The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 1 (of 3): From original and authentic sourcesThomson, A. T., Mrs.
History
The life and times of George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, Volume 1 (of 3): From original and authentic sources
Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
Buckingham, George Villiers, Duke of, 1592-1628
Some awkwardness attended this visit to the Earl and Countess of
Salisbury. The Countess of Suffolk, the mother of Lady Somerset, was
there; and fears might be entertained in what manner King James would
meet the mother of so great a culprit; but the imperturbable
insensibility of the monarch, or perhaps his lingering regard for
Somerset, obviated all difficulties. He kissed the Countess of Suffolk
twice; and performed the office of sponsor conjointly with her husband,
with whom, relates an eye witness, “the King is grown as great and as
far in grace as ever he was, which sudden invitations, without any
intermedience, made the Spanish Ambassador cry out, ‘Volo a dios que la
Corte d’Inglatiérra es com uno libró di Cavalleros andantes.’“ Upon this
stately occasion, the Countess of Suffolk “kept a table alone, save that
the Lady Villiers Compton only was admitted, and all the entertainment
was chiefly intended and directed to her and her children and
followers.” Nor was it only empty civility that marked the royal favour:
shortly afterwards the elder brother of George Villiers, John, was
knighted at Oatlands, in Surrey, that ceremonial being a prelude to the
titles of Baron Villiers of Stoke and Viscount Purbeck, which were
conferred upon him three years afterwards. On the sixth of July, the
instalment of the new Knights of the Garter, the Earl of Rutland and Sir
George Villiers, and of Robert Sydney, Viscount Lisle, took place; the
ceremonial was performed on a Sunday, and on the same afternoon, a
chapter was held to consider the point whether the Earl of Somerset’s
arms were to be taken away or left as they were. So closely did the
elevation of Villiers follow on the downfall of his rival.[119]
Footnote 119:
Nichols, iii., p. 175. His arms were, after a long dispute, removed
higher, in the same manner as when new arms and banners were
introduced. According to Camden, “the King ordered that felony should
not be reckoned amongst the disgraces of those who were to be excluded
from the Order of St. George,” “_which, was without precedent_.”
Nichols, iii., p. 177.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account