‘Oppressed with numbers, in the unequal field,His men discouraged, and himself expelled,Let him for succour sue, from place to place,Torn from his subjects and his son’s embrace,’ etc. etc.
‘Oppressed with numbers, in the unequal field,His men discouraged, and himself expelled,Let him for succour sue, from place to place,Torn from his subjects and his son’s embrace,’ etc. etc.
‘Oppressed with numbers, in the unequal field,His men discouraged, and himself expelled,Let him for succour sue, from place to place,Torn from his subjects and his son’s embrace,’ etc. etc.
‘Oppressed with numbers, in the unequal field,
His men discouraged, and himself expelled,
Let him for succour sue, from place to place,
Torn from his subjects and his son’s embrace,’ etc. etc.
It is a part of Dido’s curse. The King was very much impressed by the boding passage, and Lord Falkland tried his fortune. This was quite as prophetic as the last, being the lament of Evander over his son, who was killed in battle:—
‘Well I knew,What perils youthful ardour would pursue,That boiling blood would carry thee too far,Young as thou wert in danger, raw to war.O curst essay of arms, disastrous doom,Prelude of bloody fields, and fights to come.’
‘Well I knew,What perils youthful ardour would pursue,That boiling blood would carry thee too far,Young as thou wert in danger, raw to war.O curst essay of arms, disastrous doom,Prelude of bloody fields, and fights to come.’
‘Well I knew,What perils youthful ardour would pursue,That boiling blood would carry thee too far,Young as thou wert in danger, raw to war.O curst essay of arms, disastrous doom,Prelude of bloody fields, and fights to come.’
‘Well I knew,
What perils youthful ardour would pursue,
That boiling blood would carry thee too far,
Young as thou wert in danger, raw to war.
O curst essay of arms, disastrous doom,
Prelude of bloody fields, and fights to come.’
Such predictions were not calculated to cheer the spirits of the inquirers.
As time passed on, and all hope of peace between the Royalists and the Parliamentarians seemed lost, Lord Falkland, to whom his King and countrymen were alike dear, became a prey to profound melancholy.
That worst of all misfortunes, a civil war, affected him deeply; all his efforts at pacification were ineffectual; he would sit often silent when in company, for a long time, and then break forth in shrill accents—‘Peace! peace! peace!’
Pale, dejected, negligent of his dress, of which in former days he had been proverbially careful, he passed sleepless nights, and often said his heart was breaking. In battle he exposed himself to so much danger, that a friend expostulated with him, upon which he replied, among other reasons, that it behoved him to be more hazardous than others, lest any oneshould say that his desire for peace proceeded from pusillanimity.
On the morning of the battle of Newbury ‘he appeared more cheerful, put on a clean shirt in case he should be killed, and said he was weary of the times, and did think he would be out of it, before night.’
On the 20th of September 1643, in the front rank of Lord Byron’s regiment, Lucius Carey, Viscount Falkland, fell from his horse, pierced by a musket-ball. His body was not found till next morning. Thus, at the early age of thirty-four years, died one of the most remarkable men of his age and country. A true patriot, a loyal and attached subject, learned, witty, wise, honourable, and of so gentle and winning a disposition, that all men could not choose but love him; a soldier, a scholar, deeply attached to the Protestant faith, he withstood all the endeavours of his mother, a strict Roman Catholic, and a woman of great power of mind, to gain him over to her way of thinking.
He was very studious, and used to say he pitied ‘unlearned gentlemen on a rainy day.’ ‘Lord Falkland had dark hair and black eyes, in stature low, and of no great strength.’
THE LORD KEEPER COVENTRY.In robes of office.
THE LORD KEEPER COVENTRY.In robes of office.
THE LORD KEEPER COVENTRY.
In robes of office.
No. 7.
EDWARD SACKVILLE, FOURTH EARL OFDORSET.By Cornelius Jansen.BORN 1590, DIED 1652.White and black slashed dress, gold buttons. Jewel of the Garter.
EDWARD SACKVILLE, FOURTH EARL OFDORSET.By Cornelius Jansen.BORN 1590, DIED 1652.White and black slashed dress, gold buttons. Jewel of the Garter.
