History HubΒ permalink
Bothwell
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
There was an article in our newspaper from the Observer, talking of historians and family trying to restore the reputation of James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell. I am not all that familiar with the ins and outs of Scotland at the time, but it seems that historians are querying the original sources for his life as unreliable witnesses who disliked Bothwell. They talk of him as loyal to the Queen (of Scots) and 'the last great patriot of an independent Scotland" to be correctly thought of in the same way as Robert the Bruce and William Wallce.
I hadn't realised Bothwell had Danish connections through his first wife and is buried in Denmark, after she had him arrested. He 'died, his mind unhinged, in a Danish dungeon in 1578'; for 10 years chained to a pillar. It is no wonder his mind was unhinged.
The family, led by Sir Alastair Buchan-Hepburn, is hoping his remains can come back to Scotland and the French historian Catherine Hermary-Vieille said 'I don't see any reason why the Danes want to keep this man in some little church at the end of nowhere. He was the king and he belongs to Scotland... the coffin is behind big, big iron chains and a lock. It is sad he is still locked up. He needs to be free now. And come home.'
Is anyone here very familiar with this period in Scotland's history - are the sources likely to be biased to the degree that his reputation has been most unfairly impugned? This part of Scottish history is only really known to me as a fascinating story, not really a historically analysed period.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 2
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Very interesting, Caro....
It would be great to hear what other posters have to say about this matter. But I would like to see how the family's efforts pan out.
I do think Bothwell seems to have gotten something of a bad rap, because this is how politics was conducted in those days. It just so happened that he and Mary lost out in what was also a religious power struggle, i.e. Mary being Catholic, Scotland being largely converted by Knox to a form of Calvinism, that little matter of assassinating a disgusting person in the form of Darnley, who probably deserved what he got. -
Message 3
Posted by Jak (U1158529) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Oh dear, it sounds like this might be another case like that of Richard III. Maybe it too will run and run.
Sure, more research needed! Try to establish the facts of what really happened. But digging him up and bringing his remains to Scotland sounds weird to me.
Even weirder: not long ago, someone (a Member of the Scottish Parliament, I think) was suggesting that the bones of Mary Queen of Scots should be disinterred from Westminster Abbey and brought "home". To Scotland.
(Though maybe the lady herself might have preferred France?)
These folk are dead. What can it possibly matter where they are buried? -
Message 4
Posted by greatnovak (U13923414) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Its hard to establish the facts with Bothwell though part of the problem is that Mary is considered to be one of the great "romantic" heroines and part of that means portaying Mary in the best light and Bothwell in the worst , that said Darnley was no great loss , he had done his job when he fathered an heir.
-
Message 5
Posted by LairigGhru (U14051689) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Given that history has recorded that Bothwell imprisoned and raped Mary Queen of Scots, whatever may have come afterwards, he hardly sounds like somebody who should be adulated and revered.
-
Message 6
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Oh dear, it sounds like this might be another case like that of Richard III. Maybe it too will run and run. Β
I'm absolutely bursting to witter on and on and on about Bothwell. But I won't.
Anna Throndsen wasn't really Bothwell's wife at all - it was another of those dodgy "handfasting" affairs. And she didn't have him arrested in Denmark. He was already being detained in Bergen in Norway (1567) because his ship didn't have correct exit papers. God knows what Bothwell must have thought when she quite unexpectedly turned up in Bergen and lodged *another* formal legal complaint against him, demanding restitution of her "dowry" (which Bothwell had spent seven years previously). It just so happened that Throndsen's cousin was the Danish Viceroy, Erik Rosenkrantz (nothing to do with Hamlet), and he had Bothwell incarcerated in the Rosenkrantz Tower. Frederick II of Denmark (who was also ruler of Norway) was alerted and he, realising what an ace political pawn Bothwell could prove be, had him transferred to the prison at Dragsholm Castle in Denmark. Bothwell was at first treated quite well, but it was Rosenkrantz who, in a blood-chilling phrase, eventually recommended that Frederick should put the Scottish Lord in a place "where men would forget him". This was the dungeon with a chain and pillar. A terrible fate for a man who had spent his life in the saddle patrolling the Border wilds, or at sea around the coasts of Scotland.
Could add a bit about his mummified body, but haven't time.
Bothwell was really a man's man - a great soldier and sailor, but women were his undoing and he was theirs. Mary of Guise's best advice to her daughter ( written just before she died) was that the young Earl could be trusted with *military* but never *political* power. She should have added, "And for God's sake, don't ever sleep with him - or worse - fall in love with him."
Did Bothwell kill Darnley? He was undoubtedly involved in the death of that vicious young fool, but then so too was half of the nobility of Scotland - and Cecil in London knew more than most.
Am wittering. Will cease forthwith.
