Queen Elizabeth I Parliamentary Rhetoric and The Exercise of Power

Queen Elizabeth I: Parliamentary Rhetoric and the Exercise of Power
Author(s): Allison Heisch

Source: Signs, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Autumn, 1975), pp. 31-55
Published by: University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3172965
Accessed: 17-02-2016 00:52 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3172965?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Signs.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.248.132.248 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:52:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Queen Elizabeth I: Parliamentary
Rhetoric and the Exercise of Power
Allison Heisch
Of Queen Elizabeth's last parliamentaryaddress, Sir John Neale says:

"In the course of the reign,she had come to regard these parliamentary
occasions-great actress that she was-as the supreme opportunityof
projectingupon the nation,throughitsassembled deputies, her person-
ality and affection, her discipline, her will and unrivalled gifts of
leadership."' That is true,particularlyof the speeches thatbelong to the
last yearsof her reign. However, Elizabeth began to make her addresses
largelyout of expediency and because of necessity;and it was not until
1576, seventeen years afterher accession, that she gave a major speech
because she apparentlywished to do so. Even afterthat,grand as they
were, the queen's speeches were occasionallywrittenfor highlypolitical
purposes. Yet, not all of the speeches were intended to reach a public
audience, either parliamentaryor general. There is good reason and
strongevidence to support the contentionthat not all of them were fit
for public consumption. Some-for example, those addressed to
privateaudiences of bishops or councillors-were simplytoo blunt. But
no matterwhat the specificaudience or strategywas, the parliamentary
speeches permitsubstantialinsightinto the ways in which Elizabeth ex-
plored and exercised her monarchal power and in which rhetoricmay
become an instrumentof power.
Out of eighteen or nineteen speeches, her accession speech and
thirteenothers survive.Eleven she delivered herself.Five are the prod-
uct of the long and troublesomebattleover the matterof her marriage
1. John E. Neale, ElizabethI and Her Parliaments,2 vols. (London: Jonathan Cape,
Ltd., 1957), 2:432. Neale's work should be consulted for modernizationsof certain of the
texts of the parliamentaryspeeches, and more generally, for the environmentof the
addresses discussed in this essay, which reflectssome conclusions I have drawn frommy
unpublished edition of Elizabeth's parliamentaryspeeches.
[Signs:Journalof Womenin Cultureand Society1975, vol. 1, no. 1]
? 1975 by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved.
31
32 Heisch QueenElizabethI
and the naming of a successor. There are two each on religionand the
execution of Mary Stuart.Four dwell on her stewardship.The addresses
were delivered to various segmentsof the parliamentaryaudience: to
Commons, Lords, Lords Spiritual (the bishops),joint delegations,or to
the entire Parliament.Taken all togethersome patternsare apparent in
the speeches. The strongest talk is reserved for those most nearly
Elizabeth's peers. In everycase but one, a speech in 1576 that was the
firstretrospectiveaccount of her stewardship,there is a directcorrela-
tion between the politicalinsecurityof her positionand the oftendelib-
erate obscurityof her language. Very direct speech signals a greater
sense of certaintyand conviction.Sugared speech, flatteringand affec-
tionate,is for Commons and for general distribution.Throughout her
reign, in a metaphor her sex made plausible, she picturesand presents
herselfas a loving and yet virginalmother.
The necessityfor making herselfexpert in public speaking arose
fromthe factthat,to rule effectively,Elizabeth had to controlthe Parlia-
ment. The House of Lords ordinarilypresented no special problemsin
that respect because the interestsof Lords frequentlycoincided with
those of the crown. The House of Commons was much less easilyman-
aged. The power of Commons had been expanding, albeitfitfully, since
the time of Elizabeth's father,and direct taxation to supplement royal
income had to be passed by both Houses in the formof a subsidybill.2
That meant, in effect,that if the queen needed money in excess of that
generated throughher privaterevenues or if the crown wanted legisla-
tion on a particularmatter,Elizabeth had to convene Parliament.Once
in session, Parliament could attemptto discuss other matters,matters
occasionallyunpleasant to the queen, and even to use the subsidybill for
leverage. Moreover, on issues where Elizabeth's privycouncillorsfound
themselvesantagonisticto the queen's position,it was not unusual for
them to join with the Parliamentin opposing her.
Even in the face of strong opposition, the queen had substantial
power to wield; yet,as she quicklylearned, therewere timeswhen power
was mosteffectively exercised in public. This was the case because in the
Parliament,when gentlemengathered to discuss the thingsmost press-
ing to them, that which seemed possible often came to seem necessary
and eventuallyinevitable.And if the queen were absent,her opposition
relayed by message or by messengercould remain an abstraction.The
labor investedin the parliamentarypetitionsshe receivedatteststo that.
Evidently,itwas theirauthors'collectivehope thata reasoned argument,
amplyillustrated,would presenttheirpositionwithsuch comprehensive
force that Elizabeth could by no means resist their conclusion. Fre-
quently,theywere wrong; but Elizabeth's general strategywas to prom-
ise an answer and then to choose carefullyboth the momentand styleof
2. For a summaryhistoryof the expansion of the power of the House of Commons,
see Neale, 1:15-29.
Signs Autumn1975 33
response. On those occasions, she often spoke; and even when her re-
sponses could be construed as answers only because she described them
as such, the combinationof her presence and her language was generally
sufficientto scotch discussion and graciouslyto end illusions fostered
and reinforcedin her absence.
In the early speeches, Elizabeth relied heavily on adorned prose.
That maybe blamed on the fashionof the time,but itwas also a technique
of evasion. Moreover, it is evident that she had determined to teach
herselfsomethingthather formaleducation had not included, viz., how
to make a princelyoration. Her oratorical prowess improved with ex-
perience and must be credited directlyto her, but the fact that it de-
veloped at all is a testamentto the virtueof her tutors,to her Henrician
lineage, and to her early parliamentaryauditors, none of whom could
have been listeningverycarefully.Had theypaid stricterattentionto her
accession speech, theywould have been substantiallyless sanguine both
about theirabilityto controlher, and about the queen's intentionsto act
according to theirwishes: to marryquickly and acceptablyand to turn
over the real business of governmentto her husband. In comparatively
unadorned language, she said:
My Lords the Law of Nature movethmee to sorrowe formySister,

the burthen that is fallen upon me maketh me amazed, and yet
considering I am Gods Creature, ordeyned to obey his appoint-
ment I will theretoYelde, desiringe fromthe bottomof my harte
that I may have assistance of his Grace to bee the ministerof his
Heavenly Will in thisofficenow commyttedto me, and as I am but
one Bodye naturallye Considered though by his permission a
Bodye Politique to Governe, so I shall desyre you all my
Lords /Chieflyyou of the nobilityeuery one in his Degree and
Power to be assistantto me, thatI withmyRulinge and you withyor
Service may make a good accompt to AlmightyGod and leave some
comforteto our posterityein Earth.3
That such a traditional statementof intent could be ignored can be

explained solelybythe gender of the speaker. Parliamentwas blinded by
itsown assumptions,and the blindness lasted long enough forElizabeth
to complete her politicalapprenticeshipand to develop a genuine sense
of identityas a monarch.
That identityis one which shiftsover time. Uncertain of herselfin
the beginning,she became, in turn,defensivelyassertive,assertive,and
finally,matter-of-factabout herself.Likewise,Divine Right,to whichshe
frequently alluded in the firsthandful of years,became in easier days a
gracious explanation for her success, and in her last years almost
irrelevant-something accepted rather than insisted upon. Probably,
3. Stow MS 361, fol. 1., BritishMuseum, London. (Hereafter manuscriptsbelonging
to the BritishMuseum are cited as B.M.)
Elizabeth's conception of a "regal" self was fashioned initiallyfromat-
titudes toward kingshipacquired in her youth. From studyand direct
observation,Elizabeth knew how she oughtto be regarded. On this she
leaned. In her firstspeech to Parliament, a speech in response to a
petition that she marry, Elizabeth included a tentativeand perhaps
gratuitousobservationon the decorum of theirrequest.
For the other parte the manner of yor peticionI do well likeof and
take in good parte. because that it is simple. and contennithno
limytacionof place or person. If it had bene otherwise I muste
nedes have myslikedit verie muche and thoughtit in yowa verie
greate presumption,being vnfitting and altogethervnmete,foryow
to require them that may commande, or those to appoynte whose
partes are to desire, or suche to bind and lymite,whose duties are
to obaye, or to take upon yowto drawe my love to yorlykingeor
frame my will to yor fantasies. for a guerdon constreined and a
giftefreliegeven, can never agree together.4
Such a strong reaction to somethingthat has not occurred could have

