LUMLEY, John (c.1533-1609)

Lumley’s forebears first acquired their barony in 1385, but they traced their pedigree right back to one Liulph, allegedly the lord of Lumley Castle around the time of the Norman Conquest. It was a proud heritage, which Lumley celebrated by creating a funerary chapel at Chester-le-Street, County Durham, filled with fake, medieval-style tombs.28 Milner, 11, 23; Surtees, ii. 139. However, the Lumleys also had a chequered political history. The first Lord Lumley (Ralph de Lumley^†) was attainted for treason early in Henry IV’s reign, the barony being recreated in 1480 for his great-grandson. Lumley’s own father participated in the Pilgrimage of Grace, and was attainted and executed in 1537. Consequently, when Lumley’s grandfather, John Lumley^†, 4th Lord Lumley died around eight years later, the barony became forfeit to the crown.29 Milner, 12, 23, 29; LP Hen. VIII, xii. pt. 1, p. 114; CP, viii. 276.

Lumley was restored in blood by act of Parliament in 1547, his peerage thus being revived for a second time. (As such, his position was broadly comparable to that of William Paget^*, 5th Lord Paget and Henry Wriothesley^*, 3rd and 1st earl of Southampton, though according to modern conventions Lumley’s restoration is deemed to have been a new creation.) However, he too suffered disgrace, being imprisoned in the Tower of London in 1569 for conspiring to marry Mary, queen of Scots to his kinsman Thomas Howard^†, 4th duke of Norfolk, and to restore Catholicism in England.30 CP, viii. 276-7; LJ, i. 313b; Milner, 55-7, 60-1; CSP Dom. Addenda, 1566-79, p. 269. Having failed to learn his lesson, Lumley was back in the Tower two years later, suspected of involvement in the Ridolfi Plot. The government was prepared to tolerate his Catholic leanings, but he lost most of his public offices for a time, and thereafter found it safest to live in comparative retirement.31 Milner, 62-3; Gooch, 69; CSP Dom. 1591-4, p. 504.

In fact, Lumley was more than happy to have the time to indulge his cultural interests. His first father-in-law, Henry Fitz Alan^†, 19th earl of Arundel, bequeathed him a substantial library and art collection, along with the spectacular Henrician palace of Nonsuch, which he had acquired from Mary I. Lumley himself was a serious bibliophile, and by the time of his death he owned around 2,800 books and 400 manuscripts, probably the largest private library in England, despite being a generous donor to both Oxford and Cambridge universities. He also possessed several hundred paintings. Keenly interested in science and exploration, he helped to found a lecture in surgery at the College of Physicians, in London, and invested in John Davis’ voyages in search of the North-West Passage.32 Gooch, 18, 60-1, 87-8, 108; L. Stone, Crisis of the Aristocracy, 714-15; J. Stow, Survey of London ed. C.L. Kingsford, i. 75; Milner, 93; S. Jayne, Lib. Cats. of the Eng. Renaissance, 45. In 1592 Lumley was obliged to surrender Nonsuch to Elizabeth I, in return for the cancellation of a massive debt. (Almost 30 years earlier, he and Arundel had inexplicably become suretors for £12,350 owed to the crown by the state of Florence, but it proved impossible to recover most of this money.) Nevertheless, the queen granted him a lease of Nonsuch great park, and he took up residence in the keeper’s lodge instead.33 Gooch, 48, 107; Rymer, vi. pt. 4, pp. 128-9; CPR, 1572-5, p. 538; 1580-2, pp. 140-1; 1591-2 ed. F. Slingsby (L. and I. Soc. cclxxii), 51; CSP Dom. Addenda, 1580-1625, pp. 416-17 (miscalendared as 1601). In the latter years of the reign, he was on friendly terms with Sir Robert Cecil^* (later 1st earl of Salisbury), even having the latter’s young son William (Cecil^*, later 2nd earl of Salisbury) to stay. However, by the turn of the century Lumley was struggling with his health, which discouraged him from attending court more than necessary.34 HMC Hatfield, iv. 356, 618; xi. 312, 389; xii. 509.

