I

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

Collectanea $?mza\o$\ta.

INTRODUCTION.

HAVING pledged myself to raise my "Peerage and Baronetage" to a standard of
excellence never as yet attained by any similar Works, and having also commenced
the compilation of a series of Royal Descents, it will be a surprise to some of my patrons
that I have now undertaken, in addition, to edit a Monthly Publication, although it is generally
allowed that the proposed contents are destined to prove of the greatest importance to the
Genealogist and the Historian, by placing at their disposal an invaluable array of facts, "all
which would require Briareus his hundred hands,. Argus his hundred eyes, and Nestor his
century of years, to marshal."
Shortly stated, the explanation is, that upon applying myself to perfect the Pedigrees in
my Peerage, and more especially in my Royal Descents, as I consider they ought to be
perfected (my standard of excellence always ascending), I found myself confronted with
difficulties so great that I felt compelled to lower for awhile my flag, so that I might give
the causes of those difficulties my careful deliberation — more especially as I am strongly of
opinion that too many of the genealogical books issued in the present day are merely sprinkled
with an infinitesimal quantity of original matter; while they abound with repetitions of well-
known blunders and are embellished with many that are new. . .'•
For some reasons, I hold that further MS. Collections are to be deprecated, especially
if they are not well arranged, and that attention should be rather bestowed on utilizing the
vast unindexed, and consequently unknown, raw material which lies ready at hand, not only in
existing MSS., but also in printed books. If such a plan could be extensively carried out, not
only would an incalculable boon be conferred upon all Genealogists, but a more wide-spread
interest in their science would also be aroused among those to whom the difficulties of its
study have hitherto, made it a sealed book. All Genealogical Serials, extant or extinct, have
failed, in my opinion, to interest more than a narrow circle of readers, because they have
been too diffuse in tlieir aim and too kaleidoscopic in their contents. The Collectanea
proper should be reduced almost to a minimum (pone but subjects of general interest and
permanent value being admitted), and the bulk of the Serial should be devoted to the
publication of important matter, carefully and systematically arranged.
To supply in some measure the above want, which must have been generally felt by
others also, and to lessen the difficulties which I, in common with all, have experienced in the
compilation of the genealogical works to which I have already referred, I have determined to
edit, and issue to Subscribers, a Monthly Serial, devoted principally to the republication, in
an original and handy form, of . Collections of Genealogical matter, each alphabetically
arranged and each independently paged. The importance of good Indexes has been of late
much insisted on, but even the best Index involves a reference to, and implies the
possession of, the original work ; whereas, it will be a special feature of my own plan that,
by substituting Lists for Indexes, the required fact will be found at a glance, without the
need of a second reference. A Series of Lists will thus be eventually formed, which must
serve to lighten incalculably the arduous labours of the Genealogist.
I have been fortunate in having such material at hand as the " Obituary" of Sir William
Musgrave, Bart., the Funeral Certificates of Ireland, and (by permission of Mr. Sims) the Index
to the Heralds' Visitatioiis, which last will be re-arranged, with additions, in continuous
Alphabetical Order. But, in each and all of these, much careful revision is still absolutely
necessary in preparing them for the press.
The Alphabetical Lists of Members of Pailiament, and of the Marriages from the
Historical Register and the Gentleman's Magazine (171410 1867), have been worked up
Collect. _. _ b
3L3VA

£/

X- _ . /

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

ab initio. The former is compiled from the Parliamentary Return, and is supplemented with
genealogical notes ; this is peculiarly my own ground, and as I have also the good fortune
to be able to include copious annotations from the private collections of Rev. A. W. Beavan
of Preston, and Thomas J. Hercy, Esq., of Cruchfield House, Berks, so I trust it will assume
considerable importance, supplying, as it does, a fund of material for another branch of
neglected Biography.
The Marriages of the Nobility and Gentry claim special notice. Their compilation is
due, in the first instance, to the rare energy and perseverance of Miss Ada Gardner, a great-
niece of Dalloway, the historian of Sussex. Those from the Registers of Westminster Abbey
are included by permission of Col. Chester, and those from the Times (1865 to 1880) are
extracted by special permission from the private collection of Sir Albert Woods, Garter
King-of-Arms. This collection has a pagination of its own.
To test the value of the plan I am pursuing, let any well-known Pedigree be taken, and
let it be seen what additions can be made to it merely from the Lists of Marriages, of
Deaths, and of Members of Parliament (as they appear in this Part only), and I apprehend
.that all will admit that, with a few Collections such as these, it would not be a difficult
matter to transform almost any Pedigree (other than that of an old ennobled family) from a
meagre string of nominal generations into a family history, abounding and sparkling with
facts, without which it possesses few, if any, points of interest.
The Collectanea proper will be published at intervals, and will include Pedigrees of
notable and celebrated families, contributed by eminent Genealogists, Notes and Queries
on genealogical subjects, &c. &c.
In selecting subjects for publication it will, I think, be admitted that I have adopted
those which have the widest scope and which are likely to confer the most general benefit.
It will be a leading feature of my Work that I shall endeavour to interest and assist not only
the Genealogists of the Sister Kingdoms, but also those who have worked so ably in the
United States bf America.
Practical suggestions for new subjects will be gladly received, as also offers of literary
help, and the co-operation of Genealogists in each county is specially invited, in order that
they may respectively ransack their County Histories and kindred works,, and that all ,
Monumental Inscriptions, Wills, and Extracts from Parish Registers may be transcribed
(condensed when desirable), so that ultimately three general alphabetically arranged
collections may be compiled and printed under the above titles. " Many hands make light
work," and it is one of the maxims of the present day that co-operation will often succeed
where individual enterprise must fail.
It only remains for me now to press upon my Genealogical friends the fact that I hope
they will honour me with their support by sending me their names as Subscribers, and by
forwarding me their Annual Subscription for this Publication. As all Genealogists of any status
admit that it must prove indispensable to them, so I trust that their interest in the Work will
induce them to show practically their approval by influencing their friends to become
Subscribers also, and by doing all in their power to ensure its success.
I feel sure that, sooner or later, there will not be a library of any importance, public or
private, which will not possess this Series of Works of Reference. Joseph Foster.

¦ 21, Boundary Road,
Fischley Road, LoNDOiN, N.W.
June, 1881.

E^. v. WLhin fling of ^rms.

¦***-

A FASHIONABLE Newspaper which prides itself on its dilettante Genealogical
L\ information, has recently drawn the attention of its readers to the provisions
ofa Royal Warrant, bearing date 3rd December, 1783, and intended to compel every
holder of the title of Baronet to prove his right to that distinction in the College
of Arms, before accepting, as a Baronet, an appointment in any ofthe public services.
Unfortunately for the argument of this ingenious writer, his statement betrays a
lamentable ignorance of the real facts of the case. For a subsequent Warrant had
within two years completely suspended the provisions he refers to and no further
action has been taken. Thus as matters now stand there is no tribunal authorized
to decide upon such claims as those which are collected under the supplemental
section entitled " Chaos," in Foster's Baronetage.
The assumption of the title of Baronet has now become so common that it calls
for more serious attention than may at first sight seem necessary. Sir William
Fraser has done good service on more than one occasion, by calling the attention
of Parliament to this increasing scandal ; but it is probable that few, if any, were
aware till the appearance of Mr. Foster's " Chaos " of the great extent to which
the practice had spread. Society is powerless in the matter. It may well hesitate
to take the initiative in refuting a discredited title, when such time honored author
ities as Ulster King-of- Arms and Mr. Edward Walford, M.A., together with the
editors of kindred works practically — by publication and therefore apparently by
confirmation — support the Soi-disant Baronets in their pretensions.
A former Norroy King-of- Arms (died 16th January, 1839, aged 83) edited a peerage
which still deservedly commands a large share of public patronage ;• though it is
extremely doubtful whether any part of his actual revision or compilation now
remains. It is clearly to be regretted that the name of so honored a herald should
be made to play the role of sponsor, not only to his editorial successors for all time,
but also to discredited baronetcies on such an extended scale as to suggest grave
doubts as to the propriety of such a course. It is true that some of these doubtful
titles which too long have appeared on Ulster's pages, are quietly disappearing
one by one probably for the same reason that should have debarred their admission
more than a generation ago. It is to his " Baronetage" that is attached the greatest
share of responsibility for the confusion that has arisen, hot so much because it is
perhaps the oldest publication of its class, but rather because it enjoys ' (though
accidentally) the prestige of being edited by a recognized and salaried officer of the
Crown. _ '.;
Let us at once disclaim any personal animus against so courteous a gentleman
and so distinguished a public servant as Sir Bernard Burke. The criticisms which
we feel called upon to offer are directed against systematic official laxity, rather
than against easy-going editors, whose business is not our concern. Our contention
is that it is a manifest injustice to the recipients of hereditary honors, from whom
heavy fees were exacted when those honors were conferred on them, that the
Crown should have been a consenting party for a quarter of a century at least to
the publication- — by one of its own officers, in his governmental capacity, and with
his official brand — ofa work which not only contains what are practically new titles,
but also in which those already discredited honors are placed on precisel^the same
footing as those which are. satis reproche and on which the legal fees have been paid.
By this means, these discredited honors have gradually attained a dignity, for
which there is practically no foundation, other than that which is conferred upon
them by a semi-official publication. Now we maintain that the two positions of an
irresponsible editor of a peerage and a responsible official guardian of arms and
honors are mutually irreconcilable ; that they never can be satisfactorily
filled at the same time by one and the same person. It will doubtless occur to our
readers that the same problem must arise as in the celebrated case of the ex-cathedra
utterances of the Pope, namely when does he speak as Pope and when as private
individual ? So too in the case before us. How can we tell when we are dealing

REG. v. ULSTER KING OF ARMS.

with the real Simon Pure ? We protest against the theory that Ulster King-of-
Arms may divest himself at will of his Tabard and come down among men as Sir
Bernard Burke. Ev0* avr oAV evorpre Sea yAav/c __7r_s AOrjinj,
Ti)XxpM.)(to S'eucvia Kara jrroAxv t>x«ro -iravrrj. — HoM. Od. II., 3°2.
For if we pursue the editor in his human form, we find ourselves confronted by
an avenging figure in all the majesty of a King-of-Arms. There is a passage m
the " Lay of St. Odille " which describes so exactly the situation that we hope we
may be pardoned for quoting it entire.
"Odille had scarce closed her pathetic address
When the rock, gaping wide as the Thames at Sheerness,
Closed again, and secured her within its recess.
In a natural grotto, which puzzled Count Otto,
Who could not conceive where the deuce she had got to. -
Then burst from the mountain a splendour that quite
Eclipsed, in its brilliance, the finest Bude light,
And there stood St. Ermengarde, drest. all in white,
A palm branch in her left hand, her beads in her right."
There is no reason why we should appear to beg the question by citing as examples
"of these laches, the well known cases among the Baronets of Nova Scotia, for in
this branch, there might possibly be some shadow of an excuse. We need do no more
than substantiate our case, by citing examples and proofs, derived from the archives
of Ulster's office.
The first instance to which we would invite the attention of our readers is that of
a Baronetcy, to which a certain gentleman is said to have established his right
(after it had long lain dormant), and to have had the dignity revived in his favour
" by a full recognition of his right by the College of Arms in Ireland." Now, not
only are no proofs forthcoming of his descent from his reputed ancestor, but the very
name qf this reputed ancestor is actually changed in the editions of "Burke's Peerage"
subsequent to 1868, though this change, apparently, is quite immaterial to that!
"full recognition of his right " &c. &c. which is supposed to decide the question.)
An attempt has recently been made to bolster up the new ancestor on whose
personification doubt has been thrown, and its value has been analyzed elsewhere. \
In further proof of the Hibernian eccentricities of the " College of Arms ¦ in ^
Ireland," let us turn to another " Baronetcy," the title to which has, thanks to Sir
Bernard, been regarded as above suspicion. Hawkins, when Ulster King-of-Arms
" certified in 1730" — or 1780 (we prefer the latter date) — the pedigree ofa claimant
to a dormant Irish Baronetcy. The brilliant concoction by which the claimant was
attached to the line of the original grantee may be estimated at its just worth when
we learn that not only is it devoid of all dates or references, not only (as inscriptions
prove) does it transpose two generations, but it actually identifies, to prove ils
point, a Knight who died in 161 1 with a Knight of the same name who was created
a Baronet in 1644, and died in 1670. Such was the document which an Ulster
King-of-Arms, " in virtue of the powers to him committed," unhesitatingly and
solemnly attested ! The more conscientious Betham, however, on succeeding to the
office, hesitated to sanction so flagrant an attempt, and entered a pedigree recording
the descent as from the Knight who died in 1611, naturally without venturing to
suggest that it was he who was honoured in 1644 with the much coveted badge of
the red-hand of Ulster. Yet, in the face of this conclusive evidence (to say nothing
of an attainder which appears to have never been reversed), a King-of-Arms
continues to class this title among those on whose legitimacy the nation justly
prides itself.
Among English Baronetcies, " Temple of Stowe" rests on the ipse dixit of a
Marquis of Buckingham, whose statements are not only unproved, but are capable
of actual disproof.
Dismissing the subject of discredited Baronetcies, we would now touch upon
another subject, in some respects of greater importance, inasmuch as it has a
wider bearing. The evils of the system we are complaining of are as marked in
the case of Coat Armour, as in that of Hereditary Titles. Can anything • be more
inconsistent than that Government should reserve to itself the payment of a not
inconsiderable fee upon every grant of Arms, and yet should allow that monopoly
to be virtually invaded through the, medium of its own officer's publications and

REG. v. ULSTER KING OF ARMS.

to the presumable detriment of its Exchequer.* It is not too much to say that
as matters now stand, these ancient and coveted marks of gentility are issued
broadcast by an officer of the Crown, in printed works, not only with the full
weight of his official status, but with a notorious (because uniform) omission of
the evidences, */ any, justifying their publication or assumption, which in
too many instances is clearly that of mal-appropriation. Nor are the opera
tions restricted to Ulster's own province. Those of Garter and of Lyon are
invaded as well. We complain, not only of the publication of arms originating
merely in the imagination of the engraver, but of the (pseudo-official) confirmation
of pirated Arms, the legal property of a family, or of its heirs, but assumed
for obvious reasons by other families of the same name, though not descended
from the original grantee. And by way of making matters even worse the
Arms having first been wrongfully assumed, are actually adduced in evidence
of an equally fallacious descent. Nor Will the matter end here, for if the present
system is allowed to contmue unchecked, we must not be surprised if we awake
some day to the fact that the ancient authority of the " Laws of Arms," which
are now suffered to be treated with contempt in high quarters, has been ruinously
impaired. How intense our mortification when we then remember that the example
was set, and the coup-de-grdce in truth delivered by one who, as a King-of-Arms,
was " more especially bound " to uphold and protect the venerable though
unwritten laws of heraldry !
(In an early number I purpose giving some interesting particulars concerning the
users of false coat armour, e.g., a detailed list of the names of those peers and
baronets who are not entitled to coat armour, and also the names of those peers
who have no supporters ; together with a list of the " Landed Gentry " who have
no armorial ensigns save " by the grace of" Ulster King-of-Arms.)
Now it is manifest that but for the prestige which the post of Ulster has conferred
upon Sir Bernard Burke, and which has invested his works, in the eyes of an in
different public, with a quasi-official authority, fewer discredited Baronetcies
and fewer spurious Coats-of-Arms would have succeeded in obtaining currency
society would have been freer from the scandal of doubtful honors, the designation
" Ulster King of Arms " would have retained the respect of the best informed, and
Her Majesty's Exchequer might in all probability have been so much the richer.
This being so, we leave it to the public to decide on the merits of the case, merely
observing that if the Master of the Mint were to commence business on his own
account to-morrow, his fate would be peremptorily determined by the force of
public opinion. The two cases are precisely analagous, except that the one we
are considering appeals not only to the pocket but to the pride of the public.
We have endeavoured to discharge what we conceive to be a public duty, in a
public spirit, and if in so doing,- the cases in point have necessitated some out-
' spoken criticisms, we venture to think, that when the facts are borne in mind,
the verdict will be, that our remarks are justifiable, and our point established.
* The appropriation of Court Armour by the public has become so universal as to be al
most beyond remedy, principally owing to the supineness of a Jong succession of crown
officials. As a heavy tax is paid by the " laws of arms " abiding citizen it seems to us that
the mauvais sujet should not be allowed to go " scot free." Treble fees should in the first
instance be exacted from the herald painters, and the die and seal engravers, (be they the
silversmith or stationer,) on behalf of their clients, the annual duty should be at a double rate
and collected as usual from the public by the tax gatherer. These traders in Coat
Armour should also be duly licensed and should pay an annual duty, an embargo ofthe magic
penny might be laid upon every quire of paper bearing illicit, i.e. unlicensed, coat armour.
H. M. post office and H. M. customs would in all probability be able to detect any wholesale
evasion, while the College of Arms cculd for a small fee issue certificates of exemption to
arms bearers. Nor should the editors and publishers of works containing false coat armour
be allowed to escape the responsibilities they have incurred for the harm that. has accrued
from their publications.

©Israeli, of fL?ugIjen&en Jfllanor, Bucks*

Rebecca Mendez (ist wife), dau. of:
Gaspar Mendez Furtado (by his wife
Clara als. Abigail), m. at the Syna
gogue, Bevis Marks, London, 29\readar,
§516, (reg.) (2 April, 1756), died in
London I Feb., 1765, aged 3S, M.I.

:Benjamin D'Israeli, " of Enfield, Middlesex,:
then of Woodford, Essex, and of Old (? New)
Broad Street, London, and lastly of Church
Street, Stoke Newington," an Italian mer
chant in New Broad Street (1759), b. 22 Sept.,
1730, d. at Stoke Newington, 28 Nov., 1816,
bd. in Cemetery of Spanish and Portuguese
Jews, London, E., M.I., w. d. 1 Nov., 1813,
cod. 23 Nov., 1813, and 29 May, 1816, p.
(C.P.C.) 7 Dec. following (under ^30,000),
mentions (inter aha) niece Rachel Crasto, ol
Kensington.

:Sarah Siprut de Gabay (2nd wife), m.
(contract, 24 May, 1765,) at the
Synagogue, Bevis Marks, London, 4
Sivan, SS2S.(reg) («8 Mfly> r76S)- The
surname is also spelt Seyproot (living
May, 1817). The entry of date of her
death and burial has been omitted from
the records at Bevis Marks.

'I
Mordecai als. Angelo, (2nd=Rache), (only child, M.I.), Isaac D'Israeli, of Hughenden Manor, Bucks, by=Ms"*n, dau. of Nathan

husband) brother of Joseph
• di Samuel Tedesco, of
Leghorn, m. 4 July, 1792,
d. in London, 20 Oct.,
1798.

m. 1st, 15 May, 1771,
Aaron Nunes de Lara;
she dead in 1813.

Hannah Tedesco.
Rebecca, b. 29 Oct, 1795.

Sarah, b. 5 March, 1797.
Maria (a twin posthumous),
b. (Miiiani) 16 April, 1 799.

All living 1816.

purchase in 1 847, resided at 6, Kings Road,
Bedlord Row, London, 1802/17, at 6, Blooms
bury Square, 1818/29, al Bradenham Ho., Bucks,
182 >, until his death, hon. D.C.L. Oxon,
F.S.A., author of "The Curiosities of L'nera-
ture," " Calamities of Authors," " Amenities of
Literature," &c. &c, born at Enfield, Middlesex,
May, 1766, died at Bradenham, 19 January, 1848
(Gent's. Mag., vol. xxx. N.S., p. 96 el seq.),
buried in the vault of the chancel of Bradenham
Church, M.I., will dated 31 March, 1847, p.
(C.P.C.) 24 July, 1848 (under ^20,000).

Basevi, of Billiter
Square, London (sis
ter of George Basevi,
of Brighton, J.P.,
father of George
Basevi, architect,
who was accidentally
killed in Eiy Cathe
dral, 16 Oct., 1845,
aged j 1), ni. 10 Feb.,
1802, d. 21 April,
1847, aged 71 M.I.

, Benjamin,Earl of Beaconsfield,:
K.G., P.C, thrice Chancellor
of the Exchequer, twice First
Lord of the Treasiiry, Lord
Privy Seal, 1876/8, born in
London (19 Tqbet, 5.65), 21
Dec, 1804, bapt. by J. Thim-
bleby, at S. Andrew, Hol
born, 31 July, 1817, died s.p.,
in London, 19 April, 1881,
bd. at Hughenden, 26th.

_:Mary Anne, Viscountess Bea- Naphtali,
consfield in her own right, so born in
created 30 Nov., 1868 ; widow London, (4
of Wyndham Lewis, esq., Hesvan,
M. P., of Pant wy nglass Castle, 15568), 5
co. Glam., and only dau. of Nov., 1807,
Capt. John Viney Kvans, R.N., died young.
of Bampford Speke, Devon.
m. 28 August, 1839, rl. 15
Dec., 1872, bd. at Hughen
den, M.I., aged 76.

Ralph (formerly Raphael),:
deptny clerk of the Par
liaments, formerly a clerk
in the register office in
Chancery, bom in Lon
don (23 lyar, 5569), 9
May, 1809, bapt. by W.
H. Coieridge, at S.
Andrew, Holborn, 11
July, 1817.

r

:Katherine, dau. of
Charles Trevor,
esq., of Somerset
House (by his
wiTe Olivia, dau.
ol Ephr aimLindo,
who married ....,
dau. of Nathan
Basevi,aforesai<l), m. 15 Aug., 1861.

James, formerly Jacob.r
a Commissioner of In
land Revenue, b. in
London (26 Sivan,
5573), 24 June. «8i3,
bapt. by W. H. Cole
ridge, at S. Andrew,
Holborn, 1 1 July, 1817,
died s.p., 23 Dec, 1868,
bd. at Hughenden, M.I,

zl sabel l.\
Anne, dau.
ol William
Cave.csq.,
of Brcn-
try, Som-*
erset. She
died, s.p.s.
19 Due,
1859, aged
56.

Sarah, bom in
London, 29 Dec.
i_o_, bapt. by
Thoin.is Price
at S. Andrew,
Holborn, 28
Aug., 1S17, d.
unm. 19 Dec,
1859, bd. in Pad
dington Ceme
tery, M.I.

Coningsby R-dph Disraeli, of Hughenden
1VT .n_.r_n„ri.». 1- -¦- Fr'-, ifi'--

Dorothy Sa. Sybil Isabelle. Marguerite Katherine.

%\)t Bisraelt ^eirigra.

IT is not surprising that the material for a history of the family of the late Premier of
England should be more than usually scanty when it is remembered that Lord Beacons
field, when giving a rteum'e — deriving his facts in all probability from his memory rather
than from any ancestral archives — was content to limit his pedigree by a mere reference to the
fact that he (like most people) had a great-grandfather, naively adding, amidst a plethora
of ungenealogical padding, that his grandfather was " the youngest of two sons !" But
preceding all this, we are introduced to the family through " unprecedented trials," and
" unheard-of perils," having fled from " the Spanish Peninsula j" so that it requires no
stretch of imagination to believe that the great master himself is daintily though disingenuously
treating us, in his most felicitous style, to a veritable Chateau en Espagne.
This account by Lord Beaconsfield, the earliest and the only one possessing any origi
nality, accompanies an interesting biography of the author of "The Curiosities of Literature,"
in a Preface to that work. It is valuable so far as it relates to facts which came under the
writer's personal observation ; though few for this purpose, yet it seems to be the source
from which his biographers derive their facts.
But, thanks to the time-honoured rite of our forefather Abraham, to the recording pen
of the priest, and to the chisel of the sculptor, a pedigree of three generations can actually
be constructed, while the historic flourish in which its late representative enveloped his
account, must, for all serious purposes, be rejected. How much more satisfactory would it
have been had he given us instead a few prosaic facts, such as the " Gothic surname" of
his family, together with the names, not only of his great-grandfather and of his great-grand
mother, but also of their offspring.
A very interesting memoir of Isaac D'Israeli will be found in the Gentleman's Magazine,
Vol. xxx., N.S., page 96 ei seq. The account of his separation from " the Congregation"
is given by James Picciotto, in " Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History." From this it appears
that he had been elected " Parnass or Warden" of the Bevis Marks Synagogue, to which he
demurred, but in vain; he therefore tendered his resignation, which was not accepted until
four years after, in 1821.
The City Press, 28 August, 1878, page 5, also gives an interesting notice of the family.
THE D'ISRAELI FAMILY LEGEND.
"My grandfather, who became an English Denizen in 1748, was an Italian descendant from one of those
Hebrew families whom the Inquisition forced to emigrate from the Spanish peninsula at the end of the fifteenth
century, and who found a refuge in the more tolerant territories of the Venetian Republic. His ancestors had
dropped their Gothic surname on their settlement in the Terra Firma ; and, grateful to the God of Jacob who
had sustained them through unprecedented trials, and guarded them through unheard-of perils, they assumed
the name of Diskaeli, a name never borne before or since by any other family, in order that their race might
be for ever recognized.* Undisturbed and unmolested, they flourished as merchants for more than two centuries
under the protection of the lion of St. Mark, which was but just, as the patron saint of the Republic was
himself a child of Israel. But, towards the middle of the eighteenth century, the altered circumstances ot
England, favourable, as it was then supposed, to commerce and religious liberty, attracted the attention of my
great-grandfather to this island, and he resolved that the youngest of his two sons, Benjamin, the ' son of his
ri.u'ht hand,' should settle in a country where the dynasty seemed at length established, through the recent
failure of Prince Charles Edward, aud where public opinion appeared definitely adverse to persecution on
matters of creed and conscience  At the time when my grandfather settled in England, and when
Mr. Pelham, who was very favourable to the Jews, was Prime Minister, there might be found, among other
Jewish families flourishing in this country, the Villa Reals, who brought wealth to these shores almost as great
as their name, though that is the second in Portugal, and who have twice allied themselves with the English
aristocracy, the Medinas — the Laras, who were our kinsmen — and the Mendez da Costas, who, I believe, still
exist  "—Preface ty Benjamin Disraeli to " The Curiosities of Literature"

. * Benjamin D'Israeli, of Beechey Park (which residence he built), co'. Carlow, High Sheriff, 1S10, was buried
in S. Peter's Churchyard, Dublin; his tombstone bears the following inscription: — "The remains of Benjn.
Disraeli, Esq™., are deposited here. He departed this life "n the 9th clay of August, in the year 1814, aged 48."
The following notice- ofthis personage will be interesting : — Dublin Chronicle, of Tuesday, Feb. ra, 1788, viz. —
" This day ( 1 1 th) Benjamin Disraeli, of Grafton Street, gent, (who served his apprenticeship tp Mr. Richard Bayly),
was admitted and sworn a Public Notary before the R. Worshipful Stephen Ratcliff, Judge of his Majesty's
Court of Prerogative in Ireland." He appears in the public lists as a Public Notary irom 1788 to 1796, wilh
the name and address of Benjamin Disraeli, 105, Grafton Street, Dublin; and from 1797 to 1810 inclusive,
with the name altered to Benjamin Disrael, \_sic\ of the same profession, and at the same address. In 1803, 4 and
5 (but not later), he appears also as a Lottery Office keeper, as well as a stock-bioker. From 1806 to 1809
inclusive, he is one oi the members of the " Stock Exchange Company," in Dublin, his address still being 105,
Grdfton Street. In 1810, although described as a "Public Notary," he is not on the list of members ofthe
Stock Exchange. In 181 1 his name disappears from the Dublin directories. It is said that he realized a
fortune on tlie Stock Exchange, and bought a property in county Carlow, 011 which he built a residence, called
"jBeechey Park." His will ¦ 's signed Benjaim Disraeli.

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGTCA..

Evidences from which the fouecoing Pedigree is compiled.
Spanish and Portuguese Jewi Synagogue, Bevis Marks.
register of births.

Day in
Child's
Father's
Mother's
Surname.
Week of
Jewish
Christian
Circum-
Attested
Name.
Name.
Name.
Child's
Date.
Era.
cised 1 y
by
Birth.
Benjamin.
\
/
Friday.
19 Tebet,
55°5-
21 Decern. 1804.
\
Naphtali.
Thursday.
4 Hesvan
5 Nov. 1807.
Raphael.
) Isaac.
Maria.
D'Isiaeli.
Tuesday.
5568.
23 lyar,
55&9-
9 May, .
1809.
D. A.
) Lindo.
D. J. De
Castro.
Jacob.
Thursday.
26 Sivan,
24 June,
'-'
/
i
5573-
l8t3v
/
Pari-h of S. Andrew, Holborn, in the City of Loudon, and in the County of Middlesex.
Extracts from the Register Book of Baptisms.
When baptized.
Child's
Chris' ian
Name.
Parents' Name.
Abode.
Quality.
By whom
ceremony was
performed.
Christian.
Surname.
1817.
July II,
No. 529.
Raphael, son of
, Isaac
Maria
Said to have
Disraeli,
been born May
King's Road.
9, 1809, W.
Gentleman.
rr.c.
W. H. Coleridge.
1S17.
Julyn,
No. 530.
James, son of
Isaac
Maria
Said to have
Disraeli,
been bornjunt
King's Road.
24, 1813, W.
Gentleman.
ff.C.
W. H. Coleridge.
1817.
July 31,
No. 633.
Benjamin, son of
Isaac and
Maria Said to
D'Israeli,
be about 12
King's
\ Road.
rears old.
Gentleman.
J. Thimbleby.
1817.
August 2S,
No. 777.
Sarah,
daughter of
Isaac and
Maria Said
D'Israeli,
to be born 20
King's Ro.id.
Deer., 1802.
.Esquire.
Thos. Price,
Offe. Curate.
The above are true extracts from the Registered Book of Baptisms, kept in the Parish Register.  r r: "V
Witness my hand this 27th day of April, in the year 1881, Henry Blunt, Rector. .«4
It is usually stated that Isaac D 'Israel Ts children were baptized at the sweeslion of th. *,.. *» „ .
other authorities attribute it to the advice of Basil Montagu, thebio^heroflffZot *" **" ' **
THE DISRAELI PEDIGREE.

Spanish and Portuguese yews' Synagogue, Bevis Marks.
register of marriages.
Benjamin D'Israeli, married 29 Veadar, 5516, Rebecca Mendez Furtado.
Benjamin D'Israeli, married 4 Sivan, 5525, Sarah Siprut de Gabay *
Aaron Nunes de Lara, married 2 Sivan, 5551, Rachel, daughter of Benjamin D'Israeli.
Mordecai Tedesco, married 19 Hesvan, 5552, the widow, Rachel Lara.

Enscrfptfonj..

Spanish and Portuguese Cemetery,
Mile End Road.

roV_m r. rvm m-i__*r. mi iop
raxo
.twbtib «r_ra *»_*» mo mup
trrt nv *w» ins. raw W 'sii
mr. VVn rowa. n's'p'n'n raw Wk
toss, ttqi re* toto nn-ii tiMi '.*
11
¦jn-owo m__m3 Ttm *faa n cbv
THE SEPULCHRE OF ABIGAIL,
WIDOW OF
Gaspar Mendes Furtado,
of Portugal — who after Suffering
the Tortures of the Inquisition,
fled for Protection to England
with her children, fince named
Rachel, Rebecca, Iudith,
Abraham, Isaac & Iacob,
whom She educated in the
Jewish Faith & established well
in marriage ; & where having
survived her beloved daughter
Rachel, (*) was- called to Rest
Friday Night, 7 September, TT&b
Aged 65.

 A Free Translation of the Hebrew
Inscription.
" Her sons rise up and pronounce her blessed, and
her daughters praise her."
Monumental record of the burial of Abigail Mendes
Furtado, who died on the night of Sabbath, the tenth
day of Elul A.M. 5624, in the 65th year of her age.
Go back in peace to thy abode, thou blessed of the
'Lord, and blessed be thy portion. May the Lord
recompense thy deeds, and may thy reward be one of
peace.

Tn irterr m '.is rtnsn S* D"r»» "w«m
raxo
-run mux npn ma map
j err 'sru '.ww n pa'a
npm -iVp'n'n raw too vnrf)'
11
n ro. -erf) nroto rt_w rft ra

THE SEPULCHRE OF REBECCA,
Wife of Benjamin d'Ifraeli,
born at Portugal, died the
I Feb., 1765, aged 38 years,
left i.iue a Daughter named
Rachel. — She was daughter
of Gafpar and Clara, alias Abig1
Mendes Furtado, dec*, & Sifter ¦
of Rachel (*) wife of M' Aaron
Lara (2) dec", Judith Fernandes
da Sylva, Wid: Ab™., If & lac"
Mendes Furtado.
mm npn V» Wita* rmi
' O daughters of Israel, mourn for Rehekah."

P) Rachel died 22 March, 1763, aged 41.
(2) Aaron Nunes de Lara died 6 Oct., 1768,
V aged 53.

A Free Translation of the IIebrew_
Inscription. ~~
"And she said unto him, delay me not, for the Lord
has made my journey prosperous."
Monumental record of the death of Rebekali, wife
of Benjamin D'Israeli, who died on the 3 of Sebar,
A.M. 5614.
Rebekah was in her 38th year when she went to
enquire of the Lord.

StarreDr
to the memory of
BENJAMIN D'ISRAELI,
Born 22nd September, 1730,
Died 2&lh November, 1816.
AN AFFECTIONATE HUSBAND,
.FATHER and friend.

* This lady's name is written "Sarah Villa Real de Seybroot.'
[Continued on page 16.]

2*

IO

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

BENJAMIN DISRAELI, k.g., Earl of
Beaconsfield, and Viscount Hughen
den, of Hughenden, in the county of Buck
ingham, so created 21 Aug. 1876 ; p.c, d.cl.
Oxon., ll.d. Edinburgh and Glasgow ; thrice
Chancellor of the Exchequer, (1) from March
to Dec. 1852, (a) from Feb. 1858, to June,
l8S9. (3) from J^e, 1866, to Feb. 1868;
Lord Privy Seal, 1876/8 ; twice First Lord
of the Treasury, viz., in 1868, and from
Feb. 1874, to 19 April, 1880; Lord Rector of
the University of Glasgow, 187 1/7; m.p.
Maidstone, 1837/41, Shrewsbury, 1841/7,
Buckinghamshire, 1847/76; Her Majesty's
Plenipotentiary (with the Marquis of Salis
bury) tb the Congress of the European Powers
assembled at Berlin, 1878; k.g., invested at
Osborne, 22 July, 1878; b. 21 Dec. 1804,
d. 19 April, 1 88 1, when his titles expired.
He m. 28 Aug. 1839, Mary Anne, created
Viscountess Beaconsfield, of Beacons
field, Bucks, 30 Nov. 1868 (widow of Wynd
ham Lewis, Esq., m.p , of Pantwynglass
Castle, co. Glamorgan, and only dau. of
Capt John Viney Evans, r.n., of Bampford
Speke, Devon), she d.s.p., 15 Dec. 1872,
aged i%.j6
Arms — Per saltire gu. and arg., a castle triple tur-
retted in chief ppr., two lions rampant in fesse sa.,
and an eagle displayed in base or.
Crest — Issuant from a wreath of oak a castle triple
turretted all ppr.
Supporters — Dexter, an eagle, and sinister, a lion,
both or, and gorged with a collar gu., pendent there
from an escocheon of the last charged with a tower
arg.Motto — Forti nihil difficile.
Seat — Hughenden Manor, High Wycombe, Bucks.
Town -House— 19, Curzon Street, Mayfair, W.

THAT the late Premier was born 2ist December,
1S04, there cannot be the shadow of a doubt ;
but his birthplace still seems to be a mystery, from the
numerous localities for which the honour is claimed,
and in this respect Lord Beaconsfield may be said
almost to rival Homer. Even though he singled out
the locality of the Adelphi lor that distinction, no
corroborative evidence has been evoked, while, on the
other hand it has been stated that Mr Disraeli, in his
youth (1824) gave St. Mary Axe as his birth-place,
in making a proposal for assurance. Claims are also
made on behalf of Upper Street, Islington, Blooms
bury Square, and John Street, Bedford Row.
In reply to a question put by Lord Barnngton,
during his last illness, he said, "I was born in the
Adelphi, and I may say in a library. My father was
not rich when he married. He took a suite of apart
ments in the Adelphi, and as he possessed a large
collection of books, all the rooms were covered with
them, including that in which I was born."
Mr. Jeaffreson, of Highbury New Park, states
that his grandfather. Dr. Jeaffreson ushered one of
Isaac D'Israeli's children into the world, and that
that child was, according to his young tradition,
Benjamin D'Israeli ; this was in Upper Street, Isling
ton, and was the house next to the Bank.
Mrs. Tait, of Milrig House, Kilmarnock, also
states that Isaac D'Israeli took her father's house in
John Street, Bedford Row, in April, 1802, ami that
her mother stated that " Benjamin D'Israeli was bom
in the same room as her brother, had the same doctor
and the same nurse as herself.". The Directories of
the day are corroborative, inasmuch as Isaac D'Israeli
appears as residing at 6, John Street, Bedford Row,
from 1803 to 1817; and although the actual birth
place still remains unknown to tne public, yet it is
equally certain, from the facts before us, that Blooms
bury Square is almost the last place for whicii that
distinction can be claimed.
For his education he was partly indebted to Dr.
E. Cogan, of Higham Hill (now Essex Hall), Wal-
thamstow, a Unitarian preacher, and a scholar of
rare attainments.
On 10th November, 182 1, he was articled to the
firm of Swain, Stevens, Maples, Pearse and Hunt,
of No. 6, Frederick's Place, Old Jewry, E.G. The
" Apprenticeship Indenture," No. 2,953 of 'be Old
King's Bench (71,821), is between Isaac D'Israeli,
Esq., of Bloomsbury Square, Benjamin D'Israeli,
his son, and William Stevens, Solicitor, of Frederick
Place (Swain, Stevens & Co.), whereby the son was
placed for five years a clerk to learn, &c, in the usual
form, to become "an Attorney of the Court of King's
Bench and a Solicitor of the Court of Chancery."
The deed was executed by all three parties, verified
by the usual Affidavit, filed on the 13th of November,
and thea enrolled (C. Nash, Coppleston Road).
The Articles are in the possession of Messrs. Maples,
Teesdale & Co., the present representatives ot the
firm. Mr. Disraeli was exclusively engaged in the depart
ment of which the chief was Mr. Maples, a friend
of his father's, and through whose interest he joined
the staff of that firm. Here he remained until he
became nominally a pupil of his cousin, Mr. Nathaniel
Basevi, an eminent conveyancer, and was admitted a
student of Lincoln's Inn, 18th November 1824
remaining until 25th November, ,831, as the following
extract shows : — 1 "
Lincoln's Inn.
"Benjamin Disraeli, of Bloomsbury Square; in

LORD BEACONSFIELD.

li

the County of Middlesex, aged 20 years, eldest son of
Isaac Disraeli, ofthe same place, Esquire.
Admitted L.I., iS Nov. 1824.
Sureties in Admission Bond, _
Isaac Disraeli, and j
Nathaniel Basevi, Esquires.
Dined in HaU in the following Terms :—
Michaelmas, 1824.
Hilary, 1825.
Ea-ter, Trinity, and Michaelmas, 1827.
Hilary, Easter, Trinity, and Michaelmas, 1828.
Performed Exercises —
May 23rd and May 26th, 1827.
At a Council held the 25th November, 1831, upon
the petition of Benjamin Disraeli, a Fellow of this
Society, praying that his name may be taken off the
books, his health not permitting him to follow the
profession of Law. It is ordered accordingly."
During the above period, he visited Italy, Greece,
Syria, and the Holy Land, and wrote " Vivian Grey,"
tbe first of his novels, in 1826.
He unsuccessfully contested High Wycombe, both
in December, 1832, and in January, 1835, and in the
April following was defeated at Taunton ; his parlia
mentary career is briefly stated on the opposite page.
The following anecdote of ' Mr. Disraeli, when
sworn on his first appointment as Chancellor oi
the Exchequer, from the diary of Mr. George H.
Parkinson, then a clerk to Baron Parke (Lord
Wensleydale) is worth recording :—
" Saturday, June 12, 1852. — Mr. Disraeli, the new
Chancellor of the Exchequer, came down about 2 to
be sworn in. He was quite alone, and Davis, the
usher, showed him into the Judge's private room,
where I happened to be, arranging some papers. - I
placed him a chair, and said I would go and tell the
Judges he had arrived. In a few minutes they came
in— Lord Chief Baron Pollock, Barons Parke, Alder-
son, Rolfe, and Piatt. All seemed to know him, and
all talked and laughed together. His new black silk
robe, heavily embroidered with gold bullion fringe
and lace, was lying across a chair. ' Here, get on
your- gown,' said Baron Alderson ; 'you'll find it
monstrously heavy.' 'Oh, I find it uncommonly
light,' said the new Chancellor. 'Well, its heavy
with what makes other things light,' said the Lord
Chief Baron. ' Now, what am I to say and do in this
performance?' was the next question. 'Why you'll
first be sworn in by Vincent, and then you'll sit down
again ; and if you look to the extreme left of the first
row of counsel you will see a rather tall man looking
at you. That is Mr. Willes out of court, but Mr.
Tubman in court, and you must say, "Mr. Tubman,
have you anything to move?" He will make his
motion, and when he sits down you must say " Take
a rule, Mr. Tubman," and that will be the end of the
affair.' " The ushers were summoned, and all marched to
the Bench — Baron Piatt as junior baron first, Mr.
Disraeli last, immediately preceded by tbe Lord Chief
Baron. Mr. Vincent, the Queen's Remembrancer,
administered the ancient oath, in Norman-French, I
think. Mr. Tubman (afterwards Mr. Justice Willes)
made some fictitious motion, was duly desired to ' take
a rule,' and the Chancellor and Barons returned to
the private room. 'Well, I must say you fellows
have easy work to do if this is a specimen,' said Mr.
Disraeli. ' Now, don't you think that, or you'll be
cutting_down our salaries,' replied one of the Judges.
' Take care of that robe,' said Baron Alderson ; ' you
can leave it to your son when the Queen makes him
a Chancellor.' 'Oh, no ; you've settled that business,"
said the new Chancellor, '-you'd decide that was
fettering the Royal prerogative.' There was a general
roar at this witty allusion to a very important case

just decided in the House of Lords, in which the
Peers had held that a large monetary bequest by the
late Earl of Briiigewaler to his son on condition that he
should obtain the title of Duke within a certain time
was void on the ground that it was a fettering of the
Royal prerogative.
''There was a mutual shaking of hands, and all
parties separated."
In 1863, he acquired by will the fortune of Mrs.
Sarah Willyams, of Mount Braddon, Torquay, widow
of Col. James Brydges Willyams, of Carnanton,
Cornwall, and daughter and heiress of Mendez da
Costa, a Portuguese.
The will (whicii was proved under ^40,000)
reads : " And I make this bequest to the said
Benjamin Disraeli, .in testimony of my affection for
him, and of my approval and admiration of his
efforts to vindicate the race of Israel with my views
respecting which he is acquainted, and which I have
no doubt he will endeavour to accomplish.' And I
express my wish and desire that he should obtain the
permission of Her Majesty to use and adopt the names
and arms of the families of Lara and Mendez da
Costa, in addition to, or precedent to that of, Disraeli,
as may on consideration be deemed most convenient."
S. JMicfiae. anti SII .3nge.3, f^ugljett-tttt.
In Memory of
SARAH BRYDGES WILLYAMS,
relict of
JAMES BRYDGES WILLYAMS,
OF carnanton,
in the county of cornwall,
and colonel of the
Royal Cornish Militia.'
She died at Torquay, II Nov.' 1863,
AND WAS BURIED AT HER DESIRE
IN THIS VAULT.

Funeral ofthe Earl of Beaconsfield, K.G.
Hughenden Manor, Tuesday, April 26, 1881.
The mourners and friends are requested to arrange
themselves in the following order of procession from
Hughenden Manor to the church : —
Mr. Frederick Baum,
a His Lordship's Confidential Valet,
Carrying the Insignia of the Order ofthe Garter.
THE BODY,
Borne by Eight Labourers on the Estate-
Chief Mourners.
Mr. Disraeli. Mr. Coningsby Disraeli.
Lord Rowton. Viscount Barrington.
Sir N. M. de Rothschild, M.P. Sir Philip Rose.
H.R.H. the H.R.H. the H.R.H. the
Prince of Wales. Duke of Connaught. Prince Leopold.
General Sir Henry General Viscount
Ponsonby. Bridport.
Col. the Hon.w. J. Colville, Captain Eliot,
representing: H.R.H. the _ representing the
Duke of Edinbuigh. Prince & Princess Christian.
Colonel Tyrwhitt, C.B., representing H.R.H.
the Duke of Cambridge.
The Ambassadors and Ministers of Foreign Powers,
two and two.
The Friends ofthe deceased Nobleman who were
his Colleagues in the Governments of
1868 and 1874.
The other Friends ofthe deceased Nobleman whose
wish to follow the remains from Hughenden
Manor has been complied with, and
who hold cards of admission to
Hughenden Manor.
Mr. Algernon Tumor, Mr, James F. Daly,
Mr. W. H. Van Baerle,
late Private Secretaries.
Mr. P. Frederick Rose, Mr. Arthur Vemon,
Solicitor. Land Agent.
' The Household Servants.
The Tenants.

