Emperor: A New Life Of Charles V

I'm in the middle of reading: Emperor: A New Life Of Charles V by early modern historian, Geoffrey Parker, which was published in 2019, so this isn't my usual book review as I haven't finished the biography yet. However halfway through (on page 332 with 200 pages to go!) I can say it's meticulously researched and compelling to read. The section I'm on is where the Catholic Holy Roman Emperor is intent on wrangling in all those rebellious Lutheran German Princes who have broken away from Rome (and thus labeled Protestants) and taken theirs, as well as, Charles' subjects with them. As you might imagine, Emperor Charles is thinking, "What the hell! Those pesky heretics!!! Not gonna happen on my Christian watch!!!" So he's organizing talks and campaigns to deal with the German problem in his realm.

Charles of Habsburg was born on February 24, 1500, in Ghent, then called the Low Countries in the Netherlands, which today is Belgium. Son of Joanna of Castile and Philip of Habsburg, Charles was the grandson of Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragan (present-day Spain), Mary of Burgandy (Belgium and the Netherlands) and Maximillian I of Habsburg, Archduke of Austria, as well as, the elected Holy Roman Emperor of the Germanies before Charles campaigned and won the title in 1519 at age 19 (upon Maximillian's death).

After the death of his grandparents, Charles V ruled over Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands, as well as, much of Italy, Central, and South America. He was an Emperor with a capital ''E," conquering, reorganizing, and protecting what the book calls the "world's first and most enduring transatlantic empire."

An artist's images of what Charles and his wife, Isabella would look like if they lived today.

I can't grasp doing the colossal research for this book. The author had to turn to documents and primary sources written in French, German, Spanish, Italian, Burgundian, English, Latin, Hungarian, as well as, the regional dialects in these languages like Castilian in Spain and Flemish in the Low Countries. 

          

Likewise, Charles V had to become proficient in many languages to rule over his vast lands, and of course, he had an overall fine education in philosophy, theology, the arts and was taught jostling, hunting, shooting, fishing, good manners, chivalry, to play music and dancing in his role as heir to the throne. His two closest in age sisters took classes with him. He studied mathematics as an adult to "escape the burden of affairs" of state for a few hours at night.

A lesser ruler with a weaker intellect and will couldn't have held such a diverse and enormous empire together for 40 years. At the time monarchs believed their roles were divinely ordained, and, the grandson of 4 sovereigns carried out his duty with conviction and gratitude to God. Charles worked tirelessly and constantly traveled throughout Europe attending to conflicts and ensuing problems by negotiating, writing up, and signing over 100,000 documents, edicts, and treaties. He asked for what he wanted  -- in point-by-point terms -- and got much of it. He called forth and oversaw major councils and diets of the day, as well as, met privately and publically with townspeople, officials, kings, and Popes. And when talking didn't lead to peace and agreement, he took rulers prisoner until they came around, as Charles was a capable and successful military commander and also lucky since the weather or an advisory's blunder often favored him. Moreover, Charles V strategized and knew how to seize an advantage.

Painted by Peter, Paul Rubens

It's a long, serious detailed biography. The nitty-gritty of the long-ago battles get somewhat tiring, yet you do come away with knowing what a brilliant, comprehensive mind Charles V had and why he came out on top. As Emperor, he appointed smart, capable people as regents during his absences. Regents included his wife, Empress Isabella over Spain; his aunt Margaret of Austria (and later when Margaret died) his sister Maria of Hungry over the Netherlands; and his brother, Ferdinand over Germany. Emperor Charles married his sister, Eleanor to King Francis I of France although the marriage didn't stop the rivalry or wars with France; a sister Isabeau to Christian II of Denmark; and another sister Catalina to the King of Portugal. 

Emperor Charles is a complex historical character. He was dutiful, patient, conscientious, dogmatic (i.e., inclined to lay down principles), a seeker of advice, a good listener, but also selfish, dogmatic (this time meaning opinionated and domineering), and a forceful ruler who always settled scores. Like many leaders and diplomats of a country, he told the truth, but not necessarily all of the truth, nor all of the time.👑

Habsburg siblings: Eleanor, Isabeau, Ferdinand, Maria, and Catalina

It's impossible to overlook how Charles manipulated Joanna I, his mother. She was the Queen of Castile, inheriting the Kingdom jointly with Charles, but he made sure she was left in the dark, and he ruled Spain solo. It's possible he thought she wasn't capable of statesmanship but the ends didn't justify the means. Periodically he visited his mother but kept her secluded from the world and secretly took her treasures for himself and his sister, Catalina's dowery which is appalling!

