sign in sign up
<<
Home , Andrew Dudley, Baron Dudley, Battle of the Solent, Duke of Northumberland, Duke of Somerset, Edward VI of England

John , 1st of

For other people named John Dudley, see John Dudley The 15-year-old King fell ill in early 1553 and ex- (disambiguation). cluded his half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth, whom he re- garded as illegitimate, from the succession, designating John Dudley, 1st , KG non-existent, hypothetical male heirs. As his death ap- proached, Edward changed his will so that his Protes- (1504[1] – 22 August 1553) was an English general, admi- ral, and politician, who led the government of the young tant cousin Jane Grey, Northumberland’s daughter-in- law, could inherit the . To what extent the Duke King Edward VI from 1550 until 1553, and unsuccess- fully tried to install on the English throne influenced this scheme is uncertain. The traditional view after the King’s death. The son of , a is that it was Northumberland’s plot to maintain his power of Henry VII executed by Henry VIII, John Dud- by placing his family on the throne. Many historians see ley became the ward of Sir Edward at the age of the project as genuinely Edward’s, enforced by Dudley seven. He grew up in Guildford’s household together with after the King’s death. The Duke did not prepare well his future wife, Guildford’s daughter Jane, with whom he for this occasion. Having marched to East Anglia to cap- was to have 13 children. Dudley served as Vice-Admiral ture Princess Mary, he surrendered on hearing that the and Lord Admiral from 1537 until 1547, during which Privy Council had changed sides and proclaimed Mary as time he set novel standards of navy organisation and was Queen. Convicted of high , Northumberland re- an innovative commander at sea. He also developed a turned to Catholicism and abjured the Protestant faith be- strong interest in overseas exploration. Dudley took part fore his execution. Having secured the contempt of both in the 1544 campaigns in and France and was religious camps, popularly hated, and a natural scapegoat, one of Henry VIII’s intimates in the last years of the . he became the “wicked Duke”—in contrast to his prede- He was also a leader of the religious reform party at court. cessor , the “good Duke”. Only since the 1970s has he also been seen as a Tudor Crown servant: self- In 1547 Dudley was created and, with serving, inherently loyal to the incumbent monarch, and the , England’s , dis- an able statesman in difficult times. tinguished himself in the renewed Scottish war at the . During the country-wide uprisings of 1549 Dudley put down Kett’s Rebellion in . Con- 1 Career under Henry VIII vinced of the Protector’s incompetence, he and other privy councillors forced Somerset out of office in Octo- ber 1549. Having averted a conservative reaction in reli- gion and a plot to destroy him alongside Somerset, Dud- ley emerged in early 1550 as de facto regent for the 12- year-old Edward VI. He reconciled himself with Somer- set, who nevertheless soon began to intrigue against him and his policies. Somerset was executed on largely fabri- cated charges, three months after Dudley had been raised to the Dukedom of Northumberland in October 1551. As Lord President of the Council, Dudley headed a dis- tinctly conciliar government and sought to introduce the adolescent King into business. Taking over an almost bankrupt administration, he ended the costly wars with France and Scotland and tackled finances in ways that led to some economic recovery. To prevent further up- risings he introduced countrywide policing on a local basis, appointing Lords Lieutenants who were in close contact with the central authority. Dudley’s religious policy was—in accordance with Edward’s proclivities— decidedly Protestant, further enforcing the English Ref- Arms of John Dudley as Duke of Northumberland ormation and promoting radical reformers to positions. John Dudley was the eldest of three sons of Edmund

1 2 1 CAREER UNDER HENRY VIII

Dudley, a councillor of King Henry VII, and his sec- became Viscount Lisle after the death of his stepfather ond wife Elizabeth Grey, daughter of Edward Grey, 4th Arthur Plantagenet and “by the right of his mother”.[21] Viscount Lisle.[2] His father was attainted and executed Being now a peer, Dudley became Lord Admiral and a for high treason in 1510, having been arrested immedi- of the Garter in 1543; he was also admitted to the ately after Henry VIII's accession because the new King Privy Council.[22] In the aftermath of the Battle of Sol- needed scapegoats for his predecessor’s unpopular finan- way Moss in 1542 he served as Warden of the Scottish cial policies.[3] In 1512 the seven-year-old John became Marches, and in the 1544 campaign the English force un- the ward of Sir Edward Guildford and was taken into his der Edward Seymour, Earl of was supported by household.[4] At the same time Edmund Dudley’s attain- a fleet which Dudley commanded. Dudley joined the land der was lifted and John Dudley was restored “in name force that destroyed Edinburgh, after he had blown the and blood”. The King was hoping for the good services main gate apart with a culverin.[23] In late 1544 he was “which the said John Dudley is likely to do”.[5] At about appointed Governor of Boulogne, the siege of which had age 15 John Dudley probably went with his guardian to cost the life of his eldest son, Henry.[24] His tasks were the to serve there for the next years.[6] to rebuild the fortifications to King Henry’s design and to He took part in Cardinal Wolsey's diplomatic voyages of fend off French attacks by sea and land.[25] 1521 and 1527, and was knighted by Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk during his first major military ex- perience, the 1523 invasion of France.[7] In 1524 Dud- ley became a Knight of the Body, a special mark of the King’s favour,[8] and from 1534 he was responsible for the King’s body armour as Master of the Tower Armoury.[9] Being “the most skilful of his generation, both on foot and on horseback”, he excelled in wrestling, archery, and the tournaments of the royal court, as a French report stated as late as 1546.[9] In 1525 Dudley married Guildford’s daughter Jane, who was four years his junior and his former class-mate.[1] The Dudleys belonged to the new evangelical circles of the early ,[10] and their 13 children were educated in Renaissance humanism and science.[11] Sir Edward Guildford died in 1534 without a written will. His only In 1545 Lord Admiral John Dudley, Viscount Lisle welcomed son having predeceased him, Guildford’s nephew, John King Henry VIII on board the Henri Grace a Dieu, popularly Guildford, asserted that his uncle had intended him to in- called Great Harry. herit. Dudley and his wife contested this claim. The par- ties went to court and Dudley, who had secured Thomas As Lord Admiral, Dudley was responsible for creating the Cromwell's patronage, won the case.[12] In 1532 he lent Council for Marine Causes, which for the first time co- his cousin, John Sutton, 3rd Dudley, over ₤7,000 ordinated the various tasks of maintaining the navy func- on the security of the baronial estate.[13] Lord Dudley was tioning and thus made English naval administration the unable to pay off any of his creditors, so when the mort- most efficient in Europe.[1] At sea, Dudley’s fighting or- gage was foreclosed in the late 1530s Sir John Dudley ders were at the forefront of tactical thinking: Squadrons came into possession of .[14] of ships, ordered by size and firepower, were to manoeu- Dudley was present at Henry VIII’s meeting with Francis vre in formation, using co-ordinated gunfire. These were [26] I of France at Calais in 1532. Another member of all new developments in the English navy. In 1545 he the entourage was , who was soon to be directed the fleet’s operations before, during, and after queen. Dudley took part in the christenings of Princess the Battle of and entertained King Henry on the Elizabeth and Prince Edward[15] and, in connection with flagship Henri Grace a Dieu. A tragic loss was the sinking [27] the announcement of the Prince’s birth to the Emperor, of the with 500 men aboard. In 1546 John travelled to Spain via France in October 1537.[16] He Dudley went to France for peace negotiations. When he sat in the parliament for , in place of suspected the Admiral of France, Claude d'Annebault, of his deceased father-in-law,[17] in 1534–1536, and led manoeuvres which might have led to a renewal of hostili- one of the contingents sent against the Pilgrimage of ties, he suddenly put to sea in a show of English strength, [28] Grace in late 1536.[18] In January 1537 Dudley was before returning to the negotiating table. He then trav- made Vice-Admiral and began to apply himself to naval elled to Fontainebleau, where the English delegates were matters.[19] He was Master of the Horse to Anne of entertained by the Dauphin Henri and King Francis. In Cleves and Katherine Howard,[20] and in 1542 returned the Peace of Camp, the French king acknowledged Henry to the House of Commons as MP for Staffordshire[17] VIII’s title as “Supreme Head of the but was soon promoted to the when he and ”, a success for both England and her Lord Admiral.[29] 3

John Dudley, popularly fêted and highly regarded by King Henry as a general,[30] became a royal intimate who played cards with the ailing monarch.[24] Next to Edward Seymour, Prince Edward's maternal uncle, Dudley was one of the leaders of the Reformed party at court, and both their wives were among the friends of Anne Askew, the Protestant martyr destroyed by Stephen Gar- diner in July 1546.[31] Dudley and the Queen’s brother, William Parr, tried to convince Anne Askew to conform to the doctrines of the Henrician church, yet she replied “it was great shame for them to counsel contrary to their knowledge”.[1] In September Dudley struck Gar- diner in the face during a full meeting of the Council. This was a grave offence, and he was lucky to escape with a month’s leave from court in disgrace.[32] In the last weeks of the reign Seymour and Dudley played their parts in Henry’s strike against the conservative House of Howard, thus clearing the path for a Protestant mi- nority rule.[33] They were seen as the likely leaders of the impending regency[34]—"there are no other nobles of a fit age and ability for the task”, Eustache Chapuys, the former Imperial ambassador, commented from his retirement.[35]

