Who Saved Southampton from the Ax?

Henry Wriothesley,
3rd Earl of Southampton

In  this series:

• The Essex Rebellion and the Earl of Southampton.
• The Secret Correspondence of Robert Cecil and James I.
• Who Saved Southampton from the Ax?

One of the popular mysteries of the final years of the reign of Queen Elizabeth I is why the Queen executed her favorite, the Earl of Essex, for treason, and left his accomplice, the Earl of Southampton, to languish as a prisoner in The Tower until King James I ascended the throne.  Like any apparent inconsistency, concerning a Queen’s broken heart, treason, witness testimony and heads being lopped off it has proven endlessly intriguing.

Even day to day governance during Tudor times was inherently steeped in deeper shadows than governing in the modern world.  The Earl of Essex had been corresponding with the King of Scotland for years, James VI (later James I of England).  During some of those years he had been doing so at the behest of the Queen who had made him a sort of special ambassador while reading over his shoulder.  Other letters seem to have been written on his own initiative toward his own purposes.  James had come to count Essex his most valuable and dedicated ally in England.

 

Certainly, the communications of 1600 were deeply private and amounted to treason.  Essex was furious and distraught to have been placed under house arrest after insubordinately returning from his command in Ireland.  The sources of his wealth and power were being removed from him.

His lieutenant in Ireland, Lord Mountjoy, unwisely made inquiries to James VI.  If Montjoy marched toward the Scottish border at the head of 4000-5000 soldiers would James muster forces to join with him and enforce his claim as the legal heir to the English throne upon the death of Elizabeth?   Essex would join them with what men he could muster.  With James as established heir, Essex’s power would be restored. 

The Earl of Southampton further wrote the King to sound him on his thoughts and to let him know the extent of Essex’s support.  Always careful, James was inconclusive and played for time.  Mountjoy began to realize his vulnerability and soon withdrew his own idea.

By February of 1601, Southampton was in London spending his time at his residence, Drury House, consulting with his cynosure.  The two Earls were surrounded by a small cadre of allies and retainers.  Soon they were at Essex House planning the takeover of London in preparation for taking control of the person of the Queen. 

Another letter had already gone from Essex to James, this one asking the Scottish King to send ambassadors to the English Court to demand his restoration.  The takeover of London was being considered while Essex waited.  By the time the letter had arrived to the King and the decision was made to send the ambassadors to save James’s most valuable ally in Elizabeth’s Court word had followed that the Earl had been executed for treason.

On February 11, while the conspirators were beginning to be tried, Southampton wrote a letter to the Queen’s First Secretary, Robert Cecil.  In it, he provided evidence he had not thought to give before and some insight into how he avoided execution:

I doe rely so much vppon your fauor that I doute not but you will make vse of them for my aduantage, and I shall continew bound vnto you, as I protest I doe account my self alredy, more then to any man lyuinge, which whether I liue or dy I make the world know to your honor.[1]

Cecil, with whom he had shared a home as a ward of William Cecil, was now advising him.  Shortly after Essex’s execution Cecil freely presented his feelings on the Southampton matter in a letter to Sir George Carew:

It remayneth now that I lett you know what is lyke to become of the poore yong Erle of Southampton, who meerely for the love of the Erle hath ben drawen into this action, who, in respect that most of the conspirascies were at Drury Howse, where he was alwaies cheef,… those that would deale for him (of which number I protest to God I am one as farr as I dare) are much disadvantaged of arguments to saue him; and yet when I consider how penitent he is, and how mercifull the Queen is, and neuer in thought or deed but in this conspiracy he offended, as I can not write in despaire, so I dare not flatter myself with hope.[2]

The evident sense of powerlessness, however, is Cecil being politic.  Always aware that communications might be intercepted at any time, his letters always stress the power of the Queen regardless that he was ever more often having to send clean copies of her illegible letters and artfully guide her towards decisions personal and governmental.  Fragile though she might be, she could still command misery with a flourish of her hand.  Of this, enemies at Court were well aware.

While there would seem to be no direct reference to Southampton in the extant secret correspondence of the Scottish King, Cecil’s right hand man, Henry Howard, comforted his ambassadors that great care was being taken for Southampton’s safety.  In a letter to the King from the Earl of Northumberland, the Earl lauds Cecil in terms sure to please the man who will soon be King also of England:

was not the clemency great that hath been used to all the nobility that offended in this last rebellion, and many others that were conceived to lean toward your majesty? Was it anybody else that saved Southampton? Has he not mitigated the extremities against Mountjoy…[3]

It was fully understood by all that James had made clear he wanted Southampton to be treated as leniently as Cecil could arrange.  Surely, a more easily distractible Queen proved a help in the matter.

It was Robert Cecil who saved the Earl of Southampton from the axe.  He might have chosen to do so simply because he had  gotten to know Southampton as the Earl had grown up a ward in his father William Cecil’s house.  He most certainly chose to do so in order to serve the wishes of  the man who would soon be King of England and hold his fate in his hands.

---

[1] Stopes, Charlotte Carmichael. The Life of Henry, Third Earl of Southampton, p. 230.  Citing Salisbury Papers, vol. xi,

p. 72.

[2] Maclean, John.  Letters from Sir Robert Cecil to Sir George Carew (1864), 74.

[3] Bruce, John.  Correspondence of King James VI. of Scotland with Sir Robert Cecil and others in England (Camden Society, 1861), 68.  “was not the clemencie great that hathe bene wsed to all the nobilitie that offendid in this last rebellion, and many wthers that were conceawed to leane towars your maiestie? Was it any boddy els that sawed sowthehamtonne? Hes he not mitigated the extremities against montioye…”

Also at Virtual Grub Street:

• The Fascinating Itinerary of the Gelosi Troupe, 1576.  June 10, 2019.  “The Spanish soldiers had not been paid and unpaid soldiers tend to rob and loot.  The citizens were prepared to give them a fight.  Violent flare ups were occurring everywhere.”
• A Thousand Years of English Terms.  June 2, 2019.  ‘One person did not say to another, “Meet you at three o’clock”.    There was no clock to be o’.  But the church bell rang the hour of Nones and you arranged to meet “upon the Nones bell”.’
• A Most Curious Account of the Funeral of Queen Elizabeth I: April 28, 1603.  April 28, 2019.  “Once it was clear that James I would face no serious challenges, Cecil and the others could begin to give attention to the matter of the Queen’s funeral.”
• The Battle Over Shakespeare's Early and Late Plays. September 24, 2018. “The answers to the post-Oxford dilemma, of course, are three.”
• Stratford Shakespeare’s Undersized Grave.  July 22, 2018.  “Mr. Coll’s considers this evidence to support an old rumor that Shakspere’s head had been stolen in 1794.  But I submit that he is merely making his observation based upon a coincidence.”
• Check out the English Renaissance Article Index for many more articles and reviews about this fascinating time and about the Shakespeare Authorship Question.