The Ancestor; a quarterly review of county and family history, heraldry and antiquities

//,, yf, y////y .

THE ANCESTOR

A Quar v and

OSWALD

NUMBER X
JULT 1904

NiDON
ARCHIB

THE ANCESTOR

A Quarterly Review of County and

Family History, Heraldry

and Antiquities

EDITED BY

OSWALD BARRON F.S.A

NUMBER X
JULT 1904

LONDON
ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE & CO LTD

M).IO

THE pages of the ANCESTOR will be open
to correspondence dealing with matters
within the scope of the review.

Questions will be answered, and advice
will be given, as far as may be possible,
upon all points relating to the subjects
with which the ANCESTOR is concerned.

While the greatest care will be taken
of any MSS. which may be submitted for
publication, the Editor cannot make him-
self responsible for their accidental loss.

All literary communications should be
addressed to

THE EDITOR OF THE ANCESTOR,
1 6 JAMES STREET,

HAYMARKET,

LONDON, S.W.

CONTENTS

PACI

THE CARTWRIGHTS i

FOUR ANCIENT WILLS G. H. 13

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS CHARLES E. LART 22

THE CLINTON FAMILY E»UL 32

HERALDS' COLLEGE AND PRESCRIPTION.

W. PALEV BAILDON, F.S.A. 52

AN ANCIENT SCOTTISH SETTLEMENT IN HESSE.

S. H. SCOTT 70

THE TRAFFORD LEGEND J. HORACE ROUND 73

SEALS AND ARMS W. H. B. BIRD 83

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 87

THE WANDESFORDES OF KIRKLINGTON 98

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS . . . . J. HORACE ROUND 104

FIFTEENTH CENTURY COSTUME .... THE EDITOR 120

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES: XII. THE GRESLEYS. THE EDITOR 133

WHAT IS BELIEVED 138

OLD CHELSEA 145

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY. A GENEALOGY OF THE
FAMILY OF PETT. H. FARNHAVI BURKE, C.V.O., Somerset

Herald, and the EDITOR 147

THE FREKE PEDIGREE 179

DEEDS RELATING TO THE FAMILY OF WYDMERPOL

OF WYDMERPOL IN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE . . . . 213

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 221

EDITORIAL NOTES. 228

The Copyright of all the Articles and lUuitratims
in thii Review it strictly reserved

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

DR. EDMUND CARTWRICHT AND HIS CHILDREN Frontispiece

HUGH CARTWRIGHT OF MALLING Facing page z

THE WIFE OF HUGH CARTWRIGHT OF MALLING ... „ „ 4

SIR HUGH CARTWRIGHT „ „ 6

JOHN BROWNLOW, VISCOUNT TYRCONNEL „ „ 8

WILLIAM CARTWRIGHT OF MARNHAM „ „ 10

SIR BROWNLOW AND LADY SHERARD „ „ 12

CAPTAIN GEORGE CARTWRIGHT ........ „ „ 14.

JOHN WoMBWELL AND HIS FRIENDS IN INDIA .... „ „ 1 6

OLD CHEST OF DRAWERS WITH ARMS OF DABRIDGECOURT

AND CARTWRICHT „ „ 18

ILLUSTRATIONS OF FIFTEENTH CENTURY COSTUME ... 7 plates, 120-132

THE CARTWRIGHTS

THE history of the Cartwrights cannot be taken back to
the days of the pointed shoe. Square toes and the
Tudors were reigning when we hear first of a Hugh Cart-
wright who, by his wife Maude Coo, was father of some
three or four sons, two of whom at least prospered in the
world. William the heir was of Malbeck and Norwell in
Nottinghamshire, and as neither his marriage nor his acti-
vity was noteworthy, some inheritance must have come to
him from his father. Rowland Cartwright, a younger son,
is hailed as the founder of the Cheshire Cartwrights, from
whom come the Cartwrights of Aynho, opulent squires and
great parliament men with manors in Northamptonshire and
Oxfordshire ; but this descent is wrongly stated, and it seems
probable that careless pedigree-makers have tagged the first
known ancestor of the Aynho line to the nearest unappro-
priated cadet of a county family with a genealogy in the
heralds' books.

Of the sons of this Hugh Cartwright, one Edmund Cart-
wright, wrought best for the family and its advancement.
His wife Agnes is claimed as a daughter of Thomas Cranmer,
the squire of Aslacton, whose son Thomas rose to be Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury. She is not named in her father's
will, but the near kinship of Edmund Cartwright to the
Cranmers is made apparent in many ways. When the Arch-
bishop had leases from the Crown of certain manors in Kent,
West and East Mailing, Ewell and Parrock, and the site of
Mailing nunnery, Edmund Cartwright had these long and
rich leases from his patron. In Nottinghamshire Edmund
bought Ossington, which was to be the chief seat of his
branch, a manor near Newark, which had been late of the
lands of Newark Priory. With his hands thus full of church
lands the squire of Ossington should have earned the church's
curse for himself and his line, but the ill-gotten Ossington
lands were long handed down by prosperous descendants.
He died in the first year of Queen Mary, before my lord

2 THE ANCESTOR

archbishop came to the fire and faggot. His son and heir,
Hugh Cartwright of Mailing, married a daughter of Sir John
Newton, a lady whose hand he might have demanded with
less than the traditional diffidence of the suitor, for she is said
to have left no less than sixteen sisters in her father's house.
He lived in his Mailing home, and when the Kentish rebels,
under Sir Harry Isley and the two Knevetts, were marching
to join Wyatt at Rochester, Hugh Cartwright was one of
those from Mailing who met them in Wrotham and routed
them in the little Kentish battle of Blackesol field.

His nephew, William Cartwright, followed Hugh of
Mailing as his heir. This William, who died in 1602, as
appears by his tomb at Ossington, married Grace Dabridge-
court, a descendant of the knightly house of Aubricicourt, or
Dabridgecourt, the Hainaulters whose ancestor Nicholas
received Queen Isabel of England and her son Edward when
they fled from Paris in 1326. Young Edward the king
remembered the kindness to the prince, and the Dabridge-
courts prospered under him. The stall plate of Sir Sanchet
Dabridgecourt, a founder of the Order of the Garter, still
remains in St. George's Chapel, enamelled in its colours. Sir
John, another Dabridgecourt came to be honoured in the same
order, and Froissart has much to tell of the deeds of Sir
Eustace Dabridgecourt, who was struck to the ground at
Poitiers, and taken by five German men-at-arms to be tied
ignominiously to a cart until his own men rescued and re-
mounted him. From this house descended a family of mid-
land gentry, and Grace, the wife of William Cartwright, was
daughter of Thomas Dabridgecourt, of Longdon Hall in
Warwickshire. The shields of husband and wife may be seen
painted on the doors of the curious chest of drawers still in
the possession of their descendant, Mr. George Cartwright.

These Cartwrights of Ossington threw themselves in the
civil war and spent themselves for the king. Ossington Hall
went to ruin in these troubles, and William Cartwright of
Ossington, the head of the branch, was amongst those who
must needs compound for their estates with the committee
of the parliament in 1646. He is described as of Ossington
in Nottinghamshire, and of Stoke Lacy and Mintridge in
Herefordshire, and pleaded that he had been in arms in 1643,
but not afterwards. In that year also came Sir Hugh Cart-
wright of Southwell, and Hugh his son, to compound. These

HUGH CARTWRIOHT OF MALLING.

THE CARTWRIGHTS 3

two cadets of the house had been at the taking of Newark.
Before Pontefract fell, Sir Hugh and his son were excepted
as dangerous malignants from the mercy offered the garrison,
and Sir Hugh's life was saved by his suffering himself to be
bricked up by his friends in a hiding hole with a month's
meat and drink. John Cartwright of Wheatley, who was
probably a younger brother of William, was another com-
pounder, confessing ' delinquency in arms.' He made his
peace, taking the Covenant and the Negative Oath in this
same year. Another kinsman, Lieutenant-Colonel George
Cartwright, who had a pass to go beyond sea in 1645, may
have been the Colonel Cartwright of whose ill-treatment
Mrs. Lucy Hutchinson makes her complaint.

Side by side with the Ossington branch the elder line of
Cartwright survived, descendants of William, the eldest son
of the founder of the house. That the two branches held
together is shown by more than one marriage of kinsfolk.
William Cartwright of Norwell married a daughter of Rey-
nold Peckham of Wrotham, by a daughter of the first Ossing-
ton Cartwright, and his grandson, another William, who
built a new house of brick and stone at Normanton, married
his cousin Christian, daughter of Sir Hugh Cartwright the
cavalier. This William is said to have been himself a cava-
lier in arms, but he begot a son, again a William, who
left the Stuart cause and served as a captain in Ireland in
the regiment which the Earl of Kingston led for King
William of Orange. He died in this campaign, not by the
sword, but by small-pox, and was buried at Belfast. John
Evelyn, in his diary, names him as a Nottinghamshire man,
who persuaded the council of state to send a letter of amnesty
to the New England colonists, who were even then in a
' peevish and touchy humour.' His son's marriage with
Rebecca, daughter and heir of Edmund Nicholson, squire
of Marnham, made Marnham the chief seat of his family.
Elizabeth, youngest daughter of William and Rebecca,
married Sir John Brownlow, K.B., Viscount Tyrconnel.
William Cartwright of Marnham, high sheriff of Notting-
hamshire in 1742, brought both lines of the family together
by marrying his distant cousin, Anne Cartwright, daughter
and heir of George Cartwright of Ossington.

The marriage of cousins is held to beget weaklings, but
the children of these cousins defied the rule by growing up

4 THE ANCESTOR

as a nest of celebrities. It is not demanded of a squire's son
and heir that he should be famous, and William the son and
heir is only a name in the pedigree, with more than a sus-
picion of extravagance and loose living clinging about his
memory. Charles Cartwright, the youngest of the five sons,
entered the navy, and with a lieutenant's command took a
West African Dutch fort. But he left the navy too soon to
take part in the great sea epic of his later days, and died at
home with nothing more than lieutenant for his tombstone.

The second brother advanced but to a captain's rank in the
army, but fame came to him with a surname. He is Labra-
dor Cartwright. Born at Marnham in 1739, ' a Pair °^
colours,' as the saying of his day went, was procured him, and
he sailed to the East Indies, coming back in 1757 as ensign
of the 39th. He went to the German wars in 1758 and
1759 as aide-de-camp to that popular hero, Marquess of
Granby. As a captain of a company of the 37th he was sent
back to England from Minorca in failing health, and from
this time he gave himself to sport and travel. The young
officer, whose health would not allow him to stay with his
regiment, hardened into a mighty hunter, who spent sixteen
years trapping and exploring amongst the snows of Labrador,
to which coast he made five voyages, and lived to hearty old
age, dying at Mansfield in 1819.

From one of his voyages he brought home five Innuits of
Labrador, whose arrival in eighteenth century London was
more than a nine days' wonder. The life of the Innuits
inspired half Grub Street to tales of the frozen lands, and
doubtless even good Mr. Barlow's anecdotes of Esqui-
maux life and the social moral to be drawn from it came to
Master Sandford and Master Merton at secondhand from
Captain Cartwright.

Like a good son of the house, Captain Cartwright first
delighted the home at Marnham with his Innuits. In a little
diary book in faded red morocco with silver clasps his sister
Catherine tells the story of the Innuit invasion. Under the
date of 1 6 April 1770 ' my brother George left Marnham
after breakfast to go upon his Labrador scheme.' On 13 De-
cember 1772 brother George landed at Gravesend from Cape
Charles in Labrador, bringing with him five fur-clad visitors.
These were Ittuiack, aged forty, and Econgoke his wife, aged
twenty-four, with Ikkyana their daughter, whose years were

THE WIFE OF HUGH CARTWRIGHT OF MALLINU.

"593-

THE CARTWRIGHTS 5

two, Tooklavvinia, aged nineteen, brother of Ittuiack, and
Cauboic his wife, aged seventeen. On a never-to-be-forgotten
1 8 March ' my brother George came to Marnham with his
five Indians in their proper habits, which are very curious
and ingeniously form'd and ornamented with bead. All the
Indians have bright black eyes and dark complexions. Cau-
boic is very handsome, has a regular face with an uncommon
degree of sense, sweetness, sprightliness and sensibility in her
countenance, and of ease and gentility in all her actions and
notions.'

The party stayed at Marnham until 9 April, when
they departed ' with mutual regret.' The kindly spinster
sister at home took the whole party to her heart, and
although she came at the last to admit that the natures of
Ittuiack and Tooklavvinia were rude, and that Econgoke was
something wanting in the esteemed quality of ' gentility,'
her affection for the beautiful Cauboic never failed, and it
is evident that only the constraints of genteel language keep
her from describing brown baby Ikkyana as a duck. ' For
Cauboic,' says Miss Catherine Cartwright, ' I conceived such
a love and friendship as I am convinced neither time or ab-
sence can ever efface.'

Two post-chaises carried Captain Cartwright and his
friends to London, where the town seized upon them. King
George received them at his Court of St. James's, and the
sights of the town were at their feet. Five wondering
Innuits walked with Captain Cartwright amongst the fiddlers
and coloured lamps of Ranelagh, the crowd in its floured
wigs and hooped petticoats pressing with giggling amazement
upon these beings so strangely clad in deerskin coats and
moccassins. They must have supped in one of the arbours
on the famous Ranelagh punch and the transparent slices of
ham, for they stayed until half past eleven at night, by which
hour we may hope that Ikkyana was asleep in somebody's
arms.

On 4 May they embarked in the Thames on a ship named,
after Captain George's aunt, the Lady Tyrconnell, and began
coasting towards the west, whence bad news comes to Marn-
ham to be recorded in the red leather diary with the silver
clasps. The London crowd of the eighteenth century might
not be mingled with without risk, and off Lymington or
Weymouth the beautiful Cauboic sickened of a fever. Small-

6 THE ANCESTOR

pox declared itself, and Econgoke was the next to take the
disease. With putrid fever and small-pox aboard, the Lady
Tyrconnell became foul as a plague pit, and her crew were fain
to run for Plymouth, where ' Ikkyana, that sweetest of babes,
resigned her innocent soul.' The baby was buried in the
sand of ' thafrneckof land which helps to form the harbour of
Catwater. She was in her sealskin dress, wrapped up in a
deerskin, and had all her cloaths, beads and ornaments,
sewing implements and a knife and spoon inter'd with her.'
After her death her father and mother lost hold on life.
Econgoke died. Miss Cartwright, when the news came,
' wished her well, but could not love her.' Ittuiack died,
and within half an hour of him, Tooklawinia.

Captain George had been summoned to London by
urgent affairs, and hurried back fearful of news of Cauboic,
but the news was good. As he came before the house Cau-
boic's window was open and the curtain drawn. In our
grandfather's time the physician boxed the sick man in his
room to struggle with the pestilence behind closed doors and
sealed windows. The open window told the captain that
all was over for good or ill, and in another minute he was
wished joy of the recovery of his daughter, ' for so he calls
that amiable Innuit.'

The deaths of all her folk had next to be broken to Cau-
boic, and George, who was setting about it with an anxious
mind, found that Cauboic bore the news with calmness.
' That amiable Innuit ' confessed to him that ' she hated
them all excepting the child,' and begged to be allowed to
live with him. Once again in the open air of Plymouth she
mended fast, and Miss Cartwright, far away at Marnham,
records thankfully how she had eaten in the morning a whole
chicken roasted with pease, and was to eat another in broth
before night.

Captain George stayed at her side, and brought amuse-
ments to divert her. A fiddler played by her bed, and on
one memorable day her guardian ' obtain'd the Old Buffs'
band of music, consisting of nine hands, with which she was
so delighted that she kept the band for twelve hours, and
never shed another tear for her relations.'

The Lady Tyrconnell was cleansed and re-manned, the
voyage was taken up again, and before the end of August the
captain and his adopted daughter were landed at Cape

SIR MUCH CAR i AVRICHT, THK CAVAI.IKR, D. 1668.

THE CARTWRIGHTS 7

Charles, where they were well received by Cauboic's people,
who, listening to her tale, forbore to lay the deaths of their
kinsfolk at the captain's door. It was probably not long
before the wildest beliefs concerning Ranelagh and its coloured
lamps had passed into the tribal lore of the Innuits.

Southey's fat Commonplace Book gives us a picture of
Captain George Cartwright eighteen years later. He was
then a guest at the house of his brother-in-law Hodges, and
the amazing appetite of the man kept the eyes of the young
Southey upon him. With this mighty hunter the phrase of
a hunter's hunger was indeed justified. The footman, who
knew his manner of life, carved for him at the sideboard a
plate of beef piled so high that Southey believed it a lackey's
insult to a stranger, but the plate returned empty to the
joint not once or twice. Satisfied at last, the captain ad-
mitted that he was an earnest trencherman, and boasted that
a leg of mutton was with him an affair of but two slices, the
first slice taking one side away, and the other clearing the
bone. Before he left in the morning he ate a breakfast with
three cucumbers and much bread and cheese in it, and
Southey thought he had never before met so extraordinary
a man. Few of us to-day have read George Cartwright's
Journal of Transactions and Events during a Residence of
nearly Sixteen Tears on the Coast of Labrador (three volumes
quarto, 1793), but Southey read them with delight : —

The annals of his campaigns amongst the foxes and beavers interested me
more than ever did the exploits of Marlboro' and Frederic ; besides, I saw plain
truth and the heart in Cartwright's book, and in what history could I look for
them ?

The third son of the Marnham family was John Cart-
wright of Wyberton, born in 1740. This was the ' Major
Cartwright ' the reformer, very famous in his day and
accursed of his brother squires. He began life in the navy,
and saw servrce under Lord Howe, was first lieutenant of the
Guernsey in 1766, and explored part of Newfoundland.
The restless spirit of his brothers was upon him in good
measure, and his popularity in the navy may have suffered
through his being one of the first Englishmen to take up the
cry of ' efficiency.' Towards efficiency he himself contri-
buted improvements in the gun exercise, but by 1775 he was
ashore and addressing a letter to Edmund Burke, Esquire,

8 THE ANCESTOR

' controverting the principles of American Government laid
down in his lately published tract.' If his ancestor were in-
deed that Cartwright who, in 1671, was asking justice and
consideration for the claims of the American colonists, we
must recall this when we learn that John Cartwright left the
navy and all hope of advancement in 1777 rather than join
Lord Howe's new command on the American station. As
a naval officer ashore he had busied himself in the Notts
militia, and by his militia majority he was henceforward to
be known, even after his commission had been taken from
him by reason of a public meeting in which he had cheered
for the fall of the Bastille.

The busy life was before this sailor ashore, this major from
the sea. At once he thrust both hands into politics, and the
descendant on both sides of a line of squires declared boldly
for the people. He was the father of reform, and more than
two generations before the coming of the Chartists he was
fighting in and out of season for annual parliaments, universal
suffrage and the ballot, demands which, to the ears of most
of his astonished class, must have sounded as the blasphemings
of the restless pit.

In those anxious times when a troubled government was
wont to see Armageddon and red revolution awaiting it round
the very next corner, it is at least remarkable that the major
came so safely away from his political adventures, but the
hemp was never heckled for him, and the loss of his militia
commission and a hundred pound fine for sedition were the
worst that he came by.

Politics were not enough to fill his life with. He made
experiments in husbandry on his Lincolnshire lands, he
fought against slavery with Clarkson and Granville Sharp,
and when his old calling of the navy was to be honoured with
a public monument by a people in high delight over Nelson's
doings at sea, this handy sailor man was ready with marvellous
designs for a Hieronauticon or Naval Temple, which came to
a quarto volume, but never rose in stone and bronze.

In this red radical our little Englanders can have no
pleasure, for he was full of schemes for the better defence of
England and her coasts. He had good counsel for the Spanish
patriots, and Greeks were helped with his money and with
tracts on the proper use of the pike when bayonets may not
be obtained.

JOHN UROWNLOW, VISCOUNT TYKOINNKI., D. 1754.

HUSBAND OK ELIZAUETH CAKTWKIGHT.

THE CARTWRIGHTS 9

He wrote eighty political tracts, and saved four lives from
drowning. He was a generous soul, a dull and troublesome
writer and orator. Mr. Francis Place did not love the major,
but others found him a cheerful man and good companion.
He died in Burton Crescent, where now his grimy monument
looks upon the windows of that encampment of paying guests.

The major's next brother was Edmund Cartwright, born
in 1743. Something in the Treasury had been found for
the eldest son during his father's lifetime. Two of the
squire's sons had been given to the navy and one to the army ;
the career, therefore, of Edmund Cartwright was clear before
him. It is superfluous to add that it led to a rectory. But
the soldier had taken to radical politics, the surviving sailor
to fur-trapping, the Treasury clerk to the Bad, and it was
written that Edmund Cartwright should not find his way to
the Biographical Dictionary by his divinity. To the mind of
the young Edmund it was literature which should lead him
towards posthumous fame, and his Armine and Elvira, a
Legendary Poem, was long admired in his family, and was well
received by that eighteenth century so easily pleased, so
artless in its literary pleasures. The twentieth century
writer, in the moments when ' the ink and the anguish start,'
may look back with an unfeigned regret to the day in which
a Hermit, a Pilgrim, and their encounter by a Mossy Cell
would furnish all that the public at its Chippendale reading-
desk would look for in a polite author. A hermit was not
lacking in Armine and Elvira. Rage, Despair, Pity, Distrac-
tion, Friendship and Grief, and other abstractions with
capital letters, were pleasantly met in the underwoods of the
quatrains, and the whole poem, as an admiring daughter
most justly observes, is of the ' refined and classic school.'

The rectory was not too long delayed, the living of
Goadby Marwood coming to Mr. Edmund in 1779, a rectory
with a glebe upon which the rector fell at once to work with
experiments in agriculture. The author of Armine and
Elvira could never degenerate to the life of Parson Trulliber,
but he became a keen and successful farmer, who brought his
active Cartwright brains to the toil with an originality which
is politely lacking in his gentle verses. A farmer he might
have stayed, if aught might be safely predicted of one of these
restless brothers, had it not been for a holiday visit to Mat-
lock in Derbyshire. From Matlock he went with a party,

io THE ANCESTOR

Manchester spinners amongst them, to see Arkwright's cotton
mills at Cromford. The talk amongst the Manchester men
was of the weaving trade going abroad to German cheap
labour, and the poet, eager as a Pepys after a new fact, flashed
out with the fancy that machines must come to the help of
England, and maintained the possibility of such machinery
to the contempt of practical Manchester, with a tale of the
wonderful movements of the Automatic Chess Player which
had been shown in London.

Home again at the rectory, he walked his study hour by
hour before his delighted children imitating with his hand
the cast of the shuttle. Before he had even seen a handloom
this wonderful man had framed a clumsy power loom, and
his earlier patents were taken out in 1785, 1786, and 1787.
The poet, the rector, and the farmer turned weaver, and set
up a factory in Doncaster with the first power looms by which
wide cloth was ever woven for practical purposes. His
wool-combing machine of 1789, in its crudest form, did the
work of twenty men, with the result that fifty thousand wool-
combers cried aloud to Parliament for the restraint of the
rector of Goadby Marwood. ' My father,' says his daughter
in her diary, about this time was so absorbed by his machinery
that he instituted processions in honour of Bishop Blaise,
the patron of woolcombing, which we young people dis-
liked as being a -popish ceremony unbecoming bis clerical pro-
fession? By 1793 he had come by the fate of the inventor
who invents for the generations after him. Thirty thousand
pounds of the Cartwright money was sunk in machinery
and patents which yielded no return. Giving up the
works to his creditors, and his patents to his brothers, he
left invention and imagination and fell back upon his
poetry, consoling himself with a sonnet on his ill fortune.
He came to try his fortune in London, where, the itch of
invention taking him anew, he built a house with his own
patent geometrical bricks, patented an alcohol engine, and
experimented with the application of steam to navigation.
In intervals of leisure he invented a reaping machine, wrote
a prize essay on husbandry, and became manager of the Duke
of Bedford's experimental farm at Woburn.

Now and again he was reminded of his orders. Lincoln
made the maker of the power loom a prebendary, and Oxford
in 1806 gave the degree of Doctor of Divinity to the patentee

\VII.I.IA.M CARTWRIGHT OK MAKMIA.M, u. i/.(

THE CARTWRIGHTS n

of the geometrical brick. He lived to see the power loom
making wealth for others, and to define a patent as ' a feeble
protection against the rapacity, piracy and theft of too many
of the manufacturing class.' Parliament in 1809 gave £10,000
to the man who had shown the way to the northern million-
aires, and the Rev. Dr. Edmund Cartwright took the sum like
a philosopher and bought a farm in Kent with it. His active
and, one must believe, his happy life was lived out busily to
the end. Little there was in nature that he did not finger.
In his parish he practised medicine, and ' exhibited ' yeast in
a case of putrid fever with a recorded success. In his eighty-
third year he offered the Royal Society a theory of the move-
ment of planets round the sun. The year before his death,
in 1823, he was at Dover for warm bathing in sea-water, and
though old and ill he must needs teach his bathing man a
method of filling his cistern by an application of power.

He was the only one of the brothers to carry on the family.1
The next generation was a less strenuous one, but it pro-
duced the Reverend Edmund Cartwright, F.S.A., a topo-
grapher and county historian who in 1830, with the aid of
his friend the Duke of Norfolk, made a respectable continu-
ation to Dallaway's History of Sussex. He married twice,
his first wife being one who, had she borne children, would
have brought a curious strain of blood to the family. She
was the daughter of John Wombwell, apparently a cousin
german of the first baronet of that name, by a lady who is
styled in the family records a Persian princess. The child
of this union was married to Mr. Cartwright in 1795 at St.
George's, Hanover Square, and died in February of the next
year, being then but a child of sixteen years.

Of the daughters of the inventor one lived with her uncle,
the reforming major, and wrote his life. Another wrote a
memoir of her father. A third daughter was Elizabeth, who
married in 1814 the Reverend John Penrose, a Bampton
lecturer, and dying in 1837 was buried in Lincoln Cathedral.
Few will recognize from this description one of the most

1 Our family picture of Cartwright and his children is thus described in
his daughter's notes for 1786 — 'In this year my brother and sisters and
myself all met together at Doncaster and had our picture taken by Mr.
Hawes. We are represented sitting under the great mulberry tree at
Mirfield Hall, my father standing behind and looking at us with a pensive
expression of countenance well suited to his widowed situation.'

12 THE ANCESTOR

famous of our countrywomen, one whose work three gener-
ations of English children have thumbed. For Elizabeth
Cartwright, Mrs. John Penrose, was no other than the MRS.
MARKHAM of our childhood, MRS. MARKHAM of the history-
book.

Let us laugh indulgently as we remember the conversation
of Richard and George, of their sister and their mamma.
Before the day of Mrs. Markham the history of our country
was administered to the young from the ponderous inaccura-
cies of Rapin, the dulness of Goldsmith's unwelcome task.
From Mrs. Markham in her later form, made glorious with
charging knights and battling archers ' from an old MS.,'
many a child has persuaded himself to grow up a man to whom
the history of the English and the mystery of old and far-off
days are not things which may be lightly cast into that calm
limbo where rest for the most of us the irregularities of the
Greek verb.

There are school room histories nowadays which even in
the matter of the pictures in the margin drive poor Mrs.
Markham from her pride of place, and much of her chronicle
was the Berlin woolwork of history, now sadly faded. But
from 1823 to 1880, at the least, all young England learned
history at Mrs. Markham's knee. Little Arthur was her
wash-pot, over Mrs. Mangnall she cast forth her shoe, and,
be it said to her credit, her steady popularity saved a gener-
ation of us from the rant of that Child's History of England,
in which a great man went so deplorably beyond his last.

The year 1904 has seen an attempt to give his due
measure of fame to one of this family of Cartwright.
Bradford and Lord Masham have raised the Cartwright
memorial hall in honour of the name of Edmund Cartwright,
upon whose labours the town's prosperity rests. Lord
Masham, in reproaching his countrymen with having so
easily forgotten Edmund Cartwright, did not hesitate to call
him the greatest of English inventors, beside whose achieve-
ments those of Stephenson and Watt suffer in comparison.
This article will have served its purpose in showing that so
famous a man was English in blood and nurture.

O. B.

LAUY SHERARU.

SIR BROWNLOW SHERARD.

FOUR ANCIENT ENGLISH WILLS

IN the Ancestor (v. 159) will be found transcripts of the first
ten wills written in English in the registers of the Arch-
deaconry of London. The four wills which follow are taken,
two from the Commissary Court of London and two from
the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. When the wills
published by the Early English Text Society are reckoned
with it will probably be found that all English wills made
before 1410 and now in London are in print.

I. THE WILL OF ROBERT BARAN '

In the name of god Almythty in Trinite Amen I Robert
Baran in good mynd and memorie I make myn testament in
this maner In the ferst begynnyng I be quethe myn soule
to almyghty god in Trinite and to hys blyssyd moder holy
made Marie and to alle the holy compayne of hevene Also
I be quethe myn body to be beryed in the church of Bethlem
befor the cros in the body of the church Also I be quethe to
the heye auter xld Also to the church pavyng xld Also I
be quethe to the prest that shall berye me xld Also I be
quethe to the ordre of the qwhyte frers of london Xs Also I
bequeth to the ordre of the Augustin x* to preye for me
Also I bequethe to Syr Thomas Grene prest x1 Also to Sire
Thomas Riedle xld to preyn for me Also I be quethe to
Annes Nok myn servaunt a coffre wyth a lok and a keye
Also I be queth to the fornseyd Anneys a bed of suych as
Hawys my wyf wyll ordeyne for here. Also I bequethe to
John Baran sadyller the best goune and the hood that I have.
Also I bequeth to Robert cordwayner dwellyng wyth inne
bysschopsgate a goune and a hood to preye for me Also I
bequeth to Hawys myn wyff the place that is ours wyth inne
Bethelemthewhyche place wewonynin wt. all portenance and the
termes of Wynter and other covenantz as oure dedes makyn
mencioun and sche to yeven and to sellen and to do what sche
wolle al the fornsayde terme Also I wyll that the fornsayde
Hawys have the place wyth all the portenans that sire Hugh
dwellit in the persone be hire live and the termes as myn dedes

1 Commissary Court of London. 463 Courtney.

13 D

14 THE ANCESTOR

specifien Also evermore I be queth to Hawys myn wyf and
assigne to have myn new place wt the aportenans that I have
do made in Bethelem be twyxen the kychan and the gardyn
the forsed Hawes to have and to holden al be hyr live tyme
and oure termes as oure dedes maken mencioun and in cas
that the forsede Hawys deye bynne the terme I wyll that the
forsede place torne sir Nicholl myn cosyn and evermore yef
it so be that Sir Nicholl deye bynne the terme I wil that the
fornseyd place wyth alle the portenans torne to Anneys Nook
myn servant and yef it so be that Anneys deye bynn the
terme I wyll that it torne to John Baran myn cosyn tailor of
London Also I be queth to Hawys myn wyff all myn neces-
saries that arn in myn place be hyr live as of masiers pecys
spounes naperis bakclothis bedclothis and all other divers
necessaries that arn in houshold and after her disses sche to
sellen hem and to do for oure soules Also overmore I for-
seyde Robert Baran I have ordeyned and made and i wreten
here in myn testament myn executour Hawys myn wyff and
sir Nichol Byschop myn cosyn and nalych Hawys myn wyf to
be myn principalle executor sche to do for me Als she
wold that I dede for hyr and overmore myn wyl is that sir
Thomas Grene be an overseer by myn goodes so that
myn godes be yovyn and dispendid as I have ordeyned an
wrytyn in this fornseyd testament in wytnes of wych thing I
Robert Baran have set myn seel wretyn and yoven atte
Londene as the xvij dey of Juin the yer of the incarnacion of
our Lord Jeshu Crist mlcccc wytnesyng sir Thomas Redele and
sir Thomas Grene prest Richard Spencer and William Lylbech
and Nicholas of Norfolk

Proved 3 November, 1400.

II. THE WILL OF JOHN RYNGFELD.*

In the name of god amen the vjte day of the monthe of
August In the yere of oure lord a ml cccc xxxix I John Ryng-
feld citezin and drapor of London beyng in good and hool
mynde make ordeyne and dispose this present testament aftir
my last wille in this maner of wise First I betake my soule
to almyghty god my worth! creature and maker to his blessed
modir mary vurgyn and to all the holy company of hevyn
And my body to be beryed in the church by the north est

1 Comm Court of London. 28 Prctcef.

CAPTAIN GEORGE CARIAVRIOHI.

" I ABHADOK CARTWR1GHT."

FOUR ANCIENT ENGLISH WILLS 15

piler of the stepil in seint Michell of Cornhull in london And
on the same piler over me I wol have a table peynted with an
image w' a similitude of a risyng of the dome l havynge iij
rolles in the right and writen ther yn Mercyful lord over al
tbynge For mercy and grace to the I calle for thejoye that ever is
lastynge lord fro dampnacion save us all And in the lift hand
Godefrendes of me taketh bede prent in youre hertes in speciall In
the ertbe here am I leyde wormy s to ete thus shall ye all And over
the heed For Jb's love that died for yow and me belpetb the soule
of John Ryngfeld with a pater noster and an ave and a ston upon
me w' my mark and theron writte declina a malo etfac bonum I
bequethe to the high auter iijs iiijd Item I bequethe for the
table and for the stoon xxvjs viijd Item for lying in the
church vjs viijd Item I beqwethe to the church vj newe
torchis everych of xvij" Item ij tapres I bequethe everych of
xiiijlb And ij° of the torchis I bequethe to Markyatte
nonnery beside seynt Albons in the worship of the Trinite and
an other torch to the praye that is a nonry beside and irs iiijd
of money to the laumpe of the same church and vj* viijd for
selynge of her parlour And that the seid nonnes sette me in
here marcilage to pray for me perpetuall Also I woll that the
pore men of the parissh atte the service tyme hold my torchis
Item bequeth every of hem iiijd and her mete for her labour
Also and I have seynt Michell candelstykkes and tapres to
stonde beside the cors and I be fette to church with here torches
they shul have vj5 viijd Also I beqwethe for the torchis of
oure lady and of seynt Anne to brynge me to church xld and
to pray for me Item I bequeth to the fyndyng of a laumpe
brennyng atte Markayate to fore the Trinite xlvj' viijd and
that laumpe to be found still as longe as the seid money
lastith undir this condicion that the seid covent have a laumpe
in here dortor al the wynter nyghtes of the seid cost and that
my name be sette in here martilage and I for to have the a
dirige and a masse on the inorow and so to be prayed for per-
petuall to the which light a barell of oill of iiij galons wol serve
it a yere And I beqweth to the prestes there xxd and to my
sistur xxd and every nonne of the same hous xijd aftir my
decesse that I am past hens and that I have there a dirige and a
masse Also whanne that ye se that I shal nedely passe lete be
done for me a Tretall of massis by my life dayes and lete me

1 A picture of the resurrection of the dead is here described. The rolls
are the scrolls bearing the legend.

1 6 THE ANCESTOR

have a pryve dirige by my life that I may her hit and yeve x*
of money to pore folk of the parissh to pray for me and let
hem be atte the dirige and eerie of hem sey oure lady sawter
And I bequethe every preste ijd and every clerk ijd that is atte
this servys thus doon and affir that they have bredde and
drynke whanne dirige is doon And aftir that my soule and
my body be departed I charge yow myn executours that it be
kept w' v pore folk men and women and eche of hem to have
ijd and here mete and they sey oure lady sawter Item that I
have vij tapres eche of half a Ib and iiijor of hem lete brenne
abowte me til that I be bore to church And thenne take the
iij hole tapres and bere hem unto the iij upper Auters in my
parissh churche And the other iiij tapres that are brent be
sette upon the iiijor lower Auters And thanne forthw' a dirige
by note and xiij massis on the morow and xiij pore men and
women with here children to here the service ther of And
they to sey oure lady sawter Item I bequethe to the person
for sey ing and syngynge atte my dirige viijd Also to every
prest doynge the holy service for me with massis and all iiijd
And every pore man and woman a jd and here mete in the
parissh Also whenne the cors is leid in the erthe that all the
prestes assoille the body undir here seele Also I wol have
every day this monyth folowyng iij massis of the Trinite of
our lady and of the holy gost and iij pore men and women to
here tho massis seying oure lady sawter And every prest
shal have jd And every pore man jd Also I wol that every
day in thik month the vij tapres brenne atte messe tyme in the
worshipe of the sacrament And that the prey for me by
name And that the tapres be renewed til the month be endet
And atte ye month is ende I wol have xiij masses and xiij pore
men and women seying oure lady sawter And I woll that
every prest have jd And every pore man and woman
of hem a jd and a lowe dirige And every prest therat
ijd And so every monthes ende duryng xij month
sewynge xiij masses and xiij pore men and women
seying oure lady sawter and every prest a jd And every
pore man and woman a jd Also more over it is my
ful will and I wol have yerely every xij monthis ende a
messe of requiem and a lowe dirige withoutenote and
xiij pore men and women heryng the servys of the parissh
seyng oure lady sawter havynge bredde and ale as the maner
is til the summe of xli be spent for my soule and the soules of

FOUR ANCIENT ENGLISH WILLS 17

my fadir and modir and of trew cristen peple and al my gode
doers that I have ferd the better fore And that this be
contynued til this seid x" be fully spent and more over if god
sent it yow Item I bequethe to the almes of pore peple vij1'
of money this viju to be fully spent in this maner use that ye
hire an hors and ley ther in xiij quartres of coles and a m1 of
bilet and dispose 'it thus to pore folk yef ther of litel and litel
to pore folk. They that have wife and children delyvre hem
ij busshels and xx" billetes And they that have no children a
busshell and x billettes And al one man or al one woman
half a busshell and v billettes and let hem be refresshed often
sithes to the somme yerely of xvijs vjd and more over if god
send it til the somme of vij1' be fully spent and more and god
sent it yow Item I bequethe iiij ridelles to the iiij lowe
auters with wepyng eyen with this poysy writen ther upon
Declina a malo et fac bonum Also I bequethe to Anneys my
wife in money xu and the bedde that I lye in and al that
perteyneth to the seid bedde Also a coverlit and a testre of
tapicers werk that sumtyme was Danyells and half a doz of
peuter vessell that is to wete yj platers and vj saucers and al
burdcloth and a towell of diaprewerk and ij paire shetes Item
a basyn and a laver countrefait Item a grene gown furred
with libbards and a medley gowne furred w' bevir and othir
and a ridyng of medley Item I bequeth unto my sister a
maser with a beryng bonde with a p'nt a mydds of silver and
overgilt Item and iij silver sponys marked with ermyn tailles
and a basyn and a laver and every yere an noble whil she
lyveth to pray for me and al cristen Also I bequethe to
the same to the sams hous of nonnes of Mergate other iij
silver sponys to the use of the covent perpetuall to prye for
me and all cristen Item I bequethe to Jonet Fuller my
servant xiiis viijd Item I bequeth to Robert Tharcot my
servant that was xiijs iiijd To Gillion on London brigge
yj9 viijd Item to Thomas Brambill vjs viijd Item I bequethe
unto Symkyn Gold and his wife a coverlite of tapiceys werk
w' a lyon and lebard and I bequethe to the same Symkyn an
harnysshed gurdill with a blakke cors y harnesshed rounde a
bowte Also I forgife William Smyth my prentys of his
termes an yere and an half so that he truly labor to gete in my
dettes to the executours and that he be undir governance of
Clement Liffyn duryng the said termys. And I bequethe to the
same William Smyth whan his termes be come up xls Also I

1 8 THE ANCESTOR

relesse of certeyn sommes of money that is owed of sondry
persons of detters Furst I relesce unto John Walron of the
somme of xxvj1' vjs viijd I forgife hym vi" vis viijd so that he
pay xxn every weke xijd and atte the quarter ende xs wikely and
quarterly til xx1' be ml paied Item I forgif John Mark
of xx1' v1' the seid John to paye xv1' to myn executours
withynne the quarter folowynge aftir my decesse Item I
forgive the same mark of an obligacion that Adrian Grove and
he is bounde to me in of xij1' of sterling xls to be paied in the
forme aforesaid Item I forgife John Everard al that he oweth
me Item to John Lord I forgife xs of Caunterbury Item
Middilton gentilman of Feversham I forgife him al his dette
to me ward unto xxs Item William Covinton of Feversham
I forgife him xxxv1' every peny Item Gors of the Kynges
benche I forgife hym of xiij1' vjs viijd in to vij1' vjs viijd Item
John Everton undirporter of the Tour I forgife hym xis Item
John Hill of Maideston 1 foryife him all his dette Item
John Costantyn sherman I forgife xliiij5 Thomas Scotte draper
of xij1' that he oweth me I foryeve hym unto iiij1' Richard
Shudd draper I forgife him al his dette Thomas Hamond of
Caleys of ix1' xiij5 iiijd that he oweth me I forgeve him unto
v1' Item William Dormyk of Caleys oweth me vjs viiid I
foryeve hit him Item Hwe servant of the Staple I foryeve
hym all his dette Item Downe draper I forgife hym al his
dette Item Nicholas Mondy I foryeve hym that he oweth
me unto xx1' And therof I yeve hym this ij° yere day of
payment aftir my decesse to paye myn Executours and that
he be delyvered out of prisoun Also I gife Wynter of Caun-
terbury my best harnesshed girdell with a blew cors Of this
present testament I make overseer William Parker draper And
myn executours I make Clement Lyfyn draper and William
Reresby draper And I gef either of hem for her labour iiij
nobles every of hem iij to their part Also I gyf my fadir an
hanger harnesshed with silver Item I gife my modir the
best pece of lynnyn cloth that I have over that that beleveth
over my wyndyng cloth The residue of my godes noght
bequoth aftir that the will of my testament be fulfilled and my
dettes paid I wol that hit be disposed for my soule and al
cristen aftir the will of myn exec In witnes herof I putte to
my seel And the gode that be sette to my wife I wol that
hir fadir have it in governaunce Also I wol that Richard
Shudd draper have al his gere ayeyn that he toke me in

X

E <

2 ;

II
si

CJ

FOUR ANCIENT ENGLISH WILLS 19

plegge and that he pray for me I writen and made the yere
and the day afore rehersed

Proved [no date given]. This will was afterwards declared
void, and its registration was cancelled.

III. THE WILL OF SIR THOMAS LATYMER, KNIGHT *

In the name of God amen The xiij day of Septembre in
the yeer of our Lord m°cccc and on I Thomas Latymere of
Braybrok a fals knyt to God 8 thankyng God of hys mercy
havynghe siche mynde as he vouchit saff desyryngge that
Goddes wyl be fulfillyd in me and in alle godys that he hath
taken me to kepe ant to thaat make I my testament in this
maner Furst I knowlyche on worthy to bequethyn to hym
any thhyngge of my power and therfore i preye to hym
mekely of hys grace that he wole take so pore a present as my
wrecchud soule ys in to hys mercy thorw the besechyngeof his
blyssyd modyr and hys holy seyntys and my wruchud body to
be buryid were that evere i dye in the nexte chirche yerd God
vouchesaff and naut in the churche but in the uttereste corner
as he that ys unworthi to lyn therinne save the mercy of God
and that ther be non maner of cost don aboute my biryngge
neyther in mete nether in dryngg non in no other thynge but
yt be to any swych on that nedyth it after the lawe of God
save twey taperc of wex and anon as i be ded thud me in the
erthe Also my wull ys pryncipaliche that my dedtes be
payed that ys to seye thre maner of dettes the furste dette ys
that i have borwyd of anyman or bout of any man or taken of
any man and not payed therfore thys dette my wille ys to be
payed furst the secunde dette ys to paye my servauntes
here hyr that serven me or han servyd me and over that they
be rewardyd by good discrecion be the oversite of Anne
Latymer my wyve and Sire Lowes Clyffbrd and after the con-
dicions that they standyn inne that ys to se afater the lengthe
in ther servyce and after the bysynesse and the sor travayle
and after that they han ben rewardyd more or lesse and also
as they ben straunge or han fewe frendys or havyngge
syknesse or elde or other poverte and most special as they ben
of condicion and nedy and also havyng reward to the quantyte
of the goodes that leve behynde me the thrydde ys to my

1 P.C.C. 2 Marche.

8 The pious clauses of this will have their own interest, seeing that Sir
Thomas was suspect of Lollardy.

20 THE ANCESTOR

tenauntes of thys condition that yyff any tenaunt of myn that
hatt payed me ony sylver be it freyngge of her bodies or of
here children or dowtris leve to wedde or sones to ben
prestys or any man that hath made fyn for hous or lond or
any other swych yyff they be lettyd thorw Edward my
brother or oni other that ys myn eyr after me i wul thanne
that the reversion of Caldensland and the reversion that was
Jons of Trafford be solde be Anne mi wyfe and restitucion be
mad to the seyd men or wymmen Also my wille is thys that
yyff ther be ani tenaunt man or woman longynge to lorschipe
the qwhech i schuld have be servant to that been poor and
feble por and blynde por and crokyd thanne after her nede
and after the quantite of godis and after here condicion than
be discrecion of the forsayde Anne and Lowes that they be
reward and ferthermore it is mi wille that alle the londes that
holde in fe symple ether be heritage or be purchas in fee or in
reversion that is in feffies handis after mi decces that they
feffe Anne mi wyf in that forseyd londes the terme of hir life
And yiff it so be that Edward Latimer mi brother wul holde
the covenauntes that he hat behight to me that is to seye that
enpeche not Anne Latimer mi wyff of the Castell of Braybrok
ne of the maner wyth londes rentis avuouesons of chirche and
chapel and the Westhalle fee with alle other purchases and
alle the portynaunce w hem but lete hir holde it paysabeliche
as as (sic) I have holden it ant conferme covenauntes that i have
maad the wiche ben rehersid bi foore thanne the forsayde
feffees to feffe Edward Latimer and eyris of his bodi Also
this is my wull that yf Anne Latimer mi wiffe dye in myn
absens or elles whan ever likith to hir to make a testament
algates that the dettes aforesayd beyn payd that hire wulle be
fullyd as fere forth as myn owene And if Edward Latimer my
brother holde naut these covenauntes thanne reversion of the
forsayde londes after the deces of the forsayd Anne to be sold
and don for alle cristen soules be the disposicion of the forsayde
Anne and Lowes And to thys testament treweliche executen
ordeyne and do principaliche I desir and preye Anne Latimer
mi wiff and Sire Lowes Clifford the on or bothe to been of
overseers of alle these thyngges be fulfullid after the lawe of God
myn executors of this testament I preie Thomas Wakeleyn
Herry Sleyer Richard Marmion John Pulton and Janyn
Baker and this be don in the name and in the worschip of
God Amen

Proved 20 April 1402.

FOUR ANCIENT ENGLISH WILLS 21

IV. THE WILL OF DAME ANNE LATYMER *

In the name of god Amen the xiij day of July in the yeor
of our lord mmo cccc"10 and ij I Anne Latymer thankyng god
of his mercy havyng siche mynde as he voucheth saff desiring
that godes wil be fulfild in me and in alle goodes that hath take
me to kepe and to that entent make my testament in this
maner. First I be take my soule in to the hondes of god
preynge to hym mekely of his grace that he wole take so pore a
present as my wrechud soule is to his mercy And I wole my
body to be beried at Braybroke beside my lord myn hosebonde
Thomas Latymer yiff god wole. Also I be quethe to
reparacioun of the caunsel and of the parsonage of the chirche
of Braybroke xls Also to make the brigge that my lord bygan
xls Also I bequethe xxu to be deled to nedy pore men and
knowen by the discrecioun of the overseers and executores of
my testament Also to Roger my brother xls Also to
Alysoun Bretoun v marks Also to Kalyn Okham xx* Also
to Anneys xx5 Also to Magote Deye xxs Also to Thomas
Fetplas xxvjs viijd Also to John Pissoford xs Also to Robert
Koke vjs viijd Also to Wyllyam my brother man iijs iiijd
Also to Wyllam Leycestrechyre xs Also I bequethe xls to be
departide among the remenant of my servauntes by the dis-
crecioun of the executres and overseers of this testament
The residue off my goodes I wole to be solde and deled to
nedy pore men after the lawe of good by avisse and dis-
crecioun of the overseers and executores of this testament
And to this testament trewly executen ordeyne and do
princypaly I desire and prey maystre Philipp Abbot of
Leycestre and syre Lowes Clifford and Robert parson of
Braybroke to be overseers that alle these thynges ben fulfild
after the lawe of god. Myn executores of this testament I
praye Sr Robert Lethelade parson of Kynmerton Thomas
Wakeleyn Sr Henry Slayer parson of Warden and John
Pulton. And thes be don in the name and in the worschepe
of god Amen In wytnesse of this this («V) testament I
seele wyth my scale thes wytnesse Sr Robert prest of Bray-
broke Thomas Fetplas and Alysoun Bretoun. Wrete the
yeer and day befor seyde

Proved 27 Oct. 1402.

G. H.

1 P.C.C. 3 Marche.

THE ANCESTOR

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS

THE letters of Giovanni Moro, Venetian Ambassador
to the Court of France in 1583, and of Carlo Birago, a
secret agent of Catherine de Medici, throw a very different
light on the intrigues of Marguerite of Valois — more particu-
larly on that between her and Harlay de Chanvallon — to that
which the flattery of Brantome or of Sainte-Beuve give us.

It must be confessed that a large part of the history of
Queen Marguerite deals largely with her amours with various
personages, from the Marquis de Canillac to her cook. And
the following letters, found some years ago in an old chateau
among the papers in the possession of a family which bore a
prominent part in the events of that time, reveal a no more
creditable part of her history. They deal however with a
period of her life which has long been dark and obscured : to
wit, the events which took place between her flight from Agen
in 1585 to her captivity of eighteen years in the Castle of
Usson.

The worthy Brant6me and Sainte-Beuve have followed
Marguerite into the shadows, ignorant of the secret springs
of action, the evidences of which stand revealed to us to-day.
A bundle of old faded letters often throws more light on past
events than all the lucubrations of the schoolmen and pro-
fessors. There are parts in the history of nations which have
never been written, and perhaps never will be, for to the his-
torian of the day only a minute portion of the evidence was
available, and of the mass of evidence existent, little perhaps
now remains. The contents of a secret drawer may upset all
the theories and ideas which have been stereotyped for the
last three hundred years.

If the archives of the Vatican ever gave up their dead, what
a revolution in history may take place. What secrets repose
there, and how much unwritten history lies in the secret cor-
respondence of Catherine de Medici in the Venetian archives,
or is mouldering away in the garrets of many an old French
and Spanish chateau.

Among the crowd of shades whose voiceless phantoms flit

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS 23

across a ghostly stage, two figures stand forward in the dim
twilight — Mary Stuart and Marguerite of Valois — third of
the group of Marguerites ; daughter of Henry II. of France
and Catherine de Medici : sister of Francis II., Charles IX.,
and Henry III., wife of Henry IV. of France and Navarre —
' The daughter, sister, and wife, of Kings.'

