John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland
The Duke of Northumberland | |
---|---|
Earl Marshal of England | |
Spouse(s) | |
Issue |
|
Parents | |
Signature |
John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland (1504
In 1547, Dudley was created
As Lord President of the Council, Dudley headed a distinctly 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 uprisings he introduced countrywide policing on a local basis, appointing lord-lieutenants who were in close contact with the central authority. Dudley's religious policy was — in accordance with Edward's religion — decidedly Protestant, further enforcing the English Reformation and promoting radical reformers to high Church positions.
The 15-year-old King fell ill in early 1553 and excluded his half-sisters, Mary and Elizabeth, whom he regarded as illegitimate, from the succession, designating non-existent, hypothetical male heirs. As his death approached, Edward changed his will so that his Protestant cousin Lady Jane Grey, Northumberland's daughter-in-law, could inherit the Crown.
To what extent the Duke influenced this scheme is uncertain. The traditional view is that it was Northumberland's plot to maintain his power by placing his family on the throne. Many historians see the project as genuinely Edward's, enforced by Dudley after the King's death. The Duke did not prepare well for this occasion. Having marched to East Anglia to capture Mary, he surrendered on hearing that the Privy Council had changed sides and proclaimed Mary as queen.
Convicted of high treason, Northumberland returned to Catholicism and abjured the Protestant faith before his execution on 22 August 1553. Having secured the contempt of both religious camps, popularly hated, and a natural scapegoat, he became the "wicked Duke" — in contrast to his predecessor Somerset, the "good Duke". Only since the 1970s has he also been seen as a Tudor Crown servant: self-serving, inherently loyal to the incumbent monarch, and an able statesman in difficult times.
Career under Henry VIII
John Dudley was the eldest of three sons of
In 1512, the seven-year-old John became the
At about age 15 John Dudley probably went with his guardian to the
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
Sir Edward Guildford died in 1534
In 1532, he lent his cousin,
Dudley was present at Henry VIII's meeting with Francis I of France at Calais in 1532. Another member of the entourage was Anne Boleyn, who was soon to be queen. Dudley took part in the christenings of the King's children, Elizabeth and Edward[15] and, in connection with the announcement of the Prince's birth to the Emperor, travelled to Spain via France in October 1537.[16] He sat in the Reformation parliament for Kent, in place of his deceased father-in-law,[17] in 1534–1536, and led one of the contingents sent against the Pilgrimage of Grace in late 1536.[18]
In January 1537, Dudley was made Vice-Admiral and began to apply himself to naval matters.
In the aftermath of the
As Lord Admiral, Dudley was responsible for creating the Council for Marine Causes, which for the first time co-ordinated the various tasks of maintaining the navy functioning and thus made English naval administration the most efficient in Europe.[1] At sea, Dudley's fighting orders were at the forefront of tactical thinking: Squadrons of ships, ordered by size and firepower, were to manoeuvre in formation, using co-ordinated gunfire. These were all new developments in the English navy.[26]
In 1545, he directed the fleet's operations before, during, and after the
John Dudley, popularly fêted and highly regarded by King Henry as a general,
From Earl of Warwick to Duke of Northumberland
The 16
The Protector's agrarian policy and proclamations were inspired by a group of intellectuals sometimes called "the commonwealth men". These were highly critical of landlords and left many commoners with the impression that
The Lord Protector, in his
Dudley consolidated his power through institutional manoeuvres and by January 1550 was in effect the new regent. On 2 February 1550 he became
Ruling England
Instead of taking the title of Lord Protector, John Dudley set out to rule as
Dudley organised Edward's political education so that he should take an interest in affairs and at least appear to influence decisions.[81] He wanted the King to grow into his authority as smoothly as possible. Disruptive conflicts when Edward took over government could thus be minimised, while Dudley's chances to continue as principal minister would be good.[82] From the age of about 14 Edward's signature on documents no longer needed the council's countersignatures,[83] and the King was regularly debriefed in meetings with a Council of his own choosing—the principal administrators and the Duke of Northumberland were among the chosen.[84] Dudley had a warm if respectful relationship with the teenager, who "loved and feared" him according to Jean Scheyfve, the Imperial ambassador.[85] At a dinner Edward discussed with the envoy at length until Northumberland discreetly indicated to the King that he had said enough.[86] Yet the Duke did not necessarily have his way in all things. In 1552–1553 the King's hand can be discerned behind decisions (and omissions) that directly contravened Dudley's wishes.[87] At court, complex networks of influence were at work and Edward listened to more than one voice.[88] Regarding the question to what extent Edward played a role in his own government, Stephen Alford writes:
It is possible to endorse Edward's developing grasp of the business of kingship and accept the still powerful political presence of John Dudley and his colleagues. The structures of ... the ... Council and the royal household began to adapt themselves to the implications of the king's age ... the dynamics of power at the centre were capable of reshaping themselves because the men around the king accepted that, in the circumstances, they should.[89]
Social and economic policy
Dudley set out to restore administrative efficiency and maintain public order to prevent renewed rebellion as seen in 1549.[90] Equipped with a new law "for the punishment of unlawful assemblies",[91] he built a united front of landholders and Privy Council, the government intervening locally at any sign of unrest.[92] He returned to the ancient practice of granting licences to retain liveried followers and installed lord-lieutenants that represented the central government and were to keep ready small bands of cavalry.[93] These measures proved effective and the country was calm for the rest of the reign. In fact, in the summer of 1552—a year before the succession crisis—the cavalry bands were disbanded to save money.[94]
John Dudley also strove to alleviate the social situation.
