The Mysterious Death of Amy Robsart Dudley

[Steven_Rex]

Here is a case that has always fascinated me, and has been given new life by the recent discovery of a forensic report dating from the sixteenth-century: the death of Amy Robsart, wife of Elizabeth I's favourite (and reputed lover) Robert Dudley, later Earl of Leicester.

Amy's death, in suspicious circumstances, effectively put paid to any possibility that Dudley could ever marry the Queen, as rumours flew about Europe that Dudley himself had done away with his wife and the ensuing scandal would have jeopardized Elizabeth's reputation. Indeed, it is even said that Elizabeth's rival, Mary Queen of Scots' quipped 'My cousin is to marry her horse master, and he has killed his wife to make room for her!'.

Since Amy was found dead at the foot of a shallow flight of stairs, with a broken neck and relatively deep head wounds, murder seems a strong possibility. Various candidates have been put forward, from the obvious Dudley (although he must have known the scandal would have prevented him from becoming King), to William Cecil, the Queen's adviser, who would have profited from discrediting Dudley, to the Queen herself!

Wikipedia has a good, up-to-date synopsis of the case for those who are interested:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Robsart

[sdreid]

Welcome Steven. I was a little intrigued by this when I saw it mentioned on a QE entry a few weeks ago but didn't look into it any further. Interesting crime scene picture by Yeames, it reminds me of David's Death of Marat with all the darkness at the top of the frame.

[Steven_Rex]

Thanks, SDReid!

Yes, the case is very interesting, moreso, I think, because of the recently discovered forensic report. Although it is not mentioned in the wiki article, a programme was screened here (with the unfortunately trashy title, 'Elizabeth I: Killer Queen?') which pointed out that the report mentioned specifically two wounds in Amy's head - one the depth of a thumb. I cannot reconcile this with a fall down a short flight of steps, particularly as the report fails to mention any blood spatter in the surrounding area.

The programme made a strong case for murder, in particular citing Amy's insistence that the household completely depart in the morning as evidence that she was expecting a visitor of importance. It was also mentioned that she had ordered a new dress shortly before her demise, which indicates that she was NOT planning to commit suicide. The question in my mind is who dispatched her... and there I draw a blank. Again, Dudley himself seems too obvious (and he must have known the repercussions, as must Elizabeth). Cecil seems a strong candidate, but I have trouble believing the Queen's great adviser would go to such extreme lengths to keep Dudley from the crown. In my mind, the most likely candidate is Dudley's manservant, Varney. Perhaps he thought he was doing his master a service? The murder of Thomas Becket comes to mind: 'Who will rid me of this troublesome WIFE'?!

[Errata]

I cannot reconcile this with a fall down a short flight of steps, particularly as the report fails to mention any blood spatter in the surrounding area.

Did they pay attention to blood spatter in the 16th century? And blood spatter certainly isn't necessary in even a short fall. Amy Robsart was not a well woman. I have no idea if she had breast cancer or not, but she was frequently in poor health. Regardless of whether her bones were especially brittle or not, clearly hitting one's head in the right way can kill. And I imagine it did.

Amy Robsart was know to be suffering from a "pain in her breast" but even more telling is that in 10 years of marriage she never had a child. It was rare for a husband and a wife to even like each other, and when they had married it was for love. Even husbands and wives who despised each other had children. But there is no evidence of any pregnancy, no children, no stillbirths, no miscarriages. Since this is a time when heirs were more important that attraction, or even consent, this points to a grave health issue. Either she had a condition that made it physically impossible to carry a child for more that a few weeks, or her health was so fragile that her husband was unwilling to risk her life on a pregnancy.

Regardless that puts her in a terrible position. She could easily be put aside for being barren, and that doesn't take into account that she probably sincerely loved her husband, and wanted to fulfill her duty for him. If she was deprived of the only purpose given to her, it could drive her to suicide. People are often giddy and elated after making up their minds to kill themselves. The torment is over. People tend to not wait a long time between coming to their decision and acting on it. Having ordered a dress is no sign of a will to live except perhaps if she had done it that morning.

And even if she didn't kill herself, I can think of two ways even a short fall can be fatal. One, if she had a seizure. If she had seizures it could explain both her death and her inability to have children. When people seize, they stiffen and fall like a board. On stairs that is easily fatal. The second would be fainting while facing upstairs. I have actually done this and put myself in the hospital. When people feel faint they feel like they are falling forward. They aren't, but that's the sensation. So they rock backward, and if they feel themselves actually start to fall, they stiffen up. Not for long, but long enough for them to achieve a sort of backward swan dive before collapsing. On stairs, buckling at the knees actually makes it worse, because instead of landing on your back, you land on the skull above the nape of the neck. Which is precisely how people snap their necks.

As far as the wounds in her head, I'm pretty sure that at least one of them would be from a boot scraper. Possibly both depending if the had one of the fancy shaped ones, like a deer or a boar. My parents have one shaped like a grasshopper and as a kid somehow I put one its antennae through my hand. My life line has a roundabout.

The simple truth is, I have never believed that Elizabeth and Dudley were in love. I think that they were best friends, and that she could go to him for physical comfort. Not sex, but someone to hold her if she cried, or a hug if she needed it. Just contact. Even if she loved him, she never would have married him. And Dudley can't possibly have been so stupid as to believe she would. He knew her life. He knew her past. He knew she was never going to share anything else ever again with a man unless she had to. And if she had to, that meant a foreign alliance. And I am quite certain she would have found a way to make sure her foreign prince did not live terribly long.

I think Amy Robsart was sick, and she died. I don't think anyone felt so passionately about the poor girl to kill her.

[Steven_Rex]

Great points, errata! I used to be a firm believer in the theory that Amy, suffering from 'a malady in her breast' had tumbled down the stairs. I understand that certain forms of breast cancer can even cause weakening of the bones, which would make the neck-snap easier to understand. Another point to raise, however, is that before Amy's death, Cecil wrote to a contemporary that Dudley had been putting it about that his wife was grievously ill, but he had intelligence that such was not the case. However, this was written to the Spanish Ambassador of all people - a malicious gossip - and so we might surmise that the English adviser was merely stirring up trouble for his rival. I tend not to dwell to greatly on the lack of issue in the Robsart-Dudley marriage, as firstly, Dudley rarely visited his wife, spending most of his time (at the Queen's insistence) at court. Secondly, it is not unheard of for a woman to 'appear' barren: Henry VIII's last wife, Katherine Parr, had three husbands (including the King) without ever giving any sign of fertility, and was widely considered incapable, before becoming pregnant (and subsequently dying) during her fourth marriage to Thomas Seymour - by which time she was 36.

The issue of head wounds and possible blood spatter is interesting - as wiki says, the injuries are 'consistent with a fall as well as other violence'. Personally, I don't think we know enough about the scene (even the house is long gone) and although I'm sure even a sixteenth century report would have noted 'bloodiness', it simply may not have made it into the one surviving document. So much misinformation has also been passed down to us that it is difficult to know what to believe; for example, some (admittedly biased) sources suggest that Lady Dudley was found with her head-dress undisturbed, possibly indicating that she had been lain, after death, at the foot of the stairs. Forgive my ignorance here, but what is a boot-scraper, and would it be likely to be sat at the foot of the stairs? Were they around in the period?

As to Elizabeth and Dudley, I agree wholeheartedly. The rumour mill was in full swing during the Elizabethan period, with accusations that she had borne Dudley's child (which had been stuffed up a chimney!), and such nonsense has continued to this day. Simply put, a woman of the Queen's profile could never have had the 'alone' time that we take for granted, regardless of what films like 'Elizabeth' suggest. She had a train of ladies constantly in attendance, even sleeping at the foot of her bed, and she made it very clear throughout her life (even before Amy's death) that she would never marry. Certainly, she held out the idea of marriage as bait for foreign alliances, but even her later (and seemingly most successful suitor) the Duc de Alencon, never had a hope. I do think that at various times, a frightfuly ambitious man like Dudley may have secretly hoped he might change her mind, but he undoubtedly knew that such hopes were remote. Hence, his eventual remarriage to Lettice Knollys (much to the Queen's displeasure!).

[Errata]

Well, this is a boot scraper.

http://www.merebrowsmithy.com/images/mbs018.jpg

I tried looking for a period one, but quite frankly lost motivation. In a society without sidewalk or paved roads, boot scrapers were absolutely necessary at the foot of the stairs. Her chambers has a separate entrance and stairs, so the boot scraper would have been just inside the door, at the foot of the stairs. Boot scrapers were certainly immensely popular in 17th century America, so it makes sense they would be common in 16th century England. And i've seen a really old one somewhere, I just dont remember where.

The odd thing is that the description of the wounds is really vague. I picture puncture wounds, and I imagine you do to. But it could easily be dents in the skull. If the skull cracked and creased in, it would be like a cracked egg. The skull fragments would be pushed in. Which could mean hitting a doorknob or a finial on the way down.

I think the headdress thing is bollocks. She was home alone. She wouldn't have been wearing one any more complicated than a kerchief. If she was wearing some fetching hat, it would have instantly been known that she was entertaining someone alone, and the assumption would have been that it was a man. Which would have seriously altered the tone of the investigation. The comment may have been more a comment to her character than the circumstances of her death. She was said to be quite proper. Being found dead with her hair uncovered would have mortified her.

And the Queen was pissed with Dudley for marrying one of her ladies in waiting without permission. A prevailing theme in her reign. She was extremely protective of her ladies. I don't think it had anything to do with Dudley.

[Steven_Rex]

Again, very interesting, errata! I've not come across a boot-scraper before - the thing to do, if I have the opportunity, is to have a look at some manorial wills and see if there are boot-scrapers bequeathed in among the usual 'mattress and clothing', 'fine silver kettles' and so on! I've looked at 16th century wills before, and once one becomes used to the secretarial hand, they can make for a fascinating glimpse into the period.

I do indeed picture puncture wounds, and take your point that they could be caused by almost anything on the way down. The depth still interests me, though, and one would think that those conducting the inquest would have noted where they came from. I agree that the head-dress is nonsense - it first appeared in the Catholic propagandist tract 'Leicester's Commonwealth', which was basically a libel which set out to defame Dudley and bring Elizabeth into disrepute.

Yes, Elizabeth was a stickler for propriety among her ladies, and was particularly hard on those who married without permission. However, Lettice Knollys, by the time of her marriage to Leicester, was not a lady-in-waiting but rather a Countess (widower of the Earl of Essex). I do think that jealousy was a major motivation, as one of Elizabeth's less endearing attributes was extreme vanity, and Lettice was reputedly one of the most beautiful aristocrats in the land (although you would scarcely believe it from her portraits!). Having her best friend and favourite marry such a beauty without her permission would, I think, have roused her to extreme anger, and it is notable that Elizabeth kept Lettice away from court for the rest of her life, apart from one short and icy meeting, whereas her rage about clandestine marriages usually abated after a period of outward bluster. Have you ever seen Elizabeth R, by the way, with Glenda Jackson? Wonderful, wonderful series from the 70s, and it covers all of these events masterfully.

[belinda]

Elizabeth R is brilliant. I don't think Amy Robsart killed herself.I doubt if Dudley would have done it not himself anyway.How many people were in the house at the time

[Mayerling]

One of the things that barred Dudley from being even a less ranking consort for Elizabeth was his family. The Dudleys were the family of the Duke of Northumberland, the ambitious politico who married Robert's older brother Guilford to Lady Jane Gray, and then pushed that unfortunate fool into being his puppet for the shortest "reign" in British history: the "ten day Queen" between Edward VI and Mary I. Elizabeth had narrowly escaped connection to that fiasco and was suspicious of the Dudley Family's ambitious ever after. But she did like her "Robin". So he remained a leading advisor and figure at the court.

Interesting to compare this with a later event. Elizabeth, when she heard cousin Mary of Scotland was thinking of marriage, first suggested Robin, and then (when he told her off a little) sent Lord Henry Darnley, who also had a claim to the British throne. Stupidly Mary decided to marry Darnley, and while it produced James Stuart (later James VI of Scotland and James I of England) it led to the murder of Rizzio, the Kirk a' Field Explosion and murder of Darnley, the kidnapping of Mary (willingly or not) by James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, the revolt of the Scottish nobles led by the Earl of Moray, and Mary fleeing to the unwanted embrace of Elizabeth - and ultimately to Mary's own execution in 1587 at Fotheringay. So who was really stupid here!

Jeff