I would counsel women not to presume to command their husbands, and admonish husbands not to suffer themselves to be ruled by their wives; or in so doing I account it no otherwise than to eat with the feet, and travel with the hands, to go with their fingers, and to feed themselves with their toes.27
As good reputations were the keys to people’s social standing, their enemies sometimes gossiped about their sexuality to sully their honor. Because female honor was considered fragile and once besmirched almost impossible to retrieve, numerous women sued slanderers in Kirk sessions or other courts to clear their names from sexual defamation. Few aristocratic women sought legal remedies, but they did sometimes adopt deep religious demeanor partly to protect themselves from slander. Female rulers often formed political alliances with ecclesiastics to forestall such gossip albeit sometimes unsuccessfully. In 1543 Sadler heard that James V had harbored suspicions about Mary of Guise’s intimacy with Cardinal Beaton. Twenty years later, the exiled Bothwell repeated rumors circulating in France that Mary had been Lorraine’s whore. Believing that Francis was impotent, some evil tongues even claimed that her uncle planned to impregnate her.
Since their contemporaries interpreted wives’ adultery as evidence of their husbands’ failure to maintain household authority, female immorality dishonored the men, called cuckolds, as well as the women. The cuckolded husband, a name derived from the cuckoo’s practice of laying eggs in other birds’ nests, was expected to perform acts of prowess to recover his reputation; indeed, the honor code permitted all men to defend their reputations with swords. It was best for a man to maintain secrecy about his wife’s adultery. If knowledge of it became widespread, however, he needed other men to witness the violent acts that would restore his honor, since male networks confirmed and validated masculinity. Thus, Henry planned for his allies to attack Riccio in Mary’s presence to signal her disgrace and his vindication.
Men could only with difficulty distinguish personal honor from their family honor, as this trait descended to them through their collective blood inheritance. Therefore, Lennox probably promoted his son’s decision to murder Riccio and usurp his wife’s throne. George Buchanan later claimed that Lennox had actually advised Henry to seek out two of the co-conspirators, his cousin, the sixth Lord Lindsay, and Morton. Nisbet, Lennox’s master of the household, was also one of the assassins. Randolph certainly believed that both Lennox and his son conspired against Mary. Frequently at court during the winter of 1566, the earl served as one of the parliamentary lords of the articles on 7 March, two days before the attack on Riccio, and was elsewhere in the palace when it occurred.
Many of the assailants, including Morton, Ruthven, and George Douglas, postulate of Arbroath, were relatives of Henry’s mother, Margaret Douglas, countess of Lennox. As Scottish women, who took their husband’s titles but not their family names, were considered more a link to their in-law’s kindred than a part of it, Henry normally would have sought Stewart assistance. Scotsmen, in fact, usually supported others with their surnames even if only distantly connected. Since Mary was also a Stewart, and since individuals with the same surname were not expected to fight against each other, her husband turned to his Douglas kin for assistance.
During the Order festivities, if not before, Henry began conspiring with them to murder Riccio and take his wife captive. On 13 February Randolph predicted both Riccio’s death and the usurpation of Mary’s crown, and by the 25th shortly before departing, he learned that the bands would soon be signed. The king had likely agreed orally to the conspiracy before witnessing the wedding of Huntly’s sister, Jean Gordon, to Bothwell in a Protestant service at Holyrood Abbey chapel on the 24th. Earlier, perhaps at Mary’s behest since Jean was a Catholic, Archbishop Hamilton, by virtue of his authority as papal legate a latere, issued a dispensation permitting her to marry in a Catholic ceremony the earl, who was related to her in the double fourth degree of consanguinity. Delighted with the match, Mary presented the bride with 11 ells of cloth-of-silver lined with taffeta for her gown. For five days the duplicitous king participated in the celebrations, including lavish banquets and tournaments.
