king charles and the stuart mentality

Portrait of King Charles I (1600-1649)

Studio of Sir Anthony van Dyck (1599-1641)

This impressively martial portrait of Charles I is a high quality variant of the earliest likeness of the King painted by Van Dyck in 1632. The original portrait is the large group showing Charles and Henrietta Maria with their two eldest children, a work known as the ‘Great Peece’, and which is still in the Royal Collection. The ‘Great Peece’ became one of the defining images of Charles and the Stuart dynasty, and until that point the art loving King had never been painted by anyone of Van Dyck’s calibre. Therefore, as the first likeness of the King by the newly-arrived court artist, demand for replicas of all sizes must have been considerable. The present portrait, as a work painted in Van Dyck’s studio under the artist’s supervision, would have formed part of the range of portraits produced for Charles and his court for various political and diplomatic reasons. 

Charles I was passionate about art, and was the first British monarch to collect art for its own sake. Ever since his youthful (and comically unsuccessful) mission to Spain in 1623 to secure the marriage of King of Spain’s daughter, Charles had dreamed of turning his court into a rival of the great visual displays of Madrid, sparkling with pictures by Titian and Velasquez, as part of a wishful civilising exercise on his disparate and badly administered kingdom. His first route towards that end was to spend lavishly on collections of Old Masters, most notably the Mantua collection secured for about £15,000 in 1628 with the help of Van Dyck’s friend Nicholas Lanier, the ‘Master of the King’s Musick’.Such was Charles’ enthusiasm for buying art that he would often be present at the moment of delivery, insisting that crates delivered at night were immediately unpacked, and playing games of attribution by candlelight.

But it was not enough for Charles to be surrounded by great art; he wanted to be in it. Charles, more than any other English king, fell into the trap of believing that the image of power equated to its reality. The tradition is that when Charles saw Van Dyck’s c.1628 portrait of Nicholas Lanier[historisches Museum, Vienna] he demanded that the artist be ‘sent for over into England.’[Getting Van Dyck to England, however, was no easy task; he needed the inducements of an expensive annual retainer, a studio by the Thames, a large gold chain, and a knighthood. There are sixteen recorded varying portrait types or compositions of Charles by Van Dyck, and seventeen of his wife, Henrietta Maria. The fact that the majority of these are known both in multiple versions by Van Dyck himself and studio replicas gives a glimpse of how reliant on his talented studio assistants Van Dyck often was.

On one level, the need to circulate the Charles I’s image by the best artist possible was obvious – power increases with recognition. In 1504 Henry VII, the first English king to understand the importance of his own image, had the masterstroke of putting his recognisable portrait on the coinage, so that his face was in the pocket and purse of all his subjects. Other images had to visually impress viewers with the majesty and power of the monarch – some who saw Holbein’s 1537 life-size mural of Henry VIII and his family in Whitehall ‘felt abashed, annihilated’, such was its scale and realism.

The main objective of a royal portraitist was essentially the same in Van Dyck’s time as it had been in Holbein’s time. But by Van Dyck’s day, royal portraiture assumed a more complex significance. This was particularly the case for those portraits commissioned for a royal palace. Van Dyck’s Great Peecemust have been commissioned to rival Holbein’s mural and with the same desire to impress (it too was hung at Whitehall). The Great Peece was begun within weeks of Van Dyck’s arrival in London in June 1632, and the first payment for it was authorized by the King on 8thAugust 1632 at £100 (for one ‘greate peece of Or  royall self, Consort and children’).It was the first time an English monarch had been depicted in a semi-domestic setting, seated, and surrounded by dogs. In Charles’ eyes it was the perfect image of the contented royal family, and thus by extension a contented nation. And yet outside the royal palace royal portraits could assume a subtly different purpose. In private houses, for example, the display of a portrait of Charles I could not only demonstrate the owner’s loyalty to the King, but also that they were a person of importance, just as the discreet display of a signed photograph of The Queen or President Obama might today.

