The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

Engraved by J. Cochran.
EDWARD SOMERSET, SECOND MARQUIS OF WORCESTER,
Born about 1601. Died 3^rd. April, 1667
WITH MARGARET, HIS SECOND WIFE, WHO DIED 26^TH. JULY, 1681, AND THEIR ONLY DAUGHTER MARY, WHO DIED AN INFANT.
Drawn by Henry Dircks, C.E. from the Original of Hanneman in the Collection of His Grace the Duke of Beaufort

THE
LIFE, TIMES,
AND
SCIENTIFIC LABOURS
OF THE SECOND
MARQUIS OF WORCESTER.

TO WHICH IS ADDED, A REPRINT OF HIS
CENTURY OF INVENTIONS,
1663,
with a Commentary thereon,
BY
HENRY DIRCKS, ESQ.,
CIVIL ENGINEER, ETC. ETC.

Inventas aut qui vitam excoluêre per artes.
Quinque sui memores alios fecere merendo.

Virgil.

How few men of genius are there who have not been the victims of misfortune!

Sir Egerton Brydges, Bart.

LONDON:
BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY.
1865.

TO

THE MOST NOBLE

Henry Charles FitzRoy,

DUKE OF BEAUFORT,

MARQUIS AND EARL OF WORCESTER,

EARL OF GLAMORGAN, VISCOUNT GROSMONT,

BARON HERBERT OF CHEPSTOW, RAGLAND, AND GOWER,

BARON BEAUFORT OF CALDECOT CASTLE, AND

BARON DE BATTETCOURT,

ETC. ETC. ETC.

My Lord Duke,

Throughout your Grace’s most ancient and regal line of ancestry it would be impossible to name a more truly exalted character than Edward Somerset, the sixth Earl and second Marquis of Worcester, father of Henry, created first Duke of Beaufort by Charles the Second.

This pre-eminence, due to his high intellectual gifts in constructive ingenuity, distinguishes him not only amongst the illustrious descendants of Plantagenet, but renders it impossible to name his compeer, either among the highest nobility, or the most eminent scientific celebrities of Europe, during the last two centuries. Indeed, it may be justly said, that ancient lineage, noble descent, illustrious titles, even when crowned with all the glories of martial deeds, or senatorial honours, fade into comparative insignificance before the enduring renown, which it is alone the prerogative of original genius to confer on the memory of men remarkable for their discoveries in arts conducive to the elevation of mankind in the scale of being.

The History of Science from the days of Archimedes presents a vast phalanx of men mighty in genius; but foremost in this intellectual group ranks the Marquis of Worcester, the originality, independence, and grandeur of whose mechanical conceptions have acquired a world-wide celebrity; for he it was who first evoked that Titanic power, which, through successive improvements, consequent on the accumulated ingenuity of two hundred years, has given to the present age the modern Steam-engine.

It may be freely conceded that, stupendous as he himself pronounced the parent engine to be, it was, nevertheless, only as the acorn compared to the time-honoured monarch of the forest. Just as the existence of the plant is dependant on that of the seed, so, had the Engine he constructed never existed, we might have been unacquainted even to this day with the mechanical application of steam.

Living at a period when Civil War convulsed this country, and unhappily brought severe suffering on all who were conspicuous for their loyalty, the Marquis of Worcester, in common with the Royalist party, had to succumb to intolerant rulers. For while Cromwell enjoyed an income of £2,500 per annum, derived from a portion of his Lordship’s princely estates, the Protector proudly granted to The Inventor of the Steam Engine, a weekly stipend of Three pounds!

Unfortunately, the Restoration of the monarchy contributed but little to ameliorate his Lordship’s sad condition; while his enthusiasm led him to sacrifice those personal comforts which his declining years would seem to have absolutely required; rather than jeopardize operations depending on his great invention.

In offering for your Grace’s approval this first effort to realize a connected memoir of your Grace’s immortal ancestor, it is unnecessary to dwell on the fact of its matter being chiefly derived from very scattered sources, and often from but fragmentary materials, though in every instance the very best available authorities have been consulted; among which, the unique collection of Manuscripts, so freely and obligingly submitted for the present purpose by your Grace, being given entire, forms the most valuable and interesting portion. I sincerely regret my own insufficiency to do complete justice to this comprehensive labour. The result of my researches, however, may gratify your Grace’s curiosity, and prove interesting in respect to many early family details. And if my own earnestness of purpose, in prosecuting this attempt, does not mislead me, I may venture to hope, that the Memoir will not only meet with your Grace’s favourable reception, but prove, at the same time, acceptable to the general public.

With warm acknowledgments of heart-felt obligation to your Grace, for the exceedingly handsome and liberal manner in which manuscripts and paintings have been placed at my disposal,

I have the honour to be,

My Lord Duke,

Your Grace’s most obliged,

And most humble, obedient servant,

HENRY DIRCKS.

Blackheath, Kent,

January, 1865.

PREFACE.

That a Memoir of the Inventor of the Steam Engine, should appear for the first time two hundred years after his decease, is an occurrence in our literature, which, of itself, might almost be considered sufficient to arouse public inquiry in respect to such a production. But far more solid ground exists for believing that the great country which gave birth to the Inventor, and his Invention of one of man’s noblest productions in art, will peruse it with true national pride, when assured of the amount and strength of the evidence now first adduced to establish those claims which, although never entirely doubted, yet have hitherto borne too misty and mythical a character to satisfy common comprehension. The labour encountered in carrying out the required design may be appreciated from the fact, that the present work has been to a great extent the study of thirty years, although literally completed within only the last few years. This field of inquiry has been, consequently, long open to more ambitious pens, and sooner or later would, no doubt, have received, as it demands—the attention of men of letters and of science.

Probably no other country furnishes so singular a fact, as that of being for two centuries without information much better than tradition, and accumulated diversities of opinions freely indulged in, respecting the political and private character, and inventive talent of one of its most remarkable, interesting, and glorious benefactors. And, during so long a period, in consequence of such defective and conflicting information, producing the most absurd and unreliable statements, even on the most ordinary points of individual history. In the whole range of English biography, within the same period of time, no important memoir has ever been so mythical as that of Edward Somerset, second Marquis of Worcester.

So entirely unacquainted are his countrymen with the history of his life, that a very plausible work might be written to disprove both his authorship of the “Century,” and his invention of the steam-engine. Indeed Scotland has already contributed materials for the former, and M. Arago, late Astronomer Royal of France, has all but made out the latter! And such a production would excite little suspicion and probably no hostility of feeling. But this need not cause much surprise when it is mentioned, that it has not yet been the good fortune of any writer, touching on the Life of the Marquis of Worcester, to escape recording a mass of errors, such as occur in no other biography in our language; although the period usually selected seldom exceeds four or five years, out of a life of sixty-six. The reader, therefore, who takes up the present volume, under impressions derived from such dubious sources of information as those indicated, will find little to confirm his preconceived opinions. The histories of men as of nations require facts for their basis, judgment to guide in their arrangement, discretion to direct a wise selection, and a knowledge of the whole to perfect the desired work. The mixed character of the Marquis of Worcester has ever been a stumbling-block to the purely classical scholar, the divine, the politician, and the lawyer; while, on the other hand, the rapid advances in science during the last fifty years, have deprived “The Century” of more than half its interest. Science cannot hope to be advanced by discussing the automata of the 17th century, its fountains, improvements in fire-arms, bows, keys, stairs, boats, fortifications, and many other promising inventions. But a Life of the Marquis of Worcester, without the “Century,” would be a drama without its most important character. It is, therefore, no act of supererogation to give a commentary on that little, but perplexing book; it is something more than a mere amusement, it is a necessary adjunct, and is not wholly useless considered as a matter connected with the history of science. The commentator on the “Century” may hope to render the biography of its noble author interesting from another and most important point of view, which would be wholly lost by its omission, or by treating it as secondary or unimportant. The “Century” is the exponent of the man; the author without his pocket-journal of his life-long labours is reduced to a nonentity, with nothing higher left to him to boast of than his descent from royal blood, the unimpeachable character of his noble line of ancestry, and his own spotless rectitude of character—an amiable, unintellectual man!

