady who had 
been so careless of her honour that, if it became known, it would 
bring great shame upon all the company, and would highly dis- 
please the Queen if she knew of it. The next morning, in a corridor 
leading to the Queen's private chamber, the child was given to the 
man, who was told that its name was Arthur. The man took the 
child, and gave it for some days to the wife of a miller of Molesey 
to suckle. He afterwards took it to a village near where he lived, 
20 leagues from London, where the child remained until it was 
weaned. He then took it to his own house, and brought it up with 
his own children, in place of one of his which had died of similar age. 

" Some years afterwards the man Robert, who lived very humbly 
at home, left his own family, and took this Arthur on horseback to 
London, where he had him brought up with great care and delicacy, 
whilst his own wife and children were left in his village; 

" When the child was about eight years old, John Ashley, the 
husband of Catharine Ashley, who was one of the Queen's gentle- 
men of the chamber, gave to Robert the post of lieutenant of his 
office as keeper of one of the Queen's houses called Enfield, three 
leagues from London ; and during the summer, or when there was 
any plague or sickness in London, Arthur was taught and kept in 
this house, the winters being passed in London. He was taught 
Latin, Italian, and French, music, arms, and dancing. When he 
was about 14 or 15, being desirous of seeing strange lands, and having 
had some disagreement, he stole from a purse of this Robert as many 
silver pieces as he could grasp in his hand, about 70 reals, and fled 
to a port in Wales called Milford Haven, with the intention of 
embarking for Spain, which country he had always wished to see. 
Whilst he was there awaiting his passage in the house of a gentleman 
named George Devereux, a brother of the late Earl of Essex, a horse 
messenger came in search of him with a letter, signed by seven 
members of the Council, ordering him to be brought to London. 
The tenour of this letter showed him to be a person of more import- 
ance than the son of Robert Southern. This letter still remains 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


in the castle of Llanfear, in the hands of George Devereux, and 
was seen and read by Richard Jones and John Ap Morgan, then 
magistrates of the town of Pembroke, who agreed that the respect 
thus shown to the lad by the Council proved him to be a different 
sort of person from what he had commonly been regarded. 

" When he was conveyed to London, to a palace called Pickering 
Place, and he found there Wotton, of Kent, Thomas Heneage, and 
John Ashley, who reproved him for running away in that manner, 
and gave him to understand that it was John Ashley who had paid 
for his education, and not Robert Southern. He thinks that the 
letter of the Council also said this. 

" Some time afterwards, being in London, and still expressing 
a desire to see foreign lands, John Ashley, finding that all persuasions 
to the contrary were unavailing, obtained letters of recommendation 
to M. de la None, a French colonel then in the service of the States. 
He was entrusted for his passage to a servant of the Earl of Leicester, 
who pretended to be going to Flanders on his own affairs, and he 
landed at Ostend in the summer of 1580, proceeding afterwards 
to Bruges, where he remained until La Noue was taken prisoner.* 
This deranged his plans, and, taking leave of the Earl of Leicester's 
gentleman, he went to France, where he remained until his money 
was spent ; after which he returned to England for a fresh supply. 
He again returned to France, whence he was recalled at the end of 
1583 by letters from Robert Southern, saying that his return to 
England would be greatly to his advantage. 

" When he arrived in England, he found Robert very ill of 
paralysis at Evesham, where he was keeping an inn, his master 
having sold the office of keeper of Enfield. Robert, with many 
tears, told him he was not his father, nor had he paid for his bring- 
ing up, as might easily be seen by the different way in which his 
own children had been reared. Arthur begged him to tell him 
who his parents were, but Robert excused himself, saying that both 
their lives depended upon it, besides the danger of ruining other 
friends who did not deserve such a return. 

" Arthur took leave of Robert in anger, as he could not obtain 
the information he desired, and Robert sent a lad after him to call 
him back. Arthur refused to return unless he promised to tell 
him whose son he was. Robert also sent the schoolmaster Smyth, 
a Catholic, after him, who gravely reproved him for what he was 
doing, and at last brought him back to Robert. The latter then 
told him secretly that he was the son of the carl of Leicester and 
the Queen, with many other things unnecessary to be set down here. 

• La Noue waa taken prisoner on the 15th May, 1580. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


He added that he had no authority to tell him this ; but did so for 
the discharge of his own conscience, as he was ill and near death. 
Arthur begged him to give him the confession in writing, but he 
could not write, as his hand was paralysed, and Arthur sent to 
London to seek medicines for him. He got some from Dr. Hector 
(Nunes), but they did no good ; so, without bidding farewell to 
Robert, he took his horse and returned to London, where, finding 
John Ashley, and a gentleman named Drury, he related to them 
what Robert had told him. They exhibited great alarm at learning 
the thing had been discovered, and prayed him not to repeat it, 
recommending him to keep near the court ; and promising him if 
he followed their advice, he might count upon their best services 
whilst they lived. They told him that they had no means of 
communicating with the Earl, except through his brother the Earl 
of Warwick. 

" The great fear displayed by John Ashley and the others, when 
they knew that the affair was discovered, alarmed Arthur to such an 
extent that he fled to France. On his arrival at Eu in Normandy 
he went to the Jesuit College there in search of advice. After he 
had somewhat obscurely stated his case, the Rector, seeing that the 
matter was a great one and foreign to his profession, dismissed him 
at once, and told him he had better go to the duke of Guise, which 
he promised to do, although he had no intention of doing it, thinking 
that it would be impolitic for him to divulge his condition to French- 
men. When he was in Paris, he went to the Jesuit College there, 
with the intention of divulging his secret to an English father named 
Father Thomas ; but when he arrived in his presence he was so 
overcome with terror that he could not say a word. The Com- 
missioners of the States of Flanders being in Paris at the time, to 
offer their allegiance to the king of France, and there being also a 
talk about a league being arranged by the Duke of Guise, Arthur 
feared that some plans might be hatching against England, and 
repented of coming to France at all. He thereupon wrote several 
letters to John Ashley, but could get no reply. He also wrote to 
Edward Stafford, the EngUsh Ambassador in France, without saying 
his name, and when the ambassador desired to know who he was, 
he replied that he had been reared by Robert Southern, whom the 
Queen knew, and whose memory she had reason to have graven on 
her heart. 

" He remained in France until he had cause to believe that 
the Queen of England would take the States of Flanders under her 
protection, and that a war might ensue. He then returned to 
England in the ship belonging to one Nicholson of Ratcliff. The 
said master threatened him when they arrived at Gravesend that 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


he would hand him over to the justices for his own safety. Arthur 
begged him rather to take him to the earl of Leicester first, and 
wrote a letter to the Earl, which Nicholson delivered. The Earl 
received the letter, and thanked the bearer for his service, of which 
Nicholson frequently boasted. The next morning, as the ship 
was passing Greenwich on its way to London, two of the Earl's 
gentlemen came on board to visit him, one of them named Blount, 
the Earl's equerry. When they arrived at Ratcliff, Flud, the Earl's 
secretary, came to take Arthur to Greenwich. The Earl was in the 
garden with the Earls of Derby and Shrewsbury, and on Arthur's 
arrival the earl of Leicester left the others, and went to his apart- 
ment, where by his tears, words, and other demonstrations he showed 
so much affection for Arthur that the latter believed he understood 
the Earl's deep intentions towards him. The secretary remained in 
Arthur's company all night, and the next morning, on the Earl 
learning that the masters and crews of the other ships that had 
sailed in their company had seen and known Arthur, and had gone 
to Secretary Walsingham to give an account of their passengers, he 
said to Arthur, ' You are like a ship under full sail at sea, pretty to 
look upon, but dangerous to deal with.' The Earl then sent his 
secretary with Arthur to Secretary Walsingham, to tell him that he 
(Arthur) was a friend of the Earl's, and Flud was also to say that 
he knew him. Walsingham replied that if that were the case he 
could go on his way. Flud asked for a certificate and licence to 
enable Arthur to avoid future molestation, and Walsingham there- 
upon told Arthur to come to him again, and he would speak to him. 
On that day Arthur went with the Earl to his house at Wanstead, 
and returned with Flud in the evening to Greenwich. The Earl 
again sent to Walsingham for the licence ; but as Walsingham 
examined him very curiously, and deferred giving him the paper, 
Arthur was afraid to return to his presence. He therefore went to 
London and asked M. de la Mauvissifere to give him a passport for 
France, which, after much difficulty, he obtained in the guise of a 
servant of the ambassador. He supped that night with the am- 
bassador, and was with him until midnight, but, on arriving at 
Gravesend the next morning, he found that the passport would 
carry him no further without being presented to Lord Cobham. 
As he found there an English hulk, loaded with English soldiers for 
Flanders, he entered into their company and landed at Bergen-op- 
Zoom. He was selected to accompany one Gawen, a lieutenant of 
Captain Willson, and a sergeant of Colonel Norris, to beg the States 
for some aid in money for the English troops, who were in great 


