■ ' - . ^,4 v : % ■^ , ■ . .<*> # THE REAL QUEEN ELIZABETH Untouched enlargement from the original miniature by Nicholas Hilliard in Collection in ihe Victoria and Albnt Museum Duke of Buccleuch : THE PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH PORTRAIT NO. I In the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle Reprochtced by gracious permission of the A'ine From Messrs. Gou/ii & Co.' s engraving in Creightoris Queen Elizabeth PORTRAIT NO. 2 QUEEN ELIZABETH, BY MARCUS GHEERAERTS THE YOUNGER Reproducedby kind permission of the Earl of Radnor, the owner PORTRAIT NO. 3 QUEEN ELIZABETH In the Royal Collection at Windsor Castle Reproduced by gracious permission oftJie King [From Messrs. Goupil & Co.' s engraving in Creighton's Queen Elizabeth) V -v/. &'■$: y « 2 PORTRAIT NO. 4 In the Royal Collection at Hampton Court Reproduced by gracious permission 0/ the King (From Messrs. Goupil <5r> Co. J engraving in Creighton's Queen Elizabeth) f • • * * » '■:.'. t"^^c PORTRAIT NO. 5 Untouched enlargement from the original miniature by Nicholas Hilliard in the Duke of Buccleuch's Collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum I'ORTRAIT NO. 6 Untouched enlargement of an exact photographic copy of the original Nicholas Hilliard miniature bound in Queen Elizabeth's prayer book which was all in her own hand. Reproduced by kind permission of Miss Whitehead, whose father, the late great collector oj miniatures, is the last known owner of the prayer book, which has disappeared since 1892 THE PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH BY FREDERICK CHAMBERLIN LL.B., M.R.I., F.R.H.S., F.S.A., F.R.G.S., F.R.A.S. AUTHOR OF "THE PHILIPPINE PROBLEM," ETC., ETC. WITH 8 ILLUSTRATIONS AND NUMEROUS FACSIMILES NEW YORK DODD MEAD AND COMPANY 1922 P& -v ^ 11 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON ANT) BECCLES. INTRODUCTION WHEN, eight years ago, I set aside all other affairs 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 vi INTRODUCTION 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 superfluous to insist,' said the Regius Professor of Modern History in the University of Cambridge . . . 'that history is a science, no Jess 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. Pollard : " 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. 261. INTRODUCTION vii 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 long." 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 liaison with his queen. 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. (,858 ed.). So bad n use of ^'gratuitous " is rare in Froude. viii INTRODUCTION 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, far-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. Hume : , «* 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 the 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 " 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 * The Gnat Lord Burghley, p. 386. INTRODUCTION * or 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 seq. y by Algernon Cecil, London, 1915. b x INTRODUCTION Leicester had urged it for years ; and the results show that this course was the only right one. Yet Froude has the hardihood to say : " 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, Hist, of England, vol. xii. p. 559 (1870 cd.). INTRODUCTION xi 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. xii INTRODUCTION 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 reign. 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 vilification. 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. INTRODUCTION xiii 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 Trotestant 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 historia^ 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, as 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, 1S19, from MS. at St. Cuthbert'*, Ushaw. xiv INTRODUCTION 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." | 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 for them," Dr. Lingard says : "I cannot possibly conceive to what passages he (the complainant) alludes, unless it be to pp. 229 and 260, 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 sound policy because it might have provoked some one to lay before the public eye in a pamphlet a review of that mass of whoredom and immorality contained in the M. S., Chop : IV." Letter to Rev. J. Kirk, November 25, 1820, 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.). INTRODUCTION ™ As already indicated, I was, at the beginning, in the attitude of the average individual toward the morals of Elizabeth. 1 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 tart she succeeded in being called a Virgin Queen after she was dead." I had never doubted that Elizabeth was the mistress ot 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 ; and, as we shall see, no other verdict could have been expected in the light of the existing histories. . m 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 xvi INTRODUCTION 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 historian. 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 Collijn, 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. INTRODUCTION xvii 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. Whiffin, 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 z&k, 1920. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...... I. The Seymour Affair. Scandal at Thirteen (I. 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 . XL The Queen's Defence .... XII. How Elizabeth was convicted . page ? i 17 26 41 77 105 113 151 190 236 255 274 APPENDIX note 1. Family History of Elizabeth 285 2. The Earliest Writing of Elizabeth . . . 286 3. Elizabeth's Letter to Katherine Parr . . . 290 4. Why Posterity is ignorant of Queen's Ill-health . 295 5. The Story of Arthur Dudley .... 309 6. A Lewde Pasquyle of 8 Eliz 318 7. Roger ffawnes talke had wth me John Guntor uppon xpmas day... 1 578 322 LIST OF PLATES The Real Queen Elizabeth Frontispiece facing page Autograph Letter to Somerset. JEt. 15 . . . . 5 Autograph Letter to Somerset. Mt. 15 (Double Page) . 18 Autograph Prayer by Elizabeth. Mr. 64 . . . .18 Facsimile from Elizabeth's Fair Copy of her Translation of the " Miroir de l'ame pecheresse." Mr, 11 . . 19 Facsimile from Elizabeth's Fair Copy of her Translation OF THE "SERMO DE ChRISTO " OUT OF ITALIAN INTO Latin. Mr. 14 Elizabeth in her Youth. Portrait 1 . The Earl of Radnor Portrait. Portrait 2 . Oueen Mary's Portrait of Elizabeth. Portrait 3 Elizabeth in Fancy Dress. Portrait 4 . The Real Queen Elizabeth. Portrait 5 Elizabeth's Portrait in her Prayer Book. Portrait 6 . The only Authentic Portraits of Elizabeth Sir Arthur Keith's Chart of Medical Record of Elizabeth 99 Scandal Letter from Mary Queen of Scots BURGHLEY TO MuNDT Autograph Report of Nils Gyllbnstierna on Chastity of Elizabeth z6 4 21 94 94 94 9+ 9+ 94 97 208 255 THE PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH THE PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH CHAPTER I THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 1 "^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 Seymour 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 2 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 VIII., 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-old 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 SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 3 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. Seymour 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. Seymour 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 affections would appear to have been really intrigued ; but she was now more wary and circumspect, and 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 difficulty in applying it with entire success to at least thirty gentlemen whom the bluff monarch decided should no longer be of the earth earthy. 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 yt yowr Grace to be advertysed, that I hav shewed my Lady your Letter, with a grett Protestacyone that I wold SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 5 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.! 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 willingly 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 Majestie ; 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 Hatfield MS. 6 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Country. 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. And 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 Tyrwhit 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. SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 7 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 cofferer 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 show it to Elizabeth before it went ! Here we see caution 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 without 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 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." 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. SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 9 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 sufficiently 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 joyfull 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. 236 verso. Cf. Hearne's Sylloge Epist., etc., 165 ; Strick- land, Katherine Parr, 456 of Bonn's Hist. Lib. io PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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. And 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, 5th January, 1549, Haynes, vol. i. pp. 94-5- X Tyrwhit to Protector, Haynes, vol. i. p. 102. SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN n 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 that you write, 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. 102. t The letter is partly reproduced in facsimile opposite, p. 18, postea, in Chapter II. 12 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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. Howbeit, 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 °imple understanding, nor I would that your Grace should ha 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. SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 13 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 blindfold thither, and so returned, saw nothing in the house while she was there, but candle light ; 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. i 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 concerned. 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. SEYMOUR AFFAIR. SCANDAL AT THIRTEEN 15 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 Elizabeth 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 humble 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 will prove of no less honor and womanhood than shall beseem her father's daughter. ..." [This is probably the exact wording of Wriothesley. Certainly it is the wording of Hearne, the authority upon which all the later versions apparently 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 Hearne's exactness in copying. The MS. fragment — part of one page — still in existence — is Otho C. X., 272 old number, 274 present number, 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."] 16 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 those 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. CHAPTER II 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 Caesar we must leap to Constantine, from him to Elizabeth, 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 name. 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 1 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 ! — 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 different 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 Handwriting, by Henry Frith, London, 1890. t - ^e c -^ ■ /« ^s "-^ H 5 *£ - § ate, r-> '--C: ^_i *:>

>j li" g . r— "'-- , i" r* ^ i , S^* ) "*-* ^_ ^ T" — "^ ^si -*• s- ^S^ ^r-N . "iC *=> ^* v «^ i I *•** ■^— r; o * s sr ^ *-* v^ ^.^ vi — ' L «— ■+- —^ 3T ^- '»-» -^ ^^ "^ ^TTa C -SB -3e " u - 6"1 ^-i. g: o ^ C - , ~^; ^ * to ,_i ^ ^ ^Z ^^S rr •^E^tz v tS^E cs. cl ...» «^» V» . tr ie £ <0 '£ t£ ^ 0y» ^ - £ 3 $ s £3 SJS — , e_j ^x>^ Ig °^* ^^ ' x a: *I ^-» ^c; ^» c ^c "\*- c; *=> 5? ^ 5 ^ *"^TS; a , c*: ^ "*> S _ . K *H~ C fry ^ ^ N. 1 "A* ' v R: § §\)« ly^l^ : "<..- §1 ?V I & £<£ - c ^ ^ ^ XA H, - N W^ <- S^!< ft g I N IJCJ) \J S^ 5^ ^'^3^ -fti-^ ile^ ^3^1^: r«^^"p' ^' m$ J/ (more than men did) i do con/r/2c,/> that t hauc hrolzen mync othc,and prornefsc Alas thou haddesl cho fen me tor thy wjfe. and didc$Hfttt\ ofca.z h rae vp in or cat dipmtie,and hon^ \nou rc.{ffor what orealter honourl may one hauc man to he in the// place of thy wife ,wirf) Jwttlcly fa | Izeth rerte mrc to the\ofalL lhy#y\ aood es. quene jmaiffrts , and lady pndjxljo in furttu :,hoth of body/; mtd Jou ltHfo vile a crcalure.be £ ynoe ermoblfhtd hy the. No we/ (to Mi .the. Xmtty i had morc,anfl ^cik^ihan any yrian.ccmdtfyrC's Elizabeth's hand, jet. ii By permission of Royal Society of Literature. Original in Bodleian ( Miroir) § * | 9 t*tt ^^ § F §^ 3' *— ^ 5% g! ^ a .£*— =5 1 "■^i ^ Z? ^ • *^ !!t --« rj 1 Cs -*b o «"* o V ^}fC> 5 ~ ^ -^ O ^ 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 April* 2 1 8 "' 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.) 44 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH No. 13, " I hope, most illustrious King, that I shall readily JEt. 19. obtain pardon that for such a long interval of time 1^2°' y° u nave rece i ve d 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 JEt. 15-19. c i ear that it belongs to this same Group 1. " 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. — 21st and 22nd years (1553-4-5) No. 140, Elizabeth reported ill, but contemporary authority ^•19- not discovered. — Cf. Mumby, p. 81, and Strickland's Circa July 6, Elizabeth, p. 66, 1842 ed. 1553. Elizabeth quitted the Court on December 6 for No. 140a, Ashridge ; but before she reached it she was taken so n^'ft- ' ^ tnat sne nac * t0 sen d f° r the Queen's horse litter ; we ^5S3. 1S ' 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.) THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 45 , In answer to a letter from Mary summoning her to o- Court, which letter is of January 26, Elizabeth sent an oral 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. hi., Part I. p. 127.) Besides the above oral message, the high officials deputed by Mary to guard and watch Elizabeth, for 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. 