The “Century,” the only work he is known to have left to posterity, sorely perplexed the fastidious Horace Walpole, was too much of a mechanical production for the astute David Hume, and has thoroughly bewildered the legal acumen of Mr. Muirhead, the biographer of James Watt. It has challenged the skill of critics of every degree, from contributors to the Gentleman’s Magazine to those of the Harleian Miscellany, and even in all sketches of the history of the steam-engine, percolating thence through biographies, and popular accounts of Raglan Castle, to the latest and best illustrated works on our castles and abbeys. So many writers, so many minds, whose judgments in a collected form, would afford a very discordant and uninviting miscellany, a sad satire on the material and style of a certain class of criticism, too much encouraged in our current literature. It is painful to observe its constant want of sympathy with the pains and penalties which unhappily are the too frequent lot of lofty, original, inventive genius. The case might fairly be paralleled by supposing Voltaire and others to have successfully established a clique against Shakespeare, to misrepresent and malign the great dramatist up to the present time; when, suddenly should appear, the first work, to settle his literary claims! Of course it is declared impossible; and so it is, with a literary work; but it is not so with Inventions. The fame of the Marquis of Worcester rests less on his book than on his Water-commanding Engine. The book we see and read, but probably not one man in ten thousand knows anything about the Engine. Here is the weak point when the tide turns against the Inventor, against the man, a man politically and religiously proscribed. A great man for his Engine but hated by those politicians who side with the Stuart dynasty, for his luckless association with Charles the First. And misunderstood by the dilettanti Walpole, a connoisseur in paintings and works of vertu, but in matters of science more ignorant of the Marquis of Worcester’s worth, than Voltaire was of Shakespeare’s genius. But we regret there is a third conspicuous offender in the field, and as he is the latest, so we hope he is the last of the clan of vituperative critics.

Our largely gifted historian, Lord Macaulay, never wrote such feeble lines as those in which he attempted to depict the Marquis of Worcester; but the historian is a tower of strength, and his words may here be quoted without a fear of our object being either mistaken, or open to misrepresentation. Depreciation is not our object, and nothing could be a greater folly than to attempt it on such ground; we give them in evidence, to prove how little really is known, even in well-informed circles, respecting this extraordinary inventor, when so brilliant a writer as Macaulay could be at fault, from no other cause than defective information. Speaking of Charles the Second’s reign, he says:—“The Marquess of Worcester had recently[?] observed the expansive power of moisture rarified by heat. After many experiments he had succeeded in constructing a rude steam engine,[?] which he called a fire water-work, and which he pronounced to be an admirable and most forcible instrument of propulsion.[?] But the Marquess was suspected to be a madman[?] and known to be a Papist. His inventions, therefore, found no favourable reception.[?] His fire water-work might, perhaps, furnish matter for conversation at a meeting of the Royal Society,[?] but was not applied to any practical purpose.[?]” These few lines suggest seven inquiries, but we are satisfied Macaulay could never have written thus upon the life of any great man of that period, much less on this illustrious inventor, had the proper materials been at command. This example is valuable, in as much as it is well known that Lord Macaulay was master of much curious reading, particularly of the class referring to that interesting period of our country’s history, and also that he possessed a remarkably retentive memory. But he was here dealing with a shattered monument; its goodly form wholly gone, and its fragments scattered in every direction; here ground to dust, there altogether buried, and so disfigured and dishonoured that he made the most he could of the faint traces within his immediate reach, and unquestionably felt satisfied that, considering the limit of these few lines, he had boldly, graphically, and truthfully pourtrayed the character he had designed to delineate. How infinitely superior to this rough draught would have been the sketch, had Macaulay possessed proper documentary evidence. A more striking or satisfactory instance than is here adduced could not be presented for showing the paucity of information hitherto existing in a collected form; and those readers who might otherwise have doubted the fact, will readily gather from what is here brought forward, that the story of this singular man’s life has hitherto remained untold.

The life of the Marquis of Worcester affords a tissue of the most violent contrasts, romantic in many incidents, exceeding any that have ever been experienced by any other descendant of our ancient nobility. He was a man of rigid honour and probity, remarkable too for his modesty, virtue, and genius, in an age distinguished for few excellencies, and notorious for many vices. He was the favourite of his Sovereign, although in but little favour at Court, and the very esteem which raises most men was his certain ruin; obliged to flee his country, he returned only to be imprisoned; and on his release, was allowed £156 per annum out of his own princely but confiscated estates! As the subject of Charles the Second, he received back his demolished castle, without the means to re-establish himself; and, steeped in debt, he sought royal patronage in vain, although his genius was perhaps of greater value to the state, than all the revenues of the Crown! Neglected by contemporaries, his memory has been preserved rather traditionally than by any literary effort (beyond fitful glimpses of doubtful praise), to raise a monument to the indisputable inventor of the Steam Engine—that greatest source of our country’s commercial and manufacturing greatness; and universal, moral and intellectual progress. Lord Macaulay has tersely and justly remarked that:—“The chief cause which made the fusion of the different elements of society (in the 17th century) so imperfect, was the extreme difficulty which our ancestors found in passing from place to place. Of all inventions, the alphabet and the printing press alone excepted, those inventions which abridge distance have done most for the civilization of our species.” He then adds, speaking of steam, that it has—“in our day, produced an unprecedented revolution in human affairs, which has enabled navies to advance in the face of wind and tide, and battalions, attended by all their baggage and artillery, to traverse kingdoms at a pace equal to that of the fleetest race-horse.”

The general reader will be very likely to overlook one important fact, a golden hinge on which more rests than at first appears in the following narrative; and, therefore, a word of remark may not be altogether thrown away, in calling attention to the circumstance. There are very many persons, most intelligent and well informed on other matters, who have yet to learn that all invention is progressive in a regular series. There may be a long series of elementary principles developed without the occurrence of a single practical result, practical as regards any useful application to supply man’s wants. Then may arise a series combining these elements, so to speak, and for the first time producing a new instrument, machine, or engine. When a new machine is produced, we do not say, Why it only consists of a number of wheels and cylinders, therefore, surely there is nothing new in it! All the parts may be old, and yet the combination be quite new. To analyse an invention into its several parts, would be equivalent to finding that a poem was only composed of the letters of the alphabet, or the words in a dictionary. But there is another point of view not lightly to be passed over. Take this instance of the steam engine. We find a talented Scotch writer wondering that Englishmen take the trouble to claim the invention of the steam engine for the Marquis of Worcester, because of the “doubtfulness” existing respecting it, at the same time that he accompanies this statement with a large amount of evidence, but evidence which he does not fully admit. He thus places himself very much in the position of a philosopher, who should adopt as his theory some peculiar notion to the effect that the letter A, or the numeral 1, could be dispensed with, in consequence of some “doubtfulness existing” in respect to its value; and that, indeed, to retain either any longer would only be evidence of a “little national rivalry.” Although this may appear too absurd in this light, something very similar has been proposed as a kind of compromise in the contest between England and France, the “little national rivalry” between which countries might be settled, would Englishmen but give up all further advocacy of the Marquis of Worcester’s claim. This is not the reason given, but it is the happy result which would follow; and it is urged against the invention, that there is so much “doubtfulness existing” about it, that it is a wonder any one takes further trouble in the matter. So far as we can see, its value is A, or 1, it is the first of a series, it is the golden hinge, or link, on which all hangs; take this away, and we sever the head from the main body. Will any one in future be found to take up and maintain so foolish a line of argument? The Marquis of Worcester was unquestionably the Inventor of the Steam Engine in the first of its three stages, as a fire engine. Previous to the Marquis of Worcester, all that had been done, was solely in the series developing a principle, a mere idea, but still no invention, in the proper sense of such a term, as applied to works of practical utility. All other early efforts were purely elementary or experimental.