12

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Inscription on Coffin Plate.
The Right Hon.
BENJAMIN DISRAELI,
Earl of Beaconsfield,
. AND
Viscount Hughenden, K.G.,
Born December 21, 1804, died April 19, 1881.

2>. fHfrijael anto Sill Angels, f_ft.glin.ton-.
In Memory of
MARY ANNE DISRAELI,
Viscountess Beaconsfield
in her own right.
For Thirty-three Years the Wife of
The Right* Honourable
- BENJAMIN DISRAELI,
LORD OF THIS MANOR.
OB. : December 15, 1872.
Coffin Plate.
MARY ANNE DISRAELI,
Viscountess Beaconsfield
in her own right,
And Wife of the Right Honourable
BENJAMIN DISRAELI.
Died December 15, 1872.

Obelisk; Hughenden Manor.
MARY ANNE DISRAELI,
Viscountess Beaconsfield, _
- . OB.- December 15, 1872.
o dulcis conjux!
The following full text of Lord Beaconsfield's will
is reprinted from the Times : —
''The Right Honourable Benjamin Disraeli,
Earl of Beaconsfield and Viscount Hughenden, of
Hughenden-manor, in the county of Buckingham,
Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, and
First Lord of Her Majesty's Treasury, hereby revoke
all wills and other testamentary dispositions hereto
fore made by me and declare this to be my last will.
I desire and direct that I may be buried in the same
vault in the churchyard of Hughenden in which the
temains of my late dear wife Mary Ann Disraeli,
created in her own right Viscountess Beaconsfield,
were placed, and that my funeral may be conducted
with the same simplicity as hers was. I bequeath
all my personal estate, including the copyrights of all
my published works (except chattels real included in
the general devise herein contained of real estate, and
except what I otherwise bequeath by this my will or
any codicil thereto, and except any articles belonging
to me which I may by any memorandum in my own
handwriting or by any paper signed by me designate
as intended for personal remembrances to my friends,
and which memorandum or paper I direct may have
the same force and effect as if it had formed part of
this my will), unto my friends Sir Nathaniel Meyer
de Rothschild, of Tring Park, Herefordshire, Baronet,
M.P., and Sir Philip Rose, of Rayners, Penn, Buck
inghamshire, Baronet, their executors, administrators,
and assigns, upon trust that they or the survivor of
them, or the executors or administrators of such
survivor,, or the trustees or trustee who shall have
succeeded in their place (hereinafter called my trustees
or trustee or the trustees or trustee of this my will),
shall call in, sell, and convert into money such part of
jny said personal estate as shall not consist of money.

" And I declare and direct that my trustees or
trustee shall out of the moneys to arise from the call
ing in, sale, and conversion into money of such part
of my said personal estate as shall not consist ol
money and the money of which I shall be possessed at
my death, pay my funeral and testamentary expenses
and all my just debts and such other sums as are here
inafter mentioned, and apply the residue of the said
moneys upon the trusts with and subject to the
powers, provisoes, and declarations, and in the
manner hereinafter declared and directed of and con
cerning the moneys to arise, and as if the same were
moneys arising, from any sale ol the hereditaments
hereinafter devised in strict settlement under the
power of sale thereof hereinafter contained.
" I devise all that the Manor of Hughenden, with
the mansion-house known as Hughenden Manor, and
the pleasure-grounds, gardens, plantations, lands,
easements, and appurtenances thereunto belonging
or therewith held or enjoyed together with the ad-
vowson of the vicarage of Hughenden, and all my
messuages, farms, lands, tenements, and heredita
ments situate in the parishes of Hughenden and West
Wycombe or elsewhere in the county of Buckingham,
with their rights, easements, and appurtenances, but
subject to all charges and incumbrances affecting the
same, to the use of my nephew, Coningsby Ralph
Disraeli (son of my brother Ralph Disraeli, Deputy
Clerk of the Parliaments), during his life without
impeachment of waste, and after his decease to the
use of each successively, according to seniority, of the
sons of the said Coningsby Ralph Disraeli in tail
male, with remainder to the use of the other sons of
my said brother Ralph Disraeli who may. hereafter be
born, successively according to their respective
seniorities in tail male, with remainder, to the use of
Dorothy Sa Disraeli, eldest daughter of my said
brother Ralph Disraeli, for her life, without impeach
ment of waste, for her sole and separate use, indepen
dently of any husband with whom she may intermarry,
and of his debts, control, and engagements, and from
and after her decease to the use of her first and other
sons successively according to seniority in tail male,
with remainder to the use of Sybil Isabelle Disraeli,
second daughter of my said brother Ralph Disraeli,
for her life, without impeachment of waste, for her
sole and separate use, independently of any husband
with whom she may intermarry, and of his debts,
control, and engagements, and after her decease to the
use of her first and other sons successively according
to seniority in tail male, with remainder to the use of
Marguerite Katherine Disraeli, third daughter of my
said brother Ralph Disraeli, for her life, without
impeachment of waste, for her sole and separate use,
independently of any husband with whom she may
intermarry, and of his debts, control, and engage
ments, and after her death to the use of her first and
other sons successively according to seniority in tail
male, with remainder to the use- of the daughters of
my said brother Ralph Disraeli who may hereafter be
bom successively, according to tlieir seniorities in tail
male, with remainder to the use of my own right heirs
for ever.
" Provided always, and I hereby declare that every
person actually born in my lifetime (but not any per
son en ventre sa mire at my decease) who under the
limitations hereinbefore contained would be entitled
or inheritable to an estate in tail male in the said
premises hereinbefore devised shall, in the place and
order in which he or she would be entitled or inherit
able as aforesaid, take therein in lieu of the estate in
tail male to which he or she would have been entitled
or inheritable as aforesaid an estate for life only, with
out impeachment of waste (and if such person be a
woman the said estate shall be for her sole and
separate use, independently of any husband with

LORD BEACONSFIELD.

^

whom she may intermarry, and of his debts, control,
and engagements), with remainder after the decease
of such person and the failure of issue male of his oi
lier sons born in my lifetime (if any) to his or her sons
born after my decease successively according to
seniority in tail male.
" Provided always, and I hereby expressly declare
it as my wish, although I abstain from attaching any
penalty to the non-performance of this direction, that
every person who under this my will shall become
entitled as tenant for life or as tenant in tail male to
the actual possession or to the receipt of the rents and
profits of the said premises hereinbefore devised in
strict settlement and who shall not then use and bear
the surname of Disraeli shall, within one year after
he or she shall become so entitled, and also that every
person whom any woman so becoming entitled shall
marry, shall within one year after such woman shall
so become entitled or shall marry, whichever of such
events shall last happen (unless in the said respective
cases any such person shall be prevented by death),
take upon himself or herself and use in all deeds and
writings which he or she shall sign and upon all occa
sions the surname of Disraeli only and not together
with his or her own family surname,
" Provided always, and I hereby declare that not
withstanding anything herein. contained, it shall not
be lawful for any person who for the time being shall
under the provisions of this my will be actual tenant
for life of the premises hereinbefore devised, to fell or
cut down or cause to be felled. or cut down any timber
or timber-like trees for the time being standing in the
park, gardens, pleasure-grounds, and woods, including
the wood usually known by the name of the German
Forest, or any part of the said lands and heredita
ments hereby devised, save and except such timber or
timber-like trees as the trustees or trustee of this my
will in their or his discretion, and without being
accountable for the exercise of such discretion, and
whose decision shall be final, shall declare ought in
the ordinary course of good management of an estate
to be felled or cut down.
. "And I hereby declare that if any person who
would but for this present declaration be entitled to
the possession or the receipt of the rents and profits of
my said real estate as tenant for life or in tail male
under this my will shall (being a child of my said
brother Ralph Disraeli now living) be under the age
of twenty-six years, or (not being such child of my
said brother now living) be under the age of twenty-
one years, then and so often the trustees or trustee of
this my will shall during such minority receive the
rents of and manage the said real estate and may let
the said mansion-house of Hughenden Manor either
from year to year or on lease for a term of years not
exceeding the period of such minority, and may fell
timber for repairs or sale or otherwise and accept sur
renders from and make allowances to and arrangements
with tenants and others, and may do all other things
which to them or him may seem expedient for the due
management thereof, as if he or they were the absolute
beneficial owners or owner thereof, without being
answerable for any loss or damage which may happen
thereby, and after deducting the expenses of manage
ment, repairs, insurance, and other outgoings, and
satisfying any and every annual sum and the interest
of any and every gross sum which may be charged
upon the said real estate or any part thereof, shall
invest the residue of the said rents and profits in the
names or name of the trustees or trustee of this my
will i.i any of the public stocks, or funds, or Govern
ment securities of the United Kingdom, or India, or
any colony or dependency of the United Kingdom, or
upoa freehold, copyhold, leasehold, or chattel real
securities in the United Kingdom, or in or upon the
*tocks, funds, shares, debentures, mortgages, or secu

rities of any corporation, company, or public body,
municipal, commercial, or otherwise, in the United
Kingdom, or India, or any colony or dependency of
the United Kingdom, or in or upon the stocks, funds,
bonds, debentures, mortgages, or securities of any
foreign Government, country, or State, or upon any real
security in any foreign country, and may at their and
his discretion vary the said stocks, funds, shares, and
securities as to them or him shall seem meet, and shall
accumulate the dividends, interest, and income of the
said stocks, funds, and securities in the way of com
pound interest by similarly investing the same arid the
resulting income from time to time, and shall hold the
said residue ofthe said rents-and profits, and the said
original and accumulated stocks, funds, and securities
and the annual income thereof upon the trusts and
with, under, and subject to the provisoes, powers, and
declarations applicable to moneys to arise, and as if
the same were moneys arising, from a sale in pursu
ance of the power of sale hereinafter contained, and
the stocks, funds, and securities in and upon which
such moneys are hereinafter authorised to be invested
and the dividends, interest, and income thereof.
"Provided nevertheless that it shall be lawful for
the trustees or trustee during any such minority as
aforesaid to 'apply any part of the accumulations of
such minority in such manner for the permanent
improvement of the property as he or they in his or
their absolute discretion shall think fit.
"And I hereby declare that every person hereby
made tenant for life of the said premises when he or
she shall be in actual possession or entitled to the
receipt of the rents and profits thereof, and also the
trustees or trustee of this my will during the minority
of any person who, if such minority did not exist (such
minority being in tlie case of any children of my said
brother Ralph Disraeli now living considered to termi
nate at the age of twenty-six years), would be entitled to
the possession or to the receipts of the rents and profits
of the said premises may by deed appoint by way of
lease all or any of the said premises for any term of
years absolute or determinable not exceeding for
agricultural or occupation purposes twenty-one years,
or for building or repairing purposes ninety-nine years
to take effect in possession or within six months from
the date of the appointment so as there be reserved
the best yearly rent that can reasonably be gotten
without taking any premium, but in the case of build
ing or repairing leases any rent smaller than the rent
to be ultimately payable may be reserved during the
first five years.
"Provided also, and I further declare tbat the
trustees or trustee of this my will shall have an abso
lute discretionary power of sale and exchange oyer all
or any of -the said premises hereinbefore die vised
(except my said mansion-house of Hughenden Manor,
together with the park, park-like grounds, gardens,
pleasure-grounds, and woods thereto adjacent and
necessary or convenient for the proper enjoyment of
the same) exercisable during the life of any tenant for
life of full age in possesion of the said premises under
this my will with his consent in writing, and during the
minority of any tenant for life or of any tenant in tail
by purchase in possession of the said premises under
this my will at the discretion of the trustees or trustee
of this my will.
" And I hereby declare that the trustees or trustee
of this my will shall, with such consent or at such.
discretion as aforesaid at such time as they shall think
proper (such time being in their absolute discretion)
fay out the money to be received upon any sale or
exchange as aforesaid in the purchase of freehold or
.copyhold hereditaments of inheritance in England or
Wales, or in procuring the enfranchisement of copy
hold hereditaments purchased or previously settled,
and shall settle or cause the same to be settled to the

i4

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

uses and subject to the powers hereby limited of and
concerning the said premises hereinbefore devised so
far as the deaths of parties and other intervening cir
cumstances will admit.
"Provided always, that the trustees or trustee of
this my will may at their discretion apply any moneys
to be received upon any sale or exchange as aforesaid
or any part thereof in or toward., satisfying any mort
gage or other charge or incumbrance which may then
affect all or any of the hereditaments which shall then
be subject to the uses and trusts of this my will.
"And I further declare that until the moneys to be
received upon any sale or exchange as aforesaid be
invested in the purchase of real estate as aforesaid,
they may be invested and the investments varied in
the same manner as is hereinbefore specified with
regard to moneys to arise from the accumulation of
rents and profits during minorities as aforesaid, and
that the annual income from such investments shall
be paid and applied in the manner in which the rents
and profits of tbe hereditaments to be purchased there
with as aforesaid would be applicable in case such
settlement as aforesaid were then actually made.
" Provided always that if the trustees or trustee of
this my will should be required or should think proper
to pay off any charge or incumbrance upon the
whole or any part of my said real estate it shall be law
ful for my said trustees or trustee at any lime or from
time to time to raise any such sum or sums of money
as may be necessary for such purpose by way of mort
gage or charge legal or equitable upon the whole or
- any part of my said real estate upon such terms and
subject to such conditions as they in their discretion
shall think proper.
" And I hereby bequeath unto the trustees or trustee
ofthis my will all such ofthe books, pictures, statues,
furniture, works of art, articles of vertu, and other
articles of which I shall at the time of my death be
possessed as they or he shall in the exercise of their
discretion think fit and proper to be selected and set
apart and be held as heirlooms with my said mansion-
house of Hughenden Manor, and shall so specify in a
document in writing signed by them or him upon
trust to allow the same to go devolve and remain as
heirlooms, together with my said mansion-house at
Hughenden Manor hereinbefore devised so far as
the rules of law and equity will permit, but so never
theless that the same shall not vest absolutely in any
person hereby made tenant in tail male unless such
person shall attain the age of twenty-one years, but
on the death of such tenant in tail male under the age
of twenty-one years the said article so specified shall
go devolve and remain as if the same had been free
holds of inheritance and had been devised in strict
settlement accordingly.
"And I hereby expressly direct that all books and
pictures and other articles which have been presented
to me eiiher by Her Majesty Queen Victoria or the
late Prince Consort shall be included in the articles
to be selected and set apart as heirlooms as aforesaid.
" And I further direct that as soon as conveniently
may be after the said selection shall have been made
as aforesaid, an inventory shall be taken of the said
articles so specified, and such writing (subject to its
being revised as occasion shall require) shall be signed
by every person for the time being entitled to the
enjoyment of the said articles under the limitations
hereinbefore contained, and also by the trustees or
trustee of this my will, and the said articles shall at
all times be kept adequately insured against loss or
damage by fire (so far as the same are capable of being
so insured) property preserved by and at the expense
ofthe usufructuary thereof for ihe time being;
" Provided always, that after the usufructuary for
the time being shall have signed the inventory afore
said, the trustees or trustee of this my will shall not be

bound to see to the insurances or preservation of the
said articles or any of them, and shall not be respon
sible for any omission or neglect on the part of the
usufructuary with respect to the insurance and Pr"""
vation thereof, nor for loss or damage occasioned by
any other act or omission on the part of the usufruc
tuary ; but the trustees or trustee of this my will shall
not be precluded from interfering for tlie protection of
the property when and as they or he shall think fit.
" I give and bequeath to my friend and private secre- ¦
tary, Montagu Corrv, Esquire, all the letters, papers,
and documents, whether of a private or of a public
character, and whether in print or in manuscript, and
also all the manuscript of any writings published or
composed by me of which I shall die possessed, and
also all the manuscripts and papers of my late father,
Isaac Disraeli, Esquire, upon the trusts hereinafter
declared concerning the same.
" I hereby request the said Montagu Corry with all
convenient speed after my death to collect or aid in
collecting the said documents, and I hereby, relying
on the discretion of the said Montagu Corry, do
authorise and request him to destroy any of the said
documents or any part thereof as he, in the absolute :
exercise of such discretion shall think ought to be
destroyed, and I authorise the said Montagu Corry to
keep and deposit all or any of the said documents as
he shall think ought not to be destroyed in such place
as he shall think fit during such period of time as he
shall require to have access to them for tbe purposes
of examination or publication. I give to the said
Montagu Corry full discretion with regard to the "
publication of all or any of such documents, leaving .
to him to decide as to the time and mode of publica- -
tion ; and as many of the said documents are con
nected with my official and public life, and contain
matters bearing on the character and conduct of con. -
temporary statesmen and on affairs which it may be
of importance to the public interests should not be
prematurely or indiscreetly disclosed, I give the above
discretion to the said Montagu Corry in the full
assurance that he will scrupulously respect every con
fidence reposed in me, and will cause or allow nothing
to be published calculated to do injury to the public
service or to inflict needless pain on the living or on
the, families of the dead.
"And I especially and expressly desire and direct
that no portion of my correspondence with Her
Majesty Queen Victoria shall be published or made
known until the said Montagu Corry shall have ascer
tained and shall have satisfied himself that no objec
tion is entertained to such use of ihe said correspond
ence on the part of Her Majesty herself during her
life, or after her death on the part of those who may,
in the belief of the said Montagu Corry, be likely
to be conversant with her wishes and opinions on the
subject. " And I hereby authorise the said Montagu Corry
to sell and dispose of the copyright of any of the said
documents in the case of their publication, or to make
such pecuniary arrangements as to the terms of their
publication as he may think fit; and if any less sum
than ,£500 shall, after payment of all expenses of
publication, be received by the said Montagu Corry
from the publication of any of such documents, I
hereby give and bequeath such, sum to the said
Montagu Corry for his own use,, but if any greater
sum than the sum of ^500, after payment of expenses
as aforesaid, shall be so received, I desire and direct
that the said Montagu Corry shall pay such surplus as
soon as the same shall have been actually received and
got in by him to the trustees or trustee of this my will,
and that the said trustees or trustee of this my will
shall apply the same upon the trusts and with and
subject to the powers and provisions applicable to
moneys arising from sales under the power of sale

LORD BEACONSFIELD.

*<.

hereinbefore contained and investments respecting the
same, but I expressly declare that this provision shall
not be construed to give to any per.son the right to in
terfere with the discretion of the said Montagu Corry
with regard to the time and mode of publication of
the said documents.
"And I hereby authorise the said Montagu Corry to
give gratuitous access, whether for historical, literary,
or other purposes, to any per-on or persons to whom
in his judgment such access should be given. And
with regard to the permanent disposal of the said
documents I direct and desire that the said Montagu
Corry will, when and so far as is consistent with the
due carrying out of the purposes of this my will as to
publication and otherwise, deposit the same at my
mansion-house of Hughenden Manor and allow the
same to go, devolve, and remain as heirlooms together
with my said mansion-house so far as the rules of law
and equity will permit, but so nevertheless that the
same shall not vest absolutely in any person hereby
made tenant in tail male unless such person shall
attain the age of twenty-one years, but on the death
of such tenant in tail male under the age of twenty-
one years the said documents shall go and devolve and
remain as if the same had been freeholds of inheritance
and had been devised in strict settlement accordingly.
" And I hereby declare that it shall be lawful for
the said Montagu Corry to seal up and keep sealed up
all or any of such documents as he shall think proper,
and that it shall be lawful at any time for the said
Montagu Corry or for any person bearing an order
signed by him to have access to. the said documents
and to make copies of the same or any part thereof,
and for the said Montagu Corry to remove to such
place as he shall think proper any of the said docu
ments for such length of time as he may desire for
the purposes of examination or publication, and further
that a list shall be made (subject to revision from time
to time) of the said documents n t destroyed and'
• shall be signed by the said Montagu Corry and by
every person for the time being entitled to the use and
occupation of my said mansion-house or during the
minority of any person who shall be so entitled as
aforesaid by the trustees or trustee of this my will.
Provided always that the said Montagu Corry shall
not at any time be responsible for any inadvertent loss
or damage which may happen to any of the said
documents but shall not be precluded from interfering
for the preservation and protection of the said docu
ments whenever he shall think fit.
"And I hereby declare that if and when the said
Montagu Corry shall die or become incapable to act
or be desirous of retiring from the execution of the
trusts herein conferred upon him it shall be lawful for
. the trustees or trustee of th's my will to appoint a
successor or successors to the said Montagu Corry in
the execution of the said trusts relating to the said
documents, and thereupon the execution of the said
trusts and all powers and rights hereby conferrred on ,
the said Montagu Corry in relation thereto shall
devolve on the said successor or successors so ap
pointed as aforesaid precisely as if he or they had
been named in this my will.
" Provided always that ali sums of money received
by the said Montagu Corry which he would be entitled
to keep and retain for his own use under the provisions
of this my will shall remain the absolute property of
the said Montagu Corry, his executors, administrators,
and assigns, and shall not pass to such successor or
successors as aforesaid, and such successor or suc
cessors shall pay to and account for to the trustees 01
trustee of this my wiil all suras of money received by
him or them on account of the publication of any of
the said documents after payment of all expenses
incurred in connexion with such publication, and the
trustees or trustee of this my will shall apply such
/

sums in the same manner as the money received by
them from tlie said Muntigu Corry ill respect of the
publication of any of the said documents is herein
before directed to be applied.
"And I hereby direct and desire that the trustees or
trustee of this my will shall collect or aid in collect
ing the said documents with all convenient speed after
my death and place the same at the disposal of the
said Montagu Corry, and I authorize them to pay all
the expense of such collection out of my personal
estate. .
" Provided always and I hereby declare that upon
every or any appointment of new trustees or a new
trustee of this my will the number of the said trustees
may be augmented or reduced, and (in addition to
the ordinary powers of indemnity and right to re
imbursement by law given to trustees) the trustees or
trustee of this my will shall be at liberty to accept
less than <_ marketable title upon the purchase or
taking in exchange of any hereditaments and shall not
be answerable for any loss thereby occasioned nor for
any default in title or value of hereditaments pur
chased or taken in exchange.
" I hereby appoint the said Sir Nathaniel Meyer
de Rothschild and the said Sir Philip Rose executors
of this my will.
" In witness whereof I the said Ear] of Beaconsfield
have to this my last will and testament contained in
this and the preceding sheets of paper set my hand
this sixteenth day of December, one thousand eight
hundred and seventy-eight. "(Signed) BEACONSFIELD.
" Signed by' the said Earl of Beaconsfield, the
testator, as and for his last will and testament in
the presence of us both present at the same time, who
at his request, in his presence and in tl-e presence
of each other, have hereunto subscribed our names as
witnesses. "(Signed) P. Frederick Rose, 6, Victoria-
street, Westminster, Solicitor.
"(Signed) John Brewer, 6, Victoria-street,
Westminster, Solicitor."'
'""pHOSE who closely watched the health of Lord
L Beaconsfield, during the last fifteen years par
ticularly, cannot fail to have noticed the struggle which
has been maintained by the mind against, and, to some
extent, at the expense of, the body. While Mr.
Disraeli sat in the House of Commons his life was an
almost continuous effort. His imperturbable bearing,
his habit of emotional self-restraint, his almost
uniformly placid style of delivery — artistically, and
always as the result of purpose, never involuntarily —
varied by lighter and brighter passages of elocution,
were the fruits of effort. The statuesque posture,
the motionless face, tbe abstracted or seemingly in.
different manner, which the superficial observer
mistook for indications of a constitutional lack of
sensibility, were, in truth, tokens of the intensity of
the emotional nature they disguised. Lord Beacons
field was a man of profoundly deep feeling and a.
highly sensitive temperament, but wilh an indomitable
will habituated to self-control, the customary ex
pressions of such feeling as he possessed were inter
dicted. For example, in place of movements of the
ordinary excito-motor-type, the noble lord's physical
habit was, in the later-middle period and towards the
end of his carter in the Commons, characterized by
slight and seemingly automatic, but really conscious,
acts ofthe slightest kind often repeated. It was very
curious and profoundly interesting to study these move
ments from the psychological standpoint. Under
ordinary circumstances Mr. Disraeli would sit for long
stretches of time during the violent or terribly irritating
attack of a political opponent, with nearly closed eyes,
as though asleep. When the onslaught waxed furious

i6

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

he would, as though with all-engrossing intent, fix
his gaze at the toes of his boots, moving them slowly,
so as to bring all points under observation. If the
taunts or reproaches hurled at him were of so grievous
a nature as to make any other man furious, he would
straighten himself and brush some particle of dust
from the front of his buttoned frock-coat or from the
sleeve of his left arm. Then he would examine his
nails, and, as a climax, when few statesmen so assailed
could avoid some token of emotional restlessness, he
would, perhaps, take out his single eyeglass, and,
fixing it firmly, look for an instant at the clock in the
front of the gallery opposite Mr. Speaker, dropping
the_ glass with one quick elevation of the eyebrow.
This last-mentioned trick being the only part of a
series of actions which, though familiar to his observer,
was never a mere matter of habit. Probably, and it
is worth noting in reference to the recent incident of
his approaching the Ministerial bench in the House
of Lords after the division at the close of the Can
dahar debate, the noble lord was less a man of habit
in thetrue sense of that term — i.e., as implying the
relegation of large classes of actions to the sub-con
sciousness to be performed automatically— than the
average brain-worker. The fact is interesting as
throwing light on the type of his physico-mental
constitution, and as illustrating the character of the
strain which the life and enterprise of the deceased

statesman imposed on his mind-power. ... I' was,
practically, too late when Mr. Disraeli became Karl
of Beaconsfield to prolong a valued life by the means
adopted. Speaking now freely, we believe the
deceased statesman would have lived longer if he had
not thus late retired to a scene of comparative quiet,
upon which he ought, in the interests of his health, to
have entered when the Queen urged him to do so
some years before. As it was, Lord Beaconsfield
was deprived of his accustomed mental stimulus at
the precise moment when he most needed it ; and
although his immediate personal feelings were those
of relief, the physical ease was purchased at too
great a price. From the outset of his last illness the
case was, in our judgment, hopeless, unless the
higher cerebral centres of the nervous system came
to the relief of the lower. The bronchitis was not
a 'complication,' but an integral part of the gouty
affection. In the end death occurred, as it must
have been expected to occur, after a temporary revival
of the failing powers of vitality such as is usually
manifested in cases of the class — in the closing days
of a life lived, mainly, by mental energy or mind
force. The apparent improvement which took place
towards the end of last week, and which was attri
buted to ' the weather,' and seems to have excitedfalse
hopes, should scarcely have proved misleading." —
The Lancet.

3-txsctipttang (continued from page 9).

In 1862, the Viscountess Beaconsfield (then Mrs.
Disraeli), caused an obelisk to be erected, to perpetuate
the literary fame of her father-in-law, on the brow of
an eminence adjacent to that upon which Hughenden
Manor is situated. The following is the inscription : —
In Memory of
ISAAC DISRAELI,
of Bradenham, in this County;
Esquire and Honorary D.C.L. of
the University of Oxford,
Who, by his happy Genius, diffused among the
multitude that elevating taste for literature,
which, before his time, was the privilege
only of the learned,
This Monument was raised in
Affectionate Remembrance by
MARY ANNE, wife of his eldest son,
The Right Honorable
BENJAMIN DISRAELI,
Lord of this Manor,
Chancellor of the Exchequer,
1852, — 8 and 9,
and now for the sixth time
Knight of this Shire.
June, 1862.

S. _3oto.pf), ISratoertljam.
MORTUARY chapel.

rJPa.--_ii.gton CTtmetetg.
In Memory of
• SARAH,
ONLY DAUGHTER OF
ISAAC DISRAELI, ESQre.,
AUTHOR OF. "CURIOSITIES OF LITERATURE,"
Born 29TH December, 1802, dieu 19TH December, 1859.

Sflcrra
TO THE MEMORIES OF
ISAAC DISRAELI ESQUIRE, D.C.L.,
of Bradenham House,
. AUTHOR OF "CURIOSITIES OF LITERATURE,"
Who died January iqlh, 1S48, in his %znd year.
And of
HIS WIFE MARIA,
To Whom He was United for Forty-five Years.
She died April 21st, 1847,
In the 72nd Year of her Age.

Their Remains lie Side by Side
in the Vault of the Adjoining Chancel.

5. iatcfcarl anto .311 arigels, J-fagTjentotn.
In Memory of
JAMES DISRAELI, ESQre.,
One of Her
Majesty's Commissioners
of Inland Revenue,
and third son of
ISAAC DISRAELI, ESQre.,
of Bradenham, in this County,
AUTHOR OF THE
CURIOSITIES OF LITERATURE,
OB. Dectmber 23, 1868. ¦

RACHEL, LADY KINGSTON.

17

RACHEL, LADY KINGSTON.
There is no stranger tale revealed by genealogical
research than that ofthis mysterious lady, who was left
a widow at eighteen, and died at the early age of
twenty-seven* Though a Duke's daughter-in-law and
a Duke's mother, and one of the greatest heiresses of
her day — so strange a cloud overhung her parentage,
that an elaborate genealogical imposture (by which
an absolutely fictitious mother was assigned her) was
deliberately concocted, in order to account for her
inheriting the great estates which descended from her
to the noble family by whom she is now represented.
If we turn to Brydges' edition of " Collins'
Peerage" (1812), vol. v. p. 28, we find it stated that
Evelyn, fourth Earl and first Duke of Kingston, K.G.
(created Marquis of Dorchester, 29th December, 1706,
and Duke of Kingston, 20th July, 1 715), had, with

five daughters (including the celebrated Lady Mary
Wortley-Montagu), an only son, " WiUiam, Viscount
Newark, born 1692, ob. v. p., ast. 21, ist July, 1713,
leaving issue by Rachel, daughter of Thomas Bainton,
Esq., a daughter, Lady Frances, and an only son,
William, who, on his grandfather's death, 5th March,
1716, succeeded as second Duke of Kingston."
Burke's version is slightly different ("Extinct
Peerage," 1866, p. 418) — " William, Marquess of
Dorchester, who died in the Duke's lifetime, 1713,
leaving by Rachel, his -wife, a son and a dau."
In the first volume of the "Wilts Arch. Soc.'s
Magazine," 1854, we find the following tabular
pedigree set forth in an article on the Halls of
Bradford, by the Rev. J. F. Jackson, the Wiltshire
archaeologist.

Sir Thomas Thynne,=
Knt., of Longleat,
d. 1670.

Sir Thomas Hall, of=Katherine, dau. of Sir Edward
Bradford, Knt., d. I Seymour.of Berry Pomeroy,
1663, set. 62. I Knt.

Stuart Thynne,:

Sir Edward Bayn
ton, K.B.,ofBrom-
ham, d.1679.

Elizabeth=John Hall, of Bradford, Bridget=WilIiam Coward,

Thynne,

Esq., High
1670, d. 1711.

Sheriff, HaU.

Thomas Baynton,=Elizabeth Hall,
of Chalfield, dau. and heir,
2nd son. (Chalf. p. reg.).

Recorder of
Wells, d. 1700.

Col. William Coward,  , dau.,=.,.. Pearce.
M.P. for WeUs.

Henry Baynton, only son, d.
Chalfield, 14 Dec, bur. Brom-
ham, 19 Dec, 1696 (Chalf.
p. reg.).

Rachel, only
& heir, bapt.
Chalf. 14 Ap..
(reg.), d, 1722.

William Pearce.
dau.=Hon. William Pierrepoint, only
Gt. son and heir of Evelyn, ist
1695 Duke of Kingston. He d.
aged 21, v.p. ist July, 1713.

But in vol. v. of the same Society's magazine
(1858) a new light is thrown on the subject by an
article on "Old Bradford Families," by the Rev.
W. H.Jones. At p. 46 he indeed states, "through
the marriage of Elizabeth Hall (the heiress of John
Hall) with Thomas Baynton, of Chalfield, and the
subsequent marriage of their daughter, Rachel
Baynton, with the son of Evelyn, Duke of Kingston,
the property came into the possession of that ducal
family." But at pp. 364-5 he says : " He (Mr.
Hall) was the last of bis family, and died in 1 71 1.
According to some authorities, he left one daughter,
Elizabeth, who became the wife of Thomas Baynton,
Esq., of Chalfield. The issue of that marriage,
Rachel, was the inheritor of John Hall's large estates.
A very careful search amongst all documents to
which access could be gained, likely to throw any light
on the matter, has discovered no entry that accounts for
a daughter Elizabeth born to yohn Hall, or for the
marriage of Thomas Baynton with such daughter."
Walker, in his ' History of Great Chalfield,' gives,
a somewhat different account, and represents ' Rachel
Baynton' as having a yet stronger claim to be the
inheritor of the ' Hall' estates.
The following extract is taken from a MS. in the
possession (in 1837) of William Waldron, of Lyppiat,
and which was itself extracted from an old vellum MS.
(by a Mr. Dickenson), which was at Monks in the
year 1744, and was supposed in 1837 to be in the pos
session of a family of the name of Mordaunt : —
"Little Chaldfield, or West Chaldfield, lately sold
to Mr. Baynton, who left it to his youngest son Thos.
Baynton; and Mr. Thos. Baynton's wife had a
daughter by Mr. Hall ; he gave her all his estate; and
this lady marry'd y" Marquis of Dorset, was mother to
the last Duke of Kingston," &c. &c.
A special Act of Parliament was obtained for the
purpose of settling John Hall's estates on Wm.
Pierrepoint and Rachel Baynton, on their marriage.
In the Bill (see page 19) John Hall is styled "her
uncle and next friend," and this in the lifetime of
Collect.

Thomas Bayntun, her putative father. A petition
- was presented against it by WiUiam Coward, as the
legitimate next of kin, but after much opposition the
Bill passed (in a very mutUated state), (receiving the
Royal assent 16th of May, 171 1, "H. of Commons
Journals," vol. xvi. p. 668,) with several amendments
and excisions, notably the exclusion of the alleged con
nection recited in the Bill ; and with the addition ofthe
following suspicious " rider" :—" Provided also that
nothing in this act contained shall be deemed, taken,
or construed to be any allowance of, or any wayes to
approve consent unto or confirm any articles or supposed
articles, or agreement made, or pretended to be made,
or agreed upon by or between the said Lord Marquis
of Dorchester, and the said John HaU, deceased."
After thus discrediting any descent of our Rachel
from the Hall family— and inserting in his tabular
pedigree Thomas Bayn _on=2i/jzflitfi___-Mr. Jones con
cludes, inconsequently enough, " Earl Manvers, who is
now the representative of the Halls of Bradford" (!).
We are enabled at this point to supplement the
foregoing evidence by the important statement con
tained in Mrs. Bayntun's Will, dated 1 705. She had
by that date (probably by indenture, of 7 June,
1 701) separated from her husband, taking with her
Rachel, her younger daughter, then ten years old,
while her husband . had retained the elder (and
undoubted) daughter, Elizabeth. Mrs. Bayntun adds
these significant words, after bequeathing her property
to Rachel :— "I doe freely forgive my husband and
my daughter Elizabeth Bayntun all tlie injuries, vn-
kindnesses, and reflections done to me." It is to be
observed that John Hall's will, making Rachel
"Bayntun" his heir, is dated three years sub
sequently, so that the belief in her illegitimate
parentage was pre-existent, and not a mere inference
from his Will.
Thomas Bayntun though referring to " my daughter
the Right Hon. the Lady Kingston" in his will dated
4 March, 1718/19, leaves all his property away
from her. C

i8

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

We now come to the Pedigree, as given in Mar
shall's "Genealogist" for 1878 (vol ii. p. 91) :—

Thomas Baynton, of Little:
Chalfield, co. Wilts, 2nd son
of Sir Edward Baynton, Knt.,
of Bromham, by Stuarta, dau.
of Sir Thos. Thynne, of Long-
leat, buried after 1664.

Henry Bayn
ton, died s.p.,
named in will
of his grand
father, Sir
George Wil-
1 o u g h b y,
dated 1 Dec,
I693-

:Elizabeth, 2nd dau.
of Sir George Wil
loughby, Knt., m.
28 June, 1687, at
Bishopston.

R a c h e l=William Pierre-
Baynton, point, Marquis
of Dorchester,.
son of Evelyn,
ist Duke of
Kingston, b. 21
Oct., 1692, d, x
July, 1713.

d.l8May, 1722,

Elizabeth Baynton,named in
will of her
grandfather, Sir G.
Willough by, dated
1 Dec,
-••"-• - 1693.
Of this production it may be observed: —
(1.) That if Elizabeth WiUoughby was married in
1687, it is perhaps superfluous to inform us that her
husband, Thomas Baynton, was buried after 1664.
It would have been much more to the purpose to
have informed us that his will is dated 4 March,
1718/19, and proved (C.P.C.) 10 Aug., 1710.
(2.) For "Sir Edward Baynton, Knt.,'f read Sir
Edward Baynton, K.B., he having been created
Knight ofthe Bath at the Restoration.
(3.) For "dau. of Sir Thomas Thynne," read
"dau. and co-heir (or eventual co-heir) of Sir Thomas
Thynne, Knt."
(4.) .For " Henry Baynton died s. p." read "died
young, 14 Dec., I096," this date having been pub
lished, as above, twenty years before, though unknown
to the pages ofthe " Genealogist".
(5.) Of Elizabeth Baynton, we at any rate know
that she was the elder dau., and not as in this Pedi
gree, the younger, for she was living in 1693, whereas
Rachel (this (late also is ignored) was not .baptized
till 1695.
(6.) Of Rachel, not only is the baptismal date
omitted, but no reference whatever is made to her
supposed connection, legitimate or illegitimate, with
BAYNTUN, OF LITTLE CHALFIELD.
Sir Edward Bayntun, 1 Sir Thomas Thynne,
of Bromham, Knt, of Longleat, Knt.,
d. 1657. d. 1670.

John Hall, in virtue of which she became his heir (to
the exclusion of his sister's descendants). Had her will
been consulted, the "Indenture, dated 7 June,i70l,
might have aroused suspicion.
(7.) Of her husband it can only be said that no
such person as William, "Marquis of Dorchester,
ever existed, although the title is probably inserted on
the authority ofthe pedigree by Ulster King-of-Arms
in his Extinct Peerage already referred to. UI tne
various titles attributed to him, this one at any rate can
not possibly have been bome by him, as it was his
father's own title' till two years after the serfs death,
when (and not before) he was created Duke of
Kingston. . . .
We should obviously expect the son to have borne
the courtesy title of "Viscount Newark" up to 1706,
and of " Earl of Kingston" from 1 706 to his death in
1713, and this appears to have been the case, for he
is described in the Act passed 171 1 as "commonly
called Lord Kingston." .
So much for this latest attempt tb solve the parentage
of Lady Kingston.
If we now sum up the whole evidence, we find,
on the one hand, that all legitimate kinship between
her and the Hall family is effectuaUy disproved — the
existence of Elizabeth Hall and her marriage to
Thomas Bayntun being equally fictitious. As a
corollary of this, it follows that as there was no
issue ofthe marriage of Elizabeth Thynne with John
HaU, her elder sister Stuarta- became eventually sole
heir-general of the great family of Thynne of Long
leat, a distinction now enjoyed by her representatives.
On the other hand, we find that, though registered as
"the daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Baynton"
(on the principle " Is pater est quem nuptise demon-
stravit"), this Rachel's parentage lay under such grave
suspicion that there was the greatest difficulty in
passing, even in a mutilated form, the Act settling
upon her the Hall estates, to which she succeeded so
inexplicably, to the exclusion of the rightful heirs.
There is, therefore, presumptive evidence of the
existence of an illicit intercourse, - and it is to this
connexion, and not to a legitimate descent, that the
noble family now in possession stands indebted for
the large and lucrative estates which it inherited from
the putative father of Rachel, Lady Kingston.

HALL, OF BRADFORD.
Sir Thomas Hall,=Katherine, dau. of Sir
Edward . Seymour, of
Berry- Pomeroy, Knt.

of Bradford, Knt.,
d. 1663, aged 62.

Sir Edward Bayn-=Stuarta Thynne,

tun, of Bromham,
K.B., bapt. 2 Dec,
1618, d. 26 July,
1679.

elder dau. and
co-h. to her
brother, Tho
mas Thynne,
Esq. "Tom of
10,000."

Elizabeth Thynne,:
younger dau. and
co.-h. to her bro
ther, Thomas
Thynne, Esq. she
died s.p.

Henry Bayntun,
of Bromham,
Esq.

Thomas Bayntun, of:
Little Chalfield,
Esq., mar. Bishops-
ton, 28 June, 1687.
jr. d. 4 March,
i7i8/i9p.(C.P.C.) 10 Aug., 1719.

Henry Bayntun, d. Chal
field, 14 Dec.,bd. Brom
ham, 19 Dec, 1696 (Ch.
par. reg.), mentioned in
Sir G. Willoughby's will,
dated 1 Dec, 1693.

Elizabeth, 2nd dau.~
of Sir George
WUloughby.Knt.,
of London, w.d.
12 May, 1705 p.
(C.P.C.) 3 Oct.,
1712.

=John HaU, of-
Bradford and
Chalfield.Esq., High Sheriff,
1670, w. d. 10
Sept., 1708, p.
(C.P.C.) S
Sept, 1711.
ob. s. p. leg.
=John Hall (as-
above).

B r i d-=VVilliam Coward,

get
HaU.

Recorder of
Wells, d. 1700.

Col. William Coward,
M.P; for Wells, 1705.
The petitioner against
the Act ot 1711.

Elizabeth 'Bayn- Rachel 'Bayntun,'=William,. 'Lord Kingston,'
tun, mentioned in heiress io yohn only son of Evelyn, Mar-
will of Sir George Hall, bapt Gt. quis of Dorchester. He
Willoughby, I Chalfield, 14 ob. v. p. set 20, 1 July,
Dec, 1693, lvg. April, 1695, d. 18 »7'3- >
1705. May, 1722.

RACHEL, LADY KINGSTON.

19

EXTRACTS FROM WILLS AND ACT OF PARLIAMENT REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT.

P. C. C. 181 Barnes.] Elizabeth Bayntun, wife of
Thomas Bayntun, late of Little Chaldfield, co. Wilts,
Esq., dated 12 May,l7o5 :— To my daughter Rachell
Bayntun that legacy of £2000, &c, and I do in pursu
ance of power in me vested by Indenture dated 7 Tune,
1701, between my said husband and myself of one
part, John Backwell, of-Tyringham, co. Bucks, Esq.,
of second part, and said Daniel Germain of third part,
appoint said John Backwell to pay said legacies to my
said daughter and said Daniel Germain. To be
buried in linen in the parish church of Bishopstone,
Wilts, near my deceased father Sir George WiUoughby
. — I doe freely forgive my husband and daughter
Elizabeth Bayntun all the injuries, unkindnesses and
reflections done to me, which were unjust and un
deserved from either of them — all residue to said
Daniel Germain and appoint him executor.
Proved 3 Oct., 1712, by executor, .........
P. C. C. 187 Young.] .John Hall-, b. Bradford, co.
Wilts, Esq., dated 10 Sept., 1708— To the son and
daughter of my sister Coward deceased each .£100,
to my servant James Fellowes ^50 and all my wearing
apparel," to Denzill Onslow, of Pirfort, co. Surrey,
Esq., Edward Lisle, of Crook Easton, ca Southamp
ton, Esq., Francis Goddard, of Standen, co. Wilts,
Esq., and Robert Eyre, of Lincoln's Inn, co. Middle
sex, Esq., and their heirs aU my manors, messuages,.
lands, and tenements, in trust that they shall until the
death or marriage of Rachell Bayntun, daughter of
Thomas Bayntun, 'of' Little Chaldfield, co. Wilts,
Esq., and Elizabeth- his —now wife,- dispose of the
rents and profits of said premises as I shaU hereafter
- direct, and from and after the marriage of said RacheU
then in trust for her. for her life, on condition that her
husband (if not a peer or eldest son of a peer) shaU
assume and use only the surname of. Hall and the
arms of HaU as nowjused and borne by me, and after
the death of said Rachell then to her sons and their
heirs male in succession, and in default then to her
daughters, and in default then to use of Edward
Seymour son of Sir Edward Seymour, Bart, and his
heirs male, and in default then to William Pearce
grandson of my late sister Coward and his heirs male,
&c, and in default then to Henry Seymour son of my
uncle Sir Joseph Seymour and his heirs for ever.

