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

by Alison Weir

  William Blackadder had also been arrested,28along with John Blackadder (perhaps his brother), James Edmonstoun and Mynart Fraser, a Swedish sailor, in whose ship the other three had been trying to reach Bothwell at Dunbar. But the vessel was captured, and when the four men were brought ashore at Leith, a mob tried to stone them. All were imprisoned in the Tolbooth.29

  According to a statement made by Morton on 9 December 1568,30on 19 June, while he and Maitland were dining in Edinburgh, they received secret information, probably from Balfour, that three of Bothwell’s servants— Thomas Hepburn, Parson of Oldhamstocks, John Cockburn (brother of Skirling) and George Dalgleish—had managed to gain entry to Edinburgh Castle. Buchanan later stated that Dalgleish had been sent by Bothwell to recover “a small silver casket bearing inscriptions which showed that it had once belonged to Francis, King of the French. In this, there were letters, nearly all of them written in the Queen’s hand, in which the murder of the King and practically all that followed was clearly revealed. Balfour gave this casket to Bothwell’s servant, but first he warned [the Lords].” Buchanan was writing propaganda for the Lords; as has been demonstrated, the authenticity of the letters to which he referred is by no means well founded, nor can there be any certainty that any of them were actually in the casket at this time. Furthermore, it is hardly likely that Bothwell would send his servants to ask Balfour for the casket after the latter had so treacherously betrayed him, especially if it contained anything compromising.31Bothwell must surely have heard by now that Balfour had gone over to the Lords, for it was common knowledge.32

  Morton sent Archibald Douglas, Douglas’s brother Robert, James Johnston of Westerrow and about thirteen of his own servants to the castle to search for and apprehend the three men, but when they got there, their quarry had already left, so Morton’s men split up into three groups. Archibald Douglas could only find Hepburn’s horse, for its master had fled; Cockburn was arrested by Johnston, but afterwards released, as he had no compromising evidence on him; and Robert Douglas tracked down George Dalgleish to a house in Potterrow, near Kirk o’Field itself. With him were found “divers evidences and letters in parchment, viz. the Earl of Bothwell’s investments of Liddesdale, of the Lordship of Dunbar, and of Orkney and Shetland, and divers copies,” which Robert Douglas brought to Morton with his prisoner.

  When questioned, Dalgleish “alleged he was sent only to visit his master’s clothing, and that he had no other letters or evidences but those which were apprehended with him; but, his report being found suspicious, and his gesture and behaviour ministering cause of distrust,” he was kept under guard overnight and the next day taken to the Tolbooth to be tortured “for furthering of the truth.”33

  Terrified by the sight of the instruments of torment, “and moved of conscience,” Dalgleish led Archibald and Robert Douglas back to the house in Potterrow, where he took from “under the foot of a bed” the locked silver casket that had allegedly belonged to Bothwell, which he said he had taken from the castle the day before, and gave it to them. At 8 p.m., it was delivered to Morton, who, “because it was late, kept it all that night.” Dalgleish was returned to prison.34

  That day, 20 June, Drury reported Mary’s defeat and incarceration to Cecil, and wrote that the Confederate Lords were awaiting Elizabeth’s approval and would not attempt any other enterprise “till they hear how this that they have already done be liked by the Queen’s Majesty, at whose devotion it seems they desire to be, to be directed wholly by Her Majesty.” He added that Cullen, Blackadder “and others” (among them Powrie, who was arrested around this time) had not yet been arraigned because the authorities had been unable to track down as witnesses the tenants of the cottages at Kirk o’Field, in which they believed these men had been hiding.35Meanwhile, the Lords and their acolytes had begun spreading rumours that the Hamiltons were heavily implicated in Darnley’s murder. In July, there was speculation that Archbishop Hamilton himself would be charged with it.36

  On 21 June, the silver casket was forced open in the presence of Morton, Maitland, Atholl, Glencairn, Tullibardine, Archibald Douglas and others, “and the letters within sighted.” The Scots word “sicht” then meant “inspect” or “peruse,”37so, according to Morton, the letters were read, although many historians have misunderstood the meaning of the word “sichted” and disputed this. Immediately afterwards, the casket and its contents were delivered to Morton for safe keeping, “since which time [he stated in December 1568] I have observed and kept the same box, and all letters, missives, contracts, sonnets and other writings contained therein, surely, without alteration, changing, eking [adding] or diminishing of anything found or received in the said box. This I testify and declare to be the undoubted truth.”38He was almost certainly lying.