In early March he signed two bands, the first with his relatives and associates for Riccio’s murder. It is possible, as Mary later claimed, that the motive of the signatories for removing her from the queenship was that she, as was her right after she reached her 25th year, would revoke some of the grants made to them during her minority. Additionally, Randolph passed on the absurd rumor that she would give to Riccio the chancellorship held by Morton. In the second band, which referred to Riccio’s death and was endorsed by Moray and the other noblemen with him, the king promised to pardon Moray and the Chaseabout raiders, who were mostly at Berwick, and to support the Protestant faith. In return, they pledged to assist him in obtaining the crown matrimonial and to petition Elizabeth for the release of his mother, imprisoned because of his marriage. Ironically, eight months after these men rebelled against Mary because she wed Darnley, they agreed to empower him as king and aid him in usurping her realm. Aware of these bands, Bedford and Randolph at Berwick informed Elizabeth that Moray would soon return home. The date parliament was to meet scheduled the timing of the attack. On the 7th the king refused to accompany Mary to the opening of parliament, which among its other business, restored Huntly and Sutherland to their earldoms and ordered the raiders to appear on the 12th for the forfeiture of their lands.
Two days later about 7:00 p.m. the assault commenced as the queen, who was six months pregnant, supped in a small room just off her bedchamber on Holyrood’s second floor. The following account is based mostly on Mary’s letter of 2 April in which she described the events to Archbishop Beaton.28 It differs in some particulars from Ruthven’s apologia which was written on 23 March; however, a rehearsal of her statements is important because they reflect her recollections of the conspiracy that form the context for some of her later actions.
Seated at the center of the supper table, Mary was attended by Lady Argyll, Lord Robert, Arthur Erskine, master of the horse, Robert Beaton of Creich, Balfour, and other domestic servants, including Riccio at the sideboard. Meanwhile, the conspirators assembled, Morton, Lindsay, and his followers securing the courtyard gates and Ruthven and other murderers gathering in the king’s apartments on the first floor.
Henry emerged from the secret stairs to her lodgings, entered the chamber, and sat beside her on the royal chair. Soon thereafter to her amazement appeared Ruthven, who was pale and gaunt from a serious illness that took his life three months later. Dressed in armor with a sword drawn and accompanied by Douglas of Arbroath and two others, Ruthven, reputedly a sorcerer, reassured Mary after she ordered him under pain of treason to depart that no harm would come to her and that he wanted only to speak with Riccio. She quizzed Henry about this intrusion, but he denied all knowledge of it. She then promised Ruthven that she would see that justice was done if Riccio, hiding behind her, had committed some crime. As more accomplices, including Makgill, rushed in shouting the Douglas war cry, Ruthven ordered Riccio to depart with him. In the ensuing tumult the assailants over-turned the table, prompting the quick witted Lady Argyll to grab a falling candle to prevent total darkness from descending upon them. Andrew Ker of Fawdonside held a loaded pistol to Mary’s breast; Douglas of Arbroath wounded Riccio over her shoulder with Henry’s dagger; they dragged him from the room and stabbed him some 56 times, leaving the king’s weapon in his body.
Upon returning, Ruthven explained that Riccio was killed for counseling her to restore Catholicism, refusing to pardon the Chaseabout raiders, maintaining friendly relations with Catholic powers, and appointing the traitors, Bothwell and Huntly, as her councilors. In extreme fear for her life, Mary responded defiantly that if she died or her child perished, European princes would avenge their deaths. Ruthven assured her and later Bothwell and Huntly, who were elsewhere in the palace, that no harm would come to them.
Her husband foiled her chance for escape when S
imon Preston, Edinburgh’s provost, and other citizens arrived to check on her safety. The conspirators kept her from the window while Henry reassured them all was well. When Huntly and Bothwell heard that their enemies, Moray and the other raiders, would reach Edinburgh the next day, they fled through a window. Subsequently some others escaped, among them, Atholl, Sutherland, John, fifth Lord Fleming, brother of Mary Fleming, Livingston, and even Balfour, whom Mary claimed the assassins meant to hang. Besides Riccio, they also murdered John Black, the Dominican friar.
