Showing posts with label Charles V. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charles V. Show all posts

Sunday, 11 July 2010

Tuesday, 11 July 1553 – Confusion in Ipswich and an earl’s support is secured



Non aliena putes homini, quæ obtingere possunt:
Sora hodierna mihi, tunc erit illa tibi
.

Do never think it strange,
Though now I have misfortune,
For if that fortune change,
The same to thee may happen.

(Verse written by Jane Grey during her imprisonment in the Tower)



Whilst Mary was preparing to move to Framlingham, Thomas Wentworth, Baron Wentworth and his cousin Sir Thomas Cornwallis, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, received instructions from the Council to proclaim Jane queen in Ipswich. This they duly did though they soon learnt that Thomas Poley, a servant of Mary’s, had come to the town and announced her accession there. Standing in the market place, he boldly declared that Mary was the rightful queen and then gathered his men and fled. Poley had succeeded in not only alerting the people of Ipswich to Mary’s stand but in disturbing Cornwallis. Now he ‘had reached the crossroads’, as one contemporary put it. Clearly his heart was not fully with Jane’s cause and he had taken note of the sympathy for Mary amongst the people. Perhaps more importantly, his wife was a relation of Henry Jerningham, one of Mary’s most loyal allies. Quickly making up his mind he rode to Framlingham, reaching it the next day, and paid homage to Mary. It would take Wentworth another three days to come to the same conclusion.


Meanwhile in London men were called to assemble on Tothill Fields and ordered to guard the city against possible attack. The duke and fellow conspirators realised that Mary could be drawing upon significant support and prepared for the possibility that she may advance to London. This was the worst case scenario and not one the duke was prepared to happen. Hence he, along with the William Parr, marquess of Northampton and Francis Hastings, second earl of Huntingdon (whose son was married to Northumberland’s daughter) would ride out with armies to suppress Mary’s supporters. There is ambiguity about the exact date of the duke’s departure – the 12the to the 14th has been given – but it is clear that by this date he was preparing to muster forces and leave. Given that letters written on the 12th indicated that the men were ‘presently in the field’, it seems the 12th is the more likely date. Clearly the duke wanted to deal with Mary sooner than later.


In Spain, English diplomat Sir Richard Shelley had the hapless task of informing Mary’s cousin, Charles V, of the accession of Jane Grey and the unsuitability of Mary as a claimant. If Charles or Mary begrudged Shelley for completing this task they never showed it. He would remain in his position and two years later granted an annual income of £50 for life.


Mary had won the support of various gentlemen of the counties she was strongly affiliated to, including men of her household. Yet she had yet to secure the support of a prominent peer. All this was about to change. Sir John Huddleston, the same man who had housed Mary as early as the 4th, was busy recruiting support for his queen in local areas. He had heard that Robert Dudley was still operating with an army nearby, making him vigilant of individuals he encountered on the roads. Along the way he came across a young man of about twenty. The man was carrying letters to the Council in London detailing Mary’s activities. So far so good; Huddleston had acquired an excellent prize. But he quickly learnt that the man was more valuable than that. For he was none other than Henry, second son of Henry Radcliffe, second earl of Sussex. As Robert Wingfield would put it, ‘fortune was beginning to smile on scared Mary’s righteous undertaken’. Young Henry was quickly captured and a letter dispatched to his father detailing what would happen if he persisted in his support for Jane. Now the earl had to decide: his son or Queen Jane. For the earl it was not a particularly hard decision to make. Whilst the anxious earl wrote to his son’s captors and preparing to ride to Framlingham, young Henry was taken to Mary who was ‘thoroughly delighted with his arrival’. She had every reason to be.



(Image – Medal of Sir Richard Shelley by Bernardo Rantvic, 1577)

Monday, 5 July 2010

Wednesday, 5 July 1553 – The plotting continues




“...she made a difficult and tiresome journey, hurrying at the dead of night to the home of Sir John Huddleston in Cambridgeshire, where she spent the night.”

(Wingfield, The Vita Mariae Angliae Reginae, 1554)


Whilst Mary was fleeing into Cambridgeshire to seek support and get as far away from her enemies as possible, the duke of Northumberland and the King were busy trying to secure the support of the nobility. Later, when the plot failed, many alleged that they had been bullied into agreeing to the affair though their hearts had always been with Mary. Nevertheless only a few did make significant protests against the changes at the time. Happy to please their monarch and perhaps genuinely agreeing with him about how unfit Mary was to be queen, most signed the letters-patent that sought to legalise Edward’s ‘devise’ of the succession. Mary’s movements had not gone unnoticed nor did the duke trust that all in the realm would readily accept Jane as the queen. Thus in these crucial final moments, numerous fortresses, amongst them the Tower, were secured and troops accumulated. Mary could not even escape by sea for the duke had ensured that the royal fleets were assembled, ready to face any potential attacks from Mary’s relatives abroad and blockading Mary’s access to the same relations. Six of the nine ships were active around East Anglia, where the princess was based. Mary, the duke hoped, would prove to be the insignificant fly, tangled in the spider’s web.