  It should be noted that there is no contemporary evidence, apart from Morton’s statement, for the discovery of the casket. Had it contained the compelling evidence against the Queen that it was later held to contain— Buchanan says “the whole wicked plot was exposed to view”—it is astonishing that the Lords did not immediately use it against her in order to justify her proposed deposition. Morton’s statement, however, merely says that the letters were sighted; it does not even say who wrote them. If letters in the Queen’s handwriting had been found in a locked casket belonging to Bothwell, surely the Lords, considering their precarious position, would have seized upon them as evidence to support their coup, and Morton would surely have given some description of them and the shock they engendered. But the fact that Morton made no comment about the Lords’ reactions to the letters on the day the casket was opened, and the fact that these letters were not at once made public and used against Mary, suggest that, if such a casket containing documents was found in the manner described, then the documents were of an innocuous nature, and deserving of little publicity.

  It might not be stretching credulity too far to suggest that their discovery may have inspired the Lords to seek, or manufacture, letters that could be used to incriminate the Queen. Thus, when Buchanan came to compose the Book of Articles, which was made public at the same time as Morton’s declaration, he could state that, in the casket, “there was found such letters of the Queen’s own handwriting direct to [Bothwell] and other writings as clearly testified that, as he was the chief executor of the murder, so was she of the foreknowledge thereof, and that her ravishing was nothing else but a coloured mask.”

  On the day the casket was allegedly opened, or the day before, Robert Melville was sent to London to explain the Lords’ actions to Elizabeth. There is no direct evidence that he took with him secret information about the Casket Letters, although Maitland did write to Cecil stating that the Lords’ messenger would explain the reasons why he had taken sides against the Queen. Maitland, however, had taken sides against Mary fifteen days before the alleged discovery of the casket; he also said in his letter that “the best part of the nobility [had] resolved to look narrowly into [Bothwell’s] doings, and being by them required, I would not refuse to join me to them in so just and reasonable a cause.” He also asked Cecil for English money to finance the Lords’ coup.39

  More than three years later, Randolph was to report that, around this time, another casket was found in Edinburgh Castle. This was said to have been a small coffer covered with green cloth, which contained a copy of the Craigmillar Bond, and it was discovered, probably in Bothwell’s apartments, by Balfour and Maitland.40Needless to say, this copy of the bond was suppressed.

  On 25 June, Drury referred to a casket: “There is [news] here that the Queen had a box, wherein are the practices between her and France, wherein is little good meant to England.”41Given the timing of this dispatch, it is certainly possible, even likely, that Drury was talking about the silver casket opened by the Lords, which was found to contain only diplomatic documents. If it had contained more contentious matter, the Lords would certainly have informed Drury of it, for they needed to justify their actions to Queen Elizabeth, whose reaction they feare
d. Drury again mentions this box in a report sent on 29 June, in which he says that the partly coded documents in it have been deciphered.42Again, there is no mention of their supposedly dramatic content.

  On 21 June, the day the casket was purportedly opened, the Lords sat in Council, but no mention was made in the minutes of the casket or its contents, which is astonishing, given the reputedly sensational nature of the latter. Instead, the Councillors denounced Bothwell for keeping the Queen under restraint, ignoring the fact that they themselves were doing just that, and far more straitly.