2 From Earl of Warwick to Duke Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset. In October 1549, the Lord Protector proclaimed his recalcitrant colleagues to have “come of Northumberland up of late from the dunghill ... more meet to keep service than to occupy offices”.[43] The 16 executors of Henry VIII’s will also embodied the Regency Council that had been appointed to rule collec- tively during Edward VI’s minority.[36] The new Coun- or even rebellion all over England.[46] The Marquess of cil agreed on making Edward Seymour, Earl of Hert- Northampton had been unable to restore order in and ford Lord Protector with full powers, which in effect around Norwich,[47] so John Dudley was sent to get hold were those of a prince.[37] At the same time the Coun- of Kett’s Rebellion. Dudley offered Robert Kett a pardon cil awarded themselves a round of promotions based on on the condition that the peasant army disband at once. Henry VIII’s wishes; the Earl of Hertford became the This was rejected and the next night Dudley stormed the Duke of Somerset and John Dudley was created Earl of rebel-held city with a small mercenary contingent and Warwick.[38][note 1] The new Earl had to pass on his post of drove the rebels out after fierce street fighting; 49 pris- Lord Admiral to Somerset’s brother, Thomas Seymour, oners he had immediately hanged. Two days later Kett, but advanced to Lord Great Chamberlain. Perceived as who had his main camp outside the city, confronted the the most important man next the Protector, he was on royal army, resulting in a slaughter of over 2,000 peasants. friendly terms with Somerset,[39] who soon reopened the In the following weeks Dudley concucted courts-martial war with Scotland. Dudley accompanied him as second- which executed many rebels, perhaps up to 300.[48] For in-command with a taste for personal combat.[40] On one the enraged and humiliated local gentry this was still not occasion he fought his way out of an ambush and, spear in enough punishment, so Dudley warned them: “Is there hand, chased his Scottish counterpart for some 250 yards no place for pardon? ... What shall we then do? Shall we (230 m), nearly running him through.[41] In the Battle of hold the plough ourselves, play the carters and labour the Pinkie Dudley led the vanguard, being “one of the key ground with our own hands?" [49] [42] architects of the English victory”. The Lord Protector, in his proclamations, appealed to the The Protector’s agrarian policy and proclamations were common people.[50] To his colleagues, whom he hardly inspired by a group of intellectuals sometimes called “the consulted,[51] he displayed a distinctly autocratic and “in- commonwealth men”. These were highly critical of land- creasingly contemptuous” face.[50] By autumn 1549 the lords and left many commoners with the impression that same councillors who had made him Protector were con- were unlawful.[44] As one of England’s major vinced that he had failed to exercise proper authority landowners, Dudley soon feared that this would lead to and was unwilling to listen to good counsel.[52] Dud- serious trouble and discreetly tried to warn Somerset.[45] ley still had the troops from the Norfolk campaign at By the summer of 1549 there was widespread unrest his disposal, and in October 1549 he joined the Earl 4 3 RULING ENGLAND

of Southampton and the Earl of Arundel, prominent re- cording to a French eyewitness, confessed before his own ligious conservatives, to lead a coup of councillors to end that “nothing had pressed so injuriously upon his oust the Protector from office.[53] They withdrew from conscience as the fraudulent scheme against the Duke of court to , meeting in Dudley’s residence. Starting Somerset”.[74] with the Protector, each side issued proclamations accus- ing the other of treason and declared to act in defence of the King’s safety.[54] Somerset tried in vain to raise 3 Ruling England a popular force and entrenched himself with the King at the fortress . Military force near Ed- ward’s presence was unthinkable and, apparently, Dud- ley and Archbishop Cranmer brokered an unofficial deal with Somerset, who surrendered.[55] To keep appear- ances, the 12-year-old King personally commanded his uncle’s arrest.[56] For a moment there was hope of a con- servative restoration in some quarters.[57] However, Dud- ley and Cranmer secured the Reformed by per- suading Edward to appoint additional Reformed-minded members to the Council and .[58] In De- cember 1549 Southampton tried to regain predominance by charging Dudley with treason, alongside Somerset, for having been an original ally of the Protector.[59] The scheme misfired when Dudley invited the Council to his house and baffled the plotters by exclaiming, with his hand at his sword and “a warlike visage": “my lord, you seek his [Somerset’s] blood and he that seeketh his blood would have mine also”.[60] Dudley consolidated his power through institutional ma- noeuvres and by January 1550 was in effect the new regent. On 2 February 1550 he became Lord Presi- dent of the Council, with the capacity to debar coun- cillors from the body and appoint new ones.[61] He ex- cluded Southampton and other conservatives, but ar- ranged Somerset’s release and his return to the Privy Council and Privy Chamber.[62] In June 1550 Dudley’s heir John married Somerset’s daughter Anne as a mark of reconciliation.[63] Yet Somerset soon attracted polit- ical sympathizers and hoped to re-establish his power by removing Dudley from the scene,[64] “contemplat- ing”, as he later admitted, the Lord President’s arrest and execution.[65] Relying on his popularity with the masses, he campaigned against and tried to obstruct Dudley’s policies.[66] His behaviour increasingly threatened the co- hesion vital within a minority regime.[67] In that respect [68] Warwick would take no chances, and he now also as- King Edward VI c. 1550 pired to a dukedom. He needed to advertise his power and impress his followers; like his predecessor, he had Instead of taking the title of Lord Protector, John Dud- to represent the King’s honour.[69] His as Duke ley set out to rule as primus inter pares.[75] "[He] is of Northumberland came on 11 October 1551 with the absolute master here”, Francis van der Delft, Imperial Duke of Somerset participating in the ceremony.[70] Five ambassador, commented.[76] Nevertheless, as the same days later Somerset was arrested, while rumours about and other ambassadors noted, the working atmosphere supposed plots of his circulated. He was accused of hav- had markedly changed from autocratic to conciliar.[77] ing planned a “banquet massacre”, in which the Coun- The new Lord President of the Council reshuffled some cil were to be assaulted and Dudley killed.[71] Somerset high offices, becoming Grand Master of the Household was acquitted of treason, but convicted of felony for rais- himself and giving Somerset’s former office of Lord ing a contingent of armed men without a licence. He Treasurer to William Paulet, 1st Marquess of Winch- was executed on 22 January 1552. While technically ester.[78] The office of Grand Master entailed super- lawful,[72] these events contributed much to Northum- vising the Royal Household, which gave Dudley the berland’s growing unpopularity.[73] Dudley himself, ac- means to control the Privy Chamber and thus the King’s 3.1 Social and economic policy 5 surroundings.[79] This was done via his “special friends” out to restore administrative efficiency and maintain pub- (as he called them), Sir and Lord Thomas lic order to prevent renewed rebellion as seen in 1549.[93] Darcy.[80] Dudley also placed his son-in-law Sir Henry Equipped with a new law “for the punishment of unlaw- Sidney and his brother Sir near the ful assemblies”,[94] he built a united front of landholders King.[81] William Cecil was still in the Duke of Somer- and Privy Council, the government intervening locally at set’s service when he gradually shifted his loyalty to John any sign of unrest.[95] Dudley’s methods were a mixture Dudley, who made him Secretary of State and thought of old and new. He returned to the ancient practice of him “a most faithful servant and by that term most witty granting licences to retain liveried followers and installed [wise] councillor ... as was scarce like in this realm”.[82] Lord Lieutenants that represented the central government In this position Cecil was Dudley’s trusted right hand, and were to keep ready small bands of cavalry.[96] These who primed the Privy Council according to the Lord measures proved effective and the country was calm for President’s wishes. At the same time Cecil had intimate the rest of the reign. In fact, in the summer of 1552—a contact with the King because Edward worked closely year before the succession crisis—the cavalry bands were with the secretaries of state.[83] disbanded to save money and because they had never been actually needed.[97] Dudley organised Edward’s political education so that he should take an interest in affairs and at least appear to In a more practical style than Somerset, John Dud- influence decisions.[84] He wanted the King to grow into ley strove to alleviate the social situation.[98] The 1547 his authority as smoothly as possible. Disruptive conflicts “Act for the Punishment of Vagabonds”, which had en- when Edward took over government could thus be min- acted that any unemployed man found loitering was to be imised, while Dudley’s chances to continue as principal branded and given to the “presentor” as a slave,[51] was minister would be good.[85] From the age of about 14 abolished as too harsh in 1550.[99] In 1552 Northumber- Edward’s signature on documents no longer needed the land pushed a novel Poor Law through parliament which Council’s countersignatures,[86] and the King was regu- provided for weekly parish-based collections for the “re- larly debriefed in meetings with a Council of his own lief of the poor”.[100] Parishes were to register their needy choosing—the principal administrators and the Duke of inhabitants as well as the amounts people agreed to give Northumberland were among the chosen.[87] Dudley had for them, while unwilling contributors were to be “in- a warm if respectful relationship with the teenager, who duced” by the parson and, if need be, by the bishop.[100] “loved and feared” him according to Jehan de Schey- The years 1549–1551 saw poor harvests and, accordingly, fye, the Imperial ambassador.[88] At a dinner Edward dis- soaring food prices. Dudley tried to intervene against cussed with the envoy at length until Northumberland dis- the “insatiable greediness” of middlemen by searches for creetly indicated to the King that he had said enough.[89] hidden corn and by fixing maximum prices for grain, Yet the Duke did not necessarily have his way in all meat, and other victuals.[101] However, the set prices things. In 1552–1553 the King’s hand can be discerned were so unrealisitic that farmers stopped to sell their pro- behind decisions (and omissions) that directly contra- duce at the open market and the regulations had to be vened Dudley’s wishes.[90] At court, complex networks rescinded.[102] The regime’s agrarian policy, while giv- of influence were at work and Edward listened to more ing landlords much freedom to enclose common land, than one voice.[91] Regarding the question to what extent also distinguished between different forms of . Edward played a role in his own government, Stephen Al- Landlords guilty of illegal enclosures were increasingly ford writes: prosecuted.[103] The financial legacy of the Protectorate consisted, apart It is possible to endorse Edward’s devel- from crippling Crown debts, of an unprecedentedly de- oping grasp of the business of kingship and based coinage.[104] On the second day as Lord Presi- accept the still powerful political presence of dent of the Council, Dudley began a process to tackle John Dudley and his colleagues. The structures the problems of the mint; his declared aim was “to of ... the ... Council and the royal household have his majesty out of debt”.[105] He set to work with began to adapt themselves to the implications of and Sir William Herbert, cracking down the king’s age ... the dynamics of power at the on peculation by the officers of the mint and other centre were capable of reshaping themselves institutions.[106] In 1551 they at the same time tried to because the men around the king accepted that, yield profit and restore confidence in the coin by issuing in the circumstances, they should.[92] yet further debased coinage and “crying it down” imme- diately afterwards.[107] The result was panic and confu- sion and, to get hold of the situation, a coin of 92.3% 3.1 Social and economic policy silver content (against 25% silver content in the last de- basement) was issued within months.[51] The bad coin The English people, as is evident from contemporary prevailed over the good, however, because people had broadsheet ballads and alehouse talk, were generally dis- lost confidence.[108] Northumberland admitted to his col- affected to the men who ruled in the name of their leagues that he found finance a puzzling and disagreeable king.[93] Having inherited a failed government, Dudley set 6 3 RULING ENGLAND