Eleanor, Charles, and Isabeau were born and raised in the Netherlands and took lessons together, sharing a tutor.

On the other hand, as Emperor, he never demanded more sacrifice or hard work from his family than he was already doing himself. At times he pressed some of his sisters into service to govern as his trusted regents over Habsburg territories when they wanted to step down. He administered hands-on leadership over his armies and subjects. Charles rode into battles and fought alongside his troops. He motivated and spent time with the men ... once staying on his horse in full armor for 21 hours; and to the extent possible he was accessible to his many subjects, those born aristocratic and lowly in his kingdoms whenever he visited. 

A few interesting facts about Charles V on the personal side:

1) He had 4 illegitimate children -- 3 before and 1 after his marriage to Isabella of Portugal (born in 1503). Yet during his marriage, there is no record of the Emperor ever having extra-marital affairs ... rather moral considering his immense power, lots of travels, and what powerful rulers could get away with during the 16th century.

2) The Habsburgs watched each other's backs. Sometimes Emperor Charles appealed to (critics might say shamelessly exploited) his siblings' loyalty and love for him to get them to act as regents for the Habsburg dynasty. The siblings cooperated and even spent time together after Charles abdicated and went into retirement. They managed to stay cohesive and put dynasty above ego, as well as, be close in their later years. 

3) Charles attended mass daily and without fail took a week off to participate fully in Holy Week devotionals every Easter. 

4) As devout as Charles V was to Catholicism (and indeed, he was pious all his life) when the Pope crossed the line into politics by siding with Francis I of France and sent troops against him (1526 - 1527), Charles defeated those armies and took the Pope hostage! It's the reason why Henry VIII of England was not granted his annulment against his popular Queen of 25+ years, Catherine of Aragon, to marry a woman who would have faired better as his mistress. Queen Catherine of England was Charles V's maternal aunt ... and with the pope as his prisoner, Henry was not going to get his divorce. In fact, it was a term the Pope had to agree to in the peace treaty to gain his freedom. Charles' troops had invaded and sacked Rome.

5) Charles had an enlarged lower jaw (mandibular prognathism) a congenital deformity that got worst in later Habsburg generations due to inbreeding.

Charles' and Isabella's surviving children: Philip II of Spain, Maria, and Joanna

6) When his wife, Empress Isabella, died from a fever after childbirth in 1539, Charles was so devastated, he locked himself away in a monastery for 2 months to grieve her. He never remarried and wore black for the rest of his life.

7) I haven't gotten to the part of the book where Charles abdicated as Emperor in 1556, but I find the fact that he knew when to relinquish power interesting, as well as, admirable. Due to acute arthritis (called gout) and his declining health, Charles knew he couldn't travel and reign as effectively as before, and the burden of ruling and traveling non-stop for 40 years exhausted him. The man was tired!!

8) Realizing it was too much for one person, Charles V divided the Habsburg Empire into two parts, giving Spain, the Netherlands, and parts of Italy and America to his son, Philip II to rule ... and Austria, and the German states to his brother, Ferdinand I -- the next elected Holy Roman Emperor. Charles V's daughter, Maria, married her 1st cousin, Maximillian II, who also became the Holy Roman Emperor (= Charles' nephew and brother, Ferdinand I's son). Charles and Isabella's other surviving child, Joanna, married another 1st cousin, Prince (later King) John Manuel of Portugal. Joanna became the Regent of Spain during her brother, Philip II's absence and marriage to Queen Mary Tudor, Philip's 1st cousin. All the family intermarriages occurred for the purpose of keeping the territories in Habsburg hands, but over the generations, it also weaken the dynasty as defects in recessive genes lead to horrible birth defects including the inability to produce healthy heirs in Spain.

Photo by Alonso de Mendoza of His Majesty's bed and the room where he died.

After his public abdication in the Netherlands in October 1556, Charles V left for Spain persuading his two widowed sisters, Eleanor of France and Maria of Hungry to accompany him. He lived in lovely quarters at the Monastery of Yuste from January 1557 until September 21, 1558, dying from malaria at the age of 58 while clutching the same cross that his wife, Isabella, held in her hands when she died.

Pantheon of the Kings

Well, it's back to page 332 for me. I think reading 10 - 15 pages per sitting is about right to keep a myriad of historical details straight. Common sense and intuition tell me Charles isn't done with the Germans, French, or Turks, and none of them are done with him either. What's more, the "taming of America" is coming up in a later chapter. Oh, taming Americans, eh ... I'd like to see him try.😁 

For sure, this biography of a remarkable Emperor, the most powerful man of his time, is a riveting read for a history buff!

