Annotations and comments

San Diego Sarah has posted 8,953 annotations/comments since 6 August 2015.

Comments

Third Reading

About York House

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

CONCLUSION:

It might still be a grand house, but Buckingham;s memories were of much more grandeur:

1628] MURDER OF THE FIRST DUKE 9
In the midst of her overwhelming grief, Lady Katherine Manner Villiers, Duchess of Buckingham realized she was in urgent need of help. During the last year her husband had pledged lands and jewels with prodigal magnificence to assist King Charles, for whose policy he held himself accountable. When his executors drew up an estate statement, they found no acknowledgment for 50,000/. loaned to the Crown.

The works of art, which Rubens and Balthasar Gerbier had collected for York House, now proved a mine of gold. A few of these matchless gems were sold to King Charles, Algernon Percy, 10th Earl of Northumberland, and Abbe Walter Montagu, and Lady Buckingham's immediate necessities of were relieved. 1
1 Brian Fairfax. Preface to Rehearsal, Arber Ed.

@@@

1648] ALCHEMY 27
Happily for Buckingham, he was still able to rely on the fidelity of his servants, whom throughout his strange career, he inspired with devotion.

... he would have landed in the Dutch Republic a penniless outlaw but for the foresight of a trusty steward. The excellent John Trayleman smuggled out of England the pictures and gems which had made York House the finest museum in the land. 1
1 Warrant States-General, Bodl. Cal. MSS. 2732.

Under the pass of the States-General, 16 cases of art treasures found their way to Antwerp to be coined into daily bread for Buckingham.

One picture, the "Ecce Homo" by Titian, was now sold for ^5,000 to the Archduke Leopold of Prague, so Buckingham had considerable resources. But for a nobleman of the Duke's rank, the expenses of exile were heavy.

@@@

So his "imprisonment" at York House must have been bitter-sweet; yes, better than close confinement at the Tower of London, but nothing like his childhood memories. No wonder he sold York House in 1672.

About York House

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Adapted from
GEORGE VILLIERS, SECOND DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM -- 1628-1687 : A STUDY IN THE HISTORY OF THE RESTORATION
By WINIFRED, LADY BURGHCLERE
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W. LONDON
1903
https://archive.org/stream/cu3192…

CHAPTER IV
Buckingham's marriage

1657 saw a great change in George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham's career:
Parliament had granted Gen. Thomas, Lord Fairfax, a distant relative of Buckingham’s, part of the Duke's possessions — worth about ^5,000 a year — in quittance of his arrears of pay.
They also gave him, "as a salve for a bad wound" he had received in their service, York House in London, and the Manor of Helmsley, a Yorkshire property which had been brought into the Villiers' estate by Katherine Manners. 1
Brian Fairfax's "Life of G. Villiers, Second Duke of Buckingham."

@@@

York House, once the town residence of the Archbishops of York, with its gardens sloping down to the Thames, ... . Less ornate outwardly than some of the neighboring mansions, the interior was noted for its sumptuous decoration. Every chamber was adorned with lions and peacocks, the arms of the great families of Villiers and Manners. 2 ]
2 Brian Fairfax.

A truly royal suite of apartments, hung in green embroidered velvet, had been specially designed for the reception of King Charles when he condescended to stay with his favorite.

And even the critical Pepys cannot contain his admiration for the palace, "where the remains of the noble soul of the late Duke appears in his house in every place, in the door cases and the windows!" 1
1 Pepys, vol. iii. p. 160. 6 June, 1663.

But, despite York House’s perfections, it was not long before Buckingham felt ‘cribb'd, cabined and confined’ in his splendid abode, and, relying on his power of disguise, broke bounds and went off to visit his sister Mary, Duchess of Richmond, at Cobham.
[COBHAM HALL, NEAR GRAVESEND IN KENT, NOT COBHAM, SURREY – SDS]

@@@

Buckingham had spent his early childhood at York House, until he was taken in by King Charles when his mother lost custody because she turned Catholic.

About Sunday 26 May 1661

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"... I to Sir W. Batten’s, where I have on purpose made myself a great stranger, ..."

While Elizabeth was away and the Pepys' kitchen a mess, he dined nearly every day with the Battens. On 27 April he noted: "so home by coach to Sir W. Batten’s, who seems so inquisitive when my house will be made an end of that I am troubled to go thither."
There are limits to Stuart invitations to stop by for free food any time.

@@@

Pepys has never mentioned meeting Mrs. Batten Browne before, so their interaction must have been passing.