The financial legacy of the Protectorate consisted, apart from crippling Crown debts, of an unprecedentedly debased coinage.
Religious policy
The use of the Book of Common Prayer became law in 1549. King Edward's half-sister, Mary Tudor, de facto had licence to continue hearing mass in private. So soon as he was in power, Dudley put pressure on her to stop her from allowing her entire household and flocks of visitors to attend.[107] Mary, who in her turn did not tolerate the Book of Common Prayer in any of her residences, was not prepared to make any concessions. She planned to flee the country but then could not make up her mind in the last minute.[108] Mary denied Edward's personal interest in the issue and entirely blamed John Dudley for her troubles.[108] After a meeting with King and Council, in which she was told that what mattered was not her faith but her disobedience to the law, she sent the Imperial ambassador Scheyfve to threaten war on England.[109] The English government could not swallow a war threat from an ambassador who had stepped out of his commission, but at the same time would not risk all-important commercial ties with the Habsburg Netherlands, so an embassy was sent to Brussels and some of Mary's household officers were arrested.[110] On his next visit to the council, Scheyfye was informed by the Earl of Warwick that the King of England had as much authority at 14 as he had at 40—Dudley was alluding to Mary's refusal to accept Edward's demands on grounds of his young age.[111] In the end a silent compromise came into effect: Mary continued to hear mass in a more private manner, while augmenting her landed property by exchanges with the Crown.[112]
Appealing to the King's religious tastes, John Dudley became the chief backer of evangelical Protestants among the clergy, promoting several to bishoprics—for example
At the heart of Northumberland's problems with the
Peace policy
The war policy 1547–1549 had entailed an extraordinary expenditure of about £350,000 p.a. against a regular Crown income of £150,000 p.a.
The war between France and the Emperor broke out once again in September 1551. In due course Northumberland rejected requests for English help from both sides, which in the case of the Empire consisted of a demand for full-scale war based on an Anglo-Imperial treaty of 1542.[136] The Duke pursued a policy of neutrality, a balancing act that made peace between the two great powers attractive.[137] 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 continuance of war being more advantageous to them.[138]
Overseas interest
John Dudley recovered the post of Lord Admiral immediately after the Protector's fall in October 1549,[139] Thomas Seymour having been executed by his brother in March 1549.[140] Dudley passed on the office to Edward, Lord Clinton, in May 1550, yet never lost his keen interest in maritime affairs.[141] Henry VIII had revolutionised the English navy, mainly in military terms.[142] Dudley encouraged English voyages to far-off coasts, ignoring Spanish threats.[143] He even contemplated a raid on Peru with Sebastian Cabot in 1551.[144] Expeditions to Morocco and the Guinea coast in 1551 and 1552 were actually realised. A planned voyage to China via the Northeast Passage under Hugh Willoughby sailed in May 1553. King Edward watched their departure from his window.[145] Northumberland was at the centre of a "maritime revolution", a policy in which, increasingly, the English Crown sponsored long-distance trade directly.[146]
1553
Changing the succession
The 15-year-old King fell seriously ill in February 1553. His sister Mary was invited to visit him, the Council doing "duty and obeisance to her as if she had been Queen of England".
