by David Loades
Jurisdiction within the verge of the court traditionally belonged to the Lord Steward, at this time Edward Fiennes, Earl of Lincoln. However, for some reason which is not clear, Elizabeth was not satisfied with this arrangement, and on 20 February 1579 constituted a special commission of Oyer and Terminer to hear criminal cases which arose within the verge and gave that commission to Henry Carey.[437] It may have been that the council was alarmed at the rising threat of political assassination, in which case it would have made sense to grant a special jurisdiction to the Captain of the Queen’s chief bodyguard. It seems that the Steward’s civil authority over mere misdemeanours was not affected, nor is there any evidence that he resented this intrusion upon his traditional rights. Meanwhile, Sir George Carey’s career was advancing alongside that of his father. In 1572 he sat in parliament again, this time for Colchester, and served on the Commission of the Peace for Essex, which perhaps indicates that he had taken over responsibility for Rochford. On the other hand, in 1584 he sat for Hampshire, and thereafter for Middlesex, both counties in which he held property and for which he acted as a Justice, so it is not safe to assume a connection between his parliamentary seat and his place of residence.[438] He was primarily a courtier, and in 1578 was appointed a Marshall of the Household, which was a virtual sinecure, carrying official duties only at the time when the accounts were due to be audited. In 1583 George received also two apparently incompatible promotions, that as Constable of Bamburgh Castle in Northumberland, and that as Governor of the Isle of Wight. The Bamburgh office he discharged by deputy, and there is no evidence that he ever visited it, but the governorship was a different matter altogether. He conducted an extensive correspondence over several years with Burghley and Walsingham about the security of the island, conducted musters and arranged for troops to be stationed there.[439] He was on the spot during the critical summer of 1588, and retained the post until he succeeded to his father’s offices in 1596.
In 1583 occurred the Throgmorton plot. Worked out in Paris, and involving agents of the Guises, Mary Queen of Scots and the English Catholics, this aimed at the assassination of the Queen and at a joint Spanish and French invasion to install Mary on the English throne. Bernardino de Mendoza, the Spanish ambassador, was put in touch with Francis Throgmorton, a young English aristocrat, whose job would be to mobilise the Catholics in support of the invasion, and to provide essential information about English troop deployment. Charles Paget, the exiled brother of Lord Paget, visited England secretly more than once in pursuit of this objective. Unfortunately for them, Walsingham’s spies were already on to Throgmorton, and the council had good warning of what was afoot. Toward the end of 1583 he was arrested as a ‘privy conveyor and receiver of letters to and from the Scottish Queen’ and a series of interrogations was established.[440] During one of his visits, Charles Paget had talked with his brother, and, it was suspected, with Philip Howard Earl of Arundel. Arundel was placed under arrest and on 24 December Lord Hunsdon and Sir Walter Mildmay were given the invidious task of questioning him. What questions they may have asked we do not know, but Arundel denied any involvement with Paget and his schemes, and there the matter was allowed to rest.[441] Throgmorton himself, against whom the evidence was clear if circumstantial, was tried and executed, and Mendoza was expelled in January 1584. Hunsdon and Mildmay were obviously selected for this duty because both were notoriously hostile to Catholics in general and to the Queen of Scots in particular. In February the former sent to Walsingham a set of notes which he had compiled on the recusant problem, and on the seminarians who were at the heart of it, indicating the names of prominent suspects of whom he was aware. It is unlikely that these told the Secretary anything which he did not know, but it was accepted in the spirit in which it was intended.[442]
Meanwhile, the affairs of Scotland were unsettled. King James was still underage, and the Earl of Arran was Regent, but Mary had not given up hope of being reinstated as a joint ruler, and a complicated three way negotiation between Arran, Mary and the English Council was underway. At this point James complicated the issue still further by taking as his favourite Esme Stuart, a kinsman of the late Earl of Lennox who had been brought up in France and was a Catholic. Mary naturally took this to be good omen, and began to work to undermine Arran. Hunsdon, as the council’s resident expert on Scottish affairs, was deeply involved in support of the Regent, and he tended to see eye to eye with Lord Burghley on this issue.[443] Leicester on the other hand was suspicious because he believed that Hunsdon nursed a secret ambition to marry either his daughter or his niece (Sir Francis Knollys’ daughter) to the young King of Scots. Walsingham was also suspicious because one of Burghley’s nephews, Sir Philip Hoby, was married to another Carey daughter and he thought that kinship was taking precedence over policy. In July 1584 he wrote:
