Chapter III: The Last Years of Lady Mary (2)

Sheen, the Charterhouse at (residence of the Marquis of Dorset), 108,
132, 135, 137, 284

Shrewsbury, George Talbot, Earl of, 86, 250

Skipton Castle, 294, 295;
Skipton Church, 296, 297

Somerset, Anne Stanhope, Duchess of, 106, 125-126, 132;
letter to Cecil of, 169;
writes to Cecil, blaming Lady Katherine, 173 and _footnote_, 236;
appeals on behalf of Lady Katherine and Hertford, 208-209, 216; 224,
242, 244 _f. n._, 249, 274;

Somerset, Duke of, 110, 122, 127, 181 _f. n._

Spaniards, the, their opinion of England and the English, 119,
124-125;
create disturbances, 126-127

Stanley, Lord William, 304

Stokes, Adrian (second husband of Lady Frances Brandon), 103, 104,
105, 136, 138, 139, 141, 256, 284, 285

Strange, Fernando, 300, 303-304

Suffolk, Duchess of. _See_ Brandon, Lady Frances; Katherine
Willoughby; Mary Tudor

Suffolk, Duke of. _See_ Brandon, Charles

Suffolk Place, or Court, 19 _f. n._, 58, 59, 120, 295

Symonds, Dr., 231, 237 _f. n._

“The Chequers,” 266, 273

Tudor, Owen. _See_ Owen Tudor

Warner, Sir Edward (Lieutenant of the Tower), 174, 175, 182, 189,
192, 196, 197 and _footnote_

Wentworth, Lady, 219, 225

Wentworth, Sir John, 216, 219, 220, 225, 228, 241

Westhorpe Hall, 18, 19 _f. n._, 67, 68

Westminster Palace, 164

Westminster, tournament at, described, 23-26;
watergate at, 258 and _footnote_, 260;
Hall, 299

Will of Edward VI, touching the succession to the Throne, xvii, 104,
134, 245, 277

Will of Henry VIII, touching the succession to the Throne, xvi-xviii,
104 and _footnote_, 134, 159, 212 and _footnote_, 245, 277, 293

Willoughby, Katherine, Duchess of Suffolk. _See_ Katherine Willoughby

Wolsey, Cardinal, 6, 37, 51, 56-57, 61, 62, 68

Zouch, Lady, 87 and _footnote_, 88

RICHARD CLAY & SONS, LIMITED,
BRUNSWICK STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E.,
AND BUNGAY, SUFFOLK

EXTRACTS FROM SOME OF THE PRESS NOTICES OF OTHER WORKS BY RICHARD DAVEY

=THE NINE-DAYS’ QUEEN=: The Life of Lady Jane Grey.
Illustrated. [London: Methuen & Co. 10_s._ 6_d._

“Mr. Davey in this scholarly volume—it rests on original research—tells without rhetorical appeal the moving story of the poor girl’s fate.... The book is written with lightly handled knowledge and conspicuous charm.”—_The Standard._

* * * * *

“Diving deep into historical records, Mr. Davey has given us not only a most fascinating narrative of the chief conspiracies, but also some excellent character sketches.... A most interesting volume, which may be read by the general reader with profit, and will be heartily welcomed by students who wish to arrive at a fuller knowledge of that extraordinary period.”—_The Globe._

* * * * *

“A fascinating narrative.... The work is one calculated to lure indolent readers into perusing something of more permanent worth than third-rate fiction.”—_Pall Mall Gazette._

* * * * *

“Mr. Richard Davey’s exhaustive and admirably written history.”—_Morning Post._

* * * * *

“The story emerges clearly through an extraordinary amount of anecdote and personal detail. The detail is never superfluous or indifferent. The narrative and description alike hold the reader’s attention.... The wealth of this new telling lies in the careful psychology and wealth of detail which we have praised. Mr. Davey’s story is essentially exact....”—_The Athenæum._

* * * * *

“Mr. Davey has presented his tragic materials with fulness and clearness.... Among the best of historical biographies.... The work is, indeed, far better than most of the memoirs of this kind, and should have more than a season’s success. It is evidently the fruit of long and careful study, and is admirably presented.”—_Daily Telegraph._

* * * * *

(Extract from a long review of this work by M. T. de Wyzewa in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_ for April 15, 1910).

“La haute portée de l’ouvrage de M. Davey lui vient surtout de ce que, après avoir écarté ces fables que l’imagination populaire a amoncelées pendant plusieurs siècles, et sous lesquelles la personne authentique de la petite reine improvisée nous apparaît enfin, pour la première fois, dans son émouvante simplicité, l’auteur s’est attaché à évoquer devant nous les vigoureuses et sinistres figures des acteurs principaux du drame. _Jamais encore_, je crois, _aucun historien_ n’a reconstitué avec autant de relief et de couleur pittoresque le tableau des intrigues ourdies autour du trône du vieil Henry VIII et de son pitoyable successeur Edouard VI.”

=THE TOWER OF LONDON.= With Fourteen Illustrations.
[London: Methuen & Co. 10_s._ 6_d._

“The grim annals of the Tower of London have already been treated by various historians, but there is still room for an accurate, yet animated, work such as Mr. Richard Davey has produced. His topography is carefully done, and he has a nice eye for architecture. Mr. Davey sets forth the facts with spirit; we get, indeed, a singularly complete record.”—_Morning Post._

* * * * *

“Mr. Davey’s competent and readable book will rank among the best upon its subject. Mr. Davey has two conspicuous qualifications for a work of this kind; he is careful about his authorities and he writes uncommonly well.... In writing of the Tudor period Mr. Davey is at his best. He shows the true historian’s gift for dissecting motive and probing to the heart of a situation, and he keeps the interest continually quivering with the spirit of suggestion and interpretation.... A book packed with historical interest.”—_Daily Telegraph._

* * * * *

“Mr. Davey’s book is one which no visitor to the Tower, or any one interested in that grim building, should fail to read. He writes pleasantly; the wonderful story he has to tell is related with full appreciation of its dramatic possibilities. Mr. Davey is at his best in relating the tragedies of the Tower.”—_Evening Standard._

