Author: David Chandler, MA, FRH, TS, FRGS
Onetime Colonel and Adjutent General of the Sealed Knot

Orders of the day, Volume 31, Issue 1, Jan/Feb 1999

That the said Charles Stuart, being admitted King of England, and therein trusted with a limited power to govern by and according to the laws of the land, and not otherwise; and by his trust, oath, and office, being obliged to use the power committed to him for the good and benefit of the people, and for the preservation of their rights and liberties; yet, nevertheless, out of a wicked design to erect and uphold in himself an unlimited and tyrannical power to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the rights and liberties of the people, yea, to take away and make void the foundations thereof, and of all redress and remedy of misgovernment, which by the fundamental constitutions of this kingdom were reserved on the people’s behalf in the right and power of frequent and successive Parliaments, or national meetings in Council; he, the said Charles Stuart, for accomplishment of such his designs, and for the protecting of himself and his adherents in his and their wicked practices, to the same ends hath traitorously and maliciously levied war against the present Parliament, and the people therein represented, particularly ... in the year of our Lord 1642, at Beverley, in the County of York; and ...at the County of the Town of Nottingham, where and when he set up his standard of war; and also ...at Edgehill or Keynton-field, in the County of Warwick; and ...at Brentford, in the County of Middlesex; and ... in the year of our Lord 1643, at the Caversham Bridge, near Reading...; and ... at the City of Gloucester; and ...at Newbury ...; and ... in the year of our Lord 1644, at Cropredy Bridge, in the County of Oxon.; ... at Bodmin ..., in the County of Cornwall; and ...at Newbury aforesaid; and ... in the year of our Lord 1645, at the Town of Leicester; and ... at Naseby-field, in the County of Northampton.

At which several times and places, or most of them, and at many other places in this land, at several other times within the years aforementioned, and in the year of our Lord 1646, he, the said Charles Stuart, hath caused and procured many thousands of the free people of this nation to be slain; and by divisions, parties, and insurrections within this land, by invasions from foreign parts, endeavoured and procured by him, and by many other evil ways and means, he, the said Charles Stuart, hath not only maintained and carried on the said war both by land and sea, during the years beforementioned, but also hath renewed, or caused to be renewed, the said war against the Parliament and good people of this nation in this present year 1648, in the Counties of Kent, Essex, Surrey, Sussex, Middlesex, and many other Counties and places in England and Wales, and also by sea.

And particularly he, the said Charles Stuart, hath for that purpose given commission to his son the Prince, and others, whereby, besides multitudes of other persons, many such as were by the Parliament entrusted and employed for the safety of the nation (being by him or his agents corrupted to the betraying of their trust, and revolting from the Parliament), have had entertainment and commission for the continuing and renewing of war and hostility against the said Parliament and people as aforesaid. By which cruel and unnatural wars, by him, the said Charles Stuart, levied, continued, and renewed as aforesaid, much innocent blood of the free people of this nation hath been spilt, many families have been undone, the public treasure wasted and exhausted; trade obstructed and miserably decayed, vast expense and damage to the nation incurred, and many parts of this land spoiled, some of them even to desolation. And for further prosecution of his said evil designs, he, the said Charles Stuart, doth still continue his commissions to the said Prince, and other rebels and revolters, both English and foreigners, and to the Earl of Ormond, and the Irish rebels and revolters associated with him; from whom further invasions upon this land are threatened, upon the procurement, and on the behalf of the said Charles Stuart.

All which wicked designs, wars, and evil practices of him, the said Charles Stuart, have been, and are carried on for the advancement and upholding of a personal interest of will, power, and pretended prerogative to himself and his family, against the public interest, common right, liberty, justice, and peace of the people of this nation, by and from whom he was entrusted as aforesaid. By all which it appeareth that the said Charles Stuart hath been, and is the occasioner, author, and continuer of the said unnatural, cruel and bloody wars; and therein guilty of all the treasons, murders, rapines, burnings, spoils, desolations, damages and mischiefs to this nation, acted and committed in the said wars, or occasioned thereby.”

This article was first published in “Mercurius Militaris” the precursor to “Orders of the Daye”, Vol 1 No 2, December 1969.

It is not the intention of this article to describe or comment upon the ‘whys’ and wherefores’ of Charles I’s execution, but to consider points of detail connected with Charles’ death and burial. It is a sorrowful topic, but not without its fascination; for on many points of procedure and detail there are divergent accounts. My task has been to try to discover exactly what did take place on that chilly morning of 30 January 1649.