Touching the by-course between Lord Hunsdon and the Earl of Arran, there is nothing to help it but time and trial. You know Lord Hunsdon’s passion, whose propinquity in blood doth somewhat prevail to enable his credit to more harm than good. And yet he should not herein greatly prevail were he not countenanced by the Lord Treasurer, who dealeth strangely in the action of Scotland.[444]
Strangely or not, Burghley was dealing cautiously both with Scotland and its queen, far too cautiously for Walsingham’s taste, who wanted a more robust defence of the reformed faith. He suspected the Lord Treasurer of using Hunsdon as a catspaw against Leicester, whom neither of them trusted, ‘although, God wot, he be but a weak one’.[445] He was sent to the King of Scots again in June 1584, at Arran’s suggestion, which gives some point to Walsingham’s concern.[446] Burghley was trying to conciliate both James and his mother at this point, knowing that the Queen was in two minds, and obviously felt the need to have her closest kinsman in the council on his side. That he was a weak support is merely Walsingham’s opinion, and is not borne out by other evidence. In any case Esme Stuart was ousted in 1583, and the Earl of Arran in 1585, leaving James (more or less) in control. Meanwhile, Mary’s involvement in the Babington plot forced Burghley and Hunsdon into a tactical withdrawal, which neither of them was reluctant to make. Although the Lord Treasurer’s professions of friendship apparently deceived Mary at the time, they had been made in the interests of a cause which was now discredited, and the evidence suggests that both of them were heartily glad to see the back of her.[447] Elizabeth herself treated all the parties in this tangled situation to the rough side of her tongue, and Walsingham confessed to Burghley in June 1584 that he had received ‘hard speeches’ over his attitude to Scotland, but that was in the context of informing him that her Majesty was in a foul mood, particularly with Lord Hunsdon, in case he should be thinking of using the latter as a means of access.[448] However, his loss of favour, if such it was, does not seem to have affected him adversely. He was reappointed to the captaincy of the Gentlemen Pensioners in 1583, and served as Lord Lieutenant of Hertfordshire from 1583 to 1585, both positions of trust. Then in July 1585 the Lord Chamberlain, Charles, Lord Howard of Effingham was appointed Lord Admiral in place of the deceased Earl of Lincoln, and Henry Carey was named in his place.[449] The summit of his career as a courtier had now been reached. He was fifty-nine, and his kinship with the Queen had paid its full dividend.
Hunsdon, however, was still not an officer of state, and over the next two years he seems to have busied himself with routine council business, authorising a warrant for the building expenses at Portsmouth, and keeping an eye on Scotland, which he was no doubt expected to do. In February 1588, Lord Admiral Howard wrote to Walsingham that he had received ‘advertisement’ from Hunsdon relating to the affairs of the north, and was relieved to hear that the King of Scots was running ‘a true course’. This presumably meant that he was resisting the blandishments of some of his Catholic peers to become involved in Philip of Spain’s plans against England, and must have been sent to the Admiral in his military capacity.[450] It may well be that Hunsdon was reluctant to communicate directly with the Secretary bec
ause of the tensions which existed between them. He remained a conscientious attender at council meetings, in spite of his commitments elsewhere, but had presumably written to Howard in case he did not see him at a meeting. Howard, like Walsingham, was one of the workhorses of the council, and he wrote because he considered that his tidings needed to be ‘of record’ rather than through any lack of personal contact. Since 1585 Hunsdon had shifted his lord lieutenancy from Hertfordshire to Norfolk, which was a maritime county and therefore more likely to come under attack, and in the summer of 1588 mustered the county in preparation for Philip’s expected invasion. He was still, however, spending a good deal of his time in the north-east, where he also had responsibility for the East and Middle Marches, although intelligence out of Scotland suggested that the threat from that quarter was minimal.