A. TABLES.i. Contemporary Rulers, 1475-1542.ii. Do. do., 1542-1603.iii. Genealogy of Lennox Stewarts.iv. Genealogy of Howards and Boleyns.v. House of Habsburg.vi. Houses of Valois and Bourbon.vii. House of Guise.B. Claims to the English Throne.C. The Queen of Scots.D. Bibliography.
[Tables omitted]
When Henry of Richmond was hailed king of England on Bosworth Field, the principles and the practice of succession to the English throne were in a state of chaos; as far as hereditary right is concerned, his claim could hardly have been weaker. The titles both of his son and grandson were indisputable. Those of Mary and of Elizabeth were both questionable. From Elizabeth's accession to her death, it was uncertain who would succeed her. Accordingly, in the reign of Henry VII. we find actual pretenders put forward, and potential ones suspected and punished. No attempt was ever made to challenge Henry VIII. or Edward VI.: but there were sundry executions on the hypothesis of a treasonous intent to grasp at the crown, in the reign of the former. Lady Jane Grey was set up against Mary, and Elizabeth herself was under suspicion in that reign. Against Elizabeth, Mary Stewart's title was constantly urged; after the death of the Queen of Scots, Philip of Spain set up a claim on his own account; and at different times, the claims to the succession of a large variety of candidates were canvassed. It has seemed advisable therefore to give a complete genealogical table, which appears at the beginning of this volume: and the following summary, for convenient reference.
It was perfectly certain that whoever was rightful king or queen of England in 1485, Richard III. was personally a usurper who had secured the throne by murdering the king and his brother, and setting aside his other nieces and nephew, the children of his elder brothers of the House of York. They however were not in a position to assert themselves. If therefore the representative of the rival House of Lancaster could succeed in deposing the usurper, he would thereby create a claim for himself, beyond that of heredity, as the man who had released the nation from the tyrant; as Henry IV. had done. If he married the heiress of York, the two would unite the hereditary claims of the rival Houses, and the title of their offspring would be technically indisputable.
Through his mother, Henry Tudor was now the acknowledged representative of the House of Lancaster. On the assumption—for which there was no indisputable precedent—that a woman could succeed in person, his mother had the prior title, but since she did not appear as a claimant that technical difficulty could be passed over. On the like assumption, the Princess Elizabeth represented the House of York. Henry thus stood for the one House, the Princess Elizabeth for the other. Henry deposed and killed Richard. As soon as Elizabeth was his wife, and while both he and she lived, no one living could with much plausibility assert a prior claim. Henry's own personal claim however would continue disputable (though not his children's) in the event of his wife's demise; therefore, to strengthen his position, he sought and obtained the ratification of his own title by parliament before marrying Elizabeth, so as to have a sort of legal claim independent of her.
Still, until the sons of this union should be old enough to maintain their own rights in person, there remained the obvious possibility that the claims of a male member of the House of York might be asserted: the male members living being Warwick, and, through their mother, his De la Pole cousins.
Now the hereditary claim of the House of Lancaster, descending from John of Gaunt, the fourth son of Edward III., requiredab initiothe assumption that descent must be in direct male line; for if succession through the female line were recognised, the House of York had the prior claim, as descending through females from Lionel of Clarence third son of Edward III. But when Henry VI. and his son were both dead, there was left no representative of John of Gaunt in direct male line. The only male Plantagenet remaining was young Warwick, son of George of Clarence, of the House of York; Plantagenet in virtue of his descent, in unbroken male line, not from Lionel of Clarence but from Edmund of York, fifth son of Edward III.
Thus, except on the hypothesis that the settlement of 1399 had excluded the entire House of York from the succession, no Lancastrian claim could hold water, technically. Granting succession through females, Elizabeth was the heir; denying it, Warwick was the heir.
Although accepted as the sole possible representative of John of Gaunt, and therefore of the House of Lancaster, Henry Tudor's claim to that position lay only in the female line, through his Beaufort blood. This title was the more ineffective because the Beauforts themselves were the illegitimate offspring of John of Gaunt by Katharine Swynford, and had only been legitimated by Act of Parliament under Richard II.; while even that legitimation had been rendered invalid, as concerned succession to the throne, by the Act of Henry IV. which in other respects confirmed it.
Nevertheless although there were other indubitably legitimate descendants of John of Gaunt living, no claim on behalf of any of them was put forward till a full century had elapsed. The royal House of Portugal sprang from the second and that of Castile from the third daughter of Lancaster; so that after the death of Mary Stewart, Philip II. of Spain, posing as their representative, claimed the inheritance, ignoring the superior title of his cousin Katharine of Braganza. But in 1485, the title of any alien would have been flatly repudiated by the whole country. There remained only in England, descending through his mother from John of Gaunt's eldest daughter, a young Neville who had just succeeded to the Earldom of Westmorland; whose line was extinguished in the person of the Earl who took part in the Northern rising of 1569. This branch however appears to have been completely ignored from first to last.
