Duke of Malborough, chapters 1-6

Note: first draft, grammar is questionable :)

I

Sir Winston Churchill had a rather gloomy point of view on his life. Well, it’s so understandable – what else should we expect from a man who up to the mature age of 40 years old was forced by circumstances to live with his wife and children under the roof of his mother-in-law, Lady Drake ? And even at her expense?

We would not even mention that in touchy field of politics his convictions were just the opposite of the set of opinions of this worthy lady. He believed in God’s given Divine Right of Sovereign, she unshakably believed in supreme Parliament’s prerogatives - and is it not really hard for a man to be so deeply dependent on a good will of his political opponent ?

Thus, even at the times when Sovereign was restored to his Throne, and the King made peace with Parliament – or rather Parliament made peace with the King, it depends on one’s personal point of view – Sir Winston still felt miserable. Oh, yes, his life got a turn to a better future and he was awarded a state office – a minor one but nevertheless, an office - and he managed to restore a small part of his family’s fortune, and was even knighted, but still his thoughts were not happy ones.

That is why he put a rather pessimistic motto at the gates of his new house: “Faithful but unfortunate” By the customs of his time the motto was expressed in Castilian: “Fiel Pero Desdichado”.

If we look at Spanish/English Dictionary, we’ll see that “Desdichado” could be translated to English in several different ways:
 
 desdichado [des-de-chah’-do, dah]
adjective

... Unfortunate, unhappy, unlucky, distressed, wretched, miserable, calamitous.
Es un desdichado -> (Coll.) he is a sorry, pitiful creature; he is a good-for-nothing fellow ...

We probably can suggest that Sir Winston would be really surprised if somebody mentioned to him that he would become some sort of a founder of two Dukedoms – one in Great Britain and another one in France.
 
Probably, he would be surprised even more, if he knew that one man, his descendent in the 10-th generation, famous statesman, author and journalist, dilettante-painter, who was also a mason of a really professional quality, would personally put this very same motto on the brick wall around his house in Kent.

Even more – this man, who would be born 254 years after Sir Winston, would remember him in his book dedicated to their family, and would start this book with a story about Sir Winston and his not-too-successful life story. 

On the other hand, it’s not so strange. This man would be his full namesake.

Sir Winston Churchill.

II

The name – Sir Winston Churchill - was not the only thing both men had in common. Two and a half centuries is rather a long time, and the Art of War is changing quickly – nevertheless, both of them served in cavalry.

Sir Winston Churchill, who was born in 1620, was a brave Cavalier and a Horse Guard captain, serving King Charles I. He was fighting against “roundheads” – supporters of the Parliament.

Sir Winston Churchill, who was born in 1874, was a brave Hussar and a cavalry subaltern, serving Queen Victoria. He was fighting against rebellious tribes on Indian Northern Border and participated in Khartoum Expedition.

Sir Winston Churchill, who was born at 1874, was involved in many things and was really crafty in many crafts. For instance, he just loved to write history books.

Sir Winston Churchill, who was born at 1620, once also wrote a history book with impossibly long title:

“Divi Britannica; being a remark upon the Lives of all the Kings of this Isle, from the year of the World 2855 until the year of Grace 1660”.

Especially interesting is the author’s use of “Divi” – far too close to “divinity”, in my humble opinion.

It’s probably worth mentioning that both men – Sir Winston Churchill, who was born in 1620 and Sir Winston Churchill, who was born in 1874 – were systematically short of money.

However, it was the end of their similarities.

Sir Winston Churchill, who lived in the XX century, was a politician and a statesman of a high regard. His book related to the history of his family in the XVII-XVIII centuries, he researched and developed at the time of his temporary retirement from a top position of Canceller of Exchequer in “shadow cabinet” of Conservative Party. 

And even in his retirement he managed to make some good money just by his pen – he was one of the best journalists of his time.

