THE ANCESTOR

A Qlarterly R eview of Cou n ty and

Fam ily H i story, Heraldry

and An tiqu i ties

NUMBER III

OCTOBER 1 902

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE CO LTD

2 WH ITEHALL GARDENSWESTMINSTER S.W

C O N T E N T S

THE jERVOISES OF HERRIARD AND BRITFORDBy F . H . T . Jnxvoxsz

THE TALE OF A GREAT FORGERYBy HORACE ROUND, M .A.

DOCTOR AND PATIENT IN 1 62 1 . By W. H . B . Bu m, B .A.

SOME PORTRAITS AT THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIESBy Es

'

ru m NATHAN (I llwtrated)

A GENEALOGIST’S KALENDARSOME EXTINCT CUMBERLAND FAMILIES I . THEW IG

’

I‘

ONS ;

I I . THE a mc‘

x‘

ons By the REV. JAMES W ILSON, M .A.

THE ARMS OF THE SANDYS OF CUMBERLANDBy the REV. jm ns WILSON, M.A.

THE EVOLUTION OF THE COMBED HELMETBy T . G . N EV ILL, P.S.A. (Illwtrated)

ARMS AND THE INLAND REVENUEBy OSWALD BARRON, F .S.A.

THE GENESIS OF A MYTHBy the RH . THOMAS TAYLOR, MA .

THE HUGUENOT FAM ILIES IN ENGLAND I I . Tm: Ba nousWHAT IS BELIEVED

THE GENTILITY OF WILLIAM EXELBYBy OSWALD BARRON

,P.S.A.

THE HOUSEHOLD BOOKS OF SIRMILES STAPLETON,BART.

By the s . J . CHARLES Cox, LL .D. , F . S.A.

THE GARTER PLATES AS A ROLL OF ARMS (Illwt mted)THE ANTIQUARY AND THE NOVELIST

By OSWALD BARRON, P.S.A.

A FIFTEENTH CENTURY BOOK OF ARMS (Illwtrattd)OUR OLDEST FAM ILIES : I I I . SH I RLEY ; IV. CARTERETTHE GENEALOGY OF THE GIFFARDSTHE PERCYS OF NORTHUMBERLAND

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

EDITORIAL NOTES

ra erved

PA8!

Ta n pages of Tm: Ancxsr on will be Opento corresponden ce dea l in g w i th ma t tersw ithin the scope of the review.

Qg es t ion s w i l l be an swered,and adv ice

will be given , as far as may be poss ible,upon all po in ts rela t in g t o the su bjec tswi th which THE ANCESTOR is concerned.

W hi le the grea tes t ca re wi ll be takenof an y MSS. which may be subm i tted forpubl ica t ion

,the Ed i tor cannot make him

se l f respon sible for their acciden ta l loss .All l i terary commun ica t ion s should be

addressed to

THE EDITOR 01: THE An cxs ron

2 WH ITEHALL GARDENS

WESTM IN STER S.W

S I R JOH N Don nmbcn .

( F rom In‘

: for th ” ! a t flu Soc'fc (y of A u h qlm n es . )

THE JERVOISES OF HERR IARD AND

BR ITFORD

H E earliest authentic information of the h istory of th isly wh ich has been associated for between three and

fou r centuries wi th the counties of Hampsh ire andWiltsh ire,i s ga thered from an ancient ‘cartulary ’ of 180 fol ios, boundin vellum and comp iled in 1 55 1 during the lifetime of itsowner R ichard Jerveys , mercer and alderman of Lo n don .

From the pedigree on the fir st page we find that he wasborn in x500 and that his father was Thomas Jerveys sometyme of Kidderm inster .

’

The next memorandum in th i s cartulary,

’

or,as Richard

call s it, his Book of Evidences,

’

is as followsMemorandum that I R ichard Jerveis of Lon don mercer

toke to wyfi'

e Wen efr ide late the wyfl'

e of Wi lliam Stathum ofLon don mercer and maried her the thursdaye the xxvj day inOctobre A? dn i . x52 5 whiche was doughter of John Bernerdof Lon don mercer and had i s shu es by the soverau n ce of Godthese ch ildren as hereafter doth folowe by the said W en efride

Jerveis .

I tem Barnard Jerveis my firs t sone was borne the xvdaye of Septembre A?

xv°xxx betwex t x an d x i of the cloke

at n ight and cri s in ed the xvj daye Doctor Clement and JamesBarnard his godfathers Mrs . Resce late the wyfi

'

e of John Grenemercer godmother and James Bolney mercere godfather at thebys shop wh ich Barnard departed to Gode in Octobre annodu i . 1 53 5.

I tem Thomas Jerv eis my second sone was borne onSaterday being Ch ildermas day the xxv i ij daye of Decembrethe yere of our Lord God xv° an d xxx ij ilj quarters of thehoure after ix of the cloke in the n ight an d cr is in ed onSeih t Thomas day followyn his godfathers Sir Thomas MoreKn yght late Lord Chaun cefior of Inglon d M’Thomas Walshethe Kyngs Remembrau n cer in his Exchequer Ladie MarySeymer wyffe to Sir Thomas Seymer Knyght Alderman ofLondon godmother

,godfather at the bu s shop George Welshe

brother to the said Thomas Walshe .

2 THE ANCESTOR

I tem Richard Jerveis my i ijd° sone was borne on Sonday thei ij day of Septembre A

?I 53 6 at v ij of the cloke before noon

and cri s in ed the same daye his godfathers at the Fount WalterMarshe an d Henry Pols ted gent. godmo ther Barbara wyfl

'

e toAndrewe Fuller of London mercer and merchau n t of theStaple at Caleis and at the bys shop John Walker depu tie tothe righte honorable Counties of Sarum . These Chri st gevethem of his grace that they may be alle his servau n ts in thefai th of Jesu Cri ste Amen .

’

From the fact that Sir Thomas More an d R ichard Jerveiswere living at Chelsea, and the evident friendsh ip that ex i stedbetween the fam il ies

,i t i s thought qu ite possible that the por

trai t of R ichard Jerveis (wh ich we give) m ay have beenamon those painted by Holbe in of persons known to havebeen Friends of More .

Richard gives no clue to his ancestors,and

,if we may

infer, from hi s placing a pedigree of h is father's ch ildren at the

beginn ing of his cartulary, that his obj ect was to found a

fam ily, it is interesting to find that he was so far successfu lthat one of his largest properties

,that of Bri tford near Salis

bury (bought in I 538 from the Earl of Huntingdon and Lo rdHastings his so n ), still remains to hi s descendants . Amongstthe other purchases of land by the weal thy mercer were themanors of Northfield

,Weoley and B edcote in Worcestersh ire

and a house in the ci ty ofWorcester, where he retired to ; them anors of Qlatt and Chelmarsh in Shropsh ire ; the manorofWalkeringham in Nottinghamsh ire

,and in London

,a house

in Bow Lane .From the Records of the Mercers’ Company we find that

R ichard Jervais was apprenticed in 1 507 . In 1 543 he succeeded Laxton as Alderm an of Aldersgate

,and in 1 549 of

Bas s ingshaw, wh ile in I 546 he served as sheriff wi th Thomas

Cu rteis, during the Lord Mayoralty of Sir Hen ry H obberl

thorne.Ri chard in h i s wi ll leaves all his goods to be divided into

th irds between his wife and two surviving sons, ‘according

to the custom of the city of London,

’

an d we feel that aworthy man ha s had his due by h is rem embering his ‘penneman the properties eventually came to hi s eldest surv iving son Thomas .I n St. Luke’s Church at Chelsea there i s a monument in

the form of an arch,but it i s uncertain whether it was erected

THE JERVOISES 3

to R ichard the father or Ri chard the son, for, though theonly inscription is doubtless to the son who d ied in 1 563

(the father dying in i t seems probable that an altartomb has been removed from below the arch .

From the address on the letters wri tten by the motherat Worcester to her sons, after their father’s death

,they

appear to have continued to l ive at Chelsea : both brotherswere ‘called to the bar,

’

Richard to the Inner Temple and

Thomas to the M iddle Temple . I n each letter Win ifredJ erveis gives some sound advice ; on one occasion she wri tes :‘ I pray you and you r brother not to be so louyse yn yourexpence, for, yf you be, y t woll melte as botter yn the sonne .

’

Of Thomas Jerveys , who succeeded his father, we knowli ttle, except that he married Cicely Ridley, a Shropsh ireheiress

,and was the first governou r of Stou rbridge School

(King Edward probabl on account of his being lordof the Manor of Bedcote. {lis dea th in 1 588 at Bri tfordnear Salisbury i s shrouded in m stery , wh ich remained u n

solved in spi te of a large reward or information being offeredby his widow, who afterwards marr ied Sir George Wrottesley,kn ight

, a member of a younger branch of the family ofWrottesley of Wrottesley.

The wardsh ip of his only son Thomas, who was then a

year old,was granted to Rowland Lacon an d Franci s Newport,who sold it for £300 to Sir George Wrottesley, who in 1 60 1

parted wi th it to Sir R ichard Powlett, kn ight, of Herriard andFryfolk in Hants

,for the object of the purchase on

the part of Sir R ichard being to marry his daughter and co

heiress Lucy to the ward. The marriage licence,costing 20a ,

i s signed by Thomas Ridley (July 1 7 ,I n August 1 6 1 1 , at the age of twenty, he received kn ight

hood at the hand of K ing Jam es at Sal isbury, an d five years

later Sir Thomas entered public life as H igh Sheriff of Shropsh ire . The part he took in public affairs in his native countyof Wiltshire was much less important than in H am shire,where the estates wh ich he held with hi s wife

, after her ther'

s

death in 1 6 14, made his influen ce felt . H e was elected in theth ird Parliament of James I . ( 1 62 1) to represent the boroughof Wh itchurch (Hants) wi th Sir Robert Ox enbrid e

,kn ight

in 1 628wi th h is wife’s cousin, Sir Henry Wallop, i n i ht, an d

along wi th his eldest son Richard he sat for the sameEoroughin the Short and Long Parl iaments of Charles I .

4 THE ANCESTOR

Various comm issions show that, Wi th him as wi th so man ycountry gentlemen of those unhappy times, hi s career on itsmili tary side developed into a grim reali ty .

“ o

Colon el of a

regiment of dragoons and Hampsh ire M il i ti a (KingsclereD ivi sion) in 1 630, Sir Thomas was subsequently appointedby the Earl of Essex in 1 642 to the command of a Regim entof Horse

,an d was with Sir Wi ll iam Waller at the surrender

of Portsmouth . Later he was one of the comm i ttee formedfor the defence of the same town by the Parliamentariantroops

, an d in June 1 644, the diffi culty in obtain ing su ffi cien tmoney to pay the garri son caused the House of Commons toi ssue the order to Sir Thomas Jervoise, Richard Wallop an d

Ri chard Wh itehead to take steps, wi th in one m onth, for thes equestration of the estates of Papists and Delinquents ’ ofa less value than wi th in the cities of London and

Westm inster,and to apply the proceeds to the l iqu idation of

the due in arrears to the garri sons of Portsmouth,an d

of Hurst,Southsea and Cal shot Castles .

After th i s time Sir Thomas retired from a m ilitary to a

civil life on h is appointment in 1 644, by both Houses ofParliament, to succeed the Duke of Lennox, in the oth ee ofH igh Steward of the Royal Manor of Ri chmond (Surrey) an dKeeper of the Li ttle Park . From his accounts kept in a pocketbook he appears to have constan tly travelled up to London byboat from R ichmond, probably to attend to Parliamentarybusiness .The manor of Herriard, wh ich Lucy Powlett brought to

her husband,Sir Thomas Jervo i se, was one of the sixty held

by Hugh de Port at the tim e of the Domesday survey,and in

the twelfth century probably by the de H er ierds,

’ mentionedin the Pipe Rolls as holding under the de Ports . ’ The earliestcharter in the possession of the Jervoise fam ily relating to th i smanor i s that of Maud de H erierd, who, holding i t underReynold Fi tz Peter, granted i t, in about 1 240, to Fulc deCoudray, his step—grandson, in exchan ge for the manors ofPadworth in Berks and Mulsho in Bucks for her life . TheCowdrays held it till an heiress Elizabeth married, in 1 540,Richard Powlett, younger brother of the firs t Marqu i s ofWinchester, who were the great- grandparents of Lucy.

The charter from Reynold Fi tz Peter, con firm ing thegrant by Maud de H erierd

,has an interesting armorial seal

i n green wax .

R ICHA RD Juxvur s . 1500- 1557.

CAL' I‘

AIX THOMA S J euvoxsn

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

6 THE ANCESTOR

Oxford to rel ieve the hard press ed garri son . Captain Thomas’scaptivi only lasted three months, being exchanged in October1 644 or a Royal ist ofl'i cer impri soned at Farnham, and hewas in the field again in December drawing fu ll pay .

The activity an d excesses of Goring in the west drewFairfax there wi th his n ew modelled army to rai se the siege ofTaunton

,and large bodies of recru i ts were ra ised in Hampshire

to join him . At a muster held at Romsey in June 1 645Colonel Massey, the Governor of Gloucester, who wascollecting reinforcements, was joined by ‘Capt. Jervo ise with340 horse an d 340 Reformadoes

,a welcome accession of

strength Wi th a force of men Massey joined thearmy of Fairfax wh ich

,return ing from the deci sive victory of

Naseby, was on its way to relieve Taunton an d recover the

towns captured by Goring in Somerset andWil ts . Th is wasthe last cam paign of the war, and the defeat of Goring atLangport in July

,followed by the capture of Bridgewater and

Bri stol, shattered the hopes of the Royali sts . Captain Jervoise returned home on his troop being di sbanded (December24,Several of his appointments and certificates of having been

in actual service are in good preservation, two of wh ich ares igned by Waller, one testifying to h is ‘having demeas n ed

h im self well in actual Servi ce under him in Captain Wi ll iamCross’ Troop from 29th Au s t to November 1 643another that he was ‘Captai n o a troop of horse, from 29 th

December 1 643 , to 3oth Apri l 1 645, in Sir R . Gren v ille’

s

regiment. ’ On the fin al di sband ing of hi s troop he wasgiven the following certificate by General Fai rfax

‘Qaptain Jervo i se, in the said Brigade (Maj or—Ge neralMassi e’s), hath demeasn ed h imself wi th fidelity 8: couragei n the.

Service wherein he hath bin employed, 8: wi th fair8: civ i ll carriage in the Di sbanding of the sai d Brigade i sfreely di smi ssed an d d ischarged from hi s urgent service 8: isat hberty to repaire to hi s owh e hom e or friends .

‘Given under my hand 8: seal the 24th day of OctoberT. Famm x .

’

1 An interes ti ng sequel to the C ivilWars is the claim of Sir Thomas fordamages done to his properties in d ifferent counti es, m a inly to Herriard wh ich,owmg to i ts prox im i ty to Basing House, suffered to the exten t of aboutfor corn, cattle and other prov isions commande ered,’ out of a tota l claim of

An Act was passed in 1 649 granting him the esta tes of john, Mar~

THE JERVOISES 7

Capta in Thomas Jervo ise married in 1 6 57 Mary, seconddaughter of Geo . Pu refoy ofWadly, co . Berks, another Parl iam en tarian fam ily, by whom he had two sons an d fourdaughters . After his m ili tary career was over Thomas tookhis part in county affairs as H igh Sherifi

' for co. Southam ton,1 667, and as one of the two Hampsh ire members 0 theParliaments of January and August of 1 689 . H is seconddaughter, Lucy, married Adm iral Killygrew of S . Julias,Hertford . H e was buried at Herriard May 1 3 , 1 693 .

H i s eldest son Thomas, bo rn September 6, 1 667, tooka leading part in olitics . H e represented Stockbridge 1 69 1 ,and Hampshire 20m 1 698 till 1 702, when he was returnedfor Plympton (Devon), but was unseated the following year.I t was not long before he was again at Westm inster, as hewas returned for Hendon in November 1 704. I n the following year Hampsh ire again elected him ,

an d he continued tos it as one of the two members for the county till 1 7 10,when he was defeated by a small majority.H i s chief work on h is Hampsh ire property was the build

ing of the present house, com pleted in 1 704. H is arch i tectwas Tollman

,and i t is interesting to find accounts of a j ourney

to Chatsworth wi th the object, probably, of seeing the fin estmansion designed by th i s arch i tect. That i t was erected ona new si te is ga thered from a note in Thomas ’s pocket book

,

of an agreement to dig up ye foundations and rubb ish of yeolde house at 3 d'

a load .

’ The laying out of the park followedthe build ing of the house .

By his first marriage with Elizabeth, daughter of Sir GilbertClarke, he had one son Thomas

,who succeeded h im in 1 743 ,

and who lived chicfly at Northfield,where he died unmarried

in 1 77 6 at the age of 81 . H is second Wife Elizabeth was theheiress of Sir John Stonehouse

,bart.

,of Amerden Hall (de

scended from the younger brother of Sir Will iam Stonehouse

qu i s of Winchester, who had held out during a siege lasting two and a halfyears,until he should be able to recoup the sum of I n 1 65 1 , however,another Act of Parl iamen t appo inted the es tates to be sold by the trustees of theCouncil at Drury House as lands forfei ted for treason . Sir Thomas now seem sto have done the Marquis a ne ighbour ly turn by agree ing to accept a sum of

rem i tting of the debt, and us ing his good offi ces to obta in therepea l of the Act, thus saving the estates from be ing d ispersed . After theRestora tion a B ill was brought into the House of Lords for the repaym en tof the by Thomas jervoise the son and Robert Wal lop, but th is wasallowed to drop (H ist. MSS . Comm. House of Lords) .

8 THE ANCESTOR

of Radley, the an cestor of the present fam i ly of that name),whose portion of was all in land. Their daughterElizabeth married Samuel, son of Sir Samuel Clarke, an d toher son

, Jervo ise, Northfield andWeoley were bequeathed byhi s grandfather,Thomas Jervo ise . On succeeding to th i s property he took the name of Jervo i se, according to his godfatherThomas’s wi ll . Their son Richard, born 5th Januarylived chicfly at Bri tford, co. Wilts, and at one time on thecontinent. H e married Anne, daughter of Tri stram Huddleston of Croydon in 1 733 , an dwas buried at Bri tford in March1 62 .7In the large p icture painted by Chamberlayne, he an d his

wife are portrayed with their two sons, Tri stram and George,and their only daughter Anne, who died in 1 758, a

fied th irteen.

A memorandum tells u s that the dog was especi y taken upto London to be introduced into the picture .H is two other sons, R ichard an d Thomas

,predeceased

their father. Tristram,born 1 73 6, lived at Britford, an d spent

much money on improving that estate . During h is lifetimethe manors of Lasham and Tunworth, co. Hants, were addedto the property ; he repurchased Stratford St. Anthony, co .

Wilts,which had been sold to pay the heavy expenses incurred

by his grandfather in electioneering. I n 1 7 67 he was sherifffor Hampshire and dying unmarried in 1 794 was succeededby his brother in the Wi ltsh ire property, having conveyedHerriard during his lifetime

,in 1 792, to h is nephew, George

Pu refoy Jervoise.

The property of Shals ton , co. Bucks,was left to Tri stram’s

only surviving brother, George (born by hi s kinsmanHenry Purefoy in 1 765, an d wi th i t he took the surnam e ofits late owner. Four years later he married Mary

,daughter

of Rev . Wright Hawes, rector of Shalston , by whom he hadthree sons an d four daughters . I n 1 795 George resumed thefam ily name of Jervo ise, and on his death at Shalston , 1 805,was succeeded by his son, George Pu refoy Jervo ise, who t e

presented Sal isbury in Parliam ent for som e years an d afterwards Hampsh ire . H e married twice

,but dying in 1 847 left

no ch ildren the Pu refoy estate he bequeathed to Elizabeth,the daughter of his brother Richard who died in the Peninsular W ar, who m arried Thomas Fi tz Gerald

, an d whosegrandson Richard, lately Commander on H .M . yacht

,has

recently assumed the nam e of Purefoy wi th the estates .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

THE JERVOISES 9

The Jervoise estates, according to the enta il, passed to hissister Mary, whose husband, the Rev . Franc i s Ell is, assumedthe name and was granted the arms of her fam ily, and, on herdeath m 1849 , to her son Franci s Jervoise Ellis Jervo ise, thefather of the present head of the fam ily, Franci s M . E .

Jervoise, born 1 844.

I I

M iscellaneous Extracts from Pocket Book of Sir Thomas jerveys during hisres idence a t Richmond

1 644- 5To Cap' Bruce for 7 pound and a halfe of tobaco the 3 fi

'

eb. 2

To M' Lacok the 7 day of Web. for a weekly dyett an dCham ber ren t

To Will iam Sm ith for a bottle of sack and a bottl e of C lary:wine the 10 day

To him the 1 1 day for half a p int of' sack

The 1 5 day to the poore at Richm ond1 645To the officer at the parlymen t house this 1 6 day (Apri l 0 5

Payed to John Galbra i th the taylo' for Win ifi'id’s goune the

fiy day the 24 Ap whereof 20‘ is not to be contod inth is yea r

To a constable of Richmond the 2 7 day for a taxTo a m in ister the 26 dayFor my dyner Thursday 7 MayAtt the Abbey for a sea t 9 MayReceived of M' Gu idott by th e appo intment of Wi ll iam

G u idott the 29 Decembe r being parte of my ren t attBirdford . 20 0

Layed outTo Hudson the shomaker the 30 dayTaken out then for my own usepayed tha t 0 10 0 the 7 day of january for the expos i tionupon the bible

payed to Makerell the harn esse ma ker the 8 day for 2 Coachham esse

the 9 day of Ian . for Coach hirefor my d inner tha t day .

payd M' Lacok th i s 1 0 jan for my chamb‘my breckfas t and 4pond of candell 8c 3 qu ire of paper

that day for oranges .

To W1llm Sm i th tha t day to pay the ferryman a t Kew 1 6"

del ivered himthat day to one who brough t a cheyre for my boyI came to London Thursday the 19 ffcb.

Received of my wife tha t daybrought up in s ilver

1 0 THE ANCESTOR

Layed outpayed for my dinner the 20 dayto Macy the booksell er yt day .

To a coachm an yt day .

To TO : at M' Lacoth the 2 1 day foran once of tobaco 8:pap

’ to him tha t day for cu ttinge a pond of tobacoto Wi lli am Sm i th th is day for w inethat day for a rod for my pistoletha t day for a payre of ores a t KewGiven to a poor m in i ster the 2 1 day att RichmondTo the ferryman att Kew 8: to a payre of ores the 2 3 day

I came up to London 2 3 ofDecembre being TusdayReceived ofmy wife tha t dayBroght up in all .

Layd out2 3 To Macy the booksellerfor a pinte of sackefor my dynner the 29 Day .

given the 2 5 day to the house mentha t day for h ire of a coach .

given away that day for a messenger to Ri chmondTo Mr. Lacok the 2 7 day for half a 1 00 fagot tthe 2 7 day for my Chamb"To the Barber that dayTo the ferry man at Richmond that day

Sir Thomas jervoi s(From Book in vell um cover of) ‘Money Sir Rd. Poulett ha th delyveredto M" Thomas Gervois 30 Maye 42 Eliz . 1 600.

Sen t him by M" Samborn e on Lamas day being fa ire a t BurfordPd. (in M ichaelmas term e) for appar ell boughte a t hi s request for

him 1 600 7 O ct . to M . W in che for 7 yards of ashcollersatten to make him a dublet and hose at 14J . the yard

Pd. in Cheps ide then for chaing of ix“ into goldPd. for 3 yards quar ter of clothe to make him a cloke a t xjr. the

Pd. for a yard of fin e bayes to lyne ytPd. for a booke of humors for h imPd. for a paire of Silke Stockings for h imPd. for a shert and a black . . band 8: cufl’esPd. for a qztern e 8: halfe ofTafl

'

a ta to face 8: lyne the shi rts ofh is dublet . v

’ iv“

Pd. for 3 donsen of bu ttons for yt 8: his ClokeAccounts of money spent on Sir Thomas Jervois pd. out of the yerely Ezhibi tiou from M' Fleetwood gen eral receiver court of wards 8: l iveries byJam es Samborn e hi s tn tor.’ From year ending M ichaelmas 1 60 1 to30 Dec. 1 606 .

THE jERVOISES

Receptes £49 5 1 7 oPaimen tes £82 7 8 6

so he he the expen ded more than his Exh ibi tion as apearcth in part iculars inth is book wch he remayn eth th is 2 7 December 1 606 endebted to me forbeside 8: all other Reckn ings dew to me 8: my w ife inst the some of1:3 3 1 6 6 .

Payde to Wrotsly by Me : bes ide £200 pd. byMr. I rton 8:£ 20 by Mr. G iles Hutch ins of Sarum I saye pd. by L

"

1 . d.

me 880 o oLayd out in his

m

busn es before exh ibition 200 0 0

I I I

A t ru e inven tory taken of the goods and chattles of S" Ri cha rd Poullett la te ofHerryott in the county of South . Kn ight deceased by vi rtue of an Adm in istracon granted to Dam e Lucy Jervoyse the daughter of the sa id SirRi chard 8: now wyfe to Sir Thomas jervoyse Kn ight by Wil l iam PrinceClement Welsh Thomas Oldes john Spa rry 8: Wi ll iam Waterman .

171 1511 114111: 1 , J ,

I tem—3 ta ble boords 2 longe old Eormes 8: joyn ed fi'

oorme andseaven jond stoolcs

one lyttle clocke and the frame thereunto1 2 lethern e bucketsan old pair of bra s se An ndiron s , a pr. of 1ron dog s and 2

pr. of tongesa lyttle s tanding joyn ed pres seTwo hangi ng brasen candles ticks an old skreen e 8: 2 pr. of

s n ufi'

ers

eight smal l pic tures

I r: 111: parlor

Itm . Two table boord s 8: two ii 'oormes 00 26 8

Six cloth Qlyshin s toolcs

Six needlework Qlyshin s toolcs .

An old l ivery cubbard a pres s e cubbard and a round table .

an olde hye cheere a s toole and 2 old longQlys hin s of blacl:velvett embro idered wi th goold 3 3 4.an old couch cheere a fl

'

oorme a ly ttl e s toole of blacl: velvett

and fryn ged 2 3 4Two old hye cheers two lowe cheers and two lowe s toolcs woLtawny velvett fryn ged 00 36 8

one old hye cheere one hye s toole two lowe s toolcs wroughtwi th needle workee

Two long n eeled woorlt Qlyshin sone old long (Luyshin of yellow sa tin embro idered w"L velvet:on e old hye cheer w. red velvett layd on w"L goclcl laceone old greene cloth carpett and s ixe Turk

yOgyshins

Thre old long cloth (LuyshimsThre greene say w indow cut teytis and curteyxi rods .

1 2 THE ANCESTOR

a pair of old bra sen and irons a pr. of iron doggs a fyer shovell 1: r. d.

and tonge s 2 pr. of snuffers a skreen e a lyttle hand skreen ea pair of Bellowes

Tre l i ttle lowe joyn d s toolcs a deske ten picktures a byble andhollin shud

’s chron ycle l i 00 3 3 4

I n rbe Wardropp

I tem a low Beds teed w“ a can n ypye a long curteyn e 2 {etherbeds 1 bol ster 2 pillowes 4 pr . of blan ketts 1 greene rugg

Two longQ1yshin s

Three greene say w indow curteyn s

an old pair of black tuftafaty valen s w ith yellow fryn gea pair of old red vallen s wi th wh i te and an old covering belong

ing to the sameTwo red curteyn sOne lardge crimson curteyn e wi th goold butten s for a canypieSix corsletts of old Armor a halbeard a patron ell a black b i llwi th flower old Jack s

a pill ion and an old velvett cloth W" the furn yture thereuntoa l i ttle cheer for a chi ldone wooden frame for 3 cheerThre lawe booksone table boord and a matt wi th a l i ttle box and a mesur ingold chayn e and an old yellow buckram bed cover wi thsome other implement s of lumber 10 0

LETTERS TO GEO. WALSHE

I n London , 2 2 Day (f 7 1015 , Anna Dm. 1 5 37 .

Mr. Wa lshe I send you a l etter by Henry Horton whiche I kn oue wel lcam to yor hands for payment of the res t of yor accompt to the hands of mycosin Sir William Tomyn s vicar of K idderm inster whiche is xxvifi . i . vijd .

oh. for the payment thereof. Thereof now which I suppose i s not don .

Wherin I requ ire you at the syght of thi s letter ye pay or cause to be paid tothe hands of my said kinsman the said som of twen tye syxe pounds vj. s . vij.d.

oh. And that I may percyve by my sa id coeyu by wrytyn g that he have t eceyved the said som yf ye refuse this to doo take this for a full perfect answerand knowledge I wi ll seke remedy accordyn g to the Kyngs Lawes whiche yeforce me to doo contrary to that Eryn dshipe as ye have foun de in me whiche

Ea

senot to be rehersed but God send you 1100 worse fortune then I wold yea

Per me RICHARD Jaavsvs .At London 16: 1 5tbJ aye q ecembre, Arms Dm

’

. 1 537 .

Master Welshe this ys to advertyse youe thi s ys the thyrde lettre Ihave wrytten to you for my ren t to whome and where ye shulde delyver yoraccompt w‘ paymen t to M" Vicar of Kydermyn ster whiche ye have refus ednether send bym answer of my lett" in wryty

'

ng but a sleveles answer be

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

THE JERVOISES 1 3

mouthe by yor servant the daye have ben ye conlde have wryten very well butI doo finde the say ing of yor kyn sman and my fi'

yn des true nevertheless insomoche as ye w i l l nether bryn g y t nether send y t nor pay yt where I dooappoyn t i t a greate lyckly ye intend too pay no rent I trust there be a rem edyby the order of the Kyn gs lawe whiche ye doo force me to seke . God willyn gI w i ll so doo . An d furder I charge you and commande you ye rcceyve noopeny of rent of my tennan ts from Myghelmas last pas t forwarde and ye doo a tyour perell

By me R1cm ao js avzvsl

THE ANCESTOR

THE TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY

F all ages have their rascals, there was none perhaps in ourh i story when they so abounded an d flou rished as in that

time of revolution, spoliation an d general social upheavalwh ich we term the Tudor period . For the readers of TbeAncestor its ch ief interest lies in that passing of the old orderwh ich drove the ‘

ancient nobil i ty ,’

as they sty led themselves,to revolt

,an d wh ich involved the ri se of the ‘

n ew men,

’

founders often of houses afterwards ennobled and famous,upstarts, as they were deemed by the v iei lle soueba

,who

owed their rise to the favour of an upstart royal house .Not indeed that an y one would have dared to call in questionthe Tudor pedigree its truth was proclaimed by subservientheralds, who ‘found pedigrees wi th equal readiness for thei rsovereign

,their clients and themselves . 1

I ndeed, a passion for pedigrees ap cared to have seizedu pon the people . I n loyal im i tation 0 their sovereigns theyplanted family trees, an d the newer the lord of the'm anor thelonger was the pedigree he required . Human nature repeatsi tself, and even in the present day the sam e phenomenon i sobserved. But the Tudor squ ires, or the heralds who aidedand abetted their desires, proceeded to lengths wh ich now, onehopes

,if not unknown, are rare . I t i s possible indeed in these

latter days to di scern, if one may paraphrase the line, Sh ipwaysi n stones an d arms in rafter beams

,

’ but these discoveries areapt to lead to disconcerting results . Forgery, at least, has an

ugly sound, and al though the newest of armorial gents mayfall at times into bad han ds

ron e cannot imagine h im si tting

down to forge charters in cold blood in order to prove thatthe founder of hi s house accompan ied the Conqueror toEngland.

I n an article enti tled The Compan ions of the Conqueror1 Compare p. 1 24 below .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY

I po inted out that a charter had been forged for th i s purposein the case of the Mordau n ts, and that the earl iest portionof their ped igree in Burke’s Peerage rested on th i s forgery .

l

Accord ing to th i s precious document Eustace de St. Gillesmade over to his brother Sir O sbert le Mordaunt the manorof Radwell, co . Bedford, wh ich he had received by the munificence of William ,

most i llustr ious King of the English,for

the services rendered him in the Conquest by my father andmyself. ’ I n the same article I po inted out how descent fi'

om

a follower of Will iam,al though so often and so gl ibly alleged,

was in fact one of the rarest of d istinctions, so rare indeedthat it could hardly ever be claimed for a fam ily w i th success .Th i s conclusion appears to be the cause of an outburst ofobvious irri tation in the article w ith wh ich the latest volume(xv i .) of the Surrey Arcbceological Collections opens, namely the‘Notes on the Manor and Parish of Woodmansterne

,

’ byColonel Lambert, P.S .A . To i ts statement that Radulphu sde [sic] Lambert, son of Regn ier (or Ragerin u s), fourth sonof Lambert I .

,Count of Mons and Louvain e, accompanied

the Conqueror to England there i s appended the footnote

It is now demonstrated by the h igher critic ism that few,if any, fam il ies

came over w i th the Conqueror. Tha t enterpr ising usurper seems to haveinvaded England s inglehanded, if indeed the Norman invasion is not al together an h istorical fict ion (p.

I t will doubtless occur to the readers of 779: Ancestor that theNorman Conquest may have taken place and an army havefollowed William

,w i thout that arm y including of necessi ty

any person wi th the impossible name of ‘Radu lphu s dc

Lambert,’

an d al so wi thout a fam ily of Lambert be ing ofnecessi ty descended from that impossible person . There was

,

I believe, a Corn i sh fam ily wh ich claimed descent from a

Rom an centu rion the rej ection of that descent can hardly besaid to imply that Julius Caesar never invaded Bri tain .

My attention being drawn by th i s footnote to ColonelLambert’s article, I di scovered that i t contained transcriptsof several remarkable charters, illustra ting an d proving theearly pedigree of the Yorksh ire Lamberts, from whom,

according to his narrative, the Surrey.

Lamberts are descended . Here however there is some obscuri ty

,for wh ile

1 Moutb/y Review (June, p. 107 .

THE ANCESTOR

the chart pedigree prefixed to the arti cle begins only, l ikethat in Burke

’

s L anded Genny , wi th John Lambert ofWoodmansterne, co . Surrey, the narrative iden tifiesthi s John as son of another John, ‘who was a ci tizen ofLondon

,and had estates in Surrey and Norfolk, and i n 2 1

Edw. I . granted lands there to the Prior an d conventof Our Lady of Great Massingham,

’

and affiliates the latteras a brother of ‘Sir Henry Fi tz Lambert, and a son ofR ichard Lambert, who had an estate in Lincolnshire and

Norfolk.

’ We thus reach the parent stock of the Yorksh ire Lamberts, from whom are descended

,it is said

,the

Earls of Cavan .

Now ‘the reader i s referred,

’

in the article from wh ich Iquote, to “ ‘Lodge

’

5 Peerage (art.‘Cavan among other

authorities but there i s a discrepancy,at the point of j unction

,

between the two pedigrees . That of Lodge runs as follows

S ir Edmun d Lambert Thom as, shea f? of

of Sk lpton Lon don 1 22 1 ,

ob. s .p.

Edmun d Skipton

S ir as of the coun tyof L in coln , who bore the

fam i ly armswithin a bordu reingrailed or an d d1ed without issue ' 1

When we turn to Colonel Lambert’s version belowwe findthe first John of Woodmansterne affiliated as a younger sonunknown to Lodge, in Whose pedi cc he does not appear .Nor does Lodge connect th is l ine 0 the fam ily wi th Norfolkor w i th Surrey

1 He grants on e of the charters to be d iscussed below .

Edm un d R ichard

‘Sir john of WoodF itz Lambert ' mamtern e

The point at i ssue i s of some interest to intell igentgenealogi sts, for it illustrates two of the fail ings commonto makers of pedigrees, against wh ich they have need to bemore especially on thei r guard . Of these the first i s theaffi liation of an ancestor, or alleged ancestor, as the cadet ofa known house, an affi liation usually hazardous and oftenwi thout foundation .

1 The other i s the strange assumptionthat a surname wh ich m ight originate independently in

several difi'

eren t districts implies the common origin of all

the fam il ies wh ich bear it. Heraldry doubtless,or rather the

seudo- heraldry of the decadence,

’

has here much to answerFor . Fam il ies of ‘Russell ’ or of ‘Spencer ’ m ight be as dis

tinct in origin as fam il ies of Sm ith or Brown ; yet modernherald is based on the dream that they are all akin . Th i sis no?iess true of the class to wh ich ‘Lambert ’ belongs

,

namely that of su rn ames “derived from the Chri stian nameof an ancestor. I n the age when surnames were takingform there m ight be found in d ifferent parts of the countryindividual s who happened to bear the same Chri stian name

,

but between whom of course there was no connexion whatever. When the surname of the ir descendants was formedfrom th i s Chri stian name it wou ld obviously imply no conn ex ion between the fam ilies wh ich bore it .If illustration be needed of so elementary a conclusion,

the Surrey Lamberts themselves afford it. I n modern times,1 See, for instance, the cases of Russell and of Spencer in my Studies in

Peerage and Family H istory .

18 THE ANCESTOR

especially in the eighteenth century, their di stinctive Chri stianname has been the somewhat uncommon one ofDan iel, wh ichi s found in no fewer than hy e generations i n succession . YetColonel Lambert’s ped igree of the house shows no connex ionwi th the greatest man , in one sense,who ever bore the name,namely Daniel Lambert

,son of a Daniel Lambert, huntsman

to Lord Stamford, who, according to the D ictionmy of Na tional

B iograpby, was born in 1 770 . If even th i s combination ofnames was a mere accidental co incidence, one need hardlylabour the point that the surname Lambert by i tself provesnoth ing. Every one has heard of Lambert S imnel, an d hisChri stian name was by no means uncommon in the twelfthand th irteenth centuries . I n Yorkshire

,the county with

wh ich we have to deal, an early example of i ts use is foundin old Lambert (Lambertus seizex), a peasant, Who was madeover wi th his holding, together with other peasants, in a fin e

ofUntil we are given defin ite proof that these Surrey

Lamberts descended from a Yorksh ire fam ily of the name,

we cannot accept the bearing of that surname in commonas any evidence whatever of a common origin . Of thealleged younger brother of Sir Henry Fitz LambertColonel Lambert tell s u s thatTh is John de [sir] Lambert is the first who held lands in Woodmansterne .

The estate was held freely of the Honour of G loucester an d paid no rent orservice. In 1 30 1

3 John de [u’

r] Lambert, son of the above, conveyed totrustees for the use of his son John, who in 1 3 3 3

3 signed a terrier in favourof his son of the same name (pp. 1 5

If all th i s i s proved,as alleged

,by the fam ily charters, why

i s the firs t ‘John de Lambert altogether ignored in the chartpedigree prefixed to the article If I were to say that I donot believe in the occurrence of ei ther the elder or the younger‘John de Lambert in the charters referred to

,it m ight be

thought harsh but when I point out that the wri ter of thearti cle makes the elder ‘John de Lambert a brother of Sir

Henry F i tz Lambert,’

i t wi ll at once be seen that he h imselfproves what ought indeed to be obvious

,namely the impossible

1 T'

orkrbire Finer (Surtee s Society), pp. 1 1 - 2 .

3 The lbotn ote appended to these dates runs as follows Lambe rt charters .(Most of these charters are in the hands of Colonel Wi ll iam Lambert, E.S.C.

others belong to M rs . Lambert of Hansted, and some to the wri ter ofth1s

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

20 THE ANCESTOR

less con fiden tly sugges t that he was a success ful sheepFarmer . For, as I have remarked in dealin g wi th The Ris eof the Spencers ,

’

at about the same period,There was a tim e in England, under th e a rly Tudors , when sheep fi rm

i ng ma n t a road m fon un g as i t di d in our own tim e for Austn lia’s ‘ shepherd kin g's.

’ Those we re days when a sheep’s wool proved indeed a‘golden

fiect e .

’

Indeed of Woodmansterne, hi s home, we read in ColonelLamber t’s paper that ‘most of the pari sh was downlan d, ors heepwalk, as i t was called. I n 1 63 5 Chr i stopher Kythehad a sheepwalk of 3 50 acres , and Roger Lambert anotheradjoinin g i tI t was then the custom for succes sful sheep farmers to

extend thei r operations by investi ng thei r profits in theacqui si tion of more farms ; and it was also cus tomary wi ththose yeomen who did not aspire to found a family of countyrank to bequea th lan ds to th ei r youn r sons . JeEeryIa mbert appea rs accordi ngly to have 1 small es ta tes toeach of hi s seven sons at hi s dea th in 1 567 . The subse

quent devolution of thes e prope rti es may be traced in ColonelLambert 's paper. The pedigr ee in ‘Mann in g an d Bray ’

(i i . 589) i s very imperfect and un sa ti sfactory down to SirLord M or of London in 1 74 1 , who

bought the family manor 0 Perrots from his elder bro ther,an d mar ried a daughter of Mr. John Wilm ot, ‘ci tizen and

haberdasher of London .

’ The manor then des cen ded thu s

S&r Daa Lm berth u e! of Ba moodney , Lod y

-w q u . d Lm ‘ci tL d ‘l lr.

‘Nz. }oka‘wookn fi u f h r . m m

Wh en, M 5 6 1

d u d

M d Lm hu t d Loa é m ,

h m afl M heah to é a dc

ao—hcir fi r m

1

3

ga ie m d Bmzsted ls thm a cm mry ag

-o.

All ths e da c ipda n m n km fiom the monm en a l ima i pé m inm a m fi bfi shed bm nE g m d Bn y .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 2 1

When the fam ily entered i ts pedigree at the vi si ta tion ot

1 623 they appear to have made no aim to arms or crest .Subsequently however they are found using ‘Gules 3 narc i ssu ses argent ’ (as Colonel Lambert blazons the coa t), armswh ich have a curious h istory . So far as I know, it wouldseem

,from the evidence generally accessible, that the first

appearan ce of th i s coat is as a quartering used by theLamberts in the Yorksh ire vi si tation of 1 585 . The Lambertcoat at that vi sitation is reproduced, in the tabular pedigreegiven in Whi taker’s Craven ,’ from Harl . MS. 1487, fo .

3 54b, and the true Lambert coat is obviously that wh ichi s shown in the first quarter, viz .

‘Cu . a chev. between 3lambs pas sant arg. , a ch ief chequy or and az .

" Th i s somewhat complicated coat is suggestive of a Tudor grant. In thesecond uarter i s a coat wh ich appears to be Gu . an annulet or be tween 3 roses

ggnarg, wh ich coat is assigned by

Papworth to a Yorksh ire ily of S ipl ing.

’ There i s l ittledoubt

,I th ink

,that the charges shown are roses ; but in

Dugdale’

s vi sitation ( 1 666) they are shown as 6- fo ils,

‘and

the annulet has di sappeared . The blazon must have re

mained uncertain, for the I rish fam ilies of Lambert orLambart are found usin Cu . 3 n arcissu sse s arg . p ierced ofthe neld ’

(Earl of Cavan ‘Cu . 3 cinquefoil s an d ‘Cu .

3 cinquefoils pierced arg .

" But thi s coat, as I have shownwas not a Lambert coa t a t all. In the Li ncolnsh ire v isitat ion( 1 592) it is still shown, as in the Yorksh ire ones, as the secondquarter, and we only know that the Yorksh ire house adoptedit at some

Eeriod in lieu of thei r original coat

,perhaps as a

simpler an fin er one. I t i s found, accord ing to Wh itaker’sCra 'vm on the monumental inscription to the last Lambert otCal ton .

The u ndifi'

eren ced coat,

‘Gules 3 n arcis su sses ar ent,

’

appears on a mysterious brass wh ich,in Colonel Lam rt’s

1 See p. 6 above.

2 According to thei r v isi tation pedigree in Surrey Arrbe ologit al Collection},vol . x i .

3 (3rd cd. ) fac ing p. 2 56 .

Wh i taker,’ as above, from Harl . MS. 1 394, lo . 200 .

5 Papworth, pp. 86 1 , 87 2 and Bante’: Landed Grim) .

6 Ed. M etcalfe . 7 See below .

Yet john Lambert , descri bed in the ped igree as ‘ofWoodmansterne

,

’

d i rects in his w ill ( 1 53 3) that he is to be buried in the churchyarl of Baxfiend.

2 2 THE ANCESTOR

paper, heads the inscriptions in Woodmansterne church .

Unknown,it seems, to Manning and Bray, although its

wording i s Latin and i n orthodox black letter, i t i s inscribed,‘In memoriam multorum gen erum [sic] antiqua: DomusLambert de Woodmansterne in hac Ecclesia a tempore Regi sEdwardi prim i sepultorum

1 quorum an imabu s pro icietu rDominus Deus . ’ The closing words savour more 0 DavidElginbrod than of the m iddle ages, while gen erum

’

(families)appears to be here used for generations,’ a quaint delusionnot unworthy of the Skipton charters at the end of thepaper. I t was on the strength of those same charters thatthere was erected in the Cal ton chapel at Kirby Malgdale,Yorkshire

,a monumental inscription to the last Lambert of

Calton,bearing the same u ndifi

‘

eren ced coat,

” but wordedin our mother tongue.He d ied the 14th day of March in the year of our Lord 1 70 1 , be ing

the last heir male,in whom that ancient fam i ly of ye Lamberts in a l ine from

Wi ll iam the Conqueror (and related to him by marriage) is now ext inct .

The rebufl’ to a‘h igher cri ticism wh ich had not then

been born may gratify the Surrey Lamberts, but the closingwords will not.I t a pears to be impl ied by th is strange ‘brass’ that the old

arms 0 the Lamberts of Woodmansterne were Gu . 3 narci ssusses and th is is also suggested by Burke’s Landed Gen try(cd. where the arms are given as

‘Cu . 3 narcissusflowers arg. wi th a canton or, for difi

’

erence (addedBut ‘Papworth ’ throws on their origin qui te another light,g iving them as

‘Gu . 3 narci ssus flowers arg. a canton or.

Lambert, London an d Surrey. Gran ted 1 73 7 (p.

that i s,in the tim e of Alderman (afterwards Lord Mayor)

Lambert.The Lamberts had previously urea the u ndifi'

erenced coat ofLord Gavan’s fam ily witbtbe crest of tbe Tortsbire balm,

for i ti s found, according to Colonel Lambert

's paper (p. ona ledger stone in Chaldon church to the mem ory of WilliamLambert, who d ied in 1 656 and it figu res accordingly inone corner of the chart pedigree wh ich he gives . When theywere granted a crest they had to take a variety of the centaur

1 I t is blazon ecl by Whi taker as three cinquefo ils,’ instead of 3 narcissuss es .’

3 Wh itaker’s Craven (3rd p. 249 .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 2 3

or sagi ttary of the I rish Lamberts, wh ich was sharply din’erenced from the female monster of the Yorksh ire house but,on the other hand

,in accordance with the practice of the

College,

1 they were allowed to bear the coat they had usurpedWi th only a canton for d ifference, and thereby to representthe ir brand- n ew coat as a genu ine old one to wh ich there hadmerely been added a canton or.

A considerable portion of the article I am d iscussing(pp. 14

—20) i s devoted to a h istory an d description ofLamberts Oaks

,n ow The Oaks

,

” the house wh ich gaveits nam e to the famous race . We read that ‘The Oaksoriginally belonged to the Clares as part of the ir manor ofWoodmansterne

,an d the estate appears to have been granted

to the Lamberts,temp . Henry I I I .

,by Gilbert de Clare, Earl

of Gloucester. ’ Noth ing i s offered in support of th i s suggestion

,and the phrase that the esta te was held freely of the

Honour of Gloucester and paid no tax or service ' onlymeans, I presume, that i t was held ‘in free socage thegreat residuary tenure,

’

as it has been termed .

’ What theestate really was, and what sort of a house there was on i t,one cannot well make out. We read that in later daysRoger Lambert

,the fifth son, inheri ted the Woodmansterne

estates, and in 1 584 removed from Lamberts Oaks to ShortesPlace but as early as 1 533 his grandfather (

alleged ‘of

Woodmansterne ’

) styles h imself in his will ‘0 Banstead,

’

where he lived in a copyhold tenem ent. Lamberts Oaks isnot mentioned again by C01. Lambert as a residence for nearlytwo centuries . I t seems to have been leased to Lord Derbyabout 1 760 for n inety- n ine years

,and the views given in the

article show it as a stately castellated structure circaI t wi ll often be found useful to refer to the old county

h istories for evidence of facts known to the ir writers,or still

wi th in recollection at the time when they were compiled .

Mann ing and Bray, for instance, wrote as followsThe house ca lled ‘The Oaks,’ a hunting sea t of the Earl of Derby and

much enlarged by him, was origi nally on 41260211 33 and was purchased by

General Bu rgoyne, who fitted it up, and cam e to it to hunt and shoot . He

sold it to the Earl , who has inclosed much o f the common field, and hasmade a plantati on two m iles round .

‘

I t i s to the same worthy authors that we are indebted1 See Tb: Ancestor, 11. 47 .

3 H im”) q/ EnglirbLaw, i . 27 5.

3 The i tal ics are my own . H istory «y Surrey i i . 460 .

24 THE ANCESTOR

for a glimpse of Camberwell in those now far- ofi' days when

Lo ndon was largely dependent for its m ilk on the pastu res ofPeckham Rye .

1 Wri ting in all simplicity of Lord Llangattock’s grandfather, they observe thatMr. Rolls was son of one who had acqu ireda large fortune as a cow- keeper.

After expending a great sum in completing thi s house (which had been nearlyfin ished by h is father), rai sing artificial mounts, plant ing, etc. , he pulled i tdown in 1 81 2, sell ing in lots the mater ial s as they stood .

2

Embalmed in our county h istories i s much ingenuousinformation on seats an d those who dwelt therein in thedays when London was roused from sleep by the war-cry ofthe house of Rolls .