At some point during his illness Edward wrote a draft document headed "My devise for the Succession".[156] Due to his ardent Protestantism Edward did not want his Catholic sister Mary to succeed, but he was also preoccupied with male succession and with legitimacy, which in Mary's and Elizabeth's case was questionable as a result of Henry VIII's legislation.[157][note 2] In the first version of his "devise", written before he knew he was mortally ill, Edward bypassed his half-sisters and provided for the succession of male heirs only.[158][note 3] Around the end of May or early June Edward's condition worsened dramatically and he corrected his draft such that Lady Jane Grey herself, not just her putative sons, could inherit the Crown.[159] To what extent Edward's document—especially this last change—was influenced by Northumberland, his confidant John Gates, or still other members of the Privy Chamber like Edward's tutor John Cheke or Secretary William Petre, is unclear.[160]
Edward fully endorsed it.
It was now common knowledge that Edward was dying. The Imperial ambassador, Scheyfye, had been convinced for years that Dudley was engaged in some "mighty plot" to settle the Crown on his own head.[167] As late as 12 June, though, he still knew nothing specific, despite having inside information about Edward's sickness.[152] France, which found the prospect of the Emperor's cousin on the English throne disagreeable, gave indications of support to Northumberland.[127] Since the Duke did not rule out an armed intervention from Charles V, he came back on the French offer after the King's death, sending a secret and non-committal mission to King Henry II.[168] After Jane's accession in July the ambassadors of both powers were convinced she would prevail, although they were in no doubt that the common people backed Mary.[169] Antoine de Noailles wrote of Guildford Dudley as "the new King", while the Emperor instructed his envoys to arrange themselves with the Duke and to discourage Mary from undertaking anything dangerous.[170]
Whether altering the succession was Edward's own idea or not, he was determinedly at work to exclude his half-sisters in favour of what he perceived as his jeopardised legacy.[171] The original provisions of the "devise" have been described as bizarre and obsessive and as typical of a teenager, while incompatible with the mind and needs of a pragmatical politician.[172] Mary's accession could cost Northumberland his head, but not necessarily so.[173] He tried hard to please her during 1553, and may have shared the general assumption that she would succeed to the Crown as late as early June.[174] Faced with Edward's express royal will and perseverance, John Dudley submitted to his master's wishes—either seeing his chance to retain his power beyond the boy's lifetime or out of loyalty.[175]
Downfall
Edward VI died on 6 July 1553. The next morning Northumberland sent his son Robert into Hertfordshire with 300 men to secure the person of Mary Tudor.[177] Aware of her half-brother's condition, the Princess had only days before moved to East Anglia, where she was the greatest landowner.[178] She began to assemble an armed following and sent a letter to the council, demanding to be recognised as queen. It arrived on 10 July, the day Jane Grey was proclaimed as queen.[179] The Duke of Northumberland's oration, held before Jane the previous day, did not move her to accept the Crown—her parents' assistance was required for that.[180] Dudley had not prepared for resolute action on Mary's part and needed a week to build up a larger force.[181] He was in a dilemma over who should lead the troops. He was the most experienced general in the kingdom, but he did not want to leave the government in the hands of his colleagues, in some of whom he had little confidence.[182] Queen Jane decided the issue by demanding that her father, the Duke of Suffolk, should remain with her and the council.[183] On 14 July Northumberland headed for Cambridge with 1,500 troops and some artillery, having reminded his colleagues of the gravity of the cause, "what chance of variance soever might grow amongst you in my absence".[182]
Supported by gentry and nobility in East Anglia and the Thames Valley, Mary's military camp was gathering strength daily and, through luck, came into possession of powerful artillery from the royal navy. In the circumstances the Duke deemed fighting a hopeless campaign. The army proceeded from Cambridge to Bury St Edmunds and retreated again to Cambridge.[184] On 20 July a letter from the Council in London arrived, declaring that they had proclaimed Mary Queen and commanding Northumberland to disband the army and await events. Dudley did not contemplate resistance.[185][note 4] He explained to his fellow-commanders that they had acted on the council's orders all the time and that he did not now wish "to combat the Council's decisions, supposing that they have been moved by good reasons ... and I beg your lordships to do the same."[186] Proclaiming Mary Tudor at the market place, he threw up his cap and "so laughed that the tears ran down his cheeks for grief."[187] The next morning the Earl of Arundel arrived to arrest him. A week earlier Arundel had assured Northumberland of his wish to spill his blood even at the Duke's feet; now Dudley went down on his knees as soon as he caught sight of him.[188]
Northumberland rode through the City of London to the Tower on 25 July, with his guards struggling to protect him against the hostile populace.[189] A pamphlet appearing shortly after his arrest illustrated the general hatred of him: "the great devil Dudley ruleth, Duke I should have said".[190] He was now commonly thought to have poisoned King Edward while Mary "would have been as glad of her brother's life, as the ragged bear is glad of his death".[191] Dumbfounded by the turn of events, the French ambassador Noailles wrote: "I have witnessed the most sudden change believable in men, and I believe that God alone worked it."[192] David Loades, biographer of both Queen Mary and John Dudley, concludes that the lack of fighting clouds the fact that this outcome was a close-run affair, and warns
