Robert Dudley to Marry Mary Queen of Scots?

Posted By claire on September 29, 2010

robert_and_maryOn this day in history, 29th September 1564, Robert Dudley was made Earl of Leicester, an earldom which had been planned earlier in the year to make him more acceptable as a bridegroom to Mary Queen of Scots. Yes, in the Spring of 1563, Elizabeth I offered her favourite, and the man she loved, Robert Dudley, to the Scottish Queen. How bizarre!

When she first spoke to William Maitland of Lethington, the Scottish Ambassador, about this idea, he laughed it off and then asked why Elizabeth herself did not marry Dudley and that way she could leave both her husband and kingdom to Mary Queen of Scots!

Elizabeth’s chief advisor, William Cecil, supported the plan, after all, it killed two birds with one stone: it got rid of the troublesome Dudley and it formed an alliance with Scotland. Cecil wrote to Maitland in praise of Dudley but Maitland did not pass on the proposal to his queen because Dudley was not even a peer, he was a nobody. This was something that Elizabeth said that she would rectify by giving Dudley an earldom. However, although Elizabeth’s ambassador to Scotland, Thomas Randolph, was ordered to keep on urging the Scottish queen to marry Dudley, neither Mary Queen of Scots or Robert Dudley were keen on the idea. In the Spring of 1564, when Randolph spoke to Mary of the idea, she was flabbergasted. She had been married to the King of France and here was Elizabeth trying to marry her off to a nobody. She did not say an outright “no” and demanded that if she were to marry Dudley then she should be named Elizabeth’s heir, but this was something that Elizabeth would never consider.

As we know, the marriage never took place and it is hard to know how serious Elizabeth was in her offer of Dudley to her nemesis, Mary Queen of Scots. Why on earth would she offer the man considered by many to be the love of her life to her enemy the Scottish Queen? In her book, “Elizabeth and Leicester: The Truth about the Virgin Queen and the Man She Loved”, Sarah Gristwood ponders the following possible reasons:-

  • Elizabeth was trying to settle the question of succession – If the Protestant Dudley married Mary and became her consort in Scotland then maybe, just maybe, Elizabeth could name them as her heirs.
  • Elizabeth was trying to steer Mary away from other less suitable candidates, a match that would endanger England – If Mary married a European Catholic prince then England would be in danger, it would be surrounded by threats.
  • Elizabeth was trying to insult or mock the Scottish queen, “trying to needle the Scots queen into making a foolish choice, one that would threaten Scottish stability.” –  Gristwood points out that if this was the case then Elizabeth succeeded.
  • Elizabeth was trying to make amends to Dudley – Was she offering him another queen as compensation because she couldn’t marry him?
  • Elizabeth was indulging herself – Gristwood asks “was she permitting herself a gesture – insulting, incalculable – that would silence and baffle all those men who had so patronizingly urged and arranged for her to marry?”
  • Elizabeth was trying to annoy the French and silence those who kept demanding that she should marry by considering marriage to the Earl of Arran – In return for the Scots giving her Arran, she would give them Dudley.
  • Elizabeth wanted to “silence the demanding Robert”.
  • Elizabeth was testing Dudley – She needed reassurance that he would not leave her.
  • Elizabeth had decided to stay a virgin and so wanted Dudley to marry Mary – In September 1564, Elizabeth told the Scottish Ambassador, Sir James Melville, that if she had ever considered marriage “she would have chosen Lord Robert, her brother and best friend, but, being determined to end her life in virginity, she wished that the Queen her sister should marry him.”

I don’t think that Elizabeth had any intention of marrying Dudley off to Mary. She kept Mary busy with negotiations, managed to silence those who disapproved of her relationship with Dudley, showed Mary that she was willing to be amicable and showed Dudley that she was boss, bravo Elizabeth!

On the 29th September 1564, despite the fact that the marriage negotiations had gone pear-shaped, Elizabeth I made Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester. Gristwood explains that this earldom had “resonant history” because it had previously been held by royal princes like John of Gaunt and Henry of Bolingbroke (Henry IV). Although Dudley behaved impeccably at the ceremony, the Queen did not. As she put the chain of earldom around Dudley’s neck, Melville reported that she “could not refrain from putting her hand in his neck to kittle him smilingly.” A loving gesture and perhaps one that was meant to reassure Dudley that he was still hers.



15 Responses to “Robert Dudley to Marry Mary Queen of Scots?”

  1. Christine says:

    Elizabeth had had the intention to raise Robert to the peerage for several years. The problem was to find adequate landed wealth for such a position, and it was chiefly this that caused the delay. Ambrose Dudley, Robert’s elder brother, was entitled the family title, the Earldom of Warwcik, so another title had to be found for Robert.