III

We wi ll n ow turn to the Lamberts of Skipton, the Yorksh ire house Whose supposed arm s were assumed by the SurreyLamberts

,an d whose i llustrious descent i s claim ed by Colonel

Lambert as hi s own . H i s pedigree is given in narrativeform

,but I here append i t in the form more conven ient for

referen ce, tracin it down to that Sir Edmund whom hemakes the gran dgather of the first Lambert ofWoodmansternein Surrey.

Lam bert I .Coun t of Mon s an d Louvai n e

[d. 1 004]

Regn ier (or Ragerin us)fourth son

Radulphus de Lam bert ’ Peter de Ros

Wi l l iam de Warren n e Hugo Fi tz Radulph de Lambert M a t 1 lda

(see charters 1, 2, an d 3)

l 2

Roger de Bellom on te Gun dreda Geoff rey dc Man devi lleEarl of Warwick ‘(charter Earl of Essex

‘H en ry de Lambert,

’A l l ce

‘stan dard - bearer toK in g Hen ry I I .’‘(charters 5 an d

‘Sir Edmund de Lambert of Skipton1 HM ») (y Surrey i i i . 398.

2 Ibid . i i i . 403, note,

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 2 5

Th i s i s virtually identical with the ped igree given byLodge

,save that the latter replaces Regnier (or

fourth son of the count,by ‘Rodolph the th ird son .

’ ButLodge adds the interesting information that the second sonBaldwin was ancestor of the Lambertin i of I taly, of whom wasPope Bened ict X IV .

,

‘one 1 of the most illustr ious fam il iesof Bologna . Here

,i t will be seen, we have a case parallel

to that of the Fi tz Geralds and the Gherardin i the fact thattwo fam i lies living in difi'

eren t countr ies were descended fromancestors who hap ened to bear the same Chr istian name wasse ized on as proo of a common origin .

I have deal t above with th is delusion,but Mr. Freeman

dealt w i th i t so forcibly that i t may here be well to quote hiswords

A man bea rs as his surname one of the ancient Engl ish names whichhave gone out of use as Engl ish names . He huds in early Engl i sh h istorysome one who bears tha t name as a Chr istian name. He firs t m istakes theChrist ian nam e for a surname, and fanc ies that the anc ient worthy bore thesame su rname, perhaps an unusual one, a s h imself. Having got thus far, i twould be imposs ible for an y man to keep h imself back from the next step, torefrain from claim ing the ancient worthy as a forefather.Mr. Freeman proceeded to take as an instance the myth

of Lev inge,’ by wh ich that fam i ly claimed ‘Leov ingu s, the

Archb i shop of Canterbury who crowned Canute,

’

and‘Liv ingu s ,

’ B ishop of Worcester,as i ts collateral ancestors .

Of th is cla im he bluntly wroteWha t is there to connect them wi th the house of Levinge rather than the

house of Snooks ? Simply tha t the hapless ped igree maker, in his ignoranceof the ways of the eleventh century

,tool: the ir Chr istian name for a surname .

There is exac tly as much sense to connect the modern fam ily or Levinge wi the i ther of these bishops as there is to connect any fam ily called Edwards orEdmunds w ith any of the kings who bore their names . 3

The pedigree wi th wh ich we are dealing is another instancein po int. An English fam ily of Lambert in search or a fitt ingancestor p itches upon Count Lambert who l ived in 1004 as

the origin of its house and of its name . If they had claimedthat his descendants bore Firz Lambert as a surname

,that

‘Th is account,’ we read in Lodge, ‘was given to Mr . O’

Sullivan ofthis k ingdom by Pope Benedict, who cla imed the relat ionship subs isting between him and Lambart

, Earl of Cavan .

’

2 See ‘Tbe Ancertor, i . 1 20 .

3 Ped igrees and Ped igree-Makers (Con temporary Rev iew, xxx .

2 6 THE ANCESTOR

claim would have been logical at least, al though such surnames, as a matter of fact, did not take form till a later period .

But,unluckily for themselves, they seem to have thought that

‘de Lambert ’ would sound n icer and more territorial : thatsuch a nam e was impossible was a thought that did not troublethem .

1

But what, it may be asked, were the proofs they producedof their descent from that Radulphu s de Lambert

’ whoaccompan ied the Conqueror to England Let the h ighercri tici sm ’ h ide i ts head ! They produced the same flawlessevidence as the F eildings for their Hapsburg pedigree

,a series

of original charters— in their own possession . We ought tofeel indebted to Colonel Lambert for clearing up th e mystery.

H e found in the possession of Sir Arthur M iddleton— therepresentative of John Lambert, the famous Commonwealthgeneral, through hi s granddaughter and heiress—a fam ilypedigree on which were transcribed torty - two charters, wh ichwere solemnly ‘

attested at the foot thereof ’ by all three ofthe Kings ofArms an d by one of the heralds. Wi th theseattestations hi s paper closes ; for the wri ter, doubtless, wasfirmly convinced that there was noth ing left for the h ighercritici sm but to smile a sickly sm ile an d curl up on the floor.

’

A well known antiquary had,i t i s true, handled two of

the origi nal s of these charters about a century ago, an d

bluntly pronounced them to be forgeries . But that rash m an

knew not that they had been proclaim ed genuine by the 011icial heads of that august body, ‘H is Maj esty’s College ofArm s . ’ On th i s hapless antiquary, therefore, no tim e i swasted . Colonel Lambert di sposes of him thusThe originals, wi th the exception of Nos . 5 and 8, were in the possession

of Charl es Lambart of Pain stown , Esq. (a cadet of the Cavan branch of thefam ily) when Lodge wrote his Peerage. Nos . 5 and 8were i n the possess ionof Lord Ribblesdal e when Wh i taker wrote his H irtory 9} Crown

,and he

(Wh i taker) tries to prove them to be forgeries . (He m i squotes both charters,and bases his objections to No . 8 on the use

.

of the word ‘Campus,’ wh ich,it will be seen, does not appear in the charter at all).2 He appears to havebeen ignorant of the exi stence of the others (p.

1 I t would appear, however unl ikely i t may seem ,that th ey did not see any

d ifference be tween ‘Fi tz ’ and ‘De .

’ For the pedigree in the Lincolnshi re v is i tat ion of 1 59 2 (cd. Metcalfe) runs thus : ( 1 ) Hugh Fi tz Lambart, (2) HenryFi tz Lambart

, (3) john Fi tz Lambart of Skipton, (4) Edm ond F itz Lambart,(5) John Fi tz Lambart, 1 247 , (6) John de Lambart, (7) Thomas de Lam bart,grea t-grandfa ther ofHenry de Lambart of Sk ipton (Genealogi st, vi . 263

3 The words w i th in parentheses are a footnote here in Colonel Lambert’sarticle.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

28

Henricus 8:ca. Sciatis me concessi sse et hfic ca rta con firmasse Henr icode Lambart vex illifero meo et Al iciede Mandevil e uxori ejus partit ion emde terris in corn . fi verw.

’ fact’ intereos et mon achos de Sc’o San cto et P.

de Saltmers . H is test . Rogero archiep.

Eborac. et Roberto ep’o Lincoln, et

Ric. de Chan villa, et jocel de Balolio,

THE ANCESTOR

Henricus Sciatis me concessi sse et hac mea carta confi rmasseHenrico de Lambarte vex illifero meo

et Al icia: de Maun deville uxori ejus

parti tion em illarn de terris in com ita t’

euerwycke lact’inter eos et mon achos

de San cto San cto [ 1] et Petrum deSal tmarshe m i l i tem . Qi are voloH is testibus Rogero, Arch iepiscopo

et Roberto Cl ifford, m il. Apud Castrum de Le ir.

1

Eboracen si et Roberto Episcopo Lincoln ien s i et Ri chardo Chav illa et

Jovell de Balliolo e t Roberto Clifi'

ord

m il i te apud Castrum de Leir .

Wh i taker’s obj ection to the firs t charter is that i ts handwri ting i s that of ‘the reign of Henry I I I . , wherea s thesupposed grantor lived i n that of the Conqueror that theaddition miles i s an anachron i sm ; that the word campus i s

wrongly used ; that ‘s ix oxgangs are here granted

,but i t

appears from the pa ers of John Lambert, n ow before me,

that the property o the fam ily at Sk ipton, held under thecastle

, was only two oxgan s,for wh ich they paid a rent sec of

x i i . d.

’ that the names 0 the wi tnesses are not such as occurin charters of the period that they ‘

are none of them namesof Craven fam ilies that the seal i s not that of the grantorall wh ich, wi th one other, make e ight obj ections in all.

Wh itaker’s conclusion was as followsAnd now, if the reader’s fai th i n these proofs of the early magn ificen ce of

the Lamberts be shaken,and if he be further d isposed to enqu ire where were

the esta tes which enabled the fam i ly to match wi th a sister of Mandevi l e Earlof Essex ; or by wha t c ircum stances they were reduced to a few oxgangs a tSkipton, he may be rem inded of the innumerable causes of mutabi l i ty in all

hum an th ings, and the grea t deficien cy of fam i ly evidences at that early period .

But an easier solution of the diffi culty rema ins by ascribing these documents, the genu ineness of which is contrad icted by such a body of evidencew i thin and w i thout, to a crafty and aspiring lawyer in the reign of HenryVI II . ,who, not content w i th having ra ised his fam i ly to opulence, m ight resolve todign ify the ir early h istory by a ll iances w i th the ancient lords of Craven .I n hi s second ed ition ( 1 81 2) Wh itaker thus maintained

his groundWi th respect to the two charters on wh ich some persons have grounded

their Opin ion of the early consequence of th is fam i ly, I have already givenseveral reasons, not one of which has been refuted, to prove that they are forgeries . I th ink so sti ll, and in place of a very long investigation (longer by

1 The thr ee letters in special type represent Old Engl ish ones .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 2 9

far than the subject deserved) shal l now conten t mysel f w i th say ing that one ofthem,

to a cri tica l eye, man ifestly appears to be written on an erasure ; andtha t from the Roll of Thomas Lord Cl ifford, 1 sth Henry VI . , i t may beproved that W in terwell Hall i tself,the possession wh ich first brought the Lamberts to Skipton, was then, and not before, granted to one Joan (the name isworn out in the Since the fi rs t edi tion of th is work was publ ished Ihave met w i th some cha rters drawn by john Lambert, who in his earl ier dayswas a scrivener, in whi ch he ava iled h imself of h is antiquarian knowledge tocopy the formulze of more ancient times . What he is known to have done inthe course of business he was able to do out of van i ty or wh im an d it may besome consolation to his friends tha t whatever such a forgery detracts from his

honesty is to be added to his ski ll .The rental of his paternal property was no more than £ 10 21 . 6d. The

whole of which he died possessed, in or about 1 569 , was 1:1 2 5 61 . 2d.

an d the man who in an age when there was no commerce augmented his property in a twelvefold proport ion cannot have been wanting in d il igence, dexterity, or good fortune (pp. 1 96

I t i s no answer to say that Wh itaker ‘m isquotes the

charters,

1 for he took hi s text from the professed original s,

wh ile Colonel Lambert had only before him the transcripts ofthose charters on the pedigree . But th i s point need not bepressed, for the text given by Colonel Lambert i s even moredamaging than that wh ich Wh itaker suppl ies .

Robert de Rum elli,lord of Skipton

,was contemporary

,if

not wi th the Conqueror, at least wi th his sons ; for his daughterand heir was in possession of his fief not later thanTh i s being so

,his alleged charter i s seen to be a clumsy for

gery, wh ich any one w i th the slightest knowledge of thesematters would detect at once . Apart from the reasons givenby Wh i taker

,the anachron i sm of the dating clause would con

demn it instantly,wh ile his alleged kinsman Edmund de

Lambart actu al] ngures in the fam ily pedigree several generation s later I I the charter professes to grant s ix carucates(not bovates it only makes the matter worse and as for thetext, its grammar and construction verge on m idsummermadness .The alleged charter of Henry if not so wild

,i s bad

enough Wh itaker pi tched, of course, as a cri tic, on RobertoClifl

'

ord m ilite,

’

an d according to Colonel Lambert there i sanother miles in the charter . But why dwell on these po ints

1 See p. 1 3 .

3 He was dea l t w i th by Wh i taker and by Mr. Stapleton (in his paper onHoly Trin i ty Priory, York), and qu ite recen tly by Mr. Holmes in h is Charmlory n t. 7 0671 q/

‘

Pontqfrart, pp. 392 , 41 3 .

30 THE ANCESTOR

when monachi de San cto San cto i s found in both versions,

although no human being could m ake sense thereofPBut let u s com e to grips wi th the im posture . To do so I

fix at once on charter ‘No . Th i s i s the charter that i sm eant to prove the Mandevi lle all iance . By it Wi lliam deMandeville

,Earl of Essex, con firm s to John de Lambar t,

’ sonof Henry de Lambart,

’

an d of Alice the earl’s si ster, et su i som n ibus [sic] illa ten emen ta gue Gaufria’us de Maundevill comes

fi ater meus eis dedit 1 i n v illi s de Eu erwyke, Skipton, et

Broughton etc . Th is is deci sive. I t proves that theforger actually imagined Earl William to have inheri ted theSkipton fief from h is brother, instead of wh ich he only held i tin right of his wife. Consequently Earl Geoffrey had no morer ight to make grants in Skipton or Broughton (wh ich was

flirtof the Skipton fief) than I have . The relationsh ip was

ISGeoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of E ssex

Hen ry J : Lamba rt A lia de Man devi l le W am de Man devi l le Avici aEarl of Essex, oh. u p. Earl of Essex, oh. mp. Lady of

Sk iptonf obn dc Lambar t

The i tali cized names are those suppl ied by the forged charters,

wh ich prove in Colonel Lambert’s words that Henry deLambert married Alice

,daughter of Geofi'

rey de Man

deville, Earl of Essex (p. As the brother earls shownabove both died without i ssue

,and as their grea t ficf passed to

the descendants of their aunt, the alleged pedigree i s therebyfurther shown to be false.We can n ow make m erry over the remain ing charters

wh ich are here so rashly exposed to the attentions of theh igher critici sm .

’ Five of them relate to gifts to the Abbeyof St. Gu thlac of Cro land

,of wh ich the name is imperi shably

connected wi th the (grgeries of the pseudo- Ingulf. That ofKing Henry I I . appears to have a double purpose : it wasintended to support the Mandevi lle match, and at the samet ime to prove that Henry ‘de Lambart was then the k ing’s‘standard- bearer,

’

an honour wh ich even n ow i s sometimescoveted or claimed .

The forget , having thus provided h imself wi th an ancestor1 The i tal ics are m ine .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 3 1

who bore the king’s standard,resolved upon a h igher fl ight .

Long before the days ofDumas an d of Mr . Stanley Weymanthe vi sion of single combat dazzled the romancer’s eyes . Theforget decided to despatch his standard—bearing ancestor toScotland, apparen tly as an envoy, and to make h im abandon aduel wh ich he was to have fought wi th Alexander de Oli

fard,by perm ission of the mar shal of England (a t itle then

unknown), at the instigation of the Scottish k ing, who, safeguarding the ‘dign i ty of the combatants, dec ides that theyshall shake hands an d swear to be good friends ever after .All th is is made to happen in 1 1 67 . The forget was l iberalwi th his de,

’ wh ich he not only cla imed for his ancestors, butplaced (wrongl before Olifard

,

’ 1and even

,in the charter of

Hen I I .,begre Li ster,’ intend ing, doubtless, to gra tify a

neigh ur .

One cannot do justice to th i s concoction without quotingits essential portionTal i s fa cta est compos itio inter Hen ricum de Lambart legatum ah Angl ia

et Alexan drum de Olifa rd m i l i tem quos ad Judicium fi n aliter per me fiend’

Henricus Rex Angl ia: [sic] total i ter referebat in causa dueli i ips is concess i permarescallum An gli c propter quasdam accusation es per unum adversum alt

’rum

habitas et fide i in terposition e u trinque afii rmata sc il icet quod coram me ven ie t

u terque eorum arm a tus para tus ad con gressum et me suadente totam calurn

pn iam quam qu isque habebat advers us al terum con fcs tim depon et e t remittet

ex corde et dign i tas u t riusque sal va cri t et jungen t dextras et super Evangel iaju rabun t se in etcrn um fu turos veros am icos salva ofii cia quod [fir] seors im

gerun t adversus [sic] regem suum .

A dreary and a bungling forgery at best. I f the arti st hadonly enf'

oyed the advantage of consulting Madox’s Formu'

la re

he wou d have made a better j ob of i t but, as it was, he filledhis docum ents wi th dog-Latin renderin s of the language of h isown day . And every one of the n ine ocumen ts is tarred withthe same brush

,for dc Lambart appears in all. What of the

th irty- three others,of wh ich we have not yet been privileged

to see e i ther the original s or the transcripts That ori in alsthere were we know from Lodge

,who states (i . 344) 0 one

of these charters containing the mo st solemn benediction ofRobert, B ishop of Lincoln in 1 1 64, that the original, n ow

upwards of 600 years old,wi th the seal of wh ite wax of a

bishop in his pon tificals is a great curiosity,and was in

the hands of the said Mr . Lambart. ’

1 H e al so makes a David de Olifixrd a w i tness .

3 2 THE ANCESTOR

I have used the phrase a great forgery as ju s tified notonly by the number of the documents, but by the fact thatpseudo- originals, wi th seal s attached, were produced . But theforgery also attained greatness by impos ing on all the offi cial

heads of the College of Arm s, to say noth ing of one of theheralds . Their attestations, as I said above

,are printed by

Colonel Lambert. Garter Segar formally attestshanc antiquam gen ealogiamEquestr is fam ilize Lambertorum vidi et

approbavi .

Camden, as Clarenceux, commi ts h imself to the authentici tyof the charters

oculis meis vidi eviden tias et charta s antiquas ex quibus hate genealogia autentice probatur quod non potn i non testari eandemque manus meae

subscription e approbare.St. George

,as Norroy

,recognized the charters, seal s and all,

as genu ineet vidi et perlegi scripta autentica cum sigillis appen sis antiqua huju s

fam i lia [sic] et nom in is Lambertorum tan gen tia, in fide et attestation e quorummanum meum apposu i .

Treswell,Somerset, brought up the rear

Ego Somersett Heraldus ad arm a gen ealogiam hanc an tiquze Lambertorumfami lies et specificatas ev iden tias quam verissim e [ l] approbatam a ttestor.Somerset, I presume, was the herald specially employed in

the business, and Treswell, the College might say, in the wordsapplied to Beau Brummel’s tie

, was one of our fai lures .’ For

i ts members have always been acutely alive to one another’sin firm ities . Of Treswell

,we fin d

,Noble wri tes

He was a very troublesom e,di sagreeable m em ber of the College, always

engaged in som ething which involved him in m isfortunes The Collegewere so d isgusted wi th his and York’s conduct, that May 1 6, 1 620, theycompla ined of them as common di sturbers of the peace of their society .December 4, 1 62 1

, he and York were sen t to the Marsha l sea . 1

By a curious fatali ty Somerset Herald seems to haveproved an unfortu nate ti tle down to qu i te recent times . Iam only speaking of course of past members of the College .For instance, when the eighth Duke of Somerset succeededh is kinsman in the title ( 1 750) a pretender seems to havestarted up, backed by the then Somerset Herald, Warburton

1 H irtory (f ti) : College qf Arms, p. 2 1 1 . He was however praised byDethick for his ski ll .

TALE OF A GREAT FORGERY 3 3

by name . The Duke’s agent wrote that Garter An s tis— forwhose work on seals and charters we have cause to bethankful—was giving him his assistancein order to detect the attempt to impose the false ped igree on the Crown . I twas made out by one Warburton, Somers et Herald he is a man of very ind ifferent

,if not bad, character one that is not a t all agreeable to his grace ofNorfolk

,nor to h imself; and that he would be glad of

' having out .The wri ter

,proceeding on the sound princ iple of setting

a herald to catch a herald, applied to Au sti s to find him‘an honest man

’

in the CollegeAs I apprehended th is Warburton would be there, by Mr. An stis

’s recom

mendation , one Mr. Pomfret, another of the Heralds’ office (superior in knowledge and an hones t man ), attended to prevent Warburton

’s impos ing on the

Attorney This pedigree they have trumped up is, I th ink, a forgery, forWarburton must know i t is false, and therefore w ilful, and as it cannot be supported but by oa th, it must be introductive of perjury . He must know i t tobe false, because, etc . , etc . 1

If the College resents these revelations it has only i tself tothank.

But, i t may be sa id, al l th is happened long ago. Why rev ive it ? Theanswer is that i t has become absol utely necessa ry to insist upon these factss ince the appearance of the present a ttempts to exal t the paramountauthority of the officers of arms an d of their records . 11

When the author of Armorial Families adm its that without thehelp of a m ember of the College he could have ‘done butl ittle,

’

an d,in return

,does poojah at the shrine

,we are forced

to exam ine, in a phrase of X ,

’

his l ittle tin gods . ’ 3 Whenwe are assured by the same wr i ter that

the publ i c never hears of the hard work,the careful and m inute exam ination

of pedigrees , the safeguards against m istakes, or of the endless labour and research wh ich, w i thout fee or reward [ l] or any publ ici ty, differen t Ofiicers ofArms undertake and perform , and have done fi r age: pa rt,

‘ in order tha t theymay record or make acces sible facts and evidence whi ch w i l l perhaps he wantedin the future

,15

i t becomes desirable that the public should learn someth ingof the true character an d value of these records .

1fi n al: qf tbe Seymoun p. 523 . Th is is an interesting add i tion

to the h istory of the College of Arms .3 Studies in Peerage and Family H istory , p. 309 .

3 Tb: Right to Bear Arms, p. x iv.

The i tal ics are my own .

5 Tbs Rigi t to Bear Artur, p. 181 .

34 THE ANCESTOR

The cri tical trea tment of the Heralds and their so- call ed ‘ records ’ hasbeen made necessary by recen t attempts to exal t the authori ty of thei r documents and to terrorize the publ ic in the matter of arms by crude and violen tlanguage . 1

I t i s natural in view of the stress laid on the authori ty ofthese documents that Colonel Lambert should appeal to theverdict of the Kings of Arms on a pedigree an d the evidencesupporting i t as deci sive . But what their wi tness really provesi s the worthlessness of such authori ty. When the three Kingsan d Somerset Herald attested the Lambert pedigree i t was inthe days when the Bri ti sh Solomon rejo iced in his descent fromBrute the mo st noble founder of the Bri tains

,

” even as his predecessor had exulted in her heraldic pedigree fr om Adam .

3 Whathave heralds to do wi th h i story What wi th facts Amongtheir dead legends the linger still . For Burke’s Peerage, as

we know, Ingu lf i s no l)o

'

rgery for the officer of arms,Geofii 'ey

of Monmouth i s no m ere romancer. From his sacred cell hesupplies the arms ofK ingGu ideriu s or of King Co el,‘or gravelyattempts a pedigree of King Arthur in the best style of theHeralds’ v is itation s .

‘s The college of augurs, as Mr. Barronwould say, retains its ancient reputation : Plus fa change plus

c’

est la m éme (base.

J . HORACE ROUND .

NOTEMuch l ight is thrown upon the pedigree of Lambert of Banstead by the

w i l l of john Lam bert of Banstead,the first ancestor assigned to the fam ily in

the Heralds’ Vi si ta tion . I t i s a characterist ic w i ll of a copyholder of the yeo~man or subs tantial husbandman class . It is to be found in a register of wills ofthe Ar chdeaconry of Su rrey (45 Heats). The w ill is da ted 1 9 June 1 5 3 3,and was proved 4 August 1 53 3 . No ti tle of gentl eman is assumed by thetestator or appl ied by him to any of his k insf

'olk,al though the ti tle is used by

him when he refers to the overseers of h is w ill, who as was custom ary a t tha tperiod are people of superior rank and in fluen ce, be ing in th is case m em bers ofthe gentle fam il ies of Scott of Camberwel l and Skinner of Reigate. The testator des ires to be buried by his ch ildren in the churchyard, and not in thechurch, of Banstead, again a sign ifican t po int, for the gentry of his tim e sought,in the great majori ty of cases, burial w i thin the church . H is wife Joan is tohave the occupat ion of his dwell ing house in Banstead, a copyhold m essuage,and as his lands belongi ng to i t in Banstead are in sufficien t to ma intain the said

1 Stadin in Peerage and Family H istory , p. xv .2 Ib1d. p. x i . 3 See p. 1 24 below .

7 6: Amextor,11 . 1 9 2 . Genealogist xvi i i . 2 1 5 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

DOCTOR AND PATIENT IN 1 62 1

When the artless Doctor seesNo one h0pe, but of his fees,An d h is ski ll runs on the lees,

Sweet Sp iri t, comfort me

MONG the families that emerge during the period of theHeralds’Visi tations is one named Nicolls, in Northamp

ton shire an d Leicestersh ire. Of their origin noth ing i s known .

In the pedigrees the first ancestor assigned to them i s a vagueNicoll s del North,

’ temp . Edward IV . , who settled at Ectonin Northamptonsh ire . Far away i n the Severn valley aboutthat time the last Lord Lovel conveyed to a retainer of his, aman named Wright from Yorksh ire, a small property, wh ichpassed

,wi th Wright’s daughter, to another Nicolls an d the ir

descendants several generations later convinced Dugdale,at hi s

vi si tation of Shropsh ire, that they were of the sam e stock .

William Nicolls, the actual founder of the fam ily in thesh ires

,died in 1 576, an d was buried at Hardwick near Wel

lingborough, at the age, it i s said, of n inety- s ix . There i sreason to believe that th i s is an exaggeration but in an y case hedid not live long under Edward IV. H is will was proved at

Peterborough by his grandsons . An inqu isition shows that hehad interests in the manor and advowson of Clay Coton

,one

th ird of Hardwick,the manor of Ecton

, and property inStanwick

,Clipston and Newbold.

Thomas Nicolls his son di ed eight years earlier, agedth irty- seven . H e was a reader of the M iddle Tem ple

,and

resided at the recto house of Pytchley. H e was j ointlyinterested wi th hi s ather in most of the properties abovementi oned, and held besides the advowson of HaughtonMagna, a lease of the other share of Hardwick

,property at

Lilbourne, and a moiety of the manor of Dewlish,wi th other

property in Dorset,as his will shows . H is wife Anne

,

daughter of Thomas (not John) Pell, married secondlyRichard Pu refey of Faxton . Thomas Nicoll s left four sonsand three daughters . Franc is, the eldest, was of Hardwick

,

DOCTOR AND PATIENT IN 1 6 2 1 37

and is said to have been governor of Tilbury Fort in 1 588,when (been Elizabeth reviewed the troops assembled to repelthe Span ish invas ion . To the three s ilver pheon s of thevisitation coat he added a quarter or canton—wh ich has beenstrangely represented as an honourable augmentation . H is

only son was created a baronet in 1 64 1 but upon the deathof the th ird holder in 1 7 1 7 the baronetcy became extinct.

Sir Augusti ne, second son of Thomas Nicoll s, was a j udgeof the common pleas, and d ied wh ile on circu i t at Kendal in1 6 1 6, at the age of fifty—seven, under circumstances detai led inSir James Whitelocke’

s L iber Famelz'

cus . H e married a

w idow,and having no ch ildren of his own , left his seat of

Faxton to his nephew the baronet. Lewi s Nicoll s, the th irdbrother, made a will early in 1 586, being bound for Barbaryi n the afi'

airs of his master, Mr . Richard Gore,

’ proved in November 1 592 , when the j udge ben efited to the extent ofor so . The three sisters were Susan wife of Robert Manley ofSprotton , Anne wife of Edward H eselrig e of Theddingworth, and Margery wife of M ichael Pureé y of Drayton orMuston .

William Nicoll s esquire,the youngest son of Thomas

,

married Joyce daughter of George Gifi'

ard of Bottlebridge,by whom he had several ch ildren . Under the will of hisbrother the j udge he took two- thirds of the manor of H al

stead, and of the parsonage of Tilton,with lands also i n

Whatborough and South Marefield, in tail male, and fixed hisresidence at Halstead . I n 1 62 1 , when upwards of fifty, hewas suffering from a painful fis tula, and came up to Londonfor treatm ent and relief. The surgeon he consulted was oneThomas Gillam, or Gilliam,

a professor lawfullie authorisedi n surgery,

’

as he describes h imself ; and one resul t of thej ourney was a Chancery su i t

,the pleadings in wh ich supply

the particulars that follow . As often happens,they throw an

interesting side light upon the domesti c life of the time butreaders should remember that each party i s no doubt makingthe most of h is case .I n the fi rst place we find the patient striking a curious

bargai n wi th his medical man,who undertook to trea t the cas e

for 1:50, if the patient stayed in London but if he went downto the country, ‘forasmuch as he should loose his practise

,

’

stipulated for £ 100, namely £20 in hand and £80 when thecure was perfected . The surgeon adds that he was to be

38 THE ANCESTOR

allowed all charges of travel there an d back, being seventy—fivem iles from Lo ndon but that point the pa tient om its. Theparties agreed upon these terms. Gillam received 5 105 .

down, and the balance of the £20 on arrival at Halstead about

the end of August ; and subsequently drew another £50 o n

account. But the patient, being dis satisfied w i th the resul t,sues for the return of his money Wh i le the defendant claimsto be enti tled to £30 more

,

’

wi th £ 1 2 for his travellin expenses

,an d estimates the practice lost in consequence 0 hi s

absence at £2 50 .

The plain tiE’

s b ill tells,as usual, a pi teous tale. First he

complains that hi s medical attendant grewe negligent, spendinge a grea t parte of his tyme in I nnes an d Alehowses

,an d i n

needles ioyn eyi ng abroad .

’ Not content with that,after he

had brought his patient to that state th at he was not able tosti rre of ofhi s bedd, presumeing that plaintiff, kn owinge his lifeto be in Danger

,would sooner parte wi th an ie money then

parte wi th him,

’ he pretended urgent business in town . H e

had left his wife to receive severall summes in London, and

she had writt word that she could receive none, and he mustneeds oe to see about it him self. Uppon notice whereof,plain tig

‘ be inge much displea sed, he sayd, yf plaintiff wouldlett him have 50, H e would not leave plain tifi

'

,noe not for

500, unti ll he was willi nge .

’

So the A50 was handed overbut so far from keep ing his word, th i s heartless creature onefortn ight after pretended that he had received other letters

,

and soe left, and came to London, onely protestinge that hewould come again e wi th in 10 dayes

,wh ich he did not

,but

came wi th in 1 6 daies .

’ Th i s sounds bad ; but the plaintiffforgets (as plain ti s do) to mention that meanwh ile he was lefti n charge of one Mr . Napkin

,

‘a very able surgeon

,

’ wi thdirections for hi s treatment ; and that Gillam paid th i s subs titu te £ 1 5 out of his own pocket.Perhaps all th i s friction and worry was not very good for

the fistula . At an y rate Mr . Nicolls was brought ‘to thatstate that in 1 6 dayes he did never eat one bi tt of bread nor ofm eate, nor dran ke one draught of beare,

’

and puts it all downto such thinges as he gave him . We should like to knowwhat his d iet consisted of durin the interval . Finally ‘

ou

the seaven teth day Gillam most arberou sly left an d went toLondon,

’ not wi thout a parting interview .

‘Att what tym e

plaintiff asking whether he had tryed the uttermost height of

DOCTOR AND PATIENT IN 1 6 2 1 3 9

hi s sk ill,he acknowledged that he had, an d doubted not that

that he had done, and the direction he had lefte, would perfectthe cure '

; and when ‘plain tifi

'

asked, yf that fa led, whatsatisfaccion he should have for the £70, he an swere he wouldreferr him selfe toNeedless to say Gillam,

in his answer,puts a very different

complexion upon the case . According to him,he ‘found the

d isea se to be dangerous, and a very doubtful an d hard Cure . ’H e treated it w ith much dil igence in three moneths, duringwh ich hewas for one moneth wi th plaintiff then having verynecessary afi'

ayres, an d the Consent of plain tifl,’ left him for a

fortnight in charge ofMr. Napkin, an d came to London ‘and

afterwards Continued Wi th him about 4 mon ethes more,and did

much ben efitt the compla inant. Very full deta il s of thetreatment are added

,not exactly sui ted perhaps for the general

reader,though they m ight prove of considerable interest to

the faculty .

The charge of neglect and m i sbehaviour is of course indign an tly den ied . Defendant explains that, ‘

after he had Carefullie dressed plaintiff, the season being very Cold, and therebeing but one fyer in one Ch imney Chamber, and li ttle fyer inthe plaintiff's howse but the ki tch in,

’ he went abroad for hisrecreation an d heal thes sake . ’ That the patient was reducedto a very weak state i s adm i tted . But he never gave untoplain tifl

"an ie other receiptes then was thought fitting, an d was

necessarie by reason of wh ich gyven and appl ied,plaintiff

Could not but grow veryweake,n eyther Could plain tiflf receave

an ie perfect Cure wi thout . ’I t i s s ingular that the parting i s alleged by the plain tifi

' tohave taken place upon the sevent ieth day, an d the sum re

ce ived was £70 wh ile Mr. Napkin was paid 1:1 5 for a periodvar iously stated as fourteen or sixteen days . Defendant however puts the period of his attendance at seven months in all

,

not counting hi s fortnight’s absence .If a di spute about money matters was really the occasion

of his fin al departure,nei ther party th inks fit to mention the

fact . Defendant’s story i s that divers urgent matters gaveoccasion of necessi ty for h is return to London and thatagain he had the plainti ff’ s consent. H e adds that wi th in thefortn ight he sent one of his servantes

,whom defendant knew

to be very sufficien t,and did gyve him d irections what to doe .

But plaintiff,fin ding h imself m uch eased, refused to deale an ie

40 THE ANCESTOR

further touch ing the Cure, saying he would have noth ing moredonne untill he Cam e to London . WhereofDefendan t was

very gladd to heare an d did by letter s ign ifie soe much, andrequested him to lie at Defendant’s howse wi thout anie Charge .

An d since Complainant i s Com e to London, he hath sentintreating him ,

if he were not perfectly Cured, that he m ightperfect the sam e . For he latelie Cured one wh ich was afflictewi th the like di sease, and tooke noe other Course . But Complainant refused, and in steed of than ckes hath in great furie,in fowle an d very u n civ ill s eeches, much abused D efendant,and indevou red to doe Defgndan t more preiudice than themoney Cann requ ite . ’I n sp i te of the ben efit derived from Gillam

’

s treatment,Will iam Nicolls did not live much longer, but died in Septemher 1 62 5 . H i s Widow marr ied again, an d l ived to make a

will in 1 66 1 , wh ich was not proved until 1 666. Her secondhu s

‘

yand was Roger Burgo n e esqu ire,of Wroxall and

Honiley in Warwicksh ire,angof Sutton in Bedfordsh ire

,who

died in 1 63 6 but had no ch ildren by him . H e was a

widower,and father of Sir John Burgoyne baronet. Augus

tine Nicolls,the eldest son of William and Joyce

,died in

1 639, leaving an only daughter,Elizabeth

, who marriedThomas Hackett of North Crawley, Bucks. She was repre

sented by the Carews of Beddington . Their youngersurviving sons were Will iam and Franci s

,of whom the former

married an d had i ssue . They al so had five daughters Marym arried Andrew Halford esqu i re Anne was wife ofWilliamBrooke, or Brookes, of Haselor Frances died young Elizabeth seem s to have had two husbands nam ed Orton an d

Goldsm ith and Jane was wife of Humphrey Parrott esquire .

W . H . B . B IRD .

1 71010 by Il’

a lt t r Cockrrrl.

5 1 11 jo n Do n n k n mn .

( F 1 cm form : 1!m flu \ a lnwa l Porrn u t Ga llery

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

42 THE ANCESTOR

steady a hand that nei ther love nor lucre, fear nor flattery,could bow him to e ither side,

’ prai se hardly borne out by hisnotorious conduct in the cammena’am case, or in the famouscase of the five kn ights, where he is supposed to have said,‘The king holds of none but God.

’ I ndeed,subserviency to

the king was a dom inant characteri stic,an d truly

,there i s

someth ing i n hi s face which gives the lie to Fuller s praise .From a habi t of shutting hi s eyes while listen ing intently

to a case, he acqu ired the sobriquet of The Sleeping Judge .H e was the author of a number of works publi shed after

his death, of wh ich the ch ief ones are mentioned i n LordCarn arvon

’

s speech above .Two portrai ts of Sir John Doddridge are here reproduced .

One 18 surrounded by a painted oval,and i s consequently the

larger (2 ft. 53» m . by 2 ft. though the scale 18 the same . Th i spo rtra i t is also more vigorous and vivid i n the painting. Onesees a man of great intellectual power, strength, and perhapssome brutali ty . The same man i s seen in the other p ictureyet how difl’eren t are his qual i ties in degree. H is i s a

smoother,less 1ncis ive personal i ty even hi s garm ents are less

shapely and brill iant . Th i s, we take i t, i s the fault of thearti st, who was evidently a copyist of an inferior kind . Thecopy (or what we consider to be the copy) i s owned by theSociety of Antiquar ies, wh ile the original belongs to thenat ion . The copy 1s reproduced i n colours. The arti sts ofbo th are unknown .

1

1 H is name has been very prom inently mentioned in the House of Lords,this very year, befbre the Comm i ttee for Privi leges . The G rea t Chamberla inship of England was again in d ispute before the House as i t was in 1 626, whenthe judges were cal l ed in to give thei r opin ions . On tha t occasion the LordChief Justice and the Lord Ch ief Baron held tha t th is grea t ofiice could passby a priva te entai l, and that i t therefore belonged to De Vere Earl of Oxfordbut Mr . Justice Doddr idge,’ wi th two of his fellows, held that it could notbe entai led away from the he ir- general, be ing akin in character to an earldomheld under a charter. Doddridge

’s v iew therefore prevail ed, and his judgm en t

on that occasion,wh ich is abstracted in Coll ins’ precedents, was deemed of so

much importance in the recent proceedings tha t Mr. Cripps, K .C. , on behalfof the Duke of Athol

,read i t out in full to the Comm i ttee . The counsel for

the Crown also held Doddridge’s reason ing to be sound, though, l ike other

judges, he was m i sinformed as to the facts . H . R.

44 THE ANCESTOR

R ICHARD I I I . (NO. XX )

To the reader of letters an d memoirs th i s portrait ofRichard I I I . i s well known . I t has been engraved severaltimes : once by the Reverend Thomas Kerrich (who bequeathed i t to the Society) for vol . v . of the Pastor: L etters .Another engraving has been given by Sir Henry Elli s in vol .i i . of the third series of his Onlgi nal Letters, and a th ird one,by B . Holl, forms the frontispiece to Jesse

’s Memoirs of KingRicbard I I ] . I t i s more than worthy of being reproducedhere once again

,for i t i s undoubtedly an extremely fin e p iece

of characterization . The king seems to be looking earnestlyforward

,wh ile playing wi th the rin on his finger . H is eyes

are pale grey,an d the expression 0 his countenance i s tense

his lips are compressed and very th in . Though young theface is bony, and the ch in i s not so crooked as i s usual in h isportraits. The general colouring i s somewhat brown there i sgilding on the chain an d cloak. The whole has been carefullydrawn, and i s painted on a panel 1 25 inches by 8 inches, wi than arched top . On the frame, wh ich corresponds to theone for the Soc iety’s portrai t of Edward IV.

,i s inscribed

RICHARDS REX TERTIUS .

Kwo R ICHARD I I I .

THE ANCESTOR

CHARLES, COMTE DE FLANDRE (No . XLI)

Th is beautiful picture, sometimes wrongly enti tled Charlesthe Bold of Burgundy when a Child

,

’

is one of the fin es t inthe collection of the Socie ty of Antiquaries . I t i s an excellentFrench painting, somewhat in the style of Janet the drawingi s strong and clean

,an d the colouring i s a most delicate har

mony of silvery grey,brown and Whi te. The expression of

the eyes an d the curious short chin characteristic of babyhood,are given wi th lifelike accuracy, as any one who has studiedthe proportions of a ch ild’s face wi ll di scover . The face i s notunlike that of Francoi s I I . when young ; the hypothesis thati t represents Charles of Burgundy i s at once contradicted bythe dress

,wh ich i s obviously of later date . I t i s exqu isitely

painted the fin e black rings with wh ich the wh ite ground . is

patterned, the transparent muslin apron, the cap, the si lverrattle, an d, above all, the b ird and the little fat hand that holdsi t,combine to make it a masterpiece of that style of por

tra1ture.

I t is painted on a panel of 1 33 in ches by 93 inches . On

the back i s pasted a large sheet of paper, wi th the evidentlyerroneous account of the p icture in partly obli terated French

,

The names of Ph il ip the Good,Duke of Burgu n dy, I sabell

of Portugal,are interspersed. I n another place i s wri tten

An ton ij Amaross in ,’

and in another,No . 393 . John Thane,

Rupert St.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

THE ANCESTOR

No . XXX IX

I t would be a great gain and pleasure to the members ofthe Society of Antiquaries if a name could wi th solid h i sto ricalreason be affi xed to the li ttle circular p icture here reproduced .

Perhaps some reader of Tbc Ancestor may recogn ize and provei t to be the scion of some well -known ancient house .

|

Therei s happily no doubt about the da te of i t, ‘Anno beingwri t large on the background . On the other side i s[ ETA ' SUE 4 5 , an d round the frame is a Latin di sti ch . I trepresents a man wi th a fin e reddish beard an d markedlyaristocratic features, wear ing a close fitting black dresscuriously guarded with silver lace

,and j ewelled ring hanging

by a black ribbon round h is neck . The expression of theface 18 strong yet gentle

,an d very thou htful. I t i s painted

in m in iature style,an d the diameter 15 6 inches.

ESTELLE NATHAN.

A GENEALOG I ST’S KALENDAR OF

CHANCERY SU ITS OF THE T IME OF

CHARLES I .

CARPENTER v . Tommn s

C} B i ll (2 june 1 6 3 2) of Joan Ca rpenter of Brierley in the parish ofLimster, co . Hereford, widow .

Answer and demurrer (28 Sep. 1 63 2) of Thomas Tomk ins and HenryTomki ns, his son and he ir apparen t .

Concern ing a sum of 1 001. which by the bill is al l eged to have beenentrusted by John Tomkins, since deceased, the father of the compt . ,to the defendant Thomas Tomkins h is son . The defendants say tha tthe said Joan released all claims upon them by a qu i ttance da ted 26

May 8 Car. I . , an d that the su i t is begun w i thout her consent by herson Richard Carpenter, a very turbulente and contentious person .

’

CANNER and others 0. Blsss u .

Cg B il l (5 July 1 64 1 ) of John Canner of Tewkesbu ry, co. Glouc. ,

hos ier, and Anne his wife, Richard Cave of Worces ter, mercer, an d Al ice hiswi fe, and Ri chard Jones .

Answers (1 3 july 1 641 ) of john B isse ll and (6 Oct . 1 641 ) of the sa idJohn B issel l jo in ing w i th Anne his w ife .Concern ing the estate of Edward Moore of Worcester, draper, whomade a w ill 1 3 Dec. 1 6 28, whereof Eleanor his rel ict renouncedexecut ion . The compt . Ri chard Cave obtained letters of adm in istration in the Consistory Court a t Worces ter. Anne the defendant isdaughter of Wi ll iam G ibbs of Worcester, gent . , by E leanor his w ife,daughter of the sa id Edward Moore . The sa id Canner and Cave arebrothers - in - law and their wives were two of

' the res iduary legatees ofthe sa id Edward [and probably his daughters] .

CARY and another 0. Russsu . an d others

B ill (29 Nov. 1641) of John Cary of'

Marybon e Park, co. M iddlesex ,esqu ire, and John Will iams of the Inner Temple, London , esqu i re .

Answer (2 5 Nov. 1 641 ) of' Boys Ower of M inster

,fel lmonger, andHenry H uffam of Pres ton nea r Wingham, yeoman (defendan ts wi th John

Russell of St . Peters in Thanet, yeoman).Concern ing l ea ses in the manor of M inster in Thanet, 00. Kent,whereof the complainants are sei sed .

49

5 0 THE ANCESTOR

Cox 0. SANDYS and othersC}Bi ll (14 ]uly 1 641 ) of Charles Cockes of the M iddl e Temple, London ,

esqu i re.Answer (14 Aug. 1 641 ) of Wi ll iam Sandys of Flatburie, co. Worcester,

esqu ire, and (4 Aug. 1 641) of Wi ll iam Steede, LL .D. (defendants wi thWi lliam Say, esqu ir e).

Concern ing the manor ofAtchlen ch, co. Worcester, l eased 24 March1 8: 2 Phi l ip and Mary by the Dean and Chapter of Wells to SirJohn Bourne, kn ight, for 99 years, wh ich lease is now come to the

complainant.

Cuomooas v . NonC% B i ll (1 8 June 1 63 2) of Robert Cudmoore, of co . Devon ,

bai li ff of the hundred of Black Torrington .Answer (1 Sep. 1 6 3 2) of James Nott .

Alleged m i sconduct of the defendant’s son John Nott, now decea sed,when in the service of the complainant.

Coon s 0. TRACYC B ill (1 9 June 1 63 2) of William Cooke of Corse, co . Glouc. , yeoman .Answer (5 Oct . 1 632) of Sir Robert Tracy, kn ight, for h imse lf and for

MerriallTracy his daughter (an infant under the age of n ine yea rs).Concerning a statute or recogn izance of 1 0001. aclmowledged by thecompla inant to one N i cholas Tracy of Tewkesbu ry

,esqu ire, and dated

3 June 20 Jac. I . N ichola s Tracy is dead and since his death hisexecutor Thomas Tracy Thom e is dead al so, whose execu tr ix isthe defendant Merriall Tracy . Wi ll iam Cooke of Eldersfield andRicha rd Cooke were sureti es for the complainant

,whose wife and

chi ldren are Spoken of. Thomas Thorn e left a mother Elizabe thThorne .

CLARKE v . GODFREY

C11

,B i ll (1 5 May 1 63 2) of Francis C larke the elder of New Sarum, cc.

Wi l ts, woollen draper, and Sara his wife, one of the daughters of RichardGodfrey la te of New Sarum , fishmon ger, deceased, for themselves and forFranci s, Thomas and Richard their sons, and for Sara, Katharine and Marytheir daughters, being infants wi th in age .

Answer (8 Sep. 1 63 2) of Anne Godfrey of New Sarum,widow, rel ict an d

ex trix . of Ri chard Godfrey .Concern ing sums of money wh ich Ri chard Godfrey paid to the complainant Franci s for his advancement in his trade. The defendant

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

5 2 THE ANCESTOR

CAGE v. CAGE

C f

;B i ll (2 2 Nov. 1 641 ) of Robert Cage of Hom emead, co . Hertford,

gent.Answer (23 Nov. 1 641) of Phi l ip Cage, fa ther of the complainant .Concern ing the lands in Norfolk wh i ch E l izabeth mother of the complainant had from Robert Thorn eton her fa ther.

Robert Thorn eton Dan iel Cage

11

lip Cage=Alice WoodA settlemen t after thism arriage was made byher husban d an d h is

fath er of the man or ofHorn emeade

Ct sucn 0 . Bocas

C1}

, B i ll (20 june 1 63 2) ofAlmott Clench, esqui re .

Answer a t Tivetshall, co. Norfolk (4 Oct . 1 63 2) ofAnne Bogas, w idow,

and Robert Bogas, gen t. (defendan ts w i th john Bogas, gent ).Concern ing the manor of Braham alias Brantham, co. Suffolk, wh ich ,as the compla inant all eges, was conveyed by fin e and by indenturedated 1 5 Nov . 1 2 Jac. I . by Robert Bogas, esqu ire, now deceased, toJohn Clench, esqu i re, the complainant’s late fa ther, who d ied aboutfour years since.

Robert Bogas e sq. lon g s in ce dead, whowas se ised of the m an or of Braham .

H i s wi dow An n e su rv1ved him an d

married on e Down es, whom also she

survived

Robert Bogas esq.=An n e John Bogas,gen t.

re l ict

COLLYR 0 . Rom e

OT1

3B il l ( 1 6 June 1 63 2) of Robert Collyn of co . Devon ,

yeoman .

Answer 1 6 3 2) of Robert Roll e of Heanton, esq. , and S1r SamuelRolle, kn ight (defendants w i th Robert Kendal l) .

Concerning a messuage cal led Nether Brandon w i th lands in Liskeard,co . Cornwal l, of wh ich Robert Coll ins, the compt .’s grandfa ther, i s sa idto have been se ised in fee .

(7!!n

CHAPMAN 0 . F aoocar '

r

C71

3 B i ll (28 June 1 641) of Humfrey Chapman of Baslow i n Bakewell,co . Derby, yeoman, son and he ir of Godfrey Chapman of Baslow, deceased .

Answer (4 Oct . 1641 ) of Thomas Froggatt of Calver, co. Derby , yeoman(defendant w i th Anne Chapman, mother of the compla inant).

Concern ing a loan of 501. to the compla inan t’s father.Com m on and another 0 . 5 11 11 1 11

C115 B ill ( 1 2 July 1 641 ) of Peter Courthope and Wal ter Burrel l, esqu ires,exors . of Timothy Wya t, w idow, who was ex tr ix . of Franc is Wyat, gent , herlate husband, late of Redsall in Puttenham,

co . Surrey.Answer (2 3 Oct. 1 641) ofAnthony Sm ith of Wh itley, co . Surrey, gent .Concern ing a lease from the defendant to the sa id Francis Wya t,dated in Apri l 1 0 Car. I . , of a forge and i ron work in Wh i tley andThursley, co . Surrey . The sa id Francis d ied in the followingDecember.

Cooxs v . Su ms

C313 B ill (1 9 june 1 63 2) of Abraham Cooke of Shepton , co. Somerset,

cloth ier.Answer (5 Oct . 1 6 3 2) of Hen ry Slade of Ham , co. Somerset, yeoman,

son and exor. of john Slade of the same,yeoman, decea sed .

