Category Archives: The Stuarts

Callendar House, Falkirk

Posted on by
Reply

Today the house looks like a very grand nineteenth century châteaux but it’s built around a fourteenth century tower (that’s the large square block on the right hand side of the main entrance). And there’s more history than that in the grounds. It lies on the line of the Antoine Wall that stretched from the Firth of Forth to the Firth of Clyde. By the 12th century a thane’s hall stood on the site. The Callendar family held the land until the Scottish Wars of Independence. Sir John Callender was a signatory of the Treaty of Salisbury which confirmed the Maid of Norway as queen of Scotland following the death of Alexander III when he died in March 1286. He also signed the Ragman Roll in 1296 that recognised Edward I as king of Scotland following the maid’s untimely end. He was captured by those fighting for Scottish independence at the Battle of Falkirk in 1299.

Sir Patrick Callendar had his own difficulties during the Scottish Wars of Independence but Callender House passed into the Livingston family with the marriage of his daughter to William Livingston. Unfortunately it was not that clear cut because Callender had elected to support Edward Balliol’s (the son of King John Balliol) claim to the Scottish throne when David II succeeded to the throne at the age of 4-years. Ball was crowned in 1332 after which there was rather a lot of crown swaps but essentially for our purposes when David II regained his throne the Calendars found themselves in some difficulty because of their affiliation with the Balliols.

In 1345 David II regularised matters with the grant of Callendar House to William Livingston. Livingston demonstrated his loyalty to the monarch and they were all set to rise. By the 1440s the Livingstone were the guardians of James II and Alexander, 5th Lord Livingston was one of Mary Queen of Scot’s guardians. By then the originally tower house had doubled in size but still had none of the turrets and additional wings of the modern building. The fifth lord was born at the turn of the sixteenth century and had a reputation as a military commander. When Mary travelled to France in 1548, Alexander travelled with her and remained there until his death. Alexander’s daughter Mary was one of the queen’s so-called Four Marys and his son William, who was a protestant, would fight for the queen at the Battle of Languid in 1568.

William accompanied the queen into exile. William’s wife, Agnes, travelled to Bolton Castle to serve the imprisoned queen. Like William she had known Mary all the queen’s life – Agnes was the daughter of Mary’s governess Janet Stewart, Lady Fleming (making Agnes the queen’s cousin as well). She shared several years of her mistress’s captivity. The Earl of Moray seized Callendar while William set about trying to negotiate the queen’s release. The couple’s eldest son Alexander, who would become the 1st Earl of Linlithgow, also supported the queen and was captured at Dumbarton in 1571. It was another three years before the family came to terms with James VI’s regent even though William returned to Scotland in 1573.

But by 1580 Alexander was a gentleman of the king’s bedchamber. In 1592 Alexander succeeded his father as Lord Livingston. He had worked his way into royal favour as a follower of Esme Lennox and by seizing Stirling Castle in 1584 after the Ruthven Raid. In 1594 he played a part in the baptism of James VI’s eldest son Prince Henry.

Two years later he and his wife Helenor (or Eleanor)Hay were entrusted with the care of James’ daughter Princess Elizabeth. The fact that Helenor was a Catholic did not make her unsuitable. As well as spending time at Linlithgow Palace, Alexander was its keeper, the princess also spent time at Callendar House. In 1600, at the time of Prince Charles’ baptism, Livingston became 1st Earl of Linlithgow. In 1603 the Livingstons’ took Princess Elizabeth to Windsor to return her to her father.

The couple’s eldest son, Alexander, became the 2nd Earl of Livingston while his brother James, who was a similar age to Elizabeth, became 1st Earl of Callendar in 1534. He had spent his formative years as a mercenary fighting in the Low Countries and in Germany. He served James VI (and 1) as well as Charles I but his support for the Covenanters led to difficulties. Ultimately though, he took the field on the side of the royalists. His estates were seized in 1654 and he was imprisoned by Parliament. By then Callendar House had also taken something of a battering. In 1651, following his victory at Dunbar, Cromwell had seized most of Lowland Scotland. That summer Callendar House was placed under siege. General Monck stormed the building with his men killing 62 of the garrison. The house’s governor was among the dead. Having buried the dead and demolished the gatehouse Monck departed, although not before Oliver Cromwell had arrived to survey the scene. Unsurprisingly given Livingston’s affinity, the estate was sequestered and it was General Monck who received the income from it.

The Restoration saw James Livingston return to Callendar and begin work on alterations and refurbishment to his home – a seventeenth century Manor House was added on to the tower. When he died in 1674 his title and estates were inherited by his nephew, another Alexander, who completed the building work that James’ began before his death. Unfortunately it wasn’t long before the house saw more soldiers – Alexander’s own views ran somewhat contrary to those of James VII of Scotland ( II of England) but he was dead before the Glorious Revolution of 1688. The third earl continued the policy of extending the house.