Let us take an illustration from another branch of science. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Electricity, using the term in its most extended sense, will some day or other supersede steam. We probably only require to be able to collect it cheaply and to control it effectually, to employ the artillery of heaven on the wide ocean, on our network of iron rails, and throughout all our manufacturing establishments. A, we will suppose, invents the first efficient Electric Engine, which with fifty horse power is fully at work; and in the course of a few years we sit down to write the history of this engine invented by A. Where shall we start in our history? Did not Faraday years ago produce an electro-magnetic engine; then of course Faraday invented A.’s engine! But we need not stop here; we have the whole history of electricity before us. There is no end of machines and engines; and a patent specification may come to light, the nearest possible thing to A. But we have not done yet, we have to consider France, &c., where we may find some more elementary electrical models before Faraday, and then of course before A. So that, on this system, as hitherto adopted, in attempting to settle a claim for De Caus, and depreciating the claim of the Marquis of Worcester, we may venture to predict an analogous fate for the Electric Engine, hereafter to be invented by some inventor, A. Here we must plainly see that all that has hitherto been invented in this electrical line, does not go beyond model or elementary apparatus, and that however nearly some of these may approach any plan hereafter to be invented, it would be ridiculous and highly reprehensible to set up claims based on no practical value, and only colourably similar in some single particular, but otherwise of no greater concern than as amusing or illustrative scientific toys. De Caus’ fountain was one of these pleasing toys, and De Caus himself could never have thought otherwise of it, taking his own large book and his own few lines of description; although it served the purpose of M. Arago to assume for it a pre-eminence over the Marquis of Worcester’s invention, merely because the latter came half a century later.

The author is not aware of any portion of his work that is open to controversy, unless it be that relating to a second visit to Ireland, asserted to have been made by the Earl of Glamorgan. However, should it be contended, or proved, that his negotiations refer to a single visit there, the circumstance would not affect the main story. The author has, however, had one essential difficulty to deal with, arising from the quantity of correspondence and documentary evidence, which, under the circumstances, he was obliged to introduce, thus materially affecting the text. It certainly was open to him to throw the greater part into the Appendix, but with considerable drawbacks to all readers really interested in such a work. The course adopted has been to introduce documents, of whatever kind, in their order of date, and to modernise the orthography (and that alone) to render them generally readable. The few pieces admitted in their original style will satisfy any one how thoroughly unreadable the work would have become, if largely occupied with such orthography. The prayer (for example) is a strict copy of the original, which appears to be in the handwriting of the Marchioness, with several interlinear corrections made by the Marquis himself, which certify to its genuineness.[A] Every document is given with its own date, and no deviations occur beyond the modern spelling of words. The “Century,” however, being printed matter, has been re-produced verbatim, with scrupulous accuracy.

The general reader will find that the really scientific portion of this memoir, is restricted to the “Century,” which has relieved the biographical portion of much technical detail: no more reference to inventions occurring therein than appeared absolutely necessary to preserve uniformity in the narrative.

It was very desirable in such a work as the present to steer clear of a controversial strain, whether in reference to the past or the present. This has been effected in a great measure, as regards the numerous detractors that might be cited, who have given false views, both of the personal character of the Marquis, and the merit of some or most of his inventions, until we find the admiring biographer of the celebrated James Watt, as if blinded by too much light, speaking of the Marquis in the most disparaging terms. And lastly, it was impossible to escape recurring to the charge against Savery; the dates and facts, now for the first time supplied, going far to strengthen the belief, that the engine reputed to be Savery’s, is identical with that invented by the Marquis of Worcester.

The materials of the present work are principally derived from original sources with respect to Manuscripts; and from the highest published authorities. All printed materials are scrupulously acknowledged in two catalogues, one historical and literary, the other wholly scientific. Through the kindness and liberality of His Grace the Duke of Beaufort, the entire collection of Manuscripts in his Grace’s possession, relative to the Marquis of Worcester, are here given at large. While at Raglan, on visiting Troy, Osmond A. Wyatt, Esq., was especially obliging in affording information; as well as John Cuxson, Esq., of Raglan; and at Badminton, John Thompson, Esq., materially assisted in procuring the required manuscripts, and affording facilities for copying them, for which kindly aid the author can but insufficiently here express his obligations. The author is likewise greatly indebted generally to the rich stores of the British Museum, and the obliging attentions of its principal officers; to the State Paper Office, where he was especially assisted through the kindness of Mrs. M. A. E. Green, with the uncalendered papers given at pages 249, 270, 286, and 287, and to John Bruce, Esq. Also to the excellent Libraries of the Royal Society; the London Institution; and the particularly valuable scientific collection of the Patent Office. At Oxford, the privilege of consulting works and manuscripts at the Bodleian Library, was freely granted, and every facility afforded. The author would especially notice among other contributions of information, the able assistance of Bennet Woodcroft, Esq., F.R.S., &c. To the Rev. John Webb, of Hay, he is particularly indebted for the papers at pages 64, 88, and 142, to which that gentleman directed his attention, and which he might otherwise have overlooked. He has also received assistance from the collections of Robert Cole, Esq., and of the late Dawson Turner, Esq., which are noted where they occur. When inquiring for the autograph of “Glamorgan,” every possible effort to trace it, although unavailing, was kindly employed by the Librarian of St. Cuthbert’s College, Durham, and by the Rev. Dr. Grant, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Southwark.

During the author’s visit to Dublin, Sir Bernard Burke, Ulster King at Arms, very obligingly searched for any documents referring to the Earl of Glamorgan, that might be in Dublin Castle, but without success; and the author is also much indebted for general information most courteously given by the Rev. Dr. Todd, of Trinity College, Dr. R. G. Travers, Marsh’s Library, and the Rev. C. P. Meehan; and likewise, through correspondence, by the Rev. James Graves, of Stonyford.

It now only remains for the author to say, that in the event of any of our nobility or gentry, or other collectors, possessing any manuscript whatever, even although only a copy of matter here produced, he would esteem it a very particular favour to be informed of it (through his publisher), and to be permitted to examine any record, bearing either directly or indirectly on this subject.

H. D.

Footnotes

[A] I am happy in being able to afford this testimony, were it only to dissipate the inuendoes of Mr. Muirhead.

CONTENTS.

LIST OF ENGRAVINGS.

From Drawings and Sketches made, and Ciphers and Autographs traced, by the author.

The steel engraved Portraits executed by Mr. J. Cochran, and the Wood Engravings by Mr. Stevens, and Mr. J. H. Rimbault; and Coats of Arms by Mr. Layton.

Steel Engravings.

A Family Group, being Portraits of the Marquis of Worcester, with Margaret his second wife, and their infant daughter Mary. From a painting by Hanneman. (See pages [30], [31].)

[To face title page.]

Portrait of Elizabeth Lady Herbert, first wife of Edward Lord Herbert, afterwards Marquis of Worcester. From a painting by Vandyke

[Page 16.]

Wood Engravings.

REFERENCES TO THE PLAN OF THE CASTLE AND CITADEL OF RAGLAN, MONMOUTHSHIRE.

^*_*^* All other portions are named on the plan.

THE CASTLE.

1. Outer portcullis; 1. A second portcullis within the arched entrance.

2. Gateway.

3. The gate.

4, 4. Two barbican towers.

5. A guard room.

6. Parlour or ante-room.

7. Stair-cases; all marked 7.

8. The Closet or Library Tower.

9, 10. Sitting Room or Parlour, originally wainscoted with oak, and over which was the Marquis’s Dining room.

