3tt)aca. Kern ^nrb 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 G-, L, Blct-t, 
 
w-^ IP 
 
 QUEEN ELIZABETH 
 
 AND 
 
 THE FRENCH PROTESTANTS 
 
 IN THE YEARS 1559 AND 1560. 
 
 BY 
 
 HENRY CLAY STANCLIFT, 
 
 SPENCEB, NEW YORK, U. S A. 
 
 DISSEETATION PRESENTED 
 
 TO THE PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY 
 
 OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG 
 
 FOR 
 
 THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR. 
 --»<- — ^ 
 
 LEIPZIG-REUDNITZ 
 
 PRINTED BY OSWALD SCHMIDT 
 MDCCCI/XXXXII. 
 
 3i__ jfi 
 
The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031423506 
 
QUEEN ELIZABETH 
 
 AND 
 
 THE FRENCH PROTESTANTS 
 
 IN THE YEARS 1559 AND 1560. 
 
 BY 
 
 HENRY CLAY STANCLIFT, 
 
 SPENCER, NEW YORK, 0. S. A. 
 
 DISSERTATION PRESENTED 
 
 TO THE PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY 
 
 OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG 
 
 FOR 
 
 THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR. 
 
 LEIPZIG-REUDNtTZ 
 
 PRINTED BY OSWALD SCHMIDT 
 MDCC.QLXXXXII. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 , Page 
 
 Preface . • _• • ^ 
 
 I. Introduction .... 9 
 
 U. Close of ihe Reign of Henry II. May — July, 1559 ... 14 
 
 III. Montmorency and Navarre. July and August, 1559 . . 19 
 
 IV. Conspiracy of Amboise. September, 1559 — Marcb, 1660 . 27 
 V. Embarrassment of the Guises and Treaty of Edinburgh. 
 
 March — July, 1560 ib 
 
 VI. Rally and Fall of the Guises. August — December, 1660 65 
 
 VII. Conclusion 61 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 It was originally ray intention to make the narrative 
 here begun extend to the Treaty of Troyes, in April, 1564, 
 and include Elizabeth's connection with the first Huguenot 
 war; but I found the undertaking rather large, and have 
 confined myself for present purposes to a part of the field, 
 namely, that part about which there is most uncertainty. 
 I have already done much woi'k on the remaining period, 
 and intend to resume it at the earliest opportunity. 
 
 Of the books which I have used, the following are cited 
 in the notes: 
 
 T. GENEEAL AND SPECIAL HISTORIES. 
 
 Froude, James Anthony. History of England from the Fall 
 
 of Wolsey to the Defeat of the Spanish Armada. Vol. VI. 
 
 12 "'o- London, 1879. 
 Lingard, John, D. D. A History of England from the First 
 
 Invasion by the Eomans. Second Edition. Vol. VII. 
 
 8™- London, 1823. 
 Bekker, Ernst. Beitrage zur englischen Geschichte im Zeit- 
 
 alter Elisabeths. In Giessener Studien auf dem Gebiet 
 
 der Geschichte. No. IV. 8'">- Giessen, 1887. 
 Ranke, Leopold von. Franzosisch6 Geschichte vornehmlich 
 
 im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Vol. I. 
 
 8^"- Leipzig, 1868. 
 
— 6 — 
 
 Baird, Henry M. History of the Else of the Huguenots.: 
 
 Vol. I. 8^°- London, 1880. 
 Euble, le Baron Alphonse de. Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne' 
 
 d'Albret Suite de la Mariage de Jeanne d'Albret. Vol. H. 
 
 S^o- Paris, 1882. 
 Ruble, le Baron Alphonse de. Le Traite de Cateau-Cambresis. 
 
 8^"- Paris, 1889. 
 
 Decrue, Francis. Anne, Due de Montmorency, Connetable et 
 Pair de France sous les Eois Henry II., Francois II., et 
 Charles IX. 8^°- Paris, 1889. 
 
 H. COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS. 
 
 These include, in one form or another, all, or very 
 nearly all, of the English foreign correspondence of the 
 period, and a large pait of the French, Spanish, and 
 Venetian. 
 
 Calendar of State Papers, Foreign Series, of the ^eign of 
 Elizabeth, Preserved in the State Paper Department of 
 Her Majesty's Public Record Office. Edited by the Eev. 
 Joseph Stevenson, M. A. Vol. I., 1558—1559. Vol. II., 
 1559—1560. Vol. III., 1560— 1561. Vol. V., 1562. Vol. VI., 
 1563. 8^°- London, 1863—1869. 
 
 Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts, Relating to English 
 Affairs, Existing in the Archives and Collections of Venice, 
 and in other Libraries of Northern Italy. Vol. VII., 
 1558 — 1580. Edited by the Late Rawdon Brown and 
 the Eight Hon. Gr. Cavendish Bentinck, M. P. S^"- 
 London, 1890. 
 
 A Full View of the Public Transactions in the Eeign of 
 Q. Elizabeth: or a Particular Account of all the Memorable 
 Affairs of that Queen, Transmitted down to us in a Series 
 of Letters and other papers of State, written by herself 
 and her principal ministers, and by the foreign Princes 
 
— 7 — 
 
 and Ministers with whom she had Negociations; Published 
 from original and authentic Manuscripts in the Paper 
 Office, Cottonian Library, and other public and private 
 Repositories at home and abroad. By Dr. Patrick Forbes. 
 Vol. I. 4*°- London, 1740. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth and her Times, a Series of Original 
 Letters, selected from the Inedited Private Correspon- 
 dence of the Lord Treasurer Burghley, the Earl of 
 Leicester, the Secretarie-i Walsingham and Smith, Sir 
 Christopher Hatton, and most of the Distinguished Per- 
 sons of the Period. By Thomas Wright. Vol. I. 8 ^''• 
 London, 1838. 
 
 Negociations, Lettres, et Pieces Diverses relatives au R6gne 
 de Frangois II., Tirees du Portefeuille de Sebastien de 
 I'Aubespine 6veque de Limoges par Louis Paris. 4*"- 
 Paris, 1841. 
 
 Relations Politiques de la France et de I'Espagne avec 
 I'Ecosse au XVP Siecle, Papiers d'Etat, Pieces et Do- 
 cuments In6dits ou Pen Connus Tires des Biblioth6ques 
 et des Archives de France. Par Alexandre Teulet. 
 Vols. I., IL 8^°- Paris, 1862. 
 
 Relations Politiques des Pay-Bas et de I'Angleterre , sous 
 le R^gne de Philippe II., publi^es par M. le Baron Kervyn 
 de Lettenhove. Vols. I., n. 4*° Brussels, 1882. 
 
 Lettres d'Antoine de Bourbon et de Jehanne d'Albret publiees 
 pour la Society de I'Histoire de France par le Mis de 
 Rochambeau. Paris, 1877. 
 
 Lettres de Catherine de Medicis publiees par M. le C*° Hector 
 de la Ferri^re. Vol. I. 4*°- Paris, 1880. 
 
 Colleccion de Documentos Ineditos para la Historia de Espana 
 por el Marques de la Fuensanta del Valle, D. Jose 
 Sancho Rayon y D. Francisco de Zabalburu. Tomo 
 LXXXVII. S-^"- Madrid, 1886. 
 
— 8 — 
 
 The following book has appeared during the progress 
 of my work, but I have not yet had access to it. 
 
 Despatches of Michele Suriano and Marc' Antonio Barbaro, 
 Venetian Ambassadors at the Court of France, 1560—1563. 
 Edited by H. Layard. (Publications of the Huguenot 
 Society of London. Vol. VI.) Lymington, 1891. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 A combination of the gravest difficulties stared Queen 
 Elizabeth in the face, when on the seventeenth of November, 
 fifteen hundred fifty-eight, she succeeded her half-sister on the 
 throne of England. The war with France into which Mary 
 had dragged the nation to assist her husband, Philip of Spain, 
 had resulted in the surrender of Calais, the last foothold 
 across the channel; peace was not yet concluded ; there was 
 no army or fleet; and the treasury was not only empty but 
 burdened with a heavy debt. Poverty among the masses had 
 given rise to social discontent, and the country was rent 
 by religious dissensions. A Papal judgment had pronounced 
 the marriage of Elizabeth's mother null, and there was a 
 Catholic claimant to the throne in the person of Mary Queen 
 of Scots, who had rendered her pretensions especially dangerous 
 by her marriage with the Dauphin of France. Never was 
 wise counsel more needed, and it was fortunate for Elizabeth 
 that she had the sagacity, as well as the opportunity, to 
 call to her side so able and devoted a minister as William 
 Cecil. 
 
 England, however, was not the only country which was 
 divided in religion, and it was of especial importance to 
 Elizabeth that in the lands ruled by her enemies, to the 
 south across the channel and to the north across the border, 
 the reformatory movement had gained a foothold. In France 
 it had at first and for a long time thereafter experienced 
 little progress, but was now making rapid strides, had enrolled 
 
— 10 — 
 
 under its banner some of the foremost nobles of the kingdom, 
 and had acquired strength in various places in the central 
 and southern provinces and also in Normandy. 
 
 Early in her reign Elizabeth began to court the fiiendship 
 of Protestants in other countries. A month after her accession 
 she commissioned Christopher Mundt, who had formerly been 
 in the service of Henry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth, 
 as her agent in Germany and instructed him to endeavor 
 "to revive and maintain amity'' with the Protestant princes. * 
 
 In view of the meeting of Parliament which was near 
 at hand, Cecil proposed to party leaders questions regarding 
 the course which ought to be pursued. One of the answers 
 received deserves our special attention. It contains memoranda 
 of the dangers which might ensue upon the alteration of 
 religion in England, dangers not only from sources at home, 
 but from Eome, France, Scotland, and Ireland. Among the 
 comments on how they could be met is this statement : "For 
 France, to practice a peace ; or if it be ()ffered. not to refuse 
 it. If controversy of religion be there among them, to help 
 to kindle it." In Scotland, an effort should be made "to help 
 their divisions and especially to augment the hope" of the 
 Protestants. - 
 
 Peace was soon concluded. Henry the Second of France 
 and Philip the Second of Spain, as well as Elizabeth, were 
 in financial straits, and each Avished his hands free that he 
 might crush the growing spirit of heresy in his dominions. 
 Negotiations had been begun before Mary died, and a treaty 
 was signed at Cateau-Cambresis in the following February. 
 Philip stood by England, and although France retained Calais, 
 she went through the form of agreeing to restore it at the 
 end of eight years, or else pay five hundred thousand crowns. 
 In the meantime she was to furnish hostages. During this 
 period neither the French nor the English sovereign should 
 make any hostile attempt, directly or indirectly, upon the 
 
 ' Cal. For. El., i. nos. 87, 111. 
 
 '■i Proude, vi. pp. 124, 130. Cal, For. El., i. no. 69. 
 
— 11 — 
 
 realm or subjects of the other. If tlie former should do so, 
 either Calais or the mouey would be forfeited, if the latter 
 should do it, her enemies would be released from their 
 obligations. ^ 
 
 In the course of the winter and spring Elizabeth's 
 government went over to Protestantism, and the other line 
 of conduct suggested, it ultimately adopted, first in Scotland 
 and later in France, that is, entered upon intrigues with the 
 disaffected or Protestant element of the population while 
 avoiding open hostility with the ruling powers. 
 
 Tiie condition- of the times made such a policy seem 
 particularly expedient. There was danger from France and 
 Scotland, but England was not prepared to make open war. 
 The religious dissensions in Europe afforded an inviting field 
 for intrigue, and Elizabeth, whose previous years had been 
 passed in the midst of suspicions and plots and who had 
 herself no hesitation about telling the most audacious lies 
 when she thought it could serve her purpose, was not the 
 person to have scruples about intriguing with the rebelliously 
 inclined subjects of other monarchs, even if such scruples were 
 called for. Her safety lay in the religious discords in Scotland 
 and France, and in the jealousy between the Spanish and 
 French monarchs. Her greatest political enemies were the 
 rulers of Scotland and France. To thwart them, she would 
 foster the divisions among their subjects. Philip detested 
 her religion and her encouragement of Protestantism in other 
 countries, but he was, at the same time , too jealous of his 
 own power to do anything which would enable France to 
 gather strength. 
 
 It is the object of this dissertation to present what can 
 be ascertained of the relations of Elizabeth to the French 
 Protestants and their political allies, to leading individuals 
 as well as to movements, before the death of Francis the 
 Second in December, fifteen hundred sixty. It is beyond all 
 doubt that 1r^ the beginning of the following year the 
 
 i)_Cal. For. El., i. no. 483; Forbes, i. p. 74. 
 
— 12 — 
 
 English government instituted a series of close and systematic 
 intrigues with the Huguenots. What took place before that 
 is not so clear, although historians have not hesitated to 
 make positive assertions. 
 
 The treaty of Cateau-Cambresis was ratified by both 
 parties in May, and one of the English commissioners sent to 
 receive Henry's confirmation remained as resident ambassador 
 at the French court. This was Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, 
 a man worthy of a prominent place among the many inter- 
 esting characters of the time. In Mary's reign he had been 
 arrested on a charge of participation in Wyatt's insurrection 
 against the queen, and had been a fellow-prisoner of Elizabeth 
 in the Tower of London ; but, in spite of the strong evidence 
 against him, had managed to secure an acquittal. He remained 
 in France five years, most of the time as minister. A man 
 of keen intelligence and a bold and skillful intriguer, "fitted," 
 in the opinion of the Spanish ambassador in England, "for 
 the execution of any bad undertaking," ^ he not only turned 
 his own powers of observation to good account, but made 
 use of spies and agents. At a period a little later than this, 
 one of the Venetian ambassadors, newly arrived in France, 
 wrote home, after an interview with Sir Nicholas, that the 
 latter "appears to me to be a gentleman of acute intellect, 
 and of judgment and good-will, although he now lives accord- 
 ing to the religion of that kingdom." In this very conver- 
 sation Throckmorton seems to have justified the impression 
 as to his acuteness by hoodwinking the Venetian regarding 
 the intentions of Elizabeth in language which seemed to that 
 gentleman "very straightforward and affectionate." ^ His letters 
 to Elizabeth, Cecil, and the Council, largely in cipher, are 
 of the greatest importance for a comprehension of the re- 
 lations of England and France at the time. They are full 
 and frank; for Throckmorton aimed to convey correct 
 
 1 The Bishop of Aquila to the Duchess of Parma, Jan. 21, 1560: 
 Lettenhove, Rel. Pol, des Pays-Bas et de rAngleterre, ii. p. 194. 
 
 2 Barbaro to the Doge and Senate, Apr. 16, 1562 : Cal. Ven., vii. 
 no. 283. 
 
— 13 — 
 
 impressions and give helpful advice, and did not stop to 
 consider whether his statements would be agreeable. 
 
