Wednesday 1 July 1663

This morning it rained so hard (though it was fair yesterday, and we thereupon in hopes of having some fair weather, which we have wanted these three months) that it wakened Creed, who lay with me last night, and me, and so we up and fell to discourse of the business of his accounts now under dispute, in which I have taken much trouble upon myself and raised a distance between Sir G. Carteret and myself, which troubles me, but I hope we have this morning light on an expedient that will right all, that will answer their queries, and yet save Creed the 500l. which he did propose to make of the exchange abroad of the pieces of eight which he disbursed. Being ready, he and I by water to White Hall, where I left him before we came into the Court, for fear I should be seen by Sir G. Carteret with him, which of late I have been forced to avoid to remove suspicion.

I to St. James’s, and there discoursed a while with Mr. Coventry, between whom and myself there is very good understanding and friendship.

And so to Westminster Hall, and being in the Parliament lobby, I there saw my Lord of Bristoll come to the Commons House to give his answer to their question, about some words he should tell the King that were spoke by Sir Richard Temple, a member of their House. A chair was set at the bar of the House for him, which he used but little, but made an harangue of half an hour bareheaded, the House covered.

His speech being done, he came out and withdrew into a little room till the House had concluded of an answer to his speech; which they staying long upon, I went away. And by and by out comes Sir W. Batten; and he told me that his Lordship had made a long and a comedian-like speech, and delivered with such action as was not becoming his Lordship. He confesses he did tell the King such a thing of Sir Richard Temple, but that upon his honour they were not spoke by Sir Richard, he having taken a liberty of enlarging to the King upon the discourse which had been between Sir Richard and himself lately; and so took upon himself the whole blame, and desired their pardon, it being not to do any wrong to their fellow-member, but out of zeal to the King.

He told them, among many other things, that as to his religion he was a Roman Catholique, but such a one as thought no man to have right to the Crown of England but the Prince that hath it; and such a one as, if the King should desire his counsel as to his own, he would not advise him to another religion than the old true reformed religion of this country, it being the properest of this kingdom as it now stands.

And concluded with a submission to what the House shall do with him, saying, that whatever they shall do, says he, “thanks be to God, this head, this heart, and this sword (pointing to them all), will find me a being in any place in Europe.”

The House hath hereupon voted clearly Sir Richard Temple to be free from the imputation of saying those words; but when Sir William Batten came out, had not concluded what to say to my Lord, it being argued that to own any satisfaction as to my Lord from his speech, would be to lay some fault upon the King for the message he should upon no better accounts send to the impeaching of one of their members.

Walking out, I hear that the House of Lords are offended that my Lord Digby should come to this House and make a speech there without leave first asked of the House of Lords. I hear also of another difficulty now upon him; that my Lord of Sunderland (whom I do not know) was so near to the marriage of his daughter as that the wedding-clothes were made, and portion and every thing agreed on and ready; and the other day he goes away nobody yet knows whither, sending her the next morning a release of his right or claim to her, and advice to his friends not to enquire into the reason of this doing, for he hath enough for it; but that he gives them liberty to say and think what they will of him, so they do not demand the reason of his leaving her, being resolved never to have her, but the reason desires and resolves not to give.

Thence by water with Sir W. Batten to Trinity House, there to dine with him, which we did; and after dinner we fell talking, Sir J. Minnes, Mr. Batten and I; Mr. Batten telling us of a late triall of Sir Charles Sydly the other day, before my Lord Chief Justice Foster and the whole bench, for his debauchery a little while since at Oxford Kate’s,1 coming in open day into the Balcone and showed his nakedness, … [acting all the postures of lust and buggery that could be imagined – L&M] and abusing of scripture and as it were from thence preaching a mountebank sermon from the pulpit, saying that there he had to sell such a powder as should make all the [women] in town run after him, 1000 people standing underneath to see and hear him.

And that being done he took a glass of wine … [and washed his prick in it – L&M] and then drank it off, and then took another and drank the King’s health.

It seems my Lord and the rest of the judges did all of them round give him a most high reproof; my Lord Chief justice saying, that it was for him, and such wicked wretches as he was, that God’s anger and judgments hung over us, calling him sirrah many times. It’s said they have bound him to his good behaviour (there being no law against him for it) in 5000l. It being told that my Lord Buckhurst was there, my Lord asked whether it was that Buckhurst that was lately tried for robbery; and when answered Yes, he asked whether he had so soon forgot his deliverance at that time, and that it would have more become him to have been at his prayers begging God’s forgiveness, than now running into such courses again.