=THE PAGEANT OF LONDON.= With Illustrations.
[London: Methuen & Co. 7_s._ 6_d._ per volume,
or Two volumes, 15_s._

“Mr. Davey marks London’s development up to the present situation by many typical and striking scenes.... His work is an admirable example of discriminating research.”—_Morning Post._

* * * * *

“Mr. Davey has combined the method of the impressionist with those of the historian and anecdotist, and the result is one that is admirable.... It would be easy to quote innumerable passages of admirable description, of well-told historical incidents, of pleasant anecdotes.... A deeply interesting book, quite unlike the conventional topographical works.”—_Daily Telegraph._

* * * * *

“Replete with information, presented with a considerable amount of literary skill.”—_Athenæum._

=THE SULTAN AND HIS SUBJECTS.= Second Edition.
[London: Chatto & Windus. 7_s._ 6_d._

“The best book on Turkey that has yet appeared ... a book that goes to the root of the political troubles in Turkey with directness and insight.... Mr. Davey’s book must be read by every one who has eyes to look beyond parochial politics.”—_Pall Mall Gazette._

* * * * *

“The description of the Reform Movement in Turkey is especially interesting.... This is a book which well repays perusal, and is the more interesting at a time when the once moribund Sick Man of the East looms so largely on the European horizon.”—_Morning Post._

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See the brief synopsis of Henry VIII’s Will in Note at the end of this Preface.

[2] _Ambassades Françaises_—Elizabeth: Archives Nationales.

[3] _Simancas Papers_ (Spanish State Papers), edited by Major Martin Hume.

[4] See Stowe’s _Annals_; also, _The History of the Twydyr Family_.

[5] The acquaintance of Katherine the Fair with Owen Tudor must have begun a great deal earlier than 1423, the date usually stated. There exists in the British Museum, a picturesque old French novel, entitled _Tidéric, Prince de Galles_—founded, according to its anonymous author, on little-known documents amongst the French archives—which describes Katherine as having fallen in love with Owen during the negotiations for her marriage with Henry V. The handsome Welshman certainly distinguished himself at Agincourt, and subsequent to that momentous battle, was created Captain of the King’s Guard, in which position he became a confidential attendant on the Sovereign. In that quality, we gather, he was sent with a message to Princess Katherine, who then and there fell in love with him. He was next—and this is an historical fact—created Clerk of the Wardrobe to the queen, and was, therefore, constantly in her company. When both the king and queen returned to France, and Henry died, Owen escorted the young dowager back to England. In the _Histoire de Boulogne_, a “M. Tidder” is described as being in the queen’s procession, which followed “at a distance of two miles” that conveying the king’s body through northern France on its way to England. The queen’s procession entered Montreuil-sur-Mer one hour after the one which bore the royal corpse had left that town, “M. Tidder” leading the way, on a white horse. The queen and her party paused to partake of refreshments offered by the mayor, and it was late in the afternoon before they left Montreuil for Boulogne and Calais, where Katherine embarked for England at nightfall, but not on the vessel that carried the king’s body.

Thus Katherine may have had many a meeting with Owen long before her gallant husband’s death. The adventure at the dance, which history relates as a fact, very likely occurred, and kindled a passion that resulted in the secret and momentous union, the precise date of which is lost.

[6] _Parliamentary History_, vol. ii., p. 211.

[7] Among the statutes of the foundation of Bermondsey Abbey was one whereby certain apartments were to be reserved for members of the royal family in case of sickness, the monks having a great reputation as skilful leeches and doctors, a fact which accounts for this queen and for Elizabeth Woodville and other royal ladies being permitted to reside at times in a monastery inhabited by monks.

[8] _Fosdi_, vol. x., p. 354.

[9] See Holinshed’s _Chronicles_.

[10] These facts concerning the Brandons and the Bullens are derived from notes supplied me many years ago by the eminent Norfolk historian, my old and valued friend, A. Carthew, whose history of the hundred of Launditch is one of the most extraordinary volumes of its sort in existence.

[11] Elizabeth, Duchess of Norfolk, was the daughter and heiress of Richard Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel and Surrey. Her first husband was Robert, Duke of Norfolk, who died in Venice; her second, Sir Gerald Ufflete. A year after his death she took, for a third husband, Sir Robert Goushall, by whom she had a daughter who became the wife of Sir Robert Wingfield of Letheringham; it is this lady’s second daughter, Elizabeth, who married Sir William Brandon, the grandfather of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk.

[12] Sir Henry Bruyn was a son of Sir Maurice Bruyn and of Elizabeth Radford.

[13] Elizabeth Darcy was the daughter of Sir Richard Darcy and Alice Fitzlangley, daughter and heiress of Henry Fitzlangley.

[14] _Cott. Coll. Julius_, vols. ii. and vi.

