The French Mistress

by Susan Holloway Scott

  With a startling efficiency, the one English priest in Whitehall was produced, an elderly gentleman who had known Charles when he was still a wandering prince. Charles greeted Father Huddleston with a cry of joy, and as the old priest murmured the words of conversion, followed by the last rites, I sank to my knees at the foot of the bed and prayed with him, as did the duke. Finally Father Huddleston placed his crucifix into Charles’s hands and wrapped a rosary around them to hold it steady, and said the final prayers for his salvation. With that it was done, and I rose unsteadily to my feet. Charles’s eyes were closed, not in pain, but at rest, and I’d never seen such peace on his face. Long ago he’d told me that I, above all others, brought him peace. Now, at last, I truly had.

  “Farewell, my love,” I whispered. “Farewell, my dearest friend.”

  I kissed him one last time, his lips already chill beneath mine, and retreated to my rooms. I’d no place as death finally claimed him: that belonged to his wife, his brother, his children. I was no more than his mistress, and a French one at that.

  But in the end, I’d gained all I could wish. I’d saved his soul for all eternity, and I’d won his heart for my own.

  And how could ever I wish for more?

  Author’s Note

  Louise de Keroualle may have been the most hated woman in seventeenth-century England. Every pamphlet, ballad, and article from her time blasts her as avaricious, conniving, and deceitful, and she was publicly denounced from pulpits and Parliament alike. She was a Roman Catholic and French, never a good combination to most Englishmen, and she also was quite openly on the payroll of Louis XIV even as she shared Charles II’s bed. Perhaps Lady Sunderland (not exactly an impartial witness) best sums up the general feeling toward Louise by declaring “so damned a jade as this would sell us without hesitation for fifty guineas.”

  Yet despite this, Charles clearly loved her. She represented French sophistication and elegance, and a quiet calm in the midst of his raucous Court. Unlike his other mistresses, she was entirely faithful to him, and he was her only lover. While others bemoaned her quick tears and stiff formality, he focused on her soft, accented voice, speaking gently to him much as his French mother once had done. Over and over he defended and protected her, even as she became a growing political liability and his friends and ministers begged him to send her packing. He granted her more honors and more gifts than all of his other mistresses combined, and the dukedom of Lennox and Richmond that he created for their son remains today one of the royal line, and one of the wealthiest in Britain. Louise was the mistress who tended Charles on his deathbed, the one Charles recommended most specifically to his brother James’s care, and the one who, quite possibly, made sure that he died a Roman Catholic.

  “I have always loved her,” Charles said among his last words, “and I die loving her.” From a man who had loved so widely, surely that declaration must have brought Louise considerable comfort.

  Charles died in his fifty-fifth year, most likely of the effects of chronic kidney disease, though no one now knows for certain. Those fourteen doctors crowded into his bedchamber likely did more to hasten his death than ease it. Fittingly for the king known as the “Merrie Monarch,” he was buried on Valentine’s Day, 1685. By order of the Lord Chamberlain, the duchess of Portsmouth, the duchess of Cleveland, and Nell Gwyn were permitted to wear black mourning in Charles’s honor, but were not allowed to put their households into full mourning: the fine distinction between sleeping with royalty and being married to it. Meanwhile, the entire country plunged into heartfelt mourning. Despite the many crises of his reign, Charles had remained immensely popular with his people, and was much lamented when he died.

  Perhaps part of their sorrow was knowing who their next king would be. James II swiftly used up every bit of goodwill that his much-loved brother had left behind with a reign that was marked by dictatorial ill management, egotism, and a determined effort to force England to share his Catholicism. Charles had predicted that James, due to his “turbulent and excessive nature,” would not last four years on the throne. That was almost exactly how long it took before the English people had had enough of James and, in the bloodless Glorious Revolution of 1688, sent him into exile in favor of the Protestant couple of William of Orange and James’s elder daughter, Mary.

