by David Loades
[474] Doran, Monarchy and Matrimony, pp. 42-45.
[475] Throgmorton to Chamberlain, October 1560. TNA SP70/19, f.132.
[476] Wilson, Sweet Robin, pp. 252-68.
[477] Doran, Monarchy and Matrimony, p. 45.
[478] Read, Mr. Secretary Cecil, pp. 203-205. De Quadra is the only source for this story, which must be regarded with a certain scepticism.
[479] W. P. Haugaard, ‘Elizabeth Tudor’s Book of Devotions; a neglected clue to the Queen’s life and character’, Sixteenth Century Journal, 12, 1981, pp. 79-105.
[480] Cal. Span., Elizabeth, I, pp. 262-4.
[481] MacCaffrey, Shaping of the Elizabethan Regime, pp. 93-7.
[482] Wilson, Sweet Robin, pp. 139-43.
[483] Ibid, p. 226. Cal. Span., Elizabeth, I, p. 431.
[484] Dudley Papers at Longleat, III, f.61.
[485] Francois, Duke of Alencon, as he was at that time, had been proposed to Elizabeth by Catherine de Medici, his mother, when the negotiations with his elder brother Henri collapsed in 1571. He became Duke of Anjou when Henri succeeded to the throne as Henri III in 1574. Doran, Monarchy and Matrimony, pp. 130- 153.
[486] Alan Young, Tudor and Jacobean Tournaments (1987), p. 153. Roy Strong, The Cult of Elizabeth (1977).
[487] This is a view not shared by Susan Doran, who considers that Elizabeth preferred consensual advice. However, the way in which she played the Earl of Sussex against Dudley, and Cecil against both of them does not suggest that.
[488] Doran, Monarchy and Matrimony, p. 21.
[489] Conyers Read, Lord Burghley and Queen Elizabeth (1965), pp. 256-277.
[490] Cal. Span. 1580–86, p. 226.
[491] All the negotiations suggest that Elizabeth’s requirements would have reduced the Crown Matrimonial to a mere cipher, because in addition to the limitations imposed upon Philip in 1554, there was a need for outward conformity to her Church settlement.
[492] Conyers Read, ‘Queen Elizabeth’s seizure of Alba’s pay ships’.
[493] Hughes and Larkin, Tudor Royal Proclamations, II, pp. 357-8. Geoffrey Parker, The Dutch Revolt (1977).
[494] L. O. Boynton, The Elizabethan Militia (1967).
[495] D. Loades, The Fighting Tudors (2009), pp. 196-204.
[496] Elizabeth I: Collected Works, pp. 269-74. Queen Elizabeth to Sir Thomas Heneage, her emissary to the Earl of Leicester, 10 February 1586, enclosing her letter to Dudley, bearing the same date.
[497] Loades, Elizabeth I, p. 177. At his trial in 1572 the Duke of Norfolk tried to impugn the witnesses against him on the grounds that they were men of no substance – by which he meant lineage.
[498] Wilson, Sweet Robin, pp. 278-9.
[499] Simon Adams, Leicester and the Court (2002), pp. 138-41, 143-4, 146-9.
[500] G. E. Cockayne, Complete Peerage.
[501] ODNB.
[502] L. B. Smith, Treason in Tudor England; Politics and Paranoia (1986), p. 200.
[503] W. Camden, The History of the Most Renowned Princess Elizabeth, Late Queen of England, (1688), pp. 623-4.
[504] W. B. Devereux, Lives and Letters of the Devereux Earls of Essex, 1540–1646 (1853), I, p. 185.
[505] Philippa Berry, Of Chastity and Power: Elizabethan Literature and the Unmarried Queen (1989), pp. 61-83.
[506] Conyers Read, Lord Burghley and Queen Elizabeth, pp. 464- 86.
[507] Devereux, Earls of Essex, I, p. 184.
[508] R. B. Wernham, The Expedition of Sir John Norris and Sir Francis Drake to Spain and Portugal, 1589 (1988), p. 133.
[509] Ibid, p. 134.
[510] W. MacCaffrey, War and Politics, 1588–1603 (1992), pp. 161- 2.
[511] Ibid, p. 472.
[512] S. and E. Usherwood, The Counter Armada, 1596: The Journal of the Mary Rose (1983), pp. 118-9.
[513] L. B. Smith, Treason in Tudor England, pp. 226-7. MacCaffrey, War and Politics, p. 522.
[514] Smith, Treason in Tudor England, pp. 232-3.
[515] Ibid, pp. 255-6.
[516] Camden, Elizabeth, pp. 602-3.
[517] Loades, The Cecils, pp. 217-8.
[518] For a discussion of the origins of this game, see A. Kelly, ‘Eleanor of Aquitaine and her courts of love’, Speculum, 12, 1937.
[519] G. R. Elton, The Tudor Revolution in Government (1953), p. 84.
[520] These negotiations failed because the King was unwilling to subscribe to the Confession of Augsburg. One of the consequences of that failure was the Cleves marriage. Loades, Henry VIII, (2011) p. 285.
[521] The form of acting in the King’s name was strictly observed, but Edward was a child and had no control over their actions. M. L. Bush, The Government Policy of Protector Somerset (1975).
[522] He received a few modest grants, such as that of Jane Rochford’s ‘stuff’ at Blickling in September 1542, but there is no indication of significant patronage. L & P, XVII, no. 119.
[523] Cal. Span., XI, p. 393.
[524] Statute 1 Mary, sess.3, cap.3. Jennifer Loach, Parliament and the Crown in the reign of Mary Tudor (1986), pp. 96-7.
[525] David Starkey, ‘Intimacy and Innovation; the rise of the Privy Chamber, 1485–1547’ and Pam Wright, ‘A Change of Direction; the ramifications of a female household, 1558–1603’ in D. Starkey, ed., The English Court from the Wars of the Roses to the Civil War(1987).
[526] Loades, Elizabeth I, p. 142.
[527] G. E. Cockayne, The Complete Peerage.
