Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From the moment she was told of her royal cousin's judicial murder Elizabeth I wailed, moaned and screamed to all and sundry she *NEVER* know of the plans and had not intended for Mary, Queen of Scots to be executed. The Queen's response had been she only signed the death warrant so it could be used as "protection" and or to threaten her cousin, never that it would be carried out.
Few if anyone truly believed Elizabeth's story probably including Mary, Queen of Scots son and heir James who was placed on his mother's throne.
Leaving aside the case of how involved Mary, Queen of Scots was in the Babington Plot, and if she indeed wrote the letters that lead to her trial and execution, one has a hard time believing Elizabeth was not aware plans were being made to execute Mary.
Say this because few if anything was really secret at that time. Elizabeth's ladies in particular would have been well placed to hear about the preparations for the execution of an anointed monarch (no small thing back then), and surely would have told their mistress. Considering the crowd that attended Mary's execution getting all those ladies and gentlemen up from London would have required coordination . The crowds gathered outside Fotheringhay castle obviously knew something *big* was going on as well. So how could the Queen of England claim she was totally ignorant of events?
She certainly was aware, she just wanted plausible deniability to quote modern terms. She might not have wanted her dead, but Mary was a danger to Elizabeth’s throne. While she remained alive she was the focus of various catholic plots to put Mary on Elizabeth’s throne.
I also do suspect that she did indeed write those letters. Mary's choices and how the heck she wound up in prison read like an story that could have been on an modern day talk show.
I read somewhere that Mary's jailer was stripped of his office and carted off to the Tower in a blaze of publicity - but quietly released a few weeks later by a side door in the small hours of the morning - and that three years later he was still drawing the salary for the job he'd supposedly lost. If this was true, then the whole thing was a charade put on for the benefit of the foreign ambassadors.
I read somewhere that Mary's jailer was stripped of his office and carted off to the Tower in a blaze of publicity - but quietly released a few weeks later by a side door in the small hours of the morning - and that three years later he was still drawing the salary for the job he'd supposedly lost. If this was true, then the whole thing was a charade put on for the benefit of the foreign ambassadors.
Elizabeth had a few persons thrown into prison after Mary, Queen of Scot's execution. Some were let go rather quickly, others after Elizabeth's ministers worked on her for awhile.
How history and or entertainment (and my favourite) way we are to believe things went:
In the fictional encounter between Elizabeth I and Mary, Queen of Scots shown in film "Mary, Queen of Scots" played by Vanessa Redgrave the Scottish queen tells her cousin that ordering her execution will torment the woman the rest of her days. By many accounts this did happen. We know from historical accounts that Elizabeth often referred/brought up the death of MQoS. We also know as she stood then later lay dying Elizabeth's mind again turned to the death of her cousin.
IMHO Elizabeth like her father had a very convenient conscious. Wanting and or knowing what should be done but also wishing not to have their finger prints on the thing, that was the Tudor's style.
The irony is that Elizabeth I caused much of the misery brought on by the Queen of Scots claims to the throne herself. If Elizabeth had married and begot legal heirs her cousin's along with many other claims to the throne would have weakened.
Sadly for both women the longer each lived the worse things became for both. Once Elizabeth's presumed baby making clock ran out the chances of her producing an heir became nil to none. OTOH Mary continued to live (even after twenty years of imprisonment) and had a legal heir. Thus all the plots and schemes to get shot of Elizabeth and replace her with Mary. Regardless of what she may have admitted publicly the monarch Elizabeth was knew the only way out of the mess was Mary's death.
The irony is that Elizabeth I caused much of the misery brought on by the Queen of Scots claims to the throne herself. If Elizabeth had married and begot legal heirs her cousin's along with many other claims to the throne would have weakened.
Not totally. The other problem is the whole catholic vs. protestant bit. Mary was catholic and putting her on the throne would have helped their cause protestant heir or not. In addition Mary I(queen Elizabeth's sister) did marry and the marriage proved quit unpopular with her subjects as well as unable to produce an heir. The marriage brought England into an unpopular war with France. Phillip II pretty much lost interest in Mary when she couldn't produce children.
Likewise Mary Queen of Scot's marriage which slowly lead to her downfall. However at least she did produce an heir, which other's raised after her abdication and death. Producing an heir might have weakened other's claims to the throne but Mary Queen of Scots still was an threat and marriage itself fraught with risk.
Would her husband try to wield power like Queen Mary’s? Would the relationship or possible heir spark rebellion or treason in one camp or another? Being single was probably the best choice in this situation.
I have a lot of respect for Queen Elizabeth 1. She assumed the throne of England at a difficult time when there were many dangers threatening both her country and herself. She handled herself very well, making a lot of very smart and very tough decision.