been a warning to Parliament that it not become too specificin any
future petitionsrespectingher marriage; but even if that was on her
mind, in this passage Elizabeth was tryingon her power, talkingabout
how she would react "if it had bene otherwise,"explaining the relation-
ship between queen and Commons which she expected or hoped to
have.
At the time Elizabeth wrote the speech just quoted, she had not
begun to encounter serious opposition from Parliament. A few years
later, on one of those occasions when the queen declared an answer to
another Commons petition withoutactually giving one, Elizabeth hid
behind her own skirtsand pointed to heaven:
The weightand greatenesof thismattermightcawse in me being a

woman wantingeboth wittand memorysome feare to speake, and
bashfulnes besides, a thing appropriat to my sex: But yet the
princelyseate and kinglythrone,whereinGod, (though vnworthy)
hath constitutedme, makeththese twocauses to seme litlein myne
eyes, though grevous perhaps to yor eares, and boldeneth me to
saye somewhat in this matter,which I meane only to towche,but
not presentlyto answer.5
4. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 29 (end of session, 1559), B.M.
5. State Papers Domestic, Elizabeth, 12/27/36(to Commons, 1563), Public Record
Office, London. (Hereafter, documents in this series will be cited as S. P. Dom., Eliz.,
P.R.O.) A copy of the petitionto whichthe queen responded is preserved in S. P. Dom.,
Eliz. 12/27/35,P.R.O.; another,MS F. (M.), p. 169, Fitzwilliamof MiltonPapers, Northants
Record Society,Northampton.The "answer" withwhichElizabeth provides her audience
is that,the issue being grave,she mustseek wise counsel and thinkthe matterthrough;no
specific"answer" was forthcomingon thisoccasion, but Elizabeth actuallyused the word
eighttimesin thisbriefaddress, and her auditors mayhave thoughtthatshe had said more
than the text suggests.
Signs Autumn1975 35
Whatever Elizabeth may have thoughtof women in general, it is certain

thatshe did not imagine herselfto be lackingin witor memory;but she
was keenly aware that her greatestpolitical disadvantage lay in the la-
mentable factof her gender, and she was shrewdenough to understand
that the liabilitycould be manipulated to her advantage in a varietyof
ways. In this instance,what she did was to state what all men believed
and then to declare that God had made an exception in her case. It is a
kind of self-inflicted ad feminam,and it amounts to a claim of Divine
Right.
Probably,Elizabeth believed thather oratoricalperformancewould
fortifyher argument,and probablyshe was right.She impressed them.
Equally, one must assume that despite its momentsof blindness,Com-
mons was psychologicallydisposed to be persuaded. The traditionof the
monarchy,the hierarchywhich produced kings,also produced queens.
When Elizabeth's half-sisterMary acceded to the throne,Parliamentfelt
constrained to remind itselfand England that "the regal power of this
realm is in the Queen's Majesty as fullyand absolutelyas ever it was in
any of her most noble progenitors,kings of this realm."6
In termsof her religion,Elizabeth was far more acceptable to the
Parliamentthan Mary. However, in termsof her willingnessto conform
to the demands of conventionalfemininity, Elizabeth was far less man-
ageable than Mary. For example, unlike Mary, she made speeches in
Parliament.Two responses, it seems, were possible: eitherconsider her
an early analogue of Dr. Johnson's ludicrous female preacher or accept
the phenomenon as divinelyordained, as an exception to the law of
nature. From the point of view of psychological security,the second
response was mostlogical. Otherwise,one would have had to believe that
the kingdomwas held by unfithands. There is no disputingthe factthat
Elizabeth activelyencouraged the personalitycult that grew up around
her, but it seems obvious that most of her subjects were prepared to
believe that she was God's anointed.
Elizabeth may herselfhave cherished some beliefsabout divine or-
dination, but the sincerityof the language just quoted is doubtful. Yet
another petitionfor the queen to marryand declare a successorevoked
an admirable harangue. Referringonce more to her sex and her office,
Elizabeth spoke unreservedlyand, one thinks,withconsiderable sincer-
ity.
As formyowne parte I care not fordeathe, forall men are mortall,
and thoughe I be a woman, yet I haue as good a corage awnsuer-
able to my place as euere my fathere hade: I am yor anoynted
Queene / I wyll neuer be by vyolence constreyned to doo any
thynge.I thanke god I am in deed indued withsuche qualytes,that
yfI were turned owte of the Realme in my pettycote,I were hable
to lyue in any place of Chrystendon/Yor petyconis to deale in the
6. Title of I Mary, statute3, c. 1., modernized and quoted in Neale, 1:22.
36 Heisch Queen Elizabeth I
lymytaconof the Succession, at this presentytys not conneuyent,

nor neuer shalbe withowtsum peryllvntoyow,and certyndangere
vnto me /But were ytnot foryor peryll,at thistymeI wolde gyve
place not withstandynge my dangere/ yor perylls are sondry
wayes, for sum may be tocht,who restythenowe in suche terms
withvs,as ys not meete to be disclosed eytherein the comon howse,
or in the vppere howse /But assone as there may be a conneuyent
tyme,and that yt maye be doone with leaste peryllvnto yow, al-
though neuer withowtgreat dangere vntome. I wylldeale therein,
foryorsaftye,and offreitvntoyowas yor prynce,and hed withowt
request /For yt ys monstruous that the Feet sholde dyrecte the
hed /7
In this passage, especially at the end, the queen has again invoked that
most familiarof all Renaissance conceptions,the Great Chain of Being:
She is the head, Parliament the feet of a body politic. What is most
striking,however,is not the figurebut its verypersonal interpretation:
what Elizabeth had believed in principle in 1558, she had thoroughly
internalizedby 1566, the year of thisspeech. It is not importantthatshe
was angry when she spoke or that her audience-largely from Lords
-inclined her to speak more frankly.Neitheris itimportantthatwhen it
suited her she would return to the practice of creditingGod for her
peculiar abilitiesand successes; thatwas merelypolitic.But here, in the
midst of a verydifficultsituation,withboth Houses of Parliamentand
most of her PrivyCouncil in opposition to her, she said what she be-
lieved: that she was equal in courage to her fatherand that she would
not be bullied.8
Elizabeth was righton both counts. But ordinarily,she did her best
not to say so in a threateningway. Two holograph draftsof speeches,
togetherwitha discarded beginningfora third,and heavyemendations
on scribal copies of two other addresses show that it was sometimes
Elizabeth's impulse to speak in anger or haste,but thatshe was generally
able to emend in such a wayas to modifyor entirelyto removeall but the
7. MS G.g. 3.34, pp. 211-12 (apparentlyin error,since itwould appear thatthe pages
should be numbered 213-14) (to ajoint delegation, 1566), Cambridge UniversityLibrary,
Cambridge.
8. Elizabeth reconvened the Parliamentin October 1566 because she needed money,
and it became clear almost immediatelythatCommons was prepared to tie the issue of the
succession to the granting of the subsidy (see the Journalof the House of Commonsfor
October 17 and 18, 1566, p. 74). It was Cecil's opinion that Elizabeth could not get her
Subsidy and get rid of this Parliamentwithout,minimally,swearingthatshe would marry
(S. P. Dom., Eliz. 40/91,P.R.O.). The queen knew thatanother petitionwas on its way; so
rather than wait for its arrival, she hastilysummoned a joint delegation of Lords and
generally friendlymembers of Commons and delivered a speech calculated to bully her
audience into silence. Elizabeth had determinedthatthe best tacticforavoiding the matter
was to hand pick an audience she thoughtshe could manage and trythen thoroughlyto
intimidatethem. Alas for her, Commons was not so easily managed in thissession as was
thisdelegation. The best discussionof the entireissue is inJ. E. Neale, "Parliamentand the
Succession Question in 1562/3and 1566," EnglishHistoricalReview36 (1921): 497-520.
Signs Autumn1975 37
mostirresistibleinsultsfromher public language. In itsfinalversion,the