EDWARD SACKVILLE, FOURTH EARL OF
DORSET.
By Cornelius Jansen.
BORN 1590, DIED 1652.
White and black slashed dress, gold buttons. Jewel of the Garter.
HE was the second surviving son of Robert Earl of Dorset, by Lady Mary Howard, only daughter of Thomas, fourth Duke of Norfolk, of that family; he went to Oxford, and studied there for three years. He seems to have been a great favourite with Lord Clarendon, who paints his portrait in glowing colours: ‘His person graceful, beautiful, vigorous, his wit sparkling, his other parts of learning, of that lustre, that he could not miscarry in the world, the vices he had were of the age.’
His grandfather, Buckhurst, the Grand Treasurer, took delight in his education, left him a good fortune, and helped him to a wife, who was heir to another.
In early life, Edward Sackville appears to have yielded to the dissipated examples by which he was surrounded, and a fatal duel with Lord Bruce, a young Scotch nobleman, caused him to incur many a remorseful hour in after days. The quarrel was so inveterate that the two young men went to Flanders and fought under the walls of Antwerp, with only two ‘chirurgeons’ as witnesses, having bound themselves by the obligation not to stir, till one or other of the antagonists fell. Lord Bruce was the victim, but his adversary narrowly escaped death also, for Bruce’s surgeon, seizing his Lord’s sword, fell suddenly on Sackville, till stayed by the cry of thedying man, ‘Rascal! hold thy hand!’ Edward Sackville took refuge in a monastery, there to have his wounds dressed, and to repent his crime at leisure. The cause of the quarrel did not transpire, but from a hint which Lord Clarendon lets drop, it would appear there was ‘a lady in the case.’
No notice (to use a familiar expression) was taken, either publicly or privately, of this tragical incident, and Sackville continued high in favour at the Court of JamesI.He was made Knight of the Bath in 1616, was a leading member of the House of Commons, and spoke very eloquently, more especially in defence of the Lord Chancellor Bacon, when accused of corruption.
His powers of oratory seem indeed to have been of a superior order, and a speech he made on the subject of supplies to the Palatinate, was highly commended. His chivalrous nature was roused in the cause of the Princess Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia. He spoke of the daughter of their King (in his appeal to Parliament), ‘who scarce knew where to lay her head, or, if she did, not in safety.’
He had a command in the forces sent to the aid of Frederic, King of Bohemia, and fought at the battle of Prague, went afterwards to France, as Ambassador, and on his return was made a Privy Councillor.
In 1624 he succeeded to the title of Earl of Dorset, on the death of his brother, who had greatly impoverished the estates by his extravagance. On the accession of CharlesI.he received the Order of the Garter, and was named Chamberlain to the Queen’s Majesty. Subsequently Lord Dorset was employed in many important offices, such as Joint-Commissioner, with other noblemen, for the management of Irish affairs, likewise for treating with Holland respecting the marriage of Princess Mary and William of Orange.
Dorset was wont to carry matters with a high hand, and at the time of the Bill against the Bishops, finding a mob hadbeen brought down to intimidate the House of Peers, he, as Lord-Lieutenant of Middlesex, in command of the Trained Bands, ordered them to fire, which soon put the affrighted rabble to flight. The House of Commons was very irate, and talked of impeachment, but nothing came of it.
Dorset was a staunch adherent of the King, upholding him by word of mouth, supplying him with money, and fighting by his side in the field, at the battle of Edgehill, where he distinguished himself, and recovered the royal standard from the hands of the enemy. He was, as Clarendon says, ‘of most entire fidelity to the Crown,’ attending on the royal person constantly, and using every endeavour to bring about peace between Charles and his subjects. It is said, on the authority of Sir Edward Walker, that so deeply did the noble Earl of Dorset take to heart the murder of his royal master, that he never stirred out of his house after the King’s execution.
He married Mary, daughter and co-heir of Sir George Curzon of Croxhall, county Dorset, a lady of large fortune, most virtuous and accomplished. Indeed, so highly esteemed and honoured was she, that at her demise in 1645, both Houses of Parliament decreed her a public funeral. By his wife, Lord Dorset had one daughter, and two sons, the eldest of whom succeeded him, and the second, when in arms for the King, was taken prisoner by the Roundheads and barbarously murdered.
