Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Later Stuart Queens,
1660–1735
Religion, Political Culture,
and Patronage
Edited by
Eilish Gregory
Michael
C. Questier
Download
Complete
Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Queenship and Power
Series Editors
Charles E. Beem, University of North Carolina, Pembroke, NC, USA
Carole Levin, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
This series focuses on works specializing in gender analysis, women’s
studies, literary interpretation, and cultural, political, constitutional, and
diplomatic history. It aims to broaden our understanding of the strategies
that queens—both consorts and regnants, as well as female regents—
pursued in order to wield political power within the structures of
male-dominant societies. The works describe queenship in Europe as well
as many other parts of the world, including East Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa,
and Islamic civilization.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Eilish Gregory · Michael C. Questier
Editors
Later Stuart Queens,
1660–1735
Religion, Political Culture, and Patronage
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Note on the Text
In the text, dates are given Old Style and, where appropriate in citing
continental sources, Old Style/New Style but the year is taken to begin
on 1 January.
vii
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Contents
1
1
Introduction
Eilish Gregory and Michael C. Questier
2
The Reputation of Dowager Queen Henrietta Maria
and the Legitimacy of the Restoration Monarchy
Carolyn Harris
19
Catherine of Braganza, Queen Dowager of England,
1685–1692: Catholicism and Political Agency
Eilish Gregory
45
3
4
Dynastic Politics: Dowager Queen, Catherine
of Braganza, and the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance,
1693–1705
Fleur Goldthorpe
5
Mary Beatrice of Modena: Patronage, Poetry, and Power
Mindy Williams
6
Contesting Catholic Motherhood: Mary Beatrice
of Modena, the “Glorious Revolution,” and Queenly
Agency
Susannah Lyon-Whaley
7
Mary II, Panegyric and the Construction of Queenship
Edward Taylor
71
97
121
149
ix
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
x
8
9
10
11
12
13
CONTENTS
World of Interiors: Mary II, the Decorative Arts,
and Cultural Transfer
Amy Lim
175
The Architectural Works of Hampton Court Palace
Under the Reigns of Queen Mary II and Queen Anne
Emily Birch
203
‘Sickly and Spent’: Reassessing the Life and Afterlife
of Anne of Great Britain
Jessica L. Minieri
221
“The Crown Can Never Have Too Many Liveings:”
Queen Anne’s Patronage of the Clergy, 1702–1714
Jennifer Farooq
237
“La Terrible Catastrofe”: Political Reactions
to the Estrangement of Maria Clementina Sobieska
and James III, 1725–1727
Stephen Griffin
“A Crown of Everlasting Glory”: The Afterlife
of Maria Clementina Sobieska in Material and Visual
Culture
Georgia Vullinghs
257
279
Bibliography
311
Printed Primary Sources
317
Index
355
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Notes on Contributors
Emily Birch is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of History at the
University of Hull. Her doctoral research looks at Gender and Space
in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries at Hampton Court Palace.
Emily’s broader research interests are focused on women from the late
medieval and early modern period, with particular focus on the queens
and royal family of England and Great Britain in the period 1350–1700.
Dr. Jennifer Farooq is a Research Associate at the University of
Regina and the Project Manager for GEMMS (Gateway to Early
Modern Manuscript Sermons). Her primary interests include preaching,
the publishing and reception of sermons, and religious and political
culture in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Britain. She is the author
of Preaching in Eighteenth-Century London (Boydell, 2013) and has
published articles on sermons and religious culture in England, including
“Preaching for the Queen: Queen Anne and English Sermon Culture,
1702–1714,” Journal for Eighteenth-century Studies (2014).
Dr. Eilish Gregory is Postdoctoral Little Company of Mary Fellow at the
University of Durham. She is an historian of religion and politics in early
modern Britain and received her Ph.D. in History at University College
London in 2017 on Catholic sequestrations during the English Revolution. She has held associate lectureship posts in History at the Open
University, Anglia Ruskin University, the University of Reading, was tutor
for the Oxford Department for Continuing Education, and Postdoctoral
xi
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
xii
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Research Associate for the Royal Historical Society. She has published
extensively in early modern history, including in The Seventeenth Century
journal and Parliamentary History, and in edited collections published
by Routledge, Palgrave Macmillan, and Brill, while her first monograph
Catholics during the English Revolution, 1642–1660: Politics, Sequestration
and Loyalty was published by Boydell in 2021.
Dr. Stephen Griffin is a former recipient of the Richard Plaschka predoctoral fellowship, OeAD, Vienna and the Rev. Liam Swords Foundation Bursary, Centre Cultural Irlandais, Paris. He completed his doctoral
dissertation on Count Owen O’Rourke and the Stuart diplomatic presence in Vienna, 1727–1743 at the University of Limerick between 2016
and 2020 and he is currently developing this into his first monograph.
He has been published in The Historical Journal, Royal Studies Journal,
History Ireland, and History Scotland and has several articles and chapters
both forthcoming and under peer review. He is an Associate Fellow of the
Royal Historical Society.
Fleur Goldthorpe is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of History at
the Australian National University undertaking the project “Women of
the British Portocracy: Port Wine Dinastias, Family and Transcultural
Lives, 1678–1807.” Prior to commencing her postgraduate research,
Fleur worked for nearly a decade as a senior executive in pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, translating research outputs into new
products and services. She holds a Bachelor of Science and a Bachelor of
Laws from the University of Otago in New Zealand.
Dr. Carolyn Harris is an author, historian, royal commentator, and
instructor in History at the University of Toronto School of Continuing Studies. She received her Ph.D. in European History from Queen’s
University at Kingston. Her dissertation compared popular perceptions
of Queen Henrietta Maria and Queen Marie Antoinette. She is the
author of three books: Magna Carta and Its Gifts to Canada; Queenship and Revolution in Early Modern Europe: Henrietta Maria and Marie
Antoinette; and Raising Royalty: 1000 Years of Royal Parenting; and she
is the co-editor of English Consorts: Power, Influence, and Dynasty, a
four-volume history of English and British royal consorts.
Dr. Amy Lim is an art historian and curator, and a tutor at the
Oxford University Department for Continuing Education. In 2022, she
completed her D.Phil., “Art and Aristocracy in late Stuart England,”
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
xiii
in an AHRC Collaborative Doctoral Partnership with the University of
Oxford and Tate, where her research supported the exhibition ‘British
Baroque: Power and Illusion’ (Tate Britain, February-March 2020). Her
research centres on the fine and decorative arts of the long eighteenth
century, patronage, and the intersection of history and art history. She
was a contributor to the Paul Mellon Centre’s online publication “Art &
the Country House” (2020), and has also contributed to The Georgian
Group Journal, Furniture History, and First World War Studies, among
other publications. She is curator at Buscot Park, Oxfordshire, and the
Stanley Spencer Gallery, Cookham.
Susannah Lyon-Whaley has recently completed a Ph.D. in Art History
at the University of Auckland. She has a Masters in English Literature and
has published articles in Journal of New Zealand Literature, Ka Mate Ka
Ora, Backstory, and The Court Historian. Her doctoral thesis examines
Catherine of Braganza and the “culture” of nature.