To understand the character of Marguerite aright, one
must remember the state of religious and social life in France
at the time. It is not generally realized that the term ' Hugue-
not ' itself bears a very different meaning in the sixteenth to
that which it does in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries.
In the time of Marguerite of Valois and her husband Henry
of Navarre, the term embraced two parties, religious and
political ; those who embraced the doctrines of the Refor-
mation, or rather of Protestantism, and were prepared to
sacrifice everything for liberty of conscience ; and those who
joined the party of Navarre, either from dissatisfaction with
the existing state of things, or from feudal attachment to the
kingdom of Navarre : the latter section carrying with them
the majority of the noblesse of Gascony. And this fact ex-
plains many of the apparent inconsistencies we find at this
period. There were also three parties in France. The
Ultramontane or Spanish, prepared to sacrifice all to ortho-
doxy— the party of the House of Guise — and the Huguenots
— the latter not strictly synonymous with Protestantism,
for it included many of Henry's feudal nobility, personal
friends, and ministers, who while remaining Catholics sup-
ported the cause of Navarre.

The rank and file of the Huguenots were of course Pro-
testants : largely the inhabitants of the towns — the energetic,
sober, well-to-do middle classes : the French puritans. It
was in fact the leaning of the French puritans towards repub-
licanism and secularisation of the estates of the church, which
alienated many of the Gallican party in the church, who in
the first conflicts, during the reign of Francis I., were disposed
to toleration, and a measure of reform, while leaving to them-
selves freedom from Italian temporal interference, and the
enjoyment of their dignity and estates.

Henry could scarcely be classed with the puritans — his
wife was a catholic — and the Court at Pau and Nerac took its
character from the king and queen : changed from the
austere piety of Jeanne d'Albret and Beza.

24 THE ANCESTOR

' Our Court,' savs Marguerite in her Memoirs, ' was so
fair and agreeable, that we did not envy that of France. I
had around me many ladies and maids-in-waiting, and my
husband was attended by a gallant following of lords and
gentlemen, in whom there was no fault to find, except that
they were Huguenots.' Even d'Aubigne, historian of the
Reformation, says of the Court of Nerac, ' we were all lovers
there together.'

The time passed, as we learn from his history, in love-
making, intrigues, and gaiety, varied by occasional phases of
religion. It was perhaps in one of the latter, that Marguerite
found time to write a letter, dated from Nerac 13 January
1583, to Jean de Galard, Sieur de Brassac, entreating him to
set at liberty two soldiers of the Religion, whom he held under
arrest at Brassac, contrary to the Edict of Pacification. She
signs herself ' Votre bien bonne amie, Marguerite.' His reply
was that they had committed theft and violence.

This Jean de Galard was certainly a Protestant at his death,
as appears by his ' acte de Deces,' and he died excommunicate
from the Church of Rome. His wife, Jeanne de la Roche-
Andry, was a Protestant — and both he and his son Rene appear
among the Protestant nobility and gentry of Angoumois, in a
commission which laid their grievances before the king.
Rene, his son, married Marie de la Roche-Beaucourt, and was
ensign and afterwards lieutenant in the company of Coligny,
and gentleman of the bed-chamber to Henry IV. In the
following century, many of this family distinguished them-
selves in the armies of the Prince of Orange, and the States-
general.

It would take too long to enter into the reasons for Mar-
guerite's sudden removal from Nerac in 1585. She appears
to have tired of her husband's court, especially as she had lost
a great ally in the death of her brother the Due d'Alen9on, in
June 1584. Her own excuse was the wish to keep Easter at
Agen, a Catholic town, and her own personal appanage. The
inhabitants received her with open arms, attributing her
coming to her zeal for the Catholic religion. According to
the chronicler she went with the laudable object of repairing
the disorders of her past life by making war on the heretics :
the said heretics being the subjects of her husband. She was
joined by Lygnerac, with troops which he had raised in Quercy
and Auvergne. While preparing however to make war on a

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS 25

small scale, she had word that the Marshal de Matignon had
orders from her brother the King of France to arrest her.
Finding herself between two fires, and not altogether trusting
in the attachment of the townspeople, she began to fortify
herself, and threw up some improvised works within the town.
To do this, she had to demolish some houses which stood be-
tween the Porte Neuve and the Convent of the Jacobins.

This high-handed proceeding so exasperated the wavering
town, that it rose in revolt ' a son de tocsain,' and massacred
a great number of her troops. After a short conflict in the
narrow streets, the queen's troops were overwhelmed, the
town being aided, probably by a preconcerted plan, by the
forces of Henry from Nerac, some twenty miles distant. She
herself was compelled to mount in haste, en croupe, behind
Lygnerac, attended by Jean de Lart d'Aubiac, one of her
esquires, his sister Marguerite, the queen's maid 'of honour,
and thirty or forty horsemen. After being pursued for two
days by Matignon, the party escaped to the Chateau of Carlat
in the mountains of Auvergne. Thus began the wanderings
of the queen, which ended in the imprisonment at Usson, for
a period of eighteen years !

The following letter from Joseph de Lart de Birac, bro-
ther to d'Aubiac, to his brother-in-law, Henri de Noailles,
gives an account of the rising in Agen, and the Queen's
flight.

DE BIRAC, 29 Sept. 1585.

Monsieur mon frere, comme je pensois, de jour a 1'autre envoyer en Limosin,
pour entendre de vos nouvelles, j'ay tousjours est£ prevenu tant de la memoire
du dcsastre qui nous est advenu ' en la perte du feu monsr. nostre frere, que de
1'angoisse que j'en portois et porte, et que je prevoyois que vous et tous ses
appartenans en portids ; si, que je ne sfavois quel chemin y prendre. Mais a
la fin, un tres grand desir que j'ay de S9avoir de vostre estre, m'a releve' et mis
en chemin d'y envoyer, non pas pour en ressusciter quelque chose qui vous
puisse ou doive fascher, bien plus tost pour en mediter le sujet au del, oil il est
si heureux et contant, que tous les grands biens qu'il promettoit le luy, fa bas,
ne sont rien au prix de celuy qu'il jouit, mesme en ce temps calamiteux, qui
rend la mort plus desirable que la vye. Attendant done une mesme felicit6, je
vous requiers me departir de vos nouvelles et portement, et de vouloir faire
tousjours estat A mon humble service, auquel vous me trouver6s dispose pour
toute ma vye.

Je vous advise que les habitans d'Agen se sont esleves contre la reyne de
Navarre, a son de tocqsain, et, apres grande occision de ses gens et sur le conflit,
elle, avertie que la victoire inclinoit pour les citoyens qui avoient forc6 un de
ses citadelles, et maistrise la ville, reserve la citadelle des Jacobins, oil elle s'estoit

1 Referring to the assassination of Charles de Noailles, the result of
domestic feuds.

26 THE ANCESTOR

retiree (quelque jours auparavant, mercredy dernier, que'cela fut execute) et la
porte de Saint Antoine, n'eut remede que se sauver en trousse avec quarante ou
cinquante chevaux, mon frcre estant du nombre.

Et le lendemain, suivie par monsr. le marechal de Matignon, avec trois ou
quatre cornettes de cavalerie ; mais il fust court, car elle avail gagne Cahors
ou Quercy d'une traite. Mme. de Noailles, avec vos nieces, se retira"dans le
couvent de la Nonciade, ou elle se porte tres bien, graces a Dieu ; le'quel je
supplie, apres vous avoir bien humblement baise les mains, vous donner^Mon-
sieur mon frere, en bonne sante heureuse et longue vie.

Vostre humble et obeissant frere, 'BIRAC.'

Joseph de Lart, seigneur de Birac, and his brother Jean,
were the sons of Antoine de Lart, sr de Birac, de Galard
d'Aubiac, and de Beaulens. The two latter baronies had
come into the possession of the seigneurs of Birac, by the
marriage of Gabriel, father of Antoine, with Anne de Galard,
Dame de Beaulens and Aubiac.

The chateau of Birac, or Virac, was built in 1152 by Ray-
mond, first seigneur, on lands granted to him. This Raymond
was fourth in descent from Pedro Raymond de Lar, seigneur
de Lara, a cadet of the house of Castile and Arragon.
Through him the present representatives of the family claim
lineal male descent from Constantin, founder of the royal
house of Arragon : born 525, and massacred 27 November 602.
The fief of Birac remained in the possession of the elder
branch until the year 1596, when it passed by the marriage of
Henriette, heiress of Joseph de Lart, to Agesilas de Narbonne.
It is probable that this letter was not written from Birac,
which is thirty miles from Nerac, but from the ' Hostel ' or
town house in Nerac, called the ' Maison de Birac,' which still
exists ; now the many-gabled, red-tiled Convent, in the Rue
du Pont de Lart. It stands in an enclosure of some four or
five acres, surrounded by a high defensive wall, flanked by four
tourelles.

By the end of the sixteenth century, the family had rami-
fied into several branches, all of which espoused the cause of
Navarre, though remaining Catholic. Bertrand, chief of the
branch of Rigoulieres, still existing, was Chancellor of Henry
IV. and Master of the Horse in 1624. A letter still exists
from the king to his ' bon amy et fidele serviteur,' concerning
a secret mission undertaken by him. In the persecutions of
the next century, several members migrated to Holland and
England. It is probable that Antoine de Lart, though
claimed as a Catholic, was a Protestant. His wife was Renee

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS 27

de Costin de Bourzolles, whom he married in 1534, of a family
which took an active part on the Protestant side. He paid
homage to Henry of Navarre in 1538. His eldest daughter,
Gabrielle, Baronne de Beaulens, married 2 August 1559,
Charles de Bazon, Governor of Nerac, in the Chateau of
Nerac, and in presence of Antoine de Bourbon and Jeanne
d'Albret — and therefore, it may be presumed, according to
the rites of the reformed Church. His second daughter,
before-mentioned, was maid of honour to Queen Marguerite,
and was commonly known as ' Mademoiselle d'Aubiac.'

The eldest son Joseph, Sr de Birac, married, 25 February
1572, Marie de Noailles, daughter of Antoine de Noailles,
Ambassador to England in 1554, and of his wife Jeanne de
Gontaut-Cabreres.

The second son, Jean, commonly known as ' d'Aubiac,'
gained an unenviable notoriety by his intrigue with the queen.

According to one account he was ' un homme le plus laid
de son temps.' However this may have been, he had every
opportunity of falling under the sinister charms of the queen ;
which, according to d'Aubigny, ' were so dangerous, that it
was difficult to defend oneself when she chose to exert them.'

The chateau and village of Aubiac is only a few miles from
Nerac and Agen. His sister was a maid of honour, and as he
himself became one of her equerries, he was in constant attend-
ance at court. He is said to have exclaimed, on first setting
eyes on the queen': ' Mon Dieu, 1'amiable personne ! Si
j'etois jamais assez heureux pour lui plaire, je n'aurois qas
regret a la vie : duss6 je la perdre une heure apres.' Words of
evil omen, as events proved.

According to La Ferriere, ' he never could have hoped,
with his red hair, freckled skin, and rubicund nose, to become
the lover of a daughter of France.' Cavriana, the Tuscan
Ambassador, gives a more favourable description of him,
viz., that he was ' noble, jeune, brave, mais audacieux et
indiscret.'

*****

Marguerite succeeded in outriding her pursuers, and came
at last to Carlat, a secluded chateau in the mountains of
Auvergne. It belonged to a gentleman at the queen's court,
named Lygnerac, another of her many admirers. Bazin, in
his Etudes de VHistoire et de Biographie, says of this place of
refuge, that it ' smelt more like a den of thieves than a resi-

2g THE ANCESTOR

dence of a princess, a king's daughter, sister and wife.'1
Lygnerac, as will appear, seems to have been more of a robber
chief than a French courtier.

This sojourn at Carlat lasted for some months. It was
during this time that the queen had a second child, which
according to Bazin, ' resta sourd et muet.'

At length the noise of this fresh scandal reached the ears
of her brother Henry III. ; her husband, Henry of Navarre,
apparently took no interest in his queen's doings. Henry
was roused to even greater wrath than before, and ordered the
arrest of Marguerite, and the execution of Aubiac : and orders
were given to the Marquis de Beaufort-Canillac * to effect
this.

Word of this however came to Carlat, and the queen,
attended by d' Aubiac, his sister and a few others, left Carlat
hurriedly for Iboy, a place belonging to Catherine de Medici,
as Comtesse d'Auvergne. Lygnerac, seeing that things had
come to a crisis, and probably being jealous of Aubiac, threw
off all disguise, and treated the queen with contempt and
harshness, as appears by a letter quoted by Guessard in
Memoires de Marguerite de Falois.

La verit£ est telle, que le sieur de Lignerac, pour quelque mescontantement
et jalousie qu'il a eu de la royne de Navarre, qu'elle ne se saisit du Chasteau, 1'a
chassee : et si vous cognoissies 1'humour de 1'home, vous penseries que c'est une
quinte aussy tost prise aussy tost executee. II a retenu quelque bagues en paie-
ment, come il dist, de dix mil livres qu'il a despendus pour elle, qui, apres avoir
bien conteste en son esprit, se resolut de s'en aller a Millefleur, et se mit en
chemin a pied avec Aubiac et une femme ; 3 puys sur le chemin fut mise sur un
cheval de bast ; et apres dans une charette a beufs, et come elle fut dans ung
village nome Colombe, un gentilhome nome Langlas, qui estoit lieutenant dans
Usson luy offrit le chasteau, et 1'y mena. Aussi tost qu'elle y fust arrive, luy
mesme s'en va trouver le marquis de Canillac 4 a Saint-Hicques, qui monte a
cheval, et s'estant faict ouvrir la porte, il demande ledict Aubiac cache entre les
murailles. II le prend, et le met entre les mains d'ung prevost. Le marquis
despescha incontinent le jeune Monmaurin au Roy et a la Royne mere.
***** *

A full account of the flight and capture is given in the
following letter of Henri de Noailles to his mother (nee Jeanne
de Gontaut), dated 29 October 1586.

1 Sentant plus sa tanniere de larrons, que la demeure d'une princesse, fille,
soeur et femme des rois.

3 Jean Timoleon De Beaufort-Montboissier.
3 Marguerite de Lart de Birac.
* Canillac was Governor of Usson.

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS 29

Nous somes encore en ses carders attendant le retour de monsieur le marquis
de Canillac, qui n'est encores venu de k Lymaigne, ou il alia apres la royne de
Navarre, ayant sceu du chemin, come nous venions de dessa, qu'elle estoit panic
soubdainement de Carlat, pour prendre ceste routte avecq peu de gens. Je ne
vous mandois rien par ma precedents despeche, faicte a Margoulles, du comance-
ment de ceste tragedie, parce que je pensois que La Font, que j'attendois plus-
tost qu'il ne vint, deut estre a vous un jour ou deux apres, et me remettant
encores a ce que vous en pourres apprandre de luy, je vous diray seulement
cependant en sommaire que la farsse est telle que celuy qui 1'avoit conduite a
Carlat, ayant heu oppinion qu'on le voulloit chasser, de la prenant ce pretexte,
il se randit metre de la place et dit a Marion » qu'il failhoit que Foncle cFTsabeau »
sautat le rochier, nouvelle qui luy fut si rude qu'elle se tresva bien en peine, et
apres avoir garanty par prieres et aultrement ce personnaige, elle ayma mieux
vuyder et changer de place que demeurer la sans luy. Et ayant prins son chemin
en crouppe derriere luy, et accompaignee encore de Cambon, de Lignerac et de
quelques aultres de sa maison, de ses filhes et Mademoyselle d'Aubiac, elle se
retira a un chasteau pres Lancher, qui est a la royne mere du roy, appele Yvoy,
ou, pour estre suyvie de fort pres par ledit sieur marquis, avec quarante on
cinquante gentilshommes, qui avoit commandement du roy de s'ensaisir, elle
se trouve tant surprinse qu'elle fut contrainte d'ousvrir la porte apres avoir faict
un peu semblant de se deffandre, et Aubiac, qui s'estoit desguyse pour se sauver,
fut recognu et mene1 a une maison du diet sieur marquis, appelde Saint Cirque,
et la dite Marion a une petite ville aupres en attendant k volonte du roi, vers
qui le diet sieur marquis avoit despeche, et croys que cek le retient, mais on
n'attend 1'heure qu'il arrive. On dit que cette paouvre princesse est si eplorie
qu'elle s'arrache tous les cheveux. Lynerac 1'a traictee fort cruellement et
contraincte de payer juscques au dernier denier de tout ce qu'il lui a mis en avant
qu'elle luy debvoit et contraincte de luy kisser des gaiges. Jugez le bien qu'elle
en doibt dire. A la verite, cek est estrange. Je croy qu'on la gardera bien
asteure de courre.

Henry de Noailles adds the following postscript to this
letter : —

D'ORLAC, il Novembre 1586.

P-S. — J'ay depuis veu Monsr. de Bournazel, qui m'a dit que Mile, de Birac
s'estoit retiree a Saint Vitour avec cent escus qu'on luy donna. II m'a confirm^
comme Marion est fort ^plor^edese voir prinse : Aubiac est entre les mains du
prevost, ne sachant encores ce qu'il doit devenir. On attendoit des nouvelles
du roy : cependant la dite Marion est a une petite ville appelee Saint-Amand,
avec cent harquebuziers de garde. On m'a fait voir une belle lettre qu'elle
avoit escrite durant son siege, dont je n'ay heu le loisir de tirer encore copie.
******

In these trying circumstances, Marguerite wrote several let-
ters to her brother the King of France, her mother, Catherine

1 Marguerite of Navarre.

> L'onde d'Ysabeau, i.e. d'Aubiac. Ysabeau was one of the four daughters
of his brother Joseph de Lart and Marie de Noailles : commonly known as
Ysabeau de Lart de Galard.

3o THE ANCESTOR

de Medici, and to M. de Sarlan, makre d'hotel of the latter.
One is worth quoting as showing the curious mixture in her
character. Reading it by itself, with no knowledge of the real
state of affairs, one would imagine the queen to have been the
most virtuous, persecuted and unfortunate of mortals.

A Monsieur de Sarlan.

Monsieur de Sarlan, puisque la cruaute de mes malheurs et ce ceux a qui je
ne rendis jamais que services est si grande que, non contens des indignites que
depuis tant d'annees ils me font pastir, (ils) veulent poursuivre ma vie jusques
a la fin, je desire au moms, avant ma mort, avoir ce contentement que la Royne
ma mere sache que j'ay eu assez de courage pour ne tomber vive entre les mains
de mes ennemys, vous protestant que je n'en manquerai jamais. Assurez 1'en,
et la premiere nouvelle qu'elle aura de moy sera ma mort. Soubs son asseurement
et commandement je m'estois sauvee chez elle, et au lieu de bon traicte-
ment que je m'y promettois, je n'y ay trouve que honteuse ruine.

Patience ! elle m'a mise au monde, elle m'en veut oster. Si sais-je bien je
suis entre les mains de Dieu ; rien ne m'adviendra centre sa vollonte ; j'ay ma
fiance en luy et recevrai tout de sa main. Vostre plus fidele et meilleure amye,

MARGUERITE.

d'Aubiac had not long to wait before he knew his fate :
the Marquis de Canillac carried out the king's commands,
and took the opportunity of removing two other aspirants to
the queen's favour at the same time.

d'Aubiac was hung a few weeks later at Aigueperce, and
with him also Bussey d'Amboise and Lamolle. He died with
a piece of blue velvet sleeve in his hand, which he never ceased
to kiss to the last — all that remained to him of the queen's
favour.

The queen apparently was for the time so overcome with
grief that she omitted to carry out the alarming threats of her
letter. She however composed a sonnet to d'Aubiac.

The captivity of Usson, which lasted for eighteen years,
during which time her husband, Henry of Navarre, had ' pur-
chased Paris for a Mass,' had been divorced from his wife, and
remarried to Marie de Medici, has been variously described.
Some historians, who ascribe all the virtues to the queen,
describe the Castle of Usson as ' Mount Tabor pour sa devo-
tion, un Libanon pour sa solitude, un Olympe pour ses ex-
ercises, un Parnasse pour ses Muses, et un Caucasus pour ses
afflictions.' One other however, Matthieu, not content with
enumerating the above, gives himself away by adding 'un
Citheren pour ses amours.'

Certain it is that Canillac fell a victim to the fascinations

MARGUERITE OF VALOIS 31

of Marguerite. Pere Hilarion de Coste tells us that 'he
imagined he was going to conquer her, and one sight of her
ivory arm conquered him.'

Others with fulsome adulation, liken Usson to Noah's Ark :
a sacred temple of purity and peace ! Alas for history !
what are we to believe ? There are others who tell us that
Usson was not all that the panegyrists painted it.

The characters who acted their little parts in these events
have long been dust : but the strange figure of the Queen of
Navarre still lives. The sun of Gascony shines warm on the
red roofs and grey walls of Nerac, and of Aubiac away on the
hills above the Auvignon. But no archers tread the crum-
bling battlements, or mailed knights clatter up the narrow
streets. The little town sleeps in quiet after centuries of
storm and stress, undisturbed by sound of shot or clash of
steel. The pigeons which bask on the warm tiles of the con-
vent are almost the only sign of life about the place, which
breathes an atmosphere as of immemorial chant and psalm.

The blank casements of Carlat and Iboy stare across the
sunny vineyards like the dead eyes of those who have no part
or lot henceforth in anything that is done under the sun. But
the cicada unceasingly shrills in the grass, the lizards flicker
among the stones, and a cool Pyrenaean breeze sings in the
ilex, and speaks of life.

In spite of all this queen was beloved. To this day in the
Auvergne her memory is cherished by the peasantry. ' Entrez
dans la plus pauvre chaumiere, isolee, perdue dans les mon-
tagnes, on vous parlera d'elle. Marguerite est passee a P6tat
de legende : elle le doit au souvenir de ses bienfaits.'

CHARLES E. LART.

THE ANCESTOR

THE CLINTON FAMILY
II

TO deduce correctly the descent of notable families, and
to discover their alliances during the first couple of
centuries after the Conquest, is not only to render a genuine
service to history, but to accomplish the most difficult of
tasks. Over a later period the importance of genealogy goes
on steadily diminishing, as the materials for it increase. The
great Calendars of the Patent and Close Rolls, for mediaeval
England, are on the verge of completion, and the revision of
his Complete Peerage will soon be possible for the last new
and appreciative citizen of the empire, under his own distant

falm tree. He will find, for instance in one of his green
atent Roll volumes, a ' Notification,' dated 20 February
1314-5, 'that Ida, late the wife of John de Clynton, widow, is
the first born daughter, and one of the four daughters of Wil-
liam de Oddyngesele, deceased,' and from the volumes, which
we are promised, of Calendars of ' Inquisitions post mortem
and analogous documents,' he will doubtless be able to satisfy
his curiosity as to her ancestry and her inheritance. All that
I have to do, in other words, is to summarize, as briefly as
possible, what is already or what will shortly be in print.

I had promised myself, at this point, an excursus upon the
doctrine of ' ennobling blood,' tending to show that, if Ida
de Clinton's posterity have, without interruption, received
summons to parliament, the reason is to be sought not only
in their landed estate, to which she signally contributed, but
in her illustrious parentage on both sides. There was also
something to be said in explanation of the Irish affinities of
her immediate kinsfolk ; but inasmuch as the Clintons them-
selves remained English, and the earlier pedigree is in no
way essential to establishing the match between John de
Clinton (V.) and Ida his wife, I have decided to let these
attractive side inquiries go.

After a distinguished career elsewhere, including service
in Scotland, William de Oddingeseles was appointed justiciary
of Ireland, 19 October 1294. On 28 October in the same

THE CLINTON FAMILY 33

year the custody of the castle of Donymegan was committed
to him, and on 25 November following he had a grant, for his
service, ' of the land and castle of Donymegan in Connaught,
Ireland, in fee, by the service of two knights' fees.' He died,
19 April 1295, at least that is the date, according to the
Chancellor's Roll (Irish Cal.), on which his salary ceased and
his successor's began. His lands in England were thereupon
seised into the king's hands, and on 12 May 1295 two writs
issued, the one of diem clausit, while the other recites, that it
has been shown on the part of Ela, late the wife of William
de Oddingeseles, tenant in chief, deceased, that, whereas she
was enfeoffed with the said William in the manor of Olton,
and of certain land, etc., in Solihull, co. Warwick, nevertheless
it has been taken into the king's hands, as though William
had died seised thereof in fee.

Two inquisitions were taken in response to the writ of
diem clausit, in the counties of Herts and Warwick respectively.
By the former taken Monday the morrow of the Holy
Trinity, 23 Edward I. (23 May 1295), it was found that
William died seised in fee, in the town of Pyritone, of a mes-
suage, 2OOa. arable, loa. mowing meadow, loa. pasture,
services of bondmen, loa. wood, rent of assize, profits of courts
and half a water-mill, held of Robert de Pynkeny by homage ;
and that Edmund de Oddingeseles, his son and heir, is twenty-
two years old.

By the Warwickshire inquisition taken at Makstok, Tuesday
after the Holy Trinity, 23 Edward I. (24 May 1295), it was
found that he held the manors and advowsons of Solyhull and
Makstok, namely moieties thereof of Sir Hugh de Oddynge-
seles, by service of half a knight's fee, and the other moieties
of Sir Robert de Pynkeny, by service of a pair of gilt spurs and
by service of a quarter of a knight's fee respectively. He had
fourteen free tenants at Merston and Cotes, held of the earl
of Oxford, by one twelfth of a knight's fee. He was patron
of the church of Arley, held of Sir Hugh de Oddyngeseles.
Theobald de Nevyle and John Hastang held a knight's fee
of him in Buddebrok, which he held of Hugh de Oddynge-
seles. On the day of his death his son Edmund was his heir,
and of full age, who had since died. The said Edmund had
four sisters, Ida, Ela, Alice and Margaret. Margaret is under
age ; she was eighteen years old at Whitsun last (15 May
1295).

34 THE ANCESTOR

With regard to the claim advanced by Ela, his widow, it
was found by another inquisition taken also at Makstok, and
on the same day, that she was so seised for four and a half
years before William's death, to hold to them and William's
heirs, of the fee of Hugh de Oddingeseles, belonging to half
a knight's fee held of the said Hugh in Solyhull and Makstok.
She was also jointly enfeoffed with William of \2d. yearly
rent in Makstok, of the fee of Sir Robert de Pynkeneye, as
above. William and Ela bought the said tenements of the
tenants of the same William, which tenements were charged
with z8s. to the said William and his heirs yearly before the
said William and Ela bought them.

The above findings are eloquent of the origins of the
endowment of this branch of the Oddingeseles' family, a
matter, however, upon which we are agreed not to enlarge.
For the rest, it is evident from the returns, that William de
Oddingeseles was a mesne tenant, and that the king had no
title to wardship or marriage in respect of any of his lands —
of any of his lands, that is to say, in England. But how about
the castle and land of Donymegan in Ireland, of which we
have already heard ? We are still so much at the beginnings
of history, that it was, to all appearance, a test case, which
we find stated accordingly, as follows —

Edward par la grace de dieu roi Dengleterre seigneur Dirland et dues Daqui-
tayne au Tresorer et as Barons del Escheker salutz. Nous auons entendu que
Guillame Doddingeseles qui est a dieu comande ne tynt de nous en chief terres
ne tenementez en Engleterre ne ailleurs le iour quil moreust fors qe tantseulement
celes qui nous li donames en Irland ne gueres auant le Noel precheinement
passez a tenir de nous en chief. Et pur ce que nous en voloms estre certefiez plus
pleinement par aucunes reesons vous mandoms que sur ce faciez serchier et re-
garder nos roules et les remembrances del Escheker Et puis ce qui vous enaurez
troue ensemblement vos descrecions si par reeson du dit doun deuons selonc la ley
et lusage de notre roiaume auer la garde del heir et des terres quil tenoit par tot
en notre roiaume en Engleterre et ailleurs ou noun, nous faciez sauoir destincte-
ment souz le seal de notre Escheker auantdit. Don' desouz notre priue seal a
Keleseyn le. viij. iour de Juyn Ian de notre regne . xxiij. (8 June 1295).

The above document is, at present, filed up with the three
inquisitions which we have already abstracted (Chancery
Inquisitions post mortem, ist Series, 23 Edward I. first numbers
No. 130). The reply, whatever its nature, returned by the
Exchequer officials, was not held to be decisive, and, pending
a final decision, a modus vivendi was arrived at within the
following month, as appears by two writs preserved in the

THE CLINTON FAMILY 35

series known as ' Escheators ' Inquisitions. Citra Trentam.
23 Edward I Nos. 8 and 9 : —

Edwardus, etc. Quia de gratia nostra speciali concessimus Ide, Ele, Alicie,
et Margarete, filiabus et heredibus Willelmi de Oddingeseles, nuper defuncti,
per manucaptionem Philippi de Verney et Johannis de la Wade, duas panes
omnium terrarum et tenementorum cum pertinenciis de quibus idem Willelmus
fuit seisitus in dominico suo ut de feodo in balliva vestra die quo obiit et que
post mortem ejusdem Willelmi in manum nostram cepistis, tenendum usque
ad proximum parliamentum nostrum, ita quod de exitibus inde provenientibus
nobis totaliter respondeant, si ad nos pertinere debeant ; vobis mandamus
quatinus prefatis heredibus predictas duas partes omnium terrarum et tene-
mentorum predictorum cum pertinenciis liberari faciatis in forma predicta,
tenendum per manucaptionem predictam. Teste W. Bathoniensi et Wellensi
episcopo, thesauarario nostro, apud Westmonasterium, secundo die Julii, anno
regni nostri xxiij0 (2 July 1295). Endorsed ij die Julii apud London' mittitur
subescaetori in comitatibus Hertf, Warr', Staff, et Rotel'.

And again —

Edwardus, etc., Quia Johannes de Clinton junior et Philippus de Verney,
qui sequuntur pro Ida, Ela, Alicia et Margareta, filiabus et heredibus Willelmi
de Oddingeseles defuncti coram Thesaurario et baronibus nostris de scaccario
concesserunt quod tercia pars omnium terrarum et tenementorum cum per-
tinenciis, de quibus idem Willelmus fuit seisitus in dominico suo ut de feodo in
balliva vestra, die quo obiit, et que per mortem ejusdem Willelmi in manum
nostram jam cepistis per nos assignetur Ele, que fuit uxor prefati Willelmi in
dotem ; vobis mandamus, etc. Date and endorsement as above, with ' ita quod
. . . capiat sacramentum ' added.

We may venture, I think, without injustice to the condi-
tions then, or at any other time prevalent in Ireland, to suppose
that something in the nature of a dispute had, in all probability,
led to the extinction of the male line of Oddingeseles ; that
the father, a fighting man, was killed outright, and that the
son succumbed to his wounds. Two lives at any rate of
William de Oddingeseles' coheirs were, it seems, exterminated
in the same country in like fashion within the next fifty years.

Of the four coheirs of William de Oddingeseles, Ida the
eldest married, as we already know, John de Clinton, styled
' the younger,' ' of Amington,' presumably after his mother's
decease (see vol. viii. p. 190), and ' of Maxstoke ' — not yet a
castle — licence to ' crenellate ' was only granted in 1345, as
we shall see, after his marriage. At what date they were
married does not appear. The mention of him, just above,
as suing at the Exchequer on behalf of the sisters, suggests
that he was married to Ida before the deaths of her father and
brother. If the dates are correct and the identity established

3 6 THE ANCESTOR

in the manner suggested in the previous volume, he was a
man of close upon forty in 1295, his birth dating back to 1258.
Ida's brother, on the other hand, was aged twenty- two at his
death, was born that is to say about 1273, while her third
and youngest sister was apparently born on 15 May 1277.
We may accordingly assume that Ida herself was born about
1270, and that she was married about 1290 to a man twelve
years her senior. I do not however believe, with the dates
of the subsequent pedigree before me, that her son and heir
was born before 1300. It is accordingly possible that she
was still unmarried at the age of twenty-five, that the deaths
of the males of her house and her accession to fortune brought
suitors, and that when she was thirty and her husband forty-
two the heir was born. The lords Clinton, in any case,
descended from her, and inherited her portion, which con-
sisted of the manor and advowson of Maxstoke, and the
alternate presentation to the church of Arley.

Ela, the second daughter, is stated to have married ' Peter
Fitz James Mac Phioris ' de Bermingham, and to have been
the mother of the earl of Louth, lord justice of Ireland in
1321, who was ' with his brothers Robert and Peter, and many
of his race, treacherously slain,' in 1329, 'by the rebellious
Irish.' In addition to Solihull, where as we shall see some
part of her inheritance lay, she was presumably allotted a
share of the Oddingeseles' estate in Ireland, and the above
was the natural result.

The third daughter, Alice de Oddingeseles, had her portion
in England, but she married in Ireland, — and you shall hear the
consequences. I do not know if the little history has been
set out before, but with the great green calendars to hand, it
is only necessary to turn up a few references to recover it.
The Irish Calendar abounds in references to the name of
Caunton, variously spelt. Her husband, Sir Maurice, was
one of this family. In November 1301 and April 1302 she was
resident with him in Ireland, and ' Maurice de Cauntetone
and Alice, his wife,' are licensed to appoint attorneys for all
pleas in the English courts. In due time however we arrive
at the inevitable entry ; it is on the Patent Roll, 9 September
1319 : — Grant to Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, of all
lands and tenements in England, late of Maurice de Caunton,
and William de Caunton, his son, adherents to the king's
enemies in Ireland, where the said Maurice was killed, and

THE CLINTON FAMILY 37

the said William taken prisoner . . . ; on 26 October, in
the same year, the king is found stating that, although he
could have presented to the church of Solihull, lately void, by
reason of the lands of Maurice de Caunton, who lately was
killed in Ireland fighting against the king, nevertheless he is
content to confirm the presentation made thereto by the
bishop of Ely, saving the rights of Aymer de Valence.

The church of Solihull was, as we know, part of theOddinge-
seles' inheritance, and could not by any manner of means
have been affected by any treason, or subsequent attaint,
of either Maurice, or of his son, in the lifetime of Alice
to whom the alternate presentation had presumably de-
scended. I judge therefore, from the following entry, that
she survived, but did not long survive, her husband. It
is the presentation by the king, entered on the Patent
Roll, 26 August, 1320, of Nicholas de Moreby to the
church of Solihull, in the king's gift — note how much
better informed he has become — by reason of his custody of
the lands and tenements late of Alice de Caunton, tenant
in chief. This again is revoked on 16 October following, and
the presentation made, as above, by the bishop of Ely is
again allowed. In the following year the heir came of age,
and in the year after that two inquisitions were taken upon
a writ of Mandamus dated 8 May, 15 Edward II. (1322). By
the first of these taken at Solihull, co. Warwick, 21 May,
15 Edward II. (1322), it is found that Alice de Caunton held
a quarter of a messuage and the moiety of a carucate in Solihull
of John de Odyggeseles by fealty only, worth IQJ., and that
David her son is her next heir, and is of the age of twenty-two
years. The second inquisition was taken at Hertford on
Monday after the Octave of the Holy Trinity, 15 Edward II.
It is found that Alicia de Caunton held in chief, in the town
of Pirton, a moiety of the manor of Pirton ; to this moiety
there belong a messuage and two carucates of land, worth 2ol. ;
it is held of the king in socage, by fealty and a pair of gilt spurs,
price 6d., and to the view of frankpledge of Altonishevyd, by
the hands of the sheriff of Herts, to be received yearly, 2J. Sd.
for all service. David de Caunton is her son and next heir,
of the age of twenty-two years. The moiety used to be held
of Henry de Pyngkeney, after whose death the lordship came
to the hand of king Edward the now king's father, in what
way is unknown.

38 THE ANCESTOR

All this is peaceful enough, and English, but there is still
the Irish background, dark and threatening. We have heard
that when Sir Maurice was slain, his son William was made
prisoner. Possibly they hanged him, but he had left issue,
very young as yet, but with friends, who forward the following
petition, filed with the above inquisitions (Chancery Inquisi*
tions -post mortem, ist series, 15 Edward II. No. 4) :—

Voilletz Sir Chaunceler si vous plest comander qe preiudice ne soit fait au
verre heir Sir William Caunteton qui morust nageres en Irlaund par lenqueste
qest prise par le Eschetour de la Trente a la seute Dauid frere le dit Sir William
qui est en Engleterre et ad taunt procure qe la dite enqueste est passe par simple
gentz qui mil conisaunce nauerent du fet qui ount dit quil le dit Dauid est
prochein heir le dit Sir William en deseritaunce du dit heir qui est en Ir-
laund et del age de cink auntz et ausi en deseritaunce des seignurages du fee.
par quoi sir vous plese comander qe autre enqueste soit prise par chiualers et
bones gentz qui ount conisaunce du droit le dit heir.

David de Caunton, who thus poses as the wicked uncle,
defrauding his nephew, the lawful heir, established his claim,
possibly as heir to his mother, upon the outlawry in her life-
time of his elder brother, possibly upon some plea of the
illegitimacy of his brother's issue, a constant source of trouble
when Irish heirship came to be tried by English tests ; but
that his claims or rights were resisted is evident from an entry
on the Close Roll. Not till 10 February 1326-7, nearly five
years later, does an order issue to the escheator to intermeddle
no further with a quarter messuage and a half carucate in
Solihull, the king learning that Alice de Caunton held at her
death of the king a moiety of the manor of Periton, etc., and
that David de Caunton is her son and heir.

Meanwhile the Valence family waited patiently, and as
soon as it was decided whom they had to sue, laid claim to the
whole Caunton inheritance, unless, as is quite possible, they
had been in more or less quiet possession of Purton manor
ever since the grant made to them on 9 September 1319.
In any case the following entry occurs on the Close Roll,
under date 10 July 1327: —

To John de Bousser, Gilbert de Toutheby, and John de Cantebrigge, order
to proceed to take the assize of novel disseisin arramed before them by David
son of Alice de Caunton against Mary, late the wife of Aymer de Valence, late
Earl of Pembroke, and others named in the original writ, concerning tenements
in Periton and Kemyton, and to proceed to render judgment therein with all
speed, notwithstanding the king's late order not to proceed to render judgment

THE CLINTON FAMILY 39

without consulting him, which order he made because Mary alleged before them
that the late King by his charter, which she produced, gave the tenements, to
wit the manor of Peryton, to the said Aymer, and that they were assigned to her
in dower.

The decision was undoubtedly in David's favour — it is
difficult to see how it could possibly have been adverse to him,
and he was free to attend to his Irish interests. Notices recur
of his passage to Ireland. I select one, on the Patent Roll,
4 May 1336 : — David de Caunton, going to Ireland, has
letters nominating Roger de Luda (scilt. Louth, a great name
in Hertfordshire) and Lawrence de Ayet (another neighbour
of whom we shall hear again) his attorneys in England for one
year. He also married. Then on I October 1340 he died.
His widow Joan re-married with Lawrence de Ayete, whose
coheirs (he died 3 December 1353) by some previous wife are
famous as the ' intruded heirs ' in one of the most complicated
and prolonged law suits ever known, as may be seen under
* Dodford ' in Baker's History of the County of Northampton.
I mention this inasmuch as our Caunton investigations correct
Baker's pedigree, who apparently considers our ' Joan ' to have
been the mother of the Ayete coheirs, which from the
Caunton side is impossible. Baker's work needs no apology ;
but it is worth mentioning, as illustrative of the pitfalls pre-
pared by the ancients for later day enquirers, that whereas,
within a year, inquisitions were taken after the deaths both of
Lawrence de Ayet, and, as we shall shortly see, of Joan, his
widow, there is not a word in the former, or in the writ at-
tached to it, to show that she had been previously married
to David de Caunton, or in the latter, or in the accompanying
writ, to show that she had ever been the wife of Lawrence
de Ayet ; though when we have, from other sources, dis-
covered that such was indeed the case, our conclusion is
confirmed by the date of the lady's death, which is assigned
in both documents to the same day.

On 10 June 1343, as appears by an entry on the Patent
Roll (cf. Inquisitions Ad quod damnum, file 265, No. Il),
Lawrence de Ayete and Joan his wife, in consideration of
401. fine paid by Lawrence, are licensed to hold a moiety of
the manor of Pirton, co. Herts, with remainder to her heirs
by David de Caunton, knight, her late husband, with remainder
to William de Clynton, earl of Huntingdon, and his heirs, in
accordance with a settlement made, without licence, by the

4o THE ANCESTOR

said David and Joan — a settlement made possibly for money,
possibly to secure the earl's support, or possibly to bar the
other descendants of his father, his nephew in particular.

Lawrence de Ayete died, as I have said, 3 December 1353.
His widow did not long survive, and from an inquisition taken
at Pyriton, co. Herts, upon a writ of diem clausit, Thursday
after Easter, 28 Edward III. (17 April 1354), and from the
documents filed with it, we learn the rest of the remarkable
history. It was found that she held a moiety of the manor
of Pyriton in fee tail of the king in chief, by the grant of Adam
Doverton, parson of Ibestok (co. Leicester) and Henry de
Sodyngton, parson of Esshetesford (co. Kent), to hold to the
said David, now long deceased, and Joan, and the heirs of
their bodies, with remainder in default to William de Clynton,
earl of Huntyngdon and his heirs, with the king's charter of
licence. The said David and Joan had issue a daughter, born
in Ireland, and whether she be alive or not the jurors do not
know. The said moiety is held of the king, by service of one
knight's fee ; it is worth I3/. 6s. 8d. The said Joan died on
Tuesday after St. Gregory the Pope last (Tuesday, 18 March
1353-4). The said daughter, if alive, is her heir, and is aged
sixteen years and more.

Next follows a writ, dated 6 June, 28 Edward III. (1354),
addressed by the king to J., Archbishop of Dublin, Chancellor
of Ireland. Supplication is made to us, it states, on behalf
of John son of Nicholas de Kery, that whereas by our letters
patent, under our seal in Ireland, we gave him, for his good
service, the custody of all the lands in Ireland which were of
David de Caunton, knight, in our hands by reason of David's
death and the minority of his heir, till the full age of the said
heir, and whereas upon the untrue suggestion of William son
of Edmund de Caunton, by writ under the great seal of
England directed to you, the said lands have been taken again
into our hands, we wish to be certified of the tenor of such
writ, of the process of taking again the said lands from the
said John, and of the inquisition taken upon David's death.

Thereupon follows the reply of the Chancellor. Nothing
is found. It was said here, in council, that Sir Maurice
Caunton, father of David, whose heir David was, as is asserted,
forfeited, or was outlawed for rebellion (vel forisfecit erga
Dominum Regem, equitando de guerra cum vexillo explicate,
contra vexillum Regis in Hibernia, vel ea occasione utlagatus

THE CLINTON FAMILY 41

Juii) ; it is not found by what process David came to the said
lands, but it is believed that David did his homage in Eng-
land, and had restitution there ; this can be verified by the
rolls of the English Chancery. Nevertheless the (said) lands
and tenements, of late, by the death and by reason of the
forfeiture of David, son of William de Caunton, nephew of
the said David de Caunton, who slew the said David, and
after his death intruded himself thereon, were taken into, and
are in, the king's hands.

Finally there is a writ, dated 8 August, 28 Edward III.
(I354)» ordering a transcript to be made and forwarded of the
inquisition, taken in Ireland on the death of David de Caunton,
knight. The transcript follows. The writ bears date 13 Sep-
tember, 15 Edward III. (1341). The inquisition was taken
the Sunday after St. Luke the Evangelist, 15 Edward III.
(Sunday, 21 October 1341). David de Caunton held at his
death the castle of Balyderawyn, etc. David died the Mon-
day after Michaelmas, 14 Edward III. (Monday, I October
1340). Elizabeth, daughter of David, is his daughter and
heir, aged three years, on the feast of the Nativity of St. John
the Baptist last (24 June 1340).

So, after all, the wicked uncle was slain, presumably in his
own castle, by his disinherited nephew ; his wife, we may
suppose, was safe at home, or was spared or escaped ; but
her little daughter was taken from her, and when she died
thirteen years later none in England knew if the child was
living or dead.

The death was at any rate assumed on this side. By letters
patent dated 15 May, 28 Edward III. (1354), the king, reciting
the inquisition upon Joan de Caunton, commits a moiety of
the manor of Pirton to the earl of Huntingdon, who thus
secured for the Clinton family another fraction of the Oddinge-
seles inheritance.

; THE ANCESTOR

The pedigree seems to be as follows : —

Sir Maurice de Caunton = AIice de Oddingcseles
dead or outlawed before I dead before August
September 1319 I 1320

r

1

1

Sir William de Caunton

Sir David

de Caunton=Joan . . . =

Lawrence de

Edmund de

dead

before May 1322

n. circa 1 300, died

died

Ayete, mar.

Caunton

—

(killed by his nephew)

1 8 March

before 1343,

—

I October

'340

'353-4

died 1353

1

Da

nd de Caunton

J°

n de Caunton

Will

amde

killed his uncle

set. 3, June

Caunton,

1 340, dead and

1 340 ; xt. 1 6

claimant,

forfeited before

and more 1354,

'354

'354

•if alive.*

Dugdale states that Alice de Oddingeseles remarried
with Ralph de Perham, after the death of Sir Maurice de
Caunton. He also gives references to the following fines,
from which it would appear that the principal estate in Soli-
hull was allotted to Ela de Birmingham, upon the division
of the Oddingeseles inheritance, and was sold by her repre-
sentative to the bishop of Ely, mentioned above : —

Hec est finalis concordia facta in curia domini regis apud Westmonasterium
a die Pasche in quinque septimanas, anno regni regis Edwardi filii regis
Edwardi septimo (May 1314) . . . inter Radulfum de Perham querentem et
Elam que fuit uxor Petri de Byrmyngham deforcientem de duabus partibus
manerii de Sulyhull cum pertinenciis . . . Habendum et tenendum eidem
Radulfo de predicta Ela et heredibus suis tota vita ipsius Radulfi reddendo
inde per annum viginti libras sterlingorum . . . pro omni servicio ... ad
predictam Elam et heredes suos pertinente . . . Et post decessum ipsius
Radulphi predicte due partes cum pertinenciis integre revertentur ad pre-
dictam Elam et heredes suos . . . — Feet of Fines, Warwick, file 42, no. 18.

Ela was apparently possessed of two parts of the manor, into
three parts divided ; the remaining third may have been
still in dower to her mother. Her son, lord Louth, at any
rate sells the whole : —

Hec est finalis concordia facta in curia domini regis ... in octabis
sancti Johannis Baptiste anno regni regis Edwardi filii regis Edwardi duode-
cimo (June 1319) . . . inter Johannem de Hothum Eliensem episcopum
querentem et Johannem de Bermyngeham comitem de Loueth' deforcientem
de manerio de Solihull cum pertinenciis et advocacionem ecclesie ejusdem
ville . . . Habendum et tenendum eidem episcopo et heredibus suis . . .

THE CLINTON FAMILY 43

imperpetuum. Et preterea idem comes concessit pro sc et heredibus suis
quod warantizabunt . . . Et pro hac recognicione reddicione warantizatione
fine et concordia idem episcopus dedit predicto coraiti centum marcas argenti.
— Feet of Fines, Warwick, file 44, no. 42.

There is, however, an endorsement to the above fine from
which it may be inferred that the case, even then, was not
wholly free from obscurity : —

Ida que fuit uxor Johannis de Clinton de Maxstok apponit clamium

suum.
Robertus de Moiby (sic) et Margareta uxor ejus apponunt clamium

suum.

That is to say, a caveat is lodged by the two surviving sisters
of Ela de Birmingham, the earl's aunts ; for there can be
little doubt that in Margaret de Morby we have Margaret,
formerly the wife of John de Grey of Rotherfield, the
youngest of William de Odingeseles' coheirs, and we get an
explanation of a difficulty that Dugdale left unsolved.

Whether by any conveiance from the Bishop of Ely, before spoke of, it
was that Rob. de Moreby, of Moreby in Yorkshire, had an interest here, I
know not, nor what he so had : But in 7 E. 3. I find that the K. granted
him a Charter of ttee»wattcn in all his Demesn Lands here at Solihull, as
also at Bonneteick and Moreby in Yorkshire.

Nothing in the dates conflicts. Margaret, fourth daughter
and coheir of William de Oddingeseles, youngest sister of Ida
de Clinton, was born in 1 277 (see above) ; she married John
de Grey of Rotherfield, who died 17 October 1311, leaving
John de Grey, his son and heir, aged ten on 28 October in
that year; in 1319 she occurs as the wife of Robert de
Morby, who, as we have just learned, had a grant of free
warren in Solihull as late as 1333 ; her share of the Oddinge-
seles inheritance appears to have been the manor of Olton
in Solihull, and the alternate presentation to the church
of Arley, both of which passed to her descendants ; it is
stated however in the inquisition on the death of her first
husband, taken at Coleshull, 13 December 1311, that he
held 22 marks of rent in Solihull and the said advowson, of
her inheritance ; and it is possible that the manor of Olton
may have accrued to her later, on her mother's decease, or
represent a purchase from the other coheirs.

The history of the manor of Solihull, as Dugdale left it,
is confessedly obscure ; and if it has subsequently been

44 THE ANCESTOR

made out, I have failed to find the reference. All we know
for certain is that William de Oddingeseles died possessed of
it, and that John de Hotham, bishop of Ely from 1316 and
chancellor of England, who died 25 January 1315-6, in some
way acquired it from the Oddingeseles' coheirs. Incidentally
we have brought out the fact that one of these coheirs, the
youngest, remarried with Robert de Morby, which explains
the grant of free warren to this Robert in Solihull, in 1333.
Robert had previously obtained a like grant in lands of which
his wife was tenant for life ; and in the same year his stepson
Sir John de Grey, being then just of age, had a similar grant,
not only in lands already in his possession, but apparently in
some of the lands stated in the previous grant to belong to
his mother for her life, and also in Moreby, where his step-
father's estate lay. This in itself is difficult ; and it appears,
further, by the text of the charter of 1333 — cited by Dugdale
—that the estate of Moreby was parcelled between three men,
Henry, William and Robert de Moreby, to all of whom the
like favour is extended, viz., of free warren in Morby, with,
in the case of Robert, in Solihull as well. The text of these
three grants is as follows : —

Pro Roberto Rex eisdem. Salutem. Sciatis quod cum dilectus et fidelis
d' Moreby et noster Robertus de Morby et Margareta uxor ems teneant maneria

Margareta . _. . . _. J . . °_ . J _ ,

more eju» et de Coges m comitatu Oxome et de Opton et de Scolcotes m comi-
Johanne de tatu Eboraci et Weford in comitatu Staffordie cum pertinenciis
Grey. a(j vitam ipsius Margarete que quidem maneria post mortem pre-
dicte Margarete dilecto et fideli nostro Johanni de Grey et heredibus suis
remanere debent ut dicitur. Nos eisdem Roberto et Margarete, et Johanni
gratiam specialem facere volentes in hac parte concessimus et hac carta nostra
confirmavimus pro nobis et heredibus nostris prefatis Roberto et Margarete,
quod ipsi ad totam vitam ipsius Margarete et predicto Johanni quod ipse et
heredes sui post mortem predicte Margarete imperpetuum habeant liberam
warennam in omnibus dominicis terris suis maneriorum predictorum, dum
tamen terre ille non sint infra metas foreste nostre, Ita quod nullus intret terras
illas ad fugandum in eis vel ad aliquid capiendum, quod ad warennam pertineat
sine licencia et voluntate ipsorum Roberti et Margarete dum eadem Margareta
vixerit seu predict! Johannis vel heredum suorum post mortem ejusdem Mar-
garete super forisfacturam nostram decem librarum. Quare volumus et firmiter
precipimus pro nobis et heredibus nostris quod predicti Robertus et Margareta
ad totam vitam ipsius Margarete et predictus Johannes et heredes sui post
mortem predicte Margarete imperpetuum habeant liberam warennam in
omnibus dominicis terris suis predictis. Dum tamen etc. Hiis testibus ven-
erabilibus patribus H. Lincolnensi episcopo, cancellario nostro, S. Londonensi
episcopo, Johanne de Eltham comite Cornubie fratre nostro carissimo, Rogero
de Mortuo Mari comite Marchie, Olivero de Ingham, Gilberto Talebot,

THE CLINTON FAMILY 45

Johanne Mantravers senescallo hospicii nostri et aliis. Data etc. apud
Wodestok rxi. die Aprilis (1330). per breve de private sigillo.

j Chaffer Roll, 4 Edward HI. (i 17) No. 94.]

