Skip to main content

Final Quote from Ackroyd Book

File:Sir Francis Walsingham by John De Critz the Elder.jpg


Much of Ackroyd's discussion of Elizabeth's reign is given over to the rivalry between Liz and her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.


That theme comes to its inevitable end in chapter 35, a chapter evocatively titled "The Dead Cannot Bite."


By early February 1587 all was in readiness for the end of this rivalry as an earthly contest. Mart had been effectively deposed. Her (Protestant) son, James VI, had been formally recognized as King of the northern neighbor by the English government, though James insisted on referring to his mother as "Queen Mother" anyway.


Mary had been convicted in a trial before the Privy Counselors of conspiring to kill Elizabeth and usurp her throne. All Elizabeth had to do was to give the final order and the execution would proceed.


But ... she hesitated. And sought to find a way to kill her Stuart cousin by indirection, to keep her own sovereign hands free of regicidal blood.


Here's a fine passage from pp. 422-423:




"She asked her secretary, Sir William Davison, to carry to her the warrant for Mary's execution....Elizabeth then told him to get the warrant sealed by the chancellor as quickly and as quietly as possible; it was then to be sent, without proclamation of any kind, to the commissioners....Davison was about to leave her presence when she called him back. What if a loyal subject ... would commit the deed? She mentioned two such subjects, one of whom was Mary's gaoler, Amyas Paulet. By these means she might be able to avoid censure and the unfavorable attention of rival powers. She did not wish to incur the guilt of regicide. She asked Davison to raise the matter with Walsingham [the head of her spy network -- that's his charming visage at the top of this post]; [Davison] agreed reluctantly to do so but told her that it was a labour lost. No official would contemplate such an act without the queen's express commandment."


So ... after her efforts to avoid direct responsibility fail, Paulet specifically writes her saying he cannot act without a warrant. She attempts nothing more in that line and the execution proceeds on the authority of her warrant. The deed was done on the morning of February 8.


When Elizabeth learned that it had been done, on the morning of February 9, she was distraught and furious. Now we flip to p. 426.


"She admitted to signing the warrant but claimed that she had asked Davison to keep hold of it. Now she wanted Sir William Davison's life in revenge. She was persuaded out of this impolitic course, and instead Davison was tried in the court of the Star Chamber for abusing the confidence of the queen; he was committed to the Tower, but was released a year later. He, too, had played his part."



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more