speech quoted above is fieryenough. However, the discarded opening
containsan implied accusation of nearlytreasonous behavior on the part
of the queen's petitioners:". . . but when I call to mynd how far from
dutiful care yea rather how ny a traiteroustrikthis tumblymcast did
springe I. muse how men of wit can so hardly use that giftthe hold."9
The hold, or reins, to which Elizabeth referredbelong to a sustained
equestrian metaphor which appeared in transmutedform in the final
version. But there she removed all glancing referencesto treason and
simplyaccused her petitionersof stupidity.
Two petitionswhich belong to the Parliament of 1563 drew a re-
sponse fromElizabeth in whichshe tried,and tried,and ultimatelyfailed
to be completely polite. The petitionswere unconsciously patronizing
and remarkablylong. They can be reduced to the usual request that
Elizabeth marryand name a successor.10The queen's draftresponse to
the petitionsis reproduced here (fig. 1), and fromher copy it is possible
to make a rough reconstructionof her struggleto be gracious.
Referringambiguously to the prolixityof the petitions,Elizabeth
began "The gret,"canceled it,and startedagain: "The two huge scroles
that you made gave in many words." Then, she tried to tone down her
language: "The two peticionsthat both house." No. "The two peticions
that you presented me." That would do, but she could not restrain
herself entirely: "The two peticions that you presented me in many
wordes exprest conteined thes two thingesin some my mariage and my
successan ...." Then, in a final attemptto temporize,Elizabeth added
something to acknowledge the sincerityof their entreaties: "The two
peticionsthat you presented me in many wordes exprestconteined thes
two thinges in some as of your cares the gretestmy mariage and my
successan. . . ."1
9. S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/41/5,P.R.O.
10. The petitionsof Lords and Commons are preserved in S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/27/34
and 12/27/35,respectively;an additional copy of the Commons petitionis in MS F. (M.), p.
169, Fitzwilliamof Milton Papers, NorthantsRecord Society,Northampton.Reading the
petitions,one gathersthe impressionthather petitionersbelieved thatiftheycould simply
explainmattersto theirsovereign,iftheycould only make her understand, she would have to
agree withthem. It is fromsituationsof thissortthatone begins to understanda contradic-
toryattitudetoward the queen. She was widelyand popularly regarded as a marvel,even
in Parliament; but the admiration applied perhaps more to the image than to the indi-
vidual. For when committeesin eitherHouse began to writetheirpetitions,theyinevitably
constructeddocuments which drew on biblical and historicaland legal historyat such
lengthand in such detail that-decorum aside-the effectis so patronizingand pedantic,
one mightthinka precocious child were being addressed.
11. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 30 (end of session, 1563), B.M. It will be noted fromthe
reproductionthatthe rapid italichand in thismanuscriptis in everyrespectdifferentfrom
the elaborate scriptwhichElizabeth used forher famous formalsignatures.This is the way
she wrotewhen she was writing-her workinghand, in other words; and the differenceis
instructiveas well as striking.The absence of marginsis also characteristicof the queen; a
psychologistmight have something to say about the relationshipbetween that and her
legendary parsimony.
I44 1A'
I
t.t4 .l
FIG. 1.-Lansdowne MS 94, fol.30, BritishMuseum, London. Holograph draftof Eliz-

abeth's speech at the end of the parliamentarysession, 1563. Reproduced by permissionof
the BritishLibraryBoard.
Signs Autumn1975 39
Elizabeth's sense of balance was not perfecthere, but it was close

enough to accomplish her purpose. Elsewhere, she was able to manage
her language better.At the end of a sternspeech to Commons, Elizabeth
wrote a perorationwhich,in its firstformulation,sounded like a threat:
"Let thismy displing stand you in stede of sorar strokesnever to tempt
to fara princes pow.... "Power" was clearlythe word she had in mind,
but she struckit and added "paciens."12 That was a prudent alteration.
She was well aware thatdisplaysof magnanimitywere vastlymore effec-
tive than threats.At times,in fact,one feels that Elizabeth carried dis-
plays of magnanimity to extremes. However, the examples of that
phenomenon belong either to timeswhen the queen was under special
stress,as withthe execution of Mary Stuart,or when she was stillsome-
what self-consciousabout her position.
One such speech marked the end of the parliamentarysession of
1576. The address did not respond to any petition,nor was it designed
to get the queen out of political difficulty.She wrote it, apparently,
because she wanted to; and its opening section,one which imitatesthe
"disabling" statementwithwhich contemporaryparliamentaryorations
generallybegan, showed the queen verymuch on the offensive,thank-
ing God for a stringof successes, which she then went on to list.
Doe I see Godd's most sacred text of holie writtdrawen to divers

sences, be it neuer so perfectlietaught: and shall I hope that my
speache can passe fourthethroughesoe manye eares, withoutmis-
take; wheare soe many ripe and diverswittsdoe oftnerbende them
selves to conster,then attaine,the perfectunverstandinge?If any
looke foreloquence, I shall deceive theirhope; ifsome thinkeI can
match theirguiftethatspake before,theyholde an open heresie. I
cannot satisfietheirlonging thirstethat watche for those delights,
unlesse I sholde affourdetheme what myselfe had never yetin my
possession. If I sholde saie the sweetestspeache withthe eloquent-
est tonge that ever was in man, I were not able to expreasse that
restles care which I have ever bent to governe for the greatest
welthe; I sholde wronge myneintent,and greatliebaite the merite
of my owne indevour. I cannot attributethose happes and good
successe to my devyse,withoutdetractingemouche fromthe De-
vine Providence; nor challendge to my privatecomendation, what
is onlie dewe to Godd's eternal glorie. My sex permittsit not; or, if
it might be in this kinde, yet finde I noe impeachement whie, to
persons of more base estate, the like proportion sholde not be
allotted.13
12. Cotton Charter IV. 38 (2) (end of session, 1566), B.M.

13. This text is froma printed source,John Harington,Nugae antiquae,ed. Thomas
Park (London, 1804), 1:120 ff.The manuscriptsource for Park's textmay exist,but it has
not yet been located.
40 Heisch QueenlElizabeth I
Because of its linguistic artificiality,the speech is something of a

curiosity. Yet the queen was evidently pleased with it. She sent a copy to
her godson, John Harington, and the survival of an unusually large
number of contemporary manuscripts traceable to the court suggests
that Elizabeth allowed the speech to be copied and to be circulated
privately.'4 This was the firstof four speeches in which the queen made
an account of her stewardship. At thisjuncture, she had ruled for seven-
teen years. She was fully in control of the government, had become
identified with English success at home and abroad, and had, in some
sense, become identified with England. Very likely, Elizabeth had begun
to feel that identification herself; and this speech, this performance,
acknowledged the myth growing up about her and celebrated her public
persona.
The speech is particularly striking because of the contrast between
genuine feelings and false language which characterizes it. It is heavy-
handed from the beginning-just quoted-to the end, where the queen,
who had entirely reworked the speech at least once, affected to wish ". ..
that each of youe, had tasted some dropes of Lethe's floode, to cancell
and deface those speeches [i.e., hers] owt of yowr remembraunce."15 In
later years, when a confident and seasoned Elizabeth spoke to instruct
and to report, she kept oratorical artifice to a minimum.
I do assure yo" there is no prince that loues his Subiectes better or

whose loue can countervaile our Loue. Ther is no iewell beeit of
neuer so rich a price which I set before this iewell. I meane yor
Loue for I do esteeme it more than anie treasure. or riches, for that
wee know how to prize But Loue and thanks I counte vnvallueable,
and though god hath raised mee high, yet this counte. the glorie of
my Crowne. That I haue raigned with yor loues; This makes mee
that I do not so muche reioyce that god hath made mee to bee a
queene; as toe be a queene ouer soe thankfull a people; therfore I
14. A note writtenby Haringtonon his copy and subsequentlyprintedby Park reads
as follows:"Memorandum, These good wordes were givenunto mee bymymosthonorede
Ladye and Princesse,and did bringwithetheme these good advyses:-'Boye Jacke,I have
made a clerke wrytefairemy poore wordes forthyneuse, as it cannot be suche striplinges
have entrance into parliamenteassemblyeas yet. Ponder theme in thyhoures of leysure,
and playe withe theme tyllthey enter thyne understandinge; so shallt thou hereafter,
perchance, fyndesome good fruteshereofwhen thyGodmotheris oute of remembraunce;
and I do thys,because thyfatherwas readye to sarve and love us in trouble and thrall'"
(Harington, 1:127). Apart fromHarington'scopy,there are in the BritishMuseum at least
fiveearly manuscriptsof the speech (additional MSS 32, 379, fols. 22-24; 33, 271, fol. 2;
15, 891, fols. 198-99; 29, 973, fols. 3-5; Harleian MS 787, fols. 125-26.); and there is a
peculiar copy, possiblyan early draft,MSSL T8525 a 3, Dawson Turner Papers, Virginia
Historical Society,Richmond.
15. The evidence for reworkingof the speech is contained in the patternof textual
variationsin the survivingmanuscripts.The usual scribalchanges and errorsare there,but
larger mattersof dictionand placementsuggestthoroughrevision,possiblyin twoor three
drafts.
Signs Autumn1975 41
haue cause to wish nothinge more then to contente the subiectes