Rex eisdem. Salutem. Sciatis nos de gratia nostra special!

Pro Johanne concessiSSe et hac carta nostra confirmasse dilecto et fideli nostro

Rotherfeld*! Johanni de Grey de Rotherfeld quod ipse et heredes sui imper-

petuum habeant liberara warennam in omnibus dominicis terris

suis de Shobynton, Estcleydon et Botilcleydon in comitatu Buldnghamie, Cogges,

Herdewyk, Stanlak, Feringford et Somerton, in comitatu Qronie, Wyntreburn

in comitatu Berk', Duston in comitatu Norhamptonie et Upton, Stilingflete,

Moreby, Drynghous, Sculcotes et Ketelwell in comitatu Eboraci . . . Data

per manum nostram apud Clipston primo die Septembris (1330).

per breve de privato sigillo.
[Ibid. No. 44.]

Pro Henrico Rex eisdem. Salutem. Sciatis nos de gratia nostra special!
dc Moreby. concessisse et hac carta nostra confirmasse dilecto nobis Henrico
de Moreby quod ipse et heredes sui imperpetuum habeant liberam warennam
in omnibus dominicis terris suis de Moreby et Elvyngton in comitatu Eboraci . . .
Data per manum nostram apud Berewicum super Twedam vicesimo tercio die
Julii (1333). per breve de privato sigillo.

Consimiles cartas de libera warenna habent subscripti videlicet.

Pro Willelmo Willelmus de Moreby 'in omnibus dominicis terris suis de
de Moreby. Bonnewyk et Moreby in comitatu Eboraci etc. ut supra. Data ut
tupra, per idem breve.

Pro Roberto Robertus de Moreby in omnibus dominicis terris suis de Bonne-
de Moreby. wyfc et Moreby in comitatu Eboraci et de Solihull in comitatu
Warwici, etc., ut supra. Data ut supra per idem breve.

[Charter Roll, 7 Edward III. (120) Nos. 12, 1 1 and 10.]

There remains yet another difficulty with regard to Solihull
Lord Louth sold to Bishop Hotham in 1319. In 1320 there
is a sale, or release, to Hotham, of the same property, namely
of the manor and advowson, by Philip Purcel and Ela his wife.
Dugdale ventures the supposition that this Ela was the earl's
daughter. Apart from the fact that the earl does not appear
to have had a daughter of this name at all, the conjecture is
not a happy one, seeing that Lord Louth himself survived till
1329. It seems therefore more reasonable to suppose that
in Ela wife of Philip Purcel we again meet with the earl's
mother. The presentations to the church of Solihull, given
by Dugdale are as follows : —

(1) Eustace le Poer and Ela de Oddingeseles his wife. Sans date.

(2) Sir John de Grey, 1303.

46 THE ANCESTOR

(3) The four daughters and co-heirs of John (sic) de Oddingeseles, 1310.

(4) William de Bromwich, procurator of Sir Eustace le Poer, 1310.

(5) Dame Alice de Caunton, lady of Pyriton, IV. Cal. Nov. 1311 ; and
thereafter the bishop of Ely.

It would thus appear that before 1303 Piers de Berming-
ham, the earl's father, was dead, and that Ela, his mother, had
remarried with Eustace le Poer, who was living in 1310 : that
Eustace was, however, dead before May 1314, when by the
description of ' Ela late the wife of Piers de Bermingham,' she
granted two parts of the manor of Solihull to Ralph de Per-
ham for life; that in the interval between 1314 and 1319,
Ralph de Perham died, and that she, being again in possession,
granted whatever she had in Solihull to the earl her son, who
sold it in 1319 to the bishop ; and lastly, that in 1320, having
by that time remarried with Philip Purcel, as her third hus-
band, she joins with her husband in releasing her right to the
bishop. Even the release is not in ordinary course, but is
preceded by the following mandate, which may, however,
have been occasioned merely by the residence of Philip and
Ela in Ireland : —

6 May, To the Justices of the Bench. Order to cause a fine to be levied

1 320. between John, bishop of Ely, demandant, and Philip Purcel and
Ela his wife, deforciants, of the manor of Solihull and the advowson of the church
of that town according to the acknowledgment made by the deforciants before
the king, whereby they acknowledged the said manor and advowson to be the
right of the said John, and released the same to him and his heirs quit of the said
Philip and Ela, and her heirs, for ever, and warranted the same to him ; for the
purpose of making which fine Philip and Ela have attorned in their place Alex-
ander Aptot and John de Hales, whom they are to admit in the plea and to
receive part of the chirograph in place of Philip and Ela.

The Chancellor of Ireland received the acknowledgment and attornment
by the king's writ of precept.

[Close Roll Calendar.]

The fine was levied accordingly : —

Hec est finalis concordia facta in curia domini regis apud Westmonasterium
in crastino Ascensionis Domini anno regni regis Edwardi filii regis Edwardi
terciodecimo . . . inter Johannem Eliensem episcopum querentem, per
Johannem de Ponte Fracto positum loco suo per breve domini regis ad lucrandum
vel perdendum et Philippum Purcel, et Elam uxorem ejus deforcientes, de
manerio de Solihull cum pertinenciis et advocacione ecclesie ejusdem ville . . .
scilicet quod predict! Philippus et Ela recognoverunt predictum manerium
cum pertinenciis et advocacionem predictam esse jus ipsius episcopi, et ilia
remiserunt et quietum clamaverunt de ipsis Philippe et Ela et heredibus ipsius
Ele predicto episcopo et heredibus suis imperpetuum. Et pretera . . . con-

THE CLINTON FAMILY 47

cesserunt pro se et heredibus ipsius Ele quod ipsi warantizabunt predicto
episcopo et heredibus suis predictum mancrium cum pertinenciis et advoca-
cionem predictam contra omnes homines imperpetuum. Et pro hac recog-
nicione . . . idem episcopus dedit predictis Philippe et Ele centum libras
sterlingorum.

[Feet of Fines, Warwick, file 45, No. 19.]

I am not at all sure that the explanation offered is correct ;
and it is to be noted that Ela the wife of William de Oddinge-
seles, mother of Ida de Clinton and the other sisters, survived
her husband, and that she is not accounted for.

We have thus ascertained the parentage, and the nature
of the inheritance of Ida de Oddingeseles, wife of John de
Clinton (V.). The manor of Maxstoke, which she brought to
him, was not held in chief, nor was he himself a tenant in
chief, in respect of his own manors of Amington or Lydiard
or of any other lands. Thus it happens that no ' office ' or
iniquisition post mortem was taken upon the death of himself,
his widow, for Ida survived him, or of his son and successor ;
and we are all the more dependent on such notices as we can
find relating to them in the calendars issued under the super-
intendence of the deputy keeper of the records. I do not
propose to inquire into the summons to parliament received
by successive members of this family. The distinction, upon
principle, between parliaments and councils appears to me to
break down. It is for the wisdom of parliament, which still hap-
pily exists, in individual cases to decide and for the student of
such matters to admire the expediency of its decisions. We are
told nowadays that nothing — I allude to disease — is inherited ;
but for the life of me I cannot see a very important distinction
between the tendency in certain families to be summoned to
parliament and a birthright inherent in them to such summons.
The barony of Clinton, upon ' Garter's Roll,' must, as we
learn from a note in the Complete Peerage, be considered by
its ' ranking ' to originate in a summons to John de Clinton
(VI.) son of John de Clinton (V.) and Ida his wife, and this
in spite of the fact that John de Clinton (V.) was himself
summoned to parliament 6 February 1298-9, which gives
us however a date in his career. Other such dates are as
follows. On I September 1300 'John de Clynton ' had a
grant of freewarren in his demesne lands of Amington, co.
Warwick (Charter Roll, 28 Edward I. No. 4). On 6 June
1 306 there is a protection for John de Clinton of Maxstoke,

48 THE ANCESTOR

going beyond seas with Robert de Burghersh, constable of
Dover Castle (Pat. Roll Cal). On 5 August 1309 there is
an order to deliver to John de Clynton the castle and honour
of Walyngford, the honour of St. Valery and the town of
Chichester (Close Roll Cal). That he was dead before 7
January 1310-1 appears by a remission of payment to the
heirs and executors of John de Clynton of 3i/. IQJ. 4^., in
which he was indebted to the king for the time in which he
was seneschal of Ponthieu ; also of 6il. is. 2d. as steward of
Walyngford (Pat. Roll Cal).

During the following ten years there are constant references
to Ida, his widow. In September 1311, 'Ida, late the
wife of John de Clynton,' is bound jointly with John de
Bracebrigge, knight, for the proper debt of the said Ida, to
Sir Edmund Deyncourt, in 450 marks, to be levied in default
upon her land, etc., in Warwick and Wilts, by which it would
appear, incidentally, that Lydiard was settled upon her (Close
Roll Cal.). On 3 May 1313 and 20 February 1313-4 there
are protections for ' Ida late the wife of John de Clynton '
going beyond seas with Queen Isabel (Pat. Roll Cal.). On
9 September 1313 there is a pardon, at ' Ida de Clynton's '
request, touching a disseisin at Solihull (Close Roll Cal.). In
1315 there is the ' Notification ' printed above that she was
the eldest of William de Oddingeseles' daughters, upon what
occasion issued I cannot tell. And lastly, on I March 1321-2
there is an order to John de Walewayn, escheator this side
Trent, to permit ' Ida, late the wife of John de Clynton,' to
have the easement of houses in the manor of La Grove, till
further order, as the king wishes to show her special favour.

By Ida de Oddingeseles John de Clinton (V.) had issue,
John de Clinton (VI.) and William de Clinton, summoned to
parliament from 6 September 1330, and created earl of
Huntingdon, 13 March 1336-7. There were presumably
also daughters, to one of whom I suppose the following entry
in the Calendar of Papal Letters to refer—

6 June 1336. Mandate to the bishop of Coventry to grant a dispensation
to John de Steanuge, knight, and Ida de Clinton to remain in the marriage they
have contracted, notwithstanding that the knight had for a concubine, before
the said marriage, one who was related to Ida in the third degree of kindred ;
declaring their offspring legitimate.

John de Clinton (VI.), summoned to parliament as men-
tioned above, from 27 January 1331-2 to I April 1335 — I

THE CLINTON FAMILY 49

derive this information from the Complete Peerage — was under
age at his father's death. The further statement in the
Complete Peerage that he was aged twelve in 1315, we have
shown in the previous volume to be due to a confusion between
him and John de Clinton of Coleshill, his second cousin ; but
from the inquisition in which this cousin is found heir to his
grandfather, also of Coleshill, we gathered that John de Clinton
(VI.) was in 1316 in ward to the executors of the late earl of
Warwick, and that he had been previously in the custody of
that earl himself, who died 10 August 1315. We have also
seen above that his parents were certainly married before 1 300,
to which year we are inclined to assign his birth. As correctly
stated in the Complete Peerage he married Margery, daughter
of Sir William Corbet, of Chaddesley Corbet, co. Worcester,
for we find in the Close Roll Calendar, under date 24 February
1328-9, an enrolment of grant by William Corbet, knight,
lord of Chaddesleye, to Sir John de Clynton, of ' Mastok ' and
to Margery his wife and to the heirs of their bodies of 2OO/.
yearly rent from his manor of Chaddesleye. That this
Margery was the mother of his heir moreover appears probable,
for in the absence of any inquisition taken upon his own death,
we have a series of inquisitions taken after the death of his
brother, the earl of Huntingdon, in 1354, by which his son
John de Clinton (VII.) is found heir to the said earl, his uncle,
and is variously stated to be aged twenty-three, twenty-four,
twenty-six, and thirty years of age. Of these returns that
for Warwickshire is presumably the most reliable, and in this,
taken 24 September, 28 Edward III., the nephew is stated to
have been aged twenty-six at Easter last, that is to say on
13 April 1354 ; fr°m which we gather that he was born in
April 1328, just a year before Margery de Clinton's post-
nuptial settlement.

We find (Pat. Roll Cal.) the name of ' John de Clynton
of Makstok ' in commissions of the peace for Warwick-
shire, 1 8 May 1329, 23 March 1331-2, and 20 November
1332. His summons to parliament in 1335 is not absolute
proof that he was then living, but we have satisfactory evi-
dence, at any rate, that he was dead in 1343. On 14 May in
this year a commission of oyer and terminer was ordered,
on the complaint of Margery, late the wife of John de Clynton
of Maxstoke, that Sir Richard de Herthull and others of his
name had broken her close at Amynton, co. Warwick, felled

5o THE ANCESTOR

her trees and burned and plundered her goods (Pat. Roll
Col.).

John de Clinton (VI.) had issue by Margery Corbet a son
John de Clinton (VII.), born as suggested above in 1328. I
suppose that during a long minority he may have been in
ward to his uncle, the earl of Huntingdon. The benefits that
he received from this uncle, who died without issue, were
immense. High in favour, married to the greatest heiress in
England, but childless, William de Clinton, earl of Hunting-
don, built up a lordly estate. He held at his death in August
1354 land at Wythyhamme and Hertefeld, co. Sussex, land
in Folkston of Nicholas de Sandwich, as of the manor of
Folkston, besides a third of the manor of Goldestanton in
Esshe, with lands in Esshe and Wyngeham, and the manor
of Huntynton, co. Kent, and a moiety of the manor of Pirton,
co. Herts, of which we have already heard. In addition to
this, he was seised in fee of land in Nether Whitacre and
Amynton, held land jointly with his nephew in Kynnesbury,
and had the manors of Maxstoke and Shustoke by his nephew's
demise, all in co. Warwick. The history of this manor of Shu-
stoke is set out in full in the pages of the Patent Roll Calen-
dar. It is concerned with the founding by the earl of a priory
in Maxstoke. On 1 8 May 1 343 a series of licences is granted,
by virtue of which the earl makes an exchange with John de
Moubray of the manor of Hynton, co. Cambridge, for the
manor of Shustoke ; he then grants Shustoke in free alms to
the prior and convent of Maxstoke, who grant it to ' John son
of John de Clynton, and his heirs, in exchange for 2O/. of land
in the manor of Maxstoke, which 2O/., it appears by a further
licence, 21 October 1344, consisted of ' the capital messuage
of the manor of Maxstok, in the park there,' etc. Finally
there is a licence, 17 June 1346, for 'John son and heir of
John de Clynton of Maxstok ' to grant the manor of Shustok
to the earl, his uncle, for life. The piety is delightful. The
earl is enabled to dedicate to religion the very house in which
we must presume he first saw the light. He supplied a stately
substitute for the use of his heirs. On 12 February 1344-5
there is a licence for William de Clynton, earl of Huntyng-
don, to ' crenellate ' a dwelling place to be built in Maxstok for
the use of John de Clynton, his nephew, and for his nephew
to hold the same, thus ' crenellated,' to him and his heirs.

Thanks to Ida de Oddingeseles and to William de Clinton,

THE CLINTON FAMILY 51

her son, the house of Clinton is now fairly launched on its
superb career. The endowments are incessantly commuted.
Never a family so variously at various times endowed; but
whether reigning in the midlands, in Kent, on the east coast,
or in the northern parts the heirs male have not lacked means,
while the heir of line has somehow always contrived to re-gild
the ancient barony.

With the matrimonial alliances of John de Clinton (VII.),
Lord Clinton, we return to pure genealogy, not without
relief.

EXSUL.

(To be continued.)

52

THE ANCESTOR

HERALDS' COLLEGE AND PRESCRIPTION

V

I NOW come to the final and most difficult point of this
inquiry, the question so deftly evaded by ' X ' and Mr.
Phillimore, namely, when did the heralds cease to recognize
prescriptive rights in armorial bearings ?

I have attempted to show that the principle was admitted
by practically all the Kings of Arms down to Dugdale's time,
thus confirming the statements of his letter of I668.1

I must now call attention to another change in heraldic
practice which took place shortly after that time and has an
important bearing on the question. In the earlier grants
and confirmations we find no suggestion that any warrant of
the Earl Marshal was necessary to set the heraldic machinery
in motion. The grants, whether by Garter or by one of the
Kings of Arms either alone or in conjunction with Garter, are
expressed to be made by the authority of the letters patent
conferring the office. Thus in 1541 we find Hawley, Claren-
ceux, granting arms

by the aucthorite and power annexed, attribued, given and graunted by the
Kyng our Soverayne Lord's Highnes to me and to my office of Clarencieubc
King of Armes, ... by expresse wordes under his most noble grete seale.3

This form, with slight variations, is almost universal. One of
the later ones may be quoted also, a grant in 1663 by Sir
Edward Bysshe, Clarenceux, to Silvanus Boycott ; ' by the
power of my office granted unto me under the great scale of
England ' ; no mention being made of the Earl Marshal or
his warrant.3

Very rarely indeed down to Dugdale's time is any mention
of the Earl Marshal made in a patent of arms, and then always,
so far as I can ascertain, in a new grant, as opposed to a con-
firmation. The earliest instance I have found may be given ;
it is from a new grant made by Gilbert Dethick, Garter, in
1564.

1 Ancestor, ii. 45. * Misc. Gen. et Her., i. 304.
3 Misc. Gen. et Her. (new ser.), ii. 162.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 53

I ... by the authoritie and power off my offyce, anexed and graunted unto
me under the greate scale of England, and also by the consent of ... Thomas,
Duke of Norfolke, Erie Marshall . . . have ordayned, assigned, and set furthe,
given, graunted, . . . these armes, etc.1

The distinction made in this respect between a new grant
and a confirmation seems to have arisen out of the notorious
quarrels and disputes that convulsed the college in the sixteenth
and early seventeenth centuries.

Among other things, some of the Heralds, especially William
Dethick, afterwards Garter, had taken to visiting and giving
grants of arms of their own initiative, which they had no right
to do except as deputies to one of the Kings of Arms.3

It was in consequence of these quarrels, which had become
a positive scandal, that the Earl Marshal framed some new
orders regulating the respective rights of the disputants.
They are very lengthy, but only one is material here.

Orders to be observed and kept by the Officers of Arms, made by the high
and mighty Prince, Thos. Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal of England, 1568,
18 July, 10 year reg. Q. Eliz.

Item, it is allso ordered and decreed by the said Earl Marshall that from
henceforth there shall be no new arms granted to any person or persons without
consent thereunto of the Earl Marshal had. Provided always that it shall be
lawful! for Garter, Clarenceux and Norroy and every of them jointly together
to give new crests and confirmances, as heretofore they have done . . . and that
no patents of arms be granted unless the hands of the three Kings of Arms be
thereto subscribed.'

The most important fact in this rule is the Earl Marshal's
recognition of the distinction between a grant of new arms
on the one hand, and a grant of a crest or a confirmation on
the other. The ' confirmances,' as he calls them, can only
refer to arms not already recorded at the College, and con-
sequently depending on outside proof of user, that is, on pre-
scription. Nothing could be clearer or more in point : the
new grant to the new man required the Earl Marshal's sanction ;
the allowance or confirmation of arms to one who could prove
a right to them, did not.

The latter part of the rule was to a large extent disregarded,

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. (ser. 3), ii. 193.

a Noble, p. 198.

» Additional MS. 6297, fo. 19. The italics are mine. ' X ' states that
these rules were made by the command of Queen Elizabeth ; The Right to Star
Arms, p. 99.

54 THE ANCESTOR

for new grants of arms continued to be issued on the authority
of Garter or one of the Kings of Arms alone. In the majority
of these the Earl Marshal's warrant is not mentioned, and
presumably was not obtained.

The earlier Garters do not seem to have interfered with
the functions of the Kings of Arms, nor does it appear to have
been the intention of the Crown that Garter should do more
than superintend the work of the College generally.1 William
Dethick was responsible for the alteration. He ' induced '
(in plain English, I suppose, bribed) one of the Clerks of the
Signet to insert words in the Signet Bill, giving him powers
of making visitations and of granting arms.2 This was a clear
usurpation of the rights of the Kings of Arms, and they re-
sented it very keenly. Many details are given by Noble.

Dethick seems to have been as unscrupulous as he was
violent, and was constantly in trouble. In 1595 or 1596, he
was hauled before the Star Chamber on a complaint made by
the Earl of Kent, Clarenceux King of Arms (Lee) and York
Herald (Brookes mouth). It seems that Garter had made ' a
testimonial^ under the sealle of the Office,' that one Rother-
ham was entitled to quarter the arms of Grey of Ruthyn,
' falsely, corruptely, contrarye to his owne bookes and to his
owne knowledge.' * The result does not appear. James I.
was advised to get rid of him, and after a great deal of trouble
this was done in 1606.

William Segar, his successor, was a weak man and careless.
In 1616 he was the cause of a very serious affair. Deceived

1 That is of course apart from his public duties and those in connection
with the Order of the Garter.

2 Noble, p. 198 ; Diet. Nat. Biog. I append quotations from the patents of
Gilbert and William Dethick, the added words in the latter's patent being in
italics.

Letters Patent appointing Gilbert Dethyck, Norroy, to the office of Garter ;
da ted April 29, 1550. Habendum . . . officium illud . . . cum omnibus juribus
. . . eidem officio qualitercumque debitis ... in tarn amplis modo et forma
prout Christoferus Barker, miles, nuper Gartier, aut aliquis alius . . . habuit
usus vel gavisus fuit ... in eodem officio. [Patent Roll, 4 Edw. VI., part 2,
m. 22.]

Letters Patent appointing William Detheck [sic] to the office of Garter ;
dated April 21, 1586. Habendum officium illud . . . cum omnibus juribus
. . . quibuscumque, necnon visitandi et insignia armorum claris viris concedendi,
etc. [Patent Roll, 28 Eliz., part I, m. I.] Memorandum of surrender, De-
cember 10, 4 Jac. I.

> Hawarde, Let ReporUs del Cases in Camera Stellata, p. 66 j Noble, p. 199,

HERALDS' COLLEGE 55

by the malicious Brookesmouth, York Herald, Segar granted
the royal arms of Arragon, with a canton of Brabant, to George
Brandon, the public executioner,* for which he was promptly
imprisoned.

It was probably in consequence of this outrageous proceed-
ing that James I. appointed a fresh commission to execute the
office of Earl Marshal. The patent is most instructive, and
demands a lengthy quotation.

1618. Commission to Thomas, Earl of Suffolk, Edward, Earl of Worcester,
Ludovic, Duke of Lenox, George, Marquess of Buckingham, Charles, Earl of
Nottingham, William, Earl of Pembroke, and Thomas, Earl of Arundel. Dated
7 February, 1618.

Whereas the office of Earle Marshall of this our Realme of England re-
raayneth at this presente voyde untill wee shall dispose of the same to some
person of honor meete for it ; and there are and wilbe manye accidents of armes
and chivalrie belonging to the same office undetermined ; and that amongeste
other inconveniences of late yeares growne for wante of due regarde had to the
actions of our officers att armes, the heraldes & kinges of armes and purse-
rauntes of armes, wee are informed that divers errors are committed by certaine
heraldes now deceased and by some such as doe live, to the dishonor of our
nobilitie and chivalrie and to the disgrace of sondrie families of aunciente blood
bearing the armes of their auncestors, in assigneing and appointing the aunciente
armes, badges and crestes of some of our nobilitie and chivalrie and of other
gentlemen of auncient blood, to men that weere and that bee strangers in blood
to them and nott heritable thereto ; and likewise, that for gaine or other affec-
cion the said heraldes have appointed armes, crestes and badges for some other
persons of base birthe or of meane vocacion and qualitie of living, that were meete
for persons of good birthe and ligneage to receive honor, either for service in
politique governmente or in marciall actions : Which errors and disorders wee,
of our Princelie and Royall dignitye (from whence all inferiour honors and
dignities ought to be derived and protected), myndeing to refourme, uppon the
certaine knowledge of your fidelities, knowledges and zeale that you and everie
of you beare to the mayntenaunce of all states of our nobilitie and chivalrie and
of all gentlemen of true blood, in their rightes, titles and degrees, aswell for their
armes, crests and badges as for all other prehemynences of right by lawe of
armes belonginge unto them and everie of them or to their children, doe by
theis presentes authorize you or anye three or more of you, to exercise all accions
belonginge to the offyce of the Earle Marshall to all purposes and intentes,
untill wee shall committe the same office to some other : And by vertue hereof
and by authoritie of theis presentes doe give and graunte to you, or anye three
or more of you, as before is expressed, full power from tyme to tyme to call before
you all our officers of armes, bothe kynges of armes, heraldes and pursevantes,
and to cause due inquisicion to be made of all manner of armes by them of late
yeares given to any person withoute good warraunte by the lawe of armes, or
usurped and taken by anye person unlawfullie withoute good warraunte ; and
uppon due examinacion and triall thereof, to revoke and disanull all such as

1 Noble, p. 231.

56 THE ANCESTOR

shalbe soe tried, and fownde unlawfullie or unworthilye assigned and given, or
usurped by anye person unlawfullie : And further, to consider of such good
ordynaunces as have bene made by former Earles Marshalles or Constables of
England for the direction of the said heraldes in their severall offices, and for the
limittacion of their authoritie, and their orderlie visitacion, and to restore the
same to their aunciente usage . . . And generallie ... to doe and execute all
other thinges and actes that of right mighte be donne and executed by the Earle
Marshall of England according to the lawe and custome of this Realme, and
according to the Lawes Marshall, for which this shalbe your sufficiente warraunte
and discharge.1

The phrase * giving arms to such who had no pretensions
to them by inheritance,' distinctly recognizes a prescriptive
right ; no doubt the Rotherham case was the one aimed at.

About 1619 York and Somerset Heralds complained to
the Commissioners of ' the subtle practices of Garter, Norrey,
and his sonne.' They alleged

' that notwithstanding all your Lordships' especiall commaundement and his Ma-
jestie's pleasure signified, yet do the Kings of Armes . . . continue the giving of
armes and creasts without warrant, to men unfitting to receave the same ; and
to secure their actions the more, they neither record or make knowen any of
their doings in the generall office, as they ought to doe. . . . Also when heere-
tofore any visitacions have been made, . . . those who made suche visitacions
were bound to bring into the generall office (presentlie after their returnes) their
whole collections formerlie taken ; but these (to obscure their proceedings and
abuses) doe not performe any those auncient orders and rules, so that divers
gent., from whom they have receaved large rewardes and fees to doe the same,
comming after of purpose to see whether record hath beene made thereof
accordinglie, and finding nothing to appeare as they expected (as of all their
doings there is not so much as one leafe of paper brought into the office for these
30 yeeres), they have with great exclamacions and bitter speeches taxed the said
officers with little better than cousenage. . . . Latelie 2Otie of the best bookes
of armes, creasts, visitacions and pedigrees have beene purloyned and stolne out
of the office ... by which meanes the office is become so barren, as those nowe
remayning in the office are not able to give satisfaction to gent, as is requisite
and as ought to be done . . . And further . . . newe armes given to base men
are entred by some of the office in olde bookes, dating them 3 or 4 hundred
yeeres past.' 2

Brooke, I admit, is not a good witness, but in a complaint
of this nature to the Commissioners he would not be likely to
make any statements that he was not prepared to prove.

I have mentioned these old scandals in no unfriendly spirit
to the College ; the present staff are no more responsible for
the misdoings of their predecessors than King Edward VII. is

1 Patent Roll, 15 James I., part 1 1, m. I2d.

1 State Papers, Domestic, James I., vol. iii., No. 137.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 57

for those of the second of that name. But I wish to show that
these successive restrictions on the powers of the heralds, and
the gradual tightening up of the heraldic machinery, was as
much for the protection of the public against the heralds as
vice versa.

In 1617 there is a document which at first sight seems to
be an example of the Earl Marshal's warrant for a confirmation.

Wheras wee are enformed that James Willan, sorme and heireof Leonard
Willan, late of Kingston upon Hull in the county of Yorke, Esq., is of sufficiencie
to beare armes, and hath such armes as are acknowledged by one of the Heralds
of Scotland to be his ancestors', sent him thence, as it is informed, the w"h soe
appearinge to you, Wee doe hereby require yow to ratifie and confirme the same
unto him, as in like cases is usuall. And for soe doeinge this shalbe yor warrant.
Suffolke house, this 25th of Aprill, 1617.

Yo' loving freindes,

T. SUFFOLKE, E. WORCESTER.

To our lovinge freinde Sr Richard St. George, knight, alias Norroy Kinge
at Armes.1

On I May 1617, St. George assigns, ratifies and confirms
to James Willan, ' these armes and creast followinge.' The
form is that of a new grant, and there is no mention of the
Scotch coat.3

This grant is not easy to place. The office of Earl Marshal
was in commission, and the Earls of Suffolk and Worcester
were two of the Commissioners. Possibly the fact that the
applicant was a Scotchman may have made some difference,
and caused the English heralds to look upon the transaction as
an English grant rather than as a confirmation.

St. George, however, fully understood the distinction made
in the orders of 1568. Thus in 1617 he recites : —

I ... having power from his Matle under the great scale, with the consent
of the Earle Marshall of England, to give, grant, ratifie and confirme coates of
armes unto men of quallitie meriting the same.1

The patent from which the extract is taken is a new grant.

The same distinction is found in the letters patent of
Charles I. appointing William Le Neve to the office of Claren-
ceux in 1635.

1 Harleian MS. 1470, fos. I, lob.
> Misc. Gen. et Her. (3 ser.), i. 60.
» Harl. MS. 1470, fo. 3.

58 THE ANCESTOR

The operative words are as follows : —

Habendum, . . . et exercendum officium illud . . . cum omnibus juribus
. . . quibuscumque . . . pertinentibus ; dantes ulterius . . . eidem Claren-
cieux authoritatem, potestatem et licenciam literas patentes armorum claris
viris donandi secundum ordinacionem perComitem Marescallum nuper pre-
scriptam et cum eorum consensu, ac cetera omnia et singula que dicto incumbent
officio regis armorum sive in esse dignoscuntur in jure vel ex consuetudine
temporibus retroactis faciendi, exercendi et exequendi.1

The power of giving ' patents of arms to worthy persons '
clearly refers to new grants, and the Earl Marshal's ordinances
mentioned are probably those of 1568.

With this we may compare the statement of Francis
Thynne, Lancaster Herald and a careful antiquary. Writing
in 1605 on the duty and office of a king of arms, he says : —

He shall make diligent search, if any bear arms without authority or good
right ; and finding such, although they be true blazon, he shall prohibit them.
The said king of arms in his province hath full power and authority, by the
king's grant, to give confirmation to all noblemen and gentlemen, ignorant of
their arms ... he hath authority to give arms and crests to persons of ability,
deserving well of the prince and commonwealth.2

Note the antithesis, authority or good right, and the dis-
tinction between the confirmations and the new grants to
deserving persons, the claris viris of the letters patent just
quoted.

Edward Bysshe, the Parliamentary Garter, naturally does
not refer to the Earl Marshal in his grants during that period ;
but even after the Restoration, when he had been reduced to
his former office of Clarenceux, he made grants which contain
no reference to the Earl Marshal.3

Sir Edward Walker had been deprived of the office of
Garter in 1646, when Bysshe was appointed by Parliament ;
he was restored in 1 660. All through his second tenure of the
office, 1660 to 1677, the Earl Marshal's warrant was not
required, so far as we may judge from the absence of any
mention of it in grants of arms. A large number of his grants
exist, and many have been printed ; I have not found one
reciting that the warrant had been obtained.

Sir Edward Walker died on 19 February 1677, and Sir

1 Additional MS. 6297, fo. I57b.

2 Noble, p. 196.

* e.g. Harleian MSS. 1172, fo. 46 ; 1470, fo. 81.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 59

William Dugdale was appointed to the office of Garter on
26 May following. Despite Mr. Phillimore's sneers, he was
the most distinguished antiquary who has ever filled that post.
His career in the College runs thus : Blanch Lyon Pour-
suivant Extraordinary, 1638 ; Rouge Croix Poursuivant, 1639 >
Chester Herald, 1644 ; Norroy King of Arms, 1660 ; Garter,
1667. Thus when he became head of the College he had
already nearly forty years' experience of matters heraldic.

His opinion on the question of prescription appears from
his letter in 1668, when Norroy King of Arms. Shortly after
this we find him reciting the fact of the Earl Marshal's warrant
in a new grant.

1676. Whereas . . . Henry, Earle of Peterborough, Deputy ... by
warrant or order under his hand and the scale of the Earle Marshall's office . . .
hath signifyed unto me his consent for my devising and assigning unto John
North . . . such armes and crest as he ... may lawfully beare . . . Know ye
therefore that in pursuance of the said warrant or order and according to the
grant of my office under the great Scale of England, whereby I am authorised
to devise and grant armes according to the Earle Marshall's orders, and with his
consent, etc.1

In 1682, five years after his appointment as Garter, Dug-
dale published his treatise on The Antient Usage in Bearing of
Arms. The work itself does not throw any further light on
the present subject, but the epistle dedicatory to Robert,
Earl of Aylesbury, Deputy Earl Marshal, contains the following
passage : —

Such have been the extravagant Actings of Paynters and other Mechanicks
in this licencious Age, that, to satisfie those who are open handed to them, they
have not stuck to depict arms not only for divers younger branches of Families
with undue distinctions, if any at all, but to allow them to such as do bear the
same appellation, though of no alliance to that stock ; the permission whereof
hath given such encouragement to those who are guilty of this boldness, that
there are not a few who do already begin to prescribe as of right thereto.1

The quarrel between the heralds and the ' painter fellows '
was of long standing, and indeed has descended to our own
day. Dugdale resented as keenly as any of his predecessors
the intrusion of the heraldic stationer upon the prerogatives
of the College. Is it going too far to suggest that on his
initiative the Earl Marshal or his deputy made a more drastic
regulation to the effect that a warrant should be obtained for

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. (new ser.), i. 301.
" Edition by T. C. Banks, 1811.

60 THE ANCESTOR

' confirmances ' as well as for new grants F I have not been
able to ascertain that such an order was in fact made, the
archives of the College would doubtless show, but this is clear,
from this date onwards the Earl Marshal's warrant is recited
in all patents, and not confined as before to new grants.

It will be noticed that Dugdale, even when expressing his
well-founded indignation against the painters, still admits
that it is possible ' to prescribe us of right ' to armorial bearings;
His wrath is directed solely to this being done by ' such as do
bear the same appellation, though of no alliance to that
stock.' The phrase is not very happily worded, but the mean-
ing is unmistakeable. There is nothing against prescription
per se ; but no prescription can give a right to the arms of
another family. That is his grievance, and the distinction is
both sound and sensible. No length of user can sanction what
is in the beginning a fraudulent, if unintentional, usurpation
of another's property. Here for once The Book of St. Albans
and The Right to Bear Arms are in accord. Dame Julian says
' for that thyng the wich is myne . . . may not be take fro
me, ner the prynce may not do hit rightwysly ' ; ' X ' puts it
' the Kings of Arms in England have no power in themselves
to grant the lawful arms of one family to another family.' '
It is much to be regretted that this very proper principle has
sometimes been lost sight of by those by whom it should have
been held most sacred.

It is difficult to see how the insistence on the Earl Marshal's
warrant upon all occasions improved the position of the
heralds, unless it may have done so in the matter of fees. The
people who were content to deal with the herald painters were
not affected by it, and no doubt continued to ' send name and
county,' as they are still invited to do to-day. Moreover, it
did not at first alter the old practice as to prescription,
though it may have made the rules as to the amount of evidence
required somewhat more stringent.

The case of John Evershed seems to point in that direction.
In 1696 he obtained a confirmation of his arms from Thomas
St. George, Garter, and Henry St. George, Clarenceux,
which contains the following recital : —

Whereas . . . Henry, Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal, . . . hath by warrant
or order . . . signified unto us that he hath received testimonials that Mr.

1 P- 49-

HERALDS' COLLEGE 61

John Evershed . . . is of an antient family : and whereas he hath also produced
to his Grace an escutcheon of arms, attested under the hand of Sir Edward
Bysshe, knt., sometime Clarenceux King of Arms, declaring his arms therein
expressed to be the arms of their family, his Grace did thereupon order and ap-
point us to allow and confirm the same unto the said John Evershed and his
posterity in due form.1

This carries us a step further. A formal allowance of
arms by the proper authority would, one would have thought,
have been sufficient to satisfy the most exigent Garter or
Earl Marshal. But something was clearly lacking, or why this
confirmation ? Can it have been that Bysshe's allowance had
not been registered at the College ? It is not so stated, but
it is difficult to find any other explanation. Bysshe we know to
have been a careless person ; witness the following : —

Sir Edw. Bysshe, Clarenceaux King of Armes, was at the Crowne Inn near
Carfax in Oxon, in order to visit part of the County of Oxon. . . . Few gentle-
men appeared, because at that time there was a horse-race at Bracldey. Such
that came to him, he entred if they pleased. If they did not enter, he was in-
different, so the visitation was a trite thing. Many look'd on this matter as a
trick to get money.'

The infallibility of the College records was clearly in the
air, and we can trace the growth of the theory almost from
start to finish. The Evershed confirmation of 1696, just
quoted, seems merely to imply it ; the following grant by
Henry St. George, Garter, in the first year of his office, 1703,
goes a little further, and hints at it in set terms.

Whereas Henry Gatchell . . . hath by petition humbly represented unto
. . . Charles, Earl of Carlisle, Earl Marshal of England, . . . that he and his
ancestors have been possessors and owners of lands of inheritance in the county
of Somerset . . . ever since the reign of King Richard III., but for want of due
entries in the College of Armes, not being able to make out so just a right to a
coat of arms as he ought to do, has made application to his lordship for a grant
. . . the said Earl Marshall did by warrant . . . order and appoint us to
devysc and assign such armes, etc.3

Here then we get the first hint of the idea that the College
records are the sole authority for the right to arms. But mark
how tentatively the draftsman puts it forward ! Here is no

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. ii. 191.

*" Dallaway, 316; Noble, 272 ; quoting Anthony Wood. The visitation
was in 1669. The note is a withering comment on X's statement that the
visitations effected a ' clean sweep.'

3 Misc. Gen. et Her. (ser. 3), ii. 101

E

62 THE ANCESTOR

rude and blustering assertion that ' arms are good or they are
bad as they are recorded or unrecorded.' ' The writer is more
in sorrow than in anger ; there is a delicate suggestion that if
the College records are incomplete, it is the dead and gone
Gatchells who are to blame. They had been horse-racing, or
cock-fighting, or something, when they should have been
recording their pedigree and arms.

In 1707 there was further trouble with the ' painter
fellows,' and a royal proclamation was issued in the Queen's
name, signed by the Earl of Bindon, which contains the fol-
lowing recital : —

Whereas the ordering, judging, and determining all matters, concerning
arms, crests, supporters, cognizances, pedigrees, devices, and ensigns armorial,
the making and prescribing rules, ordinances, and decrees, for the granting,
controlling, and regulating thereof, and the putting in execution the laws and
ordinances relating thereunto, are, among other powers and authorities, with
her Majesty's approbation, invested in me, Henry, Earl of Bindon, Deputy to
Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal.'

By 1711 St. George had strengthened his formula. In that
year he granted a patent of arms to Dame Sarah Pritchard,
nee Cook,

which family of Cook the said Lady Pritchard . . . affirms to have borne
and used for their armes, Party per pale gules and blew, three golden eagles dis-
played, and a like eagle for their crest ; but for want of due entries of the said
family and arms in the Books of the Heralds' College, the right of the Cooks of
Kingsthorp to the forementioned arms is become disputable.'

This a distinct advance. In 1703, Henry Gatchell was
' not able to make out so just a right to a coat of arms as he
ought to do ' ; in 1711, the right of the Cook family had
' become disputable ' for want of due entries at the College.
We can see the theory feeling its way, if I may be allowed the
expression, though as yet it still falls far short of X's vigorous
pronouncements.

Henry St. George does not appear to have pushed the
infallibility theory any further. He was an old man of seventy-
eight when appointed Garter in 1703, and at that age his
reforming fires must have been burning low. Noble says of
him : ' He does not appear to have been much skilled in the

> The Right to Bear Arms, p. 1 39.

3 Noble, p. 329.

3 Misc. Gen. et Her. (new ser.), i. 349.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 63

profession of arms, or to have personally done much in the
science.' * His successor, John Anstis, describes him in more
caustic terms, as ' a timorous animal, governed by every
creature, minding only his iron chest and the contents of it.' *

St. George died in 1715, in his ninety-first year.

Sir John Vanbrugh was nominated to succeed him. In
the following year, 1716, before his patent was made out, he
exemplified arms to Sir Matthew Decker on the strength of
a prescriptive title.

Whereas Sir Matthew Decker, hath represented unto . . . Henry, Earl of
Suffolk and Bindon, . . . Deputy . . . Earl Marshal, . . . that his father . . .
and other his ancestors, who were natives of Flanders . . . having borne and
used the arms and crest depicted in the margin of this letter ... as the arms
belonging to their name and family ; which arms the same Sir Mathew Decker
alledgeth that he some yeares since bro' over with him into England, and hath
used the same without any interruption ; yet in regard that himself and family
are now setled in this kingdom ... he was desirous that the aforesaid arms and
crest, as borne by his ancestors, might (with his lordship's permission) be assigned
and confirmed unto him and his descendants in the usual form practiced in
England. . . . And whereas the said Earl . . . did by warrant . . . order and
appoint us to assign and confirm unto the said Sir Mathew Decker and his
descendants the aforesaid arms and crest, unless tee should see cause to make any
alteration or difference in the same, etc.5

Vanbrugh did not ' see cause to make any alteration,' and
the arms were ' assigned and confirmed ' as claimed, on the
strength of user alone.

Vanbrugh never got his patent as Garter. He was ousted
by John Anstis the elder, who may perhaps be best described
by the modern slang expression, ' hustler.' A learned man he
undoubtedly was, and his industry is unquestionable.

In 1714, more than a year before St. George's death, Anstis
obtained a patent of the reversion of the office of Garter,4
but he was unfortunately in prison on a suspicion of Jacobitism
when the office actually fell vacant, and in the meantime
Vanbrugh had been nominated.5 Anstis, however, succeeded
in getting his claim allowed in 1718, and he subsequently
obtained a grant of the reversion in favour of his son.

1 History of the College of Arms, p. 353. 2 Ibid. p. 354.

3 Misc. Gen. et Her. (ser. 2), iv. 289 ; Vanbrugh describes himself as
' nominated Garter.' The italics are mine.

4 He had apparently been angling for it as early as March 1712.

s Vanbrugh, it maybe remarked, obtained a confirmation of arms in 1714
on the strength of user by his grandfather (Noble, 355).

64 THE ANCESTOR

Anstis soon began to improve upon St. George's forms,
and of course always in the direction of infallibility. Thus,
in 1723, we get the following : —

William Heysham . . . hath represented unto . . . Henry, Earl of Berk-
shire, Deputy . . . Earl Marshal . . . that his ancestors having for many
generations lived in the credit and reputation of gentlemen, did bear a coat of
arms as of right belonging to their name and family ; but being unable, for want
of due entrys of their several descents in the College of Arms, strictly to justify
their right to the same, and desiring an indisputable authority for using thereof,
hath therefore pray'd his Lordship's warrant, etc.1

Again mark the subtle advance. In 1711, the right of the
Cook family had ' become disputable ' for want of due entries
at the College ; in 1723, Mr. Heysham for the same reason
is ' unable strictly to justify ' his right to arms.

In 1732, Anstis made a vigorous but futile attempt to
revive the Court of Chivalry, when three persons were pro-
ceeded against for the alleged improper use of arms. The
results do not appear, but Noble says that ' this whole business
was imprudently begun, and unskilfully conducted. The
lawyers who were consulted laughed at it.'

Dr. Andrews a spoke mighty well on this occasion, saying that Mr. Lad-
brook's executors could not be to blame, for they only gave the same arms at the
funeral as they found in Mr. Ladbrook's custody, and which he always bore in
his life time unmolested ; and that as visitations had been discontinued so long,
there was no certainty in arms ; and that several persons who had a right, might
in length of time have lost their grants,3 or not regarded them, but yet if they
were so lost, that loss might be repaired for money, etc. ; and took notice that
arms were granted not long since to a coffee-man on his paying for them. Mr.
Ladbrook's son produced a ' brass plate from his grandfather's grave-stone,upon
which was the arms that the son had borne.' 4

In 1733 we find another variation : —

Whereas Robert Bostock of Orford in the County of Kent . . . hath re-
presented . . . that his grandfather came out of Cheshire about the year 1630
. . . that for want of due entries in the office of arms [he] is unable to prove
his descent from the antient family of Bostock of Bostock in Cheshire . . . hath
prayed his Lordship's warrant for our granting, allowing, ratifying and con-

1 Misc. Gen. ft Her. (new ser.), iv. 375.

1 He appeared for one of the accused persons.

8 This is the only reference to a lost grant that I have found in the course
of a somewhat lengthy search. I am afraid it does not strengthen Mr. Philli-
more's argument very materially.

« Noble, p. 373. '

HERALDS' COLLEGE 65

firming the same arms and crest borne by the said family, with such alteration
as may be necessary to distinguish him and his posterity from all others of the
same name and lineage.1

This case seems to sail perilously near Dugdale's phrase
' such as do bear the same appellation, though of no alliance to
that stock,' but we may take it that Mr. Bostock produced
sufficient evidence to prove a prima facie descent from the
Bostocks of Bostock, though unable ' for want of due entries
in the Office of Arms ' to show the exact links.

By 1738 there was an emphatic alteration, and we get the
following : —

Whereas William Leeves . . . hath represented . . . that his ancestors
were formerly seated at Wimbourn in the county of Dorset, and that he hath in
his custody several of their ancient deeds, and among others a settlement bearing
date in the year 1417, whereto four persons of his surname have severally set
their seals, which are impressed with a fess dancette between three garbs, but the
colours are not there to be discovered, however, his ancestors have borne them
thus blazoned, viz. : gules a fess dancette between three garbs or, and that the
same arms are engraven upon several tomb stones now remaining in the Church
of Wimbourn aforesaid. . . . That as no entries can be found in the College of
Arms, of their descent or of the arms thus used by his ancestors, the said William
Leeves hath therefore prayed his Lordship's warrant for our granting and con-
firming unto him and his descendants . . . the same arms as borne by his ances-
tors, with some small addition, and a suitable crest thereto.*

The ' small addition ' granted was the substitution of
' erminois ' for gold in the fess, a substitution which daubed
a coat, presumably ancient, with a brush dipped in the
coach-painter's pot.

Here at last we have it, at a date so near our own that two
long lives will bridge the gap. In all its effrontery we have
the new doctrine : ' as no entry can be found in the College,'
therefore a new grant is necessary. Anstis has put the crown-
ing touch upon St. George's usurpation of power, and thus
created a precedent for the subsequent practice of the College.

Apart from everything else, I have no hesitation in de-
scribing this recital as a gross impertinence. Compare the
facts in this case with several of the quotations I gave in a
late number of the Ancestor.3 Can there be the slightest
doubt that Dugdale or any of the earlier heralds would have
exemplified these arms without any hesitation ?

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. (new ser.), iv. 92.

» Ibid. (ser. 2)^.53.

' Ancestor, viii. 139, 140, 141

66 THE ANCESTOR

The deed cited, and doubtless put in evidence, is only two
years short of Agincourt, and we may reasonably assume that
Mr. Leeves was one of the ' precious few ' (to use ' X 's elegant
term) who could prove a user from that date. But to gratify
the avarice or lust of authority of an Anstis, he is dragged
down to the level of Dr. Andrewe's coffee-man. I repeat,
it was a gross impertinence.

In 1737 the College petitioned for a new charter. I have
not been able to find a copy of the petition, and Noble merely
mentions the fact, without giving any details. It is difficult
to conceive what necessity there could be for a new charter,
unless it was to confer greater powers on the heralds. It is
curious that the petition should follow so closely after the
failure to resuscitate the Earl Marshal's Court. The petition
was not granted.

One more quotation will show how the formula crystal-
lized. Thus, in 1739, the elder Anstis recites that

John Mason . . . hath represented . . . that his ancestors having borne for
their arms, upon plates and seals, a lyon rampant with two heads . . . but find-
ing no memorial of his descent is unable to justify such a right to the same as the
strict laws of arms require.1

In 1746, John Anstis the younger, who had succeeded his
father as Garter in 1745, gave a patent of exemplification on
the strength of user.

Whereas Samuel Dicker ... on behalf of his father Phillip Dicker . . .
hath represented unto . . . Thomas, Earl of Effingham, Deputy . . . Earl
Marshal . . . that his ancestors being descended from a family of the same name
in Saxony, who have for many ages borne and used the coat of arms following
. . . ; but by reason of the great distance of time, is unable to make the due
proofs required ; and upon search made in the records of the College of Arms, does
not find them borne by any other family ; hath therefore prayed his Lordship's
warrant for our granting and confirming the same arms and crest . . . And
forasmuch as his Lordship . . . did by warrant . . . order and direct us to
grant and confirm unto the said Philip Dicker such arms and crest as he and his
descendants may lawfully bear, etc. The arms and crest are granted without
alteration.1

This is the latest case I have found in which prescription
was recognized ; sixty years after ' X ' tells us that it was
' utterly useless to put forward any prescriptive right to arms
whatsoever.' 3

1 Misc. Gen. et Her. (ser. 2), i. 295.

2 Ibid. (ser. 2), iv. 290. The italics are mine.

3 The Right to Bear Arms, p. 139.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 67

VI

We are now in a position to apply the result of this evidence
to the statements of ' X ' and Mr. Phillimore, and thus to test
the soundness of their conclusions.

Let us first see what they say.

Since the Visitations it has been absolutely impossible in England to obtain,
and utterly useless to put forward, any prescriptive right to arms whatsoever.
Arms are good or they are bad as they are recorded or unrecorded.1

If a man did not embrace the opportunity [i.e. the visitation], the arms he
used remained as they were before — that is, bogus, not merely unrecorded.
The arms were illegal ; the opportunity of making them legal was ignored,
therefore the fault lay with the individual himself, not with the Heralds. The
descendants of such people must blame their ancestors for being so foolish as to
let the opportunity pass.1

Mr. Phillimore, like the Second Spirit in the Ancient
Mariner, hath ever ' a softer voice.' He tells us that

mere voluntary assumptions, whether by the applicant or his ancestors, are
entirely disregarded, and the ultimate and only test is whether the arms rest on
a grant or ancient allowance by the heralds at some visitation.3

The fundamental error in both authors seems to me to be
this : each assumes that the heralds could record pedigrees
and allow arms only at a visitation. In each case the language
is clear and unmistakeable : ' since the visitation ' says ' X,'
an ' allowance ... at some visitation ' says Mr. Phillimore.
It is amazing to find two champions of the College thus limiting
the powers of the heralds. And the point is vital to their
argument. If arms could be exemplified and pedigrees
recorded other than at visitations, there is no reason why the
discontinuance of visitations should affect the heraldic prac-
tice ; there is no reason why ' since the visitations ' it should
be ' useless,' etc. ; there is no reason why the allowance should
be ' at some visitation.'