To be buried at Bradford near my dear wife. I
appoint said trustees executors, &c, Sec.
Codicil 7Feb.i 1710/11, merely places said William
Pearce before instead of after Edward Seymour in the
entail. — Proved 5 Sept., 1711, by the trustees and
executors. -¦»-¦
P.C.C. 140 Browning.] Thomas Bayntun, Esq.,dated
4 March, 1718/19 — My funeral to be performed in as
private a manner as may be and the charges thereof
not to exceed £S°- To Thomas Mellsham £ 10. All
residue of personalty whatsoever to my friend Isaac
Coronell whom I make sole executor and I dp recom
mend him to my daughter the Right Hon. the Lady
Kingston requesting her to show him some counte
nance. — Proved 10 Aug., 1719, by executor.
Extract from Bill for settling- John Hall Estates,
9 Anne, No. 6.
"And whereas a marriage is intended to be shortly
had and solemnized between the said Wm Pierrepoint
Esq™ commonly called Lord Kingston and Rachel
Bayntun daughter of Thos. Bayntun of Little Chal
field in the co. of Wilts Esq™ and it is agreed [by and
between the said Marquis of Dorchester on the behalf
of himself & of his sd son, and John Hall of Bradford in
the co. of Wilts Esq™ on the behalf of the sd Rachel
Bayntun, that &c &c. .... May it therefore please
your most exdl. MajT at the bumble petition of the s*
Marquis of Dorchester, and thes* Wm Pierrepoint com-.
monly caUed Lord Kingston, by the s* Marquis of Dor
chester, his Father & Guardian, the said John Hall
and Rachel Bayntun an infant, under the age of 21
years, by the said John HaU, her Uncle and next
friend, and of Gervase, Lard Pierrepoint, that
&c. &c"] *~
6 January, 1710, this Bill
was read over to John
Hall esq., and signed T/,„„ „„ , *
and consented to by him J?™. UA11- \
in the presence of, &c,
&c
N.B. — The words within brackets were not allowed
to form part of the act as passed. J. H_*R.

CI

©De Hescent of Jft.=(5feneval ©Jjfogn^erartJSumafig, of 3$agsratie 3B*K»
co. fteic, from tfcc Bloott -Uogal of iSnglantJ.

William the Con-
querer, King of
England, crowned
Christmas Day,
1066, died 9 Sept.,
1087.

Maud, dau. of Baldwin
V., Earl of Flanders,
desc. from Alfred the
Great & Charlemagne,
d. 2 Nov. 1083.

Henry I., surnamed = Maud, dau. of Mal-

Beauclerc,crowned 6 Aug., 1 100, d. 1
Dec, 1135.

colm III. Caenmor,
King of Scots," m.
noo, d. 1 May, 1118.

A, contimudfrovt ielvM,
Edward Brooke, Lord = Ehzabeth, dau

Cobham, sumd. 1445/631
d. 9 May, 4 E. IV.,
1464.

of James Lord]
Audley.

John Brooke, Lord = Margaret^ (ist viik),
Cobham, sumd. to
Parlt. 1472 .01511,
aged 18, 1464, d
9 March, 1511/12.

dau. of Edward Nevill,
Lord Abergavenny,
burd. at Cobham, 30
Sept., 1500.

Maud, died 10 Sept., 1 167, = Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count
m. ist to Emperor Hen. IV. ! of Anjou (s. and h. of Fulke,
of Germany, who d.s.p. 22 I King of Jerusalem andCount
May, 1125. I of Anjou);hed.7Sept.,H5o.
Henry II., crowned 19 Dec, = Eleanor,DucliessofGuier_ne,
1154, d. 7 July, 1 189. I eldest d. and h. of WilUam,
 | Duke of Aquitaine.
John, b. 24 Dec, 1 167, =Isabel (2nd wife), d. and h.
crowned 27 May, 1199, d. | of Aymer, Count of Angou-
19 Oct., 1216. leme ; she d. 1 246.

HenryIII.,crowned280ct.,=Eleanor, 2nd dau. and co-h

1216, b. 1 Oct., 1206, d. 16
Nov., 1272.

of RaymondBerenger, Count
ofProvence,m.l4jan.i236;
she d 25 June, 1291.
EdwardI.,crownedi9Aug., = Eleanor (tst wife), dau. of
1274, b. 17 June, 1239, d. 7 j Ferdinand IIL.King of Cas-
July, 1307. tile, d. 27 Nov., 1290.

Elizabeth (yst. dau), d. 5 = Humphrey de Bohun (2nd
May, 1316, aged 31. I husband), Earl of Hereford
| and Essex, fell at the battle
I of Boronghbridge, Yorks.,
16 March, 1321.

Margaret de Bohun, m. 31
Aug. 1325, d. 16 Dec.
1391.

Hugh Courtenay, Earl of
Devon, K.G., b. 12 July,
1303, d. 2 May, 1377.

Margaret Courtenay

Joan de Cobham, dau.
sole heir, o. v. p.

and-

= John de Cobham, 3rd lord,
sumd to Parlt. 1355 to 1407,
d. 10 Jany., 1407/8.
.- Sir John de la Pole, Knt., d.
3 March, 1379/80.

Joan de la Pole, only dau. = Sir Reginald Braybrooke,
and heir, d. 13 Jan., 1433/4. I Knt.(2ndh.),d._oSept._405.
Joan Braybrooke, dau. and = Sir Thomas Brooke, of
eventual sole heir of the Holditch, Devon, Knt.,
barony of Cobham, m. II
H. VIIL, 1410.

Holditch, Devon,
w.d. 1438.
A, continued above.

Thomas Brooke, Lord Cob-= Dorothy (ist wHe), dau. of
ham, had 3 wives, sumd. I Sir Henry Heydon. Knt
1514/22, d. 19 July, 1529.
George Brooke, Lord Cob- = Ann, eldest sister and co-h.

ham, K.G., sumd 1529 to
1558, lord depy. of Calais,
d. 29 Sept., 1558, aged 61.

of John, Lord Braye, d. I
Nov., 1558.

Sir Henry Brooke, Knt = Anne, dau. of^ir Henry
called Cobham, (5th surviv
ing son), b. 5 Feb., 1537/8,
d. 13 Jany., 1591/2,

Sutton, of Aram, Notts.,
widow of Walter Haddon,
w. d. 8. proved 10 Jany.,
1611/12.

Sir Walter Calverley, of = Philippa Brooke, =Sir Thomas Burton,

Calverfey, Yorks, exe- sister and co. h. of
cuted at York for killing Sir John Brooke,
two of his children, 23 created Lord Coo-
April, 1605. ham, 3 Jan, 1644/5.

KnL and Bart, oi
Stockerston.co.Leic,
cr. a Bait. 22 July,
1622.

Elizabeth Burton, 2nd dau. = Hugh Bumaby, patron and

and co-h., bd. 29 July, 1699,
M.I.

rector of Asfoidby,
Leic, d. 24 Jan., 1699, aged
8o, M.I.

Andrew Burnaby, patron = Anne, widow of Maurice
and rector, of Asfordby, d. j Camm, bd. 21 May, 1766,
I Jany., 1720, aged 62, M.I. I aged 68, M.I.

Andrew Burnaby, ofBramp- = Hannah, dau. of George

ton, rector of" Asfordby,
&c, b. 29 June, 1702, d.
27 Dec, 1776, M.I.

Beaumont, of Chapelthorpe,
Yorks,d 22july,l757,M.I.

Andrew Burnaby, D.D.,=Anna, dau. and heir of
of Baggrave Hall, co. Leic, John Edwyn, of Baggrave

and of Brampton, Hunts,
archdcn. of Leic. and vicar
of Greenwich, eldest son, d.
9 March, 1812, aged 80.

HaU, co. Leic, m. 26 Feb.,
1770, d. 16 March, 1812.

Edwyn Andrew Burnaby,=Mary, dau. and h. of Rev.
"' Wm. Browne, rector and
patron of Burrougb, m. 30
Dec, 1794, d. 11 Jan. 1588.

of Baggrave, gent of privy
chamber, eldest son,b. 9 May,
1771, d. 1 Oct., 1825.

Edwyn Burnaby, of Baggrave,=Anne Caroline, dau. of

capt 3rd dragoon guards, a gent.
of the privy chamber, eldest son,
b. 29 Sept., 1799, d. 18 July, 1867.

Thomas SaUsbury, Esq.,
of Marshfield Ho., co.
York,m. 28 Augt. 1829,
d. 3 May, 1881.

Gustavus Andrew Burnaby,=Harriet, dau. of Henry Vil-
of Somerby Hall, co. Leic, lebois, Esq., of Marham,

3rd son, b. 19 May, 1802,
d. 15 July, 1872.

Norfolk, m. 19 Nov., 1833.

Edwyn Sherard Bur-:
naby, of Baggrave
HaU, co. LeicJ.P.;
M.-General in the
Army; M.P. North
Leicestershire since
1880.

:Louisa Julia
Mary, dau.of Sir
Wolstan Dixie,
Bart, m. 29
Aug., 1864, d.
28 Jan., 1 88 1.

4 daus.

Frederick Gusta-.-
vus, of Somerby
Hall, co. Leic,
J.P.,authorof"A Ride to Khiva,"
&c, b. 3 March,
1842.

:Elizabeth Alice Evelyn Henry Vilr ' 2 daus.
Frances, only child lebois, patron andi
and sole heir of rectorof Burroughs
Sir St. ' Vincent on-the-Hill, co.!
Bentinck Hawkins Leic, b. 7 Jany., .
Whitshed, Bt, m. 1848, married J
27 June, 1879. twice, s.p.

Algernon Edwyn, b.
9 April, 1867.

Hilda.

Harry Arthur Gustavus St. Vincent
Fred, b. 10 May, 1880.

acjurnafcg, of asassiabe $aU, co, Heic., fcc.

BURNABY, Edwyn Sherard, Esq.,
of Baggrave Hall, co. Leic, J.P.,
Major-Genl. in the Army, Lieut-CoL com
manding Grenadier Guards 1877-80, comd.
Metropolitan Volunteers, 1877-80, served
the Eastern Campaign, 1854-55, at battle
of Inkerman and siege of Sebastopol,
medal with two clasps, 5th class Medjidie
and Turkish medal, employed on Special
Foreign Office Service in Syria, 1861 ; Hon.
Col. Leicestershire R. V. since 1878, comd.
Italian Legion, 1855-56; M.P. N.Leicester
shire since 1880; 19TH in descent from
Edward I. (see Chart pedigree) : b. 22 May,
1830, m. 29 Aug., 1864, Louisa Julia Mary,
2nd dau. of Sir Willoughby Wolstan Dixie,
Bart, of Bosworth Park, co. Leicester, she
died 28 Jan., 1881, leaving a son and
daughter.(I) Algernon Edwyn, b. 9 April, 1867.
(2) Hilda.
Motto—" Pro reee."
Shat — Baggrave Hall, Leicester.
Town House— 51, Eaton Square, S. W.
Hiiuage.
HUGH BURNEBY,* fellow S. John
College, Cambridge, patron (by pur
chase 1669) and rector of Asfordby, co. Leic. j
rector of Stainby, Hunts ; died 24 Jan., 1699,
aged 80, M.I., Asfordby. Will dated 10
Jan., 1699 (to be buried in the chancel of
Asfordby Church), proved 17 June, 1700.
He m. Elizabeth, fourth dau. of Sir Thomas
Burton, of Stockerston, co. Leic, Bart.
(descended from Edward I., see Chart pedi
gree opposite) ; she buried with her husband
29 July, 1699, M.I., Asfordby. Had 6 sons
and 2 daus.
(1) Hugh, 1699, of Asfordby, bd. there 5 Aug., 1742,
aged 85, M.I., having had a daughter.
(2) Andrew, rector of Asfordby, and patron by devise
from his father, 1699, resided at Oakenden, Essex,
in his father's lifetime, d. 1 Jan., 1 720, aged 62, M.I.,
Asfordby. He m. Anne, widow of Maurice Camm,
she bd. with her husband, 21 May, 1766, aged 68,
M.L, and had a son and dau.
(1) ANDREW, of whom presently.
(2) Elizabeth, d. unm. 1 71 7.
* Hugo Burnebye Northamptoniensis filius Robert! Burnebye
defuncti de Gretton in comitat. p'dict., g. nerosi Natus ibidem
Literis Grammatids institutus in schola publica infra Oakham,
comitai. Rutland, sub M'ro Stakkers p' biennium Annos natus
quuidiicim et q'd excurrit, admissus est Subsizator pro M'ro Col-
legiisj-b M'ro Topping fidejussore ejus Feb. vicessimo, 1638."
Ta true extract from the. Register of Admissions of St. John's
College, Cambridge, made by me, W. H. Bateson, Master,
February 28th, 1881 (died 2J March following).

(3) Benjamin, 1699, rector of Whitwell, Rutland, d.
24 May, 1 716, aged 53, M.L, S. Mary, Brampton,
Hunts. Arms — A lion rampant, impaling a chevron
between three owls.
(4) Henry, 1699, bd. at Brampton.
(5) Cornelius, 1 699, bd. at Brampton.
(o) Robert, of Brampton, Hunts, 1699, died s.p.
(7) Sarah, d. y.
(8) Elizabeth, 1699, d. un.
ANDREW BURNABY, of Brampton
Manor House, preby. bf Lincoln,
vicar of St Margaret's, Leicester, and rector of
Asfordby ; b. 29 June, 1702, d. 27 Dec., 1776,
aged 74, M.L, Asfordby. He m. Hannah,
3rd dau. of George Beaumont, Esq., of Chapel-
thorpe, Yorks ; she died 22 July, 1757, M.L,
Asfordby, and had 3 sons and 5 daus.
(1) ANDREW, of whom presently.
(2) Robert, LL.B., preby. of Lincoln, &c, (see
page 23).
(3) Thomas Beaumont,M.A. St. John's Coll.,Camb.,
1769; rector of Ashby Folville 1776, and of Asfordby
1777 ; lord of the manor and patron of Asfordby ; d.
IS June, 1823, aged 83, M.L, Asfordby. He m. 31
Oct., 1780, Catharine Clark, dau. of William Abney,
of Measham, co. Derby ; she d. 26 April, 1825, M.L,
Asfordby, having had 4 sons and 3 daus.
(1) William Abney, b. 6 Jan., 1782, d. un.
(2) Thomas Beaumont, d.s.p. Jan., 1785.
(3) Andrew, M.A. Jesus Coll., Camb., 1817, rector
(and patron) of Asfordby, 1823-56; d.s.p. 29 Oct.,
1856, aged 71.
(4) Robert Abney, d.s.p. 6 Feb., 1803.
(5) Katherine Clarke, d.un. 23 Jan., 1869, aged 80.
(6) Mary Wootton, d. y. 6 Aug., 1790.
(7) Mary Wootton, d. 29 Jan., 1869, aged 77, having
m. 12 Aug., 1824, to Rev. Henry Lockynge, and
had a dau. — Henri-et-Marie, d. y. 22 Feb., 1826,
M.L, Asfordby.
(4) Gertrude, d. y.
(5) Elizabeth, d. 1796 ; having m. to Rev. John
Clayton, and had 6 children. ~
(6) Anna Maria, m. to Richard Walters,
Esq., of Hands worth, co. Staff.
(7) Hannah, d. un. 24 April, 1824, aged 83, M.I.,
Asfordby. (8) Mary Camm, d. 16 Dec, 1820, aged 77, M.L,
Asfordby ; she m. to Rev. John Cole Gallo
way, vicar of Hinckley, co. Leic, and rector of Stoke
Golding, co. Line, and had 9 children.
ANDREW BURNABY, of Baggrave
Hall, co. Leic, j.u., Ind of Bramp
ton, Hunts, D.D., M.A. Queen's ColL, 1757,
S.T.P. 1776, archdeacon of Leicester, 178&-
1812, vicar of Greenwich, 1769-1812,
chaplain at Leghorn, d. 9 March, 1812, aged
80, having m. 26 Feb., 1770, Anna, dau. and
heir of John Edwyn, of Baggrave Hall, co.
Leic. ; she d. 16 March, 18 12, and had 4
sons and a dau.

©fie Haftent of €3jomag dPofoite &n&rtfo 3$ttrnafyjt of Brampton
iffianor, $imtg, from t|)c 33loofc &ogal of IHnglairt.

William the Con-
querer, King of
England, crowned
Christmas Day,
1066, died 9 Sept.,
1087.

Maud, dau. of Baldwin
V., Earl of Flanders,
desc from Alfred the
Great & Charlemagne, ¦
d. 2 Nov. 1083.

HenryI.,surnamed=Maud, dau. of Mai-.

Beauclerc, crowned
6 Aug., 1 100, d. 1
Dec, 1135.

r

colm III. Caenmor, '
King of Scots, m.
1100, d. 1 May, 1118.

Maud, died 10 Sept., 1 167,
m. ist to Emperor Hen. IV.
of Germany, who d.s.p. 22
May, 1 125.

Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count
of Anjou (s. andh. of Fulke,
King of Jerusalem and Count
of Anjou); hed. 7 Sept., 1 150.

A, coniimudfrom below.
Edward Brooke, Lord = Elizabeth, dau.
<_ •< 1 _...__ /_C-_ _-vf TimBe T rtrrl

Cobham, sumd. i445/°3>
d. 9 May, 4 E. IV.,
1464.

of James Lordi
Audley.

\

JohnBrooke, Lord=Margare_ (ist wife),

Cobham, sumd. to
Park 1472 to 1511,
aged 18, 1464. °-
9 March, 1511/12.

dau. of Edward Nevill,
Lord Abergavenny,
burd. at Cobham, 30
Sept., i5«>-_

Henry IL, crowned 19 Dec, = Eleanor,DuchessofGuienne,
1154, d. 7 July, 1 189. I eldest d. and h. of William,
 | Duke of Aquitaine.
John, b. 24 Dec, n67,=Isabel (2nd wife), d. andh.
browned 27 May, 1 199, d. j of Aymer, Count of Angou-
_9 Oct., 1216. I l&ne; shed. 1246.., ; ., .

Henry IIL.crowned 28 Oct., = Eleanor,. 2nd dau. and co-h.

1216, b. 1 Oct, 1206, d. 16
Nov., 1272.

of RaymondB erenger, Count
of Provence, m. 14 Jan.1236;
she d. 25 June, 1291. , - , .
Edward I., crowned 19 Aug., = Eleanor (ist wife), dau. of
1274, b. 17 June, 1239, d. 7 j Ferdinand IIL.King of Cas-
July, 1307. " tile, d. 27 Nov., 1290.

Elizabeth (yst. dau.), d. 5 = Humphrey de Bohun (2nd
May, 1316, aged 32. husband), Earl of Hereford
and Essex, fell at the battle
of Boroughbridge, Yorks.,
16 March, 1321.
Margaret de Bohun, m. 31= Hugh Courtenay, Earl of
Aug. 1325, d. 16 Dec. I Devon, K.G., b. li July,
1391. 1303, d. 2 May, 1377.

Margaret Courtenay

__John de Cobham, 3rd lord,
Isumd. to Parlt. 1355 to 1407,
d. lojany., 1407/8.

Joan de Cobham, dau. and = Sir John de la Pole, Knt., d.
sole heir, o. v. p. I 3 March, 1379/80. .
Joan de la Pole, only dau. = Sir Reginald Braybrooke,
and heir, d. 13 Jan., 1433/4. I Knt(2ndh.),d.2oSept.l40s.
Joan Braybrooke, dau. and = Sir Thomas Brooke, of
eventual sole heir of the I Holditch, Devon, Knt.,
barony of Cobham, m. 11 w.d. 1418.
H. VIIL, 1410. I:-.-.-.- . —
A, continued above. : •/¦ I _t : -.'

Thomas Brooke, Lord Cob
ham, had 3 wives, sumd.
1514/22, d. 19 July, 1529-
George Brooke, Lord Cob->
ham, K.G., sumd. 1529 to
1558, lord depy. of Calais,
d. 29 Sept., 1558, aged 61.

Sir Henry Brooke, Knt
called Cobham, (Sth surviv
ing son), b. 5 Feb., 1537/8,
d. _3jany., 1591/2. ¦-.!

Sir Walter Calverley, 'o-=Philippa Brooke,=Sir Thomas Burton,
_-__i _ «* ¦ * *_.  _l __ 1_ _./ !/__.*- __.__._1 D ______ _¦

Calverley, Yorks, exe- sister and co. h.,of
tuted at York for killing Sir John Brooke,
two of his children, 23 created Lord Cob-
April, 1605. ,.-. ham, 3 Jan., 1644/5.

Elizabeth Burton, 2nd dau. = Hugh Burnaby, patron and
and co-h., bd. 29 July, 1699, I rector of Asfordby, co.
M.L .. ..... Leic, d. 24 Jam., 1699, aged
 J 80, M.L

Andrew Burnaby, patron'
. and rector, of Asfordby, d.
1 Jany., 1720, aged 62, M.L
Andrew Burnaby, of Bramp
ton, • rector of Asfordby,
&c, b. 29 June, 1702, d.
27 Dec, 1776, M.L

Andrew Bumaby, D.D.,:
of Baggrave Hall, co. Leic,
and of Brampton, Hunts,
archdcn. of Leic. and vicar
of Greenwich, eldest son, d.
9 March, 1812, aged 80.

John Dick Burnaby, of:
Evington, co. Leic, J.P.,
D.L., Col. ist Gren. Guards,
b. 3 Nov., 1776, d. 1 June,
1852.

John Dick Burnaby, of Asfordby, Thomas Fowke Andrew Bur-_=Emily, dau. of Charles Shemrd Burnaby, of

co. Leic, Bar.-at- Law, LT., 1825, naby, of Brampton Manor,
b. 19 April, 1802, d. 29 Dec, Hunt,, J.P. (3rd son), b. 17
1854, married and had issue. Oct., 1808.

Henry Fowke=Louisa Jane, dau. ThomasFrederick=Elizabeth, dau. E u s t a c e=Alice Caro-

Burnaby, M.A.,
rector of Buck-
land, Herts, b.
12 Dec, 1834.

of George Thomas
Davy, esq., of Col
ston BasseU.Notts,
m. 24 Aug., 1871.

Burnaby - Atkins,
of Halstead Place,
Kent, b. 13 Mar.,
1836.

of John Franck-
lin, of Gonalston
Hall, Notts, m.
2 Jany, 1868.

Beaumont,
Capt. 106
Ft, b. 4
April, 1842.

line, dau. of
B.W.Hot-
ham, m. 20
Feb., 1879.

Henry Beaumont Fowke, b. 24
Nov., 1874.
George Davy, b. 7 April, 1 88 1,
and six daughters.

John, b. 15 Sept., 1872,
. and 5 daus.

Eustace Hotham, b. 9 March, l8Sc
rand a dau.- - ...

Dorothy (ist wife), dau. of ,
Sir Henry Heydon, Knt.

Ann, eldest sister and co-h,
of John, Lord Braye, d. 1
Nov., 155a

Anne,' dau. bf Sir Henry
Sutton, of Aram, Notts.,
widow of Walter Haddon,
w. d. 8. proved 10 Jany.,
1611/12.- , ,,-.?. - .

Knt. and Bait, of
Stockerston.co.Leic,cr.-a Bart, aa July,
1622. . .

Anne, widow of Maurice
Camm, bd. 21 May, 1766,
aged 68, M.I.
Hannah, • daul of - George
Beaumont, of Chapel thorpe,
Yorks,d. 22 July, I7S7.M.I.

:Anna, ' dau. and Heir of
John Edwyn, of Baggrave
Hall, co. Leic, m. 26 Feb.,
1774 d. 16 March, 1812.

:Henry Anne, dau of Sir
Thomas Fowke, But, of
Lowesby Hall, co. Leic,
m. 27 Dec, 1798, d. 5
Jany., 1856.

Rupert Chawner, East Retford, Solicitor, b. 20
M.D., m. 9 Oct., Nov., 1814, m. twice, and has
1833. a dau. John Charles,
M.A., rector
of ¦ - Wyton,
Hunts, b. 28
Jsiny., 1844.

BURNABY, OF BAGGRAVE HALL, co. LEIC, <5»_-.

23

'(*) EDWYN ANDREW, of whom presently.
(2) Sherrard Beaumont, of Brampton, Hunts, D.C.L.,
LL.B. Pembr. Coll., Camb., 1796, LL.D. 1801, d.s.p.
25 March, 1848, aged 76, his wife d. 21 May, 1817,
aged 33.
(3) John Dick, of .Evington, see Burnaby of
Brampton, page 25.
(4) George Freeman, d. un. 17 Oct. 1818, aged 41.
(S) Anna Maria, d. July, 1824, having m. I Oct.,
1803, to Alderman John Atkins, M.P., of Halstead
Place, Kent, and had 2 sons and 5 daus.
EDWYN ANDREW BURNABY, of Bag-
grave, J.P., D.L., M.A. Pembr. Coll.,
Camb., 1 80 1, a gent, ofthe Privy Chamber, b.
9 May, 1771, d. 1 Oct., 1825, having m. 30
Dec, 1794, Mary, dau. and heir of Rev. Wil
liam G. Browne, rector and patron of Burrough,
co. Leic. (grand-daughter of Suffield Browne,
of Leesthorpe, co. Leic.); she d. 11 Jan.,
1858, aged 86, having had 3 sons and 4 daus.
(1) EDWY-ST, of whom presently.
(2) William Edwyn, LL.B. Trin. Hall, Camb., 1823,
bar.-at-law, I. T., one of the four common pleaders
ofthe city of London, died 22-23 Aug., 1830.
(3) Gustavus Andrew, of Somerby Hall, co. Leic,
patron of the livings of Somerby and Burrough,
M.A. Eman. ColL, Camlx, 1828, rector of St. Peter's,
Bedford, 1834-6, canon of Middleham, Yorks, chap
lain to H.R.H. the Duke of Cambridge, b. at
JSotherby, 19 May, 1802, d. in London, 15 July,
1872, brass S. Mary, Burrough-on-the-HilL He m.
19 Nov., 1833, Harriet, dau. of Henry Villebois, Esq.,
of Marham, Norfolk, and ha'd 2 sons and 2 daus.:
•-(1) Frederick Gustavus, of Somerby Hall, co. Leic,
J.P., Heut-col. R. H. Guards blue, 1881, author
of " A Ride to Khiva," &c, b. 3 March, 1842, m.
27 June, 1S79, Elizabeth Alice Frances, only child
and sole heir of Sir St. Vincent Bentinck Haw
kins- Whitshed, Bart, (ext.), and has a son :
Harry Arthur Gustavus St. Vincent Fred, b. 10
May, 1880.
(2) Evelyn Henry Villebois, M.A. Line Coll.,
Oxon, 1876, patron and rector (1873) of Burrough-
on-the-Hill, co. Leic, b. 7 Jan., 1848, m. istly,
4 May, 1872, Winifred Constance, eldest dau. of
Vandeleur Crake, Esq., of St. Leonards-on-Sea,

" she d. s.p.s., 27 May, 1873. He m. 2dly, 30 April,
1878, Hon. Margaret Catherine Erskine, yr. dau.
of John Cadwallacler, 4th Baron Erskine.
(3) Mary, m. 27 April, 1854, to John Henry Man
ners-Sutton, Esq., of Kelham, Notts, lieut.-col.
Sherwood Rangers since 1880, M.P. Newark,
1847 -57, and has a son and dau. (B. Manners, see
Foster's Peerage).
"(4) Anna Glentworth, m. 24 July, 1862, to Col.
Duncan James Baillie, R. H. Guards blue, and has
issue.
(4) Mary, m. 8 May, 1820, to John Tylston Pares,
Esq., who d. Nov., 1861, aged 64, leaving a son
and 2 daus.
!5) Selina, died un. 12 Nov., 1836.
6) Georgina, d. 30 Jan., 1874, having m. 6 April,
1839, to Thomas Henry Starr, M.D., of Twicken
ham.(7) Anna Edwyna, d. 28 Dec 1835, having- m. 23
May, 1829, as first wife to Matthew Knapp, of Lin-
ford House, Bucks, who d. 18 Oct, 1867, leaving
issue. EDWYN BURNABY, of Baggrave Hall,
, co. Leic, J.P.,D.L.,high sheriff; 1864,
gent, ofthe Privy Chamber, capt 3rd (P. W.)
Dragoon Guards, b. 29 Sept., 1799, d. 18 July,
1867, having m. 28 Aug., 1829, Anne Caro
line, dau. of Thomas Salisbury, Esq., of
Marshfield House, Yorks, she d. 3 May,
1 88 1, having had a son and 4 daus.
(1) EDWY-ST SHERAED) first mentioned.
(2) Caroline Louisa, m. ist, 14 Dec, 1859, as 2nd
wife to Rev. Charles William Frederick Caven-
dish-Bentinck (D. Portland, see Foster's Peerage),
who d. 17 Aug., 1865, having had 3 daus. ; she rem.
30 Nov., 1870, to Harry Warren, 2nd son of Sir
William Scott, of Ancrum, Bart.
(3) Cecilia Florence, d. 7 Feb., 1869, having m.
24 June, 1858, as 2nd wife to George Onslow New
ton, Esq., of Croxton Park, co. Cambridge.
(4) Laura Gertrude, d. 29 March, 1865, having m.
24 June, 1858, as first wife to Ernest Augustus Malct,
Earl of Lisbume, and has a son and 2 daus.
(5) Ida Charlotte, m. 8 Aug., 1864, to lieut.-col.
John Augustus Conolly, V.C, late Coldstream Guards,
Assist Commissioner Dublin Metropolitan Police,
and has issue. (E. Longford, see Foster's Peerage.)

&urna&g, of -Brampton iftanor, ffiurtts.

BURNABY, THOMAS FOWKE AN
DREW, of Brampton Manor, Hunts,
J.P., formerly of Langford Hall, Notts, many
years clerk of the peace for that county, 1 8th in
descent from Edward I. (see Chart Pedi
gree), b. 17 Oct., 1808, m. 9 Oct., 1833, Emily,
dau. of Rupert Chawner, Esq., M.D., of
Burton-on-Trent, and has had 4 sons and 4
daus. (1) Henry Fowke, M.A. King's College, Camb., 186 1,
late fellow, rector of Buckland, Herts, since 1872,
vicar, of. Bisbrooke, Rutland, 1869-72, b. 12 Dec,
1834, m. at Roehampton, 24 Aug., 1871, Louisa
Jane, dau. of George Thomas Davy, Esq., of Colston
Bassett, Notts, and has 2 sons and 6 daus.:

Henry Beaumont Fowke, b. 24 Nov., 1S74;
George Davy, b. 7 April, 1881 ; Charlotte Henry
Anne Dorothy, b."_5 June, 1872 ; Ethel Mary, b. 5
Nov., 1873 ; Adelaide Emily Louisa, b. 24 Feb.,
1876; Gertrude Hilda, b. 13 April, 1877; Sybil
Margaret Hannah, b. 29 Aug.,_l878 ; Anne Rosa
mond, b. 25 Nov., 1879.
(2) Thomas Frederick Bumaby-Atkins, of Halstead
Place, Kent, J.P., D.L., by devise of John Pelly
Atkins, Esq., in 1 872, and in accordance with whose
will he assumed the addl. surname of Atkins by
R. L., 3 Jan., 1873 ; M.A. Trin. Hall, Camb.,
1862, b. 13 March, 1836, m. 2 Jan., 1868, Eliza
beth, dau. of John Francklin, Esq., of Gonalston
Hall, Notts, and Great Barford, Beds, and has had a
son and 6 daus. :
John, b. 15 Sept., 1872 ; Fiances Eveline, d. 31
an., 1871 ; Emily Mary, b. 19 Dec, 1869 ; Eliza-

24

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

beth Caroline, b. 12 Sept., 1871 ; Violet, b. 16
July, 1S75 ; Cecily, b. 6 Sept, 1S76 ; Judith
Lilian, b. 5 Nov., 1878.
(3) Eustace Beaumont, capt. loth Foot, adj. 1st
Perthshire R.V., b. 4 April, 1842, m. 20 Feb., 1879,
Alice Caroline, dau. of Beaumont William Hotham,
H.M. Consul, Calais (B. Hotham, see Foster's
Peerage), and has a son and dau. :
Eustace Hotham, b. 9 March, 1880 ; Alice Muriel
¦ b. 20 March, 1881.
(4) John Charles Wellesley, M. A. Trin. Hall, Camb.,
1872, rector of Wyton, Hunts, 1877, b. 28 Jan., 1844.
(5) Emily Sarah, m. 18 Sept., 1862, to Edward Finch
Dawson, Esq., of Launde Priory, co. Leic, late capt
6th Dragoons, and has issue.
(6) Adelaide Sophia.
(7) Anna Maria Gertrude, d. 13 June, i860.
(8) Caroline Maria, m. 20 Jan., 18S0, to John Rolles
ton Prickett, lieut. R.N.
Seat— Brampton Manor House, Huntingdon.
Hmeage.
JOHN DICK BURNABY, of Evington,
co. Leic, J.P., D.L,col. istGren. Guards
(3rd son of Andrew Burnaby, D.D.,
archdeacon of Leicester, see page 23), b. 3
Nov., 1776, d. 1 June, 1852, having m. 27
Dec, 1798, Henry Anne (sponsors Duke and
Duchess of Cumberland), dau. of Sir Thomas
Fowke, Bart., of Lowesby Hall, co. Leic,
groom of the bedchamber to Henry Frede
rick, Duke of Cumberland (see Foster's
Baronetage) j she d. 5 Jan., 1856, aged 8i,
having had 4 sons and 7 daus.
(1) John Dick, of Asfordby, co. Leic, J.P., D.L.,
LL.B. Eman. Coll., Camb., 1826, B.C.L., bar.-at-law,
I.T., 1825, commissioner for bankrupts, judge of Lei
cester County Court, deputy chairman Leic Qr. Sessions,
b.. at Billesdon Coplow, Leic, 19 April, 1802, d.
29 Dec, 1854, having m. ist, his cousin, Sarah Jane,
dau. and co-heiress of Alderman John Atkins, M.P,
of Halstead Place, Kent ; she d. at Hastings, 1 1

Nov., 1844, aged 35, and had (with 1 daus., who died
young) an only son :
(1) John Dick Atkins, of Asfordby Hall, co. Leic,
lord ofthe manor of Asfordby, b. 22 March, 1842,
m. 13 July, 1865, Sarah Jane, dau. of William
, Dowsing and has a son and 2 daus. :
I John Frederick Sherard.
- 2 Anna Maria Sarah, b. 1870-I. -
3 Esther Ida Anne, b. 26 March, 1876.
John D. Burnaby m. 2ndly, 13 Jan., 1846,
Elizabeth, eldest dau. of Rev. James Williams, of
Lincoln ColL, Oxford, Vicar of S. James, Rat-
cliffe, Essex, and had 3 sons :
(2) Sherrard Beaumont James, B.A. Emanuel
Coll, Cambridge, 1869, bar.-at-law, LT, 1876, b.
21 Nov., 1846.
(3) Charles Albert curate of S. Andrews, Hert
ford, 1879, b. 15 Feb., 1851.
(4) William Augustus, of Leicester, solicitor, B. A.
Jesus Coll, Camb, 1875, b- 23 Jan-» l853-
(2) Frederick George, of Asfordby House, Melton
Mowbray, lord of the manor of Asfordby and patron
ofthe living, M.A. Caius Coll. Camb., 1830, vicar of
Barkstone, Leic, i83i-6o„of Plungar, 1831-59, b. 18
Sept, 1803, died s.p. 31 Jan., 1880, having m. 13 May,
1830, his first cousin, Anna Maria, dau. of Alderman
John Atkins, M.P, she d. 14 March, 1878, set. 74.
(3) THOMAS FOWKE ANDREW, above
mentioned.(4) Charles Sherard, of East Retford, solicitor,
b. 20 Nov., 1814, m. ist, 20 Oct., 1846, Mary,
second dau. of Francis Jessop, of Quom, near
Derby; she died 27 Oct, 1852, aged 30; he
married, 2ndly, 6 Oct., 1864, his cousin, Anne
Elizabeth, dau. of Sir Frederick Gustavus Fowke.
By his first wife he had a dau., Mary Elizabeth.
(5) Henry Anne, b. 24 Oct., 1798.
(6) Marianna, b. 27 Dec, 1800, d. un. 10 April,
I857-
(7) Maria, b. 30 Aug., 1806, d. un. 28 Sept, 1830.
(8) Aime Woollaston, b. 3 Feb.,, 1810, d. un. at .
Evington, 1 Nov., 1879.
(9) Sarah Edwyn, died 1827.
(10) Emma, b. 10 Feb., 1805, d. un. AprU, 1S33.
(11) Elizabeth Hannah, b. 27 Feb., 1817, d. un. 15
Feb., 1864.

BURNABY, RICHARD, Major Gen.
R.E., 1879, entered service 1839,
19th IN DESCENT FROM EDWARD I. (see
Chart Pedigree), b. 14 Aug., 182 1, m. 24
Oct, 1845, Matilda, dau. of (Hon.) William
Bowman Felton, of Belvedere, Canada (by
Anna Maria Vails, his wife), and had a son
and 4 daus.
(i) George Richard, b. at Stomoway, N.B, 6 Nov,
1847, m. 3 Oct, 1877, Caroline, dau. of George
Clinton Miller, Esq, of Goshen, State of New York,
and has a dau, Lucy Dyott, b. July, 1878.
(2) Lucy Sarah, b. 13 July, 1849, d.s.p. 26 July,
187S, having m. 13 Oct, 1874, as 1st wife, to Captain
Harry Hutchinson Augustus Stewart, gth Regt.'
(brother of Sir Augustus Abraham James Stewart,
Bart). (3) Mary Matilda.
(4) Constance Margarita Felton.
(5) Alice Fairlie.
Residence — Odiham, Hants,

Etnease.
ROBERT BURNABY, LL.B. Queen's
ColL, Camb., 1765, J,P.co. Leic (2nd
son of Rev. Andre iv Burnaby, of Brampton
Manor Ho., Hunts, by his wife Hannah Beau
mont, see page 21), preby. of Lincoln, 1789,
vicar of S. Margaret, Leicester, 1763-89, rec
tor of South Croxton, co. Leic^ 1765-70, of
Wanlip,co.Leic.,i77o-r8o7,d. 2 April, 1807,
aged 70, having m. 1761,, Katherine,
only dau. of Thomas Jee, of Leicester (mural
tablet S. Margaret, Leicester) ; she d. 22
March, 1795, having had 3 sons and a dau.
(1) THOMAS, of whom presently.
(2) Robert, of Leicester, attorney, d.s-p. 1 2 April I7qe
having m. 12 April, 1794, Miss Smith, of Colwlck
(3) Beaumont, of Leicester,, attorney, m. "17 Nov
1798, Mary Barrett, of Leicester, d. s.p. \ *
(4) Harriet, only dau., d. 9 April, i&>6, having m
4 May, 1805, to Edward Cole Galloway, Esq.

®f)t ZBe&cmt of JW..=©«neral a^tc^atd 2Sunta&a from tfje Bloofc 3aogal

of icnslantf*

William the Con-
querer, King of
England, crowned
Christmas Day,
1066, died 9 Sept.,
1087.

Maud, dau. of Baldwin
V., Earl of Flanders,
desc. from Alfred the
Great & Charlemagne,
d. 2 Nov. 1083.

Henry I,surnamed=Maud, dau. of Mal-

Beauclerc,crowned6 Aug, 1 100, d. t
Dec, 1135.

colm III. Caenmor,
King of Scots, m.
1 100, d. I May, 1 118.

A, continued fivm below,
Edward Brooke, Lord = Elizabeth, dau.

Cobham, sumd.' 1445/63,
A 9 May, 4 E. IV.,
1464.

of James
Audley.

Lord

John Brooke, Lord = Margaret (ist wife),

Cobham, sumd. to
Parlt 1472 to 151 1,
aged 18, 1464, d.
9 March, 1511/12.

dau. of Edward Nevill,
Lord Abergavenny,
burd. at Cobham, 30
Sept, 1500.

Maud, died 10 Sept, 1 167,:
m. ist to Emperor Hen. IV.
of Germany, who d.s.p. 22
May, 1125.

Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count
of Anjou (s. andh. of Fulke,
King of Jerusalem andCount
ofAiijou);hed.7Sept,ll5o.

Henry II, crowned 19 Dec, = Eleanor,DuchessofGuienne,
1154, d. 7 July, 1 189. I eldest d. and h. of William,
 _| Duke of Aquitaine.
John, b. 24 Dec, 1167, = Isabel (2nd wife), d. andh.
crowned 27 May, 1 199, d. j of Aymer, Count of Angou-
19 Oct, 1216. leme; she d. 1246.

Henry IIL.crowned 28 Oct, = Eleanor, 2nd dau. and co-h.

1216, b. 1 Oct., 1206, d.
Nov., 1272.

16

of RaymondBerenger, Count
of Provence.m. 14 Jan.1236;
 __ _ shed. 25 June, 1291.
EdwardI,crownedl9Aug, = Eleanor (ist wife), dau. of
1274, b. 17 June, 1239, d. 7 j Ferdinand HL.King ofCas-
July, 1307. tile, d. 27 Nov, 1290.

Elizabeth (yst dau.), d.
May, 1316, aged 31.

5 = Humphrey de Bohun (2nd
' husband), Earl of Hereford
and Essex, fell at the battle
of Boroughbridge, Yorks.,
16 March, 1321.

Margaret de Bohun, m. 31 = Hugh Courtenay, Earl of

Aug. »J9l

1325, d. 16 Dec.

Devon, K.G, b. 12 July,
1303, d. 2 May, 1377.

Margaret Courtenay

= John de Cobham, 3rd lord,
" sumd. to Parlt. 1355 to 1407,
d. 10 Jany., 1407/8.

Joan de Cobham, dau. and= Sir John de la Pole, Knt., d.
sole heir, o. v. p. I 3 March, 1379/80.

Joan de la Pole, only dau. = Sir Reginald Braybrooke,
and heir.d. 13 Jan, 1433/4. I Knt.(2ndh.),d.2oSept_405.

Joan Braybrooke, dau. and = Sir Thomas Brooke, of

eventual sole heir of the
barony of Cobham, m. II
H. VIII, 1410.

Holditch,
w.d. 1438.

Devon, Knt,

Thomas Brook^ Lord Cob-= Dorothy (ist wife), dau. of
ham, had 3 wives, sumd. | Sir Henry Heydon. Knt
1514/22, d. 19 July, 1529. I
George Brooke, Lord Cob-=Ann, eldest sister and co-h.

ham, K.G, sumd. 1529 to
1558, lord depy. of Calais,
d. 29 Sept., 1558, aged 61.

of John, Lord Braye, d.
Nov., 1558.

Sir Henry Brooke, Knt = Anne, dau. of Sir Henry

called Cobham, (5th surviv
ing son), b. 5 Feb., 1537/8,
d. 13 Jany, 1591/2.

Sutton, of Aram, Notts.",
widow of Walter Haddon,
w. d. 8. proved 10 Jany.,
1611/12.

Sir WalterCalverley, of = Philippa Brooke, 1
Calverley. Yorks, exe- sister and co. h, bf
cuted at York for killing Sir John Brooke,
two of his children, 23 created Lord Cob-
April, 1605. ham, 3 Jan, 1644/5.

Sir Thomas Burton,
Knt. and Bart, of
Stockerston,co.Leic,cr. a Bart. 22 July,
i6_2.

Elizabeth. Burton, 2nd dau. = Hugh Burnaby, patron and

and co-h., bd. 29 July, 1699,
M.I.

rector of Asfordby, co.
Leic, d. 24 Jan., 1699, aged
 80, M.L
Andrew Burnaby, patron— Anne, widow of Maurice
and rector, of Asfordby, d. j Camm, bd. 21 May, 1766,
I Jany, I720,aged 62, M.L | aged 68, MI.

Andrew Burnaby, of Bramp-= Hannah, dau. of George
Beaumont, of Chapelthorpe,
Yorks, d. 22 July, I757,M.I.

ton, rector of Asfordby,
&c, b. 29 June, 1 702, d.
27 Dec, 1776, M.I.

Robert, LL.B, preby. of=Catherine, . only dau. of

Lincoln, vicar of S. Mar
garet, Leicester, rector of
So. Croxton, and of Wanlip,
co. Leic, 2nd son, d. 2
Apr.1, 1807, aged 70.

Thomas Jee, of Leicester,
d. 22 March, 1795.

Thomas Burnaby, M.A,==Lucy, 5th dau. of Richard

A, continued above.

preby. of . Lincoln, rector
of Mister ton, co Leic, vicar
of S. Margaret, Leic, b. 2
Dec, _76i,d. r Feb, 1830.

Thomas Burnaby/
M.A., rector of Market
Bosworth, and vicar of
Btakesley, Northants,
b. 3 July, 1786, d. 3/18
October, 1851.

Dyott, esq, of Freeford
Hall, co. Staff, mar. 2
August, 1785, d. 31 Jany.,
1855.

r

Sarah, dau. of Andrew
Meares, of Daventry,
m. 12 April, 1819, d.
31 Oct, 1878.

Richard Beaumont
Burnaby, Lieuc.-Gen.
R.A., b. 22 Feb.,
¦793. d. 1 June, 1871.

Eliza, 2nd dan. of Robert Burnaby, B.A.,=Sarah Anne, eldest
General Sir Alex.-
ander Dickson, R. A,
G.C.B, m. 13 Feb,
1834, d. 1 Feb, 1879.

P.C.S. George, Leices
ter, 1827/63, b. 2i Nov.,
1796, d. 15 July. 1S63. ~

Richard Bur-=Matilda, d.iu. of

naby, M.-Gen.
R.K, b. 14
August, 1 82 1.