Concern ing copyholds in Ful ton and Shepton Mal lett, 00. Somerset .Henry Slade marr ied Mary Cooke

,the compt. ’s daughter, w i th a

port ion of 2001. The said Hen ry Slade ha th s ince, as the compt .alleges, brought h is w ife to strange d istempers of m ind by his unkindusage and his unnatural and unbeseem ing carriage, an d has left herunprovided w i th food or raiment. john Slade died 7 yea rs since,l eav ing Ka tharine h is widow, Mary h is first w ife being dead 30 yea rssince. The defendant says tha t he became a su i tor to the sa id Maryabout 1 1 yea rs since by mot ion of Thomas Corn ishe , brother- ia - law tothe compt . , and says that it was concea led from h im tha t the sa idMary was troubled before her marriage wi th the fall ing sickn ess , andhe den ies ill usage, but says tha t before her marriage the sa id Marywas ill used by the compt .’s wife, her stepmother. The defendant hasi ssue by the sa id Mary two ch ildren—John and Mary Slade .

54 THE ANCESTOR

CHAMBERLAYNE v. Nswn s oar s

C137 B i ll (30 Nov. 1 63 2) of Richard Chamberlayn e of Temple House,to. Warw ick, esqu ire, and Hugh Audleye, esqu i re.

Answers of john Newdegate, esqu ire, and RobertNewdegate his brother.

Concern ing a settlement of the manor of Griti'

e and Coton, co. Warw ick

,made by John G ifl'

ard of Ch illington, co . Stafford, esqu ire, latelydeceased

,by deed indented da ted October 2 1 E l iza. m ade be

tween (i .) the said John G ifiard and (i i .) Joan Bradshaw of Noke, co.

Oxford,w idow

,and Benedict Winchcom be of Noke, gent , and (i i i .)

Sir Wal ter Aston of Tixall, cc. Stafford, knight, john Talbott ofGrafton , co. Worcester, esq . , Edward and Humfrey Gifi'

ard, gentlem en ,

and Wi ll iam H i ll, yeom an, in consideration of a marriage afterwardssolemn ized between Wal ter G ifiard, son and heir apparen t of the sa idJohn G ifi'

ard, and Ph i l ippe Whi te, one of the daughters and hei rs ofHenry White,esqu ire, then deceased, whereby the said manor was

settled to the use of the said john and Joyce his then w ife for theirl ives, w i th remr. to their heirs m al e, and further remr. to the hei rsmale of Sir Thomas G ifiard, father of the said john, etc. The sa idJohn Gifi’ard and joyce died about August 1 1 lac. I . Peter G ifl’ard,son and heir of Wal ter, w i th Frances hi s w ife, were parties to a fin e

in Easter term last, of the manors of Griffe and Coton and Ch ilverscoton

, etc. , qu i tcla imed the same to the compla inants .

Cocrm ms and another 0. HOWARDn B i ll (27 Jan . 1 631) of Charles Cockayne of Ruston, co. Northants,

son and heir of Sir Wi ll iam Cockayn e of London, deceased, and Will iamBossvill ofHan gin ge Grimstone, co. York, gent , tenant of the said Charles .

Answer (2 2 Oct. 1 6 3 2) of the Lord Wi ll iam Howard and the LadyEl izabeth his w ife.

Concern ing a moiety of the manor of Hanging Grimston, whereof thecompt. Charles is seised, and the custom s of the manor.

CARPENTER v . TYTHER

C13 ; B il l ( 1 3 Feb . of Robert Carpenter of Hartbury in thecoun ty of the ci ty of G loucester, gent , an d John Carpenter of Norton, co.

Glouc. , yeoman .Answer (5 June 1 639) of Edward Tyther of Gloucester , gent , and Anne

his wife, who was rel ict and ex trix . of John Rogers, gent , whose wi ll is dated10 Aug. 1 1 Car. I .

Concern ing the w ill of John Rogers, deceased, and his l egacy to JohnRogers his son by the defendant Anne, who made the compt. part iesto a t ru st by her indenture dated 2 3 jan . 1 2 Car. I . before her t em arri age. Arnold Rogers, a son of john Rogers, is nam ed as beingdead a t the time of that indenture.

A GENEALOG IST’S KALENDAR 5 5

Covs usv v . Mounr usv

Cale B i l l ( 1 5 July 1 641 ) of john Coveney of Hastingleigh, 00. Kent,yeoman .

Answer of Benjam in Moun tn ey of London, and Maryhis w ife .

Concern ing a lease made 2 7 July 9 Car. I . to the compt . by thedefendant Ma ry

,then Mary Eas tday of Canterbury, w idow, of a

messuage stand in St. Ma ry’s parish in Romney Marsh .

Com 0 . MADOCKE

053, B i ll ( 16 July 1 641) of Richard Cole ofAveton G ifford, co . Devon,

gen t .Answer ( 18 Oct. 1 641 ) of Hen ry Madoclte of Brent (defendan t w ith

Thomas and Richard Madocke of Brent, co . Devon).The defen dant Hen ry was surety for the other defendants in thematter of a debt of 501. The sa id Thomas and Richard were sons ofanother Richard Madoclte, and the wife of Ri chard the younger isspoken of. The defendant Henry says that of the defendants Thom ashas forsaken his coun try and is insolven t an d Richa rd l ives s ix andtwenty m iles away and is l i t tle worth and hardly to be found.

v . Bu n and othersAnswer (1 May 1 9 30) of Sir Will iam Bla ke, kn ight, W ill iam Rolfe

and George Lowe, esqu ires, Richard Gurnard 0. Henry Jackson, defendants tothe bill ofMat th ias Caldicott, esqu ire.

Concern ing the w ill of Henry Sm i th of London, esqu ire, deceas ed,whereof the defendants are execu tors .

Cu ax s v . a ou

B ill (26 Nov. 1 629) of Raphe C larke of Chesterfield, cc. Derby,gentleman.

Answer (9 Apri l 1 6 30) of Benjam in Fi tton, gent, and Margaret his wife,ofMarston, co. Linc .

Concern ing the sale by the defendants to the compt . about 9 yearssince of the ir mo iety of a messuage in Holliewell Gate in Ches terfieldan d of their fifth part of a messuage in Tibshelfe, co. Derby, w i th awarran ty against themselves and Thomas Wa tson

,brother of sa id

Margaret .CHAVB v . Cums

B ill (24 Nov. 1 6 29) of loan Chave of Uplowrn an , cc. Devon,widow, reli ct of Ph il ip Chave ofUplowman, husbandm an, deceased.

An swer (26 Nov. 1 6 29) of Will iam Chave, son of the said Ph il ip Chave.Concern ing a messuage and lands in Uplowman call ed Beare

,which

56 THE ANCESTOR

the sa id Ph il ip by deed indented 1 0 Jan . 1 2 Jae. I . dem ised to thedefendant Will iam and his wife Susan for their l ives . The sa id Ph il ipm ade his will about six yea rs since giving legaci es to his e ight otherch ildren . Agnes, daughter of the compt . , was res iduary legatee wi thher mother .

CLOWES v . B s oox s

C313 B i ll (26 Nov. 1 6 3 1) cl' Thomas C lowes, ci tizen and sadler of

London .

Answer (6 Dec. 1 63 1 ) of Roger Brooke.Concern ing trade matters . The compla inant for the space of twentyyears hath used the trade of a m i lliner in the Royal Exchange, andthe defendant is a workm an tha t m aketh cabinets, cases and otherthings which belong to the compla inant’s trade .

Cou ms v . BERKELEY and othersCs

ls' B i ll (20 June 1 63 1 ) of Hugh Coll ins, clerk, rector of Compton

Pan cefoote, co . Somerset, and Margaret h is wife, rel ict and ex trix . of Wi ll iamRosewell ofYardington , deceased .

Answers (29 Sep. 1 63 1 ) of Sir Henry Berkel ey, knight, Thomas Brookean d john Redwood (defendants wi th Dame Anne, wife of Sir Hen ry, Jam esMorren

,Edward Davi es). In the bi ll Redwood is called Rideou t, and is

descr ibed as exor. ofGabriel Pinder.Concern ing the estate of Will iam Ros ewell deceased . The compt .Margaret described herself a s ‘

aged and of a good dispos i ti on easie tobe wrought uppon .

’She was sister to Tr istian Sadburye who dem i sed

to her an estate in certain messuages and lands in the manor of Foxcombe and Galhampton , co. Somerset. Wi ll iam Sudborough was toenjoy a messuage and lands in Galhampton for l ife.

CRANLEY v . C01 1: and others

C51

7 B i ll (8Nov. 1 63 1) of Thomas Cranley of Oxenborn e, co. Southampton, gent .Plea and dem u rrer of Francis Cole of London, merchant,

an d Robert Marston, gent . , the defendants .Concern ing money matters . The defendants plead that the compt.on Monday before the feast of St. Wolstan the B i shop was duly outlawed a t the sui t of Robert Valence in a plea of debt.

A GENEALOG I ST’S KALENDAR 57

CLOBERY an d others 0. MANATON and others

C7}; Answer (2 June 1 6 3 1) of Am brose Mana ton , esqu i re, defendant(wi th john Hanys an d Edward Robe rts) to the wi ll of john Clobery, esqu ire,and Sibil Woode, w idow.

Concern ing the estate of Henry Trccarrell, esq. , long s ince deceased.

H enry Trecarrell ofTrccarrell, esqu ire

e Loardau . and cc-he ir dau . and co-he ir clan . and cc-he ir dau . an d cc-heir

d ied s .p.John Trelawnydeceased

John Harry. Sib1l, dau . co-he ir dau. and

he ir of K atherine (re l ict of John cc-he ir, deceased,Trecarrell Wood) co - hcir late wu'

c of j ohnwith her s ister of Clobery, esqu ireLoar Trccarrcll

Chris opher Clobery

CO11 0. Bu n s

C5L5 B i ll (20 June 1 6 3 1) of Richard Coe .

Answer (4 Oct. 1 63 1 ) ofAnthony Burre.

Concern ing two pieces of meadow land in Bastwicke, co . Norfolk,wh ich the compt . alleges were conveyed in 34 E112. by john Burreto Ri chard Coe

,compt .’s grandfather.

Richard Coe n Burre

Hen ry Coe, son and he ir=Elizabethm ade s will i n Feb. 1 6 1 3 d ied 2

yearssmee

Coe thecomplai n an t

58 THE ANCESTOR

CHAPMAN and another 0. CHAPMAN and others

G31

5 Bi ll (2 Feb. 1 63-g) ofWill iam Chapman and Richard Chapman,aldermen of Bath, and Ri chard Gay of N ewton St. Loe, gent.

Answers (6 Apr. 1 630) of Joan Chapman of Bath, widow, an d GeorgeMompesson , gent. , and El eanor h is wife.

Concern ing the estate of Wal ter Chapman of Ba th, alderman, whodi ed leaving a wi ll da ted 1 6 24, whereof the compts . were exors . wi thone John Iles of Beckington, since deceased. Joan the defendant isrel ict of the sa id Wal ter, and Eleanor the defendant is his daughter .The said El eanor had legacies from M rs . Rogers of Bri stol, deceased,and M rs . Licence of Ba th, widow, deceased, who was her grandmother.

COLL I ER v. Comma and others

031, B i ll ( 1 5 May 1 628) of Will iam Coll ier of Pudletren thid, co. Dorset,

Answers (3 Oct. 1 628) of Edward Coll ier ofM interne, gent . , an d his sonRichard Coll i er (defendants wi th Will iam an d Ri chard Lockett).

Concern ing a debt of the defendant Edward who borrowed 2001. ofWi ll iam Lockett in jan . 6 Jac. I . The sa id Edward Coll ier is uncleand was guardian to the compt. who was nephew and next hei r toHenry Collier, esq. , who made a will abou t 6 years since.

C11 11 131 11111 3 0 . STRODEC33, B ill (29 Apri l 163 1 ) of Richard Chri s tmas of Broads idlin g, co.

Dorset, gent.

Answer (2 1 June 1 63 1) of Sir Ri chard Strode of Chalm ington in Catstock,co. Dorset, kn ight.

Concern ing a judgment whi ch the said Sir Richard obta ined againstthe compt . in the Court of Common Pl eas in Trin i ty term 2 1 Jac. I .

CALLOW v. B RADFORD

B ill (30 April 1629) of john Callow of Somerton, cc. Somerset,innholder.

Answer (6 June 1629) of Will iam Bradford and John Bradford his son .Concern ing a mortgage in Somerton m ade by compt. to ThomasBradford of Somerton, now deceas ed . Will iam Bradford of Loade, co .

Som erset, yeoman, the defendant, is bro ther and next heir of the sa idThomas B radford, who died about 18months since. The complainant’sw ife is m entioned .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

60 THE ANCESTOR

gent . (defendant wi th Robert Rolfe of Nedginge, co. Suffolk, gent , andEl izabeth his wife and Joane Rolfe).

Concern ing a l ease of the m anor or late priory of Kersey, co . Suffolk .The defendant Joane is la te wife of Robert Rolfe, esqu ire, fath er ofthe defendant Robert Rolfe.

CARRF. v . CREAKE

C33? B i ll ( 1 7 June 1 63 1 ) of Thomas Carre of Hopton , co. Suffo lk,mason, and El izabe th his wife .

Answer (4 Oct . 1 63 1 ) of Henry Creake of Stratford, shoemaker.Concern ing m essuages and lands in Stratford, co. Suffolk, late of RobertBrett

,deceased

, grandfa ther of the compt . El izabeth .

Thom as Brett

ett of Stratford, cc. Suff olkwi l l dated 1 6 F eb. 1 596 :

he ir of h is brother

Margaret Brett 1em Brett r1n e

son an dheir e ldest clan . an d

extrix. She and

her two sisterswere allm arri edbefore 2 3 Dec.

E liz th, dau . 3 Jae. Iand he ir,wife ofThom as Carre

CLARE v . Pour sCg; B ill (2 3 May 1 63 1 ) of John, Earl of Clare .Answer (28 Sep. 1 63 1) of Robert Porte of Ilam, co. Stafford

,esqu ire .

Concern ing freehold lands and copyholds of the manor of Yoxall, co.

Stafford, of whi ch Thomas Sal t of Yoxall is sa id to have died seised .The defendant den ies that he or Anne his wife are co—hei rs of the sa idThom as, as is alleged in the bi ll . The said Thomas by his wi ll devised certain messuages and lands to Dorothy, now w ife of ThomasDraper, gent , for l ife w i th rem t . to the defendant .

en ce Sa lt,ofWi l l iam H igges,s ister an d co-he ir s i ster an d cc

he1r

A GENEALOGI ST’

S KALENDAR 6 1

Cu m 0 . ALLEN and others

Oh B ill (3 june 1 63 1) of Sir Wi ll iam Calley of Burdroppe, co. W i l ts,kn ight, andWi ll iam Calley, Esq. ,

his son and heir apparen t.Answer ( 1 3 July 1 63 1) ofRalph Allen, bro ther an d hei r of W ill iam All en ,

esq. ,a bachelor, deceased, who was son and heir of Sir Wi ll iam All en , kn ight,

a Lord Mayor of London , and 1 0 Oct. 1 6 3 1 ) of Wi ll iam Hamond, brotherof Edmund Hamond.

Concern ing the conveyance to the compts . of the moiety of themanor of Fiddington , co. Wi l ts

,by the feofl'ees of Henry Long of

Whaddon, co. Wilts, esq.

, fa ther of Wal ter Longe, now of Whaddon .

Conan v . jonn son

Czlra B ill ( 1 0 May 1 630) of Robert Corbet of Colchester, co. Essex,cloth ier.

Answers (26 May 1 630) ofThomas Johnson ofLongMelford, co. Suffolk,clothier.

Concern ing trade matters .

Cocxs‘rr v . Nas s'rCfi b and Cfi b B il l (26 June 1 629) of Will iam Cockett of London ,

Answer ( 10 Apri l 1 630) of Edward Neast, gent , defendant .Concern ing the marriage portion wh ich the compt . had w i th Franceshis now wife, who i s sister to the defendant and daughter of one johnNeast, gent , dead about 3 years since, who was married to the compt .when thi s defendant was but a young man . The marriage was solemn ized about 1 6 1 3 or 16 14.

Coexs '

r r 0. WEBB

Czl

fa B ill (26 Feb. 1 6—3-3) of Wi ll iam Cockett ‘

on e of the gen tlemanushers quarter waighters in ord inarie to our soveraign e lord K ing Charles .’

Answer ( 1 0 Apr. 16 30) of Anthony Webb of Tewkesbu ry, co . Glouc. ,

gent.Concern ing a bond given about 1 2 yea rs since by the compt.’s fa therin - law, John Neast of Eldersfe ild 45 a: Elsfe ild, cc Wore. , gent , nowdeceased, to the sa id defendant. The compla inant once dwel t inWorcestershi re and since hath dwel t in the ci ty of London . EdwardNes s t, gent , is eldest son to the said John Neast, whose widow washis ex trix .

6 2 THE ANCESTOR

COGAN v . HAMOND

C31

3 Repl ica tion of Henry Cogan, esquire, to the answer of CordwellHamond

,defendant .

CROWCHBR v . WR IGHTC—L Answer ( 10 Feb. 1 6453) of Henry Wright, defendant, to the bi ll of4 4

George Crowcher.Concerning a croft called Peartree Croft whereof Thomas Crowcher,the father of the compla in an t, was seised, who, by his deed of feofilment

,26 Jan . 1 Car. I . , thereof en feofi

’

ed Hen ry Wright, the la tefather of the defendant. The said Henry Wright the elder madethe compt .’s mother El izabeth, s ince deceased, an es tate in the saidground for her l ife .

COLLYN v . Eomon n s and othersCf? Answer and demurrer (7 May 1 646) of Henry Edmonds, on e of

the defendants to the bi ll ofMat thew Collyn , compt.Answer (7 May 1 646) of Will iam Essex, another defendant .Answer ( 1 3 June 1 646) of Henry Edmonds .Concern ing a conveyance of lands made by the defendantEdmonds and his brother John Edmonds, now deceased .

Caoxs v . CROKE

CT? Plea and demurrer ( 1 2 Feb . of Mercy Croke,w idow

,de

fendant to the bi ll of Christopher Croke,john Croke

,Mary Croke, Rebecca

Croke an d Ru th Croke, complainants .Concern ing the child’s portions of the compla inants , who are sons anddaughters of Roger Croke, who left Wal ter Croke his eldest son as hisexecutor. The compts. are said by the defendant to be all infants

,

Christopher and John only excepted .

Caooxs v . Hu t and othersCg, Answer ( 1 1 Feb. 1 64

—3) of John H ill, a defendant to the b ill ofCharles Crooke, D.D. ,

compla inant.Concern ing ti thes in the defendant’s parish of Agmon desham, 00.

Bucks .

CL INTON v . Km n on

°

C-

3-13 Repl ication of John Cl inton and Anne his wifeficom

plaman ts, to the answers ofMary K impton an dWi ll iam Kimpton .

A GENEALOG I ST’S KALENDAR 6 3

Rejoinder ofMary Kimpton and Will iam K impton .Concern ing the recovery of the marri age port ion of the compt. Anne,who was daughter of Robert K impton (a tes tat es}. by Mary the defendant, and sister of Edward Kimpton .

Cor rass aooxs v . CHARNOCK and others

Cal; B i ll (26 Jan . 1 63-3) of Clement Cottesbrooke of London , turner,son and heir of Will iam Cottesbrooke la te of Swyn ford, co . Le ic . , yeoman,deceased, eldes t brother of John Cottesbrooke late of Wh i techapel, co . Middlesex , also deceased .

Answers (8 Feb. 1 63 -g) of Mark Smyth and Anne his w ife (defendantsw i th Richard Charnock of Rowell, co. Northants, gent ).

Concern ing a bond dated 1 6 Dec. 1 626 where in the sa id JohnCottesbrooke became bound together w i th the sa id Richard Charn ocl:as his surety for a debt, and other obl igations of the sa id JohnCottesbroolte . The defendant Anne, wi fe of Mark Smyth of Wapp ing, chandler, is rel ict of the sa id John Co ttcsbroo lte, and was marriedto her presen t husband about seven years since . She proved her latehusband’s w ill as guardian of his daughter Sarah , the ex trix . , who wasaged about 6 years, and who died soon afterwards .

Cu axs v . Cu m s and anotherC316 Repl i cation c. 1 644) of N icholas Clarke to the answers of

El izabeth Clarke, widow, and Robert Jen n or, defendan ts .Concern ing lands in Stutton , whereof the compt.

’s fa ther becamees ta ted by way of mortgage from one M ixter, of which he declaredtha t his son John should have all his estate . The compt . speaks ofthe declarat ions of his sa id fa ther made in 1 628with the intent tomake his w ill . The compt. den ies that the defendant El izabeth hadthe care wh ich she all eges tha t she had for the educa tion of him and

of his brothers, or that she kept them as her own children .

Cu csor'

r v . Goa t s and othersC11, Repl ica tion of Ri chard Cracroft, compla inant, to

the answers of Mat thew Goake, Will iam Gooday and Wi ll iam King, defendants .

Concern ing the jointure lands of the late w ife of the compla inant,who was mother of Richard Pepis.

Caar am v. Coon s and another

Cal, B ill ( 1 5 June 1 646) of Wi ll iam Cartrett of Wes tm inster, co . Mid

dlesex , brewer .Answer (2 2 June 1 646) of Peter Cooke (a near ne ighbour of the com

plainant), Sense his w ife and Edward Bond.Concern ing water suppl ied to the complainant for brewing.

64 THE ANCESTOR

CARY v . Ls xcu and others

B ill 1 62 2 of ohn u ire, son and heir apparen t ofS ir

c

Islii-

lip Ca r(y of Londoii , k

ii ighc

l

y

yS

t

ir

;qEdward Barrett, kn ight, his

guard ian .Answer Dec. 1 6 2 2) of Sir Franci s Leigh, kt. , and Dame Chri stian

h is wife .

Answers 1 62 2) of Sir Robe rt Heath, kt . , the sol ici tor- general, an dSir ]ohn Le igh, kt . , for themselves and for Thomas Leigh, Wi ll iam Le igh andjohn Le igh, sons of Sir Franci s Leigh, kt. , by Dame Chri stian hi s wife . [B1lland answers in defective condit ions .]

Concern ing the manors of Stanes and Stanwell, co. M iddlesex .

I I 1l.

R iehard=Elizabeth=Sir Thomas Knyvett Sir Edward=K atharin e K n yvettWarren survived Lord K nyvett Cary,kn ight fi rst married to the

of Lon both hus Lord Paget. Sur

d o n ban ds v ived both hus

ban ds

Sir Phi l ip Cary, kt.

Le igh Le igh

Carca s s o . Tn s ws and othersC3

17 B i ll (2 5 Apri l 1 646) of ]ohn Catcher (lately come of fii ll age), son

and heir of John Ca tcher late of M eldreth, 00 . Cambridge, husbandman, deceased .

An swer (3 June 1 646) of Wi ll iam Ti tmus and Ben jam in Payne both ofMeldreth (defendants w i th Mary Clerke, Thomas Clerke, Al exander Blaynand ]ohn Adleston . The sa id Mary is rel ict, and the sa id Thomas son and

heir, of Edward Clerke ofTriploe, co . Cambridge, deceased, the sa id Thomasbe ing a minor).

Concern ing a mortgage by the said John Catcher the elder of copyholds in Meldreth.

COLLI ER o . REMNANT an d others

Cah B ill (2 5 Oct. 1 645) of Robert Coll ier of Surrey .

An swers (6 Nov. 1 645) of Robert Remnant, Thomas West (a scrivener)and Francis Dirricke .

Con cern ing a loan to the compla inant made by the sa id RobertRemnant .

A GENEALOG IST’

S KALENDAR ‘ 65

I. ll.

Robert Collier of Purbright=Margaret=Robert Rem n antdreeas ed the defen dan t,

married in 1 6 18

ol l ierthe complai nant

Com: 0. Lowr n s a and another

G1 13 B i ll (1 Nov. 1 645) of George Co le of the prec inct of O ld B ridewell

,draper, for h imself and as guardian of ]ohn Cole his brother, a m inor.An swer of Sir john Lowther of Lowther, baron et (defeu~

dant wi th Thomas Cole).Concern ing messuages and lands called Hardrowe and Symondston e

in Wensleydale, 00. York, whereof George Cole, father of the com

plainants, died sei sed in 1 629 , leaving behind him Thom as Cole thedefendant his eldest son and hei r, the two complai nants his othersons and Rose, An ne, Hester and El izabe th his daughters. The saidRose was then married to Thomas ]obson, gent , on e of the son s ofMatthew ]obson la te of Midlam, cc. York, u ire, since deceased.The said Thomas Cole was then but young an newly come of age .

The said An ne married Matthew Metcalfe and Hester marri edEdward Moore . El izabe th the fourth si ster was brought up in

Ireland, and com ing cl'

ago made a journey into England to rece iveher portion, and fall ing s i ck at Burton in Warrell, 00 . Chester, madea w ill 26 Dec. 1 6 39 , givi ng her portion to the complainants . The

complainant George Cole came of age in 16 36 .

Cusot s e . B I SHOP or BANGOR and others

C11, Bill ( 1 7 May 1 637) of Rowland Chedle, Doctor ofDivi n i ty .Answer ( 14 June 1 637) ofM ichael Evans, clerk (defendant wi th Edmund,

B ishop of Bangor, Will iam Wyn , Thomas Drayeote, ]ohn Hopton and HarryKnowlsley) .

Concern ing the preben dal dign i ty a lled the Treasu rershi p of Bangorto wh ich belong the two churches of Llan vichangle y Traythey and

Uandegwyn in Merioneth .

C09 2 0 . Se Lss

C313 B ill ( 1 1 May 1646) of Thomas Cope and Anne Cope his wife.

Answer ( 16 May 1 646) of Elizabeth Styles, widow (defen dan t wi thRobert Mell).

Concern ing the lease of a messuage in Long Aker, cc. Mi ddlesex, ofwh ich Katherine Styles of St. Martin's in the fields, spins ter, is said by

66 THE ANCESTOR

the compla inants to have been possessed . She married one Mart inSeaman

,and they had i ssue one Hanna Saphia Seaman . The sa id

Martin made his wi ll nuncupative, giving the m essuage and householdstuff to his sa id daughter, who was then very young, and mak ingAnthony Styles her uncle his executor. The said Hanna Saphia

Seaman afterwards d ied, and since then her uncle i s al so dead. Ad

m in istration of the goods of the said Hanna Saphia was granted by theArchdeacon of M iddlesex to the complainant, the sa id Anne C0pebeing aunt to the deceased on the mother’s side. The defendantEl izabeth says that her fa ther- in - law Ol iver Styles of St. Martin’s inthe fields, gent , was possessed of the lease wh ich was made to him by]ohn Russell, esq . ,

and after the death of Ol iver the leasc "

came to hisson and heir Anthony Sty l es, his exor. , ofwhose wi ll dated 14 Dec.

2 1 Car . I . this defendant his rel ict i s executr ix.

Coam sn v . Co smsn

C315B ill (10 Feb . of Richard Corn ish of Thurleston, co. Devon,

yeoman .

Answer (1 2 Feb. 1 of Wi ll iam Corn ish (defendant w i th loan Corn i shand Henry Luscombe

,clerk).

Concern ing the estate of Andrew Corni sh, the compla inant’s father,who lately d ied intestate and indebted (according to the complainant)above the value of his esta te, of which the complainant was adm in is

trator. H e left,by the defendant Joan his wife

,four sons and

_a

daughter : Richard, Robert, Wi ll iam, Andrew an d Joan, and diedabout seven years since .

CLELAND v . CLELAND

C56 B il l (9 Feh. of john Cleland of Eastportlemouth, cc. Devon,clerk .

Answer (3 1 March 1 630) of Hester Cleland, widow.

Concern ing land which descended to the complainan t as heir of hi smother. The compla inant alleges tha t, soon after his father’s th irdmarriage, he was sent for a year in France, and on his return wasapprenticed to a merchant in Totness

,where he cont inued fiy e years,

but, havinge a greater desire to learn inge then to marchan tdisin ge,’ he

compounded w i th his master, and was adm i tted as a poor scholar toBennett College in Cambridge. There he continued five yea rs incredi t and good estimation, albei t his father allowed h im but s ix

pounds yearly, wh ilst the son of the defendant was allowed near fortypounds. After h is father’s death his friends for love and p i ty procured him the advowson ofEastportlemouth. The defendant declaresthat the complainant’s carriage, when an apprentice, was ‘

so ill

d issolute, expensive and d isservi ceable tha t his master discarded him ,

and tha t he though t not upon learn ing unti l persuaded thereto,sometime after his return home

,by Samuel Cleland his elder brother.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

68 THE ANCESTOR

Caom v . H s u mcs and othersC313 B i ll (9 May 1 646) of Matthew Crofts of Priors Hardwick, co.

Warwi ck, yeoman .An swers ( 1 3 May 1 646) of Richard Hemings, ]ohn Crofts and Robert

Welch, defendants .Concerning lands in Priors Hardwicl: of which the complainant’sfath er, Richard Crofts of Priors Hardwiclt, yeoman, d ied sei sed about1 6 years since, leaving the compla inant his son and heir, who came tofu l l age about 5 yea rs since .

CHAMBERS 0. Ba an s as

Cal; B i ll (1 ] une 1 646) of Mary Chambers of Loppington, co. Salop,w idow, adm in istratrix of Francis Chambers, gent , her late husband .

Answer (8 June 1 646) of Hatton Barri ers, gent , and Anne his wife.Concern ing a bon d dated in January 1 5 Car. I . wher ein FrancisChambe rs became bound w i th John Bromhall of Northwood Hall ,gen t , as surety for the sa id John to one Isabel Price, widow. Thesaid Isabe l afterwards d ied and An ne Price, her daughter and adm in istratrix, has married wi th the defendant Hatton Barners . The defendantsspeak of one Mr. Prince as thei r fr iend an d kinsman .

Con an 0. DAY

CT1

3 B ill (2 1 Apri l 1 646) of Thomas Collin of London, merchant .Answer (28Apri l 1646) of Thomas Day of London, merchant .Concern ing the compla inant’s deal ings i n hops w i th the defendant .

CAPE 0 . Bu r ns” and another

0613 B ill ( 1 7 April 1 646) of Thomas Cape of London, baker, an d Mary

w ife .Answers (25 Apri l 1 646) ofAnthony Bartlett and James Bes t.Concern ing three messuages in Wh itechapel whereof Thomas Bartletof Wh itechapel, bel lfounder, died se i sed . He made a w i ll 7 March1 63 1 giving one of them to Anthony his son, the defendant, and twoto the compla inant Mary, his daughter.

DALE v. B s s r 1110111 COMPANY

D1 B ill (7 Nov. 1 629) ofDame El izabe th Dale, late the w ife and ex tr ix .

of Sir Thomas Dal e, kn ight, deceased .

Plea (27 and 28Jan . 1 63—8) of the Governor and Company of Mi rchan tsof London, trading to the Eas t Indies .

Concern ing a voyage which Sir Thomas Dale began in Feh. 1 6 14} asAdmiral of a fleet of the Company’s sh ips.

A GENEALOG I ST’S KALENDAR 69

Davi o 0. Hows t t. and others

D} B ill ( 14 July 1 641) of Roger David of Bedwel ty, co. Monmouth ,yeoman, exor. cl' the nuncupa tive w ill of Rice Thomas of Bedwel ty, decw ed.

Answer (2 3 Oct. 1 641 )ofDido Howell Will iam of Bedwel ty (defen dantw i th Edward Morgan, esq . Hen ry Morgan, esq. and many others).

Con cern ing the es tate of Rice Thomas of Bedwel ty, deceas ed.

Dumuc 0. CauseD; B ill (7 july 1647) of N icholas Dun ing of Ugborrough, cc. Devon,

yeoman .Answer taken at Gulwill in Staverton (24 Sep 1647) of George Cruse of

Ashburton, gent.Concern ing the compt.’s deal ings wi th the defendant Cruse, whopractised as an attorney in the Stannary Cou rts . The said N icholasrelates how the rage of the souldiers on the k ings part ie was so grea tthat he was enforced for his better refuge to fly to the garr ison ofPlymouth .

Ds asm ux v . MURRAY and Others

Di B ill (2 2 May 1 644) of Sir Thomas Dereham of Wes t Dereham, cc.

Norfolk, kn ight.Answer (20 Dec. 1644) ofHenry Murray and An ne his w ife, (defendants

w i th Henry Dereham of the Inner Temple, esq. , a son of compt . , and O l ivehis wife

,Margaret K irby the elder an d her daughter Margaret K irby the

younger and Wal ter San ky).Concern ing the manor of Cr implesham, co . Norfolk, whereof the complainant was se i sed for his l ife with rem t . to Thomas Dereham , his sonand he ir apparen t. The defendant Anne Murray is dau . of Paul , lateViscount Ban inge, deceased, one of whose exors . was ] efi

'

rey Kirby,esqu ire. The elder Margaret K irby is rel ict and ex trix . of th is ] efii'ey,whose dans. and co- heirs are Ol ive, wife of defendant Hen ry Dereham,

and the sa id Margaret K irby the younger .

Dooswoar u 0.

D) B i ll (23 Oct. 1645) of Marga re t Dodsworth, one of the daughtersof ] ohn Dodsworth, late of Thorn ton Watlas, co. York, esqu ire .Answer (4 june 1 646) of Mat thew Smel t of Kirkby Fleetham, co. York,

esqu1re .

Concerning a sum of money wh ich was in the hands of AliceDodsworth , the complainant’s elder s ister, who was wife to thedefendant Smel t . The said Al ice d ied about two years since, andthe complainant’s father an d mother abou t e ighteen months since.

7 0 THE ANCESTOR

DENMAN v . Hau s ar on and others

D§ B ill May 1 646) ofNicholas Denman , alderman of K ingstonupon Ii uH.

Answer (2 3 Feb . of George N ight ingal e, gen t . (defendant wi thN icholas Hamerton and Thom as Dawson).Concern ing m essuages and lands in M isterton and Stockworth, co.

Notts,and in the county of York, whereof, accord ing to the com

pla inant’s story, Will iam Bett was se ised, wh ich Wi ll iam gave thesame by his w i ll dated 1 584 to Anne Bett h is daughter, and to theheirs male of her body, wi th rem t . to the heirs of her body

,wi th

remr . to William Denman son of John Denman , Isabel the wife ofWill iam Bett hav ing some esta te therein for l ife. If she ma rriedagain , ]ohn Denman (son - in - law of W ill iam Bett

,and brother of the

said W i ll iam Denm an) and Rosamond his wife should have the prem ises in Northlaverton for the res t of the lease. The sa id I sabelmarried one N icholas Hamerton, and aft erwards Anne Bett diedw ithout issue. Afterwards Isabel d ied, and the sa id Will iam and]ohn Denman and Rosamond his w ife are all dead also. The com

pla inant is son and hei r and exor. of the sa id John Denman, whosurvived Rosamond his wife. The defendant states that ‘

he is inpossession of certa in messuages and lands in North Leverton, in rightof his nephew Wi ll iam N ightingal e, an infant under the age of 20years

,son and heir of William N ightingale, deceased.

Dos son v . Moon s and anotherD; B i ll ( 1 7 May 1 642) of ]ohn Dobson of Treaswell, co. Notts, son

and he ir to Wi lliam Dobson, deceased, who was son and heir to ThomasDobson, deceased, who was son and heir to Thomas Dobson, deceased .

Answer (1 3 June 1 642) of Thomas Moore and Thomas Codd, defendants .Concern ing two tenem ents i n Gain sburgh, co. Lincoln, wh ich as thecompt . alleges one Thomas Dobson granted to Thomas Dobson hisson, grandfather of the compt . The defendant’s answer that oneWi ll iam Dobson of Barn eby on the Moor, yeoman, by his deedindented

,dated 2 3 Oct . 24 El izabeth, conveyed a certain tenement

in Ga in sburgh to Robert Shadforth of Gain sburgh, yeoman, whod ied se ised of the sam e tenement

,wh ich came to Ruth Shadforth,

his daughter and he ir, who afterwards married one Nevi ll of G rove,co. Notts, gent. In her w idowhood Ruth Nevi ll, by deed dated30 Apri l 40 El iz . , conveyed the tenement to Anne her daughterand hei r and her husband Thom as Fotherby . Shortly after th isthe sa id Ruth, Thom as and Anne, by deed 4 May 43 E112 . soldthe prem ises to Ciprian Godfrey of Gain sburgh, gent , who sold thesame by deed dat. 6 May 7 jac . I . to Thomas Sm i th, waterman , andThom as More, i ronmonger, bo th of Gain sburgh . The defendantThomas More is son an d heir of the aforesaid Thomas Moore.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

7 2 THE ANCESTOR

Du ran e . q r s and othersD7

1

,B i ll (23 Nov. 1 629) of David Draper of Ston ley, co. Warwick,

gent .Answer (9 Apri l 1 630) of George Wi llys of Fen nycompton, gent.

(defendant w ith Henry Murcott of Tachbrooke Mall ery, co . Warwick,yeoman , John Perkins of Tachbrooke, yeoman, and Richard Harvye ofTachbrooke, yeoman) .

Concern ing a loan made abou t two years since by the compla in antto the defendant Murcott.

DELL v . PLOMER

D13, Repl ication of Ralph Del l to the answer of

Thomas Plomer, defen dant .A den ial that the ground whereupon is a cottage now in question wasever part of the jo inture of the Lady Cotton , or tha t the cottage wasever conveyed to W ill iam P lomer, fa ther of the defendant ThomasPlomer .

Du n ca n”0. Facr a

D133 B i ll of Will iam Darracott of Chi ttlehampton,co. Devon, yeoman, executor of John Darracott his father, of Landlcey, co .

Devon, yeoman , deceased .Answer taken at Barnstaple in Devon (6 June 5 Car. I .) of El izabeth

Facye, w idow, rel ict an d ex trix . of Humfrey Facye, deceased, an d s ister ofthe complainant .

Concern ing the goods of ] ohn Darracott, deceased . One Tepper, aw idow, is mentioned as another sister of the complainan t.

Dovs 0 . HARDYB

D71; B ill (8Nov. 1 63 1 ) of John Dove of New Sarum, gen t.

An swer (9 Nov . 1 63 1) of Thomas Hardye, esqu ire.

Concern ing the manor of Keighaven , whereof Jane Hardye, widow,was seised for a term of years . At a court held 20 Jan . 1 2 ]ac. I . shesurrendered four copyhold tenemen ts w i th lands called Hatchley, somet ime in the tenure of John Gawney to Thomas Hardye, esq. , her son,(the defendant) and to her daughters Anne and Dorothy Hardye for

their l ives .DEERMAR v. Ds saw m

D113 B i ll (2 5 ] un e 1 641 ) of Wi ll iam B eermat of Hardi ng, oo. Herts,yeoman, compla inant against John Dearmar and Thomas Deermar, father andbrother of the complainant.

Concern ing lands i n Carrington, co. Herts, whereof ]ohn B eermatwas seised, whose son and hei r the compla inant is . The said johnDearmar i s said to have engaged to settle the lands upon the complainant i n con sideration of his be ing bound for pa en t of 601. tothe young chi ldren of the sai d John, m whi ch bon d

yr

t

l

he compla inan tbecame bound to John an d Edward B eermat his brother. The

defendant John, who is old and week, was afterwards persuaded tosettl e the lan ds upon his son the defendant Thomas .

SOME EXTINCT CUMBERLAND FAM ILIES

I . THE W IGTONS

HE manor of W igton ve i ts name to a fam ily whoheld a posi tion of con s i erable em inence in the county

for two centuries . I ts first Norman owner was Odard, sherifi'

of Carlisle, a man of great local repute said to have beenseneschal of RanulfMeschin and also sheriff of Northumberland . I t i s stated on the h ighest authori ty that Henry I .e n feofl

'

ed Odard wi th the manor of Wigton . Later evidencespoint to Waldeve, lord ofAllerdale, as the grantor , a supposit ion not wi thout force seeing that the manor was parcel ofW aldeve

’

s fee . Be that as i t may, the jurors of the grea ti nquest of 1 2 1 2 looked upon the con firmation of the Crowna s the source of Odard’

s ti tle. The first owner of W ifgton ,

called at an earl period Odard de Logy s for the sake 0 dis

tinction, shou ld,

not be confused w i th another Odard whoflou rished in the county at the same time, that i s, Odard sonH ildret, known in 1 1 30 as Odard de Chaerleolio or Odard ofCarlisle . I t i s di sputable whether or not Odard de Bebbanburgh or Bamburgh, sherifl’of Northumberland, was identicalwi th Odard de Logys as the name was common in the northerncoun ti es at th i s period.

1

1 I n the sheriff’s inqu isi tion of 1 2 1 2 Henry I . is named as the grantor ofW igton to Odard the sher iff (Vit toria History qf Cumberland, i . I n adocument among the Tower M iscellaneous Roll s (No.

1—3—9 ; Ba in, Calendar4 Document: relating to Srothnd, i i . 64) and also in the Chroni con Cumbrie ’

(Monastitofl , i i i . statements not to be rel ied on unless supported by otherev idence (Vi ctori a H ist. CM . 1. 297 Waldeve son of Gospatrick is namedas the origi nal grantor. In the Tower Roll Odard is call ed seneschal of Ranul fMeschin : in both documents he is called Odard de Logya or Logi s. Thedi stincti on betwee n contemporary Odards is of the h ighest importance. Therei s a deed in the Rtgister qf Wetberbal (pp. l43

—7 , cd. J . E . Prescott) wh ich

shows tha t Odard the sheriff was a di fferen t person from Odard son ofH ildretdc Carlel. This Odard of Carl isle was assoc iated w ith Wi lli am Mesch in andArchbishop Thurstin whe n the priory of St. Bees was founded (Harbin MS.

434, lib. i . Odard, vi cecomes de Bebbanburgh,’ w i tnessed the foundat ion charter of Selkirk granted by Earl David (Dalrymple, CaIlectiom, p. 405)and i s ca lled sheriff of Northumberland by Prior Ri chard of Hexham Memo

73

74 THE ANCESTOR

For several descents the fami ly name of the owners ofWigton alternated between Odard and Adam, necessi tatingthe closest attention . Li ttle i s known of the first Adam, thesuccessor of Odard the sheriff, but he was probably his son .

I n 1 181 William son of the first Odard had a recogn i tion ofright to three carucates of land agai nst the second Odard son

0 Adam,for wh ich he paid a fin e of three m arks .1 The

name of the second Odard i s found often in the Pipe Rollsand elsewhere till hi s death in H is wife’s name wasM ilisen t, who after hi s death married Reynold son of Adamde Cardu il. I t is evident that she was the same person as

M ilisen t of Blakehale and that i t was through her that themanors of Blakehall and perhaps ofMelmorby were added tothe possessions of th i s fam ily .

’

The second Adam son of the second Odard, succeed ing in1 208, paid eighty m arks for having his father's lands wi th the

rink, p. 6 2, Surtees Society) and by Symeon of Durham in 1 1 2 1 (Opera, 1.1 1 6, Surtees Society). Odard was acting as sheriff of Northumber land in1 1 30 (Pipe R011, p. 3 5, cd. J. Hunter). The late Mr. Hodgson H inde t e

garded these three Odards as the sam e person (H i1tary of Noflbumé erland, i .203 Mr. Horace Round has argued for the iden ti ty of Odard de Logi sand Odard de Bebbanburgh (Genealogflt, v . 2 5, new and ArchdeaconPrescott ha s stou tly pleaded for thei r di stinction (Reg. ty

'

Wetberbal, pp. 145—6 .

In 1 1 30 Symon Dispensator owed forty marks of si lver for a plea wh ich the

ki ng had against Odard de Chaerleolio his brother- ln-law (Pipe R011, p.

1 Pipe R011, 2 7 Hen . I I .3 In 1 1 86 Odard son ofAdam was hued half a mark because he had not

whom he pledged (Pipe Roll, 3 2 Hen . and i n 1 20 1 he paid 1 001. tha the m ight not go beyond the sea (71: trmy

‘retm t) and fi ve marks as scutage in

1 203 (Ratulx'

J : p. 145, cd. Hardy : Pipe 120111 , 3 8: 5 John). ]ohnDenton, who wrote about the yea r 1 620

,fa il ing to noti ce the intermed iate

l ink in the ped igree, m i stook Odard the grandson for Odard the sheriff, andin consequen ce was obl iged to make the latter l ive above an hundred ea rs ’(Hi1tary qf Cumberland, p. 62, ed. R . S. Fergu son). The second Odard

,

di edin 1 208, for in that year his son succeeded (Pipe Roll, 1 0 John).

3 The identi ty ofMilisen t i s a point of considerable interest . I t is s tatedon the same roll tha t Reynold owed forty marks for having to wife Milisen twidow ofOdard son of Adam, an d that Milisen t de Blakehale was engaged inpleas of the fores t a t the same t ime (Pipe R011, 1 1 ] ohn). Tha t was 1 209 ,the yea r after Odard’s dea th . As Milisen t was mother of Adam,

the nextowner of Wigton, i t is not improbable tha t the m anor of Blackhall descendedi n th is way to the Wigton fam ily . I t was reckoned among the possess ions ofOdard de Wigton who died thirty years la ter (Inf. Am. intern temp. Hen . I I I .No . John Denton was of opin ion that Blachall or Blackhill commonlycalled Blecltall was given by Henry I . to Odard de Logi s baron of Wigton(Him of Cumb. p. but he gave no au thori ty for the statement.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

7 6 THE ANCESTOR

and a th ird of seventy—two acres an d two bovates in Melmorby wh ich she claimed as dower. John le Frau n ceys,

guardi an of the heir and the estates adm i tted her ti tle to a

w idow’s portion .

1

Walter came of a e an d succeeded Odard his father in1 258. The sherifi' o the county certified to the j ustices inJune of that year that Odard, father of Walter

,held of

William de Fortibu s , Earl ofAlbemarle, the manor of Wigtonby cornage an d of the king in ch ief the manor of Melmorbywi th i ts pertinents, Steynton, Blakhille and Wardwyk, an d

al so that Walter h is son, the next heir, would be twenty- twoyears of age on Au s t 1 5 next, Walter’s age having beenverified by a j ury 0 his n eighbours .” Th i s member of thefam ily played a considerable part in local and m i li tary afi’airsduring his te nure of the estates . H is dealings wi th - theneighbouring monastery of H olmcultram were friendly if notbenevolent an d generous . I n 1 265 he con firm ed the possessions of the monks wi th in his manor ofWigton

, and in 1 270

he came to an agreement w i th H[enry], abbot of the house,about certain purprestures an d improvements, at the sametime giving him power to i nclose a wood at Aykehev id, calledAykehevidscawe.

3 H e also granted th e monastery certainway

- leaves ‘in his barony of Wyggeton .

" I n 1 266 Walterof Wigton peti tioned for qu i ttance of puture of the forestan d horngeld i n respect of h is manors of Wigton an d Blackhall

,but the privilege was den ied on the ground that i t would

be injurious to the king’s interest.“ But he was more fortunate in the following year

,for he was allowed to assart an d

1 Comm Rage Roll, 37 Hen . I I I . No. 9 1 , m . 1 3 ; B ain , i . 1 93 3 . Adamde W igton must have been dead before May 4, 1 2 5 1 , for in tha t year anextent of the lands i n Northumber land belonging to Isabella widow ofAdam

de Wygeton was made (lug. pm . 3 5 Hen . I I I . No . The widow wassixteen years of age and is cal l ed the daughter of the first begotten daughterof Robert de Muscampis (Calendarium Genealogicum, i . Next year shehad l icence to m arry whom she pleased (Pipe R011, 36 Hen . I I I . 111 . 1 1d. :

Rain 1. I n one of the i nqui sitions it is said that Isabe lla was marri edto a certa in boy (pan s) ca lled Adam de Wygin ton she was fifteen years ofage and her husband of the age of thi rteen or fourteen yea rs : bo th were wardsof Wi ll iam de Hun tercumbe (I flg. pm . 39 Hen . I I I . No . 40 ; B ain , i . 1 967 ,p 3 7 21

11 Comm Rage R011, 42 8: 43 Hen . I I I . No . 1 06 Rain , 1. 2 1 29 .

3 HarleiarxMS. 39 1 1 , ff. 54, 56 .

Reg. of Holmrultram, MS. f. 7 7 .

5 171g. pm . 50 Hen . I I I . No . 28.

EXTINCT CUMBERLAND FAM IL IES 77impact his woods in the same man ors .

l H e was often employed on the king's servi ce i n the Welsh wars from 1 276

till his death, and was summoned to the parl iament wh i chmet at Shrewsbury i n 1 283 , together wi th other barons of thek in dom .

’ Walter of Wigton d ied in 1 286, and was succee cd by John

,h is son and he ir, who was twenty- two years

of age.

”

Sir John ofWigton, baron of Wigton, the last heir male ofhis line

,spent most of h is life in active service in parliament

and the field. As kn ight of the shi re of Cumberland he wasreturned to serve in the parliaments wh ich met at Lincoln in1 30 1 and Westm inster in 1 305 and H is m ili taryservices in the Welsh and Scotti sh wars of Edward I . weremany and var ious .“ Ou the border he was a tower ofstren th as a conservator of the peace at home and as theinde tigable pursuer of Robert de Brus through the southernSh ires of Scotland. I n 1 295

- 6 Sir John caused Will iam deWytyngham to be attached at Bolton and im rison ed as a

Scotti sh trai tor in that he had absented h imself om his landsto avoid service in the army against the Scots, the saidWi lliam being a kinsman of John Rede Comyn

,the king’s

enemy.

