Mary, Queen of Scots, and the Murder of Lord Darnley

by Alison Weir

  Bothwell’s influence was soon felt on the political scene. On 22 May, the Privy Council drew up a rota of Councillors who were to be permanently in attendance on the Queen; Morton was among them. A day later, the Council issued a proclamation reaffirming the recent Act of Parliament that had ratified the establishment of the Kirk.

  News of the Queen’s abduction and marriage had by now reached England. Elizabeth, appalled, expressed “great surprise at these events, and deplores them very much as touching the honour of the Queen.”27Fearful of the consequences, she was moved to write candidly to Mary with a few home truths:

  Madam, it has been always held in friendship that prosperity provideth but adversity proveth friends. Wherefore we comfort you with these few words.

  She went on to say that she had learned of her cousin’s marriage.

  To be plain with you, our grief has not been small thereat: for how could a worse choice be made for your honour than in such haste to marry a subject who, besides other notorious lacks, public fame has charged with the murder of your late husband, besides touching yourself in some part, though, we trust in that behalf, falsely. And with what peril have you married him, that hath another lawful wife, nor any children betwixt you legitimate. Thus you see our opinion plainly, and we are heartily sorry we can conceive no better. We are earnestly bent to do everything in our power to procure the punishment of that murder against any subject you have, how dear soever you should hold him, and next thereto to be careful how your son the Prince may be preserved to the comfort of you and the realm.28

  Clearly, Elizabeth believed not only that Bothwell had murdered Darnley, but also that he posed a threat to the infant James. She told Randolph that she had “great misliking of the Queen’s doing, which she doth so much detest that she is ashamed of her,” and confided to him her fear that, Bothwell being “as mortal an enemy to our whole nation as any man alive,” he would incite Mary to become her enemy also.29Knowing that the Lennoxes were stung by the news of Mary’s hasty remarriage, Elizabeth showed great kindness and favour to them at this time, and Cecil told Lady Lennox that the Queen meant to ensure that James was brought to England and placed in her care.30

  On 24 May, de Silva reported that Mary’s marriage had greatly scandalised people in England, “and has caused sorrow to many who see the evils it will bring in its train. It is said here that the cause of the Queen of Scotland’s hurry over this marriage is that she is pregnant,” which must have been pure speculation, since no one could have known at this early stage that Mary actually was expecting Bothwell’s child. De Silva had also heard that the Scottish Lords were still on the march, “although now that the thing is done, they may come round to it. There is talk of delivering the Prince of Scotland to this Queen to be brought up by his grandmother.”31

  In Scotland, as we have seen, there had been concerned conjecture since before the marriage that Bothwell would seize the Prince and harm him. Buchanan claims that Mary wanted to hand James over to his stepfather, but she had in fact contrived to send Bishop Leslie to Stirling to reiterate her strict injunctions to Mar not to deliver her son into any hands other than her own, under any circumstances. According to Melville, “after the marriage, Bothwell was very earnest to get the Prince in his hands, but my Lord of Mar, who was a true nobleman, would not deliver him out of his custody, alleging that he could not without the consent of the three Estates.” But Bothwell would not give up, and after Mar “had made divers refusals,” he “made his moan” to Melville, “praying me to help to save the Prince out of his hands who had slain his father, and had already made his vaunt among his familiars that, if he could get him once in his hands, he would warrant him from revenging his father’s death. [Mar] desired to know if I could propose any outgait. I answered that he might make this one of his excuses, that he could not deliver the Prince till he should see a secure place to keep him in.”32It may be that Bothwell’s enemies were making too much of his intentions towards the Prince, and that he merely wished to remove the child out of reach of the Confederate Lords, and perhaps send him to France, but no one was taking any chances.

  Drury reported on 25 May that Bothwell had secretly warned his followers to be ready for action, and informed Cecil of the contents of the bond drawn up by the Confederate Lords, who were preparing to attack. Lord Home, Bothwell’s rival in the south, was to lead a force from the Borders, and Morton one from Stirling. Drury urged Cecil to send military support to Home. He also revealed that Balfour, “doubtful of his entertainment in passing and returning,” was not now coming to England; this, however, was almost certainly an excuse contrived to ensure that he stayed in Edinburgh. Drury stated that Bothwell had forbidden Mary to visit James at Stirling— probably from fear that she would fall into the hands of his opponents, since he had also made sure that everywhere she went she was accompanied by an escort of soldiers. Although there were no more nobles at court than had attended the marriage, triumphal entertainments—a masque, a water pageant and a tournament—had been staged there,33probably in defiance of a disapproving world.

