WAR.
1556-1558.
Want of money had hampered the Queen from the beginning of her reign,
and was not the least among the causes which led to the unpopularity
of her government. Her poverty was apparent, had observed the French
ambassador, even in the number of dishes placed on her table, and
worse still, it had necessarily influenced the distribution of rewards
to those who had risked all for their rightful sovereign. One not
unfriendly ambassador so far misunderstood the state of her finances,
as to accuse her of parsimony, although it was well known that she had
inherited debts from her father and brother, amounting to an enormous
sum.[626]
The Act of Parliament which restored Papal supremacy also decreed that
the holders of Church lands might lawfully retain them, the Kings of
England having had jurisdiction over all ecclesiastical property from
time immemorial. Mary’s own conscience refused to be quieted by an
Act of Parliament, and in November 1555, the tenths and first-fruits
which Henry had seized, and Edward had kept were restored to the
Church, together with the value of each ecclesiastical benefice and the
first year’s income of each, worth about a million a year of present
day money.[627] This strain on her already impoverished exchequer
was immense, but in vain her ministers objected that the money was
sorely needed to support the dignity of the Crown, the Queen replied
characteristically, “I would rather lose ten such crowns, than place my
soul in peril”.[628] Gardiner pledged himself to secure the consent
of Parliament to this renunciation, but his death prevented him, and
Mary herself sent for a deputation from each House, explained her
desire, and the reasons which moved her to restore the Church property
vested in the Crown. A bill was accordingly drawn up. It passed through
the Upper House with only two dissentient voices, and was carried in
the Commons by a majority of 193, against 126 votes. The money thus
restored to its original purpose was placed at the disposal of Cardinal
Pole, to be expended on the augmentation of small livings, on the
support of preachers, and on the foundation of scholarships at the
universities.[629]
It has been frequently made to appear, as if the Queen wished to oblige
all holders of ecclesiastical goods to follow her example, but the
contrary is amply demonstrated by Pole’s correspondence on the subject,
contained in St. Mark’s Library at Venice, and by Mary’s own request to
Paul IV. that he would make no difficulties about restitution.[630]
But having impoverished herself for conscience’ sake, and being
burdened with inherited debts, the Queen was ever after, in the
humiliating position of a suppliant to her people, whenever a fresh
need for funds arose. Philip moreover, who had at first contributed
in a princely fashion, to the revenues of the country, was engaged in
a costly war, while the subsidies which he had received from Spain
were pawned in perpetuity, those of Milan alienated for five years,
those of Naples for seven, and the means of finding money elsewhere
scanty.[631] The English had persistently refused to crown him, and
Mary had apparently been unable to force them to do so; she must prove
her wifely devotion by raising money for his wars, in which case he
would gratify her by going to visit her.
The new loan subscribed by Parliament, in consequence of Gardiner’s
representations, was being raised with great difficulty, thanks to
de Noailles’ manipulation of the opposing members, although Mary
had demanded less than the original sum voted. A fresh device must
therefore be invented if Philip’s wants were to be met. The plan
adopted is described by Michiel as unusual, even unprecedented.
“The Queen,” he wrote on the 25th August 1556, “sent freely to the
lords and gentlemen, the wealthiest and best provided, letters in which
is specified the precise sum demanded of each of them, according to
what the individual might be supposed able to bear, and I am told that
the least is £40 sterling, her Majesty urging all of them to exceed
their means, availing themselves of their property and credit to raise
the sum required by her, as she is in great need, and compelled to
supply herself with funds to enable her to quell the insurrections to
which she is daily subjected. This mode of request has seemed the more
strange and vexatious to everybody as it is unusual and unprecedented,
the device being attributed to the Spanish lords, in order as said by
them publicly, that the King may make use of the money; so it seems
that all (although it be untrue) apologise, under pretence of being
overwhelmed with debts. But opposition will be of little avail, nor
in the end will any one dare obstinately to resist her Majesty’s
desire.”[632]
The general irritation at this measure was increased by the
circumstance, that payment was to be made through the Queen’s
Comptroller, instead of through the Lord High Treasurer, through
a private instead of a public official. But none were taxed over
£100, the lowest sum demanded being £20. Mary told Philip of the
great difficulty she experienced in getting the tax paid, and of the
loud complaints and foul language current on this account, it being
understood that she was either giving him the money, or making use of
it to further the design attributed to the Emperor of going to England,
of crowning his son by force, and of putting pressure on Parliament to
wage war on France, “which,” adds Badoer, “it does not seem inclined to
do”. In the same despatch, Badoer says that Piamontese had told him,
that the Queen had again written very earnestly to the Pope, “not
only to pray and exhort him to abstain from disturbing his Majesty’s
affairs, but to let him know that the people of England from this cause
are greatly encouraged to resume Lutheran opinions”.
Philip, seeing that his affairs in England showed little sign of
progressing in his absence, made a virtue of necessity, and rejoiced
the Queen, by declaring that he would set out as soon as possible,
after the pending departure of the Emperor for Spain. Mary received the
news in a transport of delight, but Pole, who had learned to distrust
Philip’s repeated assurances of his speedy arrival, persuaded her to
await further intelligence, before despatching Pembroke, Arundel and
Paget to the sea coast. He could not dispel the renewed hope which sent
her back to London at Michaelmas, in better health and spirits than for
months before. She took her barge at Lambeth, but before crossing to
St. James’s Palace expressed a desire to visit the Cardinal’s official
residence, and “not only chose to enter it, but ascending the stairs,
had herself conducted by his most illustrious Lordship into his own
chamber, and through the gardens everywhere, staying for luncheon,
with infinite familiarity and kindness, asking two or three times for
Monsignor Priuli[633] who failed to present himself”.