“ Wh ile King Edward was at Lan ercos t on his lastj ourne to Scotland, he ordered him in 1 306

—7 to levy 200

stout oo trn en i n Cumbe rland and bring them to Carlisle forthe purpose of pursuing Robert de Brus and his accomplices .’Ou that business he was often engaged. I t would be tediousto recount his services i n war, as he was m ixed up in most ofthe assays and expedi tions of th is troublesome period . Li ttle

1 Patent R011, 5 1 Hen . I I I . The r i se of the wi l l of Wigton abou t th i st ime as a centre of industry and commerce is ev ident from the king’s gran t in1 26 2 of a weekly market on Tuesdays and a yearly fa i r on the 7 th, 8th and9 th of September (Cbarter R011, 46 Hen . I I I . pt. 1. No. 5 Plan

'

ta de QuaWaraflto

, p. 1 1 6, Record Commiss ion).1 Patent R0111 , 4 Edw. I . m . 2 , 5 Edw. I . m . 14 Fe dera, 1. 537—8, 608,

6 30, new ed i t. Palgrave, Parfiammtary Wn'

fl ,i . 1 5, 1 94, 2 2 3, 2 26, 246 ;

Dign ityW Pm ,i i i . 3 7. 40. 44, 47 , 49 .

3 I ng. p .m. 14 Edw. I . No . 1 5 Calend. Genes ] . i . 368 Fine R011, 14Edw. I . m . 1 3 Originafia , 14 Edw. I . m . 4 (i . 5 1 , Record Commiss ion) .

4 Parfiamerm g’

England, 1. 1 3 , 1 8, 43 , Blue Book ; Parfiammtafy Wn'

fl ,

i . 102, 1 56—7 , etc.5 Fe dera, i . 6 75, etc. 11. 8, 78 ; Dignify ty

'

a Petr, i i i . 5 1 , 54—5, etc. ;

Par]. Wri t1, i i . div . i i i . 1 6 1 1 - 2 .

5 Bain , 11. 189 .

7 Pat. Roll, 3 5 Edw. I . m . 3 2 Bam, 11. 1 902 .

78 THE ANCESTOR

reward did he receive from thefgr eat Edward, though we

find h im among the peti tioners or lands or preferment inScotland in Edward I I . however gave h im the custodyof the barony of L iddel, which Joan widow of John Wakeheld.

”

On the death of Sir John de Wigton all his estates es

cheated pending the declaration of the rightful heir. Theinquisi tions of 1 3 1 5 were at variance, an d a long su i t in lawensued . Soon after his marriage Sir John was separated fromthe Lady D ion yse de Luvetot hi s wife, an d ultimately oh

tain ed a divorce in the ecclesiastical court of Carl isle . A

daughter Margaret was born of the marriage. Ou Sir John’sdeath the manors were claim ed by Margaret h i s only ch ildand al so by hi s five si sters an d thei r heirs. The Somersetjurors declared in favour of Margaret formerly wife of Johnde Crokedak, but the Cumberland jurors supported theclaims of the five si sters .8 The di spute was referred to the

lay as well as the ecclesiastical courts. Margaret and hermother moved the provi ncial court of York to set aside thedivorce, as i t had been obtained i rregularly in the courtbelow .

‘1 Their opponents pleaded that John and his wifewere divorced on account of the precontract of D iony se . toone John Payn el. I n 1 320 the court accepted a certificate

from the B i shop of London of Margaret’s legi timacy, whereupon shewas adjudged the lawful heir and seizinwas given her. 5The Lady Mar et de Wigton

,who succeeded her

father,was the last 0 the family to use the name or own the

manor. Though she was married four times, she died ch ildless

,and the estates not alienated du ring her li fetim e reverted

to the lord of the fee or to the Crown . As her mother hadmaintained her right to a widow’s portion of Sir John’s lan ds,6the divorce obtained in the diocesan court of Carli sl e musthave been set aside . To meet the expenses of defending herti tle, Margaret was obliged to sell her manors of Melmorby,

1 Palgrave, Documen t“ and Record1 , p. 308.

1 Originafia, 3 Edw. I I . 111 . 6 (i . 1 68, Rec. Comm ission).3 I ng. p.m. 8Edw. I I . No . 6 1 .

Regi mr q p. Hakim, MS. ff. 1 76—9 , 180—1 .

5 Abé rw . Placit. p . 3 36, Record Commi ss ion . The i ssue was con fusedzby

Sir ]ohn’s dem ise of the estates to his nea rer rela tions under li cence in 1 3 1 1

(Pat. Roll, 4 Edw. I I . pt. i i . 111 .

6 Pat. Roll, 6 Edw. I I I . pt. 1. m . 1 2 lag. pm . 5 Edw. II I . pt. i i . No.1 3 5 Monasticon , v. 599 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

80 THE ANCESTOR

Blackhall and Stainton to Robert Parvyng, the king’s serj eant

at—law.

l I n 1 3 32 she granted land in W i on,wi th the

advowson of the church, to the monastery o H olmcultram

for the health of her soul . She survived her four husbands,2an d died in 1 348. I n spi te of the verdict of the in u is ition

after death, wh ich declared Richard son of Walter e K irkbride to be her heir

,the manor of Wigton escheated to

Thomas son of Anthony de Lucy, lord of the honour ofCockermouth, h'

om whom i t had been held.3 Henceforththe manor became merged in that lordsh ip .

I I . THE LEVINGTONS

Henry I . assigned the manor of Leven ton , Lev in ton , orLevington, si tuated between Carlisle an d the Scotti sh border,to R ichard de Boyv ill at an annual cornage rent. I t i s doubtfu l whether th i s Richard should be iden tified w i th Richardthe knight

,who appears in the Pipe Roll of 1 1 30 as dis

charging a portion of the debt due to the Crown for landsdemi sed to h im . The Richard of the Pipe Roll appears to bethe same perso n as Richard Ridere

,the ancestor of the

Tilliols, who received the grant of the adjoining manor of

Scaleb fr om the same king. Richard de Boywll was succeedecl

7

by his son Adam,who occurs first in the Pipe Roll

of 1 1 70 in amercement for swine taken in the forest. Adamson of R icher or R ichard must have died before 1 1 77 , for inthat year Adam hi s son paid a fin e of ten marks that theking m ight take his homage . Juliane his wife survived him ,

and was living in 1 183 .

Adam son of Richer an d Ju liane his wife had two sons,

1 Pat. Rolb, 7 Edw. I I I . pt. 11. m . 29, 8Edw. I I I . pt. 1. m . 2 1 .

2 Much confusion has ari sen over the matrimonia l alliances of Margaret 01W igton . John de Crokedayl: was her fi rst husband, from whom she inheri teda w idow’s portion of the manor of Crokedaylt and other lands pm . 2 3Edw. I II . pt. 1. No. ] ohn de Den oum or Den um was the second(Perl. Peti tiom, No. 2 5 1 3 B aifl, i i i . In the deeds of the transfer ofthe advowson of Wigton church to the monks of Holmcultram, John deDen um is spoken of as formerly her husband, and Sir John Gernon appears ata later stage of the negotiations, so tha t the th ird marriage must have takentaken place in 1 3 3 1

- 2 (Reg. q p . Kirby , MS. ff. 245 In 1 3 36 John deWeston was fin ed for marry in g her w i thout l icen ce (Pat. R011, 10 Edw. I I I .pt. i . m .

3 1719 . pm . 2 3 Edw. I I I . pt. 1. No . 86 Origi nafid, 2 3 Edw. I I I . 111. 20(11. 20 1 , Record Commi ss ion).

EXT INCT CUMBERLAND FAM ILIES 81

Adam,who succeeded to the barony in 1 1 77, and William,

Who was settled at Westham or Wes tleven ton , n ow calledWestl inton . I n 1 1 79 Adam son of Adam son of Richerendeavoured to d ispossess his brother of his inheri tance, butWill iam appealed an d aid a fin e of forty marks for a fai rtrial. Wi ll iam was still in po sses sion in 1 204 . Adam as

sumed the name of his manor andwas returned to the scutagein 1 205 and succeeding years as Adam de Lev in ton . H e

was succeeded by R ichard de Levin ton , who paid three hundred marks and three palfreys in 1 2 1 1 for having his land inthe preceding year. I n the Red Book inqui si tions Adam and

R ichard are returned as holding by cornage, the latter beingposses sed of three vills in demesne an d a half by homage .

Sir Richard de Lev in ton , Adam’s son

,i s a fam il iar figure

in the transactions of the period in wh ich he lived. Likemany of the barons of the northern counti es, he was implicated in the barons’ resi stance 1 to Kin John

,but he returned

to h is allegiance in 1 2 1 7 . The sheri was ordered to cancelhis attendance on the army at Bedford in 1 224, for the reasonthat he held his lands by cornage an d not by m ili tary service .’As a j ustice he was often em loyed on the king’s business inthe counties of Cumberlan and Westmorlan d. H e heldassize s of novel d isseizin at Carli sle and Appleby in 1 23 6, and

was one of the assessors in the international settlement of1 237

—42 in satisfaction of the heredita claims of Scotland

on the counties of Cumberland and orthumberland.

’ A

d i spute ari s in between him and his neighbour Peter deTilliol, a sui t y i n the k ing

’s court i n 1227 for the adj ustment of the boundaries between thei r respective manors ofLevi n ton and Scales. Richard complained that Peter hadappropriated four carucates of land, whereof Richer, hisfather’s grandfa ther

,was seised in demesne in the time of

King Henry, the grandfather. Peter,on the o ther hand,

asserted that he claimed no more than what hi s ancestors diedse i sed of, from father to son, from th eir first acqu isi tion (4primo conquerm), and the en feofi

'

men t of thei r ancestors. Thesherifl’was ordered to take a view and set bounds and letthem decide by a great assize or a duel.‘ Ri chard i s said to

1 Claw R011, 2 Hen . I II . p. 3746, Record Commi ss ion .1 I bid. 8Hen . I I I . pp. 6 145 , 6 395.

3 Bain, Calendar c ommenn , i . 2 34, 2 36, 2 57 , etc .4 CommRegr Rolf, 1 1 Hen . Ill. No . 2 7, m . 4 ; Ba in, Calendar, etc. i . 1 76 .

82 THE ANCESTOR

have acted as a j ustice i tinerant for Cumberland andWestmorland in 1 22 5 and for Lancashire some years later.

R ichard de Lev in ton , dying 1 in 1 250, was succeeded byhi s brother Ralf

,who had inheri ted by his marriage wi th Ada

de Morvill a moiety of the Morv ill lands, v iz . s ix carucates inK irkoswald and three carucates in Lazonby worth yearlytwenty- four marks .” By th is marriage he became brother- inlaw to Richard de Vernum, husband of H elewise de Morv ill,Ada’s si ster. I n 1 247 Richard de Vern u n and Ralf deLevi n ton did homage for the Morv ill estates lately belongingto Joan de Morvill

,mother of H elewise and Ada. The year

before, an agreement was made between Ralf de Lev in ton and

Alan de Chartres for a certain rent in Gamelsby and Glassanbywh ich Eve had given to Alan before she married him .

3 Ralfd ied in 1 253 , a few years after his brother, and all hi s property was taken into the king’s hand till the lawful hei r wasdeclared,‘except of course the land assigned in dower to Adahis widow .

H elewi se,only ch ild of Ralf and Ada de Lev in ton , was

placed in the custody of Sanch ia Countess of Cornwall,5 wi thall her lands, her mother afterwards marryi ng William deFurn ivall

,“ who di ed in 1 264. H elewise de Lev in ton marri ed

Eustace de Balliol, who enjoyed the Lev in ton property for a

short period . They had a grant of a weekly market 7 on

Thursday and a yearly fair on June 28 and two followingdays at their manor of ‘Levyngton

’

in 1 2 7 1 . Balliol hadlicence to lease hi s manors of Levy ngton , Skelton, Gamalsby,Glas sanby andQi orlyn gton for four years after M ichaelmas,1 270, as he was about to set out wi th Prince Edward for theHoly Land.

‘3 H elewise died ch i ldless in 1 272, in the twentyfourth year of her age, and the Lev in ton estates passed toco—heiresses .

1 Fine R016 , 11. 80, Record Comm iss ion 171g. pm . 34 H en . I I I . No . 47Origi nalia, 34 Hen . I I I . 111 . 7 .

2 Fine Roll1, i i . 10 ; Pzpe R011, 3 1 Hen . I I I . m . 8; 1119. 3 1 Hen . I I I:No. 3 2 .

3 Feet qf’

F ine1, 30 Hen . I I I . (Cumberland), No. 48.

4 Fine Rollt, i i . 1 76 .

5 Origi nafia, i . 1 25, Reco rd Commission .5 Fine Rollf, i i. 4 14, 507, 5 2 5 .

7 Charter Roll, 46 Hen . I I I . m . 5 Placid: deQua Waraflfo,-

p. 1 294 ,Record Comm ission .

Pat . R011, 54 Hen . I I I . 111 . 10.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

84 THE ANCESTOR

heirs did homage on receiving their portions wi th the exception of Richard de Kirkbride

,who was under age, and Patrick

de Su thayk . The Idower of Sara de Paveley was divided onher death in 1 300 among the heirs of the s ix coparcenersabove mentioned . Much of the Levin ton property was conficated during the Scottish war of independence, as several ofthe heirs were Scotsmen and opposed the English claims .

Richard de Boyv ille of Levi n gton

J u l i a n e

Adam de Levin ton, d. 1 2 10

1d Sara Robert de Ralf : Ada de Eu e Is I Margery Ju l i an ePaveley d. Morvill de de

1 2 53 K irkbride Twynham Corry Hampton Carrick SuthaykH elewise Eustace de Balliold.

1 272

JAMES W ILSON .

THE ARMS OF THE SANDES OF

CUMBERLAND

YSONS writing in 181 6 stated that as the arms of SandesSandys were not described in St. George's Vi si tation

of 1 6 1 5, it was uncertain what coat was borne by the Cumberland fam ily. By chance I met with evidence at the PublicRecord Office wh ich establ ished the po int beyond di spute .A short pedigree of Edwin Sandes, bi shop of Worcester,afterwards B ishop of London and Archbishop of York, com

Filed by Will iam Hervy, Clarenceux k ing of arms, will beou nd in the State Papers, Domestic, El izabeth, Addenda, vol .x i i . 92 . I t i s as follows—being headed by a sh ield of arm s incolours—gold witba dance gale: between tbree crosletsfi tcby gules .

San des of Saluet Beesi n the eon te of

Comberland

John n des W ill1am Sandessecond son e

Roger San desGeorge San deshad y ss ue

had yss ue W i l l iam Sandes,who served

ye k ing i n hi s wan and

was justice of peace whereRobert San des he l ived , had ysan e

Edwy n San desn ow bisshope

of WorcesterThis is the arms and dyu ent of Sandes of St. Bees in the Con te of Combe rls nd

I n witn es wherof I have her un to subscribed my n am e.

W . Hu n alias Claren deulx Ki ng of Armes .

As Edwin Sandes became B ishop of Worcester in 1 559 and

Hervy died in 1 567, the date of the compila tion must liebetween these years. I t will be seen that the document,h itherto u npubhshed as far as I know

,contains many po ints

of interest in the genealogy of this family.

JAMES W ILSON .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

88 THE ANCESTOR

No . 1 . The first exam le selected for illustration has a

skullpiece wi th a s imple and i s intended to show thelast stage of the English et before the introduction ofeven an embryo comb .

My collection being but small i t is not suggested that thebest possible examples are shown, but i t i s hoped that in eachinstance they will sufficien tly answer my purpose .Th i s helmet i s also curious as being a funeral helm made

up, for some economical fam ily, from portions of three helmets,that is to say, from two buffs or reinforcing p ieces and thefifteen th century sku ll- piece already referred to . Althoughclosely resembhng an ordinary helm of the period i t wasnever actually worn in battle.No . 2 i s a German helmet of the early part of the sixteenth

century,When flu ted armour had come into fashion . At first

the flu ted rid es on the skullpiece were all practi cally thesame in size, a t by the time th i s specimen was made thecentre ridge had slightly developed, as it was there the necessityof resi stance against the battle axe, heavy two—handed swordand m ace was the greatest.No . 3 shows an Engli sh helmet of a li ttle later date, when

the side flutes had di sappeared,the central one, n ow somewhat

larger,be ing alone retained, and the comb may n ow be

regarded as a defin ite and important part of the helmet.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

90 THE ANCESTOR

No. 4, a Spani sh helmet, engraved and dated 1 557, showsthe comb still h igher

,but retaining the graceful curves by

wh ich it ri ses from the crownp iece.No . 5 . An English helmet of the latter half of the

sixteenth century . Here the comb has reached i ts fu llestu seful height . The helmet i s exceedi ngly light as comparedw ith the earl ier examples, i ts shape making i t amply strongenough to divert a lance th rust, wh ilst the h igh comb defendedthe wearer from the heavi est cut of the swords then in use .No . 6 . I n th i s I talian burgonet the decadence of armour

i s well illustrated. Although but li ttle later than No. 5, theleaders of fashion had decided that for many purpo ses a lightheadpiece open in front was

rFreferable to the more heavy

closed helmet which sadly inte ered wi th the breathi ng of thewearer. The comb was carried to an unnecessary height topermi t of elaborate decoration .

I t should be noted that the skullpieces of all the helmetsup to thi s sample were forged out of one piece of metal wi thout a j oin, and as the armourer had also to keep them of thecorrect and mutable th ickness throughout, they are wonderfulinstances of mechanical ski ll .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

9 2 THE ANCESTOR

No . 7 . I n th i s early seventeenth century helmet the combhas lost it s original value, an d exi sts in a modified form probably as a sort of Darwinian survival of an extinct fash ion .

The particular shape of the comb is,so far as I can ascertain

unique, an d the armourer’s ar t having degenerated,the skull

p iece i s made of two parts j oined along the comb .

NO. 8. Thi s headpiece, worn by the troopers during theCromwellian wars, only retains the once important comb as a

convenient means of strongly join ing the two sides of thehelmet, and i s a mere ridge .No . 9 . Th i s light English casque of about the sam e

period has lost every trace of a comb, the armourer evidentlythinking he showed superior sk ill in j oining i ts two halveswi thout the ugly ridge shown in No . 8, and the skull, so faras the shape i s concerned, i s very sim ilar to the late fifteen thcentury helm Wi th wh ich my series commenced.

Considerations of space have prevented details being givenas to the weapons against wh ich these helmets were a defencebut in thi s instance the wearer evidently recognized that noarmour could resi st firearm s

, and so long as it saved him froma sword slash in a ski rm ish

,or from boiling water or lead

when assaulting a fortified house, he was content .A consideration of the evolution and decay of the combed

helm et is,as will be seen from these notes

,a simple matter.

How much more in terestin would be an explanation of thecauses leading to the manu ctu re of the elabo rate sword h i ltsof the sixteenth an d seventeenth centuries

,or the reason s for

the extraordinary diversity of the strange shafted weapons ofthe fourteenth

,fifteen th

, an d sixteenth centuries.

T. G. NEVILL .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

94 THE ANCESTOR

stupid an d vexatious . F irst of all it i s partial in i ts application . No reasonable measures are taken to ensure its duecollection

,and wh ilst in flictin g in many cases needless annoy

ance the return from i t can hardly j ustify the expenses of thedepartment having charge of i t. When, we m ay ask

, are

arm orial bearings ‘Worn and di splayed ’

? The silken coatembroidered wi th arms i s kept of? the m ili tary parade by hi sMaj esty

’s regulations concern ing un iform,an d even if i t were

not so the most im in ative Boer could hardly hope to beallowed such a mark or a peep—sight as would be afl'

orded bya captain shepherding h is company in a coat of gules wi th a

s ilver eagle placed, as our learned heralds would say,‘in bull s

eye point . ’ I n c ivi l life the coat of arms i s unfam il iarwear for Bond Street

,and the banner has gone . Private

banners in war would seem to be forbidden by the act ofHenry VII . although a pennon of arms i s recorded as havingflu ttered over the South African tent of an offi cer curious insuch matters. But amongst all the H ou n dsditch buntingwhich lately decorated London re

goicing no personal ensign

showed . The London palaces 0 our nobles,old or new

,

flew the flag of the merchant marine, the banner of K ingGeorge IV. or the warn ing signal of Yellow Jack, but thePercy lion an d the Glucks tein lifeboat took no part in thepageant .Arms upon houses are rare in London . A row of

vi llas nea r Tooting Common bears, it i s true, a coat of arms,apparently of the bu ilder’s design ing, upon each gable, and

the houses wi th wh ich Messrs . Ernest George an d Peto havedone someth ing for the beautifying of Kensington make someplay wi th armorial tympana to their doorways . These, forthe most part, wi th arms Which, although they have afio rded

somewhat perplexing work for the decorative carver, are ofthe class held blameless by Mr . X , recent purchases which arenot wi thout their h i storical interest, suggesting as they do tothe passing antiquary that the proud houses represented bythem had their ri se in Collingham Gardens in the m ore re

mote eighteen e ighties . There i s too the palace upon theEmbankm ent wi th i ts gilded caravel for a vane, wi th in whosesplendid wall s i t i s bel ieved that our fellow ci tizen Mr .

A stor adm ini sters h i s great estate . The tax wh ich Mr .

Astor should render to the revenue for di splaying over hi sfront door the arms of the extinct fam ily of the Counts of

ARMS AND THE INLAND REVENUE 9 5

Astorg m ight well be dec ided upon by a commi ttee uponwh ich Mr. Horace Round should s it W i th the editor of theNew York 7ourna1 and the head of the house ofMontmorenc iRohan-Noailles de Kergou rn adec.

Blazons over doors,then

,yield l i ttle to the Exchequer ;

tabards of arms are not and banners are put as ide for ever.I n what other ways do we ‘wear or otherwise d isplay ’ ourarms . Some of u s have seal rings, although the bez el ofmany rings i s a virgin one

,but notwithstanding the fact that

the gummed line of our envelopes has deteriorated unti l theenvelope opens i tself in the postbag we are too lazy for thatdelightful ceremon ial the m iddle aged can well recall— thel ighting of the wax taper, the splash and sti rring of the sealing wax , the deft impress ion of the sea l . 50 does the taxresolve i tself into a petty inqu isi tion of the revenue ofli ce toascertain whether the mazy lines of our ‘symbolist ’ bookplates conceal someth ing of heraldry, or whether the fancystationer has sent home our half- ream of notepaper w i th a

dem i - l ion rampant in the left hand top corner or w ith merelyThe Laburnum s in old English lettering.

Of what may constitute the wearing or d isplaying of armswe have no word of warn ing from the Inland Revenue Office.

There is a legend,and probably a true one, that an unfortunate

Scot in London was caught by the department in the act ofusing a brass seal wh ich yielded an impression of a th i stlewi th ‘Dinna Forget ’ on a scroll below it, an d although a

th istle does not by i tself consti tu te an ‘arm orial bearing,’ nor

i s the saying of Dinna Fo rget an accessory thereof, a dreadful banging of saxpences followed the capture . I n August ofth i s year the newspapers chron icled the summoning of a

clergym an who was charged with car ing upon his persona silver sovere ign purse of the value 0 five shillings, the faceof wh ich showed that it had once been en ved with a ‘crest. ’I t wou ld seem that for qu iet possession ogt

a

his prec ious obj ecti ts owner had paid a gu inea yearly to the revenue, but,plead ing that the engraving was n ow faint and rubbed

,he

cea sed to pay his impost . The case was adjourned for asecond hearing

,and we may well ask why the tim e of com

m iss ioners, magistrates, clerks and solici tors should be occu

pied by such a tuppenny d ispute . I t has, we believe, been

urged by the Inland Revenue Department that the m ere possession of furn iture, glass, plate or other obj ects with armorial

9 6 THE ANCESTOR

bearings consti tutes a use of them,in wh ich case the impost,

if i t were generally and fearlessly demanded, would ri se tothe proportions of a guinea poll—tax . For wh ich of u s fromthose of the m iddling sort upward but has some object bearing arms in his custody, for the I nland Revenue, be it noted,does not enter into the question of whether the arm s are

yours or your uncle’s or your butler’s . I n cases where thearms are a man’s own , the arm s of his house an d l ine, thehardshi m ay often be greater . Let a ch ina basin remain toyou of

P some e ighteenth century service wi th your grea tgrandfather’s arms painted on i t in the colours of Nank in .

Break i t you must, or sell i t, or,it may be, bury i t, for if

your wife fills it wi th marigolds you are using armorial bearings an d are taxable. The few odd fam ily teaspoons w i th a

crest upon them make you liable to a tax if you stir your teawith them

,an d your father’s ring, although hi s father wore i t

an d that one’s father before h im,must be locked up or parted

wi th if you cannot spare a yearly guinea for i ts use . Thecase of the sovereign purse shows that no trumpery i s tooremote for the perqu isi tion, and the three mean l i ttle sevenand—sixpenny wall sh ields of your school an d college and ofwhat the stationer in the H igh assured you were your armsmust come down from your wall s wi th all their recollecti onsif you are curate, or what not, wi th no gu ineas to spare .Wi th all th is no protection i s given to the arm s paid

for. A trade mark pays, but i t i s regi stered an d protected .

Here i t i s otherwi se . You may in the privacy of your heartnouri sh a harmless pride that you are not as other men inthat you are last survivor of a l ine wh ich flew a square bannerat Agincourt, but if you carry that banner’s golden hedgehogor green grifl

‘

on on an old seal for the po ssession of wh ichyou have paid no tax

,you wi ll be fin ed

,and fin ed smartly

,

wh i lst your new- rich neighbour,who on the strength of a

remote resemblance of surname has powdered house,carriage

an d plate wi th the arms wh ich belong in honour an d rightto you alone

,pays hi s two gu ineas an d i s law free . And these

th ings cannot be otherwi se, for there i s nobody in the landwh ich i s competent to pronounce wi th authori ty upon suchquestions of right in armorial bear ings - nei ther the Comm i ss ion ers of Inland Revenue nor the offi cers of the institutionwi th wh ich Mr . X . would have them hunt in couples .Stup id, partial an d m eddlesom e, here i s surely one of the

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

98 THE ANCESTOR

THE GENES I S OF A MYTH

NOTION seems to have got abroad that the modernschool of genealogi sts —o r one section of it— i s bent

solely upon destruction for i ts own sake ; that a form ofantiquarian n ih i lism i s prevalent which rages fi'

an ticallyagainst the m ost venerable and glorious of Engli sh traditions an d gloats over an d revels i n its unholy work . I t isnot for me to champion the cause of the gentlemen who are

so maligned or m i sunderstood . They are fully capable oftaking care of them selves . But it m ay not be am i ss if I tryto state how it comes to pass that so many students ofgenealogy are di sposed to insi st on thei r having fair

fplay .

Persons who are really jealous for the honour 0 an in

s titu tion or an ideal are those who most strongly obj ect toits degradation

,whether that degradation be brought about

by a lowering of the standard or by a substi tuting of a mereim i tation for the genu ine th ing. A simple i llustration willsu fii ce to m ake th i s clear . H i s Maj esty the King has recentlycreated an Order ofMeri t. To th i s order twelve d istingu i shedpersons have been admi tted . Whether they are the most distingu i shed Engli shmen alive i s not the question . I t i s indi spu table that they are great an d di stingui shed, an d that, in theirseveral departments, they are representative of the greatnessof the emp ire . Th i s fact i s, of i tself, su fficien t to invest theorder with that characteristic excellence wh ich m en are proneto reverence . I t i s certain, moreover, that the reverence forthe order will vary inversely wi th the number of membersadm i tted into i t. I t i s th i s very character of exclusivenesswh ich will cause men to regard it as an honourable di stinctionto belong to the order . The l ike holds good in the departm ent of genealogy . There are certain fam il ies who representthe ancient ari stocracy of th i s country . They are comparat ively few in number . They m ay have been, l ike Sir GeorgeSitwell

’

s Engli sh gentleman,the mere products originally of

circum stances an d condi tions by wh ich they profited an d overwh ich they triumphed . The preci se elements wh ich enteredinto their composi tion at the very firs t and wh ich secured forthem a forem ost place in bygone ages may not n ow appear to

THE GENES I S OF A MYTH 9 9

u s to be qual ities wh ich enti tle them to rank wi th those whoconsti tute the King’s Order ofMeri t. I t i s too probable that

,

like man’s consc ience, wh ich eth ical teachers tells u s is themere result of an evolutionary process by wh ich the baser andmore selfish elements are transmuted into the noblest of man 'sattributes

,they profited by endowments of m ind and of body

and by methods and artifices wh ich they—many 01 themne i ther n ow possess nor would care to employ . Whatevertheir origin they stand for u s to- day as the representatives ofthe anc ient aristocracy of England . (I use the term ari stocracyrather than nob il i ty or gentry because m a

zyare n ow noble

who can never be said to have been gen e an d many are

gen tle who have never been ennobled .) Of th is ancientari stocracy certain exi sting fam ilies are cl early representativeand certain fam ilies are commonly supposed to be representative an d are not. The cri tical school of genealogi sts

,the

n ihilists,are anxious to d ifferent iate the latter class from the

form er . They have no desire to deprec iate the many excellen t qual ities of the latter class or to deny them the ti tleof noble in i ts amplest modern s ign ification , but they refuseto adm i t claims wh ich are inval id or wh ich cannot be subs ta ntiated h istorically. Their interests an d aims are conservativei n the truest sense : their n ih il ism i s only towards th ingsspurious an d concocted . They feel that the only way ofpreserving what remains of ancient l ineage and of the prestigewh ich com es of it is by d i stingu ish ing clearly between whatis anc ient and what i s modern, and also that the only way of

securing respect for fam ily h istory,as such

,i s by being strictly

honest in dealing w i th i t. They repudiate utterly the ann exe

to the anc ient Abbey of St. Peter,an d prefer real red baize an d

bunting to the hateful im i tat ion of lath an d plaster wh ich i sintended to deceive the eye of the un in i tiated .

Wi th th i s rather di scursive and prolix introduction—forwh ich I crave the ed itor’s indulgence—I proceed to the subject of my article . My purpose is to d iscuss the genes i s of agenealogical myth , not retrospectively but proleptically. I f mytreatment of i t should be such as to compel others to provethat my myth i s no myth at all

,but a real

,substantial, v erifi

able fact,or should show i t to be a th ing of so tenu ious a con

s i stency as not even to merit the nam e of myth, I shall beequally well satisfied.

Two newspapers,one of them a London daily an d the

1 00 THE ANCESTOR

other a leading provincial daily, have wi th characteristictemeri ty set about providing the famous general and exsirdar of Egypt— Sir Franci s Grenfell—who has recentlybeen rewarded wi th a peerage, wi th an ancestry wh ich certain ly leaves noth ing to be desired in the way of splendouror of antiqu i ty . The lineage imputed to the n ew peer i snone other than that of d irect descent from the great Normanhouse of Granville, and of collateral relationsh ip w ith famousSir R ichard Grenvi lle of the Revenge an d wi th his famousgrandson Sir Bevill

,who fell at Lansdown fighting for the

k ing. The London daily i s very explici t . The family ofthe ex- sirdar (so it states) is identical with that of Grenvilleand Granville . The provinc ial paper, over the in i tials R . G .

,

states the same th ing,though wi th somewhat less con fiden ce,

and gives a number of details wh ich lend colour to the suppos ition . The form er refers to a statement of Dr . Borlase,the Corn ish h istorian

,in support of its statement R . G.

, wi thmore cogency, refers to the regi sters of St. Just—in - Penwi th ,from wh ich parish it is adm itted the fam ily of Lord Grenfellsprang, and to certain considerations wh ich will be dealt wi thin due course .I t becomes necessary therefore to exam ine the testimony

of Dr . Borlase, wh ich, as that of a vicar of St. Just from 1 73 2

to 1 772 an d of one who devoted the best years of hi s life tothe study of antiqu ities, ought to be valuable . What Dr .

Borlase says,speaking of Kalyn ack, the antient Domesday

manor of Chellen och, i s th i s : ‘It belonged in the lastgeneration, as I have been informed by Mr . Allen th is6th June 1 762 , to Grenville of Stow, Earl of Bath ; and

by remains of a like nam e common in the pari sh,wri tten

Grin field, Gren field and Grenfell in the pari sh regi ster,i t i s

probable that a branch of the family settled in the parish .

’

Dr . Borlase’s statement is qu i te unexception able both in itscaution an d in its candour . Every one will agree wi th himthat Grenfell ma be the same name as Grenvi lle or Granville .Will iam Gren v i e, Archb ishop of York, appears in the PatentRolls and other records almost invariably as Will iam deGren efeld

, so there need be no cavi ll ing over the name,although in passing one m ay be perm i tted to observe thatw teris paribus Green field or i ts equ ivalent is equally probable as the original form of i t. Dr . Borlase’s testimonytherefore amounts to no more than th is

,that Mr . Allen, who

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 02 THE ANCESTOR

serve to account for the presence of the Grenfell s at St. Just.No evidence of Grenvi lle own ersbzp being forthcom in g, theonly vestige of evidence in favour the Grenville-Grenfellrelationsbz

'

p i s swept away.

I t i s interesting, however, to observe how Borlase’sguarded statem ent is paraphrased by the London paper.‘Borlase

,

’ so i t tells u s , ‘observes that the Grenfells had a

seat at the Lands End .

’

Of course Borlase says noth ing ofthe kind ; but, if the Grenfells had ever had a seat in th i sneighbourhood

,there would surely be some trace of it i n

the records relating thereto . So far from th i s being so, therei s not a single Grenfell w i ll or adm in i stration e i ther at

Bodm in or in the Principal Regi stry at Exeter prior to theyear 1 724, when Richard Grenfell’s w ill was proved at

Bodm in . There are no Grenfell will s at Som erset Houseunti l after 1 603 . I have not exam ined the kalendars subse

quent to that date . I t i s simply inconceivable that a fam i ly,possessed of a fam i ly seat, should have left no trace whateverof departed greatness . The first mention of them— apartfrom the pari sh regi ster, wh ich I will cons ider presently— i sin the will of John Bos savern of Bos sav ern—o n e of the lastmembers of a fam ily long extinct— dated May 20, 1 62 9 . I nth i s w i ll the testator bequeaths to Mary the w ife of GlynVeale ‘

all that debt that I saack Glan fill oweth me if she can

get i t from the said I saack .

’

H e had previously bequeathedtwenty sh i llings to each of Glyn Veale’s three daughters ; sothere is no reason to suppose that ‘

all that debt ’ was an yth ing more than a comparatively small sum of money.

There i s noth ing in the parish regi sters to indicate a socialposition superior to that of others, wi th perhaps one soli taryen try wh ich records the marriage of Hercules Glan field in1 63 1 to Jane B u svargu s . The fam ily of Bu svargu s i s

amongst those given in the Vi si tation of 1 620, but I havebeen unable to identify Jane . Of the remain ing 62 9 entrieswh ich are to be found between the year s 1 599 an d 1 862

there i s not one wh ich the registrar has dign ified wi th thetitle of Mr . or gentleman .

Mr . Buller, vicar of St. Just from 1 82 7 to in his

charm ing little h i story of St. Just, gives a facsim ile of a

document contain ing the l i st, w i th the signatures, of thosewho swore to be true an d fai thful to h is H ighness the LordProtector ‘Against forraign e in vadors an d dystu rbers of the

THE GENESIS OF A MYTH

Peace of th i s nation,’ da ted May 1 , 1 658. Amongst those

who signed is to be found Pasko Gren field, the ancestor ofLord Grenfell .Those who are conversant w i th the h istory of the great

rebell ion do not need to be rem inded of the inconsistencieswh ich characterized the political careers of members of thesame fam ily

,but it is nevertheless startling to fin d a claim

advanced on behalf of Pasko Grenfell, the staunch supporterof Cromwell, of relationsh ip to Sir Bevill Grenville, who, butfifteen years before, had laid down his l ife for K ing Charles,and to S ir R ichard h is brother, whose proud boast i t waseleven years later, i .e . only four years before his supposedrelative signed the declaration, that all his ancestors since theConquest of England were ever ‘constantly for services ofthe crown of England .

’

Of Pasko Gren field'

s parentagenoth ing is certainly known, owing to the loss of the St. Justrecord of baptisms prior to 1 630 . H e married Juliana,daughter of John Oates of St. Just, by whom he becamethe father of John Gren field. John Gren field married RachelTregear, an d was the father of four ch ildren who survivedhim

, v iz . Paskow, Mary, Juliana and John . Paskow the

second married ( 1 ) Mary Edwards,whose parents were of

good condition at St. Just, but who died w i thout i ssue and

(2) at St. H ilary, Mary, the daughter of John Morgham ofMarazion

,merchant. Th i s Paskow or Pascoe Grenfell was a

successful merchant at Penzance,and the founder of the

fortunes of the Grenfell fam ily. From the time that theyleft St. Just the Grenfell s have thriven wonderfully. Theyhave been members of Parliament, an d gained d istinctionboth in the army and in the navy . They have intermarriedwi th the noblest fam il ies

,and have been widely known as

fin anciers an d ph ilanth rop ists . They have rowed i n theUn iversi ty boat, an d have enjoyed the sunsh ine of royalfavour . There i s scarcely an y department of publ ic or ofprivate life where in they have not been honourably distingu ished. That the claim to Norman descent should havebeen put forward is m uch to be regretted

,espec ially as one

can hardly believe that i t i s done w ith thei r approval .There are sti ll one or two points wh ich deserve notice .

Descendants of Paskow Grenfell the firs t survive at St. Just,

but they continue to occupy m uch the same position as the irrepublican ancestor occup ied i n the seventeenth century .

1 04 THE ANCESTOR

The local representative still rej oices in the name of Pascoe,as did his father an d great grandfather before him . Onlythose who have worked upon descents wh ich are problematical can understand the diffi cu lty of articulating the variousmembers of a ped igree when paroch ial records are u n su ppo rted— as in the case before u s —by wi lls, adm inistrationsan d inqu isi tions post mortem . I n th i s case there i s no diffi cultyhowever when once we com e to Paskow the firs t. H is son’smarriage to Rachel Tregear would never have been knownbut for the Bodm in transcript, for the St. Just register i sdefective between 1 677 and I 682— an instance wh ich mayserve to illustrate the value of the b ishops’ transcripts . Themarriage entry of Pascoe Grenfell and Mary Maughamat St. H ilary is interesting

,the father being described of

St. Just in the WestI had intended to pass over R . G .

’

s d isquisi tion uponChri stian nam es . I t i s so curious however that a word maybe added. After confessing hi s inab ility to discover them i ssing Grenville—Gren fill link, he refers to the prevalence of

Nicholas as a Chri stian nam e amongst the Grenfell s . H e

observes that Nicholas was a common Chri stian nam eamongst ‘

the Cavells,and concludes that ‘it i s therefore

possible that the Grenfells were descended from D igoryGrenville, th ird son of Sir Roger Grenville of Stow, whosesecond wife (married about 1 540) was Mary

,daughter of

Nicholas Cavell of St. Kew. Now the firs t Nicholas Grenfellwho appears at St. Just i s Nicholas the son of Edmund and

Cheston Grenfell,who was baptized in 1 676, i .e . 1 3 6 years

after the Grenville- Cavell m arriage . Fancy being pursuedby the name of Nicholas—old N ick h im self m ight do thi sperhaps— for 1 3 6 years, an d then fin ally consenting to bestowthat not altogether uncommon name upon your unhappyson ! Th is juggling with nam es i s only one out of manyinstances wh ich could be given of the fatuous attempts wh ichare made to manufacture evidence where none exi sts . Ifthe myth of a Grenville descent could be shown to besometh ing worthy of a better name

,no one would welcome

the evidence more gladly than the present wri ter ; but untilthat evidence i s forthcom ing he feels compelled to regard i t asa myth in embryo

,wh ich he tru sts will never arrive at a fur

ther stage of developm ent.THOMAS TAYLOR

,M .A.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 06 THE ANCESTOR

a scholar, taking hi s degrees of bachelor and licentiate or civi llaw at Bourges,1 wh ich town was then the headquarters of thereformed doctrine in France . I n 1 557 he was received as

an advocate in the parliament court at Paris . ‘Afterwards .being a cd 2 6 years, the year an d month in wh ich Francis I I .King 0 France, died at Orleans, that is to say the year 1 560,in D ecember, he w i thdr ew h imself to Geneva an d there,having given h imself to the study of theology, was madem in i ster an d received the imposi tion of hands from JeanCalvin ’

[Cole’

s At some date between the 1 7 Mayand 7 June 1 563 he was married at Gien on the Lo ireto Guillem ette Bu rgo in daughter of Estienne Bu rgoin ,a merchant

,by Lopza Doz ival hi s wife . Her brothers

,

Francoi s Burgo in an d Antoine Bu rgo in , are nam ed am ongstthe godparents of their si ster’s ch ildren . Com ing to England w i th hi s fam ily he was befriended by the Lord Burghley,who was at that time Chancellor of the Un iversi ty of Cambridge. Cambridge received the foreign scholar under i tsChancellor’s protection, an d on 3 Feb . l 571

fr he was incor

porated in those degrees in law wh ich he had taken at

Bourges . I n 1 576 he received the degree of Doctor ofDivin i ty, and on 1 1 July of that year he was incorpora tedin the sam e degree at Oxford . On the 1 8 March 1 57% hisun iversi ty recommended hi s case to the Secretaries of State,an d he was preferred to the Lady Margaret Professorsh ip ofHebrew . The active m ind of Baron did not long allow i tselfto enjoy i ts newly gotten freedom in quiet content. H is

earlier experiences of Calvin ism , co loured as they were bypersonal knowledge of bo th Calvin an d Beza

,had turned the

bent of h is m ind aga inst that system wh ich was then inBaron’s early days at Cambridge so eagerly studied by hi sfellows . I n 1 581 he was already reckoned as on e incl inedto Arm in ian ism, and was indeed suspect of ano ther heresythe loathed doctrine of tolerance for the rel igious beliefs '

of

others,a tolerance wh ich Dr . Baron would have extended, as

i t was believed, to the beliefs of those Who had hunted himfrom his n ative land . H i s sall ies into controversy was veryill received by hi s adopted countrym en

,and he was soon

ri sking that Tudor wrath wh ich m ight readily have proved as

unwholesome for a theologian as the zeal of any inqu i s i tor .I n December of 1 59 5 Wh itgift wrote that Dr. Baro had

19 and 10 Apr il, 1 55 5 (Cole

’:

HUé UENOT FAM IL IES 1 07

greatly offended her Maj esty that he, be ing a stranger and sowell used, should dare to stir up or maintain any controversyin that place of what nature soever—Non decaf bominem pere

grinum curi osum m e in aliena republica .

’

The plain words of warn ing came too late to save DoctorBaro at Cambridge . On 1 2 j an . 1 593. he preached before theUniversi ty at Great St. Mary’s

,cri tic izing those Lambeth

Articles wh ich Wh i taker, Tyndal and Wh itgi ft had drawnup for the repression of anti-Calvin ism . I t was . in vain forDoctor Baro to protest that he formall accepted those articles

,

for the controversialist allowed h imsel to explain his con s truction of them . I n the November of 1 596 hi s term as LadyMar et Professor ended and i t was not renewed, al thoughhe 0 ered, if re- elected

,to be cautious in his words concern ing

predestination, or, better still, to leave that vexed c

?uestion

alone for the future . To the H igh Calvin i st th is t e u sal ofbattle at the crossways had someth ing in i t of insult.Calvini sm would not accept toleration, and al though Burghleystood by Dr . Baro, an d H ars n et

,the northern archbishop

,

and Lancelot Andrewes, Cambridge would not hold the exLady Margaret Professor. Fugi o,

’ he said,

na fuga rer,’

and

for the second time in his l ife Doctor Baro fled the storm .

The rest of his years were spent in London at a house in DyersYard

,Crutched Friars

,in the par i sh of St.Olave’

s in Hart Street.There under the al tar of the parish church he was buried

,

Bancroft the B ishop of London comm and ing the attendanceof all his par ish clergy at the funeral

,at wh ich Doctors of

Divin i ty walked as pall - bearers . Twenty years later all thebest b ishoprics and deaneries were filled by the supporters ofthose tenets for wh ich Dr . Petrus Baro had been hunted fromCambridge .

H e left a will dated i n March 1 598, wri tten in the Latinwh ich was for a mother tongue to the wandering scholars andd ivines of his day . Petrus Baro— he describes h imself therein—juri 5 primum civ i/is licen tia tus deinde tbeologi e professor, CallusStempanus

— a Frenchman of Etampes—m mc Landin i irzAngliadegens, a rmor na tus sexagi n ta qua tuor, et bona n ibilominus fi rmamemori a judiciogue dei gracia 54 110. By th is will he gave tensh i ll ings to Margaret

,fo rm erly hi s maid

,who l ived at Cam

bridge . H e gave to hi s two tw in daughters,Elizabeth and

Katherine, 1001. each if they were unmarr ied at his dea th .

1 Wbitgifi’: Work ,

i i i . 6 1 7 .

1 08 THE ANCESTOR

The res idue of hi s goods in En gland or in France he gaveam ongst his ch ildren Peter, Andrew, Martha

,Mary

,El iza

beth an d Katherine . H e m ade h is sons Peter an d Andrewhi s executors, who proved the will 27 Apri l 1 599 28

By h is wife Gu illemette Bu rgo in , who died before him ,

Petrus Baro left i ssuei . Peter Baron of Boston in Lincolnsh ire, esqu ire, of whomhereafter.

n . Estienne Baron, born at Orleans 4 Nov . 1 567, and

chri stened there the same day . H e died 4 Feb . 1 568.

i i i . Estienne Baron,born at Sancerre 10 Oct . 1 568. H e

was christened the same day an d d ied on the morrow .

iv . Andrew Baron of Boston in L incolnsh ire,gentleman .

H e was born at Cambridge 8 July 1 574, an d was

chri stened there the following Sunday. H e was

buried at Boston 2 5 May 1 658. H is wi ll is dated1 August 1 653 . H e gave to Andr ew Slee (hi sgrandson) all h is lands an d tenem ents, save hi s housein Gaunt Lane

,wi th remainder

,should the said

Andrew die wi thout i ssue to George Slee (anothergrandch i ld), wi th certain exceptions in favour or

Hester Slee (another grandch ild) an d Mary Slee. Tohi s daughter Mary H oubelon , if a widow

,he ave

the dwelling house dwelled in by Master Bed ord.

To h i s nephew Doctor (Samuel) Baron, to MaryHoublon

,to Anne Slee and to Margaret Slee he gave

small legacies i n money, an d the residue of his goods,wi th the house in Gaunt Lane

,wh ich was probably

h is own dwelling house,he gave to h is son (in law)

George Slee . Adm in istration wi th th i s w ill annexedwas granted 29 Nov . 1 658 6 14 Woman] tothe said George Slee, the res iduary legatee .Andrew Baron’s wife’s name was Hester . She wasburied at Boston I April 1 63 9 . By her he hadi ssue

1 . Hester Baron, who was married at Boston2 5 Sep. 1 628 to George Slee of Boston an dAlgarkirk, gent. H e was born about 1 607,being aged 3 3 in 1 5 Car . I .

, when he was a

deponent in the su i t wh ich Peter Baron (hi swife’s firs t cousin once removed) brought

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 1 0 THE ANCESTOR

ter by the second marriage), to whom herfather gave the p ictures of her grandfatherH oubelon an d grandmothers, wi th that ofher uncle H oubelon and her mother’s . ’

11 . Mary Baron,who was chri stened at Boston

1 9 March 1 605 .

‘Mary Baron,daughter

of Andrew Baron, was buried at Bos

ton 7 March 1 635. But i n hi s wi ll of 1 653Andrew Baron bequ eathed a house to his‘daughter Mary Houbelon , if she be a

widow.

’ The posi tion of th is second Maryin the pedigrees of Baron and Houblon hasnot yet been ascertained .

11 1 . Hester Baron,christened at Boston 20 March,

1 6 15. She probably died young.

(iD.) Martha Baron,eldest daughter of Peter and Cuille

mette Baron . She was born at Orleans 1 June1 564 .

Marie Baron, born at Sancerre 2 6 May [ 1 570(i i iD.) Elizabeth Baron, born at Cambridge 24 Aug. 1 577,

an d ch ri stened there the Tuesday following. Shemarried John Lo ckton of Boston, gent , by l icensefrom the B i shop of Lincoln, dated 28May 1 600 .

H e was son of Ph ili Lockton,a son of Lockton

of Swinstead,an d let

it)

i ssue by his wife .(iVD.) Catharine Baron, born 24 Aug . 1 57 7, twin wi th

Elizabeth . She married Peter Vandeleur or Vander Leur of Boston, a refugee from Ghent inFlanders

,by whom she had i ssue . H e was buried

at Boston 24 Sep. 1 638.

I I . PETER BARON of Boston in Lincolnsh ire, esqu ire, wasborn at Orleans 1 5 Jan . 1 565, and com i ng to England wi thhi s father was naturalized by statute of 4 Jac. I . The regi sterof Peterhouse at Cambridge for 1 585 records that he wasadm is su s coram soci 1s ,

’ he s igning the regi ster wi th his own

hand, per me Petrum Baro Aureliemem. H e was a doctor ofmedicine, an d under the Ceci l in flu en ce was made free ofBoston 2 5 Oct. 1 606, becom ing alderman m 1 609 and mayorin 1 6 10 . The author of Tbe Way of Congregational CburcbesCleared (cd. London

, 1 648) thus speaks of himWhen I was first called to Boston in Lincolnsh ire [ 1 6 1 2] so it

was that Mr. Doctor Baron,son of that Doctor Baron (the Divin i ty

HUGUENOT FAM IL IES 1 1 1

Reader a t Cambridge, who in his l ectures there fi rs t broached thatwhich was then ca ll ed Lutheran ism, s ince Arm in ian isrn ) . Th i s DoctorBaron

, I say, had leavened many of the chief men of the town w ithArm in ian i sm , as be ing h imself lea rned, acute, plausible in discourse,and fit to insinuate into the hearts of his neighbours . And thoughhe was a physic ian by profession (and of good ski ll in that art) yet hespen t the grea tes t strength of his stud ies in clea ring and promotingthe Arm in ian tenets .

