Preparations for her journey began in late December She chose a number of young women from the nobility to accompany her to England. Along with these personal attendants of Cecilia, one Dr. She was ready to leave, despite complaints from some that her entourage was too small, and the trip would be susceptible to assault. Before Cecilia left Sweden, however, she had received a prayer book, in which her sisters, brothers, and closest friends had written proverbs and wishes for safe journey. Interestingly, some of the dates associated with the signatures go back to May , indicating that she had intended to leave a good deal earlier than she did.
Shortly after receiving the letter of invitation from Elizabeth, Cecilia was thrown in the midst of marriage negotiations with the Earl of Teyn, which could have delayed her. James Bell, in Queen Elizabeth and a Swedish Princess, a work dedicated to the queen, takes this view. He writes: Yea the Kinge him self sometime with halfe commaundinge wordes, sometime with sweete and gentle entreatie, sometime with wylie policies, proceadinge yeat from naturall and tender affeccione assaied the same: one daie gevinge his worde that she shoulde cause her fournyture and provisione to be brought a shippe boorde, and commaundinge all things necessarie to be in a readynes, the nexte daye revoking his promse and repealinge his commaundment and so from daye to daye still delayenge the tyme, to thende the crueltie of the extreame winter beinge now at hande might cause a terror to her grace and make her to revolte.
His decision to let his sister visit England depended upon his mood, his demeanor, and ultimately his liking of Elizabeth. Bell describes the journey in great detail, and although his account suffers from embellishment and exaggeration, he presumably had interviewed Dr. Olof, considered a firsthand source since he accompanied Cecilia on her journey, for the basis of his information in the work. After this, they set out again, encountering a terrible winter storm, barely escaping death, and landed at Revel in Livland, an important Swedish trading city.
It was because of these difficult circumstances—war and storms—that the entourage decided to embark upon a land route instead of a sea route. Cecilia and her assistants also decided to celebrate Christmas in Livland. Thereafter, she had to obtain a passport from the king of Poland to cross his country, which was a difficult endeavor, and which she did not obtain until March 2, From Revel, she travelled through Livland by sled and horse through ice and snow to reach first Kegel, then Pades, and finally Pernov. She reached the town of Sales on March 7, after nearly running out of food, and the next day went to Lemsey, where she rested for a couple of days.
She left for the Polish city of Rie, on March 11, but she was refused entry by city officials, so she went on to Newmyll, where she recovered from a minor illness. After being released, Cecilia and her train moved on to Prussia in June , through the cities of Ragnette, Tylzey, and Quinseburgh; in Prussia, she was kindly welcomed by government officials. After a number of days, the entourage crossed the English Channel, after finding favorable winds, and arrived in Dover on September 9. Her entrance was described by de Silva in great detail. She had conceived in December, and very soon after her initial meeting with Elizabeth, she gave birth to a son on September Two weeks later, the boy was christened at Westminster.
The setting for the ceremony was ornate with beautifully designed tapestries on the stalls of the church, silver and gold ornamentation on the altar, and the child himself was laden with jewels. There was no singing of music, and the bishop read the baptism ritual with little embellishment. The previous quote from the queen praising her English language skills seems to indicate that Cecilia could have been studying the language before she arrived.
Also, her brother John, Duke of Finland, had five years earlier, come to England for several months and presumably had picked up some English grammar and vocabulary, which he could impart to his sister. During her stay in England, Cecilia attended many social functions with nobles and dignitaries.
On October 13, she and her husband, Christopher, dined with de Silva and Elizabeth at their own invitation. In a presentation of Sapientia Salomonis, Drama comico-tragicum by the Westminster boys, Cecilia lodged a complaint to her brother several years later that she being bidden to see a comedy played, there was a black man brought in, and as he was of an evil-favoured countenance, so was he in like manner full of lewd, spiteful, and scornful words which she said represented the Marquis, her husband.
Seaton argues that the allusion of the subject matter of the play could have also annoyed Cecilia. Impatient creditors demanded immediate payment of loans that were taken out to finance her lifestyle, but her unchecked spending habits continued beyond her allotted salaries, a characteristic pattern of the Vasa household. Also, this matter was still unresolved. Cecilia made a list of the lenders and the amounts, but her expenditure still superseded her payment. As a result, she suffered a high degree of embarrassment.
She had fourteen large chests containing all types of jewelry, necklaces, rings, precious gems including diamonds and rubies , clothes, books, and pictures. In a letter dated March 19, , written to Elizabeth, Cecilia implores the queen to assist her in facing her creditors. Specifically, Cecilia cited the case of Ephippiarus, one of her many lenders, who, instead of helping her restructure her debt payments, had her secretary imprisoned.
Further, Ephippiarus had been spreading a rumor that Cecilia and her entourage were planning a quiet and quick departure in order to escape the payment of the incurred debt. Her letter lists four main complaints.
Join Kobo & start eReading today
First, she denies the claim made by the creditors that she refused payment and was planning to leave the country. As a result, English attitudes, especially among the nobility, began to turn against the princess; they perceived her as an arrogant, spoiled princess. The accusers emphasize the fact that being a foreign princess, she could leave the country at will to escape her debts. This was their great fear, which they emphasize in their complaint. In most situations, it was common for the nobility in England to incur debt without immediate payment and not suffer extreme consequences.