James, the 4th Earl of Calendar showed his ancestors’ loyalty to the Stuarts. He rose in support of the Jacobites in 1715 and was attainted for treason. His son-in-law, the Earl of Kilmarnock took possession of the property but in 1745 he supported Bonnie Prince Charlie (yup he stayed in the house which was looking a bit tatty again), was captured at Culloden and beheaded at the Tower of London.

In the latter half of the eighteenth century Callendar House was sold to the Forbes family. William Forbes was from Aberdeen and was known as Copperbottom from his business of coating the bottom of naval vessels. He was also a slave owner. He was very wealthy indeed, if not very popular with the people of Falkirk. It would be the Forbes’ family who turned Callendar House into a French Chateau.

You will notice that once again the sun did not shine! Good job I just need black and white photographs for Raising the Stuarts. The parking at Callendar House, which is owned by Falkirk Council, is free as is entry to the grounds and house. The history of the house was extremely well presented, as was the explanation of the location of the Antonoine Wall. Even better they did a very nice maple and pecan scone…

Falkland Palace – and me being grumpy about the no photography rule…

Posted on by
5

In 1458, on the orders of James II, Falkland became a royal burgh. The palace itself, really only the gatehouse remains today, was built in the twelfth century. It became crown property in 1424 after the death of David Stewart, Duke of Rothesay at the hands of his uncle, the then keeper of the castle. It was said that Rothesay died of a mysterious illness while quieter, but more persistent gossip, said that he died in chains in Falkland’s cellars. In any event it was James I, Rothesay’s little brother, who with the crown firmly on his head took possession of Falkland when their uncle, the Duke of Albany, fell from power.

In 1451, James II of Scotland gave the castle to his queen Mary of Guilders -and it was she who turned it into a palace with comfortable apartments and a pleasure garden. It was improved upon by successive kings. At the turn of the sixteenth century by James IV (the one killed at Flodden in 1513) improved the hunting on offer by importing wild boar from France and began work on a Renaissance palace. James V, who spent much of his minority in Falkland in captivity at the 6th Earl of Douglas, continued his father’s plan for a splendid summer palace by adding the gate house with its magnificent twin towers. It was he who added the tennis court in 1539. It was one of James V’s favourite retreats, despite the fact that he had been forced to escape from his step-father’s clutches at Falkland dressed as groom. He died at Falkland Palace in December 1542 following his defeat at the Battle of Solway Moss.

Later Falkland would hold the same appeal for his daughter Mary who could see the influence of France in its architecture and the chapel which retained its Catholic flavour in the newly Protestant realm. Her son, James VI, commissioned the famous Falkland Bed but by the time it was ready for him, he was James I of England and never slept in it. Charles I visited briefly. Charles II, who stayed in Falkland in 1650 when the Scots recognised him as their monarch was the last of the Stewarts to stay at the palace. In response, Oliver Cromwell, burnt the palace to the ground in 1654- although the fire could have been an accident.

Warning – the next two paragraphs contain evidence of a grumpy blogger at work!!

Unfortunately, despite the current entry fee of £17 per person, interior photography is not permitted. It’s a bit of a non sequitur I admit but it does make me feel that history is only for those who can afford it – which is just plain wrong on so many different levels. How can heritage belong to people if it’s made inaccessible to them? You’ll have to take my word that the painted ceilings and nineteenth century renovations including heraldic glass in the chapel are a treat – I could have an entire project on the way heraldic beasts are presented at Falkland beginning with the stencils of the red lions on the staircase at the entrance, to the wallpaper with its assorted stylised beasts, stained glass and, of course, various coats of arms. Falkland, still technically in the hands of the Crown even today, was purchased in 1887 by the 3rd Marquess of Bute who became the palace’s keeper. It was he who set about conserving and rebuilding what he was able of the palace. He even purchased the Falkland Bed when it came up for sale – and used it for the next three decades. It is indeed a bed fit for a king – complete with six royal swans, the virtues and a warning to remember that it is God rather than monarchs who are in charge! The wall paper and the decorative metalwork are pure Arts and Crafts and absolutely wonderful ( I loved the candle sconces in the chapel).