But again Philip’s coming was delayed, and the courier Piamontese
performed wonderful feats of rapid travelling between Brussels and
London, carrying despatches of the utmost weight and significance. “On
Wednesday last,” says Michiel, writing on the 23rd November, “at one
and the same time, Francesco Piamontese returned from Brussels, and
from France the secretary of the Queen’s ambassador there, both one
and the other having travelled with such speed, that the one came from
Paris to London in 25 hours, and the other out and home from Brussels
(although detained there during a day and a half) in five days. Since
their arrival until now, the ministers, and Cardinal Pole may be said
to have been in very close consultation, assembling every day at 6
A.M. well-nigh before day break, until the dinner hour, and after noon
until 6 P.M. or about the second hour of the night according to the
Italian fashion. This proceeding is unusual, and Lord Paget having
been confined to the house by indisposition, for upwards of a month,
they even urged him, on no account to absent himself from the Council
board, and although he apologised, as not being in a state to be able
to go abroad, I understand that what he could not do by word of mouth,
in their presence, was done by him in writing, and that he gave his
opinion about what had been asked him at full length. The speed of the
couriers, and these long and extraordinary consultations, indicate
the gravity and importance of the matter which is being treated so
secretly, that as yet, no one has been able to elicit anything certain
about it, although from conjecture and conversation rather than from
knowledge, many things have been, and still continue to be said,
some persons declaring, that some fresh conspiracy, in virtue of an
understanding with the French, has been discovered, or some design of
the French themselves, on certain places either here or across the
Channel. Others, on the contrary, believe the business to be some
request from the King to the Queen, to the effect that should the
truce be broken, as is feared, war be also waged by England against
France, and if this cannot or will not be done, that at least a subsidy
of money or troops be given, by reason of the great preparations of
the French for Italy, and all the borders; but be it as it may, the
deliberation proceeds so silently, that to know anything more about it
is difficult. It has been determined for the Earl of Pembroke to cross
the Channel, and in two days he will go to Calais, nor is it known
whether he is betaking himself to the King. He has ordered his whole
household to follow, and it is said that from suspicion, all the guards
will be changed.”[634]
On the 1st December, Michiel informed his government that he had
discovered Lord Pembroke’s going to Calais to be caused by the
French having reinforced their cavalry on the borders of Calais and
Guisnes, with a view to a fortress held by the English, named Hammes,
the governor of which was Lord Dudley, brother of the traitor Henry
Dudley, then still in France, and in great favour with the King.[635]
Continuing the same despatch, he says:—
“Three days ago, Miladi Elizabeth arrived from the country, fifteen
miles off (from Hatfield) with a handsome retinue, having with her,
including lords and gentlemen, upwards of 200 horsemen, clad in
her own livery, and dismounted at her own house (Somerset Place)
where she has remained ever since, to the infinite pleasure of this
entire population, though she was not met by any of the lords or
gentlemen of the Court, but many visited her subsequently. Three
days afterwards, she went to the Queen, and according to report was
received very graciously and familiarly. Yesterday, she returned
thither to take leave, having at length had an interview with the
Cardinal, whom she visited even in his own chamber, he never having
seen her until then, although last year, they both resided at the
Court for a whole month, with their apartments very near each other.
It cannot yet be ascertained whether she came for any other purpose
than that of visiting the Queen, she having with great earnestness
solicited to come, and not having been called. With this opportunity,
I (according to the custom of my predecessors) now that she seems to
be in good favour with her Majesty will not fail to visit her before
her departure, not having done so hitherto. Yesterday, the festival
of St. Andrew, in Westminster Abbey, which has been restored to the
monks, the most illustrious Legate and the royal Council (with all the
lords now here, and the nobility of the Court, I also being present,
with a great concourse of people) celebrated the anniversary of the
kingdom’s release from the schism, which took place on that day, and
the twenty-six monks and their abbot made a fine show and procession.
The Queen likewise would have been present, had she not been slightly
indisposed during the last three or four days, on which account
she has not appeared in public, or even in her own chapel at the
palace.”[636]
A week later, he wrote again: “The Queen still remains without going
abroad, distressing herself about her husband’s troubles”.
Elizabeth, unfortunately, left London before Michiel had time to pay
his proposed visit to her, and we are consequently deprived of a
description of the Princess at this period, which his realistic pen
would no doubt have rendered extremely interesting. He was, moreover,
recalled by his Government before the end of the year, and Michiel
Surian, who arrived in England as his successor in March 1557,
continued the official reports of passing events, without, however, the
life-like touches, and vivid colouring of Giovanni Michiel.
At last, it was announced that the King was indeed coming without
further delay. He had set out by the end of the first week in March,
and was met at each important place through which he passed, by two
gentlemen, sent by the Queen, one of whom returned immediately to
Greenwich, where she awaited her husband’s arrival, to bring her news
of him, and enable her to follow his journey stage by stage. “Thursday,
the 18 day of March,” says Machyn, “the King landed at Dover, about
x of the clock in the night.” His courtesy and attention to national
and local customs were as apparent as on his first setting foot in
England, and having inadvertently entered Canterbury Cathedral with
his spurs on, he gracefully paid the fine he had thereby incurred, by
emptying his purse full of gold pieces, into the cap of a young student
who claimed it.[637] After two days spent in retirement at Greenwich,
Philip rode through London to Whitehall, by the side of the Queen, who
was carried in a litter. He had no cause to complain of his reception
by the citizens, and he in his turn did his best to please them, by
pardoning and releasing certain prisoners in the Tower, “nevertheless,
from what I hear,” reported Surian, “the Spaniards are so greatly
hated, that neither his Majesty nor the Queen are well looked on by the
multitude”. On the other hand, all the members of the Privy Council
were his firm friends, “owing,” said the new Venetian ambassador,
“to the great rewards they have had from him, for when last here, he
spent and gave a considerable quantity of money, and distributed vast
revenues in Spain and Flanders, to propitiate the leading people here,
and he found by experience that what my father used to say of this
kingdom was perfectly true, that all, from first to last are venal, and
do anything for money”.[638]
He went on to say that the Count de Feria had assured him, that the
King had so much influence with the Council that he could do with them
what he pleased, and that it was in his Majesty’s power to make the
country wage war against France, when and in what manner he chose.
Surian thought however that Philip would only demand pecuniary help,
in which surmise his shrewdness was at fault. “Thus,” he continued,
”do the affairs of the government proceed at present, and those
of the religion are regulated with less severity, both to avoid
further exasperation of the public mind, as also because, although
few are perhaps really Catholic at heart, everybody nevertheless, in
appearance, makes a show of living religiously, so there is no cause
for proceeding against them.”[639]
Philip’s return, hailed by the Queen and Council, was an occasion of
some embarrassment to Cardinal Pole. On the one hand, he rejoiced
to be free from the burden of secular affairs, that had weighed so
heavily on him, and to be at last able to attend to his archdiocese;
but on the other, his position as Papal Legate, and as a member of the
Sacred College made it impossible for him to meet on terms of amity,
one who was at war with the Pope. In his official capacity he could
not meet Philip at all, and he sent to excuse himself for not going
to visit him; but before leaving for Canterbury, he went secretly,
unattended, and in his private character, to the King’s apartments, at
which proceeding the French King affected to be somewhat scandalised,
declaring it to be “an unbecoming act”. What passed at the interview
did not tend to smooth difficulties with the Pope, or to cause him
to listen more patiently to the Queen’s ceaseless appeals on behalf
of her husband, as the following transcript from a letter of the
Venetian ambassador at the Vatican very well shows. Bernardo Navagero
in describing an audience with Paul IV. on the 8th May 1557, quotes
the Pope’s own words: “The Queen’s ambassador (Sir Edward Carne) who
for a native of those regions is modest and very intelligent, has been
to us in the name of the Queen and of the kingdom, to pray me not to
abandon them, but to remember that it has lately come to our obedience.