Inevitably, therefore, there was a considerable demand for replicas of Van Dyck’s royal portraits. The present portrait of Charles I is a fine example of a studio production of a portrait of Charles I from relatively early in Van Dyck’s English career. The head is derived from the Great Peece, but the body shows the King in armour, allowing for a more militaristic look than the relative informality of the original. Intriguingly, Van Dyck’s portrait of Charles in the Great Peece differs subtly from his later portraits of Charles, which are more familiar to us today. In Van Dyck’s subsequent portraits, such as the celebrated ‘Charles I in three Positions’ [Royal Collection], Charles’ features are slightly fuller, the jaw and lower lip less prominent, and he appears less drawn, perhaps as a result of the tendency to flattery Van Dyck is regularly accused of.

Unfortunately, we cannot know which of Van Dyck’s assistants was responsible for the portrait. Unlike Rubens’ studio, we know comparatively little of those Van Dyck employed, or what they did. Van Dyck’s studio in Blackfriars lay outside the remit of the City of London and its strict rules on artists and their apprentices. Those whom we believe were employed at some stage in England by Van Dyck include Jan Van Belcamp, Jean de Reyn, David Beek, James Gandy, Henry Stone and Remigius van Leemput. Although Van Dyck came to rely more heavily on his studio towards the end of his life, it is known that, like almost all great artists of the period, he used assistants to some degree from the very beginning of his career as an independently successful artist. In about 1618 he established his own workshop in Antwerp, and it is known that he employed studio assistants even then.He was 4’-8” tall at his coronation in 1626.

His tallest height was 5’-4” tall, which was somewhat short for the times.

They say he had chestnut color hair, which is sort of a brownish red.

The paintings of King Charles I seem to show that he wore a ruffle til the early-mid 1620’s at least.  After that he wore a laced collar.  It also shows that his hair was somewhat short while wearing the ruffle.  When he went to the laced collar he let his hair grow long, at least to shoulder length.  Apparently, in the 1630’s he did let it grow to the small of his back at times.

The paintings also show he wore an earring in his left ear.  This always appears to be a pearl earring, except for some paintings when he was young which shows a ring.  He wore an earring at an early age, about 10 or so.

King Charles started to grow his moustache and pointed beard in the mid 1620’s (his mid 20’s).  He had it until his death.

Beginning at Carisbrooke Castle in 1647, King Charles’ refused to be shaved.  This was because Parliament dismissed his barber.  He did not want a Parliamentary appointed barber to shave him.  Whether this was out of fear of being assasinated or just rebelling against Parliament is unclear.  His beard is shown below in the painting that shows King Charles at his trial:Character:

One of his first acts as king was to get rid of the loafers, etc. that hung around Whitehall palace.  Shortly afterwords, he had court etiquette examined and altered (March 1629).

King Charles was very interested in the welfare of the court and court life.  He made many rules to govern how the court was to be regulated and expected people to behave themselves in a proper way.  He reinstalled court etiquette and manners into the English court life demanding, for example, that people serve him on bended knee.

King Charles was very interested in the welfare of his servants and often would do things on their behalf.

King Charles seemed to be something of a ‘matchmaker’, recommending this person to marry that person oftentimes.

There has been speculation that King Charles I and the Duke of Buckingham may have been homosexuals but there is no evidence of this.  It appears to be ‘court gossip’.

There is no evidence that King Charles had any mistresses or any affairs or associations with females other than his wife.  As a result, no scandal ever arose surrounding King Charles.

In 1647, at Carisbrooke Castle, King Charles seemed to find great interest in a 30 year old women named Jane Whorwhood.  His letters seemed to show he had a great love for her.  It is doubtful that he had anything like an affair, though he seemed to complain of her ‘platonic love’.  This was a period of time of great stress and loneliness for King Charles.  No doubt her presence helped ease his pain and loneliness.

It was said that he wasn’t very good at associating with females.

Unfortunately, it appears that King Charles was very lazy when it came to the government.  He tended to not see to its affairs as much as he should of and never really worked hard for it.

John Milton said that the only vice in King Charles was reading too much Shakespeare.

King Charles tended to be shy, particularly in his early years.

He had a slight Scottish accent.

They say he ate a very sparce and simple diet.

It has been remarked by numerous people that King Charles was a polite, casual, and unprovoking person.  His kind gentle manner was admired by many people.

King Charles was very unlike his father, almost the exact opposite in a way.

Various details about his life:

The midwife at Charles birth was Janet Kinlock.

Charles had rickets as a child.

Charles had to wear reinforced boots (made by Edward Stuteville) to help him walk.

