World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Bye Plot

The Bye Plot of 1603 was a conspiracy by Roman Catholic priests and Puritans aiming at religious toleration for their respective denominations, to kidnap the new English King, James I of England.


  • Background 1
  • Divisions among English Catholics 2
  • The plotters 3
  • Events of 1603 4
    • June 4.1
    • July 4.2
    • August 4.3
    • November 4.4
    • December 4.5
  • Aftermath 5
  • See also 6
  • Notes 7
  • References 8


Elizabeth I of England died at the end of March 1603, and James VI of Scotland claimed the English throne, with effectively no overt opposition. The religious situation in England and Wales included a substantial number of Catholics subject to fines if they did not attend Church of England services, under a system of Penal Laws. The Anglo-Spanish War had been continuing for nearly two decades, with fighting at sea, in the Netherlands and in Ireland.

English Catholics widely 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 orders active in England as a mission, and seminary priests and others not in religious orders (secular priests). The legal position of these priests was, in practice, very unclear.

Divisions among English Catholics

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.

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.[1] In 1602 he was confined in The Clink, but kept in close touch with Bancroft.[2]

The plot was initially exposed by the archpriest Blackwell and two Jesuits, 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. [3]

The plotters

The plot is known also as Watson's Plot, the Catholic Plot, the Surprising Treason,[4] or the Treason of the Priests.[5] 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 further than far-fetched discussion. Another lay conspirator was Sir Griffin Markham.[6]

Their motivations were varied, while they may have had in common a wish for religious toleration. Watson wished to have no more fines for 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 Arabella Stuart.

Events of 1603

King James moved south at a leisurely pace, having reached

Leanda de Lisle After Elizabeth (2006)

  • 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.


  1. ^ a b (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  2. ^ a b c d e  
  3. ^  
  4. ^ a b M. S. Giuseppi (editor), Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, Volume 15: 1603 (1930), pp. 5-29; British History Online.
  5. ^ a b c  
  6. ^ Nicholls and Williams, p. 194; Google Books.
  7. ^ Christopher Lee, 1603 (2003), p. 142.
  8. ^ a b Alice Hogge, God's Secret Agents (2005), pp. 311–2.
  9. ^ a b c d  
  10. ^ Bengtsen, p. 27; Google Books.
  11. ^ (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  12. ^ Scott R. Pilarz, Robert Southwell and the Mission of Literature, 1561-1595: writing reconciliation (2004), p. 16; Google Books.
  13. ^ Graham Parry, The Golden Age Restor'd: the culture of the Stuart Court, 1603-42 (1981), pp. 1–2; Google Books.
  14. ^ (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  15. ^ a b (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  16. ^ Stephen Coote, A Play of Passion: The Life of Sir Walter Ralegh (1993), p. 305.
  17. ^ 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;
  18. ^ Bengtsen, p. 29; Google Books.
  19. ^ Arthur F. Kinney, Lies Like Truth: Shakespeare, Macbeth, and the cultural moment (2001), p. 64; Google Books.
  20. ^ Nicholls and Williams, p. 300; Google Books.
  21. ^ (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
  22. ^ Peter G. Platt, Shakespeare and the Culture of Paradox (2009), p. 133; Google Books.
  23. ^ Stephen Jay Greenblatt, Shakespearean Negotiations: the circulation of social energy in Renaissance England (1988), p. 195 note 18; Google Books.
  24. ^ W. B. Patterson, King James VI and I and the Reunion of Christendom (2000), p. 49; Google Books.
  25. ^ Dictionary of National Biography, Copley, Anthony (1567–1607?), poet and conspirator, by R. C. Christie. Published 1887.


See also

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.[25]

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.[24]


The lay conspirator George Brooke was executed on 5 December.[5] 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;[9] Dudley Carleton who witnessed the proceedings, involving also Lord Cobham, took it to be a well-scripted drama of the king's mercy.[22] In particular, Carleton concluded, it was staged for the benefit of Raleigh, who had been caught up in the Bye Plot charges.[23]


The two priests, Watson and Clark, were executed for their parts in the scheme, on 29 November.[15]

Guilty verdicts on the conspirators were reached;[19] the only acquittal on a high treason charge among the Bye Plot defendants was Sir Edward Parham.[20] 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.[21]

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 November 18, with Lord Cobham who was implicated in the Main Plot.[9][18]

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.[16] These trials took place November 15–18. 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.[17]

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.[15]


Watson was arrested around 5 August in a field by the Worcester on 13 August.[14]


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 plague; at this time Westminster did not form part of London.[13]

[1] 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.[2] On 16 July a proclamation was issued for Watson's arrest.[5] A significant arrest was of


In the event, Lord Grey withdrew ahead of the day, and the plotters scattered.[9]

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.[11][12] 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.[4] It has been suggested that Copley consciously played the double agent.[2]

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.[8]

The date set by Watson for the plot to be carried out was 24 June.[9] 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.[10]



This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.