Ian Atherton. Ambition and Failure in Stuart : The Career of John, 1st Viscount Scudamore, 1620-4. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999. 300 pp. $79.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-7190-5091-6.

Reviewed by Caroline Hibbard

Published on H-Albion (May, 2001)

Ian Atherton. Ambition and Failure in Stuart later stages of Scudamore's life, key elements of England: The Career of John, 1st Viscount Scud‐ which have to be retrieved from preceding chap‐ amore, 1620-4. Manchester: Manchester Universi‐ ters. ty Press, 1999. 300 pp. Index. $79.95 (cloth), ISBN: Atherton identifes his central aims as three‐ 0-7190-5091-X. fold: to provide "a case study of how an ambitious Biographies have not been a format much gentleman sought to forge a political career on a used of late for organizing scholarly exchange; variety of levels"; to look at religion, divisions at and Scudamore, an ambassador but not otherwise court, and foreign policy in the 1620s and 1630s, a courtier, is scarcely a household word even and to contribute to ongoing debates in those ar‐ among early Stuart historians. So it is a little sur‐ eas; and to seek to explain a zealous supporter of prising, but gratifying, to report that this book is royal policy and government, a lay Laudian, and a quite successful in casting light on important in‐ supporter of the Duke of Buckingham (p. 18). terpretive issues. Scudamore was a royalist and a Atherton himself is clearly on the other side of the Laudian, but also essentially a country gentleman. political fence from Scudamore, a point that Atherton is correct that this "type" has been de‐ emerges almost of-handedly at an early stage picted as rare and, thus, not much studied. A good where he refers to "the clear immoderation and deal more attention has gone to the activist godly unconstitutionality of both King Charles and types, such as Sir Robert Harley in Scudamore's Archbishop Laud" (p. 19). One must all the more own county of Hereford. Although it is organized admire the massive and meticulous research in in a roughly chronological fashion, treating suc‐ both central and local sources that the author has cessive stages of Scudamore's life and the issues devoted to his subject, and the care with which he associated with them, the book is not a straight‐ attempts to explain his character and views. forward biography. The departure from a chrono‐ Atherton takes as a sort of unifying theme the logical scheme leads to some confusion over the idea that there were "varieties of honour" and H-Net Reviews corresponding varieties of self-fashioning. Al‐ The family seat at Holme Lacy was host to though the opening chapter on the "rhetorics of learned and well-travelled visitors, and the chap‐ honour and advancement" is a wonderfully nu‐ ter on the viscount's intellectual and religious anced examination of 17th century ideas about world helps recover a relatively neglected section honour and ambition, I am not sure that the idea of the intellectual/political/religious world of the of multiple self-fashionings does much to advance 1630s. Aristocratic fgures of this period who were our understanding of Scudamore's character or genuinely learned no longer look like anomalies career. I am much more persuaded by his discus‐ to us, in large part because of Linda Peck's study sion of how self-assertiveness and even aggres‐ of Northampton and work on other noblemen. An sion were intrinsic to the aristocratic honour avid reader of divinity, Scudamore was also "on code--something he might have more frmly con‐ the borders" (p. 52) of several scientifc and philo‐ nected with his discussion of ambassadorial be‐ sophical circles: those of Mersenne, Hartlib and havior in a later chapter. The gentry code of ser‐ Grotius. He was an early and highly successful vice to crown and commonwealth is a theme that agricultural innovator, developing a strong cider is often and rightly invoked. that became both a luxury item and a "large-scale The second chapter describes the descent of enterprise" (p. 55), and working to advance other the Scudamores of Holme Lacy, and the regional fruit and berry production in Herefordshire. context of the Welsh marches, where in the 16th Atherton suggests that there was a spiritual side century the Scudamores profted from court ofce to this practical husbandry, "God and Christ the and monastic spoils to build estates and local gardeners" (p. 57) serving as exemplars for Chris‐ power in Herefordshire and neighboring coun‐ tians on earth. Moreover, Scudamore shared with ties. The Scudamores emerged by the 1620s as the George Herbert and Henry Vaughan a sense of the richest family in a county with no resident peers, physical world (and the English landscape in par‐ who were powerful at court though no longer res‐ ticular) as manifestations of God. Atherton fur‐ ident there after the accession of James I. When ther connects this, persuasively to my mind, with the future viscount's father died in 1619, a few the sacramental character of Scudamore's piety. years after his own marriage to a marcher The picture of Scudamore as a practicing Lau‐ heiress, his grandfather set about to establish him dian is pursued convincingly and at length, in a in the local ofces due to the family--captain of chapter that is worth careful attention. Scud‐ the county horse, JP, custos rotulorum, deputy amore's piety was "built around two main pillars: lieutenant, MP for the county--an inheritance the the special or sacred nature of the church and all viscount would prove unable to pass on to his things dedicated to it, including the clergy; and heir in the Restoration. The viscount's martial ac‐ the importance of the sacraments, especially the tivities, or "military self-image"--a theme of this eucharist, in his devotions" (p. 59). Reparation of chapter--were mainly in the lieutenancy, unlike churches such as Abbey Dore was the reparation his two younger brothers who were career sol‐ of sacrilege, and the church he rebuilt there was diers. The single speech to the Herefordshire gen‐ altar-centered, carefully graduated, with a series try at musters might seem a slender basis on of hallowed spaces, and the clergy separated from which to build a putative world-view for Scud‐ the laity. Concern that it was sacrilege to hold for‐ amore, but Atherton skillfully deploys it to reveal mer monastic lands was not unique to Scud‐ his subject's very rigid and hierarchical social vi‐ amore. Yet at considerable cost to himself he sion. made elaborate amends through the restoration of tithes to clergy and churches. He believed in "hallowed times" such as Lent, and from the 1620s