to explain Mary's triumph over Jane simply in terms of overwhelming spontaneous support. Northumberland ... was completely unprepared for the crisis which eventually overtook him. He was already losing his grip upon the situation before the council defected, and that was why they did it.[193]
Trial and execution
Northumberland was tried on 18 August 1553 in Westminster Hall. The panels of the jury and judges were largely made up of his former colleagues. Dudley hinted that he had acted on the authority of Prince and Council and by warrant of the Great Seal. Answered that the Great Seal of a usurper was worth nothing, he asked "whether any such persons as were equally culpable of that crime ... might be his judges".[194] After sentence was passed, he begged the Queen's mercy for his five sons, the eldest of whom was condemned with him, the rest waiting for their trials.[195][note 5] He also asked to "confess to a learned divine" and was visited by Bishop Stephen Gardiner, who had passed most of Edward's reign in the Tower and was now Mary's Lord Chancellor.[196] The Duke's execution was planned for 21 August at eight in the morning; however, it was suddenly cancelled.[197] Northumberland was instead escorted to St Peter ad Vincula, where he took the Catholic communion and professed that "the plagues that is upon the realm and upon us now is that we have erred from the faith these sixteen years."[198] A great propaganda coup for the new government, Dudley's words were officially distributed—especially in the territories of the Emperor Charles V.[199] In the evening the Duke learnt "that I must prepare myself against tomorrow to receive my deadly stroke", as he wrote in a desperate plea to the Earl of Arundel: "O my good lord remember how sweet life is, and how bitter ye contrary."[200] On the scaffold, before 10,000 people,[201] Dudley confessed his guilt but maintained:[202]
"And yet this act wherefore I die, was not altogether of me (as it is thought) but I was procured and induced thereunto by other[s]. I was I say induced thereunto by other[s], howbeit, God forbid that I should name any man unto you, I will name no man unto you, and therefore I beseech you look not for it. ... And one thing more good people I have to say unto you ... and that is to warn you and exhort you to beware of these seditious preachers, and teachers of new doctrine, which pretend to preach God's word, but in very deed they preach their own fancies, ... they know not today what they would have tomorrow, ... they open the book, but they cannot shut it again. ... I could good people rehearse much more ... but you know I have another thing to do, whereunto I must prepare me, for the time draweth away." ... And after he had thus spoken he kneeled down ... and bowing toward the block he said, I have deserved a thousand deaths, and thereupon he made a cross upon the straw, and kissed it, and laid his head upon the block, and so died.[203]
Assessments
Historical reputation
A
As late as 1968/1970, W.K. Jordan embraced this good duke/bad duke dichotomy in a two-volume study of Edward VI's reign.[211] However, he saw the King on the verge of assuming full authority at the beginning of 1553 (with Dudley contemplating retirement) and ascribed the succession alteration to Edward's resolution, Northumberland playing the part of the loyal and tragic enforcer instead of the original instigator.[212] Many historians have since seen the "devise" as Edward's very own project.[note 6] Others, while remarking upon the plan's sloppy implementation,[213] have seen Northumberland as behind the scheme, yet in concord with Edward's convictions; the Duke acting out of despair for his own survival,[50] or to rescue political and religious reform and save England from Habsburg domination.[214]
Since the 1970s, critical reassessments of the Duke of Somerset's policies and government style led to acknowledgment that Northumberland revitalised and reformed the Privy Council as a central part of the administration,
Personality
John Dudley's recantation of his Protestant faith before his execution delighted Queen Mary and enraged Lady Jane.[198] The general opinion, especially among Protestants, was that he tried to seek a pardon by this move.[221] Historians have often believed that he had no faith whatsoever, being a mere cynic.[222] Further explanations—both contemporary and modern—have been that Northumberland sought to rescue his family from the axe,[223] that, in the face of catastrophe, he found a spiritual home in the church of his childhood,[224] or that he saw the hand of God in Mary's success.[225] Although he endorsed the Reformation from at least the mid-1530s,[10] Dudley may not have understood theological subtleties, being a "simple man in such matters".[198] The Duke was stung by an outspoken letter he received from John Knox, whom he had invited to preach before the King and in vain had offered a bishopric. William Cecil was informed:[226]
I love not to have to do with men which be neither grateful nor pleasable. I assure you I mind to have no more to do with him but to wish him well ... he cannot tell whether I be a dissembler in religion or not ... for my own part, if I should have passed more upon the speech of the people than upon the service of my master ... I needed not to have had so much obloquy of some kind of men; but the living God, that knoweth the hearts of all men, shall be my judge at the last day with what zeal, faith, and truth I serve my master.[227]
Northumberland was not an old-style peer, despite his aristocratic ancestry and existence as a great lord.