thing, and told Lord Treasurer Winchester to find other the Scot so that he should, in Northum- experts to deal with it. 's services were berland’s words, “be a whetstone to quicken and sharp called upon.[109] After the first good harvest in four years, the Bishop of Canterbury, whereof he hath need”.[121] by late 1552 the currency was stable, prices for food- Knox refused to collaborate, but joined fellow reform- stuffs had dropped, and a basis for economic recovery had ers in a concerted preaching campaign against covetous been laid. A process to centralise the administration of men in high places.[121] Cranmer’s canon law was fi- Crown revenue was underway and foreign debt had been nally wrecked by Northumberland’s furious intervention eliminated.[110] during the spring parliament of 1553.[122] On a per- sonal level, though, the Duke was happy to help produce a schoolchildren’s cathechism in Latin and English.[123] 3.2 Religious policy In June 1553 he backed the Privy Council’s invitation of Philip Melanchthon to become Regius Professor of The use of the became law in Divinity at University. But for the King’s 1549. King Edward’s half-sister, Mary Tudor, de facto death, Melanchthon would have come to England—his had licence to continue hearing in private. So soon high travel costs had already been granted by Edward’s as he was in power, Dudley put pressure on her to stop the government.[124] misuse of her privilege, as she allowed her entire house- At the heart of Northumberland’s problems with the [111] hold and flocks of visitors to attend. Mary, who in her episcopate lay the issue of the Church’s wealth, from the turn did not tolerate the Book of Common Prayer in any confiscation of which the government and its officials of her residences, was not prepared to make any conces- had profited ever since the Dissolution of the Monas- sions. She planned to flee the country but then could not teries. The most radical preachers thought that bish- [112] make up her mind in the last minute. Mary totally ops, if needed at all, should be “unlorded”.[125] This at- disregarded Edward’s personal interest in the issue and titude was attractive to Dudley, as it conveniently al- fell into “an almost hysterical fear and hatred” of John lowed him to fill up the Exchequer or distribute re- [112] Dudley. After a meeting with King and Council, in wards with Church property.[125] When new were which she was told that the crux of the matter was not appointed—typically to the sees of deprived conserva- the nature of her faith but her disobedience to the law, tive incumbents—they often had to surrender substantial she sent the Imperial ambassador de Scheyfye to threaten land holdings to the Crown and were left with a much [113] war on England. The English government could not reduced income.[126] The dire situation of the Crown fi- swallow a war threat from an ambassador who had over- nances made the Council resort to a further wave of stepped his commission, but at the same time would Church expropriation in 1552–1553, targeting not risk all-important commercial ties with the Habsburg lands and Church plate.[127] At the time and since, the Netherlands, so an embassy was sent to and some break-up and reorganisation of the Prince-Bishopric of [114] of Mary’s household officers were arrested. On his Durham has been interpreted as Dudley’s attempt to cre- next visit to the Council de Scheyfye was informed by the ate himself a county palatine of his own. However, as it Earl of Warwick that the King of England had as much turned out, Durham’s entire revenue was allotted to the authority at 14 as he had at 40—Dudley was alluding to two successor bishoprics and the nearby border garrison Mary’s refusal to accept Edward’s demands on grounds of of Norham Castle. Dudley received the stewardship of [115] his young age. In the end a silent compromise came the new “King’s County Palatine” in the North (worth into effect: Mary continued to hear mass in a more pri- £50 p.a.), but there was no further gain for him.[128] vate manner, while augmenting her landed property by Overall, Northumberland’s provisions for reorganised [116] exchanges with the Crown. dioceses reveal a concern in him that “the preaching of Appealing to the King’s religious tastes, John Dud- the gospel” should not lack funds.[129] Still, the confisca- ley became the chief backer of evangelical Protestants tion of Church property as well as the lay government’s di- among the clergy, promoting several to bishoprics—for rection of Church affairs made the Duke disliked among example and .[117] The English clerics, whether Reformed or conservative.[130] His rela- Reformation went on apace, despite its widespread tions with them were never worse than when the crisis of unpopularity.[118] The 1552 revised edition of the Edward’s final illness approached.[131] Book of Common Prayer rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation, and the Forty-two Articles, issued in June 1553, proclaimed justification by faith and denied 3.3 Peace policy the existence of purgatory. Despite these being cher- ished projects of Archbishop ,[51] he The war policy 1547–1549 had entailed an extraordinary was displeased with the way the government handled expenditure of about £350,000 p.a. against a regular their issue.[119] By 1552 the relationship between the Crown income of £150,000 p.a.[132] It was impossible to primate and the Duke was icy. To prevent the Church continue in this way,[133] and Dudley quickly negotiated a from becoming independent of the state, Dudley was withdrawal of the besieged English garrison at Boulogne. against Cranmer’s reform of canon law.[120] He recruited The high costs of the garrison could thus be saved and 4.1 Changing the succession 7

French payments of redemption of roughly £180,000 4.1 Changing the succession were a most welcome cash income.[134] The peace with France was concluded in the Treaty of Boulogne in March The 15-year-old King fell seriously ill in February 1553. 1550. There was both public rejoicing and anger at the His sister Mary was invited to visit him, the Council do- time, and some historians have condemned the peace as a ing “duty and obeisance to her as if she had been Queen shameful surrender of English-held territory.[135] A year of England”.[151] The King recovered somewhat,[152] and later it was agreed that King Edward was to have a French in April Northumberland restored Mary’s full title and bride, the six-year-old . The threat arms as Princess of England, which she had lost in the of war with Scotland was also neutralised, England giv- 1530s.[153] He also kept her informed about Edward’s ing up some isolated garrisons in exchange.[136] In the condition.[154] About this time a set of drawn-out mar- peace treaty with Scotland of June 1551, a joint com- riage negotiations came to conclusion. On 25 May 1553 mission, one of the first of its kind in history, was in- Guildford Dudley, Northumberland’s second youngest stalled to agree upon the exact boundary between the two son, married Lady Jane Grey, the fervently Protestant countries. This matter was concluded in August 1552 by daughter of the Duke of Suffolk and, through her mother French arbitration.[137] Despite the cessation of hostili- Frances Brandon, a grandniece of Henry VIII. Her sister ties, English defences were kept on a high level: nearly Catherine was matched with the heir of the Earl of Pem- £200,000 p.a. were spent on the navy and the garrisons at broke, and another Katherine, Guildford’s younger sister, Calais and on the Scottish border.[138] In his capacity as was promised to Henry Hastings, heir of the Earl of Hunt- Warden-General of the Scottish Marches, Northumber- ingdon.[155] Within a month the first of these marriages land arranged for the building of a new Italianate fortress turned out to be highly significant. Although marked by at Berwick-upon-Tweed.[139] magnificent festivities, at the time they took place the al- liances were not seen as politically important, not even by The war between France and the Emperor broke out once the Imperial ambassador Jehan de Scheyfye, who was the again in September 1551. In due course Northumber- most suspicious observer.[156] Often perceived as proof of land rejected requests for English help from both sides, a conspiracy to bring the Dudley family to the throne,[157] which in the case of the Empire consisted of a demand they have also been described as routine matches between for full-scale war based on an Anglo-Imperial treaty of aristocrats.[158] 1542.[140] The Duke pursued a policy of neutrality, a bal- ancing act that made peace between the two great powers attractive.[141] In late 1552 he undertook to bring about a European peace by English mediation. These moves were taken seriously by the rival resident ambassadors, but were ended in June 1553 by the belligerents, the con- tinuance of war being more advantageous to them.[142]