To be asked to be a godfather was a compliment. Pepys must (1) now buy some silver gift for the child, which will be set aside as part of the child's savings; (2) accept some responsibility for the Browne child: should anything happen to the Brownes, he will be expected to be one of the adults who safeguards the child's future -- since there are quite a few well-placed younger Battens around, it's unlikely the child will become his personal financial burden.

My guess is that the father, Capt. John Browne, was trying to ensure the child's successful future career in the Navy, and this invitation was therefore political. Pepys chooses to look on this manipulation as a compliment.
Accepting might even give Pepys some influence with the Captain, which could come in useful in the future. You never know when you will need to call in a favor, or who with.
Accepting was also a way of thanking the Battens for their recent generous hospitality. To refuse could have been interpreted as being ungrateful.

About About fruit and vegetables

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

There’s a reason why the humble tomato used to be known by the far more sinister moniker of “poison apple”: Europeans feared tomatoes for centuries and believed they were poisonous.
As recently as the 18th century, it was thought that aristocrats were falling ill and even dying after eating tomatoes — a misconception stemming from the use of pewter plates, which contained high lead content. The fruit, which is highly acidic, would leach that lead and then poison the unlucky eater.

The fear of tomatoes was just as prevalent across the pond, where some American farmers believed that the green tomato worm was “poisonous as a rattlesnake” (in the words of one New York farmer). An entomologist named Benjamin Dann Walsh eventually set the record straight, writing that the insect in question was “merely an ugly-looking worm which eats some of the leaves of the tomato,” and by the late 1800s, more people began to appreciate tomatoes for the nutritious treat they are.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/…

About Thursday 7 February 1660/61

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

CONCLUSION:

1661] MONSIEUR'S JEALOUSY OF BUCKINGHAM 121
Queen-Mother Henrietta Maria now regarded the matter as foolish rather than compromising, and frankly told Monsieur that his bride only tolerated the Duke's attentions because he was her brother's favorite.

The excuse seemed preposterous to Philippe: he refused to be pacified, and made a formal complaint of Buckingham's presumption to Queen-Mother Anne of Austria. Monsieur had always been his mother's spoilt darling, and had George Villiers borne any other name, he would certainly have incurred the formidable displeasure of the former Queen. But "the passion which his father had cherished in bygone days for the Queen now earned indulgence for the son." 1
1 "Hist, de Mde. Henriette d'Angleterre," par' Mde. de la Fayette.

Queen-Mother Anne of Austria deprecated an open breach, and recommended that after he had remained a short time longer in France, Buckingham should be given a hint that his return to England was necessary.

In pursuance of this advice, Queen Mother Henrietta Maria wrote privately to Charles II, exposing the perils of the situation, and the King sent orders, which, although amicably worded, Buckingham could not disregard. It must have been the harder for him to tear himself away, since, with the prescience of a lover, he had already recognized in the Count de Guiche a more formidable rival than the effeminate husband, or the royal brother-in-law.

Buckingham departed, but only after a thousand lingering farewells and renewed protestations of love and devotion.

122 THE RESTORATION [chap. v.
Buckingham left the fetes given in honor of the Duchesse d'Orleans' marriage for the festivities of Charles II's coronation. ...

About Thursday 7 February 1660/61

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

PART 2

During this period of suspense, Buckingham's misery found vent in a furious out-bursts of anger. It is charitable to suppose that solicitude had affected his brain, as his behavior is reported on all sides to have been that of a lunatic.

Nor did Henrietta Anne's convalescence mend his manners. When the Princess was sufficiently recovered to resume her journey to Havre de Grace, Buckingham’s preposterous courtship passed all permissible limits.

120 THE RESTORATION [chap. v.
Queen-Mother Henrietta Maria became alarmed that Monsieur, whose jealous nature was notorious, would resent his familiarities, and finally commanded Buckingham to precede them on the route to Paris. Much as he disliked being parted from the Princess, he had no choice but to obey.

The only vent he found for his ill-humor was in a futile squabble with Lord Sandwich, of which Pepys has left us a lively picture. The dispute arose at a game of cards between the Admiral 1, Lord St. Albans, and Buckingham.
1 Adm. Edward Montagu, Earl of Sandwich.

"The Duke did to my lords l dishonour often say that he did in his conscience know the contrary to what he then said about the difference at cards, and so did take up the money that he should have lost to my Lord, which my Lord resenting, said nothing then, but that he doubted there were ways enough to get his money of him. 2
2 Pepys, Wheatley ed., vol. i. p. 342. 5 Feb. 1661.

