The second potential source of serious opposition James might face, Northumberland wrote, was from the Catholic population. Harington had told James that ‘a great part of the realm, what with commiseration of their oppression, and what with the known abuses in our own church and government, do grow cold in religion and in the service of both God and prince’.73 Northumberland confirmed ‘their faction is strong, their increase is daily’. Indeed so many young men were being drawn to the Catholic seminaries on the Continent that there were now too many English priests to be supported at home. The numbers of converts were also growing and were found even in the families of the most bitter enemies of Catholicism: Leicester’s son became a Catholic, as would Walsing-ham’s daughter, while the children of recusant-hunting bishops such as the Bishop of Durham, Tobie Matthew and John Thornborough had already done so.74 Northumberland admitted that ‘the purer sort’ of these Catholics – those influenced by the Jesuits – preferred the candidature of the Infanta Isabella to that of James. ‘I will dare say no more,’ Northumberland concluded, ‘but it were a pity to lose so good a kingdom for not tolerating a mass in a corner.’75 The unspoken advice was clear enough: the moderates needed to be encouraged – but James already knew that well enough.
The English Jesuits, led by their Principal, the Somerset-born Robert Persons, were the most determined and dangerous opponents of James’s succession. They had been behind the Doleman book on the succession and in February 1601 they had persuaded Philip III to promote the candidature of the Infanta Isabella despite her own opposition to it.
Three main issues governed the Spanish Council’s outlook in matters of foreign policy, and as the Jesuits were aware, their relations with England affected them all: the first – the Dutch rebellion in the Netherlands – was backed by England; the second – trade in the Indies – was frequently interrupted by English privateers; the third – the threat posed by France – had been countered in earlier centuries by an Anglo-Spanish alliance. It was vitally important therefore for Spain to have a friendly monarch on the English throne. The Infanta and Albert believed this would be best achieved by peaceful relations with whoever naturally succeeded Elizabeth; but Scotland was a traditional enemy of Spain and the Jesuits had persuaded the Spanish Council that if they did not provide a candidate themselves the English Catholics would support James in return for toleration and that would be a disaster for Spain. Philip III followed their advice and the Infanta’s objections were overruled.
Spain’s invasion of Ireland in September 1601 followed. Intended as a stepping stone to an invasion of England, it proved to be a military fiasco and in December Spanish forces were obliged to surrender to Essex’s replacement in Ireland, Lord Mountjoy. By the early summer of 1602, however, the Spanish Council had devised new plans to invade England in the following March and started laying groundwork, giving the soldier and spy Thomas Wintour a large sum of money (100,000 escudos) to try to buy the loyalty of discontented Catholics. Within weeks, the Archduke Albert had admitted he was in touch with James and had offered his support in the hopes of future friendship. Clearly the Catholic campaign for the English throne required a new and more convincing candidate.
In Rome, English and Welsh Catholics were still petitioning the Pope to consider a marriage between Arbella Stuart and a member of the Farnese family, to whom she had been linked before the death of Alessandro Farnese, the Duke of Parma, in December 1592. Others suggested she marry the young Earl of Arundel whose father had died in the Tower and who was considered a Catholic martyr.76 Even Robert Persons accepted that a new candidate was required, one that might fulfil the Pope’s desire to choose one on whom Spain, France and the Vatican could all agree – and here he had a stroke of good fortune. Henri IV had always been a strong advocate of James’s claim. The Scots King had a French grandmother, their countries were traditional allies and Henri had hoped to gain goodwill from the Pope by encouraging James to grant toleration of religion to Catholics, as he had offered it to Protestants in France. Henri’s attitude, however, underwent a revolution in the summer of 1602.
After discovering that Cecil was working for James, Henri had realised that if James became king, it might mean a settlement between Spain and England, a cause that had always been close to Cecil’s heart. Although France and Spain were at peace, it was an uneasy one and Henri spent half his revenue on defence. Not only did he fear better Anglo-Spanish relations, but under James the English and Scots crowns would be united and France would lose the benefits of the Auld Alliance, which he called France’s ‘bridle on England’. In October 1602 Spanish spies reported home that Henri IV of France was ‘no less worried about the King of Scotland than we are’. Robert Persons approached the leader of the curia’s French faction, Cardinal D’Ossat, and urged him to encourage the opening of discussions between Spain, France and the Papacy. The Pope meanwhile had issued a secret brief to his nuncio in Flanders ordering all English Catholics to oppose any Protestant successor to Elizabeth, ‘whensoever that wretched woman should depart this life’.
Alarmed by the prospect of Jesuit plots in England, James wrote a furious letter to Cecil in January, attacking his pursuit of peace with Spain. If any treaty were achieved, he complained:
it would no more be thought odious for any Englishman to dispute upon [i.e. argue for] a Spanish title; … the king of Spain would … have free access in England, to corrupt the minds of all corruptible men for the advancement of his ambitions … and lastly, Jesuits, seminary priests, and that rabble, with which England is already too much infected, would then resort there in such swarms as the caterpillars or flies did in Egypt, no man any more abhorring them.77
He demanded to know why Cecil had not carried out a royal proclamation issued in November ordering the expulsion of all priests from England.
I know it may be justly thought that I have the like beam in my own eye, but alas it is a far more barbarous and stiff-necked people that I rule over. Saint George surely rides upon a towardly riding horse, where I am daily struggling to control a wild unruly colt … I protest in God’s presence the daily increase that I hear of popery in England, and the proud vaunting that the papists make daily there of their power, their increase and their combined faction, that none shall enter to be king there, but by their permission.78
Cecil tried to put James’s mind at rest. He insisted he was indeed ferocious in his pursuit of Jesuits – ‘that generation of vipers’ – and if he was reluctant to see the secular Catholic priests ‘die by dozens’ it was because by and large they shared moderate Catholic opinion. Many were loyal to James’s candidature and they were useful tools against the Jesuits. Why, some secular priests had published pamphlets accusing the Jesuits of treason and were even prepared to betray them to their deaths.79 Unconvinced, James replied with what amounted to an order:
I long to see the execution of the last edict against [the priests], not that thereby I wish to have their heads divided from their bodies but that I would be glad to have both their heads and their bodies separated from this whole land, and safely transported beyond the seas, where they may freely glut themselves on their imagined Gods.
James explained that he was not interested in ‘the distinction in their ranks, I mean betwixt the Jesuits and the secular priests’. Both were subject to the Pope, he pointed out, arguing that if the secular priests appeared harmless it actually made them more dangerous.80
On 20 January 1603 the Spanish Council finally submitted their recommendations on the succession issue to Philip III. They suggested that an English candidate should be chosen because it would satisfy the ‘universal desire of all men to have a King of their own nation … whilst the King of France will have reason to be satisfied, and to refrain from helping the King of Scotland, as it cannot suit him for Scotland and England to be reunited’. The Marquis de Poza added that