Russell [née Wriothesley; other married name Vaughan], Rachel, Lady Russell (bap. 1637, d. 1723), noblewoman, was baptized on 19 September 1637 at the parish church of St Peter in the village of Titchfield in Hampshire, the daughter of Thomas Wriothesley, fourth earl of Southampton (1608- 1667), an adviser and friend of Charles I, and Charles II's lord treasurer. Her mother was Southampton's first wife, the strikingly beautiful Rachel (1603-1640), eldest daughter of Daniel de Massüe, seigneur de Ruvigny, and widow of Elysée de Beaujeu, seigneur de la Maison Fort; she was a devout Huguenot, and her brother, the first marquis de Ruvigny, was appointed lord deputy general of protestants in France in 1653; he later served as a special envoy to the Stuart court. Rachel's mother died in childbirth in 1640 leaving another daughter, Elizabeth (1636-1680), who married Edward Noel, later first earl of Gainsborough. In 1642 Southampton married Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Francis Leigh, Lord Dunsmore. Only one of their four daughters, yet another Elizabeth (1646-1690), survived childhood. Rachel regarded her full sister Elizabeth as a 'delicious friend', whose 'conversation and tender kindness' were precious to her (Letters, 37, 168). She was also close to her half-sister Elizabeth, and 'ever loved her tenderly' (Letters, 168). The two older girls were no doubt educated together by tutors at Titchfield, where the atmosphere was high-minded, 'like ours at Cambridge' wrote a visitor (G. C. M. Smith, Henry Tubbe, 1915, 12). Rachel developed a legible handwriting, a competent orthography, and a talent for forthright, engaging expression. She learned to write French effortlessly and presumably to speak it well, skills no doubt strengthened by a visit to France. Sisterly affection not only enriched the personal lives of these three women but also enlarged their political connections and made possible the harmonious division of their father's property.
First marriage, 1654-1667
In October 1654, at the age of seventeen, Rachel accepted an arranged marriage with Francis, styled Lord Vaughan (1638-1667), a young man of limited promise, the eldest son of Richard Vaughan, second Earl of Carbery (1600?-1686). The marriage contract provided £900 a year to the couple and guaranteed that amount to Rachel for life should Francis predecease her. During this thirteen-year union Rachel Vaughan lived mostly at Golden Grove in Wales, the Carberys' principal seat, and after 1660, when the earl became lord president of the marches of ales, at Ludlow Castle. She kept in touch with the larger world, however: she visited her father in London and her sister at Titchfield and spent a holiday at Bath with her cousin Margaret, who was married to Anthony Ashley Cooper, later the first earl of Shaftesbury (1621-1683).
The Carberys provided a stimulating cultural and intellectual environment, presided over by the earl, a patron of poets, and his third wife, Alice Egerton, much admired for talent in music and dance. Jeremy Taylor, author of devotional literature which Rachel Vaughan treasured, served as chaplain.
Correspondence indicates that Rachel was already interested in politics. In 1660 the Restoration brought office and wealth to the men in the Carbery and Southampton families and gave Rachel entrée to high social and political circles in London and Wales. Her personal life was marred, however, by illness and death; in 1657 she was stricken with measles and in 1660 with smallpox; she suffered a miscarriage in 1657; two babies, one born in 1659, the other in 1665, died. On 2 March 1667 Francis died of the plague, her father two months later.
Appearance and personality
With the death of her husband and father Rachel Vaughan was transformed into a wealthy and independent widow; defying convention she almost immediately circulated in London society and was much admired for her beauty, personality, and wealth. A handsome woman with a high forehead, light brown hair, shown in a portrait in ringlets at the ears and drawn up in a large chignon, and dark brown eyes. Warm, vivacious, and quick, Rachel was also a person of sound judgement. She had a voluble manner of speaking: Gilbert Burnet recorded that her 'thoughts furnish so fast for her in discourse that she [is] sometimes as it were choked with them, and can scarce fetch them all out' (H. C. Foxcroft, A Supplement to Burnet's 'History of my Own Time', 1902, 117); an admirer thought that he 'never knew man nor woman speak better' (Letters, dedication, lxvii). Her wealth also drew suitors. Her father had left his huge estate to be divided among the three sisters; by the luck of the draw to determine which portion of it would go to which sister, Rachel received the most valuable portion: the manor of Bloomsbury in London on which stood a recently completed mansion built by her father, Southampton House (in which, at the time, her stepmother held a life interest), and manors in Hampshire, the most important being Stratton House. To this was added income from her first marriage.