That night and the next day, the 10th, she was confined to her chamber with only limited access to her attendants while Henry kept his promise to the raiders and issued a proclamation proroguing parliament. At 8:00 p.m. that evening when Mary claimed she was having a miscarriage, Morton sent her a midwife and other women to assist her. Later, after the raiders reached Edinburgh and supped at Morton’s house, Moray visited Mary, who graciously received him and heard him mendaciously deny knowing anything about Riccio’s murder.
The next morning she convinced her weak-willed, youthful husband, whom she dominated with her stronger personality, that he was the assailants’ dupe, pointing out that a guard stood near his door as well as hers. She also warned him about diplomatic problems if he agreed to religious changes. Leslie later reported that the king had been so blinded with ambition that he had not foreseen the evil intent of his cunning allies and almost too late realized that he was their pawn and in as much danger as the queen. Undoubtedly, Mary also took care to persuade him the child she carried was his. Endowed with a malleable personality, perhaps even a cowardly one, and separated from the influence of his father, the young king fell under the control of his older, more experienced wife.
Later that day Mary granted pardons to the conspirators, who were planning to incarcerate her at Stirling while her husband ruled her realm. This was a huge concession on her part. Even drawing a sword in the monarch’s presence constituted a capital offense, but Mary was willing to appease them, as her cooperation offered evidence of her wifely submission. When Henry requested to be left in control of the palace’s security, they agreed and departed for Morton’s residence.
Mary sent a message through John Stewart of Traquair, captain of her guard, to Arthur Erskine to bring horses at midnight for their journey. The royal couple’s escort also included Anthony Standen, the king’s servant, Traquair’s brother William, and her attendant, Margaret Carwood. Mary’s mode of escape is difficult to credit because of her pregnancy, but in her letters to Archbishop Beaton and Charles and Catherine, she claimed that Bothwell and Huntly arranged for her to be let down from the palace walls in a chair with ropes and other devices. They then hurried to their horses and successfully escaped imprisonment. Undaunted by this narrow escape, Mary planned to ride southeast to Dunbar, her fine artillery castle, call on her lieges for support, and secure her kingdom.
6: CONFRONTING ADVERSITY, MARCH 1566–MAY 1567
About midnight on the evening of 11 March, they left Holyrood on horseback: Mary mounted behind Erskine; Traquair took Carwood; Standen rode with Henry; and William Stewart brought up the rear. They hastened to Seton Hall, the home of Mary Seton’s brother, George, fifth Lord Seton, and the grand master of the queen’s household since 1563. The previous July during happier times, the royal couple had stayed at his mansion, which stood nine miles from Edinburgh. Resuming their flight, they reached Dunbar Castle, located on the North Sea southeast of Edinburgh. After conferring with Huntly, Bothwell, Seton, Fleming and others, Mary summoned her lieges to Haddington on 17 March.
As she approached Haddington, the rebels retreated from Edinburgh, permitting her access the next day with a force of about 8,000, composed mainly of her lords’ retainers. Avoiding Holyrood, she occupied private homes before removing to Edinburgh Castle. Having decided for security reasons to establish her lying-in room at the castle, she ordered new lodgings constructed in it with her and her husband’s monogram displayed above the doorway. By custom arras would have been hung on the confinement walls and windows except for one to let in some light.
By condemning Riccio’s murderers but pardoning the Chaseabout raiders, Mary split the confederates’ unity. Following the council’s summons to 60 fugitives to appear before it, Morton, Ruthven, Lindsay, and the others, fled south toward England while the principal Chaseabout raiders submitted to Mary and were pardoned. Meanwhile, Henry denied involvement in the murder. A proclamation on 20 March at Edinburgh’s Mercat Cross declaring his innocence prompted his former allies to send Mary copies of the bands he signed. In May she admitted in a letter to the duchess of Guise that his betrayal had changed her from a contented, satisfied person to one oppressed with troubles and perplexities.
Mary rewarded her loyal supporters with the rebels’ offices: Huntly obtained Morton’s chancellorship and after she knighted Balfour, a councilor since 1565, he assumed Makgill’s post as clerk register. James Melville later recalled performing Lethington’s secretarial duties until his reconciliation with Mary, which occurred in September. When Joseph Riccio arrived with Mauvissière in April, she defiantly appointed him to his late brother’s secretarial post. In June at Berwick, Randolph heard that Leslie had the chief management of her affairs.