3.4 Overseas interest

John Dudley recovered the post of Lord Admiral im- mediately after the Protector’s fall in October 1549,[143] Thomas Seymour having been executed by his brother in March 1549.[144] Dudley passed on the office to Edward Lord Clinton in May 1550, yet never lost his keen in- “My devise for the Succession” by Edward VI. Edward changed terest in maritime affairs.[145] Henry VIII had revolu- [146] his text from “L Janes heires masles” to “L Jane and her heires tionised the English navy, mainly in military terms. masles”.[159] Dudley encouraged English voyages to far-off coasts, ig- [147] noring Spanish threats. He even contemplated a raid At some point during his illness Edward wrote a draft [148] on Peru with Sebastian Cabot in 1551. Expeditions document headed “My devise for the Succession”.[160] to Morocco and the Guinea coast in 1551 and 1552 were Due to his ardent Edward did not want his actually realised. A planned voyage to China via the Catholic sister Mary to succeed, but he was also preoc- Northeast passage under sailed in May cupied with male succession and with legitimacy, which 1553—King Edward watched their departure from his in Mary’s and Elizabeth’s case was questionable as a re- [149] window. Northumberland was at the centre of a “mar- sult of Henry VIII’s legislation.[161][note 2] In the first ver- itime revolution”, a policy in which, increasingly, the En- sion of his “devise”, written before he knew he was mor- [150] glish Crown sponsored long-distance trade directly. tally ill, Edward bypassed his half-sisters and provided for the succession of male heirs only.[162][note 3] Around the end of May or early June Edward’s condition worsened 4 1553 dramatically and he corrected his draft such that Lady Jane Grey herself, not just her putative sons, could inherit 8 4 1553

the Crown.[163] To what extent Edward’s document— shared the general assumption that she would succeed to especially this last change—was influenced by Northum- the Crown as late as early June.[181] At a meeting with the berland, his confidant John Gates, or still other members French ambassadors he asked them out of the blue what of the Privy Chamber like Edward’s tutor or they would do in his place.[182] Faced with Edward’s ex- Secretary , is unclear.[164] press royal will and perseverance, John Dudley submitted [165] to his master’s wishes—either seeing his chance to retain Edward fully endorsed it. He personally supervised [183] the copying of his will and twice summoned lawyers to his power beyond the boy’s lifetime or out of loyalty. his bedside to give them orders. On the second occa- sion, 15 June, Northumberland kept a watchful eye over 4.2 Downfall the proceedings.[166] Days before, the Duke had intimi- dated the judges who were raising legal objections to the “devise": In full Council he had lost his temper, “be- ing in a great rage and fury, trembling for anger” and saying “that he would fight in his shirt with any man in that quarrel”.[167] So Judge Montague remembered in his petition to Queen Mary; he also recalled that, in Ed- ward’s chamber, the Lords of the Council declared it would be open treason to disobey their sovereign’s explicit command.[168] The next step was an engagement to per- form the King’s will after his death, signed in his presence by Northumberland and 23 others.[169] Finally, the King’s official “declaration”, issued as letters patent, was signed by 102 notables, among them the whole Privy Council, peers, bishops, judges, and London aldermen.[170] Ed- ward also announced to have it passed in parliament in September, and the necessary writs were prepared.[171] It was now common knowledge that Edward was dy- ing. The Imperial ambassador, Jehan de Scheyfye, had been convinced for years that Dudley was engaged in some “mighty plot” to settle the Crown on his own head.[172] As late as 12 June, though, he still knew noth- ing specific, despite having inside information about Ed- ward’s sickness.[156] Instead he had recently reported that Northumberland would divorce his wife so as to marry Princess Elizabeth.[173] France, which found the prospect Lady Jane Grey, whom Northumberland put on the English of the Emperor’s cousin on the English throne disagree- throne; he reminded his colleagues that “this virtuous lady ... by [174] ... our enticement is rather of force placed therein than by her able, gave indications of support to Northumberland. [184] Since the Duke did not rule out an armed intervention own seeking and request.” from Charles V, he came back on the French offer af- ter the King’s death, sending a secret and non-committal Edward VI died on 6 July 1553. The next morning mission to King Henry II.[175] After Jane’s accession in Northumberland sent his son Robert into Hertfordshire [185] July the ambassadors of both powers were convinced she with 300 men to secure the person of Mary Tudor. would prevail, although they were in no doubt that the Aware of her half-brother’s condition, the Princess had common people backed Mary.[176] Antoine de Noailles only days before moved to East Anglia, where she was the [186] wrote of Guildford Dudley as “the new King”, while the greatest landowner. She began to assemble an armed Emperor instructed his envoys to arrange themselves with following and sent a letter to the Council, demanding to the Duke and to discourage Mary from undertaking any- be recognised as queen. It arrived on 10 July, the day [187] thing dangerous.[177] Jane Grey was proclaimed as queen. The Duke of Northumberland’s oration, held before Jane the previous Whether altering the succession was Edward’s own idea day, did not move her to accept the Crown—her parents’ or not, he was determinedly at work to exclude his half- assistance was required for that.[188] Dudley had not pre- sisters in favour of what he perceived as his jeopardised pared for resolute action on Mary’s part and needed a [178] legacy. The original provisions of the “devise” have week to build up a larger force.[189] He was in a dilemma been described as bizarre and obsessive and as typical of over who should lead the troops. He was the most experi- a teenager, while incompatible with the mind and needs enced general in the kingdom, but he did not want to leave [179] of a pragmatical politician. Mary’s accession could the government in the hands of his colleagues, in some of [180] cost Northumberland his head, but not necessarily so. whom he had little confidence.[190] Queen Jane decided He tried hard to please her during 1553, and may have the issue by demanding that her father, the Duke of Suf- 9

folk, should remain with her and the Council.[191] On 14 were largely made up of his former colleagues. Dud- July Northumberland headed for Cambridge with 1,500 ley hinted that he had acted on the authority of Prince troops and some artillery, having reminded his colleagues and Council and by warrant of the Great Seal. Answered of the gravity of the cause, “what chance of variance so- that the Great Seal of a usurper was worth nothing, he ever might grow amongst you in my absence”.[190] asked “whether any such persons as were equally cul- [202] Supported by gentry and nobility in East Anglia and pable of that crime ... might be his judges”. After the Thames Valley, Mary’s military camp was gathering sentence was passed, he begged the Queen’s mercy for strength daily and, through luck, came into possession of his five sons, the eldest of whom was condemned with him, the rest waiting for their trials.[203][note 5] He also powerful artillery from the royal navy. In the circum- stances the Duke deemed fighting a campaign hopeless. asked to “confess to a learned divine” and was visited by Bishop , who had passed most of The army proceeded from Cambridge to Bury St Ed- munds and retreated again to Cambridge.[192] On 20 July Edward’s reign in the Tower and was now Mary’s .[204] The Duke’s execution was planned for 21 a letter from the Council in London arrived, declaring that they had proclaimed Queen Mary and commanding August at eight in the morning; however, it was suddenly cancelled.[205] Northumberland was instead escorted to St Northumberland to disband the army and await events. Dudley did not contemplate resistance.[193][note 4] He ex- Peter ad Vincula, where he took the Catholic communion plained to his fellow-commanders that they had acted on and professed that “the plagues that is upon the realm and upon us now is that we have erred from the faith these the Council’s orders all the time and that he did not now [206] wish “to combat the Council’s decisions, supposing that sixteen years.” A great propaganda coup for the new government, Dudley’s words were officially distributed— they have been moved by good reasons ... and I beg your [207] lordships to do the same.”[194] Proclaiming Mary Tudor especially in the territories of the Emperor Charles V. at the market place, he threw up his cap and “so laughed In the evening the Duke learnt “that I must prepare my- that the tears ran down his cheeks for grief.”[195] The next self against tomorrow to receive my deadly stroke”, as he morning the Earl of Arundel arrived to arrest him. A wrote in a desperate plea to the Earl of Arundel: “O my week earlier Arundel had assured Northumberland of his good lord remember how sweet life is, and how bitter ye contrary.”[208] On the scaffold, before 10,000 people,[209] wish to spill his blood even at the Duke’s feet; now Dud- [210] ley went down on his knees as soon as he caught sight of Dudley confessed his guilt but maintained: him.[196] Northumberland rode through the City of London to the Tower on 25 July, with his guards struggling to protect And yet this act wherefore I die, was not al- him against the hostile populace.[197] A pamphlet appear- together of me (as it is thought) but I was pro- ing shortly after his arrest illustrated the general hatred cured and induced thereunto by other[s]. I was of him: “the great devil Dudley ruleth, Duke I should I say induced thereunto by other[s], howbeit, have said”.[198] He was now commonly thought to have God forbid that I should name any man unto poisoned King Edward while Mary “would have been as you, I will name no man unto you, and there- glad of her brother’s life, as the ragged bear is glad of fore I beseech you look not for it. ... And one his death”.[199] Dumbfounded by the turn of events, the thing more good people I have to say unto you French ambassador Noailles wrote: “I have witnessed the ... and that is to warn you and exhort you to most sudden change believable in men, and I believe that beware of these seditious preachers, and teach- God alone worked it.”[200] David Loades, biographer of ers of new doctrine, which pretend to preach both Queen Mary and John Dudley, concludes that the God’s word, but in very deed they preach their lack of fighting clouds the fact that this outcome was a own fancies, ... they know not today what they close-run affair, and warns would have tomorrow, ... they open the book, but they cannot shut it again. ... I could good people rehearse much more ... but you know I to explain Mary’s triumph over Jane sim- have another thing to do, whereunto I must pre- ply in terms of overwhelming spontaneous sup- pare me, for the time draweth away. ... And port. Northumberland ... was completely un- after he had thus spoken he kneeled down ... prepared for the crisis which eventually over- and bowing toward the block he said, I have took him. He was already losing his grip upon deserved a thousand deaths, and thereupon he the situation before the council defected, and made a cross upon the straw, and kissed it, and [201] that was why they did it. laid his head upon the block, and so died.[211]