  That day, in London, de Silva reported that Mary was “five months gone with child,”43an obvious error that has nevertheless given rise to all kinds of speculation, since, if it had been true, then the child would have been conceived in the middle of January, when Darnley was ill with syphilis; the natural conclusion might be that Bothwell was the father, which lends credence to the allegations in the libels that Bothwell and Mary were lovers before Darnley’s death, and also to the long Glasgow letter. It is more likely that de Silva’s informant told him that Mary was five weeks gone with child. When she fell pregnant with James, reports of her condition circulated early, even before it was confirmed—ambassadors kept an eagle eye out for such things. With Mary and Darnley estranged, any hint of a pregnancy would have been scandalous, and thus would attract diplomatic attention, but there are no reports before May that Mary was expecting a child. If she had conceived in January, by late June her condition would have been difficult to conceal, and would soon have been detected by those in charge of her; moreover, her enemies would surely have made political capital out of it.

  Mary still had some friends in Scotland. Huntly had remained loyal, and around 21 June, Argyll abandoned the Confederate Lords.44Together, they joined the Hamiltons, Lord Crawford and other royalist supporters at Dumbarton, where plans were laid for rescuing the Queen.

  From June onwards, in order to exculpate themselves, the Lords did what everyone had urged Mary to do, and ruthlessly pursued a policy of arresting and executing the minor participants in Darnley’s murder. There is no doubt that the evidence they obtained from these wretches, which may well have been extracted under torture, and was contained in a series of depositions, was censored, distorted and even invented in order to incriminate Bothwell, and later Mary—neither of whom was in a position to refute the allegations— and divert suspicion from the true culprits, the Confederate Lords themselves, who were now able to have the truth suppressed. Their efforts in this respect produced an official version of the murder that contains many inconsistencies and improbabilities, and can in many respects be proved false, as has been demonstrated. These arrests and executions may have gone some way towards satisfying the public’s desire for retribution, but they left many questions unanswered, notably the matter of the Queen’s guilt. Furthermore, the material in the depositions has only served to confuse historians, not a few of whom have accepted it as wholly factual, even though there is sufficient evidence to prove the contrary.

  JAMES HEPBURN, EARL OF BOTHWELL “A glorious, rash and hazardous young man.”

  JEAN GORDON, COUNTESS OF BOTHWELL She was a woman of strong character, “a proper and virtuous gentlewoman.”

  HERMITAGE CASTLE Mary made a 60-mile round trip in a day to visit Bothwell here after he was wounded.

  MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS HOUSE, JEDBURGH Mary stayed here in the autumn of 1566 whilst she was recovering from her nearly fatal illness.

  MARY AND DARNLEY AT JEDBURGH Contrary to what this picture suggests, Mary accorded Darnley such a chilly reception that he left the next day.

  CRAIGMILLAR CASTLE It was here that the fateful chain of events that led to Darnley’s murder were set in motion.

  THE MURDER SCENE AT KIRK O’FIELD The bodies of Darnley and his valet may be seen in the orchard (top right). The ruins of the Old Provost’s Lodging are shown to the left of the centre. At the bottom (left), Darnley’s body is carried away, while (right) his valet is buried. At the top left, Prince James cries, “Judge and avenge my cause, O Lord.”

  THE DARNLEY MEMORIAL PAINTING This vendetta picture was commissioned by Darnley’s parents, the Earl and Countess of Lennox, who kneel behind James VI beside their son’s tomb. To the right is Darnley’s younger brother, Charles Stuart. Inset is a depiction of Mary’s defeat at Carberry Hill. The painting is littered with inscriptions demanding divine vengeance on the murderers.

  THE INFAMOUS MERMAID PLACARD It depicts Mary as a prostitute, with Bothwell’s hare crest below, and bears the legend, “Destruction awaits the wicked on every side.”

  DUNBAR CASTLE Bothwell’s power base served as a refuge for Mary after Rizzio’s murder, but was later the scene of her rape.

  BORTHWICK CASTLE After being besieged here by her enemies, Mary made a dramatic escape dressed in male attire.

  MARY IS LED AWAY FROM THE FIELD AT CARBERRY HILL The Queen surrendered to the Lords, “thinking that she could go to them in perfect safety, without fear of treachery.”