The hereditary keeper today is the great grandson of the Marquess of Bute but the deputy keepership resides with the National Trust for Scotland. And if anyone from that august body is reading this – I don’t make any money from the History Jar – so any photographs would be entirely non-commercial. The guides dressed in period costume are very informative and their costumes splendid – can’t photograph those either and I don’t think they’re going to stand still while I get a sketch pad out. Nor can I show you the 17th century stump work mirror frame with its rendition of Nonsuch Palace, the beautifully embroidered night cap or the modern examples of blackwork embroidery that are on display. And I shall not be recreating the blackwork motifs even if I wanted to (which I do) because there were no postcards available and there were certainly no images of the blackwork in the guide book or of the Jacobean bed hangings (in enough detail) in the event that I fancied creating a crewel work memento of my visit. Am I grumpy about this? Yes I am. But then, you’ve probably already gathered that fact. The Falkland Tapestries are old and their colour needs to be conserved – yes – but that doesn’t explain why everything is off limits. As a visitor, my experience is better when I’m looking closely at the detail and think about how I might use an image or design if I was going to turn it into a piece of needlework or even a sketch. And let’s not forget that I use images as a visual reminder of what I want to write about both for this blog and for anything else I might be writing. I think the sight of a woman scribbling manically into a notebook might be rather more off putting than one taking photos – and certainly more irritating for those members of her family who have to wait while she writes everything down and does neat little annotated sketches in the margins. In this day and age no one needs to use a flash to obtain a decent picture – so long as there is some natural light. And there weren’t that many people there so I don’t think it had much to do with crowd control. Oh well – rant over. I do think a book introducing the history of needlework through the embroideries of the Trust (Scotland or England) with some practical projects would sell a treat. I’d rather buy something like that than yet another tea towel. Come to think of it, I would love to be the one to write it. Perhaps I’ll add a new section to the History Jar- the meanderings of an embroiderer…

Falkland is a pretty little palace, or rather very large gatehouse, and it’s the first one off my Stuart odyssey. The spelling changed from Stewart to Stuart in about 1548 when Mary Queen of Scots married the French dauphin. The village has some quirky shops, friendly locals and a couple of excellent cafes. If you’re a fan of Outlander it will look very familiar. And now the sun has come out. Fingers crossed that’s it for the dreek greyness and my grumpiness for the rest of the visit.

The Chaloner family – an ambassador, a chemist, a governor and a regicide

Posted on by
4
AndyScott, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Our story starts with Thomas Chaloner the Elder who was born in 1521. Thomas’s father, Roger, was an usher in the privy chamber of Henry VIII. Thomas was well educated and was sent off in 1540 as secretary to Sir Henry Knyvett to the court of Charles V and from there he was sent to Scotland where he was knighted after the Battle of Pinkie in 1547. He continued to serve Mary I in a diplomatic capacity before becoming Elizabeth I’s ambassador to Philip II at Brussels, although it is known that he was in England during 1560 and 1561. By then he was wealthy enough to build himself a house in Clerkenwell and he also had properties in Guisborough, St Bees and Steeple Clayton, a property in Buckinghamshire that he had been granted by Queen Mary.

From there he journeyed to Paris where he met Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, the English Ambassador to France. Unfortunately he arrived just as war broke out between the authorities and the French Huguenots. Chaloner, who despite his good relations with Mary was Protestant, was promptly arrested. When he was released, having met with Catherine de Medici and the Huguenot leaders, he made his way to Madrid, where he continued to serve Queen Elizabeth despite the fact that he hated the weather, the cost of living and the extremes of Catholic faith that he encountered. Nor did the fact that he was unmarried help with the management of his estates in England.

He had hoped to marry Elizabeth Sands who was one of the queen’s ladies but in his absence she married someone else. In 1563 he received a visit from Audrey Frodsham from Cheshire. She was 33 years old when she travelled to Spain. By the time she returned to England she was expecting Chaloner’s child. Chaloner’s brother Francis, who might reasonably have expected to inherit his brother’s wealth, would describe the boy as illegitimate. The problem was that the pair wished to marry as Protestants rather than in a Catholic Church but Chaloner was delayed by his duties, trying to negotiate the release of some English sailors, so it appears that the marriage took place after the birth of Chaoloner’s heir, which took place at the end of 1564.

Chaloner the elder’s health was not good, it seems that he may have had malaria, and he died in 1565 having made a new will ensuring that his belonging went to his son. In order to prevent his brother Francis Chaloner from contesting the will, Chaloner arranged for a group of his friends, including William Cecil, to become trustees of his estate having made provision for Audrey. he also arranged that Thomas Chaloner the Younger should be educated by Cecil.

Thomas Chaloner the Younger was tutor and friend to Robert Dudley the explorer. Like his young friend, Chaloner travelled extensively and after Dudley’s flight to Tuscany with his mistress in 1605 did his best to retrieve Dudley’s fortunes for him. He was well placed to do so, having gained a place in Queen Anne’s household. This happy circumstance derived from him having been an acknowledged part of the Earl of Essex’s circle. It was his task to manage the queen’s private estates. The king also appoint him governor of Prince Henry’s household at Oatlands. Chaloner’s reputation as a chemist and his interest in natural history were the ideal qualities in a man responsible for educating a renaissance prince. Chaloner was married twice and had eighteen children. In 1610, Chaloner became Henry’s chamberlain at St James’ Palace. As well as being a scholar, Chaloner like his father was also well informed on military and diplomatic matters.