John Dudley was an imposing figure with a strong temperament who could also charm people with his courtesy and a graceful presence.
See also
Notes
- Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, and John Talbot, 1st Earl of Shrewsbury. He accordingly assumed the bear and the ragged staff, the arms of the medieval Earls of Warwick (Wilson 1981 pp. 1, 3; Adams 2002 pp. 312–313).
- ^ Henry VIII, in his Third Succession Act of 1544 and in his will, nominated his daughters Mary and Elizabeth as successors to the Crown, "upon condition" that they did not marry without the consent of the Privy Council (Hutchinson 2006 p. 212). In the same 1544 act his daughters were still, as in earlier legislation, declared illegitimate and unable to inherit by common law (Ives 2009 p. 143).
- ^ If there were no male heirs at the time of his death, England should have no king until the birth of a male royal child; a detailed system of female regency provisions was to apply in this case. Edward also distinguished between different types of minority rule and envisaged the possibility of having adult sons to succeed him (Ives 2009 pp. 137–139; Alford 2002 pp. 172–173).
- ^ It was said that "his men forsook him", as the London chronicler Henry Machyn put it (Loades 2004 p. 127). Such rumours and claims were largely exaggerated, though (Ives 2009 pp. 203–205; Loades 2004 p. 127). The bulk of the troops he had brought from London were with the Duke until the end and, in the words of David Loades, "he could have made a considerable nuisance of himself if he had chosen."(Loades 2004 p. 127).
- Sir Thomas Palmer, on the same day as the Duke (Loades 1996 pp. 270, 271).
- ^ For example: Stephen Alford (Alford 2002 pp. 171–174); Dale Hoak (Hoak 2004); Eric Ives (Ives 2009 pp. 136–142, 145–148); David Loades (Loades 1996 pp. 231–233, 239–241; Loades 2003 pp. 79–80; Loades 2004 pp. 68–69, 121–123; Loades 2008); Diarmaid MacCulloch (MacCulloch 2001 pp. 39–41); Linda Porter (Porter 2007 p. 188); Judith Richards (Richards 2007); Chris Skidmore (Skidmore 2007 pp. 247–250); David Starkey (Starkey 2001 pp. 112–114); Derek Wilson (Wilson 2005 pp. 215–221).