(Hon.) William
Bowman Fel-
ton,of Belvedere,
m. 24 Oct., 1845.

n 
Alexander Dickson Burna
by, Major, R.A., b. 6
March, 1835, has issue.
Eustace Beaumont, L.-Col.
51st Regt, b. 1 June, 1837.

Richard
Briones.Capt.
70th Regt.
Eul aria Eliza
beth.

r

dau. of Rev. William
Blow, m. 18 Nov,
1841, d. 30 May,
1844.

Robert William=Constance Mary,

Bumaby, M.A.,
vicar of S. Barna
bas, Marylebone,
b. 6 Nov., 1842.

George Richard, only son,
married, and has issue.

eldest dau. of
John Radford,
esq, of Smalley,
co. Derby, m. 30
April, 1848.

Robert Beaumont, b. id Feb., 1870. Lucy Dyott Mary Cecilia.

26

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGlLA

THOMAS BURNABY, B.A. Clare Coll.,
Camb., 1784, M.A. Emanl. Coll, 1789,
preby. of Lincoln, rectorof Misterton, co.Leic,
1786, vicar of S. Margaret, Leicester, 1789,
b. 2, bapt. at S. Margaret, Leicester, 7 Dec,
1761, d. 1 Feb., 1830, aged 68, having m., at
S. Mary, Leicester, 2 Aug. 1785, Lucy, 5th dau.
of Richard Dyott, Esq, of Freeford Hall, co.
Staff, (by Katherine, only dau. of Thomas
Herrick, Esq., brother to'William Herrick, of
Beaumanor Park); she d. 31 Jan., 1855, aged
89, having had 6 sons and 4 daus.
(1) THOMAS, of whom presently.
(2) Richard Beaumont Lt-Gen. R.A., served the
campaign of 1815, including the battle of Waterloo,
comd. Hants Arty. Mil. 1853-71, b. at Misterton,
22 Feb, 1793, d. 1 June, 1871, having m. 13 Feb,
1834, Eliza, 2nd dau. of Gen. Sir Alexander Dick
son, R.A., G.C.B. (see Foster's Baronetage) ; she d. 7
Feb., 1879, having had 3 sons and 2 daus. :
(1) Alexander Dickson, Major R.A, retd. h.p,
assist, corny, genl, 1878, served Eastern cam
paign, 1855, including siege and fall of Sebastopol
(medal and clasp); served in Indian Mutiny, 1858,
at siege and capture of Lucknow and actions of
Sirsee and Nawabgunge (medal with clasp) ; b. 6
. March, 1835, m- at Plumstead 22 Nov, 1865, Mary
• Anne, only dau. of Capt Charles Granet, 12th
" Regt, (he divorced her Nov., 1878), and had a son
and 2 daus. : '
Charles Granet, b. 5 Dec, 1867; Rita Augusta,
'"" b\ 16 April, 1871; Beatrice Rose, b. 26 May,
1873.
- ' ¦ (2) Eustace Beaumont bt Lt.-CoI. 51st Regt,
served in the Umbeyla expedition, 1863, and in
: Jowaki campaign, 1877, and in Afghanistan,
1878, 1879/80 (medal and clasp), b. 1 June, 1837.
(3) Richard Briones, Capt. 70th Regt, served in
Afghanistan, 1878/9, medal, b. 28 April, 1849.
(4) Eularia Elizabeth.
(5) Rita Briones, d. y.
(3) Robert, B.A. St. John's Coll, Camb, 1818,
P.C. S. George, Leicester, 1827-63, b. 21 Nov.,
1796, d. 15 July, 1863, having m. 18 Nov, 1841,
Sarah Anne, eldest dau. of Rev. William Blow, rector
of Goodmanham, Yorks ; she d. at Leicester, 30 May,
1844, aged 30, having had a son and dau.
(1) Robert William, M.A. New Coll, Oxon, 1867,
vicar of S. Barnabas, Marylebone, since 1876, b.
6 Nov., 1842, m. 30 April, 1868, Constance Mary,
eldest dau. of John Radford, Esq., of Smalley, co.
Derby, and has a son and 2 daus. :
'Robert Beaumont, b. 16 Feb., 1870; Lucy
Dyott, b. 28 Feb., 1869 ; Mary Cecilia, b. 9 July,
187 1.
- (2) Sarah Anne, b. 20 May, 1844, m. 16 Aug.,
1866, to Rev. James Henville Thresher, M.A. New
Coll, Oxon, 1867, rector of Bucknell, Oxon, 1878-9,
and has issue.
(4) Charles Herrick, Lt-Gen. R.A., served at the
Cape, b. 28 Oct., 1800, d. 11 Jan, 1879, having m.
Jane, dau. of John Oliver, Esq., of
and had a son and 2 daus. :
(1) Charles, d. y. (2) Marian. (3) Henrietta.
(5) John Philip, of Doctor's Commons, b. 10 April,
1802, d. 12-13 Oct, 1S43, having m. at St. Benet"s,
Paul's Wharf, London, 12 Aug., 1829, Jemima

Savage ; she d. 3 June, 1850, having had a son ahd 2
daus. : ,
(I) Sherrard Beaumont, B.A. Ch. Coll, Camb.
(sen. opt), 1854 ; M.A. 1857 ; vicar of Hampstead,
1873; rector of Wapping, 1867-73, b. 2 Nov.,
183 1, m. 7 Feb., 1871, Jane Mary, dau. of Kev.
Wm. Barlee, rector of West Chiltington, Sussex,
and has 3 sons.
Evelyn Beaumont, b. 24 Feb, 1872 ; Charles
Beaumont, b. 13 May, 1873; Hugo Beaumont, b.
5 May, 1874-
{2) Jemima Mary, b. 2 June, 1830, d.s.p. 6 .June,
1862, having m. 12 March, 1856, to Charles,
younger son of Richard Critchett, esq, of Brighton.
(3) Jane Dyott, b. 9 June, 1834, d. unm. 5 June,
1878.
(6) William Dyott, Civil Service (retd.), b. 21 Feb,
1807, m, 28 Jany, 1832, Emma, dau. of Anthony
Rich, Esq, of Hersham, and has had 4 sons and a
dau: (1) Will-am Edward, b. 15 Aug, 1836, died unm.
25 Aug, 1876.
(2) Henry Dyott, b. 15 May, 1836, d. 2 April foi.
lowing. (3) Arthur, b. 19 Feb, 1838, d. 23 March, 1841.
(4) Edgar, b. 12 Feb, 1839, died at Hersham,
15 July, 1845.
(5) Emma, b. 9 Dec, 1832, d. 6 June following.
(7) Lucy Dyott, b. 12 April, 1794, d. 22 July, 1868.
(8) Katharine, b. 9 Aug., 1795, d. 1838.
(9) Augusta, b. 15 June, 1798, m. - ¦ to John
Oliver, and had 2 daus. :
(10) Emily, b. 22 Oct, 1804, d, I June, 1 840.
THOMAS BURNABY, B.A. 1809, M.A
1812, fellow of Trin. Coll. Camb,
rector of Market Bosworth, 1841, vicar of
Blakesley, Northants, 1841, domestic chap
lain to Marquis of Anglesey, b. 3 July, 1786,
d. 3-18 Oct, 1 85 1, having m. 12 April, 1819,
Sarah, dau. of Andrew Meares, of Daventry;
she d. 31 Oct., 1878, aged 90, having had 5
sons and 5 daus.
(1) Thomas, B.A. Trin. ColL, Camb., 1843, rector
of Stanton Wyville, b. 19 July, 1820, d.s.p, 23 Dec.,
1870.
(2) RICHARD, first mentioned.
(3) Hugo Beaumont, Capt R.N., retd. 1871,
Emigration Officer, Liverpool, b. 18 June, 182$, m.
17 Feb., 1874, Emily, dau. of Richd. Haworth, Esq.,
of Manchester, and has had 3 sons' and 2 daus. :
¦ Hugo Richard, b. 15 Nov.,- 1876; WilUam Dyott,
b. 14 Feb, 1879, d. 27 Jan., 1881 ; Thomas, b. 3
Aug., 1880 ; Sarah Cecilia Rose, b. 21 Aug., 1875 ;
Helen Beatrice, b. 6 Nov, 1877.
(4) Robert, of Victoria, Brit. Columbia, b. 30 Nov.,
1828, d. un. Jan, 1878.
(5) George Herrick, Lieut. R.N., H.M.S. Poly.
phemus, drowned at Fernando Po, 2 June, 1853.
(6) Sarah, b. 22 Oct, 1822, d. 24 March, 1873.
(7) Harriet b. 16 March, 1824, m. 14 Jan., 1847, to
General Sir Collingwood Dickson, R.A, V.C,
K.C.B. (see Foster's Baronetage).
(8) Mary Dyott, b. 25 March, 1827, m. 26 Dec, ¦
1850, to Henry Marshall, Esq, of Gray's Inn, and
has 3 sons and a dau.
(9) Lucy, b. 22 July, 1831.
(10) Rose, b. 23 March, 1833.

NOW REPRESENTED BY EDWARD PENINGTON, OF PHILADELPHIA.

PmningtOtt, buried at Henham, Essex, before 1557.=

Richard Thomas Pennington, of=:
Penn- Tottenham High Cross,
INGTON, Middlesex, gent, living
1 5 5 7> , I557i citizen and currier, of
dead , London, so styled in deeds
b efore ' dated 9, 12 and 14 Eliz,
1592. executor of his brother
= William in 1592. His will
| dated 27 April, 1593, 35
* Eliz, and proved 12 Oct,
1594, to be buried in the
parish church of Totten
ham.

:M ARG A RET, 1593
(Thos. Pennington's
wife is called Jane in'
, his brother Wm. Pen
nington's will, dated
'592). (Jane, wid. of
George Foster, of the
parishofSt.Antholin's, London, currier, 9
Eliz, mar. to Thos.
Pennington, at All-
Hallo ws-in- the -Wall,
17 Nov., 1562, living
1592.)

William Pennington, ot
London, 1557, citizen
and grocer, will dated 9
, Nov, 1592, and proved
C.P.C, " born at Henham,
Essex," mentions "Robt.
Pennington, of Henham,
the elder. " He was buried
at St. Benet's, Gracechurch
Street, n Nov., 1592, as
"Mr. Wm. Pennington,
grocer."

J I I I I
I, Jacob Pennington, resid. legatee
and executor of his father's will, 1 591.
On 23 Mar., 1636-7, adm. of Jacob
Pennington, late of the parish of St.
Peter's* West Cheap', London, dec.
granted to Daniel Pennington, his
cousin, and one of his creditors,
Agnes, his relict, renouncing, 5 Oct,
1648, Agnes Pennington,' late of St
Peter's, West Cheapeals, Cheapside,
London, dec. admon. to James Pen
nington, her son.
3. Arthur, living 1592.
4. William Pennington, liv. 1592. ...
On 2 Mar. 1635-6, admon, of Wm.
Pennington, late of the parish of
St, Peter's, West Cheap, London,
granted to Alice, his relict.
Mary, living 1592.
Thomas, buried at St. Benet's,
Gracechurch, 22 July, 158 1,

Alice Pennington,
widow (? wife of Isaac
Shetterden), will dated '
5 Mar., 1605-6, and
pr. 22 Oct, 1607, to be
bd. in the churchyard of
Gracechurch St., men: '"''
tions her brother, John
Woodcock, sister Mar
garet Shereman, bd. at
St. Benet's, Gracechurch,
9 Oct., 1607, as"Widow
Pennington, an ancient
householder."

Robert Penning-=Anne,
ton, of the hamlet 
of Plegden, parish living
" of Henham, Essex, 1557.
will dated 20 Aug.,
. 1S77, and p. 19
Jan. following, to be
bd....at. Henham,
"nye my father,"
bd. at Henham, 28
Aug, 1557.

I
2. Robert Pennington (1592),:
citizen and fishmonger, of London,
w. d. 24 Dec, 1622, 20 Jac, cod,
17 Mar., 1624-5, proved C.P.C,
20 Apr,, 1627, by his son Isaac,
sole exec, to be bd. in the church
of St. Andrew-under-Shaft He
bequeaths ^100 to the Company
of Fishmongers for an increase
of the building of their alms
houses at Newington, Surrey,
and desires his executors to make
a dinner at his funeral for the
. Master of Christ's Hospital, leaves
his house in, West Cheap to his
son Daniel. He died in London,
1 18 April, 3 Kmg Charles (1628).
Inq. p, m. at Harleston, Nor
folk, 30 Oct., 1628,

Judith,
(1 S 9 2.
1605,
1622), da.
of Isaac
Shetter
den, of
London,
calleddaughter
by Alice
Penning
ton above
named, in
her will.

,..,dau, ma. to
Daniel Shet
terden.

Richard =A n n 1

 Pennington, a dau,
mar. to  Newton,
and had a son Richard,'
under age in 1557: he
and his sister Ann were
living 1592.* ' /
' * Robert Pennington, by will
dated 1 .__, leaves £50 to the two
daughters of Richard Newton
when married or 24.
Anne Pennington, m.
at Henham, 10 April,-
1560, to John Gott.

POUNTES,

Pen n-

draper,bd. at St.
Benet's,

INGTON,bd-atSt.Benet's,

Grace- Grace
church, 10 church,
August, 8 Aug.,
1585- A 1599-

A

John Hol.
lingshead (2nd husb.),
of St. Mar
tin's, Lud-
gate,draper,married at
St. Benet's,
G r a c e- <
church, 4
December, •585.

M A R G A-:
RET (ist
wife),dau. of 
Barfoot,
of Lam-
b o urne
Hall, Es
sex. She
was bd.at
Henham,
22 Sept.,
I579-

J

:3. Robert Penning-=
TON, of Plegden,
parish of Henham,
Essex, tanner, pur
chased lands (inden
ture dated 12 Sept.,
9 Elizabeth, 1567)01
John Marion, of
Stortford, , Herts,
in Henham and El-
senham, for 40 marks
(j/afcCloseRoll). He
was baptised at Hen
ham, 20 Feb., 1543
(under age in 1557),
styled " the elder,"
in 1592, buried at
Henham, 22 Nov.,
1612, will proved 7
Dec, l6it, C.P.C.

;E L I Z A-j
BETH (2nd .
wife), dau.-
of  ¦
mar. after
Sep, 1579,
and before
Sep, 1581,'
buried at
Henham,. 15 M a y,
1619, will
dated 20 -
April, 18
Iv. James,
andproved 13 June,
1620.

PENNINGTON, OF HENHAM, ESSEX, AND AMERSHAM, BUCKS.

I A

Abigail (ist=SiR Isaac Pennington, of London, mer-=M a ry,1

wife), dau.
of John
Allen, of
Lond on,
merchant,indenture of marriage
3 Feb, 10
K. James,
I6i2-I3,ma. 7 Feb., 12
K. Tames,
1614/15.

chant, set. 40 years, at his father's death,
1627, knighted by the Speaker of the House
of Commons, and in 1649 was made a mem
ber of the Council of State, succeeded to all
his father's lands and tenements in Suffolk and
Norfolk, high sheriff of London, 1638, M.P.
for the City in 1640-1, and lord mayor in
1643, lieutenant ofthe Tower and one ofthe
commissioners of the High Court of Justice
for the trial of King Charles 1, but he did
not sign the warrant for his execution ; he
was betrayed by King Charles II, and
committed to the Tower of London in 1660,
and his estates confiscated, he was sentenced
to death, and died in the Tower, from the
effects of ill-usage. 19 Dec, 1661, before his
sentence was put into execution.

(2nd wife),
dau. of
Matthew
Young.

I
Robert P enn-
ington,
citz. and
grocer,of London, 1605-6
andl622. His will
dated 8
Nov.,
l645,andprvd. II
Nov. fol-
lowing by his
widow,
Anne,
soleheir.

3. Dan IE t=E liza-
beth, da.
of Wm.
Risby, of
London,draper, will dated
9 May,
1660, and
proved 6
Feb. fol
lowing by
Elizabeth
Mauditt,her dau.
and exix.

Penning
ton, of Lon
don, citz. and
fishmonger,
1 60s -6 and
l662,executor to his grand
mother's will.
His'will dated
26 Jan., 1664,
and prvd. 10
June, 1665.

Mary Judith
Penn- Penning-

ington,living
i622,ma.to Robt.
Robinson, of
London.

ton, liv-
ingl6o5-6, mar. to
... Clax-
ton, 1622.

2. Sir John Pennington, baptised at
Henham, 30 Jan. 1568, admiral of his
Majesty's fleet for the seas, treasurer of his
Majesty's navy, and one of the gentlemen
of his Majesty's privy chamber in ordinary.
He died Sept., 1646, M.I. at Muncaster.
His will dated 29 Mar., 21 Car., 1645, and
proved 28 May, 1648. He bequeathed
sums of money to the poor of Henham,
Lambourne, and C hig well, &c. &c, and
mentions his cousin, WILLIAM PEN
INGTON, OF MUNCASTER (to whom
he bequeaths " my Great Heart diamond
ringe"), Thos. Pennington, of Radcliffe,
Rich. Pennington, ofthe Fleet, and Thomas
Kimboul, " and I desire all these legacies
be paid as soon as it shall please the
Almightie God lo give an end unto the
distractions of these times."

Sir William=Mary, only child=ISAAC Pennington (2nd hus.), of
o — ...„„_,_, _._. „„,_ i,_,i, _,f Sir the Grange, in the parish of St.
Peter's, Chalfont, Bucks, 1658,
which his father gave him on his
marriage, ar»d lastly of Woodside,
in the parish of Amersham,
Bucks. He adopted Quaker tenets,
was committed to Aylesbury
gaol in 1660, He mar. in 1654,
and d. at Goodneston, Kent,
8th of 8th month, 1679, bur. at
Jordans, Bucks.

U1A ¦¦ illlliA™
Springett (1st
husband), eldest
son and h. of
Herbert Sprin.
gett,ofRingmer.
He died near
Arundel, 3 Feb,
1643, set 23, bd.
at Ringmer,
Sussex, M. I.

and heir of Sir
John Proude, of
Qoodneston Court, Kent; she
d. at Worming-
hurst, Sussex, 1 8th
of 7th m, 1682.
Her will dated
4th month, 1680.

2. Arthur Pen
nington, a Ro
man Catholic
priest in 1676.
3. William Pen
nington, mer
chant, of London,
" a Friend," died
1689/2/3, set. 67,
of the palsy.

Daniel Pen
nington, ne
phew and god
son to Daniel
Pennington.
He and his wife
are mentioned
by his bro. Isaac
Pennington in
1667.

I

Abigail. Bridget,
Judith, All living
1634.

Anne, dau. of
Isaac Penning
ton, 1659, mar.
to Rich. More,
Esq., of More
and Larden,
Salop, M.P.,
but afterwards
divorced.

A son, 1660.
Mary, mar. to
William Holgate,
living 1660 and
1664.
Elizabeth, 1660,
mar. to Richard
Mauditt, and had
a dau. Elizabeth
and 3 other child
ren, all living
1660,

1 1
Sarah, living
1660 and
1664, mar. to
Thomas Goodyear,! 1664.

PENNINGTON, OF PHILADELPHIA.

Dl

John
Sr-RiN-
gett,died
young.

gulielma: Maria Sprin- gett (ist
wf.), post-
humou s
child and
sole heir,
mar. 1672,
and died
23/xii, J693-

:William Penn, son of
Sir William, admiral of
England, born in the
parish of St. Katherine,
near the Towerof Lon
don, 140^,1644. This
eminent man was the
founder and legislator
of Pennsylvania. He
d. 1, bd. 7/6, 1718.

I
1. John Pen.
nington, of
Amersham, Bucks, gent,
d. 1710/3/8,
bd. at Jor-
dans.

I
4. William:
Pennington,
druggist, bom
at Amersham,
1665/6/3. He
died 1703/3/S.
jet. 38, then of
Cripplegate.

:Elizabeth, 5. Edward PENNiNGTON.born at=SARAH, da.
widow of Amersham, Bucks, 1667/7/3,
William, late and emigrated to Pennsylvania,
citizen and and arrived at Philadelphia, 30
glover.of Lon- Nov., 1698. He was made sur-
don, married veyor-general of the province by
1704/12/1 to his kinsman, William Penn. He
Robert Plum- was the second to hold that posi-
stead, citizen tion, having succeeded Thomas
and draper, of ' Holmes. He died in Philadel-
London. phia, II Nov., 1701.

of Samuel
Jennings, theQuaker governorof New
Jersey, m.
at Burling
ton, 16
Nov.,1699.

I I
2. ISAAC,d.
at sea in
1669, on
his return
voyage
from the
Barbadoes.
3. ? (a third
son.)

Mary, born at Amer
sham, i6s7/«2/i°i
mar. at Jordans,
1686/9/4, to Daniel
Wharley, citizen and
woollen diaper, of
London, son of
Henry and Anne
Wharley, formerly
of Hunsdon, Herts.

Isaac, bom in London,
1691/4/6^.1691/4/23,
"of gripes."

Mary, bom in Lon
don, 1692/8/4, m
there, 1717/3/7-

=Thomas Pixley, citizen &
merchant taylor,of London,
son of Walter Pixley, of
Uttoxeter, co, Stafford.

Hannah, bom
in London,
1693/12/4, died
there, 1696/5/30,
burd. at Jordans,

G U LI ELM A
Maria, died
i°97/3/'o, set.
15 days.

Isaac Penington, of Philadelphia,=^ANN, dau. of William
only son, for several years sheriff of
Bucks County, United States, born 22
Nov, 1700, and died 5 July, 1742.

Biles.of Bucks County,
United States, mar. 5
Nov, 1725.

Edward Penington, of Phila-rsSARAH, dau. of Benjamin and Sarah Shoemaker, of German Town, mar.
delphia, bom 4 Dec, 1726, died I at the Bank Meeting, 26 Nov., 1754. She was bom 3 April, 1729, and
30 Sept, 1796. died 3 Nov, 1797'

Thomas, MARY,=Hon. Isaac Smith, of
ob. inf. Trenton, New Jersey.

Sarah, died unm. 31
Mar, 1765,

Isaac Pening-
T0i.,born 30 Oct,
1756, and died «8
April, 1803, near
Bordentown. .

Edward Pening-=Helena Lawrence, dau. of John Penington, M.D., Anne Penington, bom 9 Mary, bom 28
 . ¦ _._• T_l_:i_.J_l T  T_r_l~_.- T?.« ... It.,..,. ___, nn Can. TtfAR an/1 S.n... T *.c£ And died l6 NOV.. I*76l. died

ton, of Philadel
phia, bom 8 May,
1760, and died 16
March, 1834.

I. John Penington,:
bom at Mulberry
Hill, I Aug, 1799,
and d. in V hiladel-
phia, 18 March,
1867.

James Holmes, Esq.', of New born 29 Sept., 1768, and Sept., 1758, and died 16 Nov., 1763, died
York, mar. at Mulberry Hill, died 20 Sept, 1793. May, 1759. 16 July, 1764.
'Monmouth County, New Jersey, Benjamin Penington, b. Anne Penington, bom 28 Sarah, b. 3 Aug,
by the Rev. Hy. Waddell, 27 16 April, 1765, died 19 April, 1760, and died 15 1767^. 9th same
Sept, 1798. She died 28 Jan, Aug, 1792. Aug, 1 79 1. month.
1852. Sarah, bom 22 Aug, 1762,
, , mar. to ... Bezonett.

Mary Pknington,
born 17 Mar, 1771,
mar. ... Sept, 1797,
to Dr. Benjamin
Smith Barton, of
Philadelphia, and d.
24 Dec, 1S10.

Lucetta, dau. of 3. Edward Pen-=Elizabeth 3. William Le=Anne, dau. 4. Lawrence 5. Henry Pen- 6. George,
rr't? ."i •*.._*___— _ t._m. _ — _,_.. -r "V.  „ t>_._..x„, 0f Richard PENiNGT0N,lieut ington, born in born in Phila-
Harding, U.S. navy, b. in Philadelphia, 19 delphia, 17
Esq., of Phi- Philadelphia, 25 Sept., 1807, and July, 1809,
ladelphia Oct, 1805, and d. died . unm, II died 10 Nov.
County. unm.S Aug, 1870. Nov, 1858. following,

John Davis, Esq, ington, of Phila.
of Philadelphia, m. , delphia, bom there
in Christ Church by 6 Dec, 1800, and
Bp. White, 12 Jan., [died .16 Jan., 1868.
1824.

E

Ann, dau. of Conte Pening.
Joseph S  ton, of Philadel-
Lewis, mar. by phia, bom there 18
Bishop White, April, 1803, died
10 Nov., 1827, 16 Aug, 1863,

PENNINGTON, OF PHILADELPHIA.

|E

I
Edward :
P en -
INGTON, of Phila
delphia,b. there
24 July,
1832.

:Mary Rebec
ca, dau. of
Robert W...„
Allen, Esq,
of Baltimore,'
mar. by the
Rev. Corne
lius E. Swope,
6 Nov., 1856.

MaryLawrencePen-
[ ington, born at Mul
berry Hill, Monmouth
County, N.J, 29 Aug,;j
1825, mar. in Philadel
phia, 27 Dec, 1855, to
Commander John Ro
berts Goldsborough, of
U.S. Navy, and died 8
May, 1869. =

r
John Pening.
ton, born in
Philadelphia,16 May, 1858.

Elizabeth
Davis Pening-
. ton, b. in
Philadel phia, 14
June, 1827,
mar. 26
Sep.,1850.Hy. Carey
Baird, of
Philadel
phia. =

I.

a"

Meta Ro-
BERTSPening-
'TON, bom
in' Phila
delphia, 4
Dec.,1837,m. 1 -June,
1864, ' to
Horatio
Paine,
M.D, of
NewYork.

Joseph Lewis
Penington,
only son, bom
24 Feb, 1841,
' and " died 13
Mar. following.
1. Helena
LawrencePenington,
born 19 Dec,
1828, died 28
Oct, 1853.

t
2. Frances
J, Lewis
1 P ening-
' ' ton, born
8 Nov.,
., 1830, ma.
-26 Jan.,
i860, .' to
Wharton Griffitts, of
Phila del-
phia.- =

¦II , •
3. Rosalie
' PENiNGTON.b.
23 April, 1833,
: and died 12'
^ June following-.
4. Josephine
Lewis Pen
ington, bom.
7 Nov, 1836,
mar. 22 Oct.,
1862', to Frank-
lin Peale Grif
fitts, of Phila.
delphia. =

5. Elizabeth
Le Conte
PENiNGTON.b. 19 May, 1839,
ma.. 264'Oct.', '
1871, to Philip
Francis Chase,
ofPhiladelphia.
6. Mary Moore
. PENiNGTON.b. 12 Oct 1843. '

r. Lawrence Penington,
bom 4 Feb, 1840, killed?
in battle at Cold Harbor,'
¦ ' Virginia, 2 June, 1864.' ,
2. William Lis Conte,
bom 17 Mar. 1845, died
29 Jan, 1870.
1. Mary Harding, b. 12-
Oct, 1836.
2. Annette Penington,
bom 19 Jan., 1S38.
AU bom at Mantua, Phila
delphia County.

Katharine Allen Pen-
ington, b. at
Philadelphia,
23 Aug, 1857.

Lucetta Pening
ton, and Mary
Lawrence Goldsborough,
twins, bom in Phi-
Iadelphia, 29 Sept.,
1856.

Helena Law-;
rence Baird, b.
in Philadelphia,
18 Dec, 1851, m.
Ii June, 1874.

I~

:W_LLIAM
Howard
G a r d i-
NER, jun,
of Boston,

Joseph Lewis Grif
fitts, b. 10 Oct, 1862,
d. 30 July, 1864.
Wharton Griffitts,
b. 3 Mar. 1865, d. 29
June, 1865. ' ' .

I
Fanny Pen-
ingtonGrif- fitts, b. 24
June, 1 86 1, d.
22 June, 1863.

I

1

Elizabeth Lewis Grif-
fitts, b. 18 April, 1866.
Mary Wharton Grif
fitts, b. 6 April, 1874,
d. 7 April, 1874.

II
David Stuart;
Griffitts.
Frances Mont
gomery Grif
fitts.

William Howard Gardiner,
born in Boston, 24 March,, j.875.;

All bom at Philadelphia.
Reprinted front the History and Pedigree ofthe Penmugloiis.
' Compiled by Joseph Foster;

otes anti Queries*

THE CARNWATH PEERAGE.
In the usual accounts of this Peerage, Sir Robert
Dalzell, second Earl of Carnwath, is said to have
married Christian, daughter of Sir William Douglas,
of Hawick, and by her to have had two sons, of whom
Gavin the elder succeeded as third Earl. There appears
to be no doubt that Robert, second Earl, was slain at,
or died soon after, the battle of Naseby, 14 June, 1645,
for Wood, in his edition of Douglass "Peerage" (_.
312), cites a charter to " Gavin, Earl of Carnwath,"
dated 15 th April, 1646, and adds, " which proves his
father must have been then dead." Gavin, third
Earl of Carnwath, is said to have lived until 1674.
Who, then, were the persons named in the various
and independent records quoted below ?
The parish register of St. Margaret, Westminster,
records the burial, 21st June, 1654, of " Robert, Arle
of Camwath."
On the 3rd October, 1660, letters to administer
the estate of " Robert, Earl of Camwath," of Cam
wath in Scotland, were granted by the Prerogative
Court of Canterbury to " the Countess of Carnwarth,
the relict."
On the 21st December, 1661, a marriage licence
was issued, from the Faculty Office of the Archbishop
of Canterbury, for William Watkins, of the city of
Westminster, esquire, a widower, aged about sixty,
and " Katharine, Countess Dowager of Camwath,"
of the same parish, aged about twenty-four.
In the Calendar at the Registry of Probate, under
the date of June, 1662, and in the column for
Administrations, occurs the name of William Wat
kins, but the Act Book for this year is not in
existence. On the'~i3th February, 1662-3, a marriage licence
was issued from the ofiice of the Vicar-General of
the Archbishop of Canterbury, for Samuel Collins,
of London, doctor of physic, a widower, aged about
40, and "Katherine, Countess of Carnwath, in
Scotland," widow, aged about twenty-six.
In the parish register of St. Martin-in-the-Fields,
Middlesex, under date of 10th November, 1670, is
recorded the baptism of " Diana Collins fil. Samuelis
D.M. et Catharinse Comitissse de Carnwarth."
On the 2nd October, 1707, Samuel Collins, of
St. Martin-in-the-Fields, doctor in physick, made his
will, which was proved in the Prerogative Court of
Canterbury, 5th June, 17 10. He bequeathed certain
lands, &c to his " dear and loving wife, the Right
Honourable Katherine, Countess Dowager of Carn
warth, in the kingdom of Scotland."
His widow made her will on the 15th of May, 1710,
and it was proved in the same Court on the 9th of
August, 1712. She described herself as " Katherine,
Countess Dowager of Camwath, in the kingdom of
Scotland, but now of the parish of St. Martin-in-the-
Fields, in the county of Middlesex, widow, and relict
of Samuel Collins, of the parish and county aforesaid,
doctor of physick, lately deceased." Neither her will,
nor that of Dr. Collins, gives the slightest clue to her
family or antecedents. If, as appears to be the case, she
was the widow of the " Robert, Earl of Camwath,"
buried at St. Margaret's, Westminster, in 1654, she
could have been, from the evidence of the two mar
riage licences, only about seventeen years of age at his
death. She was buried at St. Martin-in-the-Fields, on the
12th of August, 1712, the precise entry in the burial
register being, "My Lady Catharine, Countess
Dowager of Conwath." Joseph Lemuel Chester.

NEWPORT  EARL OF BRADFORD.
Henry Newport, third Earl of Bradford, died 26
December, 1734, and the " Historical Register" states
that he was succeeded by his brother Richard as
fourth Earl. Courthope, in his "Historic Peerage,"
and Ulster King of Arms, in his "Extinct Peerage,"
both adopt this succession ; but that all these authori
ties are equally at fault may readily be inferred from
the fact that Richard Newport's will, as "of Eyton
upon Seavern, co. Salop, esq," dated 27 Aug., 1716,
was proved (C.P.C.) 7 Sept. following, only eighteen
years before the death of his elder brother whom he is
said to have succeeded.
A letter is extant written somewhat later than 1737
by Henrietta Maria Cope (afterwards Mrs. Chetwode,
of Woodbroke, Ireland), third daughter of Sir Jona
than Cope, Bart, of Bniern Abbey, Oxon, " to the
Right Honourable the Countess of Bradford f par
ticulars are desired which will lead to the discovery of
the hitherto unrecorded Countess of this name.
 T. E. S.
POOLEY OF HARTEST, SUFFOLK, AND OF
DUBLIN.
Proof or evidence is desired of the marriage of
Thomas Pooley (described as of Hartest, and also as
of Ipswich), with a daughter and co-heir of Edward
Nevill, of Bentworth, Hants, and of Keymer, Sussex.
Lodge's " Irish Peerage," by Archdall, vol. ii. p.
398. — Brinsley, Viscount Lanesborough, m. Catherine,
dau. and co-heir to Nevil Pooley, of Dublin, esq.,
Counsellor-at-Law (who died in March, 1675, by his
wife Mary, elder dau. of Sir Humphrey Jervais, Lord
Mayor of Dublin for the years 1681 and 1682), third
son of Thomas Pooley, of Hartest, nr. Boxted, Suffolk,
Esq., by Mary, third dau. of Col. Edward Nevil, 2nd
son of the Lord Abergavenny. [Edward Nevil, here
alluded to, is supposed to be the eldest son of Francis
Nevill, of Chichester, and of Keymer, Sussex, who
was 2nd son of Edward, 5th Baron Abergavenny
"surdusNevill."] Lodge's "Irish Peerage," by Archdall, vol. vi.
p. 14;*. Anne Southwell, of London, will dated 22
July, 1657, mentions her brother-in-law, Sir Richard
Southwell, of Singland (co. Limerick, who married
Anne, dau. of Edward Nevill, of Bentworth, afore
said), her dau. Mary, m. to Thomas Pooley, the-
elder, of Dublin, esq., &c. &c. &c.  ...
Betham's "Baronetage," vol. v. p. 531; note.
Frances Pooley, 2nd wife of Sir Richard Hull, Jus
tice Common Pleas) Ireland . . . was granddaughter
of Pooley, Esq., who married the sister of Sir
Richard Southwell. Her father was William Pooley,
of Hartest, nr. St Edmundsbury, Suffolk, he married
Douglas Neville, third daughter and co-heiress of
Edward Neville, Esq. [son and heir of Francis (liv
ing 1623), and son of Edward Nevill, Baron Burga-
venny, 1587, by Catherine, dau. of Sir John Brome,
Knt, of Halton, Oxon], who married Margaret, dau.
of Sir Francis Palmes, Knt William and Douglas
Pooley had with 3 daus, 5 sons, viz, Thomas,
Neville, John, Bishop of Cloyne, w. d. 30 Jan.,
1710 ; Giles (Rev.), in London, and Robert, &c. &c.
The Nevill descent by Lodge and the parentage
of Frances Pooley by Beetham as given above are
both clearly inaccurate.
The following are from the Prerogative Court,
Dublin:— Will of Nevill Pooley, of Dublin, lawyer,
dated 18 March, 1675, mentions— father-inJaw,

32

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Humphrey Jervnise, alderman of Dublin, and his
wife Catherine Jervoise ; " the child my ia ife Marye
now goeth with" ; eldest brother, Thomas Pooley ;
brothers, John (Dean of Kilkenny), Giles, M.A, and
Robert ; sisters, Frances, Catherine, and Elizabeth
wife of Roger Jones : father, Thomas Pooley, and
his mother, Mary, then alive. Among his lega
tees are cousins Thomas Hickman, of Ballyhinan, and
John Gore.
Will of John Pooley, Bishop of Raplioe, dated
30 January, 1710, proved II Oct., 1712, mentions —
brothers, Thomas, Giles, and Robert ; nephew,
Richard Hull ; niece, Frances Hull, child of his sister,
Frances Lady Hull ; sister, Catherine Molineux, now
Campbell, and her two unmarried daughters ; niece,
Elizabeth, daughter of his brother Thomas.
Will of Thomas Pooley, of Dublin, dated 15
Dec, 1722, mentions — wife, Mary; daughter,
Elizabeth Paul ; son-in-law, Joshua Paul ; nephew,
Pooley Molyneux ; sisters, Elizabeth Baskerville,
Frances Lady Hull, Catherine Campbell; niece,
Elizabeth Shuldham ; nephew, Thos. Stopford.
Will of Lieut. Thomas Pooley ("under the com
mand of Captn. Cardogan, now at garison in Dun-
dalk," formerly in " troupe service under the com
mand of Sir Adam Loftus"), dated 31 May, 1642,
mentions — Mother, Ann ; youngest sister, Catherine
(both in England) ; wife, Margaret.
Will of William Poollee (Poolley, or Pooely), dated
7 September, 1636. Proved in same year, mentions
son Thomas ; wife Honnor, and his daughter Alice.

MODE OF ELECTING COMMONS
to serve in parliament of united kingdom
on the part of ireland.
Act of Union of Great Britain and Ireland.
The English Act of Union, 39 & 40 George III, cap.
67, recites The Irish Act, 40 Geo. Ill, cap. 29, whicii
regulates the mode of electing Commons for
Ireland to serve in First Parliament of
United Kingdom.
If the King shall declare before January 1, 180T,
that the Lords and Commons of present Parliament
of Great Britain should be Members of the First
Parliament of United Kingdom (such Proclamation
was dated November 5, 1800, London Gazette, 1800,
page 1253), then the present Members for the
thirty-two Counties of Ireland, and the two Mem
bers for City of Dublin, and the two Members
for City of Cork, shall be Members for the above
Counties and Cities in First Parliament for United
Kingdom, and that on a Day and Hour to be
appointed by His Majesty under the Great
Seal of Ireland, previous to January i, 1801
[the election took place 1 December, 1800] the
Members then serving for the College of Holy
Trinity, Dublin, and for each of the following Cities
and Boroughs (whose names are given at length), or
any five or more of them shall meet in the now
usual flace of meeting of the House of Com
mons of Ireland, and the names of the Members
then serving for the said Places and Boroughs shall
be written on separate pieces of paper, to be folded
up, placed in a glass, and then to be successively
drawn thereout by the Clerk of the Crown ; and the
first-drawn name of a Member of each of aforesaid
places shall be taken as the name of the Member to
serve for the said place in the First Parliament of
the United Kingdom, and Clerk of Crown to return
such names to House of Commons of First Parlia
ment of United Kingdom.
And it is hereby provided that any Member may
withdraw his name previous to the drawing of
the names by lot, and in this case, or in case of one
vacancy by death or other cause, the other Member
shall be returned as the sitting Member ; or if

both Members shall withdraw their names, or if there
shall be a vacancy of both Members at the time atore-
said, the Clerk of Crown shall certify such fact to
House of Commons, and shall also certify whether
any writ has issued for Election of a Member or
Members to supply such vacancy. .
And if a writ has issued for the Election of one
Member only, such writ shall be superseded and be of
no effect; but if such writ has issued for the election
of t-wo Members, the said two Members shall be
chosen accordingly, and tlieir names being returned to
House of Commons, one of the said names shall lie
drawn by lot in such manner and time as the said
House shall direct, and the name drawn shall be
deemed to be the sitting Member ; but if no writ has
issued to supply such vacancy, none shall thereafter
issue without order by a resolution of the House.
NAMF5 AND DATES OF ELECTIONS OF THE LAST
Representatives of the following Consti
tuencies ARE DESIRED TO COMPLETE THE LlST OF
Members in the last Irish Parliament : —
Co. Galway. — A vacancy 2 Aug, 1800. Richard
Martin probably elected.
Co. Meath. — A vacancy I Aug, 1 800. Sir Marcus
Somerville probably elected.
Co. Wexford. — A vacancy 1 Aug, iSoo. Viscount
Loftus probably re-elected. Boroughs —
* Ardfert. — A vacancy 1 Aug,, 1800.
* Banagher.. — A vacancy 28 May, 1800.
Belfast. — A vacancy I March, 1800. Robert Con
greve probably re-elected ; resigned before the Union.
* Dingle-Icouch. — A vacancy 2 Aug., 1800.
* Doneraile. — A vacancy 15 Jan., 1800.
Dungannon. — A vacancy 18 July, 1800. Hon.
John Knox, probably elected.
* Enniscorthy. — A vacancy 1 1 June, 1800.
* Lanesborough. — A vacancy I Aug., 1800.
* Killyleagh. — A vacancy 13 Feb., 1800.
* Roscommon. — A vacancy I Aug., 1800.
* These boroughs were disfranchised at tlie Union.

THE PRINCE IMPERIAL MEMORIAL.
The memorial to Prince Louis Napoleon, sculp
tured by Mr. J. E. Boehm, has now been fixed in the
Braye Chapel, in St. George's Chapel, Windsor. The
site was chosen by the Queen, and to make room for
the memorial an ancient font has been removed. At
the base is the foUowing inscription j —
"Napoleoni
Ludovico Eugenio Johanni Josepho,
Napoleonis III. Francorum Imperatoris,
et Eugenise Imperatricis,
Filio unico
Amici lugentes hoc monumentum posuerunt.
Natus Martii XVI. MDCCCLVI. Obiit Junii I.
MDCCCLXXIX."
Upon the opposite side : —
" Iuvenem desideratissimum
In Bello Africano
Nostrorum commilitonem occisum,
Inde ad sepulchrum partis deportation,
Regina Victoria,*
In sanclo hoc Regum domicilio funebri mamiore
Repr_esentatumr
Hospitem tanquam suum amplectitur."
Upon a tablet there is the following extract from
the Prince's will: — "Je mourrai avec un sentiment
de profonde gratitude pour Sa Majeste la Reine
d'Angleterre, pour toute la famille royale, et pour le
pays ou j'ai recu pendant huit ans une si cordiale
hospitalite. Testament du Prince Imperial, 26
Fevrier, 1879." The centre tablet at the right of the
base contains the prayer of the Prince, which was
found after his death. — Times, 28 May.

Crrata
IN THE OFFICIAL RETURN OF THE MEMBERS OF THE IRISH
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The following list of errata — not perhaps quite exhaustive, but at any rate of sufficiently
formidable proportions — speaks for itself as to the imperfect and careless manner in which the
parliamentary return of the names of members elected to serve in the parliaments of the
three kingdoms was compiled. It would not be difficult to expose similar though perhaps
less wholesale blundering in the other portions of the Return. At present, however, I draw
attention only to that part which refers to the Irish Parliaments before the Union.
This portion bears the signature of Sir Samuel Feiguson, Deputy Keeper of the Public
Records in Ireland. I do not know whether the Deputy Keeper or any one in his office has
ever devoted any special attention to the personnel of the Parliaments of Ireland ; but I take it
(although the contrary inference may fairly be assumed) that he is at any rate acquainted not
only with the existence of the Journals of the House of Commons, but also with Lodge's
Parliamentary Register, now in Ulster's office, (of which the greater part is printed in the "Liber
Munerum Publicorum Hiberniae," compiled by Mr. Rowley Lascelles,) to which his official
position would doubtless have given him access.
Certainly it was not too much to expect that amongst the officials of the Public Record
Office in Ireland there might have been some Irishmen sufficiently acquainted, for instance,
with the great governing families of Ireland to have recognised the identity of "William
Burton" of 1776 with "the Right. Hon. William Conyngham" of a few years later; or
some one familiar enough with the political career of Henry Grattan to have observed that
this return contains no record of his first entry into parliamentary life, and to have supplied
the omission before it was made public Another great Irishman, the Marquis Wellesley,
who, before his accession to his father's peerage, represented his family borough ih the
Lower House, is omitted altogether. Of the members whose fame has not survived them,
the following list will show that dozens, nay, scores, have either been omitted altogether,
or blunders made in recording the occasion of their entry into or disappearance from
Parliament One very striking point about the Return is that for all the parliaments^, m 1695 A. r8oo
not one single date ofa bye-election has been recorded; another is that ofthe many cases in which
members have died and been succeeded by sons or relatives of the same name, hardly one
has been noted — apparently the possibility of two different persons bearing the same name
and representing the same constituency in the same parliament has not occurred to the
enlightened minds of the persons to whom has been entrusted the task of preparing what
should have been a most valuable addition to historical literature. Let it not be supposed
that the revisional labour required to make this Return more nearly perfect would have
entailed any stupendous efforts. The whole of the corrections in the following list, with the
exception of those in the last Irish parliament, which are supplied by Mr. Foster, I am
enabled to make by just one week's work at the British Museum, in going through the
Journals of the Irish House of Commons with the aid of the index of writs issued for bye-
elections, which will be found in Lascelles' compilation, and the lists of members con
tained in successive issues of the Royal Kalendar. I myself compiled a MS. list of Irish
members before this Return was published, and it is literally the truth that I have not found
one single additional fact, nor have I been enabled to correct my list to the extent of one
iota by the aid of Sir S. Ferguson's labours, though I had not unnaturally expected that the
issuing of the Blue Book would supply all my desiderata, and set me right in any errors
into which I might have fallen. Yet I have never even seen a copy ofa single Dublin Gazette,
nor have I been inside the Irish Record Office, or addressed a query to any Irish official
on the subject Surely Sir S. Ferguson, with the aid which his official position necessarily
places at his command, might have secured at least as complete and correct information as
lay within the reach of my unassisted researches.
I have no hesitation in saying that this Return, published with the signature ofthe Deputy
Keeper of the Records, and therefore presumably prepared by persons having access to all
.the original authorities, whether in manuscript or printed, is positively discreditable. The
Return professes to be accurate, and, as nearly as can be ensured, exhaustive : in fact it is
neither the one nor the other, and its pretension to be so is little short of a disingenuous hoax
upon the literary public.
Collect. tt

34

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Those who have occasion to consult such compilations need not be reminded that without
the most scrupulous care they are worse than useless, for they are actually misleading. _ It is
earnestly to be hoped that before the mischief become irreparable, and the opportunity be
thus irrevocably lost of producing a really valuable work of reference, some steps may be at
once taken to repair the shortcomings which have rendered the return thoroughly untrust
worthy, and have caused public money to be spent in vain.
An index is being compiled by the officials of the Public Record Office, England ; it is
most desirable that it should not be printed until a second and revised edition of the official
return of the members of parliament has been published, otherwise it will, at best, be but
another record of so much more additional waste of public money and of quite as much editorial
supineness. Preston, October 1881. Alfred B. Beaven, M.A.

