Henriette Anne, Minette, Princess of England, Duchesse de Orleans by Abby Louise Woodman

Think of political women. Presumably, the names that come to mind are fairly modern. Thatcher, Merkel, Elizabeth II. Less commonly recalled are names such as Barbara Palmer, Diane de Poitiers or Henriette Anne. Historical study has often perceived these women of mediaeval and early modern European royal courts as having little to no autonomy, influence, or respect. Whilst those who historians memorialise for impacting the political or social landscape are considered extraordinary, transgressive, or innately anti-feminine; Isabella of France, Margaret Beaufort, Elizabeth I, Catherine de Medici. There is a need to discuss the myriad of ways women could exert influence, despite the unpopularity of women's involvement in political, social or religious development with their contemporaries or in historical canon. This does not, and cannot eradicate that women have always held a complex role within their political landscapes. (Note that when ‘women’ is used throughout this article it is with the awareness that political involvement and authority was almost entirely restricted to the aristocracy, the complexities of autonomy, the financial and daily lives of lower class women differ greatly throughout this period to the women in discussion here.) When historians have considered women and the political influence they held, it is common to disregard the entire gender based on the assumption that the women who are (begrudgingly) acknowledged as politically active were unique. The argument that these women were unique in their actions is flawed simply due to the breadth of politically active women. Throughout European Courts women’s political value was not only understood by their contemporaries, but also utilised by ‘powerful’ men. If a political system functioned on the word of one man, then who could be better placed to influence the choices and actions of that political system than the woman who shared his bed? Despite canonical history’s difficulty in comprehending women’s involvement in court factions, women were fundamental to the political action of the courts they lived in. Be through their active involvement, the relationships they created, the space or factions that they forged, or simply by virtue of their relationships and the people they cared about. It is impossible to fully comprehend the political developments of the late mediaeval and early modern Europe without acknowledgement and understanding of the women who participated. One such woman, virtually unknown yet crucial to French-English diplomacy for two-hundred years, is Henriette Anne, “Minette” Princess of England, Duchesse de Orleans. On the sixteenth of June 1644, whilst two armies prepared for another battle of the English Civil War, in Exeter the much hated French born Queen of England gave birth to a princess. Too easily recognisable with a newborn, Queen Henrietta Maria disguised herself as a servant and fled first to Falmouth, then to France in the hope of securing further financial support for the Royalist forces. The newborn was left in the care of one of her Royalist ladies, Anne Douglas, Lady Dalkeith, in the vain hope that her husband (Charles I) would both survive the upcoming battle and reach the infant before the Parliamentary Army could learn of her birth. On the 21st July, the baby was baptised at Exeter Cathedral. Charles had sent word that the princess was to be baptised Protestant and for her to be named Henrietta, after her mother. She finally met her father on the 26th July. Henrietta remained with Lady Dalkeith as they moved from Exeter to Oatlands Palace in Surrey, and it was Dalkeith who apparently carried the two year old princess on her back to Dover, escaping to France in June 1646. Henrietta never saw her father again. At the French court Henrietta became known as Henriette Anne, her second name given in honour of her aunt, Queen Anne (often referred to as Anne of Austria) the mother and regent of Louis XIV. Her official title became Princesse d’Angleterre, however, in almost every functional aspect, Henriette Anne was a Princess of France. Following the execution of Charles I in 1649 she was exclusively raised Catholic, her Protestant baptism a minor inconvenience. Practically speaking, Henriette Anne was the first princess of France after her mother and aunt, and by the time she had reached her teens, she became a favourite, even protege of Queen Anne. Henriette Anne seemed, to her mother at least, to be a perfect match for the young King of France, her cousin and only five years her senior. Henriette Anne’s suitability for marriage to Louis XIV is a clear example of women’s political significance. For royalty and the aristocracy, marriage was diplomacy and a woman’s body a key tool, as Princess of England and granddaughter of Henri IV of France, Henriette Anne would have been a desirable choice. A marriage alliance could secure a military alliance, a princess’ dowry could provide a much needed boost to the economy of a country. Additionally, a woman's ability to navigate the family, estate and country of her husband was fundamental to the continued success of a diplomatic marriage. Already a popular feature at court, she appeared to have been an excellent choice for the role. However, as an exiled Princess of England, Henriette Anne diplomatically had little to offer. Charles II maintained a small court in exile which moved around the courts of his European allies throughout the 1650s. Whilst Louis XIV and France continued to support the Stuart Divine Right to rule, they had also been providing for the upkeep of Henrietta Maria, Henriette Anne and the remnants of the English Royal Family for over a decade. In 1657, at the time of Louis’s marriage negotiations, the 13-year-old Henriette Anne was not a lucrative option to become the Queen of France. Queen Anne chose her niece by blood instead, Marie-Therese, infanta of Spain. With the restoration of Henriette Anne’s brother to the English throne in 1660, her diplomatic value (and dowry) increased. A marriage was quickly arranged with Phillipe, the younger son of France, known simply as Monsieur, thus she became Madame.