No. 8.
HENRY RICH, EARL OF HOLLAND.By Cornelius Jansen.EXECUTED 1649.Breastplate. Order of the Garter. White collar. White and gold sleeves.Flowing hair.
HENRY RICH, EARL OF HOLLAND.By Cornelius Jansen.EXECUTED 1649.Breastplate. Order of the Garter. White collar. White and gold sleeves.Flowing hair.
HENRY RICH, EARL OF HOLLAND.
By Cornelius Jansen.
EXECUTED 1649.
Breastplate. Order of the Garter. White collar. White and gold sleeves.
Flowing hair.
He was the second son of Robert Rich, first Earl of Warwick, by the Lady Penelope Devereux, daughter of Walter Earl of Essex.
Clarendon says of him that ‘he was a very handsome man, of a lovely and winning presence and genteel conversation.’ He went to France in his youth, was afterwards in arms in Holland; and returning to England, presented himself at Court. Here he attracted the notice and favour of George Duke of Buckingham, then all-powerful with King JamesI.Young Rich was said to have flattered his patron not a little, and certainly if he did so, it was to some purpose. It seems to have been through Buckingham’s intervention that he married the rich heiress of Sir John Cope of Kensington, of which place Rich shortly bore the title of Baron. He also held offices at Court, both about the King’s person and that of Henry, Prince of Wales, was made Earl of Holland, Knight of the Garter, Privy Councillor, and sent Ambassador to treat, concerning the marriage of Prince Charles, first in Spain and afterwards in France. On the latter occasion, it was rumoured that his beauty and courtliness made a deep impression on the heart of Henrietta Maria.
He also went to Holland with the Duke of Buckingham on matters regarding the Palatinate, etc.
In 1639, on the first breaking out of an insurrection ofthe Scots, he was made General of the Horse in that expedition, and though not in arms at the commencement of the Civil War, when evil days fell on the King, Holland joined him with many other Royalist noblemen, and being appointed General of the King’s army, numbers flocked to ask commissions from him. But in July 1648, after several fluctuations of fortune, Lord Holland was pursued, and taken prisoner near St. Neot’s, in Huntingdonshire, whence he was conveyed to Warwick House, and finally to the Tower.
A High Court of Justice was appointed to sit for the trial of the Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, and other Peers; he was in ill-health, and when examined, answered little, ‘as a man who would rather receive his life from their favour, than from the strength of his defence.’
But he was condemned with the rest of the Lords, in spite of the influence of his brother, the Earl of Warwick, and the Presbyterian party, who to a man voted for his life. There was a majority against him of three or four votes only; but Cromwell, it appears, had an inveterate dislike to him. Accordingly, on the 9th of March 1649, on the scaffold erected before Westminster Hall, Lord Holland suffered death, immediately after the Duke of Hamilton.
Spent by long sickness, he addressed but few words to the people, recommending them, with his last breath, to uphold the King’s government and the established religion.
He left four sons and five daughters. Robert, the eldest, succeeded to his father’s honours, and likewise to the earldom of Warwick, on the death of his uncle in 1672.
MALE PORTRAIT—UNKNOWN.Black gown and cap. Holding a carnation. A scroll with the words‘Supplicatur vos.’ The rest is illegible.
MALE PORTRAIT—UNKNOWN.Black gown and cap. Holding a carnation. A scroll with the words‘Supplicatur vos.’ The rest is illegible.
MALE PORTRAIT—UNKNOWN.
Black gown and cap. Holding a carnation. A scroll with the words
‘Supplicatur vos.’ The rest is illegible.
No. 10.
HENRY THE EIGHTH, KING OF ENGLAND.By Holbein.BORN 1491, DIED 1547.
HENRY THE EIGHTH, KING OF ENGLAND.By Holbein.BORN 1491, DIED 1547.
HENRY THE EIGHTH, KING OF ENGLAND.
By Holbein.
BORN 1491, DIED 1547.