Parliament of 1595-1727.
Antrim county. 1665. Skeffington "de
ceased" should be "succeeded to the
[Peerage."
Bei.turbet. " 1662." F.Butler, shouldbe
[" 1663."
Mallow. 1661. "Mayward" St. Leger
{should be " Hayward."
Killybegs. 1665. "Shouldbe Lyndon vice
Burton" "1665, Nov., Richard Murray;
1666, Feb. 14, John Lyndon, on petition."
Kerry county. 1661. "Blennerhasset"
should be " Richard Chute; 1661, July 8,
[John Blennerhasset, on petition."
Callan. Omitted " new writ issued 18 Nov.
1634, vice Maltravers, absent in England."
Tralee. 1634. vice Radcliff, elected for
"borough" of Armagh should be "county."
Kilkenny county. 1692. Richard " Cook "
[should be " Coote."
Bannow. 1692. John "Smith" should be
["Cliffe."
Mallow. "New writ issued 2.9 Dec. 1698,
[vice Jephson deceased."
Gorey. 1692. For "John Chichester" read
"Andrew Ram; 1692, Nov. 1, on pe
tition John Chichester."
.Limerick. Omitted "new writ -issued 23
[Nov. 1677, viceCoghlan deceased."
Kilkenny city. 1703. For "Tulistein" rc.../
{"Zulistrin."
Philipstown, 1 7 13. Omitted "new writ
issued vice Forster (elected to sit for
[Dublin), Dec. 16 1713."
Ratoath. 1 7 13. Omitted " new writ issued
, vice Lowther (elected for Coleraine),
[Dec. 23 1 7 13."

Youghal. 1715-27. Omitted "i72i,Oct. 7,
vice Hyde deceased, Arthur Hyde, Richard
Fitzgerald, double return; 1721, Oct 26,
[A. Hyde seated."

Killybegs. 1715.

For "Thomas" Colvill
[nad" Robert"
Killyleagh. Omitted" 1725, Sept 18, vice
Haltridge deceased, James Stevenson of
[Kfflyleagh."
Drogheda. 17 15. The return gives
"Henry Singleton expelled.
John Graham (after deceased).
John Leigh.
Edward Singleton,"
which is erroneous as to the expulsion of
H. Singleton and barely intelligible in other
respects. Read
'" Henry Singleton,
John Graham,
1717, Sept 2, vice Graham (deceased),
John Leigh expelled Sept. 17 1727 ;
1727, Nov. 1, vice Leigh expelled,
Edward Singleton."
Longford county. For "Sir Thomas
[Newcomen " read " Sir Robert."
Lanesborogh. Omitted "171 5, Nov. 29,
[Wentworth Harman, Robert Bray seated."
Dundalk. For •« Brooks" read " Brooke."
Mayo county. Omitted "1 717-8,. Jan. 10/
vice Cuffe deceased, Arthur Onnsby ; 171 9,
[July 27, Michel Cuffe, on petition."
Tulsk. T715. For" Henry" Caulfield r«.</
["Thomas."
Sligo county. Omitted " 1.719^ July 2 1, vice
Coote deceased, Francis Onnsby; 1719,
[Oct. 8, Joshua Cooper, on petition."
Clonmel. 1715. Fox'1 Robert Hamilton"
[read " Hamerton."
Fethard. Omitted " 1 7 1 9, Aug. 1 2, Joseph
Slatterie, vice Marsh deceased ; 171 9, Oct.
[10, on petition, Guy Moore."

ERRATA.

35

Lismore. 17 15. The return gives
"Sir ArthurShaen, Bart, (after deceased),
Right Hon. Lieut-Gen. Thomas Mere-
(after deceased),
Sir John Osborne, Bart,
Hugh Dixon."
A more accurate and precise statement is:
" Sir Arthur Shaen, Bart,
Right Hon. Thomas Meredyth,
171 9, Aug., vice Meredyth (deceased),
Sir John Osborne, Bart.,
1725, Sept., vice Shaen (deceased),
Right Hon. Thomas Clutterbuck,
1725, Nov., vice Clutterbuck (elected for
Hugh Dixon," [Ljsburn),
Wexford county. Omitted " 172 1, Sept.,
[vice Stopford deceased, James'Stopford."
Gorey. Omitted " 1725, Nov., vice George
Ram deceased, Stephen Ram, esq., of
[Middle Temple.
Parliament of _;727-i76o.
Belfast. 1727. For " William Macartney,
in place of David John Barry deceased,"
read " 1745, Nov. 14, vice Barry deceased,
Hon. John Chichester; 1747, Oct
13, vice Chichester deceased, William
[Macartney."
Carrickfergus. 1727. For "Arthur
Upton, in place of John Lyndon de
ceased," read " 1741, Oct. 20, vice Lyndon
deceased, Francis Clements; 1 741-2,
Jan. 6, vice Clements deceased, George
Evans, Arthur Upton, double return;
[1741-2, Jan. 25, Arthur Upton seated."
Cavan borough. 1727. For " Right Hon.
' Henry ' Weston, in place of ' Henry '
Clements deceased," read " 1745, Oct 28,
vice ' Hemry ' Clements deceased, ' Ro
bert' Clements; 1747, Oct. 22, vice
' Robert ' Clements deceased, Right Hon.
['Edward' Weston."
Clare county. 1727. For "Sir Edward
O'Brien, Bart," read " George Purdon ;"
1727-8, Feb. 1 6, Si^ Edward O'Brien,
[Bart., on petition."
Kinsale 1727. For " Richard Ponsonby,
in place of Edward Southwell deceased,"
read " 1731, Oct. 2.2, vice Southwell
deceased, Gervais Parker;" 1731, Nov.
[23, Richard Ponsonby, on petition."
Rathcormack. 1727. For "Redmond Barry
deceased," read "elected for Tallagh."
For "John Magill, esq, in place of
James Barry deceased," read " 1743, Oct
26, vice James Barry deceased, Brettridge
Badham; 1745. Oct. 19, vice Badham,
[deceased, John Magill."

Donegal county. 1727. For "Sir St George
Gore, Bart, in place of Hon. Gustavus
Hamilton deceased," read " 1735, Oct 30,
vice Gustavus Hamilton deceased, George
Knox; i74r, Oct 26, vice Knox
[deceased, Sir StGeorge Gore, Bart1
Ballyshannon. Omitted "1727, Dec. 7,
vice Conolly (elected for Londonderry
[county), William Conolly, Jun."
Bangor. 1727. For Michael "Maude"
««<_•" Ward."
Newry. Omitted " i75r, Nov. r, vice Ross
[deceased, Robert Scott"
Dublin university. 1727. For "Philip
Tisdall, in place of Marmaduke Coghill
deceased," read " ^39, Oct 31, vice
Coghill deceased, Alexander McAuley }
1739, Nov. 29, Philip Tisdall, on petition."
Galway town. 1727. Omitted" 1732, April
17, vice Thomas Staunton deceased,
Thomas Staunton." After "in place of
- [Richard Fitzpatrick," read "on petition."
Dingle Icquch. 1727. After " in place of
John Percival," read v succeeded to the
[peerage.'
Tralee. 1727. Omitted " 1743, Oct ?7,
vice A. Blennerhasset (appointed a judge
of the king's bench), Hon. Thomas
Southwell; 1743, Dec. T7, on petition,
[Arthur Blennerhasset."
Naas. 1727. Omitted " 1737, Oct. 23
vice Thomas Burgh deceased, Thomas
[Buigh."
Kilkenny connty. ^27. Omitted" 1747,
Oct 23, vice Patrick Weymes deceased,
[Pato-ick Weymes."
St. Canice. 5727. For "Harvey Morris,
in place of James Agsur,''' read " 1733-4,
Jan. 30, vice Agar deceased, Richard Read ;
1734, April 19, Harvey " Morres," on
petition." For ""Eland Mossom, in place of
Harvey Morres, Lord Montmones," read
"1756, May 17, vice Morres, (created a
peer), Charies, Viscount' Moore; 1759,
Oct 25, vice Moore (succeeded to the
[peerage), Ekmd Mossom."
Banagher. 1727. for "Richard Trench,
in place of George Holmes deceased,
Henry L'Estrange, in place of William
Spngge deceased," read " 1734, May 28,
vice George Holmes deceased, Galbraith
Holmes; 1735, Nov. 8, vice Sprigge de
ceased, Robert Holmes; 1735, Dec. 12, on
petition, vice Galbraith Holmes and
Robert Holmes, Richard Trench, Henry
[L'Estrange."

36

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Leitrim county. 1727. Omitted "1729-30,
March 12, vice William Gore deceased,
[William Gore."
Jamestown. 1727. For "John Gore, in
place of Robert French, Justice of the
Common Tleas,read "1745, Oct. 22, vice
French (appointed judge of common
pleas), Rt-Hon. Richard Liddell;" 1747,
Oct. 26, vice Liddell deceased, John Gore."
Limerick city. 1727. For " Richard
Maunsell " in place bf Thomas Pearce
deceased," read" 1739, Oct 29, vice Pearce
deceased, William Wilson ; 1741, Oct. 31,
[vice Wilson deceased, Richard Maunsell."
Londonderry county. 1727. Omitted
"1743, Oct 14, vice Hercules Rowley
. [deceased, Hercules Langford Rowley."
Coleraine. 1727. For " Henry Cary,
Thomas Jackson," read Matthew Penne-
father, Henry Cary; 1727-8, Feb. 16, vice
Pennefather (elected for Cashel), Thomas
Jackson." Omitted " 1751, Oct 25, vice
Thomas Jackson deceased, Richard Jack-
[son."
Londonderry city. 1727. For "Henry
Hamilton, in place of Robert Norman,
William Hamilton, in place of William
Scott, Justice of the King's Bench," read
"1743, Nov. 16, vice Norman deceased,
Frederick Cary Hamilton; 1747, Oct 30,
vice F. G Hamilton deceased, Henry
Hamilton; 1759, Nov. 9, vice Scott
(appointed a Judge of king's bench,)
William Hamilton, unseated on petition
Feb. 20, 1760; 1760, March 18, vice W.
Hamilton unseated, Alexander Stewart ;
1760, May 8, on petition, William Ham
ilton."
Newtown Limavaddy. 1727. For "Isaac
Manley, Thomas Medlicott," read " Isaac
Manley, Thomas Marlay; 1727-8, March
5, vice Marlay (elected for Lanes borough),
[Thomas Medlycott."
For " Edmond Leslie Corry, in place of
Thomas Medlicott deceased," read " 1739,
Oct 25, vice "Medlicott deceased, Edward
Riggs; 1741, Dec. r8, vice Riggs deceased,
[Edmond Leslie Corry."
Ardee. 1727. Omitted " 1751, Oct. 23, vice
[William Ruxton deceased, John Ruxton."
Dunleer. 1727. For "Francis North,
William Tenison," read "Henry Single
ton (Prime Serjeant), Francis North; 1727,
Dec. 7, vice Singleton (elected for Drog-
[heda), William Tenison."
Mayo county. 1727. Omitted " 1749, Oct
30, vice Sir John Bingham, Bart., deceased,
[Sir John Bingham, Bart."

Athboy. 1727. For " Hon. Thomas Bligh,
Robert Napper," read "Thomas Bligh,
Richard Ashe; 1727-8, Jan. 16, vice Ashe
(elected for Trim), Robert Napper." Omit
" Robert Napper in place of William Nap
per deceased, William Napper in place of
[Robert Napper deceased."
Trim. 1727. For " William Francis Crosbie,
in plaec of Chichester Fortescue deceased,"
read. "1757, Oct 22, vice Fortescue de
ceased, Hon. Garrett Wesley; 1758, Feb.
13, vice Wesley (succeeded to the peerage),
[William Francis Crosbie."
Monaghan county. 1727. For " John Murry,
in place of Hon. Thomas Coote deceased,"
read" 17 41, Oct. 28, vice Coote deceased,
John Montgomery; 1741, Dec. 9, vice
[Montgomery deceased, John Murray."
Monaghan borough. 1727. For "William
Blair, in place of Sir Henry Cairnes decea
sed," read 1743, Oct. 26, vice Cairnes
deceased, John Dawson; 1747, Oct 16,
vice Dawson deceased, and Lucas
[deceased, William Blair, Baptist Johnson.
Boyle. 1727. Omitted" 1749, Oct. 24, vice
Sir Robert King (created a peer), Edward [King."
Tipperary county. 1727. For "Kingsmill
Pennefather, George Mathew,' 'read "Kings-
mill Pennefather, James Dawson; 1727-8,
Jan. 15, on petition, vice Dawson, George
[Mathew."
Clonmel. 1727. Read "Stephen Moore,
Guy Moore; 1727-8, Feb. 19, on petition,
Robert Hamerton, Robert Marshall ; 1733,
Oct 25, vice Hamerton deceased, Guy
Moore; 1733, Dec. 10, on petition, vice
Moore, Right Hon. Sir Thomas Prender
gast, Bart.; 1755, Oct- 2°> vice Marshall
(appointed a judge of the common pleas),
Guy Moore; 1756, Jan. T9, on petition,
vice Moore, William Bagwell; 1757, Oct.
[24, vice Bagwell deceased, Guy Moore."
Waterford county. For " Beverley Usher
in place of Edward May deceased," read
" 1729-30, March 9, vice Edward May
deceased, James, Viscount Villiers ; 1733,
Oct. 27, vice Villiers deceased, James
May; i735» Oct. 23, vice James May
deceased, Ambrose Congreve , 1735, Dec.
3, On petition, vice Congreve, Beverley
[Usher, jun."
Waterford city. 1727. For "Robert Carew,
in place, of John Mason deceased," read
" 1738, March 25, vice Mason deceased,
Ambrose Congreve; 1739, Nov. 22, on
[petition, Robert Carew."

ERRATA.

37

Lismore. 1727. For "Hon. Ponsonby
Moore, in place of Right Hon. William
Bristow deceased," read "1758, May,
vice Bristow deceased, Hon. Charles
Boyle; 1759, Oct., vice Boyle deceased,
[Hon. Ponsonby Moore."
Wexford county. 1727. For "Andrew
Ram, in place of Nicholas Loftus,
Lord Viscount Loftus," read " 1751, Oct.,
vice Loftus (created a peer), Arthur Jones
Nevill, expelled, Nov. 23, 1753; 1754,
Jan. 12, vice Nevill (expelled), Robert
Leigh; 1755, Nov. 29, on petition, vice
[Leigh, Andrew Ram."
Wicklow borough. For "Samuel Walter
Whitshed " read " Samuel . Waiter
[Whitshed."
Parliament of 1761-1768.
Donegal borough. Omitted " 1768, Feb.,
[new writ and return, vice Doyne deceased."
Kerry county. " Hon. Thomas Fitzmaurice,
in place of John Blennerhassett deceased ; "
[after "Blennerhassett" insert "junior."
Callan. Omitted "Patrick Weymes re
elected after being unseated on petition
[1762, Jan."
Instead of "John Flood in place of James
Weymes deceased," read "1765, Nov. 2,
Jocelyn Flood vice James Weymes de
ceased; 1767, Nov. 2, John Flood, jun.,
[vice Jocelyn Flood deceased."
Banagher. Instead of " Henry Prittie, jun.,
in place of John Pigott deceased," read
" 1764, Jan. 13. Sir John Meade, Bart, vice
Pigot, deceased; 1767, Nov. 6, Henry
[Prittie, jun., vice Meade (created a peer)."
Limerick county. Omitted " 1767, Dea 14,
vice Southwell (succeeded to the peerage),
[Hon. Thomas Arthur Southwell."
Newtown Limavaddy. Instead of " John
Staples, in place of E. L. Cory deceased,"
read " 1765, Nov. 2, vice Cory (deceased),
Arthur Magan; 1765, Dec. 14, vice Magan
[(unseated), John Staples."
Longford county. Instead of " Wentworth
Parsons, in place of John Gore, lord chief
justice of king's bench," read " 1765,
Nov. 19, vice Gore (appointed lord chief
justice of the king's bench), Hon. Edward
Michael Pakenham; 1766, June* 2, vice
Pakenham (succeeded to the peerage),
[Wentworth Parsons."
Baltinglass. Omitted "1763, Nov., vice
John Stratford (created a peer), Hon. John
[Stratford."

Parliament of 1769-76.
Charlemont. Omithd(}.S) "1775, Dec,
[vice Caulfeild deceased, Henry Grattan."
Cavan county. Omitted " 1779, Dec, vice
Barry (succeeded to the peerage), Hor.
[John James Barry MaxwelL"
Cavan borough. For "in place of Nathaniel
Clements deceased," read " elected for Lei-
[trim county."
Ennis. Omitted "1773, vice M'Donnell
[deceased, Edward O'Brien."
Baltimore. For "in place of 'Sir John
Freke* deceased," read " 'Richard Tonson,
[deceased."
Castlemartyr. Omitted " 1775, vice Colt-
[hurst deceased, John Bennett"
Ballyshannon. Omitted " 1775, vice
[Clarke deceased, Thomas Smyth."
Killyleagh. Omitted " May 1774, vice
Ikerrin (succeeded to the peerage), Hon.
[Pierce Buder."
Newtown borough. Omitted "1775, vice
Le Hunte deceased and Morres deceased
Cornelius O'Callaghan, sen., Arthur Daw-
[son.:'
Kerry county. Omitted " 1775, vice John
Blennerhasset deceased, Arthur Blenner
hasset"
Tuam. Instead of "William 'Tonson,' in
place of Richard 'Power,'" and "Hugh
' Carleton,' in place of William ' Hull,' "
read" 'Tonson' in place of 'Hull,' and
['Carleton ' in place of ' Power.' "
Tralee. Omitted " 1775,— vice Denny de
ceased, Boyle Roche."
Harristown. Omitted "1775, vice Fitz-
Gerald deceased, Thomas Burgh of
[Oldtown."
Londonderry city. Omitted "1775, vice
[Andrews deceased, James Alexander."
Longford county. Omitted "1775, vice
Pakenham deceased, Lawrence Harman
[Harman."
Castlebar. Omitted "i775» vice Knox
[deceased, John Hamilton.
Athboy. Omitted " 1775, Nov., vice Bligh
[deceased, Hon. John Crosbie."
Monaghan county. 1775. Omitted "vice
[Lucas deceased, Thomas Tenison."

38

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Portarlington. Instead' of " ' Joseph Daw
son,' in place of 'William Henry Dawson,'"
read " 1771, March n, vice W. H. Daw
son (created a peer), Thomas Butler; 1 773,
vice Butler deceased, Hon. Joseph Daw-.
[son."
Roscommon county. Omitted "1769, Dec.
4, John French, Thomas Mahon, declared
duly elected; 1775, Dec, vice John
[French deceased, Arthur French."
Boyle. Omitted " new writ issued Feb. 2,3
[1776, vice Richard FitzGerald deceased."
Tulske. Instead of " ' Nicholas Westby,'
. in place of 'William Caulfeild,'" _--•<-_/'-'-_: 771,
March 26, vice William Caulfeild deceased,
Toby Caulfeild ; 1772, April 25, vice Toby
t. [Caulfeild deceased, Nicholas Westby."
Westmeath county. Omitted "1775, vice
Bellfield (succeeded to the peerage), George
[Rochfort."
Baltinglass. Omitted "1775, Oct., vice Lill
(appointed a judge of the common " pleas),
[Hon Edward Stratford."
Carysfort. Omitted "1771, March, vice
Right Hon. Sir Robert Deane, Bart.,
deceased, Sir Robert Tilson Deane, Bart."

Parliament of 1776-1783*
Ennis. " Right Hon. William Conyngham
in place of William Burton, esq." This
is a freak of the compiler's imagination.
Mr. Burton was sworn a privy councillor
April 26 1777, thus deriving the prefix
"right hon.;" and on May 3 1781, he
took the name " Conyngham " in lieu of
[his patronymic.
Tralee. Instead of " in place of Hon. John
Crosbie, Lord Crosbie," read " in place of
[Crosbie elected for Ardfert"
Kilkenny. For " Gervase P. Bushe, in place
of Ralph Gore deceased," read " 1778,
March, vice Gore deceased, Charles Agar ;
1778, July 28, on petition, vice Agar,
[Gervais Parker Bushe."
Kilmallock. For " Right Hon. Silver Oliver,
William Christmas, esq.," read " Right
Hon. Silver Oliver, Thomas Smyth, Esq. ;"
1777, Oct., vice Smyth (elected for Lime-
[rick city), William Christmas."
Cashel. Omitted "1777, Oct, vice Richard
Pennefather deceased, Richard Penne-
[father."

Mayo. Omitted " 1782, August, vice Hon.
George Browne deceased, Hon. Denis
[Browne.
Trim. Qmitted " 1780, June, vice Fortescue
deceased, Hon, Richard Wellesley, by
courtesy Viscount Wellesley" (afterwards
celebrated Marquis Wellesley); and instead
of "William Arthur Crosbie, in place of
Fortescue deceased," read " 1781, vice
' Wellesley ' (succeeded to the peerage as
« Earl of Mornington '), William Arthur
[Crosbie."
Queen's County. For "Charles Henry
[Cook" read "Coote."
Sligo county.. Instead of "Owen Wynne,
j,uiu" read " Right Hon. Owen Wynne, un
seated May 7, i778-"
Omitted" 1778 May, vice Right Hon.
[Owen Wynne (unseated)
Owen Wynne, jun."
Sligo borough. Omitted "1777 Nov., vice
Richard Hely Hutchinson (elected for
Dublin University), John Wynne ;"
" 1 7 7 8, Mar. 1 6, R ichard Hely Hutchinson
reinstated in his seat, and the writ of Oct
27i 1777. and return to the same taken off
*' [the file."
Parliament of 1783-90.
Armagh borough. Omitted " 1790 January,
[vice Meredyth (deceased),
Henry Duquery."
Carlow borough. Omitted " 1789 Dec,
[vice Browne (created a peer),
Hon. James Caulfeild Browne."
Ennis. For " Wddon" read " Wddon."
Lifford. Qmitted " 1^89, vice Lawless
[(created a peer),
Edward Cooke."
St. Johnstown borough. Omitted " 1789,
[vice Howard (succeeded to the peerage),
Hon. Hugh Howard."
Dvblin county. Qmitted " 1789, vice
Gardiner (created a peer), William, Lord
Ardee ; 1790 Feb., vice Ard'ee (succeeded
[to the peerage),
John Find lay."
Athenry. Omitted "1789, vice John
[Blakeney (deceased),
William Blakeney."
Kilkenny county. Omitted "1789 Feb.,
[vice Agar (succeeded to the peerage),
Walter Butler."

ERRATA.

39

Banagher. Omitted " 1788 or 1789, vice
[Swan (deceased),
William Tighe." ¦
Kilmallock. Omitted" 17 89, vice Fitzgibbon
[(created a £eer),
Charles William Bury."
Coleraine. Omitted" 1789, vice Jackson,
[(deceased),
George Jackson."
Longford county. Omitted "1/789, vice Gore
[(created a peer),
Sir William Gleadowe Newcomen, Bart" ;
Parliament of 1 790-1797.
Lisburn. Omitted " 1791 March 48, vice
Hatton and Moore (unseated on petition)
George Hatton and John Moore re-elected;
1796 Jan., vice Hatton (appointed to an
office of profit), George Hatton re-elected."
Randalstown. For " Michael " Cony read
["Edward."
Old Leighlin. Omitted "June 1795,
Edward Cooke re-elected on accepting
[office; Oct. 1796, ditto."
Cavan county. Omitted " Nathaniel Sneyd,
[vice Maxwell succeeded to the peerage."
Cork county. Omitted "April 17 91, vice
Kingsborough (unseated on petition), Vis-
[count Kingsborough re-elected."
Castlemartyr. For " John Hobson, jun. "
( bis) read" Sir Nicholas Conway Colthurst, {Bart."
Clonakilty. For "Sir Nicholas C. Colt
hurst, Bart, in place of Thomas Adderley"
read "John Hobson, jun., esq."; omit
"John Hobson, esq., in place of Sir
[Nicholas C. Colthurst"
Newtown ards. Omitted "1796 Feb., vice
[Latouche (deceased),
John Latouche, jun."
Naas. For " John Bond," read " James
Bond," and omit " Sir James Bond, Bart.
[in place of John Bond, Esq."
Galway county. Omitted "1792 Feb., vice
Blake (unseated on petition), Joseph Henry
[Blake re-elected .
Parliament of 1798-1800.
Belfast. Omitted " 1800 Feb., vice Cfook-
[shank, escheator of Munster,
John Congreve, junr."
Armagh. Patrick "Dungertan,LLD.,"--^»/-? [be " Duigenan."

Ennis. Omit/ed" John Ormsby Vandeleur
of K__nish, re-election (Feb. 1800) on having
accepted the office of a commissioner of
[his majesty's revenue."
CastlEjSarIyr. Omitted " John Townsend,
re-election (Fe{>. 1800) on having accepted
the office ofa commissioner of his majesty's
[revenue."
ClonakiltY. Omitted "John Hobson, re
election (April 1799) on having accepted
[office of storekeeper of the ordnance."
Cork city. 'Omitted "Mountiford Long-
field, re-election (Feb. 1800) on having
accepted office of a commissioner of his
[majesty's revenue."
Donerxii_e. Omitted " 1800 Jan., vice St.
[Leger, escheator of Ulster,
Francis Prittie."
Kinsale. Omitted "William Rowley, re
election (July 1798) having accepted office
[of a commissioner of accounts."
Middleton. Omitted "Richard Hardinge,
re-election (about July 1798) having ac
cepted office of surveyor-general of cus
toms."
Youghal. Omitted "Robert Uniacke, re
election (Feb. 1800) having accepted office
of surveyor-general of his majesty's ord
inance."
Donegal. William "Smyth," should be
["Smith."
Killybeggs. Omitted "Richard Archdall,
re-election (Aug. 1798) having accepted
[office of commissioner of barracks."
St. Johnston (co. Donegal). Omitted "Hon.
Hugh Howard, re-election~(March 1799)
having accepted office of escheator of
Ulster." Omitted "Rt Hon. William Forward,
re-election (Feb. 1800) having accepted
[office of treasurer of post office."
Newry. Omitted "*• Rt Hon. Isaac Corry,
re-election (June 1798 and Feb. 1799)
having accepted the office of surveyor-
general of his majesty's lands and manors,
and also chancellor of exchequer Ireland."
Drogheda. Omitted "Edward Hardman,
re-election (March 1798) having been
[declared not duly returned."
Enniskillen. Omitted " Hon. Arthur Cole-
Hamilton, re-election (July 17.98) having
accepted office as a commissioner of
[barracks."

40

COLLECTANEA GENEALGv

Galway co. Omitted "Aug. 1800, vice
[Joseph Henry Blake, cr. Lord Wallscourt,
Richard Martin."
Galway (town). Omitted " St. George Daly,
re-election (Feb. T799) on appointment as
[his majesty's prime sergeant-at-law."
Tuam. Omitted "Hon. Walter Yelverton,
re-election (Feb. 1800) on appointment as
[cursitor in court of chancery."
Kerry co.. Omitted "Maurice Fitzgerald,
. re-election (Feb. 1800) on appointment as
[commissioner of his majesty's revenue."
Ardfert. Omitted " Aug. 1800, vice John
Talbot, appointed a gentleman at large to
¦ [the lord lieutenant,
Matthew Franks."
Dingle Icouch. "William" should be
"William Thomas" MonselL Omitted"the
election (speaker's warrant 2 Aug. 1800) in
place of Lodge Morres, cr. Baron Frank fort"
Naas. Omitted " Hon. Francis Hely Hutchin
son, re-election (Jan. 1800) having ac
cepted office of collector of port of Dublin."
Knocktopher. Omitted " Sir George Shee,
re-election (Jan. 1800), on having accepted
office as secretary to commissioners of the
[treasury."
Banagher. Omitted "June 1800, vice
[Edward Hoare," escheator of Munster,
John Philpot Curran."
Carrick. Omitted "William Gore, re-election
(Jan. 1800) having accepted office of com
missioner of barracks.'>
Newtown Limavaddy. The representation
should be
" 1. Rt. Hon. Robert Stewart, commonly
called Lord Viscount Casdereagh.
2. Hon. Richard Trench.
3. John Maxwell, afterwards Barry, in
place of Mr. Trench, who made his election
for Galway county.
4. General Eyre Power Trench, in place
of Lord Castlereagh, who made his election
for Down county.
5. Hon. Charles Trench, in place of
General Eyre Power Trench, escheator of
[Munster."
The compound error in the official return is
caused by the compiler having treated John
Maxwell and John Barry as if they were
two separate persons, and not (as is the
[fact) the same person.

Lanesborough. Omitted " 1800 Aug., vice
Martin, appointed gentleman at large to
John Kelly." [^ lord lieutenant,
St. Johnstown, county Longford. Omitted
" 1800 Jan., vice Moore, escheator of
Robert Shaw." £MunSter'
Castlebar. For " Thomas Lindsey, jun.,
accepted the office of escheator of Ulster,"
[read " sen."
Meath county. Omitted " 1800 Aug., vice
Hoa Clotworthy Rowley, created Baron
[Langford,
Sir Marcus Somerville, Bart"
Duleek. Charles Montague-Ormsby, re
election (Jan. 1800), having accepted office
[as a commissioner of barracks.
Trim. William Arthur Crosbie, re-election
(Aug. 1798), having accepted office as a
commissioner for managing stamp duties.
Monaghan county. Omitted " Aug. 1800,
[vice Charles Powell Leslie (deceased),
Warner William Westenra."
Boyle. Col. Robert King, re-election (Jan.
1800), having accepted office of escheator
[of Munster.
Roscommon borough. Omitted "1800, Aug,
vice Henry Moore Sandford, created Baron
[Mount Sandford,
Maurice Copinger."
Dungannon. Omitted " 1800 Aug., vice
Richard Fortescue Starkey, escheator of
Hon. John Knox." [Munster,
Westmeath county. For " Gustavus Roch-
[fort" read "Gustavus Hume Roehfort"
Wexford county. Omitted "John Loftus,
ailed Viscount Loftus, re-election (Aug.
c 800), on accepting office as a commis
sioner forexeeuting office of lord high
[treasurer of Ireland."
Enniscorthy. Omitted " 1800 July, vice
[Thomas Whaley, escheator of Munster,
Thomas Dawson."
Fethard, county Wexford. Omitted" George
Harrison Reade, re-election (Jan. 1800),
on accepting office of port surveyor of
[Wexford."
Newborough, alias Gorey. Omitted " John
Toler, re-election (July 1798), on having
accepted the office of attorney-general of
[Ireland."
Wicklow county. Omitted
" George Ponsonby,
elected shortly before the Union, vice
Westby deceased." See correspondence
Marquis Cornwallis, vol iii.,, p. 42.

General Syllabus of Errors in Blue Book in the Last Irish Parliament.

a
ii u

3
»3
57
74
899>
106125140146

5258
99
m114

7
33
98

58

98

132

ra .

5J3

686687687688688
689 689690 690691691

688688689690
690

686
687
689

688689 9>

L (._) Names of M.P. omitted In Blue
Book.

Belfast (Borough). \
Cavan (County). "^
Doneraile (Manor).
Ardfert (Borough).
Banagher (Borough).
Lanesborough (Borough).
St. Johnston (Borough), county
Longford.
Monaghan (County).'
Duncannon (Borough).
Enniscorthv (Borough).
Wicklow (County). "

t iB) Names of M.P. omitted In Blue
Book, cause of vacancy being
Creation of Peers.
Galway (County) — [Richard Martin]
vice Joseph H. Blake, created Baron
Wallscourt.
Dingle Icouch (Borough) — [Name
»not given] vice Right Hon. Lodge
Morres, created Baron Frankfort.
Meath (County) —[Sir Marcus Somer
ville] vice Hon. Clotworthy Rowley,
created Baron Langford.
Portarlington (Borough) — [Name
not given] vice Fred. Trench, created
1800, Dec. 27, Baron Ashtown.
Roscommon (Borough) — [Name not
given] vice H. Moore Sandford,
created Baron Mount Sandford.

n. Errors consisting of wrong Spell
ing Of NameB.
Armagh (Boro')— Patrick Dungenan
should be Duigenan.
Donegal (Borough)— Wiliiam Smyth
should be Smith.
Castlebar (Borough)--Lindsay should
be Lindsey.

in. Errors In Description of Persons.
Dingle Icouch (Borough) — William
Monsell should be William Thomas
Monsell.
Castlebar (Boro') — Thomas Lindsay
should be Thomas Lindsey, junior.
Castlebar (Borough) — Vice Lindsay
junior should be vice Lindsey senior,
as seen in Irish Commons Journals,
[vol. xix., p.' 22.
Westmeath (County) — .Gustavus
Rochfort should be Gusta^ .Hjjme
Rochfort.

-1
«•_». a
4J _
¦°_! 6-3
II

SI.
"I

86

689

17

687

21

687

2324
26 28

687 687687
687.'

30
34

687
687

(36
•1

687

142

687

L

687

44 S»

687 687

5455

688688

56
64

688688

7i

688

77
101

689"690

105

690

"3

690

137 141

691691

142

691

3»

687

0

689

»49 1

v&l 1

ru. Errors In Description of Persons,
(continued).

Nkwtown Limavaddv (Borough) —
John Maxwell, who became John
Barry, is treated as if two separate
persons.

IV. Re-Elec .iona, omission of, In Blue
Book.
Ennis (Borough)— John Ormsby Van
deleur.
Castlemartyr (Borough) — John
Townsend.
Clonakiltv (Boro") — John Hobson.
Cork (City)— Mountiford Longfield.
Kinsale (Town)— William Rowley.
Middleton (Town)— Richard Har
dinge.
Youghal (Town)— Robert Uniacke.
Killybegs (Boro'j— Richard Archdall.
ISX.JOHNSTONE) Hon. Hugh Howard.
\ (Borough), \ Right Hon. William
( co. Donegal. ) Forward.
Newrv (Borough)— Rt. Hon. Isaac
Corry.
Newrx (Borough)— Rt Hon. Isaac
Gorry.
Drogheda — Edward Hardman.
Enniskillen (Borough)— Hon-Arth.
Cole Hamilton.
Galway (Town) — St. George Daly.
Tuam (Borough)— Honble. Walter
Yelverton.
Kerry (County)=Maurice Fitzgerald.
Naas (Borough) — Hon. Francis Hely
Hutchinson.
KNOCKTOPHER(Borough) — SirGeorge
Shee.
Carrick (Borough) — William Gore.
Duleek (Borough)— Chas. Montague
Onnsby. - 
Trim (Borough) — William Arthur
Crosbie.
Bovle (Borough)— Col. Hon. 'Robert
King.
Wexford (County).
Fetharid (Borough), county Wexford
— George 'Harrison Reade.
Newborough alias GOREY (Borough)
—John Toler.

Eemarks as to Precedents for Re-
Electlons being given ta Blue Book.
Bangor (Borough) — The double Re-
Election of John Stewart is given in
Blue Book.
DuNLEER(Borough)-The Re-Election
of Hon. Thomas Henry Foster is
given in Blue Book.
Carysfort (Borough) — The Re-Elec
tion of Charles Osborne is given in
B\ue Book.

Collect.

42 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

€#e Baronp of 2lr!Uoto.
The Editor is indf.bted for this Article to J. HJ Round, Esq., M.A.

ON the 24th of May, 1881, Her Majesty was graciously pleased to create H.R.H. Prince
Leopold a Peer of the United Kingdom by the ti.les of Duke of Albany, Earl of
Clarence, and Baron Arklow. A circular paper, dated June 1881, was thereupon issued by
Lord James Wandesford- Butler. Its contents are as follows : —
THE BARONY OF ARKLOW IN IRELAND.
" Her Majesty has been pleased to create H.R.H. Prince Leopold a Peer of Parliament by the titles of
Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence, and Baron Arklow. Every loyal subject of Her Majesty, and faithful
adherent to our Constitution, must feel rejoiced that one so distinguished, not only by birth, but by his talents
and successful attention to study, should be honoured by being made a member of the Hereditary Legislature,
on which the presence of another member of the Royal Family confers additional brilliancy. I see in au Irish
journal that the creation of H.R.H. as ' Baron of Arklow ' ' was in compliment, we presume, to Ireland.'
While rejoicing, as I have said, in the event, I cannot but think, however, that the Crown was very ill advised
in selecting for an Irish title (I quote from ' Feudal Baronies in Ireland during the reign of Henry the Second,'
by William Lynch. Longmans, 1830) 'a Barony which was held by the Lord Theobald Walter; Pincerna
Hiberniae le Botiller, or Chief Butler of Ireland, as fax back as the twelfth century, 1177.
"It may be said that the creation, like that of his late Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex by the same
title, was as a Peer of Parliament of the United Kingdom, and that, therefore, it is a wholly-different title. Yet
it certainly does appear, if I may -be allowed the expression, to trench on the hereditary Barony which has
descended from Lord Theobald Walter, Chief Butler of Ireland, 1177, and Lord of Arclo, to James Theobald
(Walter), Chief Butler of Ireland, now Marquess of Ormond, 1881, by giving to a member of the Royal Family
the same identical designation. Lord Theobald Walter, Pincema Hiberniae, *he 4th Chief Butler, is mentioned
in an ecclesiastical record, the ' Crede Mihi, ' as ' Lord of Arclo ' and patron of the church there.
"In 1315 the 6th Pincerna, ' Edmund,' was created Earl of Karryk, which became the designation of the
head of the family until the Earldom of ' Ormond * superseded it, 1328. ' In 1382, the Butlera^e, as well as
the estates as « Arklow,' Carrick, etc., etc., were taken into the King's (Richard II.) management."'
"James, the 12th Earl, created Duke of Ormond 1661, obtained confirmation of all ' his ancient paternal
property by several patents and statutes, in which he is styled Duke, Marquess and Earl of Ormond and Ossory,
Viscount Thurles, Lord Baron of Arklow, etc., etc
"James, the 13th Earl of Ormond and second Duke, was attainted, and dying at Avignon in 1745, the
titles of Duke, Marquess and Earlof Ormond, and Baron Arklow in Ireland, descended to his brother, the Earl
of Arran. He, however, never assumed them. The English titles had expired, and the ancient Irish honours
ofthe Butlers of Ormond remained dormant until 1 791. In that year, however, it having been discovered that
they were not affected by the English attainder, they were restored in the person of 'John the 17th Earl of
Ormond.' 'But it should be observed,' says Lynch (p. 91), ' that notwithstanding the multiplicity of proofs
and documents still to be. found respecting his Lordship's right as heir male to the ancient feudal Barony of
Arklow, it does not appear that his claim to that dignity was then supported. No statute of restoration was
considered necessary on this occasion, as the title had not been attainted by an Act of the Irish Parliament.' In
the * Dictionary of the Peerage,' by Sir Bernard Burke, Ulster King-at-Arms, i860, James Theobald, the
present Marquess of Ormond, 27th Chief Butler of Ireland, is styled ' Baron Arklow of Arklow in the Peerage
of Ireland,' the dignity held by him as descended from Lord Theobald, first Chief Butler, in 1 177, and Lord
of Arclo. "The descendant of Walter, 18th Earl of Ormond, created Marquess, from Theobald Walter; first Chief
Butler, having been proved indisputably before the House of Lords, when the presage of wines granted to the
Hereditary Chief Butler Was re- vested in the Crown, compensation was awarded to him as the 24th Chief Butler,
•the most ancient hereditary dignity now enjoyed by the heirs male of any family in Great Britain' (Lynch,
p. 92). James, 19th Earl of Ormond (created Marquess), 25th Chief Butler of Ireland, and Lord Baron of
Arklow, had his place and rights allowed him at the coronation of George IV., 1821.
" The present Marquess is his grandson.
"The Irish Magnates, though (and with reason) somewhat anxious at this moment about their 'poises,'
still possess that, which in Shakespeare is valued far higher than the purse, and the ' taking away' of which it
very strongly characterized ; and a nobleman, whether chief of his race, or one ofthe same descent, does nos
the less value the ' good name ' and the hereditary dignity of a Feudal Barony or Lordship because it has
descended to the Head of the House through not undistinguished ancestors, after a period ol more than seven
hundred years.
" Instead of signature
" I may conclude by adopting the distich of the head of the » De Couci ' family fredy Englished:—
" Je stiis ni Due ni Prince aussi,
Je suis le Sire de Couci"
• * * * *
" I am no Duke, nor Prince, I know,
I am son of the twenty-fifth Lord of Arklow:
" With Lord James Wandesford Butler's Compliments."
June 1881, 18, Palace Row, Dublin.

THE BARONY OF ARKLOW. 43
The issue of this paper was alluded to by the Times without note or comment. The
St. James's Gazette, however, referred to it in the following terms : —
" According to the limes this morning, Lord James Butler, the brother of the Marquess of Ormonde, has
printed and distributed among his friends a paper ' ccmmenting on the Barony of Arklow which, along with
the dukedom of Albany and the earjdcm of Clarence, has lately been bestowed on Prince Leopold.' We have
not seen the paper in question. But, frcm what the Timessays, it seems to be a protest against the creation of
Prince Leopold as Baron Arklow, on the ground that Arklow is the designation ofa ' Feudal Barony which has
descended to the present head of thehouse of Butler, through not undistinguished ancestors, after a period of
more than seven hundred years,' and uiat therefore the grant of this title to the Duke of Albany now, as well as
the granting of it at the beginning of the current century to the Duke of Sussex, appears to Lord James Butler
' to trench on the hereditary barony ' which is vested in his brother {reete nephew), the Marquess of Ormonde.
Without raising any question as to whether the * Feudal Barony ' was ot was not a ' Peerage Barony ' of $_. 1. low,
it may be pointed out that, on Lord James Butler's own showing, the barony held by the Marquess of Ormonde
is one of Ireland, while Prince Leopold's barony is one ofthe United Kingdom ; and this consideration alone
is sufficient to demonstrate that the second cannot in any way 'trench' upon the first."
To these comments Lord James replied as follows : —
«« THE BARONY OF ARKLOW.
" To the Editor ofthe St. James's Gazette.
" Sir, — You favoured me by inserting a paragraph relating to the Barony of Arklow, and, further, by
commenting upon' what I had written. Allow me space for some remarks.
"The term ' protest ' is, I think, rather too strong to apply, though I entirely abide by my words as to
the Crown being ' ill-advised ' in the selection ofthe Irish title of H.R.H. Prince Leopold.
« I find in Archdall's Lodge's Irish Peerage 1784, Vol. IV., that the Lord Theobald Walter was a person
of large possessions in England and Ireland, being a Baron of both Kingdoms. He was Sheriff of Lancaster,
holding the Lordship of Preston in Amoundemesse, in Lancashire (confirmed to him and his heirs by the
charter of King Richard, 1 194). He founded and endowed the Monastery at Arklow for Cistercian monks,
whom he brought from Furness, in Lancashire. His descendants, the second, third, and fourth Chief Butlers,
are buried in the ' Abbey of Arklow.* The fourth was also, by marriage, Lord of Ailesbury, Bucks — which
descended in the family for about five hundred years — (Lipscombe, Bucks). He died at his residence in the
Castle of Arklow, 1285, and was buried in the monastery there. Theobald, fifth Chief Butler, sat in the Irish
Parliament of 1295, fifth on the roll. Edmond, sixth Butler, sat. in Parliament, 1302, by the name of Edmond
'le Botiller.' He was knighted by Edward IL, 1309, and created Earl of Karryk 1315. The Castle of
Karryk then probably became the residence of the family, and so continued, off and on, until the eighteenth
century. " Your remarks as to ' feudal ' and * peerage ' baronies have led me to touch on those points. Arklow
was the scene of many a bloody struggle : in 1281, when Stephen de Fulbourne, Bishop of Waterford, Lond
1 justiciary, defeated the Irish; in 1316, when the O'Tooles and CByrnes, who had risen in arms and burnt
Arklow, Bray, and Newcastle, etc., were defeated by Edmund le Botiller; and again in 1 331, in 1641-1649,
and in 1798, Arklow would seem to have had its baptism of blood. Edmond, seventh Chief Butler, having
been created Earl of Ormond in 1326,* the barony of Arklow was naturally but little heard of; though not lost
sight of, as the action of the Duke of Ormond claiming it and having been confirmed in it shows. My
nephew, James Theobald, the present Marquess of Ormond, inherits it as heir of the Lord Theobald Walter,
the first Baron.
" You charge me with not remembering numerous similar cases, and say that the ' duplication of the
barony 'of Arklow is in no way an extraordinary or exceptional occurrence.' I have looked through the
Peerage for a precedent, at the titles of those you have named, and cannot consider tbat they prove your case.
I speak of a modern creation by the same identical designation as an ancient barony. The Duke of Richmond,
Lennox, and Gordon is Earl of March (1675) — so is Earl of Wemyss j bnt the latter was by inheritance after
the death ofthe fourth Duke of Queensbury. There are two Earls of Darnley — a Scotch (the Duke of Rich
mond) and an Irish (Bligh); but some Lennox connection probably suggested the title— perhaps 'Methuen,'
a barony held by the Duke of Richmond (Scotch), and another barony of * Methuen ' (English, 1779). A
personal distinction is more remarkable, the last Baron being_ of Scotch descent, long back. The Duke of
Buccleuch and Queensberry holds the title of Drumlanrig. This is again, as to the two last, a question of in
heritance ; but it is difficult to unravel the intricacies of Scotch descents and creations of the Douglas family
and its widespread and powerful connections. The Dukes of Hamilton and Abercorn have each a Marquess
of Hamilton among their titles— a difficulty which their Graces must settle between themselves ; as also which
is the head of the house of Hamilton, appertaining to which is the Dukedom of ChatelWrault. The Duke
dom of Buckingham and Earldom of Buckinghamshire give point to the objection to even similarity of
"The Arklow case is certainly peculiar — a feudal barony going back to so early a date is not common.
Arklow, an Irish seaport, granted to Theobald Walter, a Norman-Irish magnate, ii72,f by Henry IL, con
firmed to him by John, Lord of Ireland — its castle the residence of the first four Barons of Arklow, and its
title so valued that the Duke of Ormond had it confirmed to him.
"It is surely a pity to 'duplicate' such a title; and although the brand-new barony w one of the
' United Kingdom ' (which would mean, presumbly, to give it superiority over the mere Irish barony) ; yet,
as in the case of the Montmorenci title under Napoleon HI., and the Chatelherault title under the same
Emperor the act of the Crown in France did but recall perhaps the more forcibly the long and honourable
descent of the rightful inheritor of the original distinction.
" I am, Sir, your Obedient Servant,
"James Wandesford Butler."
18, Palace-row, Dublin, June 28.
* This should be 1328. f This should be 1177.