CHILDBIRTH ARRANGEMENTS
That Mary was increasingly thinking about her unborn child is proven by her communications with Elizabeth. In her letter from Dunbar on 15 March revealing Riccio’s murder, she apologized for not writing with her own hand, but admitted she was exhausted from covering 20 miles on horseback in a five-hour period and was also indisposed because of her pregnancy. In April she confessed she had grown so large she could not stoop over and that physical overexertion made her ill.1
Treating pregnancy as a disease, physicians diagnosed women fearful of surviving their confinements as melancholic. Modern demographers have concluded that the mortality rate in childbirth was no greater than that of the victims of infectious diseases; even so many expectant mothers prepared for their deaths. That Mary had her will drawn up by Mary Livingston, her jewelry custodian, and Carwood, her bedchamber attendant, indicates she began arranging for her demise as her due date drew closer. None of the copies she reportedly retained for herself or sent to her executors and to France is extant but an inventory on which she indicated her jewelry beneficiaries is available. She gave one item to Bothwell, three to his countess, and the most, 26, including her wedding ring, to Henry. Altogether she bequeathed 253 pieces to 60 persons with the proviso that they go to her infant should he survive her. Biographers have viewed these gifts as measures of her esteem for the recipients, but she must have designated most, if not all, to individuals because of their rank and relationship to her. She gave three diamond rings to her husband’s parents despite her estrangement from Lennox since Riccio’s murder. The 14 gifts destined for the Maries and their families were less valuable than the 14 bequeathed to the Guises. Perhaps, she offered some out of affection but pinpointing which ones is impossible.
As contemporary understanding of reproduction was limited, she must also have been concerned about her child’s well-being. Following the assault on Riccio in her presence, observers treated her request for a midwife seriously because they believed that a sudden shock could cause a miscarriage. James Melville remembered that Mary’s attendants feared she would lose the baby she was carrying.
Midwives entreated pregnant women to curtail physical activities, display moderation in their activities, and avoid riding on horseback because the movement might dislodge the fetus. In 1561 Catherine de’ Medici advised her pregnant sister-in-law, Margaret of Savoy, that if she must travel she should journey in a chair but only for short distances. Husbands were also admonished to be solicitous over the health of their pregnant wives.
Clerics frightened parents by warning that a wrathful God interfered with nature to cause sinners’ children to be born with deformities, such as missing digits. Expectant mothers were also admonished to monitor the objec
ts they observed; their viewing a creature with excessive hair, for example, might cause their fetuses to develop that trait. This possibility could partially explain Mary’s astonishment at the sickly appearance of Ruthven in her supper room. She might have been more concerned about her child’s condition than her intruder’s health.
After entering her lying-in lodgings in early June to await delivery, she depended only on women attendants, since childbirth was an all-female affair. If she had harbored fears that witnessing the attack on Riccio would harm her infant, they were misplaced. Between 10:00 and 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, 19 June, after a long, difficult labor in which she was assisted by Margaret Houston, her midwife, she was delivered of a healthy son. As midwifery was often associated with witchcraft, the supernatural was sometimes evoked during childbirth. Reportedly, Margaret Fleming, countess of Atholl, futilely attempted to cast Mary’s suffering upon Margaret Beaton, Lady Reres, who later became the prince’s wet-nurse. To celebrate his birth Mar fired the castle guns and the citizens lit the customary bonfires.
A tradition repeated in the Herries Memoirs claims that when Henry, a castle resident, visited her, she showed him the child in the presence of witnesses and announced that he was his “own” son. She may have uttered this remark but the other claims of Herries, who was absent at the Anglo–Scottish border, are improbable. It is unlikely that she stated it would “be the worse for him [their son] hereafter,” since she would not have alluded to Riccio’s death. She did not predict that he would be the first monarch to unite Scotland and England; those were the words of someone writing with hindsight.2
Mary Queen of Scots Page 15