H e lived in a mansion house, formerly of the Westlands,wh ich stood between the east end of Beadman’s Lane an d

Spain Lane in Boston,wh ich was afterwards held by his great

nephew Andrew Slee . H e d ied 6 Sep. 1 630 and was buriedat Boston 7 Sep. 1 630, the entry in the regi ster describinghim as a j ustice of the peace and doctor of physic . By i h

quest post mortem taken at Boston 2 July 8 Car. I . it was

returned that he d ied sei sed of lands in Co n isby, S ibsey,Skirbecke, Wyberton, K irton, Moulton and Leake. H e

made a wi ll 3 1 May 1 628 describing h imself there in as

Peter Baron alias Baro of Boston in the county of Lincolnesqu ier and doctor of Phis ick,

’ the only legatees be ing hiselder son Peter Baron, who had lately married Martha Forres t

,

daughter of Myles Forrest of Peterborough,es u ire, and h is

younger son Samuel Baron . The testator’s wi e Mary wasthen lately dead . The will was proved 22 Feb . 1 6352 5 St. 7a1m] by Peter Baron the son an d exor . Admon . d.b. n .

was granted 2 9 Dec. 1 664 to Samuel Baron, brother of theexor. , who was then also dead . Peter Baron m arried Mary

,

who i s described in the Heralds’ Vi sitation of Norfolk i n1 664 as a daughter of De la Fon tain e of Antwerp . She d iedin April

,1 628, and was buried at Boston 2 6 April 1 628.

Peter Baron an d Mary de la Fontaine had issuei . Peter Baron of Bo ston

,esqu ire, of whom hereafter.

11. Sam uel Baron of South Lynn in Norfolk,gent. As

‘Samuel Baron Lin colin en sem ’ he was adm itted toPeterhouse in Cambridge . L ike his father he was a

Doctor of Physick and settled at South Lynn inNorfolk

,where his father had owned a house . H e

died 1 2 April 1 673 , and was buried 1 5 Ap. 1 673 at

South Lynn as‘Samuel Baron esqu ire . ’ A marble

stone at the foot of the altar in All Saints’ Church inSouth Lynn marked his grave. H e made a wi ll 1 0Aug . 1 67 1 , wi th a codicil dated 24 Jan . 1 675, wh ichwas proved 2 6 May 1 673 55 Pye] by Andrew

1 1 2 THE ANCESTOR

Baron the son an d exor. H e ve hi s lease of therectory of Sharnborn e, co . Norglk

,to his daughter

Martha Baron, wi th 8001. H e gave the u l timatereversion of his house and lands in South Lynn

,and

in Algarkirk, Fossdyke, F reeston and Butterwick inLincolnsh ire

,wi th the manor of Roos Hall

,to his son

Andrew Baron . H e married 1 5 Feb . 1 635, FrancesGoddard, the only daughter of Thomas Goddard ofStan how and Rudham in Norfolk

,esqu ire . She died

1 9 June 1 667, and was buried 2 1 June 1 667, at

South Lynn,where a marble slab near that of her

husband marks her grave . Upon it are the arms ofBaron impaled wi th an eagle for Goddard .

Samuel Baron an d Frances Goddard had i ssue1 . Samuel Baron, born 1 0 Dec. 1 63 3 , who diedyoung before 1 664 .

2 . Thomas Baron,born 1 Feb . 1 645, who died

young before 1 664.

3 . Peter Baron,born 1 Jan . 1 635,who died young

before 1 664.

4 . Andrew Baron of South Lynn and Cambridge .H e was born 18 June 1 645, and was re

turned as his father’s son and heir in theHeralds’ Vi si tation of Norfolk in 1 664 . H e

was of Peterhouse, Cambridge, a bachelor of

arts 20 May, 1 665, and fellow of his college24 May 1 666, M .A . March 1 665. H e died14 Aug. 1 7 1 9, aged 74 . H i s wi ll

,dated

2 Sep. 1 709, was proved 6 Oct . 1 7 1 9

[Arch Norwicb] by Samuel Taylor of Lynn,merchant, one of the exors . H e was buried1 7 Aug. 1 7 1 9, at South Lynn as

‘Mr.

Andrew Baron the impropriator,’

an d lies inthe chancel near hi s father an d mother undera stone bearing the arms of Baron .I t is probable that the descendants in the

m ale li ne of Petrus Baro ended wi th th i sAndrew Baron

,his great—grandson .

5 . Samuel Baron,born 1 6 July 1 646, dead before

1 664 .

6 . Henry Baron,born on Lamm as day 1 65 1 ,

dead before 1 664.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 14 THE ANCESTOR

d ied 28 Sep. 1 679, and was buried at New

Windsor (M . Humphrey Graves died7 Sep. 1 703 , aged 7 1 , an d was buried by hiswife at New Windsor (M . They hadi ssue ( 1 ) Baron Graves who died 1 5 Oct .1 683 , aged 9 years, and was bur ied wi th hi sparents (M . an d (2) Charles Graves, whodied wi thout i ssue in 1 696, his father beinghi s adm ini strator .

I I I . PETER BARON of Boston , esqu ire, was born about1 595, being described in the allegation for h is marriage licenseas about 2 2 . H e married in 1 6 1 7 Martha Forrest, eldestdaughter of M iles Forrest of Peterborough

,co . Northants,

esqu ire, by Cicely his wife, sole hei r of her mother MargaretSanderson, widow. M i les Forrest was the descendant of a

certain M iles Forrest who appears as bailifi' of Peterboroughat the time of the di ssolution of the monastery, and one mayat least draw attention to the persi stence of the chri stianname ofM iles in thi s fam ily an d to the sim ilar chri stian nameof one Forrest whose name i s coupled wi th that ofD ighton inconnection wi th certain services alleged to have been renderedK ing R ichard I I I . in the Bloody Tov’

ver . M i les Forrest wasburied in the cathedral of Peterborough about eight yearsbefore the dea th of his relict Cicely, whose will dated 20 Sep .1 63 1 was proved 2 9 March 1 63 6 3 2 Pile] _by M i lesForrest

,her son and exor . On the death of M iles Forrest

the son,who d ied wi thout i ssue in 1 63 6, adm in istrationwas granted 30 Jan . 1 635, to Newdigate Poyntz and Anne hiswife

,the survivor of the two si sters of the said M iles the son .

Th i s adm in i stration grant was afterwards revoked by sentencean d another grant was made to Mary Baron alias Wh i ting,the granddaughter of the said Cicely. By the allegation formarriage license

,dated 22 August 1 6 1 7 (Lincoln), Martha

Forrest i s described as of Skirbeck,and like her husband aged

about 22 years . She was therefore born about 1 595 . Shewas buried at Boston 7 Aug. 1 63 2 . Her husband re—marriedJoan Sm i th, daughter of Edward Sm ith of the c ity of Lincoln,gent , who survived him an d re—married in Feb . 1 658, wi thAndrew Slee of Boston

, M .D . ,grandson of her first husband’s

uncle Andrew Baron of Boston . Joan Slee died in the l ifetim e of her second husband and was buried at Boston 5 Nov1 660 .

HUGUENOT FAM ILIES 1 1 5

By his wife Martha Forrest, Peter Baron had i ssuei . Peter Baron, ch r istened at Boston 28Feb . 1 6 13. H e

would seem to have died youn11. Peter Baron of Boston, gent , tu at Boston and

christened there 7 July 1 622 , as Peter son ofPeter Baron, son an d heir of Peter Baron, justi ce ofthe peace . ’ I n 1 5 Car . 1. he brought a su i t by hisguardian aga inst Newdigate Poyntz his uncle, be ingthen the sole surviving heir of the bod ies of M ilesand Cicely Forrest, h is aunt Anne, w ife of the saidNewdigate

,being dead some two years s ince wi thout

i ssue [Gbam depm . before 1 7 14, M iy’

ord H e

d ied without i ssue in h is father’s lifetime, and wasburied at Boston 1 9 Sep . 1 65 1 .

i n . Mary Baron, chri stened at Boston 9 April, 1 620,hei r of her mother. She married (i .) Whi ti ng,and (i i .) Bankes An derson of Boston, co . Lincoln,clerk

,by whom she had daughters Mary, Elizabeth ,

Deborah and Rebecca (all m inors i n Oh 14

May 1 658, Bankes Anderson an d h is wife Maryset forth a bill in Chan cery aga inst Samuel Baron (am inor), half brother of the said Mary, and Joan hismother. I n th i s bill the said Mary is described asco- heir wi th her sister Elizabeth, wife of GeorgeSm ith (bo th parties to the beforen amed b ill) ofPeter Baron the younger, la te of Boston, esqu ire,and Martha his wife, daughter of M iles Forrest,esqu ire, by Cicely his wife, daughter and heir of hermother Margaret Sanderson, w idow . Bankes Anderson was buried at Boston 6 Sep. 1 668. H e left aw il l dated 30 Jan . 1 663 , under wh ich h is wife an d

daughters were legatees. H is relict an d executr ixproved the will in the B ishop’s Court at Lincoln24 November, 1 668.

Elizabeth Baron,christened at Boston 1 1 Dec. 1 623 ,

co- heir of her mother. I n 1 658 she was wife ofGeorge Sm i th of the Fi rth in S ibsey, co . Lincoln ,gent , who was buried at Boston 20 Feb. 1 665 .

By his wife Joan Sm i th Peter Baron had i ssuei i . Ph i lip Baron, who was buried 1 9 Nov. 1 65 1 , at Boston .i i i . Samuel Baron of Horncastle, co . Lincoln

,gent , after

wards of Boston . H e was a m inor in 7 Nov. 1 664,

1 1 6 THE ANCESTOR

when his bill in Chancery was set forth by LaurenceJackson of Alford, gent , his guardi an, againstAndrew Slee, M .D . ,

hi s stepfather [Cbam pro. before1 7 14, Collin s who had married hi s mother inFeb . 1 658. Li ttle more i s known of Samuel Baron,but he m ay have been the Samuel Baron who wasburied at Qi arrington , co . Lincoln, 1 8 Dec. 1 7 1 5,in his 7 5 th year.

iv . Edward Baron, born 9 Jan . 1 655, and buried at Boston4 Feh. following.

i i iD. Catharine Baron, buried at Boston 1 2 Oct. 1 657 .

PED IGREE FROM THE V I S ITAT ION 0 11 NORFOLK IN 1 664Peter Baron s ive Baro=Gu illemette

Mary, dau . of De lacom . L in coln Foun tain e of An twerp

Fran ces, dau . of Thomas c dard

of Ru dham i n com . Norf.

Fran ces ux . Marthaand beire, set. 1 8 Petr. Prittiman

1 664

These two ped igrees following of fam ilies allied wi th theBarons occur in the Heralds’ V i si tation of Lincoln in 1 634.

LOCKTON

Swi n sted

1 . E l iza. Barron Thomasof Boston , co . dau . of PeterL in es. Barron

,Doc

tor ofD ivin it ie an d Pro

feasor, etc.

iam Lockton of

of John Boston , son n e and

Harrdm an he i re

Arms Silver 4 cbeverotzbetween tbree crescent: azure.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 18 THE ANCESTOR

WHAT I S BEL IEVED

Under tbis beading The Ancestor will call tbe a tten tion of pressafldpublic to mucb curious lore concern ing genealogy, beraldryand tbe like wi tbwbicbour magaz ines, our rev iews and news

papersfi om time to time deligbt as. I t is a sign of awaken inginterest in saeb matters tba t the subj ects witb wbicb TheAncestor sets i tself to deal are becoming less and less tbe sealedgarden of a flaw workers . But upon wbat strangefood tbc

growing appetite for popular arch eology must feed . wil. be

sbawn i t: ibe columns before as . Our press, tbe best—informedand tbe most widely sympa tbetic in tbe world, wbicbwa tcbes

i ts record of science, art and literature wi tba jealous eye, sti llpermi ts i tself, in ibis li ttle corn er of tbirzgs, to be v ictimiz ed bytbe most recklessly fum isbed information , and i t would seem

tbat no story is too wildly improbable tofind tbe widest cur

reney . I t is no cri ticism for a ttacking’

s sake tbat we sball

ofi r, and we [ mm but to beg tbe distinguisbed j ournalsfromwbicbwe sball draw our texts for commen t to take in good

part wbat is ofi red in goodfa i tbandgood bamaur .

WEEKLY j ournal of Court Intell igence, wh ich devotesspecial attention to matters of genealogy and peerage,

formed its readers, in its i ssue of July 5, thatThe Ph i l ipps fam i ly i s of grea t antiqu i ty in South Wales. Among its

ancestors was Sir Aa ron Ap Rhys, who a ttended Ri chard I . to the Holy Landin 1 1 90, when he behaved so gallan tly against the Saracens that he i s saidto have received from Richard the kn igh thood of the Sepulch re of OurSaviour and the addi tion of a crown and chain to his arm s of a lion ram

pant sable.We have not been able to refer to the Gazette of theperiod

,and are therefore unable to say posi tively whether S ir

Aaron was men tioned in despatches ; nor does there seem tobe an y record of the mysterious augmentation to hi s arms

,

wh ich rem inds one of that wh ich was bestowed upon a

Plowden for his gallantry at the siege of Acre . l Bu t.the

knighthood savours of a weakness we have observed in old1 See Tbs Anteri or, No. 1 , p. 2 34.

WHAT IS BEL IEVED 1 1 9

time heralds for provid ing a Kn ight of the Holy Sepulch reas a sort of necessary ancestor that no gentlemen should beWi thout .

fi t

The next paragraph is devoted to a wedding between a

daughter ‘of Sir Edward Cockburn, Bart.

’

(a ti tle that willnot be found in Burk

?‘and Lady Cockburn of Pen n ox ton ’

to the representative 0 the em inent and very anc ient Herefordshire fam ily ofHereford of Sutton andMord iford, wh ichclaims to be derived from Roger Hereford

,a famous ph ilo

sopher in the tim e of Henry I I . ’ The elaborate account ofth i s fam ily in Du n cumb

’

s Coun ty of Hereford ( 1 882) does notgo so far as th i s, but mentions i ts tradi tional descent fromRobert de Hereford, fin ed in 1 1 58 for a hom icide, andexcused payment of a fin e for his pardon in consideration ofhi s

1

bosp itable procliv ities—guia dedit se bospitali .

’ Lest th i sstatement should startle the reader, a footnote is thoughtfuflyappended to explain that, according to Robertson

’s Cbarles V. ,

among people whose manners are simple,and who are seldom

vi sited by strangers, hosp ital i ty is a vi rtue of the first rank,’

etc.,etc. Reference to the printed Pipe Roll of 4 Hen . I I .

( 1 1 58) reveal s the fact that the money was due, not for ahomic ide

,but pro duello

,

’ that is for a tr ial by battle . Thereason for Robert rece iving a remission of the paym ent was

,

of course, not his hospi table procl ivi ties but that he had j o inedthe Order of the Hosp ital That a blunder so grotesque as

thi s can be found in a modern county h istory proves theneed in that department of work for such expert knowledgeas has been secured for the n ew Victoria Coun ty History .

<3 1‘ O

A paragraph went the round of the press on June 1 8 inwh ich was mentioned the interesting fact that Dean Lucas ,who had just d ied in charge of the Roman Cathol ic Churchat Colchester, was a direct descendant of Sir Charles Lucas

,

’

the hero of the defence of Colchester,who was shot by the

besiegers after its su rrender in 1 648. Two days later B i shopBellord, preach ing after the requ iem for the dean, observed(according to the report in the E ssex Coun ty Standa rd) thatI t was in teres ting to trace his character from his antecedents, as he camefrom an old Engl ish stock who grea tly di stingu ished themselves . H e was a

1 Ed. w. H . Cooke, P. S.A.

1 20 THE ANCESTOR

descendant of General Lucas who had achi eved fame for hi s defence of Colchester, during the siege, and his glorious dea th. H is ancestors had a t onetime been prom inent (luakers, but h is fa ther had been converted to the fa i th,etc . , etc .As the paper from wh ich we take thi s report grimly ob

serves : ‘It i s, to say the least of it, unusual to talk of thedirect descendants of bachelors. ’ For

,as every one knows

,

S ir Charles Lucas d ied unmarried, and his only legi timatebrother, who (partly in consideration of Sir Charles

’ services)was created Lo rd Lucas

,left no male i ssue. How the ‘prom i

nent (luakers were connected wi th the famous cavalier we donot know

,nor

, we suppose, does an y one else . I t i s noteworthy that the Tablet wh ich was founded, we believe, by thedean’s father did not repea t the story.

l k

Harwich, wh ich is one of the boroughs rivi leged to electits own H igh Steward

,has recently chosen f

idr that offi ce Mr.

Berners of Woolverstone Park, Sufl'

olk . I n returning thanksfor his election

,according to a local paper, Mr . Berners

observed that ‘according to h i storians, the ancient town ofHarwich was known many years before Christ, in the days ofthe early Bri tons, and in the reign of a King called Kimberlayne . ’ We are not acquainted wi th the latter monarch

,

whose nam e is suggestive of a foreigner’s confusion betweentwo of our Co lon ial secretaries, Lord Kimberley and Mr .

Chamberlain ; but as to the antiqui ty of Harwich, thatborough i s not even mentioned in Domesday, being of subsequent growth . Towns, i t would seem ,

like famil ies,have

their apocryphal pedigrees but the good people of Harwichcan hardly have heard of i ts antiqu i ty ti ll their n ew H ighSteward revealed it to their delighted ears .

The Royal Champ ion was the subj ect of a special arti clein ‘the oldest even ing paper ’ on June 24 . For the popularm ind the king’s champ ion has always possessed a singularfasc ination and the legends wh ich surround his h i story possess undying vi tal ity . We read for instance in th i s arti clethatThe ceremony of the appearance of a champion da tes back in th is country

to the tim e of Wi l liam the Conqueror, a t whose Coronation Ro bert de [sic]Marm ion, Lord of Fontenay, in Normandy, filled the honourable post ofRoyal Champion, as his ances tors had formerly done for the Dukes of Nor

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 2 2 THE A NCESTOR

nob ili ty in England. I t is perhaps in the nature of th ingsthat the j ournalist should direct public attention less to th eillu stn

'

ou s story of the Howards, of their adventurous ri se andof the woes of their h igh estate, than to one or other of thescore of legends concern ing their origi n . Of that ori '

n butone word need be said. Sir William Howard, a chi j usticeof the common pleas, who flou ri shed at the end of the th irteen th century, still mocks the labour of n ealogi sts and

keeps unchallenged the top perch of the Igward ped igree .Of the ancestors whom industrious fancy

,untrammeled by

fact, has found for Sir Will iam,a mysterious ‘Auber, Earl of

Passy,’

was long the ruling favouri te . But Dethick’

s influencehas given way to that of Kingsley. A great novel threwpopulari ty into another scale

,and in our time the favourite

Howard forefather,whether for peerage-makers or journali sts,

i s that strange shadow out of the Lincolnsh ire bogs, themythical Hereward the Wake . Month by month th i s hardylegend takes the air in print the spoiled favouri te of edi tors

,

no journal grudges it space . Here then we cull i t,in its full

flower,from an evening paper of 9 July 1 902 .

The fam ily of Howard is unquestionably the most i ll ustrious and probablythe oldest in England . The Duke of Norfolk’s coat of arm s when fully se tou t wi th a ll i ts quarterings is one of the most rem arkabl e pi eces of heraldry inexistence. To a competen t herald i t is almost a complete h istory of England .The Howards are bel ieved, on fa i rly good evidence, to go back to the Howardor Hereward

,who l ived in the reign of King Edgar (960 and whose

grandson was that Hereward the Wake, who was th e last man in England tosurrender to the Conqueror . I t was, we bel ieve, of his fa ther Leofri c that i twas said that ‘his counsel was as the oracles of God.

’

The ti tle of Earl ofAr undel is pe cul iar in that i t was never created anddepends upon no patent . I t arose somewhere about 1 1 55 entirely out of thepossession ofArundel Castle, and i t would be a curious puzzle for the lawyerswhether

,supposing such an imposs ible event as the sale of Arundel by the

Duke of Norfolk, the purchaser would becom e Earl ofArundel . The betterOpin ion i s, we bel ieve, that he would not,

‘ but tha t the anci ent ti tle wouldbecome ext inct.

The first sentence needs li ttle gloss from u s . We havealready spoken of the origin of the Howards, and can butadd that few as are the fam ilies which can in 1 902 di sputeprecedence wi th a Howard of Norfolk on the score of longdescent

,yet such families sti ll remain, an d amongst th em

some wh ich reckoned themselves of old nobili ty when S ir

William,the firs t of the Howards,was adm ini stering the k ing

's

WHAT IS BEL IEVED 1 2 3

j ustice . The Howard-Hereward legend bases i tself in themain upon the fact that Howard an d Hereward both beginwith an H—a reason in wh ich needs other support, for thesurname of the house 0 Norfolk need not go so far afield fori ts origin . The story of the Wake has already been deal twith in Tbe Ancestor . Let u s add at least that Hereward wasnot the son of Leofric

,nor is an y such person on record as

Howard or Hereward,’ the newly d i scovered parent of the

oracular counsellor. To the antiquary as to the Conquerorthe Wake i s a doughty champion . The last Engli shman tosurrender to the Norm ans, his legend holds Fleet Street today against every assault of the n ew cri ticism .

For a paragraph to follow the Hereward legend the linotype may be trusted to print u s the story of the Earldom ofArundel and although it is now fam il iar to the newspaperreader as the story of Hereward h imself

,we may say that we

have seldom met wi th a clearer setting forth of a well- kennedh istory . Long may the Howards flou ri sh Earls of Arundelbut yet we would that the experiment h inted at by thejournali st m ight be essayed. Imagine the impossible eventach ieved

,an d our m illionai re purchaser happed up solemnly

in the great bed of the tapestr ied state bedroom of Arundel,

with what exci tement we shou ld awai t his rising to learnwhether the mysterious in fluen ces of the castle had wroughttheir work, and whether he would come down to breakfast asEarl of Arundel.

i ii

I n the first issue of TbcAncestor (p. 2 3 5) we spoke of thecurious belief that th is or that oak i s mentioned in Domesday Book,

”

and explained that i t had no foundation . S incethen th i s odd delus ion has made its appea rance anew. Ah

interesting illustrated article on Lo rd Salisbury at Home in

Tbc Grapbic of July 1 9 m entioned that in H atfield Park themassive Lion Oak

,wh ich still shoots forth its green leaves,

will be found mentioned in Domesday Book, if an y one caresto look for i t. ’ Now that the contents of Domesday havebeen made accessible by the Victoria Coun ty History , one needonly turn to vol . i . of the history of Hertfordsh ire to learnthat in th i s case also the oak will be sought for in vain .

1 24 THE ANCESTOR

The same article contained a description and a small i llu stration of a chart, twelve to fifteen yards long, wh ich traces(lu een Elizabeth

’s ancestry back to Adam and Eve,’

and i s

kept in an elaborately carved oak case an d i s beautifu lly emblazoned in colours . ’ The i llustration enables one to recogn izea typical Elizabethan pedigree covered Wi th coats of arms . Theproduction i s one em inently suggestive of What was believedbefore the ‘h igher cri tici sm had turned its attention to theperformances of Elizabethan heralds .

l

A weekly i llustrated paper,wri ting of the engagement of

Mr . Dudley Carleton,Baroness Dorchester

’

s son , observesthat ‘

the Carletons were seated at Carleton near Penri th, atthe Conquest, an d at the vi si tation of Cumberland in 1 6 65Sir Will iam Carleton of Carleton Hall certified hi s descent

,

eighteen generations in all,from Baldwin de Carleton .

’ Mr .

B ird has observed that in Burke’s Peerage, Sir Bernard Burke’s

Rem in i scences are ci ted for the facts of the di spute betweenScrope and Grosvenor five centuries before ” ; but those ofSir Wi lliam Carleton were even more remarkable, enablingh im

,as they did

,to certify that Sir Baldwin was seated at

Carleton , when the Conqueror came, s ix hundred years before.Mr. Dudley Carleton

,we may add, i s paternally a Pigott .

1} I »

Under the headin of ‘What i s Believed we cannot sparethe cri tic who rej oice u s wi th a column in wh ich a not overskilful pen had striven to express a somewhat i llnatu red dissen tfrom TbcAncestor

,i ts aims

,its articles and i ts wri ters . Much

cri tici sm of Tbe Ancestor has ap eared in the press . The kindlin es s of that cri tici sm i s gratef

iixlly acknowledged by the conductors of a revi ew wh ich may be said to invi te battle by i tsattitude

,an attitude wh ich

, as we are willing to acknowledge, aherald m ight be ju stified in describing in hi s beloved jargon asrampant comba ttan t.

as 41

But some protest is surely called for when one who cri ticizesan archaeological review harangues Mr . Horace Round on thecarelessness wh ich allows him to describe a certai n W illiam as

‘a canon of Holy Trin ity

,Lo ndon .

’ The obj ection to th i s1 Compare pp. 14, 34 above.2 TbcAncestor, No . 1 , p.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 2 6 THE ANCESTOR

Blounts in th is kingdom are descended . Sir Robert le Bloun d was commander of the sh ips of war, and he was one of the Conqueror’s Counci l . H is

brother, Sir Wi ll iam,

was General of the Foot . Sir Robert le Bloun d wasstyled, from h is principal possessions, Baron of Ickworth and Lord of Orford .

He married the youngest daughter of Henry, Earl Ferrets . SirWi l l iam leBloun d, on the other hand, had an ample inheri tance in Lincolnsh ire bestowedupon h im by the Conqueror .The Blounts of Soddin gton in Worcestershi re, and of Mawley near C leo

bury i n Shropshire, are descended from Wi ll iam ,the second son of Sir Robert

le Blound.

On the.Conqu eror

’

s expedi tion i t would seem that few s

i

taflf

appointm ents were vacant after the great Blount interest at theNorman War Ofii ce had done its work . But the Blounts, asSir Edward i s ready to adm it

,are not the only old family to

be found in Shropsh ire .The long association of my fam i ly w ith Shropsh ire came out rather oddly

i n a discussion between some farmers a t an audi t dinner a t Mawley Hall a fewyears ago . Several tenants were contest ing the point a s to wh ich of theirfam i l ies could boast of having rented land for the longest period on the estate,when the woodman , named Allen , proved from documents to the sa tisfact ionof all present tha t h is ancestors had e i ther been in the employment of, or hadheld the posi tion of tenant farmers under

,the Blount fam i ly for a period of

nearly 800 years. H is ancestors came over from Normandy w i th the fam i lya t the t ime of the Conquest, and from father to son, right up to the presentt ime

,they had been reta ined on the estate (p.

An audi t dinner at Mawley Hall must be a banquet of'

wh ich the antiquary m ight crave the broken meats . An aud itdinner

,mark you

,at wh ich even the fam ily woodman

,

apparently by custom rather than by acc ident,si ts at board

wi th e ight hundred years of hi s fam ily evidences in hi s

breeches pocket . An audi t d inner at wh ich the farmers sittinground the marvellous woodman are each and all skilled inpalaeography and the necessary Old French an d contractedLatin to a degree wh ich enables them to glance through thewoodman’s evidence on the spot and to pronounce themsati sfactory . Sir Edward’s account of the audi t dinner endswi th the story of Allen the woodman, but he wrongs u s byhis reticence . Wi th gleefu l respect we shou ld listen for theoutspoken opin ion of these hearty Shropsh ire farmers, warmedwi th their audit ale, on such vexed questions as that of theRed Book of tbs Excbeguer .

THE GENT IL ITY OF W ILL IAM EXELBY

i ssue of Tbe Ancestor we told the story ofer and his gentili ty

,and how a Norfolk j ury

made sport wi th that gentili ty when i t was produced in courtfor the ir handling. I n the first year of K ing Jam es I . gentili tycomes again into court— th i s t ime into the court of the K ing’sChancery— and alas for that subtle qual i ty concerning whosevalue an d import long—winded learn ing was spread ing i tselfover much fin e paper, it again makes m atter of m irth .

Our docum ents are two in number. 1 The firs t is the B illof Complaint of Wi lliam Exelby ‘

of Sou thmym s in the cou n tieofM iddlesex gent,

’ dated 28May 1 603 . H is plea need notkeep u s long. The parchment i s torn and faded

,but the

import is straightforward enough . One Wi lliam Lee of theI nner Temple in London

,esqu ire

, was se ised of an estate ofin heri tance in a farm called Du rism es or Durhams in thepari shes of Sou thmym s an d R idge, an d be ing so seised, m adea lease of the prem ises to one Kinge, wh ich lea se the com

plainant, who was buying an estate in that neighbourhood,

bought of the lessee. I t was afterwards agreed that the complainant should surrender his interest in th is lease and take a

n ew lease from Will iam Lee, who thereupon, wi th Elizabethhis wife, by indenture of lease dated 8 June 40 El iza. [ 1 598]dem ised to the complainant the capi tal mansion house w iththe barns belonging

,and certai n parcels of land

,for a term of

2 1 years .Soon after th i s transaction the said William Lee desires to

convey away his whole inheri tan ce in the prem ises,and comes

to terms w i th the complainant for the yielding up of the leasefor a certai n consideration . But Will iam Lee's ways are notthose of one wi th whom business affa irs pas s eas ily an d

pleasantly, an d the B ill of Com plaint follows na turally enough .

The complainant descr ibes him as driven to som e necess ities,

’

no exaggerated phrase when we understand that the esqu irewas then lying and being as theretofore and sythen ce for the

1 Ch mpm. befi re 1 7 14,‘M i tford,’ v. 82 .

1 27

1 28 THE ANCESTOR

space of many years in pri son in the Counter in Woodstreet

London for debt. ’ But the stone walls and iron bars of theCounter in Woodstreet made someth ing more than a herm itage for William Lee, esqu ire . H i s innocent and quiet m indtook them for a place of securi ty from wh ich he m ight answerWilliam Exelby at his ease.H is answer i s at great length . Doubtless the preparation

of i t, a labour of love wi th one who was of the honourablesociety of the M iddle Temple

,filled many agr eeable days of

the leisured life encouraged by such retreats as the Counter inWoodstreet. One may believe that i t was heard wi th greatapproval by the contemplative inhabi tants of the Counter asWilliam Lee, esqu ire, wi th all an author’s pride, read it aloudfor a li terary accompan iment to the even ing’s ale. Even so a

certain Memorial was to be read aloud to his fellow collegiansin the King’s Bench pri son by a second esqu ire, WilkinsM icawber by name

, another neat hand at a phrase .Th i s answer is dated 1 6 June 1 603 , and we have soon put

beh ind u s the commonplaces of the d ispute about the lease .By thi s time, no doubt, his business affairs have ceased to vexWi lliam Lee. I n his character of member of the M iddleTemple, he hazards the op in ion that the action should havebeen brought at the common law, an d wi th that he wipes hishands of leases

,conveyances an d agreements. But there is

another matter in wh ich he i s more curious, and concern ingwh ich he addresses h imself to the Lord Chancellor of Englandas to a fellow member of a learned profession . Ex elby

’

s b illmay be a common law trumpery, i t matters li ttle one way orthe o ther, but i s it indeed possible that Wi lliam Exelby hasdescribed h imself at the head of it as a gent Th i s defendan t doth th ink i t strange if the complainant be the sam eWilliam Exelby wh ich he doth pretend by his said bill to be .

The Will iam Exelby wi th whom William Lee, esqu ire, had todo, surely dare not usurp the title or name of a gentlemanFor what was the father

,the ‘reputed father ’ of the said

William Exelby William Lee will tell my Lord Chancellor.That father was one Myles commonly soe called a cu ttinge

tayler dwellynge som tym es in Fletestreate London whoe byhi s large bill s an d small measures —in Will iam Lee n ow of

the Counter, esqu ire, we have doubtless a ex- customer o i

Myles—‘grewe into wealth, and being pufl’ed uppe w

th thesame termed h imself then as yt was commonly reported

’

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 30 THE ANCESTOR

of arms, who would have been i n poor case wi thout the ci tizen’s grant of arms, hi s lying in state, hi s scutcheoned funeral .Myles Exelby the father was of the parish of St. Dunstan—inthe-West

,a ci tizen an d merchant taylor, and therefore a mem

ber of one of the ch iefest and most powerful c i ty gi lds . H e

died in 1 579, an d an inquest taken after h is death describeshi s two Fleet Street houses as held in ch ief of the Crown .

H is fam ily married wi th gentry, an d hi s sons Wi lliam an d

Myles are described as gentlemen in many documents .Myles the younger settled at Stoke Nayland in Suffolk

,

where he died in 1 6 1 6, leaving a wi ll wherein he i s described as gentleman .

’ The elder brother,Wi lliam Exelby of

South M ims,was a c i tizen an d merchant taylor like hi s father.

H e was born in 1 563 and died in 1 6 1 8. In hi s wi ll he i sdescribed as of North M ims, co . Herts, gen tlem an

,andmore

solid evidence of h i s posi tion i s given in the inquest takenafter his death in 1 6 1 8

,wherein both he and h is son an d

heir are described by the Escheator of th e Crown as gendemen .

Myles Exelby the father was the son of one of theExelbys of Norton- in - the- Clay, a hamlet in Cundall pari sh ofYorksh ire .1 I t i s curious to observe that hadWi lliam Exelbyfor h is rejoinder to William Lee gone ped igree makingamongst hi s Yorksh ire kinsfolk

,i t i s highl probable that he

could have produced a line of ancestors 0 an ancient landedhouse against wh ich the esqu ire of the Counter, or an y otherLee in England

,would have been hard pressed to match

pedigrees . For the Exelbys of Norton were cadets of an

house in an adjoin ing pari sh,whose fam ily stock of Exelby 01

Exelby had its origin in an early Norman house,the Folifates,

to whom E skelby or Exelby had com e by an heiress manycenturies before Will iam Lee’s bill.Whereby a moral hangs . Gentility i s no longer to be

measured by the yardwands of William Lee an d TheodoreHook ; let u s be in no haste to set up the standard of theArm orial Gent. I f arm s make the gent

,Will iam Exelby

m ight have ‘enterpri sed that style and addi tion by ri ht 01

an older blazon and a fin er one than an y wh ich he coul haveacqu ired by purchase from Garter. Whether William Lee’s

1 For information concern ing the early Exelbys I am indebted to excellen tgenealogical work of a descendant of the house, Mr . H . D . Eshelby, F .S.A.

|t fitlitf m 1113 5011 ot'

oncoftht

jh -Chy,ahmlct in Cundall parishof

mm 1111!hadWilliamExelbyLe: epedi makin

chfl it ismproliiliicthathi

1 h d'

mstors0 anancient landed1: quit: oftheCounter,oranyother

dakm been hardpressedtomatch

Gen 1 is no longer tober;dWil

liiliihLeeandTheodore

GENTIL ITY OF

1 3 2 THE ANCESTOR

THE HOUSEHOLD BOOKS 01? SIR M ILESSTAPLETON, BART. ,

1 6 56—1 70 5

[Con tinued]

VIORD MACAULAY’

S description of the country squ ireof these times as an ignorant, determ ined stay- at- home,

an d a detester of London and Londoners, in ten s ified in thecase of a Papist, who is described as vegetating as qu ietly asthe elms of the avenue wh ich led to his ancestral grange,

’

i s

qu ite contradicted by the constant movements of Sir M ilesStapleton . Considering the numerous gaps in these households books

,i t would appear as if Sir M iles vi si ted town

nearly every year . The very first of thi s series of booksv ields a full account of hi s j ourney to the metropolis and hissojourn there

,chicfly on th i s occasion for legal purposes.

A dispute having ari sen as to certain landed property andmanorial rights at Bedale during the m inori ty of Mr . M ilesStapleton, the young squ ire took proceedings for the recoveryof his rights soon after his accession to his estates . Oh

Apri l 1 9, 1 656, he set out for London in order to be presentat the tryall for Beedall in Easter tearm .

’

H e rode to townaccompanied by his manservant

,and, j udging from subse

guent journeys

,spent four days on the road . The charges

or h imself andman and their horses in going to town amountedto £ 1 7s . 6d.

,and on the return to 1 95 . 64. They tarried

in London a li ttle over three weeks, paying for ‘dyett andother expenses ’ 5 7s . 6d.

,as well as £2 3 3 . 6d. for ‘grasse

hay an d com e for our horses . ’The legal expenses of th i s sui t are entered wi th much

detail, some of the i tems being su ffi cien tly curious1: s . d.

Ir. gi ven to Mr. Li tster for a reteyn ing fee oo 10 00

It. given to Mr . Goodr ick for a reteyn in g fee aga in st the tryall 00 10 00

I t. paid for certificates out the registers a t Beedall and Hornby oo 00 10

It. paid for a search in the rolls about Shepton s deed oo 0 1 00

It. paid for a search in the rolls for a fin e 00 0 2 04It. paid for exam in ing Sir Ri ch . Shepton s w ill 00 0 2 00

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 34 THE ANCESTOR

It . paid for two peeces of tafi'

aty ribbin for fan cyes for my su i tIt . paid to Mr. Baker the Taylor for m aking upp my su i t and

cloake w i th lin in ges an d all other th ingsIt. pa id for a paire of new si lke tops sutable to my fan cyesIt. pa id for a pa ire of thred bottoms for my toppsI t. paid for a pai re of new Span ish lea ther shoes and gallotivesfor myselfe

Ir. pa id for a new holland band and cuffs and stock ings, and a

garn ish of handcherchifi’

e buttonsIt . paid for s ix ells of holland for two sh ir ts for my selfeIt. paid to ]ohn Baker for al tering my black su i t .

It. for too garn ish more of han dcherch ifi'

e buttons for myselfe

0 1 1 5 00

00 07 00

00 1 0 00

0 1 1 1 06

00 0 3 06

00 03 04

The purchases for hi s wife an d for the Lady Sophia showthat th i s Yorkshire country gentleman was a man of goodtaste, wh il st the purchase of the luxu ry of tobacco for h islunatic brother points to a good heart.It. for a peece of plate wi th a cover and a silver spoon for myselfe and my w ife

It . paid the herrald painter for my coat of armes .

It. paid for setting my w ifes armes and m ine upon the silvercup and cover .

It. paid for two paire of otrange floore gloves for my wifeIt . paid for an ibbon y blacke box l ined wi th Span ish perfumedleather and for two pai re of orran ge floore gloves I presented my Lady Sophia

It. paid for siena, m anna, and ruberbfor my w ifeIt. paid tobacco for my brotherIt . pa id for han dchercher buttons for my w ife

0 5 00 00

00 02 00

0 1 07 00

00 1 7 00

00 04 00

00 0 3 00

I n Easter terme 1 657 the Bedale case again came oh,an d

M iles Stapleton was again in London . Friday, May 1,was

the day appointed, but ‘our adversaries would not try itwhen it came to be called . The total legal expenses of thatyear amounted to £6 1 14s . ozd. Among the i tems are :It. paid for the Act of sal e of del inquents lands wherein SirWill . Theaxton our adversa ry was named

It. paid to half'e of the Jury being but 8 in number an d I consented to give them 10s . a man , when Mr. Tasborough and I referred our business to my Lord Marq . ofDortchester and Mr. Hen . Howard my moitye whereofwas 18wh i ch Mr. Tasb: is to pay mee again e if the busines be not agreed

It . paid my halfe of the chardges spent w i th the jury whthey were agreed wi th and paid

It . paid for goeing by water and spent w i th one of the jurylt. given to Mr. Feliskirke for goeing about to exam ine some

Acts of Parl iament concern ing del inquents

1: sa d.

00 0 ! 00

1 8 00 00

00 05 00

HOU SEHOLD BOOKS 1 3 5

On th i s occasion the vi sit was prolonged from the end ofApril to the end of August ; he was accompan ied by his wi fe‘to lye in n of her ch ild there . ’ H is sister Anne went upwi th them 1n the ir coach, as well as ‘M rs . Dorothy.

’

Two

of his serving men rode by the s ide of the coach . Theywere s ix days on their Journey, and the ir expenses on the roadamounted to £6 10s . 1 1a

’. Nan , his wife

’

3 maid,came u wi th

the carrier, her journey costing 23s . The carti ng 0 the irheavy luggage to Doncaster cost 3 s .

,and the carrier’3 charges

for conveyi ng the same to London amounted to £ 1 1 2 s. 4d.

at 2d. the pound .

On arriving in London the first d isbursements were halfcrown to mu s icke for welcom ing u s to towne,

’ twopence to al ink boy, and another half- crown to the poor people whogathered round the doors of their lodgi ngs .The deta il s as to the b irth and death of hi s ch ild are worth

giving in extenso.

Chardges extraordinary a t my w ifes ly in in n of her ch i lde julythe 9 th 1 657 it was then borne be ing Thursday morn in ge .

It. given to Doctor H inton the man midwife for comeing when 1: s . 11.

she had been long in labor . 0 5 00 00

Ir. pa id to Doctor H intons Appothecary his bil l for th ings formy w ife and the ch ilde

I t. given to Doctor Pr igeon for come ing to my w ife .

It. pa id a coatch for Doctor PrigeonIt. paid to Mr. Skel ton the Appothicary for th ings for my w ifeand ch i lde . 00 14 00

It. pa id for goeing by water several] for the m idw ife M rs .Lin sec 00 05 05

Ir. given myselfe to M rs . Lin sec the m idwife for her painesabout my w ife

It . given to Nan for bringing me news of my w ife be ing del ivered

It. given to Mr. Oglethorpe for Christen ing the ch i ldI t . given to Mr. Elmer and Mr. Hawood to pray for i tIt. given to Mr. Cham bers to pray for my w ifeIt . pa id for a coffin for the ch i ld wCh dyed at 8 days endIt . pa id the church dutyes for bu ry ing the ch ild a t St. Gregoryes

under Poules 02 07 02

I t. pa id for church dutyes a t comon garden (Covent Garden)church . 00 14 06

11 . paid for the Nurse keeper for keepingmy w ife hermonth . 03 02 06

It . paid to M rs . Dorothy for prov isions of al l so rts into thehouse during my w ifes month 1 2 00 00

3 1 02 0 1

1 36 THE ANCESTOR

On his wife’s recove Sir M iles presented her wi th twofin e lardge n ew fashion e

l

c

’

l'

holland aprons,

’ which cost 38s . anda li tle silver Spoone for a farcing.

’

In 1 658 Sir M iles and his lady again vis ited London, an donce more 25 . 6a'. was given to the mu s icke y

t wellcomed mywife and mee to towne . ’ Twopence was paid for new M i lkeunder the cowe,’ an d ‘fou erpen ce

’ for peaches for his wife .‘The lame men in comon ga rden obtained 6d. an d a blacka

moor at the Beeh ive 1 24.

On September 2 9 Sir M iles paid 3 55 . for ‘a place in the

hackny coatch for myselfe from London to Ferrybridge .’ The

coach was four days on the road . When he reached Ferrybridge

,he paid 3s . for the h ire of a horse on wh ich h e rode

home.When Sir M iles was in town i n 1 659 he spent the large

sum of{I10 4s . on a sui t and cloak of satin,wh ich was trimmed

wi th th i rty—s ix yards of silver ribbon . Scouring his pearlcoloured silk stockings cost 1 s. , and a pot of j essamy butterfor his hair 1 s . 6d. At the same time he bought for his ownuse ‘

a paire of scarlett coloured worsted sti rrup s tock inges

for 5s . an d a sky coloured tabby wai stcoat for 2s . 3d.

011 June 9 , 1 662 , Sir M iles j ourneyed to London abouthis Beedall business when he agreed wi th Theakeston .

’

H is

own fare by hackney coach from Doncaster was £2 5s . , and healso paid to the coachman 1os . 611. for carrying his cloak—bag .

’

H e took up to town wi th him his man Thomas Stevenson,who rode by the side of the coach . The charges that wereincurred

,being four dayes on the road

,

’ for board and lodgingwere £ 1 8s . , inclusive of the expenses of his man

’s horse .Sir M iles alighted at the ‘Black Swan ’

in Tower Street,the tavern where the Earl of Rochester took lodgings underan assumed name when ban ished from the Court . To theporter who carried hi s cloak—bag to his lodgings a paym entwas made of 4d. H e tarried i n London during th i s vi si t forten weeks an d some odd days, lodging at M rs . Atken es , an dpaying for his own d iet at the rate of 1 2s. a week . H e paidm eanwh ile 7s . 6d. per week as board wages to his manservant .The coach h ire, wh ilst in town, ‘

on m any several times andto 1 6d. I n addi tion to th is there

i s a separate entry of for coach h ire, being half the chargeof a coach an d four to Hampton Court on August 2 , when hewent wi th his brother Gregory to ki ss the queen’s hand. H is

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 38 THE ANCESTOR

crown and digni ty.

’ I t was usually termed the ch imney orch imley tax . I t fell somewhat heavily upon Sir M iles, as

his enlarged house at Carlton had no less than twenty- threech im neys or hearths, wh il st the dower house ofQi ou squ e had

eleven .

The only book that Sir M iles Stapleton seems to have purchased on thi s vi si t:was a volume called F ia t Lax, price 7s . , ofwh ich he made a present to Lady Tempest, the daughter of hiscousin

,Sir Thomas Gasco igne . Th i s lady was afterwards in

volved in the Yorksh ire branch of the odious Titus Oates plot.The appearance of certain lame sold iers in the Strand

caused the u n looseing of the pu rsestrings to the extent of6d. ,

and various other poor folk profited by Sir M iles’sojourn in town .

One entry i n h i s account book names hi s vi si ts to thebarber. I t runs as follows : ‘Paid to the barbers for tr imming mee whiles t I stayed in Lond . be ing sometimes once a

week an d sometimes twi se 1 5s. 6d.

’ ‘Mr . Delaroach thefren shman

’ received 55 . ‘for drawinge out a stump of a

tooth and for dressing my teeth .

’ Mr . Broadstreet alsoreceived 5s .

‘for doing something to my throat when i t wasvery sore an d my uvelay downe .

’

H e also paid to Mr . Peirs

the Appothicary hi s bi ll for th ings for mee when I was notwell and my uvelay downe £ 1 , an d to Mr . Peirs

'

man foradm in istering a gli ster

,2s . At the same tim e he rem embered

to di scharge a bi ll of 1 5s . due to Mr . Shelton the Appothicary for th ings my wife had from h im when she was wi th ch ildeof Bryan .

’

H is affection for his wife i s shown in not only bringingher presents

,but i n despatching them hom e . Thus he paid

9s . for ‘some drinking glasses ' wh ich were sent on to h i swife . H e al so saw to the packing up of a gown for LadyStapleton

,paying 1 s . 24. for the box

,an d 4d. to a porter for

taki ng it to the Doncaster carryer .

’

H is brother Gregory left him for Flanders just at thebegi nn ing of August

,being presented by M iles wi th

whil st John, hi s brother Gregory’s man , received 5s .At the end of his sojourn he purchased two boxes (2s . 8d.)

to contain the clothes he had bought and the wri teings orevidences of h is Bedale property . A porter received 651. fortaking these two boxes to the Doncaster carri er at the bellsavage . ’ The ‘Belle Savage ’ on Ludgate H ill was a well

HOUSEHOLD BOOKS 1 39

known London tavern, and a starting point for sundrycoaches and stage waggons . The carrier’s charge for thetwo was 1 2s.Much of hi s visi t was occupied in legal business with

regard to the completing of years’ leas e of the Bcedaleproperty w i th 1 00 marks annu i ty an d enrolling it in Chancery .

H e also ‘paid in fees in the Exchequer about getting myquietus est out of the p ipe othee for my Barron ets Pattent,

’

45 1 6s . 0d.,together with 1 2s. 'ven then to Mr . Thomas

Lee of the Temple July the 8th fcgsi' his paines for getinge me

the Qi letus est. ’The grant of the d ign i ty of a baronet had been made to

M iles Stapleton of Carleton,co . York

,

’ on February 2 5 ,

The following are the particulars entered in hi s householdbooks for the purchase of th i s dign ity

, apart from the feesthe n ew baronet paid when in town

It. Pa id to George Abbott for Collon ell G illby Apri l] 1 66 2 ,upon our agreemen t for my Pa tten t for be ing made anEngl ish Barronett three hundred and fortye pounds 340 00 00

It. Paid then to Mr. James Wright by agreement for beingin strumen tall in the bus in es 0 5 00 00

It. G iven then to Mr. George Abbott, for his pa ines aboutthe busin es

,when I received my patten t from him under

the grea t scale of England 02 07 00

It. Given or pa id to Mr . Thomas Lee of the Temple mysollicitor for his pa ines ] uly the 1 5th 1 66 2 about mybusin es wi th Mr. Wi ll Goode who takes the accompts ofLu naticks Guardians and sent downe severall letters to meabout i t a M rs . Lee got it put of . 0 2 07 00

The following are the i tems of expend iture on clothesincurred i n London in 1 662 by th is example of Macaulay’s‘coarse uneducated country gentlemen z

s . 11 .

Ir. Paid to Mrs . Chea tam at the s igne of the fly ing pan inm iddle row for a new periwigg for my selfe 0 3 00 00

It. Paid to Mr. Rider for a pa ire of new pearle coloured s ilkestock ings for my selfe 0 1 0 2 00

It. Paid for a paire of Span ish lea ther shoues with gallotios formy selfe

It . Pa id to Mr. Mal tby for a demicaster hatt for my selfeI t. Pa id to Swayby for a pai re ofwhi te hides lea ther gloves for

00 0 1 08

Dom. State Papers, Chas . I I . li . 1 2, 49 .