It is so notorious that all these things were done out of
visitation time, that it cannot be necessary to cite authorities
to that effect. A large number of the documents already quoted
in this article were not made at visitations, and I have shown
that exemplifications continued after the visitations had ceased.
The powers of the Kings of Arms are granted by their patents

» The Right to Bear Arms, p. 139.

1 Ibid. p. 131.

3 Heralds' College and Coats of Arms, p. 6.

68 THE ANCESTOR

of creation, the patent authorizing the visitation merely
enlarged them for certain specified purposes. Thus the visit-
ing King of Arms or his deputy had authority to summon
individuals before him, to demand proofs, to enter castles and
houses, to regulate costume under the various sumptuary laws,
to use force if necessary, and to summon offenders before the
Earl Marshal ; all of which, except perhaps the last, were in
addition to his ordinary powers as contained in his patent of
creation. While conducting his visitation he granted or
exemplified arms by virtue of his authority as a King of Arms,
not of his visitation commission ; and, once the visitation was
concluded, the extraordinary and ancillary powers given to
him ad hoc, ceased and determined.

No doubt a large number of exemplifications were made
at the visitations, but this was a matter partly of compulsion,
partly of convenience. The Herald in Eyre brought heraldic
justice to the door of the country gentleman, who, willingly
or unwillingly, gratefully or otherwise, accepted his sovereign's
consideration that ' the nobilitye and gentry of this our realme
may be preserved in every degree as apperteyneth as well in
honour as in worshippe,' * and saved himself the trouble and
expense of a journey to London.

The discontinuance of the visitations, though it may be
' the saddest thing one can find to chronicle in the history of
British armory,' 2 has nothing whatever to do with the pre-
scriptive right to arms. That right was fully recognized by
the heralds long before the visitations began and long after they
ceased.

The question next arises what authority if any had St.
George and Anstis for altering ' the long practice of centuries ' ?
That the ' very ancient and long usage ' beloved of Mr.
Phillimore was capable of alteration we may admit, but how
or by whom ? An Act of Parliament could doubtless have
done it ; and so probably could a new charter, if Anstis had
succeeded in getting one in 1737. The Earl Marshal's powers
may perhaps extend so far, though I am inclined to think they
do not. It is not necessary, however, to go into this, because
it seems clear that the Earl Marshal did not make any orders on
the subject. If he had done so, we should expect to find some

1 Commission to Richard St. George, Clarenceux, to visit the east, west, and
south parts (Patent Roll, 9 Charles I.).
* The Right to Sear 4rms, p. 108.

HERALDS' COLLEGE 69

reference to them in Noble's work, and they would have been
quoted by ' X ' as authority for his assertions. Moreover,
the very gradual growth of the infallibility theory, which I
have pointed out, the insidious steps by which it finally reached
its ultimate form, preclude the idea of its being the act of the
Earl Marshal. There would have been no necessity in that
case for the cautious language used in the grants I have quoted.
The Earl Marshal would have issued his fiat in set terms, both
for the instruction of the public and the direction of the
heralds.

But if there were no Act of Parliament, no charter, no
orders of the Earl Marshal, the change must have been made
by St. George and Anstis themselves, and of their own autho-
rity ; and this was most emphatically ultra vires. Garter's
patent gives him no power to make any alteration in the law
of arms, and to this we may attribute the care and caution so
markedly displayed by the draftsman.

A precedent had been set, however, and successive Garters
have felt bound to follow it. The position was and is, I
admit, a difficult one. It is almost as hard a task to upset an
established precedent as it is to overtake a lie with a good start.
And the demonstration that the lie is a lie and the precedent
ultra vires does not necessarily diminish the difficulty.

W. PALEY BAILDON.

7o THE ANCESTOR

AN ANCIENT SCOTTISH SETTLEMENT
IN HESSE

THERE is a little town in a corner of one of the Rhine
duchies which has a special interest for the wanderer
from the British Isles. The place bears the suggestive name
of Schotten (Schotte is the German for a Scotsman) and it
lies in an out-of-the-way district of the pleasant land of Hesse.
A branch line of railway, which has its starting point at Nidda,
one of the stations on the line from Frankfort to the University
town of Giessen, connects Schotten with the outer world.
But the tourist heeds it not, and passes by along the well-worn
way.

As the traveller steams away from Frankfort he leaves
behind him the Germany of to-day — Germany, the ' world-
power,' strenuous and progressive — and is borne away to an
older Germany, the Germany of legend and romance, where
the spirit of feudalism yet lingers ; to the land of quaint
old towns and villages, of enchanted forests and pinnacled
castles perched upon the hill tops, relics of the days when
the robber-knight preyed on the treasure that flowed from
the East into the rich cities of Almayne.

From Nidda a single line winds slowly up to the foot of
the Vogelsberg hills. The railway is laid through the very
midst of a succession of picturesque villages, a bell clanging
incessantly to warn the inhabitants of the leisurely approach
of the train, which passes so close to their homes that one
might think it possible to stretch out a hand, as the train crawls
by, and touch the timbered walls of the houses. At last
Schotten is reached — a little town of a few hundred inhabi-
tants, encircled by the wooded hills.

There can be no certainty about its early history. ' Zu
den Schotten ' (at the Scots') is the earliest form of the name,
and there is no doubt that it points to the settlement here of
a colony of Scoti, who crossed the sea and made a laborious
pilgrimage to this spot, far inland, where they built a village
and church.

SCOTTISH SETTLEMENT IN HESSE 71

In the absence of any proof to the contrary, there is no
reason why the traditional story should not be accepted, which
tells that in the year 1015 two Scottish princesses began to
build a church and village, coming hither, no doubt, with pious
intent to found a religious house among a people who at that
time had not yet found the light.

The church of Schotten is a large and handsome fourteenth
century structure. Above the west door there is some curi-
ous mediaeval sculpture representing a knight on horseback.
Within the church are shown the gilded busts of the two ladies
whose piety raised the earlier building. Both have long,
flowing locks ; one has her hair encircled by a wreath, the
other wears a crown. Archaeologists are agreed that these
effigies are probably of eleventh century workmanship.1 More-
over, not many years ago an ancient document was discovered
in the ball of the church tower. Since it speaks of Schotten
as already a ' civitas,' it is held that it was not written earlier
than the fourteenth century, so that it merely represents what
was the traditional belief at that time with regard to the
foundation of the church. It is interesting, however, because
it repeats what has already been the legendary account of the
people of Schotten.

It runs as follows : ' Anno milesimo decimo quinto post
nativitatem Dom. nostri J. Christi sup. imperio regis dicti
claudi civitatem hanc et templum nostrum Schottense primum
aedificare coeperunt duae sorores ex Scotia oriundae, una
Rosamunda, altera Dicmudis vocata ' — that is to say : ' In the
year 1015 in the reign of the king nicknamed the lame (Henry
II, Emperor 1002-1024) two sisters from Scotland, one named
Rosamunde, the other Dicmudis, began to build this town and
our first church at Schotten.'

In the annals of the nunnery of Wetter, not very far away,
the names of two Scottish ladies appear at the same date. At
Wetter they are called Dicmudis and Almudis. Whether
Almudis was a third sister, or there was some confusion about
the names, can only be conjectured.

This part of Germany had, for many years before this date,
a connexion with the British Isles, for there were already nine
' Schottenkirchen ' in Mayence and in Upper Hesse, all

1 We venture to dissociate ourselves from the archaeologists who assign these
figures to so early a date. — ED.

72 THE ANCESTOR

dependent on Strassburg, where Florens, a Scoto-Irish hermit,
had been elected bishop in 679 A.D. It seems quite natural
that the Scottish sisters should settle at a place where their
countrymen were already known.

We have spoken of the settlers at Schotten as ' Scottish,'
but it is impossible to decide whether these Scoti came from
the country which is now called Scotland, or whether they
came from Ireland, whence the Scots originally migrated to
Caledonia.

So generally it was recognized that the inhabitants of
Ireland and the West Highlands of Scotland were of the same
race that it was not until the twelfth century that the word
' Scotus ' was used to denote exclusively a Scotchman in the
modern sense. For instance, the celebrated ' Schotten-
kloster ' at Ratisbon, which was in the hands of Scotsmen
till the eighteenth century, was founded in the eleventh
century by Marianus Scotus, who was in reality an Irishman.

It has been suggested that the princesses ' ex Scotia ' who
built the church at Schotten may have been two daughters of
Brian Boru, the King of Munster, who was defeated and de-
posed at the battle of Clontarf in 1014. Beyond the fact that
the date fits in with that of the arrival of the princesses in
Hesse, there seems little ground for this supposition.

There is at least one German family which claims descent
from the followers of these Scottish ladies. In the family
MSS. of the Schotts of Braunfels (begun in 1587) this claim is
set forth, and although it will not bear historical investigation
it is not inherently improbable. The tradition need not
summarily be rejected that the first recorded member of the
family migrated from Schotten to the Nassau country in the
twelfth century, and granting this, it is quite probable that
most of the inhabitants of the Scottish village at that date
were descended from the original settlers of the previous
century.

S. H. SCOTT.

THE TRAFFORD LEGEND

I HAVE read with considerable surprise, indeed with blank
amazement, Mr. Bird's article on this subject. In order
that I may run no risk of misrepresenting in any way his reply
to my criticism of the Trafford legend, I will quote his own
words. After setting forth the pedigree from ' King Kanutus
his tyme,' he proceeds : —

It is a more serious matter when Mr. Round comes forward to denounce our
pedigree as a ' grotesquely impossible tale," and declare that ' it is shattered by
Domesday Book.' l

Mr. Bird then prints abstracts of seven charters, and
observes : —

In the light of this evidence I do not think the most impatient critic will any
longer deny the existence of the impossible Randolph, or refuse assent to the
following pedigree.'

This pedigree makes the Henry de Trafford who fined for
his relief in 1 205 the great grandson of a ' Randolph,' of whom
Mr. Bird submits

that we shall not be far wrong if we set down the impossible Randolph as a
real person, probably a contemporary of the Conqueror, born »omewhere in the
latter half of the eleventh century.3

The article closes with a plea that we should ' try and
be fair even to an old-fashioned maker of pedigrees on vellum.'

Now it is an old and a very familiar device in all contro-
versy to abstain from citing your opponent's case and then
to claim to prove what he has never denied. In the present
instance I need only cite what I have actually written (in the
passages referred to by Mr. Bird) to show that what I de-
nounced was not Mr. Bird's pedigree, but, to quote his own

» Ancestor, ix. 68. > Ibid. 71.

s Ibid. p. 74. Genealogists should be careful to avoid this loose and
misleading use of the word ' contemporary.' I was, in this sense, contem-
porary with Queen Victoria, but I was not even born till she had been many
years on the throne.

n

74 THE ANCESTOR

phrase, ' the Trafford legend,' the pedigree from ' King Kanu-
tus his tyme.'

The two passages are these : —

The World (17 Oct. 1900), in an article on ' Sir Humphrey de Trafford at
Home,' asserts that ' Randolph, Lord of Trafford, was the patriarch of the
family, which for nearly nine centuries after him has produced an uninterrupted
line of heirs male. The first recorded Trafford lived in the reigns of King
Canute and Edward the Confessor, being succeeded by his son Ralph," etc.
This grotesquely impossible tale is duly found in Burke's Peerage, although it
is shattered by Domesday Book.1

Wilder, however, than the claims to descent from Norman invaders are
those of the families who would ' go one better ' by asserting an earlier origin
... As for ' Randolphus de Trafford,' who lived ante conquestum, ' as the family
pedigree sets forth,' we may leave him to the company of an impossible, etc., etc.
. . . An equally impossible ' Hugh Fitz Baldric, a Saxon thane,' was a Norman
tenant-in-chief. 2

It will be obvious to all who read these words that what
I denounce as ' grotesquely impossible ' is the existence of a
* Randolf, lord of Trafford,' who ' lived in the reigns of King
Canute and Edward the Confessor* and was succeeded by his
son ' Ralph.' In the very same number of the Ancestor
as that which contains Mr. Bird's article several paragraphs
of ' What is believed ' 3 are, devoted, as it happens, to other
families which similarly claim ' fore-conquest ancestors.' Of
these ancestors one is ' William Stanley of Stanley,' living
' fifty years before the battle of Hastings,' who is justly de-
scribed as ' a pretended Englishman with the very French
name of William ' (p. 158). No less worthy of ' What is
believed,' is that pretended Englishman with the very French
name of Renouf (Ranulphus), who is said to have been lord
of Trafford ' in the reign of King Canute,' ' nearly nine cen-
turies ' ago, and to have given his son the no less distinctively
foreign name of Ralph.4

Domesday Book shows us ' Ranulfus ' as a name that was
common after the Conquest, and was (as we should expect)
unknown before it. Mr. Bird pleads, quite justly, in favour
of Randle Holme, that ' for him were no public libraries, no
books of reference ; the public records were hardly accessible.'

1 Peerage Studies, p. i.
3 Ibid. pp. 64-6.

3 These, I need hardly add, are not from my own pen.

4 Compare Ancestor, v. 144, 146-7.

THE TRAFFORD LEGEND 75

And he urges that we should ' keep strong language in reserve
for offenders of a different class.' But it will have been
observed that I do not even mention Randle Holme in the
passages above. My complaint is against those responsible
for the issue of Burkis Peerage, precisely as was Mr. Free-
man's.1 The excuses that could be made for Randle Holme
cannot be made for them ; nor can they even plead that they
do but repeat legends as such. As Mr. Freeman complained
before me, its information is put forward as " authoritative "
on the ground of its ' testing of all facts by research and in-
vestigation.' a Yet even now, in this year of grace 1904, the
Trafford legend is thus set forth in that impenitent publica-
tion : —

RANDOLPHUS DE TRAFFORD. who flourished ante conqnestum, as the family
pedigree sets forth, was father of

RANDOLPHUS, of whom mention is made in two deeds to ' Radulphus
(sic) filius Radulphi (sic) ' by which it appears that Radulphus (sic) the
father, * was then dead, and had flourished in King Canute the Dane
his time, about the year 1030 and perhaps died after, in St. Edward
the Confessor his time, about the year 1050 ; hee had noe surname, as then
few of our Saxon nobilitie or gentry had.' From this Radulphus sprang
the great house of Trafford, which has since uninterruptedly held a most
distinguished place among the first families of Lancashire. His son

ROBERT FILIUS RADULPHI was of full age at the time of the Conquest, and
about A.D. 1080 he, with his father, received the king's peace and protection
from Hugh de Massy, Baron of Dunham Massy ; his son

HINRICUS FILIUS ROBERTI, temp. Henry I., d. about 1130, leaving a son
HENRT DE TRAFFORD, etc., etc.

This is ' the Trafford legend ' as preserved by Randle
Holme,3 but here given, it will be observed, without mention
of his name, and not as legend but as fact.

It is because we have here three generations of pretended
English thanes, successively receiving before the Conquest
distinctively foreign names, that I must denounce this legend
as ' grotesquely impossible,' and everyone familiar with the
period will know that I am right. Does even Mr. Bird ven-
ture to deny it, though he vaguely hankers after a pre-Conquest
pedigree for the family ? He does not and dares not do so.

1 See his ' Pedigrees and Pedigree-makers ' in Covtemforary Review, rxi.
11-41.

2 See Ancestor, i. 190, and compare Peerage Studies, pp. 52-3.

3 See Ancestor, Lx- 67.

76 THE ANCESTOR

As to using ' strong language,' it is evident that, as Mr.
Freeman found, not merely ' strong,' but ferocious language
is needed to produce any impression on a work such, as Burke 's
Peerage. I cited Trafford in my Peerage Studies, as an in-
stance of how newspapers were induced to repeat these fables
by ' the sanction they appeared to receive from their quasi
official and persistent repetition in the pages of Burke' s Peer-
age and of other ' Burke ' publications.1 Even the excuse
of ignorance, therefore, will not here avail. When the reader
is assured, as this very year, in the usual preface, that

The narrative pedigrees in Burke1 s Peerage are subjected annually to search-
ing revision, and . . . made to keep pace with the onward march of events and
the latest results of genealogical research and discovery [!]

it would not be pleasant, or even possible, to say what one
thinks of that assurance in the light of the Trafford legend.
I will only ask my readers — Is it true ?

When one turns from the distinctive glory claimed for the
house of Trafford, a proved pedigree from the days of Canute,
to Mr. Bird's claim that they descend from a ' Ranulphus '
(as he spells it) ' born somewhere in the latter half of the
eleventh century,' the incredibility disappears — but the dis-
tinctive glory also. There is obviously nothing ' impossible,'
still less ' grotesquely impossible ' in the existence of such a
man at a time when, as Domesday shows, his name was
common enough. Only — and this is the essential point so
strangely ignored by Mr. Bird — he cannot have been an English-
man born before the Conquest.

The pedigree propounded by Mr. Bird deserves to be
examined on its merits, and for my part I have no wish to
question it. The date at which his ' Ranulphus ' lived cannot,
of course, be exactly given ; but as he was the great-grand-
father of Henry, who succeeded to Tra fiord in 1205, he
must almost certainly have been born after the coming of
the Conqueror (1066). Mr. Bird, I gather, admits this and
suggests that he was born about 1095 if we allow twenty-five
years to a generation, or 1075 if we allow thirty. But he
thinks it impossible to say whether there were not two Henrys
in succession (as in the above pedigree derived by ' Burke '
from Randle Holme), in which case these dates would be

1 pp. ix.-x.

THE TRAFFORD LEGEND 77

thrown back to 1070 and 1045 respectively (p. 74). Now
any date earlier than 1066 would, as I have shown above,
settle the point decisively as against Mr. Bird by establishing
the foreign birth of ' Ranulphus.' But what ground is there
for supposing that there were two Henrys ? Mr. Bird can
only produce evidence for one, and his sole ground for suggest-
ing two is that ' Randle Holme supposed there were ' (p. 74).
It is evident that he cannot emancipate himself from that
' legend ' which his own evidence proves to be false. For the
Randle Holme-Burke pedigree makes even the second Henry
succeed as early as 1130, while Mr. Bird's Henry does not
succeed to Trafford till 1205 !

We have here, in fact, but another example of that process
which I have described as trying to put the new wine of scien-
tific genealogy into the old bottles. However carefully the
process is conducted, the bottles are bound to burst. In
this case the pedigree begins with ' Ranulphus ' both in the
old and in the new version ; but while, according to Mr.
Bird's dates, ' Ranulphus ' must have spent under Henry I.
his manhood, if not his boyhood, Randle Holme transports
him to the days of ' King Canute.' The natural result of
this absurdity was that, as Mr. Bird admits, ' subsequent
generations, no doubt, had to be spread out rather in order
to make all shipshape ' (p. 72). This spreading out was partly
accomplished by making one Henry into two, but even then
the gap yawned.

Perhaps Mr. Bird's reverence for ' tradition ' may lead
him to think that, after all, an authority so venerable as
Weever did not lightly repeat the legend that ' Jernihingho
now Jennings ' was among those ' of the moste esteeme with
Canute,' who ' at a parliament held at Oxford ' gave him
' certain manners lying upon the seaside near Harwich in
return for services done to his father Swenus.' A recent
paragraph in an evening paper on the name of an ancient
family being ' a noted one in England long prior to the Nor-
man Conquest,' is directly traceable to this source. The
tale may strike us as hard to swallow ; ' but,' as Mr. Bird
would say, ' no matter ' (p. 72). |r

It is the same reluctance to shake himself free from that
' grotesquely impossible ' ancestor who — as ' equall to our
Lord Barons nowe ' — may have even been one of Canute's
advisers on his attitude towards the tide, that lies at the root,

78 THE ANCESTOR

as it seems to me, of Mr. Bird's wish to instal the Traffords
at Trafford before the Conquest. For apart from Randle's
nonsense, what proof can he produce ? Tradition !

There had formerly been within the Hundred [Salford] twenty-one bere-
wicks held by as many thanes. ... At the next survey, in King John's time,
we read of a number of manors still held in thanage (in thenagio), a fact which
suggests that many or all of them had been left undisturbed. At any rate when
one of these tenants in thanage is put forward by tradition (sic) as, not merely
successor in title, but the lineal descendant of one of King Edward's thanes, I
cannot myself see anything in Domesday to shatter his claim. Indeed I should
go further, and say that Domesday, so far as it goes, tells in his favour (p. 74).

Now how far back can Mr. Bird carry his ' tradition ' ?
To ' the Elizabethan age ' (p. 66) at furthest ; definitely only,
as it seems to me, to the days of Charles I. ! And yet it is he
himself who says of Randle Holme on the Traffords . . .
' " as is proved by Ancient Tradition," be weakly adds ' (p.
67) ! It is also he himself who questions the tradition which
makes the Pilkingtons, in the same Hundred, of ' Saxon '
origin, and holds that ' instead of being Saxon irreconcilables
they were more probably on the side of the invader ' (p. 77).*
He cannot, therefore, complain if I similarly decline to accept
a tradition which traces the Traffords to ' one of Edward's
thanes ' who bore, like his father before him, a wholly impos-
sible name.

There is nothing exceptional in the vague claim to ' tra-
ditional ' Saxon origin ; and I am disposed to make the
suggestion that it may have had its origin often in the pos-
session by a family of the manor from which its name was
taken. Even since this article was written a paragraph has
appeared in the press on the present Earl of Chichester
stating that his family, as Pelham of Pelham (Herts), had a
4 clear ' pedigree to days before the Conquest ; it is claimed
for the Crofts of Croft Castle (as, for instance, even in Fos-
ter's Baronetage) that they are of ' Saxon origin ' ; and the
same claim is made for Trelawney of Trelawney, Stourton
of Stourton, and, as we have seen, for ' Stanley of Stanley,'
Pilkington of Pilkington, and Trafford of Old Trafford. Mr.
Bird, it is true, urges that the Lancashire belief in the ex-

1 This tradition, which is duly ridiculed in the same number of the Ancestor
( p. 155), is at least as old as the days of Fuller, who speaks, in his Worthies, of the
Pilkingtons as ' a right ancient family of repute before the Conquest.'

THE TRAFFORD LEGEND 79

ceptional antiquity of the Traffords must be old because
' a quaint local poet of the Elizabethan age, in A Golden
Mirror* supports it in his ' acrostic verses of a complimentary
character upon the names of knights and gentlemen of that
country,' adding —

Now there were many old families then in Lancashire — Ashtons, Pilking-
tons, and Worsleys, Standish, Molyneux, and even Stanley. But it is only
when Sir Edmund Trafford's name is the subject of his vision that our poet
chooses Time for his interlocutor.1

One verifies the reference and discovers, first, that the
' acrostic verses ' relate, not to Lancashire, but almost ex-
clusively to Cheshire, and then (not without some surprise)
that of the six houses named by Mr. Bird Stanley alone is
dealt with by the author, and that as Strange,* not as Stanley.
I venture to submit, therefore, that it is somewhat misleading
to put the case as Mr. Bird puts it.

But, it may be urged, there is the ' thanage ' argument ; is
there not something in that ? Absolutely nothing whatever.
Mr. Bird appears to have confused the holding of land ' in
thanage ' with descent in blood from a ' thane.' The fact
that holdings by thanage are found in the survey, temp. John, of
Salford Hundred, does not, I assert, ' suggest that many or
all " of the English thanes " had been left undisturbed.' At
Pendlebury, for instance, a carucate was held ' in thanage '
because it had been so granted by John when Count of Mor-
tain ; 3 and Little Bolton in Pendleton (opposite Trafford
Park) was held by the Boltons ' in thanage ' because it had
been so granted to William son of Adam by John when Count
of Mortain ; * therefore the holding of land ' in thanage ' is
no proof that it had not been acquired by a recent grant,
though the absence of enrolment in the twelfth century
makes it impossible, as a rule, to prove the fact of that grant.

If then ' tradition ' and tenure in thanage are alike of no
avail to prove that the Traffords held at Trafford before the
Conquest, what remains ? There remains nothing.

1 Ancestor, ix. 66.

a Ferdinando, Lord Strange, who was summoned to Parliament as such
1589-1593. He matriculated as ' Ferdinando Strange,' and was himself a poet.

3 ' to hold of us and our heirs ... in free thanage by the free service of
ten shillings yearly " (Farrer's Lancashire Inquests, p. 69).

• Ibid. p. 71.

8o THE ANCESTOR

The only clue for our guidance is that of the Christian
names borne by their earliest ancestors ; and these, we have
seen, are distinctively foreign. This appears to me to afford
a very strong presumption that they were not of English
origin. Take the case of their neighbour, Roger son of Wil-
liam, who held ' in thanage ' Reddish in Manchester ; l his
ancestor was Orm the son of Ailward ' living in the time of
Henry I.,' * founder of the Kirkbys of Kirkby Irleth. Or
again, take the Singletons of Singleton, descended from Huck
of Singleton, whose sons Uchtred and Siward were living
under Henry II., and apparently under Richard I.3 Lastly,
take the Traffords' neighbour, Gospatric, lord of Chorlton,
living in the days of John. One could easily adduce other
instances of the retention of native names by men of native
origin for some time after the Conquest. Had the Traffords
been of English origin, it is most improbable that they would
have adopted so early as the eleventh century so foreign a
name as Ranulf, in view of the slowness with which such
names were adopted in the north of England. The clue, it
may be said, is slight ; but it is all the evidence that we have.
For, be it observed, there is no proof that the family held
Trafford before the time of ' Robertus filius Radulfi de Traf-
ford,' whose son Henry succeeded in 1205. Even if it be
claimed that Ralf, Robert's father, held it, this would not
carry the tenure further back than the middle of the twelfth
century. To this I attach some importance, for it is perfectly
possible that, even as the carucate of Pendlebury was granted
(we have seen) by Count John to be held ' in free thanage '
at ten shillings a year, the half carucate at Old Trafford was
granted rather earlier to be similarly held ' in thanage ' at
five shillings a year, the terms on which we find it held by
the Traffords. It is, indeed, perhaps significant that the
return of these holdings in 1226 4 records Trafford as the land
of Robert son of Ralf, although, on Mr. Bird's showing, it
was then held by his grandson. I do not wish to press the
point unduly, but on comparing this with the other holdings
one is tempted to suggest that Robert son of Ralf is thus
entered because he had been the original grantee. ;

1 P- 69-

2 Farrer's Lancashire Pipe Rolls, pp. 404-6.

3 See Mr. Farrer's books.

4 Farrer's Lancashire Inquests, p. 1 38.

THE TR AFFORD LEGEND 81

With regard to the Trafford crest of the thresher, to which
Mr. Bird devotes the latter part of his article, I cannot think
that any serious student of such matters will pay much atten-
tion to the story that accompanies it or will ask whether ' in
this crude legend ' we have ' a genuine tradition of the con-
quest ' (p. 75). They will remember Bulstrode riding on
his bull to meet the Conqueror and his host, or will bethink
them of Botolph, the Stourtons' gigantic ancestor, holding
that host at bay. Like Botolph, a nameless ' Traford ' held
the line of a river and ' kepte the passages against them ' till
' the Normans having passed the ryver, came sodenlye upon
him.' At this point, as it seems to me, Mr. Bird wholly
misses the point of the story ; its hero, we read (p. 75), ' dis-
guising bimselfe, went into his barne, and was threshing when
they entered, yet, being knowen by some of them and de-
manded why he so abased himself, answered " Now thus ! "
Surely this Trafford is here alleged to have caught up a
thresher's flail — as the royal Charles might have done when
fleeing from Worcester fight — for the purpose of ' disguise,'
not of defence. And when Mr. Bird further urges, of the
Trafford in real life, that, being surrounded by Norman
neighbours, ' never was sturdy thane in more precarious
position ; good cause had he to keep his back to the wall, his
wits about him, and a stout flail handy ' (p. 77) — he not only
treats the flail as a weapon (against Norman warriors !), but
assumes exactly what he has to prove, namely, that Trafford
was an English ' thane.'

The Trafford claim, I must repeat, is by no means peculiar
to their house. Stourton was of Stourton, as Trafford of
Trafford, from early times no doubt ; but, not content with
this antiquity, Stourton claims to have been ' traditionally
a powerful and warrior family in the Saxon period,' and to
have had as its ' traditional ' ancestor, in the time of King
Alfred, ' Botolph de Stourton.' * Given the possession of
a manor from twelfth century times, there is almost bound to
arise a ' traditional ' descent either from its Norman grantee
at the Conquest, or, as in the case of the Trelawnys, from its
* fore-conquest ' possessor.8 Mr. Bird, it is true, carries back

' Peerage Studies, pp. 55-7.

* Ibid. p. 65. And compare Mr. Barren's remarks on the Ogle's patriarch
an the same number of the Ancestor as Mr. Bird's article (p. 181).

8a THE ANCESTOR

the story connected with the Trafford crest to the days of
Agard (1540-1615) ; but I have carried back to those of Par-
sons (1546-1610) the story connected with the Stourton
crest of ' a monk girt with a girdle, and armed with a scourge,'
that it commemorates the fact of ' Sturtonus ' being ' among
the first converts ' at the coming of St. Augustine (597).'

Let me now endeavour to sum up the conclusions at which
we have arrived.

(1) The pedigree of the Traffords from ' Randolphus de
Trafford,' who lived in the days of Canute, which is still pub-
lished in Burke 's Peerage, remains ' grotesquely impossible.'

(2) A vague belief that the name of Trafford ' hath been
tyme out of mynde, before the conquest was,' is found in a
local poem ' of the Elizabethan age.'

(3) The above pedigree from the time of Canute was defi-
nitely set forth by Randle Holme in 1638.

(4) It is now admitted that the above Randolphus (or
Ranulphus) was not even born till the ' latter half of the
eleventh century,' and the claim to a pre-conquest pedigree
is abandoned.

(5) The distinctively foreign name of Randolphus (or Ran-
ulphus) creates the strongest presumption that he was not of
English birth (and a certainty that he was not, if he was born
before the Conquest).

(6) Trafford cannot be proved to have belonged to the
family till the time of his grandson, or (at earliest) of his son.

(7) Trafford was probably granted to a man of foreign
blood, to be held as before ' in thanage,' not earlier than the
middle of the twelfth century.

A tenure of lands in the male line since that date is so ex-
ceptional that it places the Traffords of Trafford among the
oldest of our landed houses.

J. HORACE ROUND.

' Ibid. p. 58.

SEALS AND ARMS

THE very interesting roll of arms of the fifteenth century,
which was brought to a conclusion in the last volume of
The Ancestor, presents a large number of points that seem to
invite discussion. May I select one as a beginning, in the hope
that my example will be followed by other readers, who must, I
feel sure, have examined its quaint tricks and blazons with
the same pleasure as myself.

Among the last set of shields is depicted one to which no
name is attributed : azure a leaping fox of silver carrying off a
goose.1 This coat arrests the eye as something singular, and
not altogether heraldic in character. It stands apart from
the familiar lion and leopard, as from the boars' heads, the
corbies, and even the belled goats to be seen upon the same
page ; for there is a certain element of realism in it, a natural
vigour of action, foreign to the conventions of heraldic art.

At every period of English history we find new families rising
out of obscurity to wealth and position, as some are rising to-
day. When the novus homo has to be fitted with coat armour,
what shall be devised for him ? One will set up a claim, well
or ill founded, to an ancient coat. Another would accept arms
of affection from the chief of some established house, with
whom he was connected by marriage or other ties. A third
might prefer something more personal ; charges symbolical,
perhaps, of his profession and career, or a canting coat suggested
by his name. The shield in question may be an example of
this last class ; but the treatment, I repeat, is not exactly
that of the herald or herald painter.

The origin of a certain number of armorial designs has
been traced to antique gems. Hence come such cognisances
as the Sagittarius, the Pegasus, the salvage man, the head
bound with fillet or wreath. A gem, we may suppose, set in
a signet ring, was handed down from generation to generation,
with a legend perhaps attached to it, until the device upon it

1 Ancestor, a. 166.

83

84 THE ANCESTOR

was either chosen deliberately as a crest, or erroneously con-
ceived to represent one. Possibly in other instances the
design of a medieval seal engraver was similarly adopted,
whether consciously or by misapprehension, for a coat of arms ;
and the fox and goose is very probably a case in point.

The seal, of which a rough drawing is here given, may
lend support to this contention. Its subject happens to be
the same ; and the device, in no way purporting to be
armorial, is curiously similar in treatment to that of the later
draughtsman. This was the seal of one John le Fox, and was
appended to a letter of attorney, dated 35 Edward I. (1307).

The seal of Simon de Alvitheleye, of which a drawing is
also given, affords a remarkable parallel. It is taken from a
deed of 1300, in the same collection, which came to my hands
some years ago by the kindness of the late Mr. H. S. Graze-
brook. Both instruments relate to land in the Shropshire
parish of Alveley, lying below Bridgnorth on the left bank
of the Severn, adjacent to the Staffordshire border and to the
ancient forest of Morf.

The design of this second seal again — the buck's head
surmounted with the cross formy, with crescent and star to
fill the vacant spaces on either side below — suggesting as it does
the legend of St. Hubert, is of a type not uncommon, I
believe, in forest districts, and makes no pretence to be
armorial. Yet it reappears at a later date with little altera-
tion, as the coat of a family named Vise of Standon, allowed
by the heralds at several visitations of Staffordshire : ' argent,
a buck's head cabossed sable, between the attires a plain_cross

SEALS AND ARMS 85

of the last.' * One might safely infer, therefore, that their
arms were taken from a seal of this type, even if the manuscript
of an earlier visitation had not shown such a circular seal in
place of a shield.3 No doubt other examples might be adduced.

I should like to refer once more, in this connection, to the
well known coat of Holford in Cheshire, silver a greyhound
sable, adopted also, with difference, by a distinct family named
Halford in the shires. Originally the Holfords sealed with
the differenced arms of Toft, their male ancestor. On a former
occasion I remarked that the greyhound is probably to be
regarded as a Lostock coat, since it was also borne by the
Moretons, who descend from Lostock in the male, as Holford
in the female line ; and hazarded the question whether it
could be connected etymologically with the name of Gralam
de Lostock, an early member of the house.3 The seal of
Gralam has since been suggested to me as a more likely origin.
True, the device upon it was interpreted (correctly, I have
no doubt) as a running hart * ; but the creature is so rudely
engraved that its species might easily have been mistaken
when the arms were devised.

Rather different is the case of a Cheshire coat of greater
consequence, that of Mascy of Dunham. Mr. Round * long
ago grouped together a number of families whose arms were
quarterly of gules and gold, and was able to show that all of
them were allied to the great house of Mandeville. But his
list was not exhaustive. Two barons of the Palatinate also
bore the quarterly coat, Mascy perhaps by the same title as
the rest. At any rate the Beauchamps of Bedford belong to
Mr. Round's group ; while among the wives of the last baron
of Dunham was a Mary de Beauchamp, of unknown descent,
who was the mother of his daughters.* It may be that his
arms came by this wife, and that he retained them, though
he seems to have divorced her.

1 William Salt Soc. v. pt. 2, 295.
J Ibid. iii. pt. 2, 144.

3 Ancestor, ii. 152.

4 Ibid. 129, 148.

8 See his Geoffrey de Mandeville. He has since added Despenser (Peerage
Studies, 328-9).

• Genealogist, new ser. rri. 17. I am not aware of any evidence for
the use of this coat by earlier barons, nor indeed of any contemporary evidence
for it at all.

86 THE ANCESTOR

Several of the quarterly coats collected by Mr. Round,
that of Beauchamp among them, were marked by various differ-
ences. Like Vere, Mascy differenced his by a charge in the first
quarter, in this case a lion passant. Now in slight drawings
that I have seen of Mascy seals there appears the rude outline
of a beast, which I take to be meant for a lion. The same
device may have been borne perhaps upon their shields ; but
once more upon the seal it is not treated armorially. When
therefore the baron adopted his new coat, and it became
necessary to consider the question of a suitable difference, it
seems not improbable that he also had recourse to the art of
the engraver ; and that the device upon his seal reappeared
as the charge upon his coat of arms.

W. H. B. BIRD.

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS

THIS curious little book of arms has a peculiar value by
reason of its connection with the famous Paston letters.
Friar John Brackley, D.D., a grey friar of Norwich, was the
constant correspondent and hanger-on of the house of Paston
between 1440 and 1460. The volume is small, with but one
shield to a page. The shields are in colours and are of unequal
merit and finish. Our illustrations are of the better ex-
amples.

All the shields commemorate the descents and alliances
of the Pastons and their kinsfolk the Barreys and Mawtebys.
Agnes, daughter of Sir Edmund Barrey of Marlingford,
knight, married William Paston of Paston, the settlement
before marriage being dated the eve of the Annunciation,
8 Hen. V. [24 March 1419-20]. Margaret, daughter and heir
of John Mawteby, esquire, the wife of John Paston about
1440, made her will 4 February 1481-2, and thereby directed
that many of the shields in this MS. should grace her tomb.
Four scutcheons were to be at the corners of her gravestone,
whereof ' the first scochen shalbe of my husbondes armes and
myn departed, the i]** of Mawtebysarmes and Berneys of
Redham departed, the iij3* of Mawtebysarmes and the
Lord Loveyn departed, the iiij"1 of Mawtebysarmes and
Sir Roger Beauchamp departed. And in myddys of the seid
stoon I will have a scochen sett of Mawtebysarmes allone.'

The arms are followed by some obscure pedigree notes of
the Barreys, and these by directions for those who have ' an
affection ' to learn the French language, with a short grammar
of that tongue.

The book was once in the hands of John Ives, Suffolk
Herald extraordinary, some notes by him being written on
the title pages in the tiniest of handwritings under the date
of St. Stephen's Day 1772. It rests now in the collection of
a more distinguished Norfolk antiquary, Mr. Walter Rye
having acquired it in 1897.

87

88 THE ANCESTOR

1. Gules [no charges] impaled with silver a cross engrailed gules between
f our bougets sable for BOURCHER.1

2. Quarterly gules and gold with a pierced molet silver in the quarter for the
ERLE OXFORD impaled with gules a bend between six crosslets fitchy silver
for HOWARD.

3. Silver six fieurs de lys azure with a chief indented gold for W. PASTON.

4. PASTON impaled with silver a cheveron sable between three bears' heads
sable cut off at the neck with golden muzzles for BARREY.

5. Silver a fesse gules with two crescents gules in the chief for WACHESHAM
impaled with azure a leopard rampant gold for HETHERSETT.

6. Sable a fesse and two cheverons gold for JERBRYGG impaled with silver a
fesse gules with three golden crowns thereon.

7. Checkered gold and gules with a bend ermine [/or CLYFTON impaled
with gold flowered with sable for MORTIMER.

8. PASTON impaled with gold a cheveron 'gules between three lions' heads
razed gules with three roundels sable on the cheveron for SOMERTON.

9. BARREY impaled with WACHESHAM.

10. Checkered silver and gules for MOWNCI.

1 1 . Gules a scutcheon silver with an orle of silver martlets.

12. Party azure and gules with a cross engrailed ermine for BERNEY.

13. Azure three sheaves gold for RsnAu[?]impaledwith gules a cheveron
silver between three eagles silver for CASTOWN.

14. Silver a chief indented gold,2 impaled with azure a cross gold [MAWTEBY].

1 The names attached to the shields are italicised in the cases where a
later hand has inserted them.

* This is doubtless for the arms of Paston, the flowered field being left un-
finished.

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 89

15. MAWTEBY impaled with gules a fesse and six martlets of gold for
BEUAUCHAMP, LORD OF POWIKE.

16 Sable a bend silver [sic] with cotises dancy gold for CLOPTON.

17. Silver a fesse sable between three crescents gules for PATSULL impatfd
with paly azure and silver of eight pieces and a bend gules with three eagles
gold thereon for GRANSUN.

1 8. MAWTEBY impaled with gules billety gold anda fesse silver for LO[VEYN i],

19. Party gold and gules with a lion passant silver for PLAYSE.

20. Silver a fesse azure for CLERE impaled with ermine a chief gules charged
with a fesse indented silver with a billet azure on each fusil.

21. BARREY [the bears' heads unmuzzled], impaled with silver a chief in-
dented gules /0fHENCRAVE.

22. Barrey impaled with silver a fesse gules between sir crosslets fitchy gules
CRAUEN.

23. Gules a saltire engrailed silver for KER[DE]STON.

24. Gules [three round buckles pencilled] for KATISFYLDE [?] impaled with
gules a chief [the chief with two pierced molets pencilled within a border !]
for BACON.

9o THE ANCESTOR

25. Quarterly gold and gules with a border engrailed sable charged with
scallops silver for HENINCHAM impaled with silver a bend azure for GISSYNG.

26. Paston impaled with azure a scutcheon gold and a border of martlets gold

PECHE. A later band uti WALCQT in •place of these two names.

27. MAWTEBY impaled with CLIFTON.

28. Quarterly gold and gules with a baston sable for CLAVERYNG.

29. Gules three gimel bars gold and a quarter silver with five billets. . .
FYSEOBERDE. [FITZOSBORN.]

30. Gules a bend engrailed gold SIRE MARCHALL. A later hand adds Mar-
shall, olim Lord of the mannors of Buxton and Sparham.

31. BARREY impaled with JERBRYGG [as in No. 6].

32. Silver a chief indented gold impaled with silver a fesse azure.

33. Silver a cheveron gules with three fleurs de lys gold for PEVERE im-
paled toith silver three lions gules.

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 91

34. Azure a chief indented gold for MOUNSIRE LE GLANVYLE.

35. Gules a cross silver with five voided lozenges sable.

36. Checkered gold and azure with a fesse silver for MOUNSIRE SPRECCEYS.

37. Gules a bend cheeky gold and azure [with six crosslets pencilled in the
field].

38. PASTON impaled with sable a scutcheon gold and a border of martlet
gold.

39. Gold [with traces of a leaping lion gules] for FELBRIGG.

40. Quarterly gold and azure with a bend gules and three crosslets gold on
the bend for SIRE JON FASSETOLFE.

41. Gules a cheveron between three boars' heads silver, with a border en-
grailed silver.

92 THE ANCESTOR

42. Quarterly sable and silver with a bend gules and three molets silver on
the bend/orOuppESBY impaled with silver three lozenge bucdes gules for
JERNYCHAM.

43. [PASTON].

44. Azure a cinqfoil ermine with a border engrailed gold for SIRE ASTELEY.

45. Gules six hands silver for VAUX or GORNEY <?/ROKEWODE l

46. Silver six chessrooks sable and a molet sable in the midst for difference
for ROKEWOOD.

47. Silver two bars gules and a quarter gules with a baston sable.

48. Vert two cheverons silver each with three cinqfoils gules for SWANTON
impaled with PASTON.

' The shield may be meant for the sir gloves of Wauncy, as is suggested
by a note in a more modern hand.

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 93

49. Sable a]bend ermine with cotises dancy gold. [CLOPTON.]

50. Sable three martlets silver for NANTOH.

G

94 THE ANCESTOR

51. Gules a chief ermine for NARBOROW.

52. Gules a cross flory silver for WALSH AM impaled with two coats PASTON

53. Azure three boars gold for BACON.

54. Azure a fesse and two cheverons gold for GRAY DE MERTON.

55. Quarterly silver and azure with a bend sable and three martlets gold on
the bend for GROSSE.

56. Silver three lozenges buckles gold for SIRE GUNTUN impaled with
azure a scutcheon silver with a border of martlets silver SIRE WAKESYLDE or

WALCOT.

57. Gules a cross silver with a border engrailed gold for LEIGH.

58. Silver a cheveron azure between three squirrels gules with a rounde
silver on the cheveron /orLovELL, impaled with two coats WAL[S]HAM as in No.
52 above PASTON.

59. Azure three griffons passant gold with beaks and claws gules for
SIRE WYTHE.

60. KERDISTON impaled with azure a fesse between three leopards
heads gold for DE LA POOLS.

61. Silver a fesse azure with three eagles gold thereon for CLEERE tw-
paled with silver a lion gules and a baston sable for BRANCHE.

62. Gold three pales gules and a chief ermine for RENEY [?] or MOLOWSE.

63. KERDISTON impaled with silver a lion sable crowned gold.

64. Gold a fesse and two cheverons sable impaled with [HENGRAVE].

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 95

65. Silver a cheveron azure between three scallops sable for LITLETON.

66. Quarterly gules and silver with an eagle gold in the quarter for ERPINC-
HAM impaled with two coats, one above the other, azure three roses on cinqfoils
gold for LORDE BARDOF and vert a scutcheon silver and a border of martlets
silver for WALCOT.

67. Silver a fesse azure with three eagles gold for DOWDALE or CLEERE
impaled with silver a millrind cross gules INCH AM.

68. Silver a bend and sir crosslets fitchy sable for SIRE ROBERT TYE or
ICHINCHAM. ' Tye weddid lady Ichingham now in Newsell.'

69. Party gold and vert with a millrind cross gules for OLIVER INGHAM.

70. Party vert and gold with a lion' rampant gules. [BYCOT.]

71. A shield of twelve quarters : i. PASTON, ii. SOMERTON, iii. WALCOT, iv.
BARREY, v. JERBRYCG, vi. HENGRAVE, vii. [as the impaled shield in No. 38],
viii. CLERE, ix. GLANVILE as No. 34, x. [as the first shield of 64], xi. KERDISTON,
xii. POLE.

72. Gules a cheveron silver with arose . . . on the cheveron. [The spaces
for two more roses are marked on the cheveron.]

73. Barry gold and vert with a baston gules for LORD POTNINGS
quarterly with gules three lions passant silver the whole impaled with PASTON
quartering BARRET".

These obits of the family of Barrey or Berry and its allied
houses are written near the book's end.

Obitus of Hewe Barrey the vij day of May the yere of howr lord MCCCL.

The obite of John fader of Edmond Barry the viij day of May the yere
MCCCLXVII, and the secund day of May than nex fowlyng Edmund Berrey
knyght was of age ij yere.

The obite of Cecile Barry wife of Hugh Berry and dowtyr of Heingrave
xiij day of May the yere MCCCXLIX. The same Cecile and Beatrix Thorpe
grauntdame of Edmund Thorppe knyght weryn sisteris.

96 THE ANCESTOR

iij id' Maij obitus Cecile Berry filia Heingrave uxor Hugonis Berry a° d'ni
millesimo ccc quadragesimo nono.

Non' Maij obitus Hugonis Berry anno d'ni millesimo ccc quinquagesimo.
Eodem die obiit domina Julian de Hetirsett.

iiij°id' Octobris obitus domini Johannisde Wachesham anno d'ni millesimo
ccc sexagesimo primo.

xviij" kal' Julii obitus domini Roberti de Wachesham a° d'ni m'° CCCLXVII.
viij id' of Marcij obitus Edmundi Berry a° d'ni m'° ccc sexagesimo septimo .
zij kal' August! obitus domini Johannis Berry a° d'ni M'°CCCXXIX.
Combustum magne grangie apud Markynford a° gracie M°CCCLXXXVIII.

Obitus Cicilie Barrei filie Hengrave uxoris Hugonis Barrei a° d'ni M°CCC
quinquagesimo nono.

Obitus Clementis Paston [anno] d'ni M° [cccc] xix.

Obitus Biatricis nxoris dementis Paston a° M°CCCCIX. ^

Obitus Edmundi Paston a d'ni M°CCCCLXVIII lit' d' E.

Obitus Elizabeth Paston a° d'ni 1425.

Obitus Roberti Clere armigeri a° d'ni M°CCCCXLVI*.

Obitus Willelmi Paston Justiciarij regis qui obiit a° d'ni M°CCCCXVIIJ
litera dominicali D.

Obitus Magerie uxoris Johannis Mawdeby armigeri et filie Johannis
Berney de Redam a° d'ni MCCCCXLV.

Obitus Elizabeth Rothenale a° d'ni M°CCCCXXXVIIJ que fuit uxor Johannis
Clere armigeri postea Johannis Rothenale militis.

FRIAR BRACKLEY'S BOOK OF ARMS 97

Obitus Galfridi Somerton a° d'ni M°CCCCXVI.

xj kal' Januarij obitus dominc Elizabethe Gerbridge filie domini Roberti
de Wachesham a° domini Mtocccn litera dominicali A.

vij kal' of Febr' obitus Alicie filie Tohme Gerbrcge militis et uxoris
Edmundi Berry militis a° d'ni M'° ccccxxx".

iiij id' Octobris obitus Edmundj Berry militis a° d'ni M^

98 THE ANCESTOR

THE WANDESFORDES OF KIRKLINGTON 1

THE enamelled stall plate of an early knight of the garter
having been lately found in New Zealand, one may not
wonder overmuch at Mr. McCalPs discovery of a mass of
valuable Yorkshire deeds at Castlecomer House in the county
of Kilkenny. Christopher Wandesforde of Kirklington, the
Lord Deputy, went over to Ireland with the Earl of Strafford
in 1633, and Castlecomer became at last the home of the
Wandesfordes and the seat from which they drew the vis-
count's title which five of them enjoyed. To Castlecomer
the Wandesfordes carried the deeds of their Yorkshire lands,
which Mr. McCall has now edited and annotated with a history
of the Wandesforde family.

This family took its name from a manor near DufKeld, a
manor of the Percys, and Geoffrey of Wandesforde, first of the
house, was granted lands in 1 3 3 8 in the Percys' town of Alnwick.
Four years later Geoffrey had a pardon for taking uncocketted
wool out of the kingdom at the instance of Henry Percy.
John Wandesforde, son of Geoffrey, had before the year 1370
married the heir of Kirklington, Elizabeth Musters, last of
a family which had held Kirklington in Domesday under
Earl Alan of Brittany, being probably Bretons from Moutiers
near La Guerche. The evidences which carry the pedigree of
Musters through the difficult period of the twelfth century
are singularly complete.

Of the intimate history of a family of squires during the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries little can descend as a rule
to us, although the Paston letters show us the extent of our
loss. Lawsuits concerning trespass and the like give us some-
thing wherewith to pad our list of names, the more so as
the plaintiff in such suits is wont to magnify any personal
challenging of his rights in an acre or a cowshed into a raid of
bloody minded men in bright armour, riding and ravening

1 Story of the Family of Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castlecomer, edited
by Hardy Bertram M'Call. London : Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent
& Co., Ltd., 1904.

WANDESFORDES OF KIRKLINGTON 99

with spear and sword. Wills come to the help of Mr. McCall
from an early date. We have the will of the first Wandesforde
lord of Kirklington, dated in 1391, with his gifts of gowns
of green motley and russet with lambskin. John and Roger
his sons both dying in October 1400 leave each a will. The
one gives his mazer cup to the church for a mortuary gift, the
other his best horse, with saddle and bridle, sword and shield.
Roger had doubtless borne these arms beyond sea and had
wandered as a younger son should, for he desires his executors
to get for him a man who should go in his place as a pilgrim
to the glorious confessors who rest at Beverley and Bridling-
ton, to whom Roger had made a vow when he was tossed on
the waves of the sea and all but drowned between Ireland
and Norway.

