Mary, Queen of Scots

Mary, Queen of Scots (8 December 1542 – 8 February 1587), also known as Mary Stuart[3] or Mary I of Scotland, reigned over Scotland from 14 December 1542 to 24 July 1567.

For the Queen of England and Ireland during part of Mary's reign, see Mary I of England. For other uses, see Mary, Queen of Scots (disambiguation).

Mary Stuart
Portrait by François Clouet, c. 1558–1560
Queen of Scotland
Reign14 December 1542 – 24 July 1567
Coronation9 September 1543
PredecessorJames V
SuccessorJames VI
RegentsJames Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran
(1542–1554)
Mary of Guise
(1554–1560)
Queen consort of France
Tenure10 July 1559 – 5 December 1560
Born8 December 1542[1]
Linlithgow Palace, Kingdom of Scotland
Died8 February 1587(1587-02-08) (aged 44)[2]
Fotheringhay Castle, Kingdom of England
Burial30 July 1587
Peterborough Cathedral
28 October 1612
Westminster Abbey
Spouse
    ​
    (
    m. 1558; died 1560)
      ​
      (
      m. 1565; died 1567)
        ​
        (
        m. 1567; died 1578)
        IssueJames VI and I
        HouseStuart
        FatherJames V of Scotland
        MotherMary of Guise
        ReligionRoman Catholic
        Signature

        Mary, the only surviving legitimate child of King James V of Scotland, was six days old when her father died and she acceded to the throne. She spent most of her childhood in France while Scotland was ruled by regents, and in 1558, she married the Dauphin of France, Francis. Mary was queen consort of France from his accession in 1559 until his death in December 1560. Widowed, Mary returned to Scotland, arriving in Leith on 19 August 1561. Four years later, she married her half-cousin, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, and in June 1566 they had a son, James.

        In February 1567, Darnley's residence was destroyed by an explosion, and he was found murdered in the garden. James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell, was generally believed to have orchestrated Darnley's death, but he was acquitted of the charge in April 1567, and the following month he married Mary. Following an uprising against the couple, Mary was imprisoned in Loch Leven Castle. On 24 July 1567, she was forced to abdicate in favour of her one-year-old son. After an unsuccessful attempt to regain the throne, she fled southward seeking the protection of her first cousin once removed, Queen Elizabeth I of England.

        Mary had once claimed Elizabeth's throne as her own and was considered the legitimate sovereign of England by many English Catholics, including participants in a rebellion known as the Rising of the North. Perceiving Mary as a threat, Elizabeth had her confined in various castles and manor houses in the interior of England. After eighteen and a half years in custody, Mary was found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth in 1586, and was beheaded the following year at Fotheringhay Castle.

        Childhood and early reign

        Mary was born on 8 December 1542 at Linlithgow Palace, Scotland, to King James V and his French second wife, Mary of Guise. She was said to have been born prematurely and was the only legitimate child of James to survive him.[4] She was the great-niece of King Henry VIII of England, as her paternal grandmother, Margaret Tudor, was Henry VIII's sister. On 14 December, six days after her birth, she became Queen of Scotland when her father died, perhaps from the effects of a nervous collapse following the Battle of Solway Moss[5] or from drinking contaminated water while on campaign.[6]

        A popular tale, first recorded by John Knox, states that James, upon hearing on his deathbed that his wife had given birth to a daughter, ruefully exclaimed, "It cam wi' a lass and it will gang wi' a lass!"[7] His House of Stuart had gained the throne of Scotland in the 14th century via the marriage of Marjorie Bruce, daughter of Robert the Bruce, to Walter Stewart, 6th High Steward of Scotland. The crown had come to his family through a woman, and would be lost from his family through a woman. This legendary statement came true much later—not through Mary, but through her descendant Anne, Queen of Great Britain.[8]

        Mary was christened at the nearby Church of St Michael shortly after she was born.[9] Rumours spread that she was weak and frail,[10] but an English diplomat, Ralph Sadler, saw the infant at Linlithgow Palace in March 1543, unwrapped by her nurse, and wrote, "it is as goodly a child as I have seen of her age, and as like to live."[11]

        As Mary was an infant when she inherited the throne, Scotland was ruled by regents until she became an adult. From the outset, there were two claims to the regency: one from the Catholic Cardinal Beaton, and the other from the Protestant Earl of Arran, who was next in line to the throne. Beaton's claim was based on a version of the king's will that his opponents dismissed as a forgery.[12] Arran, with the support of his friends and relations, became the regent until 1554 when Mary's mother managed to remove and succeed him.[13]

        Treaty of Greenwich
        Gold coin of 1553: obverse, coat of arms of Scotland; reverse, royal monogram

        King Henry VIII of England took the opportunity of the regency to propose marriage between Mary and his own son and heir, Edward, hoping for a union of Scotland and England. On 1 July 1543, when Mary was six months old, the Treaty of Greenwich was signed, which promised that, at the age of ten, Mary would marry Edward and move to England, where Henry could oversee her upbringing.[14] The treaty provided that the two countries would remain legally separate and, if the couple should fail to have children, the temporary union would dissolve.[15] Cardinal Beaton rose to power again and began to push a pro-Catholic pro-French agenda, angering Henry, who wanted to break the Scottish alliance with France.[16]

        Beaton wanted to move Mary away from the coast to the safety of Stirling Castle. Regent Arran resisted the move, but backed down when Beaton's armed supporters gathered at Linlithgow.[17] The Earl of Lennox escorted Mary and her mother to Stirling on 27 July 1543 with 3,500 armed men.[18] Mary was crowned in the castle chapel on 9 September 1543,[19] with "such solemnity as they do use in this country, which is not very costly", according to the report of Ralph Sadler and Henry Ray.[20]

        Shortly before Mary's coronation, Henry arrested Scottish merchants headed for France and impounded their goods. The arrests caused anger in Scotland, and Arran joined Beaton and became a Catholic.[21] The Treaty of Greenwich was rejected by the Parliament of Scotland in December.[22] The rejection of the marriage treaty and the renewal of the alliance between France and Scotland prompted Henry's "Rough Wooing", a military campaign designed to impose the marriage of Mary to his son. English forces mounted a series of raids on Scottish and French territory.[23] In May 1544, the English Earl of Hertford (later Duke of Somerset) raided Edinburgh, and the Scots took Mary to Dunkeld for safety.[24]

        In May 1546, Beaton was murdered by Protestant lairds,[25] and on 10 September 1547, nine months after the death of Henry VIII, the Scots suffered a heavy defeat at the Battle of Pinkie. Mary's guardians, fearful for her safety, sent her to Inchmahome Priory for no more than three weeks, and turned to the French for help.[26]

        King Henry II of France proposed to unite France and Scotland by marrying the young queen to his three-year-old son, the Dauphin Francis. On the promise of French military help and a French dukedom for himself, Arran agreed to the marriage.[27] In February 1548, Mary was moved, again for her safety, to Dumbarton Castle.[28] The English left a trail of devastation behind them once more and seized the strategic town of Haddington. In June, the much awaited French help arrived at Leith to besiege and ultimately take Haddington. On 7 July 1548, a Scottish Parliament held at a nunnery near the town agreed to the French marriage treaty.[29]

        Life in France

        With her marriage agreement in place, five-year-old Mary was sent to France to spend the next thirteen years at the French court. The French fleet sent by Henry II, commanded by Nicolas de Villegagnon, sailed with Mary from Dumbarton on 7 August 1548 and arrived a week or more later at Roscoff or Saint-Pol-de-Léon in Brittany.[30]

        Mary was accompanied by her own court including two illegitimate half-brothers, and the "four Marys" (four girls her own age, all named Mary), who were the daughters of some of the noblest families in Scotland: Beaton, Seton, Fleming, and Livingston.[31] Janet, Lady Fleming, who was Mary Fleming's mother and James V's half-sister, was appointed governess.[32] When Lady Fleming left France in 1551, she was succeeded by a French governess, Françoise de Paroy.

        Mary and Francis in Catherine de' Medici's book of hours, c. 1558. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris.