He also identified the value of his Guisborough estates for its alum, having learned the process of its manufacture during his travels to Italy. Unfortunately his plans were ruined when the king seized the mines for the Crown. The seizure was one of the reasons that Chaloner was appointed to the role of Prince Henry’s governor – it was a sweetener for the loss of a fortune. Realistically Chaloner may have thought that his family would benefit more by their association and education alongside Henry. Unfortunately the prince died in 1612 – leaving the Chaloners out in the cold.

Two of Chaloner’s sons, James and yet another Thomas, would become regicides when, in 1649, they served on the commission that tried Charles I. James did not sign the death warrant but Thomas did. This meant that in 1660 Thomas, along with the other men who signed the document, was excluded from the act that pardoned other parliamentarians. James who was prominent in Yorkshire under the patronage of General Fairfax was arrested in 1655 for suspicion of involvement with the Sealed Knot and died prior to the Restoration. Thomas, the regicide, fled to the Low Countries, under the alias of George Saunders, where he died in 1661.

Chaloner the regicide had always had a difficult relationship with the Crown. The loss of the alum mines did not help matters, especially as Charles gave them to a syndicate of favoured courtiers. However, his religious beliefs, which were opposed to all formalised religions, and the publication of a treatise led to his arrest and subsequent flight from England in 1637. He returned home by 1644 and witnessed Laud’s trial. Nor was he a fan of the Scottish army in England during the First Civil War and he espoused the view that the king was bound by the laws created by Parliament – he was one step away from declaring the sovereignty of Parliament. He would be known for his opposition to the king and it was perhaps because of this that he retained his parliamentary seat (the Borough of Richmond) after Pride’s Purge. He was instrumental in the creation of the Commonwealth and was a key figure in the development of its trade and foreign policies. As a complete aside, the Chaloners were related by marriage to Oliver Cromwell. Thomas’s nephew Edward, was married to Anne Ingoldsby – who was one of the Protector’s cousins. Richard Ingoldsby, Chaloner’s brother-in-law, for those of you who might be interested, was another regicide but because he claimed that he was forced to sign the death warrant and because he supported General Monck, he was pardoned where other regicides were not.

Chaloner’s eldest brother William become Baronet of Guisborough in 1620. However, like his father and grandfather before him, William was well travelled and his died in Turkey the following year – meaning that the baronetcy was extinct almost before it began.

Amazon Associate – any purchase made after following this link, by clicking on the image to open a new tab, helps to keep the History Jar afloat.

Nottinghamshire and the English Civil War

Posted on by
Reply
Eljx1988, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

I’m researching the Little History of Nottinghamshire among other things at the moment and am having a dabble into the 17th century.

Charles I raised his standard at Nottingham Castle on 22 August 1641. It marked a call to arms and the start of the English Civil War. A little under four years later, the king surrendered to the Scottish Parliamentarian army at the Saracen’s Head at Southwell near Newark. He was moved from there to Kelham and ordered to write a letter requiring the surrender of Newark to Parliament.

Newark experienced three sieges through the course of the civil war. The town even produced its own siege money during the last siege which occurred in 1645-46 because cash was in such short supply. Inevitably after three sieges the town wasn’t in good shape and the population became ill with plague to add to the general misery. Inevitably after the surrender the church St Mary Magdalene, whose spire is said to have been damaged by a canon ball during the second siege of 1644, was badly damaged by victorious Parliamentarian soldiers.

The castles at Newark and Nottingham were both razed in the aftermath of the war. Meanwhile int he countryside a series of manor houses suffered the consequences of civil conflict. At Shelford the church tower was used by sharp shooters while the Manor House, which belonged to the Earl of Chesterfield, was provided with trenches and earthworks for the defence of almost 200 royalists. The earl’s son, Philip, was so badly wounded in the final battle that ended the siege that he died the following day and that seem evening Shelford Manor was destroyed in a fire. It was rebuilt after the Restoration.

Wiverton Hall, belonging to the Chaworth family, was a Tudor Manor House complete with a moat. Following the events of Shelford, its governor, Sir Robert Therrill, came to terms with the Parliamentarians and made the hall indefensible. Only the medieval gatehouse escaped demolition. Wollaton Hall near Nottingham had been damaged by a fire in 1642 and the Willoughby family lived at their home in Warwickshire so although the estate supported the garrisons a Wiverton and Shelford it did not suffer the consequences of being garrisoned.

Near Worksop, Wlebeck Abbey was the residence of the Earl of Newcastle. he would be rewarded with a dukedom upon the Restoration but his home became a garrison under the command of his eldest daughter Lady Jane Cavendish during the civil war. Some of the earl’s valuables were buried for safekeeping – in the time honoured manner – while both royalists and parliamentarians helped themselves to anything else. The duke and his second wife, Margaret Lucas, spent many years after the Restoration restoring the property and its estates.

