Sunday, September 25, 2016

Mistress Mayhem: The Story of Louise Renee de Penancoet de Keroualle

Hello everyone, and welcome back! I know you're all dying to know how my spreadsheets are faring. Well, I'm happy to inform you that it is going...exactly the same! I'm still entering in those names and dates like no other. It actually excites me when I find that someone left the Queen's court through death instead of removal. It breaks the monotony a bit, since about 90% of these people seem to have been removed. How boring.

Anyway, this week I decided to keep up with the trend of telling you guys about important women in the court. I promise that next week I'll try to shake things up a bit, but for now, I'd like to tell you all about Louise Renee de Penancoet de Keroualle.


Keroualle was born in September 1649 at the Manoir de Keroualle in Brittany, France. She was the second child of Guillaume de Penancoet, count de Keroualle. Around the year 1668, she was appointed as maid of honour to Henriette-Anne, Charles II's sister. However, after Henriette-Anne's death, she was taken into the service of Catherine of Braganza, a job that put her directly under the eye of Charles II. 

Unsurprisingly, after about a year, Louise became Charles II's mistress. Apparently, this was arranged by Lord Arlington and the French ambassador, though for what purpose I am unsure. Ten months later, on July 29, 1672 Louise gave birth to her only son by the king, Charles. Not long after, she became the King's main mistress, promptly bumping Lady Castlemaine out of the way. As Charles II tended to do, he soon provided Louise with numerous titles. On August 29, 1673 she was created Baroness Petersfield, countess of Fareham, and duchess of Portsmouth. Her son was given the last name Lennox and he was subsequently created baron of Settrington, earl of March, and duke of Richmond on August 9, 1675. 

As the years went on, her pension from Charles II continued to increase until she collected an average of about 20,000 pounds a year. It is thought that she was perhaps the most expensive of Charles' mistresses. She was given her own apartments at Whitehall Castle, which slowly expanded until she had about 24 rooms. These became an important place for her at court, as she put on grand entertainments here. They were described by John Evelyn as "luxuriously furnished and with ten times the richness and glory beyond the Queene's". Her life wasn't all parties and fun, however. In 1674, Charles II passed on a sexually transmitted disease to Portsmouth, and she suffered quite terribly from it. It is thought to be the source of her constantly resurfacing ill health after. Not only that, but Nell Gwyn, the king's other mistress, constantly irritated Portsmouth and the arrival of the duchess of Mazarin in England was an even greater threat, as the king was quite attracted to her. There were rumors that she would soon be displaced altogether. Ironically, though she was a mistress herself, she complained to the king of his infidelities in December of 1676 and by 1677 she had regained her position as his main mistress. 

Portsmouth was more than just a mistress in some respects. She was involved in court politics as well. In 1673 she fell out with Lord Arlington, whose fortunes were declining, and turned her allegiances towards his rival Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby. She assisted his son to get a position in the King's bedchamber and supported Danby when she heard he had fallen out with the duke of York at Newmarket. Her progress within politics was watched by Louis XIV who hoped she would prove useful in promoting French interests. Though she annoyed Louis by advancing mademoiselle d'Elbeuf as a bride for the duke of York, she was still encouraged to ask Louis XIV for several positions for her French relations. She began to facilitate access to Charles II for the French ambassador in her apartments to report useful information to him. 

Through these accesses and the negotiations she made, she appeared to represent French interests. This, plus her Catholicism and her association with Danby did not attract good attention for her. In June 1678, she was criticized in the House of Commons by Henry Booth. Concerned for her position she broke ties with Danby by March 1679 and associated herself with Robert, earl of Sunderland, the new secretary of state. She was involved in his secret plans to invite William of Orange to England that summer and they both supported the duke of York over the duke of Monmouth that same year. However, this didn't prevent her from being frowned upon by other people. She was seen as a "common nuisance" when the earl of Shaftesbury entered information against the duke of York. So by August 1680, she turned against him to avoid losing her position. She even openly advocated the bill to exclude the duke of York from the throne in early October.  By 1681, once she began to cover her position, Portsmouth once again used her influence with the king, convincing him to reconcile with the duke of York, who had been sent to Scotland, asking him to allow his return. Portsmouth was very good at changing sides, depending on which would benefit her the most.

Things continued to look up for her from there. In 1682, Portsmouth's son was installed as a knight of the Garter and then as master of the horse. She also assumed her role as intermediary with the French ambassador, encouraging Charles on certain French policies and urging him to avoid war with them. She met Louis XIV with messages from Charles II, bought back her family estates of Keroualle and Mesnouales which her father had to sell, and undertook her role of politics with renewed enthusiasm. She supported certain cabinet appointments, exchanged letters with Louis, and aligned herself with the duke of York and his allies. Meanwhile, Charles II showed no sign of decreasing his esteem for his mistress. In November of 1684 her son was naturalized as a French subject so he might inherit the property she had there. Things seemed to be going fantastic for Portsmouth until February 5th, 1685 when Charles II died. 

After his death, her influence was instantly gone. Her son was removed as master of the horse and she returned to France in August 1685. After the revolution of 1688 she lost her pensions but was granted an annuity by Louis XIV. She lived in Paris in the 1690s, but in 1692 she secretly went to England to join William of Orange and to try to reclaim her pension. It was not reinstated, however, and she spent the remainder of her life trying to regain financial stability in France. She eventually founded a convent in the town of Aubigny, and she was often visited by her grandson, Charles Lennox, second duke of Richmond and his wife. She died in Paris on November 14, 1734 and her grandson inherited her property. 

Louise Renee de Penancoet de Keroualle led quite the lifestyle for a mistress. Like Lady Castlemaine, she used her position as the king's main mistress to not only influence certain job appointments, but to also enter into politics. I am once again surprised at how influential a mistress can be. I feel as though she and Lady Castlemaine both had influences that Queen Braganza never had. Though she was not accounted as great a beauty as Lady Castlemaine, her desire for pleasing others got her a long way. She was smart in choosing the side that would always benefit her the most, which is why she was able to maintain such a high status until the king's death. Her involvement in both England and  France made her a very significant player in English politics, and I can't help but feel confused at this. It makes me wonder, did any queen ever have more power than the king's mistresses? Was she just an odd case or was this the norm in the court? The power play between these women and important political characters is challenging my ideas of not only who was important during these times, but also who was really in control. Was it Charles or was it his mistresses?


  S. M. Wynne, ‘Kéroualle, Louise Renée de Penancoët de, suo jure duchess of Portsmouth and suo jure duchess of Aubigny in the French nobility (1649–1734)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Jan 2008 [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/15460, accessed 25 Sept 2016]





No comments:

Post a Comment