The vital fact remained, that Henry was the representative, acknowledged on all hands, of the House of Lancaster. He claimed the throne on that ground, ratified the claim on the field of Bosworth, and confirmed it by a Parliamentary title. The Plantagenet Princess, he married: their offspring combined the titles of the two Houses. The Plantagenet Earl was shut up in the Tower, and finally perished on the scaffold without offspring.
The accession of Henry was bound politically, in spite of his marriage, to have the effect of a Lancastrian victory. The extreme Yorkist partisans, who could always find asylum and encouragement with Margaret of Burgundy, were not likely to be satisfied with such a result; but they had nothing approaching a case for anyone except the young Earl of Warwick, a prisoner in the Tower. Hence the first attempt was to put forward a fictitious Warwick, Lambert Simnel. This scheme collapsed at the battle of Stoke. Then it was that the Yorkists fell back on the resuscitation of Richard of York, murdered in the Tower with Edward V. If he was alive, his title could not be seriously challenged. So he was brought to life in the person of Perkin Warbeck. When Warwick and Perkin were both dead, there was no one to fall back on but the De la Poles of Suffolk; since at this stage the two senior Yorkist branches—the Courtenays of Devon, and the Poles (a quite different family from the De la Poles) could not be erected into dangerous candidates. [SeeFrontispiece.] The claims of the Courtenays would derive from the younger daughter of Edward IV.: those of the Poles from the Countess of Salisbury, Warwick's sister: those of the De la Poles from Elizabeth, sister of Edward IV.
Under Henry VIII., there was no claim which could stand against the king's own. But in the course of his reign, he found it convenient to put out of the way Buckingham, who was not only (like the Tudors) of Beaufort blood but also traced descent from Thomas, sixth son of Edward III.; and twenty-five years later his grandson Surrey: also the heads of the De la Poles, the Poles, and the Courtenays.
Edward succeeded his father as a matter of course, being his one indubitably legitimate son. But who was to follow Edward? Henry had two daughters, born ostensibly in wedlock. But the marriages of both mothers had been pronounced void by the courts.Prima facietherefore, the succession went first to the offspring of Henry's eldest sister Margaret; but these might be ruled out as aliens. Next it would go to the offspring of his younger sister Mary, the Brandons, of whom the senior was Frances Grey; who however gave place (as Margaret of Richmond had done for Henry VII.) to her daughter Lady Jane. It will thus be seen that Lady Jane had technically a respectable title. It left out of count however that the Lennox Stewarts, the offspring of Margaret Tudor by her second marriage, were English as well as Scottish subjects and therefore not barred as aliens.
But, in spite of the ruling of the Courts, no one who believed in the Papal authority could admit that Mary Tudor was illegitimate. Again both she and Elizabeth were the children of unions entered on inbona fides,and only invalidated subsequently on technical grounds: grounds, in the one case, inadequate in the eyes of the Roman Church, and in the other never made public. Hence; although it is perfectly clear that if Katharine was Henry's lawful spouse, the marriage with Anne was bigamous and its offspring illegitimate, whereas, if Anne was Henry's lawful spouse then the marriage with Katharine was void from the beginning and its offspring illegitimate—that is, while both Mary and Elizabeth might be illegitimate, it was quite impossible that both should be legitimate—yet the advantages of setting the whole problem on one side by acknowledging the right of each to the succession, in order, were obvious. And this was done by the Will of Henry VIII. to which Parliament by anticipation gave the validity of a statute.
Mary then succeeded Edward, and Elizabeth succeeded Mary, in virtue of their recognition under Henry's will.
On Elizabeth's accession then; the validity of Henry's Will being admitted, no other title could stand against that instrument, and the Brandon branch would succeed in priority to the Stewarts. But evidently it could be argued that no instrument whatever could confer priority on an illegitimate heir over a legitimate one; or on a junior over a senior branch; and since no secular authority had power to annul the marriage between Henry and Katharine, nothing after Mary Tudor's death could set aside the title of Mary Stewart. Mary might accede to an arrangement as a matter of policy, but she could not abrogate her right, or admit that she was barred as an alien. On the other hand, the Greys might be pushed forward under the Will as heirs, in opposition to Mary; but they could not be seriously upheld as rivals to Elizabeth herself; and the same applied to the living representatives of the Poles, the Earl of Huntingdon and Arthur Pole. There were now no De la Poles, nor Courtenays.