The elder of these sons had further established his
family by marriage. Isabel, a coheir of Colville of Dale, was
his wife, a daughter of that ' Colville of the Dale ' who was be-
headed at Durham, a famous rebel whose fame endures
because Sir John Falstaff took him, as witness the Second
Part of King Henry IF. The second son of this marriage, a
Wandesforde alderman of London, begat a son William, of
whose treason and fall Mr. McCall should have had something
to tell us.

Fortunately for the family the Wandesfordes have no story
to tell of the wars of the roses. In 1484 John Wandesforde
began to rebuild part of his hall of Kirklington, the old house
of the Musters being decayed, and the new work of timber
framing with wattle and daub was to be built by contract
for but 61 I3J. ifd. This new work was to contain two
parlours, four chambers, a pantry, a buttery, and a larder or
two. With this cheap building work we may contrast the fact
that when John Wandesforde died twenty years later one
of his old velvet gowns was valued at io/.

In the next generation Christopher Wandesforde married
a daughter of Sir John Norton of Conyers Norton, a marriage
celebrated when the bridegroom was eleven years old, but in
spite of this alliance the squire of Kirklington kept away from
that Pilgrimage of Grace in which a Norton was a leader with
many neighbours to follow him. The will of this Mistress
Wandesforde in 1547 disposes of many of those rare pieces of
plate — standing cups, covered salts — which fashion in our own
day has made so costly to come by, and of a set of thirteen

ioo THE ANCESTOR

apostle spoons, whose price in a London sale room would be
the price of a fair manor.

In 1568 another Christopher, the heir of Kirklington,
married Elizabeth Bowes, daughter of Sir George Bowes of
Streatlam, the knight marshal. When the rising of the north
country fell upon Sir George and besieged him in Barnard
Castle, Christopher Wandesforde joined his father-in-law with
his brother Henry and many horsemen. With the rebels were
the desperate Christopher Nevill of Kirklington, who had
married Christopher Wandesforde's mother, and old Norton
of Conyers Norton, the Wandesfordes' cousin, who had been
out in the Pilgrimage of Grace and now rode against his queen,
a whitebearded man with nine sons following him. When
rebellion was broken at the last, twenty-two names in Kirk-
lington township were set down in the black list, and three of
these suffered at the gallows. In such a hotbed of treason the
staunchness of the squire of Kirklington must have been
counted to him for great righteousness. He became deputy
steward of Richmondshire, was a commissioner to search for
' superstitious trumpery,' and it is on record that he tried and
condemned a Ripon witch.

The great man of the family comes with Christopher
Wandesforde, who was born in 1592 to an estate impoverished
by the fact that the heads of the house for several generations
had died leaving young heirs during whose wardships the
Crown and its nominees had battened upon the lands of Kirk-
lington. He read law at Gray's Inn and came home to Kirk-
lington. He married Alice, daughter of that Sir Hewet
Osborne whose father, a city prentice, had saved his master's
little daughter from the Thames to wed her and found a ducal
house. The christening of Wandesforde's son George brings
a famous name into the tale, for George's godfather was Sir
Thomas Wentworth, afterwards Earl of Strafford. When Sir
Thomas, then Viscount Wentworth, proceeded to Ireland in
1633 as Lord Deputy, his faithful friend Christopher Wandes-
forde went with him as Master of the Rolls. In 1637 tne chief
seat of the family was moved to Ireland, the castle and lands
of Castlecomer in Kilkenny, twenty thousand unkempt acres,
being bought as a country estate.

In Wentworth's absence, Christopher Wandesforde and the
Viscount Ely were joint governors of the island, administering
the absolute rule which had been established for the king, and

WANDESFORDES OF KIRKLINGTON 101

when the Earl of Strafford, the great minister, left Ireland for
the last time to go to his doom in London, he gave the sword
of state into the hands of Wandesforde, who was appointed
Lord Deputy of Ireland, l April 1640. But with the news
of Stafford's arrest, the new Lord Deputy lost heart and
health. Several months before the end came to Strafford,
Christopher Wandesforde took to his bed and died. Living in
evil times, he left no private enemy, and when his body was
laid in its grave at Christ Church in Dublin the native Irish
there assembled ' did set up their lamentable hone, as they
call it,' a thing unknown at an Englishman's burial. From
his prison in the Tower, Strafford avouched that in the Lord
Deputy was lost ' the richest magazine of learning, wisdom
and piety.'

The rebellion of the Irish in 1641 drove the Lord Deputy's
family to England, where they came first to Chester. Here
civil war followed them, and the wanderers were in Chester
when it was attacked by Brereton in 1643. From Chester
they would have gone to their own house of Hipswell, but
Hipswell was in the full path of the war, and at the last they
came to their ancient home of Kirklington. A curious tale
is told of the adventures of the Wandesfordes on the skirts of
the battle of Marston Moor. Young Christopher Wandesforde,
a schoolboy in York, was going forth with other lads to get
sight of the great battle whose guns were booming in the
distance, when he was met by his elder brother George, newly
home from France, who was seeking him under the shelter of
cousin Edmund Norton's troop of royal horse. George
Wandesforde took his brother behind him on his crupper, and
followed by Scots horsemen, who had seen George in Norton's
dangerous company, they rode in full flight to Kirklington
Hall, which they were fain to enter by night and by a back
way.

The next year George was under the Parliament's dis-
pleasure for presenting a parson of his choice to Kirklington,
in whose place General Fairfax sent a sour fanatic, who
preached but one sermon in the church, declaring all damned
who used the Popish invention of the Lord's Prayer. Kirk-
lington rose in its pews in hot anger, and a Kirklington Jenny
Geddes was found to flourish her stool at the minister, crying
that Kirklington folk were ' noe more damned than himself,
old Hackle Back.' After this the solemn league and covenant

THE ANCESTOR

was refused by George Wandesforde, who thereby became a
malignant manifest. The Hall and lands were sequestered,
and the master was forced to take to the dales in a disguise.
In 1651 George Wandesforde came by the early death which
had waited on so many of his ancestors. He set out to cross
the Swale, when it was swollen with rains. His horse gained
the north bank without a rider, and the body of the squire of
Kirklington was found two days later in a pool by Catterick
Bridge.

The Lord Deputy's third and eldest surviving son Chris-
topher was made a baronet by patent of 1662. His son,
another Christopher, became in 1 706 Lord Wandesforde and
Viscount Castlecomer in the Irish peerage. Three generations
saw five Viscounts Castlecomer, and the fifth was created in
1758 Earl of Wandesforde in the county of Kilkenny.

The first earl, an unimportant figure but a sitter to Sir
Joshua, was the last of the old line. His only daughter married
an Earl of Ormond, and her fourth son was made heir of the
Wandesforde estates at Kirklington and Castlecomer. This
Charles Harward Butler became Clarke on coming to a Derby-
shire estate, and Southwell and Wandesforde when his mother's
lands fell to him. His only surviving daughter married the
Rev. John Prior, a Dublin clergyman, and her grandson is now
Richard Henry Prior Wandesforde of Kirklington and Castle-
comer.

Mr. McCall's descriptions and pictures of old Kirklington
hall and church are of the greatest interest, and his full tran-
scripts of the early documents at Castlecomer will make good
material for Yorkshire topographers, although the translations
present here and there an amateur's too literal interpretation.
The personal names of the Latin charters follow the usual
haphazard fashion in their setting down, some translating
themselves into English, some remaining in Latin, and some
going their way in that ghost language which is neither Latin
nor English. It is difficult to understand why, since Johannes
is translated as John and not ' Johan,' Galfridus should be
' Galfrid ' instead of Geoffrey, or why Willelmus should be done
into English and Alicia his daughter remain Latin.

All the principal family pictures are reproduced from
photographs in a series continuing from 1585 to the nineteenth
century. The student of armory will delight himself with
the illustrations of the seals of the family of Musters (de Monas-

WANDESFORDES OF KIRKLINGTON 103

teriis). About 1 180 we have a round seal of Walter de Musters
of Bradbury, bearing the device of the minster church which
plays on his name. This Walter is conjectured to be a younger
brother of Robert de Musters of Kirklington. About 1200
Robert de Musters seals with the same minster upon his shield
of arms in a most interesting seal. William de Musters, lord
of Kirklington, seals c. 1325 with a curiously differenced shield,
to describe which Mr. McCall finds himself at the end of his
armory. Its bearings are probably the minster with an
engrailed border and a baston. ' At the fesse point is the
church or minster,' says Mr. McCall, ' a very unusual position
for a crest ' ! So unusual as to be impossible, even in this
instance, a crest being a cognizance borne on a helm.

This minster of Musters, however, became a crest in due
time, for the Wandesfordes who bore for arms a lion with a
forked tail carried the minster on their helms as a memorial
of their ancestors, the old lords of Kirklyngton.

104 THE ANCESTOR

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS

THE munificence of the late Sir William Fraser has
rendered possible the publication of that new and im-
portant work, the Scots Peerage, the first volume of which
has recently made its appearance. Its editor, Sir James
Balfour Paul, ' Lord Lyon King of Arms,' tells us in his
Preface that a new edition of the well-known ' Wood's
Douglas ' has long been his ' ardent aspiration,' and that a
good many years ago he endeavoured to bring it about.
He further explains the sound principles on which the work
is being written, namely the apportionment of the different
families among a staff of specially qualified writers, working
under his own supervision, and the employment of the best
sources and of modern methods of research.

It is gratifying to those who have upheld such principles
in this Review to find Lyon insisting that ' modern methods
demand a much more thorough treatment of genealogical
questions than was desired or even possible a century ago/
and that however creditable was the work of Douglas and of
Wood, ' a more accurate and detailed account ' had long been
rendered necessary by the abundance of new material now
made accessible, especially for the earlier centuries. If one
were to criticize the plan adopted, it would only be in respect
of the latitude allowed to contributors in following Wood
or Douglas, though, one hastens to add, it is frankly recog-
nized that ' so many errors had to be corrected, so many facts
re-stated in the light of modern research,' that entire re-
writing of the articles ' has been found better in many cases.'
Probably the most satisfactory plan would be to place within
quotation marks or otherwise distinguish all that is repeated
from the older writers. With this slight exception the prin-
ciples adopted are such as to raise our expectations high.

For Englishmen Scottish genealogy is essentially a thing
apart. Owing to the different character of the records,
other than monastic, of the two kingdoms, its materials, and,
therefore, to some extent its methods, are to them strange

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 105

and unfamiliar. It is consequently difficult to form an
opinion of the success at present attained in this enterprise,
save in those portions on which an Englishman may feel
competent to speak. One of these, as I conceive, is the
origin of the famous Comyns ; and I select that subject the
more readily because, as that family is dealt with by Lyon
himself, it is one that is likely to illustrate the application of
his principles in practice.

The difficulties by which the origin of the great Scottish
houses are but too often surrounded are in this case singularly
lightened. For a confirmation by Henry HI., in 1262, to
John Comyn of Badenoch of certain lands in Tynedale re-
cites that they had been granted to his great-grandfather,
Richard Comyn, and Hextilda his wife, daughter of Huctred
son of Waldeve, by King David and Henry his son. This
confirmation, which was printed by Hodgson, the industrious
historian of Northumberland, is the sheet-anchor of the early
pedigree ; it is in harmony with the descent put forward by
John Comyn, when he was a competitor for the crown ; and
the existence of Huctred, son of Waldeve, is duly proved by
the Pipe Roll of 1130, which shows that he was at that time
a man of position in Northumberland.

It adds not only to the interest of a pedigree, but also to
our means of tracing the history of a family if we are careful
to identify the places in which it acquired lands. The four
places named as acquired by Richard Cumin with Hextilda
his wife prove to be Walwick in Warden parish, with Carrow
and Thornton in Newbrough chapelry, all lying close together
just north-east of Hexham, and Henshaw in Haltwhistle,
lying just above them on the Tyne. Hodgson, who estab-
lished these identities, ingeniously conjectured that New-
brough itself (novus burgus) had its origin in the grant of a
market at Thornton to William Cumin by Henry III. 20
June 1 22 1. I should hardly describe these lands as ' the
heritage of Hextilda's father, Huctred, son of Waldef,'1 for
they are styled only the ' maritagium ' of his daughter who
married Richard Cumin, and I strongly suspect that he left
a son. For among the Swinburne of Capheaton charters is
one of Alexander, King of Scots, 4 October 1177, granting
to Reginald Prath of Tindale, his esquire, land which Ranulf,

1 Scots Peerage, i. 504.

io6 THE ANCESTOR

son of Huctred, had granted to Reginald in free marriage
with his daughter, with exemption to Reginald from the
drengage service due from it.1 To this charter are witnesses,
after two bishops, Earl Duncan, Odonel de Umfravill',
Richard Cumin, Hugh Ridele, etc., the list closing with
Symon, son of Huctred, and Adam his brother, names worth
noting. I suggest that Richard Cumin was brother-in-law
to Reginald the grantee, and that this charter proves him
to have been living at its date. The Scots Peerage, which
does not mention it, finds him living no later than 1176, but
as the Pipe Roll compiled in October 1177 again mentions
him, it confirms the evidence of the above charter.2

The connexion of the Comyns with Tynedale thus estab-
lished was of long duration ; for the lands continued in the
Comyns of Badenoch till their extinction in the main line.
In the charter of Alexander II., IO March 1228-9, which
gave his sister Margaret, as a marriage portion, the Tynedale
lands of the Scottish kings, he reserved to himself (therein)
the homage and service of William Cumin and William de
Ros. This charter, granted at Edinburgh, was witnessed,
among others, by William Cumin as Earl of Buchan, and
by Walter Cumin.3

These Tynedale lands in the south-west of Northumber-
land must be carefully distinguished from Newham — other-
wise Newham Comyn* — which David Comyn held ' de
veteri feoffamento.' B It lay in the north of the county, just to
the south of Bamburgh, and must have come to him through his
marriage with a Valoines, it having been held by Geoffrey
de Valoines, who was enfeoffed there by William de Vesci,
to hold it by the service of half a knight.6

From their Tynedale lands Richard Cumin and Hextilda
gave Carrow to the neighbouring priory of Hexham. The

1 This charter was confirmed to John, son of Reginald, by King William,
William de ' Lindesay ' being a witness.

2 I do not know why it is doubtfully observed (S.P. i. 504) that ' it may
have been he who in 1176 was fined fioo for not attending the Justice ayre
(sic) in Northumberland.' There is no reason for doubting the identity,
which was asserted by Wood.

3 Calendar of Charter Rolls, i. 127.

« ' Neuham Cumyn ' in Testa, p. 383.
« Ibid. p. 384.

' Liber Rubtus, p. 428. The name is there given as ' Wall[ibus].' Com-
pare Dugdale's Baronage, i. 441.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 107

charter, which is well known,1 mentions his brother Walter
' et haeredes meos,' and is witnessed by a Morville, two
Umfravills, a Sumerville, William de ' Lindeseia,' Walter
Cumin, and others. This charter is known to Lyon, but not,
it would seem, that (which is of more genealogical import-
ance) by which Richard grants to Rievaux Abbey twelve
bovates in Stonecroft and Thornton ' concessu et bona
voluntate Hextildis uxoris meae et haeredum meorum Will-
elmi, Odinelli, et Symonis.' It is witnessed by the convent
of Hexham Priory and several others, including ' Willelmo
clerico de Lindesia,' who must have been a clerical member
of the Lindsay family.3 Richard's charter to Holyrood
(mentioned in the Scots Peerage) is similarly granted (in King
William's time), ' assensu et consilio Hestildae uxoris meae,'
and has ' Odinello et Simone filiis meis ' among its witnesses,3
while its confirmation by David de ' Lyndesey ' speaks of the
charters of Richard and of William his son.*

Here then we have the same three sons occurring in the
Rievaux and the Holyrood evidence, but not the alleged
youngest son, ' David, who married Isabella daughter and
heiress of Roger de Valloniis of Easter Kilbride,' of whom
' descended the Comyns of Kilbride.' 5 I do not here deny
David's affiliation, but I cannot discover in Lyon's article
on what evidence it is based."

It is interesting to find that Henry Revel is a witness to
Richard's Holyrood charter, for Richard himself and Henry
Revel were among the prisoners captured with the Scottish
king at Alnwick (13 July n/4).7 I do not find in the Scots
Peerage this incident in Richard's career.8 He was, with
William de ' Lindeseie ' and Philip de ' Valuines,' among
the sureties for the treaty of Falaise (August 1175);" but
although, as we have seen, his name is found in connexion
with those of members of the great house of Lindsay, we do
not know what was the connexion, feudal or other.

1 It is printed in Hodgson's Northumberland, vol. ii. part 3, p. 396, and in
Hexham Priory [II.], The Black Book (Surtees Society), pp. 84-5.

1 Rievaulx Cartulary (Surtees Society). On p. 215 is its confirmation by
his widow, ' Hextildis comitissa de Eththetala,' then Countess of Athole.

3 Holyrood Cartulary, pp. 210-21.

« Ibid. pp. 21 1-2. s Scots Peerage, i. 505.

• It is asserted in Mrs. Gumming Bruce's book (on which see below) but is
ignored in ' Wood's Douglas.' 7 Hoveden, ii. 63.

8 It is, however, duly mentioned in 'Wood's Douglas.' • Hoveden, ii. 81.

io8 THE ANCESTOR

I have still to deal with Richard's charter to the monks
of Kelso giving them the church of ' Lyntunruderic,' which
is duly mentioned in the Scots Peerage. This gift is made
' pro anima Henrici comitis domini mei et pro anima Johannis
filii mei quorum corpora apud eos tumulantur,' etc., the
abbot and convent receiving ' Hextild' sponsam meam et
filios nostros in fraternitatem suam.' Its witnesses are
' Hextild' sponsa mea, Od' filio meo, Adam de Bonekil, Ber-
nardo filio Brien, Gaufredo Ridel.' l Here again we have
the son Od[inel] — a Christian name of the Umfravilles — but
no son David. The charter is obviously subsequent to Earl
Henry's death (1152), and 'Wood's Douglas' supplies the
evidence for placing it before 1159.

Richard Cumin and his wife, we have seen, are well-
known persons, and up to them the pedigree is clear. It is
on Richard's origin that I must join issue with the Scots
Peerage and its editor.

Here again we are fortunate in possessing the evidence
we want in a definite statement by a chronicler — a local man.
John of Hexham, who continued the chronicle of Symeon of
Durham,2 introduces us to Richard Cumin as follows : —

Mediante ergo Willelmo archiepiscopo, Willelmus episcopus et Willelmus
Cumin convenerunt in foedus pads ut Ricardus Cumin teneret de episcopo
Alvertun et totum ilium honorem, castera de integro resignerantur in manu
episcopi. Erat autem iste Ricardus nepos Willelmi Cumin, frater illius Willelmi
defuncti.»

That he is speaking of the Richard Cumin with whom
we have been dealing is certain on account of the connexion
in both cases with the Scottish king, David. For this is how
the chronicler comes to mention him. David's chancellor,
William Cumin, had been, we read, a clerk of Geoffrey,
Bishop of Durham, before Geoffrey's accession to that see
in 1133, a significant date if Scottish antiquaries are right
in placing William's first appearance as chancellor about
that time. Now Bishop Geoffrey, who had trained William,
had been King Henry's chancellor since 1123,* and we thus
make the interesting discovery that the Scottish king had
taken his chancellor straight from the English chancery.".

1 Liber de Catchou, p. 226. » He wrote under Henry II.
* Symeon of Durham (Rolls Series), ii. 316. « Feudal England, p. 485.
B ' Erat enim quidam regis Scotiz cancellarius, videlicet Willelmus Cumin,
jampridem ejusdem Gaufridi ante episcopatum dericus. Siquidem et ante

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 109

David was accompanied by his chancellor to the disas-
trous ' Battle of the Standard,' 1138, when the armed might
of Scotland was shattered by the English levies, and William
was captured in the rout and kept prisoner at Durham till
released from captivity as a clerk by the Papal Legate.*
Before long William found himself at Durham again, seeking
by his old master's deathbed to secure for himself the suc-
cession to the see. Bishop Geoffrey died at Rogation-tide
1141, and William, supported by the Scottish king, obtained
possession of the castle. With the help of certain barons of
the see he set himself to obtain the bishopric, and would
actually have been given the ring and staff by the empress
on Midsummer Day in London, had not the rising of the
citizens sent them forth in flight.2 Then, when the em-
press fled from Winchester, the peripatetic chancellor was
again in flight and met his royal master, a fugitive like him-
self, at Durham. David, on behalf of the empress, installed
him there as custos, and thenceforth the troubles of the
times enabled him to hold at least the temporalities of the
see, not as Lyon states ' for more than three years ' from 1142,
but from 1141 to 1144.

It was in 1144 that his violent rule came to an end. A
young nephew and namesake of his trained to the profession
of arms,3 met his death while supporting his uncle, and —
even as King Stephen, some years later, on his heir's untimely
death, recognized Henry as his successor by a compromise
which secured the interests of his younger son William — so the
intruder, William Cumin, allowed the lawful bishop to obtain
possession of his see on St. Luke's Day (18 October) 1144 by
a compromise which enabled Richard Cumin, a brother of
his nephew William, to retain the castle of Northallerton
with its Honor.*

»b annis adolescentiae educaverat ' (Symeon of Durham, i. 143 (compare i. 161).
I find that this point is duly noted in ' Wood's Douglas.'

1 ' Willelmus Cumin, David regis Scottiae cancellarius, de supradicto bello
fugiens captus et incarceratus ibidem detinebatur' (Richard of Hexham,
De gestis Regis Stephanf).

1 Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 85-6.

5 ' Juvenis miles Willelmus, nepos Willelmi Cumin, cum favore multorum
edoctus res militares disponere, et negotia populi administrare ' (Symeon of
Durham, ii. 316).

« i.e. its territory ; Lyon oddly renders it ' honours ' ! 'Wood's Douglas '
correctly gives ' the honour (sic) and castle.'

H

no THE ANCESTOR

The Durham chronicler is careful to note that William
did not escape from the scenes of his violence in peace ;
Richard de Luvetot intercepted and imprisoned him,1 and
Robert de ' Mundavilla,' a baron of the bishopric,3 who had
married (we are frankly told) Bishop Geoffrey's daughter,
and who owed him a grudge for his treatment, repaid him by
slaying Osbert, another of his young nephews, who served
Henry of Scotland.3 When we remember that Richard
Cumin speaks in his charter to Kelso of this Henry as his lord,
we see how the fortunes of the family were connected with
David and his son.

The following pedigree is now clear : —

r

William Cumin,
chancellor of
Scotland

r T i

William Cumin Richard Cumin mar. W
slain 1144 Hextilda dau. of Huc-
tred son of Waldcvc

a qua Comyn
of Badenoch

I have worked out this pedigree independently for myself,
but it is only right to add at once that it is identical with
that in 'Wood's Douglas' (save for the addition, from the
Hexham charter, of the younger son Walter), which begins
exactly where I do and which gives the date 1144 correctly.

1 The subsequent career of William appears to be involved in obscurity.
Crawfurd (The Lives . . . of the Officers of Crvum and State, 1736) alleges that
he returned to Scotland, but observes (p. 8) that another chancellor was ap-
pointed by David and occurs in 1151. A William Cumin appears on the
English Pipe Roll of 2 Hen. II. (l 156) in a financial position of some importance,
but the name is not exceptional enough for us to say who he was.

1 This gives us an important correction to the official edition of the Red
Book of the Exchequer (p. 417), where the Robert de ' Mandavill ' of the Black
Book (' Mandevill ' in the Red Book) is classed as one of the Mandeville family
(p. 1240), instead of being placed under ' Amundeville.'

8 ' Percussit nepotem ejusdem Willelmi, Osbertum adolescentem militem
amantissimum omnibus qui in obsequio Henrici comitis filii regis Scotia;
fuerunt.'

4 See p. 4 above.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS in

But on turning to Lyon's genealogy, we first discover with
bewilderment that he flatly contradicts himself. It is com-
paratively a trifle that he kills the younger William ' more
than three years ' after 1142 (p. 503), and on the next page
enters him as ' killed in 1 142 ... as above-mentioned ' ;
the serious thing is that he makes the two Williams ' nephew '
and ' uncle ' (pp. 503, 504), although his pedigree makes the
younger William a great-nephew of the elder one. It is the
pedigree, of course, that is wrong here, and indeed, as we shall
see, not only wrong, but absolutely baseless from the Conquest.

For here is Lyon's pedigree : —

Robert Ac Comyo (tit), Earl
of Northumberland, slain at
Durham '28 Jan. 1069-70*

'A daughter and = John 'killed in the wan William, chancellor

co-heiress of Adam
Giffard of Fonthill'

between Queen (lie) of Scotland

Maud and King Stephen
after 1135*

10 »)

William 'held one-=Maud 'daughter of= William de Hastings
third of Fonthill in I Thuritan Banaiter married her in 1 140
Wiltshire* I or Basset'

William Richard Walter

I

We have here a very feast of errors. They are so pro-
fusely scattered that it becomes difficult to select ; one can
only take them seriatim.

Why, in the first place, is Earl Robert made father to the
chancellor ? And why, in the second, is he styled Robert
' de Comyn ' ? The two questions have some connexion,
for the answer to the first appears to be that the alleged
paternity is but an instance of the reprehensible practice,
formerly common enough, of seeking a progenitor in any
one of sufficient eminence whose name was or seemed to be
that of the family into which he was pitchforked by the
pedigree-maker in a difficulty. Mr. Freeman, who gives the
date of Earl Robert's death as January 1068-9 (not Io^9~7°)^
pointed out that Orderic styled him Robert ' de Cuminis,'

ii2 THE ANCESTOR

while Symeon of Durham made him Robert ' cognomento
Cumin.' Why then style him ' de Comyn ' ? l

As the chancellor, according to Lyon's pedigree, must
have been seventy-five years old, at the least, when, with
his youthful nephew, he made himself a terror to his foes,
we must press for the proof that the earl was his father.
' Not the least important feature of this work,' Lyon writes
as its editor, ' is the fact that, wherever possible, references
have been given to the various authorities for the statements
made. This is especially the case as regards the older dates '
(p. xiii.). But, alas, we are only told that the earl ' is said to
have had two sons,' John and William. ' Is said ' by whom,
or where ? Is this among the secrets of the Lyon Office ?
We turn to Douglas, and from him we get a pedigree less
elaborate than Lyon's, but even wilder and more wonderful.
Its gist is this : —

Earl Robert

|oh

n teaif. Alexander I.
.e. 1107-24]

Sir William mar-
ried Hextilda

William Imp. Malcolm IV.
and William the Lion [i.e.
1153-1214]

Sir Richard gave the church
of Linton Roderick before
"S*

Douglas, we see, is not responsible for making the chancellor
a son of Earl Robert.

Let us, however, address ourselves to John ; for of Lyon's
Comyn pedigree John is the crown and flower. That we
have no reason to suppose that John even existed is a circum-
stance that need not deter us from studying the record of
his life.

1 With the exception of Orderic's name for Earl Robert, the 'de,' I be-
lieve, is invariably absent, which suggests that we have to do with a nickname
of the usual Norman type. But, although cummin (cuminum) was much in
use when the surname makes its appearance, one fails to see the cause of its
adoption.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 113

II. John, the elder son, was killed in the wars between Queen Maud and
King Stephen after 1135. He married a daughter and coheiress of Adam
Giffard of Fonthill (Dugdale, i. 499).

I must ask Lyon to take my assurance that the only ' Queen
Maud ' known to history at the time is Stephen's own wife,
his loyal and devoted queen ! And if the king's deadly foe,
the Empress Maud, is meant, I must observe that the ' wars '
between her and Stephen began only with her landing in the
autumn of 1139, when John must have attained the respect-
able age of more than threescore and ten.

Yet they not only know at the Lyon Office that John was
killed in those wars; they can prove his existence by his mar-
riage. For here at length a reference is vouchsafed. True,
the reference is vague enough ; for among the notes at the
foot of this page are ' Dugdale, i. 499 ' and ' Dugdale, v. 289';
the one, I conjecture, referring to the Baronage, and the
other to the Monasticon Anglicanum. But perhaps they are
much the same to a Scottish King of Arms. We try the
Baronage, and fail to discover on the page cited the statement
we seek. But, three pages further on, we do find Fonthill
mentioned in connexion with a Giffard (who was not ' Adam ')
and a Comyn (who was not John) at a date considerably later
than that of which Lyon is speaking ! Is it, can it be possible
that this is Lyon's authority ? We are forced to conclude
that it really is ; for he makes John succeeded by William,
who ' held one third of Fonthill in Wiltshire.' Now Dug-
dale, under ' Giffard of Brimsfield,' states that on the death
of Andrew Giffard, ' in King John's time? the Fonthill barony
passed to three co-heirs, of whom William Cumin was one
(i. 502). And under 'Comyn' he states that 'in 4 Hen. III.
(1219-1220) William Cumin was one of the co-heirs to An-
drew Giffard for the barony of Funtell, in com. Wiltes '
(i. 685).* But Lyon's William 'died before 1140,' that is,
some seventy years before a Cumin became co-heir to Font-
hill ! »

Now is such treatment as this fair to the great Garter
King of Arms ? In spite of his painful accuracy and of the
care with which he gave his reference, he is here vouched to

1 In each case he refers us, in accordance with his admirable method, to
the original record ('Claus. 4 Hen. III. m. 2') on which his statements rest.

1 See my paper on ' Giffard of Fonthill Giffard ' in Ancestor (July 1903),
vi. 138, and General Wrottesley's monograph on The Giffards.

1 14 THE ANCESTOR

warranty for a marriage of which he does not speak, at a date
which his own statement shows to be out of the question.

With ' William ' of the next generation our pedigree
returns to dreamland, the land of Lyonesse. No evidence is
adduced for the fact that ' he died before 1 140, when his
widow, Maud, daughter of Thurstan Banaster, or Basset,
married William de Hastings.' The register of marriages
for 1140 is unaccountably missing, as are also the files of the
Morning Post ; and the only roll assigned to 1 140 (' 5 Stephen ')
has long been known to belong to 1130. Moreover it does
not mention this marriage. There was, it is true, a widow
of a William Cumin who married a William de Hastings, but
her name was Margerie, not Maud, and the document which
shows her married to William is of I2i6,1 not of 1140.*

It should also be observed that if William ' died before
1140,' he can hardly have survived his venerable father, who
fell in * wars ' which began in 1 1 39. This, however, is of little
consequence, for William also must ' walk the plank ' ; he
must follow John overboard.

The entire pedigree of three generations, marriages and
all, crumbles into dust. Whence then can it have been
derived ? We observe that it suspiciously resembles that
which is given by Douglas ; indeed the three generations
are identical, though a fourth, in the person of a second
William, has been obviously excised as impossible. One is
reminded of Mr. Freeman's cruel remark that at least there
is somewhere ' a last pound which breaks the back even of an
Ulster King of Arms.' ; Have we then here yet another
example of that fatal system which I denounce on another
page of this volume, that hybrid mixture of ancient and
modern which endeavours to combine with modern genea-
logy the unsupported guesses of a bygone antiquary or
herald ? As the editor has recently observed in the pages
of this Review (ix. 233), ' no pedigree, old or new, can be
treated as presumably accurate unless the collateral evidence
of records be in its favour.'

1 See Ancestor, ix. 147.

'According to Eyton's Shropshire (V. 135) Maud, daughter and co-heir of
Thurstan Banaster (not Basset) married Will, de Hastings (who died 1182) and
died circa 1222. He ignores any Cumin marriage.

3 See his article (on Burke 's Peerage), ' Pedigrees and pedigree-makers ' in
Contemporary Review, xxx. 38.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 115

Lyon's attempt to pitchfork into Douglas's pedigree
evidence relating to Fonthill fails not only on account of the
dates, but also because, as my articles have shown, the Cumins
connected with Fonthill were the Snitterfield line, who were
quite distinct from the Cumins of Tynedale and Badenoch,
being found in Warwickshire, apparently, at least as far back
as 1130.' They may, however, of course have been kinsmen
descended from a common ancestor. The crude idea that
men bearing the name of Cumin were all of a single line is
one that requires to be discarded ; in Warwickshire itself a
separate line appears to have given its name to Newbold
Comyn,* and Cumins are found also at Bristol 3 and at Rouen *
in the twelfth century, while another set are discovered in
Ireland,5 possibly in consequence of John Comin becoming
Archbishop of Dublin. We may trace, perhaps, the same
idea in Lyon's suggestion that the first wife of Richard
Cumin's son and successor, William, ' may have been a daughter
of Robert Fitz Hugh, who in 1201-2 is said to have married
a William Cumin, who paid fines for the marriage ' (p. 505) ;
for, apart from the fact that, on Lyon's showing, William
must in that case have married his first wife some fifty-six
years after his father's marriage, Sara, younger daughter and
co-heiress of Robert Fitz Hugh, who is the wife referred to,
died s.p."

It will, I think, be admitted to be very unfortunate that
a house which became ' perhaps the most powerful in Scot-
land ' as early as 1258 (p. 506) should have had assigned to it
in the Scots Peerage so fictitious an ancestry. The true
origin of its fortunes in the rise of a churchman, a chancery
clerk, is of peculiar interest for its contrast with the wild and
stirring history of a race which comprised at one epoch ' no
fewer than three earls and thirty-two knights ' (p. 507).

It is also regrettable that a work intended, as one gathers,
to represent the fine fleur of Scottish antiquarian erudition

> Pipe Roll 31 Hen. I., p. 108.

s Which came by marriage to an ' Elyas Comyn ' (Regist. Malmesb. [Rolls
Series], i. 258).

3 Pipe Roll Society, vol. xx. p. 144.

« See my Calendar of documents preserved in France, p. 8. An Odard Comin
also appears as a witness to a charter of Henry Murdac, Archbishop of York
(1147-1153)

5 See, for instance, the cartulary of St. Mary's, Dublin (Rolls Series).

8 Baker's Northamptonshire, i. 224 (cf. p. 222).

n6 THE ANCESTOR

should be marred by the amazing statement (p. 504) that
Richard Comyn gave the lands of Slipperfield ' to the Augus-
tine friars of Holyrood.' When I have to form an opinion
on an English topographical work, I keep my eyes open for
that double-barrelled blunder which converts the great order
of Augustinian (or Austin) canons into ' Augustine friars,'
and which represents to me the hall-mark of incompetence.
It is positively startling to find that phrase employed by
Lyon of a period when there were no friars — ' Augustine '
or other — in the country. And it completes that strange
catalogue of errors which are here compressed into the space
of barely two pages.

The really singular thing is that Wood's account of the
origin of the Comyns, which the performance of Lyon King
of Arms is avowedly intended to supplant, is itself absolutely
accurate, although the older writer, as indeed Lyon reminds
us, enjoyed fewer advantages than those at our own disposal.
And yet Wood's modest preface does not raise such expecta-
tions as that of the Scots Peerage.

It was only at this point in my investigation of the sub-
ject that I discovered by a lucky accident the real source of
that elaborate pedigree of three generations that Lyon has
here published as the ancestry of Richard Cumin. The dis-
covery is of so startling, indeed staggering a nature that I
must invite those who doubt it to verify the fact for them-
selves.

Happening to look at Mrs. Gumming Bruce's Family Re-
cords of the Bruces and the Cumyns (1870), I there discovered,
to my amazement, the whole pedigree set forth (pp. 394-5)
as in the Scots Peerage from Earl Robert (with his two sons)
down to Richard Cumin. Collation of the two versions
proved the fact absolutely, while revealing certain changes,
sometimes for the worse, in Lyon's version. It is, we at length
discover, in Mrs. Gumming Bruce's book, that Earl Robert
' is said ' to have left two sons, John and William ;l it is there,
also, that Richard Cumin is erroneously made ' grand-nephew,
of the chancellor ' ; 2 there also that the fabled John marries,
fights, and dies ; and thence that Lyon took that strange and
tell-tale phrase ' the castle and honours of Northallerton .

' See p. 9 above. t See p. 8 above.

3 See p. 6 note 4 above.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 117

The unfortunate reference to ' Dugdale ' is again a marked
coin ; for we find Mrs. Gumming Bruce writing : —

Dugdale, in his Baronage, vol. i. 499, says : ' In the Conqueror's time
Osbert Gifford held ten lordships in Wilts.' He adds, ' there was one Andrew
Giffard who held the Barony of Fentell (Fonthill), which upon his death (ump.
John) was with the King's consent resigned to Robert de Mandeville, William
Cumin,' etc., etc.

Now the fact that Lyon cites only p. 499 proves that he cannot
have looked at Dugdale, for, had he done so, he would have
discovered that it is only on p. 502 that Dugdale ' adds ' the
passage on Fonthill and Cumin ; he must therefore have
copied the reference from Mrs. Cumming Bruce.1

But the worst of it is that Lyon could not even copy her
correctly. Of Earl Robert's alleged elder son John she
writes : —

I. John killed in the wars between the Empress-Queen Matilda and
King Stephen after 1135. He must have married one of the heirs of Andrew
Gifford of Fonthill.

'The Empress-Queen Matilda' is a phrase that may pass
muster, but the Scots Peerage makes it nonsense by omitting
' Empress,' the essential word. Again, the authoress only
held that John Cumin ' must have married one of the heirs
of Andrew Giffard,' and gives, in the passage she cites,
her reason for that conclusion. But Lyon (p. 10 above)
asserts that he actually did marry ' a daughter and co-heiress of
Adam (sic) Giffard of Fonthill,' a mere blunder, for no such
person as Adam Giffard is found in possession of Fonthill.
Nor is the matter much bettered if we substitute Andrew,
the right name ; for as Andrew appears to have been a
clerk, he cannot well have left a ' daughter and co-heiress.'

One need not pursue the comparison by collating Lyon's
account of William, John's alleged son, with that given by
Mrs. Cumming Bruce (the '1140' marriage appearing in
both), but it may be mentioned that Lyon's ' Augustine
friars ' is a development of the earlier writer's ' Augustines
of Holy rood ' (p. 396).

It is but just to Mrs. Cumming Bruce to add that her
work was avowedly written only to interest her own relatives

1 The only reference given to Mrs. Cumming Bruce's book for the period
here discnssed by me is for the career of the chancellor from 1142. It is not
cited for the pedigree at all.

n8 THE ANCESTOR

in the names she ' felt honoured by bearing,' and that she
modestly described herself as ' painfully aware of my own
incompetence.' We need not, therefore, affect surprise to
find her writing of the origin of the Comyns.

DE COMIN, COMYN, CUMIN E, COMINCE, GUMMING.

According to Sir Bernard Burke (see Extinct Peerage on Moreton or De
Burgo, Earl of Cornwall, A.D. 1068) John, Count de Comyn, and Baron de
Tonsberg in Normandy, descended from Charlemagne, etc.

Indeed, I only mention this acceptance of one of the wildest
of fables in order to illustrate the character of the work to
which we have traced Lyon's pedigree. It is, he tells us, one
of the principles adopted in the Scots Peerage that, ' wherever
possible, references have been given to the various authorities
for the statements made.1 Are we to conclude that, for
obvious reasons, it was not ' possible ' to vouch such a work
as that of Mrs. Bruce as the ' authority ' for those astounding
statements with which the history of the Comyns begins ?

The great Scottish houses are jealous, and rightly jealous,
of their long and splendid pedigrees, pedigrees closely inter-
twined with the history of the Scottish nation. They will
hardly care, one would imagine, to expose them to ridicule and
to doubt by allowing them to appear side by side with such
concoctions as the Scots Peerage gives us in the origin of the
Comyns.

My only feeling in the matter of this work is that so im-
portant a publication, appearing under such auspices, calls
for far more searching criticism than one of lesser preten-
sions. The experts in feudal genealogy are very limited in
number, and it is, I think, their duty to test its claims to con-
fidence, a task which is beyond the scope of the ordinary
reviewer. Personally I have no cause of complaint, for it
pays me the compliment of adopting wholesale my state-
ments on the origin of the Stewart kings.1 Even, however,
when doing this it displays traces — if I may use the term — of
the same amateurishness. For instance, the great abbey of
St. Florent of Saumur in Anjou is disguised at the top of
p. 10 as ' St. Saumur (sic) in Brittany.' A few lines further
on we read of ' the Abbot of Marmoutier in Brittany,' al-

1 See p. 9 above.

8 Duly citing my Studies in Peerage and Family History.

THE ORIGIN OF THE COMYNS 119

though that important abbey lay on the Loire at Tours.1
We then meet with a confirmation to ' the Priory (sic) of
Marmoutier ' of a gift by Alan Fitz Flaald ' of the title (sic)
of the lands of Burton,' although the gift was that of the
tithe, and was made to the monks of Lehon,1 which was but
a priory of the abbey of Marmoutier. Lastly, at the foot of
the same page, we are told that ' Walter, the son of Alan,
appears in the English Liber Niger Scaccarii about 1154, as
vassal of William son of Alan,' etc., although the reference,
if it were given, would be to those returns of knights in I i66,a
which constitute a sheet-anchor in feudal genealogy. I
must assure Lyon and his coadjutors that this is among
' the things that matter.'

Yet, in order that I may not part thus from the Scots
Peerage, it is a pleasure to be able to say that on turning, for
the second marriage of Hextilda, to the Rev. John Anderson's
article on 'The Celtic Earls of Atholl,'one is struck by the
care bestowed on it, and can well believe that, as Lyon writes,
the book is greatly indebted to his learning and ' invaluable
help.'

J. HORACE ROUND.

> Compare my Calendar of documents preserved in France for these houses.

1 Ibid. No. 1221.

* Entered in the ' Red Book ' and the ' Small Black Book ' of the Exchequer.

izo THE ANCESTOR

FIFTEENTH CENTURY COSTUME

(Continued from Vol. IX. 136)
XII

NANTES is besieged by the Earl of Buckingham, and
defended against him by Messire Jehan le Barrois des
Barres, Messire Jehan de Chastel Morant and many other
knights and squires. In a December sally from the town
two hundred men at arms, led by Messire Amaurry de
Clichon [Clisson], the cousin german of the constable, and
by the Sire d'Amboise, come out of the postern gate and fall
upon the English quarters, carrying the first barrier of the bul-
wark, and taking prisoner the captain of the watch, a knight
called Sir William of Quiseton. But Sir William of Winde-
sore and Sir Hugh of Cavrelee [Calveley], who are resting
in their tents, rise and ride to the aid of their men, driving the
French and Bretons back to their gate.

The two English knights, charging alone upon the French
host, present excellent illustration of armour cap-d-pie, the
breast, back, and skirts covered with blue and purple stuff.
Behind them will be seen the pleated jacket with false sleeves,
and shoes with piked toes of great length. Of the defenders
we note the fallen knight, whose blue coat is laced down the
front. An axeman's basnet shows the survival of the nose-
guard of the Bayeux Tapestry.

122 THE ANCESTOR

XIII

Here three great ships full of Englishmen come to the port
of Lisbon. They have no knight with them, but are led by
three squires, one of whom, called Northbery, lands and
addresses the King of Portugal, who thinks the English a host
of the Duke of Lancaster's. But Northbery tells him they
know naught of the Duke or he of them, they being men of
all kinds, who ask only for arms and adventures.

The remarkable feature of the ships entering harbour is
the great fighting top, which is gay with green and gold.
As yet no piercings for guns are found. The forked pennons
of the English arms have their sole origin in the artist's desire
to identify these ships as English, for St. George's cross would
have been a more probable bearing. That the painter was a
Fleming is seen in the collar of the Golden Fleece worn by
the two leaders on the first ship, a decoration which was not
wont to come to English squires. The King of Portugal is
dressed as our artist dresses all his kings, but the lord on either
hand, with their tall white hats and twisted gold hat-bands,
are more valuable pictures. There is nothing that calls for
fresh remark in the armour of the English squire, but his
whole dress is a good example of fifteenth century half armour,
the legs being in red hose and unarmed.

124 THE ANCESTOR

XIV

Here the French vanguard of the King of Castile is
attacked and routed by the men of Portugal and the English.
' There was the King of Portugal, his banners before him,
mounted on a great courser all covered with the arms of Por-
tugal.'

Here the most striking figure is that of the charging knight,
whom the artist, with his usual recklessness of detail, has armed
in the arms of Castile and Leon, as though he were the king
of those lands. Again we have the beautiful lines of the
horseman's cloak, open at the sides and seemingly longer be-
hind than before. Note the shield on which the painted bear-
ings have been accommodated to the large round boss in
the middle. The two men-at-arms hewing before him show
below the overlapping plates of their ' tonlets ' a curious
attachment like to the tail of a crab. The wounded horse,
struck through with the long English shafts, is saddled with
a saddle peaked high before and behind.

126 THE ANCESTOR

XV

Here is shown how the King of Portugal discomfited the
King of Castile at ' Juberotes.' In this fight was seen the
quality of the Spaniards, who come fiercely to the assault,
but having thrown two or three darts and given a stroke or
two with the sword, they ride for their lives. At this battle
no one was held to ransom, and many high barons of Castile
were killed on the field, so many noblemen not having been
slain in Spain since the Black Prince defeated Don Henry.

The two horses must be observed for their curious horse
trappers with the arms of Castile and Leon and of Portugal,
trappers which end close behind the ears. The crowned rider
of the Castilian horse covers his plates with the short pleated
jacket with false sleeves, in no way differing from the one worn
in civil dress.

In the front rank of Portugal is swung a long mace with
a small spindle-shaped head. The knight toppling forward
beside the macer wears a sallet whose curved brim shows from
what form arose the fore and aft brim of the morion of the
next century.

Note the lance-rest upon the right breast of the figure in
the foreground.

J28 THE ANCESTOR

XVI

Here Oliver de Clisson, the constable of France, sets a
bastille before the strong castle of Brest in Brittany, of which
castle the saying goes that he who is not lord of Brest is not
truly duke of Brittany.

Of the figures, the crossbowman winding his bow is the
most interesting, and the Burgundian tendencies of our artist
are shown by his decorating the quivers with the familiar
briquet or strike-a-light of Burgundy. The wooden bastille
appears again in all the elaboration of its towers and bul-
warks. The two cannon are worthy of study, that in mid-
distance showing the arrangement of spike and hole for raising
and lowering the breech.

130 THE ANCESTOR

XVII

Here the burial service of King Ferrant of Portugal is
made in the church of St. Francis at Lisbon.

In the midst is the great bier railed in, with candles
standing about it. The crossed pall bears a shield of the holy
lamb with four scutcheons of Portugal at the four corners.
The mourners are in blacks, those seated by the bier having
the mourning hoods which were worn at state-buryings at
least until the reign of Elizabeth. The singing clergy are
noteworthy for their hats, that on the left hand being a tall
brimless hat of pale blue.

1 32 THE ANCESTOR

XVIII

Here the Duke of Lancaster and his men land and come
against Brest, before which wooden bastilles had been built
as though to remain there twenty years.

The knight falling amongst the horse-hoofs must be re-
marked as showing the last development of the armour of the
latter half of the fourteenth century. The basnet has changed
little, but the camail does not appear to be laced to the edge
of it. His coat follows on the old lines, but it is not dagged
at the edge, it is slit open before, and the great belt over the
hips is gone. The charging knight, clad in dark armour,
follows the later fashions, and the eye is taken by the assem-
blage of small plates which allow free movement of the body.
His shield is heater-shaped, but concave, and with a huge
boss in the midst. His helm, with caged sights, is decorated
with a single feather at the top.

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES
XII. THE GRESLEYS

DESTRUCTIVE criticism has not yet done its full
work amongst our ancient English pedigrees. Gene-
alogies prolonged to the Conquest and beyond it still abound
on every side, and share the honours of those few houses whose
claims rest safely upon credible records. But the work of
those who clear away the rotten timber of the Elizabethan
and early Victorian constructions has gained in some measure
the notice of the public. The long pedigree is suspect, and
an attack upon it may count beforehand upon the sympathy
of honest folk. It is time perhaps to point out that such sym-
pathy may be as ill founded as yesterday's credulity.

In the Gresleys of Drakelow we have a Derbyshire family
making the bold assertion that its seat and manor of Drakelow
has descended to it from the age of Domesday, and in the
right male line. Such an assertion, we believe, is still made
by a dozen English families upon evidence which may be
tossed aside by any prentice antiquary. Were the claim of
the Gresleys allowed, it may be that but a single English family
would take the field to maintain the like boast.

When therefore there comes forward a stout volume whose
author's earlier archaeological achievements fill fifteen lines
of the small type following his name upon the title-page,
when such a volume challenges the claim of Gresley to long
descent, many will believe that another of our genealogical
landmarks has been torn up and cast into the limbo which
holds the stone inscribed by Bill Stumps with his mark.

Our author's attack upon the Gresley pedigree is with
no sidelong suggestion of inaccuracy, it is an attack in front
upon an entrenched position and the newspapers of the last
month have shown that such an assault may be pressed home.
He is upon his familiar ground, for in his preface he introduces
himself as the laborious historian of Derbyshire. The modern

133

i34 THE ANCESTOR

Gresleys of Drakelowe are under fire as soon as his skirmishing
line of italicised preface can extend itself.

A most impudent fraud was attempted in the enlightened age of James I.,
when a good many other impudent impositions were successful. A rich and,
no doubt, very respectable family, having acquired great wealth, purchased a
baronetcy when James set them up for sale to replenish his coffers, and bearing
a very ancient Derbyshire name, that of Gresley, eventually purchased the
land, and found a congenial herald to fake up a pedigree showing that the nov us
homo was of the old stock.

* * *

In the absence of ' inexorable ' evidence, no opinion can be formed respect-
ing the origin of the present family of Gresley. The first baronet would seem
to have acquired an interest in Drakelow, but how, or when, it is not stated.

Harsh words follow concerning the forged pedigree of
Gresley, which was based, as it seems, upon the forgery of
' a few amazing charters.'

It is not, perhaps, very wonderful that in the age of the sagacious monarch —
the only one of our kings who claimed to be a Solomon — that such an imposture
should pass muster, but it is perfectly astonishing how it should have survived
in this, so-called, critical age. The art of criticism is conducted very cheaply.
There is no school for critics ; any one who has impudence enough can pose
in that character, and editors are generally so ignorant, that they cannot see
whether their writers are properly equipped or not. All the modern critic
has to do is to use ' dictionary words.' This terribly confuses ignorant editors.
He must also be foul-tongued and abusive, sparing no one. . . . One of the
worst critics of our day, Mr. Horace Round, who spares neither the living nor
the dead, has exchanged the role of the critic for that of the author, and a good
deal of this book has been necessarily devoted to exposing his crass ignorance
and getting rid of the rubbish of the Jamish » writer and of his modern ad-
mirers. •_

The evidences for the pedigree of Gresley are not to
seek. Those who would disport themselves with the forged
pedigree of the first Gresley baronet, the novus homo of our
Derbyshire historian, have all materials at hand in the ex-
cellent family history compiled by Mr. Falconer Madan.
With Mr. Madan's work to aid we turn to the story of Sir
George Gresley, the first baronet of Drakelowe. The history
of this person can hardly be said to be wrapped in obscurity.
His life of more than threescore and ten years is before us in

1 Being ignorant, and an editor, we were at first ' terribly confused ' by
this ' dictionary word.' We hazard that Jamish writer may signify a writer
of the period of King James I. A writer during the next reign would be a
Charlish writer, and Shakespeare is easily recognizable as an Elizabish poet.