In haste,
SST. -
Message 7
Posted by greatnovak (U13923414) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Whilst its possible that he did rape her , it could also have been a story fabricated by both parties to justify their marriage.
-
Message 8
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Given that history has recorded that Bothwell imprisoned and raped Mary Queen of Scots... Β
Yes, but who was recording the "history" and for whose benefit? The English? The Lords of the Congregation? That nasty George Buchanan (who certainly had it in for both Bothwell and Mary)?
There's an absolute anthology of abuse gathered around Bothwell's name, but some of the sources do disclose a rather more credible figure than "the bogey with which history has tried to frighten us."
But if I have time later I'll dig out some of the abuse. It certainly makes colourful reading. -
Message 9
Posted by Tas (U11050591) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Hi Temperance,
You do yourself an injustice. It is a pleasure to read your messages and learn new facts and sometimes new gossip. Pray continue to enlighten us about the Earl of Bothwell. I have read Antonia Fraser's book but would like to learn more.
I suspect the Earl was something like one of those modern types; extremely dangerous and bad but women cannot resist them.
Tas -
Message 10
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Friday, 7th January 2011
I always found it difficult to accept the story that Bothwell raped Mary....
It just didn't seem to fit in with events that occurred afterwards. A woman of Mary's power surely would have exacted a severe vengeance on Bothwell, if he'd really done that.... -
Message 11
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Friday, 7th January 2011
"Anna Throndsen wasn't really Bothwell's wife at all - it was another of those dodgy "handfasting" affairs. "
If Handfasting was recognised as a legal union under Scottish law up until 1939 how can in not be a real marriage Temp? Or are you saying that they pretended to be Handfast? I think the Handfast ceremony had to be conducted publicly to be legal and so avoid doubt of it's authenticity. -
Message 12
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Friday, 7th January 2011
If handfasting was recognised as a legal union under Scottish law up until 1939 how can it not be a real marriage Temp? Β
It's perhaps that old story of a girl thinking she was as good as married when in fact she was not. Were vows made "per verba de futuro" - I *will* marry you sometime in the future - or "per verba praesenti" - I marry you here and now? The evidence Anna offered in Bergen suggests that even she realised it was the former, and that she was not properly wed. In her case against Bothwell there is no mention of divorce or desertion, and she declared that Bothwell "had taken her from her fatherland and home and had led her into a foreign land away from her parents ...Yet he would not hold her as his lawful wife, which he had promised to do with hand, mouth and letters." The peroration during the court case in Bergen also stated, "Whereas he has three wives living, herself first, another in Scotland from whom he has bought himself, and last the Queen of Scots, the Lady Anna opines that the promise of marriage has no weight in his eyes."
Promise is the key word?
More telling perhaps are the legal precautions taken by the family of Jean Gordon when she married Bothwell. Marriage in the great Scottish houses was arranged on strictly business lines and the Gordon family was taking no chances. Because there had been a marriage in the families some four generations back - which meant Bothwell and Jean Gordon were very distantly related - these two Protestants actually applied for a *papal* dispensation for their union! No legal loopholes that could cause trouble in the future were to be left - it may be claimed "that every precaution which lawyer and theologian could devise to secure the legality, permanence and irrevocability of the union was taken". Certainly no one considered that the unhappy Danish girl who had followed Bothwell to Scotland was the true Countess of Bothwell!
Jean Gordon later divorced Bothwell on the grounds of his adultery with Bessie Crawford, a blacksmith's daughter. This relationship was apparently consummated in the tower of Haddington Church. (Nice juicy bit of gossip for Tas!!) The Queen of Scots was not mentioned along with Bessie in the divorce petition.
Tas - yes Bothwell was mad, bad and dangerous to know - but extremely interesting! -
Message 13
Posted by eristheapplethrower (U9524346) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
islanddawn
Bothwell's handfasting with Anna took place in Denmark not Scotland.
Yes, handfasting was practiced in Scotland for many centuries but by the eighteenth century had largely died. It was not the form of marriage prohibited by the act in 1939. And anyway I think handfasting in Scotland was more of a promise of marriage than a marriage ceremony itself. It was the public declaration that man and woman would marry. I will take you for my wife, husband, spouse. If sex happened after the handfasting - then I think the physical consummation is what would have made the marriage. That and a statement in the present tense that I take you for my spouse. Handfasting could be followed (or not) by a religious service.
In Bothwell's case his handfast with the avenging Anna might have resulted in a son being born. And of course didn't Bothwell burn his candle at three ends - wasn't there another woman prior to his marriage to Mary Stuart.
However another unique form of Scottish marriage was abolished in 1939. That was called marriage by habit and repute. A couple could make a public announcement for example to their neighbour and say were are married I am Mr Broun meet Mrs Broun. And that would be it.