The Siting of the Scaffold

A great deal has been written attempting to fix the actual position of the scaffold. Nobody doubts that the deed took place on a stage built adjoining the Banqueting House of Whitehall Palace, rebuilt between 1619 and 1622 on the site of Queen Elizabeth’s Banqueting House, which had been destroyed, together with the greater part of the ancient palace, by a great fire in 1606. Sir Reginald Palgrave, an eminent 19th century authority upon the subject, quoted written evidence, hitherto unpublished, to the effect that the scaffold was built under the second or third window of Whitehall towards Charing Cross. His informant was Mr Thoms, Librarian to the House of Lords, who told him that some years previously he had been shown a stone which had been placed in the ground in front of the Banqueting House in order to mark the site of King Charles’ execution. This evidence is corroborated by a Mr Hugh Owen who saw the stone in position in 1931.

“To Colonell Francis Hacker, Colonell Huncks and Lieutenant Colonell Phayre and to every one of them. At the High Court of Justice for the tryinge and judginge of Charles Steuart Kinge of England is and standeth convicted attaynted and condemned of High Treason and other high Crymes, And sentence uppon Saturday last was pronounced against him by this Court to be put to death by the severinge of his head from his body Of whch sentence execucion yet remayneth to be done, These are therefore to will and require you to see the said sentence executed In the open Streete before Whitehall upon the morrowe, being the Thirtieth day of this instante moneth of January, betweene the houres of Tenn in the morninge and Five in the afternoone of the same day wth full effect. And for soe doing this shall be your sufficient warrant And these are to require all Officers and Souldiers and other good people of this Nation of England to be assisting unto you in this service ...”

So much for the evidence of relatively modern tradition; let us test its correctness by an examination of 17th century accounts. All the prints of the execution show the scaffold in front of the Banqueting House. The Warrant for the Execution prescribes that the King should be beheaded “in the open street before Whitehall”, that is to say in the wide open space between the House and the tiltyard through which the public traffic took its course between Westminster and Charing Cross. That this undoubtedly was the site is proved by the accounts of Lord Leicester and Sir William Dugdale, who at the time of Charles I’s execution was Chester Herald. Lord Leicester asserts in his Journal that the King was beheaded “at Whitehall Gate”, and Dugdale in his Diary that he was “beheaded at the Gate of Whitehall”. A pamphlet published at the time, “King Charles, His Speech” declares that “His Majesty came through the Banqueting House adjoining to which the scaffold was erected”.

“... that the officers of the ordinance within the Towre of London, ... or any other officers within the said Towre in whose hands or custody the bright execution ax for the executing malifactors is, doe forthwith deliver unto Edward Dendy Esquir. Serient at Armes attending this court, or his deputie or deputies, the said axe, and for theire ... so doing, this shall be theire warrant.”

The precise position of the scaffold, however, is more difficult to determine. On the whole Mr Hugh Owen’s statement that the scaffold was placed under the second or third window would appear to be correct. Correct, too, is his other statement that a passage to admit the King to the scaffold had been made by piercing the wall. Sir Thomas Herbert, who attended the King in his last moments, corroborates this statement in his touching Memoirs: “The King was led along the Galleries and Banqueting House, and there was a passage broken through the wall, by which the King passed on to the scaffold”. The question that immediately arises is why the King did not step out of one of the windows. The fact is, they were still blocked with masonry; a print of 1717 and a plan of 1781 by J T Groves, Architect and Clerk of Works, show four first floor windows blank. They were not opened until 1829.

Thus the old tradition - followed by several artists in their representation of the event - that Charles stepped out of one of the Banqueting Hall’s windows directly onto the scaffold would appear to be inaccurate. However the old belief died hard. A memorandum of Vertue’s on the copy of Terrason’s large engraving of the Banqueting House dated 1713, preserved in the library of the Society of Antiquaries, refers to a window marked with a cross in the print. He says,

“’Tiz - according to the truest reports - said that out of this window King Charles went upon the scaffold to be beheaded, the window frame and masonry being taken out purposely to make the passage onto the scaffold which is equal to the landing place of the Hall, either side.” But this window referred to by Vertue was in fact part of a small building adjoining the north side of the Banqueting Hall. The weight of evidence shows that it was from this window that the King stepped to reach the scaffold. For the occasion, therefore, a small window in a building abutting against the north end of the Banqueting House was unblocked, and a hole knocked through the separating wall. Sir Reginald Palgrave, in his letter to The Times of 17 May 1890 wrote, “I maintain that the window in the west front of the Hall, second from the northern or Charing Cross end of the building, was the ‘King Charles window’. This is the name given to that window by the first Dean of the Chapel, and the late Mr Thoms, the eminent historical engineer, assured me that he had seen in the pavement before that window a memorial stone placed there to mark the spot of the execution.” This stone has already been mentioned.