Inscription in background, ‘Anno reg. 36, etatis 54.’ Gold and jewelled dress, slashed. White collar. Chain, alternate columns and H.S. A disk of gold adorned with jewels. He holds a glove. Mantle trimmed with fur. Sleeves of cloth of gold, very full. Hat and feathers.
THE eldest surviving son of HenryVII.by Elizabeth of York. Succeeded his father in 1509. He married six wives, of whom ‘the best beloved’ was Jane Seymour, with whose family, that of the Thynnes had much intercourse and relationship.
THOMAS LORD SEYMOUR OF SUDELEY.By Holbein.EXECUTED 1549-50.Black gown and cap. Badge of Garter suspended by a ribbon round his neck.
THOMAS LORD SEYMOUR OF SUDELEY.By Holbein.EXECUTED 1549-50.Black gown and cap. Badge of Garter suspended by a ribbon round his neck.
THOMAS LORD SEYMOUR OF SUDELEY.
By Holbein.
EXECUTED 1549-50.
Black gown and cap. Badge of Garter suspended by a ribbon round his neck.
HE was the fourth son of Sir John Seymour of Wulfhall, by Margaret Wentworth. He was one of the twelve assistants to the executors of the will of his brother-in-law HenryVIII., and on the accession of EdwardVI.he was advanced to great honour. Having already distinguished himself as a sailor, he was made Lord High Admiral and Baron Seymour of Sudeley, also Knight of theGarter. But these honours did not satisfy the King’s ambitious uncle; he turned his thoughts to a royal alliance, and asked the consent of the Council to his marriage with the Princess Elizabeth, then only fifteen.
His suit was refused. He then, having in his pay a gentleman about the King, bade him ask Edward whom he should marry. ‘His Majesty,’ says Froude, ‘graciously offered Anne of Cleves,’ and then added he would rather he married Princess Mary, in order that she might change her opinions. But that would neither have suited the Council, nor Mary herself, so Seymour was fain to put up with a Queen-Dowager instead of a future Queen-Regnant, and he proffered his addresses in a quarter where he knew they would be acceptable.
Between him and Queen Catharine Parr there had been love-passages, when she was the widow of Lord Latimer, till a King became his rival. Catharine at first refused to marry until her two years of widowhood should be passed, but Seymour soon prevailed on her to consent to a private union, and letters still extant show that she used to receive him clandestinely, at the palace, Chelsea.
She shared her Lord’s hatred, and jealousy of his brother the Protector, and his wife, and said, if they refused their consent, it would be of no consequence. The amiable young King was easily persuaded to do as his uncle wished, and begged Catharine to listen to Seymour’s suit. She also desired her lover to ask the Council to intercede with her in his behalf, when she was already his wife.
Princess Mary sensibly refrained from meddling, and while all these schemes were being carried on, the whole truth was discovered. There was a general outcry at the scandal, and it was no wonder that the Protector was much displeased.
Besides, it was a question if it were not high treason to marry a Queen widow, so soon after the Sovereign’s death,(at all events it was made into a charge against Seymour later,) as it might possibly have added a fresh difficulty to the vexed question of the succession to the Crown.
On the breaking out of the Scotch war, the Lord High Admiral was ordered to take command of the fleet, but he preferred remaining at home, and superintending the affairs of the Admiralty, and sent a substitute to sea.
Strange as it may appear, after all that had happened, Princess Elizabeth still remained where she had been placed for some time under the guardianship of Catharine Parr. But after a while Seymour’s conduct towards the King’s sister, his want of respect, and extreme familiarity, scandalised the royal attendants, and roused the tardy jealousy of his easy-going wife. The Princess was, in consequence, removed to safer keeping; but Seymour had other noble wards,—the daughters of the Marquis of Dorset, of whom one was the unfortunate Lady Jane Grey.
The deadly hatred which Seymour bore his brother was shared and fostered by his wife, who writes to him on one occasion, ‘This schal be to advertyse you, that my lord your brother has this afternoone made me a lyttell warme. I am glad we were dystant, or I suppose I sholde have bitten him.’
During the time the Duke of Somerset was in Scotland, Thomas Seymour did all he could to injure and supplant him, telling Edward the invasion was madly undertaken, and money wasted—that it was a pity he did not assert himself more—that he was not allowed enough money to be generous to his own servants, etc. Seymour also set about a report that the late King never intended there should be a Protectorate, and he even went so far as to write a letter, which he suggested, the King should copy and sign, to both Houses of Parliament, in his (Seymour’s) own favour, but this was refused.