You may also enjoy:

German Empress Victoria: A Book Review And More

The Marriage of Charles II And Catherine of Braganza

Aboard The Underground Railroad: A Picture Book In Verse

The Girl On The Balcony: Olivia Hussey Finds Life After Romeo and Juliet

Plantagenets, Tudors and Stuarts

Photo: Carae - Elizabeth Woodville, Queen Consort of England, mother of the princes in the tower.

The question of the day is: How are you spending your extra pandemic hours at home? 

I have stepped into the past to watch history documentaries, as well as, historical fiction -- dramas that combine facts with inventions, including The White Queen, The White Princess and The Spanish Princess. As long as I can google known facts to learn what really happened or to flesh out the true characters of kings, queens and power players at court, I will accept the historical fiction story I'm watching as entertainment, and yet often I think the truth doesn't need the invention, as the real history was dramatic and fascinating enough. The old saying applies, life is stranger than fiction.

Photos: Henry VII & Elizabeth of York, the elder sister of the Princes in the tower - their marriage (happy) ended the 30 year Wars of the Roses.

Overall, I notice the 3 historical fiction series listed above get the outlines and major events right, but sometimes mess with the timeline, minor yet important details, or motivations of a character, getting them wrong by making a confident historical person weak or needy, or a righteous person of the past calculating and unrighteous. I understand the need to composite characters into one for reasons of time or storytelling, but I dislike when producers change the nature, or established deeds of a historical person. While watching you must go with it to enjoy the series ... then look the person up later to know what is real and what liberties are taken.

Catherine of Aragon & how she'd look today

In school I took required Western Civilization history courses ... and yes, learned some things ... however, I have never cared to take an extended look at Plantagenet, Tudor or Stuart England thereafter ... until 2020. Mores change in a millennium, so I didn't think I could relate. But you can relate when studying the past, and I am re-examining English history in reverse order:

The 5 eldest children of Charles I by Van Dyck
1638 - Mary, James, Charles, Elizabeth and Anne

1) Stuarts - Mostly like them despite their faults. The Stuart Kings were good fathers and (except for faithful Charles I) philandering husbands, but who protected their wives when needed. History is hard on James II, who had become a Catholic. His chief flaw was his stubbornness. James lacked the charm of his older brother, Charles II. As King, James passed laws showing tolerance of Catholics and Quakers alongside the Church of England, reforms unwanted by segments in the Church of England who had benefited from the previous history of stripping the Catholic Church of its property; and it lead to the loss of his Crown. James II was followed by his 2 Protestant daughters: Mary II and Anne (skipping over his infant Catholic son from his 2nd marriage). Queen Anne's death ended the Stuart line.

2) Tudors - Dislike Henry VII and Henry VIII. What a bloodthirsty, greedy, miserly dynasty.

Like Catherine of Aragon and Mary I, who were both victims of their tyrant husband and father, Henry VIII. Dislike Anne Boleyn (What somebody will do with you, they'll do to you ... and worse ... as she discovered!) Catherine, the wife married to Henry the longest, remained popular with the English people who considered her their true Queen and recognized her worth until the day she died in spite of Henry and Anne's efforts to erase her. Anne lasted 2 short years as Queen and never earned the love of the English people regardless of her Englishness. Have great sympathy for the other wives. Jane's reign was short, dying in the childbirth of Henry's only legitiment living son. Anne of Cleves got a raw deal, then negotiated a lucrative divorce. Poor young Catherine Howard was in over her head and lost it; and Catherine Parr married an overweight, ulcerous King and outlived him. Haven't gotten in-depth into Elizabeth I ... but will likely think she's ok.

Richard III - face
created based his skull.

3) Plantagenets -  I'm now watching every documentary about them. Lots of family infighting and betrayals happening. Tough times. Divided country. Family feuds with money and retainers!! Generally, I understand and like them. I like (English born, German) Empress Matilda who became a claimant to the English throne, and Eleanor of Aquitaine rocked! I like Elizabeth Woodville and Henry IV well enough. Richard III ... did he kill the princes in the tower as has been accepted for 500 years? Well, maybe not, I'm unsure. It could have been directed by Henry Tudor or his wily mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort. We will likely never know who killed those boys. Richard III was the last of the Plantagenets. Defeated by Henry Tudor, the new King (as Henry VII) spent his reign hunting down potential Plantagenet rivals whom he feared had a better claim to the English throne.

