Mary Queen of Scots: And the Murder of Lord Darnley

Mary Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley

---

Feb 10, Pages Buy. Dec 18, Pages Buy. Feb 10, Pages.

Dec 18, Pages. Handsome, accomplished, and charming, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, staked his claim to the English throne by marrying Mary Stuart, who herself claimed to be the Queen of England. It was not long before Mary discovered that her new husband was interested only in securing sovereign power for himself. Then, on February 10, , an explosion at his lodgings left Darnley dead; the intrigue thickened after it was discovered that he had apparently been suffocated before the blast.

Scheming bastards, treasonous plotting, multiple murders, kidnapping, espionage, and on and on. Mary Queen of Scots was a complicated woman in a complicated time, though by the end I mostly felt bad for her. Weir paints a realistic picture of a rather naive woman in over her head and surrounded by powerful and unscrupulous men plotting against her.

This book is a wonderful follow-up read to Weir's biography of Elizabeth I, who makes a fascinating contrast with the ill-fated and far less politically savvy Queen of Scots. One thing I really loved about this book was how Weir systematically goes through the tangled mess of primary sources to get to the truth, discussing their biases and how they contradict one another. This is a hefty book and not exactly an easy read, but I was engrossed.

Sep 05, Socraticgadfly rated it it was amazing Shelves: Excellent argument, first of all, for Mary being innocent of Darnley's death. Beyond that, a great bio of Mary and all the problems she dealt with in trying to navigate the Reformation in Scotland, her kinship to Elizabeth and issues related to the English succession, her first brief marriage to Francis II of France and how that affected Elizabeth's worries, and much more. Mary is presented as human, sometimes, or more than sometimes, naive, and also stubborn. That said, Elizabeth, at least in her Excellent argument, first of all, for Mary being innocent of Darnley's death.

That said, Elizabeth, at least in her counterplay with Mary, comes off not tremendously well. Oct 23, Steven Peterson rated it really liked it. At the close of the book, author Alison Weir puts the matter in straightforward terms Page Compared with her cousin Elizabeth, she was a political; innocent, and as such she was thrust into a situation in which a seasoned, hard-headed male ruler might have floundered.

This book, ostensibly, focuses on wh At the close of the book, author Alison Weir puts the matter in straightforward terms Page He was not a very likeable or admirable person, and many would profit by his death. Keep pages dog-eared. Many of the major figures in this work are included in the genealogies. Mary was married to the Dauphin of France when young; he dies relatively soon after becoming King. Unfortunately, she kept pressing and scheming to become Queen of England. Given her royal blood, there were many ideas as to whom she should marry. One key advisor, Maitland, wanted closer relations with England and, hence, preferred someone who could make that happen.

Others preferred foreign mates. Indeed, he was related to Mary. However, it rapidly became obvious that Darnley was not very admirable. He was dissolute and a constant worry to Mary. They separated on a number of occasions. The book well described the dizzying array of shifting coalitions. People went from champions of Mary to scheming to kill one of her advisors to scheming to kill Darnley to scheming to overthrow her and, to complicate matters, scheming to return her to the throne.

Needless to say, someone as unprepared for ruling as Mary was often out of her depth.

Some have claimed that Mary was involved. Others have specified other suspects. The book then chronicles her flight from the rebels and her virtual imprisonment for two decades in England. There were some positive hallmarks of her reign. For the time she a Catholic was remarkably tolerant. But in an era of religious intolerance, she was looked askance at by both Protestants and Catholics. All in all, a very well detailed and generally well written biography of Mary Queen of Scots and her star-crossed relationship with Darnley.

If interested in the history and players of this era, this is a good resource. Nov 12, Frrobins rated it it was ok. This book started out strong. I usually enjoy Alison Weir's biographies, and the earlier portions of the book that deal with Mary's early life were enjoyable and punctuated with wit and humor.

It was when the matter of Lord Darnley's murder was broached that this book fell apart. In short, the organization was a mess! Having read Weir's biography on Elizabeth I in which she tackles the suspicious death of Leicester's wife, Amy, I know Weir can do better. She gives only a very cursory overview of t This book started out strong.

Our Recommendations

She gives only a very cursory overview of the source material in the introduction, so brief that it really does not properly illuminate the reader on matters that they need to know about. She really needed to have an early chapter about the source material, but it seems she decided to present it as it was found chronologically after Mary was arrested, even though she refutes their contents as they pertain to Darnley's murder.