44 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
To this letter the Gazette appended the following rejoinder : —
" Lord James Wandesford "Butler — the nephew,* not the brother (as the Times represented him to be) of
the Marquess of Ormonde — does not say much that requires notice. In the first place, there is no evidence
that any of the ancient and illustrious House of Butler ever sat as Barons of Arklow in the Irish Parliament.
What evidence there is, as may be seen in Sir William Betham Ulster Kin<j-of-Arms' ' Feudal and Parlia
mentary Dignities,' tends to show that they sat as Chief Butlers until one (if them was created Earl of Carrick
and another Earl of Ormonde. Beyond the confirmation of the Barony o^ Arklow to the Duke of Ormonde,
there is nothing trustworthy to indicate that the Barony of Arklow was at q_iy period a peerage' of Ireland. _ In
the second place, our correspondent has omitted to notice the case of th'e titles of Devon and Devonshire,
.which, inasmuch as the Courtenays and the Cavendishes (as well as dukjfes) are earls, is a case of an identical
peerage — that is an earldom of the same county — in the possession of two families. Again, whether the pre
sent holders of the duplicated peerages of March, Queensberry, Drumlanrig, Darnley, and others, took them
by creation or not, they exist by virtue of separate creations ; and consequently one must be the original, while
the other is the reproduction. If we were to go into cases where the surnames of persons have been made the
bases of their peerage designations, there would be no end almost to the cases of identity pr similarity which
might be cited". In the third place, the Earldom of Carrick, which is now held by a kinsman of our cor
respondent, is a very striking example of the duplication of a title. Carrick was already the name of an
earldom belonging to the Braces — (afterwards it belonged to the Stuarts) — when it was conferred on the
Butlers, and it was dropped when the son of the Butler so created was made Earl of Ormonde. At any rate,
since the reign of Robert III. of Scotland, who was himself Earl of Carrick before he became King, it bas
always been one of the titles of the eldest sons of the Sovereigns of Scotland, together with the Dukedom ot
Rothsay. The Prince of Wales (like all his predecessors since the accession of James I.) is now Earl of
Carrick. Yet in 1748 one of the Butlers, Viscounts Ikerrin, was created Earl of Carrick, and his descendant
is Earl of Carrick in Ireland at the present time, while the Prince of Wales is Earl of Carrick in Scotland.
With such an instance of the duplication of a title before him, Lord James Wandesford Butler's complaints
concerning the Prince Leopold's Barony of Arklow certainly appear a little peevish and out of place."
It will at once be seen that this controversy turns on two distinct points. (1) Is the
Marquess of Ormond also Baron Arklow in the Peerage of Ireland ? (2) If he is, then — does
the creation of Prince Leopold as Baron Arklow of the United Kingdom " trench on the
hereditary Barony" of the Ormonds? It is with the former of these questions that we are
primarily concerned.
Now the conclusion that we shall hope to establish is twofold. On the one hand we shall
show that there is not one scrap or tittle of direct evidence to prove that a Barony of Arklow
in the Peerage of Ireland was even created, or even that any lineal ancestor of the present
Marquess ever sat as Baron Arklow in any Parliament of Ireland. On the other hand, we
shall be able to show that the claim of the Butlers to this Barony has been finally and
explicitly disallowed by the Law Officers of the Crown.
" I am no Duke, nor Prince, I know,
I am son of the twenty-fifth Lord of Arklow."
Thus does Lord James conclude his paper, adapting (and, by the way, mis-quoting) the famous
device of the Sires de Couci. " Twenty-fifth Lord of Arklow " his father indeed was, but in
the sense that Ingelram de Ghysnes was hereditary " Sire de Coucy;" in the sense that John
Hampden is described in his epitaph as " twenty-fourth hereditary Lord of Great Hampden."
We are apt to speak loosely of " Feudal Baronies " as " Baronies by Tenure." As this
is a point on which much misconception prevails, it may be as well briefly to define t the
terms we are about to employ. We would divide the dignities of which we are treating into
two distinct classes, namely, Feudal Lordships, and Baronies of the Realm. The latter, again,
may be subdivided into Baronies by Tenure, Baronies by Writ, and Baronies by Letters
Patent. Now these four dignities roughly represent four successive phases in the evolution of
the Peerage. Of these the earliest is the purely territorial phase ; and to this phase, as we
shall see, belongs, the Lordship of Arclo. This is the Feudal Lordship, the inseparable dignity
of the Tenant-in capite,i territorial, and, as such, obviously dependent on Tenure. Into
the second phase the personal element enters, and appears in combination with the territorial.
The Barony continues to connote the idea of Tenure, but Tenure no longer of itself confers
Barony. Next, by slow degrees, in form if not in practice, § the territorial idea is shaken off,
and the personal alone remains. A man is summoned to sit as a Baron, whether or not he
is a holder of land in chief. Here we haye the third phase, the Barony by personal Writ of
Summons. At what stage the personal idea became in its turn influenced, and eventually
supplanted, by the hereditary we cannot tell, for so imperceptible was the change from the
* Both papers are wrong. Lord James is neither brother or nephew, but the uncle of the Marquess.
+ The rough definitions which follow are only intended to make our meaning clearer.
I See petition of Sir Walter L'Enfaunt. Rymer's " Foedera," vol. viii., p 896.
§ For the jure uxoris Barony has an evolution of its own, and is often to be found underlying the apparently
personal summons to the husband ofa territorial heiress. " '

 THE BARONY OF ARKLOW. 45
individual Writ to the Writ addressed to successive generations, and from that again to the
vested hereditary right to receive a writ, that it has been found impracticable to draw any line
of division, and it has long been conceded by English Lawyers that every Writ of Summons
created an hereditary Barony. ) The fourth and latest phase, the Barony by Letters Patent
is a further confirmation of the hereditary idea, and, in practice, an even wider divorce from
the land.* }
Having thus cleared the ground, we will now proceed to examine the Lordship of Arclo,
and see under which of these '.categories it should be placed. Those, if any, who have
mastered the mysteries of the Titles of Abergavenny and Berkeley will have realised that the
title to a Peerage may have grown up as gradually as a constitution, and have passed
through as many stages. They will tell us how misleading is the attempt to reduce all titles
to a stereotyped form, or to fix with definite precision the moment when they sprang, into
being. In short, the process has been one of distinct evolution, and presents, accordingly,
certain instances which we may term " survivals in culture." Thus there lingered on, till
almost recent times, the famous "Barony "of Hilton, a title unknown to the National Peerage,
but a standing witness to that of the obsolete Palatinate ; or, to take an even closer parallel,
we would refer to the case of the Purcells, " Titular Barons of Loughmore. So too, the
Championship of England recalls to this day the name of the Feudal Lordship of Scrivelsby,
while, on the other hand, in the Earldom of Arundel we preserve the tradition of a Title held
by Tenure ofthe Caput Baronise. It were useless to multiply instances. We have seen enough
to understand that the Lordship t of Arclo is not a Peerage dignity, but a distinct " survival "
of what we may term the/r^-Peerage epoch.
But, it may be replied, Does not Lynch (in his Feudal Dignities) admit the right of the
Butlers to the Barony of Arklow? Yes, to a "Feudal Barony of Arklow" (See Lynch on
"Feudal Baronies," p. 91, as quoted by Lord James), but not, we maintain, to a Peerage
Barony. If only it were agreed to term the former dignity, as we have done, a " Feudal
Lordship" (which would be more accurate as well as more convenient), the confusion could
not arise. Now that we have established the true status of the original " Lordship of Arclo,"
let us see what proof can be adduced that it ever developed into more than a Feudal
Lordship. The first stage in this development would have been that the Butlers should sit
as Barons of Arklow in the Parliament of Ireland. Now, not only is there no proof
whatever that the early Butlers did sit in right of Arklow, but we actually learn from a
valuable M.S. Baronage in Ulster's Office (printed by Sir Bernard Burke at the end of his
"Extinct Peerage") that the two first Butlers were Barons as Lords of Carrick; and this
statement is confirmed by the fact that when their right to sit " crystallized " into a Peerage
Title (13 1 5), they took that title from Carrick, and not from Arklow.
But even conceding, in the teeth of this evidence, that a Butler ever sat as Baron of
Arklow, what proof have we for the next stage, for the conversion of a personal summons
into an hereditary title ? And here we appeal with confidence to Lynch, as quoted by Sir
Bernard, in support of the statement in his " Extinct Peerage " (p.621) that " these Writs of
Summons did not, as in England, create hereditary Peerages, descendible to heirs-general"
In other words, an hereditary tide could only be created by a definite act of the Crown. Take
for instance the famous Barony of Kingsale. The De Courcis had undoubtedly, for many
generations, sat as Barons of Kingsale, when Richard II., in 1397, issued his Letters Patent
"confirming "the honour and title to William de Courcy and his heirs. Now, if after all
these generations, the title to the Barony of Kingsale was still so precarious as to require
for its validity the definite issue of Royal Letters Patent, it is obvious that more uncer
tain titles stood in even greater need of " confirmation." Of the true meaning of this
term " confirmation " we shall yet have much to say. But, to go no further than the
Butlers themselves, let us examine the Baronies of Cahir and Dunboyne.
Among the " Feudal Barons " in the M.S. Baronage we have referred to, we find that
Adam le Petit was " Lord of Dunboyne," and are told that his " daughter and heir carried the
honour to her husband." We also find that William le Petit, Lord of Dunboyne, received
Writ of Summons 1206-7, and that his daughter brought Dunboyne, the Caput Baronise, to
the Butlers. Yet it was not till 1541 that her descendant, Sir Edmond Butler, Lord of Dun
boyne, was created a Peer of Ireland as " Baron of Dunboyne." So too with Cahir. The
"Feudal Barony of Kiltenenen," held by tenure of Cahir, was conferred, in n 84, on Philip de
* For English estates were more often inherited by heirs-general than heirs-male. (Compare the Barony of
Stafford of Grafton. Bank's "Baronage," vol. ii., p. 519).
fLord James himself tells us that "the Lord Theobald Walter" (1177) was "a Baron of both Kingdoms."
What then does he suppose has become of the English " Barmy " ?

46 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Wygornia, just as the Lordship of Arclo was conferred, in 1177, on Theobald Walter. Yet it
was not till 1543 that Thomas Butler, Lord of Cahir, was created a. Peer of Ireland as "Baron
of Cahir." But when we ask for similar official proof in the case of the Barony of Arklow, we
not only find it completely wanting, but we cannot even find that the Peerage Title of " Baron
of Arclo " was ever borne by any Butler before 1661. The reason is not far to seek. To Lord
James, as he assures us, the " Barony of Arklow " may appear peculiarly attractive (all the
more so, perhaps, from the very fact that Royalty has honoured it). But no antiquarian
virtuosi were those mighty Earls who bore rule over the Palatine in Tudor days. Their
kinsmen of Cahir and Dunboyne were welcome to convert /their petty lordships into here
ditary Baronies of the Realm, but an Earl of Ormonde could/have had no possible inducement
to add to his titles that of a mere barony derived from " the lordship of Arklow, whichis the
most remote, barren, and least valuable part of all the said territory." (See Carew Papers,
6 Aug., 1514).
Lastly, supposing all these difficulties to be surmounted (and they are practically *#sur-
mountable), the supposed Barony of Arklow might even then have lapsed, as we see by the
fate ofthe first Earldom of Carrick. Mr. Foster shows in his "Peerage" that Edward le Boteler
ancestor of the Ormondes, was created Earl of Carrick by Letters Patent, 1 Sept., 13 15, and
was succeeded in that dignity by his son. What has become of this earldom ? Lord James
merely tells us that is was " suspended " (?) by the Earldom of Ormonde. But Mr. Foster,
finding nothing to account for its loss, inserts it, as created in 131 5, among the Ormonde
Titles. Burke, on the other hand, not only omits it from the Titles, but fails to mention it at
all in the pedigree. Both these authorities seem partly right and partly wrong. That the
present Marquess is, as Mr. Foster shows, heir male of Edward, created Earl of Carrick in
1315. is quite true, but that he is himself Earl of Carrick, we must, with Burke, deny, as we
shall see in the next paragraph. So here we light upon yet another anomaly !
We stated at the commencement of this article that we hoped to be able to show " that
the claim of the Butlers to this Barony has been finally and explicitly disallowed by the Law
Officers ofthe Crown." Our authority for this statement is the report on the claim, in 1791,
of John Butler, Esq.,*tothe hereditary honours of the Ormondes, dormant since ^15, which
is now preserved in the Public Record Office of Ireland. Mr. Butler prayed " that the usual
Writ of Summons might issue calling him to take his seat as a Peer of this Realm ... .by
thestyleand title of Earl of Ormond and Ossory, Viscount of Thurles, Baron Butler, and Baron
of Arklow." Thereupon the Law Officers report as follows : — ". . . . We are further to inform
Your Excellency that the Memorialist did not think proper to lay before us any evidence ia sup
port of his claim to the said Baronies of Butler^ and Arklow. Upon the said evidence the
Memorialist did rely that he is entitled to his Writ of Summons as Earl of Ormond and
Ossory and Viscount Thurles." (Not a word, in this amended claim, of the Earldom of
Carrick, or the Baronies of Butler or Arklow.) " . . . . And upon consideration of the said
matters we humbly conceive that His Majesty may refer the said claim of the Memorialist to
the dignities of the Earl of Ormond and Ossory and Viscount Thurles to the House of Lords,"
etc. The fact that John Butler advanced, but felt compelled to abandon, his claim to 'a
" Barony of Arklow " is, it must be admitted, conclusive evidence against the right of his de
scendants to bear the title which was refused him.
But — and this is the sole piece of direct evidence adduced by Lord James  "the 12th
Earl, created Duke of Ormond 1661, obtained confirmation of all his ancient paternal property
by several patents and statutes, in which he is styled Duke, Marquess, and Earl of Ormond
and Ossory, Viscount Thurles, Lord Baron of Arklow,'1 etc., etc. Now it is true that in his
patent of creation as Duke (1661) he is termed "Lord Baron of J Arclo" (not Arklow) ; but
it must be observed, first, that his male line became extinct ; secondly, that we are not 'told
that the Barony of Arclo was inherited by him, but only that it was confirmed to him.
Now we would suggest that there is evidence to show that such "confirmation" was
virtually tantamount to a creation, though it assumed as a " confirmation " a more gracious
form. We have already alluded to the Barony of Kingsale, and have seen that, in order to
constitute it a Peerage it was necessary to issue letters patent, though under the form of a
" confirmation." We would now call attention to a yet more striking instance, and that from
the annals of the Butlers themselves. The curious history of the surrender by the family of
their ancient Earldom of Ormonde, and its re-grant to them after ten years, has been as we
shall show, misrepresented in the Peerages; but, in addition to this, it has escaped the notice
* Great grandfather of the present Marquess.
f This claim seems to coincide with Belham's view, that they originally sat as Chief "Butlers"
,_ „ *?hf, fa,shi,on. °f accumulat.irS titles was, n°w setting in. Hence perhaps his desire for an ornamental
" Barony which his more practical ancestors had despised. .........

THE BARONY OF ARKLOW. 47
of genealogists that the Earldor_i of Ormond, which was "restored" to them in rS37, and
" confirmed " to them in 1541, was-not tlie Earldom which they surrendered in 1527.
Startling as this statement may appear, it would seem impossible to draw any other
conclusion from the following remarkable words which occur in the above Report : " The
evidence laid before us of the said several creations were .... and an attested copy of an
Act of Parliament passed in this Kingdom in the thirty-fifth year of Henry the Eighth, which
recites the said creation .... and confirms the same to James the then Earl, AND THE
HEIRS MALE OF THE BODY OF PETER, EARL OF ORMOND, HIS FATHER.
That is to say, the Earldom of Ormond, which this Peter obtained in 1537, is limited to the
heirs male of his body, and he thus becomes the first Earl of what is practically a new
creation ! Thus, we take it, if the male Issue of this Peter were to become extinct, the
Earldom would ipso facto become extinct also, the right of the descendants of the earlier Earls
being barred by the surrender of 1527, and not restored to them by the confirmation of 1537.
Lodge states that this Act was passed " at the suit of James, Earl of Ormond." By the side
of this " confirmation " we would place the equally anomalous (and equally unnoticed)
Patent* of 1603. By this singular document the Earldoms of Ormond and Ossory are
" entailed on and secured to " Theobald, fourth son of Sir Edmond Butler in case of the
death of his uncle (and father in-law), James, the 10th Earl, without male issue. Now if
this Theobald were already heir presumptive, this Patent would be obviously superfluous. We
must accordingly presume that one or more of his brothers stood between him and the
heirship, but that, as son-in-law ofthetlien Earl, the line was to be diverted in his favour.!'
This alone is strange enough ; but the Patent proceeds to give " Remainder to the heirs
male of his great-grandfather, Pierce, Earl of Ormond and Ossory. Thus in the Patent of 1603,
as in the Act of 1541, we find this same Peter treated as the stirps ofa new line of Earls.
We have thus shown that there is nothing in the " confirmation " of the Peerage Barony
of " Arclo " to the Duke of Ormond to prove that it had been borne as a Peerage title by any
of his ancestors. And this conclusion is rendered the more probable by the action ofthe
Claimant of 179 r. Doubtless misled by this "confirmation," he claimed, as we have seen,
this Barony, but was evidently unable to trace the title a single generation further back, and
to thus prove that it had been borne by any lineal ancestor of his own.
Having now gone through the history of this pretended title of Arklow, we claim to
have established its true character, and to have shown that the illusion of its existence is
largely due to that habit of inaccurate definition which leads Lord James to speak of it in
turn as a "Lordship," a " Feudal Barony," and a "Barony." (See above.) It is to be observed
that in the exhaustive Pedigree contained in Lodge's "Peerage" (1754), there is not to be found
the slightest allusion to any Barony of Arklow ; and though Lord James quotes from Lodge
his account of" the Lord Theobald Walter," we fail to find the words " The Lord" at all ia
Lodge (1754). Theobald le Butler sat in a parliament held by John Wogan, Lord Justice,
in 1295, 23 Ed. I. (Cox's " History of Ireland," p. 86) ; and in that of 1302 sat Edmund,
John, Richard, William and John le Botiler (see Rymer's "Fcedera," vol. ii., p. 896).
But there is yet one point remaining to be considered. We mentioned at the com
mencement of this article that the existence of such a " Barony " had first to be proved, before
the question could be raised whether the action ofthe Crown "appeared to trench " on the
hereditary rights of the House of Ormonde. The latter question would thus become super
fluous j but still as the point has been raised, it may be as well briefly to discuss it After the
report of its Law Officers in 1791, the Crown was obviously and amply justified in ignoring
the existence of any "Barony of Arklow;* and thus, from the legal and official point of view, no
possible exception % could be taken to the creation of that title in the person ofthe Duke of
Sussex in 1801. Such creation could not "trench on" an "hereditary Barony," if that
" Barony " had no existence save in the imagination of its bearers. Still this supposed
question has led to an interesting discussion on the "duplication of titles," which, curiously
enough, particularly affects the Butlers.
"*The St. yames 's Gazette points out that an Irish Earldom of Carrick was conferred on
this very family, though an Earldom of Carrick belongs to the Princes of Wales, and can be
clearly traced back to the middle of the thirteenth century. " It is surely a pity to duplicate
such a title," the Crown might have said, in the words of Lord James, but it raised no objection.
The Gazette, however, passes lightly over the third " Earldom of Carrick " (and that, too, an
•See Lodge (I7S4) "• »9-
{Compare the grant of the Earldom to the Boleyns, through the heiress ofthe 7th Earl.
The case of the Earldom of Strathearn, which the Grahams of Menteith (whose heirs are in existence)
inherited from Prince David, and of which they were unjustly deprived by the jealousy of Charles L, stands on
quite a different footing.

48 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Irish Peerage), which, as we have seen, was conferred on the Butlers in 1315 ! Here surely, in
his own family, Lord James might find that of which he is in search — " a modern creation by
the same identical designation as an ancient one." But we commend to his notice a yet more
striking instance, which is also to be found in the annals of bis ancient House. What does
he say to the creation of Sir Thomas Boleyne as Earl of Oi mond, " by the same identical
designation" as those Earls who for two centuries had rightfully borne the title? Would it
surprise him to hear that there may yet be two " Earls of Ormond," " two Richmonds in the
field"? Sucni at any rate, is the opinion of no less an authority than Nicolas, according to
whom the Boleyne Earldom of Ormonde (being descendible to heirs-general) " reverted, on
the death of Queen Elizabeth, to the representative of the other co-heir, the heir-general of
whom is the present Earl of Berkeley, and, under the said limitation, must probably be consi
dered as EARL OF ORMONDE."
And this leads us to consider the true history of the re-grant, in rS37, of an Earldom of
Ormonde to the Butlers, which transaction, as we said, "has been misrepresented in the
" Peerages." Lodge's statement is as follows* : — " And Thomas Bullen, Earl of Ormond, dying
without Issue Male, the King, 22 February, 1537, restored to him (i.e., Peter, Earl of
Ossory) the title of Ormond." The accuracy of Lodge is (with justice) so relied upon, that
in both our leading " Peerages," those of Ulster and Mr. Foster, we find this statement has
naturally been repeated. Yet, in the first place, it is obvious that the Boleyne earldom being
to Heirs-General, the fact of Thomas Boleyne dying without issue male, could not effect
the question ; and in the second place, Thomas Boleyne was not dead at all. In fact, the grant
was made on the 22nd February, 1537, and Thomas Boleyne did not die till 1538 (as is
correctly stated in Ulster's " Extinct Peerage," and in the State Papers). Fortunately there
is preserved to us the true version in a passage we have discovered among the " Carew
Papers." In Vol. 602, p. i6r, and again in Vol. 611, p. 10 (pp. 127, 128 of the Printed
Edition), there will be found, under the year 1537, the following : — "The said Earl of Ossory "
(Peter, ist Earl), "on the death of Thomas (Butler) late Earl of Ormond, was found 'by
office ' to be Ormond's next heir-male. Thereupon he sued out his livery and was named
Earl of Ormond, both by the King's Letters Patent, and by his Grace's Letters Missive, and
he was so reputed and accepted for sixteen years. ' And now the Earl of Wiltshire is contented
he be so named Earlof Ormond in Ireland semblably as the two Lords Dacres be named the one of
the South and the other ofthe North.' " This extract is sufficient answer to all complaints of
the duplication of titles.
Before concluding, it may be worth while to notice that Arklow was for some time in the
hands of the Boleynes, who thus became " Lords of Arklow. " This we learn from another
passage in the " Carew Papers," which tells us how " Thomas Bullen," being unable to rescue
from the Irish the more exposed of those estates which the Boleynes had inherited in ^15 from
the 7th Earl, " made a deed of gift unto Peers Butler (afterwards Earl of Ossory and Ormond)
of the manors of Tullyphelim and Arkeloe, to him and his heirs, yielding to the said Earl
Thomas and his heirs the fourth- part of all the profits. It should be observed that in 1618
" Arclo " is again spoken of merely as a " manor."
We have discussed, at this length, the question ofthe "Barony of Arklow," because the
results involved are of no little importance. These results we hold to be as follows: — First,
that the Earldom of Carrick must not be included among the titles of the Marquess of
Ormonde till it has been formally claimed, and the claim allowed. Secondly, that his Earldom
of Ormonde, if it is to be considered as created in 13 15, should only be inserted among
them with the remarkable limitation introduced by the "confirmation "of 1541. Thirdly/
that the " Barony of Arklow " should be forthwith expunged from the Peerage.
* Lodge (1754) vol. if., 16.

I.— ITS CONTRADICTIONS.
WE would begin this Article with the frank admission that the handsome work on the
" Extinct and Dormant Peerage of the British Empire," issued by Ulster King-of-
Arms, with the stamp of his official paraphernalia, is employed by all (but a few genealogical
experts) as the standard book of reference on the subjects with which it is concerned. Many
an earnest worker from the days of the indefatigable Dugdale has toiled in the field of
original research, and it was but right that Sir Bernard Burke should " enter into their
labours." It was greatly to be desired that a qualified writer should gather into one con
nected whole the researches of those who had gone before ; and to none could this task more
appropriately fall than to one with the prestige and the authority of an " Ulster King-of-Arms."
To the zeal and energy displayed in arranging the materials at hand, and ransacking the
works of his predecessors, we have the strongest testimony from the mouth of the author him
self. " To the perfecting of this book," he observes in his preface, " I have devoted the most
laborious revision, the most anxious and unremitting attention. Public Documents and
Records, Heralds' Visitations, Post-Mortem Inquisitions, Patent Rolls, Lords' Entries, and
Funeral Certificates, have been referred to; printed authorities, especially Dugdale's
'Baronage,' Wood's edition of Sir Robert Douglas's 'Peerage of Scotland,' Archdale's* Lodge,'
Sir Harris Nicholas's ' Synopsis ' (so ably and learnedly edited, under the title of ' The Historic
Peerage,' by Mr. Courthope, Somerset Herald) ; Miller, Brooke, Collins, Jacob, Banks, and
Heylin, have been consulted and largely drawn on, as well as many privately printed
family memoirs. In fact, no available source of information has been neglected which I
thought would improve my work, and no trouble or research has been spared." With these
assurances before us we are fairly entitled to expect a Very high degree of perfection in a work
on which trouble and research have been so lavishly expended.
But while a book published under such auspices, and heralded by such professions,
should be able to challenge the keenest criticism, no one who has attempted a similar under
taking would wish to carp at those microscopic inaccuracies which may be due to a printer's
error, or even to the absence of any trustworthy information bearing on the poiut at issue.
As Sir Bernard well expresses it, " My readers, I am convinced, will take into account the
toilsome nature of my undertaking, the countless names and dates and facts that the follow
ing pages comprise, and will make allowance for mistakes and errors which may, despite of
the most sedulous care and minute revision, have been overlooked." Readily assenting to
this proviso, we would venture, in all humility, to take up the gauntlet so freely flung, and
examine how far this remarkable compilation fulfils the promises of its exordium.
Let us take for this purpose the "New Edition," that of 1866, in which, presumably,
those errors which had previously escaped " the most sedulous care and minute revision "
have been finally corrected or removed. We will not, in the first instance, contest any state
ment on our own authority, but will confine ourselves to those which the compiler himself
has contradicted on another page. And this we shall do not only because such contra-:
dictions will naturally be the most conclusive, but also because, after Ulster has assured us
that " no source of information has been neglected," it is somewhat startling to meet with
errors and omissions where he had only to refer to his own work to obtain the information
he required. We shall merely select a few passages, and these at random ; but though we
wish, for Ulster's sake, that we could have supplied him with a complete list, we trust that
these particular criticisms may be of service to him for his next edition, and may lead the
way to the discovery of many others. -
On p. 94, we are informed that Sir Hugh, 2nd Lord Burnell, married " ist, Lady Philippa
de la Pole, dau. of Michael, 2nd Earl of Suffolk, and 2nd, Joyce, dau. of John Botetourt."
On turning to p. 441, we are told that Michael, 2nd Earl of Suffolk, had " three daughters, —
Katherine, Abbess of Barking ; Elizabeth (called Margaret on p. 603) m. John de Foix, Earl
of Kendal; and Isabel m. to Thomas, Lord Morley." There is no mention of any dau.
Philippa. Again, though Joyce Botetourt married Lord Burnell on p. 94, she married Sir
Hugh Burnell on p. 64.
Let us turn to Edward Mortimer, 3rd Earl of March, who married Philippa Plantagenet,
granddaughter and heiress of Edward III. We should naturally expect that the issue of so
remarkable an alliance would be correctly given, whatever mistakes may occur in other cases.
Collect. f

5° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Let us see. Their elder daughter "Elizabeth " is said (p. 3S4) to have married " Henry Percy,
the celebrated Hotspur;" but under" Percy" (p. 424) we are told that Hotspur married Philippa
Mortimer. Again, their younger daughter Philippa is stated (p. 384) to have married, ist,
John, Earl of Pembroke, 2nd, Richard, Earl of Arundel, 3rd, John Poynings, Lord St. John.
On turning to "Fitzalan"(p. 201), we can find no mention of her marriage to Richard, Earlof
Arundel ; and as for her 3rd husband he is wholly unknown to Ulster's history of that title.
Turning in bewilderment to p. 444, we find that only two (possibly only one) of the Poynings
family were ever summoned as " Lord St John." Neither of them was named John, and
neither of them appears to have married a Mortimer. We appeal to Ulster to solve so hope
less a riddle.
But at any rate we look for an absence of reckless contradiction when the descent of a
barony is at stake; yet on p. 242 we are told that Peter de Grandison, 2nd baron (son of
William de Grandison by Sibylla de Tregoz), "had no issue/" while on p. 83 Sir Baldwin
Brugge is stated in the following terms to have married a daughter of this very baron, viz.,
" Isabel, dau. and Jieiress (or co.-lieiress) of Sir Piers Grandison (son of Sir William Grandi
son, by Sibel dau. and co.-heir of John, Lord Tregoz)." Could any contradiction be more
emphatic ? One is tempted to ask whether, if this be Ulster's idea of genealogy, he would
not have better consulted the interests of his reputation by abstaining from producing a work
in which statements are made on one page only to be denied on another.
On p. 543, William de Ufford, 2nd Earl of Suffolk (see pp. 373 and 433), is said to
have "m., ist, Joan, dau. (called only child p. 373) of Edward de Montacute" (why not
Edward, Lord Montacute, as on p. 373?), etc., etc.; but to have "left no issue," in direct
opposition to having " died without male issue," p. 433.
A brilliant plunge into the whirlpool of Welsh genealogy is doomed to be equally
unfortunate. On p. 377 we gather from a mass of imposing erudition that "the Lady
Eleanor Goch m. Thomas, representative of the sovereigns of South Wales, ap Llewellyn,
etc., etc. ... By Thomas ap Llewellyn, the Lady Eleanor Gech had, with an only son,
Owen ap Thomas, who d.s.p., an only daughter, heiress of her brother, viz., the Lady
Eleanor." But yet another daughter appears on p. 540, for we find that Sir Tudor ap
Grono, Knt, "m. Margaret, dau. and co-heir (with her elder sister, Eleanor. . . . ) of Thomas
ap Llewellyn  representative of the sovereign princes of South Wales by Eleanor
" Goch, his wife." (!)
The "Thomas, Lord Strange," whose dau. Alice marries Edward Burnell on p. 94
is nowhere to be found among the Lords Strange (p. 516); and the "Thomas, Lord Cob
ham," whose daughter Elizabeth marries John St. Maur on p. 469,^ is seen on p. 76 to be
Sir Thomas Brooke, Knt., whose son Edward was the first of the family who had a writ of
summons. But some of the blunders are absolutely childish. Let us take, as an instance of
"sedulous care and minute revision" the Mowbray Pedigree on p. 485. Two sons are
allotted to Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, K.G., viz., " Thomas, who never bore the
title of Duke of Norfolk," and " Thomas, restored to the dukedom of Norfolk." If we
prefer the alternative presented on p. 388, the latter's name was John.
Or again, to take another illustration, who could attempt to solve the appalling jumble
of errors in which Ulster attempts to describe the marriage of Sir Robert Ogle (p. 413).
"He departed this life" so runs this extraordinary farrago, "in the 15th Henry VI. (1436-7),
leaving issue, by his wife, Maud, dau. of Sir Thomas Grey of Heton, by Alice his wife, dau.
of Ralph ist Earl of Westmoreland and Werke, by Catherine Mowbray, according to Collins,
eight daus  and three sons." The grammatical construction'of this sentence being
obviously hopeless, let us see what light is thrown upon its meaning by other passages in the
book. The title of " Westmoreland and Werke " is a novelty to genealogists. We will not
attempt to decipher it. This " Sir Thomas Grey of Heton," however, whose dau. Maud
marries Sir Robert Ogle, seems to have been identical with a Sir Thomas Grey of ' Berwyke on
p. 253, whose dau. Maud marries Sir Henry Ogle. Unluckily this latter Sir Thomas Grey is
said to have married "Jane (or Anne) dau. of John, Lord Mowbray " (p. 253); whereas the
former Sir Thomas marries " Alice, dau. of Ralph, ist Eirl of Westmoreland and Werke ; " (!)
and though a Mowbray seems involved in the case somehow, she is neither "Jane" nor
" Anne," but " Catherine." On the whole, then, we give it up in despair.
Again, how can we reconcile the assurance that " no available source of information has
been neglected," when that information can be at once obtained by merely turning over the
pages of this very book? The wife of William, 4th Baron Furnival, is modestly described
(p. 225) as "Thomasin, dau. and heiress of  Dagworth;" but on referring to Da<nvorth
(p. 153), we find that she, as sole heir of " Sir Nicholas Dagworth, 2nd Baron Dagworth m

" DORMANT AND EXTINCT PEER A GE." 5 T
William, Lord Furnivall." Thus this lady of unknown extraction on p. 225 was identical
with the heiress-apparent to a barony on p. 153.
On p. 53, Hugh, 3rd Earl of Pembroke, marries "Joane, dau. of Nicholas Stutevflle,
and widow of  Wake." We readily discover her first husband's Christian name to be
Hugh, by turning to p. 563, where Hugh Wake marries "Joane, dau. and eventual heiress
of Nicholas de Stuteville."
" Millicent dau. of  Ferrers, Earl of Derby (p. 283) is seen on p. 19& to be dau.
of Robert Ferrers, 4th Earl of Derby."
Lastly, we are told on p. 543 that Isabel, 4th dau. and co.-heir of Sir Theobald, 2nd
Baron de Verdon, married " Henry Ferrers, Lord Ferrers of Groby," and had issue : —
¦Page 543 Page 198.
(1) William, Lord Ferrers. (1) William his successor.
(2) Ralph m. Joan, etc., etc.
(2) Philippa m. to Guy de Beauchamp. (3) Philippa m. to Guy de Beauchamp, son
and heir of Thomas, Earl of Warwick.
(3) Elizabeth m. to — De Assells. (4) Elizabeth m. to David, Earl of Atholl.
These specimens are sufficient to serve as instances of a class of imperfections, which,
with the slightest attention, might easily have been avoided.
" Thomas de Mowbray," we are told on p. 387, " was constituted Earl Marshal" (r388) ;
" his Lordship being the first who had the title of Earl attached to tite office." Why then is
William Marshal stated (p. 388) to have been appointed a " Baron of the Charter (12 15)
as Comes Mareschal"? Why is Roger Bigod (d. 1307) described (p. 53) as "2nd Earl
Marshal of this family"? Why is Thomas de Brotherton (d. 1338) twice described as
"Earl Marshall" (p. 433)?
"John de Cherlton, 3rd Baron Powys," marries on p. 116 Maud, dau. of Roger Mor
timer. This lady is not to be found in the Mortimer pedigree p. 384; but on p. 201, Alice,
dau. of Richard Fitzalan also marries this John de Cherlton. '---
John Fitzalan, who marries Elizabeth, dau. of Httgh de Despenser on p. 2or, is identical
with John Arundel who is first husband of Elizabeth, dau. oi Edward Despencer (Hugh's
nephew), on p. 167 ; while the Hugh, Lord Despencer, of p. 44 is seen on p. 166 to be
intended for his father, Hugh Despencer, a simple esquire.
So too the " Sir Edward Hungerford," whose dau. Philippa is the wife of Sir Thomas
St Maur on p. 469, is intended for his father, Sir Edmund, as is shown by the dates on
p. 291. On p. 240, Malise, Earl of Menteith, marries " Lady Anne Vere, dau. of Henry, Earl of
Oxford." No "Henry, Earl of Oxford," can be found among the Veres on p. 551, nor is
there any clue as to the solution of the mistake.
On p. 199, John, 3rd Lord Ferrers of Chartley, marries "Elizabeth, dau. of Ralph, ist
Earl of Stafford ; " but this alliance is ignored in the Stafford pedigree on p. 499.
Again, on p. 473, "Sir John Savage of Clifton, Knt.," marries "Catherine, dau. of Sir
Thomas Stanley, afterwards Lord Stanley, and sister of Thomas Stanley, Earl of Derby;"
yet there is no mention of this Catherine among the daughters of Sir Thomas, Lord Stanley
(p. 503), and no confirmation of the match.
Isabel Despencer, dau. and sole eventual heir of Thomas Despencer, Eari of Gloucester,
married, when a widow (as is seen on p. 32), Richard, Earl of Albemarle and Warwick; }et
on p. 167, where we find the fullest account of her, this second mamage, with its issue, is
completely ignored, and we are wrongly led to suppose that Elizabeth Beauchamp was her
only child. As three baronies were involved in her marriages, such an omission is quite
unpardonable. -
According to the Maltravers pedigree (p. 351), Eleanor Maltravers m. John Fitzalan,
"and had issue John Fitzalan, who s. to the barony of Maltravers, and eventually as nth
Earl of Arundel." Of course, as we see on p. 201, he never succeeded as Earl of Arundel
at all ; the "nth Earl of Arundel " being his cousin, Thomas Fitzalan.
No mistake is more misleading than that on p. 279, where Sir Thomas Holland marries
Joane, "only dau. of Edmund Plantagenet, surnamed 'of Woodstock,' Earl of Kent, 2nd son
of King Edward the IhirdZ' Now this passage betrays an unlucky confusion between the
two " Woodstocks," viz., Edmund " of Woodstock," son of Edward the First, and Thomas
" of Woodstock," son of Edward the Third. We might have hoped that the Princes of the
Blood, at any rate, would have their parentage correctly stated.
" I feel safe as to the general correctness of the whole." Such are the words with which

52 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Ulster closes the introduction to his "Dormant and Extinct Peerage." It were useless to
multiply instances, such as those we have given, of a general //^correctness, which, had the
work been compiled by any other writer, would have been stigmatized by the press as
amazing inaccuracy. The very trust with which the public uses this Peerage as a book of
reference makes us regret the more deeply that the opportunity has been lost of producing
a work which should be worthy of the author's office. We leave it to those who have any
experience of genealogy to decide whether the flaws of which instances have been given
are not sufficient to render useless a compilation in which accuracy was the first require
ment. Without the most scrupulous accuracy, genealogy is devoid of meaning, and without
"the most laborious revision, the most anxious and unremitting attention," accuracy is
impossible. In presuming to offer our criticisms on this work, and to accept the challenge
which its preface implies, we have purposely abstained from doubtful generalities and from
unproved assertions ; nor in this article have we taken upon ourselves to make corrections
from our own knowledge. Indeed, we trust that Ulster will forgive our criticisms when we
remind him that the sole authority to which we have ventured to appeal is none other than
that of Sir Bernard Burke.

|Tjorfrs raft (lurries.

ISABEL HOWARD.
COLLINS states that Isabel Howard, youngest sister of Queen Katherine, married
Henry Baynton, Esq., of Bromham, and gives as his authority St. George's MS.
Baronage. Miss Strickland, in her life of Catherine Howard, states (on authority of the
Howard Memorials) that Isabel Howard married " an Esquire of the Boynton (Baynton ?)
family," and in her description of the next queen's marriage (1543), states that Edward
Baynton, "who married the late queen's sister," was present Is either version correct?
I can find no mention of such alliance in any printed or MS. pedigree of the Baynton
family. All that is certain is that Sir Edward Baynton was vice-chamberlain, and his wife
"Lady ofthe Privy Chamber" to Queen Katherine; and in an order of nth March, 1541,
the queen is assigned " four gentlewomen and two chamberers, forseeing always that my
Lady Baynton be one, whose husband the king's pleasure is should attend the queen and
have the rule and government of the whose house. Besides Mr. Baynton, his wife, and
the almoner, the king appointeth none specially," etc. This Sir Edward Baynton is said
to have accompanied the king into France, 1544, and died there. His second wife was
named Isabel, but is said to have been a daughter of Sir John Leigh, of Stockwell, Surrey,
and the date precludes her, in any case, from being Isabel Howard. Sir Edward had a
son Henry by his second wife, but he married a daughter of Sir William Cavendish. One
MS. pedigree attributes also to him a son Henry by his first wife ; but he is said to have
married one of the Mantell family. Who then was Isabel Howard's husband?
J. H. R.
NEWPORT, EARL OF BRADFORD (page 31.)
HENRY NEWPORT, 3rd Earl of Bradford, was succeeded by his brother Thomas,
4th and last Earl of Bradford of that family, who died unm. in 1762. Richard
Newport, the second son, as stated by T. E. S., predeceased his elder brother, as did also
the fourth, fifth, and sixth sons, who all died in infancy. The Countess of Bradford referred
to in the second paragraph of the Note would have been their mother, Mary, widow of
Richard, 2nd Earl of Bradford, and daughter and co-heir of Sir Tliomas Wilbraham, of
Woodhey, Bart, by Elizabeth, dau. and heir of Edward Mytton, of Weston, Esq. This Mary,
Countess of Bradford, died 3rd Dec. 1737, and was buried at Weston. T. R. O." B.
THE CARNWATH PEERAGE (page 31.)
WOOD is wrong in stating that the Charter to Earl Gavin, 1646, proves that his father
was dead. The Act of Parliament, 1645, forfeits Earl Robert, sentences him to
death, etc., but provides that his only lawful son, Gavin, Lord Dalzell, shall enjoy not only
all the estates, but the title of Eail as if his father were dead. R. R S

THE WEEKES FAMILY.
IN the first number of this Periodical an article appeared calling attention to some
lamentable cases of official negligence, whereby the laws of arms and the genuineness
of pedigree were tending to be brought into disrepute. " We complain," ran a passage in
this article, " not only of the publication of arms originating merely from the imagination
of the engraver, but of the (pseudo-official) confirmation of arms, the legal property of a
family, or of its heirs, but assumed, for obvious reasons, by other families of the same
name, though not descended from the original grantee. And by way of making matters
even worse, the arms, having first been wrongfully assumed, are actually adduced in evidence
of an equally fallacious descent" It is a very common mistake to class together all arms
illegally borne, but, as is here pointed out, there is a marked distinction between the adoption
of unregistered coat-armour and the pirating of that which is the legal and peculiar property
of a particular grantee and his descendants. The former practice is an offence against the
laws of arms, but the latter is, in addition, an injustice to the lawful owners, and an
attempt to impose upon a credulous public utterly unfounded claims.
The subject of this note is one of many cases in point, and will serve to illustrate a
practice for which the lawful authorities are to blame. It happens also to be an excellent
example of the editor's remark that " too many of the genealogical books issued in the
present day  abound with repetitions of well-known blunders, and are embellished
with many that are new."
In the "General Armory," issued by Sir Bernard Burke (1844 Edition), we find as
follows: "Weekes. — (Hurstpierpoint, co. Sussex) as borne by George Weekes of that place,
Esquire, descended of an ancient Devonshire family, eta, etc. Quarterly : ist, ermine,
3 battle-axes sa. for Weekes ; 2nd, gu., fess chequy or and az. within a bordure or, for
Hampton ; 3rd, arg., on a bend az. 3 roses of the field, for Carey of Aston, Oxon ; 4th,
az., a chev. arg. between 2 mullets in chief or, and in base a hand in armour ppr. holding
a mace, for Mace. Crest," eta It will be shown in this note that arms, crest, quartering,
and descent are all equally fictitious. •
In Burke's " Landed Gentry" (Editions 1858 and 1862), the following "Lineage" is
recorded : — " Richard Weekes, Esq., of Shoreham, co. Sussex, the descendant of the ancient
family of Weekes of Devon, which bore the same for arms as the branch settled at Hurst
pierpoint still continue to use, m. 5th October, 1743, Anne, dau. of William Oliver, Esq.,
of Shoreham, and d. 1753, leaving an only son, Richard Weekes, Esquire, of Hurstpierpoint,
who m., 19th January, 1779, Charity, dau. and h. ofthe Rev. Charles Hampton, Rector and
Patron of Plumpton, descended from . . . . . Charles Hampton, Arclibp. of Armagh in
1613." In Walford's "County Families" (i860), the legend appears in an even more
brilliant form. Under "George Weekes, M.R.C.S., of Hurstpierpoint," we find, "This
family, formerly De Wykes, Wyke, or Wike, held knight's fees and lands by serjeanty in
Kent and Devon 1166, and Forest of Savernake and Castle of Marlborough temp. Henry
III , are descended from a common ancestor with the Weekeses of Devon, and through
their grandmother, the heiress of Hampton, from Carey, Lord Hunsdon, and other noble
families " (!).
An account of the family is also contained in an article on Hurstpierpoint in the
Sussex Arch. ColL for 1861, but it is merely a rechauffk of Ulster's; and a fresh article
in the S. A. C. of 1864 accepts the same version. But in the Genealogist for April and
July 1876, there appeared two elaborate articles on the family by Mr. W. S. Ellis, who gives
it authority by the statement, " This Pedigree is compiled entirely from family papers." His
industrious researches carry him back two generations further than the lineage given above, and
he begins with a Richard Weekes, "born about 1640" (no proof given), whose residence seems
most uncertain. " This family," he continues, " has for several generations borne the arms
of Weekes bf Devonshire ; " and he proceeds to adduce as evidence of the connection that the
will of a Joseph Weekes, of Westham, is still in possession of the family, " and it is supposed (!)
that the testator was son of Joseph Weekes, brother of Simon Weekes, living 1620, who
was descended from Sir Richard Weekes, of Honeychurch co. Devon, who bore the above
arms, but ;" he feels bound to add, " a Kentish origin is equally, if not more, probable."
The "supposed" link being thus set forth, the Devonshire origin, resting on such

54

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

slight a foundation, must stand or fall with it. Accordingly, in 1877, in a rider to his
articles, Mr. Ellis confesses that an exhaustive search among the family wills effectually
disproves the positive assertions contained in the works of Ulster King-of-Arms. As,
however, he merely supplies us with the raw material from which to construct a true
pedigree, without setting forth the descent in regular form, and as he announces that his first
Richard W., born about 1640, is identical with a Richard W., whose father's will was proved
in 1637, we may as well attempt, once for all, to compile a pedigree from his evidences which
will be beyond cavil.