Charles did not walk until about age 4.

Charles was known to be sickly as a child.

Charles did note begin to speak until about the age 3.

He had a stutter.  This made him socially awkward they say.  This was apparently quite pronounced when he was young but appeared less when he grew up.  Apparently, he went through great effort to get rid of it.  Its been said that he largely overcome it, in his adult years, by carefully thinking out each sentence before he spoke.  This may account for why he was very reserved and modest with words.

Charles’ father, King James I, and the Duke of Buckingham always called him “baby Charles”.

It appears that Charles preferred to dress modestly, in darker clothing without any adornment.

He was married by proxy to Henrietta Maria, the sister of King Louis XIII of France.  The marriage took place outside the west door of the cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris.  His proxy was the Duke of Chevreuse, who was a Huguenot.  Because he was not Catholic he had to wait outside for several hours while the French royal family was inside doing religious services.  The marriage, also, being that he was not Catholic, had to be performed outside the cathedral as well.

Cardinal de la Rochefoucauld performed the services at King Charles’ and Henrietta Maria’s wedding.

Being that the marriage was by proxy in Paris, this means that Charles never went through a marriage ceremony with his wife.  But I have also heard it said that, shortly after Henrietta Maria arrived in England at Dover, they went to Canterbury Cathedral and had an actual marriage.

While waiting for his wife to come to England he was so impatient that he sat til the sun set on the roof of Dover Castle looking out over the sea.

King Charles wife, Henrietta Maria, could not speak english when she married him.

Before he became King, Charles titles were Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Duke of York, Duke of Albany, Marquess of Ormond, Earl of Carrick, Earl of Ross, Baron Renfrew, Lord Ardmannoch, Lord of the Isles, Prince and Great Steward of Scotland.

The Kings fool was named Archie.

The Kings personal chaplains included Dr. Brian Duppa, John Hacket, Michael Hudson, Sheldon, Holdsworth, and Haywood.

The Queens ‘dwarf’ was named Geoffrey Hudson.

King Charles loved to play tennis.

King Charles loved to play bowls, especially as he got older.

King Charles loved to play in ‘masques’.

King Charles loved to hunt and often put it above most things.  Unfortunately, many diplomats and people complained because he was always away hunting and never available.

King Charles loved paintings and collected a large amount (perhaps one of the largest for a monarch).  He knew a lot of details about painting to such an extent that he could tell if a painting was painted by a master or an apprentice.

We know that he had painted several paintings but these have been lost.

King Charles was supposed to of played the viola very well, which he learned when he was young.  They say he could have been an accomplished viola player had he not been king.

King Charles was an accomplished horse rider, though they say he was a little reckless.

One of King Charles favourite poets was Thomas Carew, his Gentleman of the Privy Chamber.

He wore white at his coronation.  This was not the traditional color.   The traditional purple velvet clothe was not available at the time.  It’s for this reason he was often called the “white king”.

Charles made up his own recipe for the anointing oil that he used at his coronation.  My understanding that it has been used up to the present times.

Charles did not allow Ambassadors to dine with him, as his father did.  He did allow some to come and make some remarks to him as he ate.  This custom he copied from the Spanish court.

Charles was very conscious of the different orders of Nobility.  He required that only certain orders of Nobility be permitted in specific rooms in the palace, so that no one of inferior rank would be allowed to enter into these rooms.  Orders were drawn up and hung in each room forbidding people below a certain order of Nobility to be admitted there.  These orders hung there til the English Civil War.  This custom he may of learned from the Spanish court who had similar restrictions.

Charles set up a new Palace Court which heard cases within a 12 mile radius of the Palace or his person.

Charles hated people smoking tobacco in his presence.

The last Angel-Noble medal was minted by King Charles.  These coins were touched by the king and given to person who was suffering from an ailment to ward off the ‘kings evil’.

King Charles created England’s first military medal for bravery, called the Forlorn Hope Medal.  On one side is King Charles I.  On the other is the future King Charles II.  It is shown below:

The night before his execution he had Mr. Herbert take his bed from his room and place it next to his.

The day before his execution he got his clothes ready, as he wanted to appear as neat as he could for, as he said, the next day was his ‘wedding day’.