While the Duke of Newcastle was the most prominent of Nottinghamshire’s royalists, the Byron family of Newstead Abbey also played a significant part. There were seven brothers who all joined the Royalist army and all of them are thought to have fought at Edgehill. Thomas Byron killed by one of his own men at Oxford in a dispute over pay. His brother John was at the battles of Newbury, Nantwich and Marston Moor where he commanded the right flank of the Royalist line. He would eventually die in exile in 1652. Robert Byran became the military governor of Liverpool but was forced to surrender when his Irish troops mutinied. He spent some time in custody, fought at Naseby and was rearrested as a royalist spy. After the war he returned to Ireland with a commission. William was knighted by the king on the very day that he surrendered to the Scots at Southwell. He was with his brother John Byron at the Siege of Carnarvon and afterwards he went into exile where he continued to work for the royalist cause.

Gilbert was the youngest of the brothers and he is known to have fought in the Bishops’ War in 1639 when he was part of the King’s Lifeguard. In 1640 he was in Europe fighting on behalf of the king’s sister, Elizabeth of Bohemia but by January 1642 he was back in England and was one of the men who went with Charles I to arrest five members of Parliament. He may have been at Marston Moor before going to Wales with his brother. Eventually he made his way to Pontefract but was captured when he sallied out of the castle in search of provisions with a band of men. Like other royalists he was required to pay a fine but his health appears to have been poor, perhaps because of wounds – I’m not sure- and he died in 1656 leaving a wife and two daughters.

During the second, short lived, civil war which broke out early in 1648 Nottinghamshire saw a small but important battle near Willoughby-on-the-Wolds. At the end of the encounter 100 or so royalists were dead including Michael Stanhope, the brother of Philip Stanhope. There is a brass commemorating him in Willoughby Church.

Interestingly one of the most interesting accounts of Nottinghamshire’s civil war comes from Lucy Hutchinson, the wife of Colonel John Hutchinson who held Nottingham for Parliament and was a regicide, having signed Charles I’s death warrant. Lucy, who was devoted to her husband and wrote his biography and while it’s not as famous as Margaret Cavendish’s biography about her husband it provides an insight into the war in and around Nottingham.

Click on the image to open the link to Amazon (Amazon Associate) – For kindle owners the biography is currently (at time of writing) 49p but rathe more expensive if you prefer a hard copy.

The early difficulties of James VI and his regents

Posted on by
2

Mary Queen of Scots was raised in France and preferred to read, write and speak the language of her adopted land. She was also Catholic and although she promised not to interfere in religious matters when she returned to Scotland following the death her husband, Francis II, in August 1561 it wasn’t long before she became embroiled in difficulties. The birth of her heir, by her second husband Henry Stewart, confirmed the Stuart dynasty and enhanced her claim to the English throne.

James was baptised at Stirling on 17 December 1566. Elizabeth I was one of his godmothers. She sent the Earl of Bedford, with a gold font for the boy to be received into the church. But Mary intended that her son would be a prince of the Catholic Church rather than the Presbyterian one of John Knox. It was the Archbishop of St Andrews who baptised the boy before he was proclaimed to the world by his full titles. The Earl of Bedford, having dropped off the font waited outside the Chapel Royal along with the earls of Moray, Huntly and Bothwell who were all reformers and deeply involved with the political shinanigans that bedevilled Mary’s rule. Jane Stewart, the Countess of Argyle held the baby, as Elizabeth I’s proxy, while he was baptised but was required to do penance later for participating in a papist ritual.

Nor were those the only difficulties. Mary’s relationship with her husband, Henry, Lord Darnley was strained since the murder of her secretary, David Rizzio and he still resented the fact that he wasn’t king. He was present in Stirling but refused to attend the baptism or the festivities that followed because he knew the English delegation would call him Lord Darnley rather than King Henry.

Things went from bad to worse for Mary while James remained in his nursery at Stirling where she herself had been raised during her early years as had James V. The murder of Darnley and Mary’s third marriage to the Earl of Bothwell resulted in civil conflict and her enforced abdication after an armed confrontation at Carberry Hill. On 29 July 1567 James was carried to the parish church at Stirling and was crowned King James V according to Protestant rites. John Knox preached the sermon on that occasion.

Mary’s departure from the throne did not end Scotland’s troubles. James grew up in one of Scotland’s most turbulent periods of civil unrest. Before he reached the age of five, his rule had been managed by three regents. James Stewart, Earl of Moray, the queen’s half brother, was murdered in 1570 at Linlithgow. James’ own grandfather, Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox became regent in Moray’s stead. He was fatally shot during an attack on Stirling Castle by men who supported Mary in 1571. James’ guardian John Erskine, 1st Earl of Mar, was chosen to be the next regent. One of his first acts was to have the men who killed his predecessor executed by being broken on the wheel. He died in October 1572 in his own bed at Stirling after a short illness – even so, the job of regent wasn’t one which came with a long life expectancy, especially as the civil war continued unabated.