A number of nobles during the Tudor era kept meticulous details of their households—one of the more interesting being the household accounts of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester—and spending on credit was common practice. Dudley, who, like Cecilia, had close proximity to Elizabeth, often took large loans, such as a pound loan from the London merchant William Bird in and another pound loan from William and Robert Bowyer in These loans may have been taken out to pay off other larger debts.
The Earl of Shrewsbury, by , was in such debt that he could scarcely only pay his interest payment. For foreigners, and specifically diplomats and high-ranking government officials, credit was usually not as large of an issue because most had the financial backing of their represented sovereign. Cecilia, however, was not officially representing her brother Erik, and thus her debt ran high.
Most of the foreign diplomats in London did not experience the same kind of financial trouble as Cecilia. Unfortunately for Cecilia, her popularity in England had sunk to such a low level that it was not advantageous for her to remain in the country. She started planning her return trip. To compound her problems, however, Christopher, who had earlier crossed the Channel to Antwerp, returned to England incognito and was arrested and imprisoned in Rochester.
Some merchants, apparently, had recognized him, and he was charged for a 5,pound loan he had not repaid. He then returned to the continent, this time to Calais, to wait for his wife there. His arrest only affirmed the decision for Cecilia to permanently leave England. According to de Silva, she still owed at this point about 15, pounds, and before leaving, she gave them pledges that they would be paid. Most of the available evidence falls into the detraction camp.
Moreover, her creditors continued to hound her for payment, much to her annoyance and one later episode with John Dymoch became a highly politicized matter. Cecilia long remembered the negative aspects of her trip to England, and in a letter penned by her four years later to King John of Sweden, who had deposed Erik in , expressed her complaints about the country.
As it happened, though, she fell into disrepute. To further her problems, aggressive creditors began to demand payment, a condition which would eventually precipitate her departure. Erik had been interested in courting Elizabeth even before she was crowned queen. An embassy was sent in to propose a possible marriage alliance between Elizabeth and Erik, but this embassy failed in its mission. Later, in , Gustav and Erik decided to send another mission to England, which would include his brother, John, Duke of Finland.
This also failed, and there was no hint that Elizabeth had an inclination to accept his proposal. A later, more formal, diplomatic mission was intitated under Nils Gyllenstierna, the Chancellor of Sweden, who resided in England for several months. He, too, was unsuccessful, and by , Erik had given up on wooing Elizabeth. Ohlssons Boktyckeri , Fritzes Kungliga Hofbokhandel, , Etchells and Macdonald, , This is largely the reason that Cecilia requested the queen to add a few lines to encourage her brother to let her come, which was included in her letter of May 23, to the queen. Bell, Swedish Princess, 48— Seaton, Swedish Princess, Seaton, Swedish Princess, 17— Bell, Swedish Princess, Ibid; The Earl of Arundel warned Dr.
Seaton, Swedish Princess, 22— Bernard Manchester: Manchester University Press, , — Bernard Manchester: Manchester University Press, , Seaton, Swedish Princess, 6. Siegfried How great deception is in false coynage; The plate may be bryght in his shewing, The metall false and shew a fayre visage, All is not golde, to speake in playne language Giovanni Boccaccio, trans. John Lidgate c. William Shakespeare, King Lear c. One clock went up on the newly repaired Dublin Castle, another was added to St.
Even within the bounds of the English Pale, her claim to the Kingdom of Ireland could be—and frequently was—challenged, subverted, appropriated, and satirized. Indeed, the majority of her own English subjects were still Catholic upon her accession in Indeed, there was no sense of a unifying English tradition that Elizabeth could have drawn on in the same way she could with her local subjects. Ireland, after all, was a foreign kingdom. Gaelic princes acknowledged or refuted English sovereignty depending on what was strategically useful and tended to see themselves as part of the old unified Christendom.
All three groups took advantage of a significant level of inconsistency in the apportionment of jurisdiction between the London and Dublin seats of colonial government. In this regard, the preoccupation with coinage was also an argument for authority. But if they be counterfeited, and made in brass, copper or other vile metal, who for print only calleth them nobles? Whereby it appeareth that the estimation is in the metal and not in the print or figure. Positive perception was crucial, and Elizabeth was canny and careful in structuring her own public representations to this end.
Indeed, the medium of money and the instrument of time were the parentheses of civic intercourse: Figure 3. From the collection of John Stafford-Langan, reproduced here with his kind permission. From the collection of the author. Siegfried coins circulated among the people even as the traffic of commerce, religious devotion, and legal transactions were guided by clocks. Interestingly, clocks and coins smoothed the temporal relations of public intercourse strictly insofar as their symbolic sovereignty gave way to commonplace use.
That is, these representations of Elizabeth mattered, but they did so precisely insofar as they could be taken for granted. Paradoxically, the symbolic structure of her sovereignty entered material culture at the less-than-exalted level of everyday use. The poor, argues the new queen, stand to gain the most when currency is refined.
Their most obvious and spectacular achievement, of course, was an integral part of the recoinage of —1. Siegfried will, will yelde to bear a smal burden for a time, to avoide a perpetuall and endlesse oppressyon, not onley of them selves and their posteritie, but also of the whole common weal. The attention to the Irish money was not, moreover, merely another desultory gesture of sovereignty over the neighboring isle. As Paul E. Please your Majesty to send me three thousand pounds of English money to pay my expenses in going over to you, and when I come back I will pay your deputy three thousand pounds Irish, such as you are pleased to have current here.
