The Gowrie conspiracy of 5 August 1600 is shrouded in mystery. Although the facts of the actual attack and deaths of the Ruthvens are known, the circumstances by which that sequence of events came about remain obscure. John Ruthven, 3rd Earl of Gowrie, had reason to seek vengeance on James VI as the king had executed his father in response to the Ruthven Raid of 1582, which in turn was inspired by high debts of the King to the Ruthven family. Getting rid of the family got rid of the debts, especially if the family was stripped of all ownership for reason of "treason".
There are three possible scenarios of the tragedy which took place in St Johnstoun (Perth):
- that Ruthven and his brother concocted a plot to murder or, more probably, kidnap King James and that they lured him to Gowrie House for this purpose;
- that James paid a surprise visit to Gowrie House with the intention of killing the two Ruthvens;
- that the tragedy was the outcome of an unplanned brawl which followed an argument between the King and one of the Ruthvens.
Plots to capture the sovereign for the purpose of coercing his actions were frequent, more than one had been successful, and the Ruthven family had taken an active part in several of them. Relations between England and Scotland were more than usually strained, and the Earl of Gowrie was reckoned in London among the adherents of Elizabeth. The Kirk party, being at variance with James, looked upon Gowrie as a hereditary partisan of their cause, and had recently sent an agent to Paris to recall him to Scotland as their leader. Gowrie was believed to be James's rival for the succession to the English crown. As regards the question of motive, the Ruthvens believed their father to have been killed in treachery, and his widow insulted by the king's favourite minister. James owed a large sum of money to the Earl of Gowrie's estate, and popular gossip credited either Ruthven with being the lover of the queen.
The mystery has never been entirely dispelled. The two most recent studies subscribe to the kidnap theory. W. F. Arbuckle's study of 1957 favours the kidnapping that went wrong, while Maurice Lee proposes that James went to Gowrie House believing Ruthven was a conduit for political intelligence from London (that the pot of gold was a flimsy cover story), and when he arrived with an unexpectedly large retinue, Alexander realised that a successful kidnapping was not possible and attempted to take the King's life to avenge his father's death. Most modern research, in the light of materials inaccessible or overlooked till the 20th century, points to the conclusion that there was a conspiracy by Ruthven and his brother to kidnap the king. If this is true, it follows that the second theory, that James went to Gowrie House to specifically kill the Ruthvens, is invalid and that his own account of the occurrence, in spite of the glaring improbabilities which it involved, was substantially true.
Great efforts were made by the government to prove the complicity of others in the plot. One noted and dissolute conspirator, Sir Robert Logan of Restalrig, was posthumously convicted of having been privy to the Gowrie conspiracy on the evidence of certain letters produced by a notary, George Sprot, who swore they had been written by Logan to Gowrie and others. These letters, which are still in existence, were in fact forged by Sprot in imitation of Logan's handwriting; but the researches of Andrew Lang have shown cause for suspecting that the most important of them was either copied by Sprot from a genuine original by Logan, or that it embodied the substance of such a letter.
If this is correct, it would appear that the conveyance of the king to Fast Castle, Logan's impregnable fortress on the coast of Berwickshire,(Walter Scott's Castle Crag in The Bride of Lammermoor) was part of the plot; and it supplies, in all events, an additional piece of evidence to prove the genuineness of the Gowrie conspiracy. Robert Logan died before May 1608 the last of his line; George Sprot was hanged at the Market Cross of Edinburgh for foreknowledge of the conspiracy on 12 August 1608.
On 7 August 1600, James's Privy Council of Scotland ordered that the corpses of Gowrie and his brother should remain unburied until further decisions were made over the matter, and that no person with the name of Ruthven should approach within ten miles of the court. Orders were also sent for the apprehension of the Earl's brothers William and Patrick, but they fled to England. The bodies of Gowrie and his brother Robert were disembowelled and preserved by one James Melville, who, however, was paid for his services, not by the magistrates of Perth, but by the Privy Council; and on 30 October they were sent to Edinburgh to be produced at the bar of Parliament. On 15 November, the estates of the Ruthvens were discerned by Parliament to be forfeited and their family name and honours extinct. The corpses of the Earl and his brother were hanged and quartered at the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh on 19 November 1600. Their heads were put on spikes at Edinburgh's Old Tolbooth and their arms and legs upon spikes at various locations around Perth. Another act was further passed abolishing the name of Ruthven, ordering that the house wherein the tragedy happened should be levelled to the ground, and decreeing that the barony of Ruthven should henceforth be known as the barony of Huntingtower.
So what does Eliza Logan make of the 'Conspiracy'? She comes down firmly on the Ruthvens' side and creates a believable story of the perfidy and cowardice of King James, mashed with the jealousy and hatred of other Scottish courtiers and the scheming of a Jesuit spy. It is not until one has finished the novel, that Logan cleverly adds a 'Letter' at the end of Volume III. It purports to come from a Peregrine Rover, Esq. (a less annoying name than Scott's usual 'editors') writing to a Tacitus Torpedo (more irritating!). In a rather convoluted way of some 85 pages, Peregrine tells of a boat journey to visit Fastcastle, the ancient residence of Logan of Restalrig. Here, after scrambling off the boat into a cave beneath the ruined fortress, he finds a narrow passage leading up to a small underground chamber (Caleb Balderstone's "Secret Chammer"). He sees a huge wooden chest, staved in on one end, which contains a bundle of old documents. One roll is marked "Anent the Gowrie Conspiracie", bearing the date 1611. Returning to his home in Edinburgh, Peregrine completely made out and understood every line of it; when it struck me, that it would become more interesting by being put into the form of a modern novel, by which compliance with the prevailing taste of the day it was more likely to be read. Hence St. Johnstoun.
Humorously, Logan (or Peregrine) adds: you must not imagine...I have suffered myself to suppose that this child of my adoption is to escape lash-free from the castigating whips of the critics; far from it, I assure you. They are a race of beings who, however some folks may affect to despise, I am well aware are now more formidable than ever to a person who ventures to dress up a new dish of literary trifle for their eminencies' pampered appetites...(shades of Scott's Introductory comments). Notwithstanding this, Logan cunningly makes reference to another roll which dealt with many particulars respecting the last Logan of Restalrig and his family...which she will not mention, but with reserve should I ever require their aid. The title of her next novel? Restalrig; or, the Forfeiture (1829) !
What of the three-volume novel itself? I enjoyed it. Gowrie is, perhaps, too saint like on occasions; but, beneath his rather austere front he is capable of deep feelings, particularly for the Lady Agnes, who returns his love in equal measure. BUT, alas, he is a Presbyterian and she is a Roman Catholic. Logan is good at conveying the conflict between the love for another human being and for one's faith. Gowrie's brother, Ruthven, and sister, Lady Beatrix, are well-drawn, with identifiable characters. The 'baddies' - the ruthless Jesuit; the preposterous but vicious Doctor Herbal; Rathsay, James' page (I found it hard to understand how the latter had so much influence from so lowly a station); and Gowrie's deceitful servant, Laurence - are also believable characters. I found Queen Anne (of Denmark) a fascinating mixture. As for King James VI - Logan can stand a candle with Scott's portrayal in The Fortunes of Nigel. What a contemptuous figure of a 'man'. These characters (nearly all real historical figures) carried the story along at some pace, with fewer 'asides' that bedevils Scott's narratives. I must wait before I can purchase Logan's second novel - at present, the only copy on the Internet is being offered at a ridiculous price.
No comments:
Post a Comment