Happy Birthday, You Bastard

28th August, The Duke of Buckingham

George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, KG

28th August, 1592

As an atheist and historian, you’d think that something like The Bible wouldn’t interest me. Not so! Firstly, I’m a Roman historian and whatever you think of it, and no matter how many people shout ‘The Bible’s not a history book’, it would be absolutely daft to airily dismiss something like the New Testament as a historical source, especially considering nearly all of it takes place in the Roman Empire in the 1st Century AD. It’s crammed full of history. It’s also crammed full of nonsense. But a ‘history book’ isn’t just a list of dates and facts, like an almanac. Sources be understood as documentation of the attitudes, context and beliefs of their authors, not just as reliable sources for the events they address. In that respect, The Bible is a wonderful source.

That it’s also absolutely bonkers at times just makes it a fun read, too. Obviously, I believe that anyone who thinks that it demonstrates that God exists is wrong, but that’s just an opinion and you’re free to believe whatever you like. What you’re not free to do is impose those beliefs on other people. The Bible might tell you how to live your life, but it doesn’t tell me how to live mine. And it doesn’t tell women what they should do with their bodies, no matter what you think.

The primary area of interest for me is early Christian iconography. Really early stuff. Specialist stuff you have to get in a special brown bag from The Vatican. Hey! Stop judging me!

I like religion and I like Christianity. I also like horses, but they’re fucking maniacs and I wouldn’t sit one. Similarly, although I like religion, I like it from a distance and as long as we stay respectfully apart, we’re both happy.

But you do meet a certain type of religious blowhard, especially here in Texas where I now live, to whom The Bible, especially the King James Version, is the inerrant word of everything, ever, and must be used to beat liberals (whatever they are) into submission with, and who also believe that things like LGBTQ+ issues were invented in 2014, just annoy them, personally.

We didn’t have any of them drag gays back in those olde years.

Except, of course, we did. Humans have been gay, straight, queer, trans, intersex, whatever since we stopped hitting each other with dinosaurs and going ‘uggg…’ The incredible spectrum of human expression has been broad since before we could write.

But these people don’t believe that, because it doesn’t say ‘Oh fine, be gay, go nuts’ in the King James Bible. The wonderful irony of that being that the fellow that was ultimately responsible for the Bible that carries his name, James 1st of England or James VI of Scotland, depending on which side of the border he was on, was almost certainly bisexual and quite possibly gay as fuck.

And one of his ‘favourites’ was the first Duke of Buckingham, George Villiers.

George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, was a central figure in early 17th-century English politics, rising from obscurity to become one of the most powerful men in the kingdom. Born on August 28, 1592, in Brooksby, Leicestershire, Villiers' ascent was remarkable, and his life was defined by his close relationships with King James I and, later, King Charles I. His influence on the monarchy and the nation was profound, though not without controversy, particularly concerning his relationship with James I, which many believed was both personal and political.

Villiers hailed from a minor gentry family, but his charm, good looks, and keen political instincts helped him rise swiftly through the ranks of the English court. In 1614, he was introduced to James I, who had a known preference for the company of handsome young men. Villiers quickly became the king's favorite, a position that would define his life and career. By 1615, Villiers had been appointed Gentleman of the Bedchamber, a position that gave him constant access to the king, and in 1616, he was made the Viscount Villiers, marking the beginning of his rapid rise to power.

Over the next few years, Villiers' influence grew steadily. He was created Earl of Buckingham in 1617, and just two years later, he was elevated to the rank of Marquess. His relationship with James I was the subject of much speculation and gossip at court, with many suggesting that it went beyond mere friendship. James himself wrote letters to Villiers that contained language of deep affection and devotion, leading to widespread belief that their relationship was romantic and sexual in nature. While such relationships were not uncommon in the context of the time, the public nature of their bond and the extent of Villiers' influence over the king caused considerable unease among the nobility and the broader public.

The relationship between James I and Villiers was complex. James, who was known for his intellectual pursuits and strong opinions, found in Villiers a confidant and companion who could offer him both personal affection and political support. Villiers, for his part, used the king’s favor to advance his own position and that of his family. By the early 1620s, he was effectively running the government, acting as James’ chief advisor and using his position to amass considerable wealth and power.

