View source for Bye Plot

{{Short description|Conspiracy to kidnap James I of England}}
{{EngvarB|date=June 2017}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2017}}
{{confused|biplot}}
The '''Bye Plot''' of 1603 was a conspiracy, by [[Priesthood (Catholic Church)|Roman Catholic priests]] and [[Puritans]] aiming at [[toleration|tolerance]] for their respective denominations, to kidnap the new English king, [[James I of England]]. It is referred to as the "bye" plot, because at the time it was presented as a minor component of a larger plot (the so-called "[[Main Plot|Main]]" Plot).

==Background==
The [[Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604)|Anglo-Spanish War]] had been continuing for nearly two decades, with fighting at sea, in the [[Netherlands]] and in Ireland. [[Elizabeth I of England]] died at the end of March 1603, and James VI of Scotland [[succession to Elizabeth I of England|claimed the English throne]], without 
overt opposition. 
In England and Wales, a substantial number of Catholics were subject to fines if they did not attend [[Church of England]] services, under a system of [[English Penal Laws|Penal Laws]]. English Catholics protested loyalty to the Crown, and wished the legal constraints on their worship relaxed. They were ministered to by priests, both of the [[Society of Jesus]] and other [[religious order]]s active in England as a mission, and [[seminary priest]]s and others not in religious orders ([[secular priest]]s). The legal position of these priests was unclear.

==Divisions among English Catholics==
{{Further|Archpriest Controversy}}

A divisive quarrel and pamphlet war among English Catholics, the [[Archpriest controversy]], had in 1603 been contentious for about five years. The resulting alignment of Catholic priests had a great deal to do with making the plots of 1603 impractical, and also made one side of the argument receptive to the idea of informing the London government.

[[William Watson (priest)|William Watson]] took the "appellant" side in the Archpriest Controversy, hostile to [[George Blackwell (priest)|George Blackwell]] who had been appointed by the [[Holy See]]. Useful to the English government and church for his polemics, Watson was under the protection of [[Richard Bancroft]], then [[bishop of London]]. In September 1601, Watson was resident at [[Fulham Palace]].<ref name=Bancroft>{{ODNBweb|id=1272|title=Bancroft, Richard|first=Nicholas W. S.|last=Cranfield}}</ref> In 1602 he was confined in [[The Clink]], but kept in close touch with Bancroft.<ref name=Watson>{{cite DNB|wstitle=Watson, William (1559?-1603)}}</ref>

The plot was initially exposed by the archpriest Blackwell and two Jesuits, [[John Gerard (Jesuit)|John Gerard]] and [[Henry Garnet]], who were on the other side of the dispute. These three (by independent routes) passed on information they had relating to the conspiracy. They had other reasons besides the ongoing controversy: they feared retribution against Catholics if the plan failed; and entertained suspicions regarding the political motivations of the secular priests.{{citation needed|date=November 2011}}<ref>{{cite DNB|wstitle=Gerard, John (1564-1637)}}</ref>

==The plotters==
The plot is known also as '''Watson's Plot''', the '''Catholic Plot''', the '''Surprising Treason''',<ref name=BHO>M. S. Giuseppi (editor), ''Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House'', Volume 15: 1603 (1930), pp. 5–29; [http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=112156 British History Online].</ref> or the '''Treason of the Priests'''.<ref name=DNBBrooke>{{cite DNB|wstitle=Brooke, George}}</ref> Those involved were not in fact exclusively Catholic priests: [[Thomas Grey, 15th Baron Grey de Wilton]] was a [[Puritan]] layman who became drawn in, though the plot never went farther than far-fetched discussion. Another lay conspirator was [[Sir Griffin Markham]].<ref>Nicholls and Williams, p. 194; [https://books.google.com/books?id=R8TOqi0Dd4cC&pg=PA194 Google Books].</ref>

While they may have had in common a wish for [[religious toleration]], their motivations were varied. Watson wished to have no more fines for [[recusants|recusancy]] levied. Another plank in the platform of the Bye Plot was the removal of certain ministers of the king. To the extent that these matters can be clarified, the [[Main Plot]] that had been laid in parallel wished also for regime change, with James replaced on the throne by [[Arbella Stuart]].

