MARRIAGE OF HENRY SOMERSET, LORD HERBERT OF RAGLAN.

Towards the close of the sixteenth century there was a rumour afloat in London, among aristocratic circles, respecting a marriage in high life. At that time Blackfriars was as much the seat of fashion, as St. James’s at a later period; and was conveniently situated while Queen Elizabeth held her court at Greenwich.

A contemporary correspondent, writing in the usual quaint style of the day, states in a letter dated from Baynard’s Castle, the 23rd of November, 1599:—“I hear that the Lord Herbert, the Earl of Worcester’s son, shall marry Miss Anne Russell, and that it is concluded upon.” This announcement relates to no less a person than the future Marquis of Worcester, father of that Edward, Marquis of Worcester, whose life we shall hereafter have to detail, and whose prowess was severely tested by the evil times of his closing career; it will be interesting, at this early stage of that eminent nobleman’s personal history, to follow this same correspondent through his future gossiping epistles touching the proposed matrimonial alliance.

Writing to Sir Robert Sydney on the ensuing 22nd of December, he acquaints him:—“This afternoon your little daughter was christened by Edward, Earl of Worcester, the Lady Nottingham, and the Lady Buckhurst. My Lord of Worcester sent his son, Henry Lord Herbert, because he himself waited on the Queen, who rode abroad to take the air. Among the presents were a very fair bowl and a cover from the Earl.”

After a lapse of nearly four months, we have again news from Baynard’s Castle, under date the 19th of April, 1600, stating that—“The marriage between Lord Herbert and Mrs. Anne Russell is concluded; for my Lady Russell was at court, to desire the Queen’s leave, which is obtained.”

But on the 16th of May we are assured—“The marriage between Lord Herbert and Mrs. Anne Russell is at a stay, till it please her Majesty to appoint a day.” And further, that—“It will be honourably solemnized; and many take care to do her all the possible honour they can devise. The feast,” it is added, “will be in Blackfriars, my Lady Russell making exceeding preparations for it.”

Her Majesty appears to have been somewhat deficient in considering either the distraction she was occasioning the lovers, or the disarranged domestic economy of the several attendants, for another month is allowed to glide gloomily away, only to find on the 24th of May that—“My Lord of Bedford is come to town, and his lady to honour the marriage of Mrs. Anne Russell; but the day is not yet appointed by her Majesty, which troubles many of her friends, that stay in town to do her service.”

Some weeks more pass on, when at length we learn from Greenwich, under date the 14th of June:—“Her Majesty is in very good health, and purposes to honour Mrs. Anne Russell’s marriage with her presence. It is thought she will stay there (at Blackfriars), Monday and Tuesday. My Lord Cobham prepares his house for her Majesty to lie in, because it is near the Bridehouse. There is to be a memorable masque of eight ladies; they have a strange dance newly invented; their attire is this: Each hath a skirt of cloth of silver, a rich waistcoat wrought with silks, and gold and silver, a mantle of carnation taffeta cast under the arm; and their hair loose about their shoulders, curiously knotted and interlaced. These are the masquers. My Lady Doritye, Mrs. Fitton, Mrs. Carey, Mrs. Onslow, Mrs. Southwell, Mrs. Bess Russell, Mrs. Darcy, and my Lady Blanch Somersett. These eight dance to the music Apollo brings; and there is a fine speech that makes mention of a ninth, much to her honour and praise. The preparation for this feast is sumptuous and great; but it is feared, that the house in Blackfriars will be little for such a company. The marriage is upon Monday.”

Accordingly on Monday the 16th of June, 1600, her most gracious Majesty Queen Elizabeth, arrived at Blackfriars in all possible state to grace the marriage of the Lord Herbert and his wife. The Bride (the same gossiping authority states) met the Queen at the waterside, where my Lord Cobham had provided a Lectica, [used similar to a sedan chair] made like half a litter, whereon she was carried to my Lady Russell’s by six knights. Her Majesty dined there, and at night, went through Dr. Pudding’s house (who gave the Queen a fan), to my Lord Cobham’s, where she supped. After supper the masque came in; and delicate it was to see eight ladies so prettily and richly attired. Mrs. Fitton led, and after they had done all their own ceremonies, then eight lady masquers chose eight ladies more to dance the measures.