Photo: The Telegraph

My ancestors have the same Norman roots and took the same English paths of migration as the Plantagenets, but after 600 - 1,000 years how would you truly know if you are related? I'm skeptical when people say their gateway ancestor was a long-ago royal. Without a meticulous paper trail that stretches all the way back, you're only guessing. But you know what? I still hate those Tudors! The revisionists of history.😏 What a cutthroat bunch of murderous paranoids ... and nasty to their own family to boot!💂👑

You might also enjoy:

Masters Of Sex, A Review

Princess Louise, Duchess Of Argyll

The Marriage Of Charles II And Catherine Of Braganza

Aboard The Underground Railroad: A Picture Book In Verse

The Girl On The Balcony: Olivia Hussey Finds Life after Romeo and Juliet

Are you looking for a good book? I found one, The Girl On The Balcony: Olivia Hussey Finds Life after Romeo and Juliet. It's a fast yet fascinating read. I finished it in 3 days. Born on April 17, 1951 in Buenos Aires, Argentina to an ethnic Scottish mother and a Spanish father, whose marriage fell apart while she was still a toddler, Olivia and her younger brother, Andrew were placed in a boarding school for 3 years so her mother could work a full-time job to support the family. After several years they left to live permanently in London seeking better opportunities.

In London, Olivia attended a nearby acting school from ages 7-13. It was her idea. She had a 2 year run on the London stage as Jenny in The Prime of Miss Jane Brodie alongside Vanessa Redgrave. Next she gained international fame when director Franco Zeffirelli selected her to play Juliet opposite Leonard Whiting in what I think we can all agree is the definite Romeo and Juliet. These were the days of bonafide open additions when London drama schools sent their students over for tryouts of roles. During the audition, Zefirellini paired the 2 teenaged actors (Leonard played the Artful Dodger in Oliver on the London stage) together and unlike the other hopefuls never separated them throughout the addition process. Most would agree that everyone in the film is perfectly cast. Shot on location in Italy, making the film was hard work, yet the set was exciting and wonderful for the actors. After such a high profile and unique experience ends, what is next?

Ms. Hussey's memoir is candid and thoughtful. It goes through decades of a well-lived, often challenging life -- including an enduring if long-distance friendship with her co-star, Leonard; the ups and downs of a Hollywood career; 3 roller-coaster marriages with benevolent men who despite turbulent times, Olivia calls the 3 loves of her life. Her first husband was Dean Martin's son, Dino, who died in a plane

crash at 35. Her 2nd husband was a popular Japanese singer. Long-distance drove them apart; and her last (and Olivia says final marriage) is to her spouse of 29 years, David Eisley, another musician and the son of an American television actor. Olivia lives right outside of Hollywood, where she raises animals and is an animal activist. She has 3 adult children, Alexander, who co-wrote the book, Maximillian, and India.

Olivia's story includes overcoming a lifetime of shyness and agoraphobia; being raped by a deranged ex-boyfriend and 70s actor; stage 4 breast cancer; and corrupt Hollywood business managers who stole her money putting her into bankruptcy.

Still she remains a positive person who has lived a full and interesting life. It's a journey of self-discovery for a strong; serious; and introspective actress, one you will like a lot and empathize with every step of the way. 

She's kind and sensitive and copes with the temporary things of life by seeking out and trying to understand the eternal.

Together for the 50th Anniversary of Romeo and Juliet. 

Just 15 and 16 years old when cast in 1966 (the film came out in 1968), Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting would like to publish a coffee table book with photos and their respective memories of making Romeo and Juliet. Um, guys and publishing houses ... we're waiting! "It's not too late" as Leonard likes to say. Perhaps one day when life returns to normal, it can happen.

BTW: Before seeing Leonard Whiting in R & J, I watched him in a good television drama, Frankenstein, The True Story, which is uploaded on YouTube. He played Dr. Victor Frankenstein. Michael Sarrazin was the misunderstood creature -- it's a touching rendition that hasn't aged. Ms. Olivia Hussey, I saw in Ivanhole after R & J, and her performance as Rebecca is also up on YouTube. Fun then and now interviews of the two discussing their film can also be watched as companions to an absorbing book↑. Later acting work includes Jesus of Nazareth, Death on the Nile and Mother Teresa.