        Vivacious, beautiful, and clever (according to contemporary accounts), Mary had a promising childhood.[33] At the French court, she was a favourite with everyone, except Henry II's wife Catherine de' Medici.[34] Mary learned to play lute and virginals, was competent in prose, poetry, horsemanship, falconry, and needlework, and was taught French, Italian, Latin, Spanish, and Greek, in addition to speaking her native Scots.[35] Her future sister-in-law, Elisabeth of Valois, became a close friend of whom Mary "retained nostalgic memories in later life".[36] Mary's maternal grandmother, Antoinette de Bourbon, was another strong influence on her childhood[37] and acted as one of her principal advisors.[38]

        Portraits of Mary show that she had a small, oval-shaped head, a long, graceful neck, bright auburn hair, hazel-brown eyes, under heavy lowered eyelids and finely arched brows, smooth pale skin, a high forehead, and regular, firm features. She was considered a pretty child and later, as a woman, strikingly attractive.[39] At some point in her infancy or childhood, she caught smallpox, but it did not mark her features.[40]

        Mary was eloquent, and especially tall by sixteenth-century standards (she attained an adult height of 5 feet 11 inches or 1.80 m);[41] while Henry II's son and heir, Francis, stuttered and was unusually short. Henry commented: "from the very first day they met, my son and she got on as well together as if they had known each other for a long time".[42] On 4 April 1558, Mary signed a secret agreement bequeathing Scotland and her claim to England to the French crown if she died without issue.[43] Twenty days later, she married the Dauphin at Notre Dame de Paris, and he became king consort of Scotland.[44][45]

        Claim to the English throne
        Mary's arms as Queen of Scotland and France, with the arms of England added, used in France before the Treaty of Edinburgh, 1560

        In November 1558, Henry VIII's elder daughter, Mary I of England, was succeeded by her only surviving sibling, Elizabeth I. Under the Third Succession Act, passed in 1543 by the Parliament of England, Elizabeth was recognised as her sister's heir, and Henry VIII's last will and testament had excluded the Stuarts from succeeding to the English throne. Yet, in the eyes of many Catholics, Elizabeth was illegitimate and Mary Stuart was the rightful queen of England, as the senior surviving legitimate descendant of Henry VII through her grandmother, Margaret Tudor.[46] Henry II of France proclaimed his eldest son and daughter-in-law king and queen of England. In France the royal arms of England were quartered with those of Francis and Mary.[47] Mary's claim to the English throne was a perennial sticking point between herself and Elizabeth.[48]

        When Henry II died on 10 July 1559, from injuries sustained in a joust, fifteen-year-old Francis and sixteen-year-old Mary became king and queen of France.[49] Two of the Queen's uncles, the Duke of Guise and the Cardinal of Lorraine, were now dominant in French politics,[50] enjoying an ascendancy called by some historians la tyrannie Guisienne.[51]

        In Scotland, the power of the Protestant Lords of the Congregation was rising at the expense of Mary's mother, who maintained effective control only through the use of French troops.[52] In early 1560, the Protestant Lords invited English troops into Scotland in an attempt to secure Protestantism. A Huguenot uprising in France, the Tumult of Amboise, made it impossible for the French to send further support.[53] Instead, the Guise brothers sent ambassadors to negotiate a settlement.[54] On 11 June 1560, their sister, Mary's mother, died, and so the question of future Franco-Scots relations was a pressing one. Under the terms of the Treaty of Edinburgh, signed by Mary's representatives on 6 July 1560, France and England undertook to withdraw troops from Scotland. France recognised Elizabeth's right to rule England, but the seventeen-year-old Mary, still in France and grieving for her mother, refused to ratify the treaty.[55]

        Return to Scotland
        Mary's all-white mourning garb earned her the sobriquet La Reine Blanche ("the White Queen").[56] Portrait by François Clouet, 1560.

        King Francis II died on 5 December 1560, of a middle ear infection that led to an abscess in his brain. Mary was grief-stricken.[57] Her mother-in-law, Catherine de' Medici, became regent for the late king's ten-year-old brother Charles IX, who inherited the French throne.[58] Mary returned to Scotland nine months later, arriving in Leith on 19 August 1561.[59] Having lived in France since the age of five, Mary had little direct experience of the dangerous and complex political situation in Scotland.[60] As a devout Catholic, she was regarded with suspicion by many of her subjects, as well as by the Queen of England.[61] Scotland was torn between Catholic and Protestant factions. Mary's illegitimate half-brother, the Earl of Moray, was a leader of the Protestants.[62] The Protestant reformer John Knox preached against Mary, condemning her for hearing Mass, dancing, and dressing too elaborately.[63] She summoned him to her presence to remonstrate with him but was unsuccessful. She later charged him with treason but he was acquitted and released.[64]

        To the surprise and dismay of the Catholic party, Mary tolerated the newly established Protestant ascendancy,[65] and kept her half-brother Moray as her chief advisor.[66] Her privy council of 16 men, appointed on 6 September 1561, retained those who already held the offices of state. The council was dominated by the Protestant leaders from the reformation crisis of 1559–1560: the Earls of Argyll, Glencairn, and Moray. Only four of the councillors were Catholic: the Earls of Atholl, Erroll, Montrose, and Huntly, who was Lord Chancellor.[67] Modern historian Jenny Wormald found this remarkable and suggested that Mary's failure to appoint a council sympathetic to Catholic and French interests was an indication of her focus on the English throne, over the internal problems of Scotland. Even the one significant later addition to the council, Lord Ruthven in December 1563, was another Protestant whom Mary personally disliked.[68] In this, she was acknowledging her lack of effective military power in the face of the Protestant lords, while also following a policy that strengthened her links with England. She joined with Moray in the destruction of Scotland's leading Catholic magnate, Lord Huntly, in 1562, after he led a rebellion against her in the Highlands.[69]

        Mary's royal arms from the Tolbooth in Leith (1565), now in South Leith Parish Church

        Mary sent William Maitland of Lethington as an ambassador to the English court to put the case for Mary as the heir presumptive to the English throne. Elizabeth refused to name a potential heir, fearing that would invite conspiracy to displace her with the nominated successor.[70] However, she assured Maitland that she knew no one with a better claim than Mary.[71] In late 1561 and early 1562, arrangements were made for the two queens to meet in England at York or Nottingham in August or September 1562. In July, Elizabeth sent Sir Henry Sidney to cancel Mary's visit because of the civil war in France.[72]

        Mary then turned her attention to finding a new husband from the royalty of Europe. When her uncle, the Cardinal of Lorraine, began negotiations with Archduke Charles of Austria without her consent, she angrily objected and the negotiations foundered.[73] Her own attempt to negotiate a marriage to Don Carlos, the mentally unstable heir apparent of King Philip II of Spain, was rebuffed by Philip.[74] Elizabeth attempted to neutralise Mary by suggesting that she marry English Protestant Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester. Dudley was Sir Henry Sidney's brother-in-law and the English queen's own favourite, whom Elizabeth trusted and thought she could control.[75] She sent an ambassador, Thomas Randolph, to tell Mary that if she married an English nobleman, Elizabeth would "proceed to the inquisition of her right and title to be our next cousin and heir".[76] The proposal came to nothing, not least because the intended bridegroom was unwilling.[77]

        In contrast, a French poet at Mary's court, Pierre de Boscosel de Chastelard, was apparently besotted with Mary.[78] In early 1563, he was discovered during a security search hidden underneath her bed, apparently planning to surprise her when she was alone and declare his love for her. Mary was horrified and banished him from Scotland. He ignored the edict. Two days later, he forced his way into her chamber as she was about to disrobe. She reacted with fury and fear. When Moray rushed into the room after hearing her cries for help, she shouted, "Thrust your dagger into the villain!" Moray refused, as Chastelard was already under restraint. Chastelard was tried for treason and beheaded.[79] Maitland claimed that Chastelard's ardour was feigned and that he was part of a Huguenot plot to discredit Mary by tarnishing her reputation.[80]

        Marriage to Lord Darnley
        Mary with her second husband, Lord Darnley

        Mary had briefly met her English-born half-cousin Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, in February 1561 when she was in mourning for Francis. Darnley's parents, the Earl and Countess of Lennox, were Scottish aristocrats as well as English landowners. They sent him to France ostensibly to extend their condolences, while hoping for a potential match between their son and Mary.[81] Both Mary and Darnley were grandchildren of Margaret Tudor, sister of Henry VIII of England, and patrilineal descendants of the High Stewards of Scotland.