  James’s rule was also blackened by his ruthless treatment of Charles’s feckless illegitimate son, James, Duke of Monmouth. Under an Anglican banner, Monmouth led a poorly organized rebellion against his uncle in 1686. James crushed the rebellion and its lower-class supporters with all the force of the English army, and after ignoring his nephew’s pleas for mercy, insisted on his execution.

  Louise was devastated by Charles’s death. Not only had she lost the one love of her life, but also the center of her world. Overnight, she ceased to be important. James quickly made it clear that her days as a political power and a royal favorite were finished, and that she’d have no place in the diplomacy of his Court. She was only thirty-three when Charles died and still exceptionally beautiful, but in many ways her life was done. She left England in 1685 with her thirteen-year-old son, Lord Richmond, her jewels, several pensions, and a small fortune in gold that had been left her by Charles. It took several ships to carry all the possessions she’d acquired to fill those forty rooms in Whitehall Palace, and the English people were heartily glad to wave her farewell.

  Louise lived the rest of her life in France, falling in and out of favor with Louis XIV and losing great amounts of her fortune to gaming. She never married, and the taboret of a duchesse that she’d so coveted brought her little happiness. The French nobility that she’d longed to impress had no use for her, and she had few friends. Finally she retreated to the estates at Aubigny that were part of her duchy, and dedicated herself to good works and prayer. Shortly before her death, she was introduced to Voltaire, who marveled at her still-impressive beauty. She died in 1734 at the considerable age of eighty-five, having survived Charles by fifty years.

  Charles Lennox, Duke of Richmond, spent his childhood torn between the wishes of his two exceptional parents. He was a favorite among Charles’s numerous sons, and delighted his royal father by riding in his first race at Newmarket at the tender age of eleven. Louise, on the other hand, tried hard to mold him into a model French gentleman with beautiful manners, which was not nearly as much fun. Richmond was raised a Protestant, as were all of the king’s children, though Louise made sure he converted to Catholicism after the two of them returned to France. Louise hoped the young duke would find favor at the French Court, but he preferred England, and as soon as William of Orange had displaced his uncle James, Richmond swiftly returned to London. He once again became an Anglican, wed an English beauty, and took his seat in the House of Lords. He liked to gamble, drink, and ride, and despite his enormous wealth, he found it difficult to keep within his income. Having sired three children, including the son necessary to continue his title, he died before his mother in 1723.

  The fortunes of the rest of Louise’s acquaintances were mixed. Charles’s long-suffering queen, Catherine of Braganza, had earned the respect and regard of the English, and continued to live in England as a venerable Dowager Queen until 1692, before finally returning to Portugal, where she died in 1705. Nell Gwyn suffered a paralyzing stroke soon after Charles’s death, and died deeply in debt in 1687 at only thirty-seven. Her close friend and Louise’s gadfly, John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester, fared even worse, succumbing at thirty-three in 1680 to the effects of chronic alcoholism and syphilis. By comparison, George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, lived far longer than his self-indulgent life should have merited, dying in the country in 1687 at fifty-nine.

  After more than three hundred years, it’s very hard to find traces of Louise as the woman Charles must have adored. Much of her problem is that while she had allies at the English Court, she had almost no friends beyond Charles, and none who defended her for posterity. The same propaganda that worked so hard to defame her during her l
ife has continued successfully long afterward. Some of the vilest invented slanders have been repeated and reprinted so many times that casual historians now often present them as fact, even if other, more trustworthy evidence refutes it. Where Louise is concerned, the malevolent spirit of Titus Oates never quite died.

  I’ve tried to separate at least a few grains of truth from all the scandalous chaff, and discover the woman behind the great villain ess of too many tears. Wherever the hard facts of history are tanta lizingly vague, I tried to keep to Louise’s spirit as much as possible, and the occasional liberty I’ve been forced to take in telling her story was made with the best of intentions. As I’ve often said before, I’m a novelist, not a historian. But in the end, I dare to hope that Charles himself would be pleased with what I’ve written of the woman he loved so dearly.