Regardless of these developments, Mary did not resort to panic and take reckless decisions. The following evening she had travelled into Cambridgeshire and by the next day she was at the residence of Sir John Huddleston. But instead of confining the stay to a few hours, she spent the night of the 5th there, probably conversing with Sir John about a plan of action and ensuring which households she would go to next. Still she had no idea when her brother was to die and she could not be sure that the news would get to her quickly. She was also unaware of her cousin’s schemes. For while Mary was occupied with her fight for the throne, Charles V was directing his diplomats in London to try to come to some sort of agreement with the duke of Northumberland. Perhaps they could seek an agreement whereby Charles would agree to recognise Jane as queen if the duke promised not to form an alliance with the French. An Anglo-Imperial alliance was still obtainable if the duke was willing. Certainly a betrayal to Mary, but Charles had got wind of the duke’s talks with the French. Reports were now circulating that the duke was asking for French assistance in securing Jane’s accession and to reward them he would hand over Calais, England’s last territory in France. One wild report stated that he was even offering Ireland to the French. You must do anything to prevent this, Charles furiously wrote to his representatives (“You will take such steps as you think necessary to defeat the machinations of the French, and to keep them out of England”.) While these male leaders and diplomats conspired, the two women at the centre of this matter did not know how shortly they would have to wait to become queen. Indeed for one, then recovering from illness in Chelsea, she did not even know a crown was awaiting her.


(Image - Medal of Charles V, attributed to Hans Reinhart the Elder, c.1537; Leipzip, Germany. On display at the V&A, London)

Sunday, 4 July 2010

Tuesday, 4 July 1553 – Plotting at the “dead of night”



“....to escape as soon as possible from the jaws of her enemies, she set out secretly from Hunsdon, giving out as reason for her change of residence that her physician Rowland Scurloch, an Irishman born to a noble disposition and well-disposed to her friends, seemed to be gravely ill. From there she made a difficult and tiresome journey, hurrying at the dead of night...”

(Wingfield, The Vita Mariae Angliae Reginae, 1554)



In late 1141, a woman secretly escaped out of London in the middle of the night. Fighting to become England’s first female ruler, the lady had unfortunately worsened her cause and lost the support of the city. She fled in disgrace having failed to crush her enemies. She would never become queen.

The woman in question was Matilda, ‘Lady of the English’, the only legitimate child of Henry I. Unlike Henry VIII who went to extraordinary lengths to ensure he would not have a female succeed him, Henry I admitted defeat and left the throne to his last surviving legitimate child. But Matilda failed to become queen; instead a cousin, Stephen of Blois, took the throne and ruled until his death upon which Matilda’s heir, Henry of Anjou, became Henry II. When Matilda fled from London it was in defeat and when Mary Tudor rushed as far away from the same capital as she could in July 1553 some worried she too was giving up. The Imperial ambassadors, who represented her cousin Charles V at the English court, were beside themselves with worry. Her cause, they wrote to Charles, was ‘well-nigh impossible’ without military aid from abroad – in other words from himself. Without significant numbers of troops, the duke of Northumberland would succeed in establishing Jane Grey on the throne and Mary would end up captured, with heaven knows what else happening to her next. And surely Mary could never raise such troops on her own. If Charles did not help his cousin, her flight would be as pathetic as Matilda’s escapade.


When Mary fled secretly on the night of 4 July from Hunsdon it was not done in shame but committed in the belief that now she must act. She had decided that the throne was rightful hers and that regardless of the risks she would find the support she needed to press her claim by force. As the Imperial ambassadors remarked, “My Lady has firmly made up her mind that she must act in this manner, and that otherwise she will fall into still greater danger and lose all hope of coming to the throne”. Charles V may have been sitting on the fence waiting to see how she fared, and his representatives may have doubted her, but Mary would not admit defeat so easily.


Thus shrouded in darkness – she cunningly chose to leave in the very late hours – Mary travelled northwards throughout Hertfordshire. However troublesome and frightening the journey was for herself and her retinue of just six, they managed to escape unnoticed, heading for Swaston Hall the residence of Sir John Huddleston. Huddleston, a devout Catholic, was awaiting Mary’s arrival with much eagerness. An excellent host, Huddleston also proved an able commander. He would shortly take as prisoner the son of one of the highest peers in the land prompting the same nobleman to abandon Jane Grey and support the princess. When it came to friends, Mary was truly blessed.


(Image - Sawston Hall, Sawston, Cambridgeshire.)

Monday, 25 May 2009

Medal commemorating the restoration of England to Catholic Communion, 1554 – and possibly Mary’s ‘pregnancy’?



In November 1554, England was officially received back to the Catholic Church. It was the moment Mary had been waiting for and to have this officially confirmed by Cardinal Reginald Pole, a leading churchman, Englishman and close friend of Mary’s, made the event even more significant. It was that month that Pole, after nearly twenty years of exile, returned to England as the papal legate. Mary wished to install him as her archbishop of Canterbury although Thomas Cranmer was still alive at this point thus Mary had to wait till his execution to bestow this on Pole. Nonetheless she did reverse the act of attainder that has been passed against him during Henry VIII’s reign in the parliament that met on the 12th November 1554 [1]. On the 22nd November, Pole landed at Whitehall, having travelled in the royal barge, and met Mary on the steps of the palace. She was accompanied by her new husband Philip and ‘she received him with great signs of respect and affection; both shed tears’ (Porter, p. 331).