14*/, Elizabeth sent word to the Queen to send her own JEt. 20. physician to Ashridge so that she might see that an ' 29,I5S4 ' Elizabeth was ill. — (Renard, Imperial Ambassador, to Charles V.) At 10 in the evening of Saturday, February 10, three high officials of England reached Ashridge under 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 therefore 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 4 6 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH council and servants, . . . she is resolved to remove hence to-morrow towards your highness, with such journeys as by a paper, herein enclosed, your 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. Cornwallis 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 Sam^dat" a SO S ^ C ^ e * n '** ked, anC * Ve " e ^ ee ^ e ant ^ wea ^ e °f last above, bodie. . . On the next (the 2nd morning after their Feb. 11, arrival) they had hir forth as she was, verie faint and 15S4, 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 Feb^i *' ^ s c ^ l X anc * * n a ^ ^ e countr y s ide are the gibbets, 1554V 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. 16, " Madame Elizabeth, sister of the said lady, FeK^ "' arrived Thursday in this city (London), so ill with 1554/ dropsy or some swelling which has attacked her whole body and even her face, that those who have seen her THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 47 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 countenance was pale." — Renard to Chas. V. Feb.24,is54. "They tell me that Madame Elizabeth, sister of ZEt. 2oi. tne queen, will be soon thrust into the Tower, no March 12", matter how ill she may be ; and she almost entirely J 554' swollen." — De Noailles to Paris. (De Noailles, vol. iii. p. 125.) No. 19, " My lady Elizabeth's grace continually in helthe ZEt. 20 and accustomed with thonelye swellyng in the visage at June 9, 1554. certayn tymes excepted." — Bedingfield Papers , p. 174. No. 20, " Doctour owens letter to me. Plesyth yt that I ZEt. 20 and have understonde by my 1. off the quenys highnes Tune22° S ' most honorabyll counsell, that my ladye Elizabeths 1554.' grace ys trobled wth ye swellyng In hir face, & also of her armes and hands. Syr, the occasion off theis affects ys off 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 distemperaunce off the wether, doth not permitte to minister purgacons, her grace must have sum pacience untyll the tyme off the yere shall bee more meter for medisyns. . . ." — Bedingfield Papers. (Dr. Owen's letter to Beding- field.) N0.21.ZEt.20 Elizabeth wants a " phesician " sent to her. — andiomos. Council's letter to Bedingfield. June 25, 1554- b No. 22, " First . . . that my 1. Elizabeth's grace ys daylye ' E io 2 rno8 ld vexec * wth the swellyng in the face and other parts off June 25-29, her bodye, & graunte that shee maye have doctour x 554- Huycke, accompanied wth doctour Wendye or doctour Owen, the quenes maiesties phesicons, Immediatelye to repare unto hir, whoese 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. . . ." — Bedingfield to Gage. 4 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH No. 23, " Uppon saturdaye, her gracs face in the mornyng „mos was somewhat swolyne ; the same night, as she sayed July 16, 1554. herself, she was verye evell at ease. . . ." — Bedingfield to the Council. N ^? 3 2i. " At the after noone ( 0n 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 1554- 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. 2i 2 i554. 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. No. 25, 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. N( ^ 6 ' "Not long after (sometime in 1555) her Grace i555.' f^l sicke an d 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. — JEt. 23-25 {December y 1556, to December, 1558) No. 26a, " H er beauty perhaps had no great share in these Iss6# ' 23 ' 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 THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 49 school of affliction." — Nichols' Prog. i. p. 30, 1st ed. 1788. Not contemporary. No. 27, " The poor Dame (Elizabeth) is so bad in health Dec.'is, 3 t ^ iat *k e y 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 May^ 4 describe Elizabeth's colour by Michiel, Venetian 1557/ Ambassador at London, in addressing the Doge and Senate. The Italian word is " olivastra." (Cal. St. P. Ven. y vol. vi. Part II. 1556-7, pp. 1043 et seq.) No. 29, " She was . . . slender . . . and . . . short-sighted." ,3' 2S ' —Sir John Hayward, Annals of Q. El, p. 7, ed. of 55 ' 1840. No. 29a, "She was . . . slender. . . ." — Sir Richard Baker, isil-iooi 69 a contem P orar y wno 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- Dec^ 2S * beth) will reign a very short time. . . . The people IS ' 5 S.' are already beginning to gossip about her lacking in depth " (liviana). — Duke de Feria to Madrid from London. No. 31, " She (Elizabeth) has not been very well lately JEt. 25. anc j the opening of Parliament was postponed in Jan. 31, 1559. conse q Uence f rom t h e 2 ^ r ^ to fae, 25th . . . she was suffering from a bad cold when I saw her, and has been almost ever since." — Duke de Feria at London to Madrid. No. 32, " The Queen calls Lady Catherine (Robt. Dudley's Jam— 26 ' sister) her daughter ... the Queen has thought best 1560.' to put her in her chamber, and makes much of her in E 50 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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,' DukedeFeria. ikt.26J. " I understand that if any disaster happens to the March 7, Queen's life . . . the Catholics will raise to the throne 15 °* 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 .ffit. 27. important plan for the maintenance of their heresies, Oct. 15,1500. r r . 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 London. No. 35, " The design of Cecil and the heretics is to make &t. 27. ^ ear i of Huntington King . . ." — De Quadra from Nov. 20, t J ^ a /r J • j I5 6 0> London to Madrid. No. 36, "I must not omit to say also that the common Mt. 27. opinion, confirmed by certain physicians, is that this Jan. 22, 15 I - woman (Elizabeth) is unhealthy, and it is believed certain that 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 Mt, 28. jj er Majesty was at Ipswich, she looked like one lately THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 51 \ug. 6-10, come out of child-bed. . . . Heard Lady Willoughby 15 *" 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. — lEt. 28-9 {September, 1561, to July, 1562) ^% 38, s W What * s °^ most importance now is that the 5ept!'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. ^7 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 /Et. nearly tQ ^ ner that morn i n g, tria t the Queen's Majesty July is, 1562. (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. — JEt. 29 {October, 1562, to November, 1562) No. 41, "The Queen has been ill of fever at Kingston, &t. 20. and the malady has now turned to small-pox. The 1. 16, 1562. erU ption cannot come out and she is in great danger. If the Queen die it will be very soon, within a few days at the latest, and now all talk is who is to be her 52 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH successor." — De Quadra to Duchess of Parma from London. No. 42, "... she was all but gone." — De Quadra to Oc?i7 2 ?563. Duchess of Parma from London. No. 42a, " Our Queen is now ill with the smallpox, and ^NEW before this broke out she was in the greatest danger of Oct. 20, 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 Chancellor. No. 42b, " I advised your Highness of the Queen's illness JEt. 29. a nd convalescence. She is now out of bed and is ct.25.15 2. on jy attending to the marks on her face to avoid dis- figurement. In her extremity of the 16th 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. 1st letter of this date. No. 43, "... on the seventh day she was given up. . . . Oct 2S 2 i56a 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 improved, 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 JEt. 29. now considered certain that Parliament will be sum- ' " IS 2 " 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, the 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 THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 53 see how she can avoid it, and I am told by persons of position that they believe the matter will 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 effect. Twelve days later De Quadra asks again for such instructions. Parliament was summoned, and on November 5 the Speaker presented to the Queen a petition of the House 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. — JEt. 29I to 31 {November, 1562, to December, 1564) " The other day a meeting of gentlemen was held at the earl of Arundel's. . . . The question of the 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- p e ^ 2 jjg, m g I re f er to tne f act > now known publicly, that the ' nobles are divided on the subject of the succession. (Takes up different 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 54 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 ^NEW Queene's Majestie hath bene much troubled, and is Dec. 29, 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 London. N % 47 ' (Elizabeth had been at Cambridge on progress.) Aug. 12, 1 ' " • • • 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 JOf'^le/L* subject at the opening of the new Parliament. " In case 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, j ^ Et ; ( 3. 1 ; writing of this time, refers to the fact that Elizabeth then had her own hair. There does not appear to be Sept. 4, 1564. Oct. 1564. THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 55 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. Elizabeth tells Melville that she was in the habit of playing the virginals " when sche was solitary . . . till (to) eschew melancholy."— Melville Memoirs. Group 8.— 32nd, ?,yd, and 34^ years (December, 1564, to June, 1566) No. si, " The Quene's Maistie fell perilously sick on DwVi^. 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. " On the 9th of December she was ' sore sick of the flux/ "—Cecil's Diary. "... About this tyme the Q. Majesty was sick at Westminster." — Cecil's Diary. " About 10 o'clock before dinner, I received your > 3 i564 ot ^ er P a °ket, 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. " This Queen was attacked with a fever ten days since which was so severe as to cause her household some uneasiness." — De Silva from London to Madrid. " On the 1 8th and 23rd ult. I wrote your Majesty that this Queen had suffered from fever and had been 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 56 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH changes of 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. 56, " Although I have written that this Queen has Jan 4 Vs6s Deen iU with 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^J 1 * 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. 58, Elizabeth ill from the 6th to the 9th.— De Silva Se£t!'^', from London to Madrid. 156s. No. 59, "... she is well but thin." — De Silva from Sept!'i 7 !' London to Madrid. 15 3 ' In re "consultations with witches, what invoca- SEt. 32. 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. 6r, Elizabeth ill on 1st of month but recovered on 5th. NotVis6s — De Silva from London to Madrid. No. 62, Elizabeth " somewhat lame and thin." She falls iEt.32. downstairs. — De Silva from London to Madrid. Jan. 28, 1566. No 6 ' " The Queen is still at Greenwich. I have not jit. 32J. seen her since she left here, as she has been unwell ; Mar fifi XI ' Dut though s he is better now, she is so thin that a 15 " doctor who has seen her tells me that her bones may THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 57 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 •ffit. 32J. days since which gave her some trouble." — De Silva 1566 1 .' fr° m London to Madrid. No. 65, " About this tym the Quen of England was sa sair jEt. 32 and vesit with a het feur, that na man beleud any vther 10 mos. hot death to be the end of it, all England being June 1, 1566. 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 q.—JEt. 33 (1566) No. 66, " The next day I sent to ask after the Queen, who /Et. 33. j h earc j had been unwell, and to know when I could 1566.' se e 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. — /Et. 34, 35 and 36 {December t 1567, to December, 1568) No. 67, " The Queen entered London the 23rd instant in .Et. 34. good health, although she had not been well some 1567/ days 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, " This Queen has been ill for four or five days, /Et. 34. but is now well. . . ." — De Silva from London to Jan.io,i S 68. Madrid> N °e 6q ' " The Queen is ill in bed with a great excess of Apl. 19^1568. bile. . . ." — De Silva to Madrid from London. No. 70, Elizabeth being ill, the Spanish Ambassador saw ^Et. 34J her doctor and others, and refrained from seeing her ay *' I5 "on account of their description of her condition, 5 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 ^t- 35- this Queen at Antoncourt, whom, although still in Dec. 5, 1568. some indisposition of her health, I found nevertheless well disposed to see me in her private chamber. . . ." — Fenelon, French Ambassador at London, to the Queen of France. No. 71a, " 1568. — The Queen was this year (but at what ^J- 35. time of it I cannot tell) suddenly taken with a terrible Is68 fit of sickness, that threatened her life, 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 11. — Mt. 36 {July, 1569, to August, 1570) No. 72, Elizabeth, " with bad health and an affliction which j*Et. 36. she has in her legs, will not be of long life. . ." — July 27, 1569- Fenelon from London to Paris. No. 73, Elizabeth had not been well for 5-6 days. — Fenelon JEt. 36. from London to Paris. Oct. 13,1569. No. 74, Elizabeth became so angry that she fainted, and -ffit. 36. they ran for vinegar and other remedies to revive her." Oct. 28, 1569. _ Fenelon from London to Paris. No - 75, " Divers have demanded of me of the Quene our ^ t m 3 6 s and 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." No - 77, " Cecille . . . replied to me that she must not June^s, 7 overdo, on account of her being ill, as in truth she was, 1570.' in her leg. . . ." — Fenelon from London to Paris. No. 78, "... having had me called into her private June2Q 7 ' 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 THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 59 upon by us. . . ." In this interview she twice describes herself as lame. — Fenelon from London to Paris. No. 79, " The Queen has been three days without leaving Ju^o, 7 ' her room."