  On 27 May, the Queen and Bothwell both wrote to Archbishop Beaton, explaining the reasons for their marriage. Mary said much the same thing as she had to the Bishop of Dunblane:

  The event is indeed strange, and otherwise nor, we know, you would have looked for. But as it is succeeded, we must take the best of it, and so, for our respect, must all who love us.

  She also asked the Archbishop to excuse Bothwell if he seemed unceremonious and lacking in respect; then, revealing her anxiety as to how the marriage would be received at the French court, and showing that she was well aware of the gravity of the matter, prayed for his diligence in this case, being no less weighty, but rather of greater consequence, nor any matter we had in hand, that you bestow your study, ingenuity and effectual labours in the ordering of this present message, and in the persuading them to whom it is directed to believe that thing therein which is the very truth.34

  Bothwell, using the royal plural, wrote to Beaton asking him to assist the Bishop of Dunblane in the exacting task of announcing the marriage to the King and Queen Mother of France and the Cardinal of Lorraine. Of himself and his sudden elevation, he wrote:

  We cannot marvel indeed that this marriage, and the rumours that preceded it, appear right strange to you. The place and promotion truly is great, but yet, with God’s care, neither it nor any other accident35shall ever be able to make us forget any part of our duty to any noblemen or other our good friends, and chiefly to you, whom we have had good occasion always to esteem with the first of that number. Her Majesty might well have married with men of greater birth and estimation, but, we are well assured, never with one more affectionately inclined to do her honour and service.36

  That same day, Bothwell also wrote a courteous letter of greeting to Charles IX.37

  It was Mary’s marriage, rather than Darnley’s murder, that was the catalyst for her ultimate downfall, and everywhere, reactions to it were worse than she could ever have anticipated. Indeed, it gave rise to an international scandal. Bothwell, wrote Melville, “was at last the Queen’s wreck, and the hindrance of all our hopes in the hasty obtaining of all her desires concerning the crown of England.”

  In Scotland, the Queen’s marriage was almost universally condemned as an outrage; many saw in it confirmation of the rumours that she had plotted Darnley’s death in order to marry Bothwell, and not a few of her shocked supporters, both Catholic and Protestant, fell away. Broadsheets began circulating in Edinburgh, comparing her with Delilah, Jezebel and Clytemnestra. In England, France and the rest of the Continent, the reaction was much the same: no one believed the explanations offered by Mary and Bothwell. Those who had been Mary’s friends and allies no longer wanted anything to do with her. Even Philip of Spain and her Guise relations abandoned her38—their silence was deafening—while Catherine de’ Medici was of the opinion that it was wrong to attribute to force that which had been brought about “by free will
and premeditated determination,”39and told Archbishop Beaton that his mistress “had behaved so ill and made herself so hateful to her subjects” that France could no longer offer her aid or counsel.40

  In the eyes of Catholic Europe, Mary had bigamously married a heretic in an unlawful ceremony, and was consequently damned. In Britain, Catholics who had regarded her as their hope for the future were devastated that she, “without fear of God, or respect for the world, has allowed herself to be induced by sensuality, or else by the persuasion of others, to take one who cannot be her husband, and gives thereby a suspicion that she will go over by degrees to the new fashion,” i.e., Protestantism.41Giovanni Correr, the Venetian ambassador in Paris, correctly observed that the cause of Catholicism in Scotland had been “deprived of all hope of ever again raising its head.”42Horrified at what the Queen had done, her confessor, the Dominican friar Roche Mameret, left her service and returned to France.

  No allowances were made for Mary’s health, her state of mind, the Lords’ approval of this union, or the fact that she had been a virtual prisoner when she consented to it; the chain of circumstances leading up to it was sinister enough, in the opinion of many, to condemn her. As for the upstart Bothwell, no one doubted that he had murdered Darnley in order to gain a crown.