[15] The origin of this Lady Mortimer, who, for her sins and sorrows, yielded at a mature age to the blandishments of the very youthful Charles Brandon, has hitherto baffled the researches of historians. Quite by chance the writer discovered her identity. Happening one day to turn over the pages of Blomefield’s invaluable _History of Norfolk_, under the heading “Inglethorpe” in the Lynn district, he found, included in the pedigree of the ancient family which gives its name to this manor, that of the Lady Mortimer. It appears that Sir Edmond de Bellasis, Lord of Inglethorpe or Ingaldesthorpe, who died, seized of that manor, in the thirty-sixth year of Henry V’s reign, was the last of his line. He had, by his wife, the Lady Joan de Boase, a daughter and heiress, Isabel, who married John Nevill, Marquis Montagu or Montacute, brother to the famous “Kingmaker,” Richard Nevill, Earl of Warwick. This lady had two sons and five daughters. Her eldest son died in infancy, and the second, George, eventually followed the fortunes of his uncle, the Earl of Warwick, and rose, under Edward IV, to be Duke of Bedford, but was deprived of this title and of his estates by Richard III. He died without issue, bequeathing what remained of his fortune amongst his five sisters, one of whom, the Lady Margaret Nevill, married Sir John Mortimer, who, dying on the field of battle at Bosworth without issue, left her very richly dowered. Being considerably over forty when Charles Brandon was in his nineteenth year (it will be remembered that he was a mere child at the time of the battle of Bosworth), she fell a victim to the youth’s fascinations, and married him, to the amazement of the Venetian ambassador, who comments upon the affair in a note to his government, saying: “In this country [England] young men marry old ladies for their money, and here, for instance, is the Duke of Suffolk, who, at nineteen, married a lady, for her wealth, in whose house he dwelt, and who is old enough to be his grandmother.” This Lady Mortimer had a sister, the Lady Lucy Nevill, who married Sir Anthony Browne, governor of Calais, and who was the mother of that Anne Browne, to whom Brandon was betrothed at the time of his marriage with the Lady Mortimer. To add to the confusion, it seems that Brandon’s grandmother, Elizabeth Wingfield, had a youngest sister who married Robert Mortimer, brother to the above-named Sir John, and was therefore sister-in-law to the Lady Margaret Mortimer and Brandon’s great-aunt. These alliances, at a time when not only consanguinity, but spiritual affinity, was taken into consideration in matters matrimonial, rendered it exceedingly easy for certain thoughtlessly undertaken marriages to be annulled by the ecclesiastical tribunals.

There is in this pedigree another curious fact which tells indirectly upon the tragic history of the three sisters Grey, since it proves that there existed a connecting link between the Brandons and the Greys as far back as the beginning of the fifteenth century. The Lady Joan, widow of the last Lord Inglethorpe, married the first Lord Grey de Ruthen, and thereby became the immediate ancestress of that Henry Grey who married Brandon’s daughter by the French queen, the Lady Frances, and was the father of the three unfortunate sisters, Jane, Katherine and Mary Grey. This connection very probably led to the choice of Henry Grey as consort for the Lady Frances Brandon, Mary Tudor’s eldest daughter.

[16] Reginald de la Pole, head of this great house, was beheaded on June 30, 1513, for an alleged treasonable correspondence with his brother, then in the service of Louis XII, who, it was said, had threatened to assist in placing the “heir of the White Rose” (Perkin Warbeck) upon the English throne.

[17] Other lands and mansions assigned to Charles Brandon from time to time were: the manors of Austin’s and Gerard’s in the parish of Darsham (Suffolk), given at the Dissolution; Leiston Abbey (Suffolk), granted in 1536—it is said that the patronage of this abbey had been in the Brandon family for generations, but Charles exchanged it with the Crown for Henham Hall; properties at Laxfield and Middleton in Suffolk, attached to Leiston Abbey, granted to Brandon at the Dissolution; the Priory of St. Mary of Mendham (Suffolk), which came to Brandon through his fourth wife, Catherine, Lady Willoughby of Eresby, she being lineally descended from a sister of Sir William de Ufford, on whom it had been settled—Brandon conveyed it to one Richard Freston for an annual rent of forty pounds; the estate of Combs, which was an inheritance in the right of Catherine, Lady Willoughby, and eventually passed to her second husband, Richard Bertie, Esq.; Haughley Castle, manor and estate (Suffolk), an apanage of the de la Poles; and Cavenham, granted to Suffolk on the attainder of the Duke of Buckingham. Strange to say, Suffolk rarely visited any of his numerous castles and manor-houses. He lived in London. His favourite country house was Westhorpe Hall; but he died at Guildford Castle, which did not belong to him. The estate in Southwark came to him in 1502 on the death of his uncle Thomas, who had inherited it in his turn from his grandfather, who died in 1497. Charles so enlarged the house that it became a palace, second only in size and magnificence to the royal palace at Kennington. These facts prove—the majority of the historians of London to the contrary notwithstanding—that Suffolk Place was not a gift to Brandon from the king, but an inheritance from his forefathers.

[18] British Museum, Titus B.I. 142; also, the _Chronique de Calais_, 71.

[19] See the dowager’s own narrative in the _Chronique de Calais_.

[20] Mary openly renounced her contract with Prince Charles of Castile on July 30, 1514, at Wanstead, in the presence of Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, Brandon, and the Bishops of Lincoln, Winchester and Durham.

[21] Louis’s queen, Anne of Brittany, had died, “utterly lamented,” on January 9, 1514.

[22] Louis himself told the English ambassadors that “he was a sickly body, and not fond of having curious eyes about him.” Peter Martyr says he suffered from elephantiasis and bore signs of premature senility. See Fleming’s _Chronicles_; the _Calendar of State Papers_; and Peter Martyr’s _Epistles_, 541.

[23] Mary, however, with the kindness of heart which characterized her, saw that they eventually obtained some recognition of their services. According to documents in the French archives, her goldsmith, one William Verner, of Fleet Street, London, was ordered to prepare certain jewelry, to the value of six hundred gold crowns, to be disbursed as gifts to the impecunious gentlewomen dismissed in France. Amongst these valuable presents were a polished ruby and an emerald set in a gold cross, value two hundred _écus de soleil_; a diamond and sapphire set in a necklace, value three hundred crowns; and a table diamond worth one hundred crowns. The gems were to be worn at court, in order that all might see that the ladies had not been defrauded of their just dues.

[24] This Lady Boleyn is frequently described as the Lady Anne Boleyn who became Queen of England and died on the scaffold; but this is a popular error. Anne Boleyn was at this time in attendance on Queen Claude of France, and the Lady Anne Boleyn, her aunt, has been identified as the Lady Boleyn who was in attendance upon Mary at the time of her marriage with the French king. She was the wife of Sir William Boleyn and daughter of the Earl of Pembroke.

[25] British Museum, _Caligula_, D. vi. 192.

[26] On October 13, 1514, Louis presented his queen with the already mentioned ruby valued at 10,000 marks.