— Antonio de Guaras to Zayas, from 1570. London. No. 8o, " The illness of the Queen is caused by an open jEt. 37. u lcer (una llaga) above the ankle, which prevents her y i, I57 °f rom walking." — De Spes to Madrid from London. No. 81, Elizabeth made her progress this year in July and JEt. 37. August in a coach because of her lameness due to the July and , ° Aug. 1570. uicer ' No. Sia, " Sire, the Queen of England having herself per- ^t- 37- ceived that the trouble in her foot (mal 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." — Fenelon, 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 11, 1570. There is also a letter from Cheneys written by Leicester on the 8th.— Cat. 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. 81b, " The Queen is in poor health with her malady in ■^J- 37- the leg." — De Gueras from London to Zayas, Cal. Aug. 16, 1570. S - p y Simancas, vol. ii. p. 270. N 8lCy "... she sent three gentlemen to conduct me ■flSt. 37. ... to an arbour which had been prepared for her to Se t* E T o s h° ot w * tn tne 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." — Fenelon to the King of France from near Oxford Corresp. Dip., vol. iii. p. 290. 6o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH Group 12.— 37£ to 38 {February, 1571, to June, 1571) No. 82, " As you hold your determination for your progress FehPi 37 "' this week ' I P ra y for fair weather. . . . Nothing is x £{* 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 Elizabeth. No. 83, "... she (Elizabeth) wished to complain to me Mays 3 '!™. tnat a y° un g man wno was in tne highest place had said ' that 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. . . ." — Fenelon from London to Paris. No. 84, \ " But as regards France . . . and considering the UiSated 7 b 3 ut* great ^P^ty of a 8 e » tne P oor health of the lady, and ascribed "o tne ver 7 slight hope of offspring, one may well surmise this period that when Elizabeth dies, and the general opinion is «?twL that she will not live long, it would be an easy matter," authority. ^ ^ ^ ^ etc> _ R()dolfi tQ p hiUp IL No. 85, On the 10th of May, 1571, as he reports to his ^Et. 37?. sovereign, Elizabeth said to Fenelon, " that notwith-, * y 5 J°' 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. 85a, " She has neither youth nor health to have children > NEW ' or to live long."— Duke de Feria to Zayas. No 86 ' Leicester tells Fenelon that "he had never seen * °kt. 37 and (Elizabeth) in better health or spirits ; and that she 10 mos. would not go out in her coach any more to the chase, Ju "s7 2 i r ' but on a ^ ne lar § e horse." — Fenelon to Paris. THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 61 Group 13.— 37 to 37^ {July, 1571, to December, 1571) No. 87, " Their audience was ' differrit ' because the Queen ™mo 7 s and was sick."— Diary of Bishop Ross. N ^s 571 "... in truth, she (Elizabeth) feared very much °Et. ^ 7 anc j that this young prince would dislike her, and that she 10 mos. would not find herself sufficiently healthy or suitable July 9. 1 57 1. f or a young husband, and she would like to postpone the proposal until she felt better." — Fenelon 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. t0 understand of the Queen's majesty's restoration to perfect health." — Drury to Burghley. N "... The Queen is not able to go to ' progress.' " jEt.37 and She finally went on the 10th after a delay of five days. 11 mos. — Fenelon to Queen of France from London. Aug. 5, 1571. « 1 found her (Elizabeth) ill in bed, where she is ^Et^S. St ^' but without danger, and daily mending." — Du Sept. 1 57 1. Foix, French Ambassador at London, to Paris. No. 92, " It was also bruited she (Elizabeth) was sore sick, ^Et. 38. and had lain speechless three days, at which the rebels Year queried. mucn rejoiced." — Examination of Henry Simpson. No -93» "... he had been at Court (in France) and told Oct.2i 3 , them of the Queen's sickness. . . ." — Examination of 1571 '? Henry Simpson. Year queried. No. 94, " Other news we have none worth writing, but of ^Et. 38. her Majesties good estate, which surely is such as I Dec 6, 1571. nave not k nown been these many j^ears." — Leicester to Walsingham. Group i^.—Mt. 38! to 39 {March, 1572, to August, 1572) No. 95> "... The night after the arrival (of the courier of kx. 38*. the King of France) there took place such a great M " C -!l 25 ' il mess an d 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. . . ." — Fenelon to Paris. 1572. 62 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH No 6 This last illness, Elizabeth's physicians declared, JEt.tfh. "was occasioned by her contempt for physic, and March 25 ? ut ter neglect of such potions as they considered neces- sary to keep her in health." — Strickland quotes this, I but we have not seen the contemporary authority from which she appears to quote. No. 97, " Sire, immediately the Queen of England, with the JEt. 38 J. p erm i ss ion of her physicians, has been able to come i 1572?' 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. . . ." — Fenelon from London to Paris. No. 98, " It has been rumoured by the Italians that the JEt.381. Queen is very sick and in great danger, which causes Apnl 2,1572. p a pj sts j n tne l ow 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 yEt. 3 8i. i s to be opened here on the 12th of May, it ^57"' 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 Alba. N %t 9a 8 " NeWS from En 8 land is that tne Queen has NE ^ entirely recovered her health. . . ."— Guerau de Spes April 15, to the King of Spain, from Brussels. 1572. No. 100, " Tne ni g nt after °ur audience, the Queen of /Et. 39. England became very ill on account of walking too Aug. 7, 1572. i ate jn the night air when it was very cold ; and because of having hunted too much on the preceding THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 63 days ; but to-day (two days later) she is very well. . . . — Fenelon to Paris. " Sire, because of a little stomach trouble which seized the Queen of England the day she gave us 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. " It is said that she was dangerously ill for one or two nights but is now recovered." — De Guaras to Duke of Alba. Group 15. — TEt. 39 (September, 1572, to October, 27, 1572) " The Queene also herself e, 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 before it was heard abroad that she was sicke." — Camden, Booke II. p. 52, ed. 1630. " 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 at Hampton Court. But she recovered before there was any news of her being sick." — Nichols' Prog. Not contemporary. The French Ambassador asked for an audience on the 2nd of October ; but Elizabeth sent word to him on the 1st "to 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." — Fenelon to Paris. No. 104a, " The Queen's Majesty appeared to have the ^^39- Small-poxs at Hampton-court ; but she recovered Oct. 4, 1572. spedely." — Cecil's Diary. " (Cecil) told me that if it were not for the illness 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 (unafuente) 64 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH in the leg there is always some fear of her health. . . ." — De Guaras from London to Duke of Alba. No 105a " F° ur ^ a y s s * nce tne Q ueen ^ & at Kingston and rat. 39! is still in bed." — Letter of Intelligence from London Oct. 7, 1572. (unsigned) to the Duke of Alba. No 106 " The Queen has been unwell, and her illness -it. 39. turned out to be small-pox. She is now much better." Oct. is, 1572. _ De Guaras to Alba. No. 107, " Elizabeth ill with chicken- or small-pox." — rat. 39- Fenelon to Paris. Oct. 13, 1572. No. 108, " On Thursday night last, Monsieur de Crocque rat. 39. was nere (Windsor) and had audience given him by ct-I3,1S72 'the 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 .rat. 39. night, so that my Lord of Leicester did watche with c .15,1572. j^. a jj n jg nt> rj^-g mornm g, 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 Quene's Matie hathe bene rat. 39- lately syke of the smalle pockes, & as yett no sartenty Oct. 16, 1572. ig here Q £ ^ nr Mate > s recoverej or p f tt helth."— Earl of Shrewsbury to Burghley. No. no, " He (the messenger going to Paris) can also tell rat. 39. you of a sudden alarm specially yesternight, by her ct ' 20 ' 1572 ' Majestie 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. in, "... we perceave that you had hard of som late Oct 23^1572. siknes 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 daies, without any great inward siknes, ther began to appere certain red spotts in som THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 65 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 ///., vol. ii. p. 79. " The Queen has been very ill and the malady 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. — Mt. 39 {October y 1572, to January, 1573) No. 112, Elizabeth tells Fenelon that the last time he was at ZEt. 39. Windsor, she was unable to see him " because she had .27.1572. a j Da( j stomach owing to her having taken a little mithridate." — Fenelon to Paris. " We have no news here, only that her Majestie is in 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 Walsingham. No. 114, " Her Majestie ys at this present, and hath byn all Mt. 39. this last Night veary well, and tooke not so good Rest Nov. 4, 1572. this great while _ ^ ."—Leicester to Burghley (2nd letter of same date). " My Lord, yesternight about six a Clock, I receaved your Letres, and could not have present 4 ' l5/2 " Occasione to deall with her Majestie touching the F 66 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 ^t. 39. Edinburgh Castle would not make any compromise, Jan. 7, 1573- « 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. — JEt. 41 {December, 1574) No. 117, " The Queen has been very unwell last week, and /Et. 41. the secret murmurs in Court, and amongst all over Dec 5, 1574- t ^ e coun try, 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 life 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." s — De Guaras from Lond. to Zayas. Group i$—JEt. 42 {June, 1575) No. 118, " Her Majestie, God be thanked, is better since JEt. 42. i ier fy rst coming hither, and this day was once about ""575°' t0 ^ ave ta ^ en physick, but fynding 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. 119, "I will lett your Lordship understand such newes Juntas" ^ we have ' whicn is onl Y and chiefly of her Majestie's 1575- ' § ood 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. No. 1 20, m 1577 THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 67 Group i^.—Mt. 44 (i 577 ) ^fi. th " ; • • Th J; said P uee n of Scotland had replied 77 ' S2 I!" T S bCtt ^ ^ an the Queen > (Elizabeth),and that she knew well that the Queen was subjec to a failure of the heart which returned every month so hat the Queen of Scotland was hoping a ZZ fortune^ mth ls country -Anonymous letter, Scottish Series, ™ZJ' u 577 u (Th , e Queen of Scots was nevei ! well after her 19th year.) N %; 2 !!' " ^ hC ( l ue ^ n was in some part of this year under N ™ t e h X a C t e T e /T 1Sh by P f nS ° f her teeth ! » «o much I577 . that she took no rest for divers nights, and endured Se^r ient night and day - ,, - strype - "« Group zo.-JEt. 44* to 45 QWy to 0<*>fc>r, 1578) No. 121 **&■ ConrtnfF 1 !,T hat have . some knowledge of the J,n. 6, XS78. C ° u ? of En gland I am apprised that the said Queen's physicians deem her life in danger. They say that she has hardly ever had the purgations proper to afl women l ha . mStead nature ^s come to the rW by ' establishing an issue in one of her legs, which has never been scanty of flow. But the Queen has fallen m and at present seems to be quite dried up, nor know the physicians how to find a remedy for this mish" Enclosure in a letter from Salviati, Nuncio in France to the Cardinal of Como. ' N< ffi"« ;,u The - Qu . een , has been ^-vellous & many days °^%^y s rZ in n her Cheek ' V LeiceSter t0 B -ghty C. of bt. Pap. Dom. 1547-1580, p. 601. J Group 21 .-JEt. 46,47,48-51 {April 1580, to November, 1584) htolk 1 " J h f Quee , n • ' • has also been a little ill and has mt u m ° St * ] T y l k T <° her Chamber smoe I saw her Is8o> because of a headache and a nervous headache "-De that 5S& l^ u° m L «° nd0n - The context ^ows £t» \- \^ d ^ afHicted as described for more hat neruTf '' *** ™ 0nIy kn ° W that at the «d of that period she was not recovered. 68 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH No. 124, "The Quene, our Soveraigne, beinge perswaded /Et.~ 4 6. by her physitions, did enter into a bathe on Sonday July 1, 1580. | ast . fc ev ther 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. 12;. " Assures liimself of the affection and good zeal .Et. 46. which he bears to the Queen of England, and during July 1, 15S0. some 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 j, 6 " The day following the said audience, the Queen /Et. 46. your good sister fell ill with the whooping cough Julys* 1580. accompanied with a high fever . . ." — Mauvissiere, French Ambassa dor to Lond., to Paris. No. 127. " The Queen is quite recovered." — Walsingham to .Et. 47 . Burghley. June 25. 1581. a J No. 12S, " Her Majesty had deferred signing certain papers /Et. 50. till next day on account of her headache . . ." — Robt. De 1 c : s 1 ,^' Beale to Walsingham from Windsor. No. 129, " Illness of Her Majesty through eating, for •fEt- 51. breakfast, a confection of barlev . . ." — Hatton to °y* Burghley. Xo. 130, " About four or five years ago you (Elizabeth) /Et. 51. being ill and I also at the same time, she (the Countess Nov.— ,1584 Q £ Shrewsbury) 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 Elizabeth. Group 22.— JEt. 52 (September, 1585) N " I find her Ma 1 ' very- desirous to stey me she makes .Et. 52. ^e cause only the doubtfullnes of her own self, by Sept. 21 (?), reason of her often decease taking her of late & this ,s ^ 5 " last night worst of all, she used very pittyfull words to THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 69 me of her fear she shall not lyve, & wold not have me fr° hir. Ye can consider what man r 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 Walsingham. Group 23. — JEL 52 {February, 1586, to 'July, 1586) No. 132, " Since I wrote last about England (on Feb. 1) Feb. 17," t ^ ie Q ueen ~ mot her 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 Paris. No. 133, " When the Queen was going to chapel the other T a* q 2 ' ^^' as usua l m ^ u ^ 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- ment, greatly to the wonder of those present." — Un- signed advices from London to the King of Spain. No. 1330, " 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 24.