With Mary Stewart as the only possible figure-head for a revolt, Elizabeth had no disposition to strengthen her position by acknowledging her as heir presumptive, since that would be an immediate incentive to her own assassination by Mary's adherents, who would be anxious to secure their candidate against the possible appearance of an heir apparent. It was safer to leave the question of her successor an open one, so that any overt act in favour of any particular candidate would be tolerably certain to recoil on that candidate's head. Therefore Elizabeth would acknowledge neither Mary nor another, though it can hardly be doubted that she did herself look upon the royal Stewarts as the rightful claimants, throughout her reign.
But when the Queen of Scots was dead, the Catholics were at once in want of a Catholic candidate. James of Scotland was a Protestant: so was Arabella, representing the Lennox Stewarts; so were Katharine Grey and her husband Lord Hertford (the son of the old Protector Somerset); so was their son. Lord Beauchamp; Huntingdon, the Pole representative, was a Protestant too. The Countess of Derby, like Katharine Grey, was a grandchild of Mary Brandon; but the Stanleys, though Catholics, rejected all overtures. As Elizabeth's end approached, various schemes were no doubt propounded for marrying Arabella to a Catholic, even to Beauchamp on the understanding that both were in due time to declare themselves Catholics. But the immediate result of Mary Stewart's death was that Philip of Spain entered the field as the Catholic candidate, as tracing descent from John of Gaunt through both his father and his mother. Later, his daughter Isabella was put forward.
From the legitimist point of view however the title of James of Scotland was indisputable. The stroke of deliberate policy by which Henry VII. had mated his eldest daughter to the Scots King James IV. bore its fruit when, precisely a hundred years later, the crowns of England and Scotland were united by the accession of Margaret's great-grandson to the southern throne.
The life of Mary Tudor has been in its place described as supremely tragic; that of Mary Stewart presents a tragedy not greater but more dramatic— whatever view we may take of her guilt or innocence with regard to Darnley, to Bothwell, to the conspirators who would fain have made her Queen of England. Of the misdeeds laid to her charge, that of unchastity has no colourable evidence except in the case of Bothwell, for whom it may be considered certain that she had an overwhelming passion; and even there the evidence is not more than colourable. That she wascognisantof the intended murder of Darnley can be doubted only by a very warm partisan: but in weighing the criminality even of that, it must be remembered not only that Darnley himself had murdered her secretary before her eyes, and had insulted her past forgiveness, but thatpoliticalassassinations were connived at by the morals of the times. Henry VIII. had preferred to commit his murders through the forms of law, but had encouraged the assassination of Cardinal Beton which John Knox applauded. In Italy, every prominent man lived constantly on his guard against the cup and the dagger. Philip, Parma, Alva, Mendoza, encouraged the murder of Elizabeth, and incited or approved that of Orange. The royal House of France was directly responsible for the slaughter of St. Bartholomew. Henry III. of France assassinated Henry of Guise; the Guises in turn assassinated Henry. Many of the Scottish nobility, including certainly Lethington and Morton, if not Murray, were beyond question as deep as Mary, if not deeper, in the murder of Darnley. And in England it may be said frankly that there was no sentiment against political murder, but only against murder without sanction of Law. Given a person whose life was regarded as possibly dangerous to the State, the public conscience was entirely satisfied if any colourable pretext could be found on which the legal authorities could profess to find warrant for a death sentence, though the proof, on modern theories of evidence, might be wholly inconclusive. In plain terms, if Mary had not followed up the murder by marrying the "first murderer," the deed would not have been regarded as particularly atrocious, or as placing her in any way outside the pale. But that marriage was fatal. Darnley was killed because while he lived his intellectual and moral turpitude were perfectly certain to wreck his wife's political schemes; but the new marriage was equally destructive politically and drove home the belief that passion, not politics, was the real motive of the murder. Whether politics or passion were the real motive, whether either would have sufficed without the other, whether even together they would have sufficed without the third motive of revenge for Rizzio, no human judgment can tell. But if under stress of those three motives in combination, Mary connived at the murder, it proves indeed that her judgment failed her, but not that according to the standards of the day she was unusually wicked.