==Events of 1603==
King James moved south at a leisurely pace, having reached [[Theobalds House]] in Hertfordshire on 3 May.<ref>Christopher Lee, ''1603'' (2003), p. 142.</ref> The scheme, such as it was, depended on Markham's view in May that there was a "Scottish precedent" for seizing the person of the king for political advantage.<ref name=Watson/> It was in late May or early June (on Gerard's own account) that someone (probably Markham) tried to recruit the Jesuit John Gerard. Gerard's reaction was negative, and he wrote to Henry Garnet and George Blackwell asking them to put a spoke in the wheels of the plot.<ref name=Hogge>Alice Hogge, ''God's Secret Agents'' (2005), pp. 311–2.</ref>

===June===
The date set by Watson for the plot to be carried out was 24 June.<ref name=Grey/> This was [[St John Baptist's Day]], and a [[collar day]]; in the planning of the plot its significance was that courtiers would be at court and regaled ceremonially.<ref>Bengtsen, p. 27; [https://books.google.com/books?id=meTCjNCYmsIC&pg=PA27 Google Books].</ref>

As the date and [[midsummer]] approached, Gerard had contacted a Scottish courtier asking that he make the king aware, while also Blackwell, the official head of the English Catholic secular clergy operating from hiding, took roundabout steps. Blackwell's communication outran Gerard's.<ref name=Hogge/>

Blackwell revealed something of the plot to the government through an intermediary, the recusant John Gage, who had married Margaret, the daughter of [[Sir Thomas Copley]].<ref>{{ODNBweb|id=2541|title=Blackwell, George|first=Paul|last=Arblaster}}</ref><ref>Scott R. Pilarz, ''Robert Southwell and the Mission of Literature, 1561–1595: writing reconciliation'' (2004), p. 16; [https://books.google.com/books?id=zY0E7IIeZ1YC&pg=PA16 Google Books].</ref> When Gage wrote to [[Sir Robert Cecil]], on 28 June, Cecil was already aware of plotting. The Catholic returned exile and conspirator [[Anthony Copley]] had also written to Blackwell about the Bye Plot; he was Sir Thomas Copley's son and therefore Gage's brother-in-law. Blackwell had written to Gage; Cecil assumed there was something more behind these exchanges, so that he asked Gage to produce Blackwell before the Council.<ref name=BHO/> It has been suggested that Copley consciously played the double agent.<ref name=Watson/>

In the event, Lord Grey withdrew ahead of the day, and the plotters scattered.<ref name=Grey/>

===July===
A significant arrest was of [[George Brooke (conspirator)|Sir George Brooke]] who was in the [[Tower of London]] in July. Markham and Brooke wanted to supplant current members of the Privy Council. [[Henry Brooke, 11th Baron Cobham]] was his brother, and a conspirator in the more serious "Main Plot". Sir George was arraigned on 15 July, and in his eagerness to clear himself, made confessions that clarified to the investigators that two separate groups of plotters had been active.<ref name=DNBBrooke/> On 16 July a proclamation was issued for Watson's arrest.<ref name=Watson/> Bancroft at around this time had good reason to distance himself from Watson, and claimed he had not seen him since before the queen died.<ref name=Bancroft/>

King James's coronation went ahead on 25 July, his [[name day]] (for [[James the Greater]]), as planned. His ceremonial entry into London, however, was postponed until March 1604, for reasons including the [[bubonic plague|plague]]; at this time [[Westminster]] did not form part of London.<ref>Graham Parry, ''The Golden Age Restor'd: the culture of the Stuart Court, 1603–42'' (1981), pp. 1–2; [https://books.google.com/books?id=H91RAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA2 Google Books].</ref>

===August===
Watson was arrested around 5 August in a field by the [[River Wye]] near [[Hay-on-Wye]], on the border of England and Wales. He made a confession about the plot, dated 10 August.<ref name=Watson/> [[William Clark (priest)|William Clark]], another priest who had been an active organiser, was arrested in [[Worcester, England|Worcester]] on 13 August.<ref>{{ODNBweb|id=5476|title=Clark, William|first=Mark|last=Nicholls}}</ref>

===November===
Further details of the Bye Plot were revealed by the Catholic priest [[Francis Barnaby]], in prison. He was another appellant contact of Bancroft, who communicated for him with [[Christopher Bagshaw]], and had worked with the plotter William Clark against English Jesuits.<ref name=Clark>{{ODNBweb|id=67452|title=Barnaby, Francis|first=William Joseph|last=Sheils}}</ref>

The Court had moved to [[Wilton House]], near [[Salisbury]] in Wiltshire. There it was decided that trials could conveniently be held at the bishop's palace in [[Winchester]], not very far away.<ref>Stephen Coote, ''A Play of Passion: The Life of Sir Walter Ralegh'' (1993), p. 305.</ref> These trials took place 15–18 November. [[John Lingard]] in his ''History of England'' attributed the delay to the continued presence in the country of [[Charles de Ligne, 2nd Prince of Arenberg]]; Arenburg was there to represent the [[Spanish Netherlands]] at James's coronation, and the alleged contacts of the Main Plot with him were potentially embarrassing.<ref>[[John Lingard]], ''The History of England, from the first invasion by the Romans to the accession of William and Mary in 1688'' volume 7 (1854), p. 11; [https://archive.org/stream/historyofengla0708linguoft#page/n27/mode/2up archive.org].</ref>