Second marriage, 1669-1683
Within three months of Lord Vaughan's death gossips reported that William Russell (1639-1683) had a 'great desire' to win Rachel Vaughan's hand (Chatsworth House, letters, 15.1). Russell was the third (but second surviving) son of William Russell, fifth earl and later first duke of Bedford (1613-1700), and his wife, Anne Carr (1615-1684), daughter of Robert, earl of Somerset (1586-1645), and his wife, Frances Howard, the former countess of Essex. Russell was a tall, good-looking, socially prominent man, who was well liked. Two years Rachel Vaughan's junior, he was also impetuous, extravagant, heedless of the consequences of his actions, and known to be a womanizer. He and Rachel fell passionately in love. She sought to encourage Russell by writing him expressions of love' (Woburn, Bedford estate office, HMC 40A, 17) and 'testimonies of affection' (Chatsworth House, Russell MSS, box 1). Painfully aware of the disparity in their wealth-as a second son, his prospects of inheriting the Bedford wealth and title were uncertain-William insisted that gaining Rachel's fortune was of no interest to him; ''tis her person and that alone I adore and admire' (Woburn, Bedford estate office, HMC, 39, 34-5). After a long courtship they married on 20 August 1669. The marriage settlement made them a very wealthy couple. From Bedford came cash in the form of an allowance of £2000 a year, this amount guaranteed to Rachel should William predecease her. Rachel brought to the marriage additional cash income, land, and houses, notably the Bloomsbury property in London, including Southampton House (now cleared of Lady Southampton's life interest), and manors in Hampshire, including Stratton House.
Marriage changed both of them. William became generally a model husband and father. Rachel's horizons were broadened: they included her husband, children, two households, a new sense of personal responsibility for public affairs, and a heightened religious sensibility. The Russells lived mostly at Stratton House, spending a portion of each year (after 1675) in London at Southampton House, with visits to Rachel's sister at Titchfield and William's family at Woburn Abbey. Deeply attached to William, Rachel poured out her affection in letters written when they were apart. 'My best life' she wrote in 1672, 'you that know so well how to love and oblige, make my felicity entire' (Berry, 6). In 1682 she declared, 'I know as certainly as I live, that I have been … as passionate a lover as ever woman was' (ibid., 65). Rachel bore four children: Anne (born 13 December 1671, died four months later), Rachel (1674), Katherine (1676), and Wriothesley (1680). The little children's conversation and antics were a staple of her letters: she described two-year-old Wriothesley prancing about 'mad, winking at me, and striking with his drumstick whatever comes to his reach' (Berry, 65). She ended one letter with a short, very effective word picture of the nursery: 'Boy is asleep, girls singing abed' (ibid., 56).
In 1678 Russell's elder brother died and William became heir to the Bedford title and fortune; he assumed the courtesy title of Lord Russell. This change in his position and prospects elevated his social standing and augmented his political influence. Rachel took his name, now that his rank was equal to that of her first husband, becoming Lady Russell. Rachel's interest in politics expanded as William's political visibility grew. She undertook to keep her husband informed of political developments when he was out of town, gathering news because she wanted 'to be as useful and acceptable' to Russell as possible (Berry, 19). She was able to tap into many sources thanks to her many friends and family relations in high places; unabashedly she vowed 'to suck the honey from all if they will be communicative' (ibid., 49). Lady Russell introduced her husband to her French uncle, Henri de Ruvigny, and her cousin, also Henri de Ruvigny. Russell met the latter early in 1678 to discover the true intentions of Louis XIV and Charles II. The meetings were reported in dispatches from the English ambassador to France, Lady Russell's brother-in-law, Montague, and revealed to the House of Commons by Thomas Osborne, 1st Earl of Danby (1632-1712), the lord treasurer, to document that the parliamentary opposition was in league with France. These revelations could have destroyed Russell's career, but his reputation and popularity were so strong that they did not. Rachel also brought William into contact with Shaftesbury, her cousin by marriage, and Russell became Shaftesbury's chief lieutenant in the House of Commons. As she became increasingly alarmed for William's safety she cautioned him, urged an accommodation with James, Duke of York, and argued with him for ten hours about a course of action she wanted him to take. Her more level-headed view of politics, however, did not moderate her husband's rashness.