Mary was endowed by Letters Patent (Abbeville, October 8, 1514) with the town and castlery of Caynone and its appurtenances, the castles of Saintonge, de Pezenas, etc. (R.O. Rymer xiii. 459.)

[27] This beautiful specimen of a Gothic palace of the fourteenth century was the town residence of the abbots of Cluny, and was lent to the queen dowager by the abbot of that day. The noble old building is still standing, and converted into a museum of mediæval art.

[28] Queen Claude is said to have introduced greengages into northern France. They are still called _prunes de la Reine Claude_.

[29] State Papers, Domestic Series, Henry VIII, vols. i. and ii.

[30] _Ambassades françaises (Angleterre) sous François I (Henri VIII)._ Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.

[31] “When,” says Suffolk, “I came to Paris, the queen was in hand with me the day after. She said ‘she must be short with me and show to me her pleasure and mind,’ and so she began, and showed how good a lady she was to me, and if I would be ordered by her, she verily would have none but me.” “An ever I come to England,” said the youthful dowager to Suffolk, “I never shall have you, and therefore plainly an you marry me not now, I will never have you nor never come into England.” Suffolk replied, “You say that but to prove me withal.” “I would but you knew well,” answered Mary, “at your coming to Paris how it was shown to me.” “I asked her,” continued Suffolk, “what that was?” “The best in France has been with me,” replied Mary. Here she clearly indicated Francis I, and from him she had intelligence which added to her excitement. “An I go to England,” continued she to Suffolk, “then I am sent to Flanders, and I would be torn to pieces rather than ever come there.” “And with that,” pursues Suffolk, “she weeped as never I saw woman so weep.”

[32] For this remarkable correspondence see _Cott. Col._ (British Museum), _Caligula_, D. vi.

[33] Some writers call it _le Miroir de Naples_, but in the list of gems taken by Charles VIII (Neapolitan archives), it figures as _La Stella di Napoli_. Where is it now? The “Mirror,” or “Star,” of Naples was valued at 30,000 crowns, and eighteen pearls at 10,000 crowns.

[34] The queen, in her deed of gift adds: “I give all my dote that was delivered with me, and also all such plate of gold and jewels as I shall have of my late husband’s. Over and besides this, I shall, rather than fail, give you as much yearly part of my dower as great a sum as shall stand with your will and pleasure.”

[35] The following are the headings to the lists of the property of Princess Mary Tudor, made at the time of her marriage with King Louis:—

“1. An inventory of date 12th October, 1514, of the jewelry, gold and silver plate, for the chapel, buffets and kitchen of the Princess Mary, delivered to Lewis XII, in presence of Thos. Bohier, Jacques de Beaume, and Henry Wyat, master of the jewel-house, made in the town of Abbeville, 10th and 11th Oct., 1514.” (Among the plate mentioned are several silver images of St. Thomas of Canterbury, St. Katharine, and other saints, and a silver-gilt mirror, garnished with H. & R. and red roses.)

“2. List of the furniture for the chapel, dresses, linen, tapestries, belonging to the Princess Mary, delivered to Lewis XII by Sir Andrew Windsor, master of the Wardrobe, before the same witnesses; made at Abbeville, 11th and 12th Oct., 1514.”

“3. Inventory of the horses, carriages, and their furniture, Abbeville, 12th Oct., 1514.”

There is also a minute of an agreement, in the Rolls Office, by which document Louis XII agrees to receive jewelry and furniture to the value of 200,000 crowns, as the dowry of Princess Mary, reserving certain conditions as to their restoration. What these conditions were we learn from letters of acquittance (R.O. Rymer xiii. 462) given on the delivery of Mary Queen of France, with her jewels, etc., of the 400,000 gold crowns promised as her dower by Henry VIII, provided that, in the case of restitution, the king and his heirs shall only be bound to restore what she brought with her into France, with the expenses of her passage. Subscribed, Abbeville, 13th August, 1514.

[36] An anonymous writer to Margaret of Savoy, in a letter dated April 9, 1514, says: “I think never man saw a more beautiful creature [than Mary], or one possessed of so much grace and sweetness.” Gerard de Pleine writes: “I assure you that she [Mary] is one of the most beautiful young women in the world. I think I never saw a more charming creature. She is very graceful. Her deportment in dancing and in conversation is as pleasing as you could desire. There is nothing gloomy or melancholy about her.... I assure you that she has been well educated.... I had imagined that she would have been very tall; but she is of middling height....” (_Lettres de Louis XII_, tome iv., p. 335; State Papers, 5203, p. 833.)

[37] Cavendish’s _Life of Wolsey_; also, a slightly different version, in Galt’s _Life of Cardinal Wolsey_, p. 164.

[38] In 1603, James I took a fancy to Theobalds Park at Cheshunt, the seat of the Cecils, where he stopped on his progress from Edinburgh to London to ascend the English throne, and exchanged Hatfield for Theobalds, where he died in 1625. Hatfield has ever since remained in the possession of the illustrious family of Cecil.

[39] The Lady Anne Boleyn above mentioned was not the lady who became famous as the second queen of Henry VIII, but her aunt, a daughter of the Earl of Pembroke and wife of Sir William Boleyn of Blickling Hall, Norfolk.

[40] Clement had been driven from Rome by the Spanish troops, and had taken refuge at Orvieto, in a ruinous palace. The envoys say “the furniture of his bed and all was not worth twenty nobles.”

[41] It is not at all improbable that this, the generally received version of what we should call the _affaire Mortimer_, is incorrect. Cokayne says she married, after her separation from Brandon, a gentleman named Downes—the _Baronagium_ calls him Horn. In this case she was already out of court, and the action of Brandon and Wolsey for a papal absolute nullification of the former’s marriage was to make the position of the queen-duchess and her children entirely unassailable. (See the _Baronagium Angl._; also, Brooke’s _Catalogue_, p. 141.) The third marriage of Lady Mortimer seems to have been overlooked by historians. Had Lady Mortimer’s marriage with Brandon been confirmed by the pope, both she and Brandon would have been liable to the charge of bigamy, and the succession to the throne claimed by the daughter of the queen-duchess by Brandon would have been _ipso facto_ invalid.