On the 15th the two Catholic priests involved, Sir George Brooke and Sir Griffin Markham, and others, were tried. On the 17th [[Sir Walter Raleigh]] was tried, and the prosecution managed to make a case that he had been involved in the Bye Plot. Lord Grey as a baron was tried and found guilty by 31 peers, on 18 November, with Lord Cobham who was implicated in the [[Main Plot]].<ref name=Grey>{{cite DNB|wstitle=Grey, Thomas (d.1614)}}</ref><ref>Bengtsen, p. 29; [https://books.google.com/books?id=meTCjNCYmsIC&pg=PA29 Google Books].</ref>

Guilty verdicts on the conspirators were reached;<ref>Arthur F. Kinney, ''Lies Like Truth: Shakespeare, Macbeth, and the cultural moment'' (2001), p. 64; [https://books.google.com/books?id=-FLx0eRoVpQC&pg=PA64 Google Books].</ref> the only acquittal on a [[high treason]] charge among the Bye Plot defendants was Sir Edward Parham.<ref>Nicholls and Williams, p. 300; [https://books.google.com/books?id=R8TOqi0Dd4cC&pg=PA300 Google Books].</ref> [[Sir Edward Coke]]'s prosecution case for Raleigh's involvement in the Bye Plot was tenuous and rhetorical, heavy on personal abuse, but Raleigh's role on the periphery of the Main Plot left him with much to explain.<ref>{{ODNBweb|id=5826|title=Coke, Edward|first=Allen D.|last=Boyer}}</ref>

The two priests, Watson and Clark, were executed for their parts in the scheme, on 29 November.<ref name=Clark/>

===December===
The lay conspirator George Brooke was executed on 5 December.<ref name=DNBBrooke/> On 10 December Lord Grey with Markham was taken to the scaffold, pardoned, and spent the rest of his life in the [[Tower of London]];<ref name=Grey/> [[Dudley Carleton, 1st Viscount Dorchester|Dudley Carleton]] who witnessed the proceedings, involving also Lord Cobham, took it to be a well-scripted drama of the king's mercy.<ref>Peter G. Platt, ''Shakespeare and the Culture of Paradox'' (2009), p. 133; [https://books.google.com/books?id=eWL9Pj-AjzoC&pg=PA133&lpg=PA133 Google Books].</ref> In particular, Carleton concluded, it was staged for the benefit of Raleigh, who had been caught up in the Bye Plot charges.<ref>[[Stephen Jay Greenblatt]], ''Shakespearean Negotiations: the circulation of social energy in Renaissance England'' (1988), p. 195 note 18; [https://books.google.com/books?id=866eoQY-tXIC&pg=PA195 Google Books].</ref>

==Aftermath==
By an edict of 22 February 1604, King James ordered all Roman Catholic clergy ("Jesuits, Seminaries and other Priests") to leave his kingdom by 19 March. This edict had been drafted in July 1603 on the discovery of the plots.<ref>W. B. Patterson, ''King James VI and I and the Reunion of Christendom'' (2000), p. 49; [https://books.google.com/books?id=zYK_Czpa1WwC&pg=PA49 Google Books].</ref>

Anthony Copley was condemned to death; but he was pardoned on 18 August 1604, having made a full confession on the history of the plot.<ref name=DNB>''[[Dictionary of National Biography]]'', Copley, Anthony (1567–1607?), poet and conspirator, by R. C. Christie. Published 1887.</ref>

==See also==
*[[Throckmorton Plot]]
*[[Gunpowder Plot]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist|30em}}

==References==
*Fiona Bengtsen (2005), ''Sir William Waad, Lieutenant of the Tower, and the Gunpowder Plot''; Google Books.
*Mark Nicholls, Penry Williams (2011), ''Sir Walter Raleigh: In Life and Legend''; Google Books.
*Leanda de Lisle (2006) ''After Elizabeth.''

{{Conspiracy theories}}
{{Plots and conspiracies}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:1603 in England]]
[[Category:Conspiracies]]
[[Category:History of Catholicism in England]]
[[Category:Political history of England]]
[[Category:Religion and politics]]
[[Category:1603 in Christianity]]
[[Category:James VI and I]]