There is no question that it underscored the precariousness of claiming Ireland as a kingdom while treating it as a colony. Indeed, for the English in Dublin during the s, the question of how to define kingship in a land full of provincial princes and petty kings was of immediate concern. The previous generation had witnessed in Henry VIII a fading desire to prolong military initiative or invest in creative economic pressure against the Gaelic princes.
First, he attempted to woo Gaelic leaders to take English titles; second, he methodically eradicated signs of Gaelic kingship in both bureaucratic and pointedly public depictions of Ireland. In the s, hoping to cess out the financial possibilities of Ireland, Henry ordered several assessments of the island to be taken. Indeed, while the Gaelic Irish were happy to trade for English-produced goods, they rarely adopted English customs and outright rejected Henrician legal codes. Irish order. As the report goes on to explain, in addition to following Irish structures and traditions of governance, tribute was being paid to native Irish princes rather than to the officials of the English Crown.
This was not an empty gesture toward Catholic minorities in a colonial state otherwise recognized as being under newly Protestant sovereignty. Rather, distinguished Catholic members of the international community, who considered Henry to have abdicated his role as administrator of what had been deemed for centuries a papal fiefdom, continued to refer to prominent Irish leaders as kings. Dominus Hiberniae. This inferior money—which was illegal to import to England due to its baseness—featured his own coat of arms and new title Rex Hirbniae on one side and the Gaelic symbol of kingship, the harp, on the other.
If this was an explicit nod to the tradition in which bards and brehans were instrumental in establishing local sovereignty, it was also a gesture of audacious cupidity. The culmination of over thirty years of such arguments may be seen in the writings of the Papal Nuncio, Nicolas Sander, who was sent from Spain to Ireland to encourage the Desmond uprising against Elizabeth. In both cases, the English monarch had sundered meaningful ethical relation and had shown himself incapable of moral leadership and, via divine justice, became the instrument of his own punishment: The silver coin hitherto most pure in England, was for the first time turned into brass by the king—a manifest judgment of God for the rapine and the sacrilege committed by him.
The wealth taken from the monasteries was so great that even the tenth part thereof might have satisfied the greed of the most covetous king. He ought therefore to have surpassed every prince in Christendom in his wealth of silver and of gold; but it was not so, for by the just judgment of God it was far otherwise with him, for within a few years after the plunder of the monasteries he was a far poorer man than either he himself or his ancestors had ever been before.
Rather, it fed his ambition for international conquest, the result of which was debt. Debt, in turn, gave birth to a strategy for raising further treasure by debasing the coinage in both England and Ireland. And then when he saw the fraud prosper, he debased the coinage more and more till he filled up the measure of his days. Siegfried has said, he who is unjust in that which is little, that is, in the ordering of the things of this world, is unjust also in the greater, that is in the spiritual things. Coins and Clocks in Figurative Terms At this point it is safe to say that when Elizabeth celebrates her claim to the Kingdom of Ireland with newly minted coins and newly raised clocks, few in that kingdom would have seen the occasion as purely celebratory.
Indeed, the analogy between the quality of coin and quality of birth would haunt accounts of Elizabeth well into the next century. Siegfried debased metals, add unmistakable notes of discordance to the swelling strains of praise. The alloyed local heritage was made up of several centuries of intermarriage between the Gaelic Irish nobility and English colonial families. Paradoxically, it was additionally employed to mean a wedge for prying things apart.
Queenship and Power Series
The Plutarchan model of a struggle between a polity in some part dependent for its authority on the will of the people, and a government driven by traditional aristocratic privilege, was not only of growing interest to Protestant political theorists in England, but to the local rulers of Irish provinces as well. In a sense, the sound of the song is part of the Irish response to the symbolic representations of Elizabeth recently erected in Dublin. Thus, although the stanza first imagines Elizabeth as a kindly facilitator of civic peace and tranquility—one whose feminine position as head of state is more closely aligned with a place at the side of a cradle than at the head of a table—the harsh rime scheme suggests something both humorous and sinister.
In the manner of an overburdened servant, she must be rocking the overcrowded cradle with her foot since both hands are occupied. Additional figurative associations, common in the period, provided an even broader cultural framework. In fact, though Elizabeth counted on such symbolic associations as part of her representational argument for authority, the song reminds us that such images were never received passively.
If monarchy was like a well-regulated clock, that clock, in turn, was a pattern for the divine will. Also wee see there the Planets one under another, which. Doo they move of them selves? Nay; for nothing moveth it selfe, and where things move one another, there is no possibilitie of infinite holding on. As for example, from the hammer of a Clocke wee come to a wheele, and from that wheele too another, and finally too the wit of the Clockmaker, who by his cunning hath so ordered them.
William Starmer describes it as having three automatic figures. On each side of him is a soldier in miliary attire and 3 ft. These soldiers strike the quarters by alternate blows on the two bells beneath their feet. These were no idle symbols. Just four years later, Elizabeth would issue a series of orders that would transform what had been the symbol of force into an actual military campaign meant to set Ireland into clocklike regulation.
The hammered coins of the period were made by manually striking a coin blank of silver or gold between two hand-cut die. Above all, the song demonstrates the uncertain status of the Elizabethan administration in Dublin during the first decades of her reign. We cannot doubt that Elizabeth trusted in their representational value. Siegfried Notes 1. Special thanks are due to the Kennedy Center for International Studies and the Office of Research and Creative Activities at Brigham Young University who provided the financial support that made this study possible.