10. Large bay-window looking towards the moat.

11. Broken porch.

12. Entrance from the courtyard to the vaults.

13, 13. Broken entrance to cellars.

14. Remains of a staircase.

15. This part is vaulted.

16. Suite of family apartments.

17. Gateway to the Bowling-green.

18. Bridge.

19. Bowling-green.

20, 20. Cellars.

21. Steps and door leading to—

22. Way to stable-yard.

23. One sipe of the outer wall of the Paved Court, where the first breach was made by the Parliamentary forces, 1646.

24. Ruined tower.

25. The buildings formerly here completely obliterated, having suffered most during the siege.

26. The bakery and remains of its ovens.

27. Entrance to the Wet Larder.

28. An outside high level walk.

29. Low ground.

30. Pier wall.

31. Deep space.

32. The Kitchen Tower, remarkable for its great strength, and remains of a large fire-place.

33. A draw-well.

34. A long, narrow, vertical gap through former windows and door. The building probably had a corridor at top.

35. Ruins of cellar or dry larder.

36. The uppermost window in this part indicates the situation of the apartment occupied by Charles I.

37. The Buttery.

38. The Minstrels’ gallery was probably raised here.

39. Porch leading to—

40. The great Banqueting hall.

41. Spacious fire place, with centre window high above.

42. The large, handsome, and well-preserved bay-window, with a circular opening or ventilator in the roof.

43. The recess.

44. The arms of the Beaufort Family, carved in stone, are inserted centrally in the lofty wall on this side.

45. The Pantry.

46. Ruined entrance to the wine cellar.

47. End of the Picture Gallery, a narrow upper apartment of great length, extending over and beyond the chapel.

48. Supposed to be the Bell tower.

49. The apartments above and below here were the ladies’ women’s rooms.

50. A through passage.

51. High watch tower.

52. An ancient Arbor Vitæ grows in the Fountain Court at this point.

53. Superior officers’ quarters, on the ground and upper floors.

54. Basin of the fountain.

THE CITADEL, OR KEEP,
called
The Melin-y-Gwent, or Yellow Tower of Gwent.

A. There was probably a drawbridge here.

B. B. Two broken bastions.

C. A temporary wooden bridge.

D. Site of arched bridge to the Keep.

E. The Water-works side of the Keep, presenting large grooves cut into the stone work, probably to insert metal pipes, &c.

F. Stone stair-case to the top, in good preservation.

G. Outer entrance to F.

H. I. Ruins of the massy walls varying from 4 to 10 feet high; the upper portion destroyed in 1646, by order of Parliament.

L. A well.

PLAN OF THE CASTLE AND CITADEL OF RAGLAN, MONMOUTHSHIRE, THE PROPERTY OF His Grace The Duke of Beaufort, &c. &c.
From Drawings by H. Dircks, Civil Engineer 1865.

LIFE
OF
THE MARQUIS OF WORCESTER.

CHAPTER I.

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.

BIRD’S-EYE VIEW FROM MAP OF LONDON, 1658.

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.

BIRD’S-EYE VIEW FROM MAP OF LONDON, 1658.

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.

Footnotes

[28] Collins.

[106] Wiffin, v. ii. p. 56.

[58] Kennet.

[73] J. B. Nichols, vol. vi. p. 371.

[A] Calendar of State Papers. Domestic Series. Charles I. 1628–1629. Edited by John Bruce, Esq. 8vo. 1859.

CHAPTER II.

BIRTH, HOME, EDUCATION, EARLY CAREER, TIMES, AND FIRST MARRIAGE OF EDWARD SOMERSET, LORD HERBERT.

As already related, Henry,[A] fifth Earl of Worcester, married in June, 1600, while yet attached to the Court of Queen Elizabeth, and, therefore, most likely he was resident at Worcester House, in the Strand, a building of some importance from its magnitude and position, as well as from the princely character of the noble possessor of the property.

There, it is reasonable to conclude, was born Edward Somerset early in 1601, the son and heir whose eventful history will hereafter mainly occupy our attention, first as Lord Herbert, afterwards as the Earl of Glamorgan, and lastly, on succeeding to his father’s titles, as Earl and Marquis of Worcester.

The birth of this Lord Herbert has never before been attempted to be ascertained, wherefore the present assumed date requires confirmation. On the 14th of July, 1609, when he would thus probably be only eight years of age, we find him associated with his grandfather and father in a lease of lands in the manor of Wondy, Monmouth, and of the fishing, or river of Usk and Carlion, for their lives.[B]

His preceptor at Raglan Castle was Mr. Adams; but he does not appear, like his father, to have been at any college in England; as, however, he travelled much on the Continent at an early period of his life, it is possible he also finished his education at some foreign university. In a communication of singular interest, written late in life, hereafter given in full, he specially observes:—“Amongst Almighty God’s infinite mercies to me in this world, I account it one of the greatest that his divine goodness vouchsafed me parents as well careful as able to give me virtuous education, and extraordinary breeding at home and abroad, in Germany, France, and Italy, allowing me abundantly in those parts.” This summary is sufficiently explicit as regards the circuit of his travels, and the easy, agreeable circumstances under which it was performed, but still leaves it open to doubt whether he had completed his educational course before entering on his continental tour. Wood expressly states, in reference to Lord Herbert’s father, that after he had been two or three years at college he was sent to travel in France, Italy, &c., where he presumes he changed his religion for that of Rome.[109]

During the reign of James I., and while his grandfather was Keeper of the Privy Seal, no mention occurs of Lord Herbert enjoying any favour at Court, his courtier life commencing only in that of Charles I., according to allusions made in the document before noticed. On the accession of the latter monarch to the throne, Lord Herbert might be 24 years of age. In alluding to his “education and breeding,” coupled with his travels, he adds: “And since most plentifully at my master of most happy memory, the late King’s Court;” making it almost conclusive that his education was considered as completed shortly prior to the King’s decease, in 1625.

In 1627 his grandfather was at Worcester House, whence he wrote to the Earl of Huntingdon on the 11th of June, informing him of his illness and inability to leave his bedchamber.[C]

The first year of the reign of Charles I. was an auspicious one, therefore, for the young Lord Herbert. His father, a stalwart, hale man, was in the prime of life, only 48 years of age, lord of one of the finest castles in the kingdom, whether considered for the beauty, strength and importance of its structure and its commanding situation, or the extent of its parks, pastures, plantations, and forests; it was a luxurious place well stored with paintings, furniture, and plate, while it was surrounded with every embellishment of fountains, fishponds, statuary, and gardens that art or wealth could command. Lord Herbert himself was rich in acquired knowledge, and in whatever way his natural genius then displayed itself, such a mind as he possessed must have afforded many evidences of latent talent. One important part of a young nobleman’s education in Elizabeth’s time, and later, was that of horsemanship, particularly in the tilt-yard, a kind of adjunct to noble residences, supposed by many to have existed even at Raglan Castle, but such an opinion is not even authorised by any tradition. Some interest he might take in tournaments, but we easily suspect without aiming at, or succeeding in that skill in manœuvres so requisite in the fierce and fiery jousts appertaining to such knightly contests, equipped in heavy armour, wielding a ponderous lance, and mimicking all the maddest encounters of the fellest enemies. We doubt if his talent lay that way. His grandfather’s horsemanship has been greatly extolled by all writers, in alluding to his character. In his youth (it is said) he was remarkable for his athletic acquirements, distinguishing himself by the manly exercises of riding and tilting, in which he was perhaps superior to any of his contemporaries. But we have no reason to extol the grandson for like success in these chivalric exercises.

