Mary, Queen of Scots (1542-1587)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Mary Queen of Scots

According to Antonia Fraser's book, Mary Queen of Scots "Despite the vivid sorrow of the French nation and an in spite of Mary's own desire to be buried in France, either at St Denis or Rheims, her wishes in this respect were never met." Let's not forget she was a widow of France's King, Queen dowager of France in her own right. So, the French could claim her too...
 
Hi,

Aren't there more important things to be doing in Scotland than worrying about dead queens?

I take it that James V is buried in Scotland, but where did Marie de Guise end up? I think she was buried back in France, but not too sure about that...

Larry
 
Marie de Guise is buried in the Convent of Saint-Piere in Rheims, where her sister Renée was abbess. That is why Rheims was one of the two places in France chosen by Mary Stuart to be interred.
 
Hi Cmbruno,

Thank you for that information.
I wasn't sure if I'd actually read that before or not; but now am happy you've confirmed it!!

Cheers,
Larry
 
I read somewhere~I can't think where, that there is now some question about Bothwell's remains actually being his. It would lead to some questions such as...what happened to him?
 
All I know is that the pillar he was chained to while imprisoned at Dragsholm Castle shows a groove he allegedly made while circling the pillar. His mummified remains were on display in a nearby castle up until a few decades ago but they were never tested to determine whether the mummy was James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell.
 
What was done with Bothwell's remains now that they're no longer on display?
 
Thank you! I couldn't think of the name of the church.
 
According to Antonia Fraser's book, Mary Queen of Scots "Despite the vivid sorrow of the French nation and an in spite of Mary's own desire to be buried in France, either at St Denis or Rheims, her wishes in this respect were never met." Let's not forget she was a widow of France's King, Queen dowager of France in her own right. So, the French could claim her too...

Not only was Mary(spitefully)denied the Sacraments and access to her confessor on the eve of her execution, her wishes regarding the disposition of her remains were also ignored.:sad:

The poor woman spent the last twenty years of her life trying to escape from England...I have always found it a painful irony that she is buried there.
 
:previous:
I guess there was nothing to stop her son having her reburied in Scotland (or France), but he didn't.
 
:previous:
I guess there was nothing to stop her son having her reburied in Scotland (or France), but he didn't.


To me it is significant that he had her reburied in Westminster Abbey (she was originally buried in Peterborough Cathedral).

James was her son and if anyone should have decided where to bury her it was him and he chose Westminster Abbey - the burial site of monarchs of England, including his immediate predecessor, Elizabeth I.

His decision and I don't think anyone should be against the decision of the son to make the point that his mother, who claimed the English throne in life, should be buried amongst them.
 
I wonder what her remains would be today and that of Elizabeth. Would it just be dust? a skeleton? I wonder if her clothes are still in tact.
 
Mary and Elizabeth are buried next to each other in Westminster Abbey. I think that Elizabeths feet are at Mary's head, so the two monarchs are almost side by side.
 
I don't believe Mary's lead-lined coffin has ever been disturbed. I have a curious feeling that the remains would be in remarkably good condition.
 
And it is Mary's descendants who grace the Throne, not Elizabeth's, which adds a certain poignancy when one considers the two Queens are buried near each other.
 
James was a bad son who betrayed his mother...he cared more about staying in Elizabeth I's good graces (in order to inherit her Throne) while Mary was alive, and after Elizabeth's death he was hardly likely to care about respecting his late mother's wishes regarding her Will.

I suppose he is to be commended for removing Mary from Peterborough to the more prestigious Henry VII Chapel at Westminster Abbey, however. :ermm:
 
Hi,

Ironic and poignant, that although Mary lost her head, her descendants occupied the thrones of most of Europe in the coming centuries and Elizabeth produced nothing (barren stock!!).....

Larry
 
Two women, cousins, queens, rivals buried in one place and next to each other.
So I guess that Elizabeth wouldn't be happy to know that her cousin is buried next to her...
 
James was a bad son who betrayed his mother...he cared more about staying in Elizabeth I's good graces (in order to inherit her Throne) while Mary was alive, and after Elizabeth's death he was hardly likely to care about respecting his late mother's wishes regarding her Will.

I suppose he is to be commended for removing Mary from Peterborough to the more prestigious Henry VII Chapel at Westminster Abbey, however. :ermm:



James barely knew his mother as he was only 13 months when she was deposed and forced to leave him behind. He could hardly betray someone he didn't know. What sorts of feelings he would have had for her would be hard to determine but certainly not the normal parent/child one as there was no time for that to truly develop - remember at that time too royal babies didn't see much of their parents anyway at his age. He was only 21 when she died and had only had full control of his country for about 6 years but even so a young stipling king will be strongly advised by those who had been dealing with the government of the country during his minority.