… [Upon this discourse, Sir J. Mennes and Mr. Batten both say that buggery is now almost grown as common among our gallants as in Italy, and that the very pages of the town begin to complain of their masters for it. – L&M] Thence home, and my clerks being gone by my leave to see the East India ships that are lately come home, I staid all alone within my office all the afternoon. This day I hear at dinner that Don John of Austria, since his flight out of Portugall, is dead of his wounds: —[not true]— so there is a great man gone, and a great dispute like to be ended for the crown of Spayne, if the King should have died before him. I received this morning a letter from my wife, brought by John Gower to town, wherein I find a sad falling out between my wife and my father and sister and Ashwell upon my writing to my father to advise Pall not to keep Ashwell from her mistress, or making any difference between them. Which Pall telling to Ashwell, and she speaking some words that her mistress heard, caused great difference among them; all which I am sorry from my heart to hear of, and I fear will breed ill blood not to be laid again.

So that I fear my wife and I may have some falling out about it, or at least my father and I, but I shall endeavour to salve up all as well as I can, or send for her out of the country before the time intended, which I would be loth to do.

In the evening by water to my coz. Roger Pepys’ chamber, where he was not come, but I found Dr. John newly come to town, and is well again after his sickness; but, Lord! what a simple man he is as to any public matter of state, and talks so sillily to his brother Dr. Tom. What the matter is I know not, but he has taken (as my father told me a good while since) such displeasure that he hardly would touch his hat to me, and I as little to him.

By and by comes Roger, and he told us the whole passage of my Lord Digby to-day, much as I have said here above; only that he did say that he would draw his sword against the Pope himself, if he should offer any thing against his Majesty, and the good of these nations; and that he never was the man that did either look for a Cardinal’s cap for himself, or any body else, meaning Abbot Montagu; and the House upon the whole did vote Sir Richard Temple innocent; and that my Lord Digby hath cleared the honour of his Majesty, and Sir Richard Temple’s, and given perfect satisfaction of his own respects to the House.

Thence to my brother’s, and being vexed with his not minding my father’s business here in getting his Landscape done, I went away in an anger, and walked home, and so up to my lute and then to bed.

32 Annotations

First Reading

TerryF  •  Link

L&M connect the dots of the transcription by Henry B. Wheatley.

"..showed his nakedness, . . . . and abusing of scripture and as it were from thence preaching a mountebank sermon from the pulpit, saying that there he had to sell such a powder as should make all the [women] in town run after him, 1000 people standing underneath to see and hear him, and that being done he took a glass of wine . . . . and then drank it off,"

L&M: "..showed his nakedness -- acting all the postures of lust and buggery that could be imagined, and abusing of scripture and, as it were, from thence preaching a Mountebanke sermon from that pulpitt, saying that there he hath to sell such a pouder as should make all the cunts in town run after him, -- a thousand people standing underneath to see and hear him.
And that being done, he took a glass of wine and washed his prick in it and then drank it off;"

---------

"..running into such courses again . . . . Thence home,"

L&M: "..running into such courses again.
Upon this discourse, Sir J. Mennes and Mr. Batten both say that buggery is now almost grown as common among our gallants as in Italy, and that the very pages of the town begin to complain of their masters for it. But blessed be God, I do not to this day know what is the meaning of this sin, nor which is the agent and which is the patient. Thence home;"

=======

This last is the passage quoted by David Quidnunc from Liza Picard's “Restoration London” [quoting L&M] in an annote of 16 January 1660/61 http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…

The late Sir Winston Churchill might have thought Samuel at sea because he's never been at sea, i.e., REALLY IN the navy http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1…

Michael Robinson  •  Link

Buckhurst and Sedley ...

For pointed satires I would Buckhurst choose,
The best good man with the worst-natured muse,
For songs and verses mannerly obscene,
That can stir nature up by springs unseen,
And, without forcing blushes, warm the Queen.

