Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:00:20.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spain and the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance of 1661: A Reassessment of Charles II's Foreign Policy at the Restoration*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Geraid L. Belcher
Geraid L. Belcher*
Affiliation:
Beaver College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

At the time of the Restoration, Charles II seemed to give every indication that his first and most important alliance as King of England would be with Spain. Contemporary circumstances were such that this policy would have been logical, and Charles's behavior in 1660 encouraged Europeans to expect it. Yet, within a year of his return, Charles had not only failed to forge the Spanish alliance, he had entered into a marriage-alliance with Spain's rebellious province, Portugal. The events surrounding this apparent change of attitude encouraged the Spanish government and others to misinterpret Charles's intentions. At best, the new King was seen as a weak monarch who was lured into a comfortable dependence on Spain's natural enemy and self-appointed protector of Portugal, Louis XIV, King of France. At worst, Charles was accused of duplicity, of falsely courting Spain while maneuvering into an anti-Spanish coalition being constructed by France. In both interpretations, Charles was believed to have been seduced by the French King very early in his reign. The Portuguese alliance raises the question of the nature of Charles's foreign policy immediately after the Restoration. What were his relationships with France and Spain? What did he intend by the Portuguese alliance? The key to understanding his behavior lies in his treatment of Spain, and from an examination of his Spanish policy in light of the controversial alliance, it is possible to see both reason and consistency in Charles II's initial diplomacy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , Autumn 1975 , pp. 67 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This article was partly researched under a grant from the American Philosophical Society.

References

1. Of the older historians see Lister, T. H., Life and Times of Edward First Earl of Clarendon (London, 1837), II, 135Google Scholar; Airy, Osmund, The English Restoration and Louis XIV (London, 1898), p. 102Google Scholar; and Trevelyan, G. M., England under the Stuarts (London, 1904), p. 337Google Scholar. Of the newer works see Clark, G. N., The Later Stuarts, 1660-1714 (2nd ed.; Oxford, 1955),. p. 59Google Scholar; and Ogg, David, England in the Reign of Charles II (2nd ed.; Oxford, 1956), I, 186Google Scholar. See also those recent writings listed in notes 3 and 4 below. There has been very little work on Restoration diplomacy in the past decade. The most recent call for new study of Anglo-French relations appeared in Sachse's, William L. “Recent Historical Writings on Restoration England,” Albion, VI (Spring, 1974), 3Google Scholar.

2. The quotation is from Jones, Guernsey, “Beginnings of the Oldest European Alliance: England and Portugal, 1649-1661,” The American Historical Association Annual Report for 1916, I (1919), 414–15Google Scholar: hereafter, Jones, “Oldest European Alliance”. It reflects an attitude shared by others that Charles had to choose between the two monarchies. See Hill, David J., A History of Diplomacy in the International Development of Europe (London, 1914) III, 55Google Scholar; and Feiling, Keith, British Foreign Policy, 1660-1672 (London, 1930), pp. 33–34Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Feiling, British Foreign Policy.)

3. Ashley, Maurice, Charles II: The Man and the Statesman (New York, 1971), pp. 155–56Google Scholar.

4. Stradling, R. A., “Spanish Conspiracy in England, 1661-1663,” E.H.R., LXXXVII (1972), 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar. (Hereafter, Stradling, “Spanish Conspiracy.”)

5. For example, see Davis, Godfrey, The Restoration of Charles II, 1658-1660 (San Marino, Calif., 1955), p. 198Google Scholar, for his discussion of The Merchants' Humble Petition and Remonstrance (1658). See also McLachlan, Jean O., Trade and Peace with Old Spain, 1667-1750 (Cambridge, 1940), p. 19Google Scholar; and Ashley, Maurice, Commercial Policy Under the Cromwellian Protectorate (Oxford, 1934), pp. 140–41Google Scholar.

6. Instructions to the Marquis de Ruvigny when he was dispatched to England in 1660. Jusserand, J. J. (ed.), Recueil des Instructions données aux Ambassadeurs et Ministres de France depuis les Traités de Westphalie jusqu'à la Revolution Française, XXIV, Angleterre (Paris, 1929), 238Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Jusserand, Recueil des Instructions.)

7. Giavarina to Doge and Senate, 10 Sept. 1660, Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts relating to English Affairs existing in the Archives and Collections of Venice (London, 1931), XXXII, 194Google Scholar. (Hereafter C.S.P.V.)

8. Caracena to Gamarra, Ambassador to the Dutch. Republic, 21 June 1660, Lonchay, Henryet al. (eds.), Correspondence de la Cour D'Espagne sur Les Affaires au Pays-bas au XVIII Siècle (Brussels, 1933), VI, 717Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Lonchay, Correspondence.)

9. Bodleian Library, Oxford, Edward Hyde to Henry Bennet, 6 May 1660, Clarendon State Papers 72/29. (Hereafter, Clarendon SP.)

10. Archivo General de Simancas, Spain, Gamarra to Don Luis de Haro, 2 June 1660, Documentos de Estada, Inglaterra, Legajo 2530. (Hereafter, Documentos.)