We answered him that we love the Queen for her own sake, as she is
good, and has done good works; for the sake of her mother, who honoured
us extremely, when we were sent to that kingdom by Leo,[640] and for
the sake of her grandfather, the late Catholic King, to whom we are
much obliged for the love he bore us, and he was assuredly a worthy
King, nor could we ever have believed that his descendants would have
degenerated so much as Charles and Philip; but we told the Ambassador,
that we would willingly separate the Queen’s cause from that of her—we
know not whether to call him husband, cousin or nephew—and have her
as daughter, bidding her attend to the government of her kingdom, and
not let herself be induced to do anything to our detriment nor to that
of our confederates, as for instance the King of France, for we would
spare neither relations nor friends, but include in our maledictions
and anathemas all those who shall desert the cause of God. Even
yesterday, we had a letter from the Cardinal of England, telling us
that on the arrival of Philip in London, he departed for his bishopric,
and he did well, for he could not in honour remain there. He says that
he visited King Philip in his own name, as he could not do so in ours,
seeing that he has no commission to that effect, as we on the contrary
have revoked the legations, and recalled nuncios, and all the ministers
of the Apostolic See, in the realms of that individual, to deprive
him of the means for doing injury to God and to us. Cardinal Pole also
writes that the said individual told him, he would gladly be reconciled
to us, and that he has provided for his realms so as to prevent their
molestation. This reconciliation fails through him, as _induratum est
cor ejus_, and we believe that he will not reform until his head has
been soundly beaten. God knows that for nothing do we pray Him more
earnestly, than for our quiet, and that of all Christendom, which were
He to grant us, we should close these eyes most contentedly.”[641]
But Mary’s most pressing cause for anxiety was Philip’s determination
to invade France, and to prevail on the English, not only to succour
his army with troops and money, but to consent to an aggressive
alliance, and a formal declaration of war against Henry II. Under
other conditions there would have been nothing repugnant to Mary in an
open rupture with the most Christian King, who from the moment of her
accession had been her secret, powerful and most insidious enemy. He
it was, who by his persistent intrigues was mainly responsible for the
disturbed relations between herself and her people, and nothing short
of honest, open-handed warfare would get rid of the poison with which
he had inoculated the blood of the nation. Greatly as she loved peace,
and ardently as she had desired it, and striven to secure it, she knew
well that it could be bought at too high a price. But war with France,
in the interest of Spain, would, it was clear, be extremely unpopular,
while it would constitute an infringement of one of the articles of her
marriage treaty by which Philip undertook not to involve the country in
his personal quarrel with any Continental power. Nevertheless, he was
closeted early and late with the Privy Council,[642] with the result
that Surian informed the Doge and Venetian Senate on the 21st April,
that the hope of peace with the Pope had come to nothing, and that
there was more talk of war than ever. He went on to say, that no army
would be mustered until the next harvest was gathered in, for never in
memory of man, had there been such scarcity of everything in England,
and that although for a long while, great supplies of grain had been
coming from Denmark and Sweden, and from the Hanse towns, these had
been stopped by the ice, and as there was no means of providing for
the ordinary consumption of the people, either in Flanders or England,
still less could provision be made for so great an army as was then
being mustered.
As late as the beginning of May, Philip, in spite of his influence with
the Council, had only obtained assurances of such support as the nation
was bound to give him, by ancient treaties then still existing, as an
ally of the House of Burgundy. He was to have 5,000 infantry, and 1,000
horse for four months, these to be commanded by the Earl of Pembroke,
Lord Grey, Sir Thomas Cheyne, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, Lord
Montague, and some others, “all of whom were considered good soldiers,
except Montagu, who was appointed because he was rich, and spent
willingly on his troops, who were to serve the King in Flanders”.[643]
Besides the above subsidy, 3,000 additional infantry were to be raised,
in order to garrison the English fortresses on the other side of the
Channel, and in case of need, a fleet was to be fitted out, carrying
6,000 soldiery, half to be paid by Philip, the other half by England.
It was announced that the English Government had no intention of
breaking the peace with France, the troops being sent to Flanders by
virtue of the old treaty between England and those provinces, and
solely to defend the King’s States, and not to invade France. It was
also pointed out, that the additional 3,000 soldiers were merely
for the defence of Calais and its frontiers, and that the fleet was
to secure the passage of the Channel, and not to attempt any act of
aggression.[644]
Possibly no more than this may have been intended, in spite of
Philip’s demands, but the French believing or affecting to believe
that a rupture was imminent, reinforced all their places on the
English frontier, with ammunition, victuals and soldiers. They also
sent a force to Scotland, sufficient not only for the defence of the
Scottish border, but capable of attacking England on that side.[645]
Even then the actual breaking out of war with England was due to
a renewal of Henry’s connivance with English traitors and rebels.
Dudley and his friends, among whom was Thomas Stafford, grandson of
the last Duke of Buckingham, had been quietly waiting in France,
till it should be convenient for the King to employ them, and the
moment having now arrived, he entered into negotiations with them,
and with certain families of the reformed faith, settled in and about
Calais, for delivering the English fortresses, Hammes and Guisnes,
into the hands of the French.[646] The design failed, but a few days
later, another, not less daring, was attempted by Stafford. Having
obtained two French ships, he sailed for England, with a handful of
English, Scotch and French desperadoes, about 100 in all, and landing
on the coast of Yorkshire, seized Scarborough Castle. He issued a
proclamation, assuming the titles of protector and governor of the
realm, and declared that he was come to deliver his countrymen from
the tyranny of strangers and “to defeat the most devilish devices of
Mary, unrightful and unworthy queen”. She had, he pretended, forfeited
her claim to the sceptre by her marriage with a Spaniard, who lavished
the national treasures on his countrymen, and was resolved to deliver
into their hands twelve of the strongest fortresses of the kingdom.
As for himself, he was determined to die bravely in the field, rather
than see his country enslaved; and he called on all loyal Englishmen to
rally round the standard of independence which he had set up, and to
fight for the preservation of their lives, lands, wives, children and
treasures.[647]
To his mortification, not a man answered the summons—the north was
more loyal than the traitors suspected, and Wotton, Mary’s ambassador
in France, disclosed the plot before Henry had time to send aid to his
confederates. The Earl of Westmorland marched to Scarborough with a
considerable force, and Stafford, whose language had been so bold, at
once surrendered at discretion, and met with the punishment he richly
deserved, together with about twenty-five other persons implicated in
the affair.[648]
The only result of the enterprise was, that instead of engaging in
the war with France, as an ally of Philip, England was now a principal
in the quarrel, the Council having resolved that the time had come
for demanding satisfaction for the injuries offered to Mary by the
King of France.[649] Nevertheless, when on the 7th June 1557, the
English herald announced the declaration of war to Henry, he replied:
“I foresaw this war; it is the pledge of the Queen of England’s
submission to the will of her husband.”[650] He immediately recalled
his ambassador, François de Noailles, Bishop of Acqs, who had replaced
his brother Antoine; but Mary had already dismissed him herself.[651]
The Bishop took the opportunity at Calais, to examine the state of the
fortifications, and the likelihood of its withstanding a bombardment.