Jessica L. Minieri is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of History
at Binghamton University. She previously studied medieval and early
modern history at the State University of New York at New Paltz where
her undergraduate dissertation examined the place of Queen Anne of
Great Britain in the historiography of female rulership in Europe. Her
doctoral work similarly focuses on queenship in European history through
the examination of the role of the histories of violence and imprisonment in the lives of royal women in Mallorca, Sicily, and Aragon. Jessica’s
doctoral dissertation, “Stolen Bodies and Hollow Crowns: Imprisonment
and Abduction in the Lands of the Crown of Aragon, c. 1200–1415,”
examines the use of forced confinement and marriage by the Crown
of Aragon to facilitate its expansion into Southern Italy and the wider
Mediterranean world.
Michael C. Questier was formerly professor of History in the University of London, and Research Chair at Vanderbilt University, Nashville,
Tennessee. He is currently Honorary Chair in the Centre for Catholic
Studies, University of Durham.
Edward Taylor works on news, communication and political culture, in
both English and neo-Latin, in early modern Britain. He completed a
B.A. in History and M.Phil. in Early Modern History at Clare College,
Cambridge. He wrote his Ph.D. thesis, “Commenting on the News: The
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
xiv
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Serial Press and Political Culture in Britain, 1641–c.1730,” at the University of Warwick. He subsequently worked for two years as postdoctoral
research fellow at University College London on Dr. Victoria Moul’s
Leverhulme-funded project “Neo-Latin Poetry in English Manuscript
Verse Miscellanies, c.1550–1700.” He will take up a Leverhulme Early
Career Fellowship at the University of Birmingham in 2024, working
on the project “Bilingual News: Latin and Vernacular Media in Early
Modern Britain, c.1580–1730.” He has published on themes including
the place of comment in the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century press,
early modern pamphlet collections, later Stuart political satire in Latin,
and Jacobite Latin verse.
Dr. Georgia Vullinghs is Assistant Curator of Modern and Contemporary History at National Museums Scotland. Her chapter is based
on research conducted as part of an AHRC funded Ph.D. project at
the University of Edinburgh: “Loyal Exchange: the Material and Visual
Culture of Jacobite Exile, c.1716–c.1760” (2021). In addition to the
study of Jacobitism and Jacobite material culture, Georgia works on the
material culture of Scotland, and women’s histories.
Mindy Williams is a Ph.D. candidate at Purdue University in early
modern European history, with a M.A. degree in medieval history
from Marquette University. Mindy’s research focuses on considerations
of power and gender in queenship, incorporating cultural, historical,
and literary approaches. Her dissertation explores Mary of Modena’s
political agency as an exiled queen. She is the winner of the 2021 Graduate Student Research Award from the Southern Conference of British
Studies.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Abbreviations
AAE
Add.
BL
Bodl.
CJ
CSPD
CSPV
CTB
HMC
HMSO
LJ
ODNB
RA
RO
s. n.
SP
TNA
Archives des Affaires Étrangeres, La Courneuve, Paris
Additional
British Library
Bodleian Library, Oxford
Journals of the House of Commons (13 vols, London: HMSO,
1802-1803)
Calendar of State Papers Domestic
Calendar of State Papers, Venetian Series
William A. Shaw and F.H. Slingsby (eds), Calendar of Treasury Books
(32 vols [for 1660-1718], London, 1904-1962)
Historical Manuscripts Commission
His Majesty’s Stationery Office
Journals of the House of Lords (42 vols, London: HMSO,
1767-1830).
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
Royal Archives, Windsor
Record Office
no name of publisher
State Papers
The National Archives, Kew
xv
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
List of Figures
Fig. 4.1
Fig. 4.2
Fig. 4.3
Fig. 4.4
Fig. 6.1
Fig. 6.2
Fig. 6.3
Fig. 6.4
Fig. 6.5
Isaac Beckett, The Queen Dowager, c.1680–1688,
mezzotint (Credit © The Trustees of the British Museum)
Catherine of Braganza’s Bemposta Palace, Lisbon
(Credit © Eduardo Montenegro, 2021)
Catherine of Braganza’s Coat of Arms, Bemposta Palace,
Lisbon (Credit © Eduardo Montenegro, 2021)
Methuen’s Commercial Treaty of 27th December 1703
SP 108/393 (Credit © The National Archives, Kew, UK)
Jan Smeltzing, Netherlands, 1688. British Museum,
G3,EM.72 (Credit © The Trustees of the British Museum)
Naissance de Louis XIII à Fontainebleau, engraving
on paper, 1601 (Credit National Library of France)
Anthonis Mor, Mary I, 1554, oil on panel,
109 × 84 cm, (P002108) (Credit © Photographic
Archive Museo Nacional del Prado)
Sano de Pietro, The Birth and Naming of St. John
the Baptist, 1450–1460, tempura and gold on wood,
20.6 × 42.9 cm, The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
1975.1.44
Jan Luyken, De geboorte van de prins van Wales, 1689,
engraving on paper, 18.2 × 13.1 cm. Rijksmuseum,
RP-P-1896-A-19368-704
73
84
85
86
129
131
132
133
134
xvii
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
xviii
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 6.6
Fig. 6.7
Fig. 6.8
Fig. 6.9
Fig. 6.10
Fig. 6.11
Fig. 8.1
Fig. 8.2
Fig. 8.3
Fig. 8.4
Fig. 8.5
[Incomplete pack with 51 of 52 playing cards illustrating
events leading to the Revolution of 1688], c. 1688–1689.