Sedley has that prevailing, gentle art,
that can with a restless charm impart
The loosest wishes to the chastest heart,
Rasise such a conflict, kindle such a fire,
Betwixt declining virtue and desire,
Till the poor vanquished maid dissolves away
In dreams all night, in sighs and tears all day.

John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester
An Allusion to Horace. The 10th. Satire of the 1st Book, 59 - 69

dirk  •  Link

John Evelyn's diary today

"To Lond: To our Society were brought severall Insects described by Mr. Hooke with the Microscop and reduced to a scale, which we ordered should be cut in Brasse in order to his printing his industrious description of them:"

TerryF  •  Link

Today's House of Commons Journal's not as colorful as Pepys's.

Privilege.-Charge against Sir R. Temple.

The House having received Information, That the Earl of Bristoll was at the Door; and did pray Admittance into the House, to give an Account, in Person, of the Matter concerning Sir Richard Temple, according to the Vote of the House passed, upon his Lordship's Desire in that Behalf, on the Twenty-seventh of June last;

E. of Bristoll heard.
His Lordship was, by Direction of the House, placed in a Chair, set for him, on Purpose, on the left Side of the House, within the Bar: And Mr. Speaker did open unto him his Majesty's Message, and the Votes and Proceedings of the House thereupon, concerning Sir Richard Temple.

And his Lordship having delivered his Answer thereto in the House;
And being withdrawn;
The House proceeded in the Debate of the Matter.

Resolved, &c. That this House is satisfied, That Sir Richard Temple hath not broke any Privilege of this House, in the Matter in Question concerning him.
....
Ordered, That such Members of this House, as are of his Majesty's Privy Council, do acquaint his Majesty with the Vote of the House, concerning Sir Richard Temple....

From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 8: 1 July 1663', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 8: 1660-1667 (1802), pp. 514-15. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/… Date accessed: 1 July 2006.

-------

Michael Robinson, very nice citation of John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester.

in Aqua episctula  •  Link

Ah Ha! Foreign exchange [derivitives] at an early stage "...make of the exchange abroad of the pieces of eight which he disbursed...."

Australian Susan  •  Link

"the very pages of the town begin to complain of their masters for it"

Maybe Wayneman ran off partly because he was worried about being in the house without Mrs P (although we can see by this entry that his fears would have been groundless).

Buggery and the Navy:

George Melly titled his autobiography "Rum, bum and concertina" , because that was the shipboard equivalent of the shorebound Wine, Women and Song.

" getting his Landscape done"

Not sure what this is?

Paul Chapin  •  Link

Those loose pronouns again
"I hear also of another difficulty now upon him [George Digby, Lord Bristol]; that my Lord of Sunderland (whom I do not know) was so near to the marriage of his [Digby's] daughter as that the wedding-clothes were made, and portion and every thing agreed on and ready; and the other day he [Sunderland] goes away nobody yet knows whither, sending her the next morning a release of his right or claim to her, and advice to his friends not to enquire into the reason of this doing, for he hath enough for it; but that he gives them liberty to say and think what they will of him, so they do not demand the reason of his leaving her, being resolved never to have her, but the reason desires and resolves not to give." [remaining masculine pronouns all refer to Sunderland, feminine to Digby's daughter]

TerryF  •  Link

”getting his Landskips done” transcribe L&M.

A quick check on the web find "landskips" associated with paintings in this period; and the Large Glossary in the Companion agrees.

A. De Araujo  •  Link

"such a powder as should make all the [women]in town run after him"
Always looking for "the good Chemistry";cf: Tristan and Isolde,L'Elisir d'amore and nowadays Pheronomes!

jeannine  •  Link

"my Lord of Sunderland (whom I do not know) was so near to the marriage of his daughter as that the wedding-clothes were made, and portion and every thing agreed on and ready; and the other day he goes away nobody yet knows whither, sending her the next morning a release of his right or claim to her, and advice to his friends not to enquire into the reason of this doing, for he hath enough for it; but that he gives them liberty to say and think what they will of him, so they do not demand the reason of his leaving her, being resolved never to have her, but the reason desires and resolves not to give."
The poor girl. I am speculating that the reason may be that her father (Digby) has been blowing off his big mouth and making an ass out of himself. Anyone else have any more details here?

jeannine  •  Link

From the note "Lord Dorset “Sackville, who was then Lord Buckhurst, with Sir Charles Sedley and Sir Thomas Ogle, got drunk at the Cock, in Bow Street, by Covent Garden, and going into the balcony exposed themselves to the populace in very indecent postures...."
How much do you bet they all end up getting "promoted" by Charles II?