        Darnley shared a more recent Stewart lineage with the Hamilton family as a descendant of Mary Stewart, Countess of Arran, a daughter of James II of Scotland. They next met on Saturday 17 February 1565 at Wemyss Castle in Scotland.[82] Mary fell in love with the "long lad", as Queen Elizabeth called him since he was over six feet tall.[83] They married at Holyrood Palace on 29 July 1565, even though both were Catholic and a papal dispensation for the marriage of first cousins had not been obtained.[84][85]

        English statesmen William Cecil and the Earl of Leicester had worked to obtain Darnley's licence to travel to Scotland from his home in England.[86] Although her advisors had brought the couple together, Elizabeth felt threatened by the marriage because as descendants of her aunt, both Mary and Darnley were claimants to the English throne.[87] Their children, if any, would inherit an even stronger, combined claim.[88] Mary's insistence on the marriage seems to have stemmed from passion rather than calculation; the English ambassador Nicholas Throckmorton stated "the saying is that surely she [Queen Mary] is bewitched",[89] adding that the marriage could only be averted "by violence".[90] The union infuriated Elizabeth, who felt the marriage should not have gone ahead without her permission, as Darnley was both her cousin and an English subject.[91]

        James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell

        Mary's marriage to a leading Catholic precipitated Mary's half-brother, the Earl of Moray, to join with other Protestant lords, including Lords Argyll and Glencairn, in open rebellion.[92] Mary set out from Edinburgh on 26 August 1565 to confront them. On the 30th, Moray entered Edinburgh but left soon afterward, having failed to take the castle. Mary returned to Edinburgh the following month to raise more troops.[93] In what became known as the Chaseabout Raid, Mary and her forces and Moray and the rebellious lords roamed around Scotland without ever engaging in direct combat. Mary's numbers were boosted by the release and restoration to favour of Lord Huntly's son and the return of James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell, from exile in France.[94] Unable to muster sufficient support, Moray left Scotland in October for asylum in England.[95] Mary broadened her privy council, bringing in both Catholics (Bishop of Ross John Lesley and provost of Edinburgh Simon Preston of Craigmillar) and Protestants (the new Lord Huntly, Bishop of Galloway Alexander Gordon, John Maxwell of Terregles and Sir James Balfour).[96]

        Before long, Darnley grew arrogant. Not content with his position as king consort, he demanded the Crown Matrimonial, which would have made him a co-sovereign of Scotland with the right to keep the Scottish throne for himself, if he outlived his wife.[97] Mary refused his request and their marriage grew strained, although they conceived by October 1565. He was jealous of her friendship with her Catholic private secretary, David Rizzio, who was rumoured to be the father of her child.[98] By March 1566, Darnley had entered into a secret conspiracy with Protestant lords, including the nobles who had rebelled against Mary in the Chaseabout Raid.[99] On 9 March, a group of the conspirators accompanied by Darnley murdered Rizzio in front of the pregnant Mary at a dinner party in Holyrood Palace.[100] Over the next two days, a disillusioned Darnley switched sides and Mary received Moray at Holyrood.[101] On the night of 11–12 March, Darnley and Mary escaped from the palace. They took temporary refuge in Dunbar Castle before returning to Edinburgh on 18 March.[102] The former rebels Lords Moray, Argyll and Glencairn were restored to the council.[103]

        Murder of Darnley
        Kirk o' Field drawn for William Cecil shortly after the murder of Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, 1567

        Mary's son by Darnley, James, was born on 19 June 1566 in Edinburgh Castle. However, the murder of Rizzio led inevitably to the breakdown of her marriage.[104] In October 1566, while staying at Jedburgh in the Scottish Borders, Mary made a journey on horseback of at least four hours each way to visit the Earl of Bothwell at Hermitage Castle, where he lay ill from wounds sustained in a skirmish with border reivers.[105] The ride was later used as evidence by Mary's enemies that the two were lovers, though no suspicions were voiced at the time and Mary had been accompanied by her councillors and guards.[106]

        Immediately after her return to Jedburgh, she suffered a serious illness that included frequent vomiting, loss of sight, loss of speech, convulsions and periods of unconsciousness. She was thought to be dying. Her recovery from 25 October onwards was credited to the skill of her French physicians.[107] The cause of her illness is unknown. Potential diagnoses include physical exhaustion and mental stress,[108] haemorrhage of a gastric ulcer[109] and porphyria.[110]

        At Craigmillar Castle, near Edinburgh, at the end of November 1566, Mary and leading nobles held a meeting to discuss the "problem of Darnley".[111] Divorce was discussed, but a bond was probably sworn between the lords present to remove Darnley by other means:[112] "It was thought expedient and most profitable for the common wealth ... that such a young fool and proud tyrant should not reign or bear rule over them; ... that he should be put off by one way or another; and whosoever should take the deed in hand or do it, they should defend."[113] Darnley feared for his safety, and after the baptism of his son at Stirling and shortly before Christmas, he went to Glasgow to stay on his father's estates.[114] At the start of the journey, he was afflicted by a fever—possibly smallpox, syphilis or the result of poison. He remained ill for some weeks.[115]

        In late January 1567, Mary prompted her husband to return to Edinburgh. He recuperated from his illness in a house belonging to the brother of Sir James Balfour at the former abbey of Kirk o' Field, just within the city wall.[116] Mary visited him daily, so that it appeared a reconciliation was in progress.[117] On the night of 9–10 February 1567, Mary visited her husband in the early evening and then attended the wedding celebrations of a member of her household, Bastian Pagez.[118] In the early hours of the morning, an explosion devastated Kirk o' Field. Darnley was found dead in the garden, apparently smothered.[119] There were no visible marks of strangulation or violence on the body.[120][121] Bothwell, Moray, Secretary Maitland, the Earl of Morton and Mary herself were among those who came under suspicion.[122] Elizabeth wrote to Mary of the rumours:

        I should ill fulfil the office of a faithful cousin or an affectionate friend if I did not ... tell you what all the world is thinking. Men say that, instead of seizing the murderers, you are looking through your fingers while they escape; that you will not seek revenge on those who have done you so much pleasure, as though the deed would never have taken place had not the doers of it been assured of impunity. For myself, I beg you to believe that I would not harbour such a thought.[123]

        By the end of February, Bothwell was generally believed to be guilty of Darnley's assassination.[124] Lennox, Darnley's father, demanded that Bothwell be tried before the Estates of Parliament, to which Mary agreed, but Lennox's request for a delay to gather evidence was denied. In the absence of Lennox and with no evidence presented, Bothwell was acquitted after a seven-hour trial on 12 April.[125] A week later, Bothwell managed to convince more than two dozen lords and bishops to sign the Ainslie Tavern Bond, in which they agreed to support his aim to marry the queen.[126]

        Imprisonment in Scotland and abdication
        Mary depicted with her son, James VI and I; in reality, Mary saw her son for the last time when he was ten months old.

        Between 21 and 23 April 1567, Mary visited her son at Stirling for the last time. On her way back to Edinburgh on 24 April, Mary was abducted, willingly or not, by Lord Bothwell and his men and taken to Dunbar Castle, where he may have raped her.[127] On 6 May, Mary and Bothwell returned to Edinburgh. On 15 May, at either Holyrood Palace or Holyrood Abbey, they were married according to Protestant rites.[128] Bothwell and his first wife, Jean Gordon, who was the sister of Lord Huntly, had divorced twelve days previously.[129]

        Originally, Mary believed that many nobles supported her marriage, but relations quickly soured between the newly elevated Bothwell (created Duke of Orkney) and his former peers and the marriage proved to be deeply unpopular. Catholics considered the marriage unlawful, since they did not recognise Bothwell's divorce or the validity of the Protestant service. Both Protestants and Catholics were shocked that Mary should marry the man accused of murdering her husband.[130] The marriage was tempestuous, and Mary became despondent.[131]

        Twenty-six Scottish peers, known as the confederate lords, turned against Mary and Bothwell and raised their own army. Mary and Bothwell confronted the lords at Carberry Hill on 15 June, but there was no battle, as Mary's forces dwindled away through desertion during negotiations.[132] Bothwell was given safe passage from the field. The lords took Mary to Edinburgh, where crowds of spectators denounced her as an adulteress and murderer.[133] The following night, she was imprisoned in Loch Leven Castle on an island in the middle of Loch Leven.[134] Between 20 and 23 July, Mary miscarried twins.[135] On 24 July, she was forced to abdicate in favour of her one-year-old son James.[136] Moray was made regent,[137] while Bothwell was driven into exile. He was imprisoned in Denmark, became insane and died in 1578.[138]

        Escape and imprisonment in England
        Mary's places of imprisonment

        On 2 May 1568, Mary escaped from Loch Leven Castle with the aid of George Douglas, brother of Sir William Douglas, the castle's owner.[139] Managing to raise an army of 6,000 men, she met Moray's smaller forces at the Battle of Langside on 13 May.[140] Defeated, she fled south. After spending the night at Dundrennan Abbey, she crossed the Solway Firth into England by fishing boat on 16 May.[141] She landed at Workington in Cumberland in the north of England and stayed overnight at Workington Hall.[142] On 18 May, local officials took her into protective custody at Carlisle Castle.[143]