Bristish Museum, 1896,0501.920.1-51 (Credit ©
Trustees of the British Museum)
Benedetto Gennari, The Holy Family, 1682, oil
on canvas. Birmingham Museums Trust, 1974P12
(Credit Photo by Birmingham Museums Trust, licensed
under CC0)
Benedetto Gennari, Sainte Famille, 1685,
240 × 188 cm. Palais Fesch-musée des Beaux-Arts, MFA
852.1.75 (Credit Palais Fesch-musée des Beaux-Arts)
Benedetto Gennari, Portrait of the Prince of Wales, 1689,
oil on canvas, 129.5 × 96.5 cm. Stonyhurst College
(Credit By permission of the Governors of Stonyhurst
College)
Benedetto Gennari, Faith, c. 1658, oil on canvas,
95.8 × 78.2 cm. Royal Collection Trust, RCIN 405558
(Credit Royal Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen
Elizabeth II 2022)
Alexis-Simon Belle, Prince James Francis Edward Stuart
with his sister, Princess Louisa Maria Theresa, 1699, oil
on canvas, 188.1 × 131.5 cm. Royal Collection Trust,
RCIN 401175 (Credit Royal Collection Trust/© Her
Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2022)
Attributed to Daniel Marot (designer) and William
Farnborough (maker), Table from the Hampton Court
Water Gallery (1692), carved and gilt wood, Carrara
marble top. Peter Moores Foundation, Compton Verney
Adriaen Kocks, Pyramid flower vase (c. 1692), tin-glazed
earthenware (Royal Collection Trust © His Majesty King
Charles III 2023)
Daniel Marot (designer), Adriaen Kocks (maker), Milk
Pan (c. 1694), tin-glazed earthenware (© V & A
Museum, London)
Lacquer-panelled room from the apartment of Princess
Albertine Agnes of Orange-Nassau, consort
of the stadholder of Friesland, Leeuwarden (before 1695)
(© Rijksmuseum)
Design for a porcelain room from Daniel Marot, Oeuvres
(The Hague, 1703)
135
141
143
144
146
147
187
189
190
193
194
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 9.1
Fig. 13.1
Fig. 13.2
Fig. 13.3
Fig. 13.4
Fig. 13.5
Fig. 13.6
Fig. 13.7
Fig. 13.8
Sir Godfrey Kneller, Frances Whitmore, Lady Middleton
(c. 1666–94), 1690–1691, oil on canvas, 233.7 × 143.0
cm, Royal Collection Trust. RCIN 404727 (Credit Royal
Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
2022)
Rocco Pozzi (after Panini), Princess Maria Clementina
Sobieska, 1702–1735. Wife of Prince James Francis
Edward Stuart, SNPG SPL 66.3 (Image © Scottish
National Portrait Gallery)
Balthasar Gabbugiani (after Pannini), Princess Maria
Clementina Sobieska, 1702–1735. Wife of Prince James
Francis Edward Stuart, (1735), SNPG SPL 66.2
(Image © Scottish National Portrait Gallery)
Michael Sorello after Agostino Masucci, Princess Maria
Clementina Sobieska, 1702–1735. Wife of Prince James
Francis Edward Stuart, (1737), SNPG SP III 77.3
(Image © Scottish National Portrait Gallery)
Monument to Clementina Sobieska in St Peter’s Basilica,
1742, commissioned by Pope Benedict XIV, by Filippo
Barigioni, Pietro Bracci, and Pietro Paolo Cristofari
(Image Author’s own)
Medal commemorating the completion of the monument
to Clementina Sobieska in St Peter’s, 1742, H.1962.919
(Image © National Museums Scotland)
J. Russel, Plate II. Vol.II, Letters from a Young
Painter, 1750, printed engraving of Russel’s illustration
of the monument to Clementina Sobieska in St Peter’s
Basilica. With thanks to the University of Edinburgh
Special Collections
J. Russel, Plate I. Vol.II, Letters from a Young
Painter, 1750, printed engraving of Russel’s illustration
of the tomb in St Peter’s Basilica and monument
to Clementina Sobieska in SS XII Apostoli. With thanks
to the University of Edinburgh Special Collections
Portrait Ring, NMS X.2015.105.3 (Image © National
Museums Scotland)
xix
210
280
284
294
295
297
301
302
307
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Eilish Gregory and Michael C. Questier
This collection brings together studies of the later Stuart queens
regnant and queens consort—Henrietta Maria as queen dowager for two
periods after the Restoration (1660–1661 and 1662–1665); Catherine of
Braganza, who married Charles II in 1662; Mary Beatrice of Modena, the
second wife of James, duke of York; Mary II and Anne, and, finally Maria
Clementina Sobieska, the wife of the titular King James III, otherwise
known as the Pretender. Mary II exercised royal authority as the heir of
James II and while her co-sovereign William III was away on campaign.
E. Gregory (B) · M. C. Questier
Centre for Catholic Studies, Department of Theology and Religion, Durham
University, Durham, UK
e-mail: eilish.gregory@durham.ac.uk
M. C. Questier
e-mail: michael.c.questier@durham.ac.uk
1
E. Gregory and M. C. Questier (eds.), Later Stuart Queens,
1660–1735, Queenship and Power,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38813-2_1
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
2
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
Anne ruled as sovereign in her own right.1 Maria Clementina never actually set foot in Britain, but her marriage alliance to the Stuart family was
vital for the survival of the Jacobite cause in Europe.
As far as royal reputations are concerned (and perhaps this is even more
true for queens than for kings), historians of the early modern period
have often been inclined to dichotomise. As William Charles Russell put
it, back in the 1850s, reviewing the extant literature on Mary, Queen of
Scots, “all the early biographers” of Mary “have been partisans” one way
or the other. “From Buchanan or Bishop Leslie, down to Chalmers and
Sharon Turner, there is, among the historians of this eventful reign, but
little disguise of the character of the advocate.”2
In some ways, not much has changed since the mid-nineteenth century.
It is all too easy to follow an established line of thought about this or that
sovereign—particularly when the prejudices of this or that contemporary
partisan seem to be in accord with what we take nowadays to be liberal
and progressive accounts of politics and government. Un- or subconsciously, therefore, modern-day scholars replicate the claims of earlier
historians who at least had an excuse for their partisanship—nineteenthcentury titans such as Thomas Babington Macaulay and John Lingard
whose politics and published historical writing were invariably inseparable.
Obviously, this tendency to dichotomise is not an exclusively gendered
process. Consider some of the recent renderings of the reign of Charles
I. Kevin Sharpe’s vast study of the personal rule of Charles, that is during
the years between 1629 and 1640, has been described as an account of
the world as Charles himself would have seen it “on his good days.”3
1 See esp. J. van den Berg, “Religion and Politics in the Life of William and Mary,” in
Paul Hoftijzer and C. C. Barfoot (eds), Fabrics and Fabrications: The Myth and Making
of William and Mary (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1990), 17–40; Edward Gregg, Queen Anne
(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001); Tony Claydon and W. A. Speck,
William and Mary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007); Kevin Sharpe, Rebranding
Rule: The Restoration and Revolutionary Monarchy, 1660–1714 (New Haven and London:
Yale University Press, 2013), chs 10 and 15; Judith Lissauer Cromwell, Good Queen Anne:
Appraising the Life and Reign of the Last Stuart Monarch (Jefferson (NC): McFarland
and Co., 2019).
2 [Charles William Russell], “The History of Mary, Queen of Scots,” Dublin Review
32 (1852), 135.
3 Kevin Sharpe, The Personal Rule of Charles I (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1992); Peter Lake, “From Revisionist to Royalist History; or, Was Charles I
the First Whig Historian,” Huntington Library Quarterly 78 (2015), 663.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
3
By contrast, David Cressy’s successive articles and books on Charles I
as a political (bad) actor seem at various points to mimic if not actually
reproduce the fury of the king’s critics through a good deal of his reign.4
However, in the case of women who had royal status, this dichotomy
of praise and blame often seems to be even more pronounced than in
the case of kings and (male) princes. In part this is because historians
are inclined to reproduce contemporary perceptions of the discrepancy
between, on the one hand, the actual position of a queen, especially of
a queen consort, and, on the other, the lack of formal authority, in the
sense of holding royal office. Frances Dolan’s influential account of the
problem of popery and gender in the political hostility towards, among
others, Henrietta Maria, argues cogently that, for a variety of reasons,
“anti-Catholic polemic often represents its object as feminine,” that is,
as part of a claim that popery subverts the proper holding and exercise of influence and authority. Catholicism “inappropriately empowers
women, spiritually, symbolically and socially.” This “vocabulary of gender
inversion figures the triumph of Catholicism as a disaster simultaneously
apocalyptic and domestic.”5
Thus, while dynastic matches contracted by the house of Stuart with
European royal families whose religion was Roman Catholic (that is, the
mainstream Christian tradition in the Western Church) were sought and
obtained primarily for completely logical secular purposes and advantage,
contemporary Protestant understandings of popery allowed critical voices
to allege that these female consorts were agents of corruption.6
The stock polemical figure here, of course, was the Whore of Babylon
in the book of Revelation. The imagery associated with the Whore
allowed for “corporeal denunciations of the Church’s corrupt and feminised body.” This could be extended to and infect the exercise of political
authority. Protestant polemicists claimed that the Church of Rome was
corrupted by the undue influence of (the wrong sort of) women; and that
polemical model could with relative ease be extended to queens regnant
4 See e.g. David Cressy, Charles I and the People of England (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2015).