11. PRO, Charles II to Luis de Haro, 11 June 1660, State Papers, Spanish Series, Number 94/44, 13. (Hereafter, S.P. 94.)

12. PRO, Secretary Nicholas to Bennet, 30 Aug. 1660, ibid., 86.

13. Lynch, John, Spain under the Hapsburgs, II, Spain and America, 1598-1700 (Oxford, 1969), 124Google Scholar.

14. PRO, Don Luis de Haro to Charles II, 20 July 1660, S.P. 94/44, 47.

15. Quirini, Venetian ambassador in Madrid, to the Doge and Senate, 28 July 1660, C.S.P.V., 32/175.

16. Simancas, Deliberations of the Junta de Estado, 8 July 1660, Documentos, 2530.

17. Caracena to Philip IV, 2 Sept. 1660, Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 677Google Scholar.

18. For the Spanish reaction, see de Baillon, le Comte, Henriette Anne d'Angleterre, sa vie et sa Correspondence avec Charles II (Paris, 1886), p. 77Google Scholar.

19. BM, Charles II to Sec. Morice, 20 May 1660, Lansdowne MS 1054/72.

20. See Jones, , “Oldest European Alliance,” p. 415Google Scholar; Gillespie, J. E., Influence of Overseas Expansion on England to 1700 (New York, 1920), p. 336Google Scholar; and Grose, Clyde L., “The Anglo-Portuguese Marriage of 1662,” Hispanic American Historical Review, X (1930), 330–31Google Scholar. Clarendon noted that Charles “manifested a very great desire to improve the general traffik and trade of the kingdom, and upon all occasions conferred with the most active merchants upon it, and offered all that he could contribute to the advancement thereof.” Hyde, Edward, Earl of Clarendon, A Life of Edward, Earl of, in which is Included a Continuation of his History of the Grand Rebellion (Oxford, 1827), II, 231Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Clarendon, Continuation of his History.)

21. Simancas, Junta de Estado to Henry Bennet, 13 July 1660, Documentos, 2530.

22. Jones, , “Oldest European Alliance,” 408, 416Google Scholar.

23. Journals of the House of Commons, VIII, 163Google Scholar.

24. Thomas Maynard to Clarendon, 11 Nov. 1660, as quoted in Jones, , “Oldest European Alliance,” 415Google Scholar.

25. Charles's finances are carefully discussed by Shaw, William A. in his introduction to the Calendar of Treasury Books, 1660-1667, Preserved in the Public Record Office (London, 1904)Google Scholar.

26. PRO, Charles II to de Haro, June 1660 S.P. 94/44, 25.

27. Stradling, , “Spanish Conspiracy,” E.H.R., LXXXVII, 271Google Scholar.

28. Clarendon, , Continuation of his History, II, 246–47Google Scholar. He made this specific remark with regard to the Spanish offers to purchase Dunkirk in the summer of 1662.

29. Charles II to Lt. Gen. John Middleton, 24 Sept. 1656, H.M.C., Laing MSS, I, 301Google Scholar.

30. For the treaty see Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 539Google Scholar.

31. PRO, Bennet to Hyde, 24 Oct. 1657, S.P. 94/43, 161.

32. Bodleian, Bennet to Charles II, 20 Feb. 1658, Clarendon SP 57/95.

33. Don Juan to Philip IV, 30 March 1658, Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 600Google Scholar.

34. Philip IV to Don Juan, 17 May 1658, ibid., 606.

35. Same to same, 31 Aug. 1658, ibid., 614-15.

36. Bodleian, Bennet to Hyde, 21 Aug. 1658, Clarendon SP 58/185.

37. Bodleian, Same to same, 9 Oct. 1658, ibid., 59/47.

38. Philip IV to Don Juan, 12 Oct. 1658, Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 618Google Scholar.

39. Bodleian, Bennet to Hyde, 20 Nov. 1658, Clarendon SP 59/186.

40. Bodleian, Same to same, 30 Oct. 1658, ibid., 132.

41. Bodleian, Same to same, 20 Nov. 1658, ibid., 186.

42. Bodleian, Same to same, 25 Dec. 1658, ibid., 286.

43. Philip IV to Don Juan, 5 June 1656, Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 547Google Scholar.

44. Bodleian, Bennet to Hyde, 8 May 1658, Clarendon SP 58/26.

45. BM, Egerton MSS, II, 279, 542.

46. Bodleian, Agent S. Fox to Hyde, 11 Sept. 1658, and Sir Henry Vic to Hyde, 16 Sept. 1658, Clarendon SP 58/254, 294.

47. Bodleian, Bennet to Hyde, 25 Aug. 1659, ibid., 63/219.

48. Bodleian, Hyde to Bennet, 3 Sept. 1659, ibid., 64/162.

49. Philip IV to Caracena, 10 Feb. 1660, Lonchay, , Correspondence, IV, 662–63Google Scholar.

50. Dr. George Morley to Dr. Cosin, 10 Feb. 1660, The Correspondence of John Cosin [Surties Society, LII] (London, 1869), 292Google Scholar.