        Mary apparently expected Elizabeth to help her regain her throne.[144] Elizabeth was cautious, ordering an inquiry into the conduct of the confederate lords and the question of whether Mary was guilty of Darnley's murder.[145] In mid-July 1568, English authorities moved Mary to Bolton Castle, because it was further from the Scottish border but not too close to London.[146] Mary's clothes, sent from Lochleven Castle, arrived on 20 July.[147] A commission of inquiry, or conference, as it was known, was held in York and later Westminster between October 1568 and January 1569.[148] In Scotland, her supporters fought a civil war against Regent Moray and his successors.[149]

        Casket letters
        Main article: Casket letters

        As an anointed queen, Mary refused to acknowledge the power of any court to try her. She refused to attend the inquiry at York personally but sent representatives. Elizabeth forbade her attendance anyway.[150] As evidence against Mary, Moray presented the so-called casket letters[151]—eight unsigned letters purportedly from Mary to Bothwell, two marriage contracts, and a love sonnet or sonnets. All were said to have been found in a silver-gilt casket just less than one foot (30 cm) long and decorated with the monogram of King Francis II.[152] Mary denied writing them and insisted they were forgeries,[153] arguing that her handwriting was not difficult to imitate.[154] They are widely believed to be crucial as to whether Mary shares the guilt for Darnley's murder.[155] The chair of the commission of inquiry, the Duke of Norfolk, described them as horrible letters and diverse fond ballads. He sent copies to Elizabeth, saying that if they were genuine, they might prove Mary's guilt.[156]

        The authenticity of the casket letters has been the source of much controversy among historians. It is impossible now to prove either way. The originals, written in French, were possibly destroyed in 1584 by Mary's son.[157] The surviving copies, in French or translated into English, do not form a complete set. There are incomplete printed transcriptions in English, Scots, French, and Latin from the 1570s.[158] Other documents scrutinised included Bothwell's divorce from Jean Gordon. Moray had sent a messenger in September to Dunbar to get a copy of the proceedings from the town's registers.[159]

        Mary's biographers, such as Antonia Fraser, Alison Weir, and John Guy, have come to the conclusion that either the documents were complete forgeries,[160] or incriminating passages were inserted into genuine letters,[161] or the letters were written to Bothwell by a different person or written by Mary to a different person.[162] Guy points out that the letters are disjointed and that the French language and grammar employed in the sonnets are too poor for a writer with Mary's education.[163] But certain phrases of the letters, including verses in the style of Ronsard, and some characteristics of style are compatible with known writings by Mary.[164]

        Portrait from the latter half of the sixteenth century

        The casket letters did not appear publicly until the Conference of 1568, although the Scottish privy council had seen them by December 1567.[165] Mary had been forced to abdicate and held captive for the better part of a year in Scotland. The letters were never made public to support her imprisonment and forced abdication. Historian Jenny Wormald believes this reluctance on the part of the Scots to produce the letters and their destruction in 1584, whatever their content, constitute proof that they contained real evidence against Mary.[166] In contrast, Weir thinks it demonstrates that the lords required time to fabricate them.[167] At least some of Mary's contemporaries who saw the letters had no doubt that they were genuine. Among them was the Duke of Norfolk,[168] who secretly conspired to marry Mary in the course of the commission, although he denied it when Elizabeth alluded to his marriage plans, saying "he meant never to marry with a person, where he could not be sure of his pillow".[169]

        The majority of the commissioners accepted the casket letters as genuine after a study of their contents and comparison of the penmanship with examples of Mary's handwriting.[170] Elizabeth, as she had wished, concluded the inquiry with a verdict that nothing was proven against either the confederate lords or Mary.[171] For overriding political reasons, Elizabeth wished neither to convict nor to acquit Mary of murder. There was never any intention to proceed judicially; the conference was intended as a political exercise. In the end, Moray returned to Scotland as regent and Mary remained in custody in England. Elizabeth had succeeded in maintaining a Protestant government in Scotland, without either condemning or releasing her fellow sovereign.[172] In Fraser's opinion, it was one of the strangest "trials" in legal history, ending with no finding of guilt against either party, one of whom was allowed to return home to Scotland while the other remained in custody.[173]

        Plots
        Embroidery done by Mary in captivity (now in the Royal Collection)[174][175]

        On 26 January 1569, Mary was moved to Tutbury Castle[176] and placed in the custody of the Earl of Shrewsbury and his formidable wife Bess of Hardwick.[177] Elizabeth considered Mary's designs on the English throne to be a serious threat and so confined her to Shrewsbury's properties, including Tutbury, Sheffield Castle, Sheffield Manor Lodge, Wingfield Manor, and Chatsworth House,[178] all located in the interior of England, halfway between Scotland and London and distant from the sea.[179]

        Mary was permitted her own domestic staff, which never numbered fewer than sixteen.[180] She needed 30 carts to transport her belongings from house to house.[181] Her chambers were decorated with fine tapestries and carpets, as well as her cloth of state on which she had the French phrase, En ma fin est mon commencement ("In my end lies my beginning"), embroidered.[182] Her bedlinen was changed daily,[183] and her own chefs prepared meals with a choice of 32 dishes served on silver plates.[184] She was occasionally allowed outside under strict supervision,[185] spent seven summers at the spa town of Buxton, and spent much of her time doing embroidery.[186] Her health declined, perhaps through porphyria or lack of exercise. By the 1580s, she had severe rheumatism in her limbs, rendering her lame.[187]

        In May 1569, Elizabeth attempted to mediate the restoration of Mary in return for guarantees of the Protestant religion, but convention held at Perth rejected the deal overwhelmingly.[188] Norfolk continued to scheme for a marriage with Mary, and Elizabeth imprisoned him in the Tower of London between October 1569 and August 1570.[189] Early the following year, Moray was assassinated. His death coincided with a rebellion in the North of England, led by Catholic earls, which persuaded Elizabeth that Mary was a threat. English troops intervened in the Scottish civil war, consolidating the power of the anti-Marian forces.[190] Elizabeth's principal secretaries, Sir Francis Walsingham and William Cecil, Lord Burghley, watched Mary carefully with the aid of spies placed in her household.[191]

        Mary in captivity, by Nicholas Hilliard, c. 1578

        In 1571, Cecil and Walsingham uncovered the Ridolfi Plot, a plan to replace Elizabeth with Mary by the help of Spanish troops and the Duke of Norfolk. Norfolk was executed and the English Parliament introduced a bill barring Mary from the throne, to which Elizabeth refused to give royal assent.[192] To discredit Mary, the casket letters were published in London.[193] Plots centred on Mary continued. Pope Gregory XIII endorsed one plan in the latter half of the 1570s to marry her to the governor of the Low Countries and illegitimate half-brother of Philip II of Spain, John of Austria, who was supposed to organise the invasion of England from the Spanish Netherlands.[194] After the Throckmorton Plot of 1583, Walsingham introduced the Bond of Association and the Act for the Queen's Safety, which sanctioned the killing of anyone who plotted against Elizabeth and aimed to prevent a putative successor from profiting from her murder.[195]

        In 1584, Mary proposed an "association" with her son, James. She announced that she was ready to stay in England, to renounce the Pope's bull of excommunication, and to retire, abandoning her pretensions to the English Crown. She also offered to join an offensive league against France. For Scotland, she proposed a general amnesty, agreed that James should marry with Elizabeth's knowledge, and accepted that there should be no change in religion. Her only condition was the immediate alleviation of the conditions of her captivity. James went along with the idea for a while, but eventually rejected it and signed an alliance treaty with Elizabeth, abandoning his mother.[196] Elizabeth also rejected the association because she did not trust Mary to cease plotting against her during the negotiations.[197]

        In February 1585, William Parry was convicted of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth, without Mary's knowledge, although her agent Thomas Morgan was implicated.[198] In April, Mary was placed in the stricter custody of Sir Amias Paulet.[199] At Christmas, she was moved to a moated manor house at Chartley.[200]

        Trial
        Drawing of the trial of Mary, Queen of Scots, 14–15 October 1586

        On 11 August 1586, after being implicated in the Babington Plot, Mary was arrested while out riding and taken to Tixall.[201] In a successful attempt to entrap her, Walsingham had deliberately arranged for Mary's letters to be smuggled out of Chartley. Mary was misled into thinking her letters were secure, while in reality they were deciphered and read by Walsingham.[202] From these letters it was clear that Mary had sanctioned the attempted assassination of Elizabeth.[203]