4.3 Trial and execution

Northumberland was tried on 18 August 1553 in 5 Assessments Westminster Hall. The panels of the jury and judges 10 5 ASSESSMENTS

5.1 Historical reputation remarkably able governors of any European state during the sixteenth century.”[228]

A black legend about the Duke of Northumberland was already in the making when he was still in power, the 5.2 Personality more after his fall.[212] From the last days of Henry VIII he was to have planned, years in advance, the destruction of both King Edward’s Seymour uncles—Lord Thomas and the Protector—as well as Edward himself.[213] He also served as an indispensable scapegoat: It was the most practical thing for Queen Mary to believe that Dudley had been acting all alone and it was in nobody’s inter- est to doubt it.[214] Further questions were unwelcome, as Charles V’s ambassadors found out: “it was thought best not to inquire too closely into what had happened, so as to make no discoveries that might prejudice those [who tried the duke]".[215] By renouncing the Protestantism he had so conspicuously stood for, Northumberland lost ev- ery respect and became ineligible for rehabilitation in a world dominated by thinking along sectarian lines.[216] Protestant writers like and John Ponet concen- trated on the pious King Edward’s achievements and rein- vented Somerset as the “good Duke”—it followed that there had also to be a “wicked Duke”.[217] This interpre- tation was enhanced by the High and Late Victorian his- torians, James Anthony Froude and A. F. Pollard, who saw Somerset as a champion of political liberty whose de- sire “to do good”[218] was thwarted by, in Pollard’s phrase, “the subtlest intriguer in English History”.[51] As late as 1968/1970, W.K. Jordan embraced this good duke/bad duke dichotomy in a two-volume study of Ed- ward VI’s reign.[219] However, he saw the King on the John Dudley, , with wand of office verge of assuming full authority at the beginning of 1553 (with Dudley contemplating retirement) and as- John Dudley’s recantation of his Protestant faith be- cribed the succession alteration to Edward’s resolution, fore his execution delighted Queen Mary and enraged Northumberland playing the part of the loyal and tragic Lady Jane Grey.[206] The general opinion, especially enforcer instead of the original instigator.[220] Many his- among Protestants, was that he tried to seek a pardon torians have since seen the “devise” as Edward’s very own by this move.[229] Historians have often believed that he project.[note 6] Others, while remarking upon the plan’s had no faith whatsoever, being a mere cynic.[230] Fur- sloppy implementation,[221] have seen Northumberland ther explanations—both contemporary and modern— as behind the scheme, yet in concord with Edward’s con- have been that Northumberland sought to rescue his fam- victions; the Duke acting out of despair for his own ily from the axe,[231] that, in the face of catastrophe, he survival,[51] or to rescue political and religious reform and found a spiritual home in the church of his childhood,[232] save England from Habsburg domination.[222] or that he saw the hand of God in Mary’s success.[233] Since the 1970s, critical reassessments of the Duke Although he endorsed the Reformation from at least the [10] of Somerset’s policies and government style led to mid-1530s, Dudley may not have understood theolog- [206] acknowledgment that Northumberland revitalised and ical subtleties, being a “simple man in such matters”. reformed the Privy Council as a central part of The Duke was stung by an outspoken letter he received the administration,[223] and that he “took the neces- from John Knox, whom he had invited to preach before sary but unpopular steps to hold the minority regime the King and in vain had offered a bishopric. William [234] together”.[224] Stability and reconstruction have been Cecil was informed: made out as the mark of most of his policies;[225] the scale of his motivation ranging from “determined I love not to have to do with men which be ambition”[226] with Geoffrey Rudolph Elton in 1977 neither grateful nor pleasable. I assure you I to “idealism of a sort” with Diarmaid MacCulloch in mind to have no more to do with him but to 1999.[227] Dale Hoak concluded in 1980: “given the wish him well ... he cannot tell whether I be a circumstances which he inherited in 1549, the duke of dissembler in religion or not ... for my own Northumberland appears to have been one of the most part, if I should have passed more upon the 11

speech of the people than upon the service of 8 Notes my master ... I needed not to have had so much obloquy of some kind of men; but the living [1] Claims that he was the grandson of a carpenter notwith- God, that knoweth the hearts of all men, shall standing, John Dudley was of noble ancestry. His paternal be my judge at the last day with what zeal, faith, great grandfather was John Sutton, 1st . On and truth I serve my master.[235] his mother’s side he descended from the Hundred Years War heroes, Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick and John Talbot, 1st Earl of . He accordingly as- Northumberland was not an old-style peer, despite his sumed the bear and the ragged staff, the arms of the me- aristocratic ancestry and existence as a great lord.[236] He dieval Earls of Warwick (Wilson 1981 pp. 1, 3; Adams 2002 pp. 312–313). acquired, sold, and exchanged lands, but never strove to build himself a territorial power base or a large armed [2] Henry VIII, in his Third Succession Act of 1544 and in his force of retainers (which proved fatal in the end).[237] will, nominated his daughters Mary and Elizabeth as suc- His maximum income of £4,300 p.a. from land and a cessors to the Crown, “upon condition” that they did not £2,000 p.a. from annuities and fees, was appropriate to marry without the consent of the Privy Council (Hutchin- his rank and figured well below the annuity of £5,333 p.a. son 2006 p. 212). In the same 1544 act his daughters were the Duke of Somerset had granted himself, thus reach- still, as in earlier legislation, declared illegitimate and un- ing an income of over £10,000 p.a. while in office.[238] able to inherit by common law (Ives 2009 p. 143). John Dudley was a typical Tudor Crown servant, self- [3] If there were no male heirs at the time of his death, Eng- interested but absolutely loyal to the incumbent sovereign: land should have no king until the birth of a male royal [239] The monarch’s every wish was law. This uncritical child; a detailed system of female regency provisions was stance may have played a decisive role in Northumber- to apply in this case. Edward also distinguished between land’s decision to implement Edward’s succession device, different types of minority rule and envisaged the possi- as it did in his attitude towards Mary when she had be- bility of having adult sons to succeed him (Ives 2009 pp. come Queen.[240] The fear his services could be inade- 137–139; Alford 2002 pp. 172–173). quate or go unacknowledged by the monarch was constant [241] [4] It was said that “his men forsook him”, as the Lon- in Dudley, who also was very sensitive on what he don chronicler put it (Loades 2004 p. [242] called “estimation”, meaning status. Edmund Dudley 127). Such rumours and claims were largely exaggerated, was unforgotten: “my poor father’s fate who, after his though (Ives 2009 pp. 203–205; Loades 2004 p. 127). master was gone, suffered death for doing his master’s The bulk of the troops he had brought from London were commandments”, the Duke wrote to Cecil nine months with the Duke until the end and, in the words of David before his own end.[243] Loades, “he could have made a considerable nuisance of himself if he had chosen."(Loades 2004 p. 127). John Dudley was an imposing figure with a strong tem- perament who could also charm people with his cour- [5] John, Ambrose, Robert, Henry, and Guildford Dudley tesy and a graceful presence.[244] He was a family man, were all condemned to death, as was Sir Andrew Dud- an understanding father and husband who was passion- ley, Northumberland’s brother. Only Guildford was exe- ately loved by his wife.[245] Frequent phases of illness, cuted, in February 1554, with his wife Lady Jane Grey. partly due to a stomach ailment, occasioned long absences The only other people who died were Sir John Gates and from court but did not reduce his high output of paper- Sir Thomas Palmer, on the same day as the Duke (Loades work, and may have had an element of hypochondria in 1996 pp. 270, 271). [246] them. The English diplomat Richard Morrison wrote [6] For example: Stephen Alford (Alford 2002 pp. 171–174); of his onetime superior: “This Earl had such a head that Dale Hoak (Hoak 2004); (Ives 2009 pp. 136– he seldom went about anything but he had three or four 142, 145–148); David Loades (Loades 1996 pp. 231– purposes beforehand.”[247] A French eyewitness of 1553 233, 239–241; Loades 2003 pp. 79–80; Loades 2004 described him as “an intelligent man who could explain pp. 68–69, 121–123; Loades 2008); Diarmaid MacCul- his ideas and who displayed an impressive dignity. Oth- loch (MacCulloch 2001 pp. 39–41); Linda Porter (Porter ers, who did not know him, would have considered him 2007 p. 188); Judith Richards (Richards 2007); Chris worthy of a kingdom.”[41] Skidmore (Skidmore 2007 pp. 247–250); (Starkey 2001 pp. 112–114); Derek Wilson (Wilson 2005 pp. 215–221).