The result of his investigation was a report to the French King, to
the effect that a considerable portion of the rampart lay in ruins,
and that the boasted strength of the place consisted only in its
reputation. In its present condition it offered, said the ambassador,
seconded by the Governor of Boulogne, an easy conquest to a sudden and
unexpected assailant.[652] “Here, in the meanwhile,” wrote Surian on
the 1st June, “they are expecting the succours from Spain which do not
make their appearance, and unless they be speedy and considerable, they
will show by experience what a gross blunder it is to circulate reports
of making great preparations, and not verifying them by facts, as it
merely rouses the enemy, rendering them more and more ready for attack
and defence.” But before concluding his despatch, he adds, “whilst
writing this I hear that the Admiral of England has put to sea with his
fleet, in order to meet the one expected from Spain. He has a total of
twenty-three large ships well supplied with artillery and soldiers; so
the French fleet being greatly inferior in the number and quality of
its vessels, and in the activity of its sailors, and in strength, will
be unable to show itself, and do any damage in these seas.”[653]
Philip, who had not been five months in England, re-embarked for
Flanders, on the 3rd July. Mary accompanied him as far as Dover, and
there took leave of him in a heartrending farewell. They never met
again.
Surian had been appointed ambassador to Philip, and therefore left
England with him; and in spite of Mary’s representations to the
Signory, there was afterwards no resident Venetian envoy in England,
Surian doing duty to both King and Queen.
The first important feature in the new campaign was the victory of
St. Quentin, which was taken by storm by the Spaniards, aided by Lord
Pembroke, and between 7,000 and 8,000 English soldiers. When the news
reached London “was _Te Deum laudamus_ sung and ringing solemnly;
at night bonfires and drinking in every street in London, thanking
be to God Almighty that gives the victory”.[654] Cardinal Pole, in
congratulating Philip, said, “The most serene Queen has also evinced
great gladness at this, principally from the testimony offered by your
Majesty on this occasion, of your piety, to the glory of God and to His
true honour, especially because it took place with so little loss of
life, which grace she always prays His divine Majesty to grant you in
all your victories. Here, we are anxiously expecting news of some good
agreement with his Holiness, which may our Lord God deign to grant, and
ever have your Majesty in His keeping, and for His service favour your
Majesty, whose hand I humbly kiss.”[655]
The victory of St. Quentin did actually lead, as Pole so ardently
desired, to peace with the Pope, but also indirectly to the loss of
Calais. A brief survey of Philip’s war with Paul IV. will make this
clear. Philip had always repudiated any other intention, in carrying on
hostilities against the Pope, than that of protecting the kingdom of
Naples against molestation.[656] The campaign opened by the seizure,
in September 1556, of Pontecorvo, and several other small towns in
the Papal States, by the Duke of Alva, Philip’s celebrated general.
A truce was concluded for forty days, under the walls of Ostia, and
Alva entered Naples in triumph. In the meantime, the French army,
under the Duke of Guise, had marched into Italy, and had joined hands
with the Pope. The truce having expired, and the two armies being
encamped within a few miles of each other, before Civitella, Guise
judged that Alva’s force was too overwhelming for him to risk a
battle, and retreated, leaving the kingdom of Naples to the Spaniards.
The Pope, alarmed by the success of the Colonnas, who were fighting
on the Spanish side, summoned the Duke of Guise to Rome, to defend
the Holy City. But misunderstandings arose daily between the Pope
and his French allies. He evinced a great desire for peace, and the
Florentine ambassador sent an express to his Duke, urging him to exhort
the King of Spain to adjust matters with his Holiness, by giving him
some satisfaction before the world, “the old man desiring nothing
else”.[657] At this juncture, Philip won the battle of St. Quentin,
and took the town by storm, upon which the King of France, seeing
that he would need all the strength he could muster, to oppose the
Spaniards and English combined, recalled Guise from Italy, and the Pope
was obliged to come to terms with Alva. Escorted by the Papal guard,
Philip’s _generalissimo_ entered Rome on the 27th September 1557, and
on reaching the Vatican, fell on his knees before the Pope and craved
his pardon for the offence of having borne arms against the Church, his
master having already declared, and probably with truth, that he would
never have commenced hostilities, could he have secured his kingdom of
Naples by any other means.
The Duke of Guise was now free to oppose Philip’s inroads into France.
By the month of October, Philip had three French fortresses in his
possession, namely, St. Quentin, Hammes and Catelet; and Henry’s plan
was to harass him in as many quarters as possible, in the hope that
being obliged to divide his forces, he would be inferior to his enemy
in each one of them. His further design was to hamper Mary, and prevent
her from sending reinforcements across the Channel. With this object
the French King despatched 10,000 infantry-men, and a company of horse
to the Queen Regent of Scotland, who hereupon entered Berwick-on-Tweed,
and occupied it, at the same time ravaging the Borders.
Flattering himself that Henry would disband, in face of the rigorous
winter, Philip returned to Brussels, convoked the States, and required
them to levy a subsidy in money, for carrying on the war in the spring.
The utmost that could be obtained from them was 800,000 crowns, far too
small a sum for maintaining his troops, and defending his conquered
fortresses in the midst of an enemy’s country.
If the victory of St. Quentin was the principal feature of the first
campaign, the loss of Calais marked the second with disaster. The first
note of alarm came from England, in a letter from Cardinal Pole to the
King, dated the 4th January 1558. It proved not only the prelude to
worse news, but testified to the spirit in which Mary was prepared to
meet the crowning calamity of her life.
“Although I wrote to your Majesty yesterday, in reply to what you
were pleased to write to me on the 24th ultimo, yet nevertheless
having heard to-day of the loss of Risbank near Calais (taken on the
3rd) I will not omit telling you how in an untoward circumstance, the
most serene Queen has shown her usual firmness, which has comforted
me the more, as I was at first anxious, lest such unexpected news
might seriously agitate her Majesty, especially as we now hope she
is pregnant; but having seen not only that she was not in the least
disheartened by this news, but that immediately on hearing it, she
commenced arranging and providing by such means as possible, both
divine and human, for what the present need requires, as also by
ordering supplications and prayers to be made in all the religious
congregations for success, I was much comforted. I have deemed it my
duty to give notice of this to your Majesty, as by your putting forth
your vigorous arm and aid, which we are certain you will do, with
such speed as the present need requires, I have no doubt but that the
Almighty will thus convert everything to His greater glory, and at
the same time to the consolation and honour of your Majesties and
your realms; as I continually pray His divine Majesty’s goodness to
do, and to preserve and prosper your Majesty for the common weal, and
particularly for this kingdom, which is placed under your care and
government.”[658]
On the same day, Lord Grey de Wilton, Governor of Guisnes, wrote to the
Queen as follows:—
“My most bounden duty humbly promised to your Majesty; whereas I
have heretofore always in effect written nothing to your Highness
but good, touching the service and state of your places here, I
am now constrained, with woful heart to signify unto your Majesty
these ensuing. The French have won Newhavenbridge, and thereby
entered into all the Low country, and the marshes between this and
Calais. They have also won Rysbank, whereby they be now master
of that haven. And this last night past, they have placed their
ordnance of battery against Calais, and are encamped upon St.