Russell's arrest, trial, and execution
On 26 June 1683 Russell was arrested and sent to the Tower charged with conspiring with other whig leaders in schemes to raise rebellion by seizing the king's guards. On 13 July he was tried as a traitor before the court of king's bench at the Old Bailey and found guilty. On 21 July he was executed in Lincoln's Inn Fields. Lady Russell played a prominent role in these terrible events. She successfully petitioned the government to ease the conditions of Russell's confinement, permit visits from his family, and allow him to consult lawyers (an unusual favour). She also kept William informed of events and wrote him notes, enclosing at least one in a cold chicken. She acted as an intermediary between Russell and his lawyers and his friends, and helped to persuade eleven men to testify to his good character. She eagerly agreed to, and carried out, a scheme his friends devised to have her appear at his trial to take notes for him. The purpose in making her visible in this unprecedented way was to remind the court, the king, the jury, and the public of the Russells' well-known marital felicity and also of the services Rachel's father had rendered to both Charles I and Charles II. The presiding judge, Sir Francis Pemberton (1625-1697), chief justice of the court of common pleas, who had served the Russells as their lawyer, was sympathetic to William and insistent that the law and legal procedures be observed, as indeed they were. But the evidence against Russell was compelling, his defence weak and unconvincing, and his protests about the jury and the requirement of two witnesses to the same act of treason not conformable to the law as it stood in 1683. The jury deliberated for a little over an hour and returned a verdict of guilty.
Lady Russell spent the next week in a frenzy of purposeful activity trying to win for William a pardon or at least a reprieve. She and others bombarded the king, who alone had the power of pardon, with petitions and at the same time implored the Duke of York to intervene with Charles on William's behalf. She won a personal interview with the king, at which she implored him, perhaps weeping at his feet, to grant a delay in the execution. Charles refused, saying that had it been in Russell's power, he would not have granted him six hours. She consulted William about his scaffold speech, assisted him to copy out five 'original' copies, and arranged for timely widespread distribution. On the last night of his life Rachel had dinner with him, conversed normally, and left, after a fond embrace, without shedding a tear, an act of great self-control for this spirited woman.
Widowhood
In the aftermath of Lord Russell's execution Lady Russell was 'amazed' (Letters, 6)-meaning crazy- with grief; indeed, 'wild and sad thoughts' (Letters, 60) tormented her for years. Until her own death she wore black, draped her private rooms at Southampton House and Stratton in black, and sanctified the days of William's arrest, trial, and execution with prayer, remembrance, and withdrawal. Writing letters, reminiscences, and reflections became an obsession. She poured out her grief to her most important correspondent, the Revd John FitzWilliam, who responded with counsel and comfort. These poignant letters were full of adoration for William as an 'inestimable treasure' (Letters, 32), memories of their happy marriage, and her struggle to accept God's will. She also directed attention towards defending and preserving a positive memory of Lord Russell, overseeing business affairs, and supervising the education and marriage arrangements of her children. She persuaded the king not to confiscate William's private estate, and to allow her to set up an escutcheon in William's honour, unprecedented in the case of a condemned traitor, and considered ways to counter tracts written against William by friends of the government.
Lady Russell managed her business affairs independently of the Earl of Bedford, her father-in-law; as a feme sole she had the authority to do so. Vowing in 1684 to 'converse with none but lawyers and accountants' (Letters, 196), she appointed her own business manager, opened her own account with Child and Rogers, goldsmith bankers, oversaw the development of Bloomsbury Square, and called in lawyers to redesign trusts to settle her properties in her own and her son's interest. She also drew upon the best legal advice available to assure that Wriothesley would inherit his grandfather's title and fortune. Lady Russell's most abiding concern was her three children. Dismissing objections she hired a Huguenot refugee to serve as a French master, and forced herself in winter 1684-5 to return to Southampton House, 'a place of terror' (Letters, 32) because of the memories it held, so that her son might be in London for medical treatment. In 1687 she managed to return to Stratton; thereafter she spent winters in London and other months at either Stratton or Woburn. With William Cavendish (1641-1707), her husband's dear friend, she negotiated, after five months of hard bargaining in 1687, a settlement between her daughter, Rachel, and his son, William Cavendish (1663-1729), who became the 2nd Duke of Devonshire. Lady Rachel enjoyed comparable success in 1692-3 in making arrangements for Katherine; after persuading herself that an old scandal in the Manners family had lost significance she settled Katherine with John Manners (1676-1721), who became the 2nd Duke of Rutland. As any patriarch might have done, she wrote joyfully of having joined her daughters to the 'two best fortunes in England' (Letters, 189). In the case of Wriothesley, now Lord Tavistock, Rachel chose great money over ancient lineage. After a year of negotiations in 1693-4 which involved so much property that a parliamentary act was required to settle matters Wriothesley was betrothed to Elizabeth Howland (1682-1724), the granddaughter of Sir Josiah Child, the wealthy merchant and officer of the East India Company, and daughter of the late John Howland, a rich landowner in Surrey.The dowry was the enormous sum of £50,000. Wriothesley became the second duke of Bedford at the death of the first duke in 1700. The activities associated with her children were a powerful antidote to her sorrow.