References
Footnotes
- ^ a b c d Loades 2008
- ^ Loades 2008; Adams 2002 pp. 312–313
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 7–11
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 17
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 18
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 20
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 20–22, 24–25
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 22
- ^ a b Ives 2009 p. 99
- ^ a b MacCulloch 2001 pp. 52–53; Ives 2009 pp. 114–115
- ^ Wilson 1981 pp. 11, 15–16; French 2002 p. 33
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 30–32; Beer 1973 p. 8
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 27–28
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 28
- ^ Beer 1973 pp. 8–9
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 36
- ^ a b Hawkyard 1982
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 31, 33–34
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 34–36, viii; Wilson 1981 p. 20
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 99; Warnicke 2012 p. 64
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 48
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 103
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 100–101
- ^ a b Wilson 1981 p. 22
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 101
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 71, 85
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 32; Loades 1996 pp. 69–71
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 77
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 36; Loades 1996 pp. 78–80; Ives 2009 p. 103
- ^ Wilson 1981 p. 22; Beer 1973 p. 36
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 79
- ^ Hutchinson 2006 p. 181; Loades 1996 pp. 81–82
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 82–85; MacCulloch 2001 pp. 7–8
- ^ Rathbone 2002; Loades 1996 pp. 82–85
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 41
- ^ Hutchinson 2006 p. 213
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 29, 69–70
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 88–90
- ^ Beer 1973 pp. 58–60; Loades 2008
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 100
- ^ a b Ives 2009 p. 104
- ^ Merriman 2000 p. 353
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 107
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 107–108; Loades 2004 pp. 44–45; Loades 2008
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 118
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 102
- ^ Wood 2007 p. 72
- ^ Chapman 1962 p. 63; Wood 2007 pp. 72–73
- ^ a b MacCulloch 2001 pp. 50–51
- ^ a b c d e f g Rathbone 2002
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 71–72
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 47–48
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 88; Loades 2004 p. 48
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 48–50; MacCulloch 2001 p. 51
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 50
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 84–85
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 84–85; Hoak 1980 pp. 36–37
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 95; Hoak 1980 p. 36
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 144–145
- ^ Hoak 1980 pp. 36–39; Loades 2004 p. 88
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 87–88, 104
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 111
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 39; Loades 1996 p. 186
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 48; Loades 2004 p. 110
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 168–169
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 170
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 108–109
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 182; Hoak 1980 p. 46
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 180–181
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 183, 184, 188
- ^ Loades 2004 pp. 110–111; Loades 2008
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 109; Loades 1996 pp. 189, 190
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 203; Loades 2004 p. 110
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 182; MacCulloch 2001 p. 55
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 149
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 38
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 44
- ^ Christmas 1997
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 140
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 40; Alford 2002 pp. 139–141
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 88; Loades 1996 pp. 201–203
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 88; Loades 1996 pp. 173, 193
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 193
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 163–166, 168
- ^ Beer 1973 pp. 124–125; Loades 2004 p. 89; MacCulloch 2001 p. 53
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 133
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 234
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 142, 148; Loades 1996 p. 202
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 159
- ^ Hoak 1980 pp. 29–30
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 145
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 111–112, 308; Loades 2008
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 98; Loades 2008
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 42
- ^ Williams 1998 p. 67
- ^ a b Slack 1980 p. 103; Guy 1990 p. 221
- ^ Slack 1980 pp. 105–106
- ^ Williams 1998 p. 68
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 150; Rathbone 2002
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 169–170; Hoak 1980 p. 30
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 132
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 162, 227–229
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 170–171
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 171
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 211–213
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 7; Loades 1996 pp. 248–251; Loach 2002 p. 113; Hoak 1980 p. 42
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 158–159; Ives 2009 p. 88
- ^ a b Loades 1996 pp. 158–159
- ^ Starkey 2001 p. 105
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 101
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 102; Ives 2009 p. 92
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 93; Richards 2007
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 76; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 4–5
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 56; Loades 2008
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 101; Loades 1996 p. 254
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 115–116
- ^ a b Ives 2009 p. 116
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 pp. 101–102; Loades 1996 pp. 218–219
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 139
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 254; MacCulloch 2001 p. 170
- ^ a b Loades 1996 p. 176
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 176–177; Heal 1980 pp. 141–142
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 154; Loades 1996 p. 255
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 198, 302
- ^ Heal 1980 pp. 145–146; 149
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 55; Heal 1980 p. 147
- ^ a b Loades 1996 pp. 254–255
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 170
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 169–170
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 169–170; Loades 2008
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 154–155; MacCulloch 2001 p. 55
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 166
- ^ Merriman 2000 p. 377
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 209