Peter’s heath before it; so that now I am clean cut off from all
relief and aid, which I looked to have, both out of England and
from Calais, and know not how to have help by any means, either of
man or victuals. There resteth now none other way for the succour
of Calais, and the rest of your Highness’s places on this side,
but a power of men out of England, or from the King’s Majesty,
or from both, without delay, able to distress and keep them from
victuals coming to them, as well by sea as by land, which shall
force them to levy their siege to the battle, or else drive them
to a greater danger. For lack of men out of England, I shall be
forced to abandon the town, and take in the soldiers thereof, for
defence of the castle. I have made as good provision of victuals
as I could by any means out of the country, with which, God
willing I doubt not to defend and keep this place as long as any
man, whatsoever he be, having no better provision and furniture
of men and victuals than I have; wherein your Grace shall well
perceive, that I will not fail to do the duty of a faithful
subject and Captain, although the enemy attempt never so stoutly,
according to the trust reposed in me. I addressed letters
presently to the King’s Majesty by this bearer, most humbly
desiring aid from him, according to the effect aforesaid. I might
now very evil have spared this bringer, my servant and trusty
officer here in this time of service. Howbeit, considering the
great importance of his message, I thought him a meet man for the
purpose, desiring your Majesty to credit him fully, and to hear
him at large, even as directly your Grace would hear me, to open
my mind in this complaint of imminent danger. Thus trusting of
relief and comfort forthwith from your Majesty, for the safeguard
of Calais, and other your places here, I take my leave most humbly
of your Grace.
“At your Highness’s Castle of Guisnes, most assured English, even
to the death, the 4th of January 1557 [8] at seven of the clock
in the morning. Your Majesty’s most humble Servant and obedient
Subject,
“GREY.”[659]
Lord Wentworth, Deputy Governor of Calais, in the absence of the Earl
of Pembroke, who was collecting troops in England, had written on the
2nd, that the French were before Risbank, and that he feared no more
of his despatches would get through, adding, “but I will do what I can
tidily to signify unto your Majesty our state”.[660] Close upon this
followed the news that Risbank had fallen, and Lord Pembroke crossed to
Dunkirk, six leagues from Calais, with 5,000 infantry, hoping to raise
the siege of that place.[661]
In Michiel’s report of England in 1557, the ambassador describes Calais
as having a garrison of 500 of the best soldiers, besides a troop of
fifty horsemen, and as being considered an impregnable fortress, on
account of the inundation with which it could be surrounded, although
certain engineers doubted that it would prove so, if put to the test.
The recent inspection of the town by the French had led them to the
conclusion that its boasted strength was a fable, and that it might
easily be taken by storm; and their chief reason for recalling the
Duke of Guise from Italy was probably, that he might restore this lost
jewel to the French Crown.
Michiel, now Venetian ambassador in France, informed the Doge and
Senate on the 4th January, that on presenting himself before Calais,
M. de Guise made himself master of Risbank, which Michiel describes as
“that part of the town fronting the sea, and which, forming a bank,
receives as it were into an arm or small gulf, the vessels which arrive
there, and which for greater security, withdraw thither under the walls
of the town; and he simultaneously took possession both of the ships
and their crews, and of the hostels which are built there outside, for
the accommodation of the mariners and wayfarers, so that when they
embark or disembark by night, on account of the tides, they may not
have to enter the town”.[662]
Notwithstanding the ease with which Risbank had been captured, the
first attempt to storm the castle of Calais proved ineffectual,
according to the French account, by reason of the fluctuation of the
tide. The assault being made from the ships, which at high-tide, were
on a level with the town, but at the ebb below it, the cannon struck
at low tide six or seven paces below the wall, and the besiegers were
at the mercy of the besieged, who from the ramparts made a convenient
target of them. They also threw up earthworks, and barricades, and
fortified the road between the castle and the town, by placing
artillery there. The duke, therefore, returned to a site above his
first position, “Boulogne in his rear supplying him with provisions,”
and a wood not more than half a league distant affording him plenty of
fuel.
From this position, he, two days later, began bombarding the castle
with sixty pieces of artillery, and Michiel observes that “although
the besieged defend themselves stoutly, it is nevertheless not
authentically understood that the garrison is more numerous than
usual, the governor, as said lately by the King, not having chosen to
admit any one; and notwithstanding a public report, that the Duke of
Savoy in person is coming to succour the place, with a strong body of
cavalry and infantry, the hope of its capture does not in the least
diminish”.[663]
Lord Grey and Lord Wentworth afterwards refuted this charge, and
declared that they sent five messengers to Philip before the appearance
of the French army under Calais, and never received any reply whatever,
which totally disheartened them, in contradiction of what was said,
as to their not having chosen to accept the garrisons offered to
them.[664] Philip, however, cannot reasonably be blamed for the straits
to which the place was reduced. He had never ceased recommending that
Calais should be carefully guarded,[665] and when he heard that the
French were preparing an attack, he insisted that nothing should be
neglected to defeat their projects. His answer to the appeals of the
Governors of Calais and Guisnes was to commission the Duke of Savoy
to levy troops, and to proceed at once to their aid, but the latter
arrived on the scene too late to avert disaster. Within a week of the
assault a wide breach was made in the castle wall, and seeing that all
was lost, Wentworth ordered the garrison to be withdrawn and the towers
to be blown up, at the approach of the enemy. That same evening, when
the tide was low, a company of French soldiers waded across the haven,
but contrary to expectation, no explosion occurred, the engineer to
whom the order had been given excusing himself, on the pretext that the
water dropping from the clothes of the Frenchmen, as they passed over
the train, had wetted the powder, rendering it useless.[666]
The town itself still remained untaken, but on the 8th January, news
was brought to the French court, that while the Duke of Guise was
preparing to storm it, “one of the inhabitants appeared on the ramparts
with a flag of truce, praying the besiegers not to fire, nor to proceed
to further hostilities, as the townspeople were willing to surrender;
so whilst it was being treated to have them at discretion, according
to the Duke’s resolve, as he knew that those who remained were very few
and very weak, he having shortly before at the passes occupied by him,
routed four companies of Spaniards on their march to succour them, they
demanding safety for their properties and persons, he sent Robertet to
assure the King that either at discretion or in some other way, the
town could not fail to be his”.[667]
Eventually, the place surrendered, on condition that the citizens and