        Mary was moved to Fotheringhay Castle in a four-day journey ending on 25 September. In October, she was put on trial for treason under the Act for the Queen's Safety before a court of 36 noblemen,[204] including Cecil, Shrewsbury, and Walsingham.[205][206] Spirited in her defence, Mary denied the charges.[207] She told her triers, "Look to your consciences and remember that the theatre of the whole world is wider than the kingdom of England".[208] She protested that she had been denied the opportunity to review the evidence, that her papers had been removed from her, that she was denied access to legal counsel and that as a foreign anointed queen she had never been an English subject and thus could not be convicted of treason.[209]

        She was convicted on 25 October and sentenced to death with only one commissioner, Lord Zouche, expressing any form of dissent.[210] Nevertheless, Elizabeth hesitated to order her execution, even in the face of pressure from the English Parliament to carry out the sentence. She was concerned that the killing of a queen set a discreditable precedent and was fearful of the consequences, especially if, in retaliation, Mary's son, James, formed an alliance with the Catholic powers and invaded England.[211]

        Elizabeth asked Paulet, Mary's final custodian, if he would contrive a clandestine way to "shorten the life" of Mary, which he refused to do on the grounds that he would not make "a shipwreck of my conscience, or leave so great a blot on my poor posterity".[212] On 1 February 1587, Elizabeth signed the death warrant, and entrusted it to William Davison, a privy councillor.[213] On 3 February,[214] ten members of the Privy Council of England, having been summoned by Cecil without Elizabeth's knowledge, decided to carry out the sentence at once.[215]

        Execution
        The execution scene, drawn by eyewitness Robert Beale

        At Fotheringhay, on the evening of 7 February 1587, Mary was told she was to be executed the next morning.[216] She spent the last hours of her life in prayer, distributing her belongings to her household, and writing her will and a letter to the King of France.[217] The scaffold that was erected in the Great Hall was draped in black cloth. It was reached by two or three steps, and furnished with the block, a cushion for her to kneel on, and three stools for her and the earls of Shrewsbury and Kent, who were there to witness the execution.[218]

        The executioner Bull and his assistant knelt before her and asked forgiveness, as it was typical for the executioner to request the pardon of the one being put to death. Mary replied, "I forgive you with all my heart, for now, I hope, you shall make an end of all my troubles."[219] Her servants, Jane Kennedy and Elizabeth Curle, and the executioners helped Mary remove her outer garments, revealing a velvet petticoat and a pair of sleeves in crimson brown, the liturgical colour of martyrdom in the Catholic Church,[220] with a black satin bodice and black trimmings.[221] As she disrobed Mary smiled and said she "never had such grooms before ... nor ever put off her clothes before such a company".[222] She was blindfolded by Kennedy with a white veil embroidered in gold, knelt down on the cushion in front of the block on which she positioned her head, and stretched out her arms. Her last words were, In manus tuas, Domine, commendo spiritum meum ("Into thy hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit").[223]

        Mary was not beheaded with a single strike. The first blow missed her neck and struck the back of her head. The second blow severed the neck, except for a small bit of sinew, which the executioner cut through using the axe. Afterwards, he held her head aloft and declared, "God save the Queen." At that moment, the auburn tresses in his hand turned out to be a wig and the head fell to the ground, revealing that Mary had very short, grey hair.[224] Cecil's nephew, who was present at the execution, reported to his uncle that after her death "Her lips stirred up and down a quarter of an hour after her head was cut off" and that a small dog owned by the queen emerged from hiding among her skirts[225]—though eye-witness Emanuel Tomascon does not include those details in his "exhaustive report".[226] Items supposedly worn or carried by Mary at her execution are of doubtful provenance;[227] contemporary accounts state that all her clothing, the block, and everything touched by her blood was burnt in the fireplace of the Great Hall to obstruct relic hunters.[225]

        Copy of Mary's effigy, National Museum of Scotland. The original, by Cornelius Cure, is in Westminster Abbey.

        When the news of the execution reached Elizabeth, she became indignant and asserted that Davison had disobeyed her instructions not to part with the warrant and that the Privy Council had acted without her authority.[228] Elizabeth's vacillation and deliberately vague instructions gave her plausible deniability to attempt to avoid the direct stain of Mary's blood.[229] Davison was arrested, thrown into the Tower of London, and found guilty of misprision. He was released nineteen months later, after Cecil and Walsingham interceded on his behalf.[230]

        Mary's request to be buried in France was refused by Elizabeth.[231] Her body was embalmed and left in a secure lead coffin until her burial in a Protestant service at Peterborough Cathedral in late July 1587.[232] Her entrails, removed as part of the embalming process, were buried secretly within Fotheringhay Castle.[233] Her body was exhumed in 1612 when her son, King James VI and I, ordered that she be reinterred in Westminster Abbey in a chapel opposite the tomb of Elizabeth.[234] In 1867, her tomb was opened in an attempt to ascertain the resting place of James I. He was ultimately found with Henry VII. Many of her other descendants, including Elizabeth of Bohemia, Prince Rupert of the Rhine and the children of Anne, Queen of Great Britain, were interred in her vault.[235]

        Legacy

        Assessments of Mary in the sixteenth century divided between Protestant reformers such as George Buchanan and John Knox, who vilified her mercilessly, and Catholic apologists such as Adam Blackwood, who praised, defended and eulogised her.[236] After the accession of James I in England, historian William Camden wrote an officially sanctioned biography that drew from original documents. It condemned Buchanan's work as an invention,[237] and "emphasized Mary's evil fortunes rather than her evil character".[238] Differing interpretations persisted into the eighteenth century: William Robertson and David Hume argued that the casket letters were genuine and that Mary was guilty of adultery and murder, while William Tytler argued the reverse.[239] In the latter half of the twentieth century, the work of Antonia Fraser was acclaimed as "more objective ... free from the excesses of adulation or attack" that had characterised older biographies,[240] and her contemporaries Gordon Donaldson and Ian B. Cowan also produced more balanced works.[241]

        Historian Jenny Wormald concluded that Mary was a tragic failure, who was unable to cope with the demands placed on her,[242] but hers was a rare dissenting view in a post-Fraser tradition that Mary was a pawn in the hands of scheming noblemen.[243] There is no concrete proof of her complicity in Darnley's murder or of a conspiracy with Bothwell. Such accusations rest on assumptions,[244] and Buchanan's biography is today discredited as "almost complete fantasy".[245] Mary's courage at her execution helped establish her popular image as the heroic victim in a dramatic tragedy.[246]

        Family tree
        Family tree of Mary, Queen of Scots
        James II of Scotland
        James III of ScotlandMary Stewart
        James Hamilton, 1st Earl of ArranElizabeth Hamilton
        James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of ArranJohn Stewart, 3rd Earl of LennoxHenry VII of EnglandElizabeth of York
        Claude, Duke of GuiseAntoinette de BourbonJames IV of ScotlandMargaret TudorArchibald Douglas, 6th Earl of AngusHenry VIII of England
        Francis, Duke of GuiseCharles, Cardinal of LorraineMary of GuiseJames V of ScotlandMatthew Stewart, 4th Earl of LennoxMargaret Douglas
        James Stewart, 1st Earl of MorayMary, Queen of ScotsHenry Stuart, Lord DarnleyEdward VI of EnglandMary I of EnglandElizabeth I of England
        James VI and I
        gollark: Pygmies are the opposite of my megadragon idea though.
        gollark: A megadragon 1000km across.
        gollark: We do not speak of TJ08.
        gollark: *than before
        gollark: Fewer palindromes before? This is clear evidence of a TJ08/TJ09 conspiracy.