"The paper then relates at length Arthurs plot with one 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Seymour to deliver the town of Tele to the Spaniards, which plot 
was discovered. His adventures at Cologne and elsewhere are also 
recounted. He opened up communications with the elector of 
Cologne and the Pope, and indirectly the duke of Parma learnt his 
story, and sent Count Paul Strozzi to interview him. After many 
wanderings about Germany, he received a messenger from the 
Earl of Leicester at Sighen, but to what effect he does not say. He 
then undertook a pilgrimage to Our Lady of Montserrat, and, on 
learning in Spain of the condemnation of Mary Stuart, he started 
for France, but was shipwrecked on the Biscay coast, and captured 
by the Spaniards as suspicious person, and was brought to Madrid, 
where he made his statement to Englefield. (The latter portion of 
the statement is not here given at length, as it has no bearing upon 
Arthur Dudley's alleged parentage.) 

" The above statement was accompanied by a private letter from 
Arthur Dudley to Sir Francis Englefield as follows : 

" As time allowed I have written all this, although as you see 
my paper has run short. If God grants that his Majesty should 
take me under his protection, I think it will be necessary to spread 
a rumour that I have escaped, as everybody knows now that I am 
here, and my residence in future can be kept secret. I could then 
write simply and sincerely to the earl of Leicester all that has 
happened to me, in order to keep in his good graces ; and I could 
also publish a book to any effect that might be considered desirable, 
in which I should show myself to be everybody's friend and nobody's 
foe. With regard to the king of Scotland, in whose favour you 
quote the law, I also have read our English books, but you must 
not forget that when the din of arms is heard the laws are not 
audible ; and if it is licit to break the law for any reason, it is licit 
to do so to obtain dominion. Besides which, if this reason was a 
sufficiently strong one to bring about the death of the mother, the 
life of the son might run a similar risk. Those who have power 
have right on their side. As for the earl of Huntingdon, and 
Beauchamp, son of the earl of Hertford, both of them are descendants 
of Adam, and perhaps there is some one else who is their elder 

" Attached to this document there is another memorandum from 
Englefield as follows : 

" I recollect that this Arthur Dudley amongst other things 
repeated several times that for many years past the earl of Leicester 
had been the mortal enemy of the queen of Scots, and that the 
condemnation and execution of Throgmorton, Parry, and many 
others had been principally brought about in order to give an excuse 
for what was afterwards done with the queen of Scots. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


"I think it very probable that the revelations that this lad 
IS making everywhere may originate in the queen of England and 
her Council, and possibly with an object that Arthur himself does 
not yet understand. Perhaps, if they have determined to do away 
With the Scottish throne, they may encourage this lad to profess 
Catholicism, and claim to be the Queen's son, in order to discover 
the minds of other Princes as to his pretensions, and the Queen 
may thereupon acknowledge him, or give him such other position 
as to neighbouring Princes may appear favourable. Or perhaps in 
some other way they may be making use of him for their iniquitous 
ends. I think also that the enclosed questions should be put to him 
to answer in writing— whether all at once or at various times I 
leave to you. I also leave for your consideration whether it would 
not be well to bring Arthur to San Geronimo, the Atocha, or some 
other monastery, or other house, where he might be more com- 
modiously communicated with."— Ca/. S. P., Simancas, vol. iv. 
p. loi. June 17, 1587. 

" Sir Francis Englefield to the King. 

" Very late last night Andres de Alba sent me what Arthur 
Dudley has written, which being in English, and filling three sheets 
of paper, will take some days to translate and summarize in Spanish. 

" As, however, I have read it, I think well in the meantime to 
advise your Majesty that the effect of it is a discourse about his 
education, with the reasons and arguments which have led him to 
believe to be, as he calls himself, the son of the Queen, He then 
gives an account of his voyages away from England, in France 
and Flanders, showing that they had no other intention or motive 
than a desire, on his first voyage, to see strange countries. He 
returned in consequence of poverty, and subsequently set out on 
his second voyage for his own safety's sake. He mentions several 
things that happened in France and Flanders, and speaks of the 
letters that passed between him and the elector of Cologne, and 
says that his reason for coming to this country was a vow he had 
made to visit Our Lady of Montserrat, where he was shriven on 
the 13th of October of last year. He enumerates certain places in 
Spain where he has stayed, and the persons he has been living with. 
He adds that his intention was to go to France when he was detained 
in Giupuzcoa, and ends by begging his Majesty to accept and 
esteem him as the person he claims to be, and to protect him (although 
with the utmost secrecy). He indicates a desire also to write some- 
thing in English, to publish to the world, and especially to England, 
who he is, as he thinks that those who have put the queen of Scotland 
out of the way will endeavour to send her son after her. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


" As he replies in this discourse to some of the questions I sent 
to your Majesty on Monday, they may be modified accordingly 
before they are sent to him.— Madrid, i8th June, 1587."— Zfarf. 
p. 106. 

" Sir Francis Engkfield to the King. 

" I send your Majesty herewith a summary of all that Arthur 
Dudley had sent to me, and as it appears that some of the questions 
your Majesty has are answered therein, I have eliminated the 4th, 
5th, and 6th questions and have added those I now enclose. 

" I also send enclosed what I think of writing with the questions, 
as I think I had better defer my going thither until after he has sent 
his answers to them, as I find many things which he told me 
verbally have been omitted in his statement. 

" When your Majesty has altered what you think fit, I will 
put my letter, which I will take or send as your Majesty orders, 
in conformity. As he says he is in want of paper, your Majesty 
had better order him to be supplied with as much as may be needed ; 
because the more fully he writes the better shall we be able to 
discover what we wish to know. — Madrid, 20th June, 1587." — Ibid. 
p. 106. 

" Sir Francis Englefield to the King. 

" Although the statement sent to me by Arthur Dudley omits 
many things that he told me verbally, which things must be inquired 
into more particularly, yet it appears evident from what he writes 
that he makes as light of the claims of Huntingdon, and of the sons 
of the earl of Hertford, as he does of the life of the king of Scotland ; 
and it is also manifest that he has had much conference with the 
earl of Leicester, upon whom he mainly depends for the fulfilment 
of his hopes. This and other things convince me that the queen 
of England is not ignorant of his pretensions ; although, perhaps, 
she would be unwilling that they should be thus published to the 
world, for which reason she may wish to keep him (Dudley) in his 
low and obscure condition, as a matter of policy, and also in order 
that her personal immorality might not be known (the bastards of 
princes not usually being acknowledged in the lifetime of their 
parents), and she has always considered that it would be dangerous 
to her for her heir to be nominated in her lifetime, although he 
alleges that she has provided for the earl of Leicester and his faction 
to be able to elevate him (Dudley) to the throne when she dies, and 
perhaps marry him to Arabella (Stuart). For this and other reasons 
I am of opinion that he should not be allowed to get away, but 
should be kept very secure to prevent his escape. It is true his claim 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


at present amounts to nothing, but, with the example of Don 
Antonio before us, it cannot be doubted that France and the English 
heretics, or some other party, might turn it to their own advantage, 
or at least make it a pretext for obstructing the reformation of religion 
in England (for I look upon him as a very feigned Catholic) and 
the inheritance of the crown by its legitimate master ; especially 
as during this Queen's time they have passed an Act in England, 
excluding from the succession all but the heirs of the Queen's body. 
— Madrid, 32nd June, 1587. 

" Note to the above letter, in the handwriting of the King. 
' Since the other letters were written, the enclosed from Englefield 
has been handed to me.' It certainly will be ' safest to make sure 
of his (Dudley's) person until we know more about it.' " — lUd. 
p. III. 