  LOCHLEVEN CASTLE Mary was a prisoner here for ten months before she escaped and fled to England.

  GEORGE BUCHANAN “The author of slanderous and untrue calumnies.”

  WILLIAM CECIL “The Queen of Scots is, and always shall be, a dangerous person to Your Majesty’s estate.”

  ELIZABETH I She told Mary: “Your case is not so clear but that much remains to be explained.”

  THE CASKET LETTERS MAY HAVE BEEN KEPT IN THIS SILVER BOX The letters contained “many matters unmeet to be repeated before honest ears.” But were they genuine?

  From the time they seized power, the Lords were in control of all sources of official information, and there is no doubt that they manipulated such information to their own advantage, for it was essential to justify their conduct towards their anointed sovereign. The chief victim of this policy would, of course, be the Queen.

  On 23 June, William Powrie made a deposition describing the conveying of the gunpowder to Kirk o’Field, the details of which were sent by Drury to Cecil four days later; clearly, the Lords were anxious to prove their case to the English. However, on 3 July, Powrie made a second deposition, which contradicted many of the details in the first.45Whatever the truth of the matter, something underhand was certainly going on.

  Bedford reported on 23 June that the Lords did not wish to imprison their Queen any longer than necessary, but would do as Elizabeth appointed,46which suggests that Cecil had all along been aware of their plans. On the 25th, the General Assembly of the Kirk met, and appointed George Buchanan as Moderator. Once Mary’s tutor and admirer, Buchanan, a staunch Lennox man, had aligned firmly with the Protestant Lords, and would soon become the Queen’s most effectively virulent enemy, spitting out his venom in tract after tract of highly readable propaganda so convincing that much of it is still believed today, flawed though it can be proved to be.

  On 26 June, George Dalgleish was brought before the Council and made a deposition about Darnley’s murder, in which it was made clear that he had played no active part. Strangely, he did not refer in it to the casket or its discovery, which, together with the fact that his name was not mentioned in connection with them until after he was dead, lends credence to the theory that its original contents were of little import.47Had incriminating letters been found, Dalgleish would have been a useful witness to their having been in Bothwell’s possession. But it was only after his death, when the Lords had decided to put forward the Casket Letters as evidence against Mary, that the silenced Dalgleish became useful to them as the man who had allegedly led them to the letters.

  As Dalgleish was making his confession, Bothwell was back in the Borders, assessing support, and that night he returned to Dunbar, where he no doubt learned of the arrest of his servants. The Lords may have been aware of his return, and, taking no chances, for it was certain that he would try to rescue the Queen and stir up trouble for them, they proclaimed a reward of 1,000 crowns for anyone apprehending Bothwell, and ordered the surrender of
Dunbar Castle. Those who helped the Earl would be adjudged “plain par-takers with him in the horrible murder.”48That same day, in an Act of the Privy Council, the Lords announced that they had sufficient proof—“as well of witnesses as of writings”—of Bothwell’s guilt, which some writers have understood to refer to the Casket Letters. This is possible, although the reference may be to the depositions. However, it seems likely that, by this time, the Lords had discovered, or forged, some letters that were suitable for their purpose.

  Around the 26th, Robert Melville arrived in London with Maitland’s letter to Cecil.49Certainly, on that day Cecil sent some packets to Moray in France, expressing the hope that he would return at once. Historians have speculated that these packets contained copies of the Casket Letters, but this is unlikely, because in August, Moray revealed to de Silva that he had not actually seen the letters, and seemed to know the contents of only one of them, of which he had heard from a man who had read it.50

  On 27 June, William and John Blackadder, James Edmonstoun and the Swedish sailor, Mynart Fraser, were summarily tried by a new committee called the Lords of the Secret Council. William Blackadder insisted he was innocent, but he was tortured, found guilty of being “art and part” of Darnley’s murder, then hanged and quartered at the Mercat Cross.51There is no record of the evidence on which he was convicted. Edmonstoun and John Blackadder were executed the following September, while Fraser was released and allowed to return to his ship.52