For instance, starting around page Weir starts disproving the Casket Letters, but she does not explain what the Casket Letters were, how they were found, how many there were, etc, until about page ! She dives into finding contradictions between how Darnley died and then two chapters later finally gives a timeline for how he died. She needed to establish what the indisputable facts were first before diving into the letters and witness testimony and disproving them. It was so disjointed and hard to follow that I nearly gave up towards the middle and reading through reviews, noticed that was a common trend.

It picked up a bit when she dealt with the events after Darnley's murder, but then dragged on towards the end. The only other biography on Mary Queen of Scots I have read has been Antonia Frasier's, who had a much more sympathetic view towards Mary. Yet both Fraser and Weir determined her to be innocent of any complacency in Darnley's murder. Without viewing the documents first hand I have to trust that people who write history are accurate in what they present. Overall I feel, based on the portrayals of both Frasier and Weir, that Mary was so inept that if she had played a role in Darnley's downfall there would have been a smoking gun, though from reading Weir's accounts I can't rule out that Mary potentially had knowledge that there was a plot to kill him but did not intervene.

Yet the way that the evidence was presented in this book was so disorganized it made me wonder if the reason it was was to hide the fact that Weir's premise, that Mary was innocent, was not as sound as the author would like it to be. Of course, it could be that Weir has been writing biographies for so long she was not accustomed to writing an effect forensic work, but once again, she did a good job with Leicester's wife, so why not here? Unless you are a diehard historian I would skip this book.

It started out promising, but when it got to the meat of the matter, Darnley's murder, the evidence was presented so poorly that it's difficult to draw any conclusion from it. Mar 26, Caroline rated it it was ok Shelves: The murder of Lord Darnley at Kirk o'Field is one of the most celebrated mysteries in Scottish history, and with Alison Weir being one of the most well-known historians writing today, I was looking forward to reading this.

I've always approached Weir's books with a hefty dose of caution - she's never been shy of 'nailing her colours to the mast' when it comes to her subjects so I was prepared for a certain amount of bias. After all, all history is to a certain extent conjecture; we can never trul The murder of Lord Darnley at Kirk o'Field is one of the most celebrated mysteries in Scottish history, and with Alison Weir being one of the most well-known historians writing today, I was looking forward to reading this.

After all, all history is to a certain extent conjecture; we can never truly know what happened, only assemble a plausible story based on the evidence available to us. Weir certainly relies very heavily on primary sources, which is to be applauded, although I did find endlessly reading large chunks of arcanely-written letters and documents very quickly became tedious. Without being more familiar with this era in history, I can hardly claim to be aware of sources ignored or refuted unfairly, facts presented in a specific light - but it doesn't require any level of familiarity to be aware that right from the beginning Weir is presenting the whys and wherefores of this whodunnit with the aim of exonerating Mary, and this necessarily requires a certain amount of accepting as fact something which just cannot be known - such as Archibad Douglas' role in the murder of Darnley.

Weir repeatedly presents him as the man who actually did the deed, as those who plotted, planned, schemed, were present etc. But this simply cannot be taken as fact, there are so many conflicting reports and tales, and it is impossible at this remove to ever know exactly what happened as fact, just as it impossible to definitively convict or exonerate Mary. Page after page of speculation presented as fact proved wearing, and I found this book a slog.

See a Problem?

It was a relief to finish it, although I can't honestly say I feel any more enlightened about Mary, Darnley, the murder or this period in Scottish history. Events were so complicated and convoluted that I very quickly became confused and remained that way for most of the book. My one consolation is that events must have been equally as confusing for those participating in them, but that doesn't make for easy reading centuries on!

This is not only one of my favorite Alison Weir historical works but also one of my favorite books, in general. All pages of it I read the hardcover. The overwhelming but in a positive way level of research, organization, sleuth-like discoveries, and yet cake batter smoothness of this book results in the perfect combination of informational read and entertainment. Certainly a page turner, the only thing that kept me taking breaks while reading is that I didn't want to finish it!

MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS, AND THE MURDER OF LORD DARNLEY

I've alw This is not only one of my favorite Alison Weir historical works but also one of my favorite books, in general. I've always been a supporter of the brave and yet ambitious Mary Stuart. Another female who has historically received insults and negative connotations towards her person, I see past the bad reputation and support her triumph over trife.

Mary Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley gives an overview of the little girl who became queen merely days after her birth with the tragic death of her father King James. Weir then dives head first into Detective Weir mode and like a modern-day criminal investigation, she reviews historical documents, letters the now-hotly debated vailidity of the Casket Letters , personal quotes, actions, etc; to try to map out the events leading up to and during the murder of Darnley. There were several groups of ambitious indiviuals who would have liked to gain from Darnley's death and Weir investigates each thread.