{b) In England 

The letter published by Ellis and referred to by Lingard per- 
taining to Arthur Dudley, except so much of it as concerns other 
matters, is as follows : 

" B. C. an English Spy to his Government upon the preparation 
of the Spanish Armada. 

(MS. Harl. 295, fol. 190. Grig.) 

Madrid, aSth May, 1588. 

" About xvi monthes agone was taken a Youthe entringe Spaine 
owte of France, about Fontarabie, who hathe gyven owte his person 
to be begotten betwene our Queue and the Erie of Leycester ; borne 
att Hampton courte, and furthwith by the elder Assheley delyvered 
into the handes of one Southorne the servant to Mrs. Assheley, 
with charge upon payne of deathe that the sayde Southorne shoulde 
not revele the matter, but bringe ytt upp ; who brought the babe 
to a myllers wyfe of Mowlsey to gyve ytt sucke, and afterwards the 
said Southorne goynge into his countrey whiche was Wurcester or 
Shropshier, caried with hym the chylde, and there brought ytt up 
in learnynge and qual3rties. In the ende, discoveringe unto this 
youthe the whole secrete, he tooke a flyght over sees, where many 
yeres he hathe remayned untill his commynge hyther. His name 
is Arthure, and of xxvii yeres of age, or there about. This forsoothe 
ys his sayenge, and takethe upon hym lyke to the man he preten- 
dethe to be ; wherupon he wanteth no kepers, and is very solemply 
warded and served, with an expence to this Kinge of vi crownes a 
daye. If I had myne Alphabete I woulde saye more towchinge his 
lewde speches ; and yf I maye I will do hym plesure, specially 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


beinge called to accompt about hym, as yt is tolde me I shall 
shortly be ; the kinge beinge informed that aboute that time I 
served in Courte, whereby I maye saye somewhat to this matter.* 
Madrid the xxviiith of Maye 1588. 

" Yours to use, 

" B. C." 

Note 6. 

lewde pasquyle sette forthe by certeyn of the parlyament 
MEN, 8 Ely. 


Quis regnaturus est super populum Israel. 

tollitur nomen euis de familia sua quia filium non habet. 


date nobis possionem {sic) inter cognatos patris mei. 

dabitur hiis qui ei proximi sunt. 

Religio sancta et immaculata hec est. 

Libertate qua vocati estis ambulate. 

cum Juuenis eram loquebar vt iuuenis. 

* " This sort of scandal was not confined to Queen Elizabeth. In the 
Lansdowne MS. 53, art. 79, is a very curious Examination taken by virtue 
of Letters from the Lords of Queen Elizabeth's Council in 1587, respecting 
one Anne Bumell, who was stated to have announced herself as the daughter 
of JPhilip King of Spain, and that " it might be Queen Mary was her mo£er," 
she being marked " upon the reynes of her back " with the Arms of England. 
Her wits, it was discovered, were troubled, through great misery and 
penury, and the slighting of her Husband. To be serious, however, that 
Queen Elizabeth had her private attachments, no reasonable man who 
peruses the documents and histories of her time can doubt. They probably 
operated against her entering the married state more than any physical 
cause : though to soothe the wishes of her people the Queen's intention of 
marr3ring continued to be rumoured and encouraged almost to the end 
of life," — Foot-note by Ellis to above letter. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

/vrrr,iNDIX 319 

St. John. 
Odium sussitat rixas. 

tolle tolle crucifige eos. 


Lex data est per moysem. 

Obsecro vos in viceribus Jesu Christi. 

CoUeccio fiat propter sanctos. 


me sequimini et nolite iungi moabitis. 

occidit Josias vniuersos sacerdotes excelsorum. 

age, insta, loquere, lege, scribe, tempestine et intempestine. 

Gentes et populos diuisit per regiones. 

Judas mercator pessimus. 


Clamabo sicut tuba. 

tu dixisti. 

non ego domine. 

Audaces fortuna iuuat. 


Esurii (sic) nee habeo quod manducem. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


qui prouocat iras producit discordias. 


mora trahit periculum. 


sicut quidem eorum poeta dixit. 

per mare per terras. 


Inundacio aquarum cooperuit terrain, 


hoc facite et salui eritis. 

qui se exaltat humuliabitur. 


abscindatur qui aliter senciat. 

nil addas verbis illius ne inueniaris mendax. 

rapite rapite ad carcerem. 

pacem meam do vobis. 


aperto capite intrent. 


concordat cum originali. 

cum priuilegio regali. 


et omnis populus dicat amen. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


1 Molynaxe the movere. 

2 Bell the Orato'. 

3 Monson the provere. 

4 Kyngsmell the coUecto'. 

5 Wentworthe the wranglere. 

6 Strange the Relygyous. 

7 Seynt John the Janglere. 

8 Goodiere the gloryous. 

9 Browne the blasphemore. 

10 marshe the hance ledere. 

11 Chestere the dremore. 

12 iQeetwood the pledere. 

13 Wythers the wryngere. 

14 Grafton the pryntere. 

15 Strykland the styngere. 

16 ffleetwood the myntere. 

17 Colbey the prouydere. 

18 Segarston the merye. 

19 wrothe the aspyrere. 

20 Warncombe the werye, 

21 Carewe the cruell. 

22 Bartewe the indyto'. 

23 Chichester the fell. 

24 Gryse the bakbyto"^. 

25 Arnold the accuso'. 

26 pates the pacyfyere. 

27 oseborne the Deuysor. 

28 Nudigate the cryere. 

29 Alforde the bolde. 

30 ffoster the fryere. 

31 Norton the scolde. 

32 Dalton the denyere. 

33 Dodmere the drudgere. 

34 pratte the presumere. 

35 ffarror the flyngere. 

36 Compton the consumere. 

37 Egecombe the erneste. 

38 Grymston the procto'. 

39 Hales the hottest. 

40 Gallyce the docto'. 

41 Wyntere the mariner. 

42 Yeluerton the poet. 

43 Bowyere the antiquer. 

here restes vs o' quiere. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


As for the rest 
theye be at deuotion 
and when theye be prest 
theye trye a good motion. 

Note 7 

" Roger ffawnes talke had wth me John Guntor uppqn 
xPmas day & St. Stephins day being the xxvh & 
xxviTH of December 1578. 

" Uppon Christmas daye at night, he and his brother in lawe & 
I came from evensong togither, & by the waye as we went I 
used some talke of Mr. Darrell, marveling much what he ment 
having so fayre a living, that he lived no quieter in his cowntrie, 
to w"='" he annswered, that in trewth he was a marvaylous trowble- 
some man, & that he did not care what he did to be revenged or 
succh as he had malice vnto. to whom I sayd, yo" have cawse to 
take hede, for if it be true as I have harde, he hath a rodd in pisse 
for yo", to w"*" he replied sayeing, that if he begon to trouble him, 
he would utter succh matter, as he should be ashamed to hyre, & 
then he swore by the lordes bodie, that if some men dyd knowe 
what he knew, he wold haue his hedd stroked from his bodye or 
elles be imprisoned during his lief, ffor it was to shamfull his 
hart dyd ake to thinck of it./ these wordes were vttered vnto me 
alone in cwming from the churche warde in a little meade plott 
w^'out my Orcharde, his broth* being somewhat behinde, & he 
wisshed that it were knowen, but he was very lothe to deale in it 
to openly, but sayd he, if there were articles drawne, succh as I 
should deuise, & that John Pynnock, Thorns Rewes, John Horseman 
ffantleroye W him self were examined vppon them, there wold be 
succh matter opened, as towching the Queenes Ma"" and the 
nobilitie, as a man wold blesse him self to heare./ Then sayd I 
vnto him, if yo" know any succh matt", you shall do well to vtter 
it ; for truely if he take yo" in his reche he will make yo" to feele 
him the longest daye of yo" lief, then sayd he in fayth M' 
Gunto*, I will showe it vnto yo", so as yo" will vse the matter that 
it be not knowen to come of me, but as though it were drawen 
out of me by Interrogatories, but first before all this talke, he 
showed me, that he was enquired of at the Assises at Sarg (Sarum) 
for a childe w'='' should have byn murdered at littlecote, & that 
Marye Bonham was in like wise talked w*"* all about the same 