51. Hyde to Col. Holies, 31 March 1660, H.M.C., Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Marquis of Bath Preserved at Longleat, Wiltshire, p. 144Google Scholar.

52. Bodleian, Hyde to Bennet, 21 Feb. 1660, Clarendon SP 69/131.

53. Thornton, Archibald P., West India Policy Under the Restoration (Oxford, 1956), p. 14Google Scholar.

54. Simancas, Deliberations of the Junta, 9 Aug. 1660, Documentos, 2530.

55. Simancas, Deliberations of the Junta, 13 July 1660, communicated to Bennet in response to his inquiry of 10 July, ibid.

56. Simancas, Batteville to Philip IV, 27 Dec. 1660 and 2 Jan. 1661, ibid., 2531.

57. Simancas, Same to same, 23 Dec. 1660, ibid.

58. Batteville expressed his belief that circumstances were working towards Spain's advantage. He felt that his threats of war would have an effect, that Portugal would not be able to pay the dowry, that parliament, for commercial reasons, would reverse Charles if he were to decide in favor of Portugal, and that the matter would ultimately be settled by his own judicious distribution of money. Simancas, Batteville to Philip IV, 14 March 1661, to the Junta, 14 Apr. 1661, and to Philip IV, 2 May 1661.

59. PRO, Sec. Nicholas to Sir Henry Vic, 15 Feb. 1661, State Papers, Flanders Series, Number 77/33, 148. (Hereafter, S.P. 77.)

60. PRO, Vic to Nicholas, 26 Feb. 1661, ibid., 151.

61. Prestage, E., Diplomatic Relations of Portugal with France, England and Holland from 1640 to 1668 (Watford, 1925), pp. 143–44Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Prestage, Diplomatic Relations of Portugal.)

62. Giavarina to Doge and Senate, 25 March 1661, C.S.P.V., 32/265.

63. Clarendon, , Continuation of his History, I. 524Google Scholar. Ironically, half of the dowry was diverted for use against Spain in the critical summer of 1662. It was not paid to Charles for nearly a decade.

64. Prestage, , Diplomatic Relations of Portugal, p. 147Google Scholar.

65. Instructions to the Marquis de Ruvigny, Aug. 1660, on going to England as ambassador ordinary. Jusserand, , Recueil des Instructions, XXIV, 238Google Scholar.

66. PRO, Nicholas to Vic. 28 Sept. 1660, S.P. 77/33, 122.

67. Prestage, , Diplomatic Relations of Portugal, p. 142Google Scholar. Batteville made the proposal on behalf of Hortence on 27 December. Simancas, Batteville to Philip IV, 27 Dec. 1660, Documentos, 2531.

68. Simancas, Junta de Estado to Batteville, 29 Jan. 1661, ibid.

69. Simancas, Same to same, 21 March 1661, ibid.

70. Prestage, E., Diplomatic Relations of Portugal, p. 145Google Scholar.

71. Clarendon, , Continuation of his History, I, 497–98Google Scholar.

72. Bodleian, Clarendon SP 74/373-79, for the entire speech. The portion quoted is from p. 379.

73. Simancas, Batteville to Philip IV, 30 June 1661, Documentos, 2531.

74. See, for example, Sir Richard Fanshaw, envoy to Portugal, to Clarendon, 31 Oct. 1662, H.M.C., The Manuscripts of J. M. Heathcote, Esq., pp. 37-38. See also, Bodleian, Alfonso VI to Charles II, 31 Oct. 1662, Clarendon SP 78/43-44, with Charles's answer, ibid., 101/16; and BM, Bennet's answer to the Memorial presented by the King of Portugal, 14 April 1663, Add. MS 34,329, 67-68.

75. Simancas, Junta de Estado's Consulta for the King, 7 June 1661, Documentos, 2531.

76. Simancas, Instructions for Batteville, 19 June 1661, ibid.

77. Clarendon to Sir George Downing, 21 April 1662, in Lister, , Edward, First Earl of Clarendon, III, 190Google Scholar. The English fleet in Tangier was regularly supplied from Cadiz, , Kennet's Register (London, 1728), I, 559, 617, 635Google Scholar.

78. See Feiling, , British Foreign Policy, pp. 58–62Google Scholar, for a discussion of the factors that went into the decision.

79. Clarendon, , Continuation of his History, II, 247Google Scholar.

80. The French dispatches referred to him as a “Spaniard.” For a discussion of his differences with Clarendon, see Barbour, Violet, Henry Bennet, Earl of Arlington, Secretary of State to Charles II (Washington, 1914), pp. 70–75Google Scholar. (Hereafter, Barbour, Arlington.)

81. Simancas, Moledi to Philip IV, 7 Nov. 1662, Documentos, 2532.

82. Barbour, , Arlington, pp. 75–76Google Scholar.

83. BM, Bennet's answer to the Memorial presented by the King of Portugal, 14 April 1663, Add. MS 34,329, 68.

84. Barbour rightly says that the promotion of commerce was “the keynote of the new Secretary's foreign policy.” Barbour, , Arlington, p. 74Google Scholar.