 Weekes, of Pen-
hurst, mentioned in
nephew's will.

I
Weekes =

I

William Weekes, of B'rchington, in Bexhill,
Sussex, yeoman. Will d. 2 Feb. 1623, proved
17 Jan. ,1624 =
Joseph Weekes, of Playden, near Rye,
yeoman. Will d. 19 Oct. 1637 ; proved 10
Nov. 1637 ; mentioned in father's will =
 I

William Weekes,
son and heir, of
Birchington, in Bex-
hill, yeoman, men
tioned in grand
father's will 1623.
Willd. 23 Ap., 1663,
proved 20 July, 1663= I

I
Joseph Weekes, of
Westham, "The
Link," mentioned in
father's will. Willd.
2 May, l658,d.s.p.(.')

I
Richard Weekes, of
Broad Ten-
derden.Kent. (') =

Martha
Weekes

Makv
Weekes

I
Elizabeth Weekes
 <

Mentioned in father's will.

I
Thomas Weekes, a
minor, 1663.

William Weekes,
a minor, 1663.

John Weekes, of Broad Tenterclen, _=
Kent, yeom in, b. 1663, d. 1758-9,
jet. 96.

Jane
Boreman.

I

Richard Weekes, of Shoreham, _= Anne
Sus>ex, d. 23 Nov., 1753, or Oliver.
>757-

1  : 
Richard Weekes, of Hurstpier- = Charity
point, surgeon, b. 4 Nov., 1751, Hampton.
d. 25 Oct., 1823.
(') Mentioned in father's will 1637, and brothers' wills 1658 and 1663.
The true origin of the family is thus effectually established. The name is now, as it
always has been, extremely common among the lower and middle classes in Kent and Sussex,
but no connection can be traced between the different families who bear it, even in this
district, and it is probable that (being a local derivative) they assumed it from different localities,
as in the case of such families as Wood and HilL No family of the name appears in the
visitations of Kent or Sussex, and there is no record of any one of the name being entitled to
bear arms at all, and certainly not the arms which belonged to Weekes of Devon .(J)
The dates given in Mr. Ellis's Articles remind us of a practice, apparently common among
less accurate genealogists, of ascertaining the year of birth simply by subtracting the recorded
age from the year of death. This practice may be generally detected by the absence of any
day or month. Nor the date of birth can only be discovered, by this means, within two years.
Thus if John Weekes died 1758-59 (i.e., in the spring of 1759), aged 96, he may have been
born in 1662 or in 1663. So, too, if his son died in 1757 aged 53, he may have been born
in 1703 or 1704. (Mr. Ellis admits that 1753 may also be the date.) This practice may
(') It is a curious example ofthe persistence of genealogical error that in the Vol. of S. A. C. just published
there is a paper by an able genealogist, Sir G. Duckett (on a subject which he has made his own. — the
Repeal of the Penal Laws), in which he speaks of Oliver Weekes, J. P. (1688), as "probably ancestor of the
family afterwards of Shoreham and Hurstpierpoint ; one of whom, Carew Weekes, of Tortington, represented
Arundel in 1702." A simple reference to Dallaway would at once have shown that Oliver Weekes was not
the ancestor of this family, and that Carew W. did not belong to them, but was himself the son of this Oliver
who inherited Tortington.)

SPURIOUS COAT ARMOUR. 55
be further complicated by the loose use of the term "in his — th year," which is often met
with (specially in monumental inscriptions), and should, but often does not, record the age
to be attained next birthday. Lastly, the statement that Richard Weekes was born 4th Nov.,
1751, and d. 25th Oct., 1823, aged 73, surely required editorial revision. There is a mistake
of two years somewhere.
There is a careful pedigree of Hampton in Coll. Top. and Gen. vi. 294., down to Charity
Hampton, who married Richard Weekes, surgeon (" of Hurstpierpoint, Esq.," apud Burke), in
1779 ; but it is shown that they were not descended from the Archbishop (as in Burke), but
from his younger brother. Also the Carey match is ignored ; but it is shown in another
place that no connection can be traced between these Careys and the noble family of that
name who bore the arms assigned by Ulster as a quartering to Weekes.
It will now be interesting to observe how far the apocryphal version in the "Landed
Gentry " has been modified in consequence of these exposures.
" In my Landed Gentry," * writes Sir Bernard, " as in the Heralds" Visitations, and indeed,
in every similar undertaking, errors must creep in. In some few, very few, instances has false
information been imposed on me ; even when it has, the recurrence of editions enables me to
detect and erase incorrect statements."
The latest edition of Ulster's "General Armory" (18781 continues to assign to this family
the coat of Weekes of Devonshire, but omits the quarterings. In the latest edition of the
" Landed Gentry " (1879), we are prudently informed that Richard Weekes, of Shoreham is
"stated to be of the ancient family of Weekes of Devon, which bore the same arms as the
branch settled at Hurstpierpoint still continue to use " (the italics are our own) ; but the
pedigree is innocently carried up to John Weekes, of Tenterden ! The erroneous Hampton
descent is reasserted, and the true version ignored. But an addition is made. to this pedigree
which is too amusing to leave unnoticed. Presumably to console the family for the less
positive assertion of their Devonshire ancestry, we are now told that its patriarch, John
Weekes, married Jane Borman, " whose sister is said to have married Archbishop Sheldon " (!).
Now it must require a strangely constituted mind to accept the statement that the aunt
of Richard Weekes, born in 1694, married a man born in 1598 (to say nothing of a Sussex
yeoman having a Primate of ancient Staffordshire descent for his brother-in-law) ; but a greater
difficulty remains, — the Archbishop never was married.
* Preface to " Extinct Peerage."

C&e Descent of jFreOetic'l Cennpson from tbe IBIood Kopal of aEnrjlano.

William L, King of Ens-
land, surnamed the Con
queror, crowned Christmas
Day, 1066, died at Rouen
9 Sept. 1087.

:Maud, dau. of Baldwin V.,
Count of Flander_, de
scended from Alfred the
Great and Charlemagne.

HENRY L, surnamed Beau-=Matilda, d. of Malcolm III.,
clere. crowned 6 Aug. 1 100, I Caenmor, King of Scots,
d. at St. Denis, I Dec. 1135. I m. 1100, d. I May, 1 1 18.
I — '  '
MAUD, died at Rouen lO-=Geoff_eyPlantaganet, Count

Sept., 1167, m. ist to Henry
IV., Emperor of Germany,
who died s.p. 22 May 1125.

of Anjou (son and heir of
Fulke, King of Jerusalem
and Count of Anjou), d. 7
Sept. 1 1 50.
Henry IL, crowned i9_=Eleanor,DuchessofGuienne,
Dec 1154, d. 7 July 1189. eldest d. and h. of William,
Duke of Aquitaine, d. 26
June 1202.
JOHN,crowned27May Iioo^lsahel (2nd wife), d.and h.
b. 24 Dec. 1 167, d. 19 Oct. I of Aymer, Count of Angou-
1216. I Ieme, she d. 1246.
1  '
Henry III., crowned 28-_=E_eanor, 2nd dau. and co-h.

r

October 1216, b. I Oct.
1206, m. 14 Jan. 1236, d.
16 Nov. 1272.

ofRaymond Berenger.Count
of Provence, she d. 25 June
1291.

Edward I., crowned io=Eleanor (ist wife), dau. of

Aug. 1274, b. 17 June 1239,
d. 7 July 1307.

Ferdinand III., King of
Castile, d. 27 Nov. 1290.
Edward IL, crowned 23=Isbbel, dau. of Philip IV.

Feb. 1307, b. 25 Apl. 12S4,
d. 21 Sept. 1327.

of France, m. 28 Jan. 1308,
d.22 Aug. 1357.
Edward III., crowned i=Philippa, 3rd d. of William,
Feb. 1327, b. 13 Nov. Count of HoUand and
1312, d. 21 June, 1377. Hainault, m. 24 Jan. 1328,
d. 15 Aug. 1369.

John of Gaunt (5th son),_=Katherine (3rd wife), d. of

Duke of Lancaster, Earl of
Richmond, &c, b. 24 June
1340, d. 3 Feb. 1399.

Sir Payn Roet, of Hainault
(widow of Sir Otes Swyn-
ford, knt.), m.13 Jan. 13961
d. 10 May 1403.
Sir John Beaufort, Earl of=Margaret, 3rd d. of Thomas,

Somerset and Marquis of
Dorset, so cr. 1 397, d. 21
Apl. 1410. -

and sister and co-h. of
Edmund HoUand, Earl of
Kent (shere-m. to Thomas,
Duke of Clarence, 2nd son
Henry IV.), d. 31 Dec. 1 440.
Edmund, Duke of Somerset,==Eleanor, 2nd d. and co-h.

so cr. 31 March 1449, slain
at the first battle of St.
Albans, 22 May 1455.

of Richard Beauchamp,
Earl of Warwick, d. 12
March 1467.
A, continued above.

A, continued from lelov.'.
James Butler, Karl Ormonde^nd=Eieanor, =Sir Robert Spence.,
co-h. of I of Spencer Combe,
her I Devon, Int.
brother.

Wiltshire, K.G., beheaded
Newcastle z May 1461 s.p.

hari

Katharine

: Henry Percy, 5th
Earlof Northum
berland.

Margaret = Thomas Cary, of
I Chilton Folliott.
J Wilts, esq.

Sir John Cary, ofPlashyand:=_Joyce, widow of William

of Thremhall Priory, Essex,
knt., bd. at Hunsdon, 8
Sept. 1551.

Walsingham (father of Sir
Francis), and 5th dau. of Sit
Edmund Denny, knt., baron
of the exchequer, her w.d.
10 Nov. 1560.

Sir Edward Cary, of Alden-=Catherine, dau. of Sir Henry
Knyvett, of Buckenham,
Norfolk, knt., and widow of
Henry, 2nd Lord Paget, d.
20 Dec. 1622.

ham and Great Berkhamp
stead, Herts, and of Hunslet,
Yorks., knt., d. 18 July
1618.

Anne (6th dau.), bapt. io=Sir Francis Leke, of Sutton,

Aug., 1607.

1585, m. 16 Sept,

Anne, eldest dau. and in her:
issue co-h. of her nephew,
Nicholas, 4th Earl of Scars
dale, bapt. at Newark, 18
Aug. 16 1 4.

Henry Hildyard, of Wine-
stead, and after of Kelstern,
co. Line, b. 2 July 1637,
d. in 1705.

Christopher Hildyard, of=
Kelstern, d. 28 Aug. 1719,
bd. at K. 1 Sept. aged 51.

r

co. Derby; knt. and bart.,
cr. Baron Deincourt 1624
and Earl of Scarsdale 1645,
d. 9 Apl. 1655.
.Henry Hildyard, of Wine-
stead, Yorks., and East
Horsley, Surrey, chamber
lain of the exchequer, M.P.
Hedon, fined^466oby parlt.,
b. 26Jan. 1609, d. Jan., 1674.
.Dorothy, 1st wife, dau. of
Thomas Grantham, of
Goltho, co. Line, esq., bd.
at Winestead 1 Nov. 1667.
Jane, dau. of George Pitt,
of Strathfieldsaye, Hants
(royal descent).

Dorothy, m. at North Cock-=George Clayton, of Grims-

eringtoh 30 Jan. 1719, she
bd. at Gt. Grimsby 5 Slarch
1 78 1, aged 80, having re-m.
to Ralph Tennyson,of Grims
by, attorney (see pedigree).

Elizabeth Clayton, 5th child:
(and only one to have issue),
b. 30 Dec. 1725, d. 6 Jan.,.
1755, M.I.

George Tennyson, M.P., of.
Bayons Manor and Usselby
Hall, co. Line, b. 7 Feb.
1749-SO. d 4 July 1835, M.L

by, a Baltic merchant.

-Michael Tennyson, of Pres
ton, co. York, and of Stain-
ton, co. Line, bapt. at
Barton St. Peter, 20 Sept.
1721, d. 6 OcL 1796, M.I.
.Mary, ct. and eventual heir
of John Turner, esq., of
Caistor, co. Line, m. 1775,
d. 20 Aug. 1825, aged 72.

George Clayton Tenny-_=Eli-abeth, d. of Rev. Charles Tennyson-D'Eyn--=Frances Mary, only child Other

son, rector of Benniworth,
vicar of Grimsby, &c,
bapt at Market Rasen,
10 Dec. 1778, d. 16
March, 1 831.

Stephen Fytche, of
Louth, m. 6 Aug. 1805,
d. 21 Feb. 1865.

court.P.C, M.P., of Bayons
Manor and Noselby Ho.,
co. Line, J.P., D.L., bapt.
at M.R. 20 July 1784, d.
21 July 1864.

and heir of Rev. John
Hutton, of Morton, ccv
Line, m. I Jan. 1808, d.
26 Jan. 1S78.

issue, see
page 58.

Frederick Tennyson,
of Gl Grimsby, co.
Line, b. 5 June
1807 =

Alfred Tennyson,
poet laureate, b.
6 Aug. 1809 =

Edward Arthur.

Alfred

Other issue.

I 
Hallam.

Horatio Other
b. 25 issue,
Sept. see
1819= page 58.]

Edwin Clayton Tennyson-
D'Eyncourt, of Bayons and
Usselby, Adl. R.N., m. and
has a dau., Henrietta.

_j_

Other

Louis Charles Tennyson
D'Eyncourt, police mag is- issue,
trate, London, since see
1851= page 59.

Lionel =

Alfred Browning Stanley Locker,
Charles Frederick Locker.

Bertram, R.N.,
Charles Percy.

Other issue, see
page 58.

_

Edmund Charles,
Eustace Henry.

Other issue,
see page 59.

Cenngson, of <25rcat ©rimsop, co. Line.

TENNYSON,F_.EDERicK,ofGt. Grimsby,
co. Lincoln, and of Ewolds.St. Heliers,
Jersey, gold medallist of Eton, 17th in de
scent from Edward III. (see Chart Pedigree),
b. 5 June 1807; bapt. at Louth, m. at Florence,
5 July 1847, Maria Carolina Giuliotti, dau.
of Signor Giuliotti Vicario (chief magstrate),
of Siena, and Aldina Bruschi, of Asinalunga,
Tuscany, and has with other issue a son.
Alfred, heir to the Grimsby property, b. 24 Dec. 1854.
Asms— Gu., three leopards' faces or, jessant de lis az., over all
a bend of the last, Tennyson.
Crest— A dexter arm in armour, gauntletted or, grasping a
broken tilting spear, entiled with a garland of laurel ppr.
Motto — " Niltemere."
Residence— St. Ewolds, St. Heliers, Jersey.
?Lineag.e*
RALPH TENNYSON, of Barton, and of
Wrawby, co. Lincoln; died 17 May
I735> age(* 43> buried in chancel of Wrawby
Church, 20th. He m. Dorothy, dau. of John
Chapman, of Pickering, Yorks.; she d. 25
Feb. 1776, aged 84, bd. with her husband,
having had 6 sons and 2 daus.
(1) Ralph, of Grimsby, attorney, bapt. at Barton St.
Peter, 14 June 1720, bd. at Preston in Holderness,
20 April 1767. He m. Dorothy, widow of George
Clayton, of Grimsby, and dau. of Christopher Hild
yard, esq., of Kelstern, co. Line, (see Chart Pedigree) ;
she bd. at Gt. Grimsby, co. Line, 5 March 1781,
aged 80, leaving an only dau. :
Dorothy, bapt. at Grimsby, 18 June, 1741, d. with
out surviving issue, bd. at Grimsby, 4 Dec. 1809,
having m. there, 23 May 1782, to WiUiam Watson,
of that place ; he d. 16 Jan. 1803, having had an
only son— William, bd. at Grimsby, 7 Dec. 1784.
(2) MICHAEL, of whom presently.
(3) William, of Barton-on-Humber, attorney, bapt.
there 12 July 1723, bd. at Market Rasen, co; Line,
3 April 1787. He m. Susannah, widow of Christopher
Clayton, senr., of Grimsby (who d. 1752); she d.
24 Feb. 1 8 10, aged 83 (at the residence of her dau.,
Mrs. Stirling, Pryme St., Hull.— Cent's. Mag.),
having had 3 sons and 5 daus., all bapt. at Barton
St. Peter:
(1) William, bapt. 20 Oct. 1764, bd. 24 Nov. 1765.
(2) Ralph, bapt. 2 March 1766, bd. 25 July 1770.
(3) William, bapt. 11 May 1768, bd. 31 July 1770.
(4) Elizabeth, bapt. 26 April 1758; m. at Market
Rasen, 26 Nov. 1787, to T. Jackson Holme, clerk.
(5) Eleanor, bapt. 28 Oct. 1759, m. at Market
Rasen, 10 Dec. 1792, to Jeremy Vickery, o£ St.
George's, Hanover Sq.
(6) Dorothy, bapt. 8 May 1 761 (probably Mrs. Stir-
(7) Fanny, bapt. 13 June 1732, bd. at Market
Rasen, 27 Aug. 1812.
(S) Susannah, bapt. 16 March, 1770, bd. 19 June
(4)* John, bapt. at Barton St. Peter, 13 June 1725.
bd. 7 Feb. following.
Collect.

(5) Walter, bapt at Barton St. Peter, I9,bd.30, Sept.
1726.
(6) Thomas, bapt. at Barton St. Peter, 30 Dec. 1732,
bd. 24 Jan. following.
(7) Elizabeth, bapt. at Barton St. Peter, 2 June
1728; m. to Thomas Wressle, and d. s.p., both bd. at
Barton.
(8) Eleanor, bapt. at Barton St. Peter, 25 Feb. 1729,
bd. there unm.
MICHAEL TENNYSON, of Preston,
co. York, and of Stainton, co. Lin
coln, apothecary, bapt. at Barton St. Peter,
20 Sept. 1721 ; died 6, bd. at Hedon in
Holderness, 8 Oct. 1796, aged 76, M.I.; will
dated 10 Aug. 1796, proved July following.
He m. Elizabeth, sth child (and the only one
to have issue) of George Clayton, of Gt.
Grimsby, co. Line, alderman, and a Baltic
merchant (his son, Capt. David Clayton,
perished in "the Black Hole" of Calcutta,
20 June, 1756) ; she was bora 30 Dec. 1725,
bapt. at Grimsby, 14 Jan. following; died 6,
and bd. at Hedon in Holderness, 19, Jan.
1755, M.L, having had 2 sons and 2 daus.
(1) George Clayton, bapt. at Hedon, 28 Dec. 1747,
bd. there 13 Jan. following.
(2) GEORGE, of whom presently.
(3) Elizabeth, bapt. at Hedon, 21 Feb. 1750/1, bd.
there II March 1751/2.
(4) -Anne, bapt. at Hedon, 29 April 1753, d. I Jan.
1814, bd. at Tealby, co. Line, 6th. She m., as 2nd
wife, to William Raines, of Wyton, Yorks., esq.,
who d. 30 Nov. 1798, leaving by her an only dau.,
—Elizabeth Clayton Raises, m. to Rev. George
Inman, M.A., rector of Skeffling, Easington, and
Kilnsea, and had an only dau., Sarah In MAN', m. 21
Feb. i860, to James Dunn, esq., and has an only child,
Maud Dunn.
C"* EORGE TENNYSON,- -of Bayons
¦j Manor and Usselby Hall, co. Line,
J. P., D.L., M.P. Bletc/iingley, June 18 18,
born 7, bapt. at Hedon, 8 Feb. 1749 50, d.
4 July 1835. bd. at Tealby, co. Line, M.L
(see Gent's. Mag., vol. iv. N. S., 430). He
m., i775» Mary, dau. and eventual heir of
John Turner, esq., of Caistor, co. Line. ; she
d. 20 Aug. 1825, aged 72, bd. at Tealby,
having had 2 sons and 2 daus.-
(1) GEORGE CLAYTON, of whom presently.
(2) Charles (see p_ ).
(3) Elizabeth, bapt. at Market Rasen, 18 April 1776,
m. there, 23 Jan. 1798, to Matthew Russell, of
Brancepeth, co. Durham, M.P., who d. 7 May 1822,
leaving an only child, Emma Maria, m. to Gustavus
Frederick John James, 7th Viscount Boyne.
(4) Mary, bapt. at Market Rasen, 4 May 1777, d.
26 April, 1864; she ni., Aug. 181 1, to Jolm Bourne,
esq., of Dalby, co. Line, who d. 15 Dec. 1850. G,

5S

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

GEORGE CLAYTON TENNYSON,
LL.D. 1813, B.A. St. John's Coll.,
Camb., 1801, M.A. 1805, rector of Somersby
1806, Benniworth 1807, vicar of Grimsby
St. Mary, with Grimsby St. James, 1813,
bapt. at Market Rasen, 10 Dec. 1778, d.
16 March 1831, bd. at Somersby, co. Line.
He m., at Louth, 6 Aug. 1805, Elizabeth,
dau. of Rev. Stephen Fytche, of Louth ; she
d. 21 Feb. 1865, having had 8 sons and 4
daus. (1) George, bom at Tealby, d. in infancy.
(2) FREDERICK, first named.
(3) Charles Turner, of Trin. Coll., Camb., Bell's
Scholar 1828, B.A. 1830, patron and vicar of Grasby,
co. Line, 1835-79, formerly curate of Tealby, assumed
the surname of Turner in lieu of his patronymic by
royal licence, 24 Aug. 1835 > hom 4 July 1S08, bapt.
at Somersby; d. 25 April 1 879, having m. at Horn
castle, 24 May 1836, Louisa, dau. and co-h. of Henry
Sellwood, esq. (and niece of Sir Johii Franklin) ; she
d. 20 May 1879.
(4) Alfred, of Farringford, Freshwater, I.W., and
of Aldworth, Haslemere, Surrey, lord of the manor
and patron of the living of Grasby, co. Line, poet
laureate 21 Nov. 1850, D.C.L., Oxon, F.R.S.,
hon. fellow Trin. Coll., Camb.; b. 6 Aug. 1809,
m., 13 June 1850, Emily Sarah, dau. and co-h. of
Henry Sellwood, esq., aforesaid, and has 2 sons :
(I) Hallam, b. II Aug. 1852, bpt. at Twickenham,
Middx. 5 Oct.
(2) Lionel, b. 16 March 1854; m. 25 Feb. 1878,
Eleanor Bertha Mary, only child of Frederick
Locker, esq., by his 1st wife, Lady Charlotte
Christian Bruce (E. Elgin), and has 2 sons.
Alfred Browning Stanley Locker, b. 20 Nov.
1878.
Charles Bruce Locker, b. 8 Nov. 1879.
(5) Edward, b. 14 Oct. 18 13, bapt. at Somersby, unm.

(6) Arthur, of Clifton, Bristol, b. iz May 1S14, bapt.
at Somersby ; m., 22 May 1S60, Harriet, dau. of Rev.
John West, rector of Chettle and Famham, Dorset,
and sister of Rev. John Rowland West, M.A., vicar
of Wrawby, co. Line. ; she d. I7june 1881.
(7) Septimus, b. 10 Sept. 1815, bapt. at Somersby,
d. unm. at Cheltenham 8 Sept. 1866.
(8) Horatio, b. 25 Sept. 1819, bapt. at Somersby ;
m., ist, 16 April 1857, Charlotte, dau. of Dudley
Christopher Cary-Elwes, capt. Ist Dragoon guards,
she d. 31 Oct. 1868 ; he m., 2ndly, 8 Dec. 1870,
Catherine, dau. of Rev. John West, rector of Chettle
and Farnham, Dorset, and sister of Rev. John Rowland
West, M.A., vicar of Wrawby, co. Line. By his 1st
wife he had 2 sons and. 3 daus :
(1) Bertram, sub-lieut. R.N., b. 9 April 1862.
(2) Charles Percy, b. I August 1865.
(3) Cecilia Mary, b. 4 Feb. 1859; m.. 2 July 1878,
to Rev. Richard William Massy Pope, M. A., Worc.
Coll., Oxon, 1873, B.D. 1877 (son Rev, Richard
Thomas Pembroke Pope).
(4) Eleanor Maud, b. 2 July i860.
(5) Violet Dudley, b. 21 Dec. 1863,
(9) Mary, b. II Sep. 1810 ; m., 7 July 1851, to Alan
Ker, bar.-at-law, M.T., 1842, puisne judge, Jamaica
(son of Robert Ker, merchant), and has an only son :
Walter Charles Alan Ker, B.A., scholar of Trin.
Coll., Camb., bar.-at-law, I.T., 1879 ; b. 10 May
I853-
(10) Emilia, b. 25 Oct. 181 1 ; m., 24 Jan. 1842, to
Richard Jesse, com. R.N. (son of Rev. William Jesse),
and has 2 sons :
(1) Arthur Henry Hallam Jesse, of the Exchequer,
b. 18 Jan. 1843.
(2) Richard Eustace RusseU, who took the name
of Eustace Tennyson D'Eyncourt, b. 19 Sept. 1853.
(11) Matilda, b. 13 Sept. 1816.
(12) Cecilia, b. 10 Oct. 1817, m. at Boxley, 10 Oct.
1842, to Edmund Law Lushington, of Park House,
nr. Maidstone, M.A. Trin. Coll., Camb., Prof. Uni
versity Glasgow 1838-75, and has a dau.
Cecilia, b. 25 June 1846.

Cennpson^D'Cgncouct of TBagons ann 23.s.se.&£.

TENNYSON - D'EYNCOURT, Edwin
Clayton, of Bayons Manor and
Usselby Hall, co. Line, admiral R.N. (retd.
1878), C.B., served in China (1840-1) and
wounded; served in Gulf of Finland during the
Crimean war; 17th in descent from Edward
III.; b. 4 July 1813, bapt. at Caenby, co.
Line; m., 1 March 1859, Lady Henrietta Pel-
ham-Clinton, youngest dau. of Henry Pelham,
4th Duke of Newcastle, K,G.,and has an only
dau. (1) Henrietta Charlotte.
Arms — Quarterly x and 4, az. a fesse dancettee between ten
billets, four and six, or., D'Eyncourt ; 2 and 3 gu.. three
leopards' faces or., jessant de lis az. ; over all a bend of the
last, Tennyson.
Crests — z. A Hon passant guardant arg., crowned with a crown
composed of fleur-de-lis or. , the dexter paw resting on a shield
charged with the arms of D'Eyncourt. se. A dexter arm in
armour, gauntlet or., grasping a broken tilting spear entiled
with a garland of laurel ppr., Tennyson.
Mottoes — " En avant," D Eyncourt ; " Nil temere," Tenny
son.
Seats — Bayons Manor and Usselby Hall, Market Rasen.
Clubs — United Service ; Travellers.
Town House — 56, Warwick Square, S.W.
Jtfneage.
RIGHT HON. CHARLES TENNY
SON D'EYNCOURT, of Bayons
Manor, and Usselby House, co. Line, J. P.,
D.L., P.C, M.A., Camb., high steward of
Louth, sat in io successive parliaments —
Grimsby 1818-26, Bletchingly 1826 31, Stam
ford 1831-2, Lambeth 1832-50, contested
Lambeth 1852; equerry to H.RH. Duke of
Sussex ; assumed the additional surname and
arms by R.L. 27 July 1835 (2nd son of
George Tennyson, see page ); bapt. at

Market Rasen, co. Line, 20 July 1784; d.
21 July 1864. He m., 1 Jan. 1808, Frances
Mary, only child and heir of Rev. John
Hutton, of Morton, co. Line. ; she d. 26 Jan.
1878, having had 5 sons and 3 daus.
(1) George Hildyard Tennyson-D'Eyncourt, of Bayons
Manor and Usselby House, co. Line., J.P., D.L.,
C.M.G., registrar of the most distinguished order of
St. Michael and St. George ; b. 10 July 1809, bapt.
at Caenby, co. Line, d. unm. 23 Feb. 1871.
(2) EDWIK CLAYTON, first-named.
(3) Louis Charles, of Hadley House, Middx., bar.-at-
law, LT., 1840, police magistrate, London, since 1851 :
b. 23 July 1814, bapt. at Caenby ; m- 31 Aug. 1S52,
Sophia, youngest dau. and co.-h. of John Ashton
Yates, esq., of Dinglehead, and has had 3 sons and 3
daus. (1) Edmund Charles, b. 11 Feb. 1855.
(2) Ashton Lovett, Lieut. Princess Charlotte of
Wales' (Berkshire) regt., b. 14 Dec. i860.
(3) Eustace Henry William, b. 1 April 1868.
(4) Alice Tulia, d. 1873.
(5) Emma Frances Mary.
(6) Henrietta Clara Eliza.
(4) Eustace Alexander, capt. 46th Regiment, b. 24
March 1816, bapt. at St. Giles, Middx., d. at Barba
dos, 9 March 1842.
(5) William Henry, b. 29 Aug. 1819, bapt. at St.
Giles, bd. there, d. 5 Sept. same year.
(6) Julia Frances, a nun, b. 13 Oct. 1810, died March
J 879.
(7) Clara Maria, b. 28 June 1812; d. October 1863,
liaving m., 10 May 1849, to John Hinde Palmer, esq.
(son of Samuel Palmer, of Dulwich), Q.C. 1859,
J. P., D.L. Surrey, M.P. Lincoln. 1868-74, mid since
1880, contested Lambeth 1850, Lincoln 1857, 1859,
1862, and 1874 : bar.-at-law, L.L, 1832, bencher
1859, treasurer 1880.
(8) Ellen Elizabeth, b. 7 July 1817 ; m., 13 Feb. 1S66,
as 2nd wife, to Henry Mill Bunbury, esq., ol Marlston
House, Berks, J.P., D.L., high sheriff 1842."

€J.e ©'Israeli IpeBigrec.
(Continued from page 16).
DENIZATION OF BENJAMIN D'ISRAELI.

IN the former Act of this family I was
unable, from want of space, to in
clude the deed of naturalization granted to
Benjamin D'Israeli — the grandfather of Lord
Beaconsfield — in 1801 ; it is here given in
extenso from the patent roll; its chief point
of interest is that it satisfactorily determines
that Benjamin D'Israeli was originally of
Cento, in Italy, although there is more than
one place of that name in that kingdom.
"©rorge tlje Sufjtrtl by the Grace of God etc.
To all to whom these presents shall come Greeting
Know Ye that we for divers good Causes and Con
siderations us hereunto especially moving of our
especial Grace certain knowledge and meer motion
have Granted and by these presents for us our heirs
and successors do Grant unto our welbeloved Benjamin
D'Israeli formerly of Cento in Italy but now of Stoke
Newington in the county of Middlesex Merchant (an
alien born) that he shall and may be a free Denizen
and leige Subject of us our heirs and successors and
that he and his heirs shall and may be Leige Subjects
of us our heirs and successors and that as well he as
his said heirs may in all things be treated reputed
held and governed as our faithful leige Subjects born
within our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire
land and that he and his heirs may in and by all things
have exercise use and enjoy all and all manner of
Actions Suits and Plaints of what nature or kind
soever in all our Courts Places and Jurisdictions
whatsoever within our United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland or elsewhere within our Dominions
and in them to plead and be impleaded answer and
be answered defend and be defended as any our faith
ful leige Subject or Subjects born or to be born in our
said United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
may or can And moreover that the said Benjamin
D'Israeli and his heirs male may lawfully and with
Impunity at their pleasure acquire receive take have
hold purchase and possess Lands Tenements Rents
Revenues and Services and all other hereditaments
whatsoever within our said United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland and other our Dominions and
may use and enjoy the same to him and his heirs for
ever or in any other manner whatsoever and may
give sell alienate and bequeath the same to any Person
or Persons as he shall think fit and as fully freely
quietly entirely and peaceably as any our faithful leige
Subjects bom within our said United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland may or can and that he and his
heirs may freely and lawfully claim retain and enjoy
Manors Lands Tenements rents and hereditaments
heretofore given granted or assigned or hereafter to
be given granted or assigned to him by us or by any
other person or persons whatsoever as freely quietly
entirely and peaceably as any our faithful leige Sub
jects born within our United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland may or can And that he and
his heirs may have and possess all and all manner of
Liberties Franchises and Privileges of our said United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and other our
Dominions and may use and enjoy the same freely
quietly and peaceably as our leige Subjects born within
our said United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
without any Disturbance Molestation Hindrance Vexa
tion Claim or Grievance whatsoever of us our heirs
or successors or of any our Ministers or Officers or any
others whatsoever But notwithstanding we will and
by thesepresentsCommand the said Benjamin D'Israeli

that he and his heirs do homage and allegiance to us
our heirs and successors and that he and they do pay
and contribute Lot and Scot as other our leige Sub
jects do pay and contribute or as they ought to pay
and contribute as is just and that he and his heirs do
pay to us our heirs and successors the like Customs
and Subsidies for their Goods and Merchandizes as
aliens do and ought to pay Provided always that
the said Benjamin D'Israeli and his heirs do hold and
observe all and singular Ordinances Acts Statutes and
Proclamations of our said United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland as well those already published
as those which shall hereafter be published and that
he and they be obedient to the same according to the
form of the Laws and Statutes in that behalf Pro
vided nevertheless and we will that he and the
Family which he now hath or hereafter shall have
shall continue and be resident within this our United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland or elsewhere
within our Dominions Provided Lastly and under
this condition that if the said Benjamin D'Israeli or his
heirs male orany one of them shall be Master or Masters
of a ship or ships or if the said. Benjamin D'Israeli
or his heirs shall hereafter carry on any Traffic within
the Limits or contrary to the Liberties and Privileges
heretofore granted to any Corporation or Corporations
of Merchants of this our United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland by any Charters or Letters Patent
of us or any of our predecessors then these our Letters
Patent as to such person or persons who shall or may
be Master of (sic) Masters of a Ship or Ships or shall
or may carry on Traffic as aforesaid shall be void and
of none effect En toitnrss etc. 3!iHttltr59 etc. the
twentyfourth day of August (1801).
"By writ of Privy Seal."
Patent Poll, 41 Geo. III., Part 19, No. 9.

" As a sequel to a paragraph in a recent issue, to
the effect that inquiries were being made at Venice
into the antecedents of the Disraeli family, the follow
ing particulars furnished by Signor Vittorio de Rossi,
of Leghorn, may not prove uninteresting. Signor
Rossi states that he has obtained his information direct
from his mother, who is a daughter of Rachel Tedesco
(nee Disraeli), sister of Isaac Disraeli. Signor Rossi,
who was thus a second cousin of Lord Beaconsfield,
states: 'The late Benjamin Disraeli grandfather of
the illustrious statesman and of my mother, resided in
Venice, where he carried on commerce ; and from
there he transferred his abode to London towards the
close ofthe last century. There he begat two children,
Isaac and Rachel. The first-named, who married in
London, had three sons, one of whom was Lord
Beaconsfield, and a daughter. Rachel Disraeli, the
sister of Isaac and my grandmother, was married in
London to Angiolo Tedesco. to whom she bore four
children, of whom the youngest is my mother, Sara.
During the first years ofthe present century, Rachel
Tedesco had the misfortune to lose her husband, and
in pious fulfilment of his last wish, she went to Italy
and settled in Leghorn, where his family resided.
Here her daughter, Sara, was married in 1835 t0
Signor Flaminio de Rossi, and of that union the
writer ofthe present notice was the offspring. Rachel f
Tedesco died many years ago ia Leghorn, and of her
four children my mothir, who resides wilh me, is the
only surviver. We are still in possession of numerous
letters addressed to Rachel Tedesco by her father,
Benjamin, and her brother, Isaac Disraeli, as well as
the latter's literary publications, through which he
gained a high reputation among English writers.' "—
J he Jewish Chronicle, Aug. 26, 1881, p. 9.

Cfje Epon iSfftce
AND
Cfre ifHarjortbanfe jF amity*
A REPLY TO THE REMARKS OF THE LYON CLERK DEPUTE,
ENTITLED
'MR. JOSEPH FOSTER ON THE RETURN OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT."

PREFACE.

AS no less a personage than Mr. Stodart, the Lyon Clerk Depute, — who from
his designation should yield to the Lyon King of Arms alone as the
greatest official authority on Scottish Heraldry and Genealogy, — has taken upon
himself in a current publication to criticise my recent genealogical works with
warmth rather than with accuracy, I feel that, in justice to myself, I should
place the subscribers to my " Collectanea " in possession of my side of the case.
Reading between the lines of this embittered article, I take it that the aim
of Mr. Stodart's attack is not so much a disinterested criticism of my work on
the Members of the Scottish Parliaments, as an attempt to weaken or discredit
the strictures I have from time to time felt bound to make, regarding the worth-
lessness, both of the "services" on account of Nova Scotia baronetcies and of the
(printed) pedigrees founded thereon, and also regarding the peculiar mode of
conducting the business of the Lyon Office, in improperly granting these self-
styled baronets, on evidence wholly insufficient, the arms and supporters which
undoubtedly pertain to the Baronetcy they have improperly assumed.
It will, however, naturally suggest itself to genealogists that I chiefly owe the
honour of being thus assailed by the Lyon Clerk Depute to the criticisms in my
Peerage on Lord Tweedmouth's "proved and registered pedigree" as officially
recorded by the Lyon King of Arms. These criticisms, which merely touched
the fringe of my well-grounded suspicions, were of necessity "odd comments"
(to quote Mr. Stodart), for they were inserted with the object of placing the
authorities at the Lyon Office on their defence, and of thus demonstrating that
they dare not uphold the audacious assertion in their "proved and registered
pedigree" (see page 64), for they know that there is not one shred, one tittle
of evidence to support, much less to substantiate, their statement that Joseph
Marjoribanks was grandson of the lord clerk register. The exposure which I
am now about to make is the inevitable consequence of Mr. Stodart's reply.
Now that the stone has at last been thrown, I need no longer hesitate to tear
away the mask from this later example of a Lyon Office pedigree, and to explain
away some of the statements, and correct some of the inaccuracies in the article
of the Lyon Clerk Depute. The review of the pedigree will reveal the most
Collect. h

62

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

determined genealogical fiction perpetrated by an officer of arms within living
memory. Before it pale such minor delinquencies as simple mis-affiliations, the
deliberate manufacture, i.e., fabrication of a date, and the more ludicrous assign
ment as ancestor to a younger branch pf the family, of a brother junior to a
posthumous child, an anomaly I believe in nature, if not among the Lyons of
Scottish genealogy. I think it will be universally conceded that the confession
ofthe Lyon Clerk Depute contained in paragraph io, page 68, and the posthumous
absurdity in No. 3 pedigree, etc., etc., page 70, would be more than sufficient to
condemn this pedigree, even without the conclusive evidence which I am about
to bring forward in disproof of the alleged descent from the lord clerk register.
The evidence will, I trust, go far to show that I am more conversant with Scottish
genealogy and the matdriet necessary to construct this pedigree than the present
- authorities of the Lyon Office.
The Lyon Office has a modus operandi happily peculiar to itself. Descents
are "solemnly" recorded in pedigree form, though absolutely devoid of evidence,
as may readily be seen from those which appear in this article. True, a meagre
date appears at intervals, but invariably so inserted as to preclude the possibility
of criticism, . and to be deprived of all evidential value.
Nor is this all ; for from the materials which are collected during the con
struction of the original "recorded" descent, subsequent and more comprehensive
pedigrees are compiled and issued from the Lyon Office to the uninitiated
and unsuspecting public, who have neither the faintest suspicion of the peculiar
process by which these productions have been evolved, nor the slightest conception
ofthe distrust in which they are held by the genealogist. This mode of procedure,
which is referred to more fully at page 69, considerably increases my task ; for,
having three pedigrees to deal with, when one should have sufficed, I am com
pelled to subdivide my criticisms accordingly.
With these remarks I will address myself to the purposes of this article,
commencing with the Marj'oribanks pedigree, as being of greater importance,
and therefore of greater interest to my readers, than the other subjects.

Contents.

PAGE
(1) Preface  61
(2) Summary  63
(3) "Proved and registered pedigree" of
Lord Tweedmouth, No. 1  64
(4) " Odd comments " reprinted from Mr.
Foster's Peerage  64
(S) The rejoinder of the Lyon Clerk Depute,
together with Mr. Foster's criticisms 65
(6) Extract from the Guild registers of
Edinburgh  66
(7) Lord Tweedmouth's pedigree, with
variations, No. 2  69

(S) Remarks upon the issue by the Lyon
office of different pedigrees of the
same family 
(9) Pedigree of Majoribanks of Marjori
banks 
(10) Lord Tweedmouth and the Lyon
Office  _

69

70

72

(11) Mr. Joseph Foster oir the Return of
Members of Parliament  73
(12) Discredited baronetcies ... „. 75
(13) Mr. Foster's Peerage ...  75

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 63

Summary of the Principal Inaccuracies
IN THE

Marjoribanks Pedigrees.