We conceive he was otherwise disqualified, that he was too light of weight and too short in stature. He appears to have been of slender figure, and rather under than above the middle standard in height. In another point, indirectly perhaps affecting this same matter, he did not possess that easy, boisterous speech which armed assailants may often be called on to assume, to strike terror into a foe, by throwing him off his guard. He himself acknowledges, later in life, to this vocal defect, when, in writing to Charles II. he admits that he takes up the pen, as he says,—“To ease your Majesty of a trouble incident to the prolixity of speech, and a natural defect of utterance which I accuse myself of.” “The prolixity of speech” any one may imagine, both from the letter in which this passage occurs, as well as in the noble lord’s general correspondence throughout his life; it seems to be a style in which the close of each sentence, or its matter, suggests the next, to be followed again in like manner, until the main subject becomes so overlaid as to be lost in needless verbose amplification. But he could and did write tersely enough on occasion. No man could then better display the admirable art of compressing large meaning into small compass. If eloquence in speaking “troubled” him, eloquent writing assuredly cost him, it would appear, vastly more trouble in the labour of the pen. We suspect that concentration of thought was natural to him, but its elaboration to produce that roundness of period assumed necessary for the style of a courtly gentleman, confused and perplexed him. We imagine the prosy writer, being conversationally sententious; perhaps painfully so to the ears of fashionable society, delighting as it does in the trivialties of such conversation as that which would principally characterise the Court of those days; rendered perhaps only the more irksome by his continuance in its fashionable frivolities for three or more years.

A very fair specimen of the mechanical knowledge of the period, when Lord Herbert was finishing his education, is afforded in the work of Henry Peacham, published in 1627, entitled “The Compleat Gentleman.” In his ninth chapter, treating of Geometry, he says: “Out of Egypt, Thales brought it into Greece, where it received that perfection we see it now hath. For by means hereof are found out the forms and draughts of all figures, greatness of all bodies, all manner of measures and weights, the cunning working of all tools; with all artificial instruments whatsoever. All engines of war, for many whereof (being antiquated) we have no proper names; as, Exosters, Sambukes, Catapultes, Testudos, Scorpions, &c. Petardes, Grenades, great Ordinance of all sorts.

“By the benefit, likewise, of Geometry, we have our goodly ships, gallies, bridges, mills, chariots and coaches, (which were invented in Hungary, and there called Cotzki), some with two wheels, some with more; pullies and cranes of all sorts. She (Geometry) also with her ingenious hand rears all curious roofs and arches, stately theatres, the columns simple and compounded, pendant galleries, stately windows, turrets, &c. And first brought to light our clocks and curious watches (unknown unto the ancients); lastly, our kitchen jacks, even the wheel-barrow. Besides whatsoever hath artificial motion, either by air, water, wind, sinews or cords, as all manner of musical instruments, water works and the like.

“Yea, moreover, such is the infinite subtilty, and immense depth of this admirable art, that it dares contend even with nature’s self, in infusing life, as it were, into the senseless bodies of wood, stone, or metal. Witness the wooden dove of Archytas, so famous not only by Agellius, but many other authors beyond exception; which by reason of weights equally poised within the body, and a certain proportion of air (as the spirit of life enclosed), flew cheerfully forth, as if it had been a living dove.”

This Cambridge Master of Arts appears much delighted with these and certain minute automata, occupying two pages in describing Scaliger’s ship, to swim and steer itself by means of the pith of rushes, bladder, and little strings of sinews; a wooden eagle “which mounted up into the air, and flew before the Emperor to the gates of Nuremberg;” an iron fly that flew about a table; ants and other insects made of ivory, so small that the “joints of their legs could not be discerned;” a four wheeled coach, which a fly could “cover with her wings;” a ship with all its sails, “which a little bee could overspread;” and, “of later times, Hadrian Junius, tells us that he saw with great delight and admiration, at Mechlin, in Brabant, a cherry-stone cut in the form of a basket, wherein were fifteen pair of dice distinct, each with their spots and number, very easily of a good eye to be discerned;” how “the Ilias of Homer written, was enclosed within a nut;” while, to conclude, Scaliger, relates “of a flea he saw with a long chain of gold about its neck.” The account of these wonders of art, winds up with descriptions of brazen, glass, and silver models, or planetariums illustrating the situations and motions of the heavenly bodies.

From this serious discourse, by a grave scholar, and contemporary, relating to the labours of the first mathematicians of a bygone as well as of the existing age, we may form a valuable conception of the state of science, in its popular character, when Edward, Lord Herbert, entered upon his own course of practical philosophical pursuits, affording the ground work of his Century of Inventions, the accumulated digest of whatever he had effected during the early, middle, and later years of his life. Viewed from any other point than the period in which he lived, the means of information around him, and the comparatively limited extent of scientific knowledge, the modern reader would form a serious misconception of his singular abilities, his versatile mechanical talent and the fecundity of his inventive ingenuity. There can be little or no doubt but that he was well versed in the mathematical knowledge of his times, and that it principally contributed in aiding him to obtain those mechanical results, to which we consequently find him restricting his attention.

Lord Bacon had died but the year before the publication of Peacham’s work. Alchemy still ruled and had its adepts and votaries; and Ashmole made a large collection of alchemical writings, for Chemistry was but just faintly emerging from the mysticisms of its precursor, Alchemy.

In the year 1628 Edward Somerset, Lord Herbert, being then about 27 years of age, married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William Dormer, eldest son of Robert Lord Dormer of Weng, and sister to Robert Earl of Carnarvon.[5] She became in 1629 the mother of Henry[D] Somerset (afterwards created first Duke of Beaufort); and had besides two daughters, Anne, who married Henry Frederick, third Earl of Arundel of the Howards; and Elizabeth, who married William Herbert, first Marquis of Powis.

Engraved by J. Cochran.
ELIZABETH, LADY HERBERT,
Died 31^st. May, 1635.
FIRST WIFE OF EDWARD SOMERSET, LORD HERBERT.
AFTERWARDS SECOND MARQUIS OF WORCESTER.
Drawn by Henry Dircks, C.E. from the Original of Vandyke in the Collection of His Grace the Duke of Beaufort.
Published by B. Quaritch, Piccadilly, London, 1864.

No contemporary or other hand has recorded any details of Lord Herbert’s marriage, or even any particulars of his early life; in the absence of decisive information, we can only surmise from stray facts the possibility of his having withdrawn from the Court, taken up his abode at Raglan Castle, and there occupied himself in those scientific studies and pursuits which were his special delight at that early period, and which were indeed the solace even of his declining years.

Judging from a statement that occurs in his writings,[E] it is most likely that in 1628, soon after his marriage, he engaged the services of “the unparalleled workman both for trust and skill, Caspar Kaltoff,” of whom we shall have occasion to speak more at length hereafter, and who, he says, was “as in a school under me employed;”[F] by which we understand that Kaltoff had the practical management of those mechanical and other inventions which, then commenced, became the principal study and employment of his Lordship’s leisure during the remainder of his life. He must have set up a complete laboratory or workshop in which to operate on the many varied ingenious contrivances and experiments, of only part of which he has left us a most interesting catalogue raisonné.

The early genius of Lord Herbert would appear to have exhibited itself in an attachment to mathematical studies, and a singular predilection, in a young nobleman, for mechanical pursuits. He has himself mentioned two instances which we consider may fairly be referred to his earliest continental tour, accompanied by his tutor. Speaking of a certain contrivance for a fountain, he explicitly declares:—“This I confess, I have seen and learned of the great mathematician Claudius his studies at Rome, he having made a present thereof unto a Cardinal.” And when, alluding to a peculiar kind of lever, he pointedly remarks: “This I saw in the arsenal at Venice;”[G] thus showing how early his mind was impressed with those studies which became the distinguishing feature of his writings; and all the more surprising in him, considering his birth, his times, and the originality and fruitfulness of his inventive talent, which might have found ample scope in some branch of literature, in agriculture, or in military works.