On the contrary, Sir Winston Churchill, who lived in the XVII century, put all his hopes for advancement on his children. He had a bunch of them – one full dozen. Well, in his time not many children survived their infancy, and in case of Churchill’s family just five children managed to live long enough to outgrow such a peril.

And four out of five did not disappoint their father in his hopes – they aimed high.

First one to advance was his daughter Arabella, born in 1648.

Well, the poor girl from a relatively noble family in the XVII century could not start her career as a stenographer or a secretary.

She could try a good marriage, or probably her family might find her a place at the Court, where she could get good and useful connections.

Churchill’s family was lucky – Arabella secured a place as a maid of honor serving the wife of James Stewart, Duke of York.

III

The title of Duke of York to this very day belongs to the Royals – usually its hold by a younger brother of a ruling sovereign, so, in a sense the title is not just a title but rather a high state office.

Thus, Churchill’s were happy to receive at 1665 an offer from Anne, the Duchess of York, to take their daughter as her maid-of-honor. It was a great opportunity for Arabella to establish some useful connections and to find eventually, under patronage of the Duchess, a suitable marriage partner.

However, 17-years old Miss Churchill got her chance – and not eventually. The chance exceeded the brightest expectations of Sir Winston, her father – Arabella caught the eye of Duke himself, and very soon replaced in his bed her patron, Duchess of York.

The thoughts of Duchess are unknown to history, but Churchill’s did not take this event as a dishonor or as a tragedy. Such things at the time of Restoration looked like a great opportunity for a young lady and for her entire family.

And for young Arabella it was not a forced deal, not at all. James Stewart (or Stuart if take a French spelling of his family name) was just 32, a very epitome of a nobleman and a cavalier, he was very polite and considerate to Miss Churchill, and very soon she became not just his few-days-affection but got the status of an official Duke’s mistress, or in other words – his not-so-official wife.

In any case – at 1667 she gave him a daughter, and he recognized the child as his own – and at his court appeared Arabella’s younger brother, John, who was accepted there as Duke’s page.

However, John did not stay for long on his court position. Duke was quite willing to be helpful to brother of his favorite, and once asked him - what’s his most dear dream ?

Young John Churchill did not hesitate – he kneeled and said that he would like to serve in one of His Majesty regiments which are under command of His Highness.

Here we should probably add some explanations: James, Duke of York, was not just a King’s brother. King Charles II produced his first bastard at the tender age of 16, and now, more than 20 years later, could count them by dozens.
However, at 1667 A.D. he had no legal descendants, and it looked very unlikely that his wife, Catherine of Braganza, princess of Portugal, would be able to bring him one.

As a result, his brother James was also his Crown Prince, and as a such, hold the office of entire Royal Army commanding general.

Thus, the John Churchill desire could be satisfied with no difficulty at all – he instantly got the position of King Guard’s ensign. It was a beginning of his military career.

He was just 17 years old.

IV

John Churchill left England - most probably - around 1668. He came back probably in 1671. Our knowledge related to his whereabouts at this time interval – from 1668 to 1671 – is quite uncertain. It looks like he spent some time at Tangier (in contemporary Morocco). This town came as a part of Charles II wife’s dowry – she was a princess of Portugal. At this time Tangier was garrisoned by English troops.

There is a possibility that young John also took part in some naval action at Mediterranean - English Navy in 1668-1670 was involved in small scale fighting with Algerian pirates.

We know that it was possible because John Churchill got all equipment necessary for an officer of so called “naval brigade” – some kind of infantry units placed on Navy ships for action on shore.

Uncertainties and our overuse of the word “probably” do have an explanation – Ensign Churchill was not a person of any importance, nobody cared to trace his movements, and he himself quite rarely recalled this period of his life.   
We even are not sure about the reason why he left England so soon after receiving his ensign patent.

There is a romantic version – he happened to be liked by Duchess of York, wife of his patron.  John was a really handsome boy, and the lady decided to take revenge to her unfaithful husband by trying to start an affair with the brother of her husband’s favorite.