6 Ancestry 9 Citations

7 See also [1] Loades 2008 [2] Loades 2008; Adams 2002 pp. 312–313

• Cultural depictions of Lady Jane Grey [3] Loades 1996 pp. 7–11 12 9 CITATIONS

[4] Loades 1996 p. 17 [41] Ives 2009 p. 104

[5] Loades 1996 p. 18 [42] Merriman 2000 p. 353

[6] Loades 1996 p. 20 [43] Dawson 1993 p. 244

[7] Loades 1996 pp. 20–22, 24–25 [44] Loades 1996 p. 107

[8] Loades 1996 p. 22 [45] Loades 1996 pp. 107–108; Loades 2004 pp. 44–45; Loades 2008 [9] Ives 2009 p. 99 [46] Loades 1996 p. 118 [10] MacCulloch 2001 pp. 52–53; Ives 2009 pp. 114–115 [47] Ives 2009 p. 102 [11] Wilson 1981 pp. 11, 15–16; French 2002 p. 33 [48] Wood 2007 p. 72 [12] Loades 1996 pp. 30–32; Beer 1973 p. 8 [49] Chapman 1962 p. 63; Wood 2007 pp. 72–73 [13] Loades 1996 pp. 27–28 [50] MacCulloch 2001 pp. 50–51 [14] Loades 1996 p. 28 [51] Rathbone 2002 [15] Beer 1973 pp. 8–9 [52] Alford 2002 pp. 71–72 [16] Loades 1996 p. 36 [53] Loades 2004 pp. 47–48 [17] Hawkyard 1982 [54] Beer 1973 p. 88; Loades 2004 p. 48 [18] Loades 1996 pp. 31, 33–34 [55] Loades 2004 pp. 48–50; MacCulloch 2001 p. 51 [19] Loades 1996 pp. 34–36, viii; Wilson 1981 p. 20 [56] Loades 2004 p. 50 [20] Ives 2009 p. 99; Warnicke 2012 p. 64 [57] Loades 2004 pp. 84–85 [21] Loades 1996 p. 48 [58] Loades 2004 pp. 84–85; Hoak 1980 pp. 36–37 [22] Ives 2009 p. 103 [59] MacCulloch 2001 p. 95; Hoak 1980 p. 36 [23] Ives 2009 pp. 100–101 [60] Loades 1996 pp. 144–145 [24] Wilson 1981 p. 22 [61] Hoak 1980 pp. 36–39; Loades 2004 p. 88 [25] Ives 2009 p. 101 [62] Loades 2004 pp. 87–88, 104 [26] Loades 1996 pp. 71, 85 [63] Ives 2009 p. 111 [27] Beer 1973 p. 32; Loades 1996 pp. 69–71 [64] Hoak 1980 p. 39; Loades 1996 p. 186 [28] Loades 1996 pp. 77 [65] Hoak 1980 p. 48; Loades 2004 p. 110 [29] Beer 1973 p. 36; Loades 1996 pp. 78–80; Ives 2009 p. 103 [66] Loades 1996 pp. 168–169

[30] Wilson 1981 p. 22; Beer 1973 p. 36 [67] Alford 2002 p. 170

[31] Loades 1996 p. 79 [68] Loades 2004 pp. 108–109

[32] Hutchinson 2006 p. 181; Loades 1996 pp. 81–82 [69] Loades 1996 p. 182; Hoak 1980 p. 46

[33] Loades 1996 pp. 82–85; MacCulloch 2001 pp. 7–8 [70] Loades 1996 pp. 180–181

[34] Rathbone 2002; Loades 1996 pp. 82–85 [71] Loades 1996 pp. 183, 184, 188

[35] Beer 1973 p. 41 [72] Loades 2004 pp. 110–111; Loades 2008

[36] Hutchinson 2006 p. 213 [73] Ives 2009 p. 109; Loades 1996 pp. 189, 190

[37] Alford 2002 pp. 29, 69–70 [74] Hoak 1980 p. 203; Loades 2004 p. 110

[38] Loades 1996 pp. 88–90 [75] Loades 2004 p. 88; MacCulloch 2001 p. 55

[39] Beer 1973 pp. 58–60; Loades 2008 [76] Erickson 1995 p. 252

[40] Loades 1996 p. 100 [77] Loades 1996 p. 182; MacCulloch 2001 p. 55 13

[78] Loades 1996 p. 149 [114] Loades 2004 p. 101

[79] Hoak 1980 p. 38 [115] Loades 2004 p. 102; Ives 2009 p. 92

[80] Hoak 1980 p. 44 [116] Ives 2009 p. 93; Richards 2007

[81] Christmas 1997 [117] Loades 2004 p. 76; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 4–5

[82] Alford 2002 p. 140 [118] MacCulloch 2001 p. 56; Loades 2008

[83] Hoak 1980 p. 40; Alford 2002 pp. 139–141 [119] MacCulloch 2001 p. 101; Loades 1996 p. 254

[84] Loades 2004 p. 88; Loades 1996 pp. 201–203 [120] Ives 2009 pp. 115–116

[85] Loades 2004 p. 88; Loades 1996 pp. 173, 193 [121] Ives 2009 p. 116

[86] Loades 1996 p. 193 [122] MacCulloch 2001 pp. 101–102; Loades 1996 pp. 218– 219 [87] Alford 2002 pp. 163–166, 168 [123] Alford 2002 p. 139 [88] Beer 1973 pp. 124–125; Loades 2004 p. 89; MacCulloch 2001 p. 53 [124] Loades 1996 p. 254; MacCulloch 2001 p. 170

[89] Ives 2009 p. 133 [125] Loades 1996 p. 176

[90] Loades 1996 p. 234 [126] Loades 1996 pp. 176–177; Heal 1980 pp. 141–142

[91] Alford 2002 pp. 142, 148; Loades 1996 p. 202 [127] MacCulloch 2001 p. 154; Loades 1996 p. 255

[92] Alford 2002 p. 159 [128] Loades 1996 pp. 198, 302

[93] Hoak 1980 pp. 29–30 [129] Heal 1980 pp. 145–146; 149

[94] Loades 1996 p. 145 [130] MacCulloch 2001 p. 55; Heal 1980 p. 147

[95] Ives 2009 pp. 111–112, 308; Loades 2008 [131] Loades 1996 pp. 254–255

[96] Loades 2004 p. 98; Loades 2008 [132] Loades 1996 p. 170

[97] Loades 1996 p. 252; Hoak 1980 p. 42 [133] Loades 1996 pp. 169–170

[98] Hoak 1980 p. 30; Rathbone 2002 [134] Loades 1996 pp. 169–170; Loades 2008 [135] Loades 1996 pp. 154–155; MacCulloch 2001 p. 55 [99] Williams 1998 p. 67 [136] Loades 1996 p. 166 [100] Slack 1980 p. 103; Guy 1990 p. 221 [137] Merriman 2000 p. 377 [101] Slack 1980 pp. 105–106 [138] Loades 1996 p. 209 [102] Williams 1998 p. 68 [139] Merriman 2000 pp. 373–376; Loades 1996 p. 221 [103] Loades 1996 p. 150; Rathbone 2002 [140] Loades 1996 pp. 203–206 [104] Loades 1996 pp. 169–170; Hoak 1980 p. 30 [141] Loades 1996 pp. 203, 241–242 [105] Ives 2009 p. 132 [142] Loades 1996 pp. 203, 241–244 [106] Loades 1996 pp. 162, 227–229 [143] Wilson 1981 p. 41 [107] Loades 1996 pp. 170–171 [144] Alford 2002 p. 97 [108] Loades 1996 p. 171 [145] Loades 1996 p. 210 [109] Loades 1996 pp. 211–213 [146] Loades 1996 p. 244 [110] Ives 2009 p. 7; Loades 1996 pp. 248–251; Loach 2002 p. 113; Hoak 1980 p. 42 [147] Loades 1996 p. 245