Robert Ware Dublin, , 4—5. Andrew Carpenter cites Ware in his introduction to the poem but does not mention the shared English source. Ware, Annals, 5. While the song may indeed be an English import to Ireland, ballads were circulating back and forth with some frequency between the two islands as Gaelic Princes, Old English Lords, and New English administrators travelled to and from London. It might as easily have been an Irish import to England, especially since Ware has a tendency to ascribe English authorship to documents about which he is in doubt.
My special thanks go to Steven W. May who brought possible original English sources to my attention. Similar thanks go to Marion Nicholls for examples of disputed English-Irish authorship for several items written in the s. For examples of English poems with similar themes, see Steven W. May, Elizabethan Poetry, 3 vols. New York: Continuum, Simon Snelling is the first modern historian to set the pattern for this which all subsequent histories on the coinage in Ireland have followed. Evidences of Catholic and Protestant formulations in wills up to and including the year suggest that no more than ten percent were identified as Protestant even in the most committed regions.
See also R. These divisions are, of course, problematic. Intermarriage between the native Gaelic Irish and the Old English families, who had been in Ireland for over years, meant that many prominent families could claim status in both traditions. As images on coins, representations of monarchs were meant to circulate among the people the way images of Caesar did at the start of another empire. Elizabeth followed this dual pattern closely. Moreover, such coins often revealed official attitudes toward these other worlds. Indeed, to some extent, one can trace the international authority of nations through the influence of their coin.
From about onward, the Spanish gold doubloon and the silver reale served not only as coin of the Spanish realm, but as the central currency of international trade. The dominance of the Spanish dollar was overwhelming throughout the sixteenth century and was still a strong source of currency over the next years. The dollar famously bore the motto plus ultra more beyond and the pillars of Hercules, signifying the gateway to further wealth.
Siegfried Mario J. History is above all the mediation that the historian provides between the unwritten flow of life and the scant record that has been received, thereby striving to facilitate the expansion from facts into the record of the living. Hutcheon and Mario J. Of course, there were valuable painted and sculpted representations of the queen in several of the English-dominated regions mostly in Dublin and around the famously Elizabeth-bedecked abode of her cousin, Thomas Butler, the Earl of Ormond , and a handful of English aristocrats kept miniatures of the queen for their wear when visiting the English court or embroidered her name on wall hangings near entries where English visitors from the court might pass.
However, pondering such elaborate and pointedly political renderings of the monarch was certainly not a frequent pastime for the average citizen in Ireland. No loyalties were due to its natives.
- Shift: Innovation that Disrupts Markets, Topples Giants and Makes You #1.
- The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I by Charles Beem.
- Poet and Peasant: Overture - Soprano Saxophone.
- The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I (Queenship and Power)!
- The Wit and Wisdom of Stephen King.
Ireland, by contrast, was cluttered with the remains of previous, uncompleted conquests. Andrews, N. Canny, and P. Hair Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, , Shy of what W. Indeed, that ethical framework was reinforced by popular biblical and classical sources. Humanists frequently combined the image of the statue made of multiple metals found in the Old Testament book of Daniel, for instance, with a similar scheme famously adapted by the Greek historian Hesiod: a series of materials declining in value— gold, silver, bronze, iron, and clay—represent a notion of the ages of history which follow a pattern of declining culture and glory.
Elizabeth was all too aware that the link between debased metals and fallen kingdoms had a long literary history: a history clearly illustrating the political disarray resulting from ethical decay at the root of uninspired leadership. Summarie, 4. The concentration of wealth in the hands of a capitalist class, which enrolls labor by paying money meant to divorce the transaction from any sense of mutual loyalty, would not fully emerge for another years.
Modern capitalists chafe under the attempts of government to impose civic obligations on their economic activity. Summarie, 9. A subsequent proclamation would seek to underscore the sense that foreign perfidy was involved in passing counterfeit coin. And for that purpose, her Maiestie hath thought very meete to warne al her subiectes to take diligent heede and regarde to these maner of notable deceiptes, entended by euyll disposed persons, in vtteraunce of the sayde forrayne Coynes. The Queenes Maiestie hauying not long since geuen her louying subiectes knowledge by proclamation, of certayne forrayne coynes of golde brought into this realme.
Though foreign counterfeiters were indeed at work, the majority of counterfeit coins were of English derivation. Ware, 4. Ireland was unofficially divided into the area around Dublin ruled by the English deputy—known as the Pale—and the rest of Ireland controlled by Anglo-Irish and Gaelic lords. There were many revolts against royal overlordship, including one rebellion in the s led by an Anglo-Irish nobleman, Thomas Fitzgerald. These, combined with Anglo-Irish Gaelic armed opposition to the Protestant Reformation, led to increasing repression on the part of the English.
Slowly English common law was imposed throughout Ireland, with Dublin emerging as the most Anglicized and most prosperous area. King and Son, , — Moody, F. Martin, and F. Byrne Oxford: Oxford UP, , — Ellis, Analecta Hibernica, vol. McNeill et. Henry advanced that symbolic gesture nevertheless intending that it would, in fact, be the singular multiplier in a strategy of colonial expansion.