5 Frances E. Dolan, Whores of Babylon: Catholicism, Gender, and Seventeenth-Century
Print Culture (Ithaca (IN): Cornell University Press, 1999), 8–9.
6 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 48.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
4
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
and queens consort.7 Female resort to the services of male clergy constituted an additional layer of corruption, personal and sexual as well
as, potentially, political. As Professor Dolan remarks, “the charge that
priests invariably seduced the penitents who confessed to them worked
to discredit priests, women and the intimacies between them.”8
Here, queens and queens consort were in a not dissimilar situation to
royal mistresses who were of course very open to accusations that they
exerted undue influence on royal decision-making. The review by Sonya
Marie Wynne of the astonishing court career of Louise de Kéroualle,
duchess of Portsmouth allows one to see how visible that sort of influence could be. The duchess negotiated the fall of Henry Bennet, earl of
Arlington in 1673, the ambitions of Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby, and
James, duke of York, the priorities of the French court and the complex
business of the Popish Plot and the Exclusion Crisis, and then the postExclusion remainder of Charles II’s reign. At various points the duchess,
whose only claim to anything at all resided in the king’s affection for
her and the money that she clawed out of him, looks a good deal more
influential than many, if not most, male courtiers.9
This volume is, of course, not about royal mistresses but about queens.
Yet, the same sorts of claims about female corruption could be made
against both. However, as Professor Dolan points out, the Protestant
cultural misogyny that was deployed against women whose identity was
primarily a Catholic one also served to invest them with a cultural and
political significance that otherwise they would not have had, just as
they, in their turn, appropriated overtly Catholic modes of worship and
iconography in order to defend themselves against the defamatory barrage
directed against them in the popular press and through the rumour-mill
of contemporary politics.
The best-known cases of this are located earlier in the period than
the post-Restoration focus of this volume. Principally one thinks here of
7 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 53.
8 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 61–72, 85–94 (quotation at 90).
9 ODNB, sub “Kéroualle, Louise Renée de Penancoët de, suo jure duchess of
Portsmouth and suo jure duchess of Aubigny in the French nobility (1649–1734)” (article
by Sonya Marie Wynne). For royal mistresses in the Restoration context, see Sonya Marie
Wynne, “The Mistresses of Charles II and Restoration Court Politics, 1660–1685” (PhD,
University of Cambridge, 1997); Linda Porter, Mistresses: Sex and Scandal at the Court
of Charles II (Basingstoke: Picador, 2020).
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
5
Mary I and Mary, Queen of Scots and indeed, Henrietta Maria in the
years before 1640 and then during the civil wars. They were targets of
popular revulsion in their own time and even afterwards. But they had
their supporters too, and later they found their champions among historians who rehabilitated them by picking up on and recycling the claims
made on their behalf by their contemporary admirers.10 Of course, a
queen in the post-Reformation period did not have to be overtly a Roman
Catholic in order to be subjected to these assaults. There was virtually
nothing said by Anne Boleyn’s detractors in the mid-1530s about her
alleged sins that could not, appropriately transposed, have found its way
into the anti-popish tradition that accumulated around, say, Mary, Queen
of Scots.
But, equally, the reputations and public persona of queens regnant and
queens consort could rise and fall depending on circumstances. Thus, as
Eric Ives says, “for twenty years after May 1536, Anne Boleyn was a nonperson” and “people who had known her said nothing.”11 It was not in
most people’s interest to refer to what she might or might not have done
before the regime put her on trial for treason. In that respect, John Foxe,
who made her into, if not exactly a Protestant saint, then a heroic spreader
of the Gospel, was something of an outlier.12 Yet, as things turned uglier
for Elizabeth’s government in the 1580s, with the approach of war and
the final showdown with the Scottish queen, the reputation of Anne
Boleyn was up for negotiation (again). On the one hand, a certain sort of
Catholic activist recycled and added to the lurid earlier tales about Henry
10 For Mary I, see e.g. Judith M. Richards, “Defaming and Defining ‘Bloody Mary’
in Nineteenth-Century England,” in Peter Nockles and Vivienne Westbrook (eds), Reinventing the Reformation in the Nineteenth Century: A Cultural History (Bulletin of the
John Rylands Library 90: Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2014), 287–303;
Eamon Duffy, Fires of Faith: Catholic England Under Mary Tudor (New Haven and
London: Yale University Press, 2009); David Loades, “The Reign of Mary Tudor: Historiography and Research,” Albion 21 (1989), 547–558. For Mary, Queen of Scots, see
e.g. John Guy, My Heart Is My Own: The Life of Mary Queen of Scots (London: Fourth
Estate, 2004).
11 Eric Ives, Anne Boleyn (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986), 419.
12 Thomas Freeman, “Hands Defiled with Blood: Henry VIII in Foxe’s ‘Book of
Martyrs’,” in Thomas Betteridge and Thomas S. Freeman (eds), Henry VIII and History
(Farnham: Ashgate, 2012), 88–89.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
6
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
VIII’s second queen, and, by extension her daughter, Elizabeth.13 But
others may have tried to restore the memory of Henry VIII’s second wife.
The scientific dating of one of the National Portrait Gallery’s portraits of
Anne Boleyn to c. 1584 may well be significant. If that date is right, it
could point to an attempt at a favourable representation of Anne at a
time when Elizabeth was under threat from several directions.14 Right at
the end of Elizabeth’s reign, the Jesuit Robert Persons complained that
Protestant historians “suppress many facts concerning Anne Boleyn, for
they do not want to offend Elizabeth.”15
The tropes associated with anti-popish attacks on Stuart queens are,
we might think, little more than vehicles for tabloid-style misogynistic
abuse. As Dolan says, disdainful accounts of Henrietta Maria—as “personally motivated, partisan, or ‘bigoted’”—“participate in a more general
habit of depicting Catholic women in seventeenth-century England as
beneath politics.” Thus, it was that “foreign queens and papist mistresses”
could be taken to have distracted “men from political action rather than
participating in it fully and legitimately themselves.”16
13 Peter Lake, Bad Queen Bess? Libels, Secret Histories and the Politics of Publicity in the
Reign of Queen Elizabeth I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016).
14 National Portrait Gallery 668 (Anne Boleyn, by unknown English artist; oil on
panel, late sixteenth century, based on a work of circa 1533–1536); Richard Brooks, “No
Seducer …,” Observer (12 February 2023). We are very grateful to Charlotte Bolland of
the National Portrait Gallery and to Owen Emmerson of Hever Castle for their advice
on this point.
15 Joseph Simmons, Robert Persons S.J . Certamen Ecclesiae Anglicanae (Assen, 1965),
55.