[111] Loades 1996 pp. 158–159; Ives 2009 p. 88 [148] Beer 1973 p. 193

[112] Loades 1996 pp. 158–159 [149] Loades 1996 pp. 245–247, 238

[113] Starkey 2001 p. 105 [150] Loades 1996 p. 247 14 9 CITATIONS

[151] Ives 2009 p. 11; Loades 1996 p. 237 [183] Loades 1996 p. 241; Loades 2008; Jordan 1970 pp. 531– 532 [152] Loades 1996 pp. 237–238 [184] Ives 2009 p. 216 [153] Ives 2009 p. 94 [185] Ives 2009 pp. 202, 325 [154] Loades 1996 p. 237 [186] Loades 1996 pp. 257–258; Loach 2002 p. 170 [155] Ives 2009 pp. 185, 321; Loades 1996 pp. 238–239; Adams 1995 p. 44 [187] Loades 1996 pp. 258–259

[156] Loades 1996 p. 239 [188] Ives 2009 p. 187

[157] Ives 2009 p. 152 [189] Loades 1996 pp. 258–261

[158] Loades 1996 pp. 238–239; Loades 2004 p. 121; Ives [190] Loades 1996 p. 261 2009 pp. 152–154; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 10–11; [191] Ives 2009 p. 198 Wilson 2005 pp. 214–215; Christmas 1997 [192] Ives 2009 pp. 209–212; Loach 2002 p. 172 [159] Alford 2002 pp. 171–172 [193] Loades 2004 p. 127; Ives 2009 p. 241–242 [160] Ives 2009 pp. 137–139; Loades 2004 p. 68 [194] Chapman 1962 p. 149; Ives 2009 p. 241–242 [161] Loades 2003 pp. 79–80; Starkey 2001 pp. 111–113; Loades 1996 p. 232; Ives 2009 pp. 142–143; Hoak 2008 [195] Ives 2009 p. 242

[162] Ives 2009 pp. 139–140; Starkey 2001 p. 113 [196] Ives 2009 pp. 243–244; Nichols 1850 p. 7

[163] Ives 2009 p. 145; Loades 1996 p. 239 [197] Chapman 1962 pp. 150–151

[164] Loades 2004 p. 121; Ives 2009 p. 150; Alford 2002 p. [198] Alford 2002 p. 7 172; Hoak 2008 [199] Alford 2002 p. 8; Loades 1996 p. 257 [165] Alford 2002 p. 172; Loades 2004 p. 122; Hoak 2008 [200] Loades 1996 p. 265 [166] Ives 2009 pp. 145, 148; Loades 1996 p. 241 [201] Loades 1996 pp. 264–265 [167] Ives 2009 pp. 105, 148 [202] Ives 2009 pp. 96–97 [168] Loades 1996 p. 241 [203] Tytler 1839 pp. 225–226; Ives 2009 p. 96; Loades 1996 [169] Ives 2009 pp. 160–161; Alford 2002 p. 172 pp. 266, 271

[170] Ives 2009 pp. 165–166; Hoak 1980 p. 49 [204] Loades 1996 pp. 267–268; Ives 2009 p. 184

[171] Hoak 2008 [205] Ives 2009 p. 117

[172] Loades 1996 p. 240; Ives 2009 p. 151 [206] Loades 1996 p. 268

[173] Loades 2003 p. 79 [207] Ives 2009 p. 119 [208] Loades 1996 p. 269 [174] Loades 1996 pp. 254–255 [209] Chapman 1962 p. 169 [175] Loades 1996 pp. 262–263 [210] Loades 1996 p. 270 [176] Loades 1996 pp. 256–257 [211] Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 45–47 [177] Chapman 1962 p. 121 [212] Ives 2009 p. 109; Loades 2008 [178] MacCulloch 2001 pp. 39–41; Starkey 2001 pp. 112–114; Alford 2002 pp. 171–172; Jordan 1970 pp. 515–516 [213] Ives 2009 pp. 107–109

[179] Ives 2009 p. 141; MacCulloch 2001 p. 41; Loades 1996 [214] Loades 1996 p. 267; Ives 2009 p. 3 p. 233; Hoak 2008; Wilson 2005 p. 216 [215] Ives 2009 p. 154 (square brackets by Ives) [180] Starkey 2001 p. 111; Beer 1973 pp. 147–148; Loades 1996 pp. 238 [216] Loades 1996 pp. vii–viii; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 54–55 [181] Loades 1996 pp. 240–241; Jordan 1970 pp. 511, 517 [217] MacCulloch 2001 p. 42; Loades 1996 p. 192; Loades [182] Skidmore 2007 p. 253 2008 15

[218] Alford 2002 pp. 20–21 10 References

[219] MacCulloch 2001 p. 42 • Adams, Simon (ed.) (1995): Household Accounts [220] Loades 1996 p. 192; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 9–10, and Disbursement Books of , Earl of 12; Jordan 1970 pp. 531–532 Leicester, 1558–1561, 1584–1586. Cambridge Uni- versity Press. ISBN 0-521-55156-0. [221] Beer 1973 p. 149; Rathbone 2002 • Adams, Simon (2002): Leicester and the Court: Es- [222] Hoak 1980 p. 49; Beer 1973 pp. 148, 164 says in Elizabethan Politics. Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-5325-0. [223] Hoak 1980 p. 50; Loades 1996 p. viii • Alford, Stephen (2002): Kingship and Politics in the [224] Loades 1996 p. vii Reign of Edward VI. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-03971-0. [225] MacCulloch 2001 p. 55; Alford 2002 p. 170; Hoak 1980 p. 50 • Beer, B.L. (1973): Northumberland: The Politi- cal Career of John Dudley, Earl of Warwick and [226] Dawson 1993 p. 253 Duke of Northumberland. The Kent State Univer- sity Press. ISBN 0-87338-140-8. [227] MacCulloch 2001 p. 55 • Chapman, Hester (1962): Lady Jane Grey. [228] Hoak 1980 p. 51; Dawson 1993 p. 243 Jonathan Cape. OCLC 51384729. [229] Ives 2009 p. 118; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 56 • Christmas, Matthew (1997): “Edward VI”. History Review. Issue 27. March 1997. Retrieved 2010-09- [230] Ives 2009 p. 115 29. [231] Adams 2002 p. 133; Ives 2009 p. 118 • Dawson, Ian (1993): The Tudor Century 1485– 1603. Thomas Nelson & Sons. ISBN 0-17-435063- [232] Chapman 1962 p. 166; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 58; Loades 2008 5. • Erickson, Carolly (1995): Bloody Mary: The Life of [233] Beer 1973 p. 158; Loades 1996 p. 268; Ives p. 309 Mary Tudor. BCA. [234] Loades 1996 pp. 196, 198, 199 • French, Peter (2002): John Dee: The World of an Elizabethan Magus. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-7448- [235] Tytler 1839 p. 148 0079-1. [236] Loades 1996 pp. ix, 285 • Gunn, S.J. (1999): “A Letter of Jane, Duchess of [237] Loades 1996 pp. 285–286, 258 Northumberland, 1553”. English Historical Review. Vol. CXIV No. 460. November 1999. pp. 1267– [238] Loades 1996 pp. 222–223; 97–98; Hoak 1980 p. 46 1271.

[239] Loades 1996 pp. 269–270; Hoak 1980 p. 45; Jordan and • Guy, John (1990): Tudor England. Oxford Paper- Gleason 1975 p. 57 backs. ISBN 0-19-285213-2.

[240] Loades 1996 pp. 269–270; Ives 2009 pp. 122–123, 124; • Hawkyard, A.D.K. (1982): “DUDLEY, Sir John Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 12 (1504/6-53), of Halden, Kent; Dudley Castle, Staffs.; Durham Place, London; Chelsea and Syon, [241] Ives 2009 pp. 120–123; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 57 Mdx.”. The History of Parliament Online. Retrieved 2014-02-28. [242] Ives 2009 pp. 123–124 • Heal, Felicity (1980): Of Prelates and Princes: A [243] Ives 2009 p. 122 Study of the Economic and Social Position of the Tu- dor Episcopate. Cambridge University Press. ISBN [244] Ives 2009 pp. 104–105; Hoak 1980 pp. 44–45 978-0-521-08761-2. [245] Ives 2009 pp. 105–106, 307; Loades 2008; Gunn 1999 • Hoak, Dale (1980): “Rehabilitating the Duke of pp. 1268, 1270–1271 Northumberland: Politics and Political Control, [246] Hoak 1980 p. 40; Alford 2002 p. 140; Ives 2009 pp. 1549–53”. In Jennifer Loach and Robert Tittler 124–125 (eds.): The Mid-Tudor Polity c. 1540–1560. pp. 29–51, 201–203. Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-24528- [247] Nichols 1857 pp. ccxxii, ccxxiv; Ives 2009 p. 104 8. 16 11 EXTERNAL LINKS