  Susan Holloway Scott

  January 2009

  The

  French

  Mistress

  A NOVEL OF

  THE DUCHESS Of PORTSMOUTH AND KING CHARLES II

  SUSAN HOLLOWAY SCOTT

  QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

  1. The title of this book, The French Mistress, can describe not only how the English viewed Louise de Keroualle, but also as the way she described herself as well. Which do you think is more apt?

  2. Charles II was crowned only after a prolonged exile following his father’s beheading and the English Civil War. He was determined to create a Court that was more relaxed and informal than his father’s had been, yet often found his authority challenged during his reign. His cousin Louis XIV also had a difficult childhood for a royal prince, and he, too, was exiled from Paris by the enemies of his family during the Fronde. Yet Louis reacted to his past by insisting on a rigidly ritualized Court that he could completely control and manipulate. Which model do you feel worked better? As a courtier, which would you prefer?

  3. Louise saw no shame in her position as a royal mistress. Do you think this was because of the material wealth she amassed, the power she acquired, her ability to help her native France, or simply because of the love she felt for Charles?

  4. Louise had the opportunity to observe several arranged royal couples firsthand: Madame and Monsieur; Louis and Therese; Charles and Catherine; James and Mary Beatrice; William and Mary. Do you think this influenced her decision to become Charles’s mistress rather than pursue a marriage of her own?

  5. Charles’s mistresses were constantly faulted for their greed, and Louise was regarded as the most avaricious of them all. Do you think she was in fact greedy, or merely making the most of a brief and unpredictable opportunity to provide for herself and her son?

  6. Anti-Catholic prejudice and persecution reached hysterical levels during Charles’s reign. How do you think this compares to religious intolerance in the world today?

  7. Although Louise was undeniably a beautiful and desirable woman, she chose to emphasize her talents as a hostess and as an exemplar of elegant taste to help her maintain a lasting relationship with Charles. Do you agree with her decision? Do you think she would have held Charles’s interest if she had relied simply on her beauty?

  8. Louise made virtually no friends in England beyond Charles. Do you agree with her opinion that she was surrounded by enemies, and could trust no one but herself, or the opinions of others at the English Court: that she was chilly and aloof and too self-centered for friendship?

  9. Treatment and understanding of syphilis were rudimentary in the seventeenth century. Given Charles’s wide-ranging habits and Louise’s monogamy, it’s safe to say that he infected her. Yet she was the one was “punished” by being isolated from him and her son during the time the disease was being treated. Do you think this double standard was fair? Would it have been different if Charles hadn’t been king? Do you think Louise expected it?

  10. Louise was a favorite target both of Court satire as exemplified by the Earl of Rochester and of the more common ballads and pamphlets that circulated through coffeehouses and taverns. How do you think today’s tabloid-style journalism would treat Louise? Do you think she would be followed more for her political role, her sexual relationship with the king, or as a stylish trendsetter?

  11. While Louis treated Louise as an agent of the French, Charles chose to regard her more as a facilitator, a special kind of diplomat that he felt he could trust. How would you regard her role: as a spy or a savvy diplomat?

  12. Although Charles had many women in his life, he was surprisingly careful with his endearments. His pet names for Louise were “Fubs”—an abbreviation of fubsy, a seventeenth-century synonym for chubby—and “My Dear Life.” He used both in conversation and throughout his letters to her. What do you think these nicknames reveal about their relationship?

  13. Late in the book, Louise sees one of the queen’s maids of honor who is facing dismissal on account of her faith: “Poor poppet, I thought sadly, though perhaps it would be far better for her if her career at Court ended now, before she found her way to some lord’s bed.” Do you think Louise truly believed this? Do you think if she had her life to do over that she would have made a choice other than coming to Court?