— ;£*. 53 (1587) No. 134, « The latter (Cecil) writes (apparently to the Mayaof' English Ambassador in Paris) that ... it was feared 1587.' she would not live long." — Mendoza from Paris to Madrid. Group 25. — JEt. 55 (1588 — Armada year) No. 135, " The Queen is much aged and spent, and is very Nov. sf 1588. me ^ a ncholy. 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 7 o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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! years, which ended when she was 62! . Group 26.— JEt. 62I, 63 (1596) No. 136, " 1 know you are, as we all here have been, in March it me l ancn °ty anc * pensive cogitation. This au7rnia, 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 Root. Cotton. No. 137, "I was advertised this evening . . . that her Nov' t "i4 3 ' Majestie deferred her remove unto Wednesday . . . 1596.' 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 2j.—j£t. 64 to 65 (1597, 1598) No. 138, " The Queen hath a desperate ache in her right AugV^) tnum b> 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 ^JEt^ 64. ^ attacked by such a catarrh of the teeth that she could <*• ,1597. not see me to-day and perhaps not to-morrow . . . THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 71 (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 teeth 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 1598*' 65 ^ ace °bl° n g> 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 28 — ML 65 to 66 (1599) No. 141, JEt. 65. " Elizabeth ill." — French Ambassador. Jan. 12, 1599. ^£1*65. " Elizabeth ill." — French Ambassador. Jan. 25, 1599. No. 143, " The health of the Queen seems to me much di- Ma^'J 5 ^ minished, and if God were to call her, and the King 15 " gg / of Spain had an army ready, England would soon come to grief . . ." — French Ambassador to Paris, ^t^o " Her Ma J est y> God be thanked, is in good health, Aug. 29, ' and likes well Nonsuch Ayre. Here hath many 1599. Rumore bene bruted of her, very strange, without any Reason, which troubled her Majestie a little ; for she wold say, ' Mortua sed non sepulta.' " — Rowland Whyte to Robt. Sydnev. PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH s^pt. — . N , M - " At her majesty's returning from Hampton Court, fit M. 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 \ras 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 da\s." — Lord Semple of Beltreis. Scottish Ambassador in London, to James VI . ..- .0.— -.i'i. o~ (1600) No. i 4 c\ " In the Late Cor.ver.cion the K[ing] gave it out [i very constantly but in secrettt and indirectly that her Majestic was sick and in perill ; "—Geo. Nichols to Sir Robt. Cecil from Edinburgh. No- j 4". I do see the Queen often ; she doth wax weak since fulyf?) ' r ^ e * ate trouM* 8 ! in ^ Burleigh's death often draws 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. ^V- "... she being now an old woman, was no lesse - .'.V,.\; crooked in minde than in body." — Camden. 172, quoting Essex. Group 30.— .£7. 68 (1601) iBt& Henry IV. of France laying definite plans for the May, ifoi. situation to arise on death oi Elizabeth. N V/^-' " She {EBabeth) O quite disfavored (That .£t. 68. NEW changed in countenance.— F. C.) and unattired ; and Oct. 9, 1 601 . these troubles waste her much. She disregaxdeth 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 THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 73 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 Nugce Antiquce, vol. i. p. 46, ed. 1769. \j . ISO( " The Queen in all her robes had fallen the first Mt. 68. day of the parliament, if some gentlemen had not 0ct N 2 ^ W suddently cast themselves under that side that tottered, 1 601.' and supported her." — Lord Henry Howard (acting for Sir Robert Cecil) totheEarl 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 ^t. 68. i n F ran ce, news came that the Queen was dangerously 1601.' ill- 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. — /Et. 68 J to 69 and 5 mos. (1602) No. 152, " Elizabeth has had three or four days of pain in /Et. 68$. ner left arm." — French Ambassador to Paris. Jan. 29, 1602. No. 153, " I was sorry to hear of the Queen's ' craziness,' /Et. 68J. an d p ra y f or her long and perfect health as the main e i6o2°' pillar of our general good." — Geo. Gilpin from The Hague. No. 154, Her arm still troubles her. "... she (Elizabeth) lEx. 68 J. j s - m very good health, but taking this year less exercise April 8, 1602. , 1 • , r t -ii 11 L j 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. 155, Elizabeth tells French Ambassador at London w'mos"" 1 " ***** s ^ e was a_wear Y °f hfe " anc * with sighs and June, 160*2. tears bemoans Essex and explains why she beheaded him. No. 156, " Wednesday night the Queen was not well, but ^a 6 ?^, wou ld n °t be known of it, for the next day she walked 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 Aug. 6, 1602. 74 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH whether she was weary or not I leave to your censure." — Earl of Northumberland to Lord Cobham. No. is7, " Our queen is troubled with a rheum in her arm, Um-ertain ; which vexeth her very much. . . . She sleepeth not so Essex d. ' much by day as she used, neither taketh rest by night. Feb.25,i6oi.pj er flight 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 N^-^ 9 exhausted that when she has been on horseback for 1602. ' an hour she has to rest for two days." — French Ambas- sador to Paris. No. 159, Our dear Queen . . . doth bear show of human Dec"^? 9 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. — JEt. 69-4OT. to 6g-Sm. (1603) No. 160, She took cold on the 12th January, 1603, and on fmos 9 the J 4 th moved to Richmond, but before this had begun Jan. 12 to to see visions. The French Ambassador states that Feb. 20, she complained of " her left arm, which had pained 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 rapidly. THE MEDICAL RECORD OF ELIZABETH 75 No. 161, "... for although she hath good appetite, hath JEt. 69 and neither cough nor fever, distemper nor inordinate March™', 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 7 nio 69 3nd an aDscess broke there. Dr. James Rae concludes that Mar. 10-24, 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. — (1) 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 76 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH p. 286 we know that her sister Mary was bled for amenorrhoea. 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 ? CHAPTER V MEDICAL EXPERTS ON THE MEDICAL RECORD )A S said in the headnote preceding the Medical Record / m comprised in the last chapter, that document as / — 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, with 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 77 78 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 first 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 ? MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 79 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 Hopkins 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 — Cerebral 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 ; AZquinimitas 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 (19 14). 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 ? — 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 with 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. So PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 directlv or indirectly ? — No. Probably far too much was made of her 'illnesses. Many attacks were nothing but "a spice or show of the Mother r V.P.ig. q ~ # — is any of her ill-health due to her father's disease, and if so, in what particulars ? — The ulcer is the only suspicious feature. q s, — 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 liysteria) 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., MA., M.D., D.Sc. Oxford, D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.C.P., Fellow and V.-Pres. of The Ro\ \\\ 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 — Hie Optlialmascope in Medicine ; Goulstonian Lectures on \~is- 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 Gynacology ; Fitzpatrick Lectures on Greek Medicine in Rome, 1909-10 ; Diseases of the Arteries and Angina Pectoris, 191 5. Inventor of the short clinical thermometer. 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 ? — 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 MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 82 thereof, stating that all usual diplomatic sources were lackins between 1588 and 1596.) 5 Q. 5 —Did she or did she not probably have a strong constitution ?— As 1 and 2. (That is " No."—F. C ). 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 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 it so, in what particulars ?— No evidence. Ka3 8 -~What diseases did she have, in your judgment based upon the data submitted, and what were their reactions foUows T-F CV- 6 ktter heraoUh ' < The Ietter is as " 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 16th cent.-if on any period it is Greek and Gr. Latin. My impres- sion is that in England XVF* 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 *^7u{ fu "Pj '* 1 * *50 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 malaria 83 ™ U * feSUlt ' m3y haVe been due to kJ I / U8 Pf ct m° re over 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\ of the Court doctors, with their venesections \ in an anemic * &, ut « nephritis-acute dropsy of the kidneys.— F. C. T 1 ne too great care. — F. C. t Blood-letting. — F. C. 8 2 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH (amenorrhea)* 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 o —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 I0 — 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 FRCS • formerly House Phys. St. Bartholomew's Hosp., London; Formerly House Sg. idem. ; Asst. to Mus. Roy ColL Sura. ; Presid. oStetricd Soc. of London ; Surg, to Samaritan Free Hosp. for Women 1877- 909 ; probably greatest living authority on diseases of women ; author of -Clinical and Pathological Observations on Tumours of the Ovary, FaUopian Tubes and Broad Ligament, of Handbook of Gynacologtcal Operations; author of chapter on Medicine in Shakespeare s England, 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 they 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, * Amenorrhcea — stoppage of the monthly periods. — F. C. f 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. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 83 but the most robust women may suffer badly from dysmenor- rhea, menorrhagia, or amenorrhea. 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 constitutions. 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, 1 547-1 553, 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 influences 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. 84 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 midsummer, 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, Carlyle, 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 MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 85 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 1 " 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, 191 6, pp. 99, 101, 107-8, and 200) showed quite recently that anaesthetics, 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 corsets. 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 86 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH menstrual disorder, but the word " Mother " was well under- stood to mean hysterics. Dr. Needham in Medela Medi- cines, 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 ! Hysterica passio I 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 syphilis ; 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 " clinical 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 MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 87 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 breaths 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 15 18, 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., I. 4. 88 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 fare 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, hut pits of small-pox, and that though 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. Love's Labour Lost was written about 1591, performed a year or two later, revised in 1597 for a Court performance, and published by Cutbbert Burbie in IS9S. f Act. V. Sell. 45, 46. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 89 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 weeks 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 life 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. 9 o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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. S, — 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 shoulder." 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 Periostitis. 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 MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 91 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.) 92 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Mother." /. 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 with 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 think 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 Treve'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 Inn Fields, London, W.C.2. 22.10.17. Dear Mr. Chamberlin,— You have produced a most interesting study for MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 93 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 : (1) 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 womb. (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.2. Part I.— Notes on the Portraits of Queen Elizabeth 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. 94 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH me the truest transcript of a living and real face is that numbered 2 — 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 petulant. Turning now to Portrait No. i — The first question one asks is : Could this, 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. 1 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 Elizabeth — 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. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 95 are present across the whole width of the supra-orbital region. The eyes of No. 1 could become those of No. 5. The nose, however, of No. 1 seems at first sight to differ materially from that of No. 5. The damsel is represented in No. 1 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. 1 at seventeen may not become the nose in No. 5 at sixty. The lips and mouth of No. 1 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. 1 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 of 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. 1 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. 1 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 96 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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, with 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. 1 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. Creighton devotes a very sentimental page to it, unfortunately. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 97 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 Queen Elizabeth 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 1 "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) ; and yet 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 i'lness ; h 9 3 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 baffle 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 the whole armamentarium of diagnostic methods at the disposal of the modern physician. In the case of Queen Elizabeth, the modern 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. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 99 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 Queen. 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, ioo PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Bront6, 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 Septem. MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 101 Question 5 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 qualities 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. 102 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 overtakes 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 37th 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 symptoms 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 MEDICAL EXPERTS ON MEDICAL RECORD 103 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 ; kings 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.2. 24th day of June, 1918. My dear Chamberlin, — . . . You may take it that Elizabeth's loss of hair 104 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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. CHAPTER VI LAST WORDS ON QUEEN 'S HEALTH 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. a6o. I0 5 106 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 down 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." LAST WORDS ON QUEEN'S HEALTH 107 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 running 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 conduct me ; not to the house where she was stopping, but to an arbour which had been prepared 108 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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." — Fenelon to the King of France, Sept. 5, 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 without 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. 11. 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 retainers in 1601. " 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 so 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 daies, mense Augusti 1601, xxxix s iii d . . . . For makinge readie the Lord Marques (of Winchester) his house at Basynge by the space of xiiij en dayes mense Septembris 1601, xiij 1 ' x s iiij d . For makeinge ready the Lord Sandes house at the Vyne for the french Ambassadors by like tyme mense pred', en xiij 1 ' etc. For makinge readie a standinge in Basynge P'ke for two dayes dco mense co xxiv s ." — Accounts of the Treasurer of the Chamber of the Household, E. L. T. R. Series 1, 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 little 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, LAST WORDS ON QUEEN'S HEALTH 109 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'Aleneon." 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 thirty 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 dinner 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." * Corresp. Dip. de F&nilon, torn. v. p. 83, Aug. 7, 1572. t P. R. O., Baschet MSS., Bundle 33, purple p. 260. no PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH the 1 6th of May Rowland Whyte writes to Sir Robert Sidney : " Her Majestie 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 wrought 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 itself, 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 writ 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, 1 is false.'' Yet her Majestie rose and dawnced : . . ." A year previous, in September, 1599, the Scottish Am- bassador, Semple 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 and " took great pleasure in the ball and music . . . (and said) that in her youth she danced very well . . . when her girls are 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.j P. R. O., Bundle 30, p. 235. LAST WORDS ON QUEEN'S HEALTH in 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 mornynge, 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 manners. 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.y vol. ii. p. 386. t " One of the precursors of the minuet." — Cent. Diet. ii2 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH " 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 ruffs of several stories ; buckramed sleeves and skirts ; hoops both high and inflexible ; extravagant trains and stiff shoes, also stiff er 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 hunts. 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 conjunction 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. CHAPTER VII THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE jA T the end of Chapter I., we stated that the severest / r ^> trials of Elizabeth's whole life, its most dangerous / — ^ situations and most delicate decisions, came upon -*- JL her in the nine years between the close of the Seymour 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 ii 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 VIII. '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. THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 115 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 with the spurious summons from the dead brother, for Elizabeth at Hatfield, and Mary at Hunsdon. 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 young 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 wily 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 prisoner. 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 n6 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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. THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 117 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 IH.p.iiz; September 20th, ISS3« n8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 119 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 circumstances. 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 forgiven times beyond number in the wild 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 convincing 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 120 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 121 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 woiald 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, 122 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 123 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, 1553), 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,f if indeed she possessed any after the long illness * Med. Rec. No. iqaa. f 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 detailed*— 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. . . .AH which has confirmed the 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 i2 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 anaemic 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 Ashridge. 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 time9 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 without 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 beginning of this illness that Mumby refers to (The Girlhood of Queen Elizabeth, 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. THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 125 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 would 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 South wark. 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 126 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Noailles,the French Ambassador, 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 then* 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 sufH- * The Medical Record gives a consecutive account of these facts in Nos. 14c to 26, inclusive. THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 127 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 shamefullest 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 i 2 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 18, 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 129 skull remained. A descent into Avernus 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, another 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 urgings 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 accompanying 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 off her head the moment she was within the frowning walls. 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 K i 3 o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 hypocrisy 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 131 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 off 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 windows. 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 England. 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, 1 32 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 receive 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 toward * 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. THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 133 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, j 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. f 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 afternoone 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 inner Courte, and alighted oute off hyr lytter at the hall doore . . . ffrm whence she passed directlye to hyr lodgyng, from the which she sturred not untyll she had supped ... at hir 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 whych tyrae she sturred notte that nyght." i 3 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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's arrival, Bedingfield reports to the Council that Elizabeth is afflicted with " swellyng in the visage at certayn tymes." — (Med. Rec. No. 19). Upon the22nd 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 a fortnight previous. Uponthe25th 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 quenes 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 135 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 offset 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 Protestantism. 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 comynge ; 136 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 ty dings," 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 137 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, 1 557, 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 Wyatt. 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 anything 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 138 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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, THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 139 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 immediate. 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. 140 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Elizabeth 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 141 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 yield. 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 142 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 withered 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 affair 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 143 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 therefore 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, surrounded 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 with 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 different places as the conspirators approached, and, upon paper, success appeared almost certain ; but treachery 144 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 snaviter 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 both. 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 ■8> O o (i G -J 5 Ol - «o - to p giS- 3 — o- wo i 9 (6 T3 ^ > a 3 n sjD: »0) w 3 <*5 00 «S Q-rt »3 ■ 3-0 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 145 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 son, 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 danger. 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 L 146 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH prepared to risk the loss of throne to obtain her personal security. 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 him 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 common sense reasserted control of her judgment ; she was saved, and so was England, Great Britain, and the British Empire. 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 Savoy. 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 147 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 forces. 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 England. 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 forever put an end to Britain's dominion across the seas — that dominion which 148 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 throne. 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 twenty-four. 