James Douglas, 4th Earl of Morton had helped Lord Darnley plan the murder of David Rizzio. He ended the civil war but faced continuing resentment from his peers who plotted to bring about his downfall. He resigned in 1578 and 11-year-old King James decided that he needed no more regents even though Morton retained much of his power as well as the favour of Queen Elizabeth I in England. A month later, in April, Morton regained control of the king, the council and Stirling Castle. As James’ nobles and the Scottish Church jockeyed for power, Morton was finally accused of being part of the plot to murder Henry Lord Darnley in 1567. He was arrested and tried in 1581 before being executed on 2 June by an early form of the guillotine known as ‘The Maiden’ – which was said to be modelled on the ‘Halifax gibbet.’ He was buried in Greyfriars.

Click on the image to open the link to Amazon. I’m an Amazon Associate and any commission from following the link helps to pay to keep the History Jar running. Thank you.

James V of Scotland and the road to Solway Moss

Posted on by
Reply

James’ mother was Margaret Tudor, daughter of King Henry VII, who ruled as regent on behalf of her son when he ascended the throne aged 17 months after James IV was killed at the Battle of Flodden in 1513. The odds weren’t good. The previous four kings before James V had all died violently and let’s face it, appointing Margaret as the boy’s guardian wasn’t necessarily the smartest move – it was his uncle’s army who had killed the king. Not that Henry VIII of England was wildly delighted. He had gone on campaign to France in 1513 leaving Katherine of Aragon as his regent and it was the Earl of Surrey who had the victory.

There was intermittent border warfare and Henry VIII didn’t oppose the idea of a truce. In fact he suggested that there should be a marriage alliance between the two countries. He even offered his only legitimate child (at that point), Princess Mary as a bride. When his overtures were rejected, the border warfare stepped up a notch. Various towns and towers were burned by men loyal to one side or the other. BY 1528, James V was approaching adulthood and was heartily fed up of his mother’s second husband, Archibald Douglas, 6th Earl of Angus, nor was he that keen on the earl’s opponent, the Earl of Arran. Seizing an opportunity the king fled Falkland Palace for Stirling leaving Angus behind him. Without the king in his power, Angus’s control of James’ council collapsed. They soon found themselves under siege in Tantallon Castle and were forced to escape to England. A five year truce was agreed with Angus staying south of the border.

In 1530, James took on the border reivers, men belonging to clans like the Grahams and Armstrongs, determined to bring law and order to his domain. There were rathe a lot of executions that summer and the king got very shirty with his troublesome aristocracy. While this mad him popular with ordinary people it did nothing for the ruling class or the men who lived on the borders between England and Scotland and who were accustomed to the regular skirmishes that occurred there.

James somehow found time to take royal mistresses. One of the most notable was Margaret Erskine, the daughter of his guardian at Stirling Castle. In 1536 as the five year truce came to an end Henry VIII offered Princess Mary, no longer legitimate, as a bride once again. Although the Scottish king accepted the Order of the Garter from his uncle, and recognised the legitimacy of Henry’s divorce, he declined to take his cousin as a wife. Undeterred, Henry encouraged James to reform the Scottish Church and to dissolve the monasteries in Scotland.

Francis I of France watched affairs from a distance and was alarmed by the bonhomie that was starting to grow between the old enemies. He was keen to resurrect the so-called Auld Alliance between France and Scotland. With that end in mind he dusted down the Treaty of Rouen which offered James a French bride. Francis didn’t want to send his daughter Madeline so suggested another French princess, Marie de Bourbon. James wasn’t particularly interested as he would have happily married Margaret Erskine, who needed to get divorced from her husband and then the pair would need a papal dispensation – which the pope did not feel the need to give.

When James travelled to France, however, Francis seems to have grown to like the young king and suddenly agreed that he could marry Madeleine – and James despite his love for Margaret was a king who understood the importance of alliances, not to mention the need for very large dowries and Francis was offering 100,000 livers with his daughter’s hand. James married Francis’ daughter on 1 January 1537 at the Notre Dame – which did not go down well with Uncle Henry but he had his hands full in 1536 with the Pilgrimage of Grace and in early 1537 was taking reprisals against his subjects.

Madeline died within a few months of arriving in Scotland so King Francis suggested Mary of Guise who came with a sizable dowry and connections to an increasingly important family. The couple married in May 1538 by proxy and the bride arrived in her new country in June. So now the Scottish borderers had a grievance against the king, he wasn’t popular with his nobility and Uncle Henry was more irritated than ever.

In 1541, Henry suggested a summit in York – the English king went north with wife number five – Catherine Howard and waited there for a fortnight. James V failed to show up – oddly he didn’t fancy being kidnapped by his uncle but Henry didn’t see it that way and saw the whole episode as a huge insult. Meanwhile the borderers continued to knock nine bells from one another and to steal each other’s cattle. Even so, James did not want to go to war with the English and he certainly didn’t want to hand his uncle an excuse for a campaign north of the border not least because despite his alliance with France, the French did not have men to spare to send assistance – Henry however, was determined on a war and the Duke of York mustered an army at York. It was the usual fare of burning towers and towns. But the Scots refused to answer James’ summons.