Itm he hard his m' (master) saye vnto him in his studye, as at 
that tyme he was very familier w*'' him, that the tyme was now 
almost come, that long had byn loked for, that was, that now 
they were readie to goe togither by the eares at the co*te (corte), 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


w"'' if it so came to passe, (as he hoaped it wold) he sayd he 
wold be the first man him self that w*"* his owne hande wold 
dispatche my L. Treasourer, and diwse (diverse) oother vile wordes 
he hard his m"^ (master) at tyme speak of the Queene and of the 
Cownsell, as that her Grace was very vnmete to gouverne, and 
that she was a dronckard and a naughtie woman of her bodie w*"" 
succh odious wordes, as his eares did ake to here, and the said 
ffawne much marvayled what he ment to speak this much 
vnto him ; This was spoken about that tyme he laye at M' 
Comptrollers W^"" he reconeth to be 4 or 5 yeres past, or there- 

Itm. he sayde, that John Pynnock sayde to him, that when 
the Queenes ma"^ was at Wilton last, his master rode thith« 
hoaping to haue byn knighted as oothers were, & as he rode 
homewardes, his m' (master) sayde unto him, that the Queene 
was once mynded to ryde a hunting, but aft^ dinner she was so 
dronck, that she could not ryde, & much more talke he had at 
that tyme w"* the sayd Pynnock, as towching her ma*'* & 

Itm. he sayde, that when his m' (master) wold have byn 
diuorsed from his wief, he spake very earnestly vnto the sayd 
f&wne to gett him fowre parsons to sweare y* she that was his 
wief, was assured vnto one [ ] before he married her, and 

this flFawne sayeth, that he gott one John Shynfield, and that his 
m' (master) gott one Hugh Lamport, and twoo oothers whose 
names now he doth not rememb, & instructed them for their othe, 
& gave them oxl^ a piece for their paynes, and this he well knoweth 
to be trew, and he fiirder knoweth, that his m' pmised unto Hugh 
Lamport a howsse./ 

January 13TH 

In pmis the sayd fl&wne the daye aboue said sayde vnto me, 
that sithence I last talked w*!* him that his wief happened to tell 
him of a certen talee v/'^^ Marie Bonham told her, when she laye 
at his house, w'='' talee was as followeth./ 

She sayde, that there were twoo gentlemen, the one loving 
thother very well, the one happened to come in place where as 
was a very good mydwief, & sayd, I wold I might be so bold when 
occasion serveth to craue yo« healp, to whom she pmised, that he 
might comawnd her, aft« w'='' tyme, the oother gentleman who 
had begotten a gentle woman w*'' childe sent for y« same midwief 
in the name of the first gentleman to whom the midwief had 
pmised. Then afterward she told all the talee, likeas before I 
had told him, & when he had hard y* whole talee, he willed her 
to hold her peax, sayeing vnto her, thow hardest this talee of thy 
broth* the last daye, & now thow tellest yt after hym, but she 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


vtterly denied yt, & sayde, that she never hard it but at Mary 
Bonhams mowthe only, & that the sayd Marye told it as an old 

Not/ the effect of this talee was, that a midwief being brought 
in y" night to a gentle mans house, she fownd a gentle woman 
there, neading y* sayd midwiefes healp, w'"" she yelded vnto her, 
& was delivered of a man childe, w'''' after many threatninges vsed 
by the said gen? was throwen into the fire & so burned. Mdm 
that W" Darrell sayde at one tyme, that he trusted to hang one 
hundred knaves ministers rownd about him, and to see not one 
heretike least alyve./ 

Itm when he hard that the Duke of Norflfolke was come to 
the Towre, he sayd what a foole was he to come./ 

Itm that the sayd Darrell sayde, that my L. Dyer for his 
iniustice was worthie to haue his skynne pulled over his eares 
to make a Cheyer./ 

Itm that M' Bridges vppon a falling out betwene him & 
Darrell should saye, that if all were knowen, Darrell wold be 
made smart./ 

Itm that the sayd Darrell never came to the Churche since 
the beginning of her ma'** reigne./ 

The speach w"** fFawne told me John Gunto* here is omitted 
confining my L. Keaper, who hearing the cause betwene him and 
Ryde w'*" great extremitie (as Darrell thought) well sayd he to his 
man flfawne, thow shalt see the matter better handeled the next 
daye of hearing, w^ daye my L. sayeng nothing in steede of his 
earnestnes against Darrell the daye before, how sayest thow qd he 
to ffawne, did not I tell the ? Diddest thow not see the bittell 
headded knaue sytt still, he was muett, & had not a worde to speak ; 
& told me further he gaue y" L. Keaper a bribe of one 200''. 

Itm he sayde, that by his masters comawndement he did 
arrest w*'' ye Cownselles lyres (letters) one Lewys Dye who then 
served M' Edward Hungerford brother vnto S"^ Walter, & before 
that tyme was S' Walters man, & of sett p«pose putt to S' Walter 
to serue M' Darrelles turne, who had certen letters of his masters 
about him, and that he tooke from S' Walters heeles one oother 
man at Sarg (Sarum) w'"" both men he was earnestly by his sayd 
M' comawnded to convey vnto Balson pke lodge, & to spare for no 
cost to make them drunck, & to make them a very good fire, and 
to be carefull that after he had the parties that they conveyed no 
letters away ; & comawnde in like wise a good fire to be made 
[in their] Chamoer, sayeng that he wold come thither in the night 
priuely, and therefore willed, that when they were drunck to 
convey all succh Ires as they cowld fynde vnto him./ but bicause 
y' parties cowld not be made drunck, one Rewes was lodged w*"" 
them, who when they were fast a slepe stoale awaye their letters 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


Acqs, Evesque d', 49, 136 

Aikui, Miss Lucy, 296-7, 300 

Afac, Bishop of, 49, 136 

Alba, Duke of, 63-5, 372 

Aldgate, 116 

Alen^on, Duke of, 109, 185, 201, 

2i6-i8, 267 
Alenfon, town of, 289 
Alessandrino, Cardinal, 206 
Alexander, xiv 
Algiers, 262 
AUbutt, Sir Clifford, K.C.B., etc., 

etc., xvi, 80-82 
Allen, 5 

Allen, Cardinal, 187, 234-5 
Alva, Duke of, 179 
Ambassadors : 

English, 184, 269 

French, 156, 169, 179, 185, 197, 

Spanish, 159 

Swedish, 157 

Venetian, 156, 286 
Ames, Percy W., F.S.A., etc., 290 
Amsterdam, 291-2 
Andersson, Dr. Aksel, xvi 
Anjou, Duke of (later Henry III of 

France), 58, 164, 167, 180-81, 

216-18, 261-2, 268, 277 
Anne, Lady (Queen of Rich. Ill), 

Antonio, Don (Prince of Portugal), 

Antwerp, 62, 201 
Apollo, III 
Appleyerde, 179 
Arbela (? Arabella Stuart), 169 
Aristode, 23 
Armada, The, x, xi, 19, 187, 234, 

237. 243. 247, 2S2, 317 
Arundel, Earl of, 53, 123, 124 
Ascham, Roger, 23, 24, 25, 142, 143, 

242, 297, 298, 299 
Asher & Co., 290 

Ashley, John, 170, 310, 311-12, 317 
Ashley, Kate, 3, 4, s, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 

II, 41, 42, 144, 14s, 170. 29S1 301. 

