King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire

by David Moore Bergeron

What can we know of the private lives of early British sovereigns? Through the unusually large number of letters that survive from King James VI of Scotland/James I of England (1566 - 1625), we can know a great deal. Using original letters, primarily from the British Library and the National Library of Scotland, David Bergeron creatively argues that James' correspondence with certain men in his court constitutes a gospel of homoerotic desire. Bergeron grounds his provocative study on an examination of the tradition of letter writing during the Renaissance and draws a connection between homosexual desire and letter writing during that historical period.

King James, commissioner of the Bible translation that bears his name, corresponded with three principal male favorites—Esmé Stuart (Lennox), Robert Carr (Somerset), and George Villiers (Buckingham). Esmé Stuart, James' older French cousin, arrived in Scotland in 1579 and became an intimate adviser and friend to the adolescent king. Though Esmé was eventually forced into exile by Scottish nobles, his letters to James survive, as does James' hauntingly allegorical poem Phoenix.

The king's close relationship with Carr began in 1607. James' letters to Carr reveal remarkable outbursts of sexual frustration and passion. A large collection of letters exchanged between James and Buckingham in the 1620s provides the clearest evidence for James' homoerotic desires. During a protracted separation in 1623, letters between the two raced back and forth. These artful, self-conscious letters explore themes of absence, the pleasure of letters, and a preoccupation with the body. Familial and sexual terms become wonderfully intertwined, as when James greets Buckingham as "my sweet child and wife." King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire presents a modern-spelling edition of seventy-five letters exchanged between Buckingham and James. Across the centuries, commentators have condemned the letters as indecent or repulsive. Bergeron argues that on the contrary they reveal an inward desire of king and subject in a mutual exchange of love.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Biography, Queer

260 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 1999

About the author

David M. Bergeron is Prof Emeritus of English at the University of Kansas, US. He is the author of several books, including Shakespeare through Letters. New York, London, Lanham: Lexington Books/Rowman & Littlefield, 2020, Shakespeare’s London 1613. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2017, Textual Patronage in English Drama, 1570-1640, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006 and King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire,. Iowa City: Univ. of Iowa Press, 1999.

Reviews

[Amelia · Rating 3 out of 5]

very interesting! it was cool to read the analysis, and then get to read the letters between james and buckingham in full. i didn't realize this book was about the concept of desire in letters in general, but it was still cool to read about, especially because i've started writing letters with a few of my friends! i also enjoyed reading it and thinking about Alexandra Feodorovna Diaries and Correspondence: Volume 2: Engagement and Marriage 1894 and alexandra and nicholas' letters to each other in general, because a lot of what he said felt so applicable to them. i liked this line, which bergeron used to introduce the letters:
“We stand at the portal. The letters await us. The king opens the door, and we enter into that private space that we may recognize as a human heart. Into that cabinet we peer, straining to see and understand every nook and cranny.” (31)
letters are so so intimate, which is one of the main reasons they are so fun to read, and i think he described it well here.

some of bergeron's analysis felt weird - it was either too redundant, or kind of a reach. when i was looking through the parts i highlighted, most of it was from the letters themselves, or quotes from other people that bergeron includes. so his writing clearly didn't stick with me too much, but i appreciated his context, and most of his analysis was interesting. also, i am coming at this book from a history lover's perspective, and bergeron is an english professor, so it could just be that his approach to the analysis just wasn't what i expected or am used to.

about james himself: at first i thought it was really weird that he and buckingham referred to each other as father and son, but bergeron discussed how he really didn't have a family growing up, and his use of familial titles for buckingham (and buckingham's wife and kids) was his way of creating a loving family unit for himself. that made me sad! especially when bergeron added that james' first lover, esme stuart, was one of his distant cousins, who was then killed, so he lost his only family connection really early and in an unfortunate way. his poem (the phoenix) about esme after his death was heartbreaking, just imagining this lonely young man trying to process his grief through poetry almost made me cry. it was also nice to see in his letters that james really cared about buckingham's wife, kate, and their kids:
“A year later James notes Kate’s pregnancy: ‘The Lord of Heaven bless thee this morning and thy thing my daughter, and the sweet little thing that is in her belly.’ James as doting father offers instructions to Buckingham about how to treat Kate in her pregnancy: ‘let her never go in a coach upon the street,’ ‘let your mother keep all hasty news from coming to her ears,’ ‘let her not eat too much fruit.’
[...]
In the letters sent to Spain, James regularly includes news of Kate and other kin. For example, writing on 7 April, he says: ‘And now my sweet Steenie and gossip, I must give thee a short account of many things. First, Kate and thy sister supped with me on Saturday night last and yesterday they both dined and supped with me, and so shall do still, with God’s grace, as long as I am here. And my little grandchild with her four teeth is, God be thanked, well weaned, and they are all very merry.’ James makes Mary his own grandchild as he expresses unusual, for him, parental concern for the child’s well-being.” (136)