garrison should be allowed to depart, with the exception of Wentworth
and fifty others, all the ammunition and merchandise passing as booty
into the hands of the French. Meanwhile, ample reinforcements of troops
and stores lay waiting at Dover, detained there by stress of weather,
none divining that a place, hitherto deemed impregnable, could possibly
succumb within a week. But the French had contemplated the enterprise
for four years, and the fall of Boulogne, in the preceding reign, had
paved the way for them to Calais.[668]
Bonfires were lighted in Paris, two days before the intelligence that
was to plunge England into a stupor of despair reached London. “The x
day of January, heavy news came to England and London, that the French
had won Calais, the which was the heaviest tidings to London and to
England that ever was heard of, for like a traitor it was sold and
delivered unto them.”[669]
“On the 10th, and not previously,” wrote Surian, “the news of the
loss of Calais was received in England, and it is strange that such
important intelligence should scarcely have been conveyed in three
days, whereas the passage is usually made in one. They (a Spanish and
an English messenger) having left so immediately after the receipt of
the news, are unable to know what took place in the kingdom either good
or bad, merely saying that the Queen, when she heard it, determined
to make every possible effort to recover the place, and that besides
the ships now ready to put to sea to succour it, and the troops which
were being mustered, it will be reinforced by the greatest amount the
country can raise, and with the opportunity offered by the session
of Parliament, her Majesty will obtain any sum of money that may be
required to that effect.”[670]
Although the English laboured under a delusion in regard to the
strength of Calais, they were probably right in ascribing its prompt
fall to treachery. The whole region had been a nest of conspirators,
of whom Stafford had left many behind him, when he went to surprise
Scarborough Castle, and they were all in the employ of the King of
France. John Highfield in his letter to Mary, concerning the siege
and loss of Calais, said that the Duke of Savoy had asked him “after
what sort the town was lost”; and he had answered that “the cause was
not only by the weakness of the castle and lack of men,” but also
he thought there was some treason, for as he heard “there were some
escaped out of the town, and the Frenchmen told [him] that they had
intelligence of all our estate within the town”.[671]
Moreover, Sir Edward Carne wrote from Rome, that tidings had come from
Venice, and from Cardinal Trivulci, Papal Legate in Paris, “which last
stated, that the place had been rendered without any battery being laid
to it, or defence made, but by appointment of those within it. If so,
it is the most abominable treason that ever man heard of, and most to
be abhorred.”[672] In the same despatch, he tells the Queen that, “if
she spares either heretics or traitors, she shall but nourish fire in
her own house”.
The first to break the news to Mary was Cardinal Pole, who feared
the effect it might produce on her. But he was able to report to
Philip that, “in this present case her Majesty really shows, that in
generosity of nature and in pardoning she is very like herself,” adding
politely, “and no less connected with your Majesties in this respect,
than she is by ties of blood”.[673] Nevertheless, while she lived,
she never ceased urging the King and her Council to devise some means
for the recovery of Calais, and grievous as was its loss to the whole
realm, it was remarked that the burden of sorrow lay most heavily on
the Queen herself.[674] She declared that if her ministers should dare
to conclude peace with France, without stipulating for the restoration
of that place, they should pay for the concession with their heads; and
on her death-bed she assured the bystanders, that if her breast were
opened after death, the word “Calais” would be found engraven on her
heart.[675]
Philip, less ponderous in action than usual, was not slow to respond
to Mary’s appeals, and at once proposed to join a given number of
Spaniards to an equal number of Englishmen, and to set about the
recovery of the town and castle before the French had time to repair
the damages to the castle walls. As Surian had foretold, money was
speedily forthcoming, the nation being stirred to the quick. The clergy
granted a subsidy of eight shillings in the pound, the laity one of
four shillings on lands, and two and eightpence on goods, besides a
fifteenth and tenth, the whole to be collected in nine months. Seven
thousand men were levied and trained for service in the field, and a
fleet of 140 ships sailed out of Portsmouth harbour, in the spring. But
Philip’s offer was for various reasons declined, the Queen’s ministers
preferring to fortify the coast of Devonshire against an expected
descent by Dudley, and to send an expedition to attack the French
harbour of Brest, an alternative which the King had himself proposed,
and seconded with a strong contingent of Flemish troops. The expedition
resulted in failure, but the English Admiral Malin, by supporting the
Count of Egmont, in an engagement with the French, on the banks of
the Aa, gained him a splendid victory. In this encounter the French
lost 5,000 men, their gallant Marshal de Fermes and many distinguished
officers being taken prisoners. Peace would then undoubtedly have
resulted from the conferences which took place in the Abbey of Cercamp,
between Philip and Henry, had not the King of Spain felt bound in
honour to make the restoration of Calais an indispensable condition.
With the fall of Guisnes, three weeks after that of Calais, England
lost for ever her last foothold of territory on the French side of the
Channel. The place was so well defended “that had the like been done
by Calais,” wrote Surian, “that fortress had never been lost,” and he
goes on to say that “Lord Grey showed incredible valour, for although
he had been badly wounded in the assault, he nevertheless, with very
great courage, stood firm to the defence, until he found himself
fainting; and even then, rather to avoid alarming the soldiers than
from any personal consideration, had himself carried, all bleeding into
a house near at hand; but scarcely had he got there when he was told
that the enemy had taken the ravelin, and were attacking the bastions;
then half dead as he was, he made his men take him on a chair, to the
scene of action, where he so increased the courage and resolution
of the soldiery, that the French were doubtful of victory; but the
assault becoming more vigorous, Lord Grey seeing that all his men
were worsted,[676] and that there was no remedy, demanded terms, and
it having been granted him, that his soldiers might go out free with
their arms, and what they could carry, he surrendered himself prisoner,
the glory he thus obtained exceeding the infamy of those who through
negligence or treachery lost Calais, which is close to Guisnes”.[677]
Lord Grey remained a prisoner in the hands of Prince Strozzi, by whom
he was sold for 8,000 crowns to the Count de la Rochefoucauld, who had
been captured at the battle of St. Quentin. La Rochefoucauld demanded
25,000 crowns as Lord Grey’s ransom, a sum which would go a long way
to pay his own ransom of 30,000 crowns. But the money, when raised,
so weakened Lord Grey’s estate, that the hero of Guisnes was obliged
to sell his ancestral castle of Wilton-upon-Wye to his nephew, Charles
Bridges, second son of John, first Lord Chandos.[678] The fortress of
Hammes fell with Guisnes, and both places were razed to the ground by
the French.