Fast-paced and informational, you will feel the adrenlin of "Who did it?! Don't be initimated by its length, this is one history book combining factual research, drama, and a game of CLUE in the most exciting way possible. Even Darnley would be reading this novel in his grave to get some answers. Jul 25, Su rated it did not like it.

Alison Weir is one of those authors that I think I should love, but I don't. I have read quite a bit about Mary Stuart, and wanted to read Ms. Weir's book to further my understanding of the Queen. The murder of Darnley is fascinating history, unfortunately this book is not. I found the book to be plodding and dry. I felt there was too much distance between the author and the subjects, as if Ms. Weir was going down a list and now it was time to write about Mary of Scotland. Weir unnecessarily complicates the persons and the place of the Scottish lords, and seemed lost herself in trying to give an overview of the players.

Mar 23, Jsmith rated it really liked it. However, Mary was not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it came to leading a country, and she let her heart get in the way of leadership decisions for Scotland. This was one of the weak links that Elizabeth I played to her advantage. Darnley was a fool and an idiot. Weir captures that precisely in this drama.

Unfortunately, she also captures precisely the foolish heart and ways of Mary, which contributed to her downfall. Weir is a fine writer; I recommend just about anything she has written.

Follow Robert on Twitter

The story is enthralling and the history presented in well crafted writing. An account of factionalized backstabbing in olde Westeros Scotland. This is history written in the style of a Zagat's guide. I miss MacPherson's skepticism about the words that make it into the record, and his humanistic moral sense about the choices people made. I also miss MacPherson's ability to tag his expansive cast of characters with memorable attributes to help the reader keep up with them. Weir offers the swamp of titles and houses, and while she helpfully keeps track for us of which are C An account of factionalized backstabbing in olde Westeros Scotland.

Weir offers the swamp of titles and houses, and while she helpfully keeps track for us of which are Catholic and which are Protestant, the individual actors do not come to life. Actually, I abandoned this book. Want to read better writing. Nov 26, Pia rated it it was ok. This felt like it was written as a history paper. IMO Many of the facts she presented could've been interpreted differently, but she doesn't give the reader a chance, she plows forward w had a tougher time with this one than some of her others. May 12, Michell Karnes rated it it was amazing. This was an interesting read.

It was full of facts refuting the common theory that Mary was involved in the murder of her husband and knowingly married of the murders. I did think Mary was an ineffective ruler and either completely ignorant of what was going on or had more suspicions that she acted on in the murder of Darnley. Which leads me to place more blame than the author in some ways does. I also don't excuse her behavior considering how Bothwell used her and her behavior concerning Elizab This was an interesting read.

I also don't excuse her behavior considering how Bothwell used her and her behavior concerning Elizabeth's throne. In the Introduction, Ms. Weir says the purpose of this book is to answer the question " The result is an entertaining and engaging narrative in which she interprets the evidence in the context of the times. Oh lordy, I never thought such a short book could be so tortuous. The beginning was good, the end was good Talk about dragging out things that probably didn't need to be included.

Jan 12, Shonda Wilson rated it liked it. Weir loves this subject and she makes a pretty compelling case for her assertions involving Mary and Darnley's death For popular history Weir does OK, I would not use her as an academic source. Jan 09, Rachael rated it liked it. I waited about a week before writing my review because I wanted to think it through carefully and finish my reading of another slightly-more-recent look at Mary's life by John Guy I highly recommend his biography, even over Fraser's!! I'll be writing a lot of words as anyone who knows me knows that this is a pet interest but I'll begin with a more broad review.

Following that, I'll type up more about some quibbles with her findings that will probably constitute "spoilers" though I have no id I waited about a week before writing my review because I wanted to think it through carefully and finish my reading of another slightly-more-recent look at Mary's life by John Guy I highly recommend his biography, even over Fraser's!!

Everyone else has noted that the length is surprising, and that Weir makes no apologies for it. Initially, I chuckled at this and agreed, thinking "why should she? Unfortunately, there's so much repetition that it actually begins to become confusing to the reader. I imagine her intent was to make each individual laird's personality and role crystal clear, but this doesn't work.

It is badly in need of editing that will make her point s more succinct. I enjoy Weir's work in general and also enjoyed The Princes in the Tower; though it falls into some of the traps I'll examine momentarily, it was a shorter work and is more convincing. But, as with that book, I think some prior knowledge of the cast of characters is a necessity.