302, 310, 317 

Ashridge, 19, 44, 45, 91, 123, 125, 

307. 308 
Asmodeus, 164 
Asde, Thomas, F.A.S., 306 
Atocha, The, 313 
Attainder, Bill of, 4 
Auger, Bartholomew, 177, 178 
Austria, 119, 120, 150, 179, 258, 

2S9i 26s, 266, 267 

Babington, The Conspiracy of, 
120, 250 

Bacon, Anthony, 252 

Bacon, Francis, 33, 252, 271, 279 

Bacon, Nicholas, Lord Keeper, 153 

Bagot, Anthony, 185, 202 

Bagot, Richard, 185, 202 

Bainham, 70 

Baker, Sir Richard, 49 

Balson Park, 324 

Basing, 308 

Basing Park, 108 

Bawdewn, Thomas, 68 

Beale, Robert, 68 

Beamonde, 306 

Beauchamp (son of Earl of Hert- 
ford), 314 

Beauchamps, The, 238 

Beaulieu, 308 

Beaumont, M. de, 73, 109, 152 

Bedford, Earl of, 59, 65 

Bedingfield, Sir Henry, 47, 48, 132, 
i33i 134, 13s. 136, 139. 140 

Beesley, Prof. Edward Spencer, sii, 
33. 24s, 246, 297, 298 

Bekker, Ernst, 187, 274 

Bentley & Son, 288 

Bergen-op-Zoom, 313 

Bergundy, 179 

Berkeley, Castle of, 109 

Berkeley, Lord, 109 

Berkeleys, The, 238 

Berneye, Kenelme, 179 

Berwick, city of, 66, 188, 248 

Berwike, John, 177, 178 

Bill, Dr., 41 

Bird, Mr., 106 

Biron, Due de, 108 


Digitized by Microsoft® 



Blackfriara, 109 

Blackfrian, The (Theatre), 242 

Blanche, Mestrys, 42 

Blenheim, 133 

BloU, 217, 261 

Blount, Sir Charles (later Earl of 

Devonshire and Lord Mountjoy), 

164, 193, 194, 252, 254 
Blount, Equerry to Leicester, 313 
Bodleian, The, 20, 134 
Bodley, Sir Thomas, 254 
Boleyn, Queen Anne, vi, vii, i, 2, 4, 

26, 27, 28, 36, 37, 129, 28s 
Bonham, Mary, 322, 323-4 
Bonney, Rev. Edwin, xvi 
Bothwell, 206 
Brander, Gustavus, 306 
Bratli, Dr. Charles, xvi 
Brentwood, 174 
Bridges, Mr., 324 
Bristol, 73 

British Museum, 286, 287, 288, 291 
Brittany, 272 
Bront6, Charlotte, 100 
Brooke, Robert, 177, 178 
Browning, Elizabeth Barrett, 100 
Browning, Robert, 84 
Bruges, 311 

Brunton, Sir Lauder, 85 
Brussels, 62, 134, 144, 262, 265, 278 
Buckingham, Duke of, 164 
Burbage, James, 242 
Burghley , Lord . See Cecil , William 
Burley, Thomas, 176 
Bumdwood, 173 
Bumell, Anne, 318 
Buxton, ix 

Caoena, 213, 214 

Cadiz, viii, ix, 253 

Csesar, Julius, xiv, 17 

Calais, 148, 272 

Cambridge, city of, 54 

Cambridge, Universi^ of, 23, 251, 

253, 262, 297 
Camden, 33, 70, 88, 89, 240, 249, 

250, 270, 289 
Cameron, 191, 192 
Carey, Robert, 109 
Carleton, Sir Dudley, 32 
Carlos, Don, 142, 143, 145, 191 
Cailyle, 84 
Carrye, Mrs., 306 
Carte, 34 
Carvajal, Don, Tomas Gonzales, 

160, 161, z88, 192, 204, 205, 2o6, 

Case, 243 

Castlenau. See Mauvissiire 
Castile, Adelantado of, 73 

Catesby, 70 

Catherine of Aragon, 28, 36, 37, 39, 
n8, 285 

Cecil, Algernon, viii 

Cecil, Lord Hugh, 244 

Cecil, Sir Robert, 70, 72, 73, 75, 
208, 252, 253 

Cecil, Thomas, 179 

Cecil, William, Lord Burghley, vi, 
vii, viii, ix, x, 43, 50, Si,S4>SS. 
57, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 6s, 66, 67, 
68, 69, 70, 72, 138, I42f iSS. »S6, 
1S7. 169. I7S. 176, 180, 181, 208, 
213, 214-16, 219, 228, 229, 230, 
231. 236, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 
243, 244, 246, 247, 248, 250, 251, 
252, 253, 255-8, 261, 262, 265, 
276, 277, 278, 302 

Chaloner, Sir Thomas, 51, 262, 263, 

Chapuys, 15 

Charles, Archduke of Austria, 178, 
197, 198, 256, 258, 259, 265-7, 

Charles V, The Emperor, 44, 45. 
121, 123, 124, 125, 130, 132. '38, 

Charles DC, King of France, 180, 
181, 216, 217, 257, 258, 261, 268 
Chamocke, 325 
Chaucer, 25 
Cheke, John, 23 
Chelsea, 3 
Cheshunt, 296 
Chester, 184 
Cheston, 41, 301 
Cheyneys, 59 
Chipline, 179 
Christchurch, 308 
Cicero, 24 

Cleves, Atme of, 2, 28 
Clowes, 81 

Cobham, Lady, 51, 163 
Cobham, Lord. 74> 3^3 
Coke, Mr., 174 
Collijn, Dr. Isak, xvi 
Cologne, city of, 314 
Cologne, Elector of, 314. 3»S „ ... 
Como, The Cardinal of. See Galh 
Congreve, Richard, xii, 245 
Conningesby, Richard, 108 
Constantine, 17 
Corderius, 17 

Comwallis, Sir Thomas, 46 
Cotton, 70 
Council. The, vii, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 42, 

47. 48. 52, 70, "4. "7, 128, 130. 

131, 134, l^, 153. 15s. 156, 173. 

179, 184, 246, 310, 311, 3»S. 310. 

323. 324 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



Courtney, Lord, 124 

Cowdray, 109 

Craster, H. H. E., 289 

Creighton, Bishop Mandell, 31, 34, 

297. 300, 303 
Crocque, M. de, 64 
Cromwell, Oliver, 156, 274 

Danbye, 174 

Darrell, William, 322, 324 

Darwin, 84, 100 

Dauphin, The (later Francis II of 
France), 272 

Davison, Francis, 219 

Dell, 218, 221 

Denmark, 259, 260 

Denny, Master, 10, 291 

De Quincy, 84 

Derby, Earl of, 313 

Devereux, George, 310, 311 

Devereux, Robert, second Earl of 
Essex, viii, xv, 70, 72, 73, 74, 
97. 152, iSS, 164, 185, 193, 194, 
202, 22s, 242, 251-4, 271, 310 

Devereux, Walter, first Earl of 
Essex, 251 

Devonshire, Earl of. See Blount 

Devyzes, 177, 178 

Dombery, 174 

Donnington, Castle of, 308 


Dormer, Sir William, 133 

Dove, Anne, 172, 173, 174. 17s, 176 

Dover, 180 

Drake, Sir Francis, viii, ix, 239, 
240, 241, 242, 252 

Dewry, 61 

Drury, 312 

Drury, Sir Drew, 170 

Dudley, Arthur, 169, 170, 187, 188, 
193, 200, 212, 309-18 

Dudley, Lady Catharine (Lady 
Hertford), 49, 50, 65 

Dudley, Henry, 188 

Dudley, Henry, 238 

Dudley, Lord Robert, Earl of 
Leicester, vii, viii, ix, x, xi, xii, 
XV, 55, 57. 59. 60, 61, 64, 65, 
66, 67, 69, 108, 113. "S. 153, 155. 
158, 159. 160, 161, 163, 164, 169, 
170, 172, 173. 174. »7S. 176, 177. 
178, 179. 180, 183, 184, 18s, 187, 
188, 191, 19s. 196, 197. 198, 800, 
202, 205, 206, 207, 208, 213, 214- 
16, 219, 225, aa8, 229, 230-31, 
236-48, 251, 252, 253, 254, 256, 
257. 258, 2S9. 260, 262, 265-8, 
280, 309, 311, 313. 314. 316, 317 

Dudleys, The, 309 

Durham, 191 

Durham Place, 5 

Dychar, John, i88, 202, 203 

Dye, Lewis, 324 

Dyer, Sir Edward, 181, 182, 204, 

218-31, 232-4, 242, 324 
Dyer, H., xvi 
Dyer-Halton Letter, 1 8 1 , 204, 2 1 8-3 1 

Edderman, Francis, 184 

Edinburgh, 66, 105 

Edward VI, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 22, 36, 

37, 38. 39. 42, 43. 44, 83, 84, 113, 

114, 116, 118, 238, 285, 294, 296, 

289, 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 

307, 308, 309 
Elliott, George, 100 
Ellis, A. I., XVI 
Ellis, 169, 317 
Ely, Bishop of, 224 
Enfield, 304 

Enfield House, 109, 310, 311 
Englefield, Sir Francis, 170, 193, 

Enneley, John, 177, 178 
Erick XIV, King of Sweden, 200, 

201, 263, 278 
Essex, Robert, second Earl of. See 

Essex, Walter, first Earl of. See 

Etheldreda, 36 
Eu, 312 

Evesham, 170, 311 
Exeter, Duke of, 86 
Exeter, town of, 176 

Farnham, 307 

Faunt, 164 

Felton, Mrs., 110 

F^^lon, Bertrand de Salignac de la 

Mothe, 58,,63,65, 

88, 108, 216, 217, 262, 267, 268, 

Ferdinand, The Emperor, 262 
Feria, Duchess of^ 13 
Feria, Duke of, 49, 60, 152, 156, 

172, 196 
Ffanderoye, 322 
Ffawne, Roger, 184, 322-5 
Flanders, 138, 146, 156, 238, 239, 

Fleet Prison, 154 
Flud, 313 

Foix, Paul de, 56, 61, 257, 270, 276 
Fontarabie, 317 
France, 50, 103, 118, 119, 120, 121, 

146, 147. 148. 150. XS3. 197. 