The revolution of 1688-9 changed Lady Russell's life. She ardently supported the prince and princess of Orange, praying for their success, and wishing she could do more. When they became King William III and Queen Mary II and the whigs, for a time, were dominant Rachel enjoyed a renewed social and political position. The reversal of Lord William Russell's attainder in the spring of 1689 and the elevation in 1694 of his father to a dukedom, largely on grounds of Lord Russell's suffering, brought Rachel a respected place as 'grande dame' of the whigs. With her wide contacts and her energetic nature she exercised some influence in political and ecclesiastical affairs; she championed the appointment of William Cowper as king's counsel; encountering difficulties, she wrote that she did not 'like to be baulk'd' (Letters, 123); she had a role in the appointment of the new archbishop of Canterbury, petitioned Queen Mary in 1691 to grant a post in Wales to her candidate, and in 1703 orchestrated efforts to achieve a dukedom for the Earl of Rutland. In 1694 and 1695 she underwent two cataract operations, both successful. Her advancing years were marred by personal tragedies: Wriothesley died of smallpox on 26 May 1711 and Katherine of complications in childbirth on 30 October 1711. Her principal correspondent now became her French cousin, the Duke of Galway; together they tried to recover his property in France.
Lady Russell died, probably of a stroke, at 5 a.m. on 29 September 1723 at Southampton House, at the age of eighty-seven; she was buried, as her will directed, at Chenies, next to her husband. Thanks to her business acumen her landed properties had increased in value; the Bloomsbury rentals by 33 per cent to about £3000 a year, and the Hampshire properties by 66 per cent, also to about £3000 a year. The bulk of her property, silver plate, and money went to her surviving children and grandchildren.
Her wealth is indicated by the generous legacies she left to Thomas Sellwood, her steward, and to at least fourteen other servants: a year's salary for all and, variously, property, silver plate, and household goods. Among other beneficiaries were the poor of the parish of St Giles-in-the-Fields, poor French refugees, and a charity school for the poor. Galway, relations from her first marriage, and the widow of the minister at Micheldever also felt her largess. Sellwood went through Rachel's papers sent to Chatsworth House, finding among them her correspondence with FitzWilliam, and put the letters in order. This made it possible on short notice to publish the letters in 1773 to rebut the damaging revelations of the historian Sir James Dalrymple about Lord Russell's meeting with French envoys in 1678.
Lady Russell has inspired admiration over the centuries: her letters to FitzWilliam appeared in 1773, intimate letters edited by Mary Berry in 1819; both sets of letters were well received and helped to revive and rehabilitate the memory of Lord Russell. Five biographical sketches came out, one by Berry, another by François Guizot, the French protestant historian and statesman. All stressed her piety, devotion to husband and family, and forbearance in the face of personal tragedy. Lady Russell exemplifies these qualities, to be sure, but following her husband's execution she is also properly seen in broader dimensions, as a well-regarded, independent, intelligent feme sole, exercising authority as head of her family, overseeing the education of and negotiating favourable marriage contracts for her children, managing her property and business affairs, carrying on a large correspondence, and exercising some influence on behalf of whig interests in the revolution of 1688-9 and on appointments to political and religious offices. Her long life helps to reveal more fully the complex nature of aristocratic female culture in late Stuart and early Georgian England.
[Source: Lois G. Schwoerer, 'Russell [née Wriothesley; other married name Vaughan], Rachel, Lady Russell (bap. 1637, d. 1723)', Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). By permission of Oxford University Press.]