- ^ Merriman 2000 pp. 373–376; Loades 1996 p. 221
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 203–206
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 203, 241–242
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 203, 241–244
- ^ Wilson 1981 p. 41
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 97
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 210
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 244
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 245
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 193
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 245–247, 238
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 247
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 11; Loades 1996 p. 237
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 237–238
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 94
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 237
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 238–239; Adams 1995 p. 44
- ^ a b Loades 1996 p. 239
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 152
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 238–239; Loades 2004 p. 121; Ives 2009 pp. 152–154; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 10–11; Wilson 2005 pp. 214–215; Christmas 1997
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 171–172
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 137–139; Loades 2004 p. 68
- ^ Loades 2003 pp. 79–80; Starkey 2001 pp. 111–113; Loades 1996 p. 232; Ives 2009 pp. 142–143; Hoak 2008
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 139–140; Starkey 2001 p. 113
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 145; Loades 1996 p. 239
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 121; Ives 2009 p. 150; Alford 2002 p. 172; Hoak 2008
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 172; Loades 2004 p. 122; Hoak 2008
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 145, 148; Loades 1996 p. 241
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 105, 148
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 160–161; Alford 2002 p. 172
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 165–166; Hoak 1980 p. 49
- ^ Hoak 2008
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 240; Ives 2009 p. 151
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 262–263
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 256–257
- ^ Chapman 1962 p. 121
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 pp. 39–41; Starkey 2001 pp. 112–114; Alford 2002 pp. 171–172; Jordan 1970 pp. 515–516
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 141; MacCulloch 2001 p. 41; Loades 1996 p. 233; Hoak 2008; Wilson 2005 p. 216
- ^ Starkey 2001 p. 111; Beer 1973 pp. 147–148; Loades 1996 pp. 238
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 240–241; Jordan 1970 pp. 511, 517
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 241; Loades 2008; Jordan 1970 pp. 531–532
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 216
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 202, 325
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 257–258; Loach 2002 p. 170
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 258–259
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 187
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 258–261
- ^ a b Loades 1996 p. 261
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 198
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 209–212; Loach 2002 p. 172
- ^ Loades 2004 p. 127; Ives 2009 p. 241–242
- ^ Chapman 1962 p. 149; Ives 2009 p. 241–242
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 242
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 243–244; Nichols 1850 p. 7
- ^ Chapman 1962 pp. 150–151
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 7
- ^ Alford 2002 p. 8; Loades 1996 p. 257
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 265
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 264–265
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 96–97
- ^ Tytler 1839 pp. 225–226; Ives 2009 p. 96; Loades 1996 pp. 266, 271
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 267–268; Ives 2009 p. 184
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 117
- ^ a b c Loades 1996 p. 268
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 119
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 269
- ^ Chapman 1962 p. 169
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 270
- ^ Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 45–47
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 109; Loades 2008
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 107–109
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 267; Ives 2009 p. 3
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 154 (square brackets by Ives)
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. vii–viii; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 54–55
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 42; Loades 1996 p. 192; Loades 2008
- ^ Alford 2002 pp. 20–21
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 42
- ^ Loades 1996 p. 192; Jordan and Gleason 1975 pp. 9–10, 12; Jordan 1970 pp. 531–532
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 149; Rathbone 2002
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 49; Beer 1973 pp. 148, 164
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 50; Loades 1996 p. viii
- ^ Loades 1996 p. vii
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 55; Alford 2002 p. 170; Hoak 1980 p. 50
- ^ Dawson 1993 p. 253
- ^ MacCulloch 2001 p. 55
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 51; Dawson 1993 p. 243
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 118; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 56
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 115
- ^ Adams 2002 p. 133; Ives 2009 p. 118
- ^ Chapman 1962 p. 166; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 58; Loades 2008
- ^ Beer 1973 p. 158; Loades 1996 p. 268; Ives p. 309
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 196, 198, 199
- ^ Tytler 1839 p. 148
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. ix, 285
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 285–286, 258
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 222–223; 97–98; Hoak 1980 p. 46
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 269–270; Hoak 1980 p. 45; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 57
- ^ Loades 1996 pp. 269–270; Ives 2009 pp. 122–123, 124; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 12
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 120–123; Jordan and Gleason 1975 p. 57
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 123–124
- ^ Ives 2009 p. 122
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 104–105; Hoak 1980 pp. 44–45
- ^ Ives 2009 pp. 105–106, 307; Loades 2008; Gunn 1999 pp. 1268, 1270–1271
- ^ Hoak 1980 p. 40; Alford 2002 p. 140; Ives 2009 pp. 124–125
- ^ Nichols 1857 pp. ccxxii, ccxxiv; Ives 2009 p. 104
Bibliography
- Adams, Simon (ed.) (1995): Household Accounts and Disbursement Books of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, 1558–1561, 1584–1586. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-55156-0.
- Adams, Simon (2002): Leicester and the Court: Essays in Elizabethan Politics. Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-5325-0.
- Alford, Stephen (2002): Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-03971-0.
- Beer, B.L. (1973): Northumberland: The Political Career of John Dudley, Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland. The Kent State University Press. ISBN 0-87338-140-8.
- Chapman, Hester (1962): Lady Jane Grey. Jonathan Cape. OCLC 51384729.
- Christmas, Matthew (1997): "Edward VI". History Review. Issue 27. March 1997. Retrieved 2010-09-29.