[451] By July of 1588 he was back in the south and took personal command of the household and other troops designated for the protection of the Queen’s person, in the event of Parma affecting a landing. In that capacity he would have been with the army at Tilbury on 9 August when Elizabeth made her famous speech, although there is no record of his reaction. By that time the crisis was effectively over, and the Armada, defeated at Gravelines, was streaming north in an effort to escape. On 22 August Sir George Carey, monitoring the situation from his position on the Isle of Wight, was able to write to his father that a ‘great fleet’ was reported to be between the Orkneys and Fair Isle, which would have been approximately the location of Medina Sidonia’s ships by that date.[452] A few weeks later a number of them were wrecked on the Irish coast. At some point early in 1589 the Queen rewarded her Lord Chamberlain for his service in this crisis, with a licence to export 20,000 broadcloths over the next six years without paying duty. This did not mean that Lord Hunsdon had turned merchant in his declining years, but that he would have been able to sell his licence for a substantial sum to those who were in the business. This was typical of Elizabeth’s cash-cautious style at this time, more famously typified by the grants of monopolies in the manufacture of such commodities as soap and playing cards, which enabled the recipients to sell their rights, and obtain their rewards at the cost of the consumer, to whom the price would have been enhanced.[453]
By this time, Lord Hunsdon was settled at the court, although he still retained his interests in the north. In 1592 it was noted again that no one knew ‘the Scottish causes’ better than the Lord Chamberlain, who should be consulted over any matter relating to King James or his conduct over the English succession.[454] He also held Norham Castle of the Queen, and the fishing rights in the river Tweed, which had come to the Crown from the bishopric of Durham by a statute of the first year of her reign. These would have gone along with his governorship of Berwick, a post which he continued to hold, and would have been leased out to those with the relevant interests, while Norham would have been in the hands of a reliable deputy.[455] He continued to be busy almost to the end, but his health was giving way, and in March 1596 the Earl of Essex reported to Sir Robert Sidney, the Governor of Flushing that he was likely to die. In the event he survived until 23 July when he expired at Somerset House at the age of seventy. The Queen’s personal reaction is not known, but he was one of the last of her early favourites, and his death severed a link with her mother which she must surely have valued.[456] Her feelings are probably best gauged by the fact that she promptly bestowed the chamberlainship upon his son George, who became the second Lord Hunsdon. George’s brothers Henry, Robert and Edward were also in the royal service, so the image of her cousin lived on in his descendants. The elder Henry is alleged to have been discontented that he was never promoted to an earldom in spite of his closeness to the Queen, but Elizabeth’s creations at that level were so few that it is not surprising. Moreover, although his services were worthy, and extended over many years, they lacked the distinction of her lord admirals, created Earls of Lincoln and Nottingham respectively in 1572 and 1597. In spite of her early flutter with the Earl of Leicester, the Queen was not anxious that it should appear that she was promoting peers primarily for kinship to herself. Her affection for her cousin is probably best expressed in the fact that she paid for his funeral, which cost her £800, and gave Lady Hunsdon and her daughters £400 by way of a gift in November 1596. Shortly after, on 5 December she also took the most unusual step of conferring the keepership of Somerset House upon Ann, with all the rights and fees dependent upon that office, and the following July gave her an annuity of £200, which would have made her virtually independent of her son.[457] George, as we have seen, sued unsuccessfully for the earldom of Ormond in 1597, and may have done his own chances no good by being notoriously opposed to the pretensions of the Earl of Essex. He would probably have been raised to a superior title by King James, who was much more generous than his predecessor, but he died at the age of fifty-six on 8 September 1603, before the King had got around to thinking about him. His mother outlived him, dying at Somerset House in 1607. His son, Henry, the third Lord Hunsdon, was created Viscount Rochford in 1621, in what must have been a deliberate echo of his family history, and Earl of Dover on 8 March 1628. When his son John, the second Earl, died in May 1677 the senior branch of the Carey line became extinct.[458] It was left to the descendants of George’s younger brothers to carry the Carey descent down to the present day.