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES 135

every detail. He matriculates at Balliol in 1594, goes to an
Inn of Court and lives at Colton Lodge until his father's
death. Twenty-eighth on the list of King James's new order
of baronets in 1611 is Sir George Gresley of Drakelowe in
Derbyshire. He bears a bannerol at Prince Henry's funeral
in 1612, is a commissioner of musters, and M.P. for New-
castle-under-Lyme. In 1642 Sir George Gresley breaks with
the Derbyshire squires and knights, hot royalists to a man,
and comes out in arms for the parliament, leaving his lands
and houses to be spoiled by the cavalier garrisons. He
married a lady of the noble house of Ferrers, begat five chil-
dren, and was buried in the Temple church of London in
February 1650-1.

And now for the new man's parentage. Mr. Madan, a
kinsman as well as historian of the house, will doubtless move
us by specious pleadings, by subtle guesses, to identify George
Gresley the novus homo with some George who may be safely
tagged to an older family of the name. But evidences in
profusion give us as a father for Sir George Gresley one Sir
Thomas Gresley, knight, of Drakelowe in Derbyshire, whose
inheritance from his own father, Sir William Gresley, includes
the manor of Drakelowe, upon which the family is still settled
in this twentieth century, the manor of Colton, which he and
his son, the novus homo, sell in 1609, and the manor of Roslis-
ton, which George sells in 1629. With these is ' the manner
of Castle Gresley with the appurtenances in Castle Gresley
. . . holden of the quenes majestic as of her honor of Tut-
berye.' Our natural respect for the Derbyshire historian
suffers shock upon shock as we discover that this new man, this
imposter who by obscure means acquired an interest in
Drakelowe is manifest as Gresley of Gresley, lord of Drake-
lowe by inheritance from no mean line.

We have seen that the baronet's father was a knight living
upon his heritage, a sheriff of Derbyshire too, and deputy
lieutenant, who attended Mary of Scots to Fotheringay on
the last of her journeys. This Sir Thomas was returned heir
of Drakelowe and Gresley on his father's death in 1573.
That father, made knight on Queen Mary's coronation in
1553, was son and heir of Sir George Gresley, Knight of the
Bath when the Lady Anne Boleyn was crowned, who had in
Leland's day ' a very fayre manner place and parke at Dray-
kelo.' Our Derbyshire historian must therefore hark back

136 THE ANCESTOR

to days long before Sir George the novus homo if he would
find by what secret chaffering Drakelowe came to that
' Jamish ' intruder.

Sir George Gresley, the Knight of the Bath, succeeded at
Drakelow and Gresley to his elder brother, Sir William, a
soldier at the day of the Spurs in 1513 and at the sieges of
Therouanne and Tournay, whose knighthood was given him
by the king's hand in France. A fine of 1519 reckons seven-
teen of his manors, and an inquest shows that he was heir of his
father, Sir Thomas Gresley, by Sir Thomas's wife and cousin, a
Ferrers of Tamworth. Sir Thomas, twice Sheriff of Stafford-
shire, was son of Sir John, Sheriff of Derbyshire and Notting-
hamshire, who was in arms for the White Rose in 1452, and
for the Red Rose in 1459, who was at the crowning of King
Richard III., and yet followed the first Tudor King in his
northern progress. This Sir John was son of Sir John, who
with his father Sir Thomas, Sheriff of Staffordshire and
Derbyshire, and master forester of High Peak, was in France
for the Agincourt campaign at the head of five men-at-arms
and fifteen archers.

We are still long in coming to a point where the genealogy
of Gresley may appear mean or obscure to the historian.
With Sir Thomas Gresley the point is no nearer, for no doubt
can be thrown upon his birth. He is son of Sir Nicholas of
Gresley by Thomasine of Wasteneys, heir of those Colton
lands alienated by the first baronet and his father in 1609.
Nicholas was son of a knight Sir John, son of Sir Geoffrey.

Sir Piers of Gresley, father of Sir Geoffrey, married Joan
of Stafford. This knight and his wife are sketched for the
family picture gallery with broad brush strokes in the records
of their times. His slaying and his robbings, had he lived on
the northern marches where the ballad-makers were, might
have been sung up and down the country-side for many a
long year. That his lady was his worthy mate is vouched
for by her abetting her two Gresley lads in the murder of her
late husband's son, Sir William de Montgomery, ' on the
high road under the park of Seal.'

The father of Sir Piers, as became one who held under
Ferrers, was in arms against his king, and lost his lands for a
time as the king's enemy and rebel. Looking back from
this point we find that our Derbyshire historian's novus homo,
Sir George Gresley the baronet, who, as we are to believe,

OUR OLDEST FAMILIES 137

crawled into the light under the first Stewart King, and
gathered lands about him by pounds furtively pushed across
a table at a place and time undiscoverable, was the successor
at Drakelowe and Gresley of twelve knights of his name and
house, for each of whom good proof is forthcoming. Truly
the Gresleys of Drakelowe will do well to content themselves
with Mr. Falconer Madan for a chronicler, and relinquish
any attempt to obtain recognition from the historian of
Derbyshire.

Sir Geoffrey, of the barons' war, followed five ancestors
at Drakelowe, which manor is in Domesday Book as held by
a great tenant, Neel of Stafford — Nigellus de Stafford — whom
a mass of evidence goes to show as the father of William, son
of Neel of Gresley, who is found holding lands which Neel of
Stafford held in Domesday Book, and lands in that Derby-
shire Gresley which henceforward gave its name to the race.
William and his son Robert held four knight's fees of that house
of Ferrers from whose arms of vairy gold and gules the Gresleys
in later days took their shield of vairy ermine and gules.
Robert's son William held Drakelowe of King John by the
service of a bow, a quiver and twelve arrows, the Earl of
Ferrers being the mesne lord. His son Geoffrey was constable
of the castle of the High Peak, and steward of the household
to his lord the earl. Geoffrey's grandson was that other
Geoffrey who rode with Simon of Montfort.

To the genealogist nothing can be more fascinating than
the examination of those records which step by step carry the
line of Sir Robert Gresley of Drakelow, who was one of those
representing his order at the crowning of King Edward VI.,
to Neel, who held Drakelowe under the Conqueror. With
such a pedigree content might come, but the ingenious
pleadings which would derive Neel of Stafford from Roger
de Toeni, who bore the banner of the Dukes of Normandy
before the Conquest, have not yet ended. The reasonings
for this proud beginning to the genealogy of Gresley are
not fully accepted by antiquaries, but disproof has not yet
pushed them aside. When the last word has been said it
may be that the Gresley pedigree will dispute for place with
the oldest line in England.

O. B.

138 THE ANCESTOR

WHAT IS BELIEVED

Under this beading the Ancestor will call the attention of press
and public to much curious lore concerning genealogy, heraldry
and the like with which our magazines, our reviews and news-
papers from time to time delight us. It is a sign of awaken-
ing interest in such matters that the subjects with which the
Ancestor sets itself to deal are becoming less and less the sealed
garden of a few workers. But upon what strange food the
growing appetite for popular archeology must feed will be
shown in the columns before us. Our press, the best-informed
and the most widely sympathetic in the world, which watches
its record of science, art and literature with a jealous eye, still
permits itself, in this little corner of things, to be victimized by
the most recklessly furnished information, and it would seem
that no story is too wildly improbable to find the widest cur-
rency. It is no criticism for attacking' s sake that we shall
offer, and we have but to beg the distinguished journals from
which we shall draw our texts for comment to take in good
part what is offered in good faith and good humour.

THE fact that a Duke and Duchess have gone down
to their riverside residence at Runnymede, where they
will have a ' party for Ascot,' does not at first suggest ground-
work for the genealogically - minded paragrapher. But in-
genuity will find a way or make one. Even the peerages yield
no Grosvenor who was in arms on this or that side at the seal-
ing of the charter, but —

The association of the Grosvenors with Runnymede is not an uninteresting
one ; for the family was already a prominent one, and had been so for a cen-
tury and a half at least, when on June I5th, 1215, on that long stretch of level
meadow near Egham, ' inter Windleshoram et Stanes,' took place th= mem-
orable subscription to the Great Charter which has made Runnymede im-
mortal.

Let us put aside the century and a half of prominence
which had been enjoyed by the Grosvenors before 1215.
Mr. Bird's article in the first volume of the Ancestor sent into
the air the myth upon which that boast is founded. When

WHAT IS BELIEVED 139

we have said at the date of the sealing of the charter the
earliest Grosvenors have come into the view of the patient
antiquary curious concerning the lesser Cheshire houses, we
have said all that may be said of the early prominence of
the Grosvenors. But that their contemporary existence in
Cheshire should be held to associate them with the doings of
that famous June day is nothing less than amazing. By such
reasoning a citizen, whose ancestor was a known and respected
member of the Paddington vestry for twenty years before
1815, might be allowed to describe the association of his
family with the field of Waterloo as ' not an uninteresting
one.'

* * *

In the last number of the Ancestor we spoke of the popu-
larity of the myth which derives Lord Derby's ancient house
from pre-conquest ancestors in England. Since then the
legend has made again and again an entry amongst those
newspaper paragraphs whose applause of ancestry has taken
the place of the songs of bards. A late version hails Adam
de Aldithley, who ' came over from Normandy with Duke
William,' whose grandson William married Joan Stanley,
a descendant of the Saxon kings. This royal dynasty of Stanley
we greet as a new development ; but our Danish kings would
have made a better breeding stock. For it is evident that the
Stanley pedigree is still growing, and a Stanley of the right
Canute strain, who would bid the flowing tide of legend
arrest itself, would do his family a service.

Of Lord Barnard it is written : —

The trial of Harry Vane's claim in the House of Lords was perhaps one of
the most remarkable which that august tribunal has adjudicated upon in recent
years ; but step by step Mr. Vane proved his case from that remote ancestry
which claimed kinship with Howell ap Vane of Monmouthshire circa William
the Conqueror, down through Sir Henry Vane, knighted by the Black Prince
at Poitiers, and ancestor of the Earls of Westmorland, past that later Henry
described by Milton as ' Vane, young in years, but in sage counsel old," and
so to the father of the Vane whose eldest son became Earl of Darlington.

The paragraph leaves a thought uncertain what it was
that Mr. Harry Vane proved before the august tribunal.
What he proved was no more remote a fact than that his
ancestor, Mr. Morgan Vane, who died in 1779, was a second

1 4o THE ANCESTOR

son of the second Lord Barnard, and we cannot help believing
that the august tribunal has had more remarkable cases
before it than one in which a gentleman produced before it
the formal evidences of a relationship which was never in

doubt.

* * #

Had an attempt been made to prove before the august
tribunal the kinship with Howell ap Vane of Monmouthshire,
or with Sir Henry Vane, knighted by the Black Prince at
Poitiers, genealogists at least would not have grudged ' most
remarkable' to the case. We note that the honours of the
second of these ancestral shadows are still growing. A
knight at Poitiers was once description enough for him, but
now he must take knighthood on the field from his prince's
sword. It is sad to think that an irreverent descendant of
this hero should have been the first to cast doubt upon his
fame, and to suggest that Fanes and Vanes, Dukes of Cleve-
land, Earls of Westmorland and Darlington, Viscounts Fane
and Vane, and Lords Barnard sprang with greater probability
from a nest of Kentish yeomen.

* * *

Carlton Towers in Yorkshire is happy in having a ' child
peeress ' for chatelaine, whereby the house is often described
for us by our newspapers, together with its picture gallery,
' among whose treasures are the seals and signatures of
William the Conqueror and Henry the First, as well as the
regimental colours of the 2Oth Hussars carried in the Penin-
sular War and at Waterloo.' Antiquarian prejudice makes us
regard the signatures of the Conqueror and his clerkly sons
as treasures more remarkable than the embroidered honours
of the aoth Hussars, for the reason that, outside the picture
gallery of Carlton Towers no signatures of our ancient kings
exist of an earlier date than the latter half of the fourteenth
century. King John, it is true, scowling above his swan
quill, signs Magna Carta in a thousand historical paintings
of the great Gandish school, but no signed version of that
document has been found for us.

* * #

The family of Heneage distinguishes itself by allowing
its claim to long descent to stay at the very threshold of the
Conquest of England, the pedigree-makers, with a pleasant

WHAT IS BELIEVED 141

appearance of judiciousness, claiming neither Norman nor
Saxon origin for the race. But the statement which has
followed us in various journals that ' the name of Sir Robert
de Heneage appears as that of a witness to a grant of land to
the monks of Brucria [sic] in the time of William Rufus,'
does not carry with it enough to justify the addition of seven
or eight generations to the pedigree of a family whose descent
from a fourteenth century John Heneage of Hainton could
probably be supported by proofs. If Heneage be a place-
name, it may well have produced a Robert in the eleventh
century, and that Robert an approving witness of a pious
gift. Yet Robert need be no ancestor of John, who two
hundred and fifty years later carried a surname derived
from the same place,

* * *

The heralds have hitherto, and with some reason, re-
fused to recognize the county as an entity capable of bearing
arms. But the new County Councils, bodies having com-
mon seals and power to sue and be sued, cannot be denied
when they seek for a shield for their seal, their note-paper
and their lamp-posts. From the Times we borrow this
curious account of the devising of the new arms for the
Council of Norfolk.

30 May 1904.

The King, in view of his long connexion with and residence in the county
of Norfolk, both as Prince of Wales and as King, has honoured the county with
the royal augmentation for a part of the Royal bearing to be embodied in the
county arms.

At a meeting of the Norfolk County Council held at Norwich, on Saturday,
Mr. le Strange announced that His Majesty, through Sir Dighton Probyn, had
written stating that he gladly acceded to the request that he should confer this
honour on the county. After communication with the College of Heralds
it was decided to adopt the arms of one of the earliest Normans associated with
the county — namely, Sir Ralph de Guader, or Wcer, who went to the Cru-
sades, and whose wife successfully withstood a siege of Norwich Castle for three
months. The arms are per pale or, and sable with a bend ermine on a chief
gules, a lion of England between two Prince of Wales's plumes, princely crowned
or. The Royal augmentation was obtained by warrant, through the Home
Office, whose fee of £50 was paid by Lord Amherst of Hackney.

An uncertainty of language is apparent in these para-
graphs. ' The royal augmentation for a part of the royal
bearing ' is a phrase difficult to translate.

How can arms not yet called into existence have an

K

1 42 THE ANCESTOR

augmentation added to them ? The royal beast has been
adopted by many English towns as a part of their bearings,
but never before has it been styled an augmentation thereof.
And if the •plumes dostruce of the Prince of Wales's badges
are not to be assumed without permission, it would seem to
be the Prince of Wales whose permission should be sought.
The blazon of the arms is not easily read in the form printed,
but more sanely punctuated it can be understood.

* * #

We may take it then that the first part of the blazon stands
for the arms of an Earl of Norwich who flourished and fell
in the days of the Conqueror. The selection of his shield is
an unfortunate one, and open to sentimental as to archaeo-
logical objections. Tradition stamps the earl as the only
traitor in the Norman host at Hastings, and as he lived nigh
upon a century before armorial bearings had come into use,
it would be interesting to know upon what authority these
arms are ascribed to him. Unless indeed those of our heralds
who hold that nobility has its root in duly registered arms
have given themselves to the pious work of granting post-
humous arms without fee or reward to those of our ancient
lords who would otherwise remain ignoble in their graves.
Such retrospective piety should persuade the Chinese that
we are not a wholly barbarous people.

* * *

We promised long since that in the present season the
pre-Conquest ancestor should be in good fashion. Wisdom
has since been justified of us, and we find ourselves compassed
about with scores of records of those in whose family
history the date of 1066 is but a landmark by the way.
Two examples may be quoted. Our first paragraph is
dealing with the Rev. the Earl of Chichester.

Curate and congregation formed a strange contrast, Mr. Pelham tracing
back a clear descent from the holders of Pelham in Hertfordshire long anterior
to the Norman Conquest ; his cab-yard flock compacted of the scum of the
Euston-road — cunning, cruel, brutal to the verge of savagery.

Comment fails, but curiosity remains awake. Domesday
records no one lord, but several men, French and English,
as holders in Pelham. Amongst these Lord Chichester may
pick and choose his ancestor, but our own methods of genea-

WHAT IS BELIEVED 143

logy are defective, and we are willing to learn by what means
the selected forefather may be traced to a stock of lords of
Pelham long anterior to the Norman Conquest. For there
comes a point when public records fail. It is at this point
that the inquirer may be recommended in a genealogical
difficulty to consult the Peerage and the Landed Gentry.

* * *

The case of Lord Stafford next intrigues us : —

Lord Stafford, who appeared as a witness in the Law Courts yesterday be-
fore the new Chancery Judge, Mr. Justice Warrington, is a Jerningham, whose
name was a noted one in England long prior to the Norman Conquest. The
family was Danish, and the name originally Jernegan. A Jernegan was settled
in Suffolk in the time of King Stephen, and a son of his, one Hubert, appears
in the roll of knights in 1203. A second Sir Hubert figured with the barons
in their revolt against King John, and only escaped the headsman through the
clemency of the third Henry.

As hereditary surnames were not found in England be-
fore the Norman Conquest, Lord Stafford's family may well
have been reckoned a noted one in those far-off times, if only
for the haughty disregard of anachronism which persuaded them
to adopt such a distinction. It is but reasonable that the
Jerningham family should know best where their kinsfolk had
their origin, but the antiquary finds the first ancestor of this
ancient house at a date in the twelfth century well this side
of the Conquest, and finds him too amongst a group of
Bretons, for which reason he might be reckoned a Breton had
not the family pedigree written him down a Dane.

* * *

Of those mushroom houses which are content to prove
mere descent from the men of the Conquest we have enough
and to spare. The death of the late Sir W. C. H. Domville
has been followed in the newspapers by two accounts of his
genealogy.

Rear-Admiral Sir W. Cecil Domville, Bart., R.N., died yesterday, at Ips-
wich. He was descended from the Lord Mayor of London who entertained
the foreign Sovereigns after Waterloo.

Rear-Admiral Sir Cecil Domville died at his residence, The Chantry, Ips-
wich, yesterday. Sir Cecil, who retired from the Navy in 1893, traced his
descent to a certain Hughes [sic ! ] de Domville, who came over from the
town in Normandy of that name with William the Conqueror.

i44 THE ANCESTOR

One of these two statements seems to us more genealo-
gically probable than the other.

* * *

In recording Lord Donegal's death an archasologically-
minded journalist thus propounds the question of his an-
cestry : —

How far back the Chichesters go is a problem which has never been quite
definitely settled, but there was a John de Chichester in 1433 who was eighth
in descent from William de Chichester, and whose son married the daughter
of the first Earl of Bath ; and there was a Chichester in the first William's
time who was doubtless a progenitor.

It will be seen that the noble Chichesters at least share
the common lot, for how far back the pedigree of any one of
us may go is a problem which has never been quite definitely
settled by geologists or theologians. That John Chichester
of 1433 married his son to the daughter of an Earl of
Bath whose will was proved in 1541 seems also a point
worthy of definite settlement, but that there was a Chichester
in the first William's time cannot be doubted. A Colchester,
a Dorchester, a Winchester existed at the same period accord-
ing to sound authorities. If we are asked to believe also that
a gentleman of that date bore Chichester for a heritable
surname, and founded the ancient West Country family of
the name, hesitation takes us.

OLD CHELSEA1

HELSEA Old Church, as the title of Mr. Randall Davies'
, new book, says something less than the truth. We have here
not only a monograph on the old church, but an account
of the village of Chelsea, of the great houses — the Manor
House, Beaufort House, Gorges House, Danvers House and
Lindsey House — and of the Mores, the Lawrences, and
other departed Chelsea families. All this is set down for us by
Mr. Davies, to whom Chelsea is familiar and beloved, being
son to one who for nearly half a century has been incumbent
of the old church.

Of the old church of Chelsea, a London beauty which few
Londoners have turned out of their way to observe, nothing
can be said better than in the words of Mr. Herbert P.
Home, Mr. Davies' fellow-worker, who has given a preface
to his book. Whilst Putney, Fulham, Hammersmith and
Chiswick have gone one by one to the church knackers
Chelsea remains upon the river which it graces with its plea-
sant patchwork of historical architecture. In 1820 its doom
compassed it about, but the site was a narrow one, and the
new church of Chelsea, that grim pile of Georgian Gothic,
rose in chilly respectability in another place. Old Chelsea
church remains, as Mr. Home points out to us, a church with
its history upon it, its history of the fourteenth, sixteenth, and
seventeenth centuries. It has been the prey of no restoring
architect of that accursed race which, seizing upon a lancet
window or a zigzag moulding, declares a church ' Early
English ' or ' Norman,' and sends all work of other ages pack-
ing to the rubbish heap.

This church is rich in undisturbed monuments of the
dead. The gentle More lies here, and his arms upon a pillar
show the work done upon his chapel after the designs of Hans
Holbein, his illustrious guest at Chelsea. Sir Arthur Gorges
— ' Alcyon he, the jollie shepheard swaine ' — kneels upon a
brass plate with his wife and ample progeny. That monu-

1 Chelsea Old Church, by Randall Davies, F.S.A., with a preface by
Herbert P. Home. London : Duckworth & Co., 1904.

146

146 THE ANCESTOR

ment of Lord and Lady Dacre, admired of the young Burtons
in Henry Kingsley's novel, is spick and span within its railings,
the city of London having a careful eye for it. Richard
Jervoise, third son of Richard Jervoise, alderman and mercer
(for whose story and picture see the third volume of the
Ancestor), is probably buried under the strange memorial of
an Elizabethan triumphal arch decorated with his arms,
Richard the elder having had a lease of the old manor house
of Chelsea. An old tomb without inscription marks the
grave of the Brays, lords of Chelsea manor. The Lady Jane
Cheyne, a daughter of William, Duke of Newcastle, reclines
easily upon her elbow, under a tall monument of marble,
dressed and jewelled for the court of the Restoration. Mr.
Davies has recovered from the Bridgewater MSS. at Walkden
the whole story of the planning and the working of this mem-
orial, and little as we may love the cold splendours of the
Roman taste, we may admire the pains and cost whereby they
were wrought at Rome and brought to Chelsea on the
Thames.

This handsome volume, with its illustrations, its well
edited parish register extracts, and carefully copied inscrip-
tions, leads one to hope that as careful hands may soon be at
work upon more of those parishes about London, which have,
in too many cases, the useful Lysons for their only historian.
The editors of such parish histories might be advised in many
details by the example of Mr. Davies. Rarely have we ex-
amined a parish history which is so little disfigured by the
sham archaeology. When documents are cited we find
abbreviated words reasonably extended to the avoiding of
the jumbled and misunderstood contractions which vex
printer and reader. The capital F is here, the ' ff,' beloved
of the smatterer, being ignored. When dates before 1752
are cited the ' double date ' is always accurately given. The
illustrations illustrate the text, and are for the most part
well reproduced, although we might have begged for a few
more old landscapes of this waterside parish. The beautiful
frontispiece of Chelsea Old Church in 1788 must be one of
many more such pictures of a century which on its own
assurance was a noisy age, but which gives us here the sudden
impression of calm days a long while gone by.

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY

A GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF PETT

I am credibly informed that that Mystery of Ship-Wrights for some de-
scents hath been preserved successively in Families, of whom the Petti about
Chatham are of singular regard ; Good success have they with their skill, and
carefully keep so precious a pearl, lest otherwise amongst many Friends jome
Foes attain to it (FULLER'S Worthies of England, 1662).

I

PETER PETT of Harwich in Essex, shipwright (son of
John Pett, son of Thomas Pett of Skipton, as is recited
in the grant of arms to his son Peter). He made a will 6
March 1553-4, which was proved . . . [Commissary Court of
London, Essex and Herts division]. He gave to his wife
Elizabeth the household stuff, plate and implements which
he had with her, a cow, 2O/. in money, half the wood in his
yard, his ' short somer gowne faced with satten,' and his
' trendyll bed.' He gave his son Peter Pett his dwelling-house
and yard, with remainder to the heirs of his body, and with
further remainder to the testator's daughter, Anne Chapman.
He gave to Sir Richard Paynter, a priest, half a mark, and the
like to Sir John Goslyn, another priest. He gave to his
brother-in-law William Paynter, 2os. and his second gown
furred with fox, and to his nephews, the sons of William and
John Paynter, zs. each. He gave to his son-in-law, John
Chapman, 2os. and his best gown furred with fox, and to his
daughter's children, Christian and Elizabeth Chapman, 40*.
each. He gave to his sister, Elizabeth Kyngson, if alive, 2OS.
with remission of her debt, and to Robert Kyngsson's
daughter, Joan Kynston [sic], $s. ^d. He gave 6s. Sd. to Alice
Roger, and 31. \d. to her daughter, Anne Roger. The residue
he gave to his son, Peter Pett, his executor, making the said
John Chapman his overseer. William Paynter was a witness
to this will.

147

148 THE ANCESTOR

Peter Pett of Harwich left issue : —

i. Peter Pett of Deptford, a master shipwright of the

navy, of whom hereafter.
iD. Anne Pett, wife of John Chapman, who was overseer

of her father's will, by whom she had issue, Christian

Chapman and Elizabeth Chapman, who are both

named with her in that will.

II

PETER PETT, of Deptford in Kent, one of the master ship-
wrights of the royal navy. The domestic series of the state
papers show that he was master shipwright in the reign of
Edward VI. In 1587 he joined with Matthew Baker, another
shipwright, in bringing charges against Sir John Hawkins, the
treasurer of the navy, of malpractices in connection with the
repairs of the queen's ships, but the charges were not sustained.
He had a grant of arms in 1583 of which only the docquet
now remains at Heralds College. The shield was gold a fesse
gules between three roundels sable with a lion passant gold upon
the fesse. He died about 6 September, 1589. He made a will
2 September 1589, which was proved 10 September 1589
[P.C.C. 69 Leicester], by Elizabeth, the relict and
executrix. In this will he describes himself as ' one
of her majesties maister shipwrightes.' He gave to
his wife Elizabeth ' all such bargaynes undertaken by
me from her majestic accordinge to suche forme and order
as is sett downe in the office of the admiralties, viz. one
greate shipp called a crumpster fynished, twoe greate boates
nere done and perfected, whereof certayne money is re-
ceyved,' the workmanship and finishing of these being at
' the travell and disposition ' of the testator's son Joseph,
' who hath plattes and order for the same.' His wife was to
have his dwelling-house for life, and he gave her his house in
Norwiche [a scribe's error, no doubt, for Harwich], and the
house at Deptford purchased of his son Richard Pett. To
his son Joseph he gave land at Frathinge in Essex. To his
son Peter Pett the elder he gave the lease of his house at
Chatham yard and his ground at Wapping. To his sons
Phineas Pett, Noah Pett, and Peter Pett the younger he gave
loo/, each, to be paid when they should come to twenty-four

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 149

years. To the three children of his son Richard Pett he gave
61. i$s. ^d. each at marriage or twenty-four years. To the
upbringing of Lydia, the child of his daughter Lydia, he gave
61. i^s.^d. To his daughters Rachel, Abigail, Elizabeth, and
Mary Pett he gave 100 marks each at twenty-four or mar-
riage. To his wife's unborn child he gave an equal portion
with the rest. He gave small legacies to his cousin John
Paynter, Mr. Rockery, William Hedger and his wife, Mr.
Honingborne and Philip Ellis. To the widow dwelling in
the almshouses which he had built at Harwich he gave 203.
To the children of his brothers, Thomas and Nicholas Thome-
ton, he gave 40*. each. He made his sons, Joseph Pett, Peter
Pett the elder and Phineas Pett, his overseers. He gave the
residue of his estate to his wife, making her his executrix.
Litigation between the executrix on the one hand and Joseph
Pett, Peter Pett, Richard Pett, and Lydia [blank] alias Pett
followed, but the will was confirmed by sentence promul-
gated 4 November 1589.

This Peter Pett was twice married, and had issue by both
wives. By his first wife, whose name is unknown, he had
issue : —

i William Pett of Limehouse, in Middlesex, who died
in his father's lifetime. He made a will [in 1587 ?]
wherein he described himself as of Limehouse, ' one
of her majesty's master shippwrightes.' He gave to
his wife Elizabeth his houses and leases in Limehouse,
with his yard and the stuff remaining therein. He
gave to his two daughters, Elizabeth Pett and Lucy
Pett, 2OO/. each at marriage or twenty-four years.
To his three brothers and to his sister Lydia zo/. each.
To his brother, Joseph Pett, his interest in a purchase
at Blackwall. To his seven half-brothers and sisters
[the children of his father's second marriage] he gave
5/. each. He gave a bay gelding to his brother,
Richard Mercy or Marcy, who was probably a brother
of his wife. He gave rings of forty shillings value to
his brother John Marcy, his brother Pyke, his sister
Marcy, his mother Elizabeth Pett, his uncle Girdler,
his cousin John Paynter, his brother Peter's wife, and
his brother Richard's wife. He gave to his father,
Peter Pett, a ring of 4/. value, and the like, or a cup
of the same value, to his father Marcy. He made

150 THE ANCESTOR

his father, Peter Pett, and his brothers, Richard
Marcy and Joseph Pett, his overseers. To his wife
Elizabeth he gave his lands in Chiselhurst, with his
lease of Hawke's Wood there, and a wood in Essex
called ' Jackherdes,' in Prittlewell. The witnesses to
this will were Peter Pett the elder, Joseph Pett, and
Robert Girdler, who was perhaps the ' uncle Gird-
ler ' named in the will. The will was proved 3 1
August 1587 [P.C.C. 48 Spencer] by the relict and
executrix. By his wife Elizabeth [Marcy] William
Pett had the two daughters named in his will, Eliza-
beth and Lucy Pett, of whom we know nothing
more.

ii. Joseph Pett, of Limehouse in Stepney, who was,
like his father and elder brother, a master shipwright
of the navy. He made a will 14 November 1605,
wherein he released his brother Phineas Pett of all
debts and accounts between them ' from the be-
gynninge of the world untill this present day.' He
recognized a debt of 32/. to his sister Mary Pett,
which should be paid at his marriage or age of twenty-
four years, and he gave her 8/. in addition thereto.
Amongst the witnesses to his will were John and
William Chapman. This will was proved 26 June
1606 [P.C.C. 46 Stafford] by Margaret the relict,
power being reserved etc. to John Humphrey the
elder, her father. Sentence in favour of the will
had been pronounced the same day, following liti-
gation between the relict and Richard Pett the
brother.

Joseph Pett was first married to Margaret Curtis,
whom he describes in his will as one of the daughters
of William Curtis, late of Ipswich, deceased. Ad-
ministration of her goods was granted to him 25
October 1594 [P.C.C.]. He had issue by her, an
only daughter, Margaret, to whom he gave by his
will 2oo/. and the houses in St. Matthew's, Ipswich,
called the ' Turke,' and a house in St. Clement's,
Ipswich, which houses he had in her mother's right.
To this daughter Margaret he gave ' one bed cover-
ing of tapestrey and six great silver and guilt spoones,

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 151

that were given to her by her grandfather-in-lawe, John
Chapman, and a goblet of silver parcell guilt that
was her mother's, and two rings of gold, whereof one
was her mother's and the other her grandmother
Chapman's.1 If the said Margaret died under
eighteen years of age the legacy of 2OO/. was to go to
her half brothers, William and Joseph Pett.

Joseph Pett married as his second wife Margaret
Humfrey, whom he describes as daughter of John the
elder of Ipswich, a clothier. She proved her hus-
band's will, and went to live in Ipswich. Adminis-
tration of her goods was granted 22 June 1612
[P.C.C.], to John Humfrey, her brother, she being
described in the grant as of Ipswich, a widow.
Joseph Pett had issue by her : — two sons, William
and Joseph Pett. The elder son, William, was
probably the William Pett who petitioned the
lords of the admiralty 12 April 1631 [Dom. State
Papers] for the mastership of the Fortune pink. His
petition recites that he had two sons cast away in the
Six Whelp

iii. Peter Pett of Wapping, of whom hereafter.

iv. Richard Pett of London, gentleman As Richard
Pett of London, gentleman, by his deed 29 May 1593
{Close roll 35 Eliza., fart 5], he sold to his brother
Peter Pett of Wapping, his portion of a messuage,
etc., in Deptford )ate of his father Peter Pett. He was
a litigant in 1606 concerning the will of his brother
Joseph. The heralds' visitation of Kent in 1619
describes him as ' unus valettorum regis.' The
will of his brother William in 1587 speaks of him as
married, and his father's will of 1589 gives a legacy
to his three children.

i°. Lydia Pett, the only daughter of Peter Pett of
Deptford, by his first wife, is named in her brother
William's will of 1587. She was married before
1589 to a husband whose name is not yet ascer-
tained, her father giving a legacy towards the bring-
ing up of her daughter Lydia.

1 52 THE ANCESTOR

Peter Pett of Deptford married as his second wife Eliza-
beth Thornton, described in the pedigrees as daughter of
George Thornton. Her brothers, Thomas Thornton and
Nicholas Thornton, are named in Peter Pett's will of 1589
with their children. Another brother, called George Thorn-
ton, is described in the autobiography of her son Phineas Pett
as an ancient and well-experienced ship captain. Noah
Pett, brother of Phineas, sailed with this uncle to Ireland
about March 159!, and was drowned in the river at Cork.
The autobiography of Phineas Pett relates the miserable
story of his mother's end. She matched herself with ' a
most wicked husband,' one Thomas Nunn, a minister, after
incumbent of Weston in Suffolk, not far from Bury St.
Edmunds. At this place she died in the beginning of 1597,
and was buried in the church. Her husband married again,
and cruelly treated her three daughters, who were left in his
hands. His barbarity came at last to murder, for in
1599 he beat the girl Abigail Pett so cruelly with the tongs
and a firebrand that she died three days after. This wicked
priest was convicted at Bury Assizes, but, to the scandal of
justice, was allowed to sue out a pardon, which was
granted him 28 May 1599 with restoration to the regularity
which he had forfeited [Dom. State Papers] His parish did not
enjoy his ministrations much longer, for his will, dated
21 July 1599, was proved 7 September 1599 (P.C.C. 70 Kid£\
by his second wife Anne and his brother Walter Nunn. He
gave his ' clothe gowne lyned with budge ' to his own father,
Mr. Thomas Nunn, and his ' gowne faced with dammaske '
to his wife's father, Mr. Nuce. He also named his sister
Ezard, his brother Jolly, and his uncle Robert Nunn of Wor-
tham and his two daughters. The murderer also directed
that a new English Bible price 6s. 8d. should be bought for
each of his own brothers and sisters, but the names of his
surviving stepchildren are not amongst those of his legatees.

By his second wife, Elizabeth Thornton, Peter Pett of
Deptford had issue : —

v. Phineas Pett of Chatham, of whom hereafter.

vi. Noah Pett. The autobiography of his brother Phineas
relates that, having no help from his unkind brother,
Joseph the master-shipwright, Noah Pett sailed to

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 153

Ireland with his mother's brother, George Thornton,
a sea-captain, under whom he was master of the royal
ship Popinjay. He was drowned about the beginning
of Lent in March 159*. His body was buried in
the church of Cork.

vii. Peter Pett, called Peter Pett the younger, being, after
the confusing fashion of his day, one of two sons
with the same Christian name. After his mother's
death he was for a time in the cruel hands of his
stepfather, Thomas Nunn, who put him out to a
gentleman's house in Suffolk as teacher to the chil-
dren. At the death of Thomas Nunn in 1599 ^e
came to his good brother Phineas at Limehouse,
and was prenticed by him in London. Soon after-
wards he left his master for an idle life which he was
not long to lead, for on 21 June 1600 he died of
small-pox at the Dolphin in Water Lane. On
23 June he was buried in the churchyard of All-
hallows, Barking.

ii°. and iiiD. Jane and Susanna Pett, children of Peter
and Elizabeth Pett, were both buried 21 August
1567 at Deptford.

iv°. Rachel Pett, who was married about two months
after her father's death in 1589, according to the
relation of her brother Phineas, to Mr. Newman,
minister of Canewdon in Essex. He was a man ' of
dissolute life,' and she died not long after her mar-
riage, having had by him two children, who died.

v°. Abigail Pett, who was beaten by her stepfather in
1599 with the tongs and a firebrand, dying three
days afterwards.

viD. Elizabeth Pett, who came to her brother Phineas in
1599 and was put out as a servant with ' a gentleman
of good fashion ' in London. Soon afterwards she
came back to her brother at Limehouse and died of
what was reckoned to be the plague, but proved to
be small-pox.

vii°. Mary Pett, who came to Limehouse with her brother
Peter and sister Elizabeth in 1599. She sickened

1 54 THE ANCESTOR

of the small-pox, of which Elizabeth died, but
would seem to have recovered.

Ill

PHINEAS PETT, of Chatham, master shipwright of the royal
navy, fifth son of Peter Pett of Deptford, being the eldest son
of his second marriage, was born in his father's dwelling-house
in Deptford on the morning of All Saints' Day I November
1570, and was christened in the parish church on 8 November.
These and other details of his life we have on the authority
of his own history of his life and fortunes, of which a copy is
preserved amongst the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum
[Harl. MS. 6279].

His education began at a free school in Rochester, from
which he went to a private school at Greenwich to be prepared
for Cambridge. In 1586 he entered Emmanuel College, but
his father's death in 1589 forced him to leave the university
without a degree and to seek a handicraft. The young
Phineas who had lately enjoyed his father's ample allowance
of £20 yearly besides books and apparel was forced to serve
as a covenant servant to Mr. Richard Chapman of Deptford,
one of the queen's master shipwrights whom old Peter Pett
had bred up, for a bare 46^. 8^. a year, out of which tools and
clothing must be found.

The rise of his half-brother Joseph Pett to be one of the
master shipwrights brought Phineas no advancement, and he
was compelled when out of his place to ship himself on ' a
desperate voyage,' not greatly caring what became of him.
Peter Pett, another half-brother, had some compassion where
Joseph had none, and at Peter's house in Wapping Phineas
had meat and drink until his ship sailed. In the gallion
Constance of London the adventurer spent twenty miserable
months, ragged and hungry. He saw the Levant and the
coasts of Barbary and Spain, and after an unlucky voyage
left his ship at Cork to visit his uncle George Thornton, with
whom his brother Noah was master in the Popinjay. ^

Kind brother Peter received him again at Wapping, and
the niggard Joseph parted with forty shillings to clothe this
ragged man home from sea. Phineas, who loved fine clothes,
bought himself ' mean attire ' in Burthen Street in London

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 155

and found work in Woolwich dock, where the Defiance was
being sheathed for Drake's voyage. By God's blessing
Master Phineas was soon able to cast his mean duds, and he
relates that before Easter of 1595 he had appareled himself
' in very good fashion, always endeavouring to keep company
with men of good rank, far better than myself.' The same
year saw him, although still an ordinary workman, with a boy
to work under him, ' the first servant that I ever kept.'

From this point the prosperity of Phineas grew steadily.
He worked at home on winter nights at cyphering and drawing
and the theory of his profession. In 1600 came his first place
in the Chatham yard, a small one but enough to persuade
the cautious Joseph that the time had come for Phineas and
himself to live together ' as loving brethren.' He was made
assistant master shipwright in March of l6o£, and in January
i6of he was chosen by his good patron the Lord High Admiral
to build for the young Prince Henry a little ship wherewith
' to acquaint his grace with shipping.' This little model, on
the lines of the Ark Royal, was wrought upon day and night,
and launched on 6 March ' with a noise of trumpets, drums
and such like ceremonies at such time used.' Pett himself
sailed her as captain with a crew of boatswains of the navy
and other choice men. At the Tower they took in ordnance
and powder, and passing Whitehall saluted the Court with
small shot and great ordnance. At Paul's Wharf on 22 March
the young prince came on board with a noble company and
christened the ship the Disdain ' with a great bowl of wine.'
Afterwards in the cabin Phineas Pett, whose apparel on this
famous day was doubtless a radiant sight, was presented by his
patron to the prince as ' a servant worth the acceptance of the
greatest prince in the world.'

When Joseph Pett died in 1605 Phineas was given his place
of master shipwright, and in this new position wrought so well
that his majesty the noble King of Denmark was received with
a fleet in being to the great honour of King James and
admiration of all strangers. At this time the master ship-
wright had for his guest in his house his good friend Sir Oliver
Cromwell, a knight with a little nephew and godson who was
to make more noise in the world than the great ordnance of
Chatham.

On the 25 April 1606, Phineas Pett was elected and sworn
master of the company of shipwrights and kept a feast with

156 THE ANCESTOR

many friends and good store of venison before them at the
King's Head in New Fish Street.

In 1609 a foul wind blew against this great shipwright's
rising fortunes. He had made friends and enemies, and of the
latter was the Earl of Northampton, who allowed himself to
be made a tool by Baker and Bright, Pett's fellow shipwrights
and old adversaries to his name and family. Charges of gross
incompetence were pressed against him, and he was tried at
Woolwich before a tribunal, to preside over which the British
Solomon came in his coach. For many hours Phineas Pett
knelt before majesty, ' baited by the great lord and his ban-
dogs,' and Solomon spake of upper and lower futtocks, of
midship bends and scantlings, delighting his court now and
again with the judicial jest which causes reverent laughter.

In the end all went well with our master shipwright. He
rose from his cramped knees, the multitude heaved up their
hats with a loud shout, and Northampton slunk by the back
way to his coach. For the rest of his life the history of old
Captain Phineas Pett is the history of the navy. Now and
again he sailed in the ships he built so skilfully. He carried
the Lady Elizabeth and the Palsgrave to Flushing, he fought
the pirates of Sallee. On King Charles' accession he was
given a chain of gold of £104 value, and two ' blanks for
baronets ' were amongst his other rewards. He brought the
young queen to Dover in 1625, and at Portsmouth in 1628 he
saw Felton knife my lord duke of Buckingham.

In 1608-10 he built the Prince Royal, the largest ship of
her day, and in 1632-33 the Charles. In 1637 he launched
the still greater Sovereign of the Seas, one of the most splendid
vessels that ever took the water. The Trade's Increase and the
Peppercorn were great merchantmen of his planning. He
was now on a height above the malice of his enemies, but
without good watch kept they would have ' bored holes
privily ' in the Trade's Increase the night before his Majesty
came to the launching, and ' a sore gust of rain, thunder and
lightning ' which came later made Phineas aware that old
Matthew Baker and his like had called in dreadful help to their
plots.

The son and grandson of shipbuilders, the craft was doubtless
near to the nature of Phineas Pett, but we must remember
that he was not bred to the yard, and his father's death kept
him from inheriting the secrets of the craft. His rare success

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 157

is rather to be attributed to his keen industry and to the Cam-
bridge training and mathematics, whereby he took up the chisel
and square as a man with a trained and educated mind.

Of the manner of his death we know naught, but he was
buried at Chatham 21 August 1647 as ' Phineas Pett, esquire
and captain.' No will or administration act has been found.

He married three times. His first wife was Anne Nicholls,
daughter of Richard Nicholls, of Highwood Hill in Hendon,
Middlesex, ' a man of good repute and honest stock.' They
were married at Stepney church on a Monday forenoon
15 May 1598. She died suddenly 14 February i62|, and
was buried 16 February in Chatham church. The second
wife of Phineas Pitt was Susan Eaglefield, daughter of Chris-
topher Eaglefield, of Stratford-le-bow, who names her in his
will dated 12 May 1592. She was married at Chatham
20 January 159^ to Robert Yardley of Chatham, gent.,
of a Warwickshire family, by whom she had issue two sons
and three daughters, of whom the youngest daughter, Kather-
ine Yardley, married John Pett, son of Phineas Pett by his
first wife. Robert Yardley was buried 26 December 1622
at Chatham. His widow was married to Phineas Pett at
St. Margaret's 16 July 1627. On 21 July 1636 she was brought
sick from Woolwich to Chatham. She died 24 July 1636,
and was buried 26 July at Chatham. On 7 January 1634
her husband married at Chatham his third wife, Mildrea
Byland. On 8 September 1638, being then with child (a
child which does not seem to have been born), she sickened
of a fever, and dying on 19 September, she was buried at
Chatham 20 September 1638.

Phineas Pett had issue by his first wife only. By her he
had eleven children, eight sons and three daughters : —

i. John Pett, son and heir, born 23 March l6oj. In
the summer of 1627 he was captain of a merchant
ship and served under Sir Sackville Trevor in the
taking of a French ship called the St. Esprit. On
\ September 1628 he left England as captain of the
royal ship the Six Whelp, and was cast away at the
isle of Rhe on his return from Rochelle. He had
married at Chatham, 14 July 1625, Katherine Yard-
ley, third and youngest daughter of Robert Yardley of
Chatham, gent., by Susan Eaglefield his wife, which

158 THE ANCESTOR

Susan afterwards married John's father, Phineas Pett,
as his second wife. By her he had a posthumous
son : —

Phineas Pett, christened at Chatham 23 Novem-
ber 1628. He had a grant cMarch 166?-, of the
office of master shipwright of Chatham dockyard.
[Docquet book, p. 98] following his petition, in
which he recites the services of his father, Cap-
tain John Pett, and of his grandfather, ' old
Captain Phineas Pett,' under whom he was
brought up. His marriage and his issue will be
given hereafter in detail.

ii. Henry Pett, who was born 18 March 1603, and chris-
tened 27 March at Chatham. He died 22 September
1613, and was buried 28 September 1613 at Chatham.

iii. Richard Pett, who was born (according to his father's
account) on 21 July 1606. This is probably an error
for 21 June, as he was christened 29 June 1606 at
Chatham. He worked with his father at the ship-
building trade, and, dying 27 November 1629, was
buried the next day in the chancel of Woolwich
church.

iv. Joseph Pett, born 27 April 1608, of whom hereafter.

v. Peter Pett, of Chatham, born 6 August 1610, of whom
hereafter.

vi. Phineas Pett, born 9 October 1614. He died 28
October, 1617, and was buried 10 December at
Chatham.

vii. Phineas Pett of Chatham, christened there 24 January
i6if, of whom hereafter.

viii. Christopher Pett, eleventh and youngest child, born
14 May, 1620, and christened 25 May at Chatham.
He was an assistant master shipwright at Woolwich.
As a master shipwright of the navy he attended the
Protector's funeral in November 1658. At the
Restoration he was re-appointed to his office of

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 159

master. Addressing the commissioners of the navy
16 September 1667 he complains that his salary is
so mean that, even if paid, it would scarce find his
family in meat and drink. He has served twenty
years at Woolwich, had but small fortune with his
wife, and having a wife and children to maintain,
is in debt [Dom. State Papers]. He built many
ships for the royal navy and his friend Samuel
Pepys relates that the king commanded him to alter
his moulds upon no man's advice for, says he, ' God
hath put him in the right assuredly, for no art of his
own could ever have done it, for it seems he cannot
give a good account of what he do.' He made a will
6 March i66j as ' his majesties master shipwright
of Deptford and Woolwich.' He gave to his wife
Anne all his estate for life, asking her to distribute
the same at her discretion amongst his children.
She proved the will as executrix 4 April 1668 [P.C.C.
51 Hene]. He died Sunday before 26 March 1668,
as appears by his widow's letter of that date to
Samuel Pepys the diarist [Dom. State Papers}. She
complains that she is left in a mean condition with
four children and 300^. of debt, her husband having
' always attended to his Majesty's service and never
looked after his own concerns.' She herself sur-
vived until 1679, anc^ was buried 26 December of
that year at Woolwich. She made a will 21 Novem-
ber 1679, being then a widow at Woolwich, giving
legacies to her three surviving children. Of this
will her brother, Philip Brace, gent., and her son,
Peter Pett, were named as executors, and Margaret
and Deborah Brace were witnesses. We may there-
fore guess that her own name was Brace. These
executors proved the will 7 January i6|$ [P.C.C.
9 Bath].

Christopher and Anne Pett had issue a son and
three daughters : —

1. Peter Pett, who was an executor of his

mother's will in i6H-

2. Anne Pett, who is named in her father's will

a6o THE ANCESTOR

in i66|, and is unnamed in that of her
mother in 1679, at which date she was
probably dead. She may have been the
Anne Pett who was married 20 April 1674
at Greenwich to Daniel Farrer of Woolwich.

3. Mary Pett, who was married 8 August 1676

at Greenwich to William Kethridge [sic].
Her mother names her as wife of William
Kildridge in 1679, and gives a legacy to
Alexander Kildridge their son.

4. Martha Pett, who was unmarried in 1679.

Her mother gave a necklace of pearls between
her and her sister Mary.

i". Anne Pett, born 15 October 1612, and christened
26 October at Chatham. She was probably wife of
William Ackworth, storekeeper of Woolwich. 'He
knows himself and I know him to be a very
knave,' records Pepys, who describes Ackworth's
wife as a very proper, lovely woman. When her
brother, Peter Pett, was committed to the Tower
in 1667 his sister, Mrs. Ackworth, had a warrant to
see him, which warrant wrongly described her as
Mrs. Pett [Dom. State Papers].

ii". Martha Pett, born 15 April 1617 and christened
22 April at Chatham. She was married 25 April
1637 at Chatham to John Odierne, her father's ser-
vant, one of a Kentish family of that name.

iii". Mary Pett, born 15 April 1617, and christened
22 April 1617 at Chatham, where she was buried
17 November 1617.

Ill

PETER PETT of Wapping (third son of Peter Pett of Deptford,
and grandson of Peter Pett of Harwich). He followed the
family calling of a shipwright, and was living at Wapping in
1592, when he gave his half-brother Phineas, then in great
straits, meat and lodging with him until his ship sailed. He
was dead before 2 March 163!, when his widow Elizabeth
petitioned the lords of the admiralty that she might have

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 161

the law against Captain Phineas Pett, his half-brother. This
Elizabeth was probably a second wife, for an administration
of the goods of Richard Tusam of Deptford was granted
9 January 158* [P.C.C.] to Anne Pett, alias Tusam, wife
of Peter Pett of Deptford, during the minority of Henry
Tusam.

Peter Pett had issue several children : —

i. Peter Pett of Deptford, esquire, born about 1592, of

whom presently.

ii. William Pett, clerk in holy orders. He made a will
25 April 1651, which was proved 31 December 1651
[P.C.C. 246 Grey} by Anne, the relict and executrix.
He described himself therein as of Wilsburrough
in Kent, where he desired to be buried. Admon.
d.b.n. was granted 18 July 1666 by Toby Garbrand,
uncle and guardian to Peter Pett the son (a minor).
He was twice married. His second wife, Anne
(Garbrand), made a will 10 September 1652, with
a nuncupative codicil of 2 January 165^, which
was proved 7 March 165^, [P.C.C. 342 Aylett] by
her friend Mr. Herne Thurston of Rochester, the
executor. She desired to be buried by her late
husband in the parish of Cuxton. She speaks of
her husband's five children, naming William, Bea-
trix, and Peter as her own children. She gives
legacies to her aunt and uncle Richard, her uncle
Nicholas, and her brother Tobiah Garbrand.
William Pett had issue five children. By his first
wife : —

ID. Mary Pett, who at the date of her father's will
of 1651 was wife of John Merricke, mariner.
They are both legatees under the will of her
stepmother, Anne Pett, in 1652. Her father's
will speaks of her as sister to Anne Pett, and
names their aunt Trelawne. She and her
sister are both named in the will of their
uncle, Peter Pett, about 1652. Her half-
brother, William Pett, in his will of 16
June 1692, speaks of her as wife of John
Bettenham.

2". Anne Pett, who was unmarried in 1652, when
she was a legatee of her stepmother, Anne Pett.