 Some knowledge of the chief personages at the French 
 court and of the groups which they formed is necessary to 
 an understanding of our subject. Henry the Second had now 
 obtained peace, and was ready to devote all his energies to 
 the suppression of Protestantism; but a mortal wound, received 
 in a tournament, put an end to his life on the tenth of July. 
 Francis the Second was only sixteen years of age when he 
 succeeded his father upon the throne, and was deficient in 
 both mental and bodily strength. He was under the influence 
 of his wife, the young Scottish queen, and she, in turn, was 
 guided by her maternal uncles, the Duke of Guise and the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine. The queen-mother, Catherine de' Medici, 
 who had been neglected by her husband for his mistresses 
 and had played so insignificant a role during his reign that 
 her real character was little known, now saw a field opening 
 for her ambition. For the present, she felt compelled to 
 cast in her lot with the Guises. This family had acquired 
 great influence at the court of Henry the Second. Of six 
 brothers, the eldest was Francis, Duke of Guise, the capturer 
 of Calais. He was a good soldier, but, outside of military 
 affairs, possessed little knowledge, and in matters of politics 
 and religion submitted to the advice of his brother Charles, 
 the accomplished and able, but unprincipled Cardinal of 
 Lorraine. Their eldest sister was the widow of James the 
 Fifth of Scotland and mother of the reigning queen, and was 
 then in that country acting as regent. 
 
 Over against these was a hostile party, headed by the 
 Bourbons. Anthony of Bourbon was, next to Henry's children, 
 the first prince of the blood, and through his marriage with 
 Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre, had become titular king 
 of that country. His wife was a Protestant, and at this 
 period he himself attended Protestant services. His brother 
 Louis, Prince of Conde, was also a Protestant, and though 
 not without serious faults, had far more stability of charactei' 
 than Anthony. Associated with the Bourbons, were the three 
 
— 14 — 
 
 Clmtillons, comprising the illustrious Admiral Coligny, his 
 younger brother, Francis d'Andelot, both of them Reformers, .; 
 and an elder brother, Odet, who, though a cardinal, was 
 suspected of being at heart a convert to the new doctrines " 
 and who subsequently espoused them openly. Anne de Mont- 
 morency , Constable of France , had been one of the most 
 prominent and influential characters at the court of Henry 
 the Second, but was hated by Catherine and with her hus'- 
 band's death lost influence for a time in state affairs. He 
 had been a rival of the Guises. The three Chatillons were 
 his nephews, and Eleanor de Roye, his grandniece, was the 
 wife of the Prince of Conde; but although political and 
 personal ties bound him to the Protestant leaders, the con- 
 stable himself remained a Catholic. 
 
 Tliere were thus two parties, one headed by the Catho- 
 lics, the other, for the most part, by Protestants; but what 
 really distinguislied them throughout the reign of Francis 
 the Second was their attitude to the pretensions of the Guises., 
 French Protestantism had no more violent enemies than thei; 
 members of that house, and all who favored the new faith 
 through depth of conviction were naturally foes to their 
 ambition. Others of their opponents , like Constable Mont- 
 morency, were Catholics, and their hostility was the result 
 of personal rivalry or party affiliation. Still others were 
 animated by a combination of motives, and some among them 
 proved willing to throw aside religious scruples, provided 
 personal or political ends could be gained. 
 
 11. 
 
 CLOSE OF THE REIGN OF HENRY THE 
 SECOND. MAY— JULY, 1559. 
 
 The party differences south of the Channel which burst 
 into flame upon the accession of Francis the Second, had 
 for some time been ready to ignite. It was the opponents 
 of the Guises who had been favorable to peace with Eng- 
 
— is- 
 land. Certain occurrences in the relations between that 
 country and members of the two groups before the death of 
 Henry the Second are not without interest in the light of 
 subsequent events.^ 
 
 In Throckmorton's instructions as resident ambassador 
 he was directed to "promote the increase of amity between 
 the two realms," and when he asked how he should conduct 
 himself toward the Guises, was instructed, in case they 
 should show a friendly spirit, to treat them likewise; if not, 
 he might dissemble as he should see fit. "It is best to know 
 them, and without knowledge, if any harm be meant, -it is 
 to be learned thence, and therein may ye have most help 
 of the Scots." 2 
 
 In the month after Elizabeth's accession the constable 
 had written to Cecil and other Englishmen, asserting his 
 desire for peace and his readiness to do all in his power to 
 bring it about. ^ His eldest son, Francis de Montmorency, 
 was one of the two French commissioners sent in the follow- 
 ing May to receive her ratification of the treaty. A younger 
 son accompanied them, and Throckmorton suggested to Cecil 
 that there be "some special entertainment used toward him" 
 
 • Froude makes two statements which are peihaps worthy of note 
 in this connection. He says (vi. p. 138): "While the Cardinal of Lorraine 
 at Cercamp [where the commissioners first met to negotiate for peace] 
 would have persuaded Spain to sacrifice England , the King of Navarre 
 was p,llowed [by Henry the Second] to tempt England to sacrifice Spain." 
 He also tells us (vii. p. 176) that after the treaty was framed, "the 
 king of Navarre wrote indeed to Elizabeth to assure her of the lasting 
 regard of Henry; to tell her that all which she had gained at Cambray 
 would have been conceded more willingly in a private treaty; and that 
 although the immediate opportunity was lost, 'a way' would soon be 
 found again to settle the question more definitively." I find no mention 
 of these matters, however, in either the "Calendar of State Papers," 
 Lettrea d'Antoine de Bourbon et de Jehanne d'Albret^ De Ruble's 
 "Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret," or the same writer's 'Traite 
 de Gateau Cambresis." The King of Navarre was not present at the 
 negotiations. His interests were represented by two commissioners.: 
 
 2 Cal. For. El , i. nos. 621, 645, 676; Forbes, i. pp. 88, 89. 
 
 3 Montmorency to Cecil, to the Earl of Bedford, and to the Earl of 
 Pembroke, Dec. 30, 1568: Cal. For. El., i. noa. 154, 155, 166. 
 
— 16 — 
 
 and, at his departure, "some convenient present prepared for 
 him," as well as for his brother and the other commissioner, „ 
 "which, though it be extraordinary, yet the constable must 
 needs take it very thankfully." Sir Nicholas seems, however,, 
 to have feared Elizabeth's parsimony; for he added, "It may 
 serve the queen's majesty to some other purpose a great deal 
 more than the value of the present." The suggestions of 
 Throckmorton were complied with, and Francis de Mont- 
 morency returned full of praises for the entertainment and 
 courtesy experienced. ^ The English commissioners, including , 
 Throckmorton, were, in the meantime, handsomely entertained 
 on the way to Paris at two of the constable's houses.^ 
 
 Sir Nicholas immediately informed the English govern- 
 ment of the preparations making to suppress Protestantism 
 both in France and in Scotland. The French Protestants, 
 he reported, were ready to "resist to the death," and they 
 said that as "the spirituality of France taketh this time as 
 propitious for the subversion of religion, so the queen's 
 majesty hath the like for the setting forth of the same."^ 
 He thought it would be well "to use the matter in Scotland 
 
 • Commission of Henry II. and letters of the English commissioners 
 in France: Cal. For. El., i. nos. 661, 685, 787, 789; Forbes, i. pp. 92, 
 113, 115. For Elizabeth's entertainment of the French commissioners 
 see Cal. For. EL, i. no. 780, ii. pref. p. xliv. et seq., and Cal. Ven , vii. 
 nos. 77, 79. Froude evidently makes the mistake of understanding it to 
 have been the constable and not his eldest son who was one of the 
 commissioners. He translates without comment from a letter of the 
 Bishop of Aquila to Philip II., dated May 30 (see vol. vi. p. 211), to 
 that effect. The bishop very likely understood the matter so, but does 
 not state it quite as Froude would have him. He mentions the com- 
 missioner merely as "Montmorency" (see Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des Pays 
 Bas et de I'Angleterre, i. p. 526, or Documentos Ineditos, Ixxxvii. 
 p. 191). In Froude's index "Montmorency, Constable of France," is 
 mentioned as having been "in London," and the reader is referred to 
 vol. vi. p. 211 as above. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Cecil, May 23, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 732; 
 Forbes, i. p. 103. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, May 15, 1559: Cal. For. El., i. no, 685; 
 Forbes, i, p. 92- 
 
— 17 — 
 
 after such sort as may seem best to serve the turn and the 
 like in the other places, if it shall be thought convenient."* 
 Two weeks later he urged the English government to 
 "nourish and entertain the garboil in Scotland as much as 
 may be."^ The Scots had already broken out into open 
 insurrection, and money was sent by the English to help 
 them. Regarding the situation in England, Philip's ambassador 
 there, the Bishop of Aquila, wrote to his master: "The fear 
 which they have of the French by reason of Scotland is 
 incredible, and if they were not so confident of the weakness 
 of the King of France , who , they say, will for many years 
 be unable to make war, and of the large number of heretics 
 which they say there is in France, who hope some day to 
 be able to embarrass the king, they would certainly consider 
 themselves lost; for they know their weakness and the part 
 which he of France with the title of legitimate heir and of 
 defender of the religion would play in the kingdom."^ 
 
 The admiral, arriving at the French court, had treated 
 the English commissioners with great courtesy. Conducting 
 them to Notre Dame, he made inquiries of Throckmorton 
 regarding the state of religion in England. When the mass 
 began, he was not to be found, but reappeared in time to 
 escort them to their lodgings, and on the way displayed his 
 Protestantism by praising King Edward as having been "the 
 most virtuous and godUest prince and of the greatest hope 
 to do good in Christendom that was of many years." ^ 
 
 The constable assured the English commissioners of his 
 
 « Throckmorton to Cecil, May 23, 1559: Cal. For. El., i. no. 732; 
 Forbes, i. p. 101. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Cecil, June 7, 1559: Cal. For. El., i. no. 826; 
 Forbes, i. p. 118. "Garboil," a word now obsolete, meaning "tumult" 
 or "disorder." 
 
 3 The Bishop of Aquila to Philip 11., .TunQ 19, 1559: Lettenhove, 
 Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, i. p. 538; Dooumentos Ineditos, 
 Ixxxvii. p. 201. 
 
 * Throckmorton to Cecil, May 30, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 789; 
 Forbes, i. p. 115. 
 
 2 
 
— 18 — 
 
 good-will toward their country, especially now, because of 
 tlie "many goodly virtues" with which he understood the 
 queen to he endowed. He and his were ready to do her 
 "aU the honor and service they could." ^ Throckmorton was 
 convinced that Montmorency was thoroughly in favor of peace, 
 and therefore in view of the latter's great power at court, 
 did not fear that the French would, for the present at least, 
 proceed to war to vindicate the claims of Mary Stuart. ^ 
 
 The constable's expressions of good-will were not, however^' 
 to be taken too seriously. In spite of his dislike to the 
 Guises, he could not entirely forget the interests of the 
 dauphin. When Throckmorton, acting on instructions, ■' remon- 
 strated with him for the assumption of the arms of England 
 by Francis and Mary, the aged warrior treated the matter 
 somewhat coldly, though lie promised to lay it before the 
 King's council, and renewed his professions of esteem for 
 Elizabeth. ' Word reached the English ambassador that Mont- 
 morency, on one occasion at least, had declared that the 
 dauphiness hai "right and title" to the English crown. ^ When 
 Henry tlie Second was wounded, the constable sent Elizabeth 
 a formal notiiication of the fact, and she despatched a 
 messenger to the French court with expressions of sorrow. 
 In her reply to Montmorency's letter she said she mingled 
 with her "grief for the French King's hurt" her "gladness 
 to be advertised of the fact" by her "good cousin."" 
 
 Among the foreigners serving in the French army was 
 the colonel of the Scottish guards, the Earl of Arran, eldest 
 
 ' The English ambassadors in Prance to Elizabeth, May 30, 1559: 
 Cal. For. EL, i. no. 787; Forbes, i. p. 113. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Cecil, June 7, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 826; 
 Forbes, i. p. 118. 
 
 3 Cecil and the Council to Tlii-ockmorton, June 13, 1559: Cal. For. 
 EL, i. nos. 840, 837; Forbes, i. pp. 131, 134. 
 
 * Throckmorton to the Lords of the Council, June 21, 1559: Cal. 
 For. EL, i. no. 868; Forbes, i. p. 138. 
 
 ■'' Throckmorton to Cecil, June 21, 1559: Cal. For. EL. i. no. 870- 
 Forbes, i. p, 136. 
 
 fi Cal. For. EL, i. nos. 898, 964, 965, 967. 
 
— 19 ~ 
 
 son of the head of the house of Hamilton. The father was 
 next of kin to Mary Stuart, and had been the recipient of 
 the French duchy of Chatelherault. The earl had recently 
 been converted to the reformed faith, and it was the desire 
 of the Scotch Protestants that he should become the hus- 
 band of Elizabeth. He was summoned to attend the marriage 
 of the French king's sister and daughter in June, but sent 
 an excuse for not coming, and learning that the King had 
 resolved to have him arrested because of his heresy, dis- 
 appeared. It is probably true, as the French suspected, that 
 Throckmorton had bSen instrumental in the matter. ^ The 
 earl fled to Geneva, and an agent sent by the English 
 government conducted him to London. Before proceeding to 
 Scotland, he had secret interviews with Elizabeth, but the 
 marriage project came to naught. 
 
 As we have seen, the Guises became, with the death 
 of Henry the Second, virtual rulers of France and Scotland, 
 and their niece was already a claimant to the throne of 
 England; but there was a hostile party in each of the 
 countries under their sway. Elizabeth was seeking the 
 friendship of the Protestant princes of Germany, and was 
 feeding the flame of insurrection in Scotland. A shrewd and 
 daring intriguer, who was urging this policy towards Scot- 
 land, represented England at the French court, where he 
 had established amicable relations with some of the adversaries 
 of the Guises. 
 
 TIT. 
 
 MONTMORENCY AND NAVARRE. 
 JULY AND AUGUST, 1559. 
 
 In one of Throckmorton's earliest letters he had asked 
 that he might soon be recalled, and the request was repeated 
 
 1 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Cecil, and the Council, and 
 Cecil to Throckmorton, May — July, 1559: Cal.For.EL, i. nos. 789 (par. 9), 
 826 (par. 16), 833 (par. 6), P40. 868 (par. 16, 18), 870 (par. 6), 888, 1009; 
 
 2* 
 
— 20 — 
 
 almost uninterruptedly as long as he was in France. At 
 first he urged that the expenses of the post were greater- 
 than he could bear, but shortly after added that he had 
 fallen under suspicion. ^ The queen insisted, however, that 
 his services there were very acceptable to her, and that he 
 must be content that for a season she have the use of them. ^ 
 He now replied that the death of Henry had brought those 
 into power who had an evil opinion of him , partly on reli- 
 gious grounds , but especially because they considered him 
 "to have been a practicer in the matters of the Earl of 
 Arran and of Scotland, besides other matters for the which 
 they hold me greatly suspected," and therefore that he could 
 not do her such service as he would , but if she were 
 thoroughly resolved that he should remain, he would do his 
 utmost. ' 
 
 The king being so young, it was to be expected that 
 Anthony of Navarre, or at least some other prince of the 
 blood, would have the chief voice in the government; but 
 such an arrangement did not accord with the ambitious 
 views of the king's mother and the queen's uncles. Throck- 
 morton promptly reported the changes at court. The con- 
 stable, Cardinal Ohatillon, and the admiral were, by order 
 of the king, kept occupied with attendance upon his late 
 majesty's remains, from which circumstance it was concluded' 
 that Montmorency and his house would "even now at the 
 first be excluded from all doings" and that the Guises were 
 
 Forbea, i. pp. 117, 120, 129, 131, 144, 136, 147, 164. Henry II. to 
 Noailles, June 21, 1559: Teulet, i. p. 320. As Lingard says (vol. VII. 
 p. 377, footnote), "Throckmorton repeatedly mentions it [the suspicion 
 of the French], but never so much as hints that it is false." 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Cecil, May 23 and June 21, 1559: Cal. For. EL, 
 i. nos. 732, 870; Forbes, i. pp. 101, 186. 
 