216-17. 239. 258, 259. 260, 261, 

262, 267, 311, 312, 313. 314, 31S1 


Digitized by Microsoft® 



Froude, J. A., v, vi, vii, xii, sdii, 
xiv, 34, 148, IS7. 160, i6i, ai6, 
240, 842. 870, a87 

Gage, 47, 134 

Galen, 81 

Galli, Ptolemey, Cardinal of Como, 

184, 199, 269 
Gardiner, Lord Chancellor, 122, 

I2S, 131 
Gardiner, S. R., 195 
Garrerd, Robert, 51 
Garrerd, Mrs. Robert, 51 
Gawen, 313 
Geneva, 300 
Geoftey- Whitney, 242 
George, 167 

Germany, 256, 265, 272, 278, 314 
Gibbon, 287 
Giessen, 187 
Gilpin, George, 73 
Globe, The (Theatre), 242 
Gonzales. See Carvajal 
Gould, Dr. George, 84 
Gravesend, 312, 313 
Green, Mrs. Everett, 293, 298 
Green, J. R., 34 
Greenwich, 56, 115, 116, 305, 306, 

307, 313 
Grey, Lady Jane, 13, 114, 115, 125, 

126, 129, 238, 309 
Greys, The, 238 
Grindall, WiUiam, 23, 297 
Guaras, Antonio de, 59, 62, 63, 64, 

Guilderstem, Nicholas, 52, 264, 265, 

Guildford, 307 
Guise, Duke of, 312 
Guispuscoa, 169, 315 
Guntor, John, 184, 322-s 

Hague, The, 73 

Hampton Court, 33, 58, 63, 72, 87, 
88, 89, los, 138, 141, 170, 307, 
310, 317 

Harpur, Richard, 177 

Harrington, 164 

Harrington, Sir John, 72, 74 

Harrington, Miss or Mrs., 310 

Haryngton, N., 170 

Hastings, Sir Edward, 46 

Hastings, Lord, 50 

Hatfield, 4, 6, 12, 114, 115, 143, 144, 
145, 148, 149, 165, 208, 209, 256, 
2S7. 296, 301, 303, 304. 30s. 306 

Hatton, Sir Christopher, xv, 68, 
164, 166, 167, 180, 183, 204, 
218-31, 248, 254, 269, 278 

Haynes, 301 

Hayward, Sir John, 49 

Heame, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292 

Hendley, Robert, 176 

Heneage, Thomas, 311 

Henry II, of France, 119, 122, 141, 

Henry III, of France, 156 

Henry IV, of Fiance, 72, 73, 157, 
194. 271, 279 

Henry V, of England, 86 

Henry VIII, of England, vi, vii, 
»v. 2, 3. 8, 13, IS, 21, 26, 27, 28, 
36, 37i 38, 39. 40, 83, 114, 118, 
122, 285, 286, 291, 292, 294, 295, 
303, 304 

Hentzner, 71, 87, 97, 98 

Herbert, Lord, 109, iii 

Hermione, 85 

Hertford, Castle of, 15 

Hertford, Earl of, 65, 66, 183, 198 

Hertford, for son of, see Beauchamp 

Hertford, town of, 287 

Highgate, 46, 126 

Hilliard, Nicholas, 94, 95, 97, 98, 102 

Hippolyte, 24 

Holbom, 224 

Holland, 239 

Homer, 17 

Horseman, John, 322 

Howard, Lord Admiral, 46 

Howard, Lord Henry, 73 

Howard, J. A., M.D., xvi, 77, 89 

Howard, Katherine, 2, 28, 37 

Howards, The, 138 

Hume, M. A. S., viii, xii, 35, 161 

Hundsdon, Lord, 72 

Hungary, 134 

Hungerford, Edward, 324 

Hungerford, Sir Walter, 324, 325 

Hunsdon, 115 

Huntington, Earl of, 50, 53, 314 

Huxley, 84, 100 
Huycke, Dr., 47 

Innes of Court, 249 

Ipswich, 50 

Ireland, xi, 103, 164, 187, 251, 253 

Isocrates, 24 

Italy, 81, 120, 272 

James VI of Scotland and I of 
England, viii, ix, x, 66, 72, 73, 
74. 75. loS. 106, 110, 117, 148, 
183, 198, 316 

Jessopp, A., 297 

John, Duke of Finland, 263 

Johnston, Robert, 75 

Jorba, 213, 214 

Joseph, 227 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



Katharine (an attendant), 88 

KeiUj, Sir Arthur, xvi, 93-104, 151 

Kellmg, Simon, 87 

Kellwaye, 87 

Keralio, Mile de, 35 

Killigrew, Henry, 66, 167 

Kingston, SI, 64, 87 

Kirk, Rev. J., xiii, xiv 

Knoles, 168 

Knox, John, 310 

Kyembek, Martin, 52 

Kyng, Betterys, 175 

Kyng, John, 174, 175 

Labanoff, Prince, 166, 308, 209 

Lamport, Hugh, 323 

Latimer, 13 

Laud, Archbishop, 2t8, 221 

Lauri, Bishop of Mondovi, 206 

Lear, King, 86 

Lear, The Play, 86 

Leche, John, 176 

Ledyngton, Lord of, 248 

Lee, John, 62 

Lee, Sir Sidney, 88 

Leicester. See Robert Dudley, Earl 

Lemon, Robert, 301 

Lennox, Countess of, 167 

Lennox, Duke of, 73 

Lenton, Jon, 168 

Leontes, 85 

Lethington, si, 55 

Leti, Gregorio, 291, 292, 293-5 

Lincoln, Abraham, 135 

Lingard, John, vii, xiii, xiv, is8, 
159, 160, 161, 162, 163, X64, 
165-171, 187, 190, 191, 192, 193, 
194. 195. «>5. 207, 208, 209, 210, 
2". 257. 317 

Lisbon, 252 

Lisles, The, 238 

Littlecote, 325 

Livius, Titus, 24 

Livy, 299 

Llanfear, Castle of, 311 

Lloyd, David, 250 

Lopez, 252 

Lorraine, 265, 278 

Louis, Don, of Portugal, 132 

Love's Labour Lost, 88 

Lowe, 81 

Lownde, 293 

Lyes, 173 

Mab, 87 

Macaulay, Lord, v, 287 
Macmillan, Messrs., 288 
Madrid, 160, 169, 184, 198, 199, 
200, 314 

Maisse, M. de, 71, 86, no, m 

Malta, 272 

Mannell, 51 

Marburg, 289 

Margaret of Navarre, 19 

Marr, Earl of, 73 

Marshame, 179 

Mary I, Queen of England, 6, I2, 13, 

15. 25, 34. 36, 37. 39. 40, 45. 46. 

47. 48, 76, 91. "3. "4. "5. "6. 

117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 125, 

126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, t33, 

134. 135. 136, 137, 138, 139. 140. 