Lovely to know that after the film and with some stays and bumps in the road, Romeo and Juliet are on real-life paths giving them a happy ending. We love and wish them well!📚💌


You may also enjoy:
Guilty Pleasure Songs 4
Princess Louise, Duchess Of Argyll
German Empress Victoria: A Book Review And More
The Marriage of Charles II And Catherine of Braganza

The Marriage of Charles II And Catherine of Braganza

I recommend all 3 biographies as scholarly in understanding history. The middle bio is drier; while the 2 books on the ends explain Charles II's character and are written with more flair. Don't let the "King's Bed" title fool you into thinking it is not a serious bio. Paramours are expertly fleshed out and connected to explain the King, events, and the royal court.

Recently I found myself back in Stuart England. My desire was to learn more about the life of Catherine of Braganza, who married King Charles II, becoming the Queen of England. Unable to find a comprehensive biography on her, I turned to bios of the King.

What a complicated royal court the new Queen found herself joining and was powerless to change. It would not be wrong to say, Charles II was a rake, a predator with royal pimps and powerful mistresses, and yet, unlike the bloodthirsty Tudor kings (such as Henry VIII), he had something of a heart. Although he neglected his wife too often, when necessary, Charles II also protected her (from statesmen in the realm who hated her due to her Catholicism). What's more, the King refused to divorce his Queen because she couldn't produce an heir, as well as, recognized and took care of his 12 illegitimate children by 7 of his (I lost count!) powerful mistresses. He gave each a title, property, and wealth* [funded from taxes and bribes paid by France's Louis XIV via an ultra-secret treaty].

I have no idea how Queen Catherine coped with her flawed husband who lived (his princely, then kingly) life exactly as he pleased. When first married, she tried to object, but couldn't change the libertine life that characterized the Stuart court at Whitehall, so she had no choice but to accept and make the best of her humiliating circumstances.

King Charles II was a 17th century Don Draper, a cad, who you still like (in spite of yourself) ... I suppose because you see him as debauched, but not evil. After a happy start in life, followed by the beheading of his father, Charles I, he was one of the few kings to live outside the privileged walls of a castle, without money, position, or stability and among the local folk before the Restoration of the English Monarchy in 1660. As the restored King of England, Scotland and Ireland, he was generous, charming, self-deprecating, well-intentioned, and had unfailingly good manners. He became a popular king in England. He had flashes of temper or coldness but usually could control it. Unlike some kings, he wasn't petty, nor vindictive. He loved reading unflattering criticism about himself and laughed along with it.

May 29, 1630 - February 6, 1685

For all his faults, Charles II is difficult to hate. There are times the King showed genuine courage, decency and loyalty. Author Christina Croft shared the following with me: "I recall one book about her [Queen Catherine] that portrayed so beautifully her terror that she was about to be arrested for her beliefs [Catholicism]. She was led before the King and, to her amazement and that of the court, he stepped down and took her hand in a show of affection and solidarity. It was very moving to read ... that one episode enabled me to forgive all his misdemeanors!! I also like the way he threw off his jacket and got to work with all the other people trying to put out the Great Fire of London [1666]."

Charles II had a soft spot for his illegitimate children, another of his admirable traits. Unlike the later Hanovers, the Stuart Kings loved and were attentive to their children.

Still your heart goes out to the sheltered, convent-raised Portuguese Princess who left her home to become his Queen, and you wonder what might have been ... without all the stress and nonsense of the Stuart court. Portugal sent a very classy daughter to England. She was intelligent, religious, kind and fun-loving when given a chance. She had a talent for acting, dancing and athletics. Catherine of Braganza is credited with introducing the practice of drinking tea in England. Charles II grew fond of her, and she remained devoted to him, despite the fact he was never at any time faithful to her. Not only did he have multiple courtesans and casual flings, his serious mistresses along with their bastard children were flaunted within his court, as well as, openly in public. His philandering brought sadness and isolation into her life.

November 25, 1638 - December 31, 1705

Queen Catherine had 4 miscarriages and stillborn children. Nobody can really know why she couldn't carry her babies to term, but as it turns out, the Queen was given quinine by 17th-century doctors, which is known to cause miscarriages. Also, the stress of having powerful wenches and their bastards in her face; the worry of being tossed out by divorce; and having little say in her own court, couldn't have helped matters in the least. Then there were the sexually transmitted diseases, including syphilis the King and his French mistress, Louise deKèrouaille (who caught "the pox" from him), were known to have been treated for in 1674. Miraculously the Queen is not known to have contracted the disease. 

But could she have caught other viruses affecting childbearing? We will never know ... but perhaps Charles II's hedonism was a factor in his own lack of a legitimate heir. He alone was responsible for his lubricious court. Queen Catherine remained a treasure ... her integrity and benevolence intact. It is speculated that the King never divorced his Queen partially out of guilt.