He was loyal to his religion at a time when religion was extremely important and his mother was of the opposite religion but Elizabeth was of the same as him. Had he supported his mother he would probably have lost his own throne as well as the Scots were determined to stay protestant and having Mary come back would likely have lead to a civil war in Scotlant to ensure a protestant monarch. As Mary was Elizabeth's direct heir while she was alive James would inherit the English throne whether he supported his mother or not but supporting her could have been disastrous for Scotland with civil war over religion and James even losing his life.

When Camden wrote his Life of Elizabeth in the reign of James, James insisted on checking what was said about Mary to ensure that a reasonable picture of his mother was given. He ensure rhat she was buried with the monarchs of England - a throne she had claimed since 1558 due to Elizabeth's religion and more particularly the timing of her birth (Catherine of Aragon was still alive so in the eyes of the RC church Elizabeth was a bastard who had no claim - whereas Edward did as Catherine was dead so Edward was always seen as legitimate by the RCs).

When a child loses their parent as an infant unless they are raised to have some feelings for that parent they won't have them and James wasn't raised that way. He was raised to look after Scotland and Scotland's interests and that meant leaving Mary where she was - out of the way.
 
Hi,

Ironic and poignant, that although Mary lost her head, her descendants occupied the thrones of most of Europe in the coming centuries and Elizabeth produced nothing (barren stock!!).....

Larry


It is hard to say that Elizabeth was barren as she simply never married and so it would have been inconceivable for her to have a child - but an unmarried woman not having a child doesn't equal barren but rather an unknown. Of course there are also the rumours that she did have a child with Dudley but ...
 
Hi Iluvbertie,

I agree with you wholeheartedly...
I only placed that saying there, as I believe that Elizabeth uttered it when Mary had James.
"The Queen of Scots is today lighter of a fine, bonny prince; and I am but barren stock" - - paraphrased.
I remember Glenda Jackson crying out this in "Elizabeth R"; whether Elizabeth actually said it is congecture...

Larry
 
Hi Iluvbertie,

I agree with you wholeheartedly...
I only placed that saying there, as I believe that Elizabeth uttered it when Mary had James.
"The Queen of Scots is today lighter of a fine, bonny prince; and I am but barren stock" - - paraphrased.
I remember Glenda Jackson crying out this in "Elizabeth R"; whether Elizabeth actually said it is congecture...

Larry


That is reputed to be what she said but as she was still able to marry and have a child at that time I have often wondered if she ever truly said it as how would she have known?
 
In 1867 there was a search for the place where James I was buried. His body was found in the tomb of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York, but at first is was thought he was in Mary’s tomb. A large vault of brick was found under the Mary’s monument and to everybody’s surprise many small lead coffins where there sharing the space with Mary’s coffin. Queen Anne’s still born 18 babies where there, among other royal children and some adults as well. It is said that Mary’s coffin had a remarkable size and the case had not given way. No attempt was made to open it. What a fascinating woman! I remember when I was in England for the first time and in Westminster Abbey looking at her tomb and thinking about the irony of her resting place.
 
I really don't understand why Mary and Elizabeth are buried next to each other. I'm sure they would not have agreed with it if they had known before hand! I bet there is some major ghostly catfights going on in Westminster Abbey at night time!
 
Australian,
given the number and diversity of people buried in Westminster Abbey, I don't think the cat fights will be just between Elizabeth and Mary. I'm quite sure that HenryVII and Elizabeth of York would have plenty to say about what their son did to the country ! Elizabeth was pressed for many years to sign Mary's death warrent ,but was reluctant to do so because Mary was an anointed queen, her cousin and ,a rarity at that time ,a fellow female monarch.
 
I really don't understand why Mary and Elizabeth are buried next to each other. I'm sure they would not have agreed with it if they had known before hand! I bet there is some major ghostly catfights going on in Westminster Abbey at night time!


I believe that it was James' decision to bury them that close together.
 
As the founders of two dynasties, it seems appropriate.
 
As the founders of two dynasties, it seems appropriate.
'

Which dynasty did either of them found?

Elizabeth had no children and the Stuart dynasty existed long before Mary.
 
I goofed. I think I was trying to say is that it was appropriate for Mary to be entombed there as her descendants went on to merge the two crowns.
 
Back
Top Bottom