As to her conduct in England—whatever it was—in connexion with the Ridolfi, Throgmorton, and Babington plots. In the first place, she owed Elizabeth no gratitude. She was perfectly well aware that the Queen kept her alive because—unlike her ministers and her people—she thought Mary alive was on the whole more useful than dangerous. Mary always without any sort of concealment asserted throughout the eighteen years of her captivity her quite indisputable right to appeal to the European Powers for deliverance. She always denied that she had any part in or knowledge of schemes for Elizabeth's assassination. Those denials were never met by any evidence [Footnote: Cf. Hume inState Papers, Spanish,III., iii.] more conclusive than alleged copies of deciphered correspondence, or the confessions of prisoners on the rack or under threat of it. But assuming that her denials were false, that in one or other instance or in all three she was guilty, she did only what Valois and Habsburg and half the leading statesmen in Europe were doing, with the approbation of Rome, and without Mary's excuse. For they had the opportunity of overthrowing Coligny, Orange, Henry of Guise, and Elizabeth herself in fair fight; Mary had not: her crime therefore at the worst was infinitely less than theirs. To a caged captive much may be forgiven which in those others could not be forgiven.
And if in her prison she did assent to her own deliverance by assassination, and condescend (as no doubt she did) to use in some of her dealings with her captor some of that duplicity whereof that captor was herself a past mistress—if she used on her own behalf the weapons which were freely employed against her—she displayed at all times other qualities which were splendidly royal. She never betrayed, never disowned, never forgot a faithful servant or a loyal friend. If she bewitched the men who came in contact with her, she was the object of a no less passionate devotion on the part of all her women; not that transient if vehement emotion which a fascinating fiend can arouse when she wills, but a devotion persistent and enduring. And withal she dreed her weird with a lofty courage, faced it full front with a high defiance, which must bespeak for ever the admiration at least of every generous spirit.
All this we may say and yet do justice to the attitude towards her of the people of England. For to them, her life was a perpetual menace. The idea of her succession was to half of them unendurable, yet if Elizabeth died it could be averted only at the cost of a fierce civil war, aggravated almost certainly by a foreign invasion. About her, plots were eternally brewing which if they came to a head must involve the whole nation in a bloody strife. She engaged when she could in negotiations which could not do otherwise than imperil the peace of the realm. If no law or precedent could be found applicable to such a situation, there was clear moral justification for removing such a public danger in the only possible way. Mary's release would only have aggravated it; her death was the one solution. England had no hesitation in assuming the grim responsibility which the Queen of England was fain to evade at her servants' expense.
The works enumerated in this bibliography are such as may usually be found in the larger public libraries, or are available to members of the London Library. In most cases a few words of description are added, and the whole list has been so classified that the reader—it is hoped—will be able without much difficulty to pick out those volumes which will best help him whether to a general view or in gathering detailed information on specific points.
* * * * *
To a student "taking up" the Tudor period, the best brief general introduction, as a preliminary survey of the whole subject is to be found— judging from the writer's early experiences—in two small volumes in the "Epoch" Series (Longmans), Seebohm'sEra of the Protestant Revolution,and Creighton'sAge of Elizabeth.
The continuous narrative,in extenso,is presented consecutively inThe Tudor Period,vol. i., by W. Busch (translated by A. M. Todd) for Henry VII.: Brewer'sHenry VIII.(2 vols.) for Henry VIII. to the fall of Wolsey: Froude'sHistory of England(12 vols.) from the fall of Wolsey to the Armada—cautious though the reader must be; with Major Martin Hume'sTreason and Plotfor Elizabeth's closing years.
Proceeding to the detailed list; the first division gives authorities covering all sections of the Tudor Period. Then, under each reign, are the authorities for that reign, selected as being on the whole the most prominent or the most informing. These are divided into contemporary,i.e.Tudor; Intermediate; and Modern,i.e.publications (roughly) of the last half century. Further classification is introduced, where it seems likely to be of assistance.
TheCarew Papers(Ireland).
Four Masters, Chronicle of The:Celtic Chronicles, collated and translatedcirca1632 by four Irish Priests. Hakluyt'sVoyages.
TheHatfield Papers(Historical MSS. Commission). The period before Elizabeth occupies only half of vol. i.; the rest of which, with the following volumes of the series, is devoted to that reign. Rymer'sFoedera. Stow,AnnalsandSurvey of London and Westminster.
Hallam'sConstitutional History of England. A valuable study of the constitutional aspects of the period; and especially of the attitude of the Government to the great religious sections of the community.
Hook'sLives of the Archbishops; a work somewhat coloured by the author's ecclesiastical predilections.
Lingard'sHistory of England; a fair-minded account written avowedly from a Roman Catholic point of view. Valuable data have however been brought to light since Lingard wrote.
Von Ranke'sEnglische Geschichte, translated as "History of England principally in the seventeenth century": not a detailed history of this period, but marked by the Author's keen historical insight.
———History of the Popes, for those aspects of the period suggested by the title: see also Macaulay'sEssayon this work.