Lumley was in London when Elizabeth died, and signed the proclamation announcing James I’s accession. The new king visited Lumley Castle on his way south from Scotland, but found a recitation of the lengthy family pedigree tedious, reputedly commenting: ‘I didna ken Adam’s ither nam was Lumley’.35 J. Strype, Annals, iv. 519; J. Nichols, Progs. of Jas. I, i. 71-2; Milner, 92. Despite this inauspicious start, Lumley still enjoyed the favour of the now Lord Cecil, who helped him to secure expenses towards the upkeep of Nonsuch park in June 1603, and probably also arranged for him to participate in the preparations for James’s coronation. That September, Lumley was honoured with a visit from the two young princes, Henry and Charles (Stuart^*, later prince of Wales). Another occasional visitor around this time was a distant kinsman, John Williams^*, later archbishop of York, on whom the baron generously bestowed books and manuscripts. In the estimation of the antiquary William Camden, Lumley was ‘a person of entire virtue, integrity and innocence, and now in his old age a complete pattern of nobility’.36 HMC Hatfield, xv. 145; CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 15; Cal. of Talbot Pprs. 229; J. Hacket, Scrinia Reserata (1693), i. 11; W. Camden, Britannia (1772) ed. E. Gibson, ii. 136.

When Parliament met in March 1604, Lumley was named a trier of petitions from Gascony and other overseas territories, to which position he had been appointed in every session since 1584. However, he failed to attend the Lords, being formally excused on 26 March. Instead, he presented his proxy to his brother-in-law, Thomas Darcy^*, 3rd Lord Darcy of Chiche. It was clear that Lumley’s parliamentary career was rapidly drawing to a close. He was recorded as present in the Lords for the last time on 9 Nov. 1605, and awarded his proxy for the second and third Jacobean sessions to Henry Howard^*, earl of Northampton, a cousin of his first wife.37 LJ, ii. 62a, 113b, 145b, 168b, 191b, 226b, 263a, 264b, 266a, 355a, 449b.

In the autumn of 1604 Lumley faced a fresh setback at Nonsuch. The palace had been given to the queen, Anne of Denmark, who demanded the cancellation of his lease of the great park, so that she could use it herself. After negotiations lasting an entire year, Lumley finally obliged in return for an annuity and the office of keeper of game in the environs of the estate.38 Letters and Memorials of State ed. A. Collins, ii. 307-8; HMC Hatfield, xvii. 374, 433. He apparently continued to live at Nonsuch in the summer months for the next few years, but preferred to pass the winter in London, observing the goings-on at court, and reporting them to his friend Gilbert Talbot^*, 7th earl of Shrewsbury. The latter’s brother-in-law, Sir Charles Cavendish^‡, an amateur architect, visited Lumley in May 1607 to inspect a model of a house, ‘the inventor being present’, but was not impressed.39 SP14/34/115; Illustrations of Brit. Hist. ed. E. Lodge, iii. 106-7, 146-8; HMC Hatfield, xix. 121; M. Girouard, Robert Smythson and the Elizabethan Country House, 184. By the following year, Lumley’s health was failing, and he had lost the use of an arm and a leg. In June 1608 he wrote pathetically to Cecil, now earl of Salisbury and newly appointed lord treasurer, requesting protection for a servant who faced an indictment for recusancy: ‘I have had much help and comfort of his service, … as … I know not how to spare him, … and when my latest date is so near come on, that it is not fit for me to look for a new man in his place’.40 Cal. of Talbot Pprs. 251; SP14/34/115.

Lumley died at his London home in April 1609, but was buried at Cheam, in Surrey, close by Nonsuch, where he had built another funerary chapel.41 C142/311/109; Surtees, ii. 142; Surr. Arch. Coll. iii. 324. In his will, dated 28 Jan. 1606, he left the bulk of his estate to his wife Elizabeth for life, while also providing for the maintenance of his preferred heir, his young cousin Richard Lumley. His household servants were each assigned a year’s wages on top of what they had earned, and £200 was bequeathed to the poor.42 PROB 11/113, ff. 262-3. Lumley’s library was acquired by Prince Henry, and some remnants of it eventually found their way into the British Museum’s collection. As Lumley died leaving no direct male heir, his barony became extinct, though his cousin Richard was created Viscount Lumley of Waterford [I] in 1628. The baron’s heir-general was a nephew, Splandian Lloyd. A descendant of that line, Robert Lloyd, unsuccessfully claimed the Lumley barony in 1723.43 Gooch, 62-3; CP, viii. 278-9.