 2 Queen Elizabeth to Throckmorton, July 11, 1559: Cal. For. EL, 
 i. no. 970; Forbes, i. p. 156. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, July 13, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 987; 
 Forbes, i. p. 160. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 18, 1559: 
 CaL For. EL, i. no. 1009; Forbea, i. p. 163. 
 
— 21 — 
 
 "like to govern all about the king," who was "much affected 
 towards them;" but what was "like to become of this state 
 and the government" could not be known until the arrival 
 of the King of Navarre , who was in the south of France. ' 
 Sir Nicholas also notified Cecil that certain Frenchmen 
 were said to be about to cross over to England to avoid 
 persecution at home. He hoped that those who came really 
 on account of religion might find shelter, as Englishmen had 
 done abroad under similar circumstances; but advised that 
 care should be exercised, on the ground there was danger 
 that some might, "under color of reMgion," serve "some other 
 turn." ^ 
 
 Among the problems which Cecil had under consideration 
 a week after King Henry's death was the question, "What 
 is to be done in France for the maintenance of the faction?"^ 
 
 Montmorency, acknowledging the receipt of Elizabeth's 
 letter, wished her to believe that there was "not a gentle- 
 man in France better inclined than himself to do her ser- 
 vice.'" On the same day Throckmorton advised her to write 
 again to the constable, sending "some kind letter to comfort" 
 him, the delivery of which might be left to his own discre- 
 tion; for he thought, from what he had heard, that if the 
 King of Navarre should make any changes, Montmorency 
 would become a principal minister. Sir Nicholas and the 
 others who believed this rumor seem to have overlooked the 
 fact that the feelings of Anthony toward the constable had 
 been anything but friendly since the negotiations at Cateau- 
 Cambresis, where the latter and the other French com- 
 missioners had effected nothing for the interests of Jeanne 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 11 and 13, 1559: Cal. 
 For. El., i. nos. 972, 985 (par. 1); Forbes, i. p. 157. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Cecil, July 19 and Aug. 1, 1559: Cal. For. EL, 
 nos. 1025, 1103; Forbes, i. pp. 167, 186. 
 
 3 Cecil's memoranda, July 18, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 1008. 
 
 ■• The constable to Queen Elizabeth, July 18, 1559: Cal. For. El,, 
 i. no. 1011, 
 
— 22 — 
 
 d'Albret's claim upon Spanish Navarre. ' It was also Throct 
 morton's opinion that if nothing should be done by Anthony, 
 the constable would retire; for the king had already given 
 his father's favorite to understand that the Cardinal of 
 Lorraine and the Duke of Guise should '-manage his whole 
 affairs."- Before the messages of Montmorency and Throck- 
 morton reached England, Cecil had already decided that a 
 letter be "sent to the constable so as to embrace his good- . 
 will," and "another to the Queen of Navarre, in case her 
 husband have the government, to embrace her;"' and these 
 letters, together with others, had been forwarded to Throck- 
 morton."' 
 
 On the day following the king's death it had been pro- 
 posed in the council that Francis use a seal bearing the 
 title of "King of France, England, Scotland and Ireland;" 
 but the Prince of Conde had recommended that the decision 
 be deferred till his brother's arrival, and the matter had 
 for the time being been dropped. ^ A few days later it was 
 again called up. This time the constable arose, and addres- 
 sing tlie Guises, said he thought it ''not honorable that there 
 should be used in tlie seal of France any other arms" than 
 
 ' Baivd, i. p. 352. De Ruble, Tmite cle Cateau-Cambresis, p. 145, 
 footnote 2. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 18, 1659: Cal. For. EL, 
 i. no. 1009; Forbes, i. p. 165. 
 
 3 Cecil's memoranda, July 18, 1659: Cal. For. El,, i. no. 1008. 
 
 * Queen Elizabeth to Francis II., the constable, the Duke of Guise, 
 the King of Navarro, and the Qaeen of Navarre, July 17—19, 1559: Cal. 
 For. El., i. nos. 1014—1021.. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 27, 
 1559: Cal. For. EI, i. no. 1075 (par. 1); Forbes, i. p. 172. Here occurs 
 an instance of carelessness in the editing of the "Calendar." That 
 collection states that "Tremayne delivered" these letters to Throck- 
 morton; but a careful reading of Forbes shows that it was Killigrew 
 who did it. The editor must have read the document very carelessly; 
 for Throckmorton states in the next sentence, "as yet Richard Tremain 
 is not come unto me," and the statement is reproduced with a slight 
 modification of the language in the "Calendar." 
 
 ^ Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 13, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 985 (par. 3); Forbes, i. p. 158. 
 
— 23 — 
 
 those of that country. At any rate, such were the reports 
 which reached Throckmorton, and in view of them he decided 
 to deliver the queen's letter to the constable at once, in 
 order that if any question touching her relations with France 
 should again come before the council, he might "be the better 
 affected" to her. ^ Accordingly, Sir Nicholas visited the con- 
 stable and, after being received very courteously, gave him 
 the letter, stating also that the queen wished him to put 
 her friendship to proof and that she would do the like by 
 him "in such things as may occur on this side from time to 
 time." The veterafi warrior and courtier replied in like 
 vein, said that he would do what he could, but that his 
 opportunities would hereafter be limited. He had a favor 
 to ask, and that was that Throckmorton would help him to 
 procure some English greyhounds. '^ The ambassador con- 
 sidered the matter of some importance ; for he wrote to Cecil 
 that a gift of this kind would "be more esteemed than a 
 greater present at another time,"'' and a month later inti- 
 mated to the queen that the hounds should not be forgotten, 
 for they would ''be well bestowed." ^ In the answer to Eliza- 
 betli's letter Montmorency declared that Avhat she had written 
 and what Throckmorton had said gave him great pleasure 
 and "increased the affection" which he had always felt towards 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 27, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1075 (par. 4, 5); Forbes, i. p. 173. 
 
 ■^ Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, August 16, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1090 (par. 1, 2, 3, 4); Forbes, i. p. 197. According to the "Calen- 
 dar," the constable said "divers times" to Throckmorton, "Mon compere, 
 when shall I have occasion to see that woman [Queen Elizabeth] whom 
 the world speaketh so much of?' and that he thought one day he should 
 see her." In reality, however, as we see by consulting Forbes, where 
 the document is given in full, the constable was quoting words which 
 Henry the Second had used to him. Decrue (p. 260) has made the 
 mistake of accepting the statement of the '-Calendar.'' 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, Aug. 9, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. no. 1177 
 (postcript, evidently of later date). 
 
 * Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Sept. 10, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1331; Forbes, i. p. 227. 
 
— 24 — 
 
 her. He said again that he was ready to serve her whenever 
 he should have the opportunity. ' His eldest son sent the 
 queen some pieces of music, but they failed to reach their 
 destination. ^ In this exchange of courtesies between Eliza- 
 beth and Montmorency there is , of course , much of empty 
 formality as well as a surfeit of expressions of esteem, but 
 beneath them we can detect a real tendency of the two to 
 draw near each other, in view of the common foe, the house 
 of Guise. It led, however, to no substantial results. 
 
 Thus we see that Throckmorton was on very good terms 
 with the constable. His relations with the King of Navarre 
 went somewhat deeper. On the death of Henry , Elizabeth 
 sent to Anthony a letter containing formal expressions of 
 good-wilP and another, as we have seen, to liis wife. The 
 
 ' The constable to Queen Elizabeth, Aug. 16, 1659: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1201. 
 
 2 Montmorency to Thiockmorton, Aug. 14, 1559: Cal. For. El., i. no. 
 1189. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Aug. 25: Cal. For. El., i. no. 
 1244; Forbes, i. p. 215. Cecil to Throckmorton, Aug. 29: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1274. Throckmorton to Cecil, Sept. 19: Cal. For. EL, i, no. 1339, 
 p. 5G3. A mistake has been made in numbering the documents in this 
 volume. The numbers first run up to 1355, proceed from that point 
 however, as 1336, 1337 etc., and so continue. Hence there are tviro 
 documents numbered 1339. 
 
 The letter given in an abridged form in the "Calendar" (no. 1189) 
 under the heading 'Montmorency to Throckmorton" does not occur in 
 Forbes. The heading implies that the constable wrote it, and in the 
 index to vol. i. it is mentioned in the list of letters from him. Decrue 
 (p. 260) has assumed it to be such. The editor of the "Calendar" seems, 
 however, to have made a mistake. Throckmorton, in his letter to the 
 queen, speaks of the person who sent the music and wrote the letter 
 to him as "Monsieur de Montmorency" This was the appdlation given 
 at the time to the eldest son of the constable, the father being always 
 known by his title (see Decrue, p. 25). Moreover, the writer of the 
 letter speaks of having been recently in England, and of having been 
 ill of a fever of which he had not yet recovered at the time of writing. 
 So far as I know, neither of these statements applies to the constable; 
 but Francis de Montmorency had, as we have seen, been at the English 
 court within two months. 
 
 ' Queen Elizabeth to the King of Navarre, July 19, 1559: Cal. For. 
 El., i. no. 1018. 
 
— 25 — 
 
 latter epistle was very cordial. Elizabeth began by inquiring 
 in Biblical language, "If God be for us, who can be against 
 us?" She wished she could make the acquaintance of the 
 Queen of Navarre. She entertained her kindly feelings "not 
 only for the degree of the world, but for the true profession 
 and sincerity of your Christian religion,'' and prayed that 
 the Queen of Navarre might "continue a supporter of his 
 Holy Word." ^ Partly to flatter Anthony, partly because he 
 did not know how important the contents of the letters 
 might be, Throckmorton sent a special messenger, Sir Henry 
 Killigrew, to Vend^me to tell him that letters from the 
 queen awaited him in Paris, and to inquire what should be 
 done with them. The king . said he was glad to hear of 
 Elizabeth's "wise, politic, godly, and discreet proceedings in 
 religion," and would like to "enter into friendship" with lier. 
 He was himself desirous to "set forth religion as much as 
 was in him," and to discourage "such as should stand in 
 contrary." He asked if she had formed an alliance with the 
 Protestant Princes of Germany. Killigrew answered that he 
 did not know, but thought there was "great show of friend- 
 ship." The King also asked what had become of the Earl of 
 Arran, and Killigrew said he "knew nothing certain," but 
 "had heard of his being at Geneva and in Germany." As 
 to the letters, the king directed that on his arrival in Pans 
 Sir Nicholas should send to inquire when they should be 
 delivered. '^ 
 
 Anthony proceeded to the capital, and by his own 
 appointment had a secret conference with the ambassador 
 at St. Denis on the twenty - second of August at eleven 
 o'clock at night. Throckmorton, delivering the queen's letters, 
 told the king that she would gladly form a league with 
 
 ' Queen Elizabeth to the Queen of Navarre, July 19, 1559: Cal. For, 
 EL, i. no. 1020. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 27 and Aug. 15, 1559: 
 Cal. For. EL, L nos. 1075 (par. 5), 1190 (par. 9, 10); Forbes, i. pp. 
 174, 201. 
 
— 26 — 
 
 him to promote religion. Tlie king expressed his thanks, 
 and said that on his part he would do what he could, 
 rejoicing that he had so good a colleague in so good a cause; 
 but did not wish to prolong the audience, for he "had many 
 eyes upon him" and so, said he, had Throckmorton. The 
 interview took place in the king's wardrobe, and the only 
 other person present Avas his secretary, who heard nothing 
 that was said. For fear of detection Sir Nicholas declined 
 both the king's invitation to stay all night and the offer of 
 an escort to his lodgings. 
 
 On the following day Anthony sent to the ambassador 
 to meet him again that evening at eight o'clock in the 
 cloister of the Augustinian friars. Both were to appear in 
 disguise, and the king said he would be attended by a lackey 
 and a page. When they came together, Anthony indulged 
 in elaborate assurances of his affection for the queen. He 
 would write to her "with his own hand," and wished that 
 she would 'do the like always to him," "for all princes have 
 corrupt ministers about them," and if the French or Spaniards 
 •'should know of the amity and intelligence betwixt the queen 
 your mistress and me, it should be dangerous for us both 
 and hinder the good enterprise that we are about." Before 
 long he would dispatch one whom he trusted to the queen 
 "with his mind in sundry things," and wished Throckmorton 
 to send one of his most reliable agents to conduct the 
 messenger secretly to her. He said the queen's marriage 
 would be the "making and marring of all," and desired her 
 to be advised by him. Throckmorton concluded from this 
 that he intended to offer "some of his friends." At any rate, 
 the king hoped she would not marry a member of the House 
 of Austria, for they were "great papists," or the Earl of 
 Arran. He asked if she were still "at liberty" in the matter, 
 and Throckmorton assured him that she was , and had not 
 yet decided what she would do. Anthony requested an inter- 
 view with Sir Nicholas after the next audience of the latter 
 with the French king, and begged him, as he esteemed his 
 honor, to let nobody but the queen and her most trusted 
 
- 27 — 
 
 minister know of their conversation. Throckmorton promised 
 the utmost secrecy , and they parted. ^ The king sent the 
 queen a letter expressing his gratitude and readiness to 
 serve her.- A great many words had passed on both sides, 
 but this seems to have been all that ever came of the pro- 
 posed league between Elizabeth and the vacillating King of 
 Navarre. ^ ~ '~~~ 
 
 It was soon reported that a contention for precedence 
 had arisen between Navarre and others. "This being thus," 
 was Throckmorton's amiable comment, "matters are like to 
 go well."-' The cSnstable kept away from the court, and 
 although Anthony remained for a time, he exercised no 
 influence. '" Neither rendered Elizabeth any service. 
 
 IV. 
 
 CONSPIRACY OF AMBOISE. 
 SEPTEMBER, 1559 — MARCH, 1560. 
 
 Throckmorton begged tliat he might be recalled at the 
 expiration of his first six month in office, which would be in 
 
 'Throckmorton's address to the King of Navarre: Cal. For. Kl., 
 i. no. 1231. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Aug. 25, 1559: Cal. For. 
 El., i. no. 1244; Forbes, i. p. 212. 
 
 If De Ruble is correct, Anthony's big words must have been the 
 vainest kind of hypocrisy and boasting. That writer says (Traite de 
 Cateau- Cambresis, p. 148): "Pendant la nuit, le faible prince perdit 
 courage. Le lendemain 24 aout, au point du jour, il quitta Paris \\ 
 I'improvisite pour ne pas se compromettre avec le synode du lendemain." 
 
 - The king of Navarre to Queen Elizabeth, Aug. 25, 1559: Cal. For. 
 El., i. no. 1249. 
 
 ■' Throckmorton wrote to the queen August 25: 'By my next letteis 
 I will advertise your majesty what is the discourse of wise men and 
 well afiected to you and to the advancement of religion, concerning the 
 Earl of Arran and the King of Navarre." I do not find, however, that 
 he took up the matter again. See Cal. For. El., i. no. 1244, and Forbes 
 i. p. 215. 
 
 * Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Sept. 4, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1316; Forbes, i. p. 224. 
 
 •' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Sept. 10, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 i. no. 1331; Forbes, i. p. 228. 
 
— 28 — 
 
 October. He recommended to the queen as his successor, 
 Sir Peter Mewtas, who "hath besides the good parts that 
 belongeth to a good minister, a faithful zeal to promote your 
 work of religion, which, besides divine success, is now a 
 great piece of your policy." He would give Mewtas full 
 instructions, and "hide nothing from him." ' Before the end 
 of September Sir Nicholas was laying the greatest stress on 
 the necessity of preparations for defense. Frenchmen were 
 everywhere talking of the title of their queen to the English 
 throne, and she had openly assumed the English arms. "Let 
 us not," said he, "tempt God too far, and, as Queen Mary 
 did," refer all things to him, "without doing anything our- 
 selves." - He wrote further that in order to give Elizabeth 
 better information regarding the intentions of the French, 
 he wished , even if not permanently relieved of his post , to 
 be permitted to come over to England for a short time and 
 have a talk with her. There were precedents for such a 
 proceeding, he urged, in cases of less importance under Henry 
 the Eighth. "AVhat I have to say to your majesty, neither 
 may it well be committed to writing, neither by such adver- 
 tisement may it well be conceived." He inquired if he should, 
 in case lie went, notify the French government of his departure 
 or go as secretly as he could. ^ He was duly informed that 
 his services were so great that they could not be perma- 
 nently dispensed with. ' He might, however, because of the 
 "pitiful suit" of his wife, who was "vexed with an ague," go 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth and to Cecil, Aug. 25 and 
 Sept. 3, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. nos. 1244, 1246, 1312; Forbes, i. pp. 215, 
 217, 219. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth and to Cecil, Sept. 23, 24, and 
 30, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. nos. 1360, 1362, 1369, 1408; Forbes, L pp. 236, 
 238, 239. 
 
 ■* Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth and to Cecil, Sept. 23, 24, 30, 
 and Oct. 25, 1559: Cal. For. EL, i. nos. 1360, 1362, 1369, 1406, iL no. 
 134 (par. 1); Forbes, i. pp. 236, 239, 240, 252. 
 
 ^ Cecil to Throckmorton, Oct. J, 1559: Cal. For. El, ii. no. 4 
 (par. 6). 
 
— 29 — 
 
 over temporarily, but must not remain longer than "four or 
 five days," and should notify the French King or the Guises, 
 mentioning the alleged cause. ^ Cecil thought the aifair 
 would "seem very strange to the French both there and 
 here; sed non ponendi sunt rumores ante sahtem." '^ Throck- 
 morton went to England early in November, reaching Lon- 
 don on the seventh ; ^ but instead of returning at once, 
 remained nearly eleven weeks. Two questions arise : what 
 was the real reason of the ambassador's going home, and 
 why did he stay so much longer than was originally intended? ^ 
 The pretext of his wife's illness did not deceive the 
 Guises. The cardinal and the duke declared that her health 
 was not so bad as represented , that ambassadors were not 
 apt to leave their posts on account of private affairs, and 
 that the return of Sir Nicholas was for some purpose "little 
 to their advantage." ^ His wife seems even not to have 
 
 » Queen Elizabeth to Throckmorton, Oct. 11, 1559: Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 63; Forbes, i. p. 251. 
 
 2 Cecil to Throckmorton, Oct. 13, 1559: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 77. 
 
 3 Killigrew and Jones to Cecil, Nov. 10, 1559: Cal. For. EL, ii, no. 
 227 (par. 1); Forbes, i. p. 254. Noailles to Francis II., Nov. 9, 1559: 
 Cal. For. EL, ii. p. 96, footnote; Teulet, i. p. 370. 'L'ambassadeur 
 Throgmorton est arrive icy le 7e de ce moys et si inopinement que quasi 
 personne n'avait sceu qu'il deust venir. Et plusieurs de caste court et 
 habitans de Londres ont estim6, avec les autres conjectures, que c'estoit 
 quelque prognosticq de gueiTO." — Report by Noailles to Francis II., 
 Nov., 1659: Teulet, i. p. 377; see also CaL For. EL, ii. p. 103, footnote. 
 The Bishop of Aquila to the Bishop of Arras, Nov. 12, 1559: Letten- 
 hovo, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 87. 
 
 * Elizabeth told Noailles that she had "commanded him to come 
 for seven or eight days only." See Teulet, i. p. 370. Cecil wrote to 
 Challoner November 2: 'Sir N. Throckmorton has leave to return in 
 consequence of his wife's extreme sickness, and will soon be here. It 
 will seem strange to the French, but he will certainly return with 
 speed." See CaL For. EL, ii. no. 173 (par. 3). 
 
 5 Killigi-ew and Jones to Cecil, Nov. 1559: Cal. For. EL, ii. nos. 290 
 (par. 4), 292 (par. 10), 343 (par. 2); Forbes, i. pp. 265, 271. The Guises 
 added that in their opinion, "if he had not cum into France, the Earl 
 of Arran had still remained here." 
 
— 30 — 
 
 known of his coming; for on the morning of his arrival she 
 sent to Noailles, the French ambassador in London, to learn 
 news of him , and to request that a letter which she had 
 written to him be forwarded. ' 
 
 Throckmorton had alleged to the queen as his object in 
 wishing to return , the giving of "better information" regard- 
 ing the "French meaning" towards her. It could scarcely 
 liave been this, however, which could not safely be intrusted 
 to a cipher letter, He was constantly making statements 
 which would have been far more dangerous, if discovered 
 by the French, than anything of the kind mentioned. 
 
 He had also in the course of his correspondence touched 
 on the affair of an English pirate , named Sti'angways , who 
 had been captured and was about to be executed. Throck- 
 morton had suggested before this that the queen might 
 secretly put his services to good account. Now, he requested 
 that the punishment be delayed till he could speak with 
 her ; and before he went back to France, the pirate had been 
 released and placed in the command of a galley. ^ But this 
 was, of course, only an incident connected with his visit to 
 England and not the cause. 
 
 It has been stated that he went to hasten the decision 
 of the queen to give the Scots open help. ^ But this also 
 could not have been the matter about which so much secrecy 
 was necessary. He had hitherto urged her to encourage the 
 insurgents across the border all she could, and what could 
 he now say that would be more dangerous? It is true that 
 while in England he took an active interest in the relations 
 
 1 Report by Noailles to Francis II., Nov., 1559: Cal. For. EI, ii. p. 
 103, footnote: Teulet, i. p. 377. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, July 18, Sept. 23 and 24, 1559: 
 Cal. For. El., i. nos. 1009, 1360, 1369; Forbes, i. pp. 166, 238, 240. 
 Cecil to Throckmorton, Oct. 1, 1659: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 4 (par. 5). 
 The Bishop of Aquila to the Duchess of Parma, Dec. 18, 1559: Letten- 
 hove, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 138. Report of 
 Noailles, Jan, 4, 1560: Cal. For. El, ii. p. 251, footnote; Teulet, i. p. 400. 
 
 ^ Froudc, vi. p. 306. 
 
— 31 — 
 
 with Scotland,' but this could hardly have been the chief 
 reason of his going. 
 
 Still another motive has been suggested,^ and it seems 
 to have been the real one. In considering it, we are taken 
 back to certain events which had been transpiring in France. 
 The severe persecutions inflicted upon the Protestants , com- 
 bined with political grievances in the shape of intolerable 
 laws, had soon aroused deep and wide-spread feeling against 
 the Guises. The discontented elements began to consider 
 the advisability of an uprising. Early in September the 
 Protestant theologians of Geneva were asked whether it 
 were lawful to make insurrection against those who unlaw- 
 fully usurped authority, and exercised it in a manner hos- 
 tile to religion and the state. They gave no encouragement, 
 but from French and German theologians a more favorable 
 opinion was received. 
 
 There is nothing in Throckmorton's correspondence to 
 show that up to the time of his going to England he knew 
 anything about the conspiracy. It was already on foot, 
 however, and we can hardly conceive that a man of his 
 character, representing a government which, as must have 
 been obvious to everybody, counted the Guises as among 
 its worst enemies, should not have been acquainted with the 
 enterprise from the beginning. He would seem, indeed, to 
 have been one of the first with whom the plotters would be 
 inclined to confer. Moreover, the matter was known outside 
 of France at an early date. Before the end of September 
 
 * On one occasion certain Scotchmen were seen by a spy of the 
 French ambassador to enter Throckmorton's lodgings. The Bishop of 
 Aquila to the Bishop of Arras, Nov. 18, 1559: Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des 
 Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 96. Memoir upon the affairs of Scot- 
 land sent by Noailles to Francis II., Dec. 20, 1559: Gal. For. El., ii. p. 
 20B, footnote; Teulet, i. p. 384. Noailles to D'Oisel, Dec. 22, 1559: Cal. 
 For. El, ii. no. 472 (par. 7); Forbes, i. p. 286. The Bishop of Aquila 
 to the Duchess of Parma, Jan. 21, 1660: Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des Pays 
 Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 191. 
 
 ' Lingai'd^ vii. p. 391. 
 
— 32 — 
 
 Challoner, the English ambassador in Brussels, was visited 
 by a stranger who asked for letters to some of the council. 
 He said he had "matter of importance to declare to the 
 queen," and talked "of great revolts, like shortly to be in 
 some parts of France." The ambassador regarded him with 
 suspicion , but gave him a letter to Cecil. ^ Mundt wrote 
 from Strasburg October fifth : "The present administration of 
 affairs in France is exceedingly displeasant to many great 
 men , and many persons think that this usurpation will be 
 broken up with some great tumult, fcr which a head is 
 wanting, but not members."^ Thus, when Throckmorton 
 reached England, the government had already learned of 
 the conspiracy from other sources, and Throckmorton's silence 
 hitherto is of itself evidence that he was waiting to impart 
 the information orally. 
 
 The Bishop of Aquila had for some time believed that 
 he was helping to stir up religious troubles in France and 
 that if Elizabeth "were able , by using religion as a pretext, 
 to bring about a rebellion there, as in Scotland, neither fear 
 nor conscience would restrain her."^ The bishop was at 
 first unable to find out just why Sir Nicholas had come to 
 England,* but before long had formed an opinion, or at least 
 said he had. In a conversation with Noailles he put the 
 question to him. The French ambassador replied that it was 
 to report certain matters to the queen and council, and for- 
 ward his undertakings in France. The bishop pronounced 
 
 1 Challoner to Cecil, Sept. 28 and Sept. 29, 1559: Cal. For. E!., nos. 
 1390, 1393. 
 
 2 Mundt to Queen Elizabeth, Oct. 5, 1559: CaJ. For. El., ii. no. 
 26 (par. 2). 
 
 3 The Bishop of Aquila to Philip II., Aug. 13 and 18, 1559: Letten- 
 hove, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, i. pp. 596, 605; Docu- 
 menfos Ineditos, Ixxxvii. p. 230. Froude (vi. p. 258) makes the bishop, 
 in his letter of the 13 th condition Elizabeth's "heretical intrigues in 
 France" upon her mamage to the Earl of Arran. As a matter of fact, 
 however, the bishop states the matter absolutely. 
 
 * The Bishop of Aquila to the Bishop of Arras, Nov. 12, 1559: 
 Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 87. 
 
— 33 -- 
 
 the answer correct beyond a doubt, and added that he had 
 been directed by Chantonay, Philip's ambassador in France, 
 to beware of Throckmorton; for he had come to England to 
 give all manner of trouble, had been carrying on pernicious 
 intrigues in France, and had been having intercourse with 
 the greatest personages. ' 
 
 It is not likely, however, that anything connected with 
 the conspiracy in France detained Throckmorton in England 
 so long. The government was deliberating how far the 
 Scots should be helped, and it seems not improbable that he 
 was kept at home until a decision should be reached. At 
 the end of December he received instructions to recross the 
 channel, and the queen in a letter to Francis the Second 
 stated that the ambassador, "having been compelled for his 
 business to return home, has been detained by the long and 
 dangerous illness of his wife."'^ Sir Nicholas was directed 
 to tell the French Government, in case her attitude toward 
 the movement in Scotland should be discussed, that she could 
 not look upon the Scotch noblemen as rebels or allow them 
 to be Qpnquered by the French.'' This was strong language, 
 but the English had been making preparations for war. They 
 still hesitated, however, and Throckmorton was detained 
 nearly a month longer. 
 
 ' Memoir by Noailles upon the affairs of Scotland, Dec. 20, 1559: 
 Cal. For. El., ii. p. 210, footnote; Teulet, i. p. 388. "Trois ou quatre 
 jours apres, estant le susdict de la Mothe alle visiter ledict d'Aquila de 
 la part dudict sieur de Noailles, icelluy d'Aquila lui diet que ceste 
 privee communication qu'il faisoit et vouloit faire avec ledict sieur de 
 Noailles estoit par commission du roy son maistre qui vault continuer 
 I'entretfenement de I'amitie du Roy son frere en telle fraternite et vraye 
 alliance qu'il se peult desirer." — Ibid. This statement is probably an 
 invention of the bishop's. Philip would not have been apt to adopt such a 
 roundabout method of getting infoi-mation to the French government. 
 
 2 Queen Elizabeth to Francis II., Dec. 31, 1559: Cal. For. El., ii. 
 no. 530. 
 
 3 Instructions to Throckmorton, Dec. 30, 1569, and Jan. 9, 1560: 
 Cal. For. El., ii, nos. 524, 567. 
 
 3 
 
— 34 — 
 
 Zilligrew and Robert Jones, ^ who had taken his place 
 during his absence, reported that, in consequence of the 
 strained relations between England and Scotland, they were 
 watched, and began to be avoided by their acquaintances. 
 No Scotchman dared talk "with them. Means of procuring 
 information being thus largely cut off, they recommended 
 that a spy be employed or else money be supplied to certain 
 men known to Throckmorton who were able to give intelli- 
 gence. The matter should be attended to at once; for the 
 men in question were liable soon to leave the court on account 
 of religion. - 
 
 Meanwhile, Francis Edwards, an English emissary to 
 France, had begun a series of reports of the warlike prepara- 
 tions on the part of the government along the northern coast, 
 and had given information as to the popular discontent 
 prevailing there. ^ News also reached the English govern- 
 ment that "the whole of Aquitaine and Normandy is in good 
 heart, and could easily be excited to action if they perceived 
 any movement elsewhere,"^ and that the people of France 
 had chosen one of their greatest princes , a Protestant , "to 
 be their chieftain and conductor, and by this means purpose, 
 God willing, to recover the Christian liberty." ^ 
 
 ' In a letter to the Council, dated December 14tli, they wrote: 'It 
 is a thing so unlikely and incredible to all men of judgment here, that 
 they ever mind to restore Calais, as it is said, that onles the same be 
 stolen from them, her majesty shall never recover the same." Gal. For. 
 Bl., ii. no. 418 (par. 4); Forbes, i. p. 278. 
 
 2 Killigrew and Jones to Queen Elizabeth and to Cecil, Dec. 27 and 
 29, 1559, and Jan. 6 and 18, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. nos. 508 (par. 5, 15), 
 522 (par. 1), 653 (par. 1, 2), 591 (par. 7); Forbes, i. pp. 288, 291, 
 297, 306. 
 