[42] “The xiij day of January was bared at (Westminster) in sant Margerett parryche my lade Powes, (daughter) to the duke of Suffoke Charles Brandon, (with two) whytt branchys, xij torchys, and iij grett (tapers), with xij skochyons of armes.”

[43] Lady Monteagle, who bore her husband six children, died in 1544. Her husband, Thomas Stanley, succeeded his father as Viscount Monteagle, 1522, and was made K.B. at the Coronation of Anne Boleyn. His second wife was Helen Preston of Livens. (See Dugdale’s _Baronagium_, Machyn’s _Diary_, etc.) These dates prove conclusively that the lovely woman in the sketch by Holbein, inscribed “the Lady Monteagle,” is intended for the daughter of Charles Brandon, and is not the second Lady Monteagle, who was married long after Holbein’s death.

[44] Dugdale. Brandon was jeweller to Elizabeth, and there are numerous references to orders given him by the queen, for plate and jewelry.

[45] In the register of St. Mary Matfellon, Whitechapel, is the record of the burial of Richard Brandon, “a man out of Rosemary Lane.” The entry is dated June 2, 1649, and to it is appended a note to the effect that “this Richard Brandon is supposed to have cut off the head of Charles I.” This man is said to have confessed that he received thirty pounds for the job, which was paid him in half-crowns within an hour after the execution had taken place; he took an orange stuck with cloves, and a handkerchief, from the king’s pocket, and sold the former article to a gentleman for ten shillings. Richard Brandon was the son of Gregory Brandon, and claimed the office of headsman by inheritance. His first victim was the Earl of Strafford. In a very old MS. on armorial bearings, dated 1692, lately in the possession of the author, is the marginal note in an antique handwriting: “Charles Brandon, who was cousin to Queen Elizabeth, had an ill-begotten son Gregory, whose son Richard beheaded Charles I.”

[46] State Papers, Henry VIII, Domestic Series.

[47] Estby’s _History of Bury St. Edmunds_.

[48] Mary Tudor, Queen Dowager of France and Duchess of Suffolk, was buried in a magnificent alabaster monument in Bury St. Edmunds Abbey, which was destroyed at the Dissolution. Although the abbey church was blown up with gunpowder, the townspeople carried the coffin, containing the queen’s body, to the parish church, where it was reinterred near the high altar, and covered with some altar slabs brought from the desecrated abbey. The alabaster monument was destroyed. In 1734 the remains of Mary Tudor were unearthed and her coffin was opened. The body, that of a large woman, with a profusion of golden hair adhering to the skull, was found to be in a perfect state of preservation. It was re-buried close to the right of the altar, where a modern inscription on a marble tablet, let into the wall, may still be read.

[49] There is an interesting account of the death of these “noble imps,” as contemporary chroniclers call them, in the _Gentleman’s Magazine_ for Nov. 1825, vol. xcv. II. 200.

[50] For an account of this visit, see State Papers, p. 453, a dispatch from the Earl of Sussex dated December 31, 1534. Suffolk had been to Bugden earlier in the year, in May, and had behaved with much unnecessary brutality.

[51] A chandler, who also exercised the calling of surgeon, opened the body of Queen Katherine, and found the heart black and dry, as he informed the Bishop of Llandaff; proving, although he was unaware of the fact, that she died of what is called melanotic sarcoma, or cancer of the heart.

[52] The venerated image was again destroyed during the French Revolution, only the left hand being saved; this is still carried in procession through the streets of Boulogne on August 14.

[53] There is a fine drawing of this lady, by Holbein, at Windsor Castle.

[54] Katherine, Lady Willoughby d’Eresby, was the fourth wife of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, and step-grandmother to Lady Katherine Grey.

[55] The Marquis of Dorset was created Duke of Suffolk early in the reign of Edward VI, and shortly after the death of his wife’s two step-brothers, both successively dukes of Suffolk, who died within a few hours of each other, as already stated, in 1551.

[56] Aylmer, however, knew Lady Katherine Grey well, for in one of his letters from Italy he desires to be remembered to her. We may, therefore, conclude that he had at least some share in her education; but whereas Jane Grey’s calligraphy is very fine, for the period, Katherine’s is nearly illegible, and her letters are not well expressed.

[57] It was written by Lady Jane, on the evening of Sunday, February 11 (the night before her execution), on the blank sheets in her favourite Greek Testament. This may now be seen in the British Museum.

[58] An allusion to the parable of the wise and foolish virgins.

[59] The next few lines are illegible, having evidently been blotted out by the writer’s tears.

[60] For a detailed account of Henry VIII’s will, see _The Nine-days’ Queen_, by Richard Davey, p. 109.

[61] The original copy is still preserved in the British Museum, bound up in a small volume of MSS., _temp._ Mary I. “On the outer cover is written, in red ink, ‘Mariæ Reginæ,’ showing this to be the copy presented to the Queen.”

[62] There is a very beautiful picture in the King’s collection, representing the mother of this young lady.

[63] Blanche Parry was the widow of Sir Thomas Parry, who succeeded Mr. Saintlow as comptroller of the queen’s household. She was a palmist of considerable skill; and an ancient black-letter volume on Palmistry, containing a great many very curious plates, is still in the library at Charlcote Hall. It is said by tradition to have belonged to Blanche Parry: if so, she “told the hand” exactly as it is “told” by the occult sisterhood of Bond Street and other fashionable parts of London in our time. Mrs. Parry was also a crystal-gazer.