        See also

        Footnotes
        1. Bishop John Lesley said Mary was born on the 7th, but Mary and John Knox claimed the 8th, which was the feast day of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary (Fraser 1994, p. 13; Wormald 1988, p. 11).
        2. While Catholic Europe switched to the New Style Gregorian calendar in the 1580s, England and Scotland retained the Old Style Julian calendar until 1752. In this article, dates before 1752 are Old Style, with the exception that years are assumed to start on 1 January rather than 25 March.
        3. Also spelled as Marie and as Steuart or Stewart
        4. Fraser 1994, p. 13
        5. Fraser 1994, p. 11; Wormald 1988, p. 46
        6. Guy 2004, p. 16
        7. This version is taken from Robert Lindsay of Pitscottie's The History of Scotland from 21 February 1436 to March 1565 written in the 1570s. The phrase was first recorded by John Knox in the 1560s as, "The devil go with it! It will end as it began: it came from a woman; and it will end in a woman" (Wormald 1988, pp. 11–12).
        8. Fraser 1994, p. 12; Wormald 1988, p. 11
        9. Fraser 1994, p. 12; Guy 2004, p. 17
        10. Fraser 1994, p. 13; Guy 2004, p. 17
        11. Sadler to Henry VIII, 23 March 1543, quoted in Clifford 1809, p. 88; Fraser 1994, p. 18; Guy 2004, p. 22; Wormald 1988, p. 43
        12. Fraser 1994, p. 15; John Knox claimed the king had signed a blank sheet of paper that Beaton had then filled in, while Arran claimed that Beaton had taken the dying king's hand in his own and traced out the signature (Wormald 1988, pp. 46–47). The disputed will is printed in Historical Manuscripts Commission (1887). The Manuscripts of the Duke of Hamilton, KT. Eleventh Report, Appendix, Part VI. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. pp. 205, 219–220.
        13. Fraser 1994, pp. 17, 60; Guy 2004, pp. 20, 60; Wormald 1988, pp. 49–50
        14. Fraser 1994, pp. 17–18; Weir 2008, p. 8; Wormald 1988, p. 55
        15. Fraser 1994, p. 18; Guy 2004, p. 25; Wormald 1988, p. 55
        16. Fraser 1994, p. 19; Weir 2008, p. 8
        17. Fraser 1994, pp. 19–20
        18. Guy 2004, p. 26
        19. Fraser 1994, p. 21; Guy 2004, p. 27; Weir 2008, p. 8
        20. Sadler to Henry VIII, 11 September 1543, quoted in Clifford 1809, p. 289; Fraser 1994, p. 21
        21. Fraser 1994, pp. 20–21
        22. Fraser 1994, p. 22; Guy 2004, p. 32; Wormald 1988, p. 58
        23. Wormald 1988, pp. 58–59
        24. Fraser 1994, pp. 23–24; Guy 2004, pp. 33–34
        25. Fraser 1994, p. 26; Guy 2004, p. 36; Wormald 1988, p. 59
        26. Fraser 1994, pp. 29–30; Weir 2008, p. 10; Wormald 1988, p. 61
        27. Weir 2008, pp. 10–11
        28. Fraser 1994, p. 30; Weir 2008, p. 11; Wormald 1988, p. 61
        29. Guy 2004, pp. 40–41; Wormald 1988, p. 62
        30. Guy 2004, pp. 41–42; "St Mauris to the Queen Dowager", 25 August 1548, quoted in Hume, Martin A. S.; Tyler, Royall, eds. (1912). "Appendix: Miscellaneous 1548". Calendar of State Papers, Spain: Volume IX: 1547–1549. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office. p. 577.; Lord Guthrie (1907). "Mary Stuart and Roscoff" (PDF). Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. 42: 13–18.
        31. Fraser 1994, pp. 31–32
        32. Fraser 1994, pp. 31–32; Guy 2004, p. 43
        33. Fraser 1994, pp. 36, 44–45, 50
        34. Weir 2008, p. 12; Wormald 1988, p. 77; Catherine's dislike of Mary became apparent only after Henry II's death (Fraser 1994, pp. 102–103, 115–116, 119; Guy 2004, p. 46). Catherine's interests competed with those of the Guise family, and there may have been an element of jealousy or rivalry between the two queens (Donaldson 1974, pp. 50–51; Fraser 1994, pp. 102–103, 116, 119).
        35. Fraser 1994, pp. 178–182; Guy 2004, pp. 71–80; Weir 2008, p. 13
        36. Fraser 1994, p. 43
        37. Fraser 1994, p. 37; Wormald 1988, p. 80
        38. Wormald 1988, p. 80
        39. Fraser 1994, pp. 39–40, 43, 75–80; Weir 2008, p. 30
        40. Fraser 1994, p. 62; Guy 2004, p. 67
        41. Fraser 1994, p. 76
        42. Guy 2004, pp. 47–48
        43. Guy 2004, pp. 90–91; Weir 2008, p. 17; Wormald 1988, p. 21
        44. Anonymous (1558). Discours du grand et magnifique triumphe faict au mariage du tresnoble & magnifique Prince Francois de Valois Roy Dauphin, filz aisné du tres-chrestien Roy de France Henry II du nom & de treshaulte & vertueuse Princesse madame Marie d'Estreuart Roine d'Escosse (in French). Paris: Annet Briere.
        45. Teulet, Alexandre (1862). Relations politiques de la France et de l'Espagne avec l'Écosse au XVIe siècle (in French). 1. Paris: Renouard. pp. 302–311.
        46. Fraser 1994, p. 83; Weir 2008, p. 18
        47. Fraser 1994, p. 83; Guy 2004, pp. 95–96; Weir 2008, p. 18; Wormald 1988, p. 21
        48. Fraser 1994, p. 85; Weir 2008, p. 18
        49. Fraser 1994, pp. 86–88; Guy 2004, p. 100; Weir 2008, p. 19; Wormald 1988, p. 93
        50. Fraser 1994, p. 88; Wormald 1988, pp. 80, 93
        51. Thompson, James (1909). The Wars of Religion in France. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 22. ISBN 978-1-4179-7435-1.
        52. Fraser 1994, pp. 96–97; Guy 2004, pp. 108–109; Weir 2008, p. 14; Wormald 1988, pp. 94–100
        53. Fraser 1994, p. 97; Wormald 1988, p. 100
        54. Wormald 1988, pp. 100–101
        55. Fraser 1994, pp. 97–101; Guy 2004, pp. 114–115; Weir 2008, p. 20; Wormald 1988, pp. 102–103
        56. Fraser 1994, p. 183
        57. Fraser 1994, pp. 105–107; Weir 2008, p. 21
        58. Guy 2004, pp. 119–120; Weir 2008, pp. 21–22
        59. Fraser 1994, p. 137; Guy 2004, p. 134; Weir 2008, p. 25
        60. Wormald 1988, p. 22
        61. Weir 2008, p. 24
        62. Guy 2004, p. 126
        63. Knox, John, History of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland, 4th Book, various editions, e.g., Lennox, Cuthbert (editor) (1905). London: Andrew Melrose, pp. 225–337
        64. Fraser 1994, pp. 155–156, 215–217; Guy 2004, pp. 140–143, 176–177, 186–187; Wormald 1988, pp. 125, 145–146
        65. Fraser 1994, p. 167; Wormald 1988, p. 125
        66. Guy 2004, p. 145
        67. The other members were Lord Justice Clerk John Bellenden of Auchinoul, Lord Clerk Register James MacGill of Nether Rankeillour, Secretary of State William Maitland of Lethington, Lord High Treasurer Robert Richardson, Lord High Admiral the Earl of Bothwell, the Earls of Arran and Morton, the Earl Marischal, and Lord Erskine (later the Earl of Mar) (Weir 2008, p. 30).
        68. Wormald 1988, pp. 114–116
        69. Fraser 1994, pp. 192–203; Weir 2008, p. 42; Wormald 1988, pp. 123–124
        70. Fraser 1994, p. 162; Guy 2004, p. 157
        71. Fraser 1994, p. 162
        72. Fraser 1994, pp. 168–169; Guy 2004, pp. 157–161
        73. Fraser 1994, p. 212; Guy 2004, pp. 175, 181; Wormald 1988, p. 134
        74. Fraser 1994, pp. 114–117; Guy 2004, pp. 173–174; Wormald 1988, pp. 133–134
        75. Guy 2004, p. 193
        76. Rennie, James (published anonymously) (1826). Mary, Queen of Scots: Her Persecutions, Sufferings, and Trials from her Birth till her Death. Glasgow: W. R. McPhun. p. 114.
        77. Fraser 1994, p. 220; Guy 2004, p. 202; Weir 2008, p. 52; Wormald 1988, p. 147
        78. Guy 2004, p. 178; Weir 2008, p. 44
        79. Weir 2008, p. 45
        80. Fraser 1994, p. 206; Weir 2008, pp. 45–46
        81. Fraser 1994, p. 118; Weir 2008, p. 23
        82. Bain 1900, p. 125; Guy 2004, p. 204; Weir 2008, p. 58
        83. For the quote and his height see Fraser 1994, p. 221 and Weir 2008, pp. 49, 56; for falling in love see Fraser 1994, p. 224; Weir 2008, p. 63 and Wormald 1988, p. 149
        84. Fraser 1994, p. 230; Wormald 1988, p. 150
        85. A dispensation, backdated to 25 May, was granted in Rome on 25 September (Weir 2008, p. 82).
        86. Bain 1900, p. 124; Fraser 1994, p. 219; Weir 2008, p. 52
        87. Fraser 1994, p. 219. Weir 2008, p. 64
        88. Weir 2008, pp. 64, 91
        89. Bingham 1995, p. 101
        90. Bingham 1995, p. 100
        91. Weir 2008, p. 64
        92. Weir 2008, p. 78; Wormald 1988, pp. 151–153
        93. Weir 2008, pp. 79–82
        94. Guy 2004, pp. 229–230; Weir 2008, pp. 77, 79; Wormald 1988, pp. 151–152
        95. Fraser 1994, p. 234; Guy 2004, p. 231; Weir 2008, p. 83; Wormald 1988, pp. 151–154
        96. Wormald 1988, p. 156
        97. Fraser 1994, p. 239; Weir 2008, pp. 87–88
        98. Fraser 1994, pp. 245–246; Weir 2008, pp. 88–97
        99. Fraser 1994, p. 247; Guy 2004, p. 245; Weir 2008, p. 95; Wormald 1988, p. 158
        100. Fraser 1994, pp. 249–252; Guy 2004, pp. 248–249; Weir 2008, pp. 105–107
        101. Fraser 1994, pp. 255–256; Guy 2004, pp. 253–258; Weir 2008, p. 113
        102. Fraser 1994, pp. 256–258; Guy 2004, p. 259; Weir 2008, pp. 116–117, 121; Wormald 1988, p. 159
        103. Fraser 1994, p. 259; Guy 2004, p. 260; Wormald 1988, p. 160
        104. Fraser 1994, p. 259 ff; Wormald 1988, p. 160
        105. Bingham 1995, pp. 158–159; Guy 2004, pp. 273–274; Fraser 1994, pp. 274–275; Weir 2008, pp. 157–160
        106. Fraser 1994, pp. 274–275; Weir 2008, pp. 158–159