141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 

Mary, Queen of France, 114 
Mary, Queen of Hungary, 134, 138 
Mason, 51 
Mather, 179 

Maurice, Prince of Orange, 194 
MauvissiSre, Michel de C^sdenau, 

Sieur de la, 67, 68, 130, 201, 202, 

272-3, 279, 313 
Mawman, 191 

Maximilian, Emperor, 266, 267, 278 
Meadows, 214 
Medea, 196 
Medical Record of Elizabeth, xvi, 

35, 36. 37. 38, 39. 40. 41-76 
Medical Society, The British, 37 
Medici, Catherine de, 180, 181, 216- 

18, 261, 262, 268, 277, 278 
Melanchthon, 24 
Melville, Sir James, 54, 55, 57 
Melville, Sir Robert, 57, 248 
Mendoza, Don Bernardino de, 69, 

185, 201, 202, 236 
Mercutio, 87 
Michiel, 49, 137, 144 
Mildmay, Sir Thomas, 173, 175. 242 
Milford Haven, 310 
Mill, John Stuart, 17 
Mint, The, 5 

Miscea, Marco Antonio, 69 
Molesey, 170, 310, 317 
Molin, Venetian Ambassador, 156 
Montpensier, Prince Dauphin de, 

Montero, Dr. Juan, xvi 
Montserrate, 169, 314, 315 
More, Sir Thomas, 23, 25 
Morgan, Thomas, 69 
Morton, Mistress, 48 
Moss, H. W., 203 
Motisfont, 308 

Mountjoy, Lord. See Blotmt 
Mumby, 288, 289, 291, 292, 293. 

295, 298, 299, 300 
Mundt, Sir Christopher, 255-7, 265, 

276, 278 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



Murdin, 159, 165, 166 
Murray, Lord of, 55, 248 
Museum, The British, xiv, ai 

Napoleon, xiv, 14, 17 

Naunton, 249, 270 

Navarre, Henry of (later Henry IV), 

Needham, Dr., 86 
Netherlands, viii, x, 62, 70, 103, 

237i 239, 241. 24S1 246, 247. 251. 

Neumann and Baretti, 213, 214 
Nevers, Duke of, 105, 109 
Newton, Sir Isaac, 17 
Nichols (author of "The Pro- 
gresses," etc.), 34, 88, 89 
Nichols, George, 72 
Nicholson, 312, 313 
Nicolas, Nicholas Harris, F.S.A. 

(later Sir Harris Nicolas), 228, 

229, 230, 231 
Noaiiles, Francois de, 46, 47, 123, 

126, 127, 143, 14s, 146 
Nonsuch, 71 
Nonesuch, 307 
Norfolk, Duke of, 153, 179, 180, 

238, 324 
Normandy, 73, 312 
Norris, Col., 313 
North, Lord, 246 
Northampton, Marchioness of, 51, 

NorAampton, Marquis of, 60 
Northumberland, Duke of, 113, 114, 

IIS, "6. 238 
Northumberland, Earl of, 74 
Norwich, 187 
Noue, M. de la, 311 
Nunes, Dr. Hector, 312 

Oldham, J. B., 203 

Ormanetto, Bishop of Padua, 184, 

Osborne, Franci?,i64, 193, 194, 195, 

271, 279 
Osier, Sir William, Bart., xvi, 79 
Ostend, 311 
Oteland, 307 
Owen, Dr., 47, 134 
Oxford, City of, 57, 59, 107 
Oxford, Earl of, 164, 167 
Oxford University of, xii, 34, 219, 

225, 243. 250 

Padua, Bishop of, 199 
Paget, Sir James, 83 
Paget, Lord, 123, 124, 168 
Palatinate, The, 265 
Palatine, Elector, 26; 

Parker, Matthew, 180 

Parliament, The, vi, 4, 49, 52, S3> 
62, 143, 146, 147, 153, 154. j88, 

Parma, Duchess of, 52, 53, 88, 175, 
212, 272 

Parma, Duke of, 314 

Parr, Katherine, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 14, 
19, 20, 21, 28, 83, 84, 287, 288, 
290, 292, 293, 294, 295, 299. 301. 
302, 304 

Parry, Sir Thomas, 4, 6, 10, 11, 42, 
43. 90. 306, 314 

Paul, Herbert, vi 

Paulet, 242 

Paulina, 85 

Pavane, The, 112 

Perrot, Sir John, 249 

Phaedra, 24 

Philip II, of Spain, viii, ix, 13, 71, 
88, 121, 130, 131, 13s, 137, 138, 
139. 140. 141. 142, 143. 144. »4S, 
146, 147, 148, 152, 159. 161, >62, 
170, 172, 179, 185, 190, 191, 192, 
193, 196, 199, 200, 201, 205, 211, 
212, 238, 239, 253, 259, 260, 262, 
269. 277. 3iS-»8 

Picardy, 272 

Pickering Place, 311 

Pole, 51 

Pollard, Prof. A. F., 34, 294 

Pope, The, 117, 155, 157. »97. 199. 
200, 206 

Portman, Sir Hugh, 73 

Portsmouth, 308 

Portugal, 132, 252 

Powell and Tout, 34 

Prestal, 51 

Public Record OfRce, 301 

Pynnock, John, 184, 322, 323 

Pythagoras, 17 

Quadra, Alvarez, Bishop of Aquila, 
5°. 5«. 52, S3, 88, 158, 1S9. »6o, 
161, 163, 175, 193. 201, 205, 206, 
207, 2i2-i6, 259, 260, 269, 277 

Rae, James, M.D., 75, 286 
Ralegh, Sir Walter, viii, xv, 164, 

»93. »?S. 240, 241, 242, 252, 254 
Randolphe, Thomas, 51, 55, 56, 58 
RatclifiT, 312, 313 
Reading, 70, 308 
Redman, 179 
Reformation, The, v 
Renard, Simon, 44, 45, 47, 123, 123, 

I2S, 126 
Rewes, Thomas, 322, 324 
Rich, L., 175 
Richard III, 85 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



Richardson, 35 

Richmond, Duke of, 36, 39, 285 

Richmond, town of, 74, 132, 204 

Ricot, 133 

Robsart, Amy, 184, 187 

Rocheford, 173, 175 

Rodolfi, 60 

Rolson, 168 

Rome, city of, xv, 17, 272 

Rome, as Catholic power, 117, 147, 

ISO, 174. 190. 197. 199, 234 
Romsey, 178 
Rosalind, 88 
Ross, Bishop of, 61 
Rouen, 252 

Royal Institution of Great Britain, xvi 
Russell, Mrs. Anne, no 
Ruxby, 1 68 
Ryche, R., 173 
Ryde, 324 
Rye, Walter, 184, 185, 187, 188, 


Saiger, John, 176 

St. Albans, 46, 123 

St. Austin, 303, 308 

St. Bartholomew, 272 

St. Cyprian, 24 

St. Cuthbert's, Ushaw, xiii, xiv, xvi 

St. Elizabeth, 54, 88 

St. George, Order of, 249 

St. Helena, 14 

St. James's Palace, 149 

St. John's (Cambridge), 17, 23 

St. Michael, Order of, 238 

St. Paul's, iss, 262 

St. Paul's Cross, 155 

St. Paul's, Dean of, iSS 

Salisbury, 176, 308 

Salviati, Nuncio in France, 67 

San Geronimo, 315 

San Quentin, 238 

Sands, Lord, 108 

Sarum, 324 

Savoy, Duchy of, 272 

Savoy, Duke of, 132, 137. I4S. 146 

Scandal Letter of Mary Stuart, 166, 

Scotland, vi, 103, 119, 198. 202, 

272, 3I4„ . . , . 
Semple of Beltrejs, Lord, 72, no 
Seoane, 213 

Sequeira, Dr. J. H., 102 . 

Seymour, Thomas, the Adnural, i, 


16, 23, 2S, 26, 28, 30, 36. 42. 84, 

1x3, 114, 128, 129, 14s, 148, 294. 