The King to Bishop Juxon, the night before his death: “Let us think of our great work and prepare to meet that great God, to whom ere long I am to give an account of myself. And I hope I shall do it with peace and that you will assist me therein. We will not talk of these rogues in whose hands I am. They thirst after my blood and they will have it and God’s will be done. I thank God I heartily forgive them ...”

“But”, continues Sir Reginald, “it was not through a window on the West Front of the Hall that Charles passed out on to the scaffold: a small building abutted against the north end wall of the Banqueting Hall, which in height and shape corresponded closely with the Georgian structure which contains the entrance staircase today. From a window in the west front of that small building, in position very similar to the blank window above the present outer entrance door, the framework was removed. Thus Charles walked down the length of the Banqueting Hall until he reached the northern end, and before him was a doorway cut through the wall giving entrance into a narrow room beyond, and then, when he stood within that room, the daylight streamed in upon him, through the dismantled window opening, and he saw the way to death.” Sir Reginald has a touching if rather pompous imagination. Thus the King entered the small adjoining house through a hole in the wall, and from there walked through the dismantled window onto the scaffold, which was carried round the front of the Hall as far as the second window. That passage-way, cut on 29 January 1649 has never been filled in; it is still the main entrance to the Hall - “a doorway, surely, as fateful as any in the world”, as Sir Reginald Palgrave put it.

The King occupied the Hall throughout his trial; he was brought there the day before the court opened in a sedan chair. “His patience, or insensibility, was very great”, wrote Harris. After sentence he was conveyed back to St James’s Palace, where he passed the few remaining days of his life.

The Execution

On 30 January 1649, the fatal day, Charles was brought under escort through the Park and Whitehall, some say at 8 o’clock, others at 10 o’clock in the morning. He was dressed in a long black coat, grey stockings, and a rich red striped silk waistcoat. He was placed under the charge of Colonel Tomlinson and attended by Bishop Juxon, both of whom accompanied him bareheaded. Harris noted that His Majesty walked very fast, bidding them go faster, adding that he now went before them to strive for a heavenly crown with less solicitude than he had often encouraged his soldiers to fight for an earthly diadem!

The Warrant for Execution, it may be mentioned here, was not signed till within a few minutes before the King was led to the scaffold. Colonel Huncks refused the duty of supervising the execution, and Cromwell appointed Colonel Hacker in his place. Hacker signed the Warrant, and took it with the ink hardly dry to call for the King. Upon reaching his bedchamber, where he remained till Hacker summoned him, Charles at once commenced his devotions. Certain Puritan clergymen offered to pray with him, but he refused the offer, saying that “they had so often prayed against him, that he would not have them pray with him in his extremity’’. They departed in a huff.

“The King himself showed a calm and composed firmness, which amazed all people, and that so much the more because it was not natural to him. It was imputed to a very extraordinary measure of supernatural assistance. Bishop Juxon did the duty of his function earnestly, but with a dry coldness that could not raise the King’s thoughts; so that it was owing wholly to somewhat within himself that he went through so many indignities with so much true greatness, without disorder or any sort of affectation.”

We learn that upon rising from his knees Charles said, “Now let the rogues come, I have forgiven them, and am prepared for all I am to undergo”. Colonel Hacker flung open the door and beckoned, whereupon the Bishop and Mr Herbert, both in tears, fell upon their knees. The King gave them his hand to kiss and helped the Bishop to rise, for he was old and infirm. Then the King passed out into the Gallery. A guard was on duty all along the galleries and the Banqueting Hall. “Behind the soldiers”, says Herbert, “was crowded abundance of men and women, though with some peril to their own persons, to behold the saddest sight that England ever saw. And as His Majesty passed by with a cheerful look, they prayed aloud for him, the soldiers not rebuking, but by their silence and dejected faces seeming afflicted rather than insulting”.

“The King strode the floor of Death”, as Fuller puts it, “with a cheerful countenance”, and when at the scaffold is thought (says Heath) “to have excelled himself and to have died much greater than he had lived”. He was attended by the Bishop and two Gentlemen of his Bedchamber - Harrington and Herbert. Upon reaching the scaffold the King donned a white satin cap, and meanwhile asked one of his two executioners whether his hair was in the way. Thereupon he was asked to brush it back and he did so with the assistance of Juxon, to whom he said, “I have a good cause and a gracious God on my side”. “There is but one stage more”, said the Bishop in reply; “it will carry you from Earth to Heaven, and there you will find a great deal of cordial joy and comfort.” “I go”, said the King, “from a corruptible to an uncorruptible crown, where no disturbance can be - no disturbance in the world.” Then he again asked the executioner, “Is my hair well?”