[64] Dr. Dee, who was born in 1527, was a man of superior attainments, and a clever mathematician. He took his degree as Master of Arts in 1548 at Cambridge. Being suspected as a sorcerer, he left England in the same year, but returned in the reign of Edward VI, who took a great fancy to him. Under Mary, he was imprisoned for attempting the queen’s life by witchcraft. After Elizabeth ascended the throne, he became such a favourite with her that she sent her own doctors to him when he was ill; and she also despatched him to investigate the recently discovered American territory. In 1583 he went to live in Bohemia with a Polish nobleman, who was likewise suspected of necromancy, and the two succeeded in imposing on a great many people on the Continent. Dee eventually returned to England, was made Chancellor of St. Paul’s Cathedral, and died at Mortlake in 1608. He possessed a magic mirror in which Elizabeth placed great faith and which she frequently consulted.

[65] See for particulars of the life of Amy Robsart, Mr. George Adlard’s interesting volume, _Amye Robsart and the Earl of Leycester_, John Russell Smith, London, 1870. Mr. Adlard had not access to the Simancas Papers, and was therefore not aware of the rumours rife in London at the time of the unfortunate lady’s accident or murder. Amy Robsart did not, as Scott tells us, belong to a Devonshire family, but to a very ancient Norfolk house.

[66] The scheme is succinctly recounted in a letter from Sir Thomas Challoner, then English ambassador at Madrid, to Cecil, which will be found in the State Papers (Foreign Series) for the reign of Elizabeth. “King Philip II,” he says, “is so jealous of the anticipated power of France, by the alliance of young Francis the Dauphin with the Queen of Scotland, and her claims to the Crown of England, that he positively contemplates stealing Lady Katherine Grey out of the realm, and marrying her to his son, Don Carlos, or some other member of his family, and setting up her title against that of Mary Stuart, as the true heiress of England. Lady Katherine will probably be glad to go, being most uncomfortably situated in the English court with the queen, who cannot well abide the sight of her, and neither the duchess her mother nor her step-father love her, and her uncle cannot abide to hear of her, so that she lives, as it were, in great despair. She has spoken very arrogant and unseemly words in the hearing of the queen and others standing by. Hence it is thought that she could be enticed away if some trusty person speak with her.”

[67] It will be remembered that these events took place late in 1558, or early in 1559, before Lady Frances’s death.

[68] Durham House, Strand, at one time the town residence of the Bishops of Durham, was ceded to the famous Duke of Northumberland; and Lady Jane Grey was married, and Lady Katherine betrothed, in the private chapel. It afterwards passed into the possession of the Archbishops of York, under Mary, and was finally leased by Elizabeth to the Spanish Embassy. The name of Durham Place and Durham Court, Strand, until lately marked the site of this at one time magnificent mansion.

[69] It was even rumoured about the court that the marriage had actually taken place in secret. Quadra, writing to the King of Spain under date November 20, 1560, says: “They say [Robert Dudley] was married to the queen in the presence of his brother and two ladies of the chamber.”

[70] Hertford mentioned at his trial that he “got up at six o’clock” on this occasion.

[71] This fashion evidently came from Germany, “froze” being an anglicized version of “frau’s.”

[72] The full text of this letter, which will be found in the State Papers for the reign of Elizabeth, is as follows:—

“GOOD MASTER SECRETARY,

“Hearing a great bruit that my Lady Katherine Grey is in the Tower, and also that she should say she is married already to my son, I could not choose but trouble you with my cares and sorrows thereof. And although I might, upon my son’s earnest and often protesting to me the contrary, desire you to be an humble suitor on my behalf, that her tales might not be credited before my son did answer, yet, instead thereof, my first and chief suit is that the Queen’s Majesty will think and judge of me in this matter, according to my desert and meaning. And if my son have so much forgotten Her Highness calling him to honour, and so much overshot his bounden duty, and so far abused Her Majesty’s benignity, yet never was his mother privy or consenting thereunto. I will not fill my letter with how much I have schooled and persuaded him to the contrary, nor yet will I desire that youth and fear may help, excuse, or lessen his fault; but only that Her Highness will have that opinion of me as of one that, neither for child nor friend, shall willingly neglect the duty of a faithful subject. And to conserve my credit with Her Majesty, good Master Secretary, stand now my friend, that the wildness of mine unruly child do not minish Her Majesty’s favour towards me. And thus so perplexed with this discomfortable rumour I end, not knowing how to proceed nor what to do therein. Therefore, good Master Secretary, let me understand some comfort of my grief from the Queen’s Majesty, and some counsel from yourself, and so do leave you to God.

“Your assured friend to my power,
“ANN SOMERSET.”

[73] Parrots and monkeys were apparently favourite domestic pets at the end of the sixteenth century—the Duchess of Northumberland (the widow of John Dudley), for instance, left her grey parrot to the Duchess of Alva; in itself a slight “sign of the times,” indicating how ideas of travel were gradually spreading. The animals were probably brought from the north of Africa, Algeria, Morocco, etc.

[74] These were: Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector, the infant’s grandfather, beheaded in 1552; Henry, Duke of Suffolk, his maternal grandfather (1554); Lady Jane Grey, his aunt (1554); Lord Seymour of Sudeley, his grandfather’s brother (1549); the Duke of Northumberland, his great-uncle (1553); and finally, Lord Thomas Grey, another great-uncle (1554).

[75] “Out of the fifteen or sixteen of them (i.e. members of the council) that there are, there were nearly as many different opinions about the succession to the Crown. It would be impossible to please them all, but I am sure in the end they would form two or three parties and that the Catholic party would have on its side the majority of the country, although I do not know whether the Catholics themselves would be able to agree, as some would like the Queen of Scots and others Lady Margaret [Lennox].”—Quadra to the Duchess of Parma, October 25, 1562; see Calendar of Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[76] Quadra to the King of Spain, October 25, 1562.

[77] Spanish State Papers, vol. i. p. 311.

[78] Spanish State Papers, vol. i. p. 321.

[79] Sir John Mason, who had been at one time English Ambassador to the court of the Emperor Charles V, was one of Elizabeth’s privy councillors.

[80] Quadra to the King of Spain, November 30, 1562. Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i.