29S, 296. 297. 299. 300 
Seymour, Jane, 2, 28, 285, 294 
Seymour (One), 314 

Seymour, Edward, the Protector, 2, 
4. S. 7. 8, II, 13, 17, 18, 19, 41, 
42. 83, 84, 113, 114, 128, 297, 
298, 299 
Shabury, Vicar of, 203 
Shakespeare, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 
Sharp, Robert Farquharson, xvi 
Shedmur, 168 

Sherburne, 191, 192, 193, 205 
Shrewsbury, city of, 187, 188, 202, 

Shrewsbury, Countess of, 68, 166-9, 

179, 209, 210, 211 
Shrewsbury, Earl of, 64, 6s, 68, 89, 

106, 211, 219, 228, 244, 313 
Shrewsbury Free School of, 187, 

188, 202, 203, 204 
Shrewsbury, Vicar of, 188, 202 
Shynfield, John, 323 
Sidney, Sir Philip, 25, 219, 229, 

242, 252 
Sighen, 314 
Silva, Guzman de, 54, 55, 149, 178, 

179. 197. 198, 259, 26s, 277 
Simancas, 159, 160, 161, 169, 170, 

190, 191, 192, 193, 205, 206 
Simier, 164, 166 
Simpson, Henry, 61 
Smith, Sir Thomas, 54, 55, 64, 88, 

89, 181, 248, 2S7, 258, 261, 276 
Smidi-Dampier, Miss E. M., xvi 
Smithfield, 141 
Smyth, 311 
Sophocles, 24 
Sotheron, Robert, 170 
Southampton, 308 
Southern, Robert, 310, 317 
Spain, viii, ix, 19, 31, 103, ng, 120, 
121, 142, 143, ISO, 193, 199. 200, 
201, 239, 241, 253, 2S9. 263, 310, 

3'"*' 3 '7 
Speaker, The, 53, 153. i54 
Spenser, The Poet, 242, 251, 254 
Spes, Guerau de, 59, 62 
Stafford, Edward, 312 
Stanhope, Sir John, ni 
Stevenson, J., 288 
Stockhohn, 263 
Strangford, Lord, 306 
Strasburg, 23 
Strickland, Agnes, 31, 32. 286, 287, 

288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 29s, 

296, 297. 298, 299, 306 
Strickland, Elizabeth, 287 
Stronge, Peter, 177 
Strozzi, Count Paul, 314 
Strype, 243 
Stuart, Arabella, 316 
Stuart, Mary, Queen of Scots, viii, 

ix, xiii, SI. 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, 100, 

Digitized by Microsoft® 



119, 120, I3S, 146, iS9f 165-9. 

J83, 197, 198, 206, 208-12, 223, 

24s. 247. 248, 250, 272, 314. 31S 
Sturm, John, 23, 256 
Suffolk, 86 
Sully, Duke of, 157 
Sussex, Earl of, 58 
Sweden, 200, 201, 259, 263, 264 
Swetkowitz, Adam, Baron Uitter- 

burg, 266, 278 
Swift, 17 
Switzerland, 272 
Sydney, Sir Robert, 71, 72, no 

Talbot, Gilbert, 219, 22s, 228, 230, 

Talbot, Lady, i68 
Talbot, Lord, in 
Talbots, The, 238 
Tele, 314 
Terence, 17 

Thames, The, 46, 128, 132, 170 
Theatre, The, 242 
Theobalds, 109 
Thomas, Father, 312 
Thompson, Sir Edward Maunde, 84 
Thou, Jacques Auguste de, 33, 157, 

270, 278 
Throckmorton, 179, 314 
Tilbury, xi, 24s, 252 
Tilbury, Castle of, 154 
Totnes, 176 
Totnes, Mayor of, 176 
Tower of London, The, 4, 6, 8, 42, 

47, so, 116, 122, 127, 128, 129, 

130, 131, 132, 138, 139. 144. 14s. 

154, 176, 183, 19s, 198, 211, 214, 

238, 324 
Traitors' Gate, The, 129, 131 
Tresham, 70 
Tyrone, 74 

Tyrwhit, Lady, 4, 10, 16, 42, 300 
Tyrwhit, Sir Robert, 4, s. 6, 7, 9, 10, 

Tytler, 33 

Univgbsity College, London, 247 
Ushaw, 191 

Valladolid, city of, 190, 191, 192, 

Valladolid, English Catholic College 

at, 190, 193, 207 
Vatican, xiii, 156, 199, 269 
Venice, Republic of, 119, 144, 150, 

Venice, Doge of, 49 
Venice, Senate of, 49 

Victoria University, 34 
Vienna, 262 

Vine, The (Hampshire), 108 
Virgil, 17 

Wales, si, 310 

Walsingham, Sir Francis, viii, x, 61, 

64, 6s, 68, 69, 88, 89, iss, 168, 

181, 229, 236, 239, 240, 241, 242, 
' 246, 2SI, 252, 261, 313 
Wanstead, 313 
Warwick, city of, 188, 204 
Warwick, Earl of, 113, 298, 312 
Warwick, Lady, no 
Weldon, Sir Anthony, v 
Wells, Spencer, 37, 286 
Wendye, Dr., 47 
Westminster, 46, 55, 70 
Weston, Richard, 177 
West Wyckham, 133 
Whifiin, xvii 
Whitehall, Palace of, I2S, 126, 197, 

Whyte, John, 176 
Whjrte, Rowland, 71, no 
Wiatt, Sir Thomas, 45, 123, 124, 

12s, 131 
Wiesener, 288, 289, 29s, 296, 297, 

299, 300 
Wikes, William, 178 
Williams, Lord, 133 
Williamson, Dr., xvii 
Willoughby, Lady, 50, 51 
Willson, Capt., 313 
Wilton, 184, 308 
Winchester, town of, 308 
Winchester, Marquis of, 108 
Winchester, Mardbioness of, 159, 

161, 190 
Windsor Castle, 64, 65, 68, 108, 1 25, 

132, 133. 307. 308 
Winter's Tale, 85 
Woking, 307 

Wood, Anthony ^, xii, 243 
Wood, Miss, 288, 289, 29S, 296 
Woodlands, 308 
Woodstock, 48, 107, 133 
Worcester, Earl of, 106 
Wotton, 311 
Wright, Thomas, 297 
Wright, 70 
Wriothesley, 15 
Wyatt. See Wiatt 

Yarmouth, 179 
York, city of 66 
York, Richard, Duke of, 86 

Zayas, 59, 60 

Digitized by Microsoft® 




"There was room for Mr. Chamberlin's inquiry, and he has 
produced what is, in many respects, a valuable piece of work. . . . 
he seems to us to have succeeded in proving that there is no his- 
torical basis for the graver charges against the Queen's personal 
character. . . . He has made a real contribution to the subject, 
and has brought new evidence to light. ... He has given us an 
important historical work." — Times Literary Supplement. 

" Mr. Chamberlin has, in our opinion, cleared the character of 
Queen Elizabeth. . , . We cannot summarize the evidence . . . but 
we advise all students of the period to study it, for it throws a 
great deal of light on the most interesting period of English 
history. . . . Before we leave his book we desire to congratulate 
Mr. Chamberlin once more on his vindication, and for his deep 
and chivalrous sympathy with the great-hearted, capricious, sorely 
tried woman he defends." — Spectator. 

" Has a permanent historical \2i\\yt.^^— Saturday Review. 

" One of the most interesting and intriguing contributions to 
English history is Mr. Chamberlin's recently pubUshed ' Private 
Character of Queen Elizabeth.' It is one of the most outspoken 
books ever written." — Bystander. 

" Mr. Chamberlin has performed a useful piece of work with 
commendable indnstiy. "—JVestminster Gazette. 

"An absorbingly interesting study. . . . History of an extra- 
ordinary realistic nature." — To-day. 

" Amazing frankness."— ZJaiV)/ Express. 

" He quotes and investigates every charge or insinuation that 
is to be found in documents of the time, shows the inadequacy of 
any evidence with which they are supported, and finally presents 
some testimonies not previously cited which are of very substantial 

weight in the opposite scale The fruit of much ongmal 

research."— Pa// Mall Gazette. 

"This book is Uncommonly interesting, and its industry 
deserves high praise."— A'eK/ Statesman. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 


And Ladies of the Privy Chamber 

Illustrated. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. 

" This handsome and well- illustrated volume performs even 
better than its title promises. It not only gives full and entertain- 
ing biographies of various members of that extremely interesting 
group, Elizabeth's Maid of Honour, but a good deal of biographical 
and historical matter that is not closely germane to the ladies 
in question." — Sunday Times. 

" Miss Wilson draws an interesting picture full of gaiety and 
intrigue." — Westminster Gazette. 

" Her narrative is based upon wide research, and many of her 
stories, especially those of the Ladies Catherine and Mary Grey 
are full of genuine pathos."— Z>a«/)' Telegraph. 

" The book is really a very interesting picture of life in those 
far-off times wherein human nature, at least, differed not a whit 
from our own." — Pall Mall Gazette. 

"A lively and amusing account of the bevy of fair women 
attached to Elizabeth and incidently of her Court and manner. 
. . . One of the great finds of the book is its account of what 
must have been the first game of lawn tennis ever played on one 
of the lawns of Elvetham, Hants." — Daily Mail. 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

Digitized by Microsoft® 

^■!' ■■ii;ir