“... On the scaffold the King showed a remarkable constancy. His beard was long and grey, his hair white and he was greatly aged. The two executioners were masked and wore false beards and wigs. Upon the scaffold, which was newly draped, were iron chains and ropes, to allow force to be used with the King if he did not submit of his own accord to the axe. There was no disturbance in London on the day of the execution; all the shops were open in the usual way.”

Taking off his long black cloak and giving his George (the jewelled pendant worn by Knights of the Garter) to the Bishop, he made use of the expression “Remember!” There has been much speculation as to the whereabouts of’ the jewel: some say it is lost; others that it is at Windsor; there is even an American claim of possession. When the King had completed this action he turned once more to the executioner. “I shall say but short prayers and then thrust out my hands”. This he repeated twice, then referring to the block, he added, “You must set it fast”. He was informed that it was fast, whereupon he remarked that it might have been higher and was told that it was impossible. “Take care they do not put me to pain”, the King added to a meddling onlooker. “Take heed of the axe; hurt not the axe which may hurt me” (Fuller).

The King, “... viewing the block, with the axe lying upon it, and iron staples in the scaffold to bind him down upon the block in case he had refused to submit himself freely, without being anyway daunted. Yea, when the deputies of that grim Serjeant Death appeared with a terrifying disguise, the King with a pleasant countenance said he freely forgave them.”

His Majesty then took off his doublet, replaced his cloak, and made a speech which seemed much broken and confused in many places, asserting his innocence. Some sources state that his words were purposely drowned by drummers; certain it is that Cromwell, afraid of the possibly sympathetic crowd, had ordered three companies of pikemen and several troops of horse to occupy the immediate scaffold area; further forces were held in reserve near at hand.

He nothing common did, or mean, Upon that memorable scene, But with his keener eye The Axe’s edge did try; Nor call’d the Gods with vulgar spite To vindicate his helpless Right But bow’d his comely head Down, as upon a bed.                     Andrew Marvell

Having made a declaration of faith at the Bishop’s request, King Charles knelt down, and was about to lay his head upon the block when one of the executioners stooped down to put His Majesty’s hair under his cap. The King misunderstood this act, and, thinking the fatal blow was about to be delivered, asked the man to await the sign. Another short pause ensued during which the King spoke a few words. Then he stretched out his hands, and the royal head was instantly severed at blow, upon which, in the sight of a great crowd, the second executioner lifted up the King’s head and exclaimed, “Behold the head of the Traitor!” Thereupon a great sigh arose from the crowd, variously interpreted by a fanatical Puritan divine as “a sober expression of great contentment”, and by a Royalist onlooker as “a groan of great sorrow”. “Charles died”, says Raysin, “with great constancy without showing the least sign of weakness or amazement”. There can be no doubt about it, King Charles died well.

At the latter end of the year 1648 I had leave to go to London to see my father, and during my stay there at that time at Whitehall it was that I saw the beheading of King Charles the First. He went by our door on foot each day that he was carried by water to Westminster, for he took barge at Gardenstairs where we lived ... On the day of his execution, which was Tuesday, January 30, I stood amongst the crowd in the street before Whitehall gate where the scaffold was erected, and saw what was done, but was not so near as to hear any thing. The blow I saw given, and can truly say with a sad heart, at the instant whereof, I remember well, there was such a groan by the thousands then present as I never heard before and desire I may never hear again. There was according to Order one Troop immediately marching from Charing Cross to Westminster and another from Westminster to Charing Cross purposely to master the people, and to disperse and scatter them, so that I had much ado amongst the rest to escape home without hurt.                       Philip Henry, Diary

Immediately after the execution the crowd was dispersed by cavalry; amongst it was a young lad, Samuel Pepys, who records in his Diary for 1 November 1660 that he rashly said to a neighbour “that was I to preach upon him (Charles I), my text should be - ‘The memory of the wicked shall rot’”. In fact, the opposite has been the case. Charles at once became the martyr of episcopacy and has inspired many individuals and Societies over the years, of which our own Company of Cavaliers is the latest. The ‘Sealed Knot’ represents our fidelity to both his cause and his memory.

The Government thought it advisable that the scaffold and everything connected with it should be removed as soon as possible. The Bishop and Mr. Herbert accompanied the body to the backstairs where it was embalmed by one Topham, Fairfax’s surgeon, who had previously sewed the King’s head to the body again. Clarendon tells us that Charles’ body was exposed for many days to public view “that all men might know that he was dead”. Whether Cromwell visited the scene is uncertain, though legend has it that he looked upon the King’s body and murmured, “Cruel necessity”.