It would seem that Mary might reasonably have hoped, whatever her
troubles from other sources, to have enjoyed the favour and confidence
of the Roman Pontiff. All her life long, most of her trials had
resulted from an unswerving devotion to the Holy See, and now the time
had come, when she might expect to reap a rich reward for her faith and
fidelity. Julius III. had sent her the Golden Rose, as an expression of
his affection and esteem, and Paul IV., throughout his differences with
Philip, and however severe his language with reference to the Catholic
King, always disassociated Mary from the blame which he lavished
freely on her consort. Even when he recalled his representatives, in
the length and breadth of Philip’s dominions, and made no exception
of Cardinal Pole, it was thought that Mary’s protests would procure a
speedy revocation of the decree, so far as it affected her kinsman and
principal adviser. But peace was ultimately made between Philip and the
Holy See, and Pole’s recall as legate _a latere_ from a country whose
King was at war with the Head of the Church, was found to be but one
aspect of a contest in which Mary, to her grief and vexation, found
herself suddenly involved.
As Cardinal Caraffa, Paul IV. had at one time expressed doubt as to
Pole’s orthodoxy, and although since his elevation to the Papacy, he
had acknowledged that this suspicion had been unfounded, repeatedly
expressing his high opinion of the English Cardinal, he once more
allowed the doubt to gain possession of his mind. Possibly Pole’s
enemies, and the Queen’s, may have contrived to revive the suspicion
for their own ends—the conspiracy in England was hydra-headed—but
the whole case is enveloped in obscurity, and the only certainty
is, that when Cardinal Morone was arrested in Rome on a charge of
Lutheranism, Pole was accused of sharing his friend’s heterodoxy. He
defended himself in various letters to the Pope,[679] and represented
that a legate was necessary in the actual state of affairs in England,
although it was immaterial whether that office were filled by himself
or by another. Mary expostulated directly by letters, and also through
her ambassador in Rome, Sir Edward Carne. Paul replied by creating
Friar Peto, a Cardinal, and giving him the English legation. Peto had
formerly distinguished himself by a firm and bold adhesion to Queen
Katharine’s cause, for which he had incurred Henry’s anger, and would
no doubt have shared Friar Forest’s fate, had he not fled to the Low
Countries. He was afterwards a chaplain in Cardinal Pole’s household,
where he attracted the attention of the Pope, by the great austerity of
his life. But he was now a very old man, and scarcely fit for active
service, and the appointment caused much surprise in Rome. In an
interview with the English ambassador, Paul expatiated on the goodness
and learning of the new Cardinal, and said that he hoped what he had
done would be agreeable to her most serene Majesty, and beneficial to
the whole kingdom. Carne replied that, as for Friar Peto personally,
he was willing to believe in his virtue and learning, but that he
was old, and could not bear fatigue, and would merely remain in his
cell praying; and that it would scarcely please the Queen to have the
legation taken away from one so nearly related to her, and to whom she
was so much attached, and to see it conferred on a decrepit friar, who
although he had once confessed her Majesty,[680] it was only before
she had attained her seventh year. As for benefiting the kingdom, the
people, Carne declared, esteemed no one, who was not of very noble
lineage, or very wealthy, or powerful through armed retainers and
dependent on the Crown; the friar having none of these prerogatives, no
respect would be paid to him.
But the Pope only replied to these objections, that he regretted not
being able to do otherwise, as he wished to have Cardinal Pole in Rome,
and to avail himself of his advice and assistance.[681]
No one felt his incompetence for the dignity and office conferred upon
him more than Friar Peto himself, and he entreated the Pontiff to be
allowed to decline them, as too great a burden for his old and feeble
shoulders. In the meanwhile, Mary wrote that although his Holiness had
not instantly granted her request, she believed that he would do so,
like the Lord, who when entreated more than once, at length satisfies
those who pray to Him heartily. In like manner, she again prayed and
supplicated the Holy Father to restore the legation in the person of
Cardinal Pole, and to pardon her, if she professed to know the men who
were good for the government of her kingdom, better than the Pope, and
also, if she wondered, that a legate, after being confirmed by him, and
after the performance of so many good works, whereby it might be truly
said, that through him alone England had resumed her obedience to the
Church, should be recalled without cause. The Queen further protested
that should any disturbance take place in England, it would be on this
account, but that she would do her utmost to prevent it.[682]
This letter Carne delivered to the Pope, whose expression while reading
it, showed extreme exasperation; he also presented another protest
from Friar Peto, and then said that he besought his Holiness, seeing
the Queen’s submission and reverence for him to be such, as would not
have been shown to him by any other sovereign, that he would be pleased
to grant her demand. After a long silence, the Pope declared that the
matter was one of very great importance, that he would confer with the
Cardinals, and give him a reply.
All that came of this conference was a summons to Pole to proceed
to Rome forthwith, to answer the charges brought against him by the
Inquisition, and a protest from Mary, that his trial should take
place in England, while Peto, invested with all the powers hitherto
exercised by Pole, was to take his place at once.
In order not to place herself in open opposition to the Pope, and yet
not to yield in a matter which appeared to her to involve the most
serious consequences, Mary had recourse to a diplomatic quibble, not
unprecedented in history. She gave orders that every courier from the
continent should be detained, and searched, on his arrival at any
English port, and when the Papal messenger reached Calais, on his way
to England, he was arrested and deprived of his despatches. In this
way, although Mary knew, from private letters, of Peto’s appointment
and of Pole’s recall, she never received the official notification
of either. The Papal brief addressed to Pole disappeared at the same
time, while Peto never received the bull which appointed him legate.
But the Cardinal ceased to exercise his functions as legate _a latere_,
although he retained those of _legatus natus_, which belonged to the
Archbishopric of Canterbury. He sent his chancellor Ormanetto to Rome
to represent him. Ormanetto arrived just as peace was being concluded
between Philip and the Holy See, and was kindly received; but the case
was referred by the Pope to his nephew Cardinal Caraffa, Papal Nuncio
at Brussels. Caraffa required that both Pole and Peto should be allowed
to go to Rome, the one to clear himself from the charge of heresy, the
other, that he might aid the Pope with his counsel. But Mary refused to
let Pole go, and the situation thus constituted only ceased to exist at
the death, a few months later, of every one concerned in it.[683] The
charge against Pole appears to have been of the flimsiest nature. It
was never substantiated, but it served the purpose of the moment, to
oppose an additional barrier to public peace and concord. It has in no
way affected his reputation for orthodoxy, and he stands out in history
as the model of a devout, loyal, upright Englishman.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 626: Michiel’s Report on England; Cotton MS., Nero B. vii.,
Brit. Mus.]
[Footnote 627: Cobbett, _History of the Reformation_, edited by the
Rev. F. A. Gasquet, O.S.B., p. 193.]
[Footnote 628: Burnet, _History of the Reformation_, vol. ii., pt. ii.,
p. 495.]
[Footnote 629: Lingard, vol. v., p. 494.]
[Footnote 630: De Noailles, _Ambassades_, vol. iii., p. 217.]
[Footnote 631: Sorranzo to the Doge, _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. i.,
619.]
[Footnote 632: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. i., 585.]
