MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
ALL MY TUDORS...history chat[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  ♦Greetings!  
  ♦Bits & Pieces  
  ♦Death & Burial  
  ♦Brasses & Monuments  
  Read this BEFORE you apply for membership!  
  ♦Group Guidelines  
  ♦To the Boards  
  ♦Message Board  
  
  General  
  
  The Dark Ages  
  
  The Normans  
  
  The Plantagenets  
  
  The Tudors  
  
  The Stuarts  
  
  Mysteries  
  
  Book Talk  
  
  Tudor Topics  
  
  Crusades  
  
  RBOR  
  
  WOTR  
  
  Right Royal Xmas  
  
  Royal Holidays  
  
  Misc Pages  
  ♦AMT Member Map  
  ♦AMT Member List  
  ♦This Week in History  
  ♦Castle of the Day  
  ♦AMT Goes to the Movies  
  ♦Lovely Links  
  ♦Brilliant Books  
  ♦Royal Begats  
  ♦The Royal Book of Records  
  ♦The Crusades  
  ♦The Wars of the Roses  
  ♦Six Wives  
  ♦Off With Her Head  
  ♦The Reformation in England  
  ♦The Tudors and the Tower  
  ♫Tudor Music  
  ♦Tudor Limericks  
  ♦Elizabethan Insults  
  ♦Elizabethan Dressing  
  ♦Elizabethan Makeup  
  ♦The Invincible Armada  
  ♦The Great Fire of London  
    
  Pictures  
  Manager Tools  
  
  
  Tools  
 
The Stuarts : MQOS: Cecil or Walsingham?
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 3 in Discussion 
From: ForeverAmber  (Original Message)Sent: 11/3/2004 10:49 PM
Am just starting a new MQOS book & the author (John Guy) in his forward has put forth the notion that Cecil actively despised MQOS & was the sole author of her downfall & ultimate execution.  I was always of the opinion is was more Walsingham than Cecil who made it his mission in life to "get" MQOS.  Any thoughts?


First  Previous  2-3 of 3  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 3 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknameterrilee62Sent: 11/7/2004 1:49 AM
If memory serves, Walsingham was in Paris at the St. Bart's massacre, and was in fear of his life, so he had a personal axe to grind against any/all Catholics.  He dreaded seeing the RC religion set up in England again.  OTOH, Cecil was totally commited to serving Elizabeth & England, prolly saw them as one & the same, and was against MQOS because she was a threat.   His son was instrumental to the peaceful rollover of the reign from Elizabeth to MQOS' son, so I don't think there was a personal hatred of her.
Just my .02 worth tonight!
terri*lee

Reply
 Message 3 of 3 in Discussion 
From: ForeverAmberSent: 11/17/2004 6:12 PM
John Guy is VERY pro-MQOS & doesn't think she did anything wrong until the Babington Plot, which he says she was driven to because of Elizabeth's accord with James I.
 
However, the book is really interesting anyway, because he takes the Casket Letters apart practically line by line & highlights some inconsistencies in both those & the statements made by the Confederate Lords.  Leaves Mary wide open for reasonable doubt in everything but the plot she got her head cut off for.
 
Interestingly, Guy says the Lords had it in for Bothwell from the days of their rebellion against Mary of Guise's regency, because apparently Cecil was bankrolling the rebels & Bothwell stole the shipment of cash LOL
 
There were a few fascinating begats as well....apparently after the death of James V, Mary of Guise's 2 most prominent suitors were Patrick Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell (Bothwell's dad) & Matthew Stuart, Earl of Lennox.  He states that it was only when Mary of Guise made it pointedly clear to Lennox that she wa having none of him, did he hightail it to England & petition to marry Margaret Douglas instead (thereby begetting Darnley).