• Hoak, Dale (2008): “Edward VI (1537–1553)". • Skidmore, Chris (2007): Edward VI: The Lost King Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Online of England. Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-0- edn. Jan 2008 (subscription required). Retrieved 297-84649-9. 2010-04-04. • Slack, Paul (1980): “Social Policy and the Con- • Hutchinson, Robert (2006): The Last Days of Henry straints of Government, 1547–58”. In Jennifer VIII: Conspiracy, Treason and at the Court of Loach and Robert Tittler (eds.): The Mid-Tudor the dying Tyrant. Phoenix. ISBN 0-7538-1936-8. Polity c. 1540–1560. pp. 94–115. Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-24528-8. • Ives, Eric (2009): Lady Jane Grey: A Tudor Mystery Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-9413-6. • Starkey, David (2001): Elizabeth: Apprenticeship. Vintage. ISBN 0-09-928657-2. • Jordan, W. K. (1970): Edward VI: The Threshold of Power. The Dominance of the Duke of Northumber- • Tytler, P. F. (1839): England under the Reigns of land. George Allen & Unwin. ISBN 0-04-942083- Edward VI. and Mary. Vol. II. Richard Bentley. 6. • Warnicke, R. M. (2012): Wicked Women of Tu- • Jordan, W.K. and M.R. Gleason (1975): The Say- dor England: Queens, Aristocrats, Commoners. Pal- ing of John Late Duke of Northumberland Upon the grave. Scaffold, 1553. Harvard Library. LCCN 75-15032. • Williams, Penry (1998): The Later Tudors: England • Loach, Jennifer (2002): Edward VI. Yale University 1547–1603. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19- Press. ISBN 0-300-09409-4. 288044-6. • Loades, David (1996): John Dudley, Duke of • Wilson, Derek (1981): Sweet Robin: A Biogra- Northumberland 1504–1553. Clarendon Press. phy of Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester 1533–1588. ISBN 0-19-820193-1. Hamish Hamilton. ISBN 0-241-10149-2. • Loades, David (2003): . Hambledon • Wilson, Derek (2005): The Uncrowned Kings of Continuum. ISBN 1-85285-304-2. England: The Black History of the Dudleys and the • Loades, David (2004): Intrigue and Treason: The Tudor Throne. Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1469- Tudor Court, 1547–1558. Pearson/Longman. ISBN 7. 0-582-77226-5. • Wood, Andy (2007): The 1549 Rebellions and the • Loades, David (2008): “Dudley, John, duke of Making of Early Modern England. Cambridge Uni- Northumberland (1504–1553)". Oxford Dictionary versity Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83206-9. of National Biography. Online edn. Oct 2008 (sub- scription required). Retrieved 2010-04-04. • MacCulloch, Diarmaid (2001): The Boy King: Ed- 11 External links ward VI and the Protestant Reformation. Palgrave. ISBN 0-312-23830-4. • “Dudley, John, Duke of Northumberland (DDLY551J)". A Cambridge Alumni Database. • Merriman, Marcus (2000): The Rough Wooings: University of Cambridge. Mary Queen of Scots, 1542–1551 Tuckwell Press. ISBN 978-1-86232-090-1. • The Archaeology of Dudley Castle VIII. Succession of John Dudley and his building the Renaissance • Nichols, J.G. (ed.) (1850): The Chronicle of Queen Range Jane. Camden Society. • Duke of Northumberland at The Internet Movie • Nichols, J.G. (ed.) (1857): Literary Remains of Database King Edward the Sixth. Vol. I. Roxburghe Club. • Porter, Linda (2007): Mary Tudor: The First Queen. Portrait. ISBN 978-0-7499-5144-3. • Rathbone, Mark (2002): “Northumberland”. History Review Issue 44. December 2002. Re- trieved 2010-09-29. • Richards, Judith (2007): “Edward VI and Mary Tu- dor: Protestant King and Catholic Sister”. History Review. Issue 59. December 2007. Retrieved 2010- 12-23. 17

12 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

12.1 Text

• John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dudley,_1st_Duke_of_Northumberland?oldid= 621508537 Contributors: Mav, Deb, SimonP, Mintguy, Gabbe, Ugen64, John K, JASpencer, Charles Matthews, Adam Bishop, David Newton, Dcoetzee, Istabraq, Lord Emsworth, Francs2000, Pigsonthewing, Seglea, Wjhonson, Cutler, Nunh-huh, Brequinda, Gdr, Icairns, Faedra, Grstain, D6, Cnyborg, CanisRufus, FeanorStar7, PatGallacher, Commander Keane, Tabletop, Marudubshinki, Coemgenus, FlaBot, Dpknauss, Kmorozov, Str1977, Choess, Gareth E Kegg, Jaraalbe, Ariasne, YurikBot, RussBot, Kauffner, Heavens To Betsy, NawlinWiki, Nlu, Nikkimaria, Bevo74, Caponer, SmackBot, Peter Isotalo, Jon513, Ohconfucius, Esrever, Meco, Neddyseagoon, LHaydon, Iridescent, The Giant Puffin, Tryde, Joseph Solis in Australia, JoeBot, CmdrObot, Cydebot, Christian75, Jed keenan, Thijs!bot, S Marshall, Phoe, Dsp13, PhD Historian, Magioladitis, Connormah, Deposuit, Daytrivia, Henning M, LordAnubisBOT, Moonksy29, The Duke of Waltham, Omegastar, TXiKiBoT, Unoquha, Bleaney, Alaric the Goth, AlleborgoBot, SieBot, StAnselm, BotMultichill, SE7, Darth Kalwejt, G.-M. Cupertino, Martarius, Twopenneth, Andrei Iosifovich, Welham66, Rs-nourse, Muro Bot, Thehelpfulone, Tseno Maximov, Sunquanliangx- iuhao, RexxS, Boleyn, RogDel, Good Olfactory, Surtsicna, Addbot, Proofreader77, Jeanne boleyn, Tassedethe, Тиверополник, Lightbot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Gremlin Scholar, Guy1890, AnomieBOT, 1exec1, Flewis, Xqbot, TechBot, Mlpearc, Sir Stanley, Žiedas, Buchraeumer, FrescoBot, Moonraker, Île flottante, Full-date unlinking bot, Trappist the monk, Nickyus, Vrenator, RjwilmsiBot, John of Reading, Go- ingBatty, AManWithNoPlan, RaptureBot, LoveActresses, ClueBot NG, Morgan.booker2109, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Fritzelblitz, BendelacBOT, Cloptonson, VIAFbot, Nimetapoeg, Madame Bonheur and Anonymous: 61

12.2 Images

• File:AnthonyRoll-1_Great_Harry.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/AnthonyRoll-1_Great_Harry. jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Anthony Roll as reproduced in The Anthony Roll of Henry VIII’s Navy: Pepys Library 2991 and British Library Additional MS 22047 With Related Documents ISBN 0-7546-0094-7, p. 40. Original artist: Own scan. Photo by Gerry Bye. Original by Anthony Anthony. • File:Coat_of_arms_of_Sir_John_Dudley,_1st_Duke_of_Northumberland,_KG.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/ wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Coat_of_arms_of_Sir_John_Dudley%2C_1st_Duke_of_Northumberland%2C_KG.png License: CC-BY-SA- 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Rs-nourse • File:Commons-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original artist: ? • File:Dudley,_John_signature.GIF Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Dudley%2C_John_signature.GIF Li- cense: Public domain Contributors: http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Objetos/Signs/1Dudley,John01%28sig%29.GIF Original artist: John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland (1504–1553) • File:DukeofNorthumberland_Penshurst.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/DukeofNorthumberland_ Penshurst.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: www.tudorplace Original artist: Unknown • File:Edward_Seymour_Duke_of_Somerset.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Edward_Seymour_ Duke_of_Somerset.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://tudorhistory.org/people/edseymour/ Original artist: The source claims that this portrait is by (d. 1543), but this is not supported by Holbein scholarship. • File:Edward_VI’{}s_'devise_for_the_succession'.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Edward_VI% 27s_%27devise_for_the_succession%27.png License: Public domain Contributors: Source of image: Jennifer Loach, Edward VI, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999, ISBN 0300079923. Original artist: Edward VI of England • File:Edward_VI_Scrots_c1550.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Edward_VI_Scrots_c1550.jpg Li- cense: Public domain Contributors: Scanned from tipped in color plate in , The English Icon: Elizabethan and Jacobean Por- traiture, 1969, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. Original in the . Original artist: Attributed to (fl. 1537–1554) • File:John_Dudley,_1st_Duke_of_Northumberland.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/John_ Dudley%2C_1st_Duke_of_Northumberland.png License: Public domain Contributors: Chris Skidmore, Edward VI: The Lost King of England, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2007, ISBN 9780297846499. Original artist: Artist unknown. • File:Streathamladyjayne.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/87/Streathamladyjayne.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Purchased from [1]. National Portrait Gallery, London: NPG 6804 Original artist: Unknown • File:Symbol_support_vote.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/94/Symbol_support_vote.svg License: ? Contribu- tors: ? Original artist: ?

12.3 Content license

• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0