1 62 THE ANCESTOR

By his second wife, Anne (Garbrand), William Pett
had issue : —

Is. William Pett, a citizen and apothecary, living
in the parish of Allhallows, Lombard Street.
Born 1643 being aged twenty - three in the
allegation for marriage licence. His will,
dated 16 June 1692, was proved 2 December
1692 [P.C.C. 230, Fane] by Richard Hoare
and Richard Edmondson, the executors. He
recites his settlement made by an indenture
of 23 April 1669, after his marriage with
Elizabeth his wife, whereby and by fine and
recovery he had settled his messuages and lands
called Hewett House and lands in Willes-
borough and Ashford in Kent. He desired
to be buried at Cuxton in Kent, and made
his cousin, Peter Pett, esquire [afterwards
knight], his overseer. fie married, at
Allhallows, Barking, 20 April 1669, Elizabeth
Marriot daughter of Robert Marriott of
Mortlake, clerk, who in the allegation for
marriage licence dated 1669 [V.G.] is aged
twenty-one. William Pett and Elizabeth his
wife had issue (i) Marriott Pett, whose
grandfather, Robert Marriott, gave him a
legacy of i,ooo/., as is related in his father's
will of 1692. He married at St. Helen's,
Bishopsgate Street, 19 February 169!, Jane,
eldest daughter of Francis Jessop, of Brome-
hall in Yorkshire, which Jane died before him.
He made a will 16 November 1706 as of
Maidstone, gentleman, and admon. with the
will was granted 22 December 1722 [P.C.C.
243 Marlborougb] to William Pett, the son,
the two executors, William Jessop of Brome-
hall and William Finch of Maidstone, apothe-
cary, having renounced. He named his
uncle, Mr. James Marriott, of Hampton
Court, and Anne his wife. Marriott Pett
and Jane his wife had issue William Pett,
Elizabeth and Jane, who are all named in his
will, (ii) Elizabeth Pett, who married Fran-

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 163

cis Cell of St. George's, Botolph Lane, mer-
chant, in 1691. Allegation for marriage
licence dated 15 December 1691 [V.G.], she
being aged twenty and he thirty. Articles
of settlement before marriage dated 17
December 1691. Francis Bell, esquire, is
named in the will of his brother-in-law, Mar-
riott Pett, in 1706.

2*. Peter Pett, who was probably the youngest
child of this marriage. He made a will I
April 1 680 as a citizen and mercer of London.
Therein he names his wife, Jane Pett, his kins-
woman, Elizabeth Codd, daughter of St.
Leger Codd, his sister Mary Bettenham, and
his nephew and niece, Marriott and Eliza-
beth Pett. His residuary estate he gave to his
brother William Pett, who proved the will 9
April, 1680 [P.C.C 50, Bates].
3". Beatrix Pett, the youngest daughter. She
married one . . . Codd, of the Kentish
family of that name. Her brother William
Pett, in his will of 1692, speaks of her as
a widow deceased, and names her children
James Codd, and Beatrix wife of Robert
Thornton.

V*. Elizabeth Pett, daughter of Peter Pett of St. Mary's,
Whitechapel, shipwright (who was probably iden-
tical with Peter Pett of Wapping), married Thomas
Barwicke, shipwright. Allegation for marriage
licence 2 June 1610 [Bp. of Land.].
ii°. Anne Pett. Peter Pett of Deptford, in his will made
about 1652, named his sister, Anne, to whom he
was bound to pay I5/. yearly.

iii". Mary Pett, who in the pedigrees of the family of
Johnson of Aldborough (Visitation of London,
1663), is said to have married Francis Johnson of
Aldborough in Suffolk (1601-36). Her grandson,
William Johnson, married Agneta daughter of Hart-
gill Baron, and sister to Philippa, Baron, wife of
Phineas Pett.

1 64 THE ANCESTOR

IV

PETER PETT of Deptford, esquire (eldest son of Peter Pett of
Wapping, grandson of Peter Pett of Deptford, and great-
grandson of Peter Pett of Harwich), was a chief contractor of
the royal navy. He was born about 1592, as appears by his
monument at Deptford, which states that he died 31 July
1652 aged sixty. He made a will (undated) which was proved
18 August 1652 [P.C.C. 223 Pett] by Elizabeth, his relict and
executrix. Administration d.b.n. was granted 15 April 1676
to Peter Pett the son, the executrix being then dead. He
married at St. Botolph, Aldgate, 23 July 1623, Elizabeth
Johnson, daughter of Henry Johnson, of Aldborough, co.
Suffolk, gent. They had issue : —

i. Sir Peter Pett, an author and lawyer, who was chris-
tened at Deptford 31 October 1630 as son of Peter
and Elizabeth Pett. He was educated at St. Paul's
school. Admitted pensioner of Sydney Sussex Col-
lege, Cambridge, 28 June 1645, where he took a
degree of B.A. 7 March 164^. He migrated to
Pembroke College, Oxford, 1647, and was elected a
Fellow of All Souls in 1648. A bachelor of civil law 14
January 165$, he was admitted to Gray's Inn 12
February 165!-. He was knighted at the Restoration
by the Duke of Ormond, and was M.P. for Askeaton
in the Irish Parliament 1 66 1-66. A barrister-at-
law of the Middle Temple 1664. He was one of the
original Fellows of the Royal Society in 1663. He
was knighted and appointed Advocate-General for
Ireland. He made a will 22 July 1685 as ' Sir Peter
Pett, knight, his majestie's Advocate-Generall for
Ireland,' giving his brother, Sir Phineas Pett,
knight, one of the commissioners of the navy, all his
lands. He gave to his friend George, Marquess of
Halifax, Lord President of the Privy Council, all his
MS. books save one endorsed Liber forestarum, which
he gave to Sir James Hayes, who married the Vis-
countess Falkland. But his most interesting legacy
was certainly ' an agate stone ovall with an antique
figure cutt thereupon, which was given me by the
late Countess of Nottingham, and which was given
by the Spanish Admirall in the yeare 1588, then

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 165

prisoner to the English Admirall, afterwards Earl
of Nottingham.' This famous jewel he gave to no
less a person than Mr. Samuel Pepys, whose diary,
aks, does not exist for this period to tell us how
mightily he was pleased by the gift. Administration
of his goods was granted 6 June 1699 [P-C.C. 100
Pett} to Elizabeth Pett, spinster, niece by the bro-
ther to the testator, who had lived in the parish of
St. Martin's-in-the-Fields. In the church of St.
Martin's he was buried 19 April 1699. He died
unmarried.
ii. Sir Phineas Pett, knight, christened 29 April 1635 at

Deptford, of whom hereafter,
iii. John Pett, christened 2 November 1636 at Deptford,

and buried there 9 December 1636.
iv. William Pett, to whom his father gave by will his

lands and tenements in Wapping.

i*. Elizabeth Pett, christened 20 March 163^ at Dept-
ford. She married Robert Moulton, captain of a
man-o'-war, and is named with him in her father's
will.

iiD. Phebe Pett, named in her father's will. She married

(i) at Stepney, 20 October 1659, Stephen North, of

Shadwell, a sea captain. Le Neve says that she

married (ii) a sea captain named Mason.

iiip. Mary Pett, named in her father's will, is said by

Le Neve to have married one How of Deptfora.

SIR PHINEAS PETT of Chatham, knight, was christened
29 April 1635, at Deptford, the second son of Peter of
Deptford and grandson of Peter of Wapping. His father gave
him by will, after his mother's death, a Bridgehouse lease of lands
and tenements in Deptford. He was commissioner of the navy
and made a short will n November 1694, leaving all to his
wife Dame Margaret, who proved the will 13 December 1694
[P.C.C. 253 Box]. He was then of Frindsbury in Kent.
He married at least four times. His first wife is said by Peter
Le Neve, in his pedigree of the Petts [Harl. MS. 5801-2], to
have been a daughter of one Hedersey. His second wife was

1 66 THE ANCESTOR

Anne Bettenham, of Canterbury, whom he married i July
1664 at St. Margaret's by Rochester. She was buried at
Chatham 13 April 1667. His third was Elizabeth Coulson,
daughter of William Coulson of Greenwich, and co-heir of
her brother Thomas Coulson, M.P. for Totness, a'director of
the H.E.I.C. This Elizabeth was first married to John
Tarleton, citizen and haberdasher of London, who lived in
St. Mary Magdalene's, Fish Street, where the banns were
published 24 October, 31 October, and 7 November 1658,
she being then of Allhallows the less in Thames Street,
spinster. By him she had issue. After her death Phineas
Pett married a fourth wife, Margaret Lovell, sister of Thomas
and Anthony Lovell. She is said by Le Neve to have been
first married to Arthur Brooker, of Rochester, and to have
remarried to Wyllen, rector of Boxley. This was John
Wyvell, prebendary of Rochester, who was presented to
Boxley in 1690 and died in 1704. He must have been her
third husband, and was himself a widower, having married
12 July 1694 at Boxley, Christian Charlton of that place,
who was buried there 29 April 1698, leaving a daughter,
Christian Wyvell (christened 3 March 169! at Boxley),
named in the will of Dame Margaret her stepmother. Dame
Margaret made a will 2 February 171* as ' Dame Margaret
Pett l of Boxley.' She gave her farm or parsonage of Hoo to
her kinsman Thomas Rogers, gent., whom she made her execu-
tor, with Frances Nash, widow, her niece. She also names her
daughter-in-law (step-daughter) Elizabeth Pett, Mrs. Chris-
tian Wyvell (her third husband's daughter), Mrs. Frances and
Mrs. Elizabeth Gillman, and her nieces Elizabeth Lovell,
daughter of her brother Thomas Lovell, and Margaret
Lovell, daughter of her brother Anthony Lovell. This will
was proved 22 May 1712 and 23 February iji? [P.C.C.
98 Barnes] by the executors.

Sir Phineas Pett had issue by his first wife (according to
Le Neve) Phineas Pett and one daughter, and by his third
wife Peter, who died young. This is evidently only partly
true. He would seem to have had by his first wife : —

i. Phineas, of whom hereafter.

1 In this keeping of the surname, as well as the title acquired by her most
important marriage, she followed a frequent practice of her period.

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 167

By his third wife, Elizabeth Coulson, he had : —
ii. Peter Pett, christened at Chatham 19 July 1669, and

buried there 30 December 1672.

i°. Elizabeth Pett, who was admor. of the goods of
her uncle, Sir Peter Pett, in 1699. She was
christened at Chatham 13 December 1670. She
died unmarried, making a will 18 September 1720
as ' Elizabeth Pett of Carshalton in the county
of Surrey.' She gave legacies to many of her
Coulson and Fellowes kinsfolk, through whom she
was connected with the great Sir Isaac Newton.
She gave her cousin Peter Pett, the elder, 2O/, and
to her cousin, Margaret Pett, i,ooo/. She also gave
legacies to her three cousins Phineas Pett, Peter
Pett, and Elizabeth Pett, who were minors and
apparently brothers and sister. The residue of her
estate she gave to her sister, Mrs. Anne Tarleton
(her mother's daughter), and made her cousin,
Coulson Fellowes, her executor, who proved the
will 9 November 1720 [P.C.C. 238 Skaller].

VI

PHINEAS PETT, son of Sir Phineas Pett, knight, by his first
wife, according to Le Neve's pedigree of his father, was dead
before the date of his father's will in 1694. He was probably
the Phineas Pett of Chatham, shipwright and bachelor, who
married Sarah Harden or Harding of .Ratcliffe, spinster, the
allegation for their marriage licence being dated 19 October
1681 [Bp. of Lond.], he being aged twenty-three and she twenty-
seven, Robert Harding attesting. He was therefore born
about 1658, and his father married for the second time in
1664. Admon. of his goods was granted 4 March i68|.
[Cons. Rochester], he being late of Chatham, to William
Yardley, the principal creditor. His widow died c. 1693 at
Chatham, when admon. of her goods was granted 14 November
1693 [Cons. Rochester] to the same William Yardley, guardian
to Margaret and Peter Pett, the children. We have thus an
explanation of the legacies to kinsfolk of her own name given
by Elizabeth Pett, of Carshalton (daughter of Sir Phineas by
his third wife) in her will of 1720. Phineas Pett of Chatham
left issue : —

1 68 THE ANCESTOR

i. Peter Pett, of whom hereafter.

ii. Margaret Pett, to whom Elizabeth Pett, her aunt by
the half blood, gave a legacy of i,ooo/.

VII

PETER PETT, only son of the above Phineas Pett and Sarah
Harding, was a minor in 1693. Le Neve describes him as living
in 1703, and then bound to the master of a ship. He was
probably the father of the children Peter Pett, Phineas Pett,
and Elizabeth Pett, to whom Elizabeth Pett of Carshalton gave
legacies in 1720. Peter Pett, gent., whose identity with him
may also be assumed, was married at Gillingham 2 January
1704 to Elizabeth Cole, spinster. Admon. of the goods of
Peter Pett of Deptford in Kent, who died in the royal service
on board the Loyal Ellen bayond sea or on the high seas, was
granted 14 August I722[PC.C.] to Elizabeth the relict.
This Elizabeth made a will 26 March 1729, which was proved
i April 1729 [P.C.C. 114 Abboi\ by Catherine Cole, spinster,
the sister and executrix, to whom the testatrix gave her things
in the hands of Mr. Roch of Rotherhith. Peter Pett and
Elizabeth Cole had issue (the order of the children's birth
being unknown) : —

i. Samuel Pett, residuary legatee in his mother's will,
ii. Peter Pett, to whom his mother gave a guinea for a

ring.

iii. Phineas Pett, who made a will 27 July 1726 at Mocha,
aboard the Princess Amelia, giving all to his mother,
with residue to his brother Samuel Pett. Eliza-
beth Pett, the mother, proved the will 26 July
1727 [P.C.C. 177 F arrant], power being reserved
to Samuel the brother.

i°. Elizabeth Pett, to whom her mother gave in her will
a guinea for a ring.

IV

PETER PETT, of Chatham, esquire (son of Phineas Pett of
Chatham, grandson of Peter Pett of Deptford, and great-

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 169

grandson of Peter Pett of Harwich). He was born 6 August
1610, according to his father's autobiography. He was
commissioner of the navy at Chatham from 1648 to 1667,
when he was superseded, having been made a scapegoat for
the disasters following the raid of the Dutch fleet into the
Thames, and the disaster at Chatham.1 He was committed
to the Tower 17 June 1667 [Gazette}, and Pepys, quaking for
his own fate, saw him brought by the Lieutenant before the
committee of the Council on 19 June ' in his old clothes, and
looked most sillily.' His house and gardens were famous and
their rarities were viewed both by Pepys and Evelyn, the former
admitting that he was more affected by the commissioner's
strong drink, which made his head ache. He made a will 13
April 1663, being then of Chatham, esquire. He was lord of
the manors of Woodbridge Ufford and Kettleborough Ufford
in Suffolk, of which he had made a settlement before his will.
He gave to his two sons, in case they should both become
shipwrights, 'all my modellsand plotts of shipps,' but neither
son seems to have followed the family calling. This will was
proved 2 December 1672 [P.C.C. 153 Eure] by Peter Pett,
the son and executor. He married three times. His first wife
was Katharine Cole, daughter of Thomas Cole, of Wood-
bridge, whom he married at Woodbridge 8 September 1633.
She was buried at Chatham 12 July 1651. He married (ii)
Mary Smith, daughter of William Smith, of Greenwich,
serjeant-at-arms to Charles I., by Alice, daughter of Geoffrey
Duppa, of Greenwich. She was living in 1663, when she is
named in her husband's will, in which he wills to her ' two
necklaces of pearles conteyning two hundred seaventy and
] pearles, one dyamond ring, severall peeces of plate
either given her or by me bought, one shelfe of bookes, one
faire great bible, one great rich cabinett, one French rich
cabinett and lookeing glasse, one Turkey carpett, and all the
pictures, shells and glasses now standing and being in her own
clossett as she shall make choyce of.' Le Neve says that she
died in 1664. The next year her husband married (iii)

1 All our misfortunes upon PETT must fall
His name alone sees fit to answer all.
* * * *

PETT, the sea-architect, in making ships,
Was the first cause of all these naval slips.

MARVELL.

i7o THE ANCESTOR

Elizabeth Pitt, daughter of George Pitt, of Harrow-on-the-
hill, esquire. She had married (i) Sir Henry Hatton, of
Mitcham in Surrey, knight. The allegation for the licence
to marry with Peter Pett is dated n December 1665 [V.G.],
she being then aged about forty.

Peter Pett had issue by his first wife six sons and four
daughters :—

i. Peter Pett, of St. Margaret's, Westminster, gentle-
man, to whom his father gave by will his free and
copyhold lands in Alderton and Hollesley, co.
Suffolk, after the death of Mary, his second wife,
who had them for her jointure. He had also
the inn called the Crown in Woodbridge, bought by
his father of Mr. William Ackworth. He made a
will 5 February 170^, and admon. with the will
was granted 4 March I7o|. [P.C.C. 94 Lane] to
Elizabeth the relict (who is not named in it), George
Williamson the nephew, who was named as exe-
cutor, renouncing execution. He married (i) Alice
Newman, daughter, according to Le Neve, of John
Newman, rector of Wythiam, co. Sussex. She
was buried 16 November 1669 at Chatham. Peter
Pett and Alice his wife had issue : —

1. A still-born son, buried 20 September 1659

at Chatham.

2. Peter Pett, born 5 May and christened 7 May

1662 at Chatham, and buried there 14 July
1666.

3. John Pett, christened 19 June 1666 at Chat-

ham, who died young.

ID. Elizabeth Pett, the only surviving child of

this marriage, has a provision made for her

in her father's will, she having been

' melancholy ' for some years.

2D. Mary Pett, buried 23 October 1 668 at Chatham.

3°. Catherine Pett, buried 21 October 1669 at

Chatham.

ii. Phineas Pett, clerk in holy orders, matriculated
23 July 1656 at Exeter College, Oxford. B.A.
28 February i6f£. M.A. 1662. Vicar of Totnes
1669. Vicar of Paignton 1674 to his death.
Admon. of his goods was granted 8 November

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 171

1684 [P.C.C.] to Sarah the relict. He married
(i) Hester Rogers, daughter of Robert Rogers, of
Wappenham, co. Northants, clerk. The allega-
tion for the marriage licence is dated 13
August 1669 [Fac. office], he being aged twenty-
nine and she twenty-six. He married (ii) Sarah
Lethbridge. She made a will 30 September
1692. Admon. with the will was granted i
June 1695 [P.C.C. 102 Irby] to Lewis Burnett,
Christopher Lethbridge the brother, and Mary
Saunders, guardians to the children. The will
was afterwards proved 7 November 1701 by the
two sons. She named her sisters, Mrs. Mary
Saunders and Mrs. Hester Rooke, and her
brother-in-law, Mr. Robert Burscough, of Totnes.

Phineas Pett and Sarah his wife had issue : —

1. Phineas Pett, who matriculated at Oxford 27

March 1699, aged eighteen. B.A. Exeter
College 1702. M.A. 1705, from Oriel College.
Vicar of Walberton in Sussex 1704. Rector
of Ford 1715. Vicar of Yapton 1719.

2. John Pett, whom Le Neve describes as living

at Exeter in 1703.

iii. Thomas Pett, named in his father's will of 1663 as a
minor. He died young.

iv. Warwick Pett. He was living in 1668, being then
in the service of the yard at Chatham, as appears
by a letter to Samuel Pepys from his father 25 June
1668 [Dom. State Papers].

v. Benjamin Pett, son of Peter Pett the commissioner,
buried at Chatham 4 October 1661.

vi. and vii. Richard and John Pett are named by Le Neve
in 1703 as having died young.

i°. Katherine Pett, who was married to Thomas East-
land, as appears by her father's will.

;i". Anne or Agnes Pett, who married at St. Leonard's,
Eastcheap, n December 1660, Rowland Crisp, of
Chatham, gent, (a younger son of Tobias Crisp,
rector of Brinkworth in Wilts, third son of Ellis
Crisp, who died Sheriff of London in 1625). His
will, dated 27 September 1691, was proved 29 April

172 THE ANCESTOR

1692 [P.C.C. 63 Fane] by Anne, the relict and
executrix. They had one son, Rowland Crisp.
Anne Crisp is named in the will of her brother Peter
in 1708 in remainder of his Woodbridge land.
iiiD. Margaret Pett, aged under twenty years at the date
of her father's will. She is said by Le Neve to
have married Edmund WoodrofTej of the Ex-
chequer, counsellor at law.

iv". Avice Pett, who was buried 18 December 1656 at
Chatham.

IV

JOSEPH PETT of Chatham, who was probably the Joseph Pett,
son of Phineas Pett, the first of that name, was born 27
April 1608, according to the relation of the said Phineas.
He seems to have been a shipwright at Chatham. Admon.
of his goods was granted 9 May 1653 [P.C.C.] to Elizabeth
the relict. He was first married at Chatham 13 April 1626
to Bithia Gardiner, who was buried there 17 March 163^.
His second wife, Elizabeth, was married to him within the
year. He had issue by his first wife : —

i. William Pett of Chatham, shipwright, who was chris-
tened at Chatham 9 December 1627. He made a
will 21 February 167!, which was proved 3 July
1679 [P.C.C. 89 King] by Elizabeth, the relict and
executrix. He gave his brother Mr. Samuel Pett, of
the Navy Office, ' one guinny peice of gold ' for a
ring, and made his wife his residuary legatee. He
married Elizabeth Houghton, who died 17 December
1711 in her seventy-fifth year [M.I.]. She married
as her second husband Robert Lee of Chatham,
gent., who was for eighteen years master shipwright
there. He died i April 1698, in his sixty-sixth year,
and was buried at Chatham under a monument
with his arms — gules a cross gold between four uni-
corns' heads razed gold for LEE, parted with sable
three bars silver for HOUGHTON. Her will, dated
i May 1710, she being then of Sayes Court, in
Deptford, a widow, was proved i October 1711
[P.C.C. 217 Toung] by her son William Lee, esquire.

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 173

She named her brother-in-law, Mr. Michael Lee,
and her young kinsman, William Houghton of
Chatham. Robert Lee and his wife had issue, with
three sons who died young,1 a son, William Lee, who
married Elizabeth Pett, daughter of the wife's
brother-in-law, Samuel Pett.

ii. Samuel Pett of Battersea, esquire, who was a brother,
and probably a younger brother, of the above
William Pett, being named in his will of 167^.
He may have been a son by the second marriage.
In May 1670 Cuthbert Curwen, purser of the Henry,
petitioned the Navy Commissioners that Phineas
Pett, brother of Samuel Pett, might act as his deputy
at Chatham, whilst the petitioner was in London,
the said Samuel having been lately appointed clerk
to the surveyor of the navy [Dom. State Papers].
He made a will 19 October 1695 as ' one °f tne
commissioners of his majestie's navy royall,' desiring
to be buried by his late father in the vault in the
parish church of Chatham. He named his mother,
Elizabeth Pett, widow, his uncle, Benjamin Middle-
ton, esquire, and his kinsman, Peter Pett, esquire,
which last two he made his executors. He
died before i February 169^, as appears by the
deposition of one John Houlton. Admon. with the
will annexed was granted 10 February 169! [P.C.C.
27 Pett] to Elizabeth Pett, alias Lee, wife of William
Lee, and Mary Pett, alias Houlton, wife of John
Houlton, the daughters, the executors renouncing
Admon. d.b.n. was granted i April 1737 to Hen-
rietta Maria Otger, alias Pett, wife of Peter Otger,
the daughter, the former administratrices being dead.
Samuel Pett, of the Navy Office, was first married
to Arbella or Arabella, daughter of ... He
married (ii) Mary Long of Battersea, a widow, the
allegation for marriage licence being dated 9 June
1684 [V.G.], he being then aged about forty, and a

1 These sons were Robert Lee the eldest son of this marriage, who died
25 April 1685, aged twenty-two years and nine months ; Daniel Lee, who died
9 December 1 680, aged thirteen years and four months, and Francis Lee, who died
7 December 1695, aged six years and six months.

M

174 THE ANCESTOR

widower. By his first wife he had issue a son and
four daughters : —

I. Toby or Tobias Pett, christened 28 September
1675, and buried 9 October 1675 at All-
hallows Barking.

ID. Elizabeth Pett, who married William Lee,
esquire, son of Robert Lee, of Chatham,
by her aunt Elizabeth (Houghton), relict
of William Pett of Chatham, her uncle.
Allegation for marriage licence dated 17
April 1694 [V.G.], she being of Battersea,
spinster, and he of Chatham. She is
named with her husband in his mother's
will of 1710, and both were dead in April

2D. Rose Pett, christened 4 September 1677 at
Allhallows, Barking. She was named in her
father's will of 1695.

3°. Mary Pett, who married 23 July 1696 at
St. Olave's, Hart Street, John Houlton of
Bromeham, co. Wilts, as a bachelor. Allega-
tion for marriage licence dated 20 July 1696
[Fac. office}, he being aged twenty-four and
she seventeen. They were both dead in
April 1737.

4?. Henrietta Maria Pett, who married Peter
Otger II February 169! at St. Alphege,
London Wall. They were both living in
April 1737.

5D. Arabella Pett, the youngest daughter,
christened II February 169! at Allhallows,
Barking.

iii Phineas Pett, who is named in the above petition
of Christopher Curwen as being at Chatham in
1670, and a brother of Samuel Pett. He may have
been a son of the second marriage. He was doubt-
less the Phineas Pett who petitions the Duke of
York, June 1671, that he may succeed to a master
shipwright's place [Dom. State Papers]. He states
that he was bred under his grandfather, Captain
Phineas Pett, and was five years in the Highlands

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 175

of Scotland procuring masts and fir timber. He
was probably buried 2 October 1674, at Chatham.
Admon. granted 27 November 1674 [Cons. Roches-
ter] to Anne the relict. He may have been the
Phineas Pett who married 26 March 1669, at
Greenwich, Elizabeth Tacklhood.

iv. Joseph Pett, christened at Chatham 4 April 1630.
He was probably the Joseph Pett, « a young man '
buried at Chatham 19 November 1652, and the
Joseph Pett of whose goods admon. was granted
2 September 1653 to Eleanor the relict.

v. Christopher Pett, christened 18 June 1632, of whom

we know nothing more.

By his second wife Elizabeth, Joseph Pett of Chatham
had issue : —

vi. Thomas Pett, christened 16 April 1649 at Chatham.

i°. Rose Pett, christened 8 March i6f£ at Chatham,
and buried there 26 November 1640.

ii°. Margaret Pett, christened 19 December 1641 at
Chatham.

iii°. Elizabeth Pett, christened 5 August 1645 at Chat-
ham.

IV

CAPTAIN PHINEAS PETT of Chatham (son of Phineas Pett of
Chatham, grandson of Peter Pett of Deptford, and great-
grandson of Peter Pett of Harwich), was christened 24 January
i6i| at Chatham. When captain of the Tiger he took a
French prize laden with brandy and wines, and making for
home with her he met, on I or 2 May 1666, with a Dutch
man-o'-war of forty guns. The Dutchman engaged with
two or three broadsides, and sought to board the Tiger,
guessing from the character of her prize that the crew would
be drunk and helpless. The Tiger, however, was well de-
fended, and the Dutchman at length fell off and ran for it.
Five Englishmen were killed in this affair, and Captain Pett
was the first to fall. This account is taken from the letters
of Thomas Waltham and John Lanyon to the navy com-
missioners [Dom. State Papers]. He married at Chatham
10 April 1642 Frances Carre of Maidstone, who was probably
of the family of Robert Carre, who was curate of Maidstone

176 THE ANCESTOR

1559-1620, his son William, who died in 1618, havingTbeen
some time his assistant and parish clerk. She is said by Le
Neve to have remarried one Roche of Ireland. Several peti-
tions in her name are found amongst the Domestic State Papers.
On 31 September 1667 Frances Pett, widow of Phineas Pett,
who was slain in the Tiger, petitions for a gift of one of the
old vessels late sunk at Woolwich. About the same time she
addresses Lord Arlington, reciting that her children have lost
a dear father, and one who whilst he lived had a large share
of his sovereign's favour, which favour, she hopes, is not lost
by his dying for his king.

Phineas Pett had issue by Frances his wife : —
i. Phineas Pett, christened 3 May 1646 at Chatham.
Le Neve speaks of him as Judge Advocate under
Sir John Holmes, and says that he died on the Sous-
dyke yacht in Ireland. Admon. of his goods, he
being late of Dublin in Ireland, was granted 14 De-
cember 1694 [P-C.C.] to Philippa Pett the relict.
Admon. d.b.n. was granted 28 July 1698 to Anne
Baron, spinster (sister to the said Philippa), the aunt
and guardian to Samuel Pett, the son of the de-
ceased. The name of his first wife is uncertain.
He married as a widower at St. Matthew, Friday
Street, i April 1687, Philippa ' Barnes.' Le Neve
describes her as daughter of ... Bacon, of Canter-
bury. She was really Philippa Baron, daughter of
the cavalier plotter Hartgill Baron of Windsor, a
royalist squire who was the first to kiss hands at
Breda with the news of the restoration of monarchy.
He was comptroller of Windsor Castle, and at one
time secretary to Prince Rupert. Philippa Pett,
the widow, probably followed her mother to Ire-
land and married as her second husband James
Weekes of Dublin, gent., to whom admon. of her
goods was granted 23 November 1702 [P.C.C.].
Phineas Pett had issue Samuel Pett, named in the
grant of administration to Anne Baron in 1698.
Le Neve says that he had two daughters by Philippa
Baron, but gives no names or details,
ii. Richard Pett, buried at Chatham 17 October 1656.
iii. Richard Pett, buried at Chatham 16 June 1660.
i°. Frances Pett, born 22 December 1649 at Chatham,

THE BUILDERS OF THE NAVY 177

and living in 1663, when she is named in the herald's
visitation of Kent.
ii°. Jane Pett, born i March 165^ at Chatham, and

buried there 9 October 1660.

Hi". Anne Pett, born 8 September 1653 at Chatham, and
living in 1663, when she is named in the herald's
visitation pedigree.

iv°. Martha Pett, buried 30 June 1655 at Chatham.
v°. Jane Pett, born 27 and christened 28 December
1664 at Greenwich.

PHINEAS PETT, posthumous son of Captain John Pett, who
was cast away on the return from Rochelle, son of Phineas
Pett of Chatham, and grandson of Peter Pett II., was chris-
tened 23 November 1628 at Chatham. He had a grant
March i66y of the office of master shipwright at Chatham
dockyard, following his petition in which he recited his father's
death at sea in the late king's service. He described himself
as having been brought up to shipbuilding by his grandfather,
' old Captain Phineas Pett.' Great difficulty has been found
in distinguishing him from others of his name, a difficulty
which is increased by the reckless identifications of the editors
and indexers of that series of Domestic State Papers to which
we must look for details of the careers of the Petts. He was
buried 2 March 167^ at Woolwich. He made a will
1 8 January 167^, being then of Woolwich, naming his four
daughters Hannah, Katherine, Elizabeth, and Mary, to whom
he gave 35^. each. He gives all his residuary estate to his wife
Elizabeth, ' considering the great losses and impoverishing
my deare faithful!, most loving and most virtuous, my dearly
beloved wife Elizabeth hath susteyned . . . leaving to her
charity and wisdom without prejudice to herselfe, if things
happen better than is expected, to cast an eye upon any of
my relations that may fall in distress.' This will was proved
22 March 167! [P.C.C. 27 Reeve]. He was probably
married three times. His first wife, Mary, was buried
20 October 1660 at Chatham. His second wife, Rabsey
Caswell, was daughter of Richard Caswell, of St. Swithin's,
London, a white baker, by Mary, daughter of Richard Slaynie

i/8 THE ANCESTOR

of Shropshire, gent, (married to Richard Caswell 9 February
i6if at St. Michael's, Cornhill). Her marriage with
Phineas Pett of Chatham is recorded in the herald's visita-
tion of London in 1663. His third wife, Elizabeth, was
probably Elizabeth Taylor of Charlton, who married Phineas
Pett of Chatham 31 March 1668 at Greenwich.
Phineas Pett had issue by Mary his first wife : —
i°. Hannah Pett, born1 13 August 1649 at Chatham.
iiD. Mary Pett, born 19 September 1650 at Chatham.
iiiD. Catherine Pett, born 22 January 165^ at Chat-
ham.

iv°. Elizabeth Pett, born 31 January 165! at Chatham.
v°. Mary Pett, born 7 April 1654 at Chatham.
vi°. Anne Pett, born 21 November 1655 at Chatham,

and buried there 31 January 165^.
vii". Anna Pett, born 29 October 1657 at Chatham,

and buried there 7 March i6ff.

Phineas Pett had issue by Rabsey Caswell, his second
wife : —

i. James Pett, buried 8 February i66i at Chatham,
ii. Charles Pett, buried 6 April 1662 at Chatham.
viiiD. Mary Pett, christened 30 May 1662 at Chatham,

and buried there 10 June 1662.
By his third wife, Elizabeth Taylor, he had issue : —
iii. Peter Pett, christened 9 July 1669 at Chatham, and

buried there 30 December 1672.
iv. (?) William Pett, 'son of Phineas Pett,' buried

28 July 1672 at Chatham.

ix. Elizabeth Pett, christened 13 December 1670 at
Chatham.

H. FARNHAM BURKE.
OSWALD BARRON.

1 From this date to the restoration births and not christenings are recorded
in the parish register of Chatham.

A PEDIGREE

or Genealogy of the family of y* Frekes for near 200 years

FIRST BEGUN

by Ralph Freke of Hannington esq a gentleman of great

integrity and learning and who living to his eighty-eighth year

might be justly deemed a credible witness

SECONDLY AUGMENTED

by y* industrious inquiryes of Mr John Freke

Rector of Ockford Fitzpaine in Dorset
and sometimes a fellow of Wadham College in Oxon. and

lastly reduced to this forme

by William Freke of Hinton St. Maryes in y* County of Dorset

Barrister of y* Mid. Temple

July y" 14th 1707

THE AUTHORS GENERALL CENSURE OF HIS
NAME AND FAMILY

The generall genius of this family (as he could ever see) has
been sincere, good natur'd and friendly and if ever it has appear'd
otherwise t'has been where crook'd thro abuses, so they have
been generally frugall and judicious w0"1 2 qualityes have raysd
many members of it at times unexpectedly to become rich, and
that so y' in y' regard w"1 an impartiall eye he can scarce see any
family to exceed it, their good nature has often made some of
them thot [?] softly and their trust to judgm' is very apt to make
y™ sour as ag8' impertinencyes especially in age, their turn to
sincerity has kept them ever from court dependencyes and their
judgm' of self-sufficiency has ever kept ym as surly ag8' all other
dependencyes as litle, and y' as well in themselves or others.
Ye Upway family has shewn the genius good for souldiery and
as for estates I have rarely known y' there has been less than 10
members in't at a time worth 2oo/. p. an. and upwards.

[This pedigree is edited from a MS. book of Freke genealogies now in the possession of Mr.
W. A. Willes, of Astrop, to whom it came by descent. It will be completed in the next
number of the AnaMr. O. B.]

m

I. FREKE OF

FREKE It seems ori
present divinity proi
of that country being

Frank Freke now lying buried at
Crewkern. Nota in 1558 he lent
I2/. per privy scale to Queen Mary
to be suppos'd no meane sume when
H. ye 8th left his daughters but i o,ooo/.
apeice fortunes in those dayes

Robert Freke esq Anno 1532 and ye 34 of
H ye 8th was chose by auditor Keynsey
as yc hopefullest boy represented him in
ye schoole he hapned to be taught in to be
his clarke, and in which place he succeeded
so well that he is computed to have left
an estate of one hundred thousand pounds
behind him, he marryed Alice Swaine of
Gunvile who lies buryed at Shrot. Ap. 1577
himself being buried there Octob. 1592.
Note by ye assistance of this Robert Freke
was raysd ye family of ye Stratt'eildsea
Pitts in ye person of Sr William Pit and

who married Swaine sister to R.

Freke' s wife

John Freke of Shilling
Ockford married to one

Christiana and

who died in August
1559 wthout issue,
note this & ye follow-
ing brother being both
named John they used
to call ye one John,
and ye other Johnie
for distinction

1 I

1

1 1

1 1

Sr Thomas Mary

Frances Margaret

Elizabeth

Freke of wm Freke

Freke Freke

Freke

yc houses of

Shroton,

Upway,

— —

—

Hannington,

Robert John Freke

William

& Hinton

Freke of whom y*

Freke

house of

of whom yc

Helton

Irish Frekes

John Freke who
farmed ye rectory of
Shroton, and from
whom ye Faringdon
estate is descended
to his heir male at
this day he married
Anne Lanning and
died there yc 1 5th of
May 1581

1

1 1

Anne Robert Freke William Joane Richard Frai

Freke of whom ye Freke Freke Freke

houses of

Ant

Faringdon, Margaret Frel

Wincanton, — Freke

of •

Gillingham Thomas James

hou

Freke Freke

Tut

John Freke

1REWKERNE

a Danish name y*

and several others

name at this instant

Thomas Freke vicar of Mountaguc
34 H. 8 his brother

About this time also liv'd
Edmund Freke Bishop
first of Rochester and
after of Norwich but
whether of this family ?

Freke of

Philip Freke of Francis Freke of Crookhorne Somerset

Joanc Freke mar-

n he mar-

Chilthorn Dom- married there to Mary and to be

rying Willra Bragg

i. and

ner in Somerset- supposd yc elder branch of yc family tho

of Thomcomb in

**out issue

shire and who Robert by a special! providence attained

Somersetshire

ota his will

left issue yc far greater estate both as inheriting his

u of his

father's name and w^all living where his

to his

father died, how great his paternall estate

ma jr* chief

was is not certainly known but conjectur'd

illustrating

to have been about 2 or joo/. per an.

I of this

besides y* provision made for younger

and where-

brothers and sisters, and indeed it could

y* rest is

not be well less considering that John of

(o his bro-

Shrowton and all y" other young" brothers

bert Freke

left their children in a very gentlemanly

condition as appears by their estates

legacyes and matches

reki Thomas
Freke

RobertFreke Elizabeth William John Freke Joane
of whom the Freke Frckc of whom the Freke

Robert W Ilia
marrying

1 1

m Mary wife to

John Comini

houses of house of

Agnei of Bishop's

Bruam, Crookhorne

Orchard Orchard Devon

r*

Preston,

— — —

Bristoll Robert Freke

Matthew Richard Anne wife to

of whom the

marrying John Beake of

:ke,

house of

y* widow Broadway

tF.

Crookhorne

Cook

II. FREKE OF FARINGDON ANE

John Frcke [thir
farmed y* rectory
ye Faringdon esta
male at this day h
died there ye 15'?

IT

3

4 S

I-

Robert Freke

Anne Freke born

John Freke born William Freke Thomas Freke

Francis F

born Anno 1562.

March 22. 1563

July 1567 dying born Oct. 3. 1568 born at Shroton

born at

buried Aug. 30

and married to

May ye 4* 1582

Dec. Ill 569 and

1571 and

1593 at Faring-

Tho. Knowles

in ye Mid Temple

dying ultra mare

at Knight

don marrying

Chancello* of

London

Dorset

Susanna Polden

Dorset 1584

of Durweston

Jane Freke married to
Geo. Harvey of Sudden-
som w^out issue

Robert Freke born Sept.
26. 1592 at Durweston.
mort. 1651 married to
Eliz. Clavell dr of John
Clavell in Blandford
Wooten Justice of yc
peace

I

T

T 1

f

John Freke slaine

William Freke

Arundell Freke Robert Freke Clavell Freke

born 1616 and

born 1618. and killed at Newborn dying

of ye plagi

executed for his

marr'd to Tho. 1649 1640

loyalty

Bunten632 dying

1635

1

| |

|

T T

T

Frances

Robert Ann Freke

Margaret

Elizabeth Priscilla

Lucy Freke

Johi

born at

Freke mort. married

Freke

mar-

Freke Freke

married to

mar

Shrot.

Rob. Freke

ried to Rich.

married to

Tho. Law-

Mai

1633

of Bruam.

Stevens

Will1" Hunt

rence

Wo

rector

of

of

Stoke

neal

Dorse

t

1

1

Margaret

Elizabeth

Richard

GILLINGHAM AND WINCANTON

Frank Freke] who

on, & from whom

cended to his heir

Anne Lanning and

Joa
to

7

rce Frekc married
John Adams of

T

James Freke born
Feb. ^^ 1573 at

I

Margaret
born May

Freke
i« 1575

Richard Freke born
Feb. 26. 1 576 at

Anth
at S

Hinton St. George

Shroton

and

Y"

at Shrot.

and mar-

Shrot. dying rector

'579

and

dying w^out

died

ried to John Atkins

yrof and buryed in

Agn<

issue

of Sarum

ye Chancell there

near

1613

whoi

1

T

1

Tho. Atkins mar-

Margaret married

Mary married to

Ann

ried to — Hide

to Tho. Adams

John Guy rector

unmarried

of Hinton S'

of Came

near

George Somerset

Dorchester

Anthony Freke born
NOT. 1 5.

1579 and married to
Agnet Weech of Came
Dorchester, of
1 come the
familyes of Tutour
Freke Frank Freke &
Breadstreet Freke

I

Richard Freke
born 1626 and
ninrried to Ann
IMcrvin of Knoyle

Matilda Freke
born June 1630
married to Nathan
Bull

George Freke
born Oct. 1633
after living at
Gillingham

Cli-nrgc-
Freke an
attorney
now in
Wincanton

John Freke
now living in
Gillingham

Elizabeth Freke
born Nov. 1633
and married to
William Stout of
Sutton

Francet Freke
born June 163;
and married to
Tho. Rogen

Thomas
Freke now
living in
Gillingham

Elizabeth

Freke

marrying

Tho.

Mansfeild

William

Freke

marrying

Margaret

Ring

I I I

Thomas

Freke

marrying

Eli/.

Huett

Matilda
Freke

Frances

Freke

marrying

John

Elam

III. FREKE Ol

Francis Freke [son of
Somerset married then
supposd ye elder branch
speciall providence attai
inheriting his father's n
father died, how great
certainly known but ci
2 or 3007 p an. besides
brothers and sisters, and
considering that John o
brothers left their child]
dition as appears by their

William Freke married
to Agnes Brown of Bra-
poole Dorset

John Freke married to
{Catherine dr of Mr
Will"1 Westover of
Culliton

William Freke of
Eastham married to
Elizabeth Merefeild of
Crewkern

Robert
attourny
Joane
Hasleber

Freke
married
Draper

U

to
of

y chard

Richard Freke married
Barbara Bacon of
Lanston Hampshire

Jane Freke married
John Francklyn of
Frigglesstreet in Wilts

Katherine Fre

married Jo

Hore of A
minster

William
Freke dead

Edward Freke
married to bad
papists and hath
five children

John Freke
dead

Thomas Freke
marrying Edith
d' of Mr John
Arding goldsmith
Crewkern

Mary Freke mar-
ried to John
Cousins a malt-
ster in Crewkern

Susan Freke mar-
rying Samuell
Hasleborough a
woolen draper in
Crewkern

William Freke
a goldsmith in
Crewkern

Anne Freke

CROOKHORN

ik Frcke] of Crookhornc
Mary — • — and to be
ye family tho Robert by »
" far greater estate both as
and w"'all living where his
>aternall estate was is not
Cur'd to have been about
irovision made for younger
•A it could not be well less
rowton and all y" young"
n a very gentlemanly con-
:es legacyes and matches

Robert Freke marrying
Ann Ford of Crewkcrn
first a barrister and after
rector of Wooton Fitz-
paine

Joane Frckc marryed to
Toby Brown of Brapoole
Dorset

Ruth Freke went to
St. Christopher's leav-
ing a bastard Eliz.
Frek

Freke

Elizabeth
Freke married
to Richard
Lumbard

1

I

T

1

James Freke
mort.

William Freke of
Wells married to

Ann Freke married
to John Bowdidgc of

Joane Freke mar-
ried to Alexander

Judyth Grey of Chelcot

"Wooton Fitzpaine

Greedy

near Wells

William
ed Freke

Judith
Freke

Mary
Freke

Ann Robert
Freke Freke

John
Freke

IV. FREKE

Robert Freke of Shroton esq f
was chose by auditor ICeynsey as
in ye schoole he hapncd to be
which place he succeeded so we
an estate of one hundred thousa
Alice Swaine of Gunvile who ly
self being buried there Octob. 1 5
Note by yc assistance of this R
ye Stratfeildsea Pitts in y° pei
married Swaine sister to R

Sr Thomas Freke
wrote of before

Mary Freke born at
Shrowton March 17. 1564
and after married Sept.
30. 1 583 to Will1" Hodges
of Ilchester and buried
after at Shrot. 1605

William
buried June
1616 at
Ilchester

Edward

Elizabeth wife to

form Bembo
and] Lord Vis-
count Mayow

Frances Freke born at
Shroton July 28. 1566.
and after married to John
Culliford of Encomb
Dorset Sept. 12. 1585 at
Shroton. She died in
yc Isle of Wight 1646.
her husband buried at
Shrot. Ap. 23. 1599

Mary married to
Will"1 Collier of
Piddle Dorset

Robert Freke born Feb.
I. 1568 at Shroton and
buried there wthout issue
July 30. 1604

Margaret married
to Will1" Bulkley
of Burgat Hamp-
shire, and after to
Barnaby Leigh of
ye Isle of Wight

Margery married
to Richard White-
head of Tetherly
Hampshire.

r

Robert
Helton at
Margaret
London

Ann Freke married to Richard
Bradrep

Elizabeth Freke born at Hel-
ton married

John Freke
y<= Middle 1
left 7 or 8
Bradrep.

F HELTON

1532 and y 3+ of H. y« 8th

,opefullest boy represented him
it in to be his clarke, and in
at he is computed to have left
oumls behind him, he marryed
uryed at Shrot. Ap. 1577 him-

Freke was raysd yf family of
of Sr William Pit and who
;ke'd wife.

a Freke born Jan 4
att Shroton married
bell dr of — Pysing

Margaret Freke born at
Shroton July 22. 1571
dying at Bristol! 1632
married to Sr Rob. Mellcr
of Longbriddy in Dorset

Elizabeth Freke born at
Shroton Aug. 10th. 1572
and after married to
Sr Tho. Neale of Warn-
ford in Hampshire

I.

William Freke bapt. at
Shrot. Ap. 24. 1577.
Marrying Ann d' of
Arthur Swaine of Sarcen
Hampshire and dying ia

Robert Freke
orn at Helton

Dorothy married
to (i) Sr Charles
Vaughan of Ful-
sham Wilts, and
(ii) to Sr Robert
Gorges of Somer-
setshire.

Ireland

1

Anne married
to Sr Tho.
Brookes in

Mary married Frances wife to
to Paine Fisher Sr Fra. Cave
Hampshire Rotherby

Elizabeth wife to
Sr Roger Feilding
brother to y€

Leicestershire.

Leicestershire.

Earle of Derby

dying 1639

born at
arried to
ightly of

at Helton of
Le London, he
to his sister

William Freke married to

leaving issue a

son dying at 18.

Margaret Freke born at
Stickland

V. FREKE (

Sr Thomas Freke born Se
knighted by King James he
and lyes buried at Shrot. h
Taylour citizen haberdasher
Lond. and widow to Fra. Sn
at Shrot. Jan. 1 6 164.0

Elizabeth
Freke married
to Sr George
Horsey of Clif-
ton Oct. 21
1616 at Shrot.
buried Nov. 5
1638 at Black-
fryers London

Robert Freke
born Ap. 13
1592 at Cerne,
and died at
Upway 1 650. he
married Kath.
dr of Matthew
Ewene of Cad-
bury Somersett
and who
at Upway also

1

Alice Freke
baptizd at

Thomas
Freke

Arundell dr =John Freke=Jane Rau
of Sr George born at Shirley Shro

ie,

Shrot. Sept. 13.

baptizd. 1595

Trenchard

Westminster

widow to ried

1594. married

and buried

who died at

June 20

Sr Walter Culp

lie

July 27 1614

at Shrot.

Upway

1589 dying

Covet in K

h.

to Sir Geo.

1597

Dorset

Nov. 12

and \

w

Hastings

1641 at

at I

d-

buried July 24

Pepper-

died

tt

163431 Christ-

harrow

1684

ed

church in

from

1

Hampshire

livd'

Fath

this

daug

fortu

John of Elizabeth

Johnstone buried at
in Pembroke Shroton

Frances born at
Shrot. May 21.
1615 wife to
John Roy
Lond.

Dorothy born
1616 and mar-
ried 1st to
Dodington and
after to Henry
Ayres

Mable born
1620 mar.
Bennet

George born
1627. mort.

Edward
born 1629
mort.

Henry
born 1630
mort.

George Freke born
at Shrot. July 23
1615. drownd' at
Leigh by Worcester
Feb. 20. 1639. his
wife Abigal dr of
John earle of Bristoll

John Frances John George
mort. married Freke Freke
1667 to Rolls died an died an
Devonshire infant infant

1

Jane mort.

George
mort.

T \

Thomas Eliza
married to wife
Frances Pile
dr of Sr Bave
William esq.
Hanham

aeth Joane married
to Tho. to Maurice
of Buckland of
rstock Standiinch
Wilts esq.

rf

abeth married Joane
Freke of
inington esq.

Thomas George Charles Arundell Lucy
twin with
Frances

Frances Luc
twin with Mr
Lucy and

y married Eliz
LoweShaston The
Geo. Pit Har

Stratfeildsea

? SHROTON

•f 1563 at Blandford arvi
att Warnford May 5 1633
ifc Eliz. daughter of John
lldcrman of Coleman Street
born Sept. I 3 1 567 and died

~r 17 17

i

eke baptird at

Thomas Freke Edmund Freke Jane Freke born William Freke born at Shroton Ap.

y 23. 1596 mar-

born at Shroton born Aug. 1 7 1 600 at Lond.

Ap 20 18. 1605. and married to Frances

y dr of Sr Tho.

March 21. 1598 at Shrot. buried 1602

married daughter of S' Tho. Culpeper of

of Hollingbourn

dying at Hinton at Forthingbridge John Tregonwell Hollingborn in kent knight w'Njut

Aug. 1 8. 1636.

S' Mary May 30. in Hampshire esq. of

Milton issue he died A° 1656. In brotherly

ied Jan. 6. 1650

1642 married to Sept. 7 1625 and Abbas Dorset love he lived in inseperate property

igborn himself

Mary y* daughter married to Eliza-

with his brother Rafe till death, being

nnington Wilts

of — Dodington beth Bartholo-

joint Lord with his brother Rafe of

years old, and ye sister to Sr mew wthout issue

the mannour of Hannington while he

minutes who

Francis Dorring-

livd as left by his father S' Thomas,

died a true

ton (tic family

while alive he left that elegant monu-

his family came

portion a looo/.

ment of his beniricence his meddall

fee. he gave his

and upwards

present at y* Schooles in Ozon. and

poo/, a peice

1

dying he waterd' his poor relations as

with a shower of numerous and great

1

A

tegacyi

A

1

1 1

1

lell Freke born

Elizabeth John Thomas Freke married Jane Freke mar- John bora Dec. 7

15. 1616 at

Freke born at Freke to Cicely Hussey buried ried to Sr Rob. 1625 at Shrot.