[81] This order only exists in the State Papers as a draft in Cecil’s handwriting. The full text of it is as follows:—

“Rt. Trusty and Well-beloved, We greet you well. Whereas we be informed that the (plague) [the words in brackets are crossed out] places near that our Tower are much visited with the plague, and yourself not without great fear that the same may enter into our said Tower, we (have thought meet upon earnest suit made unto us to license) are contented the lady Catharyne and y^[e] Earl of Hertford for y^[e] time of this danger of the plague shall be placed in some other several and convenient places out of y^[e] Tower. Wherefore (we will that you shall let either of them know of this our contentation that the lady Catharyn shall be removed to And for the places of their abode) we will that the lady Catharyne shall be removed to y^[e] house of Ld. John Grey in Essex, there to remain (within his house) with him and his wife during our pleasure; and y^[e] Earl of Hertford to be removed to his mother’s house in Middlesex, there also to remain during our pleasure; and for their behaviour our pleasure is that ye shall command them in our name under pain of our indignation and such fine as we shall please to assess, that neither of them shall depart from y^[e] said places without our leave, (neither attempt to have any converse together) otherwise than to take y^[e] air near to y^[e] same and not without the company of his mother or Newdegate. (_Endorsed_) 21 Aug. 1563. From the Queen’s Majesty to the Lieutenant of the Tower for the removal of the Lady Katherine and the Earl of Hertford.”

[82] Lord John Grey, the Duke of Suffolk’s brother, had himself been imprisoned in the Tower for eight months in 1554, for his alleged share in Suffolk’s rebellion in favour of Lady Jane Grey. His was a courtesy title, and he was sometimes called “Sir” John. Pirgo was granted to him by the queen on April 24, 1559, but he evidently found some difficulty in keeping it up, for shortly afterwards he wrote to Cecil begging him “to acquaint the queen with his embarrassed circumstances, as they affect her former grant.”

[83] It is a curious fact that the grandmother of Jane Dormer, Duchess of Feria, whom we have had occasion to mention in these pages, was of the family of “Nudigate,” her brother being that Sebastian Newdigate, a monk of the Charterhouse, London, who was executed under Henry VIII for denying the royal supremacy. The Duchess of Somerset’s husband, Sergeant Francis Newdigate, was of this same family. These Newdigates had a fine house in Charterhouse Square, which they occasionally let, furnished, for the season to Lord Latimer, Katherine Parr’s third husband.

[84] This list runs as follows, the disparaging comments, here printed in brackets, being those written by Warner himself:—

“Stuff delivered in August, 1561, by the Queen’s commandments and the Lord Chamberlain’s warrants, by William Bentley, out of the Wardrobe in the Tower, to Sir Edward Warner, Knight, then levetenant of the Tower, for the necessary furniture of Lady Katherine Grey’s chamber.

“First: six pieces of tapestry to hang her chamber. (‘Very old and coarse.’) Item: a spavier (?) for a bed of changeable damask. (‘All to-broken and not worth tenpence.’) One silk quilt of red striped with gold. (‘Stark naught.’) Two carpets of Turkey matting. (‘The wool is all worn.’) Item: one chair of cloth of gold with crimson velvet, with two pommels of copper gilt, and the Queen’s arms in the back. (‘Nothing worth.’) Item: one cushion of purple velvet. (‘An owld cast thing.’) Item: two footstools covered with green velvet. (‘Owld stools for King Henry’s feet.’) One bed, one bolster, and a counterpane, for her women. (‘A mean bed.’)”

It is not improbable that the chair of cloth of gold, of which Warner speaks so scathingly, was the “Throne” used by Katherine’s sister, Lady Jane, during her nine-days’ reign.

[85] The text of this letter is as follows:—

“Good cousin Cecil, after my very hearty commendations to my good cousin, your wife and you, with like thanks for your great friendship showed me in this my lord’s deliverance and mine, with the obtaining of the Queen’s Majesty’s most gracious favour thus farforth extended towards us, I cannot but acknowledge myself bounden and beholding unto you therefor. And as I am sure you doubt not of mine own dear lord’s good-will for the requital thereof to the uttermost of his power, so I beseech you, good cousin Cecill, make the like account of me during life to the uttermost of my power; beseeching your farther friendship for the obtaining of the Queen’s Majesty’s most gracious pardon and favour towards me, which, with upstretched hands and downbent knees, from the bottom of my heart most humbly I crave. Thus resting in prayer for the Queen’s Majesty’s long reign over us, the forgiveness of mine offence, the short [speedy] enjoying of [the company of] my own dear lord and husband, with assured hope through God’s grace and your good help and my Lord Robert [Dudley] for the enjoying of the Queen’s Highness’s favour in that behalf, I bid you, my own good cousin, most heartily farewell. From Pyrgo the thred of September.

“Your assured friend and cousin to my small power,

“KATHERYNE HARTFORD.”

“To my very loving cousin Sir William Cicyll, Knight, Chief Secretary to the Queen’s Majesty, give these.”—[“Mine own dear lord,” of whom she makes mention, is, of course, her husband, Hertford.]

[86] The letter to Cecil is worded as follows:—

“What the long want of the Queen’s Majesty’s accustomed favour towards me hath bred in this miserable and wasted body of mine, God only knoweth, as I daily more and more, to the torment and wasting thereof, do otherwise feel than well able to express; which if it should any long time thus continue, I rather wish of God shortly to be buried in the faith and fear of Him, than in this continual agony to live. As I have written unto my Lord Robert, so, good cousin Ceycell, do I unto you. I must confess I never felt what the want of my Prince’s favour was before now, which by your good means and the rest of my very good lords, once obtained, I shall not require of any of you, if it fall, through my default, to be means for the restitution thereof, so mindful, God willing, shall I be, not to offend Her Highness. Thus desiring the continuance of your friendship, I most heartily bid you farewell, good cousin Cecil, praying you to make my hearty commendations to my cousin your wife. From Pirgo, the xiii of December.

“Your poor cousin and assured friend to my small power,

“KATHERYNE HARTFORD.”