The book, The Kings Bed, depicts Charles II as a clever and shrewd King, but mentions that some historians reason, he was "a man who never truly grew up" ... perhaps "his problems stemmed from the violent death of his father and the subsequent years of his enforced exile." The King's "contemporaries agreed, his time in France [in the court of his cousin Louis XIV] corrupted him." Modern psychiatrist Dr. Paul Harlow thinks Charles suffered from "arrested emotional development stuck irredeemably in adolescence," listing several symptoms, including his "avoidance of emotional mature relationships and the need for endless female couplings ... In his formative years he lost the close contact of a mature male figure, leading him to 'Don Juan syndrome,' a condition in which a man fails to take charge of his life in an adult, mature way," notes Dr. Harlow. Also, toss in the factor: As absolute ruler, Charles received a pass from the expectation of following normal, social behavior. Accepting moral responsibility for his pleasure dome lifestyle "didn't come into play."

According to the same book, Charles isn't viewed as a psychopath as "he enjoyed life too much and engaged in it too well to be a psychopath." Moreover, the authors observe: "Whatever his failings ... Charles carried himself well enough throughout his life, usually with good humor and with a good word for the humblest of his subjects, though he cared little about them. ... Generally speaking, as long as he got his way, he was congeniality itself."

Furthermore, his erotic and parasitic behavior cut the monarchy down to size. For his subjects, it "broke the spell" of the idea of divine monarchy. Majesty -- or ''greatness of God" was forever after seen as less majestic and more human.

On Queen Catherine's final visit to her husband's deathbed in 1685, she was overcome with grief and tears. The Queen half-fainted in response to his suffering, as well as, his tenderness towards her and had to be carried back to her own rooms. She sent back a note asking Charles to forgive her if she had ever offended him. To which the dying King replied, "Poor woman, she begs my pardon! I beg hers with all my heart."

Here again, you wonder what might have been. The actor, Jon Hamm who played and knew Don Draper so well, always maintained that while his character was distinguished in his professional life, he was a coward in his private life. Was Charles II a coward also? 

A question scholars always ask is: What of his early promise went unfulfilled, due to his duplicity and need of a huge purse?

If Charles had put his energy into what should have been his most important intimate relationship, his marriage (and cared more about statesmanship) in lieu of a pleasure-seeking court, what an influential team the outwardly Protestant King and his capable Catholic Queen might have been in England at a time of fierce religious intolerance. Perhaps, just perhaps the Stuarts would be remembered as the dynasty that brought the country back together ... and is it possible the Stuarts would still be sitting on the throne today? We can only wonder.

As head of the Church of England, King Charles II was a pragmatist. In private, he sympathized with the religion so many of the people around him (his mother, Queen, brother, James, his courtesans) followed. On his deathbed, he willingly converted to Catholicism. He died bravely, remaining congenial to the end. The cause of death was perhaps a stroke ... more probably kidney disease, but possibly accidental mercury poisoning from experiments in his windowless lab at Whitehall.

Later in life ... years after the Glorious Revolution of William and Mary (1688), the widowed Catherine of Braganza returned to Portugal to successfully act as regent for her brother, Peter II ... where she died in 1705.👑


*Charles gave his mistresses the rights to the proceeds from certain government taxes collected or the King's pardons. For example, Louise deKèrouaille got the money from prisoners who paid bribes to be pardoned - a practice at the time. Many were in jail because they couldn't pay their debts. If they couldn't pay her, she then sold the prisoners into indentured servitude for $3 - $12 a head, and they were shipped off to Virginia as slaves effectively, making her and her descendants rich.

At times mistresses, Barbara Villiers and Louise deKèrouaille, were able to crush politicians who dared to criticize their influence on the King, then were given their properties (now lost to the heirs of the ousted men). They broke the property up and sold it increasing their own wealth. Barbara Villiers "borrowed" jewelry from the Crown, but in her hands, the pieces became gifts. Charles II did nothing, so Queen Catherine was powerless.

Interesting fact: Prince William will be the 1st direct descendant ever of Charles II -- 350 years later -- to sit on the British throne. His mother, Diana Princess of Wales was a direct descendant of 2 rival mistresses: Barbara Villiers and Louise deKèrouaille. Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, and Sarah, Duchess of York are also direct descendants of Charles II through Louise deKèrouaille. It's one big happy illegitimate family! But we're cool with Prince William and company. Heaven forbid if we never let bygones be bygones and had to atone for all our ancestors. Hopefully, we can look at history without judging innocent people who try to live meaningful lives.