His employment of a foreign mechanic was quite in accordance with the spirit of the age. National and private undertakings, as well as manufacturing and other matters requiring engineering skill, were ordinarily superintended by eminent Italian, Dutch, German, French, Swiss, or other continental engineers.

During a period of seven years, from the time of his marriage, his life appears to have borne an entirely studious and domestic character, spent, most likely, principally at Raglan. To the ample leisure and quiet thus afforded him we may attribute all his lesser inventions, such as the numerous schemes for effecting and conveying secret correspondence, which in early and troubled times were esteemed as highly useful; some of his automata, amusive toys, drawing and other instruments and mechanical devices. He appears to have taken considerable interest in multiplying these comparatively minor inventions almost to exhaustion, as it were, of the several subjects to which they apply. So fertile, indeed, was this inventive faculty in him, that he himself has stated: “The more that you shall be pleased to make use of my inventions, the more inventive shall you ever find me, one invention begetting still another.”[H]

Among his larger works we must rank his water-raising engines, in which his earliest efforts are exhibited in the water-works he erected in connection with the Citadel or Keep of Raglan Castle; which, as will be more minutely explained in a future commentary, belongs to this period. It probably depended for its operation on the influence of heat from burning fuel acting on a suitably constructed boiler containing water, and so arranged as to be able to apply the expansive force of steam to the driving of water through vertical pipes to a considerable elevation, which in this instance is supposed to have been limited to a large cistern on the summit of the Citadel or Donjon, known as the Tower of Gwent. This early work may, in fact, have been the occasion of calling in the aid of Caspar Kaltoff; and once thus employed, his after retention by such a master is readily conceivable. But master, and man, and works have all disappeared, and no printed, written, or drawn record or model remains of the waterworks there set up, to enable us to point distinctly to precise particulars of arrangement. All that the inquisitive and ingenious investigator can find to reward his most prying curiosity, are certain strange mysterious grooves in the external wall of the Citadel, on one side facing the moat and the castle, which point like a hieroglyphic inscription to the precise place where once stood in active operation the first practical application in a primitive form of a means of employing steam as a useful mechanical agent.

The annexed engraving represents a view of that side of the Citadel which looks across the moat towards the castle; that is, across the place where a bridge once stood, and opposite the Fountain Court. Commencing from below we observe a gothic doorway, which was the entrance to the draw and the permanent bridges. Over the arched interior of this entrance is a chamber or cell, measuring about seven feet by five feet, and better than six feet high in the centre. On the outside front of the cell are seen indications of two square places; and above them, one to each, two upright channels or grooves, each one foot wide and the same in depth. Adjoining is another groove but terminating at bottom in two lesser grooves of four inches and a half in width, connected a little way up with the large groove. This second portion has a distinct cell behind it, less in dimensions than the first. From the summit of the three large vertical channels to the ground measures forty-six feet.

Now it would have been quite possible to work a small steam boiler in each cell, and the pipes from those boilers might have been enclosed in the grooves described, entering inwards at top to discharge their contents into a cistern on the Citadel roof. And the boilers might have been conveniently supplied with water from the moat either by hand pumps, or by forming a vacuum for that purpose. It is here, however, unnecessary to enter upon mechanical details, as the subject will appear at large when describing his matured Invention.

That inimitable portrait painter Vandyck, who was born 1598–9, studied under Rubens, and was an especial favourite with Charles the First, has undoubtedly left us a faithful portraiture of the features of both his Lordship and of Elizabeth his first wife; the former dating probably between 1621 and 1626, the latter between 1628 and 1635.

The portrait of Lady Herbert, three-quarter size, is to be seen in the dining-room at Badminton House. It displays an intellectual countenance of a serious, dignified and most pleasing cast; her dark auburn hair is combed close from the forehead backwards, but so as still to leave a fringe of small curls in front; her hair braided and knotted behind is entwined with a string of pearls, while a portion of her tresses from behind falls in abundant ringlets about her neck and shoulders. She wears a large plain pearl necklace; with single pearl-drops as ear-rings. Her dress is low-bodied, of white satin, with the usual long tight stomacher, full short sleeves and large white vandyked frills or cuffs; on her arms, near each elbow, are single strings of pearls, like bracelets. Over her shoulders is thrown a light narrow fur tippet with long ends terminating backwards in short tails. The artist has represented her looking slightly aside as she might appear crossing her drawing-room, in the highly graceful and becoming style which Vandyck always so happily selected for the subjects of his magic pencil.

This may have been the period to which his Lordship later in life fondly looked back as his “golden days.” He was, however, doomed to suffer his first great bereavement in the decease of his young wife at Worcester House in the Strand, on Sunday the 31st of May, 1635. She was buried at St. Cadocus, the parish church of Raglan, within the family vault beneath the Beaufort Chapel. He was thus left a widower with the charge of his son and heir not above six years of age, and two daughters.

A singular error, as to the date, occurring in all genealogies and biographical accounts that mention the decease of Lady Herbert, renders it the more important to refer to the following certificate obtained from the Heralds’ Office:—

“The right honourable Lady the Lady Elizabeth, late wife of the right honourable Edward Somerset Lord Herbert, son and heir to the right honourable Henry Earl of Worcester, and daughter of Sir William Dormer, Knight, eldest son of Robert Lord Dormer, of Wing, (which Sir William died in the lifetime of his father) and sister to the now Earl of Carnarvon, departed this mortal life at Worcester House in the Strand, near London, on Sunday the last of May, 1635, leaving issue, Mr. Henry Somerset, only son, about six years of age, Mrs. Anne eldest and Mrs. Elizabeth youngest daughter. Her body was honourably conveyed to Ragland, in the County of Monmouth in Wales, there to be interred. This Certificate was taken by George Owen Yorke, herald, the 1st day of June, 1635, to be registered in the Office of Arms, and testified by the right honourable Lord,

“Edward Herbert.”

Among the family papers is a letter bearing date this year, alluding to Lord Herbert, but addressed by Secretary Coke to his Lordship’s father:—

“Right Honourable,

“Upon a letter received from your noble son, the Lord Herbert, whereby he signifieth, that the Deputation is now come from the Lord President of Wales, I have according to his Lordship’s desire represented his thankfulness to his Majesty, and have order from his Majesty to signify to your Lordship that it is not only in this particular case; But hereafter also he will be graciously mindful of your good service done heretofore, in the Lieutenancies of Glamorgan and Monmouth, and your willing resigning of them. And he hath also commanded me to tell the Earl of Bridgewater, that he shall proceed therein with your Lordship in the same manner the Earl of Northampton his predecessor did, and not otherwise: which accordingly I have signified to his Lordship. And thus having imparted to your Lordship both his Majesty’s gracious favour towards yourself and your son, who in this business hath performed as much respect and duty as can be expected from a worthy son, I humbly take leave and so remain,

“Your Lordship’s humble servant,

“John Coke.

“Whitehall, December 3rd. 1635.
To the right honourable the Earl of Worcester, &c.”

It is not at all unlikely that after the funeral his Lordship returned to Worcester House. London would afford him many advantages for the gratification of his scientific pursuits, not to be obtained in the country. It appears, indeed, pretty evident that about this period he set up in the Tower his large wheel for exhibiting self-motive power, which the learned assume to be a mechanical fallacy, but which no one has yet proved to general comprehension to be an impossibility. In a scientific point of view, but particularly in connection with the life of this remarkable man, a subject of this nature cannot be lightly passed over. It affects his reputation more than appears on the surface, as we shall show in the course of our observations.