Mrs. Fitton went to the Queen, and wooed her to dance.

Her Majesty asked her what she was.

“Affection,” she said.

“Affection!” said the Queen; “Affection is false.”

Yet her Majesty rose and danced. So did my Lady Marquis (of Winchester).

The Bride was led to the Church by the Lord Herbert of Cardiffe, and my Lord Cobham; and from the Church by the Earls of Rutland and Cumberland.

The gifts given that day were valued at one thousand pounds, in plate and jewels, at least.

The entertainment was great and plentiful, and my Lady Russell much commended for it.

Her Majesty, upon Tuesday (following) came back again to the Court. But the solemnities continued till Wednesday night. “And now the Lord Herbert, and his fair lady are at Court,” (writes this pleasant correspondent on the 23rd of the same month.)[28]

The bride’s portion, as a younger daughter, was said to be about two thousand pounds in money; one hundred and fifty pounds a year in land; and a reversion of one thousand marks.[106]

Thus was celebrated the marriage of Henry the young Lord Herbert, son of Edward, fourth Earl of Worcester, then Master of the Horse, who was eminently distinguished alike for his noble and ancient lineage and courtly attainments. Greatly was his son’s marriage honoured, not only by the presence of royalty in the person of a queen of Elizabeth’s high-toned feelings and sentiments, but, if possible, more so by her condescending to participate in the dance on that festive occasion.

The particulars afforded by this domestic incident take us far back to a most interesting period in our country’s history. The great Queen’s reign was then within three years of its close. The Pope had published his bulls to exclude King James from the throne of England. On the 19th of November following, was born at Dunfermline in Scotland, Prince Charles, whose future reign was destined materially to affect the family and fortunes of the Somersets, Earls of Worcester.

The social habits of the aristocracy, as here briefly pourtrayed, evince a peculiarly primitive character. Three days’ feasting shows a singular lustihood of enjoyment in the revels attaching to such occasions of festivity. But, notwithstanding we are treating of the most elevated society, in the most flourishing period of the Augustan Age of our Literature, as it has been not inappropriately styled, a comparative grossness of habit prevailed, occasioning a particular relish for such carousals, during the period that viands and wine were served without stint or stay.

Many of the modern common luxuries of the table were then unknown; asparagus, artichokes, cauliflowers, and other edibles were not introduced; while the finest clothing was costly, being of foreign manufacture. Considerations like these should check the forming of hasty judgments in reference to the manners and customs of olden times.

The lady whom Henry Lord Herbert had thus espoused was Anne, sole daughter and heir of John Lord Russell, eldest son of Francis Russell, Earl of Bedford. She bore him nine sons, of whom Edward was the eldest son and heir, and four daughters, making in all a family of thirteen children.

Sir John Somerset, the second son, married Mary, daughter of Thomas Arundel, Lord Arundel of Wardour; and, as will appear in the sequel, he resided at Troy House, near Monmouth.

The fifth son, Thomas Somerset, lived at Rome, 1676; and his brother Charles was governor of Raglan Castle in 1646, and afterwards died a Canon at Cambray in Flanders.

Four other sons died in infancy; and another, later in life, died unmarried.

Kennet, the historian, records, in respect of one of the daughters, that King James reprimanded the Earl, her father, for his sending her to Brussels to be made a nun,[58] in 1620.

But it will be our chief business hereafter to treat especially of the life and labours of the first-named son of this nobleman; only making such allusions to the father, and relating such circumstances affecting him, as serve to throw light on remote particulars of his son’s life.