and that is a dutie which I owe. neitherdoo I desire to liue longer
daies, then that I maie see prosperritie,and thatis myonelie desire
and as I am that person thatstillyetvnder god hath deliuered yow.
so I trustby the almightie power of god that I shall bee his in-
strumpenteto preserue youwfrom enuie, perill. dishonor. shame
tirannie and oppression, partlie by means of yorintended helps.
whichwee take verie acceptable because it manifesteththe largenes
of yor good Loues and Loyaltiesvnto yorsoueraigne.16
At this point,in 1601, Elizabeth must have feltthatthere was noth-

ing remainingto be proved. She wished simplyto sum up and to make
thatsummationpart of the public record of her reign. Neither here nor
in the speeches whichdirectlyprecede and followdid the queen trouble
herselfor her hearers withdark language or counterfeitmodesty; and
were it not for the existence of texts for some earlier speeches, and
accounts of stillothers,it mightbe supposed thatplain talkwas a discov-
eryof Elizabeth'sold age. But thatwas not true. For even when Elizabeth
was perfectlycertainof her position,she was carefulof whatshe said and
to whom she said it. There are two speeches whichbelong to the Parlia-
mentof 1584-85. The occasion of the firstwas the deliveryof the clerical
subsidy,a partof the church'srevenue turnedover to the queen. Present
were the principalofficersof the church and roughlyeight membersof
the Privy Council. Elizabeth spoke extempore, and her remarks, to-
getherwiththose of various councillorsand bishops, are preserved in a
third-personaccount which,judging from the hand, is the work of a
practicedprofessional.Thirtydays later,at the end of the parliamentary
session, Elizabeth spoke once again-this time to the entire Parliament,
and this time from a prepared text. The speeches cover much of the
same ground, but the effectis whollydifferent.In the second speech,
Elizabeth graciouslyacknowledged the votingof the subsidybill by Par-
liament:"Now I conclude thatyowrlove and care; neytharis nor shall be
bestowed vppon a carelesse prince: but suche as but for.yowrgood will
passeth as litleforthisworlde,as who carethleaste: withthanksforyowr
fresubsidye,a manyfestshow of the aboundence of your good wills.The
which I assure yow: but to be employd to yowrweale; I cold be bettar
pleased to. returnethen receyve/"17 The queen had had other thoughts
about that"fre subsidye"when she had been presented withthe clerical
offeringa month earlier: She took it, saying"that she did accept of yt.
thanckfully,and the rather for that ytcame voluntarylieand francklie,
wheras the laytiemust be intreatedand moved therevnto/"18
16. Stow MS 362, fol. 169, B.M. This manuscriptrepresentsone of four versionsof
the so-called Golden Speech, to a Whitehall audience in 1601, and is part of what one
mightdescribe as the authorized public text.
17. Harleian MS 540, fol. 115, B.M.
18. S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/176/68,P.R.O. The rough count of those present is derived
fromthe headnote to the P.R.O. text.
Both speeches dweltprincipallyon the matterof religion,one of the

queen's least favoritesubjects. Protestantreformersin Parliamenthad
petitioned the queen for redress of abuses, pointing especially to the
questionable practice of some bishops who, for their own profit,ap-
pointed unfitministers.Queen Elizabeth liked neitherthe petitionnor
the practiceof the bishops. And whatirritatedher mostwas thatsome of
her councillorswere activelyengaged in pressingthe issue of reformin
Parliament; and that despite the fact that Elizabeth had forbade such
discussion. The queen's genuine reaction to the activityin Commons is
contained in her speech to the bishops and councillors:
[T]hen she sayd vnto the Bishops we vnderstandthat some of the

nether house haue vsed dyversreprochfullspeeches ageinst you,
tending greatlyto yor dishonor which we will not suffer,and that
theymeddle w[ith]mattersaboue theircapacitie not apperteyning
vnto them, for the which we will call some of them to an accompt
and we vnderstandtheybe conntennced by some of our Connsell
which we will redresse or els vnconnsellsome of them/But saith
she /we will not Charge the whole house with this disorder for
although there be some intemperate and rashe heades in that
house, yettherebe manywyseand discretemen who doe fyndeiust
cause of grievannceageynstsome of you /19
Speaking before Parliament on preciselythe same subject, the queen

firstcushioned her words withthanksand then proceeded:
yet one mattar towchethe me so nere; as I may not ovarskype.

Religion, the grownd on which all othar mattarsowght to take
roote,and beinge corruptedmaye mare all the tree-And thatthere
be some faultefindarswiththe ordar of the clergye,whichso maye
make a slaunder to myselfeand the churche,whose ovar rular God
hath made me, whose negligence can not be excused. yf any
scisimesor errourshereticallwere suffered.Thus much I mustsay,
thatsome faultesand neglygencesmay growand bee, as in all othar
greate charges it happenethe/ and what vocation without: All
which yfyow my lords of the clergyedo not a mand; I meane to
depose yow. look ye there fore well to yowrcharges.20
The tactic of declaring to the Parliament that clerical corruption
should be accepted as a challenge, a call to vocation,togetherwithher
warning to the clergy,was effective.It blunted the offenseof the Puri-
tans. But the queen was herselfconcerned about the proliferationof
independent-mindedministers.In fact,she was at least as worriedabout
overzealous Protestantsas she was about the Catholics. The Catholics
19. Ibid. Bracketed letterssupplied fromS. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/176/69,P.R.O., a later
copy of the original document.
Signs Autumn1975 43
were dependable because theyalwayswanted the same thing.They pre-

sented a concreteexternal threatof invasion and overthrow,and on the
domestic front kept themselves well hidden. They endangered the
queen's person. Puritans, on the other hand, wanted an ecclesiastical
structure which the queen properly regarded as being inimical to
monarchal rule: if obedience to one's conscience came before obedience
to the queen, it followed that the queen and her policies could be dis-
obeyed on principle. The radical Protestantsendangered Elizabeth's
government. Therefore, she sought uniformity,not reform. To the
bishops she expressed her displeasure this way:
First in that you haue not greater care in making ministres,

whereofsome be of such lewd lyfeand Corrupt behavior (whereof
we knowe of some such) thatbe not worthyto come into any honest
company /Ageyne you suffermany ministresto preach what they
lyst/and to mynistrethe sacramentes according to the[ir] owne
fansies,some one way,some another: to the breach of vnytie/yea;
and some of them so curious in searchy[ng]mattersaboue their
capacitye as theypreach theywottnot what/That there is no hell,
but a torment of conscience/ nay I haue heard of there be 6
preachers in one dyocesse the which do preach 6 sondry waies I
wish such men to be broughtto Conformytieand vnytie,that they
ministrethe sacramentes according to the ordre of this Realme,
and preach all, one truth,and thatsuch as be found not woorthyto
preach, to be compelled to reede homelyes,such as were set furth
in our Brother King Edward his tymeand synce,forthere is more
Learning in one of those, then in twentyof some of theirsermons,
and we require you thatyou do not fa[vour]such men being caryed
aweye with pitye hoping of their conformytieand enclyning to
noble menes Le[ttres] and gentlemens lettres, for they will be
hanged, before theywilbe reformed/21
The speech before Parliament contained some of the sentiments

expressed franklybefore the bishops, but all traces of anger and irrita-
tion were gone, having been replaced by quiet admonition:
... yfI were not perswaded thatmynewere the treweway of gods