Henriette Anne, Princesse d'Angleterre, and Phillipe I, Duc de Orleans were married in 1661. By the time of her marriage, Henriette Anne was well-known in the French Court for her charm, beauty and piety. In the first two years of her marriage Henriette Anne became a common muse to artists and poets, with one playwright writing in his dedication that “The Court regards you as the arbiter of all that is delightful.” Despite her popularity, the marriage between Henriette Anne and Phillipe was a contentious one. Not in the least because of his numerous male lovers and hastiness to jealousy and anger. This Royal Couple was not a particularly happy one, and Henriette Anne’s love for revelry attracted the attention and affection of her brother-in-law, Louis XIV. Historians have long speculated about the true nature of the relationship between Louis and Henriette. Louis was no stranger to taking lovers and mistresses. His wife, a quiet, reserved and pious woman was not what you might expect for the wife of the man who created the Court of Versailles. Most historians do accept that the relationship between Louis and Henriette, particularly over 1661-1662 was in some way romantic, largely owing to their similar personalities and frivolity. However there is no clear conclusion with regards to how far this relationship actually went. The popular historical fiction drama Versailles, includes a sexual relationship between Louis and Henriette Anne, and indeed Michel de Decker, a historian of Louis XIV has asked, ‘what would have stopped them?’ from embarking on a full blown affair. Sex for Louis was, as several have explored, rather non-committal. On the other hand, Henriette Anne was in the eyes of both the law and God, his sister. Antonia Fraser argues that the idea of a sexual relationship between the pair would have put both into ‘mortal sin’. Is it fair to consider or depict a sexual affair between Louis XIV and Henriette Anne? Do we as modern interpreters of these events need proof of sex in order to contextualise a romance? Regardless of the exact nature of their relationship, it is evident that Henriette Anne became in her adulthood a trusted confidant, and favourite of Louis XIV. It is this elevated trust which positioned Henriette Anne to act as a diplomat for the French King in England. Despite their sizable age difference and sparse time spent together throughout their respective adolescence, Henriette Anne was also a considerable favourite of her brother, Charles II. Charles often referred to Henriette Anne as “ma chere Minette”, and addressed his letters with “my dearest sister”. Furthermore, Charles trusted Henriette Anne to act as ambassador for his communication with Louis XIV throughout the 1660s, explaining in a letter to the French King that their correspondence passed through Minette because she was “the person in the world I have most confidence in”. It is likely the close relationship between Henriette Anne and her brother which encouraged the closeness of the two kings. It is typically remarked upon that Louis referred to Charles as “monsieur mon frère”, ‘my brother’, because of the alliance she facilitated. The relationship between the two kings, and crucially, Henriette Anne’s fundamental role in the political relationship of the two courts, is evident in the 1670 Treaty of Dover. In 1670, Henriette Anne travelled to England with a small entourage to visit her brother’s court. On the 1st of June, (or 22nd May according to the Old Style English Calendar), the Treaty of Dover was signed by Charles II and Henriette Anne on behalf of Louis XIV. The Treaty was technically two, a public, and a secret treaty. The public Treaty created an alliance of France and England in the case of war with the Dutch Republic and had been formally concluded in December, several months prior. The Secret Treaty specified that for French support in case of war with the Dutch, Charles II would publicly convert to Catholicism. The Secret Treaty of Dover was not published for the public until the mid-nineteenth century. Both private and potentially controversial, the development of the secret treaty appears to have been primarily facilitated not by either king’s extensive councils, but rather through direct correspondence permitted by Henriette Anne. Although only a small number of her letters survive, Henriette Anne’s state papers, held by the British Library, indicate the prevalence of her involvement in this affair. The aforementioned letter from Charles dated 1669, is in regards to the religious aspect of the Treaty. Henriette Anne refers to Charles’ conversion as ‘le desin de la R’ (‘the design about R’), with R meaning ‘religion.’ Her letters also include discussions of finances, war with the Dutch Republic, and her own opinions on the Treaty of Dover. Within these surviving letters we can ascertain Henriette Anne’s intellect and sensibility. She writes as she closes her letter that she only dares to question such matters because of her great love for Charles, indicating that her success (as arguably all women’s at this time) relied heavily on her tactical deference to men. However, this does not negate her involvement nor her influence. Henriette Anne’s visit to England was the final part of the Treaty’s agreement. However, despite requesting his sister’s visit in 1669, she did not travel until May 1670. Whilst Louis XIV, Charles II and their respective advisors were adamant that Henriette Anne travel to England, her journey became a point of contention within her marriage. Julia Cartwright’s early biography of Henriette Anne argues that her husband’s reluctance to allow her to travel was due to his own complex affair with the Chevalier de Lorraine and ongoing conflict with the King regarding the Chevalier’s influence. Contemporaneous interpretations considered the delay to be a spiteful hindrance by Monsieur. Fraser argues that whilst her husband’s obstinate attitude was often damaging to Henriette Anne, the delay in her travel was likely due to her health. She had been considerably weakened during and since her pregnancies and had a consistent stomach ailment in 1667. However, considering her husband was the direct cause of much of her consistent ill health, Monsieur could be accused of being intentionally difficult and worsening her health. Nonetheless, Charles and Louis were certain, it was with Henriette Anne’s presence that the Treaty would be complete. She was personally responsible for the care and delivery of the French copy of the Treaty, delivered to Louis upon her return to the French court. Back in France, Henriette Anne was dead within the month, she was twenty-six. Henriette Anne had first complained of severe pains in her stomach and side in 1667, by April 1670 Henriette Anne struggled so severely with digestive pains that she often only consumed milk. On the 29th June 1670 Henriette Anne purportedly lay down, unwell after eating. Later that evening she drank a glass of iced chicory water. The Comtesse de La Fayette, who would later write memoirs of the Princess, wrote that she immediately cried out upon drinking the cold liquid, overtaken by a sharp pain. “Ah! What a pain! What shall I do! I must be poisoned!” Whilst remedies and emetics were brought, Henriette Anne remained both resolute that she had been poisoned, and certain of her impending death. The Comtesse de La Fayette’s report of Madame’s death is a touching scene, attended not only by her ladies and husband but by Louis XIV and his Queen, even his mistresses were present, a factor Cartwright argues indicates her pre-eminence within the court. There is some speculation that Henriette Anne was poisoned by her husband, a romantic and dramatic cumulation of their contentious relationship. Professional consideration of her pains and ill health has led to a more likely conclusion that Henriette Anne had a stomach ulcer which had likely ruptured on the 28th June, causing peritonitis, the chicory water and other food she attempted to consume on the 29th June likely worsening the pain.

Henriette Anne is one example of how and when women could hold and exert political influence by virtue of her connections and position with the men at court. She is not unique in this. Her mother-in-law, Queen Anne (of Austria) was such a considerable force within her son’s court that Louis XIV did not take an official mistress until after she died. She served as his regent and remained influential in French political life until her death. Prior to the outbreak of the English Civil War, Queen Henrietta Maria was often accused of being meddlesome in the governing of Charles I’s England. Within France, the position of Maitresse en Titre, was long understood as a coveted position in which the woman could influence the king. In England, Barbara Palmer, then Countess of Castlemaine held a similar enviable position at the court of Henriette Anne’s brother. Furthermore, in 1672, one of Henriette Anne’s ladies, a woman named Louise de Kérouaille, would return to England and quickly became Charles II’s mistress as well, an action which some have argued was intended to ensure that Charles II would adhere to the Secret Treaty despite Henriette Anne’s death. All of these women openly held and exerted political influence, though their ability to do so was positional, dependent entirely on their relation to men. This is true of any woman in this period. It is not possible to repatriate women of mediaeval and early modern courts into feminist politicians that we may recognise today. This does not negate that Henriette Anne, and many of her contemporaries were conscious participants in the social and political developments of the world in which they lived. Ignoring these women as autonomous, intelligent and active participants damages our understanding not only of what happened, but also why.