You may also enjoy:
Queen Victoria's Family Pictures
Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll
Remembering Prince Leopold, Duke Of Albany
German Empress Victoria: A Book Review And More

Princess Louise, Duchess Of Argyll

As mentioned, I'm reading the biographies of Queen Victoria's children. I highly recommend, "Princess Louise: Queen Victoria's Unconventional Daughter" by Jehanne Wake over other books about her. It is by far the best researched, delving into private letters and other primary sources to recall her life.

Prince Leopold and Princess Louise on the left. The Duchess of Kent?, Prince Arthur and Princess Alice. Queen Victoria under her umbrella, Prince Albert holding Princess Beatrice's hand and Princess Helena on the right of her father.

The better known bio by Lucinda Hawksley is entertaining, yet hugely based on gossip, falling short because it presents unsubstantiated hunches and rumors as truth. In biographies, all conclusions must be backed up with credible sources and solid evidence. 

Princesses Helena and Louise

Unfortunately after 100 years, the rumors stick to a historical figure as if they were true facts, which is certainly the case here. In my review, I feel compelled to confront a few of the rumors and misconceptions.

Indeed in a myriad of ways, Princess Louise was an unconventional and modern royal. Born on March, 18, 1848, the year of revolutions in Europe, she was Queen Victoria's 6th child and 4th daughter. When the little princess was only a few weeks old, the royal family was advised to flee London, which they did for the safety of Osborne due to the riots. The Queen even remarked that the volatility of the times would surely leave an imprint on the infant's character.

Princess Louise Caroline Alberta was intelligent, inquisitive and artistically gifted. Like her siblings, she received a strict academic education, becoming fluent in several languages, music, art and theater, as well as, acquiring practical skills like cooking, baking, sewing and gardening. 

However, her childhood was marred by the early death of her father, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coberg-Gotha and her mother's prolonged period of mourning. It was a traumatic period that engulfed the entire family and country for more years then it should have.

Princess Louise was the first royal offspring to enroll in a public school, the National Art Training School, at the same time as she was required to fill the role as her mother's private secretary (1866-1871). Louise was successful at both endeavors due to dedication and many hours of hard work.

The Princess was a talented sketcher, painter and sculptress and accepted commissions for her art in an era when women were only supposed to have hobbies inside the home. Her sculpture of Queen Victoria at the age of her coronation sits outside of Kensington Palace today.

Queen Victoria, who sometimes considered her daughter argumentative, had to admit the statue was a great likeness and Louise was an excellent private secretary, writing to daughter Vicky: "She is (and who would have some years ago have thought it?) a clever dear girl with a fine character, unselfish and affectionate."

Unlike the Queen, Princess Louise (like her elder sister, Vicky, i.e. Crown Princess Victoria of Prussia) supported women's rights. She secretly met with "radical" Elizabeth Garrett, the first woman medical doctor in Britain.

Photo: Royal Digest Quarterly
Traveling and at breakfast with a lady-in-wating, Queen Victoria, Leopold, Louise - standing and Beatrice

Over a lifetime, Princess Louise supported liberal and forward-thinking social causes, spearheading the education of women, lending her name to get programs and institutions up and running. Likewise the Princess initiated public works and opened wings of hospitals. Not content with merely showing up at the end, she contributed her ideas and was involved in all the phases of planning and implementation right up to the openings.

Many at court, as well as, the public thought Princess Louise was the Queen's most attractive daughter. She was the tallest and slender and as an early proponent of exercise, remained shapely and youthful throughout her life. She bicycled and walked habitually.

Princess Louise was also unconventional in choosing a spouse -- an aristocrat, John Campbell, the Marquis of Lorne, heir to the Duke of Argyll and a Liberal Member of Parliament over a foreign prince. Since he was active in politics and wasn't royal, it was controversial. In 1871, she became the 1st daughter of a Sovereign to marry a commoner since the 16th century. Queen Victoria favored the match as a way of keeping her daughter in Great Britain, and too, of introducing new blood into the family. Also, the Queen always let her children marry for love. 

Which brings us to Louise and Lorne's relationship. There's little truth to what is often written, namely: the couple was unhappy and childless because Lorne was homosexual. The marriage began happy and lasted for over 40 years. During these years, Lorne was devoted, supportive and protective of his wife, and they were very much together up until the early 1880s. He never stopped thinking she was beautiful; nor weaned in thinking of and mentioning her in conversations and letters to his family, etc.

