This is the last of a series of ten 'cameo' articles that appeared in The Scottish Field magazine beginning in December 1990 issue. This article first appeared in the September 1992 issue of Scottish Field. A fuller account of the reign of Mary Queen of Scots is contained in Tranter's novels, The Queen's Grace , Warden of the Queen's March and A Rage of Regents. And she will also appear in the story teller's next-to-the-last works, Marie and Mary scheduled to be released in December 2004..... Rory Mor.

      ALL of Mary Queen of Scots' advisers and close supporters were against the idea of her flight to England in 1568, after her cause's defeat at the Battle of Langside. They urged her to remain in Scotland and regather her strength and forces. That battle had been most badly managed -- her commander, Argyll, actually fainting away on the field, and other leaders behaving foolishly. But her cause was by no means lost, most of the nobility still supported the throne, even if the so-called Lairds of the Congregation did not. And even they were split. So why flee to England? The Queen could hide in a score of secure places in Scotland, south and north, while her support rallied.

      But Mary was determined on it, suddenly, for some reason. She was, of course, still aged only twenty-six, and had spent the last eleven months imprisoned in Lochleven Castle, maltreated there and suffering a miscarriage, forced to sign a deed of abdication much against her will, in favour of her year old son James (the Sixth). Her escape therefrom had been contrived by her friends, and she had borne it all bravely.

      But the unexpected defeat in the field so soon afterwards, at Langside, near Glasgow, seemed to have sapped her usually high morale -- for Mary was courageous as well as lovely, even though she did lack judgement, especially where men were concerned and her comparative youth must not be forgotten.

      She had this notion that her sister-queen, Elizabeth Tudor, to whom she was in fact heir-apparent, would be bound to support her cause, would never allow her fellow woman monarch to be put down by her subjects. And no doubt felt that while she remained in Scotland she could never be at peace with herself, always struggling to regain and assert her authority as queen regnant. Moreover, to be sure, she was the former Queen of France, and might possibly go there for much-needed aid and encouragement, via England. At any rate she decided to depart.

      Undoubtedly it was never her intention to stay away from her own kingdom for any long period. She would come back, refreshed and strengthened. So she left Dundrennan Abbey, near Kirkcudbright in Galloway, to which she had fled after the defeat at Langside, from the tiny haven still called Port Mary, with only two or three companions, including the most faithful of her Marys, Mary Seton, daughter of the Lord Seton who had so largely contrived her escape from Lochleven. They went in a small boat to cross the Solway Firth to the English shore.

      She had, just before, written a letter to Queen Elizabeth informing her of her intention, and sending it onwards via the English governor of Carlisle Castle, seeking sanctuary. She left behind a sorrowful and disheartened company indeed.

      We all know that she never returned to Scotland. Elizabeth, for mixed reasons, feared that her Catholic English nobles might rally to a Catholic queen who was her lawful successor and cousin, endangering her own hold on her throne; animosity towards Scotland, as had all English monarchs; and probably sheer jealousy of a more beautiful woman than herself -- for all these, offered her not sanctuary but imprisonment, eighteen long years of imprisonment, before finally she had Mary executed, one of the most shameful episodes in the long story of the two kingdoms, or queendoms.

      If, then, Mary had not made that impulsive and fateful decision at Dundrennan? What then would have been the outcome, for Scotland? We can only guess. The so-called Counter-Reformation might possibly have been successful; but even if it had not, Mary could well have re-established herself securely on her throne, for she was in fact no bigoted Catholic, despite John Knox's fulminations, and was in favour of men and women being free to worship God as they thought best, as she always declared.

      Freed from the influence of her deplorable husbands, Darnley and Bothwell, she, young and beautiful and spirited, would probably have married for a fourth time -- and who knows, perhaps at last with better judgement!

      Her baby son James would not have ascended the throne until middle-age - and Scotland spared the miseries of his lengthy minority and the misbehaviour of his regents.

      Poor Mary . . .