16 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 130; see also Charles Beem, The Lioness Roared: The
Problems of Female Rule in English History (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006), 1–3,
6, 7; idem, “The Tragic Queen: Dynastic Loyalty and the ‘Queenships’ of Mary Queen
of Scots,” in Caroline Dunn and Elizabeth Donnelly Carney (eds), Royal Women and
Dynastic Loyalty (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018), 111–121; Carole Levin, ‘The
Heart and Stomach of a King’: Elizabeth I and the Politics of Sex and Power (Philadelphia
(PA): Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994). These contemporary judgments filtered
through easily into the magisterial Whiggish sayings of, for example, S. R. Gardiner who
wrote Henrietta Maria off by saying that she was “completely ignorant” about politics:
Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 130, citing Samuel R. Gardiner, History of England from the
Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 1603–1642 (10 vols, London:
Longmans, 1884), vi, 367. It is worth adding that Nadine Akkerman makes a similar case
about historical mis-readings of Elizabeth Stuart (wife of the elector palatine, Frederick
V), that is, as shallow in political terms: Nadine Akkerman, Elizabeth Stuart, Queen of
Hearts (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2021), introduction, esp. at 6–9.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
7
The thrust of recent research is that Henrietta Maria, like Anna
of Denmark (queen consort of James I) before her, was remarkably
politically adept, and fully aware that she was the linchpin of a mixed
confessional dynastic union.17 Malcolm Smuts has demonstrated that for
much of the 1630s, Henrietta Maria kept in communication with those
court peers who might be termed puritans. It was only in the crisis at
the end of the decade that her new court alliances, recruited in the face
of the disintegration of royal authority, allowed her to be incorporated
completely into a narrative of popish corruption at court, one that was
rejected, of course, by the royalist reaction against what was described by
the king’s supporters as a puritan conspiracy.18
At the same time, the narrative of the dysfunctions caused by the
wrong sort of female influence over the exercise of sovereignty, as much
over the household as over the nation state, was undeniably a part of
contemporary politics—part of mainstream political discourse. It is unhistorical to ignore it, just as it is unhistorical to ignore these queens’
construction of their own identity—that is, the way that they presented
themselves when they engaged with contemporary culture—not just in,
for example, the profession of a certain kind of religious observance but
also via their expenditure on architectural projects and their patronage
of artists and writers. These investments in contemporary culture were
unlikely to be ideologically neutral. As Professor Dolan observes, Henrietta Maria “maintained two chapels in London,” and those venues hosted
liturgical rituals which were themselves a kind of performance, just as
the queen herself took part in “theatrical performances.” Her “entertainments were indistinguishable from her devotions, both because of a
17 For Anna of Denmark, see Helen Payne, “Aristocratic Women and the Jacobean
Court, 1603–1625” (PhD, Royal Holloway, University of London, 2001). For Henrietta
Maria, see e.g. Sara Wolfson, “Aristocratic Women of the Household and Court of Queen
Henrietta Maria, 1625–1659” (PhD, Durham, 2010); Karen Britland, Drama at the
Courts of Queen Henrietta Maria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006); idem,
“Recent Studies of the Life and Cultural Influence of Queen Henrietta Maria,” English
Literary Renaissance 45 (2015), 303–321.
18 Malcolm Smuts, “The Puritan Followers of Henrietta Maria in the 1630s,” English
Historical Review 93 (1978), 26–45; idem, “Religion, European Politics and Henrietta
Maria’s Circle,” in Erin Griffey (ed.), Henrietta Maria: Piety, Politics and Patronage
(Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), 13–38; see also Michael C. Questier (ed.), Newsletters from
the Caroline Court, 1631–1638, Catholicism and the Politics of Personal Rule (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press for the Royal Historical Society, 2005); Michelle A. White,
Henrietta Maria and the English Civil Wars (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006).
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
8
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
long tradition of attacking Catholicism for its theatricality and because of
practices that did indeed blur the distinction between liturgy and performance.”19 As Dolan also says, referring to Protestant scorn for perceived
Mariolatry in condemning Henrietta Maria, “Catholic writers responded
to attacks on their queens of heaven and of England” together, and they
“justified and celebrated women’s authority and influence.”20
The case made in the essays published in this volume is that these
queens’ engagement with contemporary culture was a potent expression
of their political influence. Published work by Adam Morton, Anna-Marie
Linnell, Peter Leech, and Edward Corp has already shed considerable
light on Catherine of Braganza’s and Henrietta Maria’s contribution
to cultural politics and courtly fashions through patronage of art and
music in the Restoration court, with Catherine stamping her influence
on the court after Henrietta Maria returned to France.21 Like Henrietta Maria, Catherine of Braganza and Mary Beatrice of Modena outlived
19 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 99–100.
20 Ibid., 102. There is a link here with the way that James II’s daughter, Mary II
(Mary Stuart), was turned into a paragon of martial valour and yet also wifely loyalty. In
Henrietta Maria’s case, as Dolan notes, royalists pointed to “the conjunction of the marital
and martial in the queen’s role as generalissima housewife.” The championing of Mary
II’s role matches earlier royalist “discussions of Henrietta Maria’s substantive interventions
… on behalf of Catholics and especially in the royalist war effort.” Here, defences of the
queen’s access to the king and the equal partnership between them, in a bond of trust via
marriage, could take place as much in various kinds of cultural performance as in, e.g.,
the prosecution of national foreign policy and military effort: Dolan, Whores of Babylon,
128–129, citing Kevin Sharpe, Criticism and Compliment: The Politics of Literature in
the England of Charles I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 288; see also
Carolyn Harris’s essay in this volume.
21 Adam Morton, “Sanctity and Suspicion: Catholicism, Conspiracy and the Representation of Henrietta Maria of France and Catherine of Braganza, Queens of Britain,” in Helen
Watanabe-O’Kelly and Adam Morton (eds), Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics, c. 1500–1800 (London: Routledge, 2017), 172–201; Anna-Marie Linnell,
“Greeting the Stuart Queens Consort: Cultural Exchange and the Nuptial Texts for Henrietta Maria of France and Catherine of Braganza, Queens of Britain,” in Watanabe-O’Kelly
and Morton, Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics, 153–171; Peter
Leech, “Musicians in the Catholic Chapel of Catherine of Braganza, 1662–92,” Early
Music 29 (2001), 153–171. Eilish Gregory’s recent research on Catherine’s relationship
with her Catholic household has uncovered the ways in which courtiers sought to gain
favour and positions from Catherine, and how she sought to protect them from persecution during the Popish Plot in the late 1670s: Eilish Gregory, “Catherine of Braganza’s
Relationship with her Catholic Household,” in Valerie Schutte and Estelle Paranque (eds),
Forgotten Queens in Medieval and Early Modern Europe: Political Agency, Myth-Making,
and Patronage (London: Routledge, 2018), 129–148.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
9
their husbands, and their influence and patronage links did not drain away
when their husbands died. In exile, Mary Beatrice was able to negotiate,
for example, a suitable marriage match for her son James. In very difficult
circumstances, Maria Clementina Sobieska dealt with the problems that
accumulated as a result of her marriage to James III in Italy in 1719, and
set up her own court in the 1720s.22
During and after the civil wars and the (temporary) fall of the British
monarchies, the Stuart court had mounted a fairly sustained counterattack against its enemies. After the emergence in the 1640s and 1650s
of new religious and political ideas, the failure of a variety of republican
experiments had led to a period of military rule. For a variety of reasons,
that style of government, for all of Oliver Cromwell’s negotiation and
accommodation with different constituencies, including Catholic ones,
could not renew itself, at least not in the way that was conventional in
contemporary politics, that is to say, in states in which the default mode of
government was a monarchical one. This eventually made it possible and
necessary to restore the previous ruling dynasty and a monarchical court,
and the restoration of many of the facets and mechanisms of pre-civil war
court culture. As a result, the queens regnant and queens consort of the
Restoration period and after were not likely to have been, or to have been
regarded as, mere ciphers.