2 H-Net Reviews through the 1650s he supported numerous local records for the 1620s and 1630s have been lost), clergy and those sequestered by the parliamen‐ but in the context somewhat digressive. As JP and tary or Interregnum regimes. He "shared none of custos rotulorum for Herefordshire from 1622 to the puritan concern for a preaching ministry" (p. 1628, as subsidy commissioner in the mid-1620s, 69) and supported pluralist, non-resident minis‐ as a forced loan commissioner in 1626-27, and as ters. He aimed at monthly communion, made the major fgure in county government up to elaborate preparations for it, and practiced auric‐ 1642, Scudamore is seen alternately trying to ular confession; he performed acts of charity in browbeat and inspire the county gentry to re‐ connection with the Eucharist, made frequent spond to the government's demands and initia‐ gifts of altar plate and eucharistic implements. All tives. The long account of the collection for re‐ these features of his piety were on display in his building St. Paul's is probably the best we have for ambassadorial chapel in Paris in the 1630s, which any county, but it reveals that Scudamore, who scandalized both visiting English Protestants and might have been expected to wax eloquent on this French Huguenots. particular subject given his enthusiasm for restor‐ Although rhetorically moderate, he was not a ing churches, was relatively mute. Local suspi‐ waverer towards Rome; rather he was a "prayer‐ cions of crown intentions, cited by Atherton (and book" member of the . In addi‐ many historians) as an important drag on this as tion to the infuence of Laud, Atherton traces that well as other local collections, indicate a mistrust of Lancelot Andrewes, adding to the voices of Pe‐ of the king not shared by Scudamore. Subsequent ter Lake, Peter McCullough and Anthony Milton in chapters reinforce an impression of naivete, not placing a renewed emphasis on Andrewes's infu‐ to say even stupidity, on Scudamore's part. ence in the early 17th century period. Scud‐ In his chapter on "the search for preferment" amore's "religious self-presentation" underlay Atherton does an excellent job of showing how Charles I's good opinion of him and this would Scudamore (and local politicians like him) culti‐ help bring him preferment despite his dubious vated patrons at court so as to protect their coun‐ successes as a local ; in Hereford his reli‐ ty position. In the process, he explains Scud‐ gious style was comfortably supported by the con‐ amore's "virtually insatiable appetite for news in servative environment which his puritan neigh‐ the 1620s and 1630s" (p. 153), which bequeathed bor Sir Robert Harley so often lamented. such a treasure trove of newsletters to later histo‐ The chapter on Scudamore as a local gover‐ rians. It is not clear when or why Scudamore de‐ nor seemed less successful to me, in part because cided that he should aim at more than a county it uneasily yokes the 1620s and the 1660s, in part role--a misguided decision as it turned out, al‐ because his role here is reactive rather than cre‐ though Atherton treats it as almost inevitable. ative, and in part because the picture drawn is of Buckingham's intervention in Hereford county a local magnate whose promises to politics, upsetting the Scudamore family's tradi‐ turn out to be largely unfulflled. As Atherton con‐ tional position in favor of the Pye and Harley fam‐ cludes, if Scudamore was successful in his local ilies, was probably crucial. When Scudamore governor role, it was because he was able to medi‐ failed to be returned as Knight of the Shire in ate between local parties, and also able to moder‐ 1625 and again in 1626, he sought Buckingham's ate (if not frustrate) the demands of the crown on patronage and in the 1628 parliament he was "a the locality. The account tends to dissolve into a vigorous but inefectual supporter of Charles and discussion of country government which is neces‐ Buckingham" (p. 145). sarily incomplete (quarter session and assize