“So they parted that night, and my Lord sent for Sir R. Stayner and sent him the next morning to the Duke, to know whether he did remember what he said last night, and whether he would own it with his sword, and a second, which he said he would, and so both sides agreed. But my Lord St. Albans and the Queen and Ambassador Montagu did waylay them at their lodgings, till the difference was made up to my Lord's honour, who hath got great reputation thereby."

The English suite had hoped that the presence of the princely bridegroom would act as a restraint on Buckingham. Philippe, Duc d'Orleans, was not the kind of personage to impress George Villiers, who continued to put so little curb on his feelings that the Princess began to fear that she would be held responsible for his follies. Finding her own rebukes unavailing, and alarmed lest Monsieur's displeasure should be aroused, she besought her mother to intervene.

About Thursday 7 February 1660/61

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

We have an explanation: Buckingham was in love -- with Princess Henrietta Maria!

The following story is from
GEORGE VILLIERS, SECOND DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM 1628-1687
A STUDY IN THE HISTORY OF THE RESTORATION
By WINIFRED, LADY BURGHCLERE
https://archive.org/stream/cu3192…
Yes, it contains a few spoilers, but not about Pepys. But as a story, it belongs to stay intact:

... with the restoration of the Stuarts, Buckingham advertised a mad passion for Princess Henrietta Anne, the youngest member of his Sovereign's family. Nor in this instance was his infatuation surprising. The testimony of two Courts, the devotion of Louis XIV, every letter, every memoir that survives, carries the conviction that never since her hapless ancestress, Mary Stuart, was a royal lady so amply endowered with grace and charm.

When Princess Henrietta Anne returned to England, her hand was already bespoken for Monsieur, the Duc d'Orleans, her first cousin, and the Grand Monarque's only brother. The conditions of this alliance were debated during the following weeks, and in the winter a special embassy was despatched to escort Madame to her bridegroom.

The delirious festivities, which had not been checked by the successive deaths of Mary, Princess of Orange and Henry, Duke of Gloucester, received a fresh impetus from their advent, and nowhere were the envoys more sumptuously feasted than at Wallingford House.

So splendid were Buckingham’s entertainments that he speedily exhausted a fortune once judged inexhaustible. His French guests infected him with their mania for high play [GAMBLING – SDS].

"Had he continued," says the biographer Brian Fairfax, "his estate had not lasted so long." For once in his life, Buckingham showed signs of self-control, and, alarmed by his heavy losses, he not only resolved to give up gaming, but ever after kept his resolution.

1661] PRINCESS HENRIETTA'S ILLNESS 119
When Princess Henrietta Anne left England, with Queen-Mother Henrietta Maria, for her future home, Buckingham obtained permission to accompany them. As Charles II remarked, "Mamie's luck at sea" was proverbial. 1
1 " Madame," by Julia Cartwright, p. 81.

Due to the negligence of the pilot, the voyage started with the ship running foul of the Horse Sand. This necessitated their putting back to the harbor. Nor did their misfortunes end there.

Hardly had they arrived at Portsmouth, when Henrietta Anne fell dangerously ill. The fever was of such a nature that the doctors at first diagnosed her malady as small-pox, and even when it proved to be merely the measles, her life, notwithstanding, hung awhile in the balance.

Happily Henrietta Anne preserved her senses, and obstinately refused to allow the posse of doctors, despatched from London by Charles II, to bleed her — a resolution to which she probably owed her recovery.

About Col. John Russell

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

CONCLUSION:

In November 1664, a detachment of “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” AKA “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” embarked on board the “Royal Catherine” and “Triumph” at Woolwich. These ships returned to Portsmouth for the winter.

In January 1665, in preparation for the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665 – 1667), 600 men of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” were apportioned for service at sea.

After the death of Thomas, Lord Wentworth on 28 February, 1665 “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” and Col. John Russell’s "King's Regiment of Guards" were amalgamated into a single regiment counting 2 battalions under the command of Col. Russell on 16 March, and later became known as "The First Regiment of Foot Guards".

On 13 June, 1665, part of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" took part in the naval Battle of Lowestoft.

In July, 1665, when plague broke out in London, 6 companies of the "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" escorted Charles II to Salisbury. In September 1665, they escorted Charles II to Oxford.

In 1666, 10 companies of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" were assembled at Hampton Court.