Strype'sEcclesiastical Memorials, containing transcripts of many important documents. The compiler however occasionally went astray; as in a remarkable instance noted at p. 129.
Ashley, W. J.,Introduction to English Economic History. Brown,P. Hume,History of Scotland.
Cambridge Modern History: vol. ii., The Reformation. Useful for reference, and containing a very full bibliography of the subject. Cc. xiii.-xvi. deal more particularly with England. Also vol. iii., The Wars of Religion.
Chambers,Cyclopaedia of English Literature, containing useful surveys, criticisms, and extracts. [New edition.]
Chambers, E. K.,The Mediaeval Stage, invaluable prolegomena to a History of the Elizabethan stage as yet unwritten. Clowes, Sir W. Laird,The Royal Navy; vol. i.
Cunningham, W.,Growth of English Industry and Commerce: the bestEconomic Authority.Dictionary of National Biography.
Green, J. R.,Short History of the English People, admirably reproducing the atmosphere of the period.
Lang, Andrew,History of Scotland, vols. i. and ii.: a strong corrective to the ordinary English treatment of Scottish relations.
Morley, Henry,English Writers; partly critical, partly consisting of numerous and ample extracts.
Rait, J. S.,Relations between England and Scotland, 500 to 1707. A short study.
Rogers, Thorold,Six Centuries of Work and Wages, andHistory ofAgriculture and Prices.
Social England, edd. H. D. Traill and J. S. Mann. Contributions by leading authorities, dealing at length with aspects commonly neglected in Political Histories.
Stubbs (Bishop),Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Medieval and Modern History; andLectures on European History(pub. 1904, delivered twenty-five years earlier); very useful to the student, from their extremely lucid method.
André, Bernard,De Vita atque gestis Henrici Septimi, andAnnales Henrici Septimi(to be found in Gairdner'sMemorials, infra). André was the court historiographer, and was blind. Honest, but not altogether trustworthy, or adequate.
Fabyan, Robert,New Chronicles of England and France, (supplement), ed. Ellis: andLondon Chronicle: both, in their present form, probably summaries from the original record compiled by Fabyan as the events took place; upon which original it would seem that both Hall and Stow largely based their Chronicles of the reign.
Hall, Edward,Chronicle: compiled chiefly from Polydore Vergil, andFabyan for this reign. For Henry VIII., he is literally a contemporary.
Italian Relation, An, (Author unknown: ed. Camden Society), by an Italian visitor to England.
Letters and Papers, Richard III. and Henry VII., ed. Gairdner.
Letters and Papers Henry VIII., (vols. i. and ii.) ed. Brewer.
Letters, Despatches and State Papers, from Simancas, ed. Bergenroth. Spanish relations.
Lyndsay of Pitscottie,Historie of Scotland: picturesque but not too trustworthy.
Macchiavelli, N.,The Prince. An interesting contrast to the political philosophy of theUtopia.
Memorials of Henry VII., ed. Gairdner: contemporary records.
More, Sir T.,Utopia, first book (illustrating social and economic conditions).
Paston Letters, ed. Gairdner; correspondence of the Paston family.
Polydore Vergil,Historiae Anglicae Libri. P. V. was an Italian who came to England in 1502. For the earlier years of Henry VII. he had access to good sources of information; for the latter years he was a witness, but with the inevitable limitations of a foreign observer.
Bacon, Francis,History of the Reign of King Henry VII.This has been the basis of all the popular histories, for the reign. It is often referred to as "contemporary". But Bacon was not born till fifty years after Henry's death, and did not write the history till he was over fifty himself. His work contains much that is merely rhetorical amplification of above named contemporary authorities, with occasional imaginative variations and misreadings: nor does he appear to have had additional sources of information.
Ware,De Hibernia;a supplement to which contains annals of IrishHistory in the reign of Henry VII.; written in the time of Charles I.
Busch, Wilhelm,England under the Tudors,vol. i., Henry VII.Translated by A. M. Todd. The one complete and thorough account of thereign, with an exhaustive examination of the authorities: and notes byJ. Gairdner.
Gairdner, J.,Henry VII.(Twelve English Statesmen series), an admirable study but with less detail; written before Busch's work was published.
Seebohm, F.,The Oxford Reformers,Colet, Erasmus and More: an illuminating study.
Calendar of State Papers
(1)State Papers, Henry VIII.A series of eleven volumes edited before the commencement of the series next named. These are referred to in this work as "S. P."; and the next series mentioned, as "L. & P."