Couples who wanted to make 'habit and repute' status more official could have their local area sheriff or his depute witness their declaration in a private home, etc. You will be aware that in Scotland Sheriffs are judges. This declaration of 'habit and repute' could be then be registered as an irregular marriage. But it provide some 'protection' for children of the marriage and property and blah de blah.
Irregular marriages were banned in England in mid C18. Cue in Gretna Green and the Scottish Borders which suddenly became very attractive for English lovers who wished to marry without seeking parent's permission. This was tricky because if the runaway did not bother to register the hasty marriage --- then there could trouble with English inheritance laws blah de blah.
Another irregular form of marriage on shakier ground was marriage by proxy. My parents married by proxy (another country another time), but I don't know whether Scots tradition and legal approach to marriage (Roman Law as opposed to English common law) allowed for marriage by proxy.
Certainly one of the reasons you don't get evening marriages in the UK is the fear of abduction and things being done under cover of darkness. I digress.
In Scotland the person was licensed to conduct marriage ceremonies not the place. So in Scotland you could marry in a hotel, or at the Gretna Green anvil , the local hall or in your home. The minister or sheriff came to you if you did not want a church.
In England and Wales the situation was only changed a few years ago. In E&W it was the place that was registered.
Anyway prior to 1939 I believe that there no Scottish marriages were carried out in local Registry Offices and that was changed by the legislation in 1939.
In Scotland was also of 'breach of promise' if a man proposed to a woman and she said yes and later he married someone else or already had a wife, the wronged woman could sue for 'breach of promise' but she did need proof either written or sworn testimony of witnesses. And I think 'breach of promise' stayed on the Scottish statute books until the 1960s or 1970s. But I may be mistaken. It may have been abolished earlier.
BW Scots marriages were not registered by civil authorities until 1855. -
Message 14
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
Thankyou to both Temp and Aneris for the very informative and interesting explanations.
-
Message 15
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
Just to complicate matters further, I've been reading this afternoon about yet *another* woman who claimed to have been "handfasted" with, to or by (I'm not sure of the appropriate preposition) the amazing Bothwell. At the time of Bothwell's divorce from Jean Gordon in 1567, it was rumoured that one Janet Beton "was to be cited as co-respondent" or "that she would claim that her handfast marriage invalidated the later union."
Bothwell was only 24 when he had a passionate affair with this remarkable lady. She was 43 years old when she took Bothwell to her bed
, had been married three times, had borne seven children and was rather alarmingly known to all and sundry as "the Wizard Lady of Branxhom". Crikey.
But enough of the delicious scandal. Caro asked a sensible question about sources. Back in a mo with some contemporary opinions about Bothwell. -
Message 16
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
Delicious scandal is probably about my level, Temperance. I suspect I understand it more than primary sources.
This has been a great discussion, thank you all, especially to someone whose ancestry is all Scottish and who only knew smidgeons of all that about their marriages. I had noticed in family research that Scottish women seemed to keep, at least to some degree, their maiden names on marriage.
Can you get married anywhere in England now? Our system is more like the Scottish one - someone the other day was married during a harness race (trotting) meeting. People can choose anywhere to get married. (There was a little fuss recently with some marriages not valid because the celebrant wasn't completely registered or something.) I thought it used to have to be a public place so anyone could attend, but I think people sometimes get married sky-diving or the like. Although maybe the signing ceremony would still be on the ground where people could attend (theoretically).
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 17
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
The contemporary judgements on Bothwell are not kind, but it should be noted that they all all from English commentators, or from members of the Scottish elite of whom Bothwell's biographer, Robert Gore-Brown, says, "In Queen Mary's day, nearly every Protestant noble in Scotland (with the notable exception of 'that unprincipled ruffian' the Earl of Bothwell) was in the pay of the hereditary enemy of his country. Here's a selection of the abuse, by no means exhaustive:
"I know him as mortal an enemy to our nation (England) as any man alive; despiteful beyond measure, false and untrue as the devil, a blasphemous and irreverent speaker and one that the godly of this nation has reason to curse for ever."
"A fit man to be minister to any shameful act, either against God or man."
"An assassin of well-known cruelty, a robber condemned by justice, human and divine."
"A monstrous beast, of all men that now exist or ever will, the most wicked."
""The vilest of all two-footed beasts."
"A glorious*, rash and hazardous young man."
"A bog of vice and sink of all horrible sins."
And yet there is one English voice - that of Henry Percy - raised in Bothwell's defence. Bothwell was held prisoner by the Percies in January 1563 and Henry Percy wrote to Cecil saying simply, "The Earl is very wise and not the man he was reported to be."
Elizabeth was enough impressed by what she heard from the North to send immediate instructions to Tynemouth Castle (where Bothwell was held) that the prisoner "should be given a greater measure of liberty."