Stolzi  •  Link

What I take away from today's entry is two things:

First, Pepys' insatiable appetite for celebrity gossip; he'd fit right in in our day. (Jeannine, I thought rather that My Lord of Sunderland - whom Pepys obviously regrets bitterly not knowing - has a strong suspicion as to his intended's chastity, but is doing the "Noble Cavalier" thing by refusing to cast the least aspersions upon her. He may figure that once everyone starts exclaiming and wondering, it'll all come out soon enough.)

Second, the not-too-surprising fact that all the women being together down at Brampton have immediately gotten into a towering row with each other. It reminds me of a despairing letter from C.S. Lewis to a correspondent of his (10 August, 1943) about the three women with whom he was sharing a house:

"There is never a time when =all= these three women are in a good temper."

J A Gioia  •  Link

"...buggery is now almost grown as common among our gallants as in Italy..."

Hmmmm...

"...and the other day [Sunderland] goes away nobody yet knows whither, sending her the next morning a release of his right or claim to [Digby's daughter in marriage], and advice to his friends not to enquire into the reason of this doing, for he hath enough for it..."

Robert Gertz  •  Link

Something tells me my Lord Sandwich is expecting to get about half of that 500Ls.

Robert Gertz  •  Link

"I to St. James’s, and there discoursed a while with Mr. Coventry, between whom and myself there is very good understanding and friendship..."

"And Mr. Coventry, sir..." the learned judge eyes the said Coventry. "Would you say that there was a very good understanding and friendship between yourself, sir and the prisoner?"

"Yes, my Lord. I regarded young Mr. Pepys as a good friend and a young man with a great future." All eye a bedraggled Pepys in the dock beside an unkempt, hollow-eyed, mumbling Creed...Who somehow finds it impossible to catch my Lord Sandwich's eye as Sandwich regards him and Pepys sternly from his seat.

"Until of course these unsavory matter came to light, whereupon I naturally felt it my duty to the Duke and his Majesty..."

Robert Gertz  •  Link

Does this mean John took Pall's side in an argument? Whoa...

But I suppose natural if he has to choose between his own daughter and the pretty Frenchie hussy who has stolen his brilliant son away and is leading him to ruin with her Frenchie ways. My guess is a rather bored Ashwell spent some time with Pall, irritating a bored Bess...Ashwell resented being told she was not to associate with someone, anyone (Pall) on her own, especially when Bess pulled rank and John foolishly tried to intervene, causing Bess to assert her rights as Mistress.

One more time...

“Welcome to Brampton, such a perfect town

Father Pepys has rules, let us lay them down.

Don’t make waves, keep behind, and we’ll get a-long fine.

Brampton is a perfect place.

Now you’re in Brampton and this is John's town

John does not tolerate any pouting frown

Watch your step, watch your speech, no French ways we beseech

Brampton is a perfect place.

Please keep off of my grass

Shine your shoes, wipe your…face.

BRAMPTON is.. BRAMPTON IS…Brampton is a per-fect plaaaaaaace!”

***

Wim van der Meij  •  Link

Sunderland and the marriage of his daughter: Warrington says this here: "The marriage, nevertheless, took place, and the youthful bride, Lady Ann Digby, second daughter and eventually sole heir of George Digby, Earl of Bristol, became by the alliance the ancestress of the dukes of marlborough and earls Spencer."

jeannine  •  Link

Wim

Thanks for this. I had some feeling that there is "something" behind Sunderland's withdrawl from the engagement that we're not seeing here and it didn't seem like it was necessarily Ann's character. Maybe Sam will shed some light on this in the days to come.

Patricia  •  Link

I'm really worried about Sam's Big Mouth. Anyone who has ever experienced office politics knows you keep your trap shut about the faults of your co-workers when talking to other co-workers. Everything will be repeated. I'm afraid Sam's aspersions on W. Batten, W. Penn, J. Minnes, etc. are going to come back to haunt him.
And re the Brampton business, "wherein I find a sad falling out between my wife and my father and sister and Ashwell upon my writing to my father to advise Pall not to keep Ashwell from her mistress" we see it was a letter from Sam to his old dad that caused the ruckus. He's trying to mediate some dispute or other by long distance, and it won't work. No, Sam, you CAN'T fix everything!