    In fact Elizabeth did assure Mary of the right of succession to the English crown if she married Dudley – and only if she married him and no other Englishman! But as the months passed she wavered of course … But she is quite clear that she wanted to see Dudley’s children with Mary of Scots on the English throne, as she would stay single (she writes). This is all in the State Papers Scottish, it’s amazing stuff. And she did declare officially that the offer was a consolation prize for Dudley whom she would make her heir if she could. Elizabeth herself said afterwards, that the chief problem had been that he didn’t want Mary.

  2. Christine says:

    I forgot: Eliazbeth also fancied that they could live all three together in England! (Mary, Robert and herself).

  3. Claire says:

    Yes, I read about the “menage à trois” too, I’m not sure it would have worked!

  4. Christine says:

    No way!! Very nice photo-montage! BTW, it is funny to see that historians writing about Elizabeth generally think she was serious, while historians writing about Mary tend to think Elizabeth used it as a ploy to sabotage Mary’s marriage (with a foreign prince or altogether).

  5. Anne Barnhill says:

    I can’t imagine Elizabeth was serious but I do think she wanted to offer Robert a kingship of some sort and also insult Mary at the same time. What a character! I hadn’t heard about the menage a trois idea before–new to me! That is even more bizarre. I believe she must have felt very confident in Robert’s love for her. And she was right, he did serve her all his life. I love Jeremy Irons portrayal as the aging yet still gallant Robert.

  6. Anne Barnhill says:

    Oh, and I , too, love the portrait montage–all we need is Elizabeth’s head poking out!

  7. Louise Pass says:

    Can you imagine how england’s history might have changed if Mary had married Dudley rather than Darnley. Perhaps The stewarts Kings (now the Dudley kings) could have avoided the ax and Cromwell, maybe the bible (King james version) would have been different. The alternate course of history, could be an interesting book.
    Elizabeth did use marriage negotioans for most of her reign for political ends so perhaps she was not serious, and might not have been able to let Robert go when push came to shove.

  8. T.W. Morrison says:

    Did the courts of Europe recognize Elizabeth”s claim to the English throne? Seems there was doubt and a question of legitimacy in England itself. Henry Vlll had to coerce Parliament to declare all of Henry’s issue as legitimate.

  9. Rob says:

    Love that montage of the two together.

  10. Ceri C says:

    Was the title of Earl of Leicester really held by John of Gaunt and Henry Bolinbroke? They were Earls of Lancaster. Or did they hold more than one Earldom?

    I don’t think Elizabeth wanted to lose Dudley but it was a calculated risk. If he had married Mary, she must have been sure that Mary would be under the influence of a man she could trust absolutely.

    There is a very good parallel biography of Elizabeth and Mary by Jane Dunn, which is very illuminating about the relationship between the two queens and the whole of this marriage question.

  11. Christine says:

    Gaunt and Bolingbroke were Dukes of Lancaster, and Earls of Leicester before that. Simon of Monfort and Edmund Crouchback had also been Earls of Leicester earlier. More to the point here, the Leicester title had been considered for John Dudley, Robert’s father in 1547; he got the Warwick title instead because he was a great-great-son or so of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick (father-in-law of Warwick the Kingmaker).

  12. Impish_Impulse says:

    Re: Lancaster/Leicester – Interesting that this should pop up, as I’m currently reading about Isabella, Queen of Edward II. One of their enemies held both earldoms. When he was executed, his brother was allowed to inherit only the Leicester title first, and some years later, was granted the Lancaster one, too.

  13. I am really glad I’ve found this information. Nowadays bloggers publish just about gossips and web and this is actually frustrating. A good website with interesting content, that’s what I need. Thanks for keeping this site, I’ll be visiting it. Do you do newsletters? Can’t find it.

  14. Tiffaney says:

    This is a great article Claire. I thank thee for thine mindful pen! 😉

  15. Sharon says:

    nice article but I could never see Elizabeth being serious as I like to believe robert Dudley was the only man she loved. I recently bought Elizabeth and Elizabeth the golden age. I know there is a lot of historic inaccuracies but it’s a wonderful portrayal of how they loved each other, and one part of it makes me go cold every time. When she says, you can make whores of my ladies but you will not make one of me…. I am currently reading Elizabeth bedfellows on kindle. Very very good. I love coming to this site and reading all the articles.

    Well done Claire n keep up the good work.
    Sharon x

Leave a Reply

Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up. Patience is a virtue; there is no need to re-submit your comment.