        107. Fraser 1994, pp. 275–276; Guy 2004, p. 274; Weir 2008, pp. 161–163
        108. Fraser 1994, p. 276; Weir 2008, p. 161
        109. Guy 2004, p. 275; Weir 2008, p. 161
        110. Weir 2008, p. 161
        111. Bingham 1995, p. 160; Wormald 1988, p. 160
        112. Bingham 1995, pp. 160–163; Fraser 1994, pp. 277–279; Weir 2008, pp. 176–178, 261; Wormald 1988, p. 161
        113. Confession of James Ormiston, one of Bothwell's men, 13 December 1573, quoted (from Robert Pitcairn's Ancient Criminal Trials in Scotland from AD 1488 to AD 1624) in Weir 2008, p. 177; Fraser 1994, p. 279
        114. Weir 2008, p. 189
        115. Weir 2008, pp. 190–192
        116. Fraser 1994, pp. 285–292; Guy 2004, pp. 292–294; Weir 2008, pp. 227–233
        117. Weir 2008, pp. 232–233
        118. Fraser 1994, pp. 296–297; Guy 2004, pp. 297–299; Weir 2008, pp. 244–247
        119. Weir 2008, p. 296; Wormald 1988, p. 161
        120. Weir 2008, p. 252; Greig 2004
        121. A post-mortem revealed internal injuries, thought to have been caused by the explosion. John Knox claimed the surgeons who examined the body were lying and that Darnley had been strangled, but all the sources agree that there were no marks on the body, and there was no reason for the surgeons to lie as Darnley was murdered either way (Weir 2008, p. 255).
        122. Weir 2008, pp. 298–299
        123. The original letter is in French, this translation is from Weir 2008, pp. 308–309. For other versions see Guy 2004, p. 312 and Lewis 1999, p. 86.
        124. Guy 2004, p. 304; Weir 2008, pp. 312–313
        125. Fraser 1994, pp. 311–312; Weir 2008, pp. 336–340
        126. Fraser 1994, p. 313; Weir 2008, pp. 343–345; Wormald 1988, p. 163
        127. James Melville of Halhill, who was in the castle, wrote that Bothwell "had ravished her and lain with her against her will" (quoted in Fraser 1994, pp. 314–317). Other contemporaries dismissed the abduction as bogus (Donaldson 1974, p. 117; Fraser 1994, p. 317). See also Guy 2004, pp. 328–329; Weir 2008, pp. 351–355; and Wormald 1988, p. 163.
        128. Weir 2008, pp. 367, 374
        129. Fraser 1994, p. 319; Guy 2004, pp. 330–331; Weir 2008, pp. 366–367
        130. Weir 2008, p. 382
        131. Fraser 1994, pp. 322–323; Guy 2004, pp. 336–337
        132. Weir 2008, pp. 383–390; Wormald 1988, p. 165
        133. Weir 2008, pp. 391–393
        134. Fraser 1994, p. 335; Guy 2004, p. 351; Weir 2008, p. 398
        135. Weir 2008, p. 411
        136. Guy 2004, p. 364; Weir 2008, p. 413; Wormald 1988, p. 165
        137. Fraser 1994, p. 347; Guy 2004, p. 366; Weir 2008, p. 421; Wormald 1988, p. 166
        138. Weir 2008, pp. 422, 501; Wormald 1988, p. 171
        139. Fraser 1994, pp. 357–359; Guy 2004, p. 367; Weir 2008, p. 432; Wormald 1988, p. 172
        140. Guy 2004, p. 368; Weir 2008, p. 433
        141. Guy 2004, p. 369; Weir 2008, pp. 433–434: Wormald 1988, p. 173
        142. Fraser 1994, pp. 368–369
        143. Fraser 1994, p. 369; Weir 2008, p. 435
        144. Fraser 1994, p. 369; Guy 2004, p. 435; Weir 2008, p. 434; Wormald 1988, p. 174
        145. Guy 2004, p. 430; Weir 2008, p. 445
        146. Weir 2008, p. 444
        147. Joseph Bain, Calendar State Papers Scotland, vol. 2 (Edinburgh, 1900), p. 460.
        148. Fraser 1994, pp. 385–390; Wormald 1988, p. 174
        149. Wormald 1988, p. 184
        150. Weir 2008, p. 447; Mary later requested to attend the conference at Westminster, but Elizabeth refused permission. In response, Mary's commissioners withdrew from the inquiry (Weir 2008, pp. 461–463).
        151. Guy 2004, p. 432; Weir 2008, p. 464; Wormald 1988, p. 175
        152. For the list of documents see, for example, Guy 2004, p. 397 and Wormald 1988, p. 176; for the casket description see Robertson, Joseph (1863). Inventaires de la Royne d'Ecosse. Edinburgh: Bannatyne Club. p. lviii. and Guy 2004, p. 432.
        153. Guy 2004, p. 435; Weir 2008, pp. 446–447
        154. Fraser 1994, p. 407; Weir 2008, p. 221
        155. e.g., Guy 2004, p. 395; Weir 2008, pp. 453, 468
        156. Norfolk, Sussex and Sadler to Elizabeth, 11 October 1568, quoted in Bain 1900, p. 527; Weir 2008, pp. 451–452
        157. Bingham 1995, p. 193; Weir 2008, p. 465; Wormald 1988, p. 176
        158. Fraser 1994, p. 392; Weir 2008, pp. 466–467
        159. McInnes 1970, p. 145
        160. Guy 2004, pp. 400, 416; Weir 2008, pp. 465–474
        161. Fraser 1994, pp. 396–397; Guy 2004, pp. 400–404, 408–412, 416; Weir 2008, pp. 465–474
        162. Guy 2004, pp. 404, 410, 420–426; Fraser 1994, pp. 287, 396–401
        163. Guy 2004, pp. 399, 401–417
        164. Thomson, George Malcolm (1967). The Crime of Mary Stuart. London: Hutchinson. pp. 148–153, 159–165. ISBN 978-0-09-081730-6.
        165. Fraser 1994, pp. 352; Wormald 1988, pp. 171, 176
        166. Weir 2008, p. 470; Wormald 1988, pp. 177–178
        167. Weir 2008, p. 471
        168. Williams 1964, pp. 137–139; Weir 2008, p. 453
        169. Weir 2008, p. 459; Williams 1964, p. 141
        170. Weir 2008, pp. 475–476
        171. Fraser 1994, p. 390; Weir 2008, p. 481
        172. Weir 2008, p. 481
        173. Fraser 1994, p. 391
        174. Mary, Queen of Scots. "A catte". Royal Collection Trust. Inventory no. 28224.
        175. Embroideries by Mary are also kept in the Victoria and Albert Museum (Marian Hanning, Oxburgh Hangings) and Hardwick Hall.
        176. Weir 2008, p. 484
        177. Fraser 1994, pp. 410–411; Guy 2004, p. 441; Wormald 1988, p. 184
        178. Guy 2004, p. 442; Weir 2008, p. 484
        179. Guy 2004, pp. 440–441
        180. Guy 2004, p. 438
        181. Guy 2004, p. 439
        182. It had been her mother's motto (Guy 2004, pp. 443–444).
        183. Guy 2004, p. 443
        184. Guy 2004, pp. 444–445
        185. Guy 2004, pp. 453–454
        186. Guy 2004, pp. 448–450, 518
        187. Fraser 1994, pp. 443–446, 511; Guy 2004, pp. 447, 458
        188. Wormald 1988, p. 179
        189. Fraser 1994, pp. 415–424; Weir 2008, p. 487
        190. Weir 2008, p. 496; Wormald 1988, p. 180
        191. Fraser 1994, p. 469; Guy 2004, p. 451
        192. Guy 2004, pp. 464–470; Weir 2008, pp. 492–494; Wormald 1988, p. 183
        193. Guy 2004, p. 467; Weir 2008, p. 493; Wormald 1988, p. 184
        194. Fraser 1994, p. 446
        195. Fraser 1994, p. 473; Guy 2004, pp. 474–476; Weir 2008, p. 506
        196. Fraser 1994, pp. 458–462
        197. Guy 2004, pp. 458–462
        198. Fraser 1994, p. 472
        199. Guy 2004, p. 457; Weir 2008, p. 507
        200. Fraser 1994, p. 479
        201. Guy 2004, pp. 484–485; Fraser 1994, p. 493
        202. Fraser 1994, pp. 482–483; Guy 2004, pp. 477–480; Weir 2008, p. 507
        203. Guy 2004, pp. 483–485; Weir 2008, p. 507; Wormald 1988, p. 185
        204. Weir 2008, p. 508
        205. Fraser 1994, p. 509
        206. Two of the commissioners were Catholics (Lewis 1999, p. 22).
        207. Boyd 1915, pp. 59–65, 143–145, 309–314; Fraser 1994, pp. 506–512; Guy 2004, pp. 488–489, 492; Weir 2008, p. 508
        208. Guy 2004, p. 488
        209. Fraser 1994, pp. 506–512; Guy 2004, pp. 489–493
        210. Fraser 1994, p. 517
        211. Fraser 1994, pp. 521–522; Weir 2008, p. 508
        212. Fraser 1994, p. 529
        213. Fraser 1994, p. 528
        214. Guy 2004, p. 519
        215. Guy 2004, p. 496
        216. Fraser 1994, p. 531; Guy 2004, p. 498; Weir 2008, p. 508
        217. Fraser 1994, pp. 533–534; Guy 2004, p. 500
        218. Fraser 1994, p. 537; Guy 2004, p. 4
        219. Guy 2004, p. 7; Lewis 1999, p. 118
        220. Fraser 1994, p. 538; Guy 2004, p. 7; Weir 2008, p. 209; Wormald 1988, p. 187
        221. Morris, John (ed.) (1874). Letter Book of Amias Paulet, pp. 368–369
        222. Guy 2004, p. 7; Lewis 1999, pp. 41, 119
        223. Guy 2004, pp. 7–8
        224. Fraser 1994, p. 539; Guy 2004, p. 8
        225. Fraser 1994, p. 540; Guy 2004, p. 9
        226. Tomascon, Emanuel (1924). "79. Execution of Mary Stuart". In von Klarwill, Victor (ed.). The Fugger Newsletters. London: John Lane The Bodley Head. pp. 97–105.
        227. Fraser 1994, p. 540
        228. Fraser 1994, p. 541
        229. Guy 2004, p. 497
        230. Hutchinson, Robert (2006). Elizabeth's Spy Master: Francis Walsingham and the secret war that saved England. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. pp. 196–201. ISBN 978-0-297-84613-0.
        231. Fraser 1994, p. 532
        232. Fraser 1994, pp. 542, 546–547; Weir 2008, p. 509
        233. Fraser 1994, p. 541; Guy 2004, p. 9
        234. Guy 2004, p. 504; Weir 2008, p. 509
        235. Fraser 1994, p. 554
        236. Guy 2004, pp. 505–506; Wormald 1988, pp. 13–14, 192
        237. Guy 2004, p. 505
        238. Wormald 1988, p. 14
        239. Wormald 1988, p. 15
        240. Wormald 1988, p. 16
        241. Wormald 1988, pp. 17, 192–193
        242. Wormald 1988, pp. 188–189
        243. Weir 2008, p. 4
        244. Fraser 1994, pp. 269–270; Guy 2004, p. 313: Weir 2008, p. 510
        245. Guy 2004, p. 391; see also Fraser 1994, p. 269
        246. Guy 2004, p. 502; Weir 2008, pp. 3–4, 509