As a consequence James raised an army lead by Lord Maxwell, then changed his mind and gave command to his favourite, Oliver Sinclair, and advanced on the English West March by crossing the Esk. The intention was to take reprisals on Carlisle. The English were hugely outnumbered -but the confusion in the leadership of the Scottish army, the soldiers loyalty to Maxwell rather than Sinclair and English tactics which were more akin to a skirmish than a pitched battle had unexpected consequences. The Scots left the field, leaving men like Maxwell as prisoners. For James V, who was already ill, the result was a disaster. On 8th December he received word that Mary of Guise had given birth to a daughter, not a son to replace two infant princes who died within hours of one another in 1541. He died on 14th December leaving his infant daughter to become the first regnant queen of Scots.

Trial of Charles I – Power and the People

Posted on by
3

MPS were divided how to deal with the king. Colonel Thomas Pride threw out 300 MPS who supported parliamentary negotiations with the king – this was known as Pride’s Purge and the ups who remained were known as The Rump. it meant that when the king was bought to trial there was no one on his side in the Houses of Parliament.
A special commission put the king on trial for treason. 68 commissioners arrived out of the 135 attendees. Among the men who did not arrive was General Thomas Fairfax. The men who did not arrive felt that things had gone too far, Charles refused to recognise the authority of the commission because he said a king could not be tried for treason. When he argued with John Bradshaw, the chief judge who was so scared of assassination that wore a special reinforced hat, the king was removed from the court while witness gave evidence against him. There were no witnesses to support Charles and he was found guilty.

Charles I was executed on 30th January 1649 at Whitehall and England became a republic – the Commonwealth. There was no monarchy during the protectorate which lasted for the next 11 years. Instead Cromwell, the army and Parliament ruled.

Government kept a strict control on many aspects of everyday life. It banned Christmas, closed all the theatres and forbade Mayday celebrations. The Commonwealth did not believe in free speech for everyone, the Levellers, a group that. believed in equality were imprisoned and their
leaders killed. And in Ireland, the Catholic population were treated appallingly. At Drogheda women and children were murdered. Land was taken from Catholics and given to Protestants. Ultimately, he disbanded Parliament and ruled through the army – which sounds remarkably like tyranny…..

People and Power

Posted on by
1

Time flies when you’re having fun! I thought it was about a week since my last post – turns out to be rather more.

In August 1642 King Charles I raised his standard at Nottingham, effectively starting the English civil war. – this did not bode well for Nottingham Castle when Parliament gained the upper hand.  Essentially England was divided into the North and West which supported the king and the South and East which supported Parliament.  

October 1642 – Battle of Edgehill – not decisive. The Earl of Essex commanded Parliament’s army. Had Charles been able to reach London the war might have had a different outcome. Instead there was intermittent fighting across the country and the king based his court at Oxford.

1643 –

The Oxford Propositions – similar to the Nineteen Propositions and like them they were rejected.

Charles I came to an agreement with the Irish – which did not go down well in England. They joined the king’s men in Cheshire and the North-West but the use of Catholic troops was counter-productive as it gave Parliament propaganda gold.

The Royalists had the upper hand until Parliament came to an agreement with the Scots. In January 1644 a 22,000 man army would cross the border into England. The royalist army in the north was sandwiched between the Scots and the Parliamentarians.

1644

Rupert of the Rhine headed north with his cavalry to support the royalists.

July 1644 The Battle of Marston Moor – the royalist commander William Cavendish, Duke of Newcastle lost the battle and left the country. It meant that the North of England came under the control of Parliament.

Newark remained a royalist stronghold but the tide had turned.

1645.

Parliament presented the king with the Uxbridge Propositions – yup – they were like the Nineteen Propositions and the king rejected them again.

June 1645 The New Model Army which was much more organised and professional than the royalists won the Battle of Naseby.

5 May 1646 Charles I surrendered to the Scots who gave him to Parliament in return for £400,000

In 1648 there were Royalist uprisings in many parts of the country including at Colchester. It became known as the Second Civil War. In August 1648 a joint force of Scots and English Royalists was destroyed by Oliver Cromwell’s army at Preston – many Scots fugitives were held captive at Chapel en le Frith.

In January 1649 – having been put on trial Charles I was executed.

A typical GCSE question asks: Explain the significance of the trial and execution of Charles I for royal authority…

It changed the relationship between the authority of the monarch king and parliament. Continuity of kingship was broken. There was a new form of government. The Commonwealth placed greater emphasis on the rights of men. Even when a monarch was restored, Parliament redefined prerogative rights and the idea of the Divine Right of Kings was dead in the water. It was certainly very evident that kings were only men and that they were fallible.