  Susan Holloway Scott is the author of more than forty historical novels. A graduate of Brown University, she lives with her family in Pennsylvania. Visit her Web site at www.susanhollowayscott.com.

  LOOK FOR MORE HISTORICAL NOVELS FROM

  SUSAN HOLLOWAY SCOTT

  Duchess

  A NOVEL OF SARAH CHURCHILL

  “No dry dust of history here, but a vivid portrait of an intriguing woman with all her flaws and strengths. Rich in period details, the novel also has all the ingredients necessary for a compelling read: conflict, suspense, intrigue, and the romance between Sarah and John Churchill, one of history’s great love stories.”

  —Susan Carroll, author of Twilight of a Queen

  London, 1673. With her family ruined by war, penniless thirteen-year-old Sarah Jennings is overjoyed to be chosen as a maid of honor at the bawdy Restoration Court of Charles II. She soon wins the trust of Lady Anne of York, a lonely princess who becomes one of her staunchest allies. And though Sarah’s beauty stirs the desires of the jaded aristocrats, she wants a grander future for herself than that of a pampered mistress. Only one man possesses ambition and passions that match her own: John Churchill, a dashing young military hero. He would ask for her hand—and win her heart for a lifetime. . . .

  Brimming with the intrigue and sensuality of one of history’s most decadent courts, duchess brings to vivid life the story of an unforgettable woman who determined her own destiny—outspoken, outrageous, but most of all true to herself.

  Royal Harlot

  A NOVEL OF THE COUNTESS OF CASTLEMAINE AND KING CHARLES II

  “Among this novel’s many strengths are Scott’s impressive depiction of time and place, her evocation of the Restoration-era mind-set, the exuberance of the period, and her sure, succinct presentation of complex historical events. The reader can well believe that this is a memoir penned by a woman who—in reality—was clearly too busy living to ever write one!”—The Historical Novels Review

  London, 1660. Ready to throw off a generation of Puritan rule, all England rejoices when Charles Stuart returns to reclaim the throne. Among those welcoming him is young Barbara Villiers Palmer, a breathtaking Royalist beauty whose sensuality and clever wit instantly captivate the handsome, jaded king.

  Though each is promised to another, Barbara soon becomes Charles’s mistress and closest friend, and the uncrowned queen of his bawdy Restoration Court. Rewarded with titles, land, and jewels, she is the most envied and desired woman in England—and the most powerful.

  But the role of royal mistress is a precarious one, and Barbara’s enemies and rivals are everywhere in the palace. Now even kings can lose their heads to treason, and swirling political intrigue brings new threats and danger—until not even Charles is safe.

  In this world where love is no more than a game, and power the ultimate aph
rodisiac, only one woman holds the key to it all: Barbara, Countess of Castlemaine, duchess of Cleveland, and the royal harlot.

  The King’s Favorite

  A NOVEL OF NELL GWYN AND KING CHARLES II

  “This is a wild joyride through Restoration England, with Nell firmly gripping the reins. Susan Holloway Scott is so intuitive with period language and so involved in the psyches of her characters, that you are at all times there with them, seeing what they’re seeing, feeling what they’re feeling—and always, always rooting for the petite whirlwind of a heroine.”—Robin Maxwell, author of Signora da Vinci

  Nell Gwyn was never a lady, nor did she pretend to be one. The daughter of a Royalist soldier, she is taken to London by her widowed mother to work in a bawdy house. At fourteen, she becomes the mistress of a wealthy merchant, who introduces her to the world of the theater. Blessed with impudent wit and saucy good looks, she swiftly rises from an orange seller to a leading lady, and she is still in her teens when she catches the eye of King Charles II. She trades the stage for Whitehall Palace and the glorious role of a royal mistress.

  Yet even as she delights the king, she must learn to negotiate the cutthroat Court, where intrigue and lust for power rule the hearts of all around her. Beneath her charm and lightheartedness, Nell has her own ambition: to become no less than the king’s favorite.