1. Roberto Gonzalez

    I agree with Memarge’s statement above that no actual proof was found regarding The Lady Elizabeth’s complicity in Wyatt’s Rebellion.Any letters she would have received would also have been burned with her providing a written replay.

    But if she did now and wasn’t part of the conspiracy, then did she fail to warn the government of her paternal half-sister Queen Mary I?

    I would add that, IMHO, Philip aided Elizabeth because. if his new wife Queen Mary I should die childless, Elizabeth was the next heir.

    And if Roman Catholic Mary executed the Protestant Elizabeth like Her Majesty executed their mutual cousin, the radical Protestant Lady Jane Grey, “The Nine Days” Queen of England, the month before Elizabeth’s incarceration in the Tower (Lady Jane was executed in February 1554); then the next heir to England was the 12-year-old Scottish Queen—Mary Queen of Scots who, although a Roman Catholic—was also being reared at the French Court and betrothed to the Dauphin [pronounced: dough-fan] Francois, Mary Queen of Scots was the granddaughter of Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scots, paternal aunt through King Henry VIII of England of both Queen Mary I and The Lady Elizabeth.

    Philip was favoring Elizabeth over Mary Queen of Scots because a Franco-Scottish alliance already would create a blockage in the English Channel for Spanish trade ships sailing to ports in the Spanish Netherlands.

  2. Memarge

    Phillip asked Mary to spare Elizabeth. There was no actual proof found that Elizabeth had participated in any way in Wyatt’s Rebellion.

Please Login to Comment.