By August 1668, "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" counted 12 companies of 80 men each; and 12 companies of 60 men each.

In 1670 and in 1671, detachments of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" were sent on board men-of-war anticipating the third Anglo-Dutch War.

In 1672, when the Third Anglo-Dutch War (1672 – 1674) finally broke out, detachments of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" served aboard the fleet, taking part, on June 7, in the naval Battle of Solebay.

In August 1672, the 24 companies of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" was deployed as follows:
 at Rochester (6 coys)
 at Carlisle (1 coy)
 at Dover Castle (1 coy)
 at York (2 coys)
 aboard the fleet (5 coys)
 in Westminster (9 coys)

In 1673, several detachments of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" once more served aboard the fleet, taking part in the naval combats near Schooneveld on June 7 and 14.

On 28 July, part of "The First Regiment of Foot Guards" embarked for the planned landing on the coast of the Dutch Republic.

In 1677, grenadiers were introduced in "The First Regiment of Foot Guards".

And so we know them today -- the Grenadier Guards.

Information taken from
https://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/ind…
and https://www.grengds.com/history
THE NAMES OF THE REGIMENTS ARE IN QUOTES AS I’M NOT SURE WHEN THE NAME CHANGES OCCURRED.

About Col. John Russell

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

By the end of March 1656, Charles II, who was living in Bruges in the Spanish Netherlands, negotiated a treaty with Spain. The King of Spain agreed to assist an invasion of England with 6,000 foot and sufficient ships to transport them to England, whenever the occasion for an invasion presented itself. Charles was required to raise troops, nominally for the service of Spain, to be equipped and paid by the Spaniards.
The treaty was signed on 21 July, 1656, and Charles II raised 3 regiments: one of English, one of Irish and one of Scots. The English regiment was placed under the command of Gen. Henry Wilmot, 1st Earl of Rochester.
Charles II named the English regiment “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” and gave its command to Thomas, Lord Wentworth after Rochester’s death. The regiment was also known as the “Lord Wentworth's Regiment”.
“Lord Wentworth's Regiment”was then involved in the last years of the Franco-Spanish War (1635–59).
By the end of April 1657, the Guards counting 400 men, and was quartered at Leuze-en-Hainaut near Tournai. They moved to the siege of Ardres and the attempted relief of Mardyck.
In the Spring of 1658, they were quartered in Dixmude.
On 14 June, 1658, “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” took part in the Battle of the Dunes, after which they were quartered in Nivelles.

In 1660, when Charles II returned to England, “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” was placed on English establishment although it was left in the Spanish Netherlands. They were successively moved from Nivelles to Namur and then to Dunkirk.

Also in 1660, Charles II raised a second regiment of Foot Guards (12 companies of 100 men each) in England which was designated as the "King's Regiment of Guards" and placed under the command of Col. John Russell.

In 1661, Col. John Russell’s Guards took part in the reduction of Venner's insurrection in London. It was then distributed among several garrisons where it replaced disbanded companies from the former Commonwealth.

The same year, “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards”, in Dunkirk, was brought back to full strength (12 companies of 100 men each).

In 1662, when Dunkirk was sold to France, “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of was recalled to England where it was distributed in several garrisons: Windsor, Landguard Fort, Pendennis Castle, Guernsey, Dover, Plymouth, Berwick and Hull. The three companies from “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” initially sent to Guernsey were soon sent to Portsmouth.

About Dunkirk, France

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

In 1660, when Charles II returned to England, “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” was placed on English establishment although it was left in the Spanish Netherlands. They were successively transferred from Nivelles to Namur and then to Dunkirk.

Also in 1660, Charles II raised a second regiment of Foot Guards (12 companies of 100 men each) in England which was designated as the "King's Regiment of Guards" and placed under the command of Col. John Russell.

In 1661, Col. John Russell’s "King's Regiment of Guards" took part in the reduction of an insurrection in London [Venner's Uprising]. It was then distributed among several garrisons where it replaced disbanded companies from the former Commonwealth.

The same year, “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards”, still garrisoning Dunkirk, was brought back to full strength (12 companies of 100 men each).

In 1662, when Dunkirk was sold, “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” was recalled to England where it was distributed in several garrisons: Windsor, Landguard Fort, Pendennis Castle, Guernsey, Dover, Plymouth, Berwick and Hull.

Information taken from
https://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/ind…
and https://www.grengds.com/history
THE NAMES OF THE REGIMENTS ARE IN QUOTES AS I’M NOT SURE WHEN THE NAME CHANGES OCCURRED.