140 THE ANCESTOR

It . Paid for a paire of new fashioned ridein g pan teloon s andstockings for my self

'

eIt . Paid to my bro . Ed. Bartye for a paire of can vi s ridein gstockings for my sel i

'elt . Pa id more to my bro . Edward I3artye for a pa ire of lardgstrong ride ing boots for my selfe

It . Paid for a paire of spurr lea thersIt. Paid to Mr . Wi seman partner w i th Mr. Halfehead, at thesign e of the naked boy in Paternoster row for 1 1 yardsof smile a t 31 . 611 . a yard for maki ng a su i t and coat formy selfe

It . Paid toMr. Pegg the Taylor his bi ll for trim ing and makingup my stuffe sui t and coat in all

It. Paid to Mr. Pegs man for bringing home my clothes whenthey were made

I t . Paid more to Mr. Pegg h is bi l l for altering my black clo thbretches an d setin g n ew blacke ribbin on them

When he left hi s London lodgings on August 2 5 , he gaveMr . Atken

’

s maid 55 . H e rode back on a‘sorr ild horse ’

that he had bought from his brother Gregory for £7 in

clu s ive of saddle and bridle, wh ilst his man was mounted on thegalloway he had brought wi th him from Yorksh ire . Theystarted w i th their horses from the King’s Head

,a well known

tavern at the corner of Chance Lane wh ich afterwards became notorious as the place 0 the incubation of the di srepu table Ti tus Oates plot.

On his way north Sir M i les stopped four n ights at

Wolverton with Lady Longueville, whose daughter he mar riedfor his second wife more than twenty years later .I n 1 663 Sir M iles was again in London . On th i s occasion

he rode wi th a servant in attendance . Both the horses weresold on thei r reach ing town . After a sojourn of three weekshe returned

,buying good horses for the journey north . The

astute Yorksh ireman reckoned that he had cleared £3 51 . byth is transaction, in addi tion to saving the keep of two horsesfor the three weeks.I n 1 669 SirM iles Stapleton spent seven weeks in London .

On th i s occasion he proceeded to London by the hackneycoach from Doncaster, securing a place on May 2 6 for £2 .

H is French valet Pullain e rode on horseback by the coach .

They were four days out on the road,during wh ich tim e he

spent on h imself an d his man another £2 . Pullain e’

s horsefor that period cost 1 3 5 . During th i s sojourn in townhe was diligent in seeking out amusement. H e paid ‘for

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 42 THE ANCESTOR

Sir M iles rode to town for a brief visi t in 1 682 . Oneresult was the following expendi ture on clothesIt. Paid to Arrundell Bradshaw of the exchain ge in the Strand 1: s . d.

for a new morn ing gown e and capp for my selfi: 03 1 6 00

It. Paid to Mr. Legate ] une the 3rd 1 682 for a new clothsu i te wh ich he got made for me a t London by Mr. PeterTay a taylor

,for cloth , li n e ing, trim in g and makein g in

all according to the part icular of the bills he sen t me in all 06 02 03

It. Pa id more then for a paire of s i lke stockings 1 0 00

It. Pa id more then for a sword knott 04 04It. Paid more then for a box to bring them downe in and forthe carriage of them by the hackney coatch

It. Pa id more Mr. Legate’s chardges about buyin ge my clothesand given the Taylors man 810. 04 02

It. Pa id to the hackney coatch man for brin gin ge my clothesfrom London to Yorke June 1 9 th 1 682 00 04

'

06

I t would seem that Sir M iles’ last vi si t to town was in1 704. H e was then an old m an . There were no furtherpurchases of gay or fash ionable cloth ing. The only specialexpenditure entered in the household books i s 3s. 6d.

‘forhippocondraicke powder bought at London .

’

Certain parts of the western block of present house at

Carlton date back to the rebu ilding planned by Sir MilesStapleton’s grandfather

,wh ich was ended in 1 6 14. I n a deed

of 1 63 1 , making some provi sion for his ch i ldren, Sir M iles’

father describes i t as a domus mansiotzalis or man iomlis . Extensivealterations an d addi tions by Mr . Pugin, wh ich were fin ishedin 1 875, included the erection of two lofty towers hence itspresent name of Carlton Towers. 1

Sir M iles when entering Carlton Hall had not much occasion to interfere wi th or amend the house so recently bu ilt,save an expendi ture of £ 1 5 on flooring an d fire laces butthere are occasional later entr ies relative to it

,ofwh ich the

more important are transcribed. Reference has already beenmade to the n ew chapel an d adjoin ing chamber an d closetsconstructed in the gallery in 1 668.

The first entry, in 1 66 1,i s one of the many tokens of

his special affection for h is first wife .1 A drawing i s given of Carlton Hal l before Pugin’s res toration, in Mr.

Chetwynd-Stapylton e’s fam i ly h i story, p. 164.

HOU SEHOLD BOOKS

Inp. Pa id to Mr. Kettlewell a t the gla s se sh0p a t York for 1 6marble stones for the s tone- head- chamber ch iml ey wheremy w ife is to lye in ch ilde bed, be ing n ine inches squareand halfe of them wh i te and the other ha ll'e blacke 05 00

It. Pa id to Ba t tle Rimere for pollishing the sa id s ixteen marblestones 1 2 00

Ir. Pa id for a ba skett to put them in and for carry ing them tothe boa t 00 0 1 00

I t. Pa id for bringing them and some Other l i ttl e th ings bywater from York to Newland when I fetched them 03 00

Early in 1 663 , the n ew baronet caused hi s crest to be rai sedon the turret of his mansion .

It. Pa id to Nestor of Sclbye the whi te sm i th for malte ing newfa ine being cutt w i th a Talbott for the h igh top terr itt

It. Pa id to joseph Robin son for gu ildin g the fa ine w i th leafegold and helpeing to s et i t upp 00 14 00

I n the same year care was taken to secure the glazing ofthe h igher parts of the house.It. Pa id more to Nes tor for two new grea t Iron ea sement s for 1: s . d.

the l itl e room e w i th in the grea t m iddle terri t 00 10 00

It. Pa id more to him for 24 l i tl e Iron barrs to hold on the

glass e in h igh topp territt and for 500 s tubs to nai le onthe gla sse in the lower grea t m iddl e territt or Lan thern e . 00 04 03

The entry of 1 676 relative to the re - leading of the roofsi s an example of the close attention he paid to pecun iarymatters

,wh ich is the special characteri stic of these household

books .Imp. paid for a fother of l ead we : Mr. John Wood of York 1 . d.

bought there for me in September for mend ing the l eadsof Carleton hou se a t eleven pounds , and 20 hundredweight to the fother and every hundred we ight i s s ix

score and three pounds wh ich i s much better . than theMarchants weight wh ich i s but 1 9 hundred and halfepounds to the hundred soe as th i s wee have now is ca lledtraine weight for which I have paid eleven pounds and ischeaper then Marchants weight a t ten pounds 1 1 00 00

Immedi ately to the south of Carlton Hall were the widewaters of the river Aire, a tributary near to i ts mouth of theOuse . Over the Ai re i t was incumbent on the lord of Carltonto maintain a ferry. The ferry- house often called for SirM iles’ attention . I t was rebu ilt in 1 662 at a cost of £8 1 s. 4d.

The following are some of the i tems

144 THE ANCESTOR

It. An thony Wil son the carpenter for pullinge down e the ould [I s . d.

ferry house and make in g a n ew roofe and rearing it in a ll 02 08 02

It. Paid more to An thony Wi lson for makeing the in wall s andpert ition s in the house w i th doores 3CC.

It. Paid to two tha tchers of Ken sall for each seven dayes thatch:in g the house at each 1s . 2d. a day 00 1 6 04

The ferry house was damaged in the winter of 1 681 - 2 bypart of the river bank givi ng way .

It. Paid more to Rich . Boyars and John Browne for filling up s . d.

the hole in the ferry hou se k i tching wck wa s worn e whenthe end of the hou se wa s driven away wi th a gal] there the1 6th day of January 1 681 and mended in 1 682 00 1 2 00

I n 1 668, a house on the estate termed ‘Petron ells ouldhouse ’

was enti rely rebuilt at a total cost of £69 3 5 . 9d. I twas a timberfi'

amed house,an d the carpenterwas paid 1 2 1 5 . 2d.

for frameing and bui lding the n ew house of timber and setingi t upp an d laying three chamber floores, mak ing staires partitions and doores and all other wood worke.

’ Nai l s,laths,

plaster, thatch, glass, etc . , brought the expenditure up to£43 85 . 9d. The bricks for the ch imneys were made on theestate, and the timber was felled in Sir M iles' woods ; theestimate of the value of these materials

,together Wi th the

draughts for leading them i s entered at £2 5 1 51 .

I n 1 702 the roofs of Baxter Hall, on Sir M iles’ property

at Drax, were renewed being much decayed ; the walls werelowered and the garret windows in the roof taken away. Thecost of these repai rs was 1 2 5s .

The entries wi th regard to a pump for Carlton Hall, in1 664, are sufficien tly curious to warrant their insertion inextenso.

Inp. Pa id to Mr. F i shwicke Mr. Walm sley Stuard for a great [I s . d.

oake tree out of Thorpe Parke con tay inge 27 foot oft imber, for making the pump in the yard, where the trowwell wa s 0 1

i

6

It. Paid to N ichola s Loftu s the pump maker for board ing thepump tree being 8 yards long at a yard

It. Paid more to him for Iron workIt. Paid more to him for boareing the bottom of the well to geta be tter springe 00 02

It. Paid more to him for another box to keepe in readinesswhen the other failes 00 0 1 06

It. Paid to Sam Ainley the joyn er for one days work plain eingthe head of the pumpe 00 1 0 00

It. Pa id for 1 5 s tone of chalke to put in the bottom of thewell when the pump wa s put in to make the water better 00 02 06

00 1 6 02

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 46 THE ANCESTOR

It . Paid for bringing the bedstead and cha ires by water from 1:York to Carleton ferrye

I t. Paid more for bra s se n ailes for the cha iresIt. Paid more to Robt . Wright the s i lk weaver i

'or twelveounces and three quarters of green s i lk fringe for maki ngup the bed, an d cha irs, at 2 shi ll ings an ounce 0 1 05 06

Inp. Paid to Franci s Rhodes of Yorke the upholdster for onenew bedstead for the s ta ire head chamber, ] une the 1 5th,1 663 0 1 06

It. Paid then more to Francis Rhodes for foure low cha irsstuffed an d covered w i th canva s s

It. Paid then more to Franci s Rhodes for 24 yards of cour sematt in for staire head chamber an d closs ett at a

yard 00 08

The following expendi ture was incurred in 1 688

It. Paid i ts Robert Rhodes of York the uphol ster for seavenpeeces of tapestry hanging for my wifes chamber

It. Pa id to him for pack ing up the hangings an d bringingthem from Yorke to Selbye by water . 00 05

It . Paid then more to h im for two p ieces of narrow dyaper fornapkins ea ch peece conta in ing 1 3 yards for a dozen ofnapkin s, at yard, wh ich comes to a peece $00 a stwo peece s for two dozen of napk ins cost 0 1 08

I t Pa id to Tho . Wherry the s tock-man for 26 yards ofhuggabagg for makein g two dozen of table napk in s at1 1 . 4d. a yard abai ting 8 pence 0 1 14 00

I n the winter of 1 700—1 , there was considerable expenditure for the ki tchen, etc .Inp. Paid to young R ichard Scholey, the blacke sm i th the 1: s . 11.

1 2th day of December 1 700 for al tering and mak ingnew the grea t Iron Ra inge in Ki tchen ch im l ey . 04 00 00

It . Pa id for a peece of stayn d Indian callicoe for a ca rpet formy closet table

It. Paid for n ine yards of fin e Indian s tayn d callicoe a t as . 94.

a yard 0 1 04 09It. Paid for n ine yards and three quarter s of cotton for smooth

i ng cloth at 1 1 . 2d. a yard . 1 1 07It. Paid for 20 yards of l inen cloth at Snaith for sheets a t

1 1 . 3d. a yard . 0 1 05It. Pa id to ]ohn Taylor for one large bra ss pott to boyle mea t in 0 1 10

I t. Pa id for two hand bra s s candles ticks for An n Barber 00 02 04It. Paid for two pairs of lardge bra s s candlest ick s 00 1 1 06

It. Pa id for mending an oulde bra s s candles t ick at Yorke 0 1 06

It. Paid for 200 sma ll bra s s n ailes for mending s toolcs andchaires

It. Paid for twoi

bra

i

ss candlesticksIt. Paid for s ix new lowe bra ss candles ti cks for the Aulter

HOUSEHOLD BOOKS 147

It. Pa id to Edward Sell er of Yorke the braz ier for one lardge g s. 4.

upper bo i ler for seting in the ki tch ing in a furnase toboyle mea t in , January the 18th 1 700 04 1 3 00

good stock of pewter was laid i n in 1 664 but by theclose of the century i t required replen i sh ingIt. Paid for two dozen of puter plates and one plate w“

]ohn 1: s. d.

and Nan Barber bought a t York December the 14th

1664 a t 1 s . 6d. a pound and they weighed 37 pound . 02 1 5 06

It. Pa id then for s ix lardge puter platters or di shes a t 71 . apound and they we ighed 57 pound an d a halfw‘” comes to 04 0 1 05

It. Pa id then more for one gallon puter can and s ix porringers 19 06

It . Pa id then more for two puter s tands for the table 00 08

It. Pa id then more for two puter m n dles tickes 05 00

It. Paid then more for two lea se puter candles tickes 00 0 3 06

It. Pa id then more for one puter chamber pott 0 3 06

It. Pa id then more for one puter sal t for the pan trye 00 0 1 00

Ir. Pa id then more for s ix puter spoon s for the pan trye 00 00 09It. Pa id then for a paire of snuffers for the

oparlour 0 1 00

It . Paid for cord ing for the puter and carry i ng i t to the water

It. Paid to a boat man of Thom e for bringing the puter fromYork by water to Donmouth new hal l fleet when wefetched it 0 1 00

It . Paid to Wi ll iam Hutch in son of Yorke the puterer the 1 5th

ofAugust 1 70 1 , for 1 7 new puter d i shes for the tableweighing 74 pounds a t 1 2 pence a pound

It. Paid then more for two dozen of new puter platesIt. Pa id then more to h im for 5 new chamber potts .It. Paid then more to h im for 3 new puter ba s insIt. Paid then more to him for a new clos e s toole panand 9d. for mend a di sh 06 0 1

In p. Paid to Hutch in son of York the puterer Aug. the l l th

1 702 , for two dozen of new puter plate s for the table 0 1 10

It. Pa id then more to him for on e dozen of puter spoon s forthe pan trye of hard m ettl e . 03 00

It. Pa id to Ruben Coolson , Augu s t the 1 2 th 1 704 for twodozen of' puter plate s tbr the table a t 1 5 sh i ll ings a dozen 0 1 10 00

I n 1 682 Sir M iles had his portrait, an d that of his lady,painted an d framed, on what appears to be exceedingly moderate termsIn p. Pa id to Mr. Timothy Stephen son for draw ing my w ife

’s 1 . 4.

picture, Jan . 5th 1 682 04 00 00

It. Paid then more to Mr. Tim . Stephen son to; drawing myown p icture 03 00 00

It. Paid then more to Mr. Tiin . S.

tepheii soi1 for the two framesof my w ifes picture and m i ne for each fi ve and twentysh i l lings soe as both cos t 02 1 0 00

1 48 THE ANCESTOR

11. Paid for a fir box for bringing the two pi ctures in from 1: s . 11.

York to Carleton 00 04 00

11. Pa id more to Mr. Timothy Stephen son 1211 draw ing myp icture w°" I gave and presented to M rs . Fairefax , w“w i th the frame in all cost 04 05 00

Sir M iles was ever ready to encourage local or i tineran tplayers an d musicians to entertain the household at Carlton

,

as well as when he was awa from home . I n July, 1 66 1,

when tar rying wi th his bro er Errington i n the north, hecontr ibuted 3 s . to the ‘mu s icke.

’ I n the following year hehad occasion to stay for the n ight at an in n at Durham,

whenhe gave 1 s.

‘ to the Landlord’s daughter playing on the

v irg malls .

’ I n Easter week of the sam e year he gave toJoseph Rob inson an d the Selby players 10s . for playmg the

lay called Mu si doru s.’ Maredorus andAmadinewas a comedyhequen tl acted at the Globe an d at Wh i tehall i t was firs t

publ ished’

in 1 598, an d had passed through eleven edi tions by1 668.

The gaie ti es ofChri stmas—tide 1 662, were duly observed bythe newly-made baronet at Carlton . The following entr iesin h is accounts show that he did his best to make i t a brightseason for his neighbou rsIt. G iven to two fidlers of Selbye tha t was here one day in 1: s . d.

Chr i s tm a s when I had invi ted some neighbours todiner

It. Given to Bat tl e Fular and his boy who was here fidlin g twodays in Chri s tmas when I in vi ted som e neigh bours and

It. G iven to W ill. Pu ree and the res t of our neighbours ofCarleton when they played thei r play in the hous e onTuesday, December the 3oth, 1 66 2 , the play i s call edthe gen tl e craft

It. Given to som e mumers y cam e in Chri s tmas11. G iven to N i cho la s Dan iel] and the ra t of the players y

cam e fi'om abou t Beedall when they p layed their two

playes here on Friday n ight, january the a 3rd, 1 66 2

(3) one of the playes was the tragadye Of Bai tman andthe other was call ed the courageous gen erall.

The Gentle Crafi or tbe Sbaemaker’

s Holiday was a playby Thomas Deaker

,firs t printed in 1 638. Tbe Tragedy qf

Bafeman was probably another name for Tbc Fa ir Ma id qfBristol

, by John Day, firs t played before the king and given at

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 50 THE ANCESTOR

167 3 1: s . d.

I t. G iven to John M i ll er s i ster for playing on the virginalls 00 02 00

I t. G iven to Selbye fidlers at Chri stma s 1 702 . 00 1 0 00

I t. G iven then more to Poll ington fidlers 00 02 06

Sir M iles was not superior to attractions of a less refin edcharacter than music an d the drama. When in London i n1 657 he paid a sh ill ing ‘for seeing the foure ch il dren at a

birth,

’

and fi fteen pence ‘for seing showes i ‘h Bartlem eu faire . ’At a later vi si t ( 1 670) the special attractions of th i s celebratedSm i thfield carn ival wh ich drew two sh i llings from the baronet'spockets were a puppet play, a

‘spotted woman,’

and ‘threehairey Indians one being 1n chaines. ’ On another occasionwhen passing through Doncaster a .penny was paid to see a

pig wi th two heads

The entries for provi sions and stores in these householdaccounts are far fewer than m ight at first be expected . But itmust be recollected that all such th ings as meat an d poultry

,

bread,dairy and garden produce would be provided by the

estate, and would naturally not fin d a place in these books

,

as they did not involve an y ready money paym ent.Five gu ineas were paid for extras preparatory to the

Chri stmas feasting of 1664.

Pa id to ] ohn Hornbyee wife March the 3rd 1 664 her bill 1: s . d

for sugar, ras in s , curran s, prun es, and nutm egs , ginger,mace, cloves, cinamon and pepper wh ich my w ife boughtof her again st Chri stmas 1 664 for u s ing in the house& c 5 5 0

I n 1 668 7 leamon s an d an ot range ’ cost 1 s . 2d.

There are entries in 1 697 telling of the price of soap,which varied from 4s . 4d. to 4s . 6d. a stone. I n 1 700 a

Chesh ire cheese weigh ing 1 5lb. was bought for 4s . 611.

Two hundred chestnuts were bought at York the same yearfor 1 od. I n 1 70 1 twenty- two stone of salt Were purchased atrs . 4d. a stone, and 7lb. of starch at 3d. a lh. Oranges werea good deal lower, two dozen being bought at York for 25 .but soap had risen to 5s . 2d. a lb. Six lem ons were purchasedin 1 702 for. 3 5 . I n the same year a quarter of veal 3 s. 6d.

Presents in kind were not infrequent, the bearers, as i snow the case

,invariably obtaining an acknowledgment. Thus

i n 1 67 6, 6d. was given to Lady Dawn ay’

s page ‘for

HOUSEHOLD BOOKS 1 5 1

bringing m wife some s trawberries. Two years later, LadyWinge of os tall s keeper rece ived 7s . 64. for bringing half abuck ; Sir John Dawnay’s gardener 1 5 . for bringing LadyStapleton two melons from his lady , and Cosen Perepon t s servant that brought u s a hansh of venson from Pomfrett from hismaister,

’

2 s. 6d. I n 1 682 Sir Thomas Yarbrough’

5 man had 1 5 .

‘when his maister sent me a side of salm on ’

; and‘M rs .

Watkinson’s maid 1 5 . that brought oysters from her m istressto my w ife . ’ Sir Thomas Yarbrough’s gardener had 1 5 . in

1 688 for bringing cherries ,an d Lord Donne’s man 25 . for

bringing half a buck on August 2 , 1 704 .

The purchase of fish,particularly for u se in Lent

,was fre

quent . The following are the more interesting of theseentr1es1 66 1

I t. Pa id more to John Hornbye for s ixteen couples of l inge for 5 . 1 .

u s ing in the house m len t 02 1 0 00

I t. Pa id more to John Hornbye for one hundred of herringsfor lent al so

I t. Paid more to ]ohn Hornbye for one s ingle l itigeI n 1 668 seventeen couple of codd fi sh for using in Lent

were purchased at 1 5 . 3d. a Ib.,together wi th 400 wh i te her

rings for 1 3 5 . 4d., and 300 red herr ings for 95 . Twenty years

later 9 stone of ling were purchased at 2 3 5 for a like purpose,as well as 450 herrings at 1 8s . The Lent purchases of 1 696

were 1 6lb. of dried l ing at 3d. a lb. , 100 red herr ings at

3 5 . 4d. ; and 6 couple ofcod fish at

The fish for Lent m 1 700 were purchased at Bedale .I t. Pa id to Robert Berry of Beedall for 60 lardge dryed l inge 1: s . a

'

.

and cod fish 04 1 9 00

It . Pa id more to him for 60 dryed white irigs . 00 05 00

Ir. Pa id for the ca rriage of the sal t fish from Beedall to Yorke 00 03 08

I n 1 704 the fish for Lent, consi sting of dried cod, l ingand herrings, were bought at York, an d cost £4 1 65 .

Two salmon were bought i n 1 698 for 75 . 6d. , and one i n1 704 for 3 5 . A turbot purchased at Snai th in 1 702 cost 25 .The capture of sturgeon in the Ai re and Ouse are well

worthy of being chron icled . The first of these recordsoccurs in 1 676, when 105 . was

given amor gs t the fishermen and others a t Selbye tha t got a great s turgeonthere which Mr. Walmley gave betw ixt my w ife and Mrs . Pockley who gavethem Twenty shi ll ings amongs t them whereofmy moitye .

1 52 THE ANCESTOR

I n 1 696 a small sturgeon was caught in the Aire, forwh ich Sir M iles gave 1 45 . I n the same year ‘

a biggersturgeon ’

was cau ht by Loa fer of Barmby in the Ouse, onJune 2 1 , for whic 205 . was paid ; and a third ‘very smalls turgeon ’

was al so bought for 95 . 6d. Ou June 10, 1 698,

1 3 5 . was paid to ‘Leafer of Barmby for one sturgeon takenover against the laine house sands nere Drax. ’ Two moresturgeon were caught in the Ai re in 1 704, for which Sir M ilespaid 275 . I t was the custom to pickle these great fish ; onone occasion Sir M i les paid the large sum of 22s . 2d. to thecooke at Yorke for dressing the stu rgeon and sousing i t. ’I t i s not to be expected that detai l s wi th r d to the

gardens would fin d their way into these hou seho d books ofaccount but at all events the gardens of the squire of Carltonproduced far more than the ‘cabbages an d gooseberries ofMacaulay fame. I ncidentally

,in connection wi th expenses in

purchasing,prun ing, or gathering, mention i s made of apples,

pears, plums, cherries, strawberri es, an d even nectarines and

apricots . I n 1 702 there was su ffi cien t refin em en t for£ 1 1 8s. 4d. to be spent i n the construction of a melon and

cucumber frame :1 702

In p. Paid to RichardMawhood for 4 deal es for make in g a frame {I s. d.

for the garden, to be gla ssed for preserving Mellons and

ccw—cumbersIt. Paid to Ri chard B irth for glass for this h'

am for MellonsI t. Paid more for dea les for another frame for Mellon sIt. Paid more to Richard B irth for gla s s for thi s frame forMellon s 00 14 06

The entries relative to wine are varied, and show that SirM i les ke t a generous table. I n 1 66 1 he pai d 1 1 5 . for aru n lit o clarett wine. ’Two entries for the year 1 673 may be c ited in full

It. Paid to S Stephen Thompson of York the 28th of No 1: s. d.

vember for s ix gallons of whi te wi ne, and five gallons anda halfe of clarret wine for bottling and using in the housea t three sh i ll ings a gallon

It . Paid then more to S' Stephen Thompson for one gallon ,three quarts and a pinte of canary sack a t eight sh i ll ings a

00 1 5 00

0 1 14 1 6

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 54 THE ANCESTOR

I t. Pa id more then to her for 3 quarts of can arye sacke at25 . 6d. a quart

It. Pa id for 5 gallons of Canary sacli e bought of Mi‘. Stone ofYork Nov. 29 th 1 70 1 , a t 8 shi l l ings a gallon

It . Pa id then for a run li t to bring i t inI t. Pa id to the boat woman of Selbye for bringing i t thi therI t. Pa id to Mr . Hardwicke of Rawcklife the 2 2n d of Jan .

1 702 , for foure gal lons and two quarts ofBran dye 25 . 6d.

a qt.It . Pa id to Mr. Hudson for one p inte ofbrandyeIt . Pa id to Mr. Hardwicke of Rawcklifl', January the 8th 1 704,for ha lfe an Anker of brandyw':h ought to be 5 gallons, butfell short soe as there was li ttl e more than 1 7 quarts in i t

1 705It. Pa id more for two bottles of Moun ta in e wh i te wine at

YorkeIt. Pa id for a bottl e ofMoun ta in e w ine from YorkThere must have been continuous brewing at Carltonhouse

,but the only references we have noted in the house

hold books are the following ones for 1 662 and 1 703

Inp. Paid to Rich. Laycock for three quarters ofmaul t brewedinto stronge beare November the 9 th 1 66 2, of wh ichwas made foure hogsheads of stronge beare and foure ofordinary beare and one of smal l beare 03 1 1 06

It. Paid then to Thoma sAndrew for sixteen pounds of hops forthe beare a t 1 5 . 3d. a pound 0 1 00 00

It. Paid to Rich . Laycocke of Barlay for make in g me twosteepein gs of Barlye 1nto mault to six quarters 1 0 00

It. Pa 1d to Mr . Todd of York the grocer for s i xteen pounds oi'h0ps a t 1 5 . 4d. a pound for brewing foure hogsheads ofMarch beare wCh was made March the a l st 1 662

,into

which wee put foure quarters of ma l t grinded moulterfree, 2 peeks of whea t, 4 pecks of pease and 4 peeks of oats 0 1 0 1 04

1 703It . Paid to Char les Bossvill for makein g the above sa id 5 1quarters of barly into maul t at his ki l l a t 1 5 . 8d. a quarter 04 05 00

It. Pa id to Charles Bossvill May 2 2nd 1 703 for makei ng threequarters of whea t into maul t 00 05 00

These household books are parti cularly explici t wi th t e

gard to Sir M iles’ expend i ture on his own clothes . They areof value as showing the sty le of dress adopted by countrygentlemen of those times. Sir M iles’ considerable outlayon f clothes in the Commonwealth period has already beengiven in detail .

HOUSEHOLD BOOKS 1 5 5

I n 1 66 1 he went into court mourn ing on the death of theDuke of Gloucester, spend ing

.

2 5s on black ribbon and

braid to trim a n ew black su i t. H is expendi ture on dressnatu rally decreased as years wen t oon in early l ife even hissaddle was trimmed wi th blue plush silver lace, but i n one ofhis last entries he 13 content to bu holland cloth to cover hiswoollen n ightcap . The buying 0 the heads of hair of daughters of his tenants to make periwigs is most characteri stic .

1 66 1 1: s . a'

.

It. Paid to Mr. Raulison of York for blew plush s i lver lace, andsilke and silver fr inge for my saddle 03 0 1 03

It . Pa id to Parker the sadler of York his bil l for making upmy saddle, and for holsters bridle breast gi rth and cruper

stiropes and lea thers w i th gi rths and other necessarysi n all 02 07 06

11. Pa id for a paire of n ew whi te woolen ridinge stock ings formy selfe 00 1 5 00

It. Pa id for a gi rdle and s ix po ints to tye upp my stockingswi th when I ride 00 02 06

It. Paid to Mr. Henl ey of York, ] une the 20th, 1664, forone yard and hall'e an el l of fin e black Spani sh cloth for amourn ing coa t for my selfe, when my poore s ister Erington dyed

,wh i ch was the t st of Aug. 1 664. Mem I

made my black su i t of a black coa te tha t I had before 02 04 09It. Pa id then to Mr. Horsefield my Taylor his bi ll for makingup my blacke mourning su i t and coa t w i th all l in ing and

orher things 0 2 18 06

1 668

Imp. paid to a man of Yorke for mendi ng and puting somehaire into my browne pe riwigg but he has spoyled it 00 1 5

It. paid to Peg. Heavisides for her head of ha i re w‘"l I got ofher towards making me a perriwigg but it is too short 00 02 06

It. paid for a new periw ig w“ll my man John Pullain e boughtfor me a t Yorke June the 8th . 02 10

It. Paid to Mr. Morland of York the habberdesher for a wh i tedem icastor edgd wi th s i lver gallown e .

It. Pa id then to him for a s ilver hat band .

It. Paid more to Mr. H i llary the mercer july the zand1 67 3his bi ll for black ribbon for trim ing my Pantaloon bri tchesand for buttons and other things for them 04 1 3 00

It. Paid more to Mr. Horsfield his bi ll for al tering my 1.1m m

den bri tch es, an d makein g them Pan teloon s . 00 05It. Pa id for two yards and three quarters of Scotch cloth to

make ha lfe a dozen n ight handcherchiefs for my selfe . 00 04 10

I n 1 668 he paid £9 95 . 8d. for a coat of fin e Span i shcloth at 2 1 5 . per yard, l ined wi th flowered silk . A ‘

n ew

1 56 THE ANCESTOR

sword belt wrought wi th silver twist ' cost and a n ew

perriwig, £3 1 55 .

I n the same year he bought 95 yards of camlett at 25 . 4d.

for a riding cloak, £ 1 25 . and of H ewley of York 5 yardsof fin e Spanish sad colou rd cloth at £ 1 55 . a yard for vest,coat and breeches, £6 25 . 64. Mr. Robt . H orsfield of Yorkfor l ining, trimming and ribbon and making of the su i tcharged £9 1 55 . A ‘ridin

gvelvet capp cost and 1 2

yards of red scarlett ribbin , 55 . 6d.

I n 1 676 he bought ‘25 yds . of fin e broad m ixt gold

coullou rd Span i sh cloth at 205 . a yard for coat an d breeches,

£2 1 2s. 6d. ; the trimm ing, lin ing, ribbin,silk and buttons

cost £5 1 8s. , an d the making up £ 1 105 . H e also gave ‘tothe tailors men to drinkeH is purchases for 1 682 included a long periwig at £2

and a short riding periwig at 1 55 .In 1 688 he paid to M rs . H illary for 25 yards of fin e

cloth for a coat at 1 85 . a yard, £2 55 . 8 yard and halfe of

sad coloured shagreen at 44. a yard for lining the coat,£ 1 1 6s. 1od. al so 1 1 dozen of s ilke buttons at 8d. a dozenfor the coat, 75 . 44.

At the same tim e he bought ‘35 ds . of rich fiowred

velvet at 1 35 . a yard for a pr . of bri tches tidr myself £2 55 .and a dozen of gold small buttons and 2 gt . ones

,1 5 . 8d. al so

a pair of long silk stockings for and a pai r of worstedstockings

,6s . 6d. The lin ing, the pockets, the stays an d the

making brought the total expendi tu re to £8 1 55 . 3d

I n 1 696 Sir M i les paidfor a new blacke beaver hatt w‘h ]ohn Reynold bought for me at [I 5 . 1 .

London 02 1 5 00

paid to Tho. Harrison the M illiner for 4 yards and ha lf aquarter of si lke mantua for l in ing my wa istcoat 0 1 06 00

It. Paid to Mr. Cayn e for a new ‘

periwigg for my selfe Apri ll1 6 7

It. Paidgto Glows daughter of Beedall for the ha ire of her

head w“ I bought on her to make me a periwigg, Mayt4n g 1 697 00 1 1 06

It. Pa id toMr. Caine March the [ St for a new periwiggfor my selfe, bes ides a head of haire which I bought thatcost me halfe a gu in ay and he added more hai re to it, soethat I paid him 1:1 1 7s . 6d. and 1 1 sh ill ings for the headof ha ire I bought, m ade it in all 1:2 85 . 6d. ,

ofw“h I paidto Mr. Cain e . 0 1 1 7 06

It. Paid then to Mr. Caine for two pounds of fin e haire powder 00 0 3 00

02 07 06

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 58

It .

It.

TH E ANCESTOR

G iven more to my w ife the 2 7th of Sep’ 1 702 on e Lu idore

and one half'e gu in ayG iven to my w ife one five guyn ay peece of gold, March the1 51 1 704

0 1 07 09

05 07 06

Sir M iles’ nephew and hei r, Nicholas Errington, wasmarried in 1 682 .

Mary (M011), and BetH e had four children, Nicholas, Gregory,

They l ived at Carlton, an d duringthe latter part of hi s li e old Sir M iles not only provided themwi th clothes, etc . , but entered the detail s among his accounts,as the household books often bear wi tness .Inp. Paid May the 1 8th 1 698, to Mr . Thomas Harrison of

I t.

It .

Ir.

It.

Yorke the Mercer,for drugi t and o ther stufi

'

e w ith l inein g shalloon e an d buttons for new coats, waistcoats andbritches for l i tle N ick . Erin gton and his brother Gregoryeand new coa t and petty coa t for their si ster Betty Erington, in a llG iven to my nephew Erington ha e a gu in ay for NewYears giuftGiven to his daughter Mary for a new years giuftG iven to l i tle Bettye for a new years giuftG iven to l i tle N i ck for a new years giuftG iven to l i tle Gregory for a new years giuftPa id to a Scotch -man feb. 3rd for three mussel incravats for thre of the ch ildren , vid. N ick . Betty, andGregory

.1 Pa id to Thoin as Roush of Snai th for 8 yards an d a halfe oidrugitt at 7d. a yard w i th buttons, si lke, canvas, thredand tape for two frocks for l i tle N ick . Erington and h isbro. GregoryPaid to Mr . George Hargrave the dan cein g master, the24th of March 1 697, for teach ing three of my nephewErin gton s chi ldren, 3 weeks to dance vid. Mary, N icholas,and Bet tyPaid to M ick I-Iessay for a paire of pumps for l i tle N ick .Apr. 14th 1 698

Paid more to h im for a pai re of shou s for himPaid more to him for a paire of shoues for Moll . B ringtonPaid more to him for a pai re of shones for Bette B ringtonPaid more to h im for a paire of shones for Greg. B ringtonGiven to my nephew Er in gton s daughter Mary, June 2 7th1 700, in money towards buying some odd necessa rys forher selfePaid for a very fin e

o

n ight iaile an d apron for Moll B ringtonflourdPaid to ThomasWheiryefor 4 yards of keating cloth forsix handkerch iefs for herPaid more to Thomas Wherrye for 5 yards of hollandcloth a t 6d. a yard for two sh ift s for her

£ 1 . d.

0 3 07 2 2

00 07 06

00 18 00

02 00 OO

0 1 00 00

00 0 2 06

00 06 06

1 2 06

HOUSEHOLD BOOKS

It . Pa id for 18 yards of str ipt Ind ian stuff at 31 . a yard formak ing her a mantle and petti coat

It . Pa id for on e yard of fin e mussle in for one handkerchiefefor her 03 00

It. Paid for two yards of musslein e for a pan for Moll . Erington ahead 06 00

Ir. Paid to Mr Harri son of Yorke his b i ll for things (0;Moll .Erin gton 1 5 00

It . Paid to Mr. Den i son his bi l l for mak ing th ings for Moll .B r ington

1 700

Ir. Pa id to john H inde for makeing pett icoats for Mull . B ringtonand trimm ing her man toe 00 1 6 06

It . Paid for 3 ounces of worsted for mend ing the ch i ldrensstock ings

It . Pa id for a paire of shone buckl es for l i tle Ni ke B ri ngtonIt . G iven 1n money to Mall . B rington Sep' 1 700It . Pa id to c g. Ph i]1it0e for two pa i re of wh i te stocki ngs forN ick . and Gregory Erington 00 02 00

I t Pa id more to Pegg. Philli toe for other two pa ire of stockingsfor them

It. Paid to John Hudson foi' two new halts for N ick . andGregory bes ides 2 they had before 1 1 00

It. Paid for halfe a yard of cloth for a pa ire of briches for N lekeB rington 04 00

Sir M iles Stapleton's livery colour was blue . The ch iefreferences to live for his servants were when they wereprovided with hangsome cloaks to wait on the h igh sherifl

' orthe judges . The firs t occasion when four such livery cloakswere purchased was in 1 66 1 , when his brother—in—law, Sir

Thomas Osborne (afterwards Duke of Leeds) was sher ifli

1 66 1 1: 3 . J

In p. Pa id to Mr. Chri stopher Howley of York for fou rteenyards of blew cloth for making four cloaks to wa i te ofS' Thomas Osbou rne the h igh Sher ifi'

e a t York in l en tAss ize3 1 66 l . 1 6 00 00

It . Pa id to Mr. Rawlison the m ercer for 5 ounces of silver laceand a quarter for the es pes of the 4 cloaks 0 1 06 03

It. Pa id more to Mr. Rawl inson for 5 yards of ell broad wh itefrench searge a t 5 yard for facing the cloakes 0 1 05 00

It. Paid more to Mr. Rawl inson for two ounces of silke andfoure longe buttons w i th si lver heads (or the cloaks 00 09 04

It Pa id to Robt . Horscfield the taylor for stifin ing for thecapes 00 0 2 00

It. Pa id more to Robert Horsefield for make in ge the foureblew l ivery cloaks .

The cloaks cost in all

1 60 THE ANCESTOR

Paid my chardges to York March the 1 51h 1 66 1 , with myfoure l ivery men to wa i te on the hi gh Sheriffe when judgeTurner came in , in Ass ize weeke in lent 1 66 1 and stayedthere a week which cos t me in all m chardges .

Paid and spent in chardges August 1 66 2 a t York be ing inlamas Assizes 1 66 2 when my man ]ohn Sotheby went towa i te of the Sherifl'e w ith my foure l ivery men in thei rcloaks S" Thomas Osborne being then h igh Sherifi

'

e andmy se lfe then at London that I could not wai te on himat this second Ass izes

1 67 3Di sbursed for Jack Taylor (posti l ion) riding blue l ivery coat 810.

It. Pa id to Mr. Sudman of York the 24th of Marchfor one yard and thr ee quarters of blue broad cloth 00 1 2

I t. Paid then Mr . H i llary for 3 yards of yeallow paddua searge

to l ine it with 00 1 0 00

It. Paid then to Sher ifl'

Horscheld of York the Taylor his bi l lfor buttons, lace, s il ks, stayes, and mak ing the livorey coatin al l 0 1 0 1 00

Paid to N i ll Lodge the 4th of Apri ll 1 67 3 his bi ll for JackTaylor shammoy leather doublett an d blue cloth searge

bri tches, w i th buttons, lin eings, s ilk, thread, galloons,ferritt ribbon and other th ings for making them up 0 1 00 08

1682

Paid to Mr. H i llary of Yorke for four l ivery cloaks wi th makeing and trimin g for sendi ng in wi th Mr. Lowther whenhe was h igh Sherrifi ofY

Jorkshire 07 1 2 00

It. Paid for two yards and a halfe of blew cloth for make ing a

l ivery coat for Robin L i ttlewood the posti ll ion and

another l ivery coat for john Coll ins 00 1 7 06

Although so staunch to his own religious convictions, SirM i les was broad m inded enough to take his share in repairsof the places of worship of the Establi shed Church on hisestates .I n 1 662 he paid 75 . 6d. to repair ‘the glasse i n our quire

on the north a isle of Snai th church wh ich has always an tien tlybelonged to Carleton house . I n the same year there is an

entry of giving 1 5 . to Foster the clerk of Bedale for shewingthe church there to my brother Errington an d mee,

’

and heseveral times contributed towards i ts general repair outsideany question of ra te .I n 1 656 ci ht sh illings were paid for glazing the windows

of the quire 0 Carlton chapel .In 1 688 Sir M iles paid £2 ‘to Stephen Sheapard the

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 6 2 THE ANCESTOR

pended 8d. on an almanack for his wife and another for himself.When the k ing returned in 1 660, Sir M iles made the

following entries in h is accounts

It. paid for Bakers Cron icle of EnglandIr. pa id for a booke cal led the Royall BucklerI t. paid for a booke of the kin ges escape ca lled BoscobellIt. paid for the Act of Indempn ity and several other Acts madesince the k ings com ing i n 00 03 0 1

It. paid for Mathew H i l tons booke ca ll ed the State of perfection .

It. paid for a new manua l for myselfeI t . paid for another book of the k ings escapeIt. paid for the k ings declarat ion about rel igionI t . paid for booke of the tryall of the kin ges judges

J . CHARLES cox .

THE GARTER PLATES AS A ROLL OF

ARMS

HE most sumptuous heraldic book ever i ssued in England is Mr. W . H . St. John Hope’s book of the Stall

Pla tes qf tbe Kn igbts qf'

tbc Garter . I n one direction i t is alsothe most important work on the subj ect .Engl ish students of heraldry who have seen and admired

i n their originals or the ir many copies those great rolls of armswh ich survive upon the continent of Europe, and notably inGermany and Swi tzerland, will have real ized that although thearmory of our own med ieval artists yields in no particu lar ofbeauty or vigour of drawing to that of the ir foreign rival s

,one

great feature i s lacking to u s . No single ancient roll of armssurvives in England in wh ich the sh ields are topped by thecrests and mantled helm s wh ich play so striking a part in suchcollections as the Zfiricber Wappenrolle or the Arlberg Bruderscbafts Barbe. That such roll s formerly existed i n England isshown by the rough copy remaining in a Harleian MS. [2076]of roll of North Country gentry of the tim e of Edward IV .

The crests i n these rough trickings show clearly enough thatthey follow an original of the date wh ich we have assigned toth i s roll . I n another Harleian MS. an original bookof arms of m id- fifteen th century date,we have near ly two hundr ed and fifty figures in colours of kn ights prancing uponhorseback wi th their arms on coats and horse- trappers, butalthough wreaths are twisted about their helmets, no crestssurmount them .

Here in Mr. Hope’s book in the Garter plates we havearmorial evidence wh ich

,leavi ng aside one early plate, may be

said to range from 142 1 to 1485 . Not the best per iod ofheraldry, to be sure, but one concern ing wh ich we have muchto learn, for the art of heraldry came by many m ishaps duringthe tugging times of the Wars of the Roses, and for th isperiod we have no roll of arms of the first rate n ow in existence .Mr . Hope’s book gives u s e ighty- n ine plates . Of these

the early plate of Ralph, Lord Bassett of Drayton, is at once

1 64 THE ANCESTOR

the largest an d fin es t, an d i s the only plate of its class . Oneplate m ay be set aside for another reason, that of Sir Frank vanHalen being an impudent forgery of Hall the chron icler, whocho se Sir Frank to be an ancestor of hi s own .

Three more achievements are from spoiled or u n fin ishedplates found on the reverse of others . Four or five othersbear foreign arms and are executed under foreign in flu en ces,so that our roll of arms i s reduced to some eighty examples .

As m ight be expected these enamellers an d metal workersof the later m iddle ages show a notable unconcern of thoserules of the sacred science of heraldry wh ich were to be laiddown an d arranged by the Tudor heralds . Each point of theirach ievem ents goes to m ake th i s clear .The mantles hanging from the helm ets are the first th ings

to attract remark . The books have laid down that the mantleshould be formed of the princ ipal colour of the sh ield an d

lined wi th i ts principal metal. Our fifteen th century arti st,untroubled by th i s hampering rule

,set out the m antle in any

colours wh ich take their fancy . The most popular mantle i sof red wi th an erm ine lin ing, an d no ‘less than th irty- five

examples are to be found of th i s treatment, the red be ing inseven cases diapered wi th leaves an d flowers, an d in two wi thdevices from the crest and sh ield .

Blue and ermine are five mantles, an d black an d erm ine,

red an d si lver, silver an d red number each three mantles .Two are of black lined wi th red, an d one example each exi stsof purple an d wh i te

,red an d gold, gold an d erm ine, an d

black an d gold . Two mantles are all black and one all ofred

,others are of three colours . The heads of b irds being

set upon four helm s allow their feathers to be continued downward from the helm et into a feathered mantle, wh ich man tle i slined in two cases wi th red

,once wi th erm ine, and once wi th

purple . The ‘bush of feathers ’ of Courtenay’s crest risesfrom a mantle all of l ike feathers

,an d the like crest of

F elbrigge has a mantle of feathers lined wi th red .

Turning again to our heraldry m anuals we fin d that wherethere i s no crown or ducal coronet,

’

as the books prefer tostyle i t

,there must be ei ther a

‘cap of m aintenance or a

wreath to support th e crest,and the said wreath must be

formed of the two tinctures,

’ the metal an d colour of them an tle, s ix twi sts showing at the sidelong view of it.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 66 THE ANCESTOR

SIR RALPH BASSETT,LORD BASSETT OF DRAYTON

Th i s noble plate,at once the largest and the most ancient

of the remaining Garter. plates, cannot be of later date thanthe death of i ts owner i n 1 3 90 . Sir Ralph

, who fought atPoi tiers and on many other fields ofFrance, was made Knightof the Garter in 1 3 68.

H is sh ield of arms i s of gold wi th three piles of gulesand an erm ine quarter

,and h is crest i s a black boar’s head

w ith golden tusks . The sh ield 1s still borne by his heirs,the

Wrottesleys of Wrottesley ln Stafiordshire .

Here we see the m antle 1n its earliest stage, the cloth hungupon the helm to protect it from the sun’s rays, but in thedagged edges an d tasseled end we see also the beginn ing ofthe mantle wh ich later artists were to play wi th at thei rfantastic will .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 68 THE ANCESTOR

SIR SIMON FELBRIGGE

Th i s plate i s one of the series set up in 142 1 . Sir SimonFelbrigge was the bearer of the king

’s ban ner, an d i s depictedas bearing it upon his magn ificen t brass in Felbrigge churchin Norfolk . H e died at a great age in 1442 .

H i s sh ield is gold wi th a leaping lion of gules, an d hi s

crest i s a bush of feathers of erm ine . The erm ine feathers rundown the mantle, wh ich is lined wi th red, the colour of th ecrown . Besides the crest i s one of the two examples wh ichthese early plates afi'

ord of what we n ow call the m otto,

’ butwh ich the old knight doubtless called hi s word or hisreason —s an3 muer.

SIR HUGH BURNELL, LORD BURNELL

Another plate of the series set up in 142 1 . Sir Hughwas governor of Bridgenorth Castle in 1 386, and was one ofthe lords who rece ived Richard II . ’s abdication in 1 399 . H e

was Kn ight of the Carter in 1406 an d died in 1420.

H i s sh ield bears the arms of Botetourt—gold wi th a saltiresable engrailed— quartering Burnell, wh ich i s si lver wi th a sablelion w i th a crown wi th in a border of azure . H is mantle i ssable an d erm ine

,and his curious crest, wh ich Mr . Hope

describes as a fan - shaped object wi th ribs an d borders and

tassels, i s noth ing more than a conventional form of the burrbush wh ich puns upon the name of Burnell.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 70THE ANCESTOR

SIR RICHARD BEAUCHAMP, EARL OF“

WARW ICK

Sir Richard Beauchamp died in 1439 as governor for theKing of France an d Norm andy. H e was made Kn i ht of theGarter in 1403 , after Shrewsbury fight ; but th i s pIate musthave been set up after 1423 , when he marr ied hi s secondwife

,I sabel le Despenser

,si ster and heir of Richard le

Despenser an d daughter of Thomas Earl of Gloucester.H is sh ield bears the arms of Beauchamp wi th its quarter

ing for Newburgh, an d an escutcheon of the arm s of Clarequartering Despenser. The crown i s red

,an d the feathered

mantle turned up wi th purple, the colour of the swan

’s beak .

SIR WALTER HUNGERFORD,LORD OF

HUNGERFORD,HEYTESBURY AND HOMET

Thi s plate,wh ich must have been made after 1426, is in

the form of a black banner wi th a gold fringe . Sir Wal terwas Speaker of the House of Commons, Constable of Windsor Castle, an d filler of many other h igh places . H e had theCarter in 142 1 and died in 1449 .

H is sh ield i s sable with two bars silver an d three silverroundels in the ch ief. H is crest

,out of a blue crown

,i s a

golden sheaf between two si lver sickles . H is mantle i s barredwi th the arms of Hussey—barry erm ine and gules—for thathis mother was a co- heir of Hussey of Holbrook .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 7 2 THE ANCESTOR

SIR HUMFREY STAFFORD,EARL OF STAFFORD

AND DUKE AND EARL OF BUCK INGHAMTh i s plate was set up about 1429 for Sir Humfrey

Stafford, who was created Kn ight of the Ga rter in 1429 .

H is dukedom was given him in 1444, and he was killed onthe Lancastrian side at Northampton in 1460 .

Th i s noble and boldly drawn p icture of his arms showshis sh ield of Stafi'

ord—gold wi th a cheveron of gu les . H is

crest i s a swan’s head and wings out of a red crown, and hismantle i s party of red and black wi th an erm ine lin ing.