        References
        • Bain, Joseph, ed. (1900). Calendar State Papers, Scotland: Volume II. Edinburgh, Scotland: General Register Office (Scotland).CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Bingham, Caroline (1995). Darnley: A Life of Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, Consort of Mary Queen of Scots. London, England: Constable & Robinson. ISBN 978-0-09-472530-0.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Boyd, William K., ed. (1915). Calendar of State Papers, Scotland: Volume IX. Glasgow: General Register Office (Scotland).CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Clifford, Arthur, ed. (1809). The State Papers and Letters of Sir Ralph Sadler. Edinburgh, Scotland: Archibald Constable and Co.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Donaldson, Gordon (1974). Mary, Queen of Scots. London, England: English Universities Press. ISBN 978-0-340-12383-6.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Fraser, Antonia (1994) [1969]. Mary Queen of Scots. London, England: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-297-17773-9.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Greig, Elaine Finnie (2004). "Stewart, Henry, duke of Albany [Lord Darnley] (1545/6–1567)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 1. Oxfordshire, England: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/26473. Retrieved 3 March 2012.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link) (subscription or UK public library membership required)
        • Guy, John (2004). "My Heart is my Own": The Life of Mary Queen of Scots. London, England: Fourth Estate. ISBN 978-1-84115-753-5.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Lewis, Jayne Elizabeth (1999). The Trial of Mary Queen of Scots: A Brief History with Documents. Boston, Massachusetts: Bedford/St. Martin's. ISBN 978-0-312-21815-7.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • McInnes, Charles T., ed. (1970). Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland Volume 12. Edinburgh, Scotland: General Register Office (Scotland).CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Weir, Alison (2008) [2003]. Mary, Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley. London, England: Random House. ISBN 978-0-09-952707-7.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Williams, Neville (1964). Thomas Howard, Fourth Duke of Norfolk. London, England: Barrie & Rockliff.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
        • Wormald, Jenny (1988). Mary, Queen of Scots. London, England: George Philip. ISBN 978-0-540-01131-5.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)

        Further reading
        • Bath, Michael (2008). Emblems for a Queen: The Needlework of Mary Queen of Scots. London: Archetype Publications. ISBN 978-1-904982-36-4.
        • Labanov, A. I. (Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky) (1844). Lettres et Memoires de Marie, Reine d'Ecosse. London: Charles Dolman.
        • Marshall, Rosalind (2006). Queen Mary's Women: Female Relatives, Servants, Friends and Enemies of Mary, Queen of Scots. Edinburgh: John Donald. ISBN 978-0-85976-667-8.
        • Marshall, Rosalind (2013). Mary, Queen of Scots. Edinburgh: National Museums of Scotland. ISBN 978-1-905267-78-1.
        • Read, Conyers (1909). The Bardon Papers: Documents relating to the imprisonment and trial of Mary, Queen of Scots. London: Camden Series.
        • Swain, Margaret (1973). The Needlework of Mary Queen of Scots. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. ISBN 978-0-442-29962-0.
        • Warnicke, Retha M. (2006). Mary Queen of Scots. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-29182-8.
        • Wilkinson, Alexander S. (2004). Mary Queen of Scots and French Public Opinion, 1542–1600. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230286153. ISBN 978-0-230-28615-3.
        Mary, Queen of Scots
        Born: 8 December 1542 Died: 8 February 1587
        Regnal titles
        Preceded by
        James V        		 Queen of Scotland
        1542–1567        		 Succeeded by
        James VI
        French royalty
        Preceded by
        Catherine de' Medici        		 Queen consort of France
        1559–1560        		 Vacant
        Title next held by
        Elisabeth of Austria

        This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.