New Light on Edward de Vere

Edward de Vere (1550-1604), 17th Earl of Oxford (or “Oxenford”, as he himself invariably spelled it), has suffered the posthumous misfortune of becoming the object of a cult that credits him with writing the works of Shakespeare. In reaction to the cultists, serious historians tend to neglect him, which is unfortunate. It’s true that he accomplished little in his life except to dissipate a substantial fortune, but he had a remarkable start: heir to England’s oldest earldom, son-in-law of the powerful minister William Cecil and for a while the recipient of favorable attention from Queen Elizabeth. His failure to advance is an interesting study in itself, colorfully punctuated by murder, feuds (including a famous quarrel with fellow underachiever Sir Philip Sidney), flight abroad, sexual adventures, a brief conversion to Catholicism, treasonable intrigues and other excitement. He even has a small place in genuine literary history, as one of the first Tudor courtiers to write secular poetry.

Two years ago, Alan H. Nelson, a Berkeley English professor, published Monstrous Adversary, a detailed documentary biography of Oxenford. As the first extensive life of the wayward peer written by someone who didn’t see him as the true “Shakespeare”, it does much to give a clear picture of a talented, feckless, discontented nobleman. In one important area, though, it falters somewhat. Professor Nelson had no desire to sift through his subject’s tangled financial affairs, so that side of the story is lightly handled, depending less on Oxenford’s accounts than on his contemporary reputation for extravagance.

Now Nelson’s work has been supplemented by a book concentrating on what he omitted. Edward de Vere (1550-1604): The Crisis and Consequences of Wardship (Ashgate Publishing Co., March 2005) is written by Daphne Pearson, a young scholar who, in her still younger years, was an Oxenford-was-Shakespeare believer. Her apostasy has led to a number of testy exchanges with her former comrades-in-arms, a couple of whom made peculiar efforts to suppress her book or, failing that, to “refute” it in advance. [Update: I am now informed that, although Dr. Pearson was once editor of an Oxenfordian newsletter, she stated at the time that she did not agree with its premise. That fact suggests that her Oxenfordian pursuer sees her as a renegade dhimmi rather than an apostate. Also, my reference to Dr. Pearson as “a young scholar” was inapposite, except in the sense that she received her Ph.D. recently. She embarked on her doctoral program as a mature student and is in what Isaac Asimov used to call “late youth”.] From the publisher’s description, the book sounds like a useful addition to Tudor studies:

Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, is often regarded as the epitome of the profligate Tudor Nobleman, whose riches to rags story provides a salutary warning of the dangers of conspicuous consumption. Yet, as this book demonstrates, the story of the earl’s fall is much more complicated than it is generally portrayed. Some of the land he inherited was held from the crown under the feudal system of knight service which resulted in the young earl becoming a royal ward during his minority. The crown had the grant of one-third of his lands and the Court of Wards and Liveries administered his estates until he was twenty-one, at which age he had to embark on the usual bureaucratic and expensive procedure to regain control of them. In this study it is argued that the primary cause of the earl’s misfortunes can be traced directly to this process of wardship. Whilst his own personality and lack of financial acumen certainly added to his difficulties, the root cause of the earl’s problems were the non-payment of livery fines imposed by the crown.

More than simply a biography of one of the most colourful Elizabethan noblemen, this book provides a fascinating insight into the process of wardship and how this feudal survival could be exploited by the crown seeking to find extra sources of revenue. It shows how financial and social pressures on the nobility forced many to resort to credit to maintain their lifestyles, and demonstrates the ruthless methods used by the crown as it pursued its prerogatives to extract fines and debts from the ruling classes. Through an examination of the extraordinary life of Edward de Vere, much is revealed about the wider social stresses that existed in the relationship between the nobility and the crown.

Oxenford was not, of course, the only earl to inherit as a minor and suffer an expensive wardship. Robert Devereux (1565-1601), 2nd Earl of Essex, and Henry Wriothesley (1573-1624), 3rd Earl of Southampton, were likewise wards of William Cecil, and there were several others. What distinguishes Oxenford is that he was never able to make up his losses by securing profitable employment from the Crown. He begged for office almost continuously, yet, despite his relationship to Cecil, the Queen gave him no help until he reached the point of destitution. In 1586, to prevent his utter ruin, he was granted a £1,000 annual pension – no vast sum for an earl – which, combined with marriage to a rich heiress, slowed, but did not arrest, his drift into poverty.

Why and how did Essex and Southampton swim while Oxenford sank? Not yet having read Dr. Pearson’s study – the cover price of almost $100 discourages quick acquisition – I don’t know whether she ventures an answer or finds a satisfactory one. It is pleasing in any case to see this sign that Edward de Vere is beginning to escape from the stifling embrace of those who admire him for what he didn’t do.

Comments

[Bruce Allardice]

I haven't read the book either (got too much American Civil War reading to do), but I think one relevant fact here is that the Oxford earldom he inherited had gone through several inheritances by junior, collateral branches of the de Veres. These junior cousins married into their own class, not the high nobility, thus Oxford didn't have a web of highly placed noble cousins who could use their influence in his behalf. Evidently his Cecil connection didn't pan out financially, either. Thus a vital part of the support system for his extravagence was missing.