 3 Francis Edwards to Cecil, Nov. 26, 30, Dec. 12, 19, 1559: Cal. 
 For. EL, ii. nos. 333, 408. 
 
 ^ N. N. to — : Cal. For. El., ii. no. 543. The editor states that the 
 letter is in Latin and in a German hand. He assigns it to the month 
 of December, 1559. 
 
 ■' The Earl of Arran to Cecil and to Maitland of Lethington, Jan. 20 
 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. nos. 605 (par. 2), 606 (par. 2). 
 
- 35 - 
 
 On the twenty-fifth of January, fifteen hundred sixty, 
 Throckmorton recrossed to Calais, and four days later reached 
 Paris. ' The Bishop of Aquila, who in December had feared 
 that the queen was "practicing in France" and that her "gospel" 
 was "making too much progress there," '■' now dreaded the 
 consequences of the ambassador's return; 'for I know," said 
 he, "that they have a very firm understanding with the 
 French heretics and that Throckmorton is the minister."* 
 
 The conspiracy had been developing for some months. 
 One La Eenaudie, .who had special private grounds for hating 
 the Guises, had become its temporary head, and had been 
 visiting different parts of the country in his efforts to further 
 the enterprise. He was also in Geneva, and is even said to 
 have crossed the channel and received from Elizabeth promise 
 of assistance, but there is little evidence to support the 
 statement. ^ On the first of February he brought together 
 in the city of Nantes a secret assembly, where plans were 
 discussed. It seems to have been understood that the move- 
 
 1 Throckmorton to Cecil and to the Council, Jan. 24, 25, and 
 Peb. 4, 1660: Cal, For. EL, ii. noa. 642 (par. 1), 644 (par. 1), 685 (par. 1); 
 Forbes, i. pp. 307, 316. De Ruble (Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 148) 
 tells us that Throckmorton 'repassa la Manche vers le 15 fevrier," and 
 cites a letter of Chantonay as his authority. The Spanish ambassador 
 probably means the time of Sir Nicholas's arrival at Blois , which was 
 more than two weeks after he crossed the channel. 
 
 - The Bishop of Aquila to the Count de Feria, Dec, 1559: Froude, 
 vi. p. 297. 
 
 3 The Bishop of Aquila to the Duchess of Parma, Jan. 21, 1560: 
 Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 194. 
 
 * De Ruble (Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, ii. p. 142) 
 makes the statement, and gives his authority as follows; — "Lettre de 
 Chantonay a la duchessede Parme, du 18 mars (Recueil conserve aux 
 archives de Bruxelles, f. 54) — Lettre du meme au cardinal Granvelle, 
 du 3 mars (Ibid., f. 47, ve ). — Dans la plupart de ses lettres, Chantonay 
 revient sur I'appui prele par la reine d'Angleterre aux conspirateurs." 
 Lingard (ii. pp. 391, 392) says that when Throckmorton went to Eng- 
 land, "he was followed by La Renaudie," who 'soon returned, the bearer 
 from Elizabeth of wishes for their success, and promises of support." 
 Lingard gives no authority. 
 
 3* 
 
— 36 — 
 
 ment was not against the king himself and that behind La 
 Eenaudie was a "mute" chief, no other than the Prince of 
 Conde, by whose authority the Guises were to be arrested. 
 A date in the early part of March was fixed upon for the 
 execution of the undertaking. * 
 
 At about the same time EUzabeth's agent in G-ermany 
 was asked, under promise of secrecy, whether the conspirators 
 could count on the queen's assistance. Mundt had no very 
 high opinion of Frenchmen, considered their character as 
 "described in history" to be "unstable and deceitful," and 
 was cautious in his reply. He said, "if it could be proved 
 that the French princes were engaged in this movement," 
 " that it was not started by the lawlessness of the inconstant 
 common people," and that its object was "the preservation 
 of the liberties of the king and realm," he thought "the 
 queen would not be wanting in kind offices." ^ The fears 
 of the Bishop of Aquila continued. He reported to Philip 
 February third that Elizabeth had just sent one of her sub- 
 jects named Tremain, a "very great heretic," into Brittany 
 to carry on intrigues with the Protestants there, and earnestly 
 warned his master that the English, who had already ruined 
 religion in Scotland, would, if not checked, do still Avorse in 
 France. ' 
 
 ' The exact date is given variously by different writers. See De 
 Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, ii. p. 146, footnote 1. 
 
 ■^ Mundt to Cecil, Feb. 27, 1560: Cal. For. El, ii. no. 780 (par. 2). 
 Mundt'says in the letter that he had the conversation "some weeks ago.'* 
 
 3 The Bishop of Aquila to Philip II., Feb. 3, 1560: Lettenhove, 
 Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 213 et seq. (footnote); 
 Documentor Ineditos, Ixxxvii, p. 273 et seq. Froude, vi. pp. 332, 333. 
 According to Lettenhove, the Bishop of Aquila writes as follows: 'T no 
 es pequeno ya el ver que estos con sus intelligencias ayan traido las 
 cosas publicas al punto en que estan y estragado las de la religion eij 
 Escocia y puesto la de Francia en los terminos que lo tienen, que, sinO 
 se remedia, estara presto peor que Escocia: demas de haver aqui mas 
 de dos mil casas de Flamencos hereges," etc. This corresponds with 
 Frottde's translation. In the "Documentos Ineditos" the latter part of the 
 quotation reads, 'estard presto, porque Escocia demis de 2,000 casas de 
 flamencos herejes" etc Here, evidently one word has been misread and 
 
— 37 — 
 
 Throckmorton wrote from Paris a few days after his 
 arrival that the French would have "now to bestir them- 
 selves for the good and quiet of this their own realm," for 
 'the factions in religion" were "springing everywhere," and 
 the consequences were "marvellously to be feared." There 
 was also a prospect of trouble with Germany, 'besides many 
 other matters not everywhere known."* The French court 
 was at Blois, and the ambassador proceeded thither about 
 the middle of Febniary.'^ Elizabeth had directed him to 
 report the state of aifairs in France, and he wrote that on 
 reaching Blois he 'found "all confirmed and fit opportunity 
 offered to disappoint their purposes."^ He wished to hear 
 often from England that he might be better able to direct 
 the work of himself and others 'greatly to the advancement 
 of England's service and affairs on this side."' In the early 
 part of January, a French fleet on the way to Scotland with 
 reinforcements had been destroyed in a storm, and the English, 
 under Admiral Winter , had sailed into the Frith of Forth. 
 Throckmorton urged repeatedly that the embarassments of 
 the French should be utilized to the utmost. 'Take your 
 time while it is offered," he wrote to Cecil, 'for you shall 
 never have better opportunity upon these men than you have 
 at this present." ^ 
 
 others are omitted. Froude attaches part of this letter to part of another, 
 written March 7, as if they were one. His translation from the words 
 "Count Helfensteyn is in good spirits" to the end belongs to the former 
 communication. 
 
 ' Throckmorton to the Council, Feb. 4, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii., no. 
 685; Forbes, i. p. 317. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 8, 1560: Cal. For. El., no. 706 (par. 1) ; 
 Forbes, i. p. 322. Throckmorton to Cecil from Blois, Feb. 16, 1560: 
 Cal. For. El., ii. no. 732; Forbes, i. p. 326. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Feb. 20, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 750 (par. 2). 
 
 * Throckmorton to the Lords of the Council, Feb. 20, 1560: Cal. 
 For. El., ii. no. 751 (par. 2); Forbes, i. p. 327. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 8, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 706 
 (par. 5); Forbes, i. p. 324. Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 16, 1560: Cal. 
 
— 38 — 
 
 He began to fear some personal inconvenience, but this 
 seems to have been in view of the news which the Guises 
 were receiving from Scotland rather than because of events 
 in France. While in Paris, he was warned that upon his 
 arrival at court he would be placed under guard. In that 
 case, said he in a letter to Cecil, he could send word to 
 England only through the Spanish ambassador; nor was he 
 sure of being able to do that, for he might be so closely 
 watched that all means of communication with Chantonay 
 would be cut off. After his audience with the king he would 
 write, if not restrained. In case nothing should be heard 
 from him soon , it might be imagined that something had 
 happened. * 
 
 When he reached Blois, the king had gone hunting, and 
 Jones was sent on to make arrangements for an audience. 
 The latter was received with marked coldness by his acquain- 
 tances, Scotch, French, and Italian; and was told by the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine that no audience could be granted till 
 the arrival of the king at Amboise, toward which he was 
 proceeding by a roundabout course, and which he would 
 reach in about a week. Sir Nicholas asked again to be 
 recalled. "You know," he wrote to Cecil, "how odious I am 
 to these men, and how they have been put out of doubt 
 that I have been the only stirrer and worker of all that is 
 done." "I trust the queen's majesty does not mean that 
 I shall end my service all at once, and be made unapt to 
 be received another time abroad," "which must needs happen, 
 
 Tor. EL, ii. no. 732 (par. 2) ; Forbes, i. p. 325." Throckmorton to Queen 
 Elizabeth, Feb. 20, 1660: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 750 (par. 2, 6). Throck- 
 morton to the Lords of the Council, Feb. 20, 1560; Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 751 (par. 2); Forbes, i. p. 327. Throckmorton to Cecil, J^'eb. 
 27, 1560: Cal. For. Bl., ii. no. 778; Forbes, i. p. 347. Throckmorton 
 to the Council, Feb, 27, 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 779 (par. 3); Forbes, 
 i. p. 345. 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 8, 1360: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 706 
 (par. 5); Forbes, i. p. 324. 
 
— 39 — 
 
 if I abide the brunt, and tarry out till things grow to 
 extremities." ' 
 
 The audience took place on the twenty-fifth at Amboise, 
 but Throckmorton's apprehensions were not realized. On 
 the contrary, although he declined to admit that the Scotchmen 
 were rebels, he was treated with every mark of cordiality. 
 The reasons of this unexpected smothering of their feelings 
 on the part of the French were, he concluded, "their own 
 unreadiness at home; the little means they have presently 
 to put themselves in order; their shortness of finances; the 
 danger they fear might happen unto them by their own sub- 
 jects by means of religion , they being once entered into 
 war;" and "the danger that they see plainly before their 
 eyes of their excluding from Scotland.''^ 
 
 Indeed, the secret of the conspiracy, so long kept, had 
 finally leaked out.. Information of it was received by the 
 king's ministers from sources both at home and abroad about 
 the middle of February, and before the end of the month 
 they were thoroughly aware of the storm which was gathering 
 over their heads. On the seventh of March Sir Nicholas 
 wrote : "The Duke of Guise and the Cardinal of Lorraine 
 have discovered a conspiracy wrought against themselves 
 and their authority, which they have bruited, to make the 
 matter more odious, to be meant only against the King." 
 "This court is in great trouble, and knows not on which 
 side to turn." "The matter is presently hot, and like 
 enough to become hotter; so if ever time were to do 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 16, 1560: Cal. For. EI., ii. no. 732 
 (par. 3); Forbes, i. p. 326. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Feb. 20, 
 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 750 (par. 1, 8). Throckmorton to the Lords 
 of the Council, Feb. 20, 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 751; Forbes, i. p. 
 326. Throckmorton to Cecil, Feb. 20, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 752; 
 Forbes, i. p. 328. See also an extract from a letter of Chantonay in De 
 Ruble, Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 148. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Feb. 27, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 777; Forbes, i. p. 334. Throckmorton to the Council, Feb. 27, 
 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 779; Forbes, i. p. 344. 
 
— 40 - 
 
 what you have to do, it is now." "Chafe the iron while it 
 is hot." 1 
 
 When, a week later, the cardinal "with many fair words," 
 requested Sir Nicholas to notify Elizabeth that a conspiracy 
 had been formed against him and his brother, which had its 
 origin in Geneva, the ambassador replied that she would 
 be sorry to hear of it, and, the affair being "so prejudicial 
 to all manner of states," she would be ready to aid the king 
 against such "meddlers."^ 
 
 The court, being on its guard, was able to defend itself, 
 and when the detached bands of the conspirators reached 
 the neighborhood, they were captured and put to death.' 
 La Renaudie was killed while fighting. Commotions con- 
 tinued, however, in various parts of the country. "Whereunto 
 this stir will grow," said Throckmorton, "God knoweth; for 
 I hear that they begin to stir in a great many more places.'' 
 Now, he thought, was the queen's opportunity; now she 
 might do what she would. ' 
 
 The leading French Protestants who were believed to 
 have taken part in the conspiracy denied the imputation, 
 and Coude, accused of being its real head, solemnly pro- 
 nounced the charge a lie. 
 
 The Guises, as soon as the plot was discovered, declared 
 that the English had been mixed up in it, and they made 
 a special effort to convince the Spanish government of the 
 
 • Throckmorton to Cecil, March 7, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 837 
 (par. 4); Forbes, i. p. 353. See also Throckmorton to Cecil, March 9, 
 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 845 (par. 4); Forbes, i. p. 358. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, March 15, 1560 : Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 859 (par. 7); Forbes, i. p. 363. The Cardinal said he made the 
 request at the command of the king. 
 
 3 The Venetian ambassador wrote to the Doge and Senate, March 17: 
 "It has also been remarked that amongst the troops of the insurgents 
 men of all nations were found, Germans, Switzers, Savoyards, Englishmen, 
 Soots, and such like." See Cal. Yen., vii. no. 136. 
 
 ^ Throckmorton to Cecil, March 21, 1560: Cal. For. EI, ii. no. 882 
 (par. 2); Forbes, i. p. 385. Note also Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, 
 March 15, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 859 (par. 13); Forbes, i. p. 368. 
 
— 41 — 
 
 truth of the statement. The cardinal told Chantonay that 
 Elizabeth 'had favored and sustained the conspirators,'" 
 and Throckmorton, learning from the Spanish ambassador 
 and others that the French greatly suspected him to have 
 been "a doer in these troubles," was uncertain what the 
 consequences would be to himself, and thought he had better 
 be recalled.^ 
 
 Chantonay portrayed to Throckmorton the bad example 
 set by the conspiracy to the subjects of princes everywhere, 
 and remarked that all rulers ought to be interested in the 
 punishment of those who would promote such disturbances.-' 
 Sir Nicholas said the queen would be very much annoyed, 
 so far as the bad example was concerned, but that the 
 differences of the English with the French would prevent 
 their entirely regretting the affair.^ At the Spanish court 
 the charges against Elizabeth were rehearsed by the French 
 ambassador, and denied by the queen's representatives. ° The 
 
 ' Extract from a letter of Chantonay to Cardinal Granvelle, March 3, 
 1560, in De Ruble, Traite de Cateau-Gambresis , p. 149, and Antoine de 
 Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, ii. p. 221. The Cardinal told Chantonay 
 that the conspirators had intended to summon the States General , to 
 make the king a Protestant, or else set up a new one, and if the Guises 
 would not accede to the new arrangements, to banish them; but, in 
 accordance with the views of English and German pioachers, to avoid 
 bloodshed (see extract from a letter of Chantonay to the Duchess of 
 Parma, March, 1560, in Lettres de Catherine de Medicis, i. int. p. Ixv., 
 footnote). 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, March 21, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 ii. p. 462, footnote (par. 5); Forbes, i. p. 379. Throckmorton to Cecil, 
 same date; Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 882 (par. 3); Forbes, i. p. 385. Throck- 
 morton to Queen Elizabeth, March 27, 1560: Cal. For. f]l., ii. no. 904 
 (par. 2). 
 
