Mary Queen of Scots in History. C. A. Campbell

her an idolatress, and, consequently--according to the Jewish criminal code, which they held in special esteem--deserving of death. There was her half-brother, Lord James, gruff, reticent and ambitious, watching for a turn of affairs that might bring him to the throne; and there, too, was Elizabeth, with her able and unscrupulous Secretary, Cecil, who had already fomented and supported rebellion in Scotland, and even now had emissaries at work for the overthrow of the young northern Queen. Worst, perhaps of all, Mary had very little counsel on which she could rely. Allowing for poetical exaggeration, a good deal of truth is contained in the words of the Jacobite bard:--

      "She stood alone without a friend,

      On whom her arm might lean,

      No true and trusty counsellors

      Were there to serve their Queen;

      But moody men, with sullen looks,

      And faces hard and keen."

      Mary was not long in Scotland before her courage was put to the test. It had been stipulated by Lord James that she should be free to have Mass in her own house. It would seem, however, that the zealots of the Congregation had little expected that in face of their strong opposition to her religion, the young Queen would venture to practice it on her return. If so, they miscalculated the extent to which she had inherited the high spirit and unflinching courage of her bravest ancestors.

      The first Sunday after her arrival, she ordered Mass to be celebrated in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood. A party of the Congregation, headed by Patrick, Lord Lindsay, rushed into the apartment and attacked the Chaplain. The Queen immediately published a proclamation to the effect that she did not intend to interfere with the form of religion she had found established in Scotland, and that she commanded her subjects not to molest any of her servants or household. Shortly afterwards she made a tour of the country, and on her return to Edinburgh, learned that the Provost and his brethren in office had, in the meantime, issued a proclamation commanding all Papists, under penalty of death for the third offence, to depart from the town. She caused the bailies who were responsible for this act to be removed from office, and issued a counter-proclamation, permitting "All good and faithful subjects to repair to, or leave Edinburgh, according to their pleasure or convenience."

      Knox was horrified at the Queen's action, and immediately predicted a sudden plague. But what annoyed him most was, that certain Protestant lords, who had professed strong opposition to the Mass, were now inclined to tolerate it in the Queen's chapel. He took care, in his weekly sermons, to make known his opinion of these "politick heads" and to give the people timely warning of the chastisement with which God would certainly visit the nation for permitting idolatry.

      The young Queen, who was still in her teens, must have keenly felt the reproaches that were being cast on herself and her religion, and, although she succeeded in showing herself cheerful in company, we may be sure her heart was sad and that memory often carried her back to earlier days, in which she experienced nothing but gentle treatment and the respectful homage of a nation of brave men, ready to draw the sword in her defence. However, it would be unjust to the Scottish people to think that the treatment which Mary received in Edinburgh was a correct index to the feeling of the country at large. The hearts of the Scottish people were with their Queen, and remained with her unto the end. Her fiercest enemies were found in the extreme religious party led by Knox. An amicable understanding with these was impossible. The Protestant nobles--except those who were zealous followers of Knox--did not, as far as I can see, care much what religious devotions the Queen practised, so long as she took no steps towards restoring the old religion. The fact that many of them had enriched themselves from church property readily explains their opposition to every movement in that direction.

      But the turbulent section of the nobles and the Congregation controlled by Knox, were not the people of Scotland. This is a fact it would be well to note, for, it seems to me, many people fall into the error that the friends and the enemies of Mary in Scotland were divided on purely religious lines. It is true, the storm in which she was shipwrecked, was mainly a religious one; yet all the Protestants were by no means opposed to her. Many of her best friends, who stood by her in every peril, and supported her cause until the last hope of her restoration was dead, were Protestant nobles.

      Early in Mary's reign there appears to have been some discontent among certain Catholic nobles, who seemed disposed to attempt the restoration of the old faith by force of arms. The Earl of Huntly said that, if the Queen would "sanction him in it, he could set up the Mass again in the three countries." She was as zealous in the cause of religion, and willing to suffer as much for it as Huntly; but the prospect of effecting any permanent good by such means, was extremely poor. If the struggle would be left to Scotland itself, Huntly's project would be more deserving of consideration. But Queen Elizabeth would never, while she could prevent it, allow her adversaries to gain advantages in Scotland; and in the event of the Scottish Catholics attempting to gain freedom of worship for themselves her gold and her soldiers would soon flow over the border, as they did in the regency of Mary of Lorraine. But apart from this, Mary was opposed to civil strife. She had come to the country in a peaceful manner, hoping, by a peaceful policy, to conciliate the minds of her people and finally to obtain an alleviation of the ills under which her Catholic subjects were suffering. But the difficulties with which she had to contend were not fully understood by her relations in France, nor, at the outset, even by the Pope; and it is not improbable that for a while they feared she was not so industrious as she should be in promoting the interests of her religion. And to this day a number of her Protestant biographers--some of them enthusiastic vindicators of her honour--speak of her leanings towards Protestantism, either from policy or from conviction. Some say that early in her reign she, through policy, openly favoured the Protestant cause, and as proof of her favour overthrew--which she undoubtedly did--the powerful house of Gordon, head of which was the Catholic Earl of Huntly. Others think if the proper means had been employed, she would have become a Protestant from conviction, and, in support of their opinion, they adduce her readiness to read Protestant controversial works, and that state of religious doubt which, they say, she manifested in a certain conversation with Knox.

      A distinguished Scottish biographer of Mary's, the late Sir John Skelton, has thought that the uncharitable treatment she received from Knox was the principal cause why she remained a Catholic. "Knox," he writes, "was the foremost of the Reformers; yet Mary had found that Knox was narrow-minded, superstitious, and fiercely intolerant,--so narrow-minded, intolerant and superstitious that he had no difficulty in believing that the orderly course of nature was interrupted because the Queen dined on wild fowl and danced till midnight. If this was Protestantism, she would have none of it. Nor can we blame her much. The eccleciastical dictator at Edinburgh was as violent and irrational (it might well appear to her) as the ecclesiastical dictator at Rome. Was it worth her while to exchange the infallible Pope of the Vatican for the infallible Pope of the High Street?"[#] (Maitland of Lethington, Vol. II., Chap. I.)