Siegfried began to acknowledge as a short-term tactic Henry—and later Elizabeth—in that capacity. Also quoted in Nolan, —4. Nolan, Luke Considering that the Irish may have tweaked an English song for local use, it is also worth special attention for the echo of English dissatisfaction. There may be a third level to the pun as well. That food was scarce throughout the Midlands or large stretches of the north and northeast is hardly surprising. Similarly, Elizabeth Grymeston councils her son by way of the metaphor. McNeill, Analecta Hibernica 2 , 95— The Old English had become exceptionally generous patrons of bards, genealogists, and translators, the professional custodians of Irish culture.
The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I | C. Beem | Palgrave Macmillan
In fact, the Gaelic-identified Old English and their allies frequently found themselves wishing to temper the Tudor reconquest with cultural practices that, in turn, prolonged precisely the political sway the New English colonial government was at pains to destroy. William Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Coriolanus, ed. Norton, , I quote from Cavendish as an illustration of just how firmly the clock metaphor would continue to be associated with monarchy.
Not surprisingly, clocks were also commonly associated with accountability and reckoning, as well as with harmony and spiritual discipline. Bentley, The Monument of Matrons London, , sig. B2v, As those who have heard such clocks know, the chimes are often elaborately musical, made up of mathematical progressions meant to harmonize the loftier rhythms of the spheres with the more mundane humdrum of everyday life. It is worth noting in this regard that the image of death as a clock is another well-worn metaphor by the time the song is in circulation.
The gesture of setting up a clock, then, was meant to reinforce notions of civic order and public virtue, especially in relation to conscience and the prospect of a final judgment. Edwards, See also T. Quoted in A Monetary History, On August 24, , two nights after a lone assassin wounded Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, the leader of the French Calvinist Huguenots, a group of French Catholics finished the job by brutally stabbing, decapitating, and burning him. Understandably, Protestant England was shocked by the governmentsponsored killings of their Huguenot brethren across the channel, but Queen Elizabeth had a far more nuanced reaction to the bloodshed.
David J. The sectarian war between Scottish Catholics and Presbyterians remained unresolved in , while England was in the midst of a five-year trade standoff with Spain. Elizabeth also feared Spanish success in their suppression of Protestants in the Low Countries, though the possibility of French intervention and their control of the entire coastline opposite England posed an equally undesirable settlement to the conflict. The massacre occurred within this context and only further complicated European international and religious relations, but Elizabeth responded quite sensibly by openly displaying her outrage, yet simultaneously reiterating her goodwill so as not to jeopardize Anglo-French amity.
Her caustic words for the French crown showed both her grief for the dead Huguenots, whom she viewed as potential allies, and her willingness to actively prevent further bloodshed. Quite akin to her somewhat politique diplomatic policy, Elizabeth tended to speak out against foreign Catholics only if they threatened her realm. The prospect of a French invasion even prompted her to muster troops, and she offered refuge to displaced Huguenots as well. Diplomatic affairs ultimately overrode her religious concerns, however, as she sought to maintain the recently concluded alliance with France and even briefly attempted to restore Anglo-Spanish amity.
After receiving word of the killings in late August, Elizabeth immediately suspended her hunting trip in the countryside and returned to her royal manor at Woodstock. Meanwhile, the ambassador hastened west from London to meet Elizabeth en route before any additional uncensored reports could reach her and further implicate the French royal family.
Eleven days later, she and her entire court, clothed fully in mourning attire, finally accepted the ambassador in complete silence, almost as if they were attending a funeral. The king even argued for his own lack of safety during the affair, which forced him to take refuge with the queen mother at the castle of the Louvre.
Although he earned praise from Spain and Rome for blueprinting the killings, he only further alienated Protestant England and its queen. His inadequacy to do so left her disappointed and strengthened her belief that he was intimately involved. Though two years earlier Charles had signed the Peace of SaintGermain-en-Laye, which ended the third of the French Wars of Religion and granted Huguenots territory and the ability to hold public office, this new bloodshed shattered any hopes of a French religious accord.
- The Grease Monkeys Tale!
- The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I.
- Wakeworld (A Book of the Between).
- Shop now and earn 2 points per $1?
- Stars Real Names Interactive Quiz!
- The foreign relations of Elizabeth I / edited by Charles Beem. - Version details - Trove;
- The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I (Queenship and Power)!
The massacre gave Catholics the upper hand in France, whereas beforehand French religious supremacy remained divided between the Catholic Guise family and various influential Huguenots vying to influence the crown. Additionally, unlike sixteenth-century European Catholicism, Protestantism comprised several antithetic sects in disagreement on doctrinal matters and without a unifying institutional structure. First and second generation Lutherans disagreed doctrinally with early Calvinists while some Protestants indentified with Catholics before other reformed denominations.
In fact, Charles recognized his mistake in taking responsibility for the massacre and tried to reconcile with Elizabeth on numerous occasions. Less than one month after the killings, he requested that Elizabeth christen his firstborn in her own name, and he exhibited a rare glimpse of shrewdness in his request since securing Elizabeth as godmother would have allied her closely to the Catholic royals, while simultaneously alienating her from the Huguenot rebels. Elizabeth initially refused to be godmother, however, or even allow her trusted advisors, Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, or William Cecil, Lord Burghley, to go to France in her stead, fearing for their safety in France.
Elizabeth anticipated that her cooperation would suffice to keep Charles content, but her expressions of disillusionment and reluctance to send her royal favorites to France reveal her continued anxiety over the massacre. He failed on all three counts. Elizabeth did not provide Retz the conciliatory funds that he requested due to her anger over the massacre and her already depleted coffers. She also refused to halt aid to La Rochelle and reiterated that English subsidies flowed unbeknownst to her, even though she personally supported such ventures to the continent.