We should say that this version is quite unlikely. Gossip and rumors are always follow any person of high distinction, and Lady Anne, Duchess of York, was not an exception.

We, probably, should stick to a more prosaic explanation: young officers at this time -XVII century – liked to join fighting units abroad as gentlemen-volunteers. The point was to get some action experience and to catch attention of their superiors by demonstrating their zeal for active service.
Their colonels used to give them an unpaid leave with no friction at all.

What is really interesting is the fact that such a practice of XVII century survived in English Army even a couple hundred years later, and Sir Winston Churchill – the one who was born in 1874 – as a young cavalry officer used it to join a military expedition to Sudan in 1895.

This Sir Winston in his famous book, Duke of Marlborough, writes a lot about John Churchill’s possible involvement with “naval brigade” – quite probably because he, as a First Lord of Admiralty, commanded naval troops in 1914-1915 at the time of World War One, so the subject was obviously dear to heart. 

However, other Sir Winston Churchill – the one who was born in 1620 – had to pay for his son’s equipment, and it was extremely difficult for him to do it.
Indeed, it was so difficult for him that he had to ask the king to reimburse him.
The amount was not too big – just 140 pounds – but the problem was with his ability to raise such a sum. Sir Winston’s year income was 160 pounds, and he had no free money to disperse.

By the way – Charles II also had no money. No money at all, his Treasury was empty. The Crown of England was bankrupt; even Army’s wages were in arrears.

Nevertheless, Sir Winston’s petition was taken in consideration, and the necessary amount of money was awarded to him. We know it for sure – there is a documented king’s order to his Treasury to pay this money with no regards to other Crown obligations.

This order is one of only two surviving documents covering Churchill’s (both father and son) at this period of time.

Another document is a short note News-Letters from London dated by Feb.6 of 1671 related to a duel between Mr. Fenwick and Mr. Churchill.
It ended with some wounds for Mr. Churchill but no danger of life.

Thus, we know for sure that at Feb.1671 John Churchill was in London.

V

John Wilmot, 2-nd Earl of Rochester, could become a good reporter of Charles II court life. He was a very intelligent man, full of life, inventive and tricky, with a great feeling of theater and theatrics, and he would also knew his subject rather well – for some period of time he was in charge of king’s bedchamber.

The Earl, naturally, knew all mistresses of his Royal master, and one of them became a target of his poisonous pen. She was not just an ordinary woman, not one of many girls surrounding him – oh, no.

She was My Lady Barbara, Duchess of Cleveland, in a sense an unofficial spouse of Charles II. So, the object of Earl’s satire was rather high placed. And about the subject of this piece of Art could be judged by reading the text in original:

Quoth the Duchess of Cleveland to counselor Knight,
I'd fain have a prick, knew I how to come by't.
I desire you'll be secret and give your advice:
Though cunt be not coy, reputation is nice'.

To some cellar in Sodom Your Grace must retire
Where porters with black-pots sit round a coal-fire;
There open your case, and Your Grace cannot fail
Of a dozen of pricks for a dozen of ale'.

Is't so?' - quoth the Duchess. Aye, by God!' quoth the whore.
Then give me the key that unlocks the back door,
For I'd rather be fucked by porters and carmen
Than thus be abused by Churchill and Jermyn'.

Well, master Jermyn – whoever he is - does not concern us but Mr. Churchill, also mentioned by Earl Rochester, is more important and really should become a point of our interest.

He is our old friend, John Churchill, whose affair with Lady Barbara began at 1671.

John managed to capture a wonderful prize – to be able to claim as his mistress a strikingly beautiful woman, known also by her charm, wild temperament and huge wealth, and who was even a Duchess – well, it would be a dream for any young officer.