the letters themselves were a bit of a challenge bc they are written in old fashioned english, so i had to get used to the wording, and sometimes i had no idea what they were even talking about. and i have to say that 'sweet Steenie gossip' is one of the best pet names i have ever heard. it's just so silly

other bits:
“To Sir Thomas Lucy, Donne writes: ‘I make account that this writing of letters, when it is done with any seriousness, is a kind of extasie, and a departure and secession and suspension of the soul, which doth then communicate itself to two bodies.’” (16)

“As a number of observers have noted, patriarchal societies encourage, perhaps require, strong homosocial bonds. Sedgwick, for example, writes: ‘In any male-dominated society, there is a special relationship between male homosocial (including homosexual) bonds and the institution for maintaining and transmitting patriarchal power over women: a relationship founded on an inherent and potentially active structural congruence.’” (28)

“James wholeheartedly believed in marriage; it just should not interfere with one’s life. He welcomed marriage for Carr so long as Carr remembered his obligations to the king.” (76)

“With bracing clarity James told the assembled members of the Privy council in 1617: [...] You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak on my own behalf, and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had His John and I have my George.” (103-104)

“Charles and Buckingham put on false beards, wore different clothes to disguise their identities, and adopted the names Jack and Tom Smith, master and servant. [...] In a letter of 27 February, James addresses Charles and Buckingham as ‘my sweet boys and dear venturous knights, worthy to be put in a new romance.’ He seems to be caught up in the excitement of this venture.” (120)

Letters between James and Buckingham:
[James]: “I have no more to say but that I wear Steenie’s picture in a blue ribbon under my waistcoat next to my heart.” (153)

[James]: “Thy single letter was so sweet and comfortable unto me as I cannot forbear to pray God ever to bless and reward thee for it.
Praying God I may never have comfort of my sweet baby longer than I shall remain a true friend to my sweet Steenie…” (173)

[James]: “And yet I cannot content myself without sending you this present, praying God that I may have a joyful and comfortable meeting with you and that we may make at this Christmas a new marriage ever to be kept hereafter; for, God so love me, as i desire only to live in this world for your sake, and that I had rather live banished in any part of the earth with you than live a sorrowful widow’s life without you.” (175)

[Buckingham]: “Here I am, now in a chamber alone, enjoying and reading over and over your sweet cordial letters. I stayed for this purpose only, having nothing more to say than what my other letters which you will receive with this hath in them; yet because in this business I know you will not be weary of repetitions, I assure you once again all goes well and very well…” (189)

[Buckingham]: “All and the least I can say is this, that I naturally so love your person, and upon so good experience and knowledge adore all your other parts, which are more than ever one man had. That were not only all your people, but all the world besides, set together on one side, and you alone on the other, I should, to obey and please you, displease, nay despise all them…” (203)

[Buckingham]: “Though I am yet but weak, and though it may offend you, as it doth my secretary; yet, in despite of you both, I must have leave now and then to write with my own hand.
Sir, I am very sorry for this new vein you have taken of losing of stags, but am much rejoiced that you attribute so much to my good luck, as to think, if I were there, your ill fortune would alter…” (204)

[Sharon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very, very interesting, especially as a rarely explored aspect of King James's personal life, gender relations, and the nature of sexual affairs in early modern England.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit slow to start, but nonetheless really interesting. Seems that our little King James was a bit of a tramp!

[Ella · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating look at affection and homoeroticism in the English renaissance. Hilariously, though, I was most taken by Erasmus’s OTT love letters to a monk he knew. I’ve really got to learn more about that.