SIR JOHN GREY OF RUTHYN

Th is plate was made about 1439 for Sir John Grey, whowas made Knight of the Garter in 143 6, and died in hisfather’s lifetime in 1439 . I t i s a black plate wi th a goldenborder.The arms are harry of si lver and azure with three roundels

of gules in the ch ief quartering the quartered arms of Hastingsand Valence . A silver label l ies over all. H is crest of ago lden wyv ern is also charged wi th th i s label . The mantle isof gold an d erm ine .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 74 THE ANCESTOR

SIR RICHARD NEVILL, EARL OF SALISBURY

Sir R ichard was a younger son of Ralph, Earl of Westmorland, an d was born in 1400, becom ing Kn ight of theGarter about 1436 . H e was the Yorki st Lord Chancellor in1454, and was taken after Wakefield fight in 1460, an d be

headed by the victorious Lancastrians . H e was a made manb his marriage wi th Alice, daughter of Thomas Montague,arl of Salisbury, whom he succeeded i n the earldom in 1428

by right of his wife .H is sh ield bears i n the firs t quarter the arms of his earl

dom—Montague quartering the green eagle of Mahermer ;

and in the second quarter i s his father’s coat of Nevill, dill’erenced with a label of the Beaufort colours of blue and wh i te,here wron

gly enamelled as black and wh ite . H i s crest is a

sitting gri on , and his mantle is parted of red and black wi than erm ine lining.

SIR GASTON DE FOIX,COUNT OF LONGUEVILLE

AND BENANGES, CAPTAU DE BUCH

Sir Gaston followed King Henry in his French wars, an din 1438 or 1 439 was made a kn ight. The plate was set upabout 1440 . I t i s here reproduced as being robably a spec imen of French work. The arms are those 0 Foix quarteringthe two red cows of Bearn, wi th a label whose three pointsare each charged wi th the cross an d escallops of Grailly, hisfather’s house . The wings of his crest are paled wi th thegold and gules of Foix, wh ich colours appear al so in the longcared blackamoor’s wreath and coat.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 7 6 THE ANCESTOR

SIR RICHARD WYDVILE,EARL RIVERS

Th i s beautiful plate was set up about 1450 for Sir RichardWydv ile, a Kn ight of the Garter in 1450. H e was a Lan cas

tr ian, who became Yorki st on the marriage of his daughterwi th Edward IV. in 1464. An earl in 1464, he was takenby Lancastrians and beheaded in Northampton in 1469 .

H i s shield bears i n the first quarter the arms of Wydv ilesilver wi th a fesse gules an d a quarter gules quartering

Prowes , gules an eagle of gold . The second quarter i s thevair of Beauchamp of the west country, and the escutcheonover all has R ivers or Reviers

,gules a grifi

'

on of gold .

H i s crest,out of a green wreath set wi th leaves of holly,

is a dem i -man flou ri shing a faulch ion hi s coat being of redwith long sleeves

,powdered wi th golden trefoil s.

SIR THOMAS BURGH,LORD BURGH OF

GAINSBOROUGH

Sir Thomas Burgh was Kn ight of the Carter in 1483 ,wh ich will represent the date of the plate before u s . I n 1487he was summoned as a baron to Parliament, and in 1496 hedied .

H is sh ield bears in the first quar ter the coat of Burghazure wi th three fleurs de lys ermine . The second quarterhas the blue lion of Percy quartered wi th Strabolgi

— SirThomas’s m other being Elizabeth, daughter and co- heir ofSir Henry Percy

,whose mother was co—heir of Strabolgi .

The helm wreath i s black and blue,an d the mantle blue and

ermine . The falcon of the crest i s si lver wi th golden beak,

red legs an d a gold crown round the neck.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 78 THE ANCESTOR

H ill to Abbotsford, an d beside Sir Walter’s Scott’s pony then ation travelled a long road . I f anywhere i t be allowed to giveone man’s name to a stream oftendency in life an d letters itmustsurely be wi th the good and gallant Scott . The h i storian, thean tiquary

,the roman‘cer— if their full debt to Sir Walter came

straightly home to all of these, what a p ilgrimage m ight set out

for Drybu rgh Abbey to ask forgiveness or all ungratefulness .Yet the man who brought u s the n ew light, who showed

u s that the past was no gloomy shadowland,but a many

coloured and delightful world,alive an d stirring wi th the

deeds of men of our own blood, was li ttle of an antiquaryh imself. Gentle Captain Clutterbuck

,for whom a round arch

was Saxon work an d a in ted arch was after the Norman’sfash ion, may well stand or his creator. They tell u s that arace of boy i s growing up who will have none of I ‘vanboe

,

preferring the fascinating machines of Messieurs Boo thby an dPemberton . I t may be said for that boy that he w ill escathose curious m isconceptions of almost every detail of twecentury manners

,wh ich cling to u s in whose nursery v arzboe

was fam iliar as our bread an d butter, but a safe grounding inarchaeology m ay be gained at too h igh a rice, an d one mayask whether the n ew novels are more satisiying to the puri st.The li sts of Ashby de la Zouche have seen many a bri sk

skirmi sh since the Templar an d the Black Kn ight rode awayfrom them . Ivanhoe h imself has been a mark for many shafts,an d the cri tic has told every link in his M ilan harness of linkedanachron isms . True i t is that young kn ights of King Richard’sday outrage the fash ions in such matters by di splaying sh ieldswi th young oak trees eradicated wi th a motto painted underneath thei r roots

,even as the fan stationer could emblazon

them upon our envelopes . And i a young En glish knight’sfancy should lead him to the improbabili ty of translating hismotto into Spani sh he ought to translate i t more accuratelythan did Sir Wi lfrid .

But to cry out upon such accidents of deta il i s treason tothe patron saint of antiquaries, the holy founder of our gild .

SirWalter rode alone even as did SirWilfrid, none aiding him ,

an d those m ighty an d whole—sp iri ted books of h is should besacred th ings for the cri tic .Our later romancers

,the he irs of three generati ons of the

new h i storical s tudies,have no claim to such forbearance. For

the most selfish reason we must remain on good terms wi th

ANT IQUARY AND NOVEL I ST 1 7 9

our Scott, knowing well that the day comes surely round whenwe shall be impelled to read him again, to go back to rub elbowswi th Du

fald Dalgetty and the Baron of B radwardi n e . Wi th

all the c everness,the learn ing an d ingen u i ty, wh ich must be

acknowledged to them, our h i story book romancers to—day fai lto call u s to a second read ing.

The criticism of the novel is no business for Tbc Ancestor,but when the novel wanders into those pa th s wh ich Tbs Ancestorwalks

,TbcAncestor may speak w i th i t on the way .

Here then for our text we have Tbc Wbi te Company , aromance by Sir Conan Do le, an honest book and a wholesom e, with better reading 161 the young of the Engli sh thanan y score n ew novels on the never- failing motives of sexproblems or ‘j ewel mysteries. ’ But the cri tics have not contented themselves wi th praising the Song of the bow for arousing song

,nor the story for a hearty an d stirring one . We

must be told that a perfect p icture of fourteenth centu ryEngland is before u s

,an d that romance has here its foundation

upon sure fact and accurate detail .As we turn the leaves of Tbe White Company, we note at

the outset that i t i s full of heraldry, and heraldry ha s everbeen the stumbling—block of the novel ist, from the catchphrase wi th the bar- sin ister ’ to the full chapter wi th thetournament banners under wh ich the hero bears away the

tiltin prize . Sir Conan Doyle trips even more heavi ly thanhis ellows . I t is evident that for him the whole businessof the ‘language and science of blazonry i s good fourteenthcentury matter instead of being post—medieval accretion . At

the beginn ing of his career Alleyne Edricson i s questionedby his master Sir N igel as to his proficien cy in th i s science,an d we are relieved to fin d that he acqu its h imself passingwell for a young man born before the language dem andedof him had been invented.

‘Argent a fesse azure chargedwith three lozenges d ivid ing three mullets sable, over all onan escutcheon of the first a jambe gules . ’ Thus MasterAlleyne

,wi th all the assurance of one who has Boutell or

Clarke at h is finger ends, and Sir Nigel assures h im wi th tru ththat the sentence i s well enough for a monk- bred man

,wh ich

i s great

fprai se from one who, l ike Sir Nigel, was a long way

ahead 0 his time in his knowledge of such th ings . Th i s wesee when Sir N igel boasts of hi s s ixty- four noble quarteri

anfgs ,

a phrase wh ich would have n o mean ing for centuri es er

180 THE ANCESTOR

him ,and wh ich would never be fully understood by English

men . Sweet counsel on heraldry we m ay also take with SirWi ll iam de Pakington , a grave personage who i s introducedas the Black Prince’s own herald and scrivener, a doubl ing oftrades hard to understand. SirWilliam in the heraldic barretcap wi th triple plume wh i ch bespoke his office — Sir Conanhas evi dently taken the best advice Covent Garden can affordconcerning the costume of heralds— i s ah impo sing figure, butwe sympath ize nevertheless wi th the young knights whomhe rebukes for their ignorance of the p oint that a crescentwas the established difference for a second son’s sh ield, asindeed two centuries later it was to become. Before we partwi th Sir William

,he gives u s a touch of his craft as a

genealogi st . Hearing that a gentleman before him i s calledby the su ffi cien tly widely spread nam e of Ford, he pronouncesh im at once

,to the admiration of his hearers, to come of a

South Saxon stock of good repute,’

and the South Saxon in

the mouth of a fourteenth century herald surpri ses nei ther SirNigel Loring nor Sir Conan Doyle.Everywhere Tbe Wbite Company encounters heraldry, and

everywhere i t i s woefully wrong and topsy- turvy heraldry:The banners of the great English lords, and with them thebanners of some fam ilies unfamiliar in such company, meet u sat every turn of the lane . We meet ‘the escutcheon of theMon tacu tes, a roebuck gules on a field argent,

’ but Montacute

,or Montague as we call him when we know our m iddle

ages, bore no such beast. Aylward the archer points out atLyndhurst the ‘three martlets on a field azure

,

’ wh ich heassures u s must be for one of the Luttrells, and Aylward iswrong as usual

,al though we can forgive a m an who knows

so li ttle of armory as to show no surpri se when he sees thatSir Bernard Brocas

,the owner of the next banner, i s bearing

h is Saracen’s head crest on that banner instead of on his helmet. Thi s

,as we understand Sir Conan and Sir Nigel, was,

surpri sing as i t may seem ,no rare practice in the Black

Prince’s host,for we find Beauchamp invar iably bearing the

wh ite wings of his swan crest on his shield, and even thenunaccountably forgetting that hi s crest was the swan ’s headalone without any flanking wings . Lord Audley bears martlets,wh ich i s no coat of Audley.

~ The Lucies bear boars’ headsin place of the ir more

' fam iliar ‘wh i te luces,’ and the Hampsh ire Roches bear, instead of their leopards, the roaches of

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 82 THE ANCESTOR

a new shield of arms, an d describing as of Hampshire instead of Bedfordsh ire . But Nigellu s m is

rendered. Nigellu s should translate as Nele or Neel,a

name from wh ich comes a frequent Engli sh surname ; andwhen Sir Conan fishes the true Sir Neel Loring from somechron icle wh ich thus rightly names h im ,

he i s allowed underthat description to enter the pages of Tbc Wh '

i a Company ,where he i s accounted for as a second cousin of Sir N

'

el.’

Sir Wi lli am Montacute, Earl of Sal isbury, represents a ike

m isrendering— the charter Latin of de Monte Acuto equalsMontague and not Montacute . Needless to say our fourteenthcen tury lord i s spoken of as the Baron Brocas

,

’ wh ich wasnot our Engli sh custom even when speaking of a baron .

The names are unfortun ate throughout. Samuel an d

Silas will serve well enough for Cromwell ian troopers in somefuture work of Sir Conan’s, but we rej ect them as characteri stic names of fourteenth century bowmen . I n a th i rteenthcentury roll the wri ter of these l ines once encountered a

Samuel ; but wi th a wider experience of old Engli sh namesthan has Sir Conan, he rejects Aylward

’s Chri stian name as a

glaring improbab ili ty . Aylward s compan ions however seemwell used to the name

,an d every stranger hails him as Sam

or Samkin wi th the ease of hab it .The hero follows the present fash ion in pedigrees. H e i s

a Saxon of Saxons,an d to our wonderment we find our four

teen th century nobi li ty so interested in Saxon pedigrees ofa genu ine character that Sir Nigel assures hi s squire that

,had

he his fam ily soccage holding, ‘an y fam ily in the land would

be proud to take you amongst them,seeing that you come of

so old a fam ily.

’ Our own experience of the marriages of thedaughters of great houses in Sir Nigel’s day would put themupon a m ore m ercenary basis.Alleyne Edricson was our hero’s own not over probable

name, and ‘his father would trace his pure Saxon l ineage tothat Go dfrey Malf who had held the manors of B isterne and

of M instead at the time when the Norman first set mailedfoot upon Engli sh soi l. ’ Sir Conan i s evidently of op in ionthat Alleyne's name i s i tself characteri sti cally Saxon, and thatthe name Godfrey is as Saxon as Hengi st. But ‘Alleyne i s

Breton an d Godfrey ’

i s so remarkably u h -Engli sh that weoverhaul Domesday to fin d that the holders of M instead at

the Survey were the sons of a deceased Godrz’cMalf. Godric,

ANTIQUARY AND NOVEL I ST 183

so Engl ish a name that twelfth - century No rmans used it forthe typ ical ‘John Bull

,

’

has thus been clumsily m isun ders toodas the French Godfrey. Surely Sir Walter was a safer gu idewi th hi s Cedrics and Wilfreds and Athelstan s l And sincethe tournament of Ashby de la Zouche and the s iege ofTorqu ils ton e we have made no advance with our knowledgeof the lesser trappings of the romance, wi th our armour andweapons and such like kn ightly necessaries .

ln Sir N igel’s ki t as packed for France we have the shoeswi th golden toe chains dear to M rs . Markham and the nursehistor1an s . The kn ights joust in ‘plain tilting salades

,

’

a

r

l):

thou h the salade i s not a characteri stic head covering forpeOpIe who jousted in the great helm wh ich carr ied the crest,an d al though the salade belongs to the fifteen th century an d i sout of place here in the fourteenth . The word brigandines ign ifies to the antiquary a jacket quilted with l ittle plates ofi ron

,to Sir Conan it i s but a conven ient word to flavou r

wi th when we are speaking of m ilitary costum e . Generallyhe describes i t as a garment of chain mai l, but in one case a

d inted brigand ine ’ shows a faded red l ion of St. George ’

alas that red l ion of Sir Conan’s dream ramping on a dis

coloured ground,

’ so that the brigandinewas sometimes a garment capable, l ike i ts name, of bear ing some embroidery. Thusmedieval local colour i s obtained by daubing in strange wordswhose meaning Sir Conan guesses at an d m i sunderstan ds .That Sir Conan Doyle has learned l ittle since the days

when he fought wi th The Wbite Company i s shown by a laterwork

, A Duet, witban Occasional Cborus . Here we have SirConan setting about a good work

,and throu h the mouth of

Mr. Frank Crosse tell ing u s that the duty 01g u s who live byLondon is to love an d cherish its old stories and its presentbeauties. But Mr. Frank Crosse i s a gu ide of the least tru stworthy. We are ashamed for h im an d for hi s godfather SirConan when he leads his beloved and betrothed to the cabyardbefore Charing Cross station an d with a grave face plants herbefore the beautiful old stone cross . ’

Six hundred years ago,’ said Frank, as they paused and l ooked up, tha told stone cross was completed, w ith heralds an d armoured knights around i t tohonour her whose memory was honoured by the k ing. Now the corduroyedporters stand where the kn ights stood, and the engines wh istle where theheralds trumpeted, but the old cross is the same as ever in the same old place .I t is a l i ttle th ing of that sort wh ich makes on e real ize the un broken h istory ofour country.’

184 THE ANCESTOR

I t i s,on the contrary, ‘a l ittle th ing of that sort wh ich m akes

one realize that the h i story of our country i s but a toyshopfancy even to our educated men and to those who, l ike SirConan Doyle, would fain be our teachers . That a m an ofliberal cultu re should take the Victorian erection wi th wh i ch thefancy of the South Eastern Railway directors have adorned theiryard for a beautiful old stone cross of the greatest days ofthe Engli sh arch i tect's art, and should waste emotional wonderupon i t i s noth ing less than amazing

,an d saddening withal .

We walk wi th Mr. Frank Crosse as far as the Abbey inchastened mood

,passing on our way wi thout comment the

real si te of the beautiful old cross . ’ Even the recollecti on ofEdward I . ’s heralds

, who blow upon trumpets for no betterreason than that the Wh i te Rabb i t of Lewi s Carroll was inafter years to be pictured in a herald’s tabard an d blowing atrumpet, fail s to cheer u s . We leave Frank an d Maude at theAbbey

,for there Frank will explain that han ging upon a cross

beam above are the actual helmet and sh ield used by HenryV. at Agincourt

,and th i s i s another th ing wh ich i s not s o .

Now, when the antiquary has fin i shed his carping at the

men who live to am use and cheer him , the last word remainsafter all wi th the novelist. Shall not the novel ist reply thatas arche ology has been reckoned for ages no more than a

fitting amusement for the closing years of elderly gentlem en,the science has left i ts work unorganized

,unarranged and

undone I t i s not the business of the h i storian, of thenovel ist, or the painter to leave desk and easel to stumblealong the ways of original research into medi eval details . Andall three m ay ask where i s the row of volum es wh ich theyshould fin d on the l ibrary shelf to give them in clear an d

tru stworthy fash ion the points they need in m atters touch ingthe custom s, dress and language of our Engli sh forefathers.

So wi th happy remembrances of a good story well told,and there are too few of such

,we leave Tbe W'

bz’

te Company togo its j olly way, blowing as i s i ts wont upon i ts nakers, a kindof kettledrum wh ich the 00d kn ight Sir Conan, who i s u n

certai n of the mean ing 0?the word, insists upon the ir usingfor trumpets .

l

OSWALD BARRON.

1 The Bab Balladmonger who 1uV1tes us to blow the spiri t- sti rring harpl ike anyth ing may here fin d countenance and good company.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

THE F I R ST PAG E or A BOOK or ARMS .

(He r! MS.

A FIFTEENTH CENTURY BOOK OF ARMS

HIS book of arms,once in the possession of Randle

Holme,whose s ignature i s found upon the firs t fol io

,i s

n ow amongst the Harleian MSS. at the Bri tish Museum,

being numbered 2 1 69 in that collection,

and enti tled‘Au n cian t Coates . ’ Seventy - one leaves remain out of

seventy- s ix or more . I t i s espec ially interesti ng as an exampleof decadent armory in the intermed iate period betweenthe practice of the art in the great days of heraldry and

the charlatanry of i ts revival as a so- called sc ience under theTudors . The book of arms before u s i s a collection of hastytr ickings wi th a pen

,a very few be ing roughly coloured

,an d

it is hoped that our illustrations, wh ich are from photographsSpecially taken for Tbe Ancestor, may fairly represent the iroriginal . I t w ill be seen that unequal and coarse as is theexecution of the work the arti st shows by his bold and wellbalanced sketches of many of the figu res that he is capable ofmuch huer work than would appear at a first glance at his

armorial crudi ties.Another reason for reproducing th i s book of arms in i ts

completeness may be found in the language of the comp ilers,for the origi nal drawings are spotted wi th words an d phras eswh ich we have endeavoured to inlay in our own blazon

,wh ich

has followed as far as m ay be the form of the customaryarmorial language of the time .The beginn ing of th i s roll is somewhat unprom ising to

the student . The arms of the ki ngs of the wild places ofthe earth, of the n ine worthy conquerors, pagan, Jew and

Christian, of the kings wh ich were once in England,and

of the old English nobles, quaint as they are, are the commonplaces of such books. But in the latter part of the work weshall be introduced to many and valuable blazons of theauthor’s contemporaries wh ich wou ld o therwise be hard tofin d, for fifteen th century heraldry, strangely enough, i sdarker to delve in than that of the fourteen th or th irteenthcenturies.The date of the roll is evidently the reign of Henry VI .

,

185

186 THE ANCESTOR

the sovereign glorified in the last of the creaking verses whichfollow the p ictures of Engli sh kings on horseback at the openi ng of the book . A more exact date i s perhaps afforded bythe presence of a number of London sh ields, which includethose of Wyfolde or Wywold, Gregory and Norman, LordMayors in 1450, 145 1 and 1453, and that of John Derby,sheriff of London in 1446 . Here al so we have the armsof John Stockton andWilliam Stoker

, who were to be LordMayors in 1470 and 1483 , and the arms of the TallowChandlers, granted in 1456 .

[fol io 1 ]Tbys n lyam damice qf Normandye. As bakys olde maky tb

mamyan .

By just lytyll and by bys cbewalreye. Made kynge by guan

gwest of Brewtus Alfiyon .

Putt awta Herrowde and takepossescyofl . And bare by; crowne

fidl one and xx yere.

Bery ed at Kane thus sayth the croneclere.

1 . Goulys a l ion gold w ith a border engrailed gold [F ITZALAN]quartering checkered gold and asure [WARENNE] . Mayster

TomAs ARRUNDELL,1 Byscboppe of Caunterbm .

2 . Tbefield sable wi th a cross engrailed erm ine an d a crescentermine in the quarter. Master Ros a n n a H ALLA[M][B ishop of Salisbury, 1408

[fo l io i h]

3 . At the back of th i s first leaf i s a torn fragment of a sh ieldhavi ng apparently these arms : sj l

‘vyr three raggedstaves sable . Ov er the sh ield i s wri tten on pas

done uncore. [Th i s is probably the sh ield of SUBSTON.]

1 Thomas Arun del, Archbi shop of Canterbury, 1 397- 98 and 1 399- 1414.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 88 THE ANCESTOR

bromgbffofl b j u all wm a . zy yfl

t a fi n prm de b tbe grw of Cryst 7am .

To wer: g em s cf f ngloadz and om m . Ta whoa CM

for b) ; bggbt. Long 10 7 1336-7214? and rqgu ya bys reygbt.

the arm s of the see of Can terbury—asm a pal] 1311072

CHYCH BJW ?f u 7. [ 14 14- 1443]

FIFTEENTH CENTURY ARMS 189

8. Sylszyr a li on goal) : erwyd w’aseure crown arm

LBUSANDBERGH Carayna l, Ca rdyxall q a [Lou n

9 . Sable three pa lm branches gold. Mavsn n Joa n CHAUNDLER .

[fol io iv]

Three leaves are wanti ng before th i s foli o . Theheaded

Tbepe dcgrewe be reygbt lyri c

Fownd a nd prewyd by a rm j munce

How Kyaga Harry tbe Sexytbnowgbt coleyne

Ts i rewe Kynge of Praunce.

But no pedigree follows .

Ascare two crossed fish syhzyr w i th crown: of gold. [T11 11

S'

rocx n sumon o s n s 01 LONDON .]1 1 . Six p ieces an d goulys w i th three pyneapplys of

gold in the gules .1 2 . Party cheveronwise battled gold and aseure with th ree

cglys couno'rcolorjys after tbe felde [j ou N D ERBY, a sherifi"

of London in

1 90 THE ANCESTOR

Party cheveronwise battled gold and sabyll with threeeg/ys contyrcalmy s . [Possibly for Sir William Taylor,Lord Mayor in 14 1 1 . H is arms are generally givenas gold w ith a dance sable between three eagles sable .]

Party sylvyr and a sear wi th two couch in g lions con tyrcolorys .[Probably the sh ield of W I LL IAM GREGORY, LordMayor of London i n 145 1 , whose arms are generallygiven w i th the two lions rampant back to back

, as i n

Harl . MS.

Party bendwise, or embelif syl'vyr and sabyll wi th a lion

con tyrcolorys enbelyfi: after tbefelde. ROTE .

Si lver a pile botony sable and thereon a lily flower silverwi th stalk and leaves .

Six pieces gold and azure with three fioum’

lyx of sylvyr in

the azure p ieces .Party bendwi se azure and silver an eagle en é elyf comyr

£010;i armyd w’

gold. BLAKENHALE.]

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 9 2 TH E ANCESTOR

Azure three hulls of long sh ips of gold with dragon headsof gules at prow and stem . Roy DE NORREWAYE.

A silver cross the first quarter being of gold with threeleopards azure, the second of azure w i th three goldencrowns, the th ird of silver wi th a grifl

'

on of gules andthe fourth of gules wi th a golden lion holdin g an ax e .

Ou the cross i s an escutcheon of gold wi th two leopardsazure . ROY DE DACYB .

Gold a lion of gules —corrected in a note to a lion passant .Tbe army: qf BREWTE tbe fi rst tba t e'ver congwery él

Party gules and silver wi th two bends of silver in thegules . SIR LAWNCELOT DE LAK E .

Tbe e d wart wi th three golden gr ifi'

on s passant . S1 17.

GAWAYNE tbe good knygbt. Below th i s sh ield i s another,

now half torn away, wh ich i s to be part wt GAWAYNE.

I t bears sable fretty si lver wi th a label gules .Silver a wyvern wart?armyd w gowéys . UTER PENDRAGON .

FIFTEENTH CENTURY ARMS 1 9 3

[fol io v]

Gold a roundel sable and thereon a l ion passant of s ilverwi th a crown . T11 11 GENTYLL SOWDAN.

Tba feld of sabyll w i th a golden chal ice and a tortose of

sylvyr . T11 15 SOWDEN or BABYLOYNE.

Azure a golden hare leaping. Roy DE TATE .

[Here follow the arms of the three Kings of Cologne .]Azure the waxing moon of gold with a golden moletbetween her horns . Ro y JASPER DE COLOYNE .

Azure seven golden molets . Roy M ELCH ER DE COLOYNE.A man clad in a coat gi rdled at the waist, having his legsbare . H e po ints w ith his right hand and in his lefthand he holds a lance with a pennon of a wyvern .

ROY BALTBZER DE COLOYNE.

1 94 THE ANCESTOR

aseure wi th a olden sh ip having the mast goldand tba 54e syl

‘vyr . g'a n ARMYS 01' 0 11 141311 1311.

Tbe fl’ld aseure tba gnfibn in tbe felde rampand [tricked as

passant] all of golde. Roy DE GRYFFON.

Azure three golden lions’ heads rased . SI R GAWAYNE

TH E GENTYLL . [Over th i s name i s wri tten Roy DEMARROKE .]

The torn sh ield at the foot of th i s fol io is of silver wi th asable wyvern . The arm grasp ing the wyvern i s clad ingules barred wi th gold . A note explains that i t is partwi tb tbe cbaleys, that is to say, impaled wi th the chal icecoat of BABYLOYNE above described [No .

TH E 1x WORTHY CONQWEROURYS .

4 1 . Sable two fighting l ions of gold . ECTOR DE TROYE .42 . Gules a golden l ion rampant si tting in a silver chair an d

holding an ax e of azure . ALYXAUNDYR MAGNUS .43 . Gules a two headed eagle sable . JULYUS SESARE.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 9 6 THE ANCESTOR

Gules a silver column bound about wi th a cord andcrowned wi th a golden crown . T11 13 POPE or ROOME

,

MARTYNE DE Cow MNxs .1

Azure the figu re of Christ nailed upon a golden cross .PRESTER Jon

Gold an eagle sable . EMPEROWRE or ROME ET DEALMAYNE .

Gold a cross gules between four fire- steels gules . T11 13

EMPEROWRE or COSTANTYNE LE NOELLE AND 01?GRACE .Silver a cross potent between four l ike crosses all of gold .

ROY DE JEREUSALEM.

Azure three fleu rs de lys of gold. ROY DE PRAUNCE .1 Martin V . (Otho Colonna) 141 7- 24.

FIFTEENTH CENTURY ARMS 1 97

France quartered wi th England . Roma 13 11 ENGLETARE ET

DE PRAUNCE .Gules a golden castle [for Cas tile] quartering silver a l ionporpy/l [for Leon] . Roy DE SPAYNE ET DE CASTYLE.

Paly gold and gules of ten p ieces R011 011 ARRAGON ET DECascvu z. A note i s added—but i ijjpal] of gowlys andtbe field of gowly s .

S ilver five escutcheons of azure set crosswise each withfive roundels of s ilver

,tbe bordewr gouly: with {be ca :

te/ys gold. The arti st seem s to have abandoned histhought of setting the five escutcheons upo n a crosspaty of vert. Roy 01: PORTYNGALE.

Gules the Navarrese net of golden chains quartering OldFrance wi th a bend s ilver an d gules gobony . Roy DENAVARRENE.

(S ilver a l ion (gules with a golden crown . Roy DEBEAUME .

1 98 THE ANCESTOR

Silver three bars gules impaled wi th old coat of FranceR011 DE H ONGERYE .

63 . Gules a kynge on born e bakke silver. ROY DE F on z .

64. The old coat of France with a label gules,im paled wi th

Jerusalem . ROY DE NAPLYS .

Party saltirewi se— the ch ief an d foot gold wi th iz'g'

j pms

of gowlys an d the flanki ng p ieces each si lver with aneagle sable with a golden crown . Roy DE CESCYLE THE

OLDE .Six p ieces

,the first barry silver an d gules but of tuj parys,

although tri cked as three bars gules the secondwith the old coat of France an d a label gules [NAPLES],the th ird with the arm s of Jerusalem

,the fourth Wi th

the old coat of France an d a bordure gules [AN thefifth azure cru s illy gold and two golden barbel back toback [BAR], the sixth gold wi th three eagles of silveron a bend gules [LORRA I NE] . ROY DE CESCYLB

,D EWKE

DE ANGOYE .Tbefield of gold tbe dowéyll tressoreflourte all gowlys tbe [yone

of tbe same. Roy DE SCOTTYS .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

200 THE ANCESTOR

Gold three leopards azure. ROY DE DENMARKE .

Tbe a rmys of 1”

ngelond tbe bom’ore sylvyr and tba flowrdelyes

of golde. E RLE OF H ONTYNGBTON. The coat and

name are struck through by a later pen .

Gold and asewre cbeccbe. E 11 1 1! o r WARREYNE .

At the foot of th i s folio is a rough trick of the arm s ofEdward the Confessor impaled with France andEngland—E DWARD and YNGELOND .

[fol io 7 b]Gold and a seure cbecbe wi th a cheveron erm ine. E RLE 01

‘

WARREWYKE,S1 11 GYE.

Silver a ch ief gules w i th three roses countercoloured.

E RLE OF HAM PTON, Sm B awy s .

Azure three bars gold an d a ch ief of gold wi th threepales an d two gyrons of azure wi th an escutcheon ofsi lver over all. E RLF. of MARCH E .

FIFTEENTH CENTURY ARMS 20 1

80. Gold a cross gules . E 11 1 1: 0 1: ULSTYR .

81 . Azure three open bam aklys of golde and a ch ief erm inewi th a dem i l ion gules . E RLE or GENEWYLE .

82 . Gules a l ion quartered wi th goldc and

ascare cbeccbe [WARENNE] . E RLE 01r ARRONDELL.

83 . S ilver a lion gules wi th a crown, the bordore mbyllbesazmteof golde. E RLE 01? CORNEWAYLE .

84. Gold a [youe ofpurpull. ERLE or LYNCOLNE

85 . Syl'vyr and a seure bcrle wi th an orle of vy or ix merletlys

gowlys [VALENCE] .

202 THE ANCESTOR

Gules a lion silver armyd w’aseure. E RLE MARCHAL

MOWBRAY .

Gules a fesse gold and s ix crosslets gold,wi th a crescent

sable on the fesse . ERLE OF WOSCESTRE .

Paly si lver an d vert [in a later hand vair and gules] ach ief gold w i th an eagle ERLE 01 PENBROK E,S I R F RAUNCYS DE CORTETYNGBM P [corrected in a laterhand to ERLE 01“ MORTAYNE AND BOLOIGNE] .

Gold a nd wart party a lion gules . BYGO’

I‘DUKE [s ic] or

NORTH EFOLK . At the side of th is sh ield is a roughtrick of a sh ield wi th a ‘gurge . ’

Gules a cross paty of syloyr and asewre werre. COUNT DEAMARLE .

Silver a lion sablewi th a border of sable [‘a2ure’

in a

later hand] . T11 11 LORD B URNEL L .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 04 THE ANCESTOR

98. Gules a lion silver wi th a forked tayll. COUNT DEL EYCESTYR .

99 . and aseure werre a fesse gules . LORD MERMYON.

100 . Azure three sheaves of gold . COUNT DE CHESTYR .

1 0 1 . Silver a bend gules and s ix m artlets gules . LORDFORNYWALE.

1 02 . Party ermine [altered in a later hand to silver] an d gulesindented . COUNT DE LEYCESTYR [altered in a laterhand to SIMON SENTLEZ

,Count de H UNTI NGTON] .

Gold three cheverons gules wi th a label azure . COWNT

DE CLARE . S I R GYLBERT [in a later hand E GLOSTER] .

FIFTEENTH CENTURY ARMS 205

[fol io 9]

7 641 t/x vy kyngy: {bat dwellydyn Tugelond arrouy .

A cross between four lions. SEYNT Oswaw z. Roy D ENORTHWMBERLONDE.

Gules three kn ives or seaxes of silver with’golden hafts .Roy DE KENT.

Gules [blank] . Roy DE Essex

107 . Azure three trefoils silver. Roy DE Sowr fl sax .

108. Si lver three crowns gules. ROY DE Noar n pom a.

109 . Azure three crowns silver. R011 DE MARCHELOND .

Ly n cou cn y a z .

206 THE ANCESTOR

1 10. Gold a cheveron gules . COUNT DE 81 1117 1 011011.1 1 1 . Gold fretty sable and a ch ief sable with three bezants.

LORD SEINCTAMOUNT.

1 1 2 . Gold three pi les gules wi th a quarter erm ine

Here be of of tbe byngy: tbat dwellyd all aft 00 ryme ya Tngrlonde

Am!Sty”: Edward] : army ; was tbc fevyntb.

[19 119 9 11]

Azure a cross paty gold between four lions gold .

SANCTUS CUTBERTUS EPI SCOPUS.

Purpull a cross gold between four lions gold. SANCTUS

OSWALDUS.

Azure wi th the device of the Trin i ty in silver . SENTMvu au . ARMYS.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

208 THE ANCESTOR

[folio 1 0]1 22 . Azure three crowns gold. Sam ar EDMOND KYNGB or

YNGBLOND 01‘

TYME .

Syl'ver iy

’

rayndere beclys all of sabyll. MAYSTER Bowa'

r,

B y scu op p op YORKE [Archbi shop of York 1407142

Sabyll i ii any: passam of syl'vyr . MAYSTER W . Asx awa

,

BYSCHOPPE 01? SALYSBERY .

Silver a wave sable between three hares’ heads gold .

BYSCHOPPE H ARREWELL [B i shop of Bath an d Wells1 3 69

—1 386]Azure a cross formy parted silver an d gules (the fieldwould seem to be parted by an error of the draughtsman ). SEYNT TomAs or AKBRYS .

Silver a lion sable an d a chief sable wi th two couples ofsilver keys . T11 11 ABBEY or H YDE 1 mWYNCHESTYR .

FIFTEENTH CENTU RY ARMS 209

Azure a crosier gold between i ij coycbonys of tbe a rmy: qfMareb wi th tbc fauce coycbon of gowlys . ABBOT or

Tu oan r on—Coa'

ravs.

Sable three silver swans.S ilver seven vo ided lozenges gules . Bvscuo ppa 01?

Lon oon .

‘

1 3 1 . Go ld a cross sable engrailed. LORD 011

1 32 . Party silver and azure indented . s o s aoo .

1 3 3 . Ermyn e a ch ief gules indented . COUNT DE MORTAYNE.

1 Robert Braybroke, B ishop of London [ 1 382 bore these armswi th in a border, as appears by his seal .

2 1 0 THE ANCESTOR

1 34. Vai ry gold and azure. LORD 0 1? GYNES.‘

1 3 5 . Paly gules and vair (of ten pieces) with a ch ief gold anda label azure . COUNT DE SENT Poo na .

1 3 6 . Paly gold and gules (probably for ten p ieces). COUNTDE Paovan sa .

Gules three pales vai r wi th a ch ief gold [a later hand hasmade a rough trick of an eagle on the chief

, and

headed the sh ield COMES ELOYs] .S ilver s ix crosslets sable fitchy wi th a chief azu re and twopierced molets of gold on the ch ief. COUNT DEH ONTINGTON.

Silver two bars azure wi th a quarter azure and a p i ercedcia o il of gold on the quarter. “

RATH ERFELD PYP

PARD .

1 The form of the va ir shows tha t the coa t was taken fi'om an earlyversion .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

ANCEST ORHNH

a borda '

(of twelv e mm ) wi th a

148. Paly s ilvu -and azure with a bm d gu lm

the bend. Loan Gu nm e n .

149 . Azur e three gim el bars gold an d a chi ef go ld. LoanMBNELL.

1 50 . Gold wi th billets sable and a labe l gu les .

1 5 1 . a chi ef gold wi thhand

,Mor t en ] .

2 14 THE ANCESTOR

OUR OLDEST FAM ILIES

I I I . THE SHIRLEYS

HE ancient house of Sh irley has been fortunate in breeding two genealogists of its name and blood . Sir Thomas

Sh irley,a cadet of the house

,kn ighted in 1 622 by that great

maker of knights,King James left behind him no less than

three h istories of his ancestors,wh ich survive as curiosi ties of

genealogy, bavin been set aside by the boo k of the late Mr.

Evelyn Sh irley o Ettington,

’ one of the first fam ily h i storiesto be wr i tten in the sp iri t of critical inqu i ry wh ich i s to- daydemanded of the genealogist.A modern genealogi st, whose tradi tional pedigree begins

wi th an ancestor seated at the tim e of Domesday upon landswh ich hi s descendants enjoy in the reign of Edward VII .

,

m ight well unroll hi s many- sh ielded pedigree w ith p ious u neasiness

,knowing how many and how stately were the three

decker legends wh ich have foundered of late years in theopen sea that bore them up so surely in Elizabeth ’s day an d

Dethick’

s . But for Mr . Sh irley there was no skeleton in thedeed chest . H e spread out an d arranged his charters andmun iments

,his deeds and evidences of the anc ient Sh irleys

,

an d generation locked i tself surely to generation, Sh irley toSh irley

,till there was no link but was strained and proved

fi'

om Evelyn Ph i lip Sh irley of Ettington to Sewal who heldEttington when the Dom esday comm i ssioners were on thei rtravels .Sewal of Ettington, the founder of th i s enduring l ine,

was a sub- tenant of the hou se of Ferrers, under whom heheld broad lands in s ix Iordsh ips

,whereof E ttington alone

remains w i th hi s descendants . Of the o rigin of Sewal noth ingi s known, but som eth ing may be guessed at an d much hasbeen asserted . Upon hi s unfam iliar name m any theories havebeen bu il t. Says Dugdale, ‘Of th i s Sasu u alo

,whose name

argues him to be of the old English stock, as some th ink, Ihave not much to say, considering that we have so li ttle lightof H i story

,and noth ing of Record, for other discovery.

’

Nowadays we are beginning to hope that H i sto ry an d Record

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 1 6 THE ANCESTOR

I t must not be supposed that a word of Mr. EvelynSh irley’s was allowed to give countenance to the story of theopu lent and dign ified thanes . Although i t seem s that Mr .

Sh irley favoured the idea of an Anglo- Saxon origin for hishouse

,he was too careful an d con sc ientious a student to give

an y space to windy speculations but it seems that hi s learnedwork has set n o l im i t to them . Here we may quote theletter of a gentlem an

,whose name argued him to be of the

old Sh irley stock on the di s tafi' side .H e had been roused to protest, be i t understood, by a

printed statement attributed to the present wr i ter that theSh irley ancestor had ‘come over wi th the Conqueror. ’ Wi ththe easy con fiden ce which marks the gentleman who takes aninterest in genealogy,

’ he assured the wri ter that th i s was notso . The Shirleys, he said, possessed amongst their papersple proof that their ancestors were possessed of Ettington

for many generations before the Conquest, an d therefore, as

he added wi th a very precious modesty, must be reckoned oneof the oldest An lo—Saxon fam ilies in England. Given hisprem i ses we shou d have been tempted to go further, for i t i scertainly startl ing news that other descendants of opulentthanes survive to match ancestors wi th Sewal’s many forefathers . Modesty was in the body of th is letter, but a stinglurked in the postscript . ‘It appears,

’ said the letter wri ter,

‘that there are people nowadays who want to reduce all

these th ings to a common level !’ That envious cri tic ismshould endeavour to fix the ‘common level of English pedigrees at the conquest of England i s an idea at wh ich a dukeof Ouida ’

s creation m ight stand aghast . The ghosts of Deth ickan d Cooke would receive it gaspmg.

Sewal’

s son Fulcher left two son s—Henry and anotherSewal to whom h is brother sold his birthright in Ettington .

Henry’s descendants settled at Ireton and became Iretons ofthat ilk

,an d, to the outspoken horror of Henry

’s nephewmany tim es removed, the loyal Mr . Evelyn Sh irley, produced at last that very wicked man Henry Ireton, LordD eputy of Ireland under Oliver, who clenched his bargainwi th Satan by marrying Oliver's own daughter .Sewal brother of Henry i s the first of the house ofEtting

ton who appears at Sh irley in D erbysh ire, an d Sir Thom as

Sh irley credi ts him wi th a seal of arms of the paly coat wh ichis the firs t armorial bear ing of the fam ily. But the evidence

OUR OLDEST FAM ILIES 2 1 7

of Pbila rcbismw in the matter of early seal s is hardly trustworthy. Th is Sewal’s grandson, a kn i ht styled Sewal deEttington

, was more probably the firs t carer of the sh ieldwith the pal gold and sable .Sewal o Ettington the grandson was succeeded by his

son an d he ir Sir James de Sh irley,wi th whom the new sur

name of the fam ily begi ns. H is son Ralf’s sh ield, palee do or

e de sable, is recorded amongst the blazons in the great roll of

arms compiled in the beginn ing of the fourteenth century,1but in 1 3 1 1

’ he seals w ith the add ition of an erm ine quarterto his sh ield . H e d ied in the last year of Edward I I . , leavingThomas his son and heir, who is hailed by his descendants as‘the great founder ’ of the l ine . H e made a great m atchwith I sabel Basset

,sister and so le he ir to Ralf, the last Lord

Basset of D rayton . The wi ll of th i s Lord Basset in 1 389 is

said to have provided for the taking of the name an d arms ofBasset by Hugh Sh irley, son and heir of Thomas and I sabel

,

but ne ither names nor arms were changed by the Sh irleys .The Wars of the Ro ses left the Sh irleys, who were

marryin ithe grea t estate of Staunton Harald in Le icestersh ire

,

u n dis tu r cd in Ettington an d the ir other lands and house .Staunton Harald became the ir main seat, and Ralph Sh irleyby his conduct on the field of Stoke in 1487 strengthenedthe fam ily interest w ith the n ew dynasty . The fourth baronetof K ing Jam es’s creation was Sir George Sh irley of StauntonHarald

,who begat amongs t other sons Thomas Pbilarcbismus,

the first Sh irley genealogi st. Wh ilst the sen ior l ine of Sewalwas ris in in the person of Major- General I reton, Sir RobertSh irley o Staunton

,a stout caval ier, was dying a prisoner i n

the Tower of London, notw i thstand ing that his mother wassister to Devereux, Earl of Essex, the general for the parl iament . The cavalier’s younger son, who became at last theheir of the family

, was Robert Sh irley, in whose favour thek ing ended the abeyance of the barony of Ferrers of Chartley

,

and in 1 7 1 1 the descendant of Henry Ferrers’

s Domesdaytenant becam e V iscount Tamworth an d Earl Ferrers . ToGeorge Sh irley, a captain in the Foot Guards and a youngerson by a second marriage, the firs t earl, hi s father, gave theh istor i c estate of Lower Ettington, wh ich i s n ow en

'

oyed byhis descendant Mr. Sewallis Evelyn Sh irley of ttington

Park, son of the celebrated genealogi st.1 Cotton MS. Cal igula,’A. xvi i i . W011. Cbart. ix . 20 .

THE ANCESTOR

The arms of Sh irley— paly gold an d azure w i th an erm inequarter— present som e difli cu lty to the student of such mat

ters . They are said to be a Clinton coat assumed on themarr1 e of Henry, son of Sewal, who died about 1 1 65, wi thJoanfgaughter and heir of John de Clinton, but the date ofthe marriage makes th is impossible, although Clintons are

found i n Warwicksh ire at a later date wi th sim ilar bearings .Sh irley s own coat

,borne by Henry’s grea t- grandson, was

gold an d sable, but th is same great- grandson, as we haveiiil

ti'

xe pointed out, seems at the last to have adopted the coatwi th the erm i ne quarter . However derived i t comes in theend

,most probably

,from some variant of the arms of the

great house of Basset,an d the will of the Lord Basset con

cern ing hi s arms was thus unconsciously half fulfilled by hisSh irley kinsfolk. To the old coat of paly gold an d sable onehero ic legend at least may be traced . Gazing at i t s idelong, aSh irley pedigree maker cauu

tght suddenly i ts resemblance i nthat pos i tion to the field 0 a sh ield well known in Europe

,

and Sewal of Domesday became for the di scoverer ‘a noble

Saxon,i ssu ing from the royal dukes of Saxony

,an d bearer

of the imperial s tandard.

’ 1

IV. THE CARTERETS

If i n our survey of the ancient English houses we are al

lowed to include those loyal vassals of the English crown,

the i slanders of the Channel, we add at least one house ofhi h antiqu i ty and distinction to our golden book of nobifity . The house of Carteret came to an English peerage inthe person of Sir George Carteret who married the granddaughter of Sir Bevill Granville the caval ier, the famous SirRichard’s famous son . John de Carteret

,the son of th is

marriage, comm emorated his descent in the title of his n ew

earldom of Granvi lle, but h is son the last Carteret so enti tleddied m 1 77 5 leaving no i ssue . Although the older an d morefamous line died w i th him ,

Jersey was not left wi thout i tsCarterets

,many descendants rema i n ing of the lines wh ich

trace to Ph i lip de Carteret, the Seigneur of St. Ouen, whodied m 1 500 and may be taken for the patriarch of all recogn ized Carterets of the old stock .

MS. Reg. K . 1. 2 79 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 20 THE ANCESTOR

before him he gives to Mont St. M ichel an d i ts monks thechurch of St. Germ ain of Carteret wi th the tithe of the wholepari sh an d with the land of the k ing’s alm s belonging to St.Germain in Jersey and wi th the ti the of the ods of hi shouse . Du Moulin gives the name of Renau de Carteretamongst the names of the kn ights who followed RobertCu rthose and Godfrey of Bouillon to Holy Land, but hi sauthori ty i s weakened by hi s adding to th e statement thatRenaud bore a sh ield de gueules a une fesse fu s ilé e d’

argentaccompagné e d’un lambel d’azur,

’ wh ich,on looking at the

date, we may deny out of hand .

H is son Ph ilip,being led astray by the counsel of wicked

men,

’ took away so far as he could the gift wh ich his fatherhad made, but St. M ichael was a powerful neighbour and onewi th whom the Seigneur of Carteret soon found it better tolive in peace . Therefore we find Ph ilip repenting an d askingwi th a contri te heart God’s pardon and St. M ichael’s, notforgetting that of the Abbot Bernard and h is chapter. At a

date between 1 1 3 5 and 1 149 he cam e to Mont St. M ichelwi th his mother Lucy

,his brethren Hum frey and Geoffrey,

and with certain of h is men, and there he restored in fullchapter hi s father’s endowment

,adding to i t the ti the of h i s

m i lls, two si tes in Jersey outside his court, one site atCarteret,and all the endowment of St. Germain . Also he aboli shedthe evil custom whereby ti the grain was stored in his own

court where the said grain lessened in bulk . The AbbotBernard, j oyfully receiving back the sinful Seigneur, gave tohim seven pounds in n ew money of Rouen, and to the saidLucy a bezant of gold . Humfrey was made happy wi th a

hawk of the abbot’s gift an d Geoffrey wi th certain wineskins .Two more charters in the sam e collection have to do wi th

Ph ilip the re entant . I n 1 1 56 he gives to Mont St. M ichelthe church 0 St. Ouen and the chapel of St. Marie in Jersey.

In 1 1 68he con firm s to the monks of St. M ichel the endowmentsin Jersey wh ich he and his forefathers have given them,

forwh ich con firm ation the monks agree that Ph il ip an d his houseshall have the right to seek adm i ssion to the monastery for oneof their k in in succession for evermore, if the k insm an shallbe a clerk or a knight or aworthy person, an d that when Ph ilipor his successors shall vi si t the mount they shall be entertainedfor one n ight as brethren . Th i s con firmation i s witnessed and

OUR OLDEST FAM IL IES 2 2 1

allowed by Nichole, Ph il ip's wife

, and by Renaud and Will iam,

his son and n e hew.

Ph ilip is fbllowed by Renaud his son, who, like him ,

is

Se igneur of Carteret and St. Ouen,and who con firm s by a

dateless charter in the sam e collection a gift of land in thevale of La Mare, wh ich h is father and he had made to thechurch an d canons of St. Heliers .

Renaud de Carteret, son of th i s last Renaud, i s named forcollector of the aid levied in the fifth year of K ing John uponthe lords of the fiefs in the i slands, and when in his n inth yearthe same k ing demands hostages for the ir feal ty from the ch iefmen of the i slands

,Renaud gave up Ph il ip, hi s son and heir,

who was thereupon comm itted to the custody of his uncleRichard, who was on the mainland, and be ing o r having beenconstable of the king’s castle of Winchester was known to bewell afl'

ected. I n 1 208Renaud had a letter of protection,and

in 1 2 1 3 Ph ilip the hostage was given up to Ph il ip Dauben ey,the governor of the islands . Thus far we may trace the history of th is Renaud from the ext racts n ow in print from theClose Rolls and Patent Rolls of King John . We may add

that when the king loses Normandy, Renaud de Carteret loses

Carteret and his other lordshi s in the duchy,but Carteret is

n ow firmly establ ished as the (Em ily surname .From Ph ilip the hostage ample evidence is found for trac ing

the Carterets of the elder and younger lines, for the h istory ofJersey is the his to

g' of a fam ily wh ich held all its ch ief offices

as it were by here i tary prescription . Amongst the wardens,baillys and j urats of the island the Carterets are foremost.L ike the loyal Jerseymen that they were

,they fought the

French and held stoutly by the Engl ish k ing's cause . A

Reynaud de Carteret, Se igneur of St. Ouen, defended MontOrgeu il Castle against the great du Gu esclin , when legend hasi t tha t he and hi s seven sons were made kn i hts in one day .