As regards the rape accusation, when one of the Edinburgh ministers was asked to proclaim the banns for Mary's Protestant marriage to Bothwell, he refused, saying that he believed his queen was being forced into a marriage against her will. However, the next day, the Lord Justice Clerk brought the minister a document signed by Mary herself declaring that she had neither been kept prisoner nor had she been raped. She made Bothwell Duke of Orkney that very same week . Was she bullied into this? Impossible to say.
There is also of course that famous declaration of Mary's, quoted by Kirkcaldy of the Grange, that "she cares not to lose France, England and her own country for him and will go with him to the world's end in a white petticoat." This would suggest she fully consented to her "abduction". Mind you, it seems that Grange was also a paid spy of England, so how much we can trust him is debatable. However, such love-sick phrases *are* echoed in a compromising letter of Mary's that Moray (not to be trusted) and Lennox (not to be trusted) were soon to report . Lennox quoted it as proclaiming undying love for Bothwell, "though she should thereby abandon her God, put in adventure the loss of her dowry in France, hazard such titles as she had to the crown of England and also the crown of her realm". Moray reported much the same.
And Mary's own comments in a letter to the Bishop of Dunblane, written in June 1567, suggest that she was not raped at Dunbar, but that, "seeing ourselves in his puissance", she rather yielded to his demands.
*The word "glorious" used here by Throckmorton means" vainglorious" - boastful, full of self-importance -
Message 18
Posted by greatnovak (U13923414) on Saturday, 8th January 2011
The Observer piece suggests that Bothwell should be considered a great patriot along the lines of Bruce and Wallace , however it neglect the fact that under Elizabeth the relationship between England and Scotland had improved greatly , partly due to the fact that both were mostly Protestant and also because of Elizabeth's general policies. In that aspect he should not be considered a great hero.
-
Message 19
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Sunday, 9th January 2011
... however it neglected the fact that under Elizabeth the relationship between England and Scotland had improved greatly, partly due to the fact that both were mostly Protestant and also because of Elizabeth's general policies. In that respect he should not be considered a great hero. Β
I'm not so sure. It was England's "policies" towards Scotland that Bothwell feared and loathed. Elizabeth - and Cecil - were pursuing a more peaceful and far cheaper (bribes are easier to fund than war campaigns) version of Henry VIII's "wooing". But theirs was just as cunning and, like Henry's, had two aims: destroy French influence in Scotland once and for all, and work towards an ultimate take-over of the entire nation. I believe that Elizabeth always intended that the little Prince James - who had a double dollop of Tudor blood running through his veins - would one day unite the two countries. But she knew that Scotland would never rule England: London, even with a Scottish born king, would always be the seat of power, and England the dominant nation.
Bothwell *was* a patriot: a *Protestant* lord who supported the French Catholic Queen Dowager through thick and thin, and who did his best to shore up the rule of her daughter. It sickened Bothwell that English gold was *buying* Scotland. As I said above, he *never* accepted Cecil's bribes, although just about every other Scottish nobleman was a pensioner of the English. And knowledge of this ignominy was general. The Spanish ambassador, de Silva, reported to Philip of Spain in 1564 that "eight thousand crowns bought Queen Elizabeth the goodwill and secret information of the leading men of Scotland". But never Bothwell's. Robert Gore-Browne puts it beautifully:
"The peculiarity of Bothwell in refusing to accept from his county's enemies an income that would have relieved his chronic need stood him in little stead with his less fastidious neighbours. Uneasy conscience finds relief in disparaging innocence, and the pensioners of England tried to cover their shame by attacking the eccentric who did not share it."
I deplore the way Bothwell treated women (I also deplore the way the women *allowed* themselves to be treated!), but - viewed as a courageous man of action and a Scottish patriot - he's up there with the best!
They should bring him home. I'd like to see Bothwell's remains (the salty sea air in the crypt of the little church of Faarevejle *mummified* his body) returned to Scotland and buried in the Border country - preferably near Hermitage. Let his ghost roam freely there, rather than around the precincts of Dragsholm Castle which now is, Lord help us, a *hotel* and golf club and which is said said to be haunted by the infamous Scottish Earl. (That said, Bothwell's ghost is perhaps happy at the golf club: he did enjoy a good game of golf - his enemies commented that he took Mary golfing after the death of Darnley.) -
Message 20
Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Friday, 14th January 2011
Very interesting, Temperance....
-
Message 21
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Saturday, 15th January 2011
Hi shivfan,
I was pathetically grateful to see your thumbs up sign - thought I'd bored everyone to death! -
Message 22
Posted by Tas (U11050591) on Saturday, 15th January 2011
thought I'd bored everyone to death!Β
Not at all Sweet Sister!
We are all ears.
Tas
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.