Incredibly, Retz claimed that no women or children had perished during the affair and that only men had died.
Unsurprisingly, Elizabeth completely disregarded his statements and refused to condone the general Huguenot slaughter. The queen ignored their call and instead offered Montgomery seven ships to relieve the siege of La Rochelle. Though Montgomery retreated after realizing the ineffectiveness of his naval aid, the additional support provided by Elizabeth helped the fortress hold out until June, when Henri, Duke of Anjou abandoned the siege to accept the crown of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Both the Guise family and prominent Huguenots attempted to gain favor with the crown, and just prior to the massacre, Coligny and his following had drawn Charles to their side. The elimination of the Huguenot leadership disrupted the aims of both women, however, since it put the Guises in a position of authority and drastically weakened their main adversaries. With the majority of their leaders deceased, thousands of Huguenots also immigrated to neighboring countries or renounced their faith in favor of Catholicism. In September and October of , priests in Rouen rebaptized nearly Huguenots as Catholics, and perhaps as many as 3, Huguenots in the city recanted.
The Rouennois grand vicars of the cathedral spent so much time administering oaths of abjuration that they missed various church ceremonies during this period, and tens of thousands of Protestants across France recanted in the wake of the massacre as France swung back toward Catholicism. Yet, Elizabeth also conveys her sympathy for the French monarchy and Huguenot refugees by mentioning Romans chapter 12, chapter five from Ephesians, and First Thessalonians chapter four, which impart brotherly love and the succor of those in want.
The renewed religious breach that the massacre engendered forced Elizabeth to reassess the proposed match with her young Catholic suitor, even though he was not involved in the affair. Though massacre refugees comprised the majority of these travelers, the officials of Winchester accused various immigrants of promoting insurrection.
The remarkable detail of many of these certificates reveals the perceived severity of the threat, as they often included various surveys of castles and garrisons, noting any fortifications that required repairs. The authorities even drafted a boat schedule to transfer soldiers to the Isle of Wight upon enemy engagement. Rather than mustering inexperienced men for this unit, as was customary, the government began recruiting an elite group of soldiers with prior combat training. Prior to late , mustering simply denoted the convening and inspection of troops and generally occurred once every few years.
The new Lords Lieutenant called, armed, and trained these men, who came primarily from higher classes and included gentlemen, merchants, and yeomen. Each county gathered their own men, who began learning how to wield both pikes and firearms, which were fairly new phenomena in England. By instituting the regular training of soldiers for the first time and incorporating new weapons into their arsenal in early , Elizabeth modernized her army to meet the standards of continental Europe. Though the Anglo-Spanish War did not erupt until the s, Spain nonetheless constituted a significant threat to England in , especially considering prior discord.
In response, the duke detained all English subjects in Flanders, and Elizabeth reciprocated by seizing all Spanish goods in her territory. Elizabeth worsened matters less than two months before the massacre by sending 1, supposed volunteers under Sir Humphrey Gilbert into the Low Countries to prevent French intervention and to disrupt the Spanish. She intensely feared a Spanish presence in already turbulent Ireland, where the Catholic rebel James fitz Maurice Fitzgerald incited various uprisings throughout the early s. She even conjectured that King Philip II and Alba had incited an Irish rebellion led by the sons of the earl of Clanricarde just days prior to the massacre.
The scheme called for Mary and the abovementioned Thomas Howard to seize the English throne and reestablish Catholicism by force with the aid of a Spanish invasion from Flanders directed Alba. Though Elizabeth wished to remain peaceful with France if possible, she also needed a backup plan in case relations soured. Gilbert returned in pretended disgrace because Elizabeth had actually supported his excursion to the continent but put on an outward show to mislead the Spanish. For five years, English merchants and the Sea Beggars had argued over the right of free passage to the city, but a naval blockade by the Dutch at the Scheldt River delta had forced English merchants elsewhere before the Spanish trade resumed.
Thus, the massacre had compelled Elizabeth to admit wrong, provide recompense, and alter her policy with Spain. The aforementioned Ridolfi plot remained fresh in memory, since the queen did not agree to execute the Duke of Norfolk for his role in the affair until two months prior to the Parisian slaughter. The potential return of these English rebels from abroad certainly concerned Elizabeth. Such factors made this latest Catholic atrocity, though foreign, all the more serious for the Protestant queen. They similarly ordered English jailers to heighten their surveillance of Catholic detainees and apprehend those prisoners recently released on bail.
The old religion remained somewhat stronger there, and the Catholic public was more prone to revolt, as evidenced by the Northern Rebellion just two years earlier. Accordingly, the Council of the North, an administrative body based at York, ordered all Justices of the Peace to acquire the names and addresses of suspected papists under their jurisdiction, especially those that abstained from church services. Somehow, Drury discovered a few such soldiers and wrote Burghley inquiring on how they should be punished.
Though four years earlier she had an employ of nearly , Elizabeth dwindled that number to just nine following the massacre. Should English Catholics revolt in response to the actions across the channel or should any foreigners attempt to invade, Elizabeth made certain that her rival would not easily be liberated and placed on her throne. Elizabeth also took more drastic, uncharacteristically sinister steps to eliminate the threat posed by Mary in wake of the massacre.