3 H-Net Reviews

The reward for his parliamentary support of way in which diplomacy was both intensely per‐ Buckingham came with an Irish peerage in July sonal and yet obsessed with procedure. 1628, although this was a dubious honor that gave Weaker aspects of the argument are his insis‐ him no infuence in Ireland and, at the same time, tence that all Scudamore's actions and problems some diminution of role in England. Preferment with the French were based on his instructions. outside the county still escaped him. As a "politi‐ Charles may not have been willing publicly to cian" (p. 155 for Atherton's use of the term) aim‐ "fynd falt" with his ambassador over his calculat‐ ing for higher ofce, he seems ill qualifed and ed snubs to the French Huguenots; but this is not, singularly inept. After returning from France in pace Atherton, an "unequivocal" endorsement (p. 1639 he would change his ways and became a 180). And the author doesn't take into account the London resident, but by then he had thoroughly inevitable ambiguities of a "pro-French" position demonstrated his incapacity for court life and after 1630, when half the French royal family was gained the distinction of being one of very few re‐ at odds with the other half; Henrietta Maria's po‐ turned ambassadors who never received further sition cannot be understood outside that context, promotion. At the Restoration he tried to play the and France cannot necessarily be equated with role for his son James that his grandfather had Richelieu. Finally, Laud was in no sense "His‐ performed for him in the 1620s, settling him in panophile" (p. 209), except as that word was used the line of county that his family status to denote those who vehemently opposed calling merited; but the young man was a dissipated a Parliament. The picture we get of Scudamore as bankrupt whose death in 1668 probably saved the ambassador (although the author tries to soften family from further disgrace and total political it), is one of an infexible, unworldly country eclipse. bumpkin; unaware of the most important court It's always refreshing to fnd a biographer quarrels in London that afected whom he could prepared bluntly to announce that his subject was or should trust; and unwilling to cultivate either "not up to the task" (p. 171), and Scudamore's ca‐ the French court or England's natural allies reer as ambassador to France, beginning in Janu‐ among the Huguenots. Scudamore was someone ary 1635, amply bears out that verdict. He appar‐ who had, as Atherton admits, "built his house on ently owed the position to Laud, but found the un‐ sand" (p. 199). courtierlike prelate could ofer him little useful The years after Scudamore's return to Eng‐ guidance in a position for which he was so ill-suit‐ land saw the outbreak of the civil war in which ed. He was a pawn in Charles's double-edged for‐ the viscount played a very ambiguous role as a eign policy, meant to stall France during serious royalist leader. His personal papers for 1639-43 negotiations with Spain. When in April 1636 the were lost in a parliamentary raid, so much has to king decided to pursue a French alliance in be inferred from his actions and subsequent ex‐ earnest, he sent as extraordinary ambassador to planations. Atherton does not comment on his ab‐ France the Earl of Leicester, an adept ambassador sence from the Short or the Long Parliaments. who could and would speak French. Thus began Scudamore frst publicly appears in the politics of an unhappy three-year standof between the two this period as a promoter of the pro-episcopacy rivals, much to Scudamore's disadvantage. Woven petition in his county in January 1642; but he then into this sorry tale, however, are very interesting disappears as the royalist party emerges in Here‐ discussions by Atherton about the sizeable litera‐ fordshire, not being one of the "nine worthies" ture on the role of ambassadors that was pro‐ who printed declarations against the parliament duced in the early 17th century, and about the in the months before the outbreak of war, nor ac‐

4 H-Net Reviews tive in the commission of array. But he successful‐ this work for nonproft, educational purposes, ly promoted his son James into the vacated seat with full and accurate attribution to the author, for Hereford city in July, albeit at the expense of web location, date of publication, originating list, one of the "worthy" candidates. This prefgured and H-Net: Humanities & Social Sciences Online. divisions among the county royalists which se‐ For any other proposed use, contact the Reviews verely damaged the king's cause. Atherton argues editorial staf at [email protected]. that Scudamore's delay in moving to the fore was not due to "moderation," as others have suggest‐ ed; and he suggests (although he does not quite say) that it was due to his rivalry with the other county royalists. From December 1642 when the royalists retook Hereford until April 1643 when Waller briefy retook it, there was "a bitter and ul‐ timately crippling struggle between Fitzwilliam Coningsby and Viscount Scudamore for leader‐ ship in Hereford" (p. 234). These quarrels, in which Scudamore seemed to have used his con‐ tacts at the court in Oxford with some success, contributed to royalist losses in the southern marches of ; he himself surrendered to Waller and was sent to London where he re‐ mained in house arrest until 1647. It had been a brief inglorious career as a royalist. The viscount himself sufered heavy losses in the 1640s, but he was able to donate alms to dis‐ tressed divines in the 1650s (and 1660s) which contributed to an image of probity and loyalty. At the death of his wastrel son James in 1668 the grandson "Jack" became the heir, but his power and position as second viscount were to be con‐ siderably less than those that the frst viscount had inherited in the 1620s. Scudamore died in London in 1671; during his lifetime and subse‐ quently his reputation was nurtured by clergy‐ men, who remembered with gratitude his munif‐ cence to the church. The author's concluding re‐ marks about the importance of local clergy, "the most prolifc of publishers" (p. 264), in fashioning lasting images of 17th century fgures, are among the many insights born of deep immersion in the county scene which fll this excellent study. Copyright 2001 by H-Net, all rights reserved. H-Net permits the redistribution and reprinting of

5 H-Net Reviews

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-albion

Citation: Caroline Hibbard. Review of Atherton, Ian. Ambition and Failure in Stuart England: The Career of John, 1st Viscount Scudamore, 1620-4. H-Albion, H-Net Reviews. May, 2001.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=5132

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

6