[Footnote 633: Cardinal Pole’s life-long friend, who had followed him
from Italy.]
[Footnote 634: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 723.]
[Footnote 635: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 743.]
[Footnote 636: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. i., 743.]
[Footnote 637: Kervyn de Lettenhove, _Relations Politiques des Pays Bas
et de l’Angleterre_ (Josse de Courteville au Président Viglius), p. 60.]
[Footnote 638: Antonio Surian, the father of Michiel Surian, had been
ambassador in England from July 1519 to September 1523.]
[Footnote 639: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 852.]
[Footnote 640: Paul IV. was nuncio in England, as Cardinal Caraffa,
from February 1514 till the spring of 1516.]
[Footnote 641: Letter Book, Ven. Archives, _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt.
ii., 880.]
[Footnote 642: Lettre de Courteville, _Relations Politiques des Pays
Bas et de l’Angleterre_, p. 66.]
[Footnote 643: Surian to the Doge and Senate, _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi.,
pt. ii., 873.]
[Footnote 644: _Ibid._ The proof that this levying of troops to help
Philip was not unpopular is furnished by Surian’s despatch of the
13th May 1557, in which he says: “The assistance given to the King
continues, for the soldiers who are going to serve his Majesty increase
in number daily, and great part of the nobility of the kingdom are
preparing, some from a longing for novelty, which is peculiar to this
nation, some from rivalry and desire of glory, some to obtain grace
and favour with his Majesty and the Queen; and the general opinion is
that upwards of 10,000 troops will pass into Flanders, although the
number fixed was only 5,000. Thus, excuse can be made to the French,
that there was no breach of the treaty. In addition, there will be
a considerable force on board the fleet and in Calais, and on those
frontiers, so that some 20,000 men will go out of England, who are to
be ready in the course of this month, when the fleet likewise is to
be in order, though it is not known on what day they will cross the
Channel, it having perhaps not yet been fixed, and possibly it will not
take place so soon, from the want of victuals, which is so great as to
be almost incredible.”]
[Footnote 645: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 873. Strype, iii., 358.
The Queen sold Crown property equal to an annual rental of £10,000, the
buyers to pay the money within fourteen days of purchase; the whole
sum was placed in Philip’s hands for the prosecution of the war (_Ven.
Cal._, 891).]
[Footnote 646: De Noailles, _Ambassades_, vol. v., pp. 256, 262, 265.
Heylin, 242.]
[Footnote 647: Strype, _Ecclesiastical Memorials_, vol iii., pt. ii.,
p. 515.]
[Footnote 648: Wriothesley, _Chronicle_, vol. ii., p. 138. As usual,
Elizabeth’s was the name conjured with. Referring to the huge
conspiracy of the preceding year, when her household had not so
entirely escaped the consequences as herself, Clifford, the secretary
of the Duchess of Feria, says: “Hereof by many prescriptions was the
Lady Elizabeth held accessory; which the Queen’s Council would have
examined and chastised, but the king again protected her from this
danger. It was consulted that two Catholic gentlemen should be sent
to her to remain there, and observe what passed, and so were sent Sir
Thomas Pope and Mr. Robert Gage. But the lady by her wary carriage,
her courteous behaviour and cunning, and by her public profession of
Catholic religion with shew of zeal did deceive these gentlemen. Before
the year was ended, underhand she had intelligence with Mr. Thomas
Stafford, who then exiled in France suddenly coming into England should
title himself king (for that he was descended from the house of the
dukes of Buckingham) and should marry with the Lady Elizabeth; they
supposing themselves strong enough against Queen Mary. It was not long
before Mr. Stafford put this in execution; for coming out of France
only with forty men on 24th April, 1557, and took Scarborough Castle,
with hope that either the Lady Elizabeth would send her forces to
fetch him or with them to come to him herself. But when by the Earl of
Westmoreland he was intercepted, sent to London and beheaded, and some
others of his faction hanged, the relics of this crime remained upon
the Lady Elizabeth. It was her luck that at this time King Philip had
returned from Flanders into England, by whose singular favour she again
escaped this plunge” (_Life of Jane Dormer, Duchess of Feria_, p. 89).]
[Footnote 649: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 926, 940.]
[Footnote 650: Leti, i., xii.]
[Footnote 651: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 940.]
[Footnote 652: Lingard, vol. v., p. 511.]
[Footnote 653: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 912.]
[Footnote 654: Machyn, _Diary_, p. 147.]
[Footnote 655: London, 2nd September 1557, MS., St. Mark’s Library,
Cod. xxiv., Cl. x., p. 187. It was universally admitted that Philip
distinguished himself by the most humane conduct towards the
inhabitants of St. Quentin.]
[Footnote 656: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 934.]
[Footnote 657: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. ii., 921.]
[Footnote 658: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1126.]
[Footnote 659: Hardwicke, _Miscellaneous State Papers_, vol. i., p.
113.]
[Footnote 660: _Ibid._, p. 112.]
[Footnote 661: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1130: Surian to the
Doge.]
[Footnote 662: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1124.]
[Footnote 663: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1124.]
[Footnote 664: _Ibid._, 1159.]
[Footnote 665: Secret. de Estado, Leg. 811, Simancas Arch., Letter to
the Chief Magistrate, Debetis, of Calais.]
[Footnote 666: Holinshed, 1135.]
[Footnote 667: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1131.]
[Footnote 668: Philip II. to the Comte de Feria, Brussels, 4th January
1558, Simancas Arch.]
[Footnote 669: Machyn, p. 162.]
[Footnote 670: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1146.]
[Footnote 671: Hardwicke, _Misc. State Papers_, vol. i., p. 119.]
[Footnote 672: Turnbull, Foreign Calendar, Mary, 28th January, 1558, p.
361.]
[Footnote 673: MS., St. Mark’s Library, Venice, Cod. xxiv., Cl. x., p.
192.]
[Footnote 674: Stow, _Annals_, p. 632.]
[Footnote 675: Gonzales, _Memorias de la real Academia de la Historia_,
vii., 257, Madrid, 1832.]
[Footnote 676: The word in the original is _maltratti_, literally,
knocked about or maltreated.]
[Footnote 677: _Ven. Cal._, vol. vi., pt. iii., 1152.]
[Footnote 678: Brantôme, art. “Strozzi,” Collin’s _Peerage_, vol. iii.,
p. 343.]
[Footnote 679: MS., St. Mark’s Library, Cod. xxiv., Cl. x., pp. 224-26.
Strype, iii., 231. Burnet, ii., 315.]
[Footnote 680: One of the reasons advanced for Peto’s promotion was the
fact that he had been the Queen’s confessor.]
[Footnote 681: Navagero to the Doge, Letter-Book, Ven. Arch., 18th June
1557.]
[Footnote 682: Same to same, _ibid._, 5th August 1557.]
[Footnote 683: Lingard, vol. v., p. 517.]