There was only one stain on the married life of Henry Carey, and that is the existence of an illegitimate son, one Valentine Carey, who became Bishop of Exeter in 1621 and died in 1626.[459] He must have been born about 1560, and the name of his mother is not known, but he appears to have been acknowledged and educated at his father’s expense. Ann, who was herself the mother of at least six children, left no recorded opinion of her husband’s waywardness, and perhaps she did not mind very much. She and Henry must often have been apart as he pursued his various official duties, and it is even possible that she never found out. Like his uncle, Lord Rochford, Lord Hunsdon left a legacy to the Church of England.
10
ELIZABETH I, THE BOLEYN DAUGHTER – THE DUDLEY YEARS
It needs to be remembered that Elizabeth I had two grandfathers – King Henry VII and Sir Thomas Boleyn, and that Anne Boleyn was her mother. She had been less than three years old when Anne was executed, and would hardly have noticed her absence. Her mother had been an occasional visitor to the daughter’s household rather than a regular presence, and the child’s affections were probably more focussed upon her nurse. Nevertheless, she had her mother’s genes, and they included not only her deviousness and acute political intelligence, but also her sexuality. We are told that Elizabeth ‘gloried’ in her father, and had learned his way of doing business. ‘She intends to have her way absolutely as her father did,’ observed the Count of Feria a few days before her accession; and indeed she inherited her imperious demeanour as well as her colouring from Henry VIII.[460] She never spoke of her mother, but promoted her Carey relations, not only Henry but also his wife Anne, his sister Catherine and Catherine’s husband Sir Francis Knollys. Elizabeth owed her evangelical upbringing to Catherine Parr rather than to Anne, and her outright Protestantism to her brother Edward and his tutors, but she must have been aware of her mother’s reputation as a promoter of reform, and determined to tread in her footsteps. Sexually, her encounter with Thomas Seymour had taught her caution, and she was careful not to allow any man’s name to be associated with hers as long as Mary was alive. Philip had been keen to marry her to a loyal Catholic and Habsburg supporter, and had endeavoured to match her with the Duke of Savoy. However, she had rejected all overtures on the pretext that she was not ready for such a commitment, realising perfectly well that his real objective was to limit her freedom of action if (or when) she should come to the throne.[461] She had affected a puritanical plainness of dress, and professed a complete lack of interest in sexual activity, lest it lead to her entrapment in an unfavourable marriage. When she came to the throne, therefore, at the age of twenty-five, she suddenly found herself the most attractive brid
e in Europe, and free to chose whatever partner she liked.
In his despatch of 14 November, Feria speculated on who would be in favour and who out when the new regime took effect. Among those not presently councillors, he mentioned the Earl of Bedford, Sir Peter Carew and Sir William Cecil as likely to be promoted. He also referred to Lord Robert (Dudley), although without any particular emphasis.[462] He reported that Elizabeth regarded talk of her marriage to the Earl of Arundel as a joke, and beyond that it was Lord Paget’s opinion that there was no one outside the kingdom or within it upon whom she had an eye. Sir William Pickering was mentioned (although not by Feria) as a possibility, but this seems to have been on no stronger grounds than that he was fine upstanding man, and worthy of any damsel’s favour. Although she talked to the ambassador with remarkable freedom, this was one subject that was not discussed between them, and he declined to speculate. It was, however, a live issue for her council as soon as she had one, and her first parliament in January 1559 petitioned her to marry. Her reply was typically devious, outlining the circumstances which had hitherto deterred her, she went on:
Although my youth and words may seem to some hardly to agree together, yet it is most true that at this day I stand free from any other meaning that either I have had in time past or have at this present. With which trade of life I am so thoroughly acquainted that I trust God, who hath hitherto preserved me and led me by the hand, will not now of his goodness suffer me to go alone.[463]
She would marry, but in God’s good time, and taking careful thought for the well being of her realm. She knew perfectly well that it was not out of any solicitude for her happiness that this course was urged upon her.
