BERKELEY, Henry (1534-1613)

One of England’s oldest aristocratic families, reputedly descended from the kings of Denmark, the Berkeleys took their name from Berkeley Castle, an important Gloucestershire stronghold, which they held from the mid twelfth century. Their peerage dated originally from 1295, and although the title was recreated in 1421, they were permitted to retain the precedence of the third most senior barony in the House of Lords.19 Collins, Peerage, iii. 591, 607-8; CSP Dom. 1635-6, p. 78; CP, ii. 120, 124-5, 127, 131-2, 137. Further titles followed in the late fifteenth century. William Berkeley^†, 2nd Lord Berkeley, who found favour successively with Edward IV, Richard III and Henry VII, was raised to the rank of viscount and then to that of marquess, and also created earl of Nottingham. However, William died childless, whereupon these new honours were extinguished. The next heir to the barony was his younger brother, Maurice^†, but William so hated him that he entailed the bulk of his property on Henry VII and his male heirs. Thus, although the 3rd Lord Berkeley possessed lands of his own through his mother, he lost control of Berkeley Castle, and was obliged to settle instead at Caludon Castle, near Coventry.20 Collins, iii. 610-11; L. Stone, Fam. and Fortune, 243; W. Dugdale, Antiqs. of Warws. (1730), i. 128. During the next few decades, his heirs gradually reconstructed their estates in Gloucestershire, even serving as constables of Berkeley Castle, but their main residence in the county was at Yate, around nine miles to the south.21 Stone, 243-4; CP, ii. 137; Collins, iii. 613.

This depleted inheritance passed in 1534 to Berkeley himself, who was born nine weeks after his father’s death. The timing of this long minority was unfortunate. Not only did he miss out on the redistribution of monastic lands following the Reformation, but also his extensive Irish estates were confiscated by the crown under the 1536 Statute of Absentees.22 Smyth, ii. 266; Stone, 244. However, his fortunes were transformed by the death of Edward VI in 1553, whereupon the lands formerly entailed on the male Tudor line reverted to the Berkeleys. The property was not returned immediately, as Berkeley had first to demonstrate his loyalty to Mary I by helping to suppress Wyatt’s rebellion. He also married a granddaughter of Thomas Howard^†, 3rd duke of Norfolk, whom the queen had restored to favour. Nevertheless, in December 1554, Berkeley was re-granted the lost estates, becoming at a stroke one of the wealthiest men in England.23 CPR, 1554-5, pp. 9-10; Stone, 244-5; Cat. of Charters and Muniments at Berkeley Castle ed. I.H. Jeayes, 213-14, 321; CSP Dom. 1553-8, p. 48.

Having achieved this highly privileged position, Berkeley proceeded to squander it. ‘Tall and slender’, ‘spare of speech’, and firmly under the thumb of his domineering wife, he was given the disparaging nickname ‘Henry the harmless’ by his steward and biographer, John Smyth^‡.24 Smyth, ii. 265, 386-7, 408. For the next three decades he lived like some medieval magnate, travelling the country with around 150 liveried servants, dressing extravagantly, patronizing one of the country’s most active companies of travelling players, and living well beyond his means.25 Ibid. 284-6; Recs. of Early Eng. Drama: Cumb., Westmld., Glos. ed. A. Douglas and P. Greenfield, 436; Coventry ed. R.W. Ingram, 286, 375; Som. ed. R.J. Alexander,ii. 991; Kent ed. J.M. Gibson, iii. 1400; Dorset ed. R.C. Hays and C.E. McGee, 616; Norf. ed. D. Galloway, 358. By the mid-1560s he had to sell land to compensate. Then, in 1572, disaster struck, as his brother-in-law, Thomas Howard^†, 4th duke of Norfolk, was executed for treason. Damned by association at court, Berkeley found himself at the mercy of the royal favourite, Robert Dudley^†, earl of Leicester and his brother Ambrose^†, earl of Warwick, who possessed a claim to some of the lands restored in 1554. An extended legal battle ensued, the queen invariably siding with the Dudleys, and Berkeley was obliged to surrender further properties.26 CPR, 1563-6, pp. 266, 270; 1566-9, p. 420; Stone, 246-9; HMC Hatfield, xiii. 521. Even after the deaths of Leicester and Warwick, in 1588 and 1590 respectively, Warwick’s widow continued the struggle, which eventually cost Berkeley as much as 15 per cent of his total income.27 HMC 5th Rep. 343; APC, 1590, pp. 345, 389; 1590-1, p. 102; HMC Hatfield, xiii. 478; Stone, 249. Finally forced into making personal economies, he drastically reduced the size of his household, even going to live with relatives at intervals, and took steps to get his chaotic finances into order. In a bid to restore his personal position at court, he married his son Thomas^‡ to the daughter of George Carey^*, 2nd Lord Hunsdon, kinsman and lord chamberlain to the queen. However, Thomas proved to be no less of a spendthrift than his father, running up huge debts and making further land sales unavoidable.28 Smyth, ii. 364, 376; Stone, 250, 252. By now more than half of the family’s manors had been disposed of, but the financial miscalculations continued unabated. As if determined to ruin himself, Berkeley took a second wife in 1598, agreeing to a lavish marriage settlement which he could not readily afford, and then fell out with his new bride, who sued him to secure her rights.29 Letters and Memorials of State (1746) ed. A. Collins, ii. 92; Stone, 251-2, 255-6.