Ph il ip,hi s descendant

,drove the French rom the i slands

when the lieutenant of the seneschal of Normandy had seizedMont Orgeu il. Th i s Ph ilip

’s son, another Ph il ip,was marriedto Margaret

,the daughter an d sole heir of Sir R ichard Harli s

ton,the governor of Jersey, and from the twen ty sons of th is

wedding spring the many l ines of CarteretEdward, the eldest surv iving son, carried on the line of

Carteret, Seigneurs of St. Ouen, and afterwards Seigneurs al soof the i sland of Serk, wh ich they had as a fief by grant of

P

2 2 2 THE ANCESTOR

(Amen Elizabeth in 1 5 65 . From th i s Edward came theCarterets - knights, baronets an d earls

,who ended in 1 7 75

wi th Robert de Carteret, second Earl of Granvi lle, Vi scountan d Lord Carteret, an d more than all— Seigneur of St. Ouenwh ich h i storic fief then passed from the fam ily of Carteretto hi s di stant kinswoman, Jane Ie Mai stre

,wife of

“ Elias leMaistre, who thus became lady of the li ef.From Ri chard

,the second surviving son of Ph ilip an d

Margaret, came the Carterets of Vin chelé s, an d from Peter,one of the many younger sons

,the Carterets of St. Brelade

,

from whom comes Pierre- John de Carteret,n ow living, the

genealogi st of hi s fam ily

,to whose labours we are indebted

or the notes wh ich enable u s to record the house of Carteretas one wh ich can show a line of male descent from an ancestorl iving in the eleventh century .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 2 6 THE ANCESTOR

and against their own k insmen of B rim sfleld and Westonunder-Edge They defend their ti tle i n their lands of Ch illington against the b ishop their overlord an d against theCorbu son s, descendants of the Domesday tenant, and theybrawl wi th their ne ighbours 1n the bloody fash ion wh ich theplea rolls make fam il iar to u s .

I n 1 585 Ch ill ington escapes a wider fame through thedeficien cies of its brewhouse . I ts brewhouse wi ll only brewone tun at a time

,and so

,in days when beer was reckoned

necessary as ai r an d light, Mary the Qi een of Scots cannot bebestowed at Ch illington .

‘I pray you,

’ writes the stern SirAmias Poulett to Wal singham wi th fervent insistence

,

‘consider effectually of the brewhowse

,because y t i s a matter wh ich

importeth greatly and yt passeth my understanding to fynd a

remedye for i t.’

I n the end the poor ueen i s packed off to Chartley. Allthe m i sery of in sufli ciensliizer follows her there, and beer mustbe bought for her at Burton . And 1n the full casks and theempties wh ich pass between Chartley an d Burton go theletters of the queen and Babington

’

s plotters,who

'

are . all

unaware that each letter on its way yields up i ts secret to theold fox Walsingham .

Gifi'

ard i s indeed still Giflfird of Ch ill ington, but the tie o i

the men and their land has often been n igh sundering po int.For the John Gifl’ard of Elizabeth ’s day gives his son to theJesu its of Donai and Am iens for education

,an d thereafter

follow a century of troubles, fin es, impri sonments and exclusions. R ich and fortunate marriages alone enable the lineto survive . I t goes wi thout saying that the loyal Giffardsare up for their king, and the ‘bloudy tirant

’ seizes theGifl

'

ard lands,wh ich m ust be redeemed at a h igh price . Need

less also to add that hi s Maj esty’s most happ restorationput s no spi lt m ilk back into the old jug, and that althoughCharles Gifl’

ard played a great part in h is Maj esty's mostblessed escape

,sheltering him at most imm inent ri sk of hi s

neck i n his house ofWh iteladies after Worcester field.

The heraldry of Gifi'

ard I S of the utmost interest,and here

our national deficien cy of reference works of armory is p i ti fullyillustrated by the fact that an antiquary of the calibre ofGeneralWrottesley 1s forced to gather his references from theusefu l but wholly uncritical General Armory of the late SirBernard Burke and from such a sl ipshod compi lation as Mr .

GENEALOGY OF THE G IFFARDS 2 27

Foster’s Some Feudal Coa ts of Arms, the preten tious inaccuracyof wh ich was exposed in the first number of TbcAncestor .

Of the curious group of sh ields borne by the variousbranches of Gifi‘

ard there is hardly one of wh ich i n its origin i tm ight be said th is is Gifi'

ard’

s coat,’ unless it be the three l ions

passant of the Barons of B rim sfi eld. The Earls of Buckingham of th i s fam ily l ived an d d ied before the age of armor ialbearings . Gifl

'

ard of Fon th ill and Ch illington,as we have

shown, bore a version of the Scudamore sti rru ps, an d Gifl'

ard

of Weston- under-Edge bore a coat w ith red roundels,said to

have been derived from the ir ancestors the Corme illes fam ily.

General Wrottesley compares wi th th is a coat in ‘Plan ché s

Roll of silver w ith three bezants on a fess sable,but th is i s

wrongly ascribed to Cormale being a Co rnwall coat,the

black fesse and bezants standing as i t were for a p iece of thewell - known Cornwall border. General Wrottesley seems toattach too much impo rtance to the fact of a seal (temp . Ric. I .)of a Gifi'

ard of Fon thill bearing an escarbon cle,’ wh ich charge

may safely be set down in such a case as noth ing more than aflowered sh ield boss .I n the sh ield of Osbert or Osbern Gifiard (temp . Hen . I I I .)we have a piece of early armory of the most interesting in itscomposi tion . For th is O sbert Gifl’ard is no Giffard of GeneralWrottesley’s broods

,unless by his mother, being a bastard of

King John of England . H is arms are ci ted by the roll s aserm ine with two bars, or two gimel bars, of gules, and a ch iefgules wi th a leopard of gold on the ch ief. H i s arm s

,says

General Wrottesley, are probably those of one of the heiresse sfrom whom he derived his lands . ’ But here Genera lWrottesley m i sses the obvious suggestion of the ch ief and itscharge

,for whatever may be the meaning of the erm ine wi th

bars of gu les, the ch ief proclaims i tself a piece of the coat ofhis royal father wi th one of the Engli sh leopards thereon, an das an early example of bastard heraldry the whole sh ield isworthy of study. The Gifl’ards of Devonsh ire took to themselves arms w i th an indented fesse of three erm ine fusils

,

clearly founded upon the arm s of the Dynhams from whommany of their lands came . Gifi

'

ard of Sufl'

olk is credited wi tha sh ield of silver cru s illy gules wi th a l ion gules—a Braose coatto all appearance, and Gifi

'

ard of Helland i n Cornwall boreazure wi th three fleurs de lys of silver, a coat of their Cantelow kinsmen, ‘

on each fleur de lys a pellet,’

adds General

2 28 THE ANCESTOR

Wrottesley,but the pellet i s an improbable charge in such a

posi ti on,and i s probably a m isreading of the knot of the fleu r

de l s .

Al though we have here in the form of a reprint only thatpart of the last volume of the William Salt Society’s publications, General Wrottesley has included that grateful thing, anindex. A good index too save that the Gifl’ards occurringin it are arranged in a tangled skein according to houses an d

dates, an d for them alone the index i s all but useless and

unconsultable.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 30 THE ANCESTOR

here offered are well arranged,well wri tten and of great in

teres t i s one which every buyer of the book will agree wi thbut the edi tor’s further suggestion that by the book a newlight is thrown upon sixteen th century h i story

, a light wh ichwi ll show our ordinary h i story books for lying compilationswri tten in the Protestant interest an d to flatter the nationalvan i ty,

’

i s at least unfortunate . Nor does a careful readingof Mr . Brenan’s work indi cate in any striking manner ‘howfar worse and inexcusable was the Catholic persecution byProtestants under Elizabeth and James than was that ofProtestants under (lucen Mary .

’ The war wh ich Elizabe thand her m in isters waged

,wi th their backs to the wall, against a

religious policy wh ich struck at the very independence of ournation will hnd excusers in most Engli shmen . The tortureand murder of men and women for the errors of thei r religiou s opin ions i s so essentially abhorrent a th ing that we mayrefuse to d iscuss its relative excusableness under one reign orthe other.We have said that Mr . Brenan is a wr i ter fit to take up

the tale wh ich was left by the great ballad—singers of the north,but there his fitn ess ends . For want of help from Mr.

Lindsay we must reckon him the bard of the Percys ratherthan their true chron icler . H is page i s wounded wi th a scoreof errors wh ich an expert m ight have corrected wi th a mumof h i s mouth .

’ The very names as we turn the leaves cryout for revi sion . We have old Baron Richard and BaronWilliam

,

’

as though it were the house of Rothschi ld we .were

dealing wi th . We have the Lady Eleanor Plantagenet andthe Lady Margaret Plantagenet, names wh ich Mr . Brenanshould surely know to have no existence outside the h istoricalnovel . Ingelgram ,

a very clumsy version of Ingram, occurspersi stently and what can be said for Gilbert de Tesson and

Gilbert do Bassett. I t would seem that Mr. Brenan, whoshould know better

,looks upon the do as a decorative prefix

for an y h igh sounding surnam e.The origin of the Percy sees the beginn ing of Mr .

Brenan’s diffi culties, wh ich yet have seemed no diffi culties toh im . H e wri tes easily, gracefully and con fiden tly on eachincident of the early h i sto ry of the fam ily. Wi th a fin e

afi'

octation of the cri tical spiri t Mr . Brenan refi i ses to passthe pedigree of the line from Main fred, who came out ofDenmark to Normandy before the advent of Duke Rollo

0 1 ll1 3 14 1 15 1)

S EAL AND Coum mtsm l. o 1~ l I 1 l’1 11 s 1‘

01 NOK I H lIMBh K I 1 x 11 .

S EAL -111 TO A PERCY.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 3 2 THE ANCESTOR

A legend wh ich crumbles under the thumb of the

antiquary . I n 1 1 50 we are before the period of settledarm orial bearings, and the suggested chopping of old sh ieldsfor n ew ones stamps the whole story for what i t i s , a chrou icler’s yarn of the approved pattern . Not only have we noevidence of Joscelin e bearing a blue l ion— wh ich by the waywas not the arm s of the Duchy of Brabant—or any beast ofany other colour, but we have ample evidence that he neverassumed the nam e of Percy, remain ing de Luvene, de Luvain ,or de Love in to the end of hi s days . I n every question ofheraldry Mr . Brenan dr ifts rudderless . Armorial bearingswh ich we hnd struggl ing into fash ion under Coeur de Lion

,

wi th whom the very sh ield of England has i ts origi n,may be

for Mr. Brenan as ancient as the totem . Th i s at least i s theimpression we gain when we read his remark concern ingGreat Alan de Percy, who died in 1 1 20 . Of him we are toldthat the ancient arms of Percy azure five fu sils in fes se,or —lost none of thei r prestige wh ile he bore them upon h issh ield

,

’

a sh ield wh ich,we beg Mr . Brenan to believe, could

have borne no such ornaments. The l ion sh ield of Percy,wh ich Mr . Brenan and the old s torymakers attr ibute toJoscelin e de Lovain e at the court of Henry I . , occurs firs t i nthe re ign of Edward I .

,s ix reigns later

,when we fin d i t as the

bearing of Henry Percy, who bore i t on his banner at

Caerlaverock—j aune 0 am bleu [yon rampant— and on hi s seal

attached to the barons’ letter of 1 30 1 . I t ma have beentaken as a variant in colour of the arms of hi s wit

}; who was a

daughter of Fi tzAlan of Arundel . To crown hi s acceptanceof the Louvain e legend, Mr . Brenan tell s u s in all gravity thatthe n ew Percys, ‘wh ile they retained their own arms, hadgladly taken the fin e motto of the former l ine esperance enD ieu .

" One step further,an d we m ight be told that the

gentle Joscelin e retained the ancient note paper head ing of theearlier Percys .I t is an irksome task to point out the many grave errors

of archaeological detail in the work of so sympathetic a wri teras -Mr. Brenan, and we will ingly make an end of our carp ing.

But a pause must be m ade before Mr . Brenan ’s description ofBurghley as the son of Saxon peasants . Now the descentwh ich the Cec il s selected for themselves was from a house ofthe Welsh borders. Apart from th i s doubtfixl pedi ee

,we

have the earliest knowledge of them as a respectable garm ily of

REV IEW S 2 3 3

the m iddl ing sort in a countryside whose people must be at

least as Dan ish as Anglo- Saxon . If,as we imagine, Mr .

Brenan has really no n ew and too thsome bit of gen ealo in

h is sleeve, the Saxon peasant reveal s i tself as a phrase filingat Cecil in mean ingless contum ely by a young h istorian whorebukes Mr . Froude for his biassed writings . And here wemust charge our author

,in h is character of h istorian

,w ith

someth ing more than b ias. The docum ents wh ich, accord ingto the preface, are here revealed to u s

,are referred to in a

most susp icious series of footnotes . Cotton MS.,Sta te Papers,

Arcbi 'ves ales Pays Bas are referred to w i thout a key to volum eor page or document

,an d when references are afl

'

orded u s ,

such references as Cotton MS. Caligula, book v i . Cotton

MS. Cal igula, book are apt to arouse doubts in thoseacquainted w i th the Cotton Library as to whether our authorhas ever had any genu ine experience of the documents i nu es tion . More serious error we hnd in that m ishandl ing of

acts wh ich we find in the h i stor ical sections of the volumeswh ich, as Mr . Lindsay tells u s in his preface

,are to prove to

the candid reader that the h istories in common use in Englandare far, very far, from verac ious .

’

Cec il is to be painted as

a master butcher,El izabeth as red to the elbows in the blood

of the saints, and in the interest of these ideals,it seems

allowed to the h istorian to garble quotations, juggle wi thdates, or suppress inconven ient facts . Even in deal ing withearlier days

,where the air is clearer of the dust of bi tter

controversy,Mr. Brenan shows that his h istory is the u ncriti

cal narrative wh ich wi ll serve a ballad singer . The ch ildRutland

,for example

,dies murdered by ruthless Clifi'

ord, thefurious queen rages like a fury before the dying York, and a

foot reference to Holinshed pays for the whole story.Wi th a good will we leave Mr . Brenan’s h i story and go

back to h is Percys . Their sto ry as he tell s i t gains interestas i t goes in the hands of a writer keen to catch the goodphrase from the long page of his chron iclers and letter i hditers . And what a ladder of h istory is th is story as weclimb i t. Percy ow les gem ouns—Percy with the wh iskers,the Conqueror’s man

,d ies i n sight of Jerusalem . A Percy

is a guard ian of the great charter of our l iberties and anotheris prisoner at Bannockburn . The favouri tes of k ings andqueens are foes of the Percy

,whether they be Gaveston s,

Spensers or Mortimers . No regimental colour bears such a

2 34 THE ANCESTOR

list of battles as does the pedi gree of Percy. D id ever ataken car e of’

ofli cer in later days have such fortune as thatwh ich fell to the little kn ight Harry Percy

, who led hisNorthumbrians on the fam ous field of Cressy and yet wasable to hurry home in tim e to share victory at Nevi ll’s Crosswi th hi s warlike father, Who was keepin g the enemy from ourback gate wi th an arm y of chaplains an d fi'iars havin g twoarchb ishops and two bi shops for brigadiers ? I n a ct morefamous Harry Percy, the Hotspur, we have a worl paladin

,

a champion who se sword- blows and '

lan ce- pushes a quarter ofEurope followed wi th that delight an d enthusiasm to wh ichour compatriots to- day are moved by very successful playersat a ball- game . At eight years of age Hotspur sees h i s firstcampaign against Du Gu esclin

,he is a knight by the king’s

hand at eleven, and at twelve he leads the last assau lt throughthe breach of Berwick wall. H e i s well wi th in forty years ofage when he dies on Shrewsbury field by an Engli sh yeoman

’sarrow, wi th Douglas dead at his side, an d hi s old compan ionin arms King Henry IV. salts hi s body an d sets i t up betweentwo m ill stones by Shrewsbury p illory . H is father is forcedto take cover amongst the Scots and to ride a moonlight forayagainst hi s own cattle, and, old as he i s, comes to no strawdeath in the end . To see how readi ly the Percys r isked thePercy skin one has but to follow the line of descent. Thefirs t earl dies fighting on Bramham Moor, an d hi s brother i sshortened by a head after Shrewsbury fight. At ShrewsburyHotspur i s k illed

,Hotspur’s brother Ralph havi ng been

slain four years before in the Holy Land. Ho tspur’s son andheir l ives to be ki lled at St. Albans

,having reared four “ sons

who each an d all die on the stricken field,two at Towton

,

one at Northampton, and one,the Gled of Du n stanbu rgh, at

Hedgeley Moor . The next generation after these four warriors has Henry, the fourth ear], and him the northern rioterskill before hi s house at Cocklodge. Henry the Magn ificen t,fifth Earl of Northumberland, i s a silken prodigal an d dies inhi s bed, an d hi s valiant brother William comes scathelessaway from Flodden, but after their generation V iolent dea thwai ts again for the Percys. The magn ificen t one

’s sonThomas is beheaded in 1 53 7 . Of Thomas’s sons the eldestis beheaded in 1 572 . H e had sought refuge amongst theScots

,as his ancestor had done after Shrewsbury, and the

Scottish gentlemen sold him to his enem ies after the fin e old

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

REV IEW S 2 3 5

Scotti sh custom,for a sum in ready money. The second son

Henry i s found dead in his cell in the Tower,and a coroner’s

jury find that not having the Alm ightie God or his feare before his c ies

,but being moved and seduced by the instigation

of the devil ’ the Earl of Northumberland did d i scharge a

dag or p i stol into his body and heart, of wh ich he instantlydied . The fore ign press, as m ay be expected, brought in i tsverd ict of wilfu l murder against (lueen Elizabeth w ith the

greatest promptness,and i t is not to be doubted but that

Mr. Brenan wi ll endorse you the ir calm and deliberate j udgement .Wi th th is sombre business ends the bloody story of the

Percys of Alnwick,who henceforth may die in their beds, u n

less we must reckon i n cousin Percy the Gunpowder Plo tter,who comes in due tim e to a plotter’s end .

W i th Jo scelin e, the eleventh lord, the line of Percyends at Turin in 1 670. H is daughter married threetimes

,and with each marriage shows forth afresh the

woes of the heiress . She i s marr ied firs t to the youngLord Ogle

,son of the Duke of Newcastle, ‘

a s ickly boyof appall ing ugl iness, certainly weak-m inded if not indeedan absolute id iot. ’ Fortunately th is gallant bridegroom leavesher a virgi n widow at th irteen years, but her second marriagebrings her to the arms of Tom Thynne of Longleat

,a bruta l

l ibertine, of whom she is rid by the three horsemen who metMr . Thynne’s coach in Pall Mall and there m urdered h imwith a blunderbuss, as m ay be seen dep icted in a neat marblebas - relief upon h is tomb in Westm inster Abbey. A th irdhusband was waiting for the unhappy lady in Charles

,

Duke of Somerset, an ill- tempered egotist, wi th whom prideof race an d place grew to be a d isease to h imself and a drolleryto hi s contem porar ies . H e l ived however to see his granddaughter and heir match Seymour—Perc w ith Sm ith son and

carry his ricketty honours to a house 0 Yorksh ire husbandmen

,who had com e to riches an d a baronetcy as London

haberdashers . But Hugh Sm i th son was a tall upstand inggentlem an

,handsome and qu ick-witted

,and we cannot but

believe that h is wife was a luckier woman than her grandmo ther . Hugh Sm i th son became Hugh Percy and HughPercy Duke of Northumberland in due course . The n ew

made Percy yielded in pride to none of his predecessors, anddevoured the fam ily legends wi th such hearty yeom an’s appe

2 36 THE ANCESTOR

ti te that he demanded of his king no less a title than thedukedom of Brabant, in recogni tion of his ancestor Joscelin ede Lovain e’

s well- known claim s to that ti tle IWe turn back through a few pages ofMr . Brenan’s book

there are nearly n ine hundred pages—an d we pass many goodstories . For quotation we take two at hazard . R ichard Caeu rde Lion having a good will towards Richard Percy, an d li ttleready money wherewi th to demonstrate his kindness

,bestows

upon the Percy a single Jew of great skill in usury, by a tollupon whose activi ties R ichard shall enrich h imself. One isi rresistibly rem inded of the Ch inese method of fishing withcormorants . An d there is a story of the law of the borderwhereby we learn that the wardens of the marches held ittheir duty to ride a foray into Scotland once a week as longas the grass was on the ground,

’wh ich encourages u s to believethat the Percy an d the Dacre have still someth ing to teach thegeneral s who fai led to catch De Wet.

O . B .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 38 THE ANCESTOR

cares to d iscard h is native particle for the French de,’ wh ich,

goodness knows,has been so m i sused as for its lustre to be

m aterially impa ired .

I t i s not too much to say that, in most works of referencepublished in Grea t Bri tain, the principle for wh ich I plead isabsolutely overlooked . Gall ic fash ions, especially since the ageof Loui s X IV. ,

have so pervaded countries surrounding Franceor at some period wi th in French con fin es

,that our insular usage

is li ttle to blame. At any rate, such aberrations need nei therbe persi sted in nor perpetuated. I t i s consoling to turn tosuch a gigantic undertaking as the Bri ti sh Museum Catalo ue

of Printed Books . In no other work i s to be found sucha

multi tude of names of authors and of h istorical personages,whi ch, though m is - spelt and m is - translated upon ti tle- pagesof various nationalities

,are here put under their vernacular

forms wi th a precision and a knowledge wh ich are marvellous .There are no ‘d

’

Egmont’ for the Bri tish Museum authori ties,

and rightly. We fin d the headings : E GMOND, Arnold van ,Duke of Guela

’ers, and h is more famous kinsman : EGMOND,

Lamoraal van , Prince of Gavre. I t i s surpri sing that theexcellent Complete Peerage of G . E . C. i s not more accuratein the nam e of the Earls of Athlone

,the so—called de Reeds

‘de ’

Ginkel . The firs t of the name in th is country wasGodard ‘vafl Reed (lord of, and consequently) ‘van Amerongen,Ginkel, etc .I t need hardly be mentioned that Dutch William’s Earl

of Portland was a fourth son of Berent, Baron Benti nck vanDiepenheim, and that Arnold Joost van Keppel heer (lord)van der Voors t became Earl of Albemarle . I n the daily papersthe names de Brienen an d ‘de Tuyll occasionally meetthe eye . The first of these Dutch baronial families shoulde i ther be fuan Brienen, or the original French do Brianne ;perhaps the latter would be going back a li ttle too far, as

the other form has been used in Holland since the fourteenthcentury. The second should run ‘

van Tuyll,’ or in full,

with the addition ‘van Serooskerke . ’ To conclude, s ir, wi th

a choice exam le of nobiliary imbecili can call itnoth ing else om Spa in . A fam ily 0 Netherlandish descent

, an d one must perforce conclude an ennobled one,gravely styles i tself a’o Vande

(I enclose my card) Yours,VAN

LETTER S TO THE EDITOR 2 39

THE FIRST GENTLEMAN

When Adam delved and Eve span,Who was then the gentleman ?

So John Ball, priest of St. Mary’s, Colchester, is said to haveenqu ired . H e was not aware that ‘when Adam delved ’

his half acre he was h imself the firs t ‘gen tleman ’ of whomwe have actual record. The earl iest mention of the word discovered for the New Englisb D ictionafy is apparently of theth ird quarter of the th irteenth century ; but, before then,as early as 1 222 , Adam ‘

gen tilman’

was putting in ‘spadework on the half acre he held of the Dean and Chapter of St.Paul’s

,in john Ball

’s own county,at Naves tock .

l Moreover,

th is Adam ‘gen tilman

'

was one of the jury who made thereturn in wh ich his name occurs . I t 18 to be feared thathis nam e originated in rural chafi

' but,even so

,i t would be

evidence that the word was already fam il iar.

J . HORACE ROUND .

THE ENGLISH GENTLEMAN

To the end that the fair pages of Tbe Ancestor may not bestained by an y inaccurac ies, however sl ight, may I be perm ittedto correct one portion of the otherw i se del ightful letter of‘A Learned Clerk .

’ The late Mr . Thomas Brassey did notstart life in qu i te so humble a way as the letter would seem toimply, but was articled to a land surveyor, and the statementthat he could not wri te his own name must, I th ink, be pureromance .Putting on one side his undoubted descent from an old

landed family, Thomas Brassey, though not of gentle birth,save in the technical or herald ic sense, yet came of a goodyeoman stock . Ormerod, in h is History of Cbesbire, publ ishedm 181 9 , refers (2n d ed i t. 11. 65 1 ) to the eat respectab ili tyof the Bra ssey fam ily, and adds : ‘The m ily have retainedthe ir property, but have duall sunk to the rank ofyeomanry .

’ Mr . Brassey’s ther med h is own estate ofthree or four hundred acres at Buerton, and also held an

adjoin ing farm at a yearly rental of £850 . The followingob i tu ary notice of his grandfa ther, wh ich I d iscovered in theMontbly Review for January 1 804 (p. is interesting as

1 Domesday of St. Paul’s, p. 80 .

249 THE ANCESTOR

showing that progressive elem ents were observed in the fam ilyeven befo re the great contractor’s tim e

Aged 60, Mr. G . Brassey, of Buerton . Th is gen tleman occupied and

managed, w i th excell en t judgement, and proport ionate success, one of themost extensive dai ry and grazing farms in th is county . He was, indeed, in all

respec ts, a strenuous promoter and encourager of agricul tural improvements .

I t would be interesting to know whether the wri ter of th i snoti ce used the word ‘gentleman after consu l tation wi th theHeralds’ College

,or whether he had anticipated Sir George

Sitwell’

s theory !I n the same magazine for July 1 805 (p. 6 18) i s recorded

the marriage of Mr. Brassey’s parents : ‘Mr . John Brassey,of Buerton, to M iss Percival .

’

Perhaps ‘A Learned Clerk rather helps to obscure themain point at i ssue by the introduction of manners andmoralsinto what must remain—let u s hope for ever— a purelyacadem ic question, entirely d ivorced from the modern interpretation s of the word ‘gentleman .

’ There are n ow manyqual i ties combined of education

,refin emen t an d good feeling,

wh ich are in fin i tely more powerful than any mere question ofpedigree in deciding whether a man shall be accepted as a

gentleman by those whose j udgement i s of most value. Butth i s affects the living present more than the dead past .Wh ile fully real izing the interest and the h i storical im

portance of Sir George Sitwell’s attempt to discover theoriginal s i

gn ifican ce of the word gentlem an

,

’ we imay yet beforgiven or breath ing more freely when he tells u s in conclu s ion that he does not intend to follow up hi s h i storical tesea rch by a n ew social programme founded upon i t. Butmay we al so hope that gentleman will sti ll endure as a dis

tin ctive word in the language endowed with that fin er an d

more comprehensive mean ing wh ich it n ow possesses whenused with due consideration and not as a purely sentimentallevel for h igh principled men in whatever rank ofmake character the only claim to the title would be even moreabsurd than to attempt nowadays to lim i t it to those descendedfrom arm igerous fam ilies

,or to those whose ancestors have

always been free . ’I am , Sir, your obed ient servant,

ALBYN LYELL READE .

71d) , 10, 1 902 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

242 THE ANCESTOR

will show that the present bearers of the name, who are cadetsof the Suffolk Gurdons, are not descended from the Rebows .

The pedigree i n Ben y’

s E ssex Pea’zy ees implies that all Sir

I saac’s descendants are n ow extinct but th i s i s not so. H is

daughter Susan married in 1 724 Sir Edmund Bacon ofGill ingham , Bart , whose daughter and sole eventual heiressSusan brought Gill in ham to the Schutz fam ily

,the heiress of

whom married Lor George Beresford i n 1 808. I n the irdescendants therefore it would seem i s vested the representationof Sir I saac an d the right to quarter his arms .

11 as

Of the coronation honours the peerage given to Sir Franci sKnollys w ill be of the most interest. Here we have a ceragegiven to a younger son of a fam ily wh ich has str iven fbr centuries to assert i ts claim to an older ti tle wh ich fai led in 1 63 2 .

The Knollys story i s of the simplest, its law of the most di tficult. Will iam

,firs t and last Earl of Banbury, died in 1 632

aged about eighty- five. H e left beh ind him in his house twochildren , the elder being aged five years, who should in theorder of th ings have succeeded to the Banbury honours. Butscandal ran vehemently concerning the widowed countess andthe Lo rd Vaux of Harrowden, whom she married w i th in five

weeks of her aged husband’s death . The countess herself was‘a professed papist

,

’

and therefore a person in ill esteem of theParliament. So i t would seem that the country had made upi ts m ind concern ing the legi timacy of the old lord’s boys

,an d

that op inion was recorded i n a h igh- handed fash ion when theyounger boy

,the heir of his elder brother, sought to take his

seat in the House of Lords in the Restoration Parliament.Despi te a protes t of the house Nicholas Knollys sat as an earlfor the rest of that Parliament, but since then no wri t has beeni ssued . The long story of the Banbury claim ended wi th theresoluti on of the House of Lords on 1 5 March 1 81 3 that the irpeti tioner was not enti tled to the ti tle etc . ofEarl of Banbury .

’

Mr . Arthur Hugh Sm ith-Barry, who becomes Lord Barrymore, i s that rare swan, a rich I ri sh landlord, and as such hasaided his fellow landlords wi th purse an d person . H is Iri shhonours include many burnings in efligy . To the genealogi sthis ti tle of Barrymore i s a rare example of a ti tle revived in an

i llegitimate line . The name of Barry i s that of one of theearli est of the invad ing kn ights under Henry I I . Kinsfolkof the Geraldi nes, they followed the m ain line over the pale

,

ED ITOR IAL NOTES 243

putti ng on the safi'

ron mantle an d with i t those Irish customsso hateful to the k ing and h is council at London . The chiefof the wi ld Barrys became Barry More

,the grea t Barry. The

fate of many such Ch ieftains m ight have been thei rs had notDavid Barry, Vi scount Buttevant, been w ise and wi se enoughto match h imself wi th a daughter of R ichard Boyle, the greatEarl of Cork. The Irish Barry More then forsook yellowcloaks, bare legs, and the idle playing on the harp, and BarryMore was translated into the English and ridiculous ti tle ofEarl of Barrymore,

’

a name wh ich had already appeared inthe title of the V icecomes dc Barrymore at least as early asthe reign of Elizabeth . The ti tle ended in the days of Georgethe Regent and George the King wi th Earls R ichard an d

Henry,who for the ir manner of l ife m ight have been Earls

Tom and Jerry . From the fourth earl came James HughSm i th- Barry, whose mother was a Smith heires s from Essex,an d who was succeeded in his lands in Chesh ire and Cork bya natural son

,the grandfather of the n ew Lord Barrymore .

G

I n the person of Mr . A . B . Freeman-M i tford the extincttitle of Redesdale i s raised up again . I n 1 802

,Sir John

M itford, Speaker of the House of Commons, was crea tedBaron Redesdale of Redesdale,

’

a fool ish redundancy of ti tlefollowing the custom of his day . H e left beh ind him formemorial the Report of tbc Lords

’

Committees toucbing tbe

D ign ity of a Peer, which was drawn up by h im m 1826 . H is

son was Chairman of Committees and died in 1 877, takingfrom London one of the last blue tail coats with bras s buttonsto be m et in i ts streets . H is estates went to his cousinAlgernon Bertram M itfo rd

,the n ow Lord Redesdale, who

thereupon took to h imself the additional name of Freeman .

Of the coronation peerages i t may be said that two weregiven as rewards for services to the party in power, one forthe solace of his Maj esty's opposi tion, one to a great officer ofthe law,

one to a d istingu ished soldier, one to an officer nearthe roya l person

,and one to an ex- diplomatist. The four

remaining creations are steps in the peerage, two be ing given toh igh ofli cials of the courts an d two to proconsuls of the emp ire .The list of baronetcies and knighthoods, well des erved as

some of these may be, contains many names round wh ich oldPeter lo Neve would have scribbled his amusing personali ties .

244 THE ANCESTOR

We have received for review a handsom ely- bound volumeof the Transactions of tbc Hampstead An tiquarian and H is

torical Society . Hampstead,

although many surroundingpari shes would fain dress them selves in i ts name

,i s set upon

a h ill and remains for all the changes i t has suffered a ci tadelwhich has not yet been stormed by the advancing march ofLondon . Therefore a society wh ich wi ll m ove the Hampsteaddweller to a wider interest in i ts story will do good work in i ndirectly encouraging h im to protect its green places and fairhouses . I n the volume before u s the papers seem well chosen .

D ickens and Hampstead must in mere grati tude be one ofthe firs t. Was not Mr . Pickwick wi th hi s ‘Speculations onthe source of the Hampstead Ponds the first of Hampsteadantiquarians and h istorians ? The veteran antiquary Mr. J .

G . Waller contributes a paper of gr eat interest concern ing h i sown early rambles upon the Heath, and other papers dealwi th the plundered m in i sters

,

’ the Church House, and thefam ous houses at Hampstead .

«k

When we have said so much for the work, we are boundto add that the Transaction s of tbe Hampstead Antiguariaa

'

and

H istori cal Society supply a noble example to other local antiqu arian bodies of how not to do i t. ’ The papers we havespoken of are printed in small type

,but plenty of larger type

i s used throughout the book . I t i s used to describe in thechoicest j ournalese the ‘light refreshments served throughthe evening before ‘

a very enjoyable and h igh class programm e of vocal an d instrum ental music was proceeded wi thduring wh ich Mr . Holyoake won an enthusiastic encore fora del ightful rendering of The Sailor's Grave I ttells how the fortunate antiquaries were hospi tably entertainedat a recherche repast,

’

an d how hearty and cord ial were thevo tes of thanks wh ich were carried unan imously.

’ TheHampstead Society invi tes men of learn ing and di stinction tocontribute to its proceedings

,and i t i s an ill complim ent to

them to smother the ir work under thi s fluffy wordiness forwh ich the local newspaper or parish magazine can offer a moreproper asylum .

B utler Tann er, The Selwood Prin ting Works , Frome, and London

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

THE V ICTOR IA H I STORY OF THECOUNT IES OF ENGLAND

The VICTORIA H ISTORY is a National H istoric Survey compi ledunder the d irection of a large staff compris ing the foremost students in sc ience ,history and archaeology, and is des igned to record the h istory of every countyof England in detai l .Thi s work was approved by our late Sovereign Lady Qleen Victoria

,who

graciously gave it her own name .I t i s the endeavour of those who are assoc iated i n comp i ling the

VICTORIA H ISTORY to trea t i t as a scien tific undertaking and to embodyi n i t all that modern scholarship can contribute . And i t is be l ieved that thesystem of cc- operation between experts and loca l students, which i s the fundamental principle of the whole work, w il l give to the H istory a completenessand defin ite authori ty h itherto lack ing in s im i lar undertakings . H is Majes ty’sGovernment, in recogn i tion of the educat ional and statistical value of theH istory

,has placed al l the Government publ ications freely at the d ispos al of

the edi torial staff.The V ICTORIA H ISTORY as projected comprises 1 60 large volumes,

an d already numbers many hundreds of selected contributors to its pages inal l parts of the country . The pr ice of the complete set of 1 60 Volumes is£ 2 5 2 net . There are al so forty supplementary Volumes of Genea logy—o n e

for each coun ty -conta in ing the ped igrees of al l fami l ies that have been possessed of a seat and an es ta te in the mal e l ine since the first year of George II I .These Volumes are i ssued a t 1:5 51 . net each .

The H istory of each coun ty i s obtainable separately,and the number of

volumes and the prices for each county are her e appended .

LIST OF COUNTIESNo. of Vols . Pri ce 111

Gui n eas

B ucks

Su ffo lk

Westmorla n dW i lts

METHODS OF PAYMENTPayment may be made on receipt of each Volume as del ivered , or i n

i nstalments by annual banker’s order (in which case the price for a completeset is £ 240) as preferred. Orders w il l be entered by any bookseller in townor country . The Volumes are bound in stout cloth gi l t. They may howeverbe obtained very handsomely bound in hal f morocco by Zaehn sdorf, price£ 1 1 1 1 . 6d. extra per volume.

A POPULAR ACCOUNT OF

THE VICTOR IA HISTORY

HEN th is grea t series of the Cou n ty H is tor ies was firs t plan n edthe approval of ou r la te Sovere ign Lady was sough t an d ga ined,

the (lucen be came pa troness of the work, wa tch ing its grow th w i thin teres t an d giv in g i t her own name as the Victor ia H i i tory of tbe

Coun ties ofEngla nd. By her orders a se t of the whole se ries was tobe reserved for the roya l l ibrary at W indso r

,an d to her memory the

work is in scribed in the hope tha t it may prove a worthy memoria l ofher i l lus triou s re ign .

That reign saw the begin n ing of many grea t l i terary en terpr iseswhose m onumen tal scale se ts them amongs t nat ional achievements .

The D ictiona ry of Na tiona l B iograpby, whose add i t ional volumes are

cl os ing w i th the b iography of the grea t (Ewen , is a work of which nonat ion has seen the fe l low an d the EnglisbD ictiona ry, now m idway inits labours

,stands a ta l l head and shou lde rs above the nea res t of its

fore ign rivals.Bu t vas t as these u nde rta k ings may be the Victor ia H istory compe tes

w i th them in friendly r ival ry . Its bulk is the leas t o f its cla im s,but

the fires o f Peking, wh ich burned the sole perfec t copy of the hal fmy thica l Ch inese En cyclopmdia, have made an end of the on e bookwh ich cou ld compa re w i th i t in s ize . The complete H is tory i tse l fmarshals a hundred an d six ty volumes

,an d to these are added the

supplemen ta ry volumes con tain ing the ped igrees of the cou n ty fam i l ies ,so tha t it w i l l be seen that it is almos t a l ibra ry in i tse l f for those whodes i re the comple te series, ra the r than a book which is in the course ofmak ing.

Such a neglec ted study has been the h is tory of our own town s an dfields tha t i t may be wel l tha t the pu bl ic shou ld learn what coun ty history shou ld be . An d yet from the seven teen th cen tury to the ea rl ie ryears of the century n ow gone by many score tal l fol ios and fat qua rt osof coun ty history came through the press, among the m os t noteworthybe ing those of Surrey by Man n ing an d Bray, Eyton ’

s Sbropxbire,N ichols’ Leicestersbire, Hutchins’ Dorsetsbire

,an d Blomfield

’

s Norfi ll'

.

As a rule however, for all but the determ ined an t iquary or grubber ofped igrees, the county h is tory of the pas t has been for the mos t part toodull for gen era l pe rusa l . St i l l, old and n ew, coun ty h istories have on e

qual i ty in comm on , tha t the ir buyer acqu i res a soun d property upon a

r is ing marke t . In the words of Tbc Times describin g the Victor ia

‘Ev e rybody kn ows wha t sort of a book was the n ormal oldfash ion ed coun ty his tory . I t was common l y the work of on e man

,

labor ious in the ext reme, pra iseworthy, decorous and du l l . I t ran tothree or four imm ense volumes

,w i th stee l pla tes of churches and

gent lemen’s seats

, good maps accord in g to the l igh ts of those days, an da good in dex . Som e t im es

,as in a few of the Yorkshi re histories

,a

fact i t ious value was len t to the books by the draw in gs spec ial ly madeby Tu rn er

,which soa red as h igh above real i ty as the prose of the

au thor san k bel ow i t. But the rea l fau l t of the coun ty his tory of.

thistype was that the loca l aspec t of thin gs was n ot presen ted in i ts prope rre la t ion t o the history of the coun try as a whole . The spi ri t in whi chthe book was wri t ten was too common l y the sp i ri t of the topographer.

Every l oca l uni t remain ed a un i t ; the wri ter, as a rule,had h is

cou n ty o r his townsh ip so much be fore h is eyes tha t he pa id n o at tent ion to the w ider aspec ts of the n at ion al l ife . Nor was i t poss ible tha tthe idea of deve lopmen t

,wh ich is the root idea of the m odern h is tor ian

,

could take an y grea t place in the olde r loca l his tor ies. Probably man yexcel len t loca l h istorian s of to-day wou ld be gu i l ty of the same faul ts ifthey were left to do the i r work a lon e ; bu t the organizat ion of theVictor ia H istory is su ch as to prevent this.What Coun ty H istory may be, in the hands of no one man

,bu t

in the han ds of a n a t ion al com pan y of scholars,the Victor ia Coun ty

H istory se ts forth to prove . Tha t the story it has to tel l shou ld bedu ll is heresy for an En gl ishman t o be l ieve ; tha t i t is, as a fac t

,far

from be in g du l l, a glan ce at the volum es of the Victor ia H i story a l readypu bl ished w i l l con v in ce the grea tes t scept ic.’

Nowadays we are a res tless people,ever on the move

,for the m os t

pa rt rega rd in g a seven years ’ lease as chain ing us u n dul y to a house .

Man y a man does no t know the very n ame of h is grea t- grandfa ther,an d when ce that remote ances tor m ay have come is as obscure as theorigin of the A ryan s . Havin g no t ie of place or blood such a manmay reason ably con ten d tha t the d iscovery of h is own ped igree, thoughi t we re for th irty genera tions back, wou ld m ove him n o more than an yother string of n ames . Yet could we presen t before him tha t ped igreein flesh an d blood—could he see his gran dfa ther in h igh stock an d

hess ian s,h is grea t- grandfa ther in powdered ha i r an d top-b00ts, h is

grea t- grea t- grandfa ther in m illed cuffs, bob-wig an d three-cornered hat,an d even the first of his n ame—fran kl in

,yeoman , or Piers the

'

Plow

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

The desc ript ion of En gl ish flora and fauna are exhaus t ive and accura te . From the fores ts of the coal period to the weeds las t arr ived inour hedgerows, from the mamm oth to the brown ratwhich la tely droveou t our n at ive black rat

,ou r b i rds, beas ts , fishes and in sects

,herbs and

fores t t rees fin d desc ri bers am on gs t a grou p of edi tors in c lud ing eve ryn am e of the fi rst ran k am on gst st udents of Na tura l H is tory .

Corn ing at last to man an d h is work,Mr. Boyd Dawkins

,the we l l

kn own au thor of Ea rly Ma n in B r ita in,is the general ed i tor of those

chapters of the history which deal wi th the history of man in our

island in the remote days before the com in g of Roman s or An gl oSaxon s.

Englan d can n ever forge t tha t she was on ce a prov in ce un der theRoman power, for over the cou n try st i l l run s the n etwork of roadswh ich grew up in the wake of the Roman eagles, the Roman t i le is inmost of our an cien t wa l ls, an d some fragmen t o f toy or too l fromRoman han ds is turn ed whe rever the ploughshare run s. Grea t carethe refore has been spen t u pon the sec t ion of the h is to ry re la t ing toRoman En gland, wh ich is d i rec ted an d ed i ted by Mr. Haverfield

,

whose n ame stan ds for the archae ology of Roman En glan d amon gs tan t iqua ries all over the world .

An glo—Saxon rema in s are dea l t w i th by Mr. C . Hercules Read,of

the departm en t of An t iqu i t ies at the Bri t ish Mu seum,an d by his

assistan t,Mr. Reginald Sm i th .

E thn ography is in the hands ,o f Mr. G . Laurence Gomrn e,wel l

known by h is work for the Folk—l ore Socie ty an d the d ialects,so fas t

d isappea rin g before the face of the School Board, are trea ted of by Mr.

Joseph W r ight, the Ed i tor 01 the Grea t Dict ion ary of the En gl ishd ialec ts .

There are those for whom En gl ish ’his tory begin s wi th K in gW i l l iam the Con queror an d Dom esday B ook. The sma t terer inan t1qu 1t1es is won t to n ou rish a bel ief tha t Domes day Book is a recordeas i ly to be con strued a l though a trifle du l l wi thal t he

'

more advan cedan t iqua ry or his torian kn ows Domesday Book for a maze o f puzz lesan d pi tfal ls

,but a record whi ch has not its fe l low in the deep in teres t

it holds for Engl ish people . Am on gs t the n am es of the ski l led in terpreters of Domes day Book that of Mr. Horace Roun d stan ds em inen t,an d from his han d come the art icles upon Domesday B ook an d its

k in dred records wh ich wi l l appear in each of the H istories .

In n o po in t w i ll the Victor ia H i stor ies con t rast m ore notably w i ththe h istori es that cam e befo re them than in the care w ith which thestory of our n a t ion a l bui ld in gs is set forth . The h is tory and descr ipt ionof cas t les an d houses, wal led town s, ca thedra ls , abbeys an d chu rches is

under the supe rvision of a large comm i t tee of s tuden ts of archi tecturalh is tory from Mr. George Fox, who Speaks w i th author ity of the Romanwork

,to Mr. Gotch, whose n ame is so fam i l iar by reason of his bril l ian t

stud ies upon the En gl ish Rena issance in a rch i tec tu re .

Mr. St . J ohn Hope, whose resea rches in to anc ien t arch i tec turehave left l i t t le un to uched from the beeh ive bu t to Sir Chris topher'sdom e

,edi ts the sect ion deal ing w i th the cathedrals an d monas t ic

remains,an d d i rects the mak ing of the coloured grou nd plans which

show the grow th an d archi tectu ral h is tory of the grea ter bui ld ings .

Mr. A . F . Leach ed i ts the his tory of the Engl ish pu bl ic schoolsan d gramma r schools . Where coun t ies have a seaboard Professo r J . K .

Laughton ed i ts the i r his tory so far as it rela tes to the story of our flee ts .The h is tory of the feudal baronage , of the N ev il ls, Mort imers

,

fitzAlan s,Bohun s

,and the i r fel lows

,is in the han ds of Mr. Horace

Roun d an dMr. Oswa l d Barron .

H is Gra ce the Duke of Beaufort is ed i tor- in -ch ief of the art icles onSport .

Sir Ernes t Clarke, Secre ta ry to the Roya l Agr icul tura l Socie ty ,d i rects the sect ion on Agricu l ture .

The grea te r part of the volumes of each coun ty w i l l con ta in the

h is tory of the Engl ish pari shes , the sum of wh ich is the h is tory of thecou n ty . The parish and its begin n ings , i ts chu rch an d its m emor ia l s

,

the s tory of i ts man ors and of the ir l ords,of i ts anc ien t an d in te rest in g

bu i ld ings , the s°

n the face of things which once sos low seems i the lan d towards a t ime whenE ngland wi l l be an island town in la id w i th m arke t ga rdens. For this

,

the m os t importan t share of our work, the Victor ia H istory has the he lpof n early every Engl ish his tor ian or an t iqua ry, and in its pages w i l l befou nd the resul ts of man y men’s l ifework of scholarly labou r an d re

search. Yet it is n ot upon such collect ions al one tha t the par ish histories are based . The vas t records of the n at ion— records wh ich forbu lk an d in terest exce l those of all o ther peoples -are be ing sys temat ically searched by a stafl

'

of sk i l led workers, ass isted by a Record sComm i t tee headed by the Depu ty- keeper of the Publ ic Records an d theD irector of the B ri t ish Museum .

I l lust ra t ions are bestowed plen t ifu l l y upon the h isto ry i l lus t ra t ionsof Roman an d Anglo—Saxon remai ns, of cas tles an d man or houses

,of

cathedrals and chu rches, and of the fas t- perishin g beau t ies of Engl i shhouse an d cot tage archi tec ture . I l lus tra t ions o f fam ous mon umen ts,Roman pavemen ts

,brasses and coloured glass have the i r place, an d

an c ien t p ic tu res of the towns and countrys ide s tand in contras t w i thphotogravu res and mez zo t in ts from the hundred and six ty pa in t ings of

modern Engl ish scen ery which are be ing specia l ly made for the H isto ry .

There is an abunda n ce of good maps, from the geo l ogica l an dbo tan ical maps an d the maps which i l lu s t rate Domesday B ook

,t o

Speed’s won derfu l m aps pu bl ished in 1 6 1 0 and the maps of the m odem

surveyors .In an add i t ional vol ume are added to each coun ty his tory elaborate ly

d rawn ped igrees wi th man y po rtra i ts of those county fam i l ies, t itled an dun t i t led

,who have he ld a seat an d lan ded es ta te in the i r ma le l ine since

1 760, the firs t year of the reign of George III . , the reign wh ich saw

the begin n in g of the modern period of chan ge .

At a price an d u n der con d i tion s of purchase which al l ow theh is tory of his own coun ty to hn d a place on the bookshe l f of every

,

En gl ishman who buys books,and to set the whole work wi thin reach

of the leas t en dowed of prov in c ial publ ic l ibraries, the Victor ia H istorycan not fai l

,ow in g to its w ide in teres ts and deep edu ca t ion al value, to

take i ts place amon gs t the greatest of the fam i l iar and trusted books ofreference.Such a work as the Victor ia H istory may be amplified in detai l ;

indeed it is hoped tha t the grea t work wi ll be the frui tful m other ofm u ch l ocal archa ological study . But the vastness of its concept ionand the accuracy of its de tai l w i l l make it stand whi ls t black in k - an d

sound rag- paper en du re,a n a t ional record an d a lan dmark in our his tory .

Full deta i ledprospectuses of ea rl) coun ty a s issued may be bad on applica

tion to booksellers or to tbe Publisbers, M essrs . Arcbiba ld Con stable ta Co.

Ltd.,2 Wbi teball Ga rden s, Westmin ster . Specimen volumes wi ll be sen t

on approva l to be v iewed a t a ny bookseller”

: i n town or coun try .