I have no doubt she was fully aware of what was going to happen to Mary. She may not have liked it, but it had to be done. I also am not surprised she acted like she did not know. This sounds like sound political strategy and may be deflected some anger from Mary's supporters being directed at her.
On a side note, I have always respected Queen Elizabeth's decision not to marry. I would love it if some day a secret diary of hers was uncovered with the honest reasoning behind her decision. Yet even knowing what the political costs were, she refused to be pressured in to a marriage she did not want. That took amazing guts.
Not totally. The other problem is the whole catholic vs. protestant bit. Mary was catholic and putting her on the throne would have helped their cause protestant heir or not. In addition Mary I(queen Elizabeth's sister) did marry and the marriage proved quit unpopular with her subjects as well as unable to produce an heir. The marriage brought England into an unpopular war with France. Phillip II pretty much lost interest in Mary when she couldn't produce children.
Likewise Mary Queen of Scot's marriage which slowly lead to her downfall. However at least she did produce an heir, which other's raised after her abdication and death. Producing an heir might have weakened other's claims to the throne but Mary Queen of Scots still was an threat and marriage itself fraught with risk.
Would her husband try to wield power like Queen Mary’s? Would the relationship or possible heir spark rebellion or treason in one camp or another? Being single was probably the best choice in this situation.
Mary, Queen of Scots life was headed for disaster the moment Francis II died and her MIL basically kicked her out of France. Her half-brother and others had grown pretty used to running things in Scotland and weren't at all pleased to have Mary back.
Had Mary borne Francis II an heir her position would have been different as a widow and Marie de Medici would have had to hatch another scheme.
If Elizabeth had married and produced an heir or two, even better if they produced their own heirs the Tudor dynasty would have been on solid footing. Mary and or her supporters would then have had to take the English throne by force, something not likely to happen. Whatever they felt during after her execution the monarchs of Europe weren't exactly falling over themselves to invade England during Mary's imprisonment and that included her BIL now King of France. Nor would help have come from Scotland either so without a powerbase Mary and her supporters would have had little hopes of getting at the throne.
Leaving aside the case of how involved Mary, Queen of Scots was in the Babington
Plot, and if she indeed wrote the letters that lead to her trial and execution,
one has a hard time believing Elizabeth was not aware plans were being made to
execute Mary.
You know the Babington plot wasn't an imaginative one. It was just one of the many that looked to get rid of Elizabeth.
And that fellow Walsingham with the spy corps were pretty busy guys unmasking plots against her. Yes, I'd think it would be superhuman for her not 'to know'. And as it was, there was that Catholic 'thing' going around as well feeding the fire against her. All I know is how the hell did she sleep under the circumstances of those English days???
Elizabeth toyed with the idea of marriage but of course never did. She also would never name an heir. She also prefered the claim of mary Queen of Scots over that of her cousin,Katherine Grey,Lady Jane Grey's sister.Katherine married secretly Edward Seymour who was Earl of Hereford.They had two sons. There is a book about the Lady jane and her two sisters Katherine and Mary entitled The Sisters Who Would Be Queen. It goes into all of this.Needless to say Elizabeth wasn't pleased with Katherine,and had her as a prisioner under house arrest until she died,some believe by starving herself to death.
Walsingham and others of Elizabeth's time grew to what have become the "Sir Humphrey Applebee" type of British Civil servants seen in modern times IMHO.
They see their jobs and duty as to the Crown not so much as to whomever is occupying the throne. Thus they act and plan accordingly and with great skill to keep their own heads whilst plotting to cause others to lose theirs.
Elizabeth's ministers and council had been at her to get rid of Mary Queen of Scots since the poor woman in one of the largest royal blunders in history set foot on English soil.
Laws of the time did not grant monarchs the right to royal blood (execution) without firm proof of their guilt. This is what to an extent kept Mary I from having her sister Elizabeth executed. It is also what did in Queen Jane Grey in the end as well.
Elizabeth would not sign her cousin's death warrant until she had clear *proof* of her guilt. Well Walsingham and others finally it seemed were fed up and if decided if truth will not out one way then try another. It didn't help Mary QofS that many of those she trusted either directly or indirectly betrayed that confidence. IIRC a few of her ladies (the other Marys) were having affairs with the Queen of Scot's jailors for instance.
As for the Queen of Scot's involvement and or knowledge of plots to harm Elizabeth their is one school of thought which says she had every right to do so. Mary was an anointed sovereign who came to Elizabeth for assistance. Leaving aside the wisdom of that venture she was locked up and held a prisoner by her cousin. Just as POWs have the duty and or expectation to escape it could be argued so did the Queen of Scots. If the only way out of imprisonment meant the death of Elizabeth, then so be it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