Catharine had two grievances against the Duke andDuchess: one was the question of precedency between her and her sister-in-law; the other a matter respecting some jewels which Somerset had sequestered as Crown Jewels, but which Catharine affirmed had been left her by the King.
Seymour tried to bring in a Bill to separate the offices of Protector and Guardian, in order to gain possession of the King’s person, but he was foiled on all sides. His conduct was so outrageous that he was summoned before the Council to explain it; he defied, and disobeyed the summons.
In spite of this behaviour, and all these machinations against himself, Somerset was lenient to his misguided brother, even to extremes; he palliated his faults, and, ‘striving to bridle him with liberality,’ gave him fresh grants of land. But Seymour was not of the stuff that can be softened by generosity; he grew desperate, and it was reported, and believed, that he had entered into a treaty with certain privateers then infesting the seas, and that his purchase of the Scilly Islands at this juncture was with the view of acting in connection with them for his own interest.
The Protector, who showed no signs of weakness in public affairs, mildly expostulated with the headstrong man, who was speeding to his ruin, but all his forbearance was thrown away.
Catharine Parr was confined of a daughter, and died a few days after, not without some rumours of her husband having helped her exit from the world; but he was out of favour now with almost all classes, and nothing was too bad to be said of him.
Lady Dorset naturally wished to remove her daughter Jane from the Admiral’s roof on the death of his wife, but he, knowing that the Duchess of Somerset was bent on marrying the young lady to her eldest son, so worked on the weakness of Lord Dorset, that Jane Grey remained under Lord Seymour’s questionable care. Once more his thoughts reverted tothe Princess Elizabeth. He gained over two of her people, who were instructed to praise him to the skies, and keep his name always before her. But Elizabeth, though only sixteen, acted with discretion and dignity, refusing to take any step without the consent of the Council, and positively declining to receive Seymour, in spite of all his tender messages.
The failures in Scotland, religious discontent, and many untoward events, had shaken the Protector’s power, and his brother was working strenuously against him. Seymour was warned of his danger; he was told that his designs on the Princess, and his scheme of possessing himself of the person of the King were discovered; but he defied advice, remonstrance, and threats.
Again summoned before the Council, he again disobeyed. He appealed to the Earl of Warwick, on the plea that he was the enemy of the Protector, but Warwick said, if there were to be any change in the Government, it should not be for the advantage of another Seymour, and so he was arrested, and sent to the Tower. All his creatures and accomplices turned upon him, and gave evidence against him, all his intrigues and machinations were discovered; and two months after his committal the Council went to the Tower and caused thirty-three charges against the Lord High Admiral to be read aloud, in his presence. When called upon for an answer, he refused to give any, (though urged to speak on his allegiance,) and demanded an open trial.
The question now arose as to the manner of the trial, and the Chancellor and the rest of the Council gave their opinions for an Act of Attainder, while the Protector, pleading ‘what a sorrowful case this was for him, did yet rather regard his bounden duty to the King’s Majesty and the Crown of England than his own son or brother, and did weigh more his allegiance than his blood, and therefore he would not resist their Lordships.’
King Edward was present, and although his gentle nature always inclined to clemency, he gave his consent to the decision. Seymour was brought before a committee of both Houses, where he pleaded his own cause; but as the charges grew graver, he stopped short, and refused to say any more.
The next day the Bill was brought before the Lords, and passed without a dissenting voice, the Lord Protector only, ‘for natural pity’s sake, desiring licence to be away.’
Seymour had a small party of friends in the Commons, but having heard the evidence, the Lower House also passed the Bill. It was sent to the Crown with the request that justice might have place. The sentence was given without reference to the Protector, who would still have interfered to save the ungrateful brother whose inveterate hatred was unconquered, but he was prevented.
The Bishop of Ely visited the prisoner to bid him prepare for death, which he did, by writing to Elizabeth and Mary to incite them to conspire against the Duke.