He was to explain the massacre to John Erskine, the Regent of Scotland and seventeenth Earl of Mar, and James Douglas, fourth Earl of Morton, who were both fighting the Catholic faction in support of Mary, and warn them that Catholics might make a similar purge in their own realm. In turn, Elizabeth wanted noble hostages from Scotland to ensure the prompt execution of the shameful deed. Had the scheme not been encumbered by lengthy negotiations or had the queen been willing to offer due compensation, Mary might have been executed nearly fifteen years earlier. Just four months prior to the massacre, the two realms had signed the Treaty of Blois, designed primarily to unite them in the Netherlands and ensure mutual defense against Spain.
The treaty stipulated that neither realm could take part in a cooperative attack with Spain against the other realm and also guaranteed the safety of English Protestant merchants in France. It further secured reciprocal military support within two months of an invasion. Should Spain succeed in subduing the Low Counties, Elizabeth also felt assured that Phillip II would turn north to quell English heretics, which would be all the more disastrous if France could join them.
England was hardly in a position for an invasion, and her queen consistently opted to remain on the defensive. The treaty also clearly favored militarily weak England, which was isolated and dwarfed by the great Catholic domains. Maintaining an ally with the military capability of France would not only be vital in case of war, but would also likely deter warmongers from engaging England.
Perhaps the most crucial of all provisions in Blois, however, dealt with affairs in Scotland. It stipulated that both English and French garrisons in Scotland would be disbanded and that neither realm could dispatch troops to the area without provocation. The treaty also granted Elizabeth permission to use arms against the Scots to force the return of English rebels. When Regent Erskine died on October 29, , the Protestants lost one of their most effective leaders, while his death also created a power vacuum and left the young king without a guardian.
The presence of French soldiers and the renewal of the Auld Alliance in this disunited region must have only further compounded her distress. It is no surprise that Elizabeth yearned to keep the treaty intact considering the proliferation of hostile Catholic factions nearby. With the clear advantages that the Treaty of Blois entailed, Elizabeth put her immediate disgust for the massacre behind her and sought to extend Anglo-French rapport. Based upon her actions in late alone, it is clear that the killings had a profound effect on the queen.
Despite all of her worries and preparations, Elizabeth realized that her emotions could not outweigh the good of the nation, which led her to shore up relations with Spain and continue her alliance with France. Anno , pt. Thomas Timme London: Frances Coldocke, , Barbara A. Bartholomew: Reappraisals and Documents, ed.
BL, Harley MS , ff. MS, ff. De Serres, Three partes of Commentaries, BL, Harley MS , f. Thesis, University of Colorado at Boulder, , Digges, Ambassador, , Digges, Ambassador, — Thomas Wright, ed. Kingdon, Myths about the St. MS , ff. Doran, Foreign Policy, 32; Kingdon, Myths, Digges, Ambassador, Strype, Annals of the Reformation, vol. Robert Steele, ed. CSP Foreign, vol. James A. BL, Lansdowne MS 16, f. Church of England, A fourme of common prayer to be vsed, and so commaunded by auctoritie of the Queenes Maiestie, and necessarie for the present tyme and state London: Richarde Jugge, , n.
See, for example, Digges, Ambassador, , George B. Harrison, ed. Nicola M. Sutherland, The Massacre of St. Mack P. Digges, Ambassador, —, Murdin, ed. Holt, Anjou and Struggle, 25, Digges, Ambassador, —, —, — Henry Ellis, ed. Robin D. CSP Domestic, vol. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, , 24— Rawdon Brown and G.
CSP Rome, vol. CSP Spain, vol. BL, Harley MS 36, ff. Camden, Annales, ; Steven W. May, ed. Nicol, , Alexander S. Wright, Elizabeth Letters, vol. This letter marked a climactic point of the epistolary relationship between the two sovereigns. In its unabashed criticism and reproach, this railing letter is a testimony to the misunderstanding between Elizabeth and Ivan, a difficulty whose causes are hardly accidental but which Elizabeth deliberately cultivated.
Wrestling with the geographical as well as political remoteness, Ivan made a concerted effort to bridge the gap between Russia and England in a conversation between the two monarchs as equals who put political matters ahead of the mercantile gain. Moreover, the two monarchs repeatedly misunderstood each other because their writing was a product of different rhetorical systems. Both the English queen and the Russian tsar had dynamic political personalities. Nowhere are the differences in their character more striking than in their correspondence.
The letters that passed between Elizabeth and Ivan from the late s to the early s register a clash between the personalities of the two rulers and also a clash between the entire diplomatic and political cultures each of them represents. As a result, the two writers continuously work at cross-purposes because their primary aims of persuasion are inherently dissimilar.
But despite the idiosyncratic elements transpiring in this correspondence, it mirrors the contrasting cultural paradigms of England and Russia. Language: Communication and Miscommunication Both Elizabeth and Ivan relied heavily on the effect of monarchial presence that allowed them to impress their audience with their personal charisma. Causes and symptoms of the fundamental miscommunication between Ivan and Elizabeth were located on a variety of linguistic levels, formal, stylistic, and rhetorical.
In the most practical sense, the two monarchs simply lacked a common language. Ivan wrote only in Russian; Elizabeth alternated between Latin and English. In addition, the two states practiced different systems of authentication and thus the two monarchs had dissimilar expectations with the use of seals, titles, signatures, and oaths. These methods of authentication constitute their own language, constructed according to the rules conceived differently by each party.
As a result, neither communicated in a manner wholly understood by the other. In foreign relations, writing was viewed as an awkward necessity for managing the mundane. Elizabeth herself was an adroit rhetorician, and the study of her writing in recent scholarship has illuminated the extent of her mastery of language.