The Burial at Windsor

Some historians believe that Charles left Juxon with instructions; but Mr. Herbert, Groom of the Bedchamber, who was frequently in company with the Bishop both before and after his Majesty’s death, always affirmed that “the Bishop never mentioned anything to him of the King’s naming any place where he would wish to be buried”. It was eventually decided to bury the body in the Royal Chapel of St George within the Castle of Windsor because the King was Sovereign of the Order of the Garter, and several other Kings had been interred there, among them Henry VI, Edward IV and Henry VIII.

Mr Herbert, having made application to the Committee of Parliament, was granted an order, dated 6 February, authorising him and Mr Anthony Mildmay to bury the King there, provided that the whole expense should not exceed £500. Accordingly the corpse was carried to Windsor from St James’s Palace in a hearse covered with black velvet, drawn by six horses, covered with a black pall, and attended by a dozen gentlemen. A heavy snowstorm coincided with the journey. On arriva1, Mr Herbert showed to Colonel Whitchcot, Governor of the Castle, the Committee’s order for permission to bury his Majesty in any place within the walls of Windsor Castle that they should think fit. The body was temporarily placed in His Majesty’s normal bedchamber, whilst the Executors went to St. George’s Chapel to find, as Wood describes it, “the most fit and honourable place for the Royal Body to rest in”.

At first they thought the Tomb House (built by Cardinal Wolsey) would be the most suitable, but that place, though adjoining, was not within the Royal Chapel, so the idea was given up. They next pitched upon the vault where Edward IV had been interred on the North Side of the choir near the altar. Orders ware accordingly given to have that vault opened; but just as the workmen were about to begin the work the Duke of Richmond, the Marquis of Hertford and Bishop Juxon, who had been given leave by Parliament to attend the King to his grave, came upon the scene.

Together with Herbert and Mildmay they revisited the Tomb House and the vault just referred to, and the choir, where one of the noble lords, according to Wood, “beating gently upon the pavement in the centre of the choir with his staff, perceived a hollow sound”. The stones being removed, they discovered a descent into a vault where two coffins were laid near to one another, the one very large, of an ‘antique form’, the other little. These were the coffins of Henry VIII and his third wife, Jane Seymour, and it was finally agreed that the King’s body should be interred in this vault.

While the men were at work engraving the King’s name and the year of his death on the leaden coffin-lid, for which orders had been given, the three noble lords went out and gave instructions to the sexton (Puddifant by name) to lock the door of the Chapel and to allow no-one to enter under any pretext whatever. It afterwards transpired, however, that a soldier had hidden himself in the building and, (to quote Wood once again) “being greedy of prey, crept into the vault and cut so much of the velvet pall that covered the coffin of Henry VIII as he thought would be hardly missed, and bored a hole through the said coffin, fancying there was something well worth the venture”. Later the sexton, on opening the door of the chapel, discovered the man, who being searched was found to be in possession of a bone. The Governor being informed rewarded the sexton, and the Lords Commissioners and others present were thereupon convinced that a real body was in the coffin which some had previously doubted.

The only words on the King’s coffin were: “King Charles, 1648”. Note the date, 1648: modern history books always ascribe his death to 1649; but in the 17th century the method of reckoning still put the year as ending on 25 March. This was not changed until 1752.

When all the preparations had been completed, the King’s body was brought down from his bedchamber, and was slowly and solemnly carried in procession into the choir of the Chapel by “gentlemen of quality dressed in mourning”. The noblemen held up the pall and the Governor and several Parliamentary officers came after, pointedly wearing their hats throughout the ceremony. The body was set down by the bearers near the place of burial, and the Bishop of London stood ready, with the Service book in his hand, to perform his 1ast duty to the King, according to the order and form of the Burial of the Dead, as set out in the Book of Common Prayer. But the Governor of the Castle, Colonel Whitchcot, would not allow the service to be read. This is borne out by Clarendon in his History of the Great Rebellion: “the King’s body was laid in the vault without any words or other ceremonies than the tears and the sighs of the few beholders”.

When the coffin was lowered into place, the black velvet pall was placed over it, which the Governor stayed to see perfectly done, before taking the keys of the Chapel. “Thus”, said Wood, “went the King to his grave in the 48th year of his age, and the 22nd year and 10th month of his reign.”

Many of these quotations appear in “O Horrable Murder”, the book on the trial, execution and burial of King Charles I by Bob Partridge of the Sealed Knot, now available.