Of the age of Henry Lord Herbert, at the time of his marriage, we are afforded indirect evidence through Wood, who, speaking of him and his elder brother William (who died unmarried during his father’s lifetime) being at Magdalen College, Oxford, in 1591, states the brothers to have been of the respective ages of 15 and 14; so that Henry, being then only 14 years of age, would have been born on or about the year 1577, and marrying in the year 1600, he would at that time be in his 23rd year.

His age has been very variously, and, as it appears, vaguely stated; originating probably with hasty printed statements during the Civil War, when no particular purpose had to be served by accuracy on such a matter. Wood certainly was not likely to be ten years out of truth in recording the ages of youths. It is also more likely that his Lordship in his circumstances, and with his family, had married rather at 23 than at 33 years of age.

We meet with no accounts of the births or baptisms of his children, with the exception of his seventh son, Frederick Somerset, who, according to the Parish Registers of St. Dunstan’s in the West,[73] London, was baptized on the 26th March, 1613, in the house of Lady Morrison in the Friars, she being related through the Russells to Anne Lady Herbert.

James I. was proclaimed on the 24th of March, 1603. The same month Lord Herbert was summoned to Parliament, being then 26 years of age. A great plague was at that time raging in the metropolis, having destroyed 30,000 of the population, rendering his residence in town very perilous.

His Lordship’s father was, in 1604, invested with the Order of the Garter, and on resigning his office of Master of the Horse, on the 1st of January, 1616, having retained it fifteen years, he was, on the 2nd of the same month, made Keeper of the Privy Seal.

In a literary and scientific point of view, this was a period of great historical interest. In December, 1608, Milton was born; while in April, 1616, Shakespeare died. In 1611 the new translation of the Bible was published. Lord Napier, in Scotland, invented his system of logarithms; the great Harvey was propounding his discovery respecting the circulation of the blood; and Sir Hugh Myddleton had completed his great undertaking of forming the New River. Such are a few among the prominent facts that mark the intelligence and enterprise of those times.

It is possible that Henry Lord Herbert’s parliamentary duties, his attendance at court, with other circumstances, might occasion prolonged residence at Worcester House, in the Strand, the ancient family town mansion, a locality which was occupied by many noble families above two centuries ago. Nothing transpires to indicate his presence at Raglan Castle at that period.

On the 24th of August, 1621, died Elizabeth, daughter of Francis Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon; and on the 3rd of March, 1627, in the 79th year of his age, Edward, fourth Earl of Worcester, the honoured parents of Henry Lord Herbert, who succeeded to his father’s dignities and fortune. Their decease happened at their town residence, whence each was conveyed with great funeral solemnity to Raglan, where, being interred in the family vault of Raglan Church, suitable monuments were raised to their memory.

Of Henry, now fifth Earl of Worcester, we have less intelligence as resident in London than as retired to his magnificent Castle of Raglan, in Monmouthshire. On the 13th of March, 1628, he obtained dispensation to be absent from Parliament,[A] which appears to have been the commencement of his decreased attention to public business.

He had then been married twenty-eight years, being in the fifty-first year of his age. Of his numerous family he lost five sons and three daughters. Edward, his first born and heir was probably about twenty-six years old; Sir John Somerset, his second son, most likely occupied Troy House, a few miles off, while his next surviving and sixth son, Charles Somerset, he installed as Governor of his Castle.

The noble Earl, inclined to a plethoric constitution, had not uniform good health, being subject to gout, yet was he of a joyous, hearty, kind, benevolent disposition. He was too a man of some learning, without being distinguished for its application, otherwise than in some verbal polemical discussions attributed to him by Dr. Bayly, the last chaplain in his service, who has preserved many of his witty apophthegms, presenting us with indications of his religious and political sentiments.

Although our interest in this memoir concerns us less in reference to the father, than to be informed respecting his son, yet the intelligent reader cannot fail to discover, that Edward, now Lord Herbert, during the early years of his life, was necessarily so intimately associated with all matters of domestic history, affecting the large family then resident at Raglan Castle, that such relations as can be gathered respecting its several branches at that early period, are invested with a degree of interest which they might not under other circumstances possess.