Mary Tudor - Anna Whitelock [113]
CHAPTER 47
SOLE QUEEN
On the word of a Queen I assure you, that if the marriage appear not before the court of Parliament, nobility and commons, for the singular benefit of the whole realm, then I will abstain—not only from this, but from any other.1
THIS WAS MARY’S PROMISE, MADE AT THE GUILDHALL AS WYATT threatened London. She would submit treaty to “the people” for ratification—a step her male predecessors had never taken. As Parliament prepared to meet in the days after the rebellion, such was the climate of fear and uncertainty that it was initially proposed that Parliament meet in Oxford. When it did meet, in London, Mary was not present.2 In his opening address on April 5, Gardiner proceeded to make the case for the marriage treaty:
whereas they [the conspirators] had said that his Highness wished to conquer the kingdom, in reality the kingdom was conquering Philip and his dominions … therefore trusted that they would not offer any opposition but rather render their humble thanks to the Queen for her affection and show their gratitude by deeds.3
In spite of their fears, both houses ratified the marriage treaty within ten days of Parliament’s opening. Renard wrote a triumphant letter, mocking “the heretics and French who hoped there would be violent dissent.”4
To secure English acceptance of the alliance, the emperor had conceded highly favorable terms. Although Philip was granted the right to enjoy the style and name of king of England, the treaty denied him regal power and limited his involvement to assisting the queen in the administration of her realm insofar as the “rights, laws, privileges and customs” of both kingdoms permitted.
Should Mary die before Philip, he would have no further claim to authority in England. The succession to the English crown was limited to Mary’s right of inheritance, and only the children from their marriage might succeed them. Don Carlos, Philip’s existing heir, did not have a claim. No foreign office holders could be introduced into English government, and England would not be involved in Habsburg wars, it being stated explicitly that England was not to be drawn into the wars between Emperor Charles V and Henry II, the king of France.
In the first draft of the marriage settlement, Philip had only to acknowledge that Mary was not bound to offer any more assistance in the Habsburg-Valois struggle than promised in two treaties signed by Henry VIII some ten years earlier. But at the last moment Gardiner inserted an additional clause stating that England “by occasion of this matrimony, shall not directly or indirectly be entangled with the war that now is betwixt Charles and the French King.” Moreover, Philip shall “see the peace between the said realms of France and England observed, and shall give no cause of any breach.”5
The treaty specifically sought to separate Mary as queen of England from Mary, Philip’s spouse, so as to underline that her power and status would not be diminished by the marriage. Mary was to be “sole Queen.” The act ratifying the treaty stipulated,
that your Majesty as our only Queen, shall and may, solely use, have, and enjoy the Crown and Sovereignty of, and over your Realms, Dominions, and Subjects … in such sole and only estate, and in as large and ample manner and form … after the hitheration of the said marriage, and at all times during the same …
It was an attempt to address concerns about the status of a married queen regnant, given the traditional subjugation of women. As Renard reported on January 7, the pretext for summoning Parliament had been “furnished by two English lawyers who have been prompted to say that by English law, if his Highness marries the Queen, she loses her title to the crown and his Highness becomes King.”6 There were no precedents,