On the morning of his execution he questioned Mr. Herbert, who was sleeping next to him, why he was having difficulty sleeping.  Mr. Herbert said it was because of a dream he had.  Charles, as a result, inquired him of his dream.  In this dream Dr. William Laud came to their room and knocked on the door while they were sleeping.  After two knocks Mr. Herbert let him in.  He then spoke to King Charles and gave a sigh.  As he walked away he bowed to King Charles several times and then fell prostrate on the ground.  Mr. Herbert went to help him up when King Charles woke him up to ask about the dream.  Laud was beheaded in 1645.

The day of his execution was very cold.  Because of this, Charles put on an extra shirt for warmth.  He did not want people to mistake a shivering from cold was a result of fear.

While being marched across St. James Park to his execution the soldiers walked very slow, which bothered Charles.  He yelled up to the soldiers in front to “march apace” so they’d walk faster.  This they did.

At his execution the balustrade around the execution platform was drapped with black cloth so no one would see the execution itself.

At his execution, they mounted two rings in the floor of the platform.  This was in case he resisted and they had to tie him down.

The actual execution block was only about 12 inches thick.  As a result, he actually layed flat on his front on the platform.  He was not kneeling, as is sometimes shown.

His last word was not “remember!”, as is often said, but “stay for the sign”.  He told the executioner  that he would hold both hands out when he was ready.  He wanted to say a prayer privately before he was executed.  What he said in this prayer we will never know.

King Charles was buried in the tomb meant for another.

Children:

The King had 9 children:

March 13, 1629 – Charles James.  First child stillborn (born feet first) when Henrietta was frightened by dogs.

May 29, 1631 – Charles (the future King Charles II).  Died February 6, 1685.  Married but with no legitimate children

November 4, 1631 – Mary.  Died December 24, 1660.  Married with children.

October 14, 1633 – James (the future King James II).  Died September 16, 1701.  Married with children.

December 29, 1635 – Elizabeth.  Died September 8, 1650.  Died at a young age.

March 17, 1637 – Anne.  Died December 8, 1640.  Died at a young age.

January 29, 1639 – Catherine.  Born stillborn.

July 8, 1640- Henry.  Died September 18, 1660.  Did not marry or have children.

June 16, 1644 – Henrietta.  Died June 30, 1670.  Married with children.

Two of his children were dead at birth, leaving 7 living children.  Two would be future Kings of England.  Four married.  Four had children.

Brothers and sisters

King Charles was in a family of 7 brothers and sisters:

Henry (February 19, 1594 – November 6, 1612).  Probably died of typhoid fever.

Elizabeth (August 19, 1596 – February 13, 1662).  Married Frederick V, Elector Palatine, in 1613.

Margaret Stuart (December 24, 1598 – March, 1600) .

Charles – King Charles I (November 19, 1600 – January 30, 1649).  Executed.

Robert Stuart (January 18, 1602 – May 27, 1602).  Duke of Kintyre.

Mary Stuart (April 8, 1605 – December 16, 1607).

Sophia Stuart (June 1607).  Died within 2 days of birth.

He had 2 brothers and 4 sisters.  Only he and Elizabeth lived beyond their late teens.  Four died while children.  One died in his late teens.

A note on the dates

Be aware that the dates used in England at the time of King Charles I are not the dates we use nowadays. They went according to the Julian calendar. England did not adopt the calendar we use now, the Gregorian calender, until 1752. During King Charles I reign the dates were about 10 days earlier than what we use now. His execution was on January 30, 1649 according to the English or Julian calendar that was used then. According to the dates we use now, based on the Gregorian calender, it was actually February 9, 1649.

The Stuart Curse: The Tragic Lives of a 17th-Century Dynasty

by Andrea Zuvich

When Elizabeth I had her beautiful cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots beheaded at Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire, in 1587, could anyone have guessed that beheading would prove so tragically common with her descendants? Who would have thought that sickliness, unhappiness and infertility would plague them? The Stuarts had so many instances of doom that it is no surprise that it sometimes seems that they were cursed!

Mary’s son with the profligate Lord Darnley, James, eventually became the last Tudor queen’s heir and began the English line of Stuart kings. But James had potentially dangerous beliefs – beliefs that would ultimately prove fatal for his son and eventual heir, Charles I. The belief they so strongly adhered to was that they had been chosen by God to rule and therefore no one could question their governance of the kingdoms. James and his wife, Anne of Denmark, had a few children, the eldest son and heir, Henry, was the best and the brightest of them all. Sadly, Henry was cut down before his time and he died, aged only 18, from what was probably typhoid.