He concealed the letters in the sole of his shoe, and his last words, as he knelt before the block, were to commission his servant to deliver them.
He died with a courage worthy a better cause. Bishop Latimer said of his death—‘Whether he be saved or no, I leave that to God. In the twinkling of an eye He can save a man, and turn his heart. What He did I cannot tell. And when a man hath two strokes with an axe, who can tell but between the two strokes he doth repent? It is hard to judge; but this I will say, if they ask me what I think of his death, I say that he died very irksomely, dangerously, and horribly.’
Latimer says elsewhere that the Admiral was a man furthest from the fear of God that ever he heard of in England. And yet in the picture in which we are treatingthere are verses that laud him to the skies. Not only his outward form—
‘Of person rare, stronge limbes, and manly shape;Of nature framed to serve on sea and lande, etc.,A subject true to Kinge, frinde to God’s truth’—
‘Of person rare, stronge limbes, and manly shape;Of nature framed to serve on sea and lande, etc.,A subject true to Kinge, frinde to God’s truth’—
‘Of person rare, stronge limbes, and manly shape;Of nature framed to serve on sea and lande, etc.,A subject true to Kinge, frinde to God’s truth’—
‘Of person rare, stronge limbes, and manly shape;
Of nature framed to serve on sea and lande, etc.,
A subject true to Kinge, frinde to God’s truth’—
and so forth, concluding with the lines:—
‘Yet againste nature, reason, and just lawes,His blode was spilte, giltless, without just cause!’
‘Yet againste nature, reason, and just lawes,His blode was spilte, giltless, without just cause!’
‘Yet againste nature, reason, and just lawes,His blode was spilte, giltless, without just cause!’
‘Yet againste nature, reason, and just lawes,
His blode was spilte, giltless, without just cause!’
The Bishop and the Poet were at variance in the estimate of Lord Seymour of Sudeley’s character.
THOMAS WRIOTHESLEY, LAST EARL OFSOUTHAMPTON.By Vandyck.DIED 1667.Order of the Garter.
THOMAS WRIOTHESLEY, LAST EARL OFSOUTHAMPTON.By Vandyck.DIED 1667.Order of the Garter.
THOMAS WRIOTHESLEY, LAST EARL OF
SOUTHAMPTON.
By Vandyck.
DIED 1667.
Order of the Garter.
HE was the second born, but only surviving son of the third Earl, by Elizabeth, daughter of John Vernon of Hodnet, county Salop. He was educated at Eton and Oxford, where he distinguished himself, and then went on foreign travel. He tarried some time in France, where it is probable he espoused his first wife, and afterwards proceeded to the Low Countries.
His father had also gone thither in command of a military expedition, accompanied by his eldest son, but they were both attacked by low fever. The youth died, and the afflicted father, journeying home with the loved remains, ere he was fit to travel, also succumbed, and died at Bergen-op-Zoom.
Thomas, now Earl of Southampton, on his return to England, found public affairs in great confusion, it was soon evident that he did not approve of many of the Government measures, and that he had no sympathy with the Earl of Strafford; in consequence of which, the discontented leaders in Parliament strove hard to gain him over to their side; but neither did he uphold their proceedings, which he considered disloyal, and would take no part therein.
In 1641, he, with Lord Robartes, refused assent to Pym’s protestation against ‘plots and conspiracies,’ which was signed by every other member in each House. This incensed the Parliament, but pleased the King. Southampton was appointed Privy Councillor and Lord of the Bedchamber, and was henceforth, in every sense of the word, attached to the royal person.
He was prudent and zealous in his master’s cause, often giving him unpalatable advice, they were now seldom apart, Southampton frequently sleeping in the King’s chamber, and trying to soothe his hours of mental anguish. He treated (unsuccessfully indeed, but nobly, and with dignity) between the adverse parties. In 1647, when the unhappy monarch fled from Hampton Court, he took shelter with Southampton at Titchfield in Hampshire, the family estate, and when brought back to the palace, in the hands of his enemies, his first request was for the attendance of his trusty friend.
