Part ofa series on the |
|---|
| History ofScotland |
  |
Eras |
|
By region |
 Scotland portal |
TheTreaty of Berwick was negotiated on 27 February 1560 atBerwick-upon-Tweed. It was an agreement made by the representative of QueenElizabeth I of England,the Duke of Norfolk, and a group ofScottish nobles, theLords of the Congregation.[1] The treaty set the terms under which an English fleet and army would come to Scotland to expel the French troops who were defending the Regency ofMary of Guise. The Lords were trying both to expel the French and to effect theScottish Reformation, and this led to rioting and armed conflict.[2][3]
The leader of the Lords of the Congregation was theDuke of Chatelherault. He had formerly been Regent, but in this treaty was described as "second person", meaning that he was heir to the throne after the 17-year-oldMary, Queen of Scots. His representatives at Berwick wereJames Stewart, 1st Earl of Moray,Patrick, Lord Ruthven,Sir John Maxwell of Terregles,William Maitland younger of Lethington,John Wishart of Pitarrow, andMaster Henry Balnaves of Halhill. England's representative wasThomas, Duke of Norfolk.[4] The English ambassador in France,Nicholas Throckmorton, encouraged Elizabeth to support the Scottish lords, arguing the benefits for her in Ireland and a stable alliance in future with Scotland severed from itsauld alliance with France.[5]
.jpg)
The treaty was effective: the English navy already had a fleet in theFirth of Forth commanded byWilliam Winter, and now an English army underBaron Grey de Wilton marched north from Berwick into Scotland, camping first atHalidon Hill on 27 March.[6] The Scottish Lords arranged to rendezvous with the English army on 31 March 1560, atAitchison's Haven, the harbour ofNewbattle Abbey atPrestongrange inEast Lothian.[7]
On 24 March 1560 Elizabeth had a proclamation published and circulated in English, French, and Italian, which detailed her concerns over Mary's use of English heraldry and the ambitions of the Guise family. The proclamation stressed that England was not at war with France or Scotland, although Elizabeth had been forced to "put in order, to her great charges, certain forces both by sea and land."[8]
The English force assisted with theSiege of Leith until hostilities ended in July 1560, after the death of Mary of Guise and the signing of theTreaty of Edinburgh. Under the terms of the treaty, the French fortifications atLeith, new works atDunbar Castle and atEyemouth were demolished and the French and English went home.[9] The religious ambitions of the Scottish lords were realised in theReformation Parliament of August 1560. This parliament also ratified the treaty;William Maitland commended it and the goodwill and favour of Elizabeth in relieving the extreme necessity and "almost utter ruen of the whole countrie." According to the English observerThomas Randolph, there was common consent and some would have happily signed in their own blood.[10]
John Knox thought the treaty so important in explaining the actions of the Lords of the Congregation to posterity that he inserted the whole text into hisHistory of the Reformation. Knox directly related the treaty to the thinking of his colleagueChristopher Goodman in his tract,How Superior Powers Ought to be Obeyed, by writing:
And because we have heard the malicious tongues of wicked men make false report of this our fact, we have faithfully and truly inserted in this our history the said contract, ... that memory thereof may bide to our posterity; to the end that they may judge with indifference, whether that we have done anything prejudicial to our commonwealth or yet contrarious unto that debtful obedience which true subjects owe to their superiors[11]
The modern historian Michael Lynch called the treaty "an astonishing document which mentioned many things but not religion."[12] Pamela Ritchie, historian and author of a political biography of Mary of Guise, sees the treaty as facilitating "the interference of a foreign monarch in what was essentially a domestic crisis."[13] William Ferguson argued that previous historians had overemphasised the significance of the treaty and the English military action. While the intervention was opportunistic, arranged following thetumult of Amboise when France was first troubled by herwars of Religion, the English army did not receive widespread welcome and support and failed to take Leith by storm.[14] The English were aware of the probable impact of troubles in France; Cecil wrote toRalph Sadler on 22 March 1560 that:
we here doo trust well that the bravery of the French wilbe cooled; at home, they have ynough to doo with trooble partly for religion, partly for governance; God send his just wrath amomgst them to their amendment.[15]
The Scottish Lords had already seen the opportunity arising from pressures on France's borders. On 20 JanuaryRichard Maitland wrote to his friend in London of their readiness to abandon theAuld Alliance, noting;
It shall not be amiss to consider in what case the French be presently, their estate is not always so calm at home as everyman thinketh ... the demand by theEmpire for the restitution ofMetz,Toul, andVerdun may grow to some business.[16]
On 27 March 1560, Mary of Guise wrote to her brothers, theCardinal andDuke of Guise, that she never saw anything so shameful as the Articles.[17]
The articles signed at Berwick included:[18][19]
The treaty was signed and sealed by 30 of the Lords of the Congregation at the 'camp before Leith' (Pilrig) on 10 May 1560.[24]
History of the Reformation