  Few could believe what Mary had done. The Confederate Lords later explained to Throckmorton, “We thought that, within a short time, her mind being a little settled, and the eyes of her understanding opened, she would better consider of herself.”43This shows that they were well aware of Mary’s state at this time, but of course, they made no attempt to prevent her from making this fatal marriage because it suited them to see her heading for a fall; in fact, they were to exploit public opinion to the full. Nevertheless, Mary’s marriage must have convinced them that they were justified in moving against her. Certainly, none of them would have bowed the knee to Bothwell: Nau says that “some joined this party out of jealousy at [his] rapid promotion.” For the present, the Lords maintained the fiction that their quarrel was with Bothwell alone. Slowly, but inexorably, Scotland was moving towards civil war.

  On 28 May, the Privy Council, in the Queen’s name, issued a proclamation summoning the lieges to arms, to convene at Melrose in the Borders on 15 June, with fifteen days’ provisions, ostensibly for a raid that Bothwell was to lead against the troublemakers in Liddesdale, but in reality to counter the military threat posed by the Confederate Lords.44On 1 June, in an effort to counteract scaremongering rumours, another proclamation was issued, denying that the Queen had any intention of subverting the laws or making changes in religion, and emphasising her love for “her dearest son: of whom shall Her Majesty be careful if she neglect him that is so dear to her, on whose good success her special joy consists, and without whom Her Majesty could not think herself in good estate but comfortless all the days of her life?”45On 4 June, in desperation, the Council issued an ordinance complaining that Mary’s subjects did not understand her, and denying rumours that Bothwell was trying to gain control of the Prince.46It was all futile. By now, most people in Scotland would have believed the Queen capable of anything, even infanticide.

  Mary was hoping that the recent entente with England could still be maintained, and on 4 June, Robert Melville departed for the English court to officially announce Mary’s marriage and secure Elizabeth’s approval. With him, he carried a letter for her from the hitherto Anglophobic Bothwell, written in a bid to win her friendship and assure her that he would be “careful to see Your two Majesties’ amity continued by all good offices,” but it fell on deaf ears, as did a similar letter to Cecil.47

  At Stirling, around 6 May, the reconvened Confederate Lords, now twenty-six in number, issued a proclamation announcing their intention of delivering the Queen from “thraldom and bondage,” punishing Darnley’s murderers and protecting the Prince.48They also signed a second bond to this effect around this time. These Lords represented a major section of the political establishment, and already they had raised an army of 3,000 men,49which, combined with the fact that they were overwhelmingly supported by public opinion, made them a very formidable opposition indeed. Nau says that the Lords had already decided “that Bothwell should be accused of Darnley’s murder. All this was done by the advice of Secretary Lethington, with whom Bothwell was on bad terms . . . The Earl of Morton held the first rank among these plotters, as he was in every deadly treason.” Maitland, who feared and hated Bothwell, and had probably only stayed with Mary in the hope of salvaging his political ambitions, had now seen the writing on the wall, and was almost certainly in touch with the Confederate Lords.

  The rats were deserting. Around 6 June, according to Drury, Huntly requested the Queen’s permission to leave court to visit his estates in the north, but she refused to grant it and, “with many bitter words,” accused him of plotting treason against her as his father had done.50

  That same day, Maitland left court without taking leave of Mary,51and joined the Confederate Lords, who received him coldly, thinking he had come on the Queen’s behalf to spy on them and subvert their cause. He himself later maintained, to Throckmorton and Melville, that he had joined the Lords because he believed that it was the best way to further Mary’s interests. It is unlikely that Maitland’s motives at this time will ever be fully known. Mary herself always held that, by defecting to her enemies, he had betrayed her under a cloak of loyalty, a belief shared by Morton and Randolph. The Diurnal of Occurrents states that Maitland left Edinburgh in fear of his life, which may be partly the truth, for Bothwell had tried to kill him at Dunbar, and, according to Drury, had “used some choler towards Lethington before his departure, wherewith the Queen was somewhat offended.”52 However, the Confederate Lords’ victory now seemed certain, and had Maitland stayed with the Queen, he might well have had cause to fear them more than he feared Bothwell.