And so the younger son, Charles, eventually succeeded to his father’s throne. Alas, he was a stubborn man – a common characteristic of the Stuarts – and under his rule the country was plunged into Civil War, which caused widespread devastation. The outcome of all the horrors of war resulted in a Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell and Charles, just like his grandmother, Mary, was beheaded, but this outside the beautiful English Palladian style Banqueting House at Whitehall Palace. The nation’s pendulum then swung from what some perceived as the Stuart oppression to fresh tyranny under Cromwell. Years passed and the Lord Protector died, and Charles’s eldest son returned to England triumphantly as King Charles II and the Restoration of the monarchy was welcomed with joy.

Future troubles began to take root at this time. Charles’s brother, James, Duke of York eventually became openly Catholic and he and his first wife, Anne Hyde, welcomed two daughters into the world – Mary and Anne. These girls would become very important towards the latter part of the century. King Charles II married the Portuguese Catherine of Braganza, but they were unable to have children together, though Charles had over a dozen children with his many mistresses. One of his earliest mistresses was Lucy Walter, with whom he had a son, James Crofts (later Scott), who became the famous and rebellious Duke of Monmouth. Monmouth, a popular Protestant figure, was extremely handsome, athletic, and an excellent soldier and dancer, a favourite of the ladies, but very malleable.

When his father died in 1685, Monmouth became convinced that he should inherit the throne, not his Catholic uncle, James. What ensued was The Monmouth Rebellion, sometimes referred to as The Pitchfork Rebellion, in which common men rose up against James II’s well-equipped and well-trained armies only to be slaughtered upon the fields at Sedgemoor and later sentenced harshly in the Bloody Assizes. Monmouth himself was subjected to the bloodiest botched execution on Tower Hill on the 15th July, 1685. If you’re counting, this is the third Stuart family member beheading.

I was so fascinated by Monmouth’s story, that I wrote my first book about the last ten years of his life and his relationship with Henrietta Wentworth, His Last Mistress.

“Dismal Jimmy” James II eventually became so unpopular a king that seven of the most influential men of the time, now called the Immortal Seven, wrote an invitation to James’s daughter, Mary, and her Dutch husband, William of Orange, to come and take the throne in what is referred to as the Glorious Revolution of 1688/89.

This was a pivotal moment in English, and British, history because never before or since, has there been a joint monarchy, a diarchy. William and Mary were offered the throne but with new limitations and under them we have the Bill of Rights, the founding of the Bank of England, and major events such as the Battle of the Boyne, the Glencoe Massacre, and the founding of the American College of William and Mary. The new limitations meant that England now had a constitutional monarchy of sorts, a very different situation than what their mutual great-grandfather had experienced.

Though William and Mary seem to have loved each other deeply, they had the tragedy of childlessness. Shortly after these first cousins were wed, Mary got pregnant but ended up suffering a very bad miscarriage, which perhaps was not dealt with properly, leaving her unable to carry a child to term. She had at least one other miscarriage and her memoirs show that she longed for a child, for she loved William dearly and also, it was her duty. Life being what it is, they did not have children, and in late December, 1694, Mary, aged 32 died from hemorrhagic smallpox. Her husband and the nation were devastated. Mary had been much beloved, except by the Jacobites, those who supported her now-exiled father, King James II. William, who himself was chronically asthmatic and ill, never remarried and died in 1702, leaving the throne to the last of the Stuarts, Anne.

Anne was an unhealthy woman, especially after eighteen difficult pregnancies, which resulted in only one boy living until the age of eleven. All the others perished even younger and so for the third time in Stuart history, having viable offspring proved impossible. Laden down by obesity and gout and perhaps a bit of an over-fondness for the brandy bottle, Anne died in 1714.

Almost all of the Stuarts had incredibly tragic lives, the most painful of deaths, the greatest of emotional sufferings despite their more wealthy and comfortable circumstances and the power they had. It’s hard to believe that any family could have such misery, but perhaps this element of misfortune (which is perhaps the case with several historical families) is why there is an increasing surge of interest in this lesser-known 17th-century dynasty.