Lady Barbara was born in 1642 as a Barbara Villiers, and in 1659 by marrying Roger Palmer became Mrs. Barbara Palmer. Her husband’s parents were deadly set against the marriage and kept saying that she already had a lover (2-nd Earl of Chesterfield) and she would ruin their son’s life. Well, they had a point.

As early as in 1660 - literally right after the wedding - Barbara became a mistress of Charles II.

At 1671 she already had 5 children, and all of them were recognized by Charles II as his bastards, with a telling family name given to them by the king – Fitzroy. In July of 1672 Lady Barbara added a brand new baby girl to Fitzroy bunch – and a lot of people credited John Churchill as a child’s father. 

Note: the list of Lady Barbara’s children:

• Lady Anne Palmer, later FitzRoy (1661–1722), probably daughter of Charles II, although some people believed she bore a resemblance to the Earl of Chesterfield. She later became the Countess of Sussex.
• Charles Palmer, later FitzRoy (1662–1730), styled Lord Limerick and later Earl of Southampton, created Duke of Southampton (1675), later 2nd Duke of Cleveland (1709)
• Henry FitzRoy (1663–1690), created Earl of Euston (1672) and Duke of Grafton (1675)
• Charlotte FitzRoy (1664–1718), later Countess of Lichfield. She gave birth to twenty children.
• George FitzRoy (1665–1716), created Earl of Northumberland (1674) and Duke of Northumberland (1683)
• Barbara (Benedicta) FitzRoy (1672–1737) - Barbara Villiers claimed that she was Charles' daughter, but she was probably the child of John Churchill.

Well, the King had no illusions about My Lady Barbara’s fidelity to him – the number of her intimate friends was rather impressive and the list included, for instance, the name of James Monmouth, Kings’ son from his other lover, Lucy Walter.

And Charles II most certainly knew about her relationship with John Churchill,  her mother's second cousin and lover.

There is even a gossip of these times that once the King caught young John in Lady Barbara’s bedroom, and John kneeled and humbly asked for King’s pardon.

“Well” – Charles II responded – “you’re a scoundrel but I forgive you. It’s how you win your bread”.

VI

Well, as far as “… John Churchill’s piece of bread …” was concerned – the King was right. Earl of Rochester once mentioned "... some dandies with negligible income of 30 pounds per year but still trying to look fashionable ...". The Earl honestly despised them.

The income of John Churchill was approximately the same – his father, Sir Winston, had just 160 pounds per year to support himself and his entire family.

He had three sons, and John was just one of them.

However, the Earl of Rochester’s poetry - which we had a chance to quote - claiming Duchess of Cleveland’s dissatisfaction with her young lover was just a figure of speech. This statement was patently untrue.

The Duchess was so deeply in love with John Churchill that she literally rained on him a lot of generous presents, and once even gave him a really princely sum of 5000 pounds, approximately 30 times more than his father’s year income.

Young man did not spend this money for earthy pleasures of flesh. Oh, no – he rather used them for a risky but well planned long term investment.

At this time, at the end of XVII century, England already used some kind of insurance schemas based on banking. So, Ensign Churchill invested his money in private bank of Lord Halifax on the following conditions: Churchill gave His Lordship 4500 pounds at once in exchange for a contract of obligation to pay Churchill 500 pounds per year to the end of his life.

The deal was a combination of a rational calculation and a game of hazard.

In essence, John’s bet was that he will live long enough to return his money with a good interest and to guarantee himself a decent life long income.

His Lordship’s bet was that young and brave Guard’s officer would not live long – in this case My Lord Halifax would win a rather significant amount of money. 

And we should say that he got a good chance to win everything – the so called Third Anglo-Dutch War began at 1672, and English Navy in conjunction with French attacked the shores of United States of Netherlands.

The Duke of York in his capacity as a Lord High Admiral placed his flag on the ship-of-war named after him: HMS Royal James. The ship also hold a most junior officer of a First Company of Guards, namely -  John Churchill.

In the very first real sea battle the HMS Royal James was lost.

VII

The project is stopped - for a while.