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 Elizabeth 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 ! * " They say 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 THE SEYMOUR AFFAIR TO THE THRONE 149 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 under 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 her. More than all this, however, she had been educated in the actual conduct of the most nerve-shaking, the most dangerous, Ambassador De Silva to Philip, 7th of August, 1564, Co/, S.P. S Simanca$, p. 373- 150 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH the most critical affairs of life. She had been humbled by disgrace, by slander, and by libel, to which she could offer no effective defence, from which she could only suffer 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 suffered 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- five. CHAPTER VIII THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 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. ... 7 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 Organization of Man and Woman, Campbell, M.D., B.S., p. 200. 152 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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, 10th June, 1602. Baschet Trans. P.R.O. , Bundle No. 33. THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 153 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 presumptious folly, by which they are thus led to meddle with what nowise belongs to them,andwhat is beyond the compass of their understanding." 154 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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's History of the Presbyterians, p, 330. THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 155 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. Religion 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 with 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. 156 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 157 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 to the qualities of her heart and of her understanding." The Swedish Ambassador in London, after many 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 reasonable. 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. i 5 8 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 dispotition 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 habitation aha junto a su camera, pretestendo que la que tenia era mal sana. The original THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 159 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), in 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 alcoba, 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 affection. 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 i6o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 resume 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 habitation alta junto a su camera, pretestendo que la que tenia era mat sana " — very soon developed a different aspect, and one much more suspicious ; for while Lingard said that Leicester was given una habitation, Froude cited the original Spanish as un aposento,\ Carvajal gave un cuarto, and the Spanish official publication of the phrase agreed with Froude's un aposenio.% 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 mat 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 " por ser mas sano que el que tiene abajo " ; while the official Spanish text reads • " Era tan publica la voz de que Isabel tenia relaciones estrechisimas con Robert, que en una de las audiencias que did ella al embajador Cuadra, tratd de sincerarse manifestdndole toda le disposition de su Camara y alcoba, persuadi- e'ndole que eran calumnias infundadas todos aquellos rumores." — Memorial de la Real Academia de la Historia, vol. vii. p. 284. f Froude, vol. vii. ed. 1863, note on p. 338. X Coleccion de Documentos Iniditos Para La Historia De Espafia, tomo lxxxvii. p. 339. THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH i6i " por ser mas sano que el que el tenia abajor 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 tune to refer to this matter, was not printed until nine years after Lmgard published his version. Froude worked at bimancas 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 ot 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 m 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." i 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 Embassador de Quadra did actually, on the 12th of April, 1561 tfnte a letter to Philip, in which these words occur : " Lord Robert's discontent has ended in her giving him an apart- nent in the story near her own, as it is healthier than the one ie 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 nihp (probably the marchioness of Winchester), describing 1 strong colours the dissolute manners both of Elizabeth, and er court," did not yield any more satisfactory evidence than ha E La d SX°R d eiJ?A 0rd * X *° rt ° * *! *" P aSadoS *> P a ^do en que noa^doueilte^ln^ "" T^ ^. lo ^ojunto al suyo, par ser mds "3i 3 flsa ^ Tsr» ;CW ^ : ^~ > » tz ^ •~*> ^ ^3 IT- 3 f ^5^3^c-,5 A = -*> 5r3 ^ =3 / THE DIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 189 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. CHAPTER IX THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 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 accompanying 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 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 190 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 191 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 leaves." 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 Valladolid, 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 canndt 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 i 9 2 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH to Lingard that he has not found the name of the Camerera mayor, and on the 16th 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 Sherburne ; nor is any correspondence or trace of her to be found in the official publication of the Spanish THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 193 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 16th 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 myth 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 o i 9 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 limit it, i.e. to sexual indulgence. It was not so limited 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 publique 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, 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." —Osborne, Memoirs, 1658 ed. p. 60. Again, on p. 31, idem, Osborne says : " Now because the generality of such as desired his (Essex's) THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 195 mine 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 thought 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, 161 6, 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 liar convicted by his own admissions." — iii. p. 141. i 9 6 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 18th 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 10th of May, iS59i Cal. S. P., Simancas, vol. i. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 197 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 very 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 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 country 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 little 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 198 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH — " 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 resume 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 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." 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 ambition. The resume 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 the 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. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 199 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 Galli, Card, of Como, to Ormanetto, Bishop of Padua, Nuncio in Spain, Rome, 29th January, 1576^ 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 foundation — 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. 601. f 76irf.vol.ix.fol.8i. 200 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH judgment she might t 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 his ambassador THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 201 here and latterly upon himself 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 (Alencon. — 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 Alengon, his brother, that that monarch would not join a proposed coalition of nations against her. Castelnau de Mauvissiere, 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 Alengon " one which was of more importance than any, namely, that it was said thzt he (Alengon. — F. C.) had had illicit relations with her." Mauvissiere 's exact purpose in saying this to Spain we cannot certainly decide — but, as we shall see, Mauvissiere did not * De Quadra to the King of Spain, from London, 7th Feb., 1563, C.S.P., Simancas, vol. i. 1558-1567, p. 299, No. 2x1. 202 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 place. In addition to this knowledge of the ambassador's belief that Elizabeth was innocent, we are quite justified in dismissing this particular charge, because Mauvissiere himself, even according to Elizabeth's bitterest enemy, Mendoza, did no more than assert that it was said that immoral relations had existed. 9. Charge 24. — Anthony Bagot's letter to his father to the effect that " 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." Date uncertain, given by some as 1581, by others as 1587. In the former year, the Queen was forty-seven ; in 1587 she was fifty-four. 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 PlantagenetyfiliusQ.E.reg.etRobt.comitisLeicestr.' . . . 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 203 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., M.A., present Librarian of The Schools, Shrews- bury, informs us that H. W. M. who signs this comment " is obviously Mr. Moss, the 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." 2o 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Scots." 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 will 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 examination. 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. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 205 We shall now examine these eight Charges which we have said to be serious : 1. 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 disprove 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 resume 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 206 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH in the year when his book was published, 1832 — 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 156 1, 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, Nuncio for Scotland, from Rome, 2nd July, 1567. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 207 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 Elizabeth 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 208 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 many him because he had a wife already. Although he has no wife 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 Office 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 different 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 ^ m mrrn Q & H. Wv S r7 ^ ^ ;' >, * £ '3 C £ ** % £ X ^ to ^ THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 209 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 accusation. 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 P 2io PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH concerns your honour . . . will never be known 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 211 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 II., 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 212 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH safeguards, must be content to forfeit the reputation, of chastity." 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 himself. 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 likely 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 213 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 commonly misled English readers. We refer to the employment of the words " intimacy " and " misconduct." To the mind of the average Englishman 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 not indicated in one of two ways, i.e. 1, 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, 109. t Privanza, sf. Favour, protection, familiar 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. Privanza, sf. Favour ; protection ; intimacy. 2i 4 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH or tertian' 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 " — . 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 cfe:: of her , and persuade her not to abandon business :'.y but to look to her realm ; . . . " hat warrant is there for leading us to suppose that de Quadra meant to suggest illicit relations 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. I _- confusion, irregularity, misorder. 2. Disc: : - . Lawlessness, licence, excess, abuse. Desordenes, in. i. Disorder, confusion, irregularity. 2. Lawlessness, licence, excess, abase. 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 --.: V .-..-•■ :: 'z ■-:.'.. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 215 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 anything in the entire ge 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 familiar:: 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 : 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 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 defended.* 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 S< tary Cecil whom I knew to be in disgrace. Lord Robert I was aware was endeavouring to deprive him of his place. " With little difficult}- I led him to the subject ; and, after • PiirCaHirafljpi R» a typical ciMnu fe of homlmt m by this Calendar translation : " Cecil, it (the de Q letter) asserts, desired the ambassador to intervene and reduce his ■ to die path of virtue.'' — Vol. ii. p. cjfa. 216 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 with 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 Catherine 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 Fenelon, French Am- bassador in London. Catherine, mother of the King, Charles IX., and of Anjou (afterward Henry III.) and Alencon, 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 57 1, 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. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 217 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 Fenelon 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 anything. 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. 218 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH " and I told him it is all the hurt that evil men can do to noble women 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 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 cannot learn 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 immoral. 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 only 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 Harl. 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 born about seven years later than his sovereign, * Notes and Queries, vol. vii. 2nd Ser., p. 283, number of 2nd April, 1859. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 219 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 Quene beleve that his sicknes came because of ye continiaunce of hir displeasure towardes him, so that unles she would forgyve 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. f Lodge, HI., vol. ii. p. 101. 220 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 will 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 dealing 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 help you.' Whereas, if you adopt my plan, and stop all public 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 mouth 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 221 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 win 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 England. 222 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 223 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 their 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.jfitrid., ed. 1680, p. 346. 224 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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." THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 225 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 protege 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 zvhich 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."— La Reine Virge Elizabeth d'Angleterre, p. 161, M. Capefigue Paris, 1863. Q 226 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 examples 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 fancied." 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 ad infinitum. 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." THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 227 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 all 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 tXIC w.,,^^ Is there a word in u^ rest that forbids us to read it as meaning that after Hatton had mu 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 with 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 will find Elizabeth guilty are prepared to go. The first man to publish the Dyer-Hatton letter was 228 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 *■- ^aKe Mr. Edward Dier as great as ever w?- "*«- ton *» f° r now, in this tyme of Hatton's sick^— » tne tvme is convenient. . . . Theise thinges I ler^ ^ 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 Rhapsody, by Francis Davison ; vide Dyer's biography by Nicolas, p. lxxy. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 229 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 public 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 Elizabeth's 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, G.C,M,G, 230 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 been, 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 sexual 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 manner — 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 when 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 231 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 until his death when they were fifty-five. He is supposed to be one of two procureurs, he whose single alleged claim 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 a procureur ! 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 . . . joyfully ... 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 232 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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) ? j^ea, 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 THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 233 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 sake. 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 */ 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. (Undated.) The fourth and last letter is dated the 10th 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 234 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 this 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 countrymen 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. THE DIRECT CHARGES CROSS-EXAMINED 235 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 innocence 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. CHAPTER X THE INDIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 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." % Other ambassadors reported that Leicester and not Burghley managed affairs. 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. X Idem, p. 344. 236 INDIRECT CHARGES AGAINST ELIZABETH 237 positions through their Queen's inordinate affection for them— and the large majority of men and *11 women have become convinced that this affection was not of an innocent character. Those w u\r A****** *+&* 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 Lingard 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. Would 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 Froude 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 bv us. . . . No. 8. Elizabeth's declaration when she was be- lieved to be in extremis, " that although she loved and had always loved Lord Robert dearly, as God was her witness, nothing improper had ever passed between them." 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- saries." Hume, M.A.S. Poulard Richardson 278 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH Defence No. 10. Cited only by Aikin LlNGARD Strickland 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 has sent him 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, Fen61on, 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 HOW ELIZABETH WAS CONVICTED Defence 279 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 impurity." 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 immoral 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 the 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. Mauvissiere, the exceedingly informed Strickland Frenchman who for ten years was his Turner country's Ambassador at Elizabeth's Court, says in his Metnoires : " 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 2 8o PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH defences each of the eleven authorities has exhibited to its readers : Authority Creighton Froude • • • 55 ,, . . . . . • • • 5» Hume, M. A. S. • • 55 LlNGARD • ' 55 ?> • • • • • ,, . . . . . • • • )> Pollard • • • 55 Richardson ji • • • • • • ' >> Strickland • • • 55 »» • • 55 3i „ Strype „ Turner • • • 55 „ • • * 55 ,, . . . . . • • 55 ,, . . . . . Wright • • • 55 • • • 55 Defence offered Our Number 10 55 5 5 55 > 4 55 5 7 55 5 J> 5 15 8 55 > , i »> 5 3 » < 4 55 5 , 10 8 8 >> 5 i5 It 5 17 » 3 5> ) 4 55 > 5 10 5> 3 H » 1 19 55 i >5 5 3 16 55 5 55 ) 17 18 55 1 J 9 55 J 3 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 HOW ELIZABETH WAS CONVICTED 281 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 ? APPENDIX CONTENTS PAGE 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 xpmas day . . . 1578 322 Note i MEDICAL RECORD OF QUEEN ELIZABETH (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 1517, 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. Henry took Anne Boleyn for his next wife, and about nine months afterward Elizabeth was born. 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 15 19 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 tell 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 down with a prolonged illness, and never had good health thereafter. Her colour was invariably sallow, and for many years she was never free Irom headache and palpitation of the heart. (Venetian Cal. i553-4> 532-) « Some personal infirmities under which she labours are the 285 286 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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, 2 Ser. II. 236. The above-quoted article in the B.M.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 amenorrhea. 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 object. "Henry VIII. suffered many years before his death from a • sorre legge,' . . ." — Annals 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, 185 1) 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 APPENDIX 2 8 7 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 error. 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 anv 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. 288 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Sinful 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 17 16 published in his book Sylloge Epistolarum (the first collection of English State Letters) — in the form of an ordinary letter with 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 (!) 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." (185 1 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 Hearne's example, and merely prints the dedication in the guise of a separate letter, referring for his authority only to Miss Wood's Letters of APPENDIX 2 8 9 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 Soide," but the title written in the original MS. in the hand of Elizabeth, " Ye Miroir of the Synnefull Soule." (Cf. first edition of original French work, published at Alencon, 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 Review 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. 1 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 19 16 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, 1544— 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 154a, at Marburg. That there are verbal differences between the M&. 2Q0 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH 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 Kingdom, 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 expect, 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 clauses " 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 playfulness 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 APPENDIX 29I TZa he A ori 8 inaI no * knew wh ere it was-in the British Museum Mbb. A more modern writer, Mumby, in The Girlhood of Queen 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 well 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 (15^). 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 liking 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 Elisabetta, 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, i$37- 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 health, I should have accounted myself happy m learning news of you from the letters of the King, my father. 1 feel 292 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH the greatest pleasure in learning that your Majesty is well and that the country pleases you. I also thank 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 born 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 15J7 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 only source, Hearne, as infra — " your grace being so sickly," which Mumby with even greater reserve softens into " your 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 " ... l'etat d'une grossesse aussi avancee," 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, cosi avanzata nella gravidanza. Thus there is not the slightest APPENDIX 293 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 sufficient condemnation of the 1557 one, for it is scarcely worth 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 Must. 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 i.im only half a century or so after Elizabeth's death, have become the foundation of all the later histories of the Elizabethan 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 294 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH the Biographie Universale. 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 would 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 know — 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 with 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 July," for he was born upon the following 1 2th 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 that 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 July " — 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, torn. i. p. 189, 1693 ed.) with the simple remark that " she fell ill, and died the 20th of September, to the great regret of her husband." (The exact date of Katherine's demise was, however, thirteen days APPENDIX 295 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 Elizabeth'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. 1, 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. 1, 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 turning-point of Elizabeth's whole life, when almost in a day she changed from a strong girl into a weak, anemic one, who was never robust again except for short periods, we are under obligation to offer 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 knowing 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. 1,2, and 3- the three Ashley statements. All of these items bore dates except Nos 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 , 12, 13, and 14-aU letters of Elizabeth herself. This feft the"se students only with two dated letters or statement referring to this illness, namely, Nos. 10 and 11 both dated wi thin a week of one another, in September, I55 o ; and they knew of no other mention of illness thereafter for more than three years, when came So 14., December, x 5 53. This gave them an approximate 296 PRIVATE CHARACTER OF QUEEN ELIZABETH date (September, 1550) for the termination of this severe sickness. But what of its beginning ? There they despaired. Miss Strickland met the difficulty 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 resuming her studies, which she had been compelled to abandon on account 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 little 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 Elizabeth 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." J 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. 