Not until 1603 did Berkeley’s situation improve again. With the accession of James I, another of the baron’s brothers-in-law, Lord Henry Howard^*, later earl of Northampton, emerged as a major player at court. The benefits were soon felt. In July Berkeley’s son Thomas was made a knight of the Bath at the coronation. A few weeks later, Berkeley himself was appointed lord lieutenant of Gloucestershire, having used his new-found influence with the king to outmanoeuvre his local rival, Gray Brydges^*, 5th Lord Chandos. In the following November, he was also installed as the county’s vice admiral by another kinsman, the lord admiral, Charles Howard^*, 1st earl of Nottingham.30 Shaw, i. 153; HMC Hatfield, xv. 230-1, 371. Although Berkeley was now entering his eighth decade, and continued to spend most of his time in Warwickshire, he proved to be a reasonably effective administrator, keeping full and accurate records of the local militia, and addressing abuses in the recruitment of soldiers for Irish service. Accordingly, his patent as lord lieutenant was renewed after six years on more favourable terms.31 Smyth, ii. 371, 377; Cat. of Charters and Muniments, 288, 325; HMC 5th Rep. 339; Add. 11402, f. 146; SO3/4, unfol. (May 1609).

When the first Jacobean Parliament was summoned in 1604, Berkeley’s influence was clearly reflected in the Gloucestershire election, at which his son Sir Thomas and a cousin, Sir Richard Berkeley^‡, were returned. When the latter died a few weeks later, he was replaced by another kinsman, John Throckmorton^‡.32 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 135. Berkeley attended the opening of the first session, but appeared in the Lords for only seven subsequent sittings, opting instead to give his proxy to Northampton. He left no mark on the Parliament’s proceedings. The cause of this absenteeism is unclear, but he never sat again. For the 1605-6 session, Berkeley obtained permission to stay away, again appointing Northampton as his proxy, but in the third session he appears not even to have followed these formalities.33 LJ, ii. 263b, 355a, 361a.

Meanwhile, Berkeley turned his mind once again to the old grievance of the lands lost to the Dudleys. In 1607, armed with new research by John Smyth into the rival claims, he launched into a protracted legal battle with Robert Sidney^*, Viscount Lisle (later 1st earl of Leicester), the heir to his former adversaries. The pretext for this fresh dispute is unclear, but it may have been around this time that Lisle sought to be joined with Berkeley in the Gloucestershire lieutenancy. If Lisle’s status as a significant landowner in the county could be undermined, his claim to this office would be significantly weakened. At any rate, Berkeley saw off this threat to his position. Moreover, Lisle was himself struggling with debt, and in 1609, after two years of court hearings, he finally went to mediation, as a result of which Berkeley agreed to buy back the disputed estates. The price initially agreed was £8,333, to be paid in instalments, but Lisle accepted an immediate payment of £7,320 instead. Nevertheless, this proved something of a pyrrhic victory, for the deal placed Berkeley’s finances under serious strain again, forcing him by 1611 to lease numerous properties at disadvantageous rates and sell other lands to recoup some of this outlay.34 Stone, 249, 254; HMC De L’Isle and Dudley, iii. 421, 431; iv. 168-9; HMC Downshire, ii. 178; Add. 15914, ff. 57, 59, 62; Smyth, ii. 298, 331; Sidneiana ed. S. Butler (Roxburghe Club), 96; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 219. For a fuller account, see ROBERT SIDNEY, 1ST EARL OF LEICESTER. It was in this context that he dragged his heels over contributing to the feudal aid requested for Prince Henry in 1609, an ironic response given that he was in the habit of exacting feudal dues from his own tenants.35 HMC 4th Rep. 367; Cat. of Charters and Muniments, 337; SP14/49/55; Stone, 253.

When Parliament met again in 1610, Berkeley handed his proxy to Northampton for both sessions, the earl presenting his excuses on 5 March.36 LJ, ii. 548b, 666b; Procs. 1610, i. 186. Berkeley also interceded with his brother-in-law in 1611 on behalf of his son, Sir Thomas, who was now tainted with recusancy. The troublesome young man died in November that year, leaving behind him a ten-year-old boy, George^*, as his heir. In July 1612 Berkeley put assorted lands into trust, to augment his widowed daughter-in-law’s jointure, and to provide maintenance for his infant grandson.37 HMC 4th Rep. 367; Smyth, ii. 399; WARD 7/49/49. Accordingly, the bulk of his financial affairs were already settled when he made his will on 12 Dec. following. In this he stated firmly that his current wife had already received all that she was entitled to, and made only one major bequest, a £3,000 dowry for George’s sister. He requested burial at Berkeley, with a ‘competent tomb’ which would also commemorate his first wife.38 PROB 11/123, ff. 86v-8.

Now aged 78, Berkeley summoned the energy to conduct several months of musters in Gloucestershire in the spring of 1613. That August his granddaughter married Sir Robert Coke^‡, heir to the lord chief justice of Common Pleas, Sir Edward Coke^‡. The famous lawyer wrote to Berkeley shortly afterwards, commiserating with him on a recent, serious illness.39 Cat. of Charters and Muniments, 289, 338; Smyth, ii. 400; HMC 5th Rep. 345. Once again the old man rallied, but he finally died at Caludon that November, of a sickness brought on by a surfeit of ‘small custards’. His body was conveyed back to Berkeley Castle in a coach escorted by a ‘fair troop’ of servants, and buried in the church there in accordance with his wishes. According to Smyth, as the coffin neared its destination, it was met by large crowds of the baron’s tearful tenants, lamenting the passing of ‘the best landlord that England had’. Berkeley was succeeded by his grandson George.40 Smyth, ii. 406-8.