will God forbydI shuld lyveto prescribeit to yow. Take yow hede
lest Ecclesiastes say not to trwe.theythat feare the horye frost,the
snowe shall fallvpon them. I se manyovarbold withgod almightye
makyngeto manysubtillscannyngsof his blessed will,as lawyersdo
with humayne testaments.The presumptionis so groase as I may
not suffarit (yetmynd I not herebyto animate Romanistes,which
what advarsaries theybe to myneestate is sufficiently knowne), nor
tolleratenewfangleness I meane to guyde themboth by gods holy
21. S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/176/68,P.R.O.; abbreviationsexpanded, and bracketedletters
supplied from S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/176/69,P.R.O.
trew rule. Yn both partes be perryllsand of the later I must pro-
nounce them daungerous to a kyngelyRule, to have every man
accordinge to his owne sensure to make a doome of the validitie
and privitieof his princes government,with a comon vaile and
cover of gods worde, whose folowersmust not be iudged but by
privatemens exposition. God defend you fromsuche a Rular that
so evill will guyde yow:22
In this instance, the queen's appearance was as essential as the

words she spoke. Protestantreformwas hypothetical,abstract.Elizabeth,
the head of the church, was not. And since relativelyfew Protestants,
even those most active in seeking reform of the church, considered
themselvesto be adversariesof the queen, theygenerallytried to sepa-
rate the issue of religious reformfromits obvious implicationsfor the
queen's government.Speaking before the bishops, Elizabeth could re-
cord her disgust,but when she came before Parliamentitwas to reassert
her position as head of the church and to state withsome particularity
the danger to her rule presentedby the radical Protestants.The speech
began withloving language whichglossed over the legislativewrangling
whichhad dominated the session: "My lords,and ye of the lower howse,
my silence must not iniuriethe owner so mouche as to suppose a substi-
tutesufficientto rendar you the thankesthatmyharteyeldetheyow: not
so mouche forthe. safe kepinge of mylyfe,forwhichyowrcare apperes
so manifest:as forthe neglectingeyowreprivatefutureperillnot regard-
yng otharwaythan my presentstate."23
The queen's thanksforthe safe keeping of her lifereferto a bill in
Parliament,originallydesigned to prosecute and to exclude Mary and
her heirs from succession in the event of an attempt to assassinate
Elizabeth. To the dismayof nearlyeveryonearound her, Elizabeth had
insisted upon modificationof the bill to remove the portion affecting
James; and she was here giving thanks for a measure, much watered
down, which she would by no means accept in a stronger form.
Moreover, she vetoed everyother bill passed by this Parliamentwhich
had anythingto do withthe church.24
Very probably,those vetoes would have come in any event. But the
queen had enjoined the Commons fromdiscussingreligion,and she had
been disobeyed. Therefore, she undid what she had told themnot to do
in the firstplace. She also made good her pledge to the bishops to call
unruly members of Commons to account. As withthe vetoes, however,
Elizabeth separated reprisals from her personal performanceby using
Sir Thomas Bromley,the Lord Chancellor, as her hatchetman.

23. Ibid.
24. See Neale, Parliaments,2:28-57 and passim, for the historyof the Act, and pp.
98-99 for a listof the vetoed bills.
Signs Autumn1975 45
The final session of the Parliament began with an oration by the

House Speaker, Sir John Puckering. Then Bromley, acting strictlyon
the queen's orders, spoke sternly and reproachfully, threatening
punishmentforthose in Commons who had ignored the queen's orders
byinitiatingdiscussionof religionand the church. Afterthat,the titlesof
bills passed by the Parliament were read and the queen's disposition
recorded. Then, at the very end, the queen spoke. After Bromley's
damning tirade, Elizabeth's words must have seemed soothing
indeed-a royalpardon, utterlyforgiving.Had Commons any inklingof
what she had said to the bishops, however,theywould not have been so
readilymanaged.25But Elizabeth was as carefulof her cameral address-
es as she was of her trulypublic speeches, and an assessmentof those
considered to be "lost" indicates that they were either brief and spon-
taneous, and thereforeunrecorded, or that theywere intended for an
immediate audience and were deliberatelyunrecorded.26
Just as Elizabeth suppressed speeches, she allowed others to find
theirway into circulation.It was a practicewhichbegan in all innocence,
but one which was used later in a fairlysophisticatedway. Elizabeth's
speech upon accession was preserved,ratheras a souvenir; so, too, her
firstparliamentaryaddress. Afterthat, and for many years, it was her
habit sometimes to give friends and relativescopies of her oratorical
labors. But beginning with the speech to the Parliament of 1584-85
quoted so extensivelyabove, the circulationof selectedaddresses became
intentional.
A copy of that speech was quickly obtained by the historianJohn
Stow, who published it in both the second edition of Holinshed's
Chroniclesand in the Annals. Stow's connections with the PrivyCouncil
are well known,but it is not clear preciselyhow he obtained his copy.27
25. As Neale observes, "both the stingand the balm were hers" (Parliaments,2:101).
Of course there was no "balm," strategic or otherwise, for the bishops; and just as
Elizabeth'sordinaryhandwritingreveals a practicalwoman, so too does her language when
she speaks to these veryworldlymen of God.
26. Most of the "lost" speeches came at the ending of parliamentarysessions, but
there is evidence for more: forexample, an angryoutburstto a delegation fromLords in
response to their petitionof 1563 (see n. 10 above) was reported by the Spanish ambas-
sador (SpanishCalendar Elizabeth 1. 296, modernized and quoted by Neale, Parliaments,
1:110); more intriguing,there was a response to a joint delegation upon the presentation,
in 1572, of a proposal to instituteproceedings against Mary Stuart (Neale, Parliaments,
1:262-74). There is nothingin eithersituationto suggesta settingfundamentallydifferent
from those audiences so fullyreported except the queen's disposition and the queen's
pleasure.
27. Apart from the giftto John Harington (see n. 14 above), there is evidence, for
example, of a copy of Elizabeth's firstparliamentaryspeech (1559) given to Lady Stafford
and the survivalof Admiral Lord Clinton's copy of Elizabeth's speech at the end of the
session in 1566 (Hatfield MS xiii. 215, Historical Manuscripts Commission, Hatfield
House). There has been some debate over whetherStow was actually hired by the Privy
Council as a propagandist, but as F. Smith Fussner has pointed out, the question is
academic, since Stow's middle-of-the-roadpoliticsso resembled the queen's (TheHistorical
What is clear, however,is thathis source was direct.The textused here is

transcribedfroma manuscriptin Stow's hand, one whichhas the look of
somethingcopied froma formalexemplar. Paragraph divisions,which
would not have appeared in the queen's draft,are preserved;so we may
assume that he got hold of a faircopy, quite possiblythatof Elizabeth's
final text.28
In that instance, the purpose of publication was to counter, or at
least to minimize,the effectof Puritanpropaganda. That was useful,but
not nearly as importantas publishing the speeches which established
Elizabeth's difficultyin acceptingthe inevitability
of MaryStuart'sexecu-
tion.Those speeches, delivered in November 1586, followedMary'strial
and preceded the execution of her sentence. Of all the parliamentary
addresses, these representthe fullestattemptat manipulationof public
sentimentthrough the queen's legislativeforum,and theyrequire con-
siderable attention.
In both cases, Elizabeth spoke tojoint delegations.The manuscript
evidence suggeststhat in each case, the queen spoke, and thata copy of
her text-either prepared in advance or supplied by a stenographer
presentat the audiences-was then revisedby the queen, convertedinto
fair copy, and revised once more. The final texts,very close to those
printedin Holinshed, were available withina couple of weeks following
deliveryof the second speech. And theirrelease was accompanied by an
elaborate, if transparent, explanation that one R. C., plausibly
Burghley's son Robert Cecil, had imperfectlytranscribedthe queen's
words.29That effortwas made solely to disassociate the queen from
publicationof her speeches, but her correctionsof the finaldraftsshow
that Elizabeth was fullyaware of the purpose of her editorial work.
Although we can never know exactlywhat was on Elizabeth's mind
either at the timethese speeches were delivered or at the timeof Mary's
execution, on balance the best guess is thatthe queen firstlooked foran
alternativeto execution; then, reluctantlydeterminingthat Mary must
die, hoped that some of her subjectsmightdecide or be encouraged to
take the law into theirown hands, thus relievingElizabethof the burden,
both psychologicaland political,of her relative'sdeath.
Revolution:EnglishHistoricalWriting and Thought,1580-1640 [New York: Columbia Univer-