185 1, pp. 47, 48. t The Court and Times of Queen Elisabeth. X Letters of Roy. and Illust, Ladies, vol. iii. p. 231. Note preliminary to Letter No. CI I. APPENDIX 297 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 also 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 Encyclop 295. 3°i» 302, 310, 317 Ashndge, 19, 44, 45, 91, 123, 125, 307, 308 Asmodeus, 164 Astle, Thomas, F.A.S., 306 Atocha, The, 315 Attainder, Bill of, 4 Auger, Bartholomew, 177, 178 Austria, 119, 120, 150, 179, 258, 259, 265, 266, 267 Babington, The Conspiracy of, 120, 250 Bacon, Anthony, 252 Bacon, Franci9, 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, 133. 134. 135. 136, 139. HO Beesley, Prof. Edward Spencer, xii, 33, 245, 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, 108 327 328 INDEX Blackfriars, 109 Blackfriars, The (Theatre), 242 Blanche, Mestrys, 42 Blenheim, 133 Blois, 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, 1, 2, 4, 26, 27, 28, 36, 37, 129, 285 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 Bronte, 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 Burndwood, 173 Burnell, Anne, 318 Buxton, ix Cadena, 213, 214 Cadiz, viii, ix, 253 Caesar, Julius, xiv, 17 Calais, 148, 272 Cambridge, city of, 54 Cambridge, University 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 Carlyle, 84 Carrye, Mrs., 306 Carte, 34 Carvajal, Don, Tomas Gonzales, 160, 161, 1 88, 192, 204, 205, 206, 207 Case, 243 Castlenau. See Mauvissiere Castile, Adelantado of, 73 Catesby, 70 Catherine of Aragon, 28, 36, 37, 39, 118,285 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, 51, 54, 55. 57, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 138, 142, 155, 156, 157. 169, 175, 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, 278 Chapuys, 15 Charles, Archduke of Austria, 178, 197, 198, 256, 258, 259, 265-7, 277 Charles V, The Emperor, 44, 45, 121, 123, 124, 125, 130, 132, 138, 259 Charles IX, King of France, 180, 181, 216, 217, 257, 258, 261, 268 Charnocke, 325 Chaucer, 25 Cheke, John, 23 Chelsea, 3 Cheshunt, 296 Chester, 184 Cheston, 41, 301 Cheyneys, 59 Chipline, 179 Christchurch, 308 Cicero, 24 Cleves, Anne of, 2, 28 Clowes, 81 Cobham, Lady, 51, 163 Cobham, Lord, 74, 313 Coke, Mr., 174 Collijn, Dr. Isak, xvi Cologne, city of, 314 Cologne, Elector of, 314, 315 Como, The Cardinal of. See Galli Congreve, Richard, xii, 245 Conningesby, Richard, 108 Constantine, 17 Corderius, 17 Cornwallis, Sir Thomas, 46 Cotton, 70 Council, The, vii, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 42, 47, 48, 52, 7°> "4» 127, 128, 130, 131, 134, 144, 153, 155, 156, 173, 179, 184, 246, 310, 311, 315, 318, 323. 324 INDEX 329 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, 155. 164, 185, 193, 194, 202, 225, 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 Doran,Aiban,F.R.C.S.,xvi,77,82-9 Dormer, Sir William, 133 Dove, Anne, 172, 173, 174, 175, 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. 6°> 6l » °4» 6 5, 66, 67, 69, 108, 113, 115, 153, 155, 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 164, 169, 170, 172, 173, 174. 175. 176, 177. 178, 179, 180, 183, 184, 185, 187, 188, 191, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200, 202, 205, 206, 207, 208, 213, 214- 16, 219, 225, 228, 229, 23O-3I, 236-48, 251, 252, 253, 254, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 262, 265-8, 280, 309, 311, 313, 314, 3l6, 317 Dudleys, The, 309 Durham, 191 Durham Place, 5 Dychar, John, 188, 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, 3°8, 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, 212, 310, 314, 315, 316 Enneley, John, 177, 178 Erick XIV, King of Sweden, 200, 201, 263, 278 Essex, Robert, second Earl of. See Devereux Essex, Walter, first Earl of. See Devereux Etheldreda, 36 Eu, 312 Evesham, 170, 311 Exeter, Duke of, 86 Exeter, town of, 176 Farnham, 307 Faunt, 164 Felton, Mrs., no F6nelon, Bertrand de Salignac de la Mothe, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 88, 108, 216, 217, 262, 267, 26S, 278 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, 262, 311, 312, 313, 315 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, 153, 197, 216-17, 239, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 267, 311, 312, 313, 3i4. 3*5i 317 330 INDEX Froude, J. A., v, vi, vii, xii, xiii, xiv, 34, 148, 157, 160, 161, 216, 240, 242, 270, 287 Gage, 47, 134 Galen, 81 Galli, Ptolemey, Cardinal of Gomo, 184, 199, 269 Gardiner, Lord Chancellor, 122, 125, 131 Gardiner, S. R., 195 Garrerd, Robert, 51 Garrerd, Mrs. Robert, 51 Gawen, 313 Geneva, 300 Geoffrey-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, William, 23, 297 Guaras, Antonio de, 59, 62, 63, 64, 183 Guilderstern, Nicholas, 52, 264, 265, 278 Guildford, 307 Guise, Duke of, 312 Guispuscoa, 169, 315 Guntor, John, 184, 322-5 Hague, The, 73 Hampton Court, 33, 58, 63, 72, 87, 88, 89, 105, 138, 141, 170, 307, 3io, 3i7 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, 257,296,301,303,304,305,306 Hat ton, Sir Christopher, xv, 68, 164, 166, 167, 180, 183, 204, 218-31, 248, 254, 269, 278 Haynes, 301 Hayward, Sir John, 49 Hearne, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292 Hendley, Robert, 176 Heneage, Thomas, 311 Henry II, of France, 119, 122, 141, 143 Henry III, of France, 156 Henry IV, of France, 72, 73, 157, 194, 271, 279 Henry V, of England, 86 Henry VIII, of England, vi, vii, xiv, 2, 3, 8, 13, 15, 21, 26, 27, 28, 36, 37, 38, 39, 4°, 83, "4, "8, 122, 285, 286, 291, 292, 294, 295, . 303, 304 „ Hentzner, 71, 87, 97, 98 Herbert, Lord, 109, 11 1 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 Holborn, 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 Hunger ford, Edward, 324 Hungerford, Sir Walter, 324, 325 Hunsdon, 115 Huntington, Earl of, 50, 53, 314 316 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, 105, 106, no, 117, 148, 183, 198, 316 Jessopp, A., 297 John, Duke of Finland, 263 Johnston, Robert, 75 Jorba, 213, 214 Joseph, 227 INDEX 331 Katharine (an attendant), 88 Keith, Sir Arthur, xvi, 93-104, 151 Kelling, Simon, 87 Kellwaye, 87 Keralio, Mile de, 35 Killigrew, Henry, 66, 167 Kingston, 51, 64, 87 Kirk, Rev. J., xiii, xiv Knoles, 168 Knox, John, 210 Kyernbek, Martin, 52 Kyng, Betterys, 175 Kyng, John, 174, 175 Labanoff, Prince, 166, 208, 209 Lamport, Hugh, 323 Latimer, 13 Laud, Archbishop, 218, 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 of Lemon, Robert, 301 Lennox, Countess of, 167 Lennox, Duke of, 73 Lenton, Jon, 168 Leontes, 85 Lethington, 51, 55 Leti, Gregorio, 291, 292, 293-5 Lincoln, Abraham, 135 Lingard, John, vii, xiii, xiv, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165-171, 187, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 205, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211,257,317 Lisbon, 252 Lisles, The, 238 Littlecote, 325 Livius, Titus, 24 Livy, 299 Llanfear, Casde 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* *99> 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, 12, 13, 15, 25, 34, 36, 37, 39, 4°, 45, 46, 47, 48, 76, 91, 113, 114, 115, "6, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 155, 285, 309, 318 Mary, Queen of France, 114 Mary, Queen of Hungary, 134, 138 Mason, 51 Mather, 179 Maurice, Prince of Orange, 194 Mauvissiere, Michel de Castlenau, 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, 4°, 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, *44 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 dc, 267 Montero, Dr. Juan, xvi Montserrate, 169, 314, 3 J 5 More, Sir Thomas, 23, 25 Morgan, Thomas, 69 Morton, Mistress, 48 Moss, H. W., 203 Motisfont, 308 Mountjoy, Lord. See Blount Mumby, 288, 289, 291, 292, 293, 295, 298, 299, 300 Mundt,Sir Christopher, 255-7, 265, 276, 278 332 INDEX Murdin, 159, 165, 166 Murray, Lord of, 55, 248 Museum, The British, xiv, 21 Napoleon, xiv, 14, 17 Naunton, 249, 270 Navarre, Henry of (later Henry IV), 252 Needham, Dr., 86 Netherlands, viii, x, 62, 70, 103, 237, 239, 241, 245, 246, 247, 251, k 253,311,313 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 Noailles, Francois de, 46, 47, 123, 126, 127, 143, 145, 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, 163 Northampton, Marquis of, 60 Northumberland, Duke of, 113, 114, 115, 116, 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, 199 Osborne, Franci?,i64, J 93, 194, *95> 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, 265 Parker, Matthew, 180 Parliament, The, vi, 4, 49, 52, S3, 62, 143, 146, 147, 153, 154, 188, 30S 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, 135, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 152, 159, 161, 162, 170, 172, 179, 185, 190, 191, 192, 193, 196, 199, 200, 201, 205, 211, 212, 238, 239, 253, 259, 260, 262, 269, 277, 3I5-I8 Picardy, 272 Pickering Place, 311 Pole, 51 Pollard, Prof. A. F., 34, 294 Pope, The, 117, 155, 157, 197. 199, 200, 206 Portman, Sir Hugh, 73 Portsmouth, 308 Portugal, 132, 252 Powell and Tout, 34 Prestal, 51 i Public Record Office, 301 Pynnock, John, 184, 322, 323 Pythagoras, 17 Quadra, Alvarez, Bishop of Aquila, 50, 51, 52, 53, 88, 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 175, 193, 201, 205, 206, 207, 212-16, 259, 260, 269, 277 Rae, James, M.D., 75, 286 Ralegh, Sir Walter, viii, xv, 164, 193, 195, 240, 241, 242, 252, 254 Randolphe, Thomas, 51, 55, 56, 58 Ratcliff, 312, 313 Reading, 70, 308 Redman, 179 Reformation, The, v Renard, Simon, 44, 45, 47, 122, 123, 125, 126 Rewes, Thomas, 322, 324 Rich, L., 175 Richard III, 85 INDEX 333 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, I5°i *74, 190, 197, i99> 234 Romsey, 178 Rosalind, 88 Ross, Bishop of, 61 Rouen, 252 Royal Institution of Great Britain, xvi Russell, Mrs. Anne, no Ruxby, 168 Ryche, R., 173 Ryde, 324 Rye, Walter, 184, 185, 187, 188, 202-4 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, 155, 262 St. Paul's Cross, 155 St. Paul's, Dean of, 155 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, 145, 146 Scandal Letter of Mary Stuart, 166, 208-12 Scotland, vi, 103, 119, 1981 262, 272, 314 . , Semple of Beltreis, Lord, 72. n° Seoane, 213 Sequeira, Dr. J. H., 102 Seymour, Thomas, the Admiral, 1, 2,3.4.5.6,7,8,9,10,11, 12,13, 16, 23, 25, 26, 28, 30, 36, 42, 84, 113, 114, 128, 129, 14s, 148, 294, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300 Seymour, Jane, 2, 28, 285, 294 Seymour (One), 314 Seymour, Edward, the Protector - 4, 5,7,8 11, 13, 17, l8l 10,41; 42, 83, 84, 113, 114, I2 8, 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, 203 Shrewsbury, Countess of, 68, 166-9, 179, 209, 210, 211 Shrewsbury, Earl of, 64, 65, 68, 89, 106, 211, 219, 228, 244, 313 Shrewsbury Free School of, 1S7, 188, 202, 203, 204 Shrewsbury, Vicar of, 18S, 202 Shynfield, John, 323 Sidney, Sir Philip, 25, 219, 229, 242,252 Sighen, 314 Silva, Guzman de, 54, 55, 149, 17S, .179, 197, 198, 259, 265, 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, 8S, 89, 181, 248, 257, 258, 261, 276 Smith-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, 119, 120, 121, 142, 143, 150, 193, 199, 200, 201, 239, 241, 253, 259, 262, 310, 314, 317 Speaker, The, 53, 153, 154 Spenser, The Poet, 242, 251, 254 Spes, Guerau de, 59, 62 Stafford, Edward, 312 Stanhope, Sir John, 111 Stevenson, J., 288 Stockholm, 263 Strangford, Lord, 306 Strasburg, 23 Strickland, Agnes, 31, 32, 286, 2S7, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 295, 296, 297, 29S, 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, 51, 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, ioo, 334 INDEX ng, 120, 135, 146, 159, «65-9» 183 197, 198, 206, 208-12, 223, 24s', 247, 248, 250, 272, 314, 315 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, 225, 228, 230, 231, 244 Talbot, Lady, 168 Talbot, Lord, III 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, 245, 252 Tilbury, Castle of, 154 Totnes, 176 Totnes, Mayor of, 170 Tower of London, The, 4, 6, 8, 42, 47, 50, "6, 122, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 138, 139, 144, 145. 154,176,183,195.198,211,214, 238, 324 __ Traitors' Gate, The, 129, 131 Tresham, 70 Tyrone, 74 Tyrwhit, Lady, 4. i°» 16, 42, 3°° Tyrwhit, Sir Robert, 4, 5, 6, 7. 9, 10, 11,42 Tytler, 35 University 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. *5°> 194 Venice, Doge of, 49 Venice, Senate of, 49 Victoria University, 34 Vienna, 262 Vine, The (Hampshire), 108 Virgil, 17 Wales, 51, 31° . ... , Walsingham, Sir Francis, vm, x, 61, 64, 65, 68, 69, 88, 89, 155, 168, 181, 229, 236, 239. 240. 241, 242, 246, 251, 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. 7° Weston, Richard, 177 West Wyckham, 133 Whiffin, xvii Whitehall, Palace of, 125, 126, 197, 210 Whyte, John, 176 Whyte, Rowland, 71, no Wiatt, Sir Thomas, 45. ™3> 12 4> Wiese'ner, 288, 289, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300 Wikes, William, 178 Williams, Lord, 133 Williamson, Dr., xvii Willoughby.Lady, 50, 5i Willson, Capt., 313 Wilton, 184, 308 Winchester, town of, 308 Winchester, Marquis of, 108 Winchester, Marchioness of, 159, 161, 19° n a Windsor Castle, 64, 65, 68, 108, 1 25, 132, 133, 307»3o8 Winter's Tale, 85 Woking, 307 Wood, Anthony &, xu, 243 Wood, Miss, 288, 289, 295, 296 Woodlands, 308 Woodstock, 48, 107, 133 Worcester, Earl of, 106 Wotton, 3" Wright, Thomas, 297 Wright, 70 Wriothesley, 15 Wyatt. See Wiatt Yarmouth, 179 York, city of 66 York, Richard, Duke of, 86 Zayas, 59, 60 SOME PRESS OPINIONS OF THE FIRST EDITION "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 value." — Saturday Review. " One of the most interesting and intriguing contributions to English history is Mr. Chamberlin's recently published ' 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 industry." — Westminster Gazette. " An absorbingly interesting study. . . . History of an extra- ordinary realistic nature." — To-day. " Amazing frankness."— Daily 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 original research." — Pall Mall Gazette. "This book is uncommonly interesting, and its industry deserves high praise."— New Statesman. QUEEN ELIZABETH'S MAIDS OF HONOUR And Ladies of the Privy Chamber By VIOLET A. WILSON 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." — Daily 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. *fcTt ^ ^ ^ -n* * 0o <" ^ V 5 ' \ A HI ^ ° ^ "% v* *+