Southampton was one of the last allowed to remain with the unfortunate Charles, and one of the four to pay the last sad duties to the remains of the master he so dearly loved, in ‘privacy and darkness.’ He kept up a correspondence with the exiled King, supplied him with large sums, and on Charles’s arrival in England, went to meet him, and was rewarded (at the same time as other faithful adherents of the Crown) with the Order of the Garter. He was shortly afterwards made Lord High Treasurer, in which office, says Clarendon,‘he had no dependence on the Court, or purpose to have any, but wholly pursued the public interest.’
Consequently he offended the King by opposing to his utmost the Bill for Liberty of Conscience, as it was called, both in Parliament and Council; yet he was not removed from his office, but held it for a few short years longer, although suffering from a terrible and painful disease, which made business irksome to him. The testimony of Burnet and Clarendon both go to prove that ‘he was a man of virtue, and of very good parts, and incorrupt,’ and during seven years’ management of the Treasury he made but an ordinary fortune, disdaining, unlike many of his predecessors, to sell places.
‘He was by nature inclined to melancholy, and being born a younger brother, was much troubled at being called “My Lord.” Great quickness of apprehension, and that readiness of expression on any sudden debate, that no man delivered more efficaciously with his hearers, so that no man ever gave them more trouble in his opposition, or drew so many to concurrence in opinion.’ The Earl of Southampton was thrice married. His first wife was Rachel, daughter of Daniel de Massey, lord of Ruvigny, in France, by whom he had two sons, who died young, and three daughters, the second of whom was Rachel, the faithful wife and widow of William Lord Russell, who was beheaded, her first husband being Lord Carbery, in Ireland. The second Countess of Southampton was Elizabeth, daughter and co-heir to Francis Booth, Lord Dunsmore, who brought him four girls, one of whom was Elizabeth, Countess of Northumberland. The third wife was the daughter of William, second Duke of Somerset, and widow of Viscount Molyneux.
The Earl died at Southampton House, in Bloomsbury, of a violent attack of the malady from which he had long suffered, and was buried at Titchfield.
No. 13.
GEORGE LORD LANSDOWNE.By Sir Godfrey Kneller.Tawny dress. Blue velvet cap.
GEORGE LORD LANSDOWNE.By Sir Godfrey Kneller.Tawny dress. Blue velvet cap.
GEORGE LORD LANSDOWNE.
By Sir Godfrey Kneller.
Tawny dress. Blue velvet cap.
He was the second son of Sir Bernard Granville, by Anne, sole daughter and heir of Cuthbert Morley, of Normanby in Cleveland, county York, consequently grandson to the gallant Sir Bevil Granville, who was slain at the battle of Lansdowne. He was raised to the peerage as Baron Lansdowne, of Bideford, county Devon, having held the appointments of Secretary at War, Comptroller of the Household, Treasurer, and Privy Councillor. He married, in 1711, Lady Mary, the widow of Thomas Thynne, Esq., daughter of the Earl of Jersey, and mother of the second Lord Weymouth.
SIR HENRY FREDERICK THYNNE.By Sir Peter Lely.BORN 1615.Oval. Dark dress. White cravat. Tawny mantle.
SIR HENRY FREDERICK THYNNE.By Sir Peter Lely.BORN 1615.Oval. Dark dress. White cravat. Tawny mantle.
SIR HENRY FREDERICK THYNNE.
By Sir Peter Lely.
BORN 1615.
Oval. Dark dress. White cravat. Tawny mantle.
WAS the eldest surviving son of Sir Thomas Thynne, by his second wife, Catharine Howard. His royal godmother, Queen Anne, wife to JamesI., desired he should bear the name of Frederick, after her father, the King of Denmark, Thomas, first Earl of Suffolk, and cousin to Henry’s mother, being one of Her Majesty’s ‘gossips.’
Sir Henry Thynne, who was created a Baronet in 1641, married Mary, daughter of Thomas, first Lord Coventry, by whom he had Sir Thomas Thynne, his heir; James of Buckland, county Gloucester, one of the representatives for Cirencester in Parliament; Henry Frederick; John; Mary, wife to Sir Richard How, Bart., of Wishford, county Wilts; and Catharine, married to Sir John Lowther, afterwards Viscount Lonsdale.
Sir Henry Frederick died at his residence at Kempsford, where he and his wife lie buried.