Carolyn Harris’s essay in this volume deals with the way that Henrietta
Maria tried to refashion her image and political reputation, that is, after
the reputational injury that she had suffered during the civil wars and
Interregnum, and indeed the catastrophic damage to her wider family in
22 For the Stuarts in exile, see esp. Eveline Cruickshanks and Edward Corp (eds), The
Stuart Court in Exile and the Jacobites (London and Rio Grande (OH): Hambledon,
1995); Eveline Cruickshanks (ed.), The Stuart Courts (Stroud: Sutton, 2000); Edward
Corp (ed.), The Stuart Court in Rome: the Legacy of Exile (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003);
idem, A Court in Exile: The Stuarts in France, 1689–1718 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2004); idem, The Stuart Courts in Exile (London: Royal Stuart Society,
2005); idem, The Stuarts in Italy, 1719–1766: A Royal Court in Permanent Exile
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011); idem, “The Alternative to the House of
Hanover: The Stuarts in Exile, 1714–45,” in Andreas Gestrich and Michael Schaich (eds),
The Hanoverian Succession: Dynastic Politics and Monarchical Culture (Farnham: Ashgate,
2015), 251–260; Edward Corp, Paul Monod, Murray Pittock and Daniel Szechi (eds),
Loyalty and Identity: Jacobites at Home and Abroad (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,
2010); Claire Walker, “‘When God Shall Restore Them to Their Kingdoms’: Nuns, Exiled
Stuarts, and English Catholic Identity, 1688–1745,” in Sarah Apetrei and Hannah Smith
(eds), Religion and Women in Britain, c. 1660–1760 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2014), 79–97.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
10
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
the wake of the regicide in England and the Frondes in France.23 While
Henrietta Maria inevitably did not exercise the same amount of political
influence in her son’s reign as she had enjoyed during that of Charles I,
she was nevertheless restored to her formal status and allowance as queen
dowager. In addition, Dr Harris argues, the continuing attacks on the
queen dowager and her reputation allowed Charles II to launch a series of
dry-run defences of her, and of legitimist ideals, which prefigured aspects
of the court’s response to the Exclusion Crisis in the later 1670s.
Eilish Gregory’s essay on Catherine of Braganza looks at this queen
consort’s political influence during her dowagership in Britain.24 Here a
predominantly Catholic culture among the courtiers about her allowed
for the creation of a patronage network which survived the politics of
exclusion. Dr Gregory also scrutinises Catherine’s relationship with James
II, and with her niece Queen Mary II, who with William III, took
the throne from James in 1688. With Catherine as, in some sense, the
squarest of proverbial square pegs after 1688, this chapter looks at the
way that she continued as a queen dowager as the Stuart family dynastically broke apart. Catherine’s pragmatism and political shrewdness are
further explored by Fleur Goldthorpe, whose chapter recovers Catherine’s Anglophile political influence in Portugal after she returned to her
brother King Pedro II’s court in 1693. This describes how Portugal’s
foreign policy over the issue of the Spanish Succession was influenced and
reorientated by Catherine during her regencies there in the early eighteenth century, principally via her challenge to entrenched Francophile
attitudes.
Susannah Lyon-Whaley’s chapter on Mary Beatrice of Modena
describes her sending clear political messages to the public as she made
23 See also ODNB, sub “Henrietta Maria [Princess Henrietta Maria of France]
(1609–1669)” (article by Caroline Hibbard); Dagmar Freist, “Popery in Perfection?:
The Experience of Catholicism: Henrietta Maria Between Private Practice and Public
Discourse,” in Michael J. Braddick and David L. Smith (eds), The Experience of Revolution in Stuart Britain and Ireland: Essays for John Morrill (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2011), 33–51; Karen Britland, “Exile or Homecoming? Henrietta Maria
in France, 1644–69,” in Philip Mansel and Torsten Riotte (eds), Monarchy and Exile:
The Politics of Legitimacy from Marie de Médicis to Wilhelm II (Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2011), 120–143.
24 Forthcoming research by Sara Wolfson will address the continuities between Henrietta Maria’s court before the civil war and in the Restoration, and the ways in which her
court during the Restoration supplied precedents for that of Catherine of Braganza.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
11
ready in 1688 to do what, of course, Catherine had not been able to
do—to provide for a succession in the direct line. Looking back from the
perspective of the collapse of the regime in 1688, and the claims about
the “warming pan,” it is easy to forget what a high-stakes game this was,
that is, if the child was male and it survived. Here was a vivid demonstration of the truism that, in a personal monarchy, the personal was political,
and vice-versa. The implications of all this can be read off in reverse from
the redescription of Mary Beatrice, post-Revolution, as Messalina, wife
of the emperor Claudius, with all the obvious polemical associations of
that claim—including the mounting of a succession conspiracy against
the emperor, spurred by sexual excess. Lyon-Whaley describes Mary Beatrice’s Catholicising of the process whereby she was going to extend the
Stuart line, even as the king’s critics then tried to redescribe the process
of pregnancy and birth as an elaborate fraud—“Mary Beatrice’s contested
pregnancy admitted that the queen’s body was a potent political symbol
and weapon for assuring a Catholic succession.”25
There is a bridge here to the revisionist rewriting of some of the
political narratives of the seventeenth century—and in particular the arguments against the inevitability of the rise of parliament as an institution.
Conrad Russell’s witty coda (“The Catholic Wind”) to his collection
of essays entitled Unrevolutionary England imagined that the Williamite
intervention had, in effect by chance, failed in 1688, leaving contemporaries to wonder why it was that they had ever thought that there could
have been any other outcome than the triumph of the Stuart dynasty’s
senior line. Though humorous in tone, Russell’s counterfactual piece,
written in the style of a school textbook, conveys what was at stake in
the period’s ideological battles (“those Protestant ministers who talked
constantly about the ‘seductive’ force of Catholicism surely recognised
that they were fighting a force, spiritual and psychological, against which
they could manage no more than a rearguard action”). Russell does not
in fact mention the birth of Prince James but his essay conveys something
of the deadly seriousness of the succession battle of the late 1680s.26
Inevitably, then, for all the potential pitfalls associated with the historiography of competing royal reputations, we do address the question of
25 Quotation from Susannah Lyon-Whaley’s essay in this volume.
26 Conrad Russell, Unrevolutionary England, 1603–1642 (London: Hambledon Press,
1991): ch. 17, quotation at 307.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
12
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
the reputations of the later Stuart queens. Jessica Minieri’s essay on Queen
Anne revisits the historical legacy of the last Stuart monarch to sit on the
British throne and argues that Anne’s reign needs to be seen, in part,
in the context of recent developments in queenship studies. The circulation of news and gossip about her physical ills was obviously politically
significant. One only has to think of Richard III’s scoliosis and link it to
the account of him as a hunchback monster. Early modern physiognomy
linked the outward appearance to inward reality.27 Undoubtedly, some
contemporaries made the connection between Anne’s physical difficulties
and her function as sovereign. But this should not be allowed to obscure
the evidence about the structural politics of the court.