It was a machine, consisting of a wheel fourteen feet in diameter, carrying forty weights of fifty pounds each,[I] and is supposed to have rotated on an axle, supported on two pillars or upright frames. His Lordship has been very precise in describing all the circumstances under which it was shown. There were present Charles the First, accompanied by two extraordinary Ambassadors, the Duke of Richmond, the Duke of Hamilton, with most of the Court; and Sir William Balfour was at the time Lord Lieutenant of the Tower. Now the latter circumstance would fix the date as not being later than 1641, while other facts make it reasonable to suppose the experiment took place at least two or three years earlier. Up to 1638 Charles the First had reigned for ten years in comparative peace and leisure. May it not have been during this lull in the portending storm of public discontent that royalty deigned to inspect a singular piece of mechanism, supposed to move of itself without any aid from external agency? In 1642, Sir John Byron was made Lord Lieutenant of the Tower; and Sir William Balfour[J] was in command of the Parliamentary forces at Edge-hill.

This wheel experiment may have been made in 1638–9, prior to the decease of his lady, and during the most peaceable portion of his Majesty’s reign; and indeed while his Lordship’s own domestic affairs were wearing their most cheerful and agreeable aspect.

His Lordship has been charged with dealing in paradoxes, and none greater than the one under consideration need be sought for. It relates to a problem which for 2000 years has not only perplexed mathematicians, but likewise been a stumbling-block to many ingenious mechanicians during at least five centuries. What mathematicians fail to prove and what mechanicians fail to produce, every modern philosopher demands shall be stamped as an impossibility, as absurd as it is impossible. Now the dilemma is, How has the author of the “Century of Inventions” fallen into the common, vulgar error of believing in the possibility of perpetual motion; and not only so, but publicly exhibiting a machine pretending to that character?

We are not disposed to question either his talent, or his veracity, hence the difficulty of offering any simple, direct, satisfactory reply to what otherwise appears to be an easily answered interrogative. Eminent writers of the seventeenth and previous centuries maintained that perpetual motion was possible. Dr. Dee, in his very curious preface to the first translation of Euclid into English, wrote favourably on this very topic; so that, however the modern scientific sceptic may blame his Lordship for want of skill, or, worse, of veracity, his opinion was quite in accordance with the estimation in which the subject was viewed in his day. But he goes a step farther, he speaks of a practical result. Hence he leaves us no alternative but to declare that he propounds either a truth or a falsehood; and if false that he was either himself mistaken, or deceived by others. But either way it is difficult to arrive at a thoroughly satisfactory conclusion, even as to what his Lordship actually intended and performed in this instance, owing to the usual vagueness of his own statements.

At 38 years of age Lord Herbert had enjoyed seven years of matrimonial felicity, and had been during four years a widower. In 1639, his son Henry would be 10 years old, his two daughters much younger, so that as well for their education as for the gratification of his own scientific investigations, he may have continued for some time to reside at Worcester House: the Strand and all that neighbourhood being then in the occupancy of families of title, wealth and high position. During his father’s lifetime, the resident housekeeper was James Redman, Esquire, as we learn from the list of his household.

The private studies and pursuits in which Lord Herbert was indefatigably engaged, must have occupied his attention from an innate love of physical science. The society in which he moved had no tendency that way, while the times in which he lived were far from affording any encouragement for such investigations as those in which he was principally engaged. The metropolis in his day was without coaches until 1625, when they were first used by the gentry, and ten years later hackney coaches were considered to have arrived at such a dangerous increase that their plying was restrained by law; and London streets were either so bad, or the treasury so low, that penalties were levied on all heavy vehicles passing over the highways. It is characteristic of the state of our laws at that period, that Dr. Leighton was for his writings sentenced to barbarous mutilations, as also happened in 1633 to the unfortunate learned Mr. Prynne, and four years later to John Lilburn. The pillory, whipping culprits through the streets, cropping ears and other mutilations and barbarities were ordinary punishments, and in 1636 the plague was raging throughout the metropolis and its suburbs, with all its accustomed terrors.

But not in this view alone do we see little to inspirit him in the ardent pursuit of mechanical employments, another and more serious obstacle arose from his belonging, like his father and ancestors, to the Roman Catholic faith. The laws against Papists were inconsistently stringent in England on religious grounds; and strange to say, in imperial Rome, the very seat of the papacy, absurdly severe denunciations were pronounced against even the free discussion of scientific subjects. On the memorable 22nd of June, 1633, Galileo, prosecuted by the Inquisition at Rome, was compelled to abjure his astronomical theories and discoveries as heretical! The inquiry with its results must have deeply interested Lord Herbert; but what could he hope to gain even from his own party, as the inventor of a “semi-omnipotent engine?” Thus situated he was surrounded by circumstances nowise calculated to stimulate his mental activity in the peculiar occupations that employed his leisure and his fortune; but the fact offers an invaluable proof of the intense satisfaction an inquiring mind always experiences in the realization of its mental speculations.

There is every reason to believe that his studies were completed, his tastes fixed, his experiments pretty well matured at this period, and that it was, therefore, the occasion of stamping his future character. He was then terminating his “golden days,” to enter upon a very different career. While, therefore, most anxious to avoid every appearance of substituting fictions for facts, we feel impelled to indulge in an attempt to account for his long serious devotion to employments so apparently foreign to either his education, his station in life, or the necessities of the times; while, indeed, on the other hand, all operated against him, owing to the darkness, ignorance, persecution and prevailing prejudices of the age.

It appears from his published work that Lord Herbert was better versed in mathematical than in classical literature. His mental activity may have been promoted by physical causes, assuming that from delicacy of constitution he may have been thereby disposed to those studious habits, to which he was ever after so much attached; the Vandyck portrait of him in his youth would indicate that he was not constituted for undergoing much severity of exercise in the fatiguing sports and pastimes then in vogue.

In 1639, his confidential workman, Caspar Kaltoff, would have expended eleven years in constructing models and machines to establish the practicability of the many novel schemes which his Lordship had, up to that time, developed. Meanwhile, his own reading was no doubt pursued with vigour, and we cannot believe him to have been unpossessed of the celebrated authorities among English and foreign writers. He must have studied with interest Ramelli’s very elaborate volume, 1588, on machines, illustrated with one hundred and ninety-five large, finely executed copper-plate engravings; the popular Spiritalia of Hero of Alexandria; with even, perhaps, the works of the engineer and architect Solomon De Caus, published in 1615; together with the labours of many kindred writers. Judging, however, from internal evidence, there was one, among many English authors, whose work especially gratified his taste, the “Mysteries of Nature and Art,” by John Bate, which went through two editions, dating 1634 and 1635, containing a “Booke of Water-workes,” treating of “evaporating water, and rarifying ayre.” The peculiarity of such studies was sufficient to separate him from the fashionable society of Courts, and the too frequently frivolous society attendant even at Raglan Castle. If he then made few enemies, his conversation and pursuits were little calculated to enlarge his social acquaintance, and may even have early inspired a belief in his possessing equal eccentricity and enthusiasm. His memory, however, cannot fail to be cherished by posterity as the illustrious possessor of a highly cultivated intellect, displaying a singularly powerful, original, protean inventive genius.

Footnotes

[A] The annexed specimen of his Lordship’s autograph, during his father’s lifetime, is from a MS. certificate in the British Museum dated 21st May, 1604.

[B] Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1603–1610. Edited by Mrs. M. A. E. Green. 8vo. 1857, page 529.

[109] An. à Wood. Vol. 3, pp. 199–204.

[C] Bodleian Library, “Carte Papers—Earl of Huntingdon’s Papers, Temp. Eliz. Car. II. 77.” No 120. The annexed engraving is a facsimile of his autograph to the letter in question.

[5] Atkyns.

[D] Henry, Duke of Beaufort, died in 1699, at 70 years of age, so that he must have been born in 1629.

[E] Dedication to the “Century.”

[F] Ibid.

[G] “The Century,” articles Nos. 21 and 26.

[H] The “Century,” Dedication.

[I] The “Century,” Article No. 56.

[J] It is not certain how long Sir William Balfour was Lord Lieutenant of the Tower prior to 1641.