(2)Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII.Vols. i.-iv. ed. Brewer, vols. v. ff. ed. J. Gairdner and others. Dr. Brewer carried his work down to the fall of Wolsey, arranging all available documents so far as possible chronologically, but without other classification. His introductions have been edited as two solid volumes (v. infra) by Dr. Gairdner. The subsequent editors were restricted as to the length of introduction permitted but the same system of arrangement is followed. Throughout, all documents of any importance are transcribed with fulness.
(3)State Papers, Venetian,(4)State Papers, Ireland,(5) (State Papers, Spanish;_ all official collections throwing some light on (various aspects of the history. [2, 3, and 5 belong to the Rolls series.]
Hamilton Papers(Scotland) 2 vols.: full transcriptions of the Hamilton collection of Papers.
Letters of Thomas Cromwell,ed. Merriman, a complete collection of all the available letters of Cromwell, with a historical survey.
Buchanan, G.,History of Scotland;the author was an excellent scholar but a violent partisan with a rudimentary idea of evidence.
Cavendish,Life of Cardinal Wolsey. The author was a member of Wolsey's household, from 1526, and regarded him with affection and admiration.
Fabyan: see under Henry VII.
Fish, Simon,The Supplicacyon for the Beggers,a pamphlet illustrating the most extravagant anti-clerical attitude, just before Wolsey's fall.
Foxe, J.,Acts and Monuments,commonly known as the "Book of Martyrs". The work of a strong but honest partisan and a good hater.Narratives of the Reformationby the same author.
Hall's Chronicle: see under Henry VII.
Holinshed, Raphael,Chronicle: compiled in the reign of Elizabeth. It forms with Hall's Chronicle, the basis of the popular impressions of English History down to Elizabeth, partly no doubt because Shakespeare, drawing upon those works, has made those popular impressions permanent.
Knox, John,History of the Reformation;less valuable perhaps as a record of facts set forth with a strong bias than as a revelation of the mental attitude of the great Reformer and his followers.
Latimer, Hugh,Sermons.
Lyndsay, Sir David,Poetical Works,for Social and Ecclesiastical conditions in Scotland.
Lyndsay of Pitscottie,Historie of Scotland. See under Henry VII.
More, Thomas,Utopia(1516) expresses the ideas of an advanced political thinker, and incidentally, directly or by implication, conveys much information as to prevalent social economic and intellectual conditions.
Pole, Reginald (Cardinal),Epistolae,illustrating the Cardinal's own views.
Roper, W.,Life of Sir T. More,whose son-in-law the author was.
Sanders, Nicholas,History of the Anglican Schismpresented from the extreme (contemporary) Catholic point of view.
Skelton, J.,Poems.
Macchiavelli, N.,The Prince.
Burnet, Gilbert,History of the Reformation;painstaking, liberal-minded and Orthodox, but requiring modification in the light of later information.
Prescott,Conquest of Mexico and Peru: the classical work on the subject.
Robertson,Charles V.
Strype,Memorials of Cranmer.
Armstrong, E.,Charles V., the best record of the Emperor's career.
Brewer, J. S.,The Reign of Henry VIII.: Introductions to the vols. of "L. & P." to the fall of Wolsey: edited in 2 vols. by J. Gairdner. Incomparable as an examination and exposition of the Cardinal's career.
Creighton (Bishop),Wolsey(in the Twelve English Statesmen series), practically an exposition of Brewer for the general reader.
Froude, J. A.,History of Englandfrom the fall of Wolsey to the defeat of the Armada. An English classic, but an unsafe guide. Mr. Froude studied and made use of an immense mass of evidence not before available; but his transcriptions and summaries are not always distinguishable nor always accurate. He was unable to describe otherwise than picturesquely and impressively, and his colouring of events is frequently imaginative; he was overpowered by an anti-clerical passion and an almost blind enthusiasm for Henry VIII.
Oppenheim, M.,History of the Administration of the Royal Navy, etc.
Seebohm, F.,Era of the Protestant Revolution("Epoch" series), professedly for school use, but extremely useful to even advanced students.
Pollard, A. F.,Henry VIII.;a sumptuous study.
Dixon, R. W.,History of the English Church(vols. i. and ii.): actually, of the Reformation in England, down to Elizabeth. Further volumes have however been added. The author holds a brief against the anti-clericals of every kind; his view may be summarised as Anglo-Catholic: the precise antithesis of Froude. He is full and careful in his documentary evidence, but is so persistently ironical as occasionally to conveyprima faciean impression diametrically opposed to what was intended.
Gairdner, J.,History of the English Church in the Sixteenth Century,concluding with the death of Mary. An admirably judicial survey, with a moderate predilection for the Conservative side.
Gasquet, F. A.,Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries,andThe Eve of the Reformation. Very able and judicial statements of the case for Home and the loyal Roman Catholics.