Terry Foreman  •  Link

The King v. Sir Charles Sedley

Discussed in English law as a problematic libel case http://goo.gl/z980Y , The King v. Sir Charles Sedley has come to have a certain cachet in U.S. law:

-- (1) "It is generally agreed that the first reported case involving obscene conduct is The King v. Sir Charles Sedley. "
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi…

-- (2) II. Previous and Current Laws Effecting U.S. Pornography
"The first case which demonstrated that the common law courts would, even in the absence of a statute, penalize conduct which is grossly offensive to the public occurred in 1663 in the case of King v. Sedley. Sir Charles Sedley and two friends became drunk at a tavern. They climbed to the balcony of the tavern and removed their clothes. Sedley gave a speech which included profanities. He also poured bottles of urine on his audience and a riot ensued. Although the case did not concern the distribution of sexual materials, it involved both a physical assault upon others and the public broadcasting of profanity and nudity upon unwilling recipients. Sedley was given a substantial fine and committed to jail for a week. This case was subsequently deemed an obscenity case when the issues involved were later cited in rulings concerning obscenity." http://www.porn-report.com/previo…

This post's first link (of 3) shows some June 1663 details may be uncertain.

Second Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

L&M transcribe: "But I hope we have this morning light of an Expedient that will right all -- "

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"my Lord Digby to-day...did say...that he never was the man that did either look for a Cardinal’s cap for himself, or any body else, meaning Abbot Montagu"

From the articles of impeachment which Bristol now drew up against Clarendon, it is clear that the reference here is to Ludovick Stuart, Lord d'Aubigny, not Mountagu. See http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1… In November 1665 d'Aubigny was nominated cardinal but died almost immediately. Bristol's words on 1 July were: 'I am no Negotiator of Cardinal's caps for his majesty's domestics.' Both d'Aubigny and Mountagu were Household officers (the former of the Queen, the latter of the Queen Mother). Mountagu was unpopular at this time. (Per L&M footnote)

Ivan  •  Link

"Sir J. Mennes and Mr. Batten both say that buggery is now almost grown as common among our gallants as in Italy, and that the very pages of the town begin to complain of their masters for it. But blessed be God, I do not to this day know what is the meaning of this sin, nor which is the agent nor which is the patient."

I may be guilty of the most appalling naivety but I am not sure I wholly understand Pepys' comments about "buggery". Does he mean he is not sure who instigates the practice? Maybe the gallants are seducing their page boys or maybe vice-versa the page boys are seducing the gallants. Is this his meaning? He evidently thinks homosexual practices are sinful, as a good heterosexual man and that he is blessed to be free of such thoughts! I am puzzled, however, by his saying that he does not know its "meaning". Is he referring to what might be termed the social effects of "buggery" becoming more common in London at that time [if it was?] or is he wondering aloud, as it were, about the religious/philosophical implications of such desires.

What, in fact, were the legal implications of such behaviour? Were homosexuals brought before courts of law at this time? The lewd behaviour of Sir Charles Sedley "acting all the postures of lust and buggery that could be imagined" in a public display had to be legally dealt with but what was the position of say the ordinary, non-heterosexual male citizen at this time?

Mary K  •  Link

Legal position

Prior to the passing of the Buggery Act in 1533, such cases were handled by the ecclesiastical courts rather than under the civil law. The 1533 act defined buggery as a capital offence. With the brief exception of a short period under Queen Mary, the civil act remained in force essentially until 1861 when buggery ceased to be defined as a capital offence, though it remained a criminal offence.

Bill  •  Link

"my Lord of Sunderland (whom I do not know) was so near to the marriage of his daughter as that the wedding-clothes were made, and portion and every thing agreed on and ready; and the other day he goes away nobody yet knows whither, sending her the next morning a release of his right or claim to her, and advice to his friends not to enquire into the reason of this doing, for he hath enough for it; but that he gives them liberty to say and think what they will of him, so they do not demand the reason of his leaving her, being resolved never to have her, but the reason desires and resolves not to give."