We know this regiment as the Grenadier Guards today.

About Monday 7 January 1660/61

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"They were driven out by a party of guards, but again entered the City, where they were overpowered by the Trained Bands."

Those guards turn out to have been a regiment of what we know today as the Grenadier Guards:

In 1660, when Charles II returned to England, “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” was placed on English establishment although it was left in the Spanish Netherlands. They were successively transferred from Nivelles to Namur and then to Dunkirk.
Also in 1660, Charles II raised a second regiment of Foot Guards (12 companies of 100 men each) in England which was designated as the "King's Regiment of Guards" and placed under the command of Col. John Russell.
In 1661, Col. John Russell’s "King's Regiment of Guards" took part in the reduction of an insurrection in London. It was then distributed among several garrisons where it replaced disbanded companies from the former Commonwealth.
The same year, “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards”, still garrisoning Dunkirk, was brought back to full strength (12 companies of 100 men each).
In 1662, ... “Lord Wentworth's Regiment” of “His Majesty's Royal Regiment of Guards” was recalled to England where it was distributed in several garrisons: Windsor, Landguard Fort, Pendennis Castle, Guernsey, Dover, Plymouth, Berwick and Hull.

Information taken from
https://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/ind…
and https://www.grengds.com/history
THE NAMES OF THE REGIMENTS ARE IN QUOTES AS I’M NOT SURE WHEN THE NAME CHANGES OCCURRED.

About Saturday 26 January 1660/61

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Meanwhile, at the Palace of Whitehall, Charles II breaks with tradition:

"The advantages of a standing army were clear to the new king, not least to the survival of his regime. In 1660-61, Charles raised a force of 5,000 men known as the ‘King’s Guards and Garrisons’.

On 26 January 1661, he issued the warrant creating the English Army.

"Financed by a new Parliament, it included Royalist units from his exile - like the King's Troop of Horse Guards (later The Life Guards) - and old regiments from the New Model Army which were disbanded and then quickly re-mustered - such as Monck’s Regiment (later The Coldstream Guards).

"The Declaration of Breda had stated that New Model Army soldiers would be recommissioned into service under the crown, along with the promise that their pay arrears would be remunerated. This incentive had won the acquiescence of many veteran soldiers to the restoration.

"Although Charles did not employ every former New Model Army soldier, he found it politically expedient to take many on. Thousands more were paid off through new taxes and coin from the royal coffers.

"Charles was also the king of Ireland and Scotland, so their parliaments paid for units as well. By the mid-1660s, the Irish Army numbered around 5,000 infantry and 2,500 cavalry. Its Scottish counterpart had about 3,000 men.

"Initially, these remained separate military establishments from Charles’ English troops. But as time went on, they were unofficially merged.

"Charles’ force gradually increased in size thanks to the demands of foreign wars and the need to garrison new colonies like Tangier and Bombay. These became English possessions in 1661 through the dowry of Charles' new wife, the Portuguese princess Catherine of Braganza."

Excerpt from 'The Restoration and the birth of the British Army'
The National Army Museum website
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/res…

About Saturday 29 August 1668

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"The English are promised their pay, which done, they will be transported according to his Majesty's order."

Charles II is taking this opportunity to send some of his left-over Commonwealth troops abroad.

"Charles’ force gradually increased in size thanks to the demands of foreign wars and the need to garrison new colonies like Tangier and Bombay. These became English possessions in 1661 through the dowry of Charles's new wife, the Portuguese princess Catherine of Braganza.

"Charles redeployed thousands of ex-Parliamentary troops to these two locations, but also to Portugal to assist in its fight against Spain. This helped consolidate royal power by removing potential troublemakers.

"Only 800 of the 4,500 veterans sent to Iberia made it home at the end of the war in 1668. Half of these were immediately re-posted to Tangier to fight the Moors.

"Charles was the first British monarch to maintain a standing army in peacetime. When he died in 1685, its permanent establishment was as follows:
England - 3 Troops of Life Guards, 1 Regiment of Horse, 1 Regiment of Dragoons, 2 Regiments of Foot Guards and 5 Regiments of Foot.
Scotland - 2 Troops of Life Guards, 5 Regiments of Horse, 1 Regiment of Dragoons, 1 Regiment of Foot Guards and 1 Regiment of Foot.
Ireland - 1 Troop of Life Guards, 3 Regiments of Horse, 1 Regiment of Foot Guards and 6 Regiments of Foot.