CHAPTER III.

EDWARD, LORD HERBERT’S SECOND MARRIAGE.

In 1639 Lord Herbert entered a second time into the matrimonial state, a prudential step as he was then situated, at the age of 38, having a young family without any sufficient guardian. He married the Lady Margaret, second daughter and co-heir of Henry O’Brien, Earl of Thomond; by which alliance he obtained some possessions, as well as a connexion with many of the best and most powerful families in Ireland. Of this, as of his first marriage, no particulars have been preserved, not even their date, or where celebrated; yet considering that both occurred during his father’s lifetime and greatest prosperity, we can readily believe that they were accompanied with all the usual demonstrations of joy, ceremony and feasting. They had but one daughter, Mary, who died during her infancy. In a family group, painted by Hanneman, a close imitator of Vandyck, Lord Herbert is represented as a Roman general, seated by his lady attired in a modern costume of pale blue satin, with their child standing before her in a reclining position. He has a very aged appearance, although one might presume that the portrait was executed when he was under forty-five. It is a very thinly and sketchily painted performance. His Lordship presents a singular appearance in a toga and tight fitting hose of deep scarlet, an ornamented leathern jerkin, and wearing a wig streaming over his breast and shoulders, sitting in a chair with his right hand resting on a walking stick, while his left hangs negligently over the arm of the chair in proximity with a mighty sheathed sword. His lady in ample folds of silk, with the usual long, tightly fitting, jewelled stomacher, has her hair in a fringe of small curls over her forehead, combed closely back, where it terminates in a knot from which a few ringlets flow behind; she wears also pearl ear-drops and a pearl necklace, which ornaments are repeated on her child.

The same year, on the 8th of April, he lost his mother, Anne, Countess of Worcester, who was buried at Raglan. It is possible, therefore, that his marriage was deferred during her illness, and not celebrated until some months after her decease.

It was then the 15th year of Charles the First’s reign. Before the close of the year following, the Long Parliament commenced its sittings, when Lenthall was chosen Speaker. All projectors and monopolists were denounced as incapable of holding office, several members, therefore, withdrew, whose places were speedily supplied. What must have been his Lordship’s impressions under the existing aspect of political affairs may easily be conceived, while as yet “Royalist” and “Roundhead” could scarcely be called popular terms of party distinction.

In 1641, that martyr of science, Galileo, died, whose case so far assimilated with the Marquis’s own, that they were of the same religious persuasion: the one proscribed at home for the peculiar heretical turn his genius had taken, the other under the ban of suspicion for his papistical persuasion and supposed consequent prejudices.

We now enter on the most critical era in the history of this great and good man. He was then residing in London, where he continued for some length of time, with the politic motive of avoiding as much as possible the suspicion of Parliament; for through his father’s liberality he had already commenced supplying Charles the First with heavy loans.

In the collection of manuscripts at Badminton, is an unpublished letter from Charles the First, dated 3rd of August, 1641, and also copies, in an ancient and probably contemporary hand, of letters, the originals of which, according to Birch, form part of the Harleian collection.[A] In the first of these, dated 7th of December, 1641,—Charles the First requires Lord Herbert to repair to Whitehall, “not only for his own particular use, but likewise for the good of the kingdom,” so early had his Majesty taken him into his confidence and council. He had then not long returned from Scotland, and soon after he retreated to Hampton Court. He writes:—

“Charles R.

“Right trusty and right well-beloved Cousin, We greet you well,—whereas We have heretofore by many letters and messages signed by us, given you testimony of Our favour and inclination to reward the good service of you and yours: These are further to assure you, that neither the times nor business shall ever make us unmindful of them: Yet upon occasions when Our good intentions therein may be really manifested, We desire to be put in mind that we may readily concur to a speedy performance, of which you may be ever most confident. And being [seeing?] your indisposition of body is such, that before Our intended journey We cannot signify the same to yourself in person, We have thought good to express it by these our Letters, Given at our Palace of Westminster, 3 day of August, In the seventeenth year of Our Reign and 1641.”

[Endorsed in an old handwriting, 1641.]

“To Our Right trusty and right well beloved Cousin, Henry Earl of Worcester.”

Next comes the following:—

“Herbert,

“Yours of the 1st of December has given me a just reason for your absence but certainly I have juster cause for your attendance, for it is well known how that you are to give me account of matters not only for my particular use, but likewise for the good of the kingdom; wherefore I require your repair hither with all convenient diligence; And the rather that you may find out the authors of these lying and scandalous Pamphlets concerning your father and you, touching [which] I not only promise you protection to your innocency but justice against those offenders, assuring you likewise that I shall be so mindful of you that, if I live, you shall neither be a loser in, nor repent you for the services you have done me. And so I rest

“Your assured friend,

“Charles R.

“Whitehall, the 7th December, 1641.[13]

“I send you herein the paper that I could not find when you were with me.”

In his journey towards the north, his Majesty, on arriving at Royston, wrote to Lord Herbert as follows:—

“Herbert,

“Your services are expressed to me in so noble a way that I cannot but acknowledge to you under my own hand, and that I should think myself very unhappy, if I did not live by real testimonies to express my gratitude to you. And for your sister, Carnarvon, though I cannot punctually answer your expectation therein, yet I hope you will be satisfied with the answer you will receive by your cousin Sir John Byron, to whom, referring myself for many things I have not time to write. I rest,

“Your most assured constant friend,

“Charles R.

“Royston, 6 March, [1641–2.]”

And again he addressed him a few lines, shortly before being refused admittance to Hull:—

“Herbert,

“I entrusted your cousin Byron with the particular answers to your letter, reserving only to myself to answer you, that I esteem your services such as my words cannot express them; but by showing myself at all occasions to be

“Your most assured constant friend,

“Charles R.

“York, 9 May, 1642.”

We have here the earliest communications on record between these two remarkable individuals, whose personal histories have alike perplexed all political, polemical, and philosophical writers.

Before setting out for Scotland, the King appears to have desired a personal interview with his Lordship, who seems to have been prevented from complying by some severe indisposition in July, 1641; his Majesty, therefore, conveys to him in writing, his “favour and inclination to reward the good service of you and yours.” His Lordship’s father had already made to the needy monarch some of those munificent advances, which, as long as he could obtain them, he was in the habit of repaying with ample promises and abundant flattery.

In his second letter, he alludes to “lying and scandalous pamphlets concerning” his Lordship’s father, but what these may have been has not transpired; they may only have referred to him as connected with the Roman Catholic party.

In another letter he expresses his “gratitude” for his Lordship’s noble expression of services; and alludes to his sister Carnarvon. And in the last of these letters, he flatteringly informs his Lordship, that,—“I esteem your services such as my words cannot express them;” yet by words alone were they ever, as then, expressed, only to be as conveniently repudiated.

Up to forty years of age, Lord Herbert had lived as became a gentleman of ancient nobility, great expectations, and in the enjoyment of the most friendly intercourse with his sovereign. Well educated, travelled, accustomed to courtly life, devoted to learned studies and given to scientific pursuits, he has been hitherto only presented to us, in his domestic relations, as a dutiful son, a husband and father, having few engagements to withdraw him from the management of his estates, or distract him from the enjoyment of country sports and social intercourse. During this period, he had probably nothing more serious on hand than an occasional change of residence, as he passed some portions of the year at Raglan Castle, and occupied at others the ample accommodations of Worcester House.

In a statement[B] he wrote long after, he incidentally remarks:—“I was not privy, or present with his Majesty at Greenwich [26th February, 1641] when he first took his resolution for the North, and removed, without the Queen, to Theobalds; from which he was pleased to write me a lamentable letter by the hands of Sir John Byron, averring that he had but £600, and £300 of which was given to defray his horses, which the Marquis of Hamilton, then Master of the Horse, refused to do, fearing to displease the Parliament.”