And although Louise could be temperamental, she too was loving, thoughtful, respectful and devoted. Apparently the couple tried to have children as Louise went to Germany over the years for cures in the effort. Although she lived to be 91 years old, the Princess suffered from ill health throughout her life (including severe headaches, neuralgia, vomiting and insomnia, especially after a serious sledging accident (on February 14, 1880) in Canada that also gave her a concussion and tore her ear lope in two). Jehanne Wake's book makes a good case that probably the real reason the couple remained childless was due to illness or infertility (possibly complications from meningitis which Louise contracted at the age of 16). Moreover in Victorian England, no one thought to consider Lorne's fertility. Both spouses hoped to have children and no doubt the disappointment put a strain on their marriage. Louise became depressed.

Furthermore, the evidence that the Princess' husband was gay is very weak based mainly on the couple's close association with Lorne's homosexual uncle and friend, Lord Ronnie Gover (his mother's brother), who although innocent, was drawn into a scandal by a gay con artist.

Princess Louise, Prince Leopold, Queen Victoria, John Campbell (Lorne), and Princess Beatrice

Louise and Lorne grew apart starting in 1884 after returning from 5 years living in Canada, where Lorne served as a capable and successful Governor General (giving the couple the chance to see Canada and the USA.) The death of Louise's favorite brother, Prince Leopold, didn't help matters as it devastated her. From childhood, she had looked after Leopold.

As the author explains, "The dynamics of a marriage can change and in the Lornes' case the balance of power swung away from him to her. The long spells apart and their clashes of opinion had changed Princess Louise's perception of Lorne; she now saw the stubborn side of his character and began to be irritated by him. Although, whenever this happened, she would be sorry and try to be kind to make up for the feeling; it took its toll upon her nerves. She was very much like her sister, Princess Alice, in temperament. In Princess Alice's words, they had 'things to fight against, and to put up with, unknown to those of quiet equable dispositions, who are free from violent emotions, and have consequently no feelings of nerves -- still less of irritable nerves.' "

According to the book, Princess Louise cared for Lorne deeply, but needed to take breaks from him in mid-marriage. Queen Victoria was exceedingly understanding of her daughter's frail emotions, ''while feeling much for Lorne." Lorne, too, was patient and understanding of his wife.

As the author notes, "At the height of Princess Louise's unhappiness," husband and wife ''kept in close contact and wrote daily." Divorce was never considered as neither party desired it.

They stayed together and became close again in later years. When Lorne's father died in 1900 making him the 9th Duke of Argyll, Louise accompanied him to Scotland. Together the couple also lived in Kent House on the Isle of Wight and at Kensington Palace in London. Unfortunately, as Lorne aged, he developed dementia and lost the easygoingness of youth, but Louise was very devoted to nursing him until his death from bronchitis that developed into double pneumonia in 1914. Again, Princess Louise was devastated. She felt dreadfully lonely without the Duke still feeling as she did when becoming engaged, there was no one quite like him!

And despite the rumors, her biographer thinks it unlikely that Princess Louise ever had sexual relations with anyone other than her husband. No solid evidence suggests otherwise. The author argues Princess Louise could be chatty, friendly and flirty, and like Queen Victoria, she loved beauty in everything, especially in the form of a good looking man. But the the book states, it would have been too risky and highly unlikely that she ever crossed the line as she never forgot Her Royal Highness status, nor her sense of duty. At any rate, says the author, "It was the maternal, domesticated hausfrau which predominated in her character." In other words, yes, she flirted, but expressed it as glee and by mothering a man. And, I agree with the biographer!

In later years Princess Louise continued some public appearances, often visiting hospitals unscheduled. She lived in Scotland and Kensington Palace next to her sister, Princess Beatrice's apartment. Although the sisters had their differences, they were a close family. Louise spent summer vacations with Prince Arthur at his house on the French Riviera and sketched up until age 90. She died on December 3, 1939 and because of the war was cremated with her ashes buried at Frogmore near Windsor. Had she died in Scotland, she would have been buried next to her husband.

In Canada, the province of Alberta, Mount Alberta and Lake Louise are all named after Prince Louise.

After you finish the Wake bio, here's another recommendation: Darling Loosy: Letters to Princess Louise 1856 - 1939 by Elizabeth Longford.

So far, I love all of Queen Victoria's children. How about you?


You may also enjoy:
Queen Victoria's Family Pictures
Princess Alice Of The United Kingdom
Remembering Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany
German Empress Victoria: A Book Review And More