Innes, A. D.,Cranmer and the English Reformation(in "The World'sEpoch Makers"): a short study.
Mason, A. J.,Thomas Cranmer(in "Leaders of Religion"): a short study.
Moore, Aubrey,History of the Reformation. This volume consists almost entirely of notes, varying in fulness, for courses of lectures delivered by Canon Moore. The student will find them of much assistance in classifying and correlating events, and touched with flashes of insight. The High Anglican position is taken for granted throughout.
Pollard, A. F.,Cranmer(in "Heroes of the Reformation" series); somewhat fuller than the above-mentioned studies.
Seebohm, F.,The Oxford Reformers. (See under Henry VII.)
Taunton, E.,Thomas Wolsey, Reformer and Legate—from the Roman point of view.
Westcott (Bishop),History of the English Bible.
Calendar of State Papers, Edward VI., etc., Domestic;vol. i. (Rolls.) Little more than a catalogue. Somewhat amplified by the Addenda in vol. vi.
Calendar of State Papers, Edward VI., Foreign,1 vol. (Rolls.) Fairly full.
Calendar of Scottish State Papers,Ed. Bain.
Hamilton Papers(Scotland).
Buchanan,History of Scotland.
Foxe,Acts and Monuments.
Holinshed,Chronicle.
Knox,History of the Reformation.
Lyndsay of Pitscottie,Historie of Scotland.
Literary Remains of Edward VI.,Ed. Nichols.
Pole, Reginald,Epistolae.
Sanders, Nicholas,History of the Anglican Schism.
Smith, Sir T.,De Republica Anglorum
As for Henry VIII.
Armstrong, E.,Charles V.
Dicey, A. V.,The Privy Council.
Froude, J. A.,History of England. In this and the next reign,Mr. Froude is much less erratic.
Oppenheim, M.,The Royal Navy, etc.
Pollard, A. F.,England under Protector Somerset. The best work on the time; though the impression given of Somerset is somewhat more favourable than the facts quite warrant, the rehabilitation was to a great extent necessary and justified. Much information as to authorities is given in the bibliography.
Tytler, P. F.,England in the Reigns of Edward VI. and Mary.
Dixon,History of the English Church,vols. iii, iv.
Gairdner, J.,History of the English Church in the SixteenthCentury.
Gasquet, F. A.,Edward VI. and the Book of Common Prayer.
Innes, A. D.,Cranmer and the English Reformation.
Mason, A. J.,Thomas Cranmer.
Moore, Aubrey,History of the Reformation.
Pollard, A, F.,Cranmer.
Calendar of State Papers, Mary, Foreign,1 vol.
Otherwise, the list of contemporary authorities is the same as for EdwardVI., with some omissions. TheDomestic Calendar, Edward VI., etc.(vol. i.) extends on to 1580: and the remaining vols. to the end ofElizabeth bear the same title.
As for Henry VIII.
Stone, J. M.,Mary I. Queen of Englandtakes the place ofEngland under Protector Somersetfor Edward VI. The facts are fairly and honestly stated; though the perspective differs considerably from that of Protestant writers, the bias is not nearly so marked as in the same writer's work on theRenaissance: and the portrait of Mary herself is probably the truest we have.
Otherwise, the list for Edward VI. is practically repeated for Mary.
Calendar of State Papers, Edward VI., etc., Domestic: (Rolls). Vol. i. 1547-80. A meagre catalogue. Vol. ii. 1580-90, somewhat less meagre. Vols. iii.-vi. 1590-1603, generally full transcriptions; but the Introductions are of much less use to the student than inHenry VIII. L. & P.,or the other "Rolls" series of Elizabeth. Vols. vi. and vii., addenda to vols. i. and ii.; the description, as for vols. iii-vi.
Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, Elizabeth: (Rolls). 14 vols., 1558-81. Very full and informing; the introductions being very useful guides to the contents.
Calendar of State Papers, Irish: (Rolls). Sufficiently full and satisfactory.
Calendar of State Papers, Spanish: (Rolls). 1558-1603. Selected and translated by Major Martin Hume, chiefly from the Simancas archives. Very valuable, and full for most of the period.
Slate Papers relating to the Spanish Armada: 2 vols.: ed. Professor Laughton, whose Introduction is of great interest.Sidle Papers: Scotland and Mary Queen of Scots.Hamilton Papers.Hardwicke Papers.Letters of Mary Queen of Scots: ed. A. Strickland.Statutes and Constitutional Documents: ed G. W. Prothero.