 3 Extract from a letter of Chantonay to the Duchess of Parma, 
 March 26, 1660, in De Ruble, Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 150. 
 
 * Extract from a letter of Chantonay to Philip II., March 20, 1560, 
 in De Ruble, Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 150. 
 
 5 Paulo Tiepolo, Venetian ambassador with King Philip, to the 
 Doge and Senate, March 26, 30, 1560: Cal. Ven., vii. nos. 140, 144. 
 Montague and Chamberlain, English ambassadors in Spain, to the Council, 
 April 10, 1560: Cal. For. El,, ii. p. 528, footnote (par. 3). The Duke of 
 
— 42 — 
 
 French ambassador in London, so ■ the Bishop of Aquila tells 
 us, reported that he had accused the queen to her face, and 
 said that there were five or six gentlemen of note who could 
 testify against her. ' Cecil and another prominent Englishman, 
 Dr. Wotton, in an interview with the Bishop did not disguise 
 their approval of the efforts which had been made against 
 the 'tyranny of the Guises," but denied that Elizabeth had 
 taken part. It was common talk in London, however, that 
 the French suspected her. - 
 
 Alva to the Bishop ot Avras, March 20, 1560: Teulet, ii. p. 76 et seq. 
 Instructions to Glajon, special ambassador sent by King Philip to Eng- 
 land to intercede between that country and France, March 27, 1560: 
 Teulet, ii. p. 86. Philip II. to the Bishop of Aquila, April 10, 1560: 
 Lettenhove, Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 368 (foot- 
 note). Note also the letter of the Duchess of Paniia to Philip II., 
 April, 1560: Teulet, ii. p. 119. 
 
 • The Bishop reports also that the French king had spoken to 
 Throckmorton about the matter, but this is doubtless a mistake. Throck- 
 morton does not mention it. The Bishop of Aquila to Philip II., March 7, 
 1660: Documentos Ineditos, Ixxxvii. p. 285; Froude, vi. p. 330. 
 
 2 The Bishop of Aquila to Philip II., March 26, 1560: Lettenhove, 
 Rel. Pol. des Pays Bas et de I'Angleterre, ii. p. 273 (footnote): Docu- 
 mentos Ineditos, Ixxxvii. p. 294. In the latter collection the letter is 
 dated March 28. 
 
 The Venetian ambassador at the French court, writing March 6 
 about the discovery of the conspiracy, said that "a certain great poten- 
 tate whoso name is not yet revealed" was reported to have been connected 
 with it. On the 23d he added: "The government have been assured by 
 confession of the prisoners and through the writings discovered that 
 there had been no understanding, as at first suspected, with any sovereign' 
 [Principe] either Germany or elsewhere, except with Geneva, but there 
 is nothing of vital importance, merely that some native Frenchmen had 
 come here from thence of their own accord, and not by any public 
 decree or by order of the governors of the city." On the 28 th he added 
 further: "According to the Cardinal's statement this conspiracy was 
 originated seven montlis ago at Geneva, one month after the late King's 
 death, and was discussed and approved both publicly and privately by 
 the inhabitants of that city, contrary to what was said of late, and 
 subsequently the conspirators conferred with some princes of Germany, 
 one of whom last January warned the king by letter of the conspiracy, 
 which was also fomented by the Queen of England." Cal. Ven. vii., 
 nos. 132, 138, 142. 
 
— 43 — 
 
 There is thus considerable evidence to show that the 
 English were mixed up in the conspiracy; but it will be 
 observed that much of it is circumstantial or hearsay. The 
 belief appears to have been wide-spread in Europe at the 
 time, especially among the Catholics, that Elizabeth had 
 helped on the plot ; but this was doubtless, to a considerable 
 extent, an a 'priori conclusion drawn from the fact that she 
 aided the Scotch rebels and that it would be to her advan- 
 tage for the French conspirators to succeed. Such a belief 
 was also largely due, directly or indirectly, to the assertions 
 of the Guises themselves.' Chantonay, for example, seems 
 to have derived much of his information from them. It was 
 to their interest to arouse prejudice against Elizabeth, par- 
 ticularjy^in the breast of Philip of Spain. We do not know 
 how much proof they may have had. We do not even know 
 how much they believed their own statements; for the Cardinal 
 of Lorraine, like Elizabeth, waa one of the greatest liars of 
 the time, and his charges are perhaps offset by her subsequent 
 denials. ''■ The Bishop of Aquila was sure that there was a 
 secret understanding, and his relations to the English coui't 
 were such that he may have learned a great deal. We 
 ought to make allowance, however, for the fact that he was 
 constantly terrified at the possibility of Elizabeth's extending 
 her intrigues to Philip's subjects in the Low Countries, and 
 was in a condition of m.ind to magnify the importance of 
 every rumor. 
 
 We should naturally expect to find the proof, if any- 
 where, in the correspondence of Throckmorton and the English 
 government. These letters, however, are almost silent on 
 the subject; indeed, laying aside a few vague and general 
 statements, one miglit read them through to the time of the 
 public disclosure of the plot without being aware that a 
 conspiracy was going on. The affair was, of course, a risky 
 one to intrust to writing, and although the contemporary 
 intrigues in Scotland were written about and later ones with 
 
 ' For further repetition of the charges, see pages 54, 55. 
 - See page 55. 
 
— 44 — 
 
 the Huguenots ' were fully described, the necessity of secrecy 
 in these cases was probably not so great. It is important, 
 however, to note that the matter is not mentioned in the 
 formal instructions to Throckmorton on his return to France 
 in the winter. In the following summer, as we shall see,^ 
 Cecil had little confldence in the continuance of the seditious 
 movements, and it is not inconceivable that he was of the 
 same opinion from the beginning, and advised the queen to 
 give no support. He was, it is true , at one time weighing 
 the question of how to "maintain the faction" in France, 
 but that was before the conspiracy, and we do not know to 
 what conclusion he came. 
 
 There is little doubt, as later events help to prove, ^ 
 that the English were doing some sort of intriguing with 
 the Protestant population of Brittany and Normandy, from 
 which provinces in the event of war, an expedition would 
 proceed against England; but (no^ far this was connected 
 with the general movement, it is difficult to tell. 
 
 Many of the statements made by Throckmorton and 
 others, especially regarding Elizabeth's relations to her 
 northern and southern neighbours , are too general to be 
 taken as evidence in a particular matter; for French and 
 Scottish affairs are inextricably mixed up. The early suspicions 
 against Throckmorton and the personal danger to which he 
 was exposed when he returned to France, may have been 
 connected entirely with the relations of the English in 
 general and of Sir Nicholas in particular to events in the 
 northern kingdom. 
 
 There is little to justify the statement of one historian that 
 Throckmorton was the "focus of the plot."'^ If he was, why 
 
 ' The name Huguenots was first given to the French Protestants in 
 the early part of the year 1560. 
 
 2 See pages 51 — 53. 
 
 3 Ibid. 
 
 * Froudej,vi. p. 336. Tlie editor of the Calendar makes an equally 
 strong statement. He says (iii., preface p. xliv); "Through Throck- 
 morton's agency the various and conflicting interests which were opposed 
 
— 45 — 
 
 was Mundt in Germany approached on the subject, of the 
 queen's assistance, ' and why did Sir Nicholas remain so long 
 in England while the conspiracy was developing? 
 
 Of course, P^ngland had every reason to desire the success 
 of the undertaking, and Elizabeth, Cecil, and Throckmorton 
 were just the persons to promote it, if there was good prospect 
 that it would amount to anything. Enemies of the Guises 
 were on friendly terras with the English, and the feeling 
 must have been mutual that they were natural allies. We 
 know that the English government was aware of the con- 
 spiracy almost from the beginning, and are reasonably certain 
 that intrigues were carried on in northern France. How 
 much further the relations went, whether Elizabeth promised 
 La Renaudie or others support, remain open questions. 
 
 V. 
 
 EMBARRASSMENT OF THE GUISES AND 
 
 TREATY OF EDINBURGH. 
 
 MARCH — JULY, 1560. 
 
 The English proceeded at once to take advantage of 
 the situation. The Guises feared that troops would be landed 
 
 to the family of Lorraine were brought into harmony and united under 
 the secret protectorate of Elizabeth, and it was understood that when 
 the moment for action arrived this newly constituted opposition might 
 depend upon substantial assistance from England." De Ruble says 
 (Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 148): "Throckmorton etait un des inspira- 
 teurs du mouvement formidable qui echoua sous les murs d'Amboise au 
 mois de Mars, 1560." Froude adds that 'the queen herself had been 
 in close correspondence with Conde and the Colignys," but doesn't tell 
 us how he knows it. 
 
 Ranke, however, says (Franzosische Geschichte, i. p. 147): "Ueber 
 der ganzen Sache schwebt ein noch nicht aufgehelltes Dunkel. Hatte 
 la Renaudie wirklich eine Verbindung mit der Konigin von England, die 
 in den Guisen ihre personlichen Feinde sab, das Auftreten der Franzosen 
 in Schottland eben nur von ihnen herleitete und eine ihnen entgegen- 
 gesetzte Bewegung in Frankreich nicht anders als wiinschen konnte?" 
 
 ' See further on this matter page 50. 
 
— 46 — 
 
 in Brittany or Normandy, where great disturbances were 
 reported to have begun, and where, in Chantonay's opinion, 
 the English would have been "well received by the inhabi- 
 tants." ' Throckmorton, in his letters, mentions the possibility 
 of the (Queen's performing "intents and enterprises" there;'^ 
 and rumors were afloat that 'great offers" had been "made 
 to the Earl of Arran by Gascony, Poit ou, Brittany and Nor- 
 mandy, if he Would descend into those parts." ^ The English 
 did nothing of this kind, however, south of the channel; but 
 the Council of Elizabeth in a memorial dated March tAventy- 
 third, advised her to send troops into Scotland, and drive 
 out the French. They recommended her, further, to give 
 public notice that she meant no hostility to France and the 
 people of that country, but merely the defence of her realm 
 against the Guises;^ and on the following day the queen 
 issued a proclamation to that effect. She said she thought 
 that "the injurious pretences made by the Queen of Scots 
 to this realm proceed from the principals of the house of 
 Guise , Avho now have the chief governance of the crown of 
 Fi'ance, and that neither the French king, who by reason 
 of his years is not capable of such an enterprise, nor the 
 Queen of Scots, his wife, also being in her minority, nor yet 
 the princes of the blood royal and other estates of France 
 have imagined such an unjust enterprise." The Guises Avere, 
 she declared, seeking to get a firm footing in Scotland and 
 then to invade England, and she must take measures for 
 the security of her realm; but she charged her subjects "to 
 
 1 Extract from a letter of Cbantonay to Philip II., March 20, 1560, 
 in De Ruhle, Traite de Cateau-Oamhresis, p. 149. Throckmorton to 
 Queen Elizabeth, March 21, 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. p. 462, footnote 
 (par. 4); Forbes, i. p. 378. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, March 27, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 ii. no. 904 (par. 3). Throckmorton to Cecil, same date: ibid. ii. no. 908 
 (par. 4). See also N6goc. sous Frangois II., p. 763. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, April 12, 1660: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 994 
 (par. 2). 
 
 4 The Privy Council to the Queen, March 23, 1560: Cal. Fur. El., 
 ii. no. 891; Forbes, i. p. 390. 
 
— 47 — 
 
 use with friendship all the French king's subjects, as in time 
 of peace, except they be provoked by any hostility." ^ 
 
 The document was published in both English and French, 
 and was , of course , intended to paralyze the efforts of the 
 Guises, by rendering the subjects of Francis the Second 
 lukewarm, A few days later Elizabeth's troops crossed into 
 Scotland and laid siege to Leith. ^ Throckmorton was not 
 entirely pleased with the proclamation. In his opinion more 
 stress was laid on the minority of the king and queen than 
 French custom wQuld justify, and the Guises were too partic- 
 ularly named as the originators of the trouble. They would 
 now be her everlasting enemies, and would never, in their 
 hearts, consent to peace. He thought, however, it would be 
 well to circulate it "by means of mercliants through Brittany 
 and Normandy to animate the people more" against them.^ 
 The Guises were enraged at Elizabeth's state paper, and 
 repeated their charges against her, declaring that 'she appears 
 to have been all the doer in this trouble here , and that 
 Throckmorton has been the minister."^ Sir Nicholas sent 
 
 1 Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 894; Cal. Yen., vii. no. 139. "A draft of 
 this proclamation, in English, the joint production of Cecil and Petrie, 
 is preserved at Hatfield House." — Cal. For. El., ii. p. 472, footnote. 
 
 " When the news reached the French court that the English had 
 entered Scotland, there was much discussion as to what should be done 
 with Throckmoiton. They feared that whatever treatment he experienced 
 would be extended to their ambassador in London, and decided to do 
 nothing with him till the ambassador should be recalled. Finally, they 
 concluded not to recall the ambassador at all; for he, with the hostages, 
 could help them more in England than Throckmorton alone could help 
 the English in France. At least, that is what Sir Nicholas heard. 
 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, April 6, 1560: Cal. For. El., ii. no. 
 952 (par. 5). Throckmorton to Cecil, same date: ibid., ii. no. 954 (par. 5). 
 Michiel to the Doge and Senate, April 26, 1560: Cal. Ven., vii. no. 155. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, April 6, 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 964 
 (par. 1, 2, 3, 9). 
 
 * Throckmorton to Cecil, April 12, 1660: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 994 
 (par. 2). Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, April 28, 1660: Cal. For. 
 EL, ii. no. 1082 (par. 11). 
 
 To an agent of Throckmorton, the cardinal said a few weeks later 
 
— 48 — 
 
 copies to the King of Navarre, the constable , and most of 
 the foreign ambassadors at the French court;' and although 
 it was forbidden to have any in one's possession, he caused 
 the document to be printed and distributed in Normand)' 
 and Brittany, also in Paris and other places.^ 
 
 April eighteenth Fi-ancis the Second, following, of course, 
 the direction of his uncles, sent the King of Navarre a copy 
 of the proclamation, together with a letter, in which he 
 called Anthony's attention to reports which were current in 
 Spain that the latter had favored the recent conspiracy, but 
 assured him that he did not believe the charges. The Queen 
 of England, however, had helped it on, he said, "on account 
 of the ill will she bears me, along with her extreme regret 
 at the loss of Calais.'" As to the proclamation, he wrote: 
 'You may see by this what a spirit of fury and vengeance 
 agitates her and what wrong she does princes of my blood, 
 pretending, nevertheless, to undertake the protection of them 
 and of the estates of my kingdom, as if they had called her 
 to their aid and succor." "You ought very quickly to make 
 the said lady understand through her ambassador at my 
 court that she has done a great wrong to you and to the 
 said princes of the blood by speaking of them in this way; 
 that being the first of the said princes, you have been 
 
 that the issuing of the document was a 'poor revenge." He declared, 
 however, that, in his opinion, it was "not the queen's doing, but the 
 persuasion of three or four about her," and expressed the hope that 
 before long she would punish the advisers. He wished that Throck- 
 morton were at home, for the remarkable reason that the latter was, 
 as he said, favorable to peace and would exert a good influence. Although 
 it is a matter of no great importance, it may be added that the cardinal 
 had this talk with Somers, not with Throckmorton, as Lingard says 
 (vii. p. 393, footnote) and as the editor of the Calendar in one place 
 assumes. Sir Nicholas was sick abed. See Throckmorton to Queen 
 Elizabeth, -May 3, 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 16 (par. 3); Forbes 
 i. p. 423. 
 