- Dawson, Ian (1993): The Tudor Century 1485–1603. Thomas Nelson & Sons. ISBN 0-17-435063-5.
- Erickson, Carolly (1995): Bloody Mary: The Life of Mary Tudor. BCA.
- French, Peter (2002): John Dee: The World of an Elizabethan Magus. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-7448-0079-1.
- Gunn, S.J. (1999): "A Letter of Jane, Duchess of Northumberland, 1553". English Historical Review. Vol. CXIV No. 460. November 1999. pp. 1267–1271.
- ISBN 0-19-285213-2.
- Hawkyard, A.D.K. (1982): "DUDLEY, Sir John (1504/6-53), of Halden, Kent; Dudley Castle, Staffs.; Durham Place, London; Chelsea and Syon, Mdx.". The History of Parliament Online. Retrieved 2014-02-28.
- Heal, Felicity (1980): Of Prelates and Princes: A Study of the Economic and Social Position of the Tudor Episcopate. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-08761-2.
- Hoak, Dale (1980): "Rehabilitating the Duke of Northumberland: Politics and Political Control, 1549–53". In Jennifer Loach and Robert Tittler (eds.): The Mid-Tudor Polity c. 1540–1560. pp. 29–51, 201–203. Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-24528-8.
- Hoak, Dale (2008): "Edward VI (1537–1553)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Online edn. Jan 2008 (subscription required). Retrieved 2010-04-04.
- ISBN 0-7538-1936-8.
- ISBN 978-1-4051-9413-6.
- ISBN 0-04-942083-6.
- Jordan, W.K. and M.R. Gleason (1975): The Saying of John Late Duke of Northumberland Upon the Scaffold, 1553. Harvard Library. LCCN 75-15032.
- Lindsay, Philip (1951): The Queenmaker: A Portrait of John Dudley, Viscount Lisle, Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland. Williams & Norgate.
- Loach, Jennifer (2002): Edward VI. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-09409-4.
- ISBN 0-19-820193-1.
- Loades, David (2003): Elizabeth I. Hambledon Continuum. ISBN 1-85285-304-2.
- Loades, David (2004): Intrigue and Treason: The Tudor Court, 1547–1558. Pearson/Longman. ISBN 0-582-77226-5.
- Loades, David (2008): "Dudley, John, duke of Northumberland (1504–1553)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Online edn. Oct 2008 (subscription required). Retrieved 2010-04-04.
- ISBN 0-312-23830-4.
- MacCulloch, Diarmaid. "Parliament and the Reformation of Edward VI." Parliamentary History 34.3 (2015): 383–400.
- ISBN 978-1-86232-090-1.
- Nichols, J.G. (ed.) (1850): The Chronicle of Queen Jane. Camden Society.
- Nichols, J.G. (ed.) (1857): Literary Remains of King Edward the Sixth. Vol. I. Roxburghe Club.
- ISBN 978-0-7499-5144-3.
- Rathbone, Mark (2002): "Northumberland". History Review Issue 44. December 2002. Retrieved 2010-09-29.
- Richards, Judith (2007): "Edward VI and Mary Tudor: Protestant King and Catholic Sister". History Review. Issue 59. December 2007. Retrieved 2010-12-23.
- ISBN 978-0-297-84649-9.
- ISBN 0-333-24528-8.
- ISBN 0-09-928657-2.
- Tytler, P. F. (1839): England under the Reigns of Edward VI. and Mary. Vol. II. Richard Bentley.
- Warnicke, R. M. (2012): Wicked Women of Tudor England: Queens, Aristocrats, Commoners. Palgrave.
- Williams, Penry (1998): The Later Tudors: England 1547–1603. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-288044-6.
- Wilson, Derek (1981): Sweet Robin: A Biography of Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester 1533–1588. Hamish Hamilton. ISBN 0-241-10149-2.
- Wilson, Derek (2005): The Uncrowned Kings of England: The Black History of the Dudleys and the Tudor Throne. Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1469-7.
- Wood, Andy (2007): The 1549 Rebellions and the Making of Early Modern England. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83206-9.
External links
- "Dudley, John, Duke of Northumberland (DDLY551J)". A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
- The Archaeology of Dudley Castle VIII. Succession of John Dudley and his building the Renaissance Range
- Duke of Northumberland at The Internet Movie Database
- Pollard, Albert Frederick (1911). . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 19 (11th ed.). pp. 788–789.