Charles I was viewed in many quarters as a tyrant. The idea of holding rulers to account was popular from then onwards e.g. America and France.

The changes were almost too radical. There was uncertainty and unrest. People didn’t know what to call Oliver Cromwell and when he died he was replaced with his son – Richard – in a way that was redolent of a royal accession. It meant that when the monarchy was restored, that it benefitted from a reluctance for change.

Amazon Associate link

Power and the People – Personal rule or tyranny

Posted on by
2

In 1629, Charles I dissolved his parliament having been presented the Petition of Right in 1628. In March 1629 the Speaker tried to dissolve Parliament, on the king’s orders, but was held in his chair by three MPS while the commons voted against some of the king’s decisions. The Speaker of the House was in a difficult position – he stated that he was parliament and the king’s servant. Charles I was not amused when he was told what had happened and dissolved parliament immediately. He decided that he did not need parliament to raise funds – instead he would rule by royal prerogative and that meant finding older ways of raising taxes. He returned in effect to personal rule and feudal taxation.

Charles used: feudal dues, customs duty and income from his own estates. James I had often been short of money and Charles’ favourite the recently assassinated Duke of Buckingham had involved England in a disastrous war with the French. Now Charles levied a tax called Distraint of Knighthood – any man who possessed more than £40 a year was required to attend a royal coronation, when one occurred, to receive a knighthood. Failure to do so resulted a fine. Charles’ coronation was in 1626 and £40 was not as much money as it had once been. Now though, Charles didn’t hesitate to levy the fine to raise funds. Not only was there this war in France to be fought there was also support to be provided for Charles’ sister, Elizabeth also known as the Winter Queen and her husband, Frederick V the Elector Palatine / King of Bohemia in the Thirty Years War.

There was also ship money. This was usually levied during time of war in coastal counties but Charles now directed that the tax should be raised across the whole kingdom. As a result there was a high profile court case against John Hampden who refused to pay.

And just in case you wanted something else – there was the grant of monopolies to individuals who paid for the right and then increased the price on whatever they held the monopoly upon.

Was Charles I a tyrant? He wasn’t a cruel man and didn’t have a secret police to enforce his whims but he ruled without recourse to parliament, on occasion men were imprisoned without trial and the taxes he imposed while legal in the strictest sense of the word had often fallen into disuse by the time he resurrected them. And then there were his religious beliefs which he tried to impose on all his subjects – more of that anon.

The turbulent seventeenth century – Divine Right and the Petition of Right

Posted on by
Reply

Divine right is the belief in the God given right of a monarch to rule. The idea was established in the reign of James (1603-25) who believed that the king was subject to no other earthly authority and could only be judged by God. Any attempt to depose or even to restrict the powers of the king went against God’s will. In 1598 he had published a book called The True Law of Free Monarchies. He claimed that ‘Kings are justly called gods for that they exercise a manner or resemblance of divine power on earth’. The Basilikon Doron written by the king as a set of instructions for his eldest son, Prince Henry, in 1599 identified his ideology more clearly.

The book is divided into three parts:

I) how to be a Christian king

2) practical aspects of kingship

3) the king’s behaviour in everyday life.

James’ belief in the divine right of kings had a negative impact on his relationship with the English Parliament. During the reign of his successor, Charles who inherited the throne following the deaths of his elder brother in 1612 and James in 1625 also believed in the divine right of kings. Charles I also believed that because he was God’s representative only he had the right to make laws and that to oppose him was a sin. He believed that he was above the law and had to govern according to his conscience.

By the time James died in 1625 Parliament was suspicious of the Stuart kings, by 1628 the tension turned to Parliamentary demands known as the Petition of Right. Charles lacked both experience and confidence and relied upon the advice of his favourite, the Duke of Buckingham. Buckingham advocated a raid on Cadiz which was a disaster. Parliament demanded that she should be impeached – so Charles dissolved parliament before it granted him any funds. Buckingham arranged for the king to marry a French Catholic bride (Henrietta Maria) and then went to war with the French in 1627 in support of the Huguenots of La Rochelle – the whole thing was a disaster because of poor planning. By 1628 Charles was at war, without any money and was trying to extract forced loans. He had no choice but to call Parliament.

Sir Edward Coke, a lawyer, put together the Petition of Right which stated, there would be no more forced loans; no imprisonment without trial – 5 knights had been sent to prison because they refused to pay Charles’ forced loan. In addition there would be no further use of free lodgings (billeting) for soldiers in civilian households and no use of martial law against civilians. At the same time, the House of Commons granted the king five subsidies but only if he agreed their terms. Coke and Parliament were defining the law by asserting rights that already existed. It should have been an opportunity for the king and parliament to learn to work together…

Click on the book to open the link in a new tab to find the book and read more about their contents. I love Leanda de Lisle’s writing. Last year she published a biography of Charle’s queen, Henrietta Maria

Amazon associate
Amazon associate