[87] This part of the letter (which is in the Lansdowne MSS. No. 7, fol. 110) is as follows:—

“But because you shall truly know what charges my lord [Hertford] is at, and hath been at, with my lady [Katherine], since her coming hither, I have herein enclosed true inventory, besides my lady’s whole furniture of her and hers, with hangings, bedding, sheets, drapery and plate, for neither she nor her little boy hath one piece of plate to drink, eat, or keep anything, but of me; which, though it cannot be much, yet is as much as I have.... I learn from Hanworth that he [Hertford] hath been very plain with Newdigate, since which Lady Katherine hath received twenty pounds, and been promised to have beds and sheets sent to her, howbeit they have not yet come; she had nothing to send any friend at New Year’s tide, which induced Lady Clinton to give Lady Grey a pair of silk hose, to present to Lady Knowles in Lady Katherine’s name, as if from her.” Lord John goes on to say that he thinks Newdigate ought to have told Cecil how unprovided she was when she first arrived at Pirgo: “for the inventory of all she had when he left her here I could send to you, but I am ashamed, for that it was so bare.”

[88] The inventory includes the following items:—

“Two coats for Mr. Thomas [Katherine’s baby, then about eleven months], whereof the one is russet damask, the other of crimson velvet. Of white cloth to make him petticoats, two yards. Of red cloth to make him like petticoats, two yards. Velvet caps for him, two. A russet taffeta hat for him, laid on with silver cord.... Two pairs of fine sheets for my Lady Katherine, of two breadths. Black velvet to make a gown for my Lady Katherine, bound with sables, ten yards. Russet velvet to make a gown and a kirtle. Black and russet lace to the gown and kirtle. Damask to make a nightgown for my Lady. Crimson satin to make a petticoat. A petticoat of crimson velvet. A velvet hood for my Lady. Two pairs of black silk hose. Black cloth to make a cloak. Two yards of cambric to make ruffs, plattes, coverchiefs and handkerchiefs, six ells. Linen to make smocks, ten ells. Silver dishes and saucers for her use. The charge of weekly rate for her board, 46s. 8d.; for her child, 13s. 4d.; for his nurse, 6s. 8d.; her three ladies, each 6s. 8d.; for her two men-servants, 5s. each; the same for her laundress and the widow that washeth the child’s clothes.”

[89] The receipt in question runs as follows:—

“January 24, 1564. Received by me, John Woode, steward to the Right Honourable my L(ord) John Graie, at the hands of George Ireland, for fourteen weeks’ diet unto my Lady of Hartford and her train, after six pounds sixteen shillings and eight pence the week, in full payment of all her Ladyship’s said diet unto this day, the sum of four score fifteen pounds thirteen shillings four pence on, besides 57li 4s. 9d. which I received of Mr. Edward Stanhope in full satisfaction of her Ladyship’s diet until the 17th of October last. In witness whereof I have here under subscribed my name this 23rd of January 1563 (n.s. 1564) et Anno Regni Regine E. sext.

li s d
95 13 4
by me John Woode
s. d.
My Lady 66 8
Her son 13 4 li
——- 4
William Hampton 5 0
Her nurse 6 8
Mrs. Woodeforde 6 8
Mrs. Isham 6 8
My Lady’s groom 5 0
Nowell her man 5 0
My Lady’s two launders 10 0
Page 6 8 s d
Lackey 5 0 56 8 li s d
——- ——- 6 16 8

“Recd. of Mr. George Ireland the 23rd of January 1563 (1564) which I stand to account for at our next reckoning, 4li 11s. 8d. by me John Woode.

“(_Endorsed_) Copies of my Lady’s diet at Pirgo last paid for 14 weeks. 23 Jan. 1563 (1564).”

[90] The text of this letter is as follows:—

“I find myself not a little bound unto your Lordship for the friendly welcoming and honourable using of my Lady my mother since her now being at the Court, as also your well-tried and goodly noble furthering her long and troublesome suit for us, to our most gracious Queen. Wherein, as always, so now, I still crave your especial and most humble means of desire to Her Majesty, that we may be unburdened of Her Highness’s intolerable displeasure, the great weight whereof hath sufficiently taught us never again to offend so merciful a Princess. And so I beseech you, my good Lord, now on our behalf, who pray not for earthly things so much as the comfort of her too long wasted favour. My trust is God will bless your Lordship’s travails with the fruit thereof, and by your means, wherein, next Him, we only depend, turn the sorrowful mourning of us, Her Majesty’s poor captives, into a countershine comfort, for which I rest in continual prayer. And so I take my leave, beseeching Almighty God long to preserve her, and make me so happy as to enjoy the company of so dear a lord and friend as I have, and do find of your Lordship.

“From Hanworth, the xviii of March, 1563.”—State Papers, vol. xxxiii. fol. 27.

[91] State Papers, Domestic, Elizabeth, vol. xxx. fol. 77.

[92] Lansdowne MSS. No. 7, article 55.

[93] Guzman de Silva, writing to the King of Spain, states that the book was written “in the interests of Katherine in the matter of the succession, and mainly consisted of two points: first, as to whether King Henry’s will was valid or not, as in it this Katherine is appointed amongst others as his successor; and secondly, the question of the Scotch Queen being an alien.”—Spanish State Papers, Elizabeth, vol. i. p. 427.

The validity of Henry VIII’s will was questioned on the ground that the king did not sign it with his own hand, but by means of a stamp. See _The Nine-days’ Queen_ (R. Davey), pp. 109, 110.

[94] Gosfield Hall, a fortified brick building, encircling a quadrangular court, is two miles from Halstead in Essex and forty-four from London. It stood in the midst of a pleasant park of a hundred and seven acres, having a lake.

[95] State Papers, Domestic, Elizabeth, vol. xxxix. fol. 70.

[96] This phrase would tempt one to think that the scheme for abducting the Lady Katherine to Spain may not, after all, have been altogether abandoned, even as late as this, or that some other plot for her sudden seizure was feared.

[97] Spanish State Papers, vol. i. pp. 618, 637.

[98] This letter runs as follows:—