:. wife to John

Pepperharrow mort. at Shrot. wlkout issue Dillington of y* Dorset and after

udock of Comp-

in Surrey 1633 buried at this gentleman gave Isle of Wight, married to Jane

Chamberlaine

married to Shrot. away the grand estate bait. dr of Richard Fen

I beheaded by

Richd Brown- of y* family to yc Pitts of Lond. esq.

iwell for his

'I

low esq. of Stratfeildsea

T 1 T 1

iry marrying Anne mar- S' John S1 W.

Robert Mabel! 2<> John

lusbands(i) ried to Tho. Brownlowe Brownlowe

mort. wife to mort.

ingways Chafm of 150001. c,ooo/. />. an

. Maurice

. (2) Strode Chetle p. an.

Buckland

.(3] Morgan Dorset esq.

of Stand-

1

linch esq.

1

Constance Diana Thomas Bampfeild Ann Mary

Arundell Bridget Rachell George

mort. mort.

knight

of f* shire

of Dorset

VI. FREKE

Robert Freke [s.
Freke of Shroto
Cerne, and die

married Kath. d
Cadbury Somer
Upway also

Katherine Freke baptizd at
Upway 1629 married to
Simon Sandyes of Petherton
Somerset

Robert Fr<
Katherine I

Freke Mar

Mary married
to John Baker
of Compton

William

Elizabeth

Edwin e a pew-
terer in Lond.

Robert Freke

Coll[onel]

mort.

OF UPWAY

son of Sir Thomas
rn Ap. 13. 1592 at

Upway 1650 he
Matthew Ewene of
and who died at

married to

George

issue

Freke mort. wlhout

Frekc-

Raufe Freke
mort.

Thomas Freke
mort.

Elizabeth Freke William Frekc mort.

Francii Freke
mort.

Jane Freke George Freke Brigadeer Edmund Freke

married in Ireland. This mort
gent tho' wthout issue may
deservedly stand as a new
father to his father's houie Henry Freke
he restor*d j* antient mort-
gagd estate & tho he never —

had aide from it yet by hit

long military gaines he not [And other child-
only got himself a g*1 estate ren unnamed]
but wthall grandly assisted
to y« support of all his B" &
Sr & their familys left by
ym by family settlement he
ot to have been yc p'sent
heir & pouess'd of y" Shrot.
estate

VII. FREKE C

Raufe Freke [fourt
Shroton] baptiz'd a1
Cicely dr of Sr Th
Kent Aug. 18. 163!
Hollingborn himself
88 years old and frol
a true father of his .
his daughters 4OOO/.

Elizabeth Freke born at
Westm. Jan. I. 1641 and
married after to Peircy Freke
of Ireland esq.

Cicely Freke born at Lond.
Feb. 164.2. married to Sr
Geo. Chute of Bethersden
in Kent

Raufe Freke
baronet

after made a

Cicely born 1663.
mort.

Sr Geo. born
1664 bart.

HANNINGTON

of Sir Thomas Freke of
. July 23. 1596 married
>eper of Hollingbourn in
who died Jan. 6. 1650 at
Hannington Wilts. 1684
minutes who liv'd and died
amc this Pedigree he gave
fortune

Frances Freke born May 22
1644 at Oxon. and married
to Sr Geo. Norton of Leigh
near Bristoll

1.

Judith Freke bora 1646 at
Sarum and married to Robert
Austin esq. of Tenterden in
Kent

r

Lady Grace Gethin

Robert

Judith

VIII. THE IRISH

William Frcke [eighth
Shroton] bapt. at Shrol
Ann dr of Arthur Sw:
and dying in Ireland

1.

Arthur
Sarcen
Aug. I
Dorotl
Smith
ye COL
Irelanc

2

Freke born at Judith Fr
in Hampshire Sept. 21
3. 1604. marrying Sarcen
iy dr of Sr Peircy Oct. i.
of Yohall in John H:
nty of Cork in Woolcorr

1. 1. 1= 1.

ekebapt. William Freke Robert Freke Ge
1605 at born 1606 at born 1609 at bor
married Sarcen, marry'd Ockford marry'd mor
1622 to to — Hays of to - • Feilding
rding of Scotland mort. Yorkshire mort.
ib Dorset

Elizabeth Freke Thomas Frefce An
born at Ockford born 1610. mort Jan
1607 mort Cer
riec
nea
Ire

Mary Freke mar-
rying Fra. Bar-
nard an Irishman
by whom

Peircy Freke Agnes Freke mar- Ann marrying — marrying Gib- Mary
marrd Eliz. ried to Patrick Wm Weston of bons minister of
dr of Ra. Crossby in yc Stalb. Weston Buckland
Freke esq. county of Kerry esq.
Ireland

Francis

Arthur Dorothy

Mary Elizabeth Ann Catherine

USE OF FREKE

lobcrt Freke of
j77. Marrying
ccn Hampshire

Alice Freke born
1613 and buried
at Cerne 1617

>rn

It

:ir-

icb

Catherine Deb.

|,

John Freke born
June II 1615,
and marrying y"
sister of Fra. Bar-
nard in Ireland

Margaret Freke
born Jan. 14.1616
and married John
Dennet of Ock-
ford Fitzpaine
w*hout issue

Mary Freke born
Aug. 13. 1618 it
Cerne mort.

I

borah Anne Freke Elizabeth Freke Alice Freke Margaret Freke

Mary Freke (Catherine Freke

Rate Freke
after Sr Raufe
baronet

DEEDS RELATING TO THE FAMILY OF
WYDMERPOL OF WYDMERPOL IN NOT-
TINGHAMSHIRE

ROBERT OF DERLEYE and Margaret his wife to
Nicholas son of Nicholas of Wydmerpol. Grant of ten
tofts and ten crofts and ten oxgangs of land which Nicholas
at the town's head, Henry the son of Matthew, Ralph
Athelin, Walter Elys, Robert son of Margery, William Bulle,
William Anne, Robert Sparewe, Ralph Hertte and William
S . . . held in villeinage, together with the said villeins
and their families, etc., and with two cottages which John
Bate and Robert Miller held. Witnesses : Walter of Grimm-
ston, William Plungoun of Stanton, John Julyen of Wydmer-
pol, Thomas Gerveyse of the same, John son of Geoffrey of
Willuby, Henry son of Hugh of the same, and Robert the
spencer of Goltham. Undated.

II

John son of Sir John de Heryz, knight, to Nicholas son
of Nicholas Wydmarpoel. Quitclaim of all right to the
wardship and marriage of the said Nicholas by reason of the
lands which the said Nicholas holds or held of Robert de la
Valeye in Wydmarpoel, which said wardship and marriage
the said Sir John held in his time on account of the
minority of William son of Robert de la Valeye, the
immediate tenant of the said Sir John. Witnesses : Sir
John of Leke, Roger de St. Andrew, and Piers Pygot,
knights ; Gervase the Fraunkeleyn of Keworthe, Gervase
son of Isabel of the same, William Plungun of Staunton, John
Gylyan of Wydmarpoel. Dated at Wynnefeld, Saturday
after St. George, 31 Hen. III. [1247].

Ill

William son of Robert de la Valeye [de Valle] to Nicholas
son of Nicholas of Widmerpol. Grant of two acres of arable

sis n

214 THE ANCESTOR

land in the fields of Widmerpol (one acre of which lies
between the land of the said Nicholas and the land
which Marjory, mother of the said William, formerly held
in dower). Witnesses : William of Schefeud in Wishowe,
William . . . , Gervase son of Henry of Keworthe,
John Lake of the same, Gervase son of Gervase of the
same, William of Houton in Boneie, Robert Pedmor of the
same, John Gilion of Widmerpol, John son of Robert of the
same, William son of Thomas of the same, William the Stede-
man of the same, and others. Dated at Widmerpol on St.
Matthew's day, n Edw. I. [1283].

IV

John called Brag of Wydemerpol, to Nicholas of Wyd-
merpol and Maude his wife, and the heirs of the said Nicholas.
Grant of a capital messuage lying near the capital messuage
of the said Nicholas in Wydemerpol, with release of all rents
and services which the said Nicholas or his ancestors owed to
the said John or his ancestors. Witnesses : Walter of Gry-
mestone, Gervase the Fraunkeleyn of Keworth, William
Plungun of Staunton, John Julian of Wydmerpol, Thomas
son of Gervase of the same, and Robert Provost of the same.
Dated at Wydmerpol, Sunday after St. Leonard, 27 Edw. I.
[1299].

For which grant the said Nicholas has given by his

charter of feoffment to the said John a messuage,

with its houses in Escambury.

William son of Henry of Schelford, to Nicholas son of
Nicholas of Widmerpol and Maude his wife and their heirs.
Quitclaim of all right in a messuage in Widmerpol which
John Bragg granted to the said Nicholas and Maude. Wit-
nesses : Gervase the Frankeleyn, William Plunghun of
Stanton, John Julian of Widmerpol, Thomas Gervays of the
same, and Robert the reeve of the same. Dated at Wydmer-
pol, Sunday after St. Leonard, 27 Edw. I. [1299].

VI

Final concord made at Westminster in the quinzaine of
St. John Baptist, 35 Edw. I. [1307], between William of

THE FAMILY OF WYDMERPOL 215

Shefeld, plaintiff, by Durand of Wydemerpol, his attorney,
and Master Ralph Barrey, deforciant, by Thomas Barrey, his
attorney, of 10 messuages, 240* land, 6* meadow, and 2OS.
6d. rent in Wysowe and Wylugbi, which the said William
recognizes to be of the right of the said Ralph, for which
recognition the said Ralph grants to the said William 9
messuages 216* land and 6* meadow of the aforesaid, to
hold to the said William for life, with remainder to Thomas
son of Nicholas of Wydemerpol and Elizabeth daughter of
the said William, and the heirs which the said Thomas shall
have begotten of the body of the said Elizabeth, with remain-
der in default of such to the right heirs of the said
Elizabeth.

VII

Final concord made at Westminster in the quinzaine of
Easter, 4 Edw. II. [1311], between Nicholas of Wydmerpulle
and Roger Burt, plaintiffs, and Master Robert of Wydmer-
pulle, parson of the church of Swafelde, deforciant, of four
messuages, one plough land and ten acres of meadow in
Querendon by Garewe [co. Leic.]. The said messuages and
lands are to be held by the said Nicholas for life, with remr.
to the said Roger for life, with remr. to Thomas son of the
said Nicholas and the heirs of his body, with remr. to the
right heirs of the said Nicholas. [Paper copy xv. cent.].

VIII

Indenture of agreement between Nicholas of Wydmer-
poyl and Elizabeth his wife and William Bolton of Wyshoue
and Margaret his wife and Sewal their son. The said Nicholas
and Elizabeth grant to the said William, Margaret and Sewal
a messuage and an oxgang of land in Wyshowe which Robert
of the Grene held aforetime, for their lives and for the life
of the survivor of them, at a yearly rent of I2s. Witnesses :
John of Haddon, Reynold Bullock, Thomas son of Richard,
John Johnet and Henry Johnet of Wyshowe. Dated at
Wyshowe, Friday after St. Valentine, 10 Edw. II. [13 IT]-

IX

Final concord made in the octave of Trinity, 10 Edw. II.
[1317], between Nicholas of Wydmerpol and his wife, Alice

216 THE ANCESTOR

and Robert son of the said Nicholas, plaintiffs, and Durand
of Wydmerpol, deforciant, of six messuages and eight rods of
land in Wydmerpol and Staunton by Wydmerpol, to be held
to the said Nicholas, Alice and Robert for their lives with
remr. to Thomas, son of the said Nicholas, and the heirs of
his body, with remr. to the right heirs of the said Nicholas.

X

Indenture between Thomas of Wydmerpol and William
son of Reynold of Wyshou. Grant of a rood of land in
Wyshou, in a place called Berehou, in exchange for a certain
part of one messuage in Wyshou. Witnesses : Gervase
Frankeleyn of Keworth, John his son, John Johnett of Wy-
shou, William of Bolton of the same, and John son of Reynold
of the same. Dated at Wyshou, Tuesday the feast of St.
George, 18 Edw. II. [1325].

XI

Nicholas of Wydemarpoll to Robert son of Ralph of
Sixhull and to Margery his wife. Grant of a piece of land
in Wydemarpoll and eight acres of arable land for a term of
years. Witnesses : John Warde of Wydemarpoll, Richard
Coke, William son of Thomas Robert and Roger Julyan.
Dated at Wydemarpoll, Monday before St. Peter in
cathedra, 39 Edw. III. [136!].

XII

Richard son of Robert of Rakedale of Wyloughbi, to
Nicholas of Wydemarpoll. Grant of a messuage in Wyl-
oughbi with 20* of arable land, and the reversion of four acres
of arable land after the death of Agnes late wife of Walter
of Tibshelf of Bonay. Witnesses : Richard of Derlay of
Wyloughbi, Richard Porchet, Richard Harding, John Warde
of Wydemarpoll, Roger Julian of the same, and others.
Dated at Wyloughbi, Wednesday after Palm Sunday, 44
Edw. III. [1371].

XIII

Richard son of Lettice of Keworth, chaplain, to John son
of Robert son of Thomas of Wyloughbi, and to Agnes wife
of the said John and daughter of John Warde. Grant of the

THE FAMILY OF WYDMERPOL 217

moiety of a messuage in Wydemerpoll, with i6i acres of
land which the said Richard had of the feoffment of John
Warde. To hold to the said John and Agnes and the heirs
of their bodies, with remr. in default of such heirs to John
Warde and Alice his wife and the heirs of the said John Warde.
Witnesses : Sir Richard of Suthorpe, parson of Wydemerpoll,
Nicholas of Wydemerpoll, Robert Herdewyn, William Robert,
Roger Julian, clerk, and others. Dated at Wydemerpoll
the feast of St. Peter in chains, 46 Edw. III. [1372].

XIV

Nicholas of Widmerpoll to Sir Thomas Walsh, lord of
Onlep, Nicholas Ridel of Witering, John Nevile of Wimond-
wold, and William Eland of Algarthorp. Enfeoffment of all
lands and tenements in the counties of Nottingham and
Huntingdon, with all goods and chattels. Witnesses : Hugh
of Annesley, Thomas of Rempston, Sir John Dene, parson of
Widmerpoll, Robert Hardwyn, Robert Clerk, and Roger
Julian of the same. Dated at Widmerpoll, Sunday after
Candlemas, i Ric. II. [137$]-

XV

Thomas Walsh, knight, John Nevell, knight, Nicholas
Rydell and William Eland, to John of Wydmerpole and Fine
his wife. Grant of all lands, etc., which the grantors had by
the feoffment of Nicholas of Wydmerpole, father of the said
John, in the counties of Nottingham and Huntingdon, to the
said John and Fine and the heirs of their bodies, with remr.
to the right heirs of the said John. Witnesses : Thomas
Rempston and Henry Nevell, knights, Thomas of Annesleye,
esquire, John of Colston, and Ralph Notyngham. Dated at
Wydmerpole, Monday after Palm Sunday, 16 Ric. II. [1393].

Four seals are attached.

I. A shield of arms : two gimel bars with a baston, S . . .
[WALSCHE].

II. A shield of arms : a cross paty fitchy between two
leopards' beads with fteurs de lys coming out of them in the
chief and a like leopard's head between two crosses paty fitchy
in the foot, supported by two sitting leopards, and hanging
from the hands of a savage man. The arms represent a
shield in which the three leopards' heads should be in a

2i8 THE ANCESTOR

field powdered with crosses paty fitchy. s' IEHAN . DE .

NVEFVILLE.

III. and IV. Devices.

XVI

John Widmerpole of Widmerpole, esquire, to Nicholas
Widmerpole his son and Elizabeth wife of the said Nicholas
and the heirs of their bodies. Grant of five messuages, five
rods and one oxgang of land in Wysowe. Witnesses : Thomas
Poge of Notyngham, Thomas Columbell, Thomas Derley,
John Melton, and Hugh Armestronge. Dated at Wysowe,
10 October, 6 Hen. VI. [1427].

XVII

Robert Hykkyllyng, chaplain to Nicholas Wydemerepole
and Elizabeth his wife. Grant of five messuages, five rods
and one oxgang of land in Wysowe which the said Robert,
with Thomas Poge now deceased, had of the feoffment of
John Wydmerepole, esquire. Witnesses : Hugh Armestronge
of Wysowe, Richard Samon of Notyngham, and Thomas
Alastre of the same. Dated at Wysowe, 18 November,
22 Hen. VI. [1443].

XVIII

Edward Warde son and heir of Edward Warde of Wyd-
merpole, to John Draper of Flyntham and Elizabeth his wife.
Quitclaim of lands, etc., in Wydmerpole, late of Edward
Wymondham, formerly of Claxton. Witnesses : Nicholas
Wydmerpole, Nicholas Peny of Wydmerpole, and William
Martyn of Keworth. Dated 27 September, 31 Hen. VI.
[1452].

A broken seal attached.

XIX

Nicholas Wydmerpole, gentleman, John Sapcootes the
elder, gentleman, and Agnes late wife of Richard Lawe of
Grantham, deceased, to Alexander Keyser son and heir of
Nicholas Keyser and of Joan late daughter and heir of the
said Richard Lawe. Grant of all lands, etc., in Grantham,
Gunnorby, Hoghton and Belton by Grantham co. Lin-
coln, which the grantors had by feoffment of the said
Richard Lawe. Witnesses : John Lane, alderman of Grant-

THE FAMILY OF WYDMERPOL 219

ham, John Haryngton, esquire, John Dages, John Brawnse-
well, and Richard Gudrye of Grantham. Dated at Grant-
ham 4 November, 13 Edw. IV. [1473].

:xx

Richard Elmeyden of North Walsham, co. Norfolk, gent.,
and Elizabeth his wife, late wife of Alexander Armestrong,
gent., deceased, and Thomas Armestrong son and heir of
the said Alexander and Elizabeth, to Gabriel Armestrong,
esquire, and John Buxsom, clerk. Grant of all lands, etc., in
Wysawe, co. Nottingham, to the use of the said Gabriel
and his heirs and assigns for ever. Dated 20 January, i
Edw. VI. [iS4|].

XXI

Bond wherein John Wharton of Westwicke, yeoman, and
Thomas Rowlandson of Barnacastell, gent., both in the
bishoprick of Durham, are bound to Edward Woodmanpoole
of Alne and William Woodmanpoole of Everton, co. Notts,
gentlemen, in ioo/. to keep harmless the said Edward and
William against Anthony Wharton, one of the sons of Robert
Wharton, late of Everton, as against all other men, by reason
of an obligation wherein the said John Wharton stands bound
in the exchequer at York with them, and one Robert Menvell
for the son's portion of the said Anthony. Dated 29 June,
3 and 4 Phil, and Mar. [1557].

XXII

Bill witnessing that Thomas Reaves of Everton, co.
Nottingham, has received of Edward Wydmerpole 46*. Sd.
in full payment of forty marks which the said Edward pro-
mised to give unto the said Thomas and Agnes daughter to
the said Edward, for the child's portion of the said Agnes.
Dated u June, 2 Eliza. [1560].

XXIII

Edward Wydmerpole of Everton, co. Notts, gent., to
William Wydmerpole, his son and heir apparent. Grant of
messuages and lands in Alne, co. York, in the tenure of Robert
Clerke and John Ibbson, for the life of the said Edward.
Witnesses : Leonard Hollyngworth and Thomas Kendall.
Dated 10 September, 6 Eliz. [1654].

220 THE ANCESTOR

XXIV

Counterpart of articles of agreement made 10 December
8 Eliza. [1565] between William Wydmerpull of Heyverton,
co. Notts, gent., and Hugh Cressy of ... well, co., York,
gent., concerning the farm of the manor or capital messuage
of Heverton aforesaid, with the lands, etc., appertaining to
the same. Signed by Hugh Cressy, who seals with a seal of
arms of a lion with a forked tail.

XXV

Counterpart of indenture made 3 August, 7 Jac. I. [1609]
between George Widmerpoole of Wysall, co. Notts, esquire,
and Roger Morrice of Widmerpoole, husbandman. Lease
of a cottage in Wydmerpoole for twenty-one years.

XXVI

Alne cum Tollarton. Copy of court roll.
Court held 7 October, 10 Elizabeth [1634].
Comes Edward Wydmerpole, gent., to be admitted to
six parcels of meadow in Alne.

XXVII

Probate copy of the codicil of the will of George Widmer-
pole, late of St. Michael Bassishaw, London, but in St. Giles's
in the fields, deceased.

Whereas upon 28 May 1689 Jane Clifton, daughter of the
said George, did of her affection to her sister Anne Home,
widow, part most of the household goods of the said George
between her sister and herself against the mind of the said
George, and something contrary to the express words of the
will of the said George then signed and sealed, the said George
now wills that the residue of all his goods not then parted
between his said daughters he will keep to himself for life,
with remainder to the said Jane Clifton, his executrix, except
his part of his plate and his ' Beaugle lookeing glasse,' which
he had given by his will to his grandson Samuel Home.
Witnesses : Edward Jenkins and Aaron Hanbury.

Proved 27 April 1696 by Jane Clifton, wife of Thomas
Clifton, the extrix.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

THE ATTWOODS AND THEIR BARD
DEAR SIR, —

I have read with interest your review of that ridiculous
book which calls itself a history of my family, and with con-
siderable amusement your ' appreciation ' of my grandfather
Thomas Attwood. I have often wondered why one so noted
in his day should have been so forgotten. Perhaps you supply
the clue ? He was an ' untiring bore ' ! A sad thought
strikes me — Can that be the reason why we are most of us
forgotten so readily ? But — perish the thought ! But for
the book. It is not a large one, and I should not have believed
so much vulgarity and so much nonsense could have been
crammed into its pages. As you kindly and truly admit, I am
' a genealogist of the modern school ' and a very keen one, so
you can imagine — no one better ! — the feelings with which I
turn over page after page of Mr. Robinson's wonderful pro-
duction. I am now the male representative of the Attwoods
of Hawne, and genealogy has been the great interest of my life,
and yet neither I nor my cousin Mr. Llewellyn C. F. Attwood
were told that such an outrage on our family, as is this book,
was even in contemplation. Mr. John Robinson, however,
whoever he may be, is not really responsible beyond the fact
that he has lent his name to statements which he can have
made no attempt to verify. The person who is responsible
is a certain John Moore, in Beckenham, who has also obtruded
statements regarding persons of his own name of whom the
Attwoods have never heard.

Even you miss some delightful points in the various
parentage suggested for my earliest authenticated ancestor,
George Attwood married Mary Foley, in 1678. In the event
of his having been a son of George Attwood and Winifred
Petre he was married some five years before his alleged father
was born, for I have good reason for knowing the latter could
not have been born earlier than 1683-4 •

Another suggested descent is from (Richard) Attwood who

MI p

222 THE ANCESTOR

married Eleanor Sutton alias Dudley. But Mr. Sidney
Grazebrook gives me the date of this marriage as 1675, which
would make their son (? !) George Attwood marry Mary
Foley at the somewhat early age of three, and become a father
— I am now speaking from memory — at the age of about five.

A few lines about the Gaunt pedigree. No portion of it
was ever lost or mislaid on the death of Benjamin Attwood.
I am very much surprised if he ever had a copy, though it is of
course possible that, together with the greater part of his
wealth, he inherited it from his nephew Matthias Wolverley
Attwood, sometime M.P. for Greenwich. Benjamin Attwood
was utterly uninterested in — in fact hostile towards all
subjects of the kind. All he cared for was the management
of his great wealth, and the systematic squandering of it in
charity.

I have what I believe to be the original, and what I believed
till lately to be the sole copy of the pedigree of the Gaunts of
Rowley Regis. It is dated June i, 1848. It consists of three
sheets of parchment, containing (l) a pedigree of the baronial
family of Gand or Gaunt, (2) a pedigree of the family of Gaunt
of Rowley Regis, co. Stafford, and (3) a pedigree of the Att-
woods of Hawne, descended from the marriage of Rachel
Maria Gaunt and George Attwood in 1742.

The first sheet is endorsed : —

Pedigree of the Gaunt Family,

Also of
Rachel Maria Gaunt,

who married
George Attwood,
And died 3rd March 1798. Aged 82 years.

Neither inside nor, as you see, in the endorsement is
any absolute claim whatever made to definite descent from the
baronial house, and thus this miserable Moore-Robinson pro-
duction only serves to make ridiculous another family once
much respected in its own neighbourhood, and with a pedigree
of considerable length and interest though it has never yet
been scientifically worked out.

Pray excuse this long letter, but the publicity you give to
my family affairs seems to demand it, and I must ask you
to be so good as to make this equally public. I have a good
deal of miscellaneous information about the different Wor-

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 223

cestershire families of my name, which is at any time at the
service of any of your readers.

To return for a moment to the original subject of my
letter. I hope shortly to have printed a small sheet of the
more obvious corrections needed by the unhappy possessors
of the Moore-Robinson production, and I shall be happy to
send it to any one who cares to apply to me for it.
I am, dear Sir,

Faithfully yours,

THOS. A. C. ATTWOOD.

ANTHONY ANGELO
SIR, —

In vol. viii. of the Ancestor there is an article on the
Angelo family by the Rev. C. Swynnerton, in which statements
are made regarding one branch of the family at variance with
the records of the India Office.

At p. 43 it is said of Anthony Angelo that ' there is at the
India Office no evidence to show that he sailed in any official
capacity.' So far from this being the case, there is complete
evidence that he was appointed a cadet in the ordinary way
on the nomination of two directors on 12 November 1777,
and directed to proceed to India by a certain vessel ; the
evidence for this is contained in the Cadet Books, 1775-98,
vol. ii, and Bengal Mily. Consultations, 9 December 1778,
p. 350. Further on in the same page it is stated that he
received his promotion to lieutenant by ' cumulative act ' ;
this is not the case ; he was promoted in the ordinary way ;
the proof of this is Bengal Mily Consultations ; 25 February
1779, the date on which the promotion was actually made and
(with several others) ordered to be antedated to 24 October
1778, to fill vacancies existing from that date, owing to the
re-organization of the East India Company Forces.

Much that follows on this page is mere conjecture, or rests
on the insecure basis of family tradition, a pitfall that Mr.
Swynnerton would have done well to avoid; but the subject
is of no interest except to his descendants, and it only derives
importance from its appearance in the pages of the Ancestor.

Yours faithfully,

JOHN P. STEEL.

224 THE ANCESTOR

AN EARLY HONEYMOON

SIR, —

When William Marshal became a made man, in 1189, by
securing the hand of the heiress of the Earls of Pembroke,
' qui fu bone e bele,' he proposed that they should be married
on her own estates on the Welsh border. His poetical
biography, however, tells us that his host, a wealthy citizen
of London, would not hear of it, and insisted on the wedding
taking place in London and paying the cost himself. When
the wedding was over, he carried off his bride to Stoke D'Aber-
non, Surrey — ' kindly lent ' (as the Society papers have it) by
Sir Enguerrand D'Abernon — ' a peaceful and delectable spot.'
All this we learn from L'historie de Guillaume le Marechal
(lines 9545-50) :-

Quant les noces bien faites furent,
E richement, si comme els durent,
La dame emmena, ce savon,
Chies sire Angeran d'Abernon,
A Estokes, en liu paisable
E aesie e delitable.

It would be interesting to learn if there can be found
any earlier mention of an orthodox honeymoon in England.

One may add that, as M. Paul Meyer points out, the
trousseau of the heiress appears to figure on the Pipe Roll of
I Ric. I. at a cost of £Q 12s. id.

J. H. R.

THE JOHNSTONS OF BALLINDERRY

SIR, —

On a tombstone in the churchyard of Ballinderry, co.
Antrim, there is the following inscription —

Here lieth the body of Mr. Thomas Johnson of Portmore, who departed this
life 3Oth July 1800, in the cjoth year of his age. He was descended from Hon.
and Rev. Thomas Johnston, 3rd son of the Earl of Annandale in Scotland, who
was Rector of Drumgoolan, and Vicar of Ballynahinch, co. Down, in the reign
of King Charles ist.

The Rev. Thomas Johnston above referred to married
Elizabeth Wrench of Devonshire, and had three sons: (i) James,
(ii) John,Vicar of Ballynahinch, of whom presently, (iii) William.

James married and had

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 225

John of Ballinderry, who married Elizabeth Marie, niece of
the Rev. James Mace, and had with other issue two sons and
three daughters, viz. : —

i Thomas, lieutenant in army, died in America : mar-
ried : his descendants held lands in Virginia and
Kentucky.

ii John of Ballinderry, of whom presently.
i Daughter, married Laird Catherwood, son of Wm.

Catherwood of Ballyvester, co. Down,
ii Daughter, married George Watson of Brookhill, near

Lisburn.
in Daughter, married John Kelly of Ballinderry.

The second son, John Johnston of Ballinderry, married
Eliza, daughter of — Bunting, and had Thomas of
Portmore, co. Antrim, who married Elizabeth Moore and had
eight sons and one daughter, viz : —

i John Moore, of Rockvale, Ballynahinch, married
Charlotte, sister of Mr. Close of Plantation, near
Lisburn.
ii William.
in Edward,
iv Arthur,
v Richard.

vi Thomas of Lurgan.
vii James of Loughbeg, near Portmore.
vin Buntin of Portmore.

i Elizabeth, married Samuel Johnson.
The second son of the Rev. Thomas Johnston, John,
Vicar of Ballynahinch, married Elinor, sister of Dr. William
Dunkin, and had two sons, viz. : —
i William, of Finglas, co. Dublin.

ii John, Rector of Clondavock, co. Donegal, married
Mildred, daughter of James Hamilton, Archdeacon
of Raphoe, and had two sons and five daughters,

viz. : —
i William, married Elizabeth, daughter of James Moore,

of Newport, co. Mayo,
ii John, Rector of Hollymount, co. Mayo,
i Catherine, married first Wm. Babington, of Urney, co.
Donegal ; 2nd Capt. John Pigott, M.P. for Banagher.
ii Elizabeth, married Richard Archer of Wicklow.
in Mildred, married Thomas Ball.

226 THE ANCESTOR

iv Susanna, married Rev. John Gage, Prebendary of
Aghadoey, Derry.

v Anne.

John Moore Johnston's descent is based on his statement
in a work called Heterogenea, published in 1803, but I have
seen another pedigree which shows him to be descended from
Thomas Johnston, Provost of Dundee, said to be the third son
of John, Vicar of Ballynahinch, and his wife Elinor Dunkin.

I do not know the actual relationship of Thomas, Vicar of
Ballynahinch, to the Annandale family. He seems to have
been born before the peerage was created, as the date of his
ordination was probably 1618.

Perhaps some of your subscribers may be possessed of
information regarding him. If so I should be greatly obliged
by their making it known to me.

G. H. JOHNSTON,

LlEUT.-CotONEL.

MARKETHILL, NORTH IRELAND,

BLOHIN ?
SIR, —

Is the use of the capital letter in Domesday really con-
clusive, or may one still cherish a lingering doubt whether
the lord of those Cornish manors was not called Blohiu, even
as his descendants were ? The scribe who read Blohin was
but a man of like infirmities with us after all. If this is
Domesday beleidigung, I think it would be worth a short
term of not too hard labour to hear what the great Domes-
day pundits have to say on such a point ; and therefore feel
sure that you, Sir, will respect my confidence, and gladly
take any risk in your own proper person.

While we are on the spot, would some Cornish scholar
kindly furnish a note upon the tenant of Deliau and Trefrioc
T.R.E. ? His name, laul or laulf , seems to be correctly printed,
to judge from the facsimile, though in the second instance
his initial is rather like L. But almost exactly opposite, in
the second column to the left, the eye rests upon a Saulf,
who held UUavestone before the Conquest.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant.

EXTRANEUS.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 227

THE SHERIDANS
DEAR SIR, —

As a descendant of the Sheridans, and as the possessor of
two of the portraits reproduced in illustration of Mr. Wilfred
Sheridan's recent article in the Ancestor, I may perhaps be
allowed to point out one or two inaccuracies into which he
has fallen.

In the first place, Dr. Thomas Sheridan was not the son
of William Sheridan, the non-juring Bishop of Kilmore. I
know that the statement in the Ancestor is in accordance
with the pedigree compiled by Francis Harvey in 1875, but
there is no evidence that I am aware of to support it.

The Bishop, in his closing days of sickness and penury,
had no nearer relation than a niece to attend on him. His
condition, as disclosed in his letter to Archbishop King in
1709 (appendix to 2nd Report of Historical MSS. Commission,
p. 244) is inconsistent with the theory that Thomas Sheridan,
then an undergraduate of Trinity College, Dublin, was his son.

Some half dozen different accounts have been given of
Thomas Sheridan's parentage. The only record on the sub-
ject is that contained in the Trinity College matriculation
book, which states that he was ' filius Patricii.' The question
who this Patrick was is a puzzle yet unsolved. The attempt
which has been made to evade it by translating ' filius patricii '
as ' the son of a gentleman ' is ingenious, but not convincing.
There was a Patrick Sheridan, Bishop of Cloyne, brother of
William, Bishop of Kilmore, but he died some years before
Thomas Sheridan was born.

As regards R. B. Sheridan's brothers and sisters, it is
perhaps hypercritical to find fault with the term ' undis-
tinguished ' as applied to his brother Charles — the expression
is of course relative — but it is a mistake to attribute Strath-
allan to his sister Alicia. She only published one comedy.
The novelist was his niece, Alicia Le Fanu, the daughter of
his younger sister Betsy.

Finally, I cannot discover that Dr. Thomas Sheridan ever
wrote a Life of Swift. The well known biography was
written by his son.

Yours faithfully,

W. LE FANU.

KlNGSCOURT, KlLLARNEY ROAD, BRAY,

30 May, 1904.

228 THE ANCESTOR

EDITORIAL NOTES

The abiding interest of the English public in all that
concerns armory is ministered to by an article which has ap-
peared at regular intervals in English magazines for the last
half century. It is not perhaps the same article every time,
but it has the air of it, and it may be that some industrious
author has many times gained acceptance for his version of
it. Internal evidence shows that the article which calls itself
4 The Romance of Heraldry,' ' Eccentricities of Heraldry,' or
' The Gentle Science,' is the fruit of an afternoon's work in
that corner of the museum library which holds the peerages
and the handbooks of heraldry. A good example is before
us, enjoying the publicity which the English magazine with
the largest circulation can give it.

# * *

The article begins in the well-approved manner by quot-
ing the arms ascribed by Morgan to Adam and Eve, and
Morgan is rated for ' calmly stating that, as Eve was sole
heiress, Adam quartered her arms with his own, bearing them
as what is termed an inescutcheon.' Morgan can of course
make no reply, but if an attorney should appear for him he
might well be absolved of the offence of describing arms upon
an ' inescutcheon ' as quartered, an armorial impossibility
which warns us in advance of the quality of the article-
monger. For the ' Romance of Heraldry ' the familiar bag
of oddments is emptied for us. The Keith arms still com-
memorate the blood streaks drawn upon a Keith shield
half a dozen generations before armory shows itself in Scot-
land. The Dalziel arms, the arms of a family whose wildest
claim to ancestry does not seek to go beyond the Ragman
Roll of 1296, are ascribed as usual to a deed of an ancestor
in the tenth century. The Drakes of Nutwell are greeted
as descendants of the great Sir Francis, who died without
chick or child, and the Lockharts take the surname which is
found in the twelfth century from their alleged adventure
with the heart of the Bruce in the fourteenth. Graeme of
Inchbrakie bears in his shield a broken wall which com-

EDITORIAL NOTES 229

memorates the breaching by an ancestor of the Roman wall
between Forth and Clyde. Armory without the romance
would suggest that as the Graemes of Inchbrakie are known
to be cadets of Montrose, the broken wall recalls nothing
more romantic than their purchase in the sixteenth century
of the lands of Inchbrakie.

* * *

To give criticism to such an article as this would seem to
be but as the breaking of a very dingy butterfly upon the
wheel. But the moral remains, that whilst such poor stuff
finds a regular and unquestioning market, it is useless to in-
dulge ourselves with talk of the revival of popular interest in
armory. The ' Romantic Heraldry ' of our article stands
for all the armory to which popular interest will ever be
directed. All the armory worth a reasonable man's study lies
the other side of the Tudors, and can only be studied by
those with an intelligent apprehension of archaeology. That
it should ever become a subject of general interest to the
public is as unlikely as unnecessary.

* * *

We have been taken to task for giving to all Gordons that
epithet of Cocks of the North, which should properly belong
to the Huntly Gordons alone. We confess Saxon ignor-
ance to be at fault, we humble ourselves and offer amends.
But rising from our knees we point in some justification to
the ballade by the editor of the House of Gordon, a ballade in
whose envoy the Cock of the North is addressed as the totem
of the race.

Cock of the North.' To you we owe

The hearts which at your slogan note

Are fain to prove by veldt and voe,
The Gordons hoe the guiding o't.

Good verse cannot abide a gloss, but we venture to
believe that the homage of these lines is not directed to my

lord Marquess of Huntly.

* * *

A more serious wrong was done the Gordons in the
omission of the footnote which should have credited that
history of the Gordons, and especially of the house of Gight,
upon which we made comment, to its learned editor and be-

2 3o THE ANCESTOR

getter, Mr. J. M. Bullock, who for the New Spalding Club
of Aberdeen had edited this the first volume of the genealogy
and history of a house and name which have played such a
great part in the world.

* # *

We have before this applauded Mr. Walter Rye's work
in saving to the city of Norwich, indifferent itself towards such
matters, much of the ancient buildings which give beauty
and interest to the town. It would appear that the historic
town of Berwick-upon-Tweed nourishes no antiquary who
will rebuke its elders and councillors. For a suggested gain
of a few yearly pounds Berwick is preparing to level the
ancient walls which, manned by Scot and Englishman in
turn, survived the border wars and the assaults of kings, to
be threatened by a knot of vestrymen.

But it is a far cry to Berwick, and those who look for
vandalism will find it planning nearer home than the Scottish
border. Croydon in Surrey is one of those country places
which have been caught up and devoured by London, but
Croydon, unhappily for herself, is governed by her own sons.
The town, which is hurrying into a state of commonplace
and dingy suburb, owns a curious treasure in the buildings of
the Elizabethan hospital which bears the name of Arch-
bishop Whitgift, its founder and builder. This is no scraped
and restored fragment, but an ancient and beautiful building,
in which the intimate life of Shakespeare's day may be recalled
and wondered at. Within its old red walls a valuable charity
still fulfils its good work. In truth, this hospital and the
school and the old palace of the archbishops are the heart of
Croydon which grew and flourished round them, and which
without them would have been but a mean village.

* * *

We assume but too hastily that the days of ignorant and
destructive vandalism are over and past. Will it be believed
that powers are being sought from parliament to enable the
local authorities of Croydon to widen a road by destroying
Whitgift's beautiful house ! The road is to swerve from its
line to do this, for on the other side of the way, in full track
of the widening road, is a public-house, to spare which these
muddy-minded folk are prepared to level the most precious
thing in their town. An effort will be made to stay their

EDITORIAL NOTES 231

hands, but it is sad to think that should Whitgift's foundation
be saved, it must needs remain a pearl cast amongst inhabi-
tants of Croydon. The fact that the public-house is a new
one, whilst the hospital is quite an old building, has, we are
told, influenced the decision of the councillors. Now and
again we are threatened with the removal of one or other of
our historic landmarks to America. Here is one such which
America should acquire from chimney to foundation, and
remove it from a people for whom we must look round the
language if we would describe them. ' Brute and beastly '
was King Harry the Eighth's bluff phrase for the Lincoln-
shire folk, and it will serve handsomely for the Croydon

fathers.

* * *

The lot of the historical painter was a pleasanter one
before the coming of the antiquary. The ' old English
dress ' of young Arthur pleading with Hubert, of Vortigern
at the banquet, of the headsman waiting for Mary of Scots,
was pictured as a stable fashion, unchanging through the
centuries. Tight breeches and stockings, resetted shoes,
narrow trunks, a close tunic with a little frill at the neck.
These, with a wide-brimmed hat stuck with ostrich feathers,
made up the ' old English dress ' unquestioned and estab-
lished.

* * *

Nowadays the painter of histories must make unwilling
search through Stothard's monuments, must thumb M.
Viollet-le-Duc's too clever Mobilier, and follow a certain
beaten track in his library before he dare seat Alfred before
the burning cakes or produce King Edward to the kneeling
burghers whose shirts must be sought in Racinet or Hotten-
roth. But the painter still grudges time spent away from
paint, and it is in our mind that the Ancestor's representative
should call yearly upon the Royal Academy Exhibition to
record his criticisms of armour and piked shoon. The idea
is not an original one, an older established journal has been
before us, but something remains to be said of painted dress
after the critic of the Tailor and Cutter has published his
spirited condemnations of the Academy's trousers, baggily
inaccurate, and of the Academy's unmodish and provincial
waistcoats.

232 THE ANCESTOR

The knight who bears a sword of state beside Queen
Margaret might be the first victim of our new departure.
The coat of arms worn under his pauldrons — but a file of the
Tailor and Cutter must first be studied before the mordant
style of its May number can be assumed. Let us rather ask
why King George the Second is making Trooper Tom Brown
of Eland's regiment a ' knight banneret ' upon the field of
battle ? A public-house in Yarm keeps Tom's memory
green, or he would have long since listed in the battalion of
our forgotten heroes. A big and raw-boned dragoon from
Kirkleatham, Tom's spirit could not bear the sight of an
English standard carried away in French hands. Single-
handed he charged upon it and carried it back to Eland's
dragoons, with five wounds about his head and neck, two
balls in his back, and a hat ragged with musket shot. Surely
a deed of arms in the true Froissart spirit, but there was no
knighthood in 1743 for a hero who was a common soldier
man. Eland's dragoons gave him ' three Huzza's ' when he
rode bleeding into their lines, and he was sent home to Eng-
land to mend his gashes, yet no knighthood was spoken of.
In England he did duty with the Horse Guards, until his
wounds and a certain soldierly weakness for the can took
him out of the army and home to Yarm, where he lived to
tell his tale for a short year or two upon a thirty pound

pension.

* # *

A second index to the Ancestor has been completed, which
will be sent to any reader who possesses the four volumes
(v. vi. vii. viii.) with which it deals. A postcard to the pub-
lishers will secure its despatch.

Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London.

The Stall Plates of the Knights of
the Orderofthe Garter i 348-1485

Consisting of a Series of 91 Full-sized Coloured Facsimiles
with Descriptive Notes and Historical Introductions by

W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE, M.A., F.S.A.

Dedicated by gracious privilege during her lifetime to HER
LATE MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA, SOVEREIGN OF THE
MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER.

The edition is strictly limited and only 500 copies of the work
have been printed.

The object of the work is to illustrate the whole of the
earlier Stall Plates, being the remaining memorials of the four-
teenth and fifteenth century of Knights elected under the
Plantagenet Sovereigns from Edward the Third, Founder of
the Order, to Richard the Third, inclusive, together with three
palimpsest plates and one of later date.

The Stall Plates are represented full-size and in colours on
Japan vellum, in exact facsimile of the originals, in the highest
style of chromolithography, from photographs of the plates
themselves.

Each plate is accompanied by descriptive and explanatory
notes, and the original and general characteristics of the Stall
Plates are fully dealt with in an historical introduction.

There are also included numerous seals of the Knights, repro-
duced by photography from casts specially taken for this work.

The work may be obtained bound in half leather, gilt,
price £6 net ; or the plates and sheets loose in a portfolio,
£5 IOJ. net ; or without binding or portfolio, £5 net.

JTHEN&UM : ' It is pleasant to welcome the first part of a long
promised and most important heraldic work, and to find nothing to say of it
which is not commendatory. The present part contains ten coloured facsimiles
out of the ninety plates which the work will include when completed. They
reflect the greatest credit on all concerned in their production.'

MORNING POST : ' There is a fine field for antiquarian research in the
splendid collection of heraldic plates attached to the stalls in the choir of St.
George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, and it will be a matter of satisfaction to all
who are interested in old memorials that Mr. W. H. St. John Hope has given
close examination to these ancient insignia and now presents the results of his
investigations, with many reproductions.'

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE fc? CO LTD
2 WHITEHALL GARDENS WESTMINSTER

THE PASTON LETTERS

Edited by JAMES GAIRDNER

Of the Public Record Office
4 vols.y 2 is. net

THE FOURTH VOLUME CONTAINING THE INTRODUCTION AND
SUPPLEMENT MAY BE PURCHASED SEPARATELY

Price ids. 6d. net

These Letters are the genuine correspondence of a family in
Norfolk during the Wars of the Roses. As such they are altogether
unique in character ; yet the language is not so antiquated as to present
any serious difficulty to the modern reader. The topics of the letters
relate partly to the private affairs of the family, and partly to the
stirring events of the time ; and the correspondence includes State
papers, love-letters, bailiffs' accounts, sentimental poems, jocular epistles,
etc.

Besides the public news of the day, such as the loss of Normandy
by the English ; the indictment and subsequent murder at sea of the
Duke of Suffolk ; and all the fluctuations of the great struggle of York
and Lancaster ; we have the story of John Paston's first introduction
to his wife ; incidental notices of severe domestic discipline, in which
his sister frequently had her head broken ; letters from Dame Elizabeth
Brews, a match-making mamma, who reminds the youngest John
Paston that Friday is ' St. Valentine's Day,' and invites him to come
and visit her family from the Thursday evening till the Monday, etc.,
etc.

Every letter has been exhaustively annotated ; and a Chronological
Table, with most copious Indices, conclude the Work.

HENRT HALLAM, Introduction to the Literature of Europe, i. 228. Ed. 1837 : ' The
Paston Letters are an important testimony to the progressive condition of Society, and come in
as a precious link in the chain of moral history of England which they alone in this period
supply. They stand, indeed, singly, as far as I know, in Europe ; for though it is highly
probable that in the archives of Italian families, if not in France or Germany, a series of
merely private letters equally ancient may be concealed j I do not recollect that any have
been published. They are all written in the reigns of Henry VI. and Edward IV., except a
few that extend as far as Henry VII., by different members of a wealthy and respectable, but
not noble, family ; and are, therefore, pictures of the life of the English gentry of that age."

THE MORNING POST : ' A reprint of Mr. James Gardner's edition of The Paston
Letters with some fresh matter, including a new introduction. Originally published in
1872-75, it was reprinted in 1895, and is now again reproduced. The introductions have
been reset in larger type, and joined together in one, conveniently broken here and there by
fresh headings. The preface is practically a new one. ... It is highly satisfactory for
readers who care about history, social or political, to have this well-printed and admirably
introduced and annotated edition of these famous letters."

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN : « One of the monuments of English historical scholar-
ship that needs no commendation.'

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE fc? CO LTD
2 WHITEHALL GARDENS WESTMINSTER

The first English Translation of Chateaubriand's famous
Autobiography — ' Memoirh d 'Outre tombe*

THE

POSTHUMOUS MEMOIRS
OF FRANCOIS RENE

VICOMTE DE CHATEAUBRIAND

Sometime Ambassador
to England

Translated by ALEXANDER TEIXEIRA DE MATTOS

With 44 Illustrations from Contemporary Sources
In 6 vols. Purple cloth, gilt top, price £4 icw. net

DR. WILLIAM BARRY in the Bookman : ' Mr. dc Mattos has seen a rare
chance, and has taken it boldly. . . . These "Memoirs from Beyond
the Tomb " are certainly unploughed land, inviolate as some Greek Temple
enclosure — or, to put the matter more temptingly, if half a dozen books over-
flowing with incidents, reflections, descriptions of persons and landscapes ;
picturesque, irritating, curious, and brilliant, equal to these, were flung upon
the circulating libraries, someone would make his fortune. Let us hope it will
be Mr. de Mattos.'

MR. AUGUSTINE BIRRELL, K.C., M.P., in the Wettminiter Gazette : ' This
excellent translation.'

Pall Mall Gazette : ' There is reason to congratulate Mr. de Mattos on the
grace and fluency of his translation, and on the careful accuracy of his
numerous footnotes.'

Times : ' Mr. Alexander Teixeira de Mattos's excellent rendering of
Chateaubriand's Memoiret d' Outre-tombed

Observer : ' Mr. A. Teixeira de Mattos is to be congratulated upon this
first instalment of a remarkable achievement. . . . A worthy translation. . . .
So admirable an English version as is given by the zeal and talent of Mr. de
Mattos.'

Daily Telegraph : ' A valuable and scholarly translation . . . elucidated
by concise and sufficient footnotes wherever necessary.'

Tablet : ' Both translator and publisher have performed their task well. . . .
Mr. de Mattos set himself to make a conscientiously correct and respectful
translation of a great original, and he has given us so excellent a rendering, so
adequately and beautifully produced and illustrated by the publishers, that we
await the remaining volumes with the greatest interest."

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE fc? CO LTD
2 WHITEHALL GARDENS WESTMINSTER

The Old Court Suburb

(KENSINGTON)

By J. H. LEIGH HUNT

Edited, with an Introduction and Notes, by AUSTIN DOBSON

With very numerous Photogravure and other Illustrations by HERBERT
RAILTON, CLAUDE SHEPPERSON, and EDMUND J. SULLIVAN

2 vols., large square 8vo, price £i is. net

EDITION DE LUXE
Signed by the Artists, and limited to 150 copies, price £4 4*. net.

Kensington (the Old Court Suburb) was still, at the beginning of the
nineteenth century, in the country, and the garden of Wilberforce, who
occupied Gore House from 1808 to 1825, is described as being 'full of
lilacs and laburnums, nightingales and swallows.'

' The way to it (Kensington) is the pleasantest out of town ; you may
walk in high road, or on grass, as you please ; the fresh air salutes you from
a healthy soil, and there is not a step of the way, from its commencement at
Kensington Gore to its termination beyond Holland House, in which you
are not greeted with the face of some pleasant memory.'

ATHENAEUM : 'To produce a good old book and make it a new one without offence
is a great feat. . . . Mr. Austin Dobson was the very man to write the graceful introduction
and brief notes. . . .'

Gilbert White's Selborne

Edited by DR. R. BOWDLER SHARPE

The hitherto unpublished 'Garden Kalendar,' to which the Very
Rev. DEAN HOLE has written an Introduction, is included

Illustrated by E. J. SULLIVAN, J. G. KEULEMANS, and HERBERT RAILTON
Price, 2 vols. large 8vo, £2 2s. net.

COUNTRY LIFE : ' The Edition of " The Natural History and Antiquities of
Selborne and A Garden [Calendar," issued in two volumes, is a work so modestly beautiful,
and so precious, that the reviewer approaches it with awe. . . . The topographical pictures
by Mr. Herbert Railton of the familiar objects at Selborne— Norton Farm, the Plestor,
the Street, the Church, the Yew Tree, and so forth — are as good as can be, the very
perfection of delicate work. Birds and beasts have fallen to the lot of Mr. J. G. Keule-
mans, and, short of colour, I have never seen anything of the kind nearly as good as they
are. The birds are, perhaps, a trifle more perfect than the beasts. Of full-page illustrations
there are fifty ; of minor illustrations a good number. . . . Altogether this is a very com-
plete and worthy edition, and it is destined to be the family Bible of those who follow the
cult of Gilbert White, and the number of them increases every day.'

ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE 6f CO LTD
2 WHITEHALL GARDENS WESTMINSTER

cs

410
A6
no. 10

The Ancestor

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY