- A Brief Introduction to Poisoning a Nobleman
- Richard Roose: Talk About the Wrong Place at the Wrong Time.
On rare occasion, a bit of evidence may have been sufficiently confirmed and survived for us to weigh. In this instance, one of Alexander's servants even confessed to having participated in the preparations for various poisonings upon the orders of his master.
More often, some variation upon the case of Richard Roose can be recognized in such records as survive.
It seems as if before this session of the parliament was ended whilst the Bishop, for his better attending on it, was at his house or place in Lambith Marsh, an attempt was made to poison his Lordship’s family. One Richard Roose of Rochester, cooke, otherwise called Richard Cooke, having some acquaintance with the Bishop’s cook, under pretence of making him a visit came into the kitchen, and took an opportunity to caste a certaine venim or poison into a vessel full of yest or barme, with which, and other things convenient, pottage or grewell was forthwith made for the family, wherby not only seventeen of the said family who eat of that pottage were mortally infected and poisoned, and one of them named Benet Curwen, Gent. actually died of it, but also certain poor people who resorted to the Bishop’s place, and were there charitably fed with the remains of the said pottage and other victuals, were likewise infected, and one poor woman-of them named Alice Tripit, widow, lost her life by it. This coming to the knowledge of the parliament, they in a just abhorrence of this detestable crime passed an act wherby it was ordered, that the said poisoning be adjudged and deemed high treason, and that the said Richard Roose, for the murther and poisoning of the aforesaid two persons, be attainted of high treason, and be therfore boiled to death without having any advantage of his clergie: which sentence was accordingly put in execution the beginning of the next year, when Roose was in this manner put to death in Smithfield. Sanders reports, that Roose was hired to do this by Anne Boleyn to be revenged of the Bishop. But the act of parliament takes not the least notice of this being designed against the Bishop, but only against his Lordship’s family, with some of whom, perhaps, Roose had a quarrel. It recites expressly, that the poison was put into a vessel full of yest or barme, to make pottage for the family and poor people, of which, probably, his Lordship never used to eat.1
Poor Roose, having walked into the kitchen at a moment that would sweep his life away. He was identified as the culprit. Why or by whom we are not informed.
Under severe torture he seems not to have confessed. Such is the report of a Venetian agent to Venice. News of a poisoner — and especially of his or her gruesome execution — tended to travel far and wide.
Some of the servants of the Bishop of Rochester died lately, he being considered in that kingdom a very religious and worthy man; and although he had always publicly advocated the Queen's [Catherine of Aragon's] cause, the King nevertheless invariably showed him great respect; and there being a suspicion of poison, and that it had been destined for the Bishop himself, he made a strong complaint about this to the King, who ordered the arrest of a cook who was suspected of the crime, he being in the Bishop's service; and after racking him severely he was put to a cruel death, though it is said that he made no confession, save that as a jest he put some purgative powder in certain viands.
Ghent, 29th April 1531.2
The Sanders mentioned in the first account is Nicolaus Sanders. He is yet another common feature of alleged poisonings though some 150 years after the fact.
Saunders, an expert in cannon law, went into exile after the death of Queen Mary I. While he wandered from place to place he wrote a ferocious Latin tome called in English The Rise and Growth of Anglican Schism (1585). It is from this book that the world received most of the dark accusations of murder and attempted murder committed by henchmen upon Anne Boleyn's express order. The Bishop, averred Saunders, was successfully standing in the way of her evil plans to bewitch the King and to drive catholicism out of England.
Why her henchman would poison the food of the household staff, which the Bishop was unlikely to share, was of no particular concern to Saunders. He had the ultimate evidence that all had who accused others of poisoning. He hated her guts with a passion.
Of course, it is far more likely that Roose just happened to visit his friend in the Bishop's kitchen when the staff was about to serve their fellows a gruel prepared with rotten meat. It was the kind of thing that happened regularly. They all become volently ill with food poisonng and vomitted. The meat had been so bad that two even died.
An entry in the Chronicles of the Grey Friars on the denouement of this affair is as euphemistic as the times would allow.
Also this yere was a coke boylyd in a cauderne in Smythfeld for he wode a powsynd the byshoppe of rochester Fycher with dyvers of hys servanttes, and he was lockyd in a chayne and pulled up and downe with a gybbyt at dyvers tymes tyll he was dede.3
Roose was wrapped in chains, suspended above a cauldron of boiling water and lowered in. Before he could pass out or die, he was lifted out again. This operation was repeated “dyvers tymes” until he finally succumbed. A crowd of spectators was surely present jeering and yelling execrations and telling him that he would face far worse in Hell.
1Bailey, Thomas. Life and Death of that Renowned John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester (1655). II.73-4.
2Brown, Rawdon. State Papers and Manuscripts Relating to English Affairs,... Venice, V. 4. (1871). Anonymous to Anonymous. 280-1.
3Nichols, John Gough. Chronicle of the Grey Friars of London (1865), 35.
Also at Virtual Grub Street:
No comments:
Post a Comment