This is a book that better serves someone who has some understanding of Mary already; it is not a great starting point, though Weir does devote a good chunk of the book to some backstory about David Rizzio and Mary's marriage to Darnley. Here's where the spoilers kick in: I think it's clear that Mary herself was in no way guilty of her 2nd husband's death. Not only is there no concrete evidence to prove this once the casket letters are scrutinized, but even a basic understanding of Mary's personality and position just prior to Darnley's death makes her guilt implausible.

I also agree with Weir's assignation of guilt amongst the lords and do not feel that Mary engaged in a relationship with Bothwell prior to Darnley's death.

However, as with The Princes in the Tower, Weir often falls into a trap of building supposition upon supposition. Of course, this is something we're often obliged to do with history when writing more informally- especially when the source material is not just biased but often an outright lie - but in this case, her initial supposition is often shaky so by the time she's extended it outward, it feels likely to tumble down entirely.

I won't sweep that assumption off the table entirely, as it's obvious that she handled the aftermath of Darnley's death terribly and in a way that does indicate a breakdown of sorts. But, by imputing all of Mary's behavior to this breakdown, Weir robs Mary of agency - which is often incompatible with Mary's own personality and strength of character. There are times when Weir will explicate to the point of tedium in order to build upon her assumptions while glossing over something that might prove her wrong. My best example is this: Weir writes about the fact that Mary is despondent the day after her wedding to Bothwell and puts forth a handful of theories as to why this might be.

But as predicted, the bridegroom's dissolute lifestyle soon angered her, causing her, of course, to second guess her decision. Most nights he roamed the streets of Edinburgh with low-life companions in search of women. He failed to participate in the business of the royal court. Less than a year after the wedding, Darnley, unhinged by immature jealousy, became involved in the murder of David Rizzio, his wife's private secretary.

Rizzio had come to Scotland from Italy some years previously on a diplomatic mission but remained at the Scottish court as a lute player, singer, and subsequently, as Mary's assistant. The more outraged Mary became over her husband's stupidity and lewd behaviour, the more she looked to Rizzio for consolation. At the time she and Rizzio were close, many Scottish Protestant lords were discontent with Mary's rule. Some of the nobles claimed that Rizzio was a secret agent of the Pope and had usurped their proper places beside the Queen.

They easily cajoled the gullible Darnley into believing that Mary and Rizzio were sexual partners, an accusation that historians have found implausible. At the time, Mary was six months pregnant with Darnley's child. They persuaded him to take part in a plot to murder the Italian.

On the night of Saturday, 9th March , Rizzio was dragged screaming from Queen Mary's side at her supper table in Holyrood House and stabbed some 56 times before life drained from his struggling limbs. It is unclear whether Darnley himself did the dragging or the stabbing or whether one of his henchmen performed the actual slaughter. Amazingly, Mary forgave--or at least pretended to forgive--Darnley and cleverly managed to sever him from the group of treasonous nobles who had masterminded the Rizzio assassination.

With Rizzio still fresh in the minds of the court, another threat to Darnley's fragile self-esteem soon took centre stage. James Hepburn, fourth Earl of Bothwell a committed Protestant himself , rushed to Mary's aid in putting down a rebellion of Protestant conspirators. Bothwell was Lord Admiral of Scotland, and although he possessed a reputation for bravery, he was also known to be lecherous, brutal, and power hungry. Mary regarded him as her saviour, and he quickly became her most trusted advisor.

By the time Mary gave birth to Lord Darnley's son in June , her husband had backslid into a life of debauchery, neglecting his royal duties and displaying a sullen resentment towards Mary's relationship with Bothwell. His disappearance from court prompted talk of a possible annulment of the royal marriage. But when the Queen learned he was seriously ill in Glasgow, she travelled to his bedside and later arranged for a horse-litter to carry him back to Edinburgh to convalesce at Kirk o' Field.

For months Mary had spoken of her husband with nothing but contempt, and the gesture was out of character. While there is no definite answer to the question of who murdered Lord Darnley, most historians agree that Bothwell--with or without Mary's complicity--concocted the plot.

A house explosion, which gave the crime such flagrant overtones and which scandalized all of Europe, was significant; a disintegrated building would cover tracks, making it impossible to prove anything. To be sure there was no direct evidence establishing Bothwell as the murderer, but for those associated with the royal court it was only too easy to guess. Bothwell was a ruthless opportunist aiming at nothing less than the kingship of Scotland.

Typical of the era, the events following Darnley's murder were dramatic, ruthless, and bloody.

• Rapid Transformation: A 90-Day Plan for Fast and Effective Change
• Beneath A Silver Moon
• Acoustic Characterization of Contrast Agents for Medical Ultrasound Imaging
• Places of the Reformation
• Foundation and Form in Jungian Sandplay
• Jakobs Plight