 1 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, April 28, 1560: Cal. For. El, 
 ii. no. 1082 (par. 9). 
 
 2 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, May 10, 1560: Cal. For. El. 
 ii. no. 67 (par. 5); Forbes, i. p. 450. 
 
— 49 — 
 
 constrained to remonstrate for all, praying her that hereafter 
 she will not put you or the said princes in her writings in 
 any way possible, not having to render to her account of 
 your actions, tho only aim of which is to serve and assist 
 me in all things." ' The faint heart of Anthony quailed before 
 the words of the king, although, as a sovereign himself, he 
 might justly have resented them. Throckmorton, in sending 
 him a copy of the queen's proclamation, had accompanied it 
 by a letter, in which he begged him "to judge of the truth 
 of her cause;" ^ but Anthony pretended not to be sure from 
 what source either was received. He replied to the king 
 May sixth, stating that he suspected the writer to be Throck- 
 morton and would give that gentleman to understand that 
 he was "neither the serf nor the pet of hits mistress and 
 that she must not address herself to him, when she wanted 
 "to play her tricks."^ Three days later he wrote to the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine and the Duke of Guise a letter similar, 
 but even more humble in its tone, in which he pretended to 
 be astonished at Throckmorton's communication.' On the 
 same day that he replied to the king, he addressed a letter 
 to Sir Nicholas, repudiating as first prince of the blood the 
 intimation that "the princes and estates of France have called 
 her to their aid," and begging the ambassador to inform 
 Elizabeth that he hoped she would not again mention him 
 or others in her proclamations, as it would only injure them 
 with the king, with whose proceedings they were perfectly 
 contented. "Any slight causes of dissatisfaction wliich may 
 formerly have existed , are now removed." ^ He submitted 
 
 ' N6goc. sous Pian9ois II., p. 366. 
 
 2 Throckmorton to the King of Navarre, April 15. See Cal. For. 
 EL, ii. no. 1007, and De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, 
 ii. p. 222. 
 
 3 Negoc. sous Pran9ois II., p. 368. 
 
 * De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, ii. p. 223, and 
 Traite de Cateau-Cambresis , p. 152. Lettres d' Antoine de Bourbon et 
 de Jehanne d'Albret, p. 190. 
 
 5 Cal. For. El., iii. no. 40. 
 
 4 
 
— 50 — 
 
 to the king Throckmorton's letter, as well as his own reply, 
 and the Cardinal of Lorraine forwarded the latter to the 
 amhassador. 1 In the meantime the representatives of the 
 French government in London had remonstrated against the 
 proclamation, but the English defended their course, and the 
 distribution of the document continued. ^ In one French town 
 about the middle of May copies of the same or a similar 
 proclamation were sold at a great fair as openly as any 
 other article. This fact convinced Throckmorton that the 
 French would "have more cause to look to themselves at 
 home than annoy the English abroad."^ 
 
 Mundt wrote that if it should "seem good to the queen 
 to treat with the persons who have been the prime movers 
 in the F'rench plots," he could "get good persons for that 
 purpose."* He was often requested to ask Elizabeth to 'assist 
 certain princes in France" wlio were "grieved with the present 
 administration," and was told that "if all things shall come 
 to a prosperous end, they would aid her again to her desire;" 
 but he was suspicious, for he had 'never seen any express 
 
 • The King of Navarre to Francis tlie Second, May 6, 1560: Negoc. 
 sous Fran9ois II., p. 368. The Cardinal of Lorraine to Throckmorton, 
 May 10, 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 69. 
 
 2 Cal. For. EL, iL no. 928, v.nos. 1428, 1429. Negoc. sous Francois 11, 
 p. 318 et seq. Teulet, iL p. 15 et seq. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Cecil, May 22, 1560; Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 116 
 (par. 9). In the same letter he wrote: 'If the subjects of the Low 
 Countries could be brought to mislike their government as the French 
 do, it would gi-eatly serve the purpose of the English." He mistrusted 
 "the Spanish as much as the French." 
 
 The Guises had now another source of annoyance. Word reached 
 them that three of the hostages in London were attending religious 
 services held by French Protestant refugees there. "The king and the 
 Guises have accordingly resolved to delay their return, and have threatened 
 that when they return, they shall be severely punished, because by their 
 example they confirm the Queen in her accursed religion, and persuade 
 her that many of the chief people in France are of the same way of 
 thinking, which is likely to be of great misfortune." See Cal. For. EL, 
 iii. no. 145. 
 
 4 Mundt to Cecil, April 2, 1560: Cal. For. EL, ii. no. 940 (par. 8). 
 
— 51 — 
 
 or certain commission." Finally, in May, according to his 
 statement, one came from the Prince of Conde, who desired 
 that the substance of the message might be communicated 
 "to the queen and to the queen only.'" 
 
 Their troubles at home prevented the French from 
 forwarding reinforcements to Scotland; in May they made 
 overtures for peace; and both governments sent commissioners 
 to Edinburgh to negotiate. Early in June the Guises suffered 
 an additional loss in the death of their sister, the queen 
 regent, who had been their mainstay in the northern king- 
 dom. Still another danger threatened them, although they 
 may not have known it, in an offer which was made to 
 Elizabeth of towns in Normandy and Brittany. 
 
 Cecil, however, was in favor of letting well enough alone. 
 He wrote to the queen from Edinburgh June twenty -first: 
 "I think surely France is disturbed, but I see not likelihood 
 of continuance, for either lack will be in the authors, being 
 but popular, to continue, or else remedy will be in the rulers 
 rather to yield in some part and so to dissolve the con- 
 junction of numbers than to lose their outward things by 
 inward contention. The offer made of certain towns in Brit- 
 tany and Normandy liketh me well, and the same would be 
 so allowed, but I cannot give your majesty counsel to embrace 
 
 I Mundt to Cecil, May 23, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 119. 
 
 The following curious rumor came from Germany: "The Count of 
 the Rhine, the Marquis of Baudien, the Count Palatine, Duke Christopher 
 of Wilrtemherg, the elder Landgrave, with the ambassadors of England 
 and Scotland, and of a certain house of Trance, have met at Worms; 
 at which meeting has been agreed a league named 'The revenge of 
 Christian blood,' to root out of all realms those who shall withstand or 
 propose anything against the doctrine of the Goapel. From this league 
 none shall depart until this revenge is executed, and all the soldiers 
 are to be sworn never to withdraw from their ensigns, oven if money 
 
 should lack The foresaid league extends to be occupied with the 
 
 king in the defence of the imperial towns, and they shall assemble in 
 some place of France with a great number of Frenchmen also sworn 
 against the house, etc. The Queen of England shall cause her strength 
 to be landed at places found to be most commodious in Normandy, 
 Brittany, or Guienne." See Cal. For. El., iii. no. 149. 
 
 4* 
 
— 52 — 
 
 things so far off. No strength is tenable that is far distant, 
 neither behoveth it that the crown of England should enter 
 into war with surety of all Brittany. Profitable it is for 
 the time to divert the enemy by procuring him business at 
 home. If it should not please God to give us his grace to 
 make a peace presently, whereof I would be sorry, there be 
 many ways to offend the enemy withal, without great charge, 
 whereof I will forbear now to write, because I do bend myself 
 to peace." ' 
 
 The negotiations resulted in the treaty of Edinburgh, 
 signed July sixth, by which the Queen of Scots was to cease 
 using the aims and title of Queen of England, and the French 
 were to withdraw their troops from Scotland.^ On the 
 following day came instructions from Elizabeth that, if peace 
 were not yet concluded, her commissioners should insist on 
 the restitution of Calais. Cecil rejoiced that they were 
 received too late. He wrote a letter to the queen on the 
 ninth, a part of which runs as follows: "As foi- the message 
 brought by Tremain, God forbid that your majesty should 
 enter into that bottomless pit of expense of your force and 
 treasure , within the French king's own mainland — being 
 that manner of war to you more troublesome and dangerous 
 than this of the French king here in Scotland; and yet this 
 is his advantage , that the obedience of this is due to his 
 wife, and cannot be lost; and there your majesty should have 
 no more to further you but a devotion popular upon opinions 
 of religion; wherein the French king, rather than lose that 
 country, would not stick to incline to his people's request, 
 and so your majesty's purpose could not then last. Indeed, 
 this I could and meant always to have allowed , that if ye 
 could not come to a reasonable concord with France, but 
 that they would continue wars, then your majesty should 
 have entertained that matter of Brittany and Normandy — 
 
 1 
 
 Cal. For. EL, iii. p. 152, foot-note; Wright, i. p. 31. 
 2 On the Treaty of Edinburgh see Bekker in Giessener Studien, 
 iv. p. 62. 
 
— 53 — 
 
 to have therewith oifended and annoyed the French king. 
 But as to have taken and kept any piece there, experience 
 of Boulogne being in sight of Dover teacheth us what to 
 do; and when I consider that for charges neither is Ports- 
 mouth, your own haven, fortified, neither the town of Berwick — 
 most necessary of all others — finished; I should think it 
 strange to take Brest or any other town in those parts, to 
 keep longer than of necessity the French would maintain 
 wars against your majesty; which being now ceased, and to 
 your great honor, I think it a happy mishap tliat your 
 majesty's letter came not before our conclusion."' 
 
 Elizabeth instructed Throckmorton to send "some discreet 
 persons into Gascony, Brittany, and Normandy" to find out 
 "how they like this accord."^ The king of France in a letter 
 to his ambassador in Spain bemoaned his hard lot in being 
 "reduced to the extremity of receiving the law from his 
 own subjects," and declared that it was all due to the Queen 
 of England, who had encouraged his subjects "to attempt 
 that of which , without her support , favor , and aid , they 
 would never have dared to dream." In this he doubtless 
 referred to the Scotch; but he added that he was glad to 
 secure peace, for he would now have "leisure to attend to 
 the internal aifairs" of France.^ 
 
 Throckmorton again asked to be recalled.' He was in 
 
 • Cal. For. El., iii. no. 320 (par. 2); Froude, vi. p. 397. 
 
 2 July 19, 1560. Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 343 (par. 2). 
 
 3 July 28, 1560. Cal. For. EL, iii. p. 194, foot-note; Negoc. sous 
 Franyois II., p. 429. Two things convinced Throckmorton that the treaty 
 was "both honorable and profitable" to the queen; one was that "France 
 mislikes it," the other, that King Philip was displeased at finding that 
 she and her realm "do not altogether depend upon his order and 
 pleasure." See Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 345 (par. 2). 
 
 * May 4. Cecil had written to Sir Nicholas that he was considering 
 the lattcr's recall "upon pretence of sickness, but no man will allow to 
 be sent there in this difficult time." Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 26 (par. 4). 
 Throckmorton replied May 10: "I will, as I may, and my health will 
 suffer, abide the decision of the war or peace. If it be war, either you 
 must revoke me or these will detain me." Cal. For. EL, iii, no. 68 
 (par. 2); Forbes, i. p. 462. 
 
— 54 — 
 
 "evil grace with the French, who impute a great part of 
 their disadvantage" to him.' Whoever should succeed him 
 'must follow a new trade and seem void of suspicion," and 
 "though he should be a careful minister to advertise what 
 he can of the French proceedings upon the sea -coast and 
 otherwise, yet the special means to learn things certainly 
 must proceed from home." ^ 
 
 However much Elizabeth may have done or not done 
 to bring about tlie tumult at Amboise, there is no doubt 
 that after the conspiracy had reached its full development 
 and the Guises were thrown into embarrassment, she helped 
 promote the disturbances and turned them to good account 
 at Edinbui'gh. 
 
 On the nineteeth of August Sir Nicholas and the Car- 
 dinal of Lorraine liad an interesting parley, in the course of 
 which the latter said there were ''bruits whereby the queen 
 was slandered to have been a comfort to the rebels and 
 makers of stirs in France, and that some of Normandy and 
 others, the king's subjects fugitive at Strasburg, had devised 
 many things, whereof tliey have altogether informed the 
 queen."' The ambassador replied that Elizabeth "naturally 
 abhorred all seditions," "that she never knew of any such 
 matters, and if she did, she would never be induced to give 
 counsel and succor to rebels." The Cardinal said the in- 
 formation had been 'revealed by one to whom torture had 
 been given;" but Sir Nicholas repeated that "she knew 
 nothing of sucli matters but by common bruit, and by his 
 advertising her of such things as came to his knowledge, 
 like as tlie French ambassador advertised them of the state 
 of things in England, and called God to witness that neither 
 she nor her minister ever had favored or would favor, any 
 rebellion against the prince."^ 
 
 1 Throckmorton to Petre , July 19, 1660: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 347. 
 
 - Throckmorton to Cecil, Aug. 9, 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii., no 413 
 (par. 2). 
 
 ■' The Cardinal said further that ho "trusted that the queen would 
 lot sutt'or any of the king's rebels to have any resort or succor in her 
 
— 55 — 
 
 As soon as Elizabeth learned of this conversation, she 
 wrote back to Throckmorton, complaining of "the slanderous 
 reports" against her. She thought that "those who make 
 them should be notably punished," wished that 'all other 
 princes were as clear in this matter" as she ; and directed 
 Sir Nicholas to (ii^ress the Cardinal , his brother , and the 
 king and queen to' punish such false reporters.^ 
 
 However much circumstances might compel them to 
 disguise their feelings , the rulers of France detested and 
 continued to detest Throckmorton , and three years later 
 Catherine de' Mediei, complaining to his successor. Sir Thomas 
 Smith, of the mischief which he had done, declared that 
 from the time of the tumult at Amboise he had been "the 
 setter on" of their domestic troubles.^ 
 
 VI. 
 
 RALLY AND FALL OF THE GUISES. 
 AUGUST — DECEMBER, 1560. 
 
 The discontent continued, and the government at length 
 felt compelled to convene an assembly of notables to devise 
 a plan of action for restoring quiet. This met at Fontaine- 
 bleau on the twenty-first of August, and as a result of its 
 deliberations, it was decided that the States General should 
 come together on the tenth of December, that the prelates 
 of the kingdom should convene on the twentieth of January, 
 and that the latter should then, in case no general council 
 were to be held, proceed to a national one. 
 
 But a fresh cause of terror now greeted the Guises. 
 
 realm," and received the answer that "though England was not so great 
 as France, yet it was easy for a man to come there as a stranger, and 
 many may be there unknown to the queen." Throckmorton to Queen 
 Elizabeth, Aug. 22, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 446 (par. 3). 
 
 ' Aug. 26, 1560. Cal. For. El., iii. no. 456 (par. 2). 
 