"Not everyone was fully reconciled to the need for a standing army. The New Model Army's political interventions and the Rule of the Major-Generals were still fresh in the memory. People also questioned the cost of maintaining a standing army when the country was not at war.

"Some feared that an army under royal command would allow future monarchs to ignore the wishes of Parliament. And their concerns proved well founded when this issue came to a head during the reign of Charles' successor, James II."

Excerpt from The Restoration and the birth of the British Army
The National Army Museum website
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/res…

About Monday 20 May 1661

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

More about the discharge of Parliamentary forces, in England, Scotland and Ireland:

"The advantages of a standing army were clear to the new king, not least to the survival of his regime. In 1660-61, Charles raised a force of 5,000 men known as the ‘King’s Guards and Garrisons’. On 26 January 1661, he issued the warrant creating the English Army.

"Financed by a new Parliament, it included Royalist units from his exile - like the King's Troop of Horse Guards (later The Life Guards) - and old regiments from the New Model Army which were disbanded and then quickly re-mustered - such as Monck’s Regiment (later The Coldstream Guards).

"The Declaration of Breda had stated that New Model Army soldiers would be recommissioned into service under the crown, along with the promise that their pay arrears would be remunerated. This incentive had won the acquiescence of many veteran soldiers to the restoration.

"Although Charles did not employ every former New Model Army soldier, he found it politically expedient to take many on. Thousands more were paid off through new taxes and coin from the royal coffers.

"Charles was also the king of Ireland and Scotland, so their parliaments paid for units as well. By the mid-1660s, the Irish Army numbered around 5,000 infantry and 2,500 cavalry. Its Scottish counterpart had about 3,000 men.

"Initially, these remained separate military establishments from Charles’ English troops. But as time went on, they were unofficially merged.

"Charles’ force gradually increased in size thanks to the demands of foreign wars and the need to garrison new colonies like Tangier and Bombay. These became English possessions in 1661 through the dowry of Charles' new wife, the Portuguese princess Catherine of Braganza.

"Charles redeployed thousands of ex-Parliamentary troops to these two locations, but also to Portugal to assist in its fight against Spain. This helped consolidate royal power by removing potential troublemakers. ...

"Not everyone was fully reconciled to the need for a standing army. The New Model Army's political interventions and the Rule of the Major-Generals were still fresh in the memory. People also questioned the cost of maintaining a standing army when the country was not at war.

"Some feared that an army under royal command would allow future monarchs to ignore the wishes of Parliament. Their concerns proved well founded when this issue came to a head during the reign of Charles's successor, James II."

https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/res…

About Thursday 5 January 1659/60

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"... Monk and Fairfax were commanded up to town, ...'

Always opposed to military rule, in 1660 Gen. Thomas, Lord Fairfax raised troops in Yorkshire to support Gen. George Monck. By neutralising Parliamentarian forces in the north, he gave Monck the chance to march south and restore Charles II.
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/tho…

About Wallingford House

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

L&M are definitive. In George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham's Companion bio., they state that he lived in Wallingford House during the 1660's.

About Friday 24 May 1661

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

The House of Lords elected a new Speaker today:

I love part of his acceptance speach:
"We read of the Emperor Adrian, when He lay a dying, he complained that many Physicians had destroyed Him; meaning, that their contrary Conceits and different Directions for His Recovery had hastened His Death.

"So it is with us: We were sick of Reformation; Our Reformers were of all Ages, Sexes, and Degrees; of all Professions and Trades. The very Cobler went beyond his Last. These new Statesmen took upon them to regulate and govern our Governors: This was the Sickness and Plague of the Nation. Their new Laws were all written in bloody Letters; the Cruelty of their Tribunals made the Judgement Seat little differ from a Slaughter House: The Rich Man was made an Offender for a Word; Poor Men were sold for Slaves, as the Turks sell Heads, Twenty for an Asper: Yet for all this Villany there was at Length found a Protector."

But no mention of who this witty fellow was! James, Duke of York mostly filled the role last year. Anyone know? I'm sure he will be revealed in time, but I'd like to know now.

Sandwich was in his seat today.

So far many interesting 17th century documents can be found at
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…

"The first volume of [LORDS] biographies, covering 1660-1715, was published in July 2016. The project staff are currently working on the second set of biographies, covering members of the Lords in the period 1715-90."
https://www.historyofparliamenton…

They probably won't be posted on line until the copyright expires. long sfter you and I are gone!