sityPress, 1962], p. 215). The best evidence forStow'sconnectionwiththe Council is to be
found in comparison of governmentdocuments withStow's publications,particularlythe
1587 edition of Holinshed's Chronicles. As Conyers Read suggested,it is possible "thatthe
Governmentmade use of his variousChronicles in somethinglike the way in whichmodern
governmentsmake use of the press to influencepublic opinion" (Mr. Secretary Walsingham
[Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1925], 3:455.). However Stow got hold of his materials,
obviouslyhe did so withthe knowledgeand approbationof the Council, and the effectwas
the same.
29. Cotton MS Faustina F. X, fol. 256, B.M. The mechanics of the release are ex-
plained by Neale, Parliaments,2:129-30.
Signs Autumn1975 47
Her hope was based on two documents: one the Parliamentarystat-

ute of 1584-85, the Act for the Queen's Safety; the other, a vigilante
pact known as the Bond of Association. The Bond of Association re-
sponded to the revelationof a series of Catholic plots against Elizabeth's
life. Presumably,the Bond was engineered by Elizabeth's councillors
specificallyas a caveat to Mary and her supportersand also as a means
for taking direct action against anyone who should attemptto murder
their queen. In its original wording, the Bond required action against
persons and their heirs for whom a plot was undertaken, even if
conspiracycould not be established.30In 1584, when the Bond was being
circulated and signed, Elizabeth could not have been happy with its
implications.Firstof all, it provided foran unthinkabledevice: an inter-
regnum supervised by parliamentarycommission in the event of her
assassination.Second, and thisis more subtle,since Elizabeth knew that
the directbeneficiariesof a successfulCatholic attempton her lifewould
probably be those radical Protestants who, with another Protestant
monarch,mightproceed more rapidlywithreform,the Bond could not
have been less than disquieting.
Nevertheless,followingMary's trial,the Bond, fortifiedby the Act
for the Queen's Safety,provided Elizabeth withat least a slender hope
thata timelyassassinationmightpreclude the necessityforMary'sexecu-
tion. Equally important,the existenceof the Bond and the Act could be
construed as an overwhelmingstatementof the will of her people, as a
mandate forthe queen's action. The drawback,of course, was thataction
constrained by parliamentarystatutetended to undermine the crown's
authority;but since Mary's death would be an invitationto invasion,the
queen's principalconcern musthave been the manner in whichthe news
was received abroad.
The pretextcentralto the printedtextsof the speeches on Marywas
that Elizabeth was speaking directlyto the members of her Parliament,
quite personallyand sincerely,and fortheirears only. While her sincer-
itymust not be doubted, neithershould strategicreferencesand altera-
tionsbe ignored. The differencebetween the textscould be examined at
great length, but three matters seem most significant:Elizabeth's at-
titude toward Mary,the reason for proceeding by Parliamentarystatute
rather than by common law, and the queen's indecision.
In the earliest version of the firstspeech on Mary, Elizabeth de-
scribed her cousin and her cousin's behavior in this fashion:
And nowe as tochyngthat person whychewytheso foule treasons

hathe steynedher estate and blood as that I cannot thynkeof her
but to my greafe I may seeme peradventure to bere her mallyce
and to be desyrous of reuenge, And mallyce I know bryngythe
30. The firstdraftis preserved in S. P. Dom., Eliz. 173/81,P.R.O.
fortherashe judgement and hastyprocedyngeoften tymes,but I
take god to wytnesfromwhom no secretsof hartscan be hydden I
bere here no mallycenor seeke other reuenge but thysthatI wyshe
wytheall myharte thatshe maybe repententforthysand all other
her crymes,And that you may the better perceaue howe maly-
cyouslyI haue proceded ageynsteher I will declare a mattervnto
you wherein I shall becvm a blabbe/Aftertheyrelate conspryces
and treasons were discouerydvnto me, of myselfI sent and wrote
vnto her, geuynge her to vnderstandthatyfshe wold confesse the
trutheand by her lettresaduertiseme forwhatcause and by whose
meanes she was indusede to consente there vnto and wythe all
dyscouer the conspyratorsin this accyon assuryngeher that I delt
not cautelouselywithher to drawe fromher the knowledgeof any
thyngewhereof I was alredy yngnorant,I wold couer her shame
and saue her from raproch whycheoffreof myne she vtterlyre-
fusede and stedfastly denyed her guyltynes therin, not
wythestandynI assure you yfthe case stode betweene her and my
selfonely yfythad plesed god to haue made vs bothe milkemaydes
wythepayles on owr armes so that the mattershold haue rested
betwene vs two, And that I knewe she did and wold seeke my
destruccion styllyet could I not consent to her deth, nay to say
ferther,the case standyngas yt dothe, yf I were assured that she
wold repent and desystefromeferthreattempts,whycheperhaps
may be promysed (but ytwere harde to trustewordes wher suche
deeds hath gone before,yea. yfI . could perceyuehow besydesthe
practysesof the Scottyshquene her selfI myghtbe Freed fromthe
conspyracyesand treasons of her fauorers In this actyon,by yor
Leaues she shold not dye Thys ys the mallyce I bere vnto this
woman31
Elizabeth's attitudeswere stated plainly here. She began with the

criminalratherthan the crime,showed thatshe had taken unusual steps
to dissuade Mary from continuingto involve herselfin treasonous ac-
tivities,and concluded that,while it was probablyhopeless to thinkthat
Mary could be induced to leave offher plotting,Elizabeth would suffer
it were no furtherconsiderationsinvolved.In the parallel passage in the
manuscriptfor the propaganda tract,Elizabeth turned attentionto the
nature and danger of the intended crime, muted and shortened refer-
ences to Mary'swickedness,and softenedexpressionof Elizabeth'sopin-
ion that her cousin was an incorrigibleconspirator.With its canceled
lines and emendations, the text which Elizabeth corrected for publica-
tion shows those alterationsin process:
31. My transcriptionis fromMS G.g. 3.34, pp. 305-6, Cambridge UniversityLibrary,

Cambridge (abbreviations expanded); the entire speech occupies pp. 304-8; there is
another, very similar copy in Harleian MS 158, fols. 156-57, B.M. The choice of the
Cambridge manuscriptreflectsthe conditionof the Harley manuscriptmore than it does
an editorialjudgment.
Signs Autumn1975 49
albeit
AND now notwithstanding, if I finde apparantlie my life hath bin
ful by suche as no desert procured
.mostdaungerouslie sought, and mr death y-e contriued^ Yet
am I in respecttherofso cleare fromemalice,whichhath the prop-
ertieto make menne gladde and rcioyccfullat yefallsand faultesof

foes
theireenemies, and make themseeme to do thingsforothercawses
is the ground Yet
when as withrancor theyarc stirredto pursue thcircintentionsan4
I protestit is and hath bine my greuous thogte
protestit is to mec; and hath been a thingmost grciuous to thinke
that one not differentin sex, of like estate and my neare kinne,
fallen into . so . great a Crime.
shold be so uoidc of grace, or false in faith as now to seckc my
death, by whomc so long her life hath bcnc prcscrued, Iwth
th'intollcrablcperill of my ownc. Yea I had so litle purpose to
pursue her withany coloure of malice, Yt as it is not unknowne to

some of my Lordes: here (for now I will play the blabb) I secratlie
sondry
wrote her a lettrevpon the discouerie of her treasons,that if she
wold them
woldc repent her thoroughlicof her -euillcourse, confesse t and
them. my self
priuatlie acknowledge - by her lettres vnto e, shee neuer
nede . them so a
shouldeA be called for4t-intopublike question, Neither did I it of
aRyminde to circumuenther, forthen I knew as much as shee cold

euen yet
confesse,and so did I write.And if at this presen now the matter
but wold
is made to apparant, I thought shee trulie we repentant-(as
to do
perhapps she wolde easely appeare in outwarAsheowe)and thatfor
her none other wolde take the matteruppon them,or thatwe were
vpon
but as two milkemaides, wthpailes under oure armes,or that there
but
were no more dependency vpon us, and myneowne lifewere onlie
danger
in perill,and not the whole estateof youre religionand well doings,
I protest(wherein you may belieue mee for-athough,I may haue
many vices, I hope I haue not accustomed my tongue to be an