James I's sexuality has long been a subject of historical debate, and the king's relationship with Villiers has been central to this discussion. James was married to Anne of Denmark, with whom he had three surviving children, including his successor, Charles I. Despite this, there is ample evidence to suggest that James had a preference for the company of men, particularly young and attractive courtiers like Villiers. The king's letters to Villiers are filled with expressions of love and affection that go beyond the platonic. In one letter, James referred to Villiers as his "sweet child and wife," and in another, he signed off as "your dear dad and husband." These letters have been widely cited by historians as evidence of the intimate nature of their relationship.

Contemporaries of James I were also aware of the king's close relationships with his male favorites. Prior to Villiers, James had other young men in his circle who were similarly favored, including Robert Carr, 1st Earl of Somerset. However, none of these relationships seemed to have the depth or the political impact that James’ bond with Villiers had. Many at court believed that Villiers had become indispensable to the king not just for his political acumen but because of their deeply personal relationship.

Some historians argue that James' relationship with Villiers was part of a broader pattern of same-sex relationships within the English court, where such bonds were often a means of securing favor and influence. In this context, the relationship between James and Villiers can be seen as both a personal and a political alliance, one that was mutually beneficial but also fraught with tensions and suspicions.

Despite—or perhaps because of—his influence, Villiers was a polarizing figure. His close relationship with the king led to accusations of favoritism and corruption. Many at court resented his rapid rise, seeing him as an outsider who had used his personal relationship with the king to bypass traditional routes to power. These tensions came to a head in 1623, when Villiers was sent to Spain to negotiate a marriage between Prince Charles and the Spanish Infanta. The mission was a failure, largely due to Villiers’ arrogance and lack of diplomatic skill, but he returned to England claiming victory, having convinced Charles to break off the marriage and pursue a war with Spain instead.

When James I died in 1625, Villiers’ fortunes did not wane. Charles I, who had developed a close bond with Villiers during the latter years of his father's reign, elevated him to Duke of Buckingham and relied on him as his chief advisor. However, Buckingham's influence during Charles' reign was no less controversial. His advocacy for war with Spain and France led to several disastrous military campaigns, which drained the treasury and alienated Parliament. Buckingham’s domestic policies, particularly his use of patronage to reward his supporters and family members, further fueled resentment among the nobility and the broader political class.

The failures of Buckingham’s military expeditions and his monopolization of power led to a growing chorus of opposition. In 1626, the House of Commons attempted to impeach him on charges of corruption, embezzlement, and incompetence. Charles, however, remained fiercely loyal to Buckingham and dissolved Parliament to protect his favorite. This act only deepened the rift between the monarchy and Parliament, setting the stage for the political conflicts that would eventually lead to the English Civil War.

Buckingham’s personal life also remained a subject of intense scrutiny. His relationship with James I continued to cast a shadow over his career, with many at court and beyond believing that his power was rooted in their intimate bond. Historians have long debated the nature of their relationship, with some arguing that it was purely political, while others suggest that it was indeed sexual. Regardless of its true nature, the relationship was emblematic of the ways in which personal and political dynamics were deeply intertwined in the early Stuart court.

In 1628, Buckingham’s position became increasingly untenable. His last military expedition, an attempt to aid the French Huguenots at La Rochelle, ended in disaster, with many English soldiers dying of disease and starvation. The failure of this campaign further eroded Buckingham’s support among the nobility and the public. On August 23, 1628, just days before his 36th birthday, Buckingham was assassinated by John Felton, a disgruntled soldier who held him responsible for the failures in France. Felton's act was widely celebrated by Buckingham’s enemies, and his death marked the end of an era in English politics.

Despite his many flaws, George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, left an indelible mark on English history. His rapid rise to power, his close relationships with James I and Charles I, and his influence over the political and military affairs of the kingdom made him one of the most significant figures of the early 17th century. His life and career also serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked power, favoritism, and the complex interplay between personal relationships and political authority.