  Argyll, meanwhile, was having second thoughts about joining the Confederate Lords, fearing that his part in Darnley’s murder would be exposed if Bothwell were captured and tried. On 6 June, he secretly warned the Queen and Bothwell that the Confederate Lords were plotting their capture and had mustered their forces ready to march on Edinburgh.53As Holyrood Palace could not be defended, Bothwell decided that it would be safer for him and the Queen to move into Edinburgh Castle, but Balfour refused to admit them,54having decided to throw in his lot with the Lords. He had taken Melville’s advice “not to part with the castle,” and heeded his warning that, if he did not join the Lords, he would be held as guilty of Darnley’s murder as Bothwell was, “by reason of his long familiarity with the Earl.” Balfour had certainly had “intelligence with the Morton faction,”55and there has also been speculation that he had entered into a secret bond with them which granted him indemnity against prosecution for his part in Darnley’s murder, in return for his support. Melville says Balfour had agreed to hold the castle for the Lords on condition “that the Laird of Grange would engage upon his honour to be his protector, in case afterward the nobility should alter upon him.”

  This was the ultimate betrayal: the loss of Edinburgh Castle was a disaster for Mary and Bothwell, for whoever held the castle held the city. In the circumstances, Bothwell decided that it would be best for them to leave Edinburgh for Borthwick Castle, which lay twelve miles to the south and was owned by the Catholic Lord Borthwick; here they could wait in readiness for their levies to assemble at Melrose, and Bothwell could hopefully rally further support in the Borders.

  On 7 June, the Queen and Bothwell left Edinburgh “with artillery and men of war” for Borthwick Castle.56In order to raise money for her troops, Mary had had Elizabeth’s gold christening font and some of her own plate melted down.57

  Borthwick Castle, which commanded a valley two miles west of Crichton, was a splendid fortress that had been built around 1420–30. It had a massive U-shaped keep with walls 12–14 feet thick, and was surrounded by a curtain wall with twin corner towers 110 feet high. Inside, there was a lofty vaulted hal
l with a minstrels’ gallery, bedchambers, a chapel and service quarters.58

  Mary and Bothwell arrived here on 7 June, probably aware that the Lords meant to march on them very soon. Leaving the castle well garrisoned, Bothwell departed immediately with his remaining men for Melrose.59It is often stated that he went to Melrose to meet with the lieges who had been summoned on 28 May, yet found the place deserted, but the lieges were not due to assemble there until 15 June. It is more likely that Bothwell made an abortive raid on Home’s forces from Melrose;60he states in his memoirs that, “when I reached the frontier, I found the enemy in such strength that I could achieve nothing, and returned at once to Borthwick in order to collect a greater force.”61Mary, meanwhile, had summoned her levies to meet at Muirshead Abbey on 12 June, instead of at Melrose on the 15th, but this “proclamation was not so well obeyed, and so many as came had no hearts to fight in that quarrel.”62

  Mary probably sent Casket Letter VIII to Bothwell when he was at Melrose. Written in what appears to be her style, it reads:

  My Lord, since my letter written, your brother-in-law that was came to me very sad, and hath asked me my counsel what he should do after tomorrow, because there be many folks here, and among others the Earl of Sutherland, who would rather die, considering the good they have so lately received of me, than suffer me to be carried away, they conducting me; and that he feared there should be some trouble happen of it, of the other side, that it should be said that he were unthankful to have betrayed me. I told him that he should have resolved with you upon all that, and that he should avoid, if he could, those that were most mistrusted. He hath resolved to write thereof to you of my opinion, for he hath abashed me to see him so unresolved at the need. I assure myself he will play the part of an honest man; but I have thought good to advertise you of the fear he hath that he should be charged and accused of treason, to the end that, without mistrusting him, you may be the more circumspect, and that you may have the more power; for we had yesterday more than 300 horse of his and of Livingston. For the honour of God, be accompanied rather with more than less, for that is the principal of my care. I go to write my dispatch, and pray God to send us a happy interview shortly. I write in haste to the end you may be advised in time.