Instrumentof vntruthe/) I wolde most willingliepardon and re-
this
mitt4ier offence.32
Apart from changes made solely in consideration of style and

modificationof language which could be interpretedas excessivelyun-
kind to Mary,it should be noted thatthe queen has retained the section
in which she plays "the blabb," plainly affectingnot to know that her
confidentialinterjectionwould findits way to a broad internationalau-
dience.
In the earlytext,when the queen explained whyshe had proceeded
by parliamentarystatute,the Act forthe Queen's Safety,ratherthan by
common law, emphasis was laid squarely on the way the outside world
would view the trial: "But I thoughtytmychebetterand more fytteto
haue her tryede by the moste honorable and anntyentnobylityof the
Realme ageynstwhom and whose procedyngesno excepcyonsmyghtor
can be taken/"33 Speaking of the odium of a common-lawtrial,Elizabeth
permitted herself a long digressionon the pettyprecisionof low-minded
lawyers and a passing insultto Mary. Describingthe process of a regular
arraignment, Elizabeth spoke sarcastically:"For yfI shold haue followed
that course of the common Lawe, For soth She must haue ben In-
dyghtydby a Iury of twelue men in StaffordShyre,She musthaue hold
vp her hand, and openly byn arayned at a barre, whyche had byn a
propre maner of procedyngewythea woman of her qualytyI meane her
qualytyby byrthand not by condycons."34
The publictextnotonlydefended the decisionto tryMarybystatute,
but made an elaborate and somewhatirrelevantdefense of the reasons
for its enactment. The explanation was not altogether satisfactory;
Elizabeth was protestingtoo much. But she rid the text of the ungra-
cious, almost off-color,referenceto Mary's "condycons"and converted
her broadly sarcastic remarks about a common-law trial into observa-
tions which were merelyironic:
And now, as towchingtheiretreasons,and conspiraciestogethrwth
her that was the contriuerof them. I will not so preiudicate my
selfe, and this my Realme, as to say or thinckethat I might not
32. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 83, B.M. (abbreviationsexpanded).

33. MS G.g. 3.34, p. 307, Cambridge UniversityLibrary,Cambridge.
34. Ibid., p. 306.
Signs Autumn1975 51
withoutthe last statuteby th'auncientlawes of thisland, haue pro-
ceeded against her, which was not made particulerlyto preiudice

hit
her, though perhaps she and thcr practices might then be sus-
respect of the
pected in respectof thcrinclination,and thc^ dispositionof those,
such as depend that way
that dcpcnded on her It was ale-so farrefromebeing intended to
to
intrapp her, that it was rather, an admonition,-a warning, and
diswasion vnto her, fromcincurrit the daungr thereof,but sithit
is made, & in the force of a lawe, I thoughtgood, in ytwch might
concerne her, to proceede according thereunto, rather then by
course of common lawe, wherein if you the Iudges haue not de-
ceaued mee, or thatthe bookes you broughtmee were not false,wCh
God forbidd I mowght as lustly haue tried her, by th'auncient
lawes of the lande. But yow Lawiers are so nice and so precise in
siftingand scanning euery word and letter,that many times yow

stand more vpon forme,then matter,vppon syllabs,then the sense
of the lawe. For in this strictnes,and exact followingof common

and then
forme she must haue bene indited in Staffordsh',haucA bene ar-
raingned at the barre, holden vp her hand, and bene tried by a
Iurye, a proper course forsothto deale in thatmatterwthone of her

thes and more
estate. I thoughtitbettertherefore(foravoiding of all absurdities),
to charge
and more honorable to comitthe cause to the inquisicon of a good
nomber of the greatest& mostnoble personages of thisRealme, of
the Iudges and others of good accownt, whose sentence I must
approue.35
35. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 84-85, B.M. (some abbreviationsexpanded).
Between the delivery of the firstand second speeches on Mary,

Elizabeth sent word asking whethersome course other than execution
might be found which would satisfythe law and reduce the danger to
Elizabeth and her realm.36The response,of course, was negative;and in
the second speech, she made numerous referencesto her latestrequest.
Again, the differencesare striking.The opening sections of the Par-
liamentaryand the propaganda textsset the differencein tone which is
maintained throughout.In the early text,the queen began witha very
straightforwardreferenceto her latest request: "I perceaue yow haue
well consydered of my last message sent vnto yow procedyingfroman
ernest desyre and a hungrywyllin me that sume way mightbe by yow
formysafetydeuysed wytheowtthe executon of thatActe whereuntoby
yorpetycon I was moved/But nothyngbeyng found for my satysfaccon
in that behalf, I must needs make a great complaynte."37
Thoroughly reworked, the text for the tract began with a classic
lament upon which the queen improved and dilated:
on end bredes
Full greuous is the way whose going-* and out findcscomber for
the hier of a laborious Iourney. I haue Griued more thisday then

use silence
euer in mylifewhitherI shold speake or hold mypoacc. If I speake
and not complaine I shall dissemble, If contraricwiscI hold my

ful
peace your labor taken weare -i4vaine. For me to make my mone
weare strange and rare, for I suppose youe shall findfewthat for
theireowne perticulerwillcomber youe withsuch a care: Yet such
I doe-protesthath bene my greedie desire and hungrywill,thatof
yourconsultationmighthaue falneout some othermeanes to work
my saftieioyned withyoure assurance (then that for wchYoue are

become so ernest suitors) as I protest I must needes vse
complaint .. .28
36. Simonds D'Ewes, TheJournalsofAl theParliamentsduringtheReignofQueenElizabeth
..., rev. P. Bowes (London: P. Bowes, 1682), p. 379.
37. MS G.g. 3.34, p. 312, Cambridge UniversityLibrary,Cambridge. As with the
preceding speech on Mary,the texttranscribedforthe earlyversionof the address is from
the Cambridge manuscript(pp. 312-16); Harleian MS 158, fols. 158-60, B.M., containsa
similarversion.
38. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 86, B.M.
Signs Autumn1975 53
In both textsfor the second speech, Elizabeth conveyed her strong

disinclinationto accede to Mary's execution. The principal differences,
apart fromthose of styleand emphasis, reside in the manner and in the
extent to which Elizabeth, speaking before Parliament,referredto her
concern over world reaction should Mary's head be removed. Some of
that is retained in the public text,but the conclusion to which Elizabeth
came was stillthatshe did not know what to do. In the public text,it was
expressed this way:
Your Iudgment I condemne not, neither do I mistake your
reasons, but praie youe to accept my thankfullnes,excuse my
doubtfullnes, and take in good part my annswer annswerles:
wherein I attributenot so much to my owne Iudgment, but that I
think,many perticulerpersons may go before me, though by de-
gree I go before them,thereforeifI shold say,I wold not doe what
youe request, it mightperadventurebe more than I thought,and
to say I wold do it,mightperhaps breed Perillof thatyoue labor to
preserue, being more then in youer owne wisdoms and discretions
wold seeme conuenient, circumstancesof place and tyme being
duely considered./39
This is wonderfullanguage: graceful,compelling,but ultimatelyvague.

Vague, probably,because at the timeshe wrote,Elizabeth could not have
known how matterswould end. The court and countrywere seized by
panic; exposure of plots against Elizabeth created rumor of stillothers.
The Parliament had voted unanimously that Mary should die, and
Elizabeth's signatureon the warrantwould clear the way.
But Elizabeth had not resigned herself to do that, even though
everything pointed to that conclusion. In her speech, therefore,
Elizabeth made a strong case against Mary, linked her cousin's death
withnational security,and then presented herselfas the last obstacle to
the execution of her sentence. This speech and the one preceding, sim-
plyby virtueof the way in whichtheywere produced and disseminated,
were propaganda pieces. Yet the queen's indecision was as real as the
danger which, alive or dead, Mary represented. The consequences of
Mary's death were potentiallyas frighteningas the continuationof plots
in her behalf, and a decision in either direction would be made more
acceptable by this "private" explanation of the queen's distress. The
credibilityof this explanation was made possible by a reputationwhich
the queen had builtover the years. In speaking of thejudicial procedure
against Mary,Elizabeth had somethingto say of herself:"wee Princes,I
tell you are set on stages, in the sightand view of al[l] the world duly
obserued, the eyes of many behold our actions,a spott is sone spied in
our garments,a blemish quickly noted in our doinges. It behoueth vs
thereforeto be carefullthat our proceedings be Iust and honorable."40
39. Ibid., fol. 88.
40. Ibid., fol. 85. Bracketed lettersupplied from Holingshed.
Undoubtedly, Elizabeth's immediate audience admired her words and