A letter from the Comte de Comminges, French ambassador at Whitehall, to M. de Lionne, dated "Juillet 2-12, 1663," contains another account of this rumour: "Je vous avois mandé que le Comte de Sunderland épousoit la fille du Comte de Bristol. Il se retira le soir qu'on devoit l'épouser, et donna ordre à un de ses amis de rompre le mariage. Le procédé surprit toute la cour, et le Roi méme s'en est moqué, et l'a blamé au dernier point."
---Wheatley, 1893.

StanB  •  Link

A little more on 'The Cock Tavern' and the Notorious 'Oxford Kate' it also refers to the infamous incident concerning 'Sir Charles Sydly' ,also a rather ghastly attack occured on or about the 21st December 1670 On 'Sir John Coventry' after a night supping at 'The Cock Tavern' and on his way home he was attacked, So vicious was the attack it brought about an act of Parliment "The Coventry Act" was passed, declaring assaults accompanied by personal mutilation a felony without benefit of clergy, an Act not repealed until 1828.
http://www.pascalbonenfant.com/18…

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"Thence by water with Sir W. Batten to Trinity House, there to dine with him, which we did; ..." On June 15, 1663, Sir William Batten took over from Sir John Mennes as Master of Trinity House. This sounds like a perk of office.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"... he never was the man that did either look for a Cardinal’s cap for himself, or any body else, meaning Abbot Montagu;"

I nominate Abbot Walter Montagu:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal…

"In 1639, at the time of the First Bishops' War, the Queen solicited monetary help from Catholics. In response a meeting of Catholics was held in London ... the collection was entrusted to Montagu and Sir Kenelm Digby. The matter came before Parliament, ... All this made Montagu a marked man, so that when the First English Civil War broke out he left for France. He entered a Benedictine monastery, and was professed in the order. In due course he was ordained priest, became a naturalised subject of France, and was in favour with the Queen-Regent, Marie de Medicis, at whose Court he appears to have resided. Through her influence he was made abbot of the Benedictine monastery at Nanteuil, in the diocese of Metz, and subsequently the commendatory abbacy of St. Martin, near Pontoise, was conferred upon him."

"Queen Henrietta Maria had taken up residence at the Louvre, and had lost her chaplain, Fr. Robert Phillip, an Oratorian and a Scot, who died on 4 January 1647. The abbot [MONTAGU] was chosen his successor, and was also appointed her Majesty's Lord Almoner. Subsequently he resided with her at the Palais Royal, with intervals of retirement to his abbey. Sir Edward Nicholas reported to Edward Hyde in 1652 that Montagu and other Catholics were the cause of the exclusion from the exile court of Thomas Hobbes, a suspected atheist. After the Restoration, and Somerset House had been prepared for her Majesty's reception in 1663, the abbot was summoned to reside with her there, and apparently returned to France with her in June 1665."

Chris Squire UK  •  Link

DNB has:

‘ . . in 1663 (Sunderland) . . court(ed) Lady Anne Digby (1645/6–1715), younger daughter of George Digby, earl of Bristol, with whom a marriage was arranged that summer. At the last moment, however, the groom panicked and fled abroad. By the time he got back to England his mind was made up, and he married Lady Anne on 9 June 1665. When they settled at Althorp, their seat in Northamptonshire, they virtually rebuilt it and used it for glittering social gatherings . . ’

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"This day I hear at dinner that Don John of Austria, since his flight out of Portugall, is dead of his wounds: —[not true]— so there is a great man gone, and a great dispute like to be ended for the crown of Spayne, if the King should have died before him.'

L&M: The story was untrue; Don Juan lived until 1679. Pepys information probably came from a letter he received from John Pitts (Lisbon , 7. June, o.s.): CSPD 1663-4, p. 165. Don Juan had not in fact been wounded at Ameixial (q.v.  https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/… and 
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/… ), though he had been forced to dismount and he had lost most of his bodyguard. For some years (1646-61) he had been the only male heir of Philip IV, and the birth of the Infante Charles in 1661 had failed to extinguish his ambition to succeed (though illegitimate to his father's throne, for his half-brother was sickly and not expected to live long. The Infante, however, succeeded his father in 1665 as Charles II, and Don Juan, after some resistance to the Council of Regency, made his submission in 1669.

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.