Buchanan,History of Scotland. Camden, W.,Britannia, a survey of the realm, andAnnals of QueenElizabeth. Foxe, J.,Book of Martyrs. Holinshed,Chronicle. Knox, John,Works. Lesley, John (Bishop of Ross),History of Scotland. The Bishop was in constant diplomatic employment, on behalf of Mary. Lyndsay of Pitscottie,Historie of Scotland, ending 1563.MarprelateTracts. Sanders, N.,History of the Anglican Schism. Raleigh, Sir W.,Works;notablyThe Discovery of Guiana,The Fight atthe Azores, and theRelation of the Cadiz Action. But the works containpassimdiscussions which throw light on contemporary history. Spenser, E.,Faerie Queen, Book I.; the Elizabethan spirit embodied in poetry. Not less necessary to a sympathetic understanding of the times than the Canterbury Tales, or Milton's Poems, for other periods.
Burnet,History of the Reformation. Macaulay, Lord, Essay onBurleigh and his Times, ostensibly a critique on the Nares Biography. Nares, E.,Memoirs of Lord Burleigh. Neal, D.,History of the Puritans. Strype,Annals of the Reformation; andLives of Parker,Grindal, andWhitgift. Wright, T.,Queen Elisabeth and her Times.
Beesley, E. S.,Queen Elizabethin the Twelve English Statesmen series. Rather a biography than a history;i.e.the Queen's personality holds almost exclusive possession of the stage. Brown, P. Hume,Scotland in the Time of Queen Mary; a study of social conditions, not politics or persons, in Scotland; inferentially, useful to the student of English social conditions.
Corbett, J.,Drake and the Tudor Navy, 2 vols., the most complete study of the Naval development under Elizabeth. Indispensable for this subject. AlsoDrakein the English Men of Action series.
Creighton (Bishop),Queen Elizabeth.
Dixon,History of the English Church.
Fleming, D. Hay, _Mary Queen of Scots; (to her captivity in England).
Frere, W. H.,History of the English Church.
Froude,History of England, vols. vii.-xii.; closing with the Armada. Mary Queen of Scots is the wicked heroine, Burghley the hero, the dramatic presentation of other characters depending largely on—and varying with—their relations to these two. These preconceptions must be borne in mind, in following a most fascinating narrative. Mr. Froude accumulated an unprecedented quantity of evidence, but does not always present it with accuracy, or weigh its value. TheElizabethan Seamenis also an interesting and graphic study.
Harrison, F.,William the Silent, in the "Foreign Statesmen" series.
Hosack, J.,Mary Queen of Scots and her Accusers, a vigorous presentation of the case on Mary's behalf.
Hume, Martin: (1)The Courtships of Queen Elizabeth—a special aspect of the reign which called for a specific treatment. (2)The Love Affairs of Mary Queen of Scotstreated from the political, not the dramatic, point of view. (3)The Great Lord Burghley, a sympathetic study. (4)The Year after the Armada, to be read in conjunction with Corbett'sDrake. (5)Treason and Plot, the best account of the Queen's closing years. (6)Life of Sir Walter Ralegh. (7) Introductions to theState Papers, Spanish, Elizabeth.
Jusserand, J. J.,The Elizabethan Novel, a very interesting study, by a Frenchman, of this particular literary development; andA Literary History of the English People.
Lang, Andrew,The Mystery of Mary Stewart, a most ingenious examination of a practically insoluble problem: performed in the true spirit of historical investigation. The conclusions, with a less exhaustive treatment of the evidence, are presented in theHistory of Scotland—which is also a running criticism on English affairs as they affected, or were affected by, Scotland.
Laughton, Introduction to theState Papers relating to the Armada.
Lee, Sidney,Life of Shakespeare; andGreat Englishmen of theSixteenth Century.
Moore, Aubrey,History of the Reformation.
Motley, J. R.,Rise of the Dutch Republic, the classical work on the subject.
Oppenheim, M.,History of the Administration of the Royal Navy, etc.
Procter, F., and Frere, W. H.,New History of the Book of CommonPrayer.
Rodd, Sir Rennell,Raleighin English Men of Action series.
Seeley, Sir J. R.,The Expansion of England, lecture v.; and,TheGrowth of British Policyfrom Elizabeth to William III. (2 vols.).
Sichel, E.,Catherine de Medici, etc.; an account of some leading characters on the Continent.
Skelton, J.,Maitland of Lethington, an able study of the "ScottishMacchiavelli".
Tomlinson, J. R.,The Prayer-Book, Articles, Homilies—from a strongly "Protestant" point of view.
[Illustration: Spanish America about 1580]
End of Project Gutenberg's England Under the Tudors, by Arthur D. Innes