The medal depicted here was struck to commemorate England’s return to Rome and Pole’s arrival in England to instigate this. Pole formally absolved the realm of past transgressions on St Andrew’s Day, 30th November, and the ceremony was greeted with much solemnity and emotion by Mary, Philip and the Commons. Mary had achieved the restoration of the old religious order; in the words of her biographer, David Loades, it ‘must have been the greatest moment of her life’ (p. 240). The medal captures this personal triumph.


The medal, made by the Paduan medallist Giovanni Cavino in 1554, depicts an allegorical scene. The symbolic figure of Anglia is depicted knelling before the pope and raising her hand forth, which he supports. By her is Pole wearing full cardinal attire, and to the right of Pole is the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, who was Mary’s cousin, father-in-law and protector throughout much of her life. Charles had been deeply involved in organising Mary’s marriage to his son Philip and in supporting Mary’s decision to restore England to the Catholic Church, which resulted in his presence on the medal. To the right are Mary and Philip, both crowned. Mary’s eyes remain fixed on Anglia, whilst Charles and Philip look pleasantly on at Mary. Above the whole group are the words ‘ANGLIA RESURGES’ – ‘England, you shall arise’.


On the reverse of the medal is an image of Pope Julius III, the contemporary pope, who Mary enjoyed good relations with. Julius had confirmed Pole’s appointment to England and although he initially pressed for former monastic lands to be resorted to the Church, he eventually conceded that ‘it would be far better for all reasons human and divine, to abandon all the Church property [in England], rather than risk the shipwreck of this understanding’ (Whitelock, p. 247). Unfortunately for Mary, a prosperous relationship with the papacy would eventually cease in the last years of her reign owing to the anti-Habsburg policies of Paul IV. [2]


The commemorative tone of the medal is notable. However there is another message, one which is subtle and hopeful. This can be seen in the figure of Mary. Although it is hard to completely establish Mary’s physique owing to the baggy nature of her dress, it is evident that she is depicted with a round stomach which she draws attention by laying her hand upon. All books that I have come across that include an image of this medal overlook the possibility that the medal is also drawing attention to Mary’s ‘pregnancy’ of 1554/1555. Yet it was around the time of the ceremonies which installed England back to the Catholic Church that Mary confirmed her condition. Personal confirmation came on the very day when she greeted Pole on the steps of Whitehall. His first words upon seeing her were, ‘Hail, thou art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed are thou among women’. Pole later retired and was subsequently greeted by one of Mary’s messengers who claimed that the queen had felt the child in her womb quicken when Pole had spoken the words to her. Quickening, the first moments of the child in the womb, was regarded as a confirmation of pregnancy in the early modern period and also a sign that the child was still alive. For Mary, the possibility of a Catholic heir was a joyous prospect and meant the security of her religious policies. Hence allusions to her pregnancy were entirely appropriate on a medal celebrating England’s return to the Catholic Church. Her condition was made widely known by the end of that month, again indicating the possibility that this medal, created near the end of that year, was purposely drawing attention to her pregnancy.


Unfortunately for Mary, the joy turned to despair when the pregnancy revealed itself to be fake in the summer of 1555 [3]. And with this came significant concerns about the succession and thus the sustainability of her religious policies. However references to the future worries about the succession that would plague the rest of Mary’s reign are practically nonexistent in this insightful medal from Mary’s Annus Mirabilis.




The medal has been recently included in Eamon Duffy, Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Mary Tudor (New Haven and London, 2009), plate 4.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[1] The bill of attainder against Reginald Pole was passed on the 19th May 1539. In January of that year his brother, Henry, Baron Montagu had been executed for allegedly plotting against Henry VIII (and he too was included in the bill along with their mother, Margaret Pole). Reginald Pole was in the Observant Franciscan house of Montili at Carpentras when this occurred.

[2] Divisions between Paul IV and Mary were also created when the Pope pressed for Pole to be sent to Rome to be tried on charges of heresy. Mary ultimately refused and her refusal to do so contributed to Paul IV’s demonstrations of gratification when he learnt of her death in November 1558.

[3] Limited work has been done into Mary’s ‘pregnancies’, although historians mostly agree that she suffered from cases of pseudocyesis, otherwise known as ‘phantom pregnancy’, whereby an individual exhibits signs of pregnancy but is ultimately not pregnant. For an interesting discussion into the possible biological and psychological causes of this see Judith Richards, Mary Tudor (Oxon, 2008), p. 173.




References

Eamon Duffy, Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Mary Tudor (New Haven and London, 2009), pp. 43-5, plate 4.
David Loades, Mary Tudor: A Life (Oxford, 1992), pp. 237-40.
Linda Porter, Mary Tudor: The First Queen (London, 2007), p. 331-33.
Judith Richards, Mary Tudor (Oxon, 2008), pp. 169-73.
Anna Whitelock, Mary Tudor: England’s First Queen (London, 2009), pp. 247-53.