 2 Smith to Queen Elizabeth, Oct. 16, 1563: Cal. For. El., vi. no. 
 1306 (par. 1). 
 
— 56 - 
 
 An agent of the King of Navarre at Fontainebleau told an 
 acquaintance tliat plots against them were still on foot which 
 Conde was heading. The confidant reported what he had 
 learned , the agent was arrested , letters found upon him 
 tended to confirm the statements , and upon being put to 
 torture, he gave the names of a number of parties who, as 
 well as the Bourbon princes, were charged by him with 
 being implicated. The Vidame of Chartres, a kinsman of 
 Conde and the writer of one of the letters, was immediately- 
 arrested and thrown into the Bastile; a messenger was sent 
 off to the king of Navarre, bidding him come to court and 
 brmg his brother with hini; and Philip the Second was asked 
 to furnish aid in case it should be needed.' Francis wrote 
 to his ambassador at the Spanish court that the Queen of 
 England was charged with having already furnished money 
 to the conspirators and with having promised more, but that 
 he doubted as yet the truth of the statements.^ The am- 
 bassador laid the request and also the charges against 
 Elizabeth before Philip,'' and that monarch promised his 
 assistance in quelling the disturbances. Francis wrote to 
 his ambassador in England and asked his opinion as to 
 whether Elizabeth had really been favoring the rebellions in 
 his kingdom , but the ambassador replied that inasmuch as 
 the intrigues took place in France, it was difficult for him 
 to know much about them , but that he would watch as 
 carefully as possible and report whatever he could learn. ' 
 Throckmorton in a letter to Cecil said that if his successor 
 
 ' Baird i., p. 424 et soq. De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne 
 d'Albret, ii. p. 322 et scq. Throckmorton to Cecil, Sept. 3, 1560: Cal. 
 For. El., iii. no. 483 (par. 2). 
 
 - Francis II. to the Bishop of Limoges, Aug. 31, 1660; Negoc. sous 
 Fran(;ois II., p. 495. Same to same, Sept. 18: ibid., p. 524. 
 
 3 Memorandum of what the Bishop of Limoges said to Philip II: 
 Negoc. sous Fran9ois II., p. 693. 
 
 * Extract from a letter of M. de Seurre to the Cardinal of Lorraine 
 and the Duke of Guise, Sept. 24, 1560: Negociations sous Fran9ois II., 
 p. 643. 
 
— 57 — 
 
 be speedily sent he would tell liim the meaning of the pro- 
 verb, 'It is good to fish in troubled waters.'" He thought 
 it a part of England's policy "to retain good credit with 
 the Protestants;"^ but was of the opinion that although 
 France was "in some disorder," it would necessarily be "reduced 
 into better terms, because the Guises are diligent in consulta- 
 tion and provision."^ He pressed the French for the ratifica- 
 tion of the Treaty of Edinburgh without further delay, as 
 the time agreed upon by the commissioners had nearly 
 expired, but was met by excuses;^ and when he asked per- 
 mission to send men along the coast to see if they had 
 ceased their warlike preparations according to the terms of 
 the treaty, was told that he was exceeding his commission.'' 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Cecil, Sept. 3, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 483 
 {par. -2). 
 
 '^ He seems to have meant the French Protestants, but may have 
 referred to Protestants in general, or possibly to Scotch Protestants. 
 We have only the abridgement of the Calendar. Throckmorton to Cecil, 
 Sept. 8, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 503 (par. 3). 
 
 a Throckmorton to Cecil, Sept. 3, 1660: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 483 
 (par. 1). 
 
 ■• Queen Elizabeth to Throckmorton, Aug. 26, 1560: Cal. For. Ei., 
 iii. no. 455 (par. 1). Throckmorton to the Cardinal of Lorraine, Sept. 1, 
 1660: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 480. Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, 
 Sept. 8, 1660: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 502. Throckmorton to Queen 
 Elizabeth, Sept. 17, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii, no. 534. 
 
 5 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Aug. 22, 1560: Cal. For. El, 
 iii. no. 446 (par. 2). Same to same, Sept. 8, ibid., iii. no. 502 (par. 3). 
 Throckmorton to the Council, Sept. 8, ibid., iii. no. 505. 
 
 The French ambassador in England had reported to the Guises that 
 the Vidame of Amiens, one of the hostages, had been attending Protestant 
 worship. According to Cecil's clerk, the Vidame detested the "religion," 
 "doings," and "talk" of the Guises, and would, if he had the means, 
 live in England, and never return to France. He was taken ill, however, 
 and wished to go home, but being oifended at what the ambassador 
 had done, sought to obtain the permission through Cecil and Throck- 
 morton. The Cardinal of Lorraine expressed his wonder that the request 
 had not been made through the ambassador, and the matter was delayed. 
 The "Vidame died in England in the following January. Thomas Winde- 
 bank to Throckmorton, Sept. 6, 1560; Cal. For. El., iii. no. 492. Throck- 
 
— 58 ~ 
 
 On the twenty-ninth of September , in connection with 
 a general assembly of the order of Saint Michael for the 
 reception of the new knights, a solemn mass was celebrated 
 in the presence of the court and various members of the 
 diplomatic body. At the elevation of the host, Throck- 
 morton did not kneel with the rest, and the ambassador 
 of Ferrara made some offensive comments, which aroused the 
 anger of Sir Nicholas. Knowledge of the affair reaching the 
 king's ears, he sent word on the following morning to the 
 English ambassador that he was sorry at the unpleasantness 
 which had occurred, but unless Sir Nicholas could conduct 
 himself like tlie others, he was at liberty to remain away 
 from that day's service ; for his example "might do much 
 harm among a great many tliat were ready enough to receive 
 it." To the lierald wlio brought the message, Throckmorton 
 defended his act, denounced the ambassador of Ferrara, and 
 said he was "very well content to stay at liome." ^ 
 
 In October Sir Nicholas notified the queen he had in- 
 formation uot only that the King of Spain would send troops 
 to assist the French government in putting down the insur- 
 
 morton to Queen Elizabeth, Sept. 30: Cal. For. El, iii. no. 577 (par. 1). 
 Cecil to Throckmorton, Jan. 25, 1561: ibid., iii. no. 931. 
 
 John Shers wrote to Cecil from Venice Oct. 12: "They write from 
 Borne that last week M. Nicetto (or Nicet), a secretary of France sent 
 by the French king to the Pope about these matters, bruits abroad that 
 there is a league concluded between the Queen, the Scots, and the 
 Princes Protestants, into which there are also entered certain of the 
 Peers of France, against the Papists, whom they name the Christian 
 Princes." Cal, For. EL, iii. no. 630 (par. 2). 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Oct. 10, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 iii. no. 619 (par. 6, 7). De Ruble, Traite de Cateau-Cambresis, p. 153. 
 De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d'Albret, ii. p. 381. 
 
 Throckmorton wrote to Elizabeth October 29 that the king intended, 
 "either by his ambassador resident, or by an express gentleman sent to 
 her," to ask for his recall, and 'that "rather than he should continue, 
 he would have no ambassador." Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 666. 
 
 Chamberlain, the English ambassador in Spain, said in a letter to 
 Throckmorton, Nov. 2, "All your tumults, we find, are ceased." Cal. 
 For. EL, iii. no. 695 (par. 4). 
 
- 59 — 
 
 rections, but that after this was accomplished, they intended 
 to proceed against England and Geneva as the authors of 
 their troubles. ' The English saw indications of warlike 
 intentions, not only in such rumors, but also in the delay 
 of tlie French to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh and in the 
 reported preparations by land and sea. Elizabeth therefore 
 warned her merchants who traded with France to be careful 
 not to send too many ships across the Channel and so tempt 
 the French "to utter their evil meaning the sooner." She 
 said she well understood that they were arming land forces, 
 but in view of the Tiostility to the rule of the Guises prevailing 
 in certain quarters, she could not see how preparing a navy 
 would help them. ^ In this remark slie doubtless referred to 
 the admiral. 
 
 The Bourbon princes hesitated about obeying the summons 
 of the king, but, receiving letters which allayed their suspicions, 
 they proceeded to the court, then at Orleans, which they 
 reached on the last day of October. Conde was at once 
 arrested by order of the king, and being granted a trial, was 
 pronounced guilty and condemned to be beheaded at the 
 opening of the States General. The King of Navarre was 
 not placed in confinement, but was so closely watched that he 
 was virtually a prisoner, and was for a time, so it is said, 
 in danger of assassination. Others, including Madame de 
 Eoye, who was the mother-in-law of Conde and the half- 
 sister of Coligny, were put under arrest ; the Guises took 
 measures to crush all opposition; and things grew to a 
 condition of silence and quietness which Throckmorton said 
 he was "sorry to see." =* The friends of Elizabeth in France 
 
 ' Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Oct. 10, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 iii. no. 619 (par. 13). 
 
 '' Queen Elizabeth to Wotton, Oct. 16, 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 
 637 (par. 2). Queen Elizabeth to the lord treasurer and the lord keeper, 
 Oct. 16, 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 639. M. de Bouille to the Duke of 
 Cxuiae, Nov. 27, 1560: Negoc. sous Fran9ois IL, p. 693. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Nov. 17, 1560: Cal. For. El, 
 no. 716 (par. 18, 19). Throckmorton to Lord Robert Dudley, Nov. 17, 
 1561: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 721 (par. 2). 
 
— 60 — 
 
 were in the greatest embarrasHment, and in the midst of it 
 seem to have turned to her for help. One day in December 
 there arrived at the English court a man who had been 
 counsellor and master of requests of Navarre and Conde. 
 He had business witli the queen; but just what it was, we 
 are now unable to determine. We do know, however, that 
 he bore a letter to Cecil from the eminent Huguenot jurist 
 Francis Hotmau, tiieu in Strasburg, stating that his errand 
 was "important, serviceable to England, and necessary for 
 the church of France." ' From the Count Palatine of the 
 Rhine came a letter to Elizabetli, dated December seventh, 
 begging that slie would assist the prince and expressing liis 
 readiness to act witli her. - 
 
 Already, however, a higher Power liad interfered and 
 the whole state of affairs had been unexpectedly changed. 
 Francis the Second, always troubled with a weak constitution, 
 had experienced about the middle of November an additional 
 affliction in the shape of a gathering in the ear. He sank 
 rapidly, and died on the fifth of December. 
 
 With this event came to an end what had been the 
 virtual dictatorship of his wife's uncles. Throckmorton, of 
 course, rejoiced. The king, he said, had taken in hand his 
 father's enterprise against Elizabeth's crown; but, "partly 
 impeached by his own affairs at liome"' and especially by 
 her "wise preventions, the same could not take effect." ''Now 
 is the time for your majesty to follow the good means 
 offered to you to establish all things to your continual quiet 
 and to make a sure and larger seat for yourself and your 
 posterity forever to God's glory a)id your own unspeakable 
 fame."^ As a result of the changes which took place in the 
 
 ' Hotman to Cecil, Doc, 1560: Oal. For. El., iii. no. 760. 
 
 - Frederic, Count Palatine of the Rhine, to Queen Elizabeth, Dec, 7, 
 1560: Cal. For. EL, iii. no. 781. 
 
 3 Throckmorton to Queen Elizabeth, Dec. 6, 1560: Cal. For. El., 
 iii. no. 771 (par. 1, 2, 3). Throckmorton to the Lords of the Council, 
 Dec. 6, 1560: Cal. For. El., iii. no. 773 (par. 1, 2). I take the liberty 
 in the case of the last sentence quoted to change the form given in the 
 
— 61 - 
 
 French government, Conde and the other prisoners were 
 ultimately declared innocent. 
 
 There is no substantial proof that from the Treaty of 
 Edinburgh to the end of the year the English had been 
 intriguing in France. Even their enemies, as we have seen, 
 hesitated to assert it. 
 
 VII. 
 
 . CONCLUSION. 
 
 During the years fifteen hundred fifty-nine and fifteen 
 hundred sixty there was much friendliness and more or less 
 temporary and desultory plotting between the English govern- 
 ment and the religious and political enemies of the Guises 
 in France ; but so far as the evidence justifies us in forming 
 definite conclusions, systematic and continuous intrigues with 
 the Huguenots did not begin till the death of Francis the 
 Second, when the helm passed from the strong hands of the 
 Guises into those of the mother of the boy king, Charles the 
 Ninth. It was then that Cecil wrote to Throckmorton that 
 they must be careful to advance Protestantism, that "herein 
 the time serves well in France to begin the conquest;" and 
 directed him to "set all the wheels that may make motion 
 agate." ' Party lines across the Channel came to be drawn 
 on strictly religious grounds, the English carried on a series 
 of the closest intrigues with the Protestants, and finally, 
 when the soil of France was reddened in civil war, sent 
 men and money to their aid. 
 
 "Calendar" into something nearer the exact original by adopting the 
 second person. 
 
 ' Cecil to Throckmorton, Jan. 16, 1561: Cal. For. EI., iii. no. 883 
 (par. 3). 
 
Yita. 
 
 Henry Clay ^tanclift, the son of Isaac S. and Jane 
 A. Stanclift, was born in Spencer, New York, U. S. A., 
 January 11, 1864. He received his preliminary education 
 in the public schools of his native village , graduating from 
 the academy in June, 1882. In the following month he took 
 part in a series of competitive examinations conducted by 
 the Inter-Academic Literary Union of the State of New York, 
 and received the first prize in American history. He continued 
 his studies under a private tutor for a year, and then became 
 teacher of History and Mathematics in the academy at Spencer. 
 Resigning the position at the end of two years, he entered 
 Cornell University at Ithaca, New York, in September, 1885, 
 where he remained four years. He held throughout his course 
 there a university scholarship, secured as a result of compet- 
 itive examinations and retained by maintenance of rank. 
 During the last two years he gave special attention to 
 History and Political Science, hearing lectures in those 
 branches by President Charles Kendall Adams, Ex-president 
 Andrew D. White, Professors Moses Coit Tyler, Herbert 
 Tuttle, Goldwin Smith, Franklin B. Sanborn, E. Benjamin 
 Andrews, and F. H. Hodder; and taking part in the exer- 
 cises of historical seminaries conducted by Professors Tuttle 
 and Tyler. In June, 1889, he received his baccalaureate 
 degree , and then proceeded to Europe. In the following 
 October he was inscribed in the University at Leipzig. After 
 studying here two semesters he spent a semester in Berlin, 
 and then returned to Leipzig, where he has remained till 
 
— 64 — 
 
 now, the end of his fifth semester at the German universities. 
 In Leipzig he has heard Professors Maurenbrecher , Roseher, 
 Brentano, Ratzel, Arndt, and Busch, and has been a member 
 of Professor Maurenbrecher's and of Professor Arndt's histo- 
 rical seminaries. In Berlin he heard Professors Kcser, 
 von Treitschke, Scheifer-Boichorst , Delbruck, Wagner, and 
 Dr. Marcks, and was a member of Professor Koser's historical 
 seminary. He holds for the present year a fellowship in 
 modern European History awarded by the faculty of Cornell 
 University. He wishes to thank his present and former 
 teachers , especially Professors Maurenbrecher and Tuttle for 
 their kindness and sympathetic interest. 
 
Coniell UnlvarsHy Ubrary 
 arW9093 
 
 Queen Elizabeth and the FfgBSiJ.PlSJSifll!" 
 
 3 1924 031 423 506 
 olin.anx 
 
»*4^Z^ 
 
 ■^ I 
 
 *^&rJ 
 
 '^N- 
 .-•^^'^' 
 
 m. 
 
 *7F 
 
 'M- 
 
 >^>.,;