dreaded their import: Perhaps Elizabeth would not do what had to be
done. Perhaps she would findreasons to spare Maryonce again. Perhaps
Elizabeth would be assassinated for her pains.
The Parliamenthad reason to fear,not only because of the danger
of the immediate situation,but because Elizabeth had so often dazzled
themand disagreed. That had been true fromthe verybeginningof the
reign: The Parliament wanted her to marry; she would not. They
wanted her to name a successor; she would not. They desired legislation
on religious reform; she generally opposed that. James must be ex-
cluded from succession; she would not agree. Mary Stuart had to be
executed; she stalled. The debate which ended with Mary's death was
the last and greatestof these disagreements.For in fact,on these and so
many major issues, Elizabeth and the Parliament were completelyat
odds. Indeed, what theygenuinelyagreed upon were not so much issues
as the queen's attitudes.So, forexample, when the Parliamentbegan to
insistthat she marryand produce an heir, Elizabeth hedged and pro-
posed an alternativeand collectivematernity,presentingherself,as she
would consistently,as the Virgin Mother: "And so I assure yow all that
though after my death you may have many stepdames, yet shall yow
never have any, a more naturall mother,then I meane to be vnto yow
all."'4 A fewyears later,when the matterof her marriagehad supersed-
ed all others in importance,Commons, in league with Lords and some
Councillors,triedto tie the subsidybill to a promisefromthe queen that
she would marry and name her successor. To Lords, Elizabeth was
angry,defensive,ambiguous: "And thereforeI saye ageyn I wyllmarry
assone as I can conuenyently/yf.god take not hymaway withwhom I
mynde to marryor myself,or els sum othere great lettehappen/"42But
the management of Commons proved to be more difficult,and, in the
end, the queen remittedone third of the subsidy-an outrightbribe
-and dismissedthe Parliamentin spiteof the factthatimportantlegisla-
tion was pending. Elizabeth was furious,but her language was a model
of polity:
thereforeI conclud with this oppinion Wiche I wyllyou to think

Vnfainedlytru that as . I haue tried that you may be deceaved so
am I persuaded you willnot begile the assured ioy thateuer I toke
to se my subiects love to me more staunche than ever . I feltthe
care in my self for: my self[e] to be great wiche alone hathe made
myheuy burden lightand a Kingedomes care but easy cariagge for
me43
41. S. P. Dom., Eliz. 12/27/36(to the Lower House, 1563), P.R.O.

42. MS G.g. 3.34, p. 211 (to a joint delegation, 1566), Cambridge UniversityLibrary,
Cambridge.
Signs Autumn1975 55
On thisoccasion, and on thisoccasion alone, Elizabeth lost a round

outrightto the Parliament. Yet her policy prevailed. She escaped mar-
riage, and she declared her successor on her deathbed-just as she had
planned. The effect,meanwhile,of her comfortablewords was to reas-
sure her people of those thingsultimatelymost importantto them: her
care forthem,her faithin them,and her will to rule. The success of her
reign influencedher speeches and the way in which theywere received.
The politicalissues which so inflamedthe Parliamentwere outshone by
the queen's power and personalityand obscured by a public expression
of devotion which caused everythingelse to seem less importantin com-
parison.
In the firstyear of her reign, that devotion was expressed with a
curious prophecy:
And albeit,it mightplease almightiegod to contynewme stillin this

mynde,to lyveout of the stateof mariage, yetit is not to be feared,
but he will so worke in my harte, and in yorwisdomes as good
provisionby his healpe maybe made in convenienttyme... And in
the end this shalbe for me sufficientthat a marble stone shall
de[clare, that a] Qu[ene h]aving ra[i]gn[ed such] a time [l]y[ved
and] dyed a vargin.44
Elizabeth never repeated that odd and early epitaph, but it became an
emblem for her reign; variations of that expression of single-minded
purpose were restatedso often in her parliamentaryspeeches that they
became a refrain; and in her last address, she said flatly:". . . I haue
diminished my owne revenewe that I might adde to yorsecuritie and
bene contentto be a taper of trewevirginwaxe to wastmyselfand spend
my life that I might giue light and comfort to those that liue vnder
me .45
me."45
43. Cotton Charter IV. 38 (2) (end of session, 1566), B.M. The queen's language may
appear somewhat obscure here. When she says that she has "tried that you may be de-
ceaved," Elizabeth means, literally,that she has exposed the issue at hand so that her
listenerswill understand and accept her sincerityand veracity.
44. Lansdowne MS 94, fol.29, B.M. (end of session, 1559); bracketedletterssupplied
fromStow,Annales(London, 1631), pp. 636-37.
45. Cotton Titus C VI, fol. 410 (end of session, 1601), B.M.
WesleyanUniversity

Queen Elizabeth I Parliamentary Rhetoric and The Exercise of Power

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Queen Elizabeth I Parliamentary Rhetoric and The Exercise of Power

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Queen Elizabeth I: Parliamentary Rhetoric and the Exercise of Power

Author(s): Allison Heisch

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Of Queen Elizabeth's last parliamentaryaddress, Sir John Neale says:

My Lords the Law of Nature movethmee to sorrowe formySister,

That such a traditional statementof intent could be ignored can be

Such a strong reaction to somethingthat has not occurred could have

The weightand greatenesof thismattermightcawse in me being a

Whatever Elizabeth may have thoughtof women in general, it is certain

lymytaconof the Succession, at this presentytys not conneuyent,

mostirresistibleinsultsfromher public language. In itsfinalversion,the

FIG. 1.-Lansdowne MS 94, fol.30, BritishMuseum, London. Holograph draftof Eliz-

Elizabeth's sense of balance was not perfecthere, but it was close

Doe I see Godd's most sacred text of holie writtdrawen to divers

12. Cotton Charter IV. 38 (2) (end of session, 1566), B.M.

Because of its linguistic artificiality,the speech is something of a

I do assure yo" there is no prince that loues his Subiectes better or

haue cause to wish nothinge more then to contente the subiectes

At this point,in 1601, Elizabeth must have feltthatthere was noth-

Both speeches dweltprincipallyon the matterof religion,one of the

[T]hen she sayd vnto the Bishops we vnderstandthat some of the

Speaking before Parliament on preciselythe same subject, the queen

yet one mattar towchethe me so nere; as I may not ovarskype.

were dependable because theyalwayswanted the same thing.They pre-

First in that you haue not greater care in making ministres,

The speech before Parliament contained some of the sentiments

... yfI were not perswaded thatmynewere the treweway of gods

In this instance, the queen's appearance was as essential as the

22. Harleian MS 540, fol. 115, B.M.

The final session of the Parliament began with an oration by the

What is clear, however,is thathis source was direct.The textused here is

Revolution:EnglishHistoricalWriting and Thought,1580-1640 [New York: Columbia Univer-

Her hope was based on two documents: one the Parliamentarystat-

And nowe as tochyngthat person whychewytheso foule treasons

30. The firstdraftis preserved in S. P. Dom., Eliz. 173/81,P.R.O.

Elizabeth's attitudeswere stated plainly here. She began with the

31. My transcriptionis fromMS G.g. 3.34, pp. 305-6, Cambridge UniversityLibrary,

am I in respecttherofso cleare fromemalice,whichhath the prop-

ertieto make menne gladde and rcioyccfullat yefallsand faultesof

death, by whomc so long her life hath bcnc prcscrued, Iwth

th'intollcrablcperill of my ownc. Yea I had so litle purpose to

pursue her withany coloure of malice, Yt as it is not unknowne to

aRyminde to circumuenther, forthen I knew as much as shee cold

I protest(wherein you may belieue mee for-athough,I may haue

many vices, I hope I haue not accustomed my tongue to be an

Apart from changes made solely in consideration of style and

And now, as towchingtheiretreasons,and conspiraciestogethrwth

her that was the contriuerof them. I will not so preiudicate my

selfe, and this my Realme, as to say or thinckethat I might not

32. Lansdowne MS 94, fol. 83, B.M. (abbreviationsexpanded).

withoutthe last statuteby th'auncientlawes of thisland, haue pro-

ceeded against her, which was not made particulerlyto preiudice

is made, & in the force of a lawe, I thoughtgood, in ytwch might

concerne her, to proceede according thereunto, rather then by

ceaued mee, or thatthe bookes you broughtmee were not false,wCh

God forbidd I mowght as lustly haue tried her, by th'auncient

siftingand scanning euery word and letter,that many times yow

of the lawe. For in this strictnes,and exact followingof common

raingned at the barre, holden vp her hand, and bene tried by a

Iurye, a proper course forsothto deale in thatmatterwthone of her

nomber of the greatest& mostnoble personages of thisRealme, of

the Iudges and others of good accownt, whose sentence I must

Between the delivery of the firstand second speeches on Mary,