To this end, Jennifer Farooq’s chapter on Anne’s ecclesiastical
patronage reviews the evidence for Anne’s active engagement in directing
the huge fund of patronage constituted by appointments to benefices in
the Church of England. This was not, of course, a process uninflected by
the petitioning and advice of a range of counsellors, lay and clerical. Nor
would it have been possible for Anne to ignore the competing demands
of day-to-day political factors that recommended, or militated against, the
promotion of this or that candidate. (It would have been quite extraordinary if the queen had not taken such factors into consideration.) But the
case is made here that to visualise Anne’s exercise of those aspects of her
prerogative which were available to her personally in the context of, say,
some of the recent portrayals of Anne in popular culture, notably in film,
is completely a-historical.
The essays by Stephen Griffin and Georgia Vullinghs bring the historiographically neglected Maria Clementina Sobieska back to the forefront
of later Stuart and early Georgian historiography. The political scandal
surrounding her flight in the 1720s to the Convent of Santa Cecilia is
the central focus of Griffin’s contribution to this volume. The Polishborn queen consort’s taking refuge in a convent not only raised questions
about her right to control her household and the education of her son; it
also prompted discussions, within the Jacobite exiled community and the
European ruling houses, about whether the estrangement of the queen
from James III would jeopardise the Jacobite cause. Here the pettiness of
disagreements and fallings out within the household mapped onto larger
geopolitical issues. Amidst reports of public arguments, accusations of
27 Rosalind Jana, “Unfinish’d Sympathy: Can Literature Get over Reading Disability
Morally?,” Guardian (5 September 2022).
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
13
mistreatment, and rumours of infidelity, there was a risk indeed of the
wider Jacobite movement fracturing altogether. As Maria Clementina in
effect went into political separation from her family, James’s agents were
trying to bring about an alliance between Austria, Spain, and Russia, in
an effort to secure his restoration. Competing and incompatible versions
of how the household had ruptured were spread across Europe.
Vullinghs examines how Maria Clementina was immortalised after her
premature death aged thirty-two in 1735 through material/visual means.
Vullinghs focuses on the funeral ceremonies for the exiled queen and on
how, through her death, the Jacobites constructed Maria Clementina as
a holy queen, as the site of her memorial tomb in Rome became a place
of pilgrimage for Jacobite supporters. In turn, her refurbished reputation was exploited by James for the purpose of securing and retaining
support. Items associated with Maria Clementina, including bodily relics,
were imbued with the power to connect loyal Jacobites with this deceased
Stuart family member. Commemorative objects such as the magnificent
memorial tomb in St Peter’s Basilica secured Maria Clementina’s presence within Rome and Britain despite her bodily absence. With perhaps a
certain cynicism, she was recruited in death, almost as a Jacobite saint, in
order to serve the dynasty’s earthly political needs.28
The later Stuart queens’ patronage of the arts and culture is explored
in several of the chapters in this collection. Mindy Williams shows how
Mary Beatrice of Modena’s appointments of poets and writers to court
positions bolstered her authority as a patron during her years as duchess
of York and later as queen. Patronage is here redefined so as to include
inspiration, encouragement, and appointment in addition to the more
traditional identification of patronage as primarily a matter of monetary reward. Poetry and print dedicated to or depicting the queen are
treated as one of the currencies of contemporary politics. The intersection between the patronage of poetry writing and mainstream politics
could become very apparent at certain points. The future Jacobite Bevil
Higgons’s first publication was a series of verses to celebrate the birth
28 For the retention of relics of James II, James III, and Maria Clementina among
the relic collections associated with the Catholic martyrs of the English Reformation, see
e.g. Archivum Britannicum Societatis Jesu, MSB/83 (Notes and Letters on Relics of the
English Martyrs, irregular foliation; Sr Maria Teresa of the convent of Mount Carmel,
Chichester to John Pollen SJ, 25 February 1907).
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
14
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
of Prince James, designed for inclusion in the collection of poetry sponsored by the University of Oxford in 1688 (Illustrissimi principis ducis
Cornubiae).29 It was the diametric opposite of, for example, the notorious playing card which subsequently portrayed Mary Beatrice in an act
of gross Mariolatry, praying to the Virgin for the birth of a son.30
Edward Taylor likewise identifies Mary II as an object for the attention
of contemporary poets and as an active consumer of, for example, spoken
and sung verse by figures such as Dryden, Tate, and Purcell at public
occasions in playhouse, chapel, and court. She was also the subject of verse
compositions from the time of her marriage to William of Orange in 1677
to her enthronement as queen as part of an innovative double monarchy
in 1689, and ultimately her death in 1694. Poems about Mary II were
written in both English and Latin, reflecting a literary culture that in
the late seventeenth century remained multilingual. They were variously
penned in panegyric and satiric modes—some praised her for her piety;
others criticised her for her filial disloyalty. They had complex patterns
of transmission, as they circulated in oral, manuscript, and printed forms,
including ballads, university anthologies, printed broadsides, and scribal
lampoons; and they were disseminated in France and the Netherlands, as
well as the British Isles.31 As Taylor says, these pieces were likely to have
very considerable resonances. Interpretations of Mary’s queenship framed
the political settlement after the Revolution. She was essential for Tories
who were offended by the ejection of James II, and yet there had to be
an arrangement via which William III was accorded executive authority.
Through the means afforded by these verse forms, it was possible both to
express complex political ideas and to gloss over rather difficult political
realities.
29 ODNB, sub “Higgons, Bevil (1670–1736)” (article by W. Courtney, rev. by Eveline
Cruickshanks); Illustrissimi principis ducis Cornubiæ et Comitis Palatini, & c. Genethliacon
(Cambridge: John Hayes, 1688).
30 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 154.
31 Edward Taylor builds upon the recent work on Mary and literature by Hannah
Smith and Elaine Anderson Phillips; see Elaine Anderson Phillips, “Creating Queen Mary:
Textual Representations of Mary II,” Restoration: Studies in English Culture, 1660–1700
37 (2013), 61–75; Hannah Smith, “Court Culture and Godly Monarchy: Henry Purcell
and Sir Charles Sedley’s 1692 Birthday Ode for Mary II,” in Justin Champion, John
Coffey, Tim Harris and John Marshall (eds), Politics, Religion and Ideas in Seventeenthand Eighteenth-Century Britain: Essays in Honour of Mark Goldie (Woodbridge: Boydell
Press, 2019), 219–238.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
15
Mary’s Netherlandish tastes were visible in her patronage of art and
architecture, something that is scrutinised in Amy Lim’s and Emily Birch’s
essays. Lim assesses how Mary’s predilections in decorative arts were
inspired by French and Dutch influences during her years in the Netherlands. Mary’s taste in Asian imported goods of lacquer, textiles, and
porcelain became fashionable and gave rise to the popularity of “chinoiserie.” There were links here with the rise of the British East India
Company and the Dutch East India Company. Birch’s essay deals with the
architectural works undertaken at Hampton Court by Mary and Anne.