These translations were not entirely reliable shadow images of the original. In both courts, this situation produced an anxiety of misunderstanding as well as a ready excuse in the argumentative exchanges that ensued. Ivan, in particular, was taken by the urgency of verbatim accuracy. He desired that Elizabeth repeat word for word all the articles of his draft of the Anglo-Russian agreement, a condition he insisted on as crucial to forming a binding alliance between the two states.
The cause whie the lettres should be written in rousse is that the emperour cannott vnderstand anie language but his own. The emperour would dislike of the lettre if it be not written word for word as that lettre which he sent. And when the said letter shalbe translated into rowsse that it maie be done in the sight of the said embassador.
However, she finds a way to counterbalance her lack of knowledge of Russian by highlighting her competence in Latin and Italian. Elizabeth writes to Ivan:. In part, these reminders function as a synecdoche for concerns about much larger difference in political culture. Together with the lack of a common written language, misunderstanding and friction between the two sovereigns were a result of their different methods of verifying the authenticity of their letters and promises.
Elizabeth did not appear to share these concerns. Elizabeth alternated between the Privy Seal and the Great Seal, and possibly even the Signet, and this inconsistency caused Ivan some suspicion. Ffor the leagues which wee confirme by othe [oath] doe ordinarily passe our greate seale: which can not be done but that the same must runne throughe the hands of so great a numbre of our ministers as in no possibilitie they can be keapt secreat.
Her European correspondents would have been familiar with the custom of affixing particular types of seals to documents of greater or lesser importance or secrecy, but Ivan was unaware of this practice. The procedure also involved the kissing of a cross which was a hallmark of Russian Orthodox practice but constituted a problematic gesture for a Protestant queen.
- Windows 8 For Dummies, Pocket Edition?
- Águas de Verão (Portuguese Edition).
- Elizabeth I in Writing: Language, Power and Representation in Early Modern England;
- The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I by Charles Beem?
- Inklusion (German Edition).
She also maneuvered around these requests by repeatedly assuring Ivan that her ambassador would discuss the matters of alliance on her behalf, but Ivan found these conversations frustratingly unproductive. There is no evidence that Elizabeth ever took an oath that Ivan so ardently demanded. Wee Q.
Elizabethe doe subscribe this with our owne hand in the presence of these our nobles and councellors. Yet, in the Russian chancery, the signature of a monarch was not customary. Such lines appear in gold on other Russian letters to the English court, but this time they are drawn in plain ink. Elizabeth did not follow suit. While she did issue occasional illuminated charters that, for their detailed beauty, may be esteemed as precious works of art, she apparently did not deem her routine letters to Ivan worthy of artistic embellishment. Ffor that it is held a kynd of abasement of the state and qualitie wee should to have any ioined with vs in that behalf.
The Russian initiative of extending negotiations with the English from the matters of trade to a political coalition started to take shape in —, after about a dozen years of relations between the two countries. In the mid-sixteenth century, Ivan was engaged in a complex program of expanding and securing his power, and in time he came to see the potential for an English alliance as a means to solidify this power as well as create a ready harbor for his personal safety should he need to abdicate.
Ian Grey suggests that Ivan was seeking to gain knowledge of Western military technology and therefore looked to England to send to Russia arms and men skilled in warcraft. The main terms of the proposed treaty, in addition to allowing traffic between and within the two realms, included a political union between Russia and England, broadly described as sharing friendship and animosity toward other states by default.
Accordingly, friends and enemies of one were to be considered the same for the other, and, in case of a disagreement, one would provide immediate military support against the enemy of the other. As late as , he once again compelled Elizabeth to defend her strategy. In fact, in his letter to Stefan Batory, the Russian tsar himself advocated the necessity for negotiations as a means to avoid spilling Christian blood. Yet, in his dialogue with the English queen, Ivan continued to choose the opposite stance on this issue. A political alliance was only necessary to protect the trade of the English merchants.
This book focuses on the ways in which Elizabeth…. Elizabeth of York by Arlene Naylor Okerlund. This book tells the story of the queen whose mar…. Shelve Elizabeth of York. The Face of Queenship investigates the aesthetic…. This collection brings together provocative ess…. The life of Mary Tudor the French queen, younger…. The first book to examine Queen Elizabeth I as a….
How were English ruling queens able to assert and…. When Mary Tudor became queen of England, the succ…. Queenship and Voice in Medieval Northern Europe …. The essays in this volume contribute to a new u…. Born to an African king in colonial Sierra Leone… More. Shelve The Autobiography of an African Princess. Most modern accounts of fifteenth-century English… More. This is a lively and erudite collection, unusual… More. Berenice II Euergetis ca.
This study of early modern queenship compares the… More. This is the first book-length study of the award-… More. Ruling Women is the first study of its kind devot… More. Ruling Women is a two-volume study devoted to an… More. From the fourteenth-century king consorts of Nava… More. The five reigning queens of Navarre comprise the… More. Queen Elizabeth I sent more letters i… More. Changing beliefs about the Virgin and her relatio… More. Marking the th year anniversary of the birth o… More. Virtuous or Villainess? This collection addresses royal motherhood across… More.
Shelve Virtuous or Villainess? There were many surprising accessions in the earl… More. Most of our fairy tale capital today comes from t… More. Though separated by over a century, Queens Henrie… More.