The works commissioned during their time were often, in part, a response
to political events. After Mary’s death in 1694, Anne brought some of her
extant commissions to completion, including the staircase and Queen’s
Drawing Room, using different artists to finish the work.
This collection of essays is not, therefore, just a series of perspectives on
female sovereignty but, we argue, stands also as a contribution to current
debates about the Restoration and the Revolution of 1688 more generally. Our impression is that much of the “mainstream” historical literature
on the period rarely focuses on queens and queenship. Not, of course,
that it is obliged to do so. But, in that it seeks to tap into the politics
of public opinion, and in that the (confessional) politics of the court was
often at the centre of political argument about (good) government and
royal authority, it seems counter-intuitive not to incorporate the ways in
which political messaging could be undertaken by queens regnant and
queens consort.
This itself raises the question of the political status of the court in the
later seventeenth and the early eighteenth centuries. In the search for
evidence of systemic change in the Restoration period and after, it has
been argued, far from implausibly, that the real revolution in government
in Britain came not so much in late 1688 with the ejection of James
II but, instead, when the post-Revolution British State moved onto a
war footing against the French monarchy—in other words, when government expanded exponentially so as to incorporate the new and expensive
military requirements of confronting Louis XIV. The monarchy itself
was certainly transformed when the king was an often-absent military
supremo.
The trade-off for the financial wherewithal to fight the French was a
massive surrender of sovereignty to the legislature. Guarantees of supply
made regular parliamentary sessions a necessity. For Angus McInnes,
William was “the arch-saboteur, the quintessential fifth-columnist.” This
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
16
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
was a trend that continued after William was gone. Crucially, in the
reigns of Anne and those who came after her, there was not the “kind
of royal counter-offensive that had characterized the reigns of Charles II
and James II.”32 Here, Anne’s “limited” capacity to exercise sovereign
authority was taken up with trying to manage the rage of party politics.
She “was also throughout her reign an ailing queen, often appearing in
public swathed in bandages and in extreme pain.”33 On this account, the
court to some extent recedes into the background as the personal powers
of the wearer of the crown were pegged back, that is, when MPs started
to deploy their “new financial strength” to insist on “redress of grievances
before the voting of the annual supplies of cash needed by the crown.”34
But there is also a case to be made that the post-1688 settlement did
not witness the immediate relegation of the court as a political entity.
Even if the war against Louis XIV, combined with periods of female rule
in Britain, did shift the epicentre of government away from the court, it
remained the venue for the transaction of a good deal of political business
in ways that were distinctly reminiscent of earlier times.35 This is a point
argued strongly by Amy Lim in this volume, taking up Adam Morton’s
case about the construction of politics through culture. Here she traces
the cultural influences imported from the Netherlands by Mary II and
shows how those tastes in material things were part of Mary’s political
character.36 The same point can, of course, be made for the court in
exile—the prominence of which would be hard to explain if the claims
made for the senior Stuart line were not being taken seriously by contemporaries, that is, despite the vigorous ridiculing of the exiled Stuarts by
their critics. Here the work of Paul Kléber Monod on the popular political culture associated with Jacobitism is crucial. He argues that “Jacobite
32 Angus McInnes, “When Was the English Revolution?,” History 67 (1982), 392,
390. See also Steve Pincus, 1688: The First Modern Revolution (New Haven and London:
Yale University Press, 2009), esp. chs 5–7.
33 McInnes, “When Was the English Revolution?,” 391.
34 Ibid., 390.
35 For the making of this case, see esp. Robert O. Bucholz, The Augustan Court: Queen
Anne and the Decline of Court Culture (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993), and
the discussion of this point in Amy Lim’s chapter in this volume.
36 See Amy Lim’s chapter in this volume; see also Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly and Adam
Morton (eds), Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics c. 1500–1800
(London: Routledge, 2017).
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
1
INTRODUCTION
17
political culture should be interpreted as a language, with its own internal
logic or grammar” and also that “Jacobitism cannot be wrenched out of
the wider culture of which it was a part.” One potent reason for this
was that “the threat of a restoration remained real as long as a viable
Stuart candidate breathed, and a foreign power was prepared to advance
his claims.” But the debates about the contested and competing rights
of existing claimants could not be kept separate from more quotidian
expressions of contemporary culture. As Professor Monod says, “polemical prose, poetry and material artefacts provide relatively accessible means
by which to examine the patterns of Jacobite political culture.”37
Of course, Monod’s emphasis here is largely on popular culture, and
in particular the evidence of Jacobite popular political protest. But a not
dissimilar case can be made for the influence of elite culture and expressions of sovereign authority focused on the court. This, we argue, is where
the emphasis of the present volume lies. We do not claim simply to have
produced a gendered version of Restoration and post-1688 politics, but
the essays in this volume go some way to thinking about that topic in a
gendered context. Here we have a range of women right at the centre
of the court whose power was not exercised through office-holding but
who, nevertheless, were crucial to more than a few possible (though often
irreconcilable) futures. Here, even the supposedly monolithic Catholicism
of the Stuart queens consort could point in different directions. As Eilish
Gregory indicates, Catherine’s brand of Catholicism, as queen dowager,
was regarded, by some, in a different light from that of her brother-in-law.
If not, one would have expected far more attacks on her and her household both in 1685–1688 and then after the Revolution. As Dolan points
out, “in 1688, after James II and Mary had both left Whitehall but before
William and Mary were in residence, rioters attacked” the chapels at St
James’s and Whitehall but they did not assault the chapel at Somerset
House, that is, where Catherine was resident though it seems that a mob
gathered outside.38
Inevitably, we remain prisoners of the archives. It is difficult to gauge,
for instance, how those who witnessed the construction of major courtbased architectural projects reacted to them. For the most part, we cannot
37 Paul Kléber Monod, Jacobitism and the English People, 1688–1788 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1989), 10–12.
38 Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 153–154. See Simon Thurley, Somerset House: The Palace
of England’s Queens, 1551–1692 (London: London Topographical Society, 2009), 72.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
18
E. GREGORY AND M. C. QUESTIER
easily recover this, just as we cannot fully ascertain the public impact of,
for example, verse publications and performances of plays on those who
read and witnessed them. But there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate
a real connection between, on the one hand, the cultural manifestations
of sovereignty (and, in the case of these essays, specifically of queenship)
and, on the other, the more immediately visible and formal functions of
monarchy. These cultural accoutrements of queenship, prefiguring aspects
of the supposedly polite society of the eighteenth century, inflected the
traditional functions of queens in a dynastic personal monarchy that had
not necessarily changed as quickly as some scholars tend to assume.
Download Complete Ebook By email at etutorsource@gmail.com
We Don’t reply in this website, you need to contact by email for all chapters
Instant download. Just send email and get all chapters download.
Get all Chapters For E-books Instant Download by email at
etutorsource@gmail.com
You can also order by WhatsApp
https://api.whatsapp.com/send/?phone=%2B447507735190&text&type=ph
one_number&app_absent=0
Send email or WhatsApp with complete Book title, Edition Number and
Author Name.