Section I.
(A.) Disproof of statement in the Lyon Office "proved and registered pedigree," that
Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Thomas Marjoribanks, lord clerk register and lord of
session. See paragraph 7, page 66.
This statement is founded on an alleged identity between
u James Marjoribanks who was undoubtedly son of Thomas Marjoribanks and
a James Marjoribanks who was undoubtedly Lord Tweedmouth 's ancestor; which identity is
capable of disproof absolute.
(B.) Disproof of the statement in the Lyon Office " proved and registered pedigree,"
that James, father of Joseph, died 1581. See paragraph 8, page 67.
(C.) Disproof of the statement in the Lyon Office " proved and registered pedigree,"
that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Edward Marjoribanks of Hallyards, by his
marriage with Agnes Murray. See paragraph 9, page 68.
It is stated in the Lyon office pedigrees that a son Edward Marjoribanks the younger was born of
this marriage, and was ancestor of Lord Tweedmouth. No such son Edward is to be found among
the baptismal or other entries of their children.
(D.) Disproof of the existence of Edward Marjoribanks the younger, alleged in the
Lyon Office "proved and registered pedigree" to be the ancestor of Lord Tweedmouth. See
paragraph 10, page 68.
The only statement that such an individual ever existed is to be found in the record of his birth, of
which the actual date is piven in the Lyon office pedigree No. 2, page 69. It is now admitted by the
Lyon Clerk Depute that this date is a fabrication, pure and simple.
Section II.
(E.) Disproof of the statement in the official Lyon pedigree that Thomas Maijoribanks,
son of the lord clerk register, was ancestor of Marjoribanks of Balbairdie. See paragraph 1 2,
page 70,

This statement is at once disproved by reference to "Lord Lyon's" account of Marjoribanks of
Marjoribanks. See pedigree No. 3, pp. 7°. 7». «here the descent is deduced from John, eldest son of
the lord clerk register.
Section III.
(F.) Disproof of the statement in the "Lord Lyon's account" that Marjoribanks of that
ilk is descended from John, younger son of John Maijoribanks of Ratho. See paragraph 13,
page 71. This statement is disproved by reference to two deeds of «' Gift by the Queen, where the only issue
of John Marjoribanks of Ratho is practically declared to be a posthumous son Thomas. See
paragraph 13, page 71.
(G.) Disproof of the statement in the Lyon Office "proved and registered pedigree"
that Joseph Marjoribanks was son of Joseph Marjoribanks, of Leuchie, by Margaret Sinclair,
his wife. See paragraph 14, page 72.
His testament dative was given up by "Margaret Brown, relict of Thomas Edgar, chirurgeon
apothecary, burgess of Edinburgh, formerly spouse to the said deceased Joseph. Marjoribanks, of
Leuchie, and mother to the said deceased Joseph Marjoribanks, sailor, etc. '

64 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

SECTION I.
The following is the discredited portion of the
No. 1 "GENEALOGY of Sir DUDLEY COUTTS MARJORIBANKS, Bart."
Recorded in tlie Lyon Office, Scotland, 2 1 April, 1 868 : —
Thomas Marjoribanks, of Ratho, lord of session, &c._= Janet Purves.

James Marjoribanks, younger son, died in or before 1S81 _=
Joseph Marjoribanks, merchant, Edinburgh, = Marion Sympson.
2nd son, &c, &c.

John Marjoribanks, of _= Elizabeth, dau. of John Andrew, &c, &c.
Leuchie, b. 1612, &c. I Trotter, of Morton Hall,
I m. 1641.
1 111 1 n
Joseph Iff., of Leuchie, b. — Margaret Andrew, Edward M., of Hall- = Agnes, dan. of James,
1642, arms Lyon register I Sinclair, John, yards, bailie of Edin- 1 Robert Mun-ay Janet,
1673. I m.inl670. Robert, burgh and merchant. I of Melgund, m. &c.,&c.
j | in 1685.
Joseph M., a merchant in Edward Marjoribanks, of = Janet, dan. of James Loch,
Edinburgh, d. s.p. 1707. Hallyards. ( of Drylaw, m. 1710.
A
Lord Tweedmouth
is descended in the 4th generation.
IN order that the rejoinder — possibly the inspired rejoinder — of the Lyon Clerk
Depute may be fully understood \ must reprint the " odd comments " on
the above pedigree from my Peerage, which are as follows: —
Foster's Peerage 1882, page 666.
LORD TWEEDMOUTH, according to some authorities, claims to be
j descended from Thomas Marjoribanks, who was a lord of session 1549,
with the title of Lord Ratho, etc., etc., through his son James, who died in
1581, leaving two sons, Symon and Joseph, of Edinburgh, merchants. In
the account referred to there is not even primd facie evidence to favour these
meagre statements, and it is extremely dubious whether they can be substan
tiated ; at any rate, it is believed that the following notes will go far to show
that a counter-descent can easily be constructed from the wills of individuals
named. PARAGRAPH 1.— Margaret, dau. of the deceased Mr. Thomas Marjori
banks, of Ratho, made her will 30 July, 1573, apjwinted her brother
James an executor, but he renounced on or about 21 Feb., 1576-7.
PARAGRAPH 2.— James Marjoribanks, burgess, of Edinburgh, made his
will and inventory 8 April, 1569 (and died that month), confirmed
2 Feb., 1 58 1 ; mentions, inter alios, son Symon and brother Symon, but no
Joseph is named.
PARAGRAPH 3.— As it is needless to point out that James Marjoribanks
who died 1569 (not in 1581 as stated), would be unable to renounce in
1577. so it is almost superfluous to add that, as no son Joseph is named by
James in 1569, Lord Tweedmouth's claim to descend, as alleged, from the lord
of session, must be considered to be unsustainable.

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 65

PARAGRAPH 4. — Joseph Maijoribanks, of Edinburgh, merchant burgess
(sole heir and executor dative of his brother James Marjoribanks, mer
chant burgess of Edinburgh, who died May, 1603), acquired lands in Salt
Preston (I'restonpans), from George Hamilton portioner died
Nov., 1635 ; in his will, dated 23 May, 1635, confirmed 2 July, 1636, styles
himself " elder merchant burgess of Edinburgh; " married Marion, sister, and
in her issue co-heir, of Andrew Sympson, merchant burgess of Edinburgh ; she
died June, 1621, (testament dative confirmed 3 Jan., 1623,) and had at least
three sons and two daughters.

Stodart on Foster. Foster on Stodart.
" Lord Tweedmouth's proved and TJARAGRAPH 5-— The rejoinder of the Lyon Clerk
registered pedigree isnot satisfactory ]~ Depute is, I am bound to point out, as slipshod as it
to Mr. Foster, who makes some odd is inaccurate; and as he leads off by flatly contradicting me,
comments. We shall only say that I herewith print the "renunciation of executry," which he
James Marjoribanks did notre- so " cavalierly" denies. It tells its own tale.
nounce the executry of his sister \\ 7"ILLofMargaretMarjor^anks,lawruldaughter
... ., V V of the deceased Mr. Thomas Marjoribanks,
Margaret; Joseph is satisfactorily of j^^ died in August ,573. Her will is dated
proved to be son of James, both 30 July 1573. She nominates her only executors
having been merchant burgesses of 'J'^J1^^'- hM b-r°^er &1?31™' ^
" ° Marjoribankis and Bessie Marjonbankis her sisters.
Edinburgh ; the James said to have In the confirmation by Mr. Robert Maitland, com-
died in April 1569, never was, as missary of Edinburgh, of date 21 Feb. 1576-7, it is
,, _ . . .. , ... declared that the two sisters alone accept the executry,
Mr. Foster gratuitously asserts, iden- ., becaus the sa;d Jame_ Marjoribanic£> the „&„ e£_
titied with James, the father of ecutor above writtin in our presens hes renuncit the
Tosech " sa"* onice aa ane act thereupon bears." Edinburgh
J p" register of wills, vol. 5. — 21 Feb. 1576-7.
PARAGRAPH 6.— The rejoinder of the Lyon Clerk Depute is— to say
the least — also evasive, for my contention is clearly shown by the extracts
from my Peerage (see paragraph 3) to be that "Joseph was not son of, fames
son of Lord Ratho," and not merely that he was not the son of a certain or
any James Marjoribanks. My objection to the statement that James, son of
Lord Ratho, died in 1581 is left unnoticed for obvious reasons, and reference to
the affiliation of James, the father of Joseph, is slurred over with equal adroit
ness ; for Mr. Stodart shrinks — as well he may — from frankly facing my " odd
comments," for neither he nor the Lyon King of Arms will now state — for
they dare not — who was the father of James, and therefore the grandfather of
Joseph; neither will they produce — for they cannot — any evidence whatever
to favour, much less to prove, their statement that the lord clerk register was
father of James Marjoribanks, the ancestor of Lord Tweedmouth. -
The Lyon Clerk Depute does not seem to recognize the meaning of the
term "gratuitously," for I "asserted" (to employ Mr. Stodart's words) that
" the James said to have died" (why "said"? there is no question about his
death in 1569, and this cavilling innuendo merely betrays the irritation of the
Lyon Clerk Depute,) "in 1569 was identified" (by the Lyon office) "with
James, the father of Joseph," not "gratuitously," but because (as will be seen
below) Lyon's "proved and registered" date of the latter James' death is
obviously taken from the confirmation of the former James' will. My view is
clearly corroborated by the Lyon office identification of Symofi, the burgess of
1 57 1 (see paragraph 11, page 69), for Lyon makes Symon and Joseph sons of
the same James (see pedigree, page 69), who is styled umquhile in 1571, and
whom it is not too much to suppose to be identical with the testator James,
who died in 1569 ; thus the very burgess rolls on which Mr. Stodart relies
affords the most conclusive refutation of his own assertions. Really the Lyon
Clerk Depute should write under supervision, and with his authorities at
command.

66 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
(A.) Disproof of statement in the Lyon Office "proved and registered
pedigree" that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Thomas Marjoribanks, lord
clerk register and lord of session.
PARAGRAPH 7.— The above pedigree states that Thomas Marjoribanks,
of Ratho, lord of session, had a younger son James, who was father of
Joseph, the ancestor of Lord Tweedmouth. That the lord clerk register had
a son James is proved by the deed of gift (see par. 13, page 71), 10 Dec. 1550,
privy seal register, vol. xxiv., folio 38. According to the hypothesis of the
Lyon office, James Marjoribanks, son of the lork clerk register, was father of
at least two sons, Simon and Joseph (see pedigree, page 69). Now this Simon
admittedly occurs in the burgess roll (on which the Lyon Clerk Depute so
unfortunately relies) as son of James Marjoribanks, but when he was admitted
3 April 1571 it was as "Symon M., eldest son of umquhile James," that is to
say, his father Symon was dead before that date, which goes far to confirm the
conviction that he was the testator of 1569 as "gratuitously asserted."
But the James Marjoribanks who was son of the lord clerk register
was, as is proved by the Lyon Clerk Depute, certainly alive, not only on
21 Sept' 1571, when he executed a deed of tack, but even 21 Feb. 1576-7,
when he renounced (notwithstanding the emphatic denial by the Lyon Clerk
Depute) the executry of his sister Margaret, who, oddly enough, is wholly
omitted from all Lyon office versions of the lord clerk register's issue, though
of his numerous children who lived to maturity, she is the only one whose
will is now on record. But all this is mere fencing, for subsequently to these
dates, and even to the date assigned for his death in the " proved and
registered pedigree," he is positively discovered taking to himself a wife,
though his marriage is somewhat naively omitted from this production of the
Lyon office. Nay, so long did this James survive his "proved and registered"
death, that, with singular disregard for the pressing requirements and the
ruffled feelings of a Lyon King of Arms, he turns up even in the following
century, as utterly irrepressible as the whilom Rip van Winkle.
To illustrate my criticism on the affiliation of James the father of Joseph,
I have printed from the Edinburgh burgess rolls the 16th century entries with
some later ones relating to the family. These extracts favour my profound
conviction that James was son of Symon (see admission 2 Oct 1563), and
such I do not hesitate to say he will undoubtedly prove to be. Indeed they
serve the additional and very useful purpose of clearly proving that there were
several families of the name anterior to and contemporary with the lord clerk
register. How, then, may I ask, does it come to pass that the genealogical
pitchfork of the Lyon King of Arms secured the lord clerk register in
preference to any other likely though untitled ancestor? The wills of the
period, which are very scanty, afford no assistance.
Extracts from the Guild Register of Edinburgh, which commences \ftk May, 1487.
1508 March 28. Johannes Marioribank 1517 August 17. Johannes Purves merca-
effectus est confrater Gilde et sumit tor effectus est confrater Gilde et
[pro libertate v. lib., vol. i., folio 116. sumitprolibertate,v.crouns. V.i.,fai28.
1515 March 29. Symoun Marioribank, ef- - , w .. _,
fectus est confrater Gilde et sumit x537 February 15. Magister Thomas Mar-
pro suo libertate ratione sponse filie lonbankis effectus est frater Glide
quondam Johannis Gray, xxvj* viii". *at'on? S1ie sponse Janete Purves filie
[Vol. i., foi. 119. J°hams Purves et fvofi^J;^-
1516 March 14. Jacobus Marioribank, ef- " "* m 22'
fectus est burgensis et confrater Gilde 1549 October 10. Johannes Mariorihankis
ratione sponse sue Cristine filie Jo- ' Pelliparius effectus est frater Gilde et
hannisAdamsoun et sumit pro libertate sumit pro libertate Decano Gilde fab-
[xiij5 iiijd. Vol. i., folio 121. rice ecclesie iiij lib. Vol. i., folio 27.

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY.

67

1561 August 7. The quhilk day Maister
Jhone Marioribankis, soun and air
of Vrnquhile Jhone Marioribankis is
maid burges and gild brother and
payit for his freedome be ressoun of
the priviliege of his father xxs. Vol. i.,
[folio 61.
1563 October 2. The samyn day in pre
sence of the Provest and David Foster,
Baillie, James Marioribankis is maid
Gild brother be rycht of Symoun
Marioribankis his father and hes payit
[xxs. Vol. L, folio 72.
1564 June 22. The quhilk day in presence
of Maister John Spens, baillie, Michaell
Marioribankis ane of the soneis of
Vmquhile James Marioribankis be the
rycht of his said father is maid burges
and gilde brother and sould payis for his
dewitie thretiene schilling four'pennies
[but given gratis. Vol. i., folio 75.
157 1 April 3. The quhilk day Symoun
Marioribankis eldest son of vrnquhile
James Marioribankis is maid burges
and gild brother be rycht of his said
father and hes payit sex3. Vol. i.,
[foi. 10 1.
1577 October 22. The quhilk day Thomas
Marioribankis eldest sonne of umquhile
Johnne Marioribankis is maid burges
and gild brother and hes payit be
rycht of his father sex3. Vol. L,
[foi. 144.
1602 July 13. The quhilk day in the pre7
sence of Johne Robertsoun Deane of
Gild and the Gild Counsaill Joseph
Marioribankis second lawful soune to

vrnquhile James Marioribankis mer
chant burgess and gild brother of this
burgh is maid burges and gild brother
of the same be richt of his said father.
Compearand sufficientlie armit with ane
furneist hagbuit and hes given his aith
in maner abovewritten and pay it for
his duetie to the Deane of the Gild
[xxx? iiija. Vol. ii.
1606 March 19. The quhilk day in pre
sence of Johne Robertsoun Deane of
gild and the Gild Counsaill, Maister
Thomas Maiijorebanks, soune lawf all
to vmquhile Mr. Thomas Maiijore
banks, Clerk of Register, burges of
this burgh compeirand sufficientlie
armit with ane furneist Hagbuit is maid
burges of the same be rycht of his said
father and hes given his aith in maner
above written. And hes payit for his
dewtie to the Deane of Gild xiij* iiij*1.
And James Forrett skynner become
souertye for payment of his extents and
watches and that he sal not be burden-
able to the guid toun at any tyme heir-
[after. VoL 2.
1606 July 30. The quhilk day in presence
of Johne Robertsoun Dene of Gild and
the Gild Counsell James Merjoribankis
Hat maker eldest lauchfull sone to
Mr. Thomas Merioribankis, Burges
of this burgh, compearand sufficientlie
airmit with ane furneist hagbut Is maid
burges of the same be rycht of his said
father and has giffin his aithe in maner
above written. And hes payit for his dew-
tie to the Dene of gild xii j* iiij'1. VoL 2-

(B.) Disproof of tlie statement in the Lyon Office "proved and registered
pedigree" that James, father qf Joseph, died 1 581.
I)ARAGRAPH 8. — It has just been shown tbat James, the (Lyon Office)
father of Joseph (admittedly brother of Symon), was dead before 1571, and
it was said that this strengthened the conviction that he was identical with the
James Marjoribanks who made his will 8 April 1569 (see paragraph 2), and
died the same month. Now the " proved and registered" Jan_es_Marjoribanks
is said to have died "in or before 1581, or — according to one of these com
plementary pedigrees whicli are so dear to a large-hearted Lyon — "in 1581,"
the latter and wholly unqualified assertion being the result of the Lyon's
growing courage. But if we would trace this assertion to its source, we must
take it in its primitive and more hesitating guise. No genealogist would fail to
form his own conclusions when he compares the suspicious date, "in or before
1 58 1," with the fact that the will of a James Marjoribanks was "confirmed"
in 1 58 1. He will infallibly detect the derivation of the date, and he will
readily perceive that there are the best of reasons for not divulging the
authority by which Lyon has been so cruelly deceived.

68 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
(C.) Disproof of the statement in the Lyon Office ''proved and registered
pedigree" that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Edward Marjoribanks, of
Hallyards, by his marriage with Agnes Murray (see page 64).
THE above, pedigree states that Edward Marjoribanks, of Hallyards, &c,
married, in 1685, Agnes, dau. of Robert Murray, of Melgund, and had a son
Edward, of Hallyards, who married, 17 10, Janet, dau. of James Loch, of Drylaw.
PARAGRAPH 9.— -The utter absence at this point, of dates and places
of births and deaths disarms suspicion. I will, however, reserve the com
plete exposure until I denl with the next point, when I shall have established
an accumulation of evidence which will be acknowledged by all to be over
whelming (see next paragraph). I am unable, after searching in every likely
parish register, to find the baptism of Edward, son of Edward. It is singular
that Edward's wife, Agnes Murray, was buried as Mrs. Jean Murray, at
Greyfriars, Edinburgh, 17 March, 17 10, and that the burial is recorded twice
in that registry.
(D.) Disproof of tlie existence of Edward Marjoribanks tlie younger, as
alleged in the Lyon Office "proved and registered pedigree" to be tlie ancestor of
Lord Tzveedmouth.
PEDIGREE No. 2 (see next page) states that Edward Marjoribanks, of
Hallyards, &c., married in 1685 Agnes, dau. of Robert Murray, of Melgund,
and had a son,' Edward, of Hallyards, born 1688, married 17 10 Janet, dau. of
James Loch, of Drylaw.
PARAGRAPH 10.— The date of birth of the "proved and registered"
Edward Marjoribanks in 1688 does not occur in Pedigree No. 1 (see
page 64). Although I discovered the baptisms of children of Edward Marjori
banks and Agnes Murray, I was unable to find the baptism of Edward, as
already stated in the above paragraph. As a date of birth was given, I was
compelled to retain the belief that it had its origin in fact ; had none been
recorded, I should unhesitatingly have solved this Lyon office crux, by giving
this "proved and registered" daughter-in-law, in marriage to her " proved and
registered" father-in-law, as his second wife. Was it because the second
marriage took place only a few months after the first wife's death, that Lyon
evidently shrank from perpetuating what seemed to him a family scandal?
My suspicion that there was only one Edward, and he blessed with two
wives, was thus placed hors de combat. In despair I wrote to ask the Lyon
Clerk Depute where I should find the entry of baptism. Here are his own
words, extracted from his letter dated 25 May, 1882 : —
" Unfortunately no entry of the baptism of Edward Marjoribanks
" has been found; Edward, the father, married Agnes Murray, 1685,
"and had
"Jean, 1686;
" George, 16S7 ;
"Elizabeth, 1689.
"As Edward, who succeeded his father, married in 1710, this
"seems- to make it all but certain that his birth took place in 1688."
No wonder then that the baptism ofthis " proved and registered" Edward
Marjoribanks has not been found ; he does not belong to mortals, and " suc
ceeded his father " only on the disastrous instinct of the pedigree-maker. Here
we have the deliberate fabrication of a date for really no purpose, but from what
I have yet to disclose I have little doubt but that similar "guesses at truth"
are to be found in the early generations of these pedigrees : C'est magnifique,
mais ce n'est pas la ginealogie.
I apprehend that even the most partial reader will admit that the. acknow
ledgment ofthe insertion of this date is fatal to this " proved and registered"
son, and that the probabilities of Edward's two marriages are confirmed. The
whole of my evidences have uniformly tended in that direction.

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 69

SECTION II.
The following is the discredited portion of the
No. 2 "GENEALOGY of Sir DUDLEY COUTTS MARJORIBANKS, BART."
From tlie archives of tlie Lyon Office, Scotland : —
Thomas Marjoribanks, of = Janet Purves.
Ratho, lord of session, &c. I

(  1
Thomas, ancestor of Marjoribanks, James, died
of Balbardie, co. Edinburgh, o.v.p. 1581 =
1 — :  —  — '-*
Symon, died s.p. Joseph, of Edinburgh, = Marion, dau of Andrew Sympson,
merchant, d. 1636. I of Edinburgh, merchant.
1  : — :  r
John Marjoribanks, _= Elizabeth, dau. Andrew, &c.
of Leuchie, charter I John Trotter, of
1653, b. 1612. I Morton Hall.

Joseph, of Leuchie == John, Edward Marjoribanks, = Agnes, dau. of Robert James,
I &c of Hallyards, by pur- I . Murray, of Melgund, &c.,&c
{ chase, 1699, merchant b. I m. 1685.
Joseph, an African traveller, only 1654. I

son, died s.p. 1704.

1 :
Edward Marjoribanks, of Hallyards, = Janet, dau. of James Loch,
b. 1688. j of Drylaw, m. 1710.
TN combating the very dangerous and highly improper practice of having
different pedigrees of the same family, and allowing them to be circulated
as equally authorised, some persons may consider that I am straining a point to
make out a case. In order to meet the charge of special pleading, I may state
that the pedigree (No. 2) as above, with continuations, was supplied by the Lyon
Office to Lord Tweedmouth, who sent it to Sir Albert Woods, Garter King of
Arms, for communication if necessary to the editors of the peerages.
This then was the pedigree furnished me for my peerage. I confess I was
dissatisfied with it, and I accordingly instituted an independent-investigation.
This had only partially proceeded when the time for the publication of my
peerage had arrived ; I thereupon embodied my views — which were necessarily
cramped — in a note to the pedigree in that work, and which is reprinted at the
beginning of this article, pp. 64, 6$ (paragraphs 1 — 4, etc.). Not so Ulster King
of Arms, who — loyal to his brother officers, Garter and Lyon — inserted the
pedigree in his peerage in the same state as he received it, viz., with all its
imperfections. PARAGRAPH 1 1 . — It will now be seen that various accounts are issued
by the Lyon office ofthe issue of James, the father of Joseph, who is
the only son given in Pedigree No. 1, see page 64, while Pedigree No. 2 gives
another named Symon ; and a third account — derived from the Lyon office,
by the same authority as in the case of Pedigree No. 3, next page— ^oes further
still, and states that James, 2nd son of Lord Ratho, had 3 sons, viz. : —
(1) Symon, admitted burgess 1571. .-_
(2) Joseph, admitted burgess Edinburgh 1602.
(3) James, designed merchant burgess, &c, died s.p. in or about 1603.
Collect. i

70 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
With these three progressive accounts before us, viz.,
(a) Joseph (see No. I Pedigree, page 64),
(6) Symon and Joseph (see No. 2 Pedigree above),
(c) Symon, Joseph, and James (see paragraph 4),
we can perhaps follow the construction of this Babel of genealogy.
As the three names affiliated above, which appear here for the first time,
have dates assigned them, I am led to ask why the date of Symon's admission as
aburgess, 1571, and of his death (? 27 June, 1582), are "suppressed" in Pedigree
No. 2, on the preceding page ; and also upon what principle Michael, son of
James Marjoribanks, admitted 1564, is excluded. As burgesses were admitted
at all ages, it is impossible to determine from the dates of those admissions the
relationship which may subsist among those of any given name, and I therefore
discredit Lyon's statement that Symon was brother of Joseph, simply because
their fathers each bore the same Christian name, more especially as there
seems to have been three, if not four, James Marjoribanks living at the same
period. The following is the genealogical data from Simon's will : —
Symon Marjoribanks, burgess of Edinburgh ; testament testamentar
24 June, 15S1, proved 30 Nov. 1583, names inter alios, sons William
and Clement (no Joseph or James named) ; Commissariat of Edin
burgh, vol. 12.
The following extract may be interesting : —
" Item thair was award to the said vmquhile Symon Marioribankis,
"merchant burges of Edinburgh, be James Marioribankis, elder
"burges of Edinburgh, called Laird Marioribankis, the soune of
"xiiij lib. xiij3. xd. '.'

(E.) Disproof of the statement in the official Lyon pedigree that Thomas
Marjoribanks, son of the lord clerk register, was ancestor of Marjoribanks of
Balbairdie. PARAGRAPH 12. — The special point in this pedigree which I here
select for criticism, is the above statement that Thomas, ancestor of
Marjoribanks of Balbairdie, was son (seniority not stated) of Thomas
Marjoribanks of Ratho. Immediately following this note will be found Lyon's
account, as extracted by the Rev. George Marjoribanks at the Lyon Office,
Feb. 1882, for insertion in my proposed history of this family. According
to this, the third of these conflicting official pedigrees, the ancestor in ques
tion was a certain, or rather uncertain John, hitherto unheard of, but now
duly and, strange to say, rightly installed for the first time as son and heir of
the lord clerk register.
SECTION III.
The following is the discredited portion of
No. 3 " Extract of pedigree, MARJORIBANKS OF MARJORIBANKS,
Taken from Lord Lyon's account in Lyon Office, Edinburgh"
by the Rev. George Marjoribanks, February, 1882.
THE family of Marjoribanks derived, etc., etc., etc. . . . Thomas Marjoribanks, lord
clerk register, by his wife, Janet Purves, had 4 sons and 3 daughters.
(1) John, ancestor of the family of Balbeardie and Maijoribanks, There is no doubt as to the enurae-
in the county of Edinburgh. ratbnp. thcsesons, which are however
/_.. t _ e-r 1-- tt hit it., wrongly placed here, see extract from
(2) James, ancestor of Leuchie, Hallyards, Lees and Preston. "Privy Seal _egiste_," paragraph 13.
(3) Thomas (the respective seniority of James and Thomas is not Symon (at least) is erroneously in-
quite clear). ser ted ; if Barbara be rightly placed,
. -\ '..rmnn ^ must nave d'ea "> infancy; per-
t4) Oymon. haps the Lyon Cterk depute will state
His daughters were : — why Robert and Margaret are omitted,
(1) Barbara, died unmarried about 1526. especially the latter, as her will is
(2) Janet. (3) Bessie. extant"

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 17

JOHN MARJORIBANKS, eldest son of the clerk register, pre-deceased his father. He
married Helen Reid, and left 2 sons.
(1) Thomas, of Ratho, &c. (whose line is supposed to have become extinct on the death of his grandson
Thomas).
(2) John, of Balbeardie (the evidence of John, of Balbeardie, being brother of Thomas is inferential rather
than direct) ; he is also described as John, of Balbeardie, apparently brother of the younger Thomas,
of Ratho ; is found witnessing the baptisms of the children of James Marjoribanks, son of Thomas,
third son of the Clerk Register (*) — he married Jean Stewart; he died in or shortly before 1642, and
had two sons.
(1) Thomas, who succeeded him, and
(2) John, born 1626.
THOMAS MARJORIBANKS, of Balbeardie, was a minor at his father's death, 1642,
etc., etc. About 1673 his arms were matriculated in the Lyon register, where he is
designated representative ofthe family of Marjoribanks of that ilk, etc. ; he m., 1676, Anna
Seton, and died 1704, and had 2 sons.
(1) Thomas, of Marjoribanks, who married and died s.p., and
(2) Andrew, of Balbeardie, who married and was ancestor of Marjoribanks of that ilk.
(*) This sentence plunges us once more into the unknown abyss of Marjoribanks genealogy, Thomas was
2nd not 3rd son of the Clerk Register. His admission as burgess of Edinburgh in 1606, followed by that of his
son James, the hatter, in the same year, is given at page 67. I find no other entry than that John, of
Balbeardie, was a witness to the baptism, 15 July 1638, of John, son of James Marjoribanks, hat maker, and
Catherine Williamson ; this James was not son of Thomas, as stated above, but grandson, i.e. son of James
son of Thomas ; perhaps the Lyon Clerk Depute can give a further supply of witnessing entries.

(F.) Disproof of the statement in "the Lord Lyon's account" that Marjoiibanks
of that ilk is descended from John, younger son of John Marjoribanks, of Ratho.
PARAGRAPH 13. — Pedigree No. 3 practically states that John, eldest son
of Thomas Marjoribanks, lord clerk register, was inferentially father of
a younger son, John of Balbeardie, ancestor of Marjoribanks of that ilk. But
the "Thomas of Ratho, etc," assumed in the above pedigree to have been the
elder of the two sons, is actually proved by documents which I have dis
covered, and which I now quote in full (in anticipation of another emphatic
denial by the Lyon Clerk Depute), to have been beyond a shadow of doubt a
posthumous and only child. His younger brother must have therefore been
produced by a process of which the less said the better.
The following extracts from the Privy Seal register will, I presume, be
accepted as putting an end once and for all to the alleged claim of the Lyon
office that Balbeardie descends from Ratho: — 
" 10 Dec. 1550. Gift by the Queen toMr. Thomas Marjoribanks,
" of Ratho, and his assignees, then to his lawful son Thomas M. and
" his heirs male, then to James M., also his son and his heirs male,
" then to the heirs whomsoever of said Mr. Thomas ofthe ward, and
"nonentry of all lands, etc., which belonged to the deceased John
"Marjoribanks, fear of Ratho, with gift of the marriage of the heir
" male or female yet unborn of said John, his relict Helen Reid being
" with child." Register of Privy Seal, vol. 24, foi. 38.
" 30 May 1551. Gift by the Queen in similar terms to the same,
" but mentioning that the child of John, now bom, is Thomas Marjori-
¦" banks." Register of Privy Seal, vol. 24, foi. 68. " —
I venture to submit that the guesses at the affiliation of John as junior
to a posthumous child are "opposed to nature, to reason most absurd."
After this astounding disclosure, we may learn what value to assign to the fact
that Thomas Marjoribanks, the son of this unfortunate child was "designated
representative of the family of Maijoribanks of that ilk," etc., at the Lyon
office in 1673, on the occasion of which official proceeding (!) he registered
arms, as — we are reminded by the Lyon Clerk Depute — " representative of
Marjoribanks of that ilk."

72 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
(G.) Disproof of the statement in the Lyon Office "proved and registered
pedigree" that Joseph Marjoribanks was son of Joseph Marjoribanks, of Leuchie, by
Margaret Sinclair, his wife.
PARAGRAPH 14.— The pedigree states that Joseph, of Leuchie, born
1642, married in 1670 Margaret Sinclair, by whom he had a "proved
and registered " son Joseph, a merchant in Edinburgh, died s.p. 1707. That the
above marriage did take place, and that the lady was buried in Greyfriars
12 May 1672, leaving an only child, Margaret, baptized 16 Feb. 1672, there
is no doubt; but that a son Joseph was the issue thereof is conclusively dis
proved by the following document : —
" npiIE testament dative of Joseph Marjoribanks, son to the
X deceased Joseph Marjoribanks, of Lauchie, merchant in
Edinburgh, and sailor on board the ship St. Andrew, belong
ing to the Company of Scotland, trading to Africa and ihe
Indies, who died in the month year, given
up by Margaret Brown, relict of Thomas Edgar, chinirgeon
apothecary, burgess of Edinburgh, formerly spouse to the
said deceased Joseph Marjoribanks, of Lauchie, and mother
to the said deceased Joseph Marjoribanks, sailor, decerned
as only executrix to the said deceased."
" Adam Brown, merchant, and late dean of gild, of Edin
burgh, cautioner. Commissariat of Edinburgh, vol. 83, 26th
Sept., 1707."
It may be worth remarking that Joseph Marjoribanks, the younger, is
styled "a merchant in Edinburgh" in pedigree No. 1, and "an African tra
veller " in pedigree No. 2 ; these may both be accurate. It is believed that
the explanation of his designation in the above testament will be found in the
fact that he was concerned in the ill-fated Darien expedition, and may have
been compelled to return "before the mast." John Marjoribanks, of Edin
burgh, merchant, subscribed ^500 to the expedition 25 March, 1696, and
Mrs. Margaret Marjoribanks, daughter of. Mr. Andrew Marjoribanks, con
tributed ^200, 31 March, .same year.
I MARVEL, indeed, to know what Lord Tweedmouth will now think of his pedi
gree and its inquisitor, more especially when " settling day " comes round, for
I am sorely afraid that the Lyon office will have to " carry over " very heavy
" differences " of opinion ; will he still, as in the past, echo " content," and stand
loyally by the Lyon King of Arms, and by his " proved and registered pedigree,"
or will he chafe under the painful conviction that the Lyon office has made him
" the tennis ball" in spite of himself ? For to the authorities of that office, and
to them alone, he must attach the responsibility for his unenviable position,
and from them he must require reparation for those proceedings which have
culminated in placing an honoured name upon the dissecting table of the
public press. My "odd comments," although hidden away in a vast peerage, have
already displeased him mightily, and his ill favour, like the sword of Damocles,
is still my nightmare; for as a solatium, he solemnly promised me that he would
certainly take care to bring the matter before Mr. Gladstone, and that he would
also tell Lord Granville, whom he knew I had offended already. I fear now that
my honest doubts must entail most terrible consequences.
If, as I suppose, these promised threats have not been carried out, I think
that a more fitting opportunity has now arisen for their execution. I hope, too,
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer may know how desirable it would be that
the stamp duty should be taken off armorial grants, or that a duty should be
placed upon all illicit coat armour — it is only fair to the man who gets a grant
and pays the Government stamp — even a penny on each quire of note paper
should not be obj'ected to, and would yield a handsome revenue. But I must
return to the more serious purposes of this paper.

MR. FOSTER ON THE PARLIAMENTARY RETURN, &>c.

73

The Lyon Clerk Depute has clubbed my peerage note "Odd Comments."
I think that even he — now that I have enabled him to form an approximately
correct estimate of this " proved and registered pedigree " (and also of the two
unproved and unregistered pedigrees, all on record in the Lyon office) — will
admit that my note was very necessary, and that his rej'oinder was very " odd,"
indeed the most unfortunate that he could possibly have made.
I have now concluded my "soft impeachment" of the Marjoribanks pedi
grees — an impeachment forced upon me by the imprudent comments of the Lyon
Clerk Depute. I regret that it should be so lengthy, but the summaries at
the commencement lay bare at once the points I have undertaken to prove. I
think the public will maintain that if a pedigree such as this be a fair specimen
of the Lyon office records, the sooner it is made an appanage of the College of
Arms in London the better. When the offices of Lyon and Ulster were made
Government departments, they should also have been made adj'uncts of the
Herald's College, which would have treated their business with the same careful
scrutiny as its own. If I appear to have been more severe than the case demands,
my retort must be that I am but borrowing some of the more telling adjectives
now rusting in the stand of arms of the Lyon Clerk Depute.

" Mr. Joseph Foster on the Return of Members of
Parliament " : —

Stodart on Foster.-
"If Mr. Foster had gone carefully over it and
corrected these (i.e. mistakes), he would have done
good service, for which every student of history and
genealogy would have been grateful ; but he would
have filled very few pages of his periodical. He has,
however, preferred to print a separate list for each
kingdom, which is to contain every name "supple
mented with genealogical notes," and he adds, — " this
is peculiarly my own ground."

". . . . But we would ask Mr. Foster to refrain
from printing and circulating any more of such non
sense as his pages are full of."
"For instance, Colonel James Dundas was not
grandfather, but great-grandfather, of the late George
Dundas, C.M.G., M.P. Thomas Dundas, M.P.
1768, did not purchase Fingask and Carronhall;
these estates were bought by his father Thomas, a
merchant and bailie of Edinburgh. Sir Waller
Dundas did not sit 'as a minor baron* 1609 and
afterwards. This is a mistake which occurs on
almost every page; after 1587 the minor barons
ceased as such .to attend parliament, the representa
tive system was established, and the proper designa
tion is ' Commissioner for the shire bf Linlithgow.' "

Foster on Stodart.
Why suppress the fact that Collectanea, part 4,
contains a host of omissions and corrections for the
Irish Return by Rev. A. B. Beavan ? So many that
the authorities at Dublin Castle have a new edition
under contemplation !
' I can testify to the excellency of the compilation of
the Scots return, and the more important mistakes
in this also have been supplied by Rev. A. B. Beavan.
The statement that " every name " was to be supple
mented with genealogical notes is Mr. Stodart's, and
I need hardly add is inaccurate.
v The accuracy of this sentence will be disposed of in
the ensuing remarks. As to its taste, comment is
superfluous. Col. Dundas' relationship is a'misprint. "Thomas
Dundas is said to have purchased Carron Hall on the
authority of his present representative.
Sir Walter Dundas is not said by me to have sat
as a minor baron after 1609. Really Mr. Stodart
should be more careful.
The Lyon Clerk Depute plays the pedant to perfec
tion when he is compelled, in order to bolster up a
weak case, to carp at the designation "members of
parliament;" the running heading of the official
return is
" Names of members returned -to serve in parlia
ment ; "
in my book it is
"Members of parliament, Scotland."
Although commissioners for burghs is a common ex
pression, I think that of "commissioner for shires"
appears only once in the return (p. 546) ; but this is
hair-splitting. If Mr. Stodart stiU persists that " this
is a mistake which occurs on almost every page," I
fear he will be alone in the poor consolation which
the discovery of such a mare's nest affords him, and
which he is not candid enough to pronounce an
anachronism.

74

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Stodart on Foster.
"At page 62 it is asserted that James Carmichael,
Commissioner for the burgh of Dundee (Mr. Foster
calls hira M.P. — a designation never used in Scotland
then) 1593, was son of Gavin Carmichael, and grand
father of James, ist Lord Carmichael, whose grandson
was created Earl of Hyndford. This remarkable
statement is a mere conjecture," etc.
" Eliott, Sir Gilbert, of Stobs, knight banneret, at
the battle of Scone 1643."
" Ewart. — Among the family of this name is in
cluded Nicholas Udwart."
"Fletcher, Sir Andrew, Lord Innerpeffer."
. " Gibson, Sir Alexander, of Durie, was not son of
Sir John, but of Sir Alexander."
"Gilmour. — There were three baronets, Sir Alex
ander, Sir Charles, and Sir Alexander, not four, as
stated." " Graham, John, of Fintry 1678 — a mistake ; he
was not a commissioner to parliament."

"There is one correction in the Collectanea.''

Foster, on Stodart.
No such "assertion" is made at page 62. The
note to James Carmichael is simply an insertion of
data relative to a James Carmichael, and is admittedly
"a mere conjecture," as Mr. Stodart eventually
acknowledges.

I am much obliged to Mr. Stodart for correcting
my extracts from Playfair, and from Brunton &
Haig, and also for the Udwart correction, which,
however, was guarded by a cross reference.
This remark is misleading, for my words are Sir
John, "said to be son of Sir John."
This Gilmour note is a valuable ore, as it corrects
all former accounts of the baronetcy.

It would have been much more manly to have said
a mistake made in the parliamentary return (but see
note on page 583), and not by Mr. Foster.
The Lyon Clerk depute is in haste. Let him refer
to Scots M.P.'s, page xvii., where he will find what
he evidently supposes will not be forthcoming.

In the foregoing is contained the principal charges of inaccuracy, saving the
four references to the doubtful baronetcies, of which I must treat separately.
But I must first refer to the following passage in Mr. Stodart's article : —

Stodart on Foster.
"A casual glance having led us to
doubt whether the promises so made
to his subscribers as to accuracy,
identification, etc., were being ful
filled, we have gone over the pages,
113 — 176, devoted in Part V. tp
Members of Parliament — Scotland."

' Misprints abound."

Foster on Stodart.
The courteous Lyon Clerk Depute is, I think, needlessly — and, I
verily believe, unwittingly — offensive in . his choice of words ; how far
in his professed zeal for accuracy he is anxious himself to be accurate
may be understood when I state that his criticisms range over at least
three times the ground he would have his unwary readers suppose,
viz., from page 28 (if not from page I) to 176, instead of from page 113
to 176 !
Excepting four references to doubtful baronetcies, which I shall
explain on the next page, there remain eleven specific blunders in the
176 pages, nine of which I have discussed above (four of these I have
explained away), leaving the two that remain and a few trivial affairs to
take care of themselves.
Twenty misprints, extending over at least 148 (perhaps 1 76) pages,
not 64, as the Lyon Clerk Depute would have it inferred, are quoted ;
these contain two blunders from the, parliamentary reUirn, and Mr.
Stodart at least stumbles twice in his anxiety to make out a case. How
then can he justly state that misprints abound ? Do not these figures
show at a glance that the animus for the attack is not to be found in
the blemishes of the work on the Scots M.P.'s? I feel that these
criticisms are barely worth the notice that I have assigned them, and
which I consider is called for merely by the warmth and the in
accuracies of the attack.

MR. FOSTER'S PEERAGE.

75

With reference to the discredited baronetcies, my critic singles out for " odd
comments" the names of Grant, Hamilton, Sir Adam Hay, and Hay of Alder ston.

Stodart on Foster.
(O .... Sir Patrick Grant entered his arms in
the Lyon Register, 12 Jan., 1753, when he was re
cognized as a baronet, and the arms confirmed to him
were those recorded in 1673 by (sie) Sweton Grant of
Gartenbeg, father of the first baronet."
" Sir Alexander, . whose title Mr. Foster tries to
discredit, had on 8 July, 1 761, the benefit of the
most direct recognition that it was in the power of
the Crown to afford, as he had a royal warrant for
supporters, in which he was styled "our trusty and
well-beloved Sir Alexander Grant of Dalvey, Baronet.
This and the supporters were recorded in the books of
the Lyon Court, 15 April following," etc., etc.
(2) " Hamilton, Sir Thomas of Preston. The ba
ronetcy conferred on his son, Sir William, is said to
V \ be extinct. The late distinguished Sir William Ha.mil-
, ton, Professor of Logic inthe University of Edinburgh,
- - "wi? served heir in 1816 and the evidence in this case
' ' was got up with unusual care and completeness by
himself and the eminent peerage lawyer, John Riddell,
advocate." (3) " Hay, Sir Adam, is said to have 'assumed the
baronetcy on the death of his brother John, M.P-,'
and Sir John is called 'sixth baronet by assumption,'
with a reference to 'Chaos' Foster's Baronetage.*
The pedigree of this family has never, as far as we
know, been called in question." .... On 9, Nov.,
1805, James Hay, of Haystoun, physician in Edin
burgh, was served "heir male general of his cousin
Sir James, of Smithfield, baronet," etc., etc.

(4) " Another family of this name, unwarrantably
thrust into 'chaos' by Mr. Foster in his 'Baronetage,'
is Hay of Alderston."

Foster on Stodart.
I would ask in all seriousness, what does this state
ment mean ? The character of a " service " is known,
but to estimate the value ofa "recognition" is even a
less serious matter, it being evidence of a payment of
Lyon's fees and nothing more, not even the suspicion of
a service or pedigree is mentioned.
Opinions may readily differ as to what is or what is
not the most direct recognition of the Crown; suffice it
to say, that nothing short of Letters Patent will create
a baronetcy, and the Crown cannot and does not
wittingly recognize any other mode ; whether it be a
grant of supporters or of anything else, and whether
" recorded in the books of the Lyon Court" or not.
From what I have said of Scotttish services and
Scottish pedigrees, I need hardly say that not the
slightest reliance can attach to them in the absence
of proofs. I have great respect for Mr. Riddell as a
genealogist, but where is the evidence in this case?
His name rather favours the theory that the pedigree
is proveable, and it may be well that the Lyon office
did not work it up.
Dr. William Chambers and the Lyon office are the
sponsors for this title ; why continue to go outside
the Lyon office for evidence ? What an outrage
on genealogy and common sense to state that a man
living in 1805 is cousin to a man who died in 1683,
more especially as the common ancestry is said to
have had its origin in 1525 1 surely this is calculated
to mislead English people. The fifth baronet, so called,
succeeded 21 Oct., 1810, why then was his son John
admitted advocate nearly a year later, viz., 29 June,
18 1 1, as son of John Hay, merchant of Edinburgh,
instead of as son of Sir John Hay, Bart.?
Sir John Hay, of Alderston, created a baronet of
Nova Scotia, with remainder to his heirs male, line
extinct on the death of his grandson ; there should be
no difficulty in obtaining the full particulars of Sir
John's brother, Alexander, the father of Thomas, lord
Huntingdon of Session, and ancestor of the present
baronet. Such is the unwarrantable wording of my
note in "chaos;" my contention is merely that the
particulars of the descent should be given, and to that
I adhere.

Mr. Foster's Peerage.

Stodart on Foster.
" We have turned to the accounts of some of the
latest created peers and find them all to contain
errors."

(i) "Lord Derwent 's dexter supporter is blazoned,
a lion murally crowned, the wood-cut gives an eastern
crown." ¦ (2) "Lord Tweedmouth's proved and registered
pedigree is not satisfactory to Mr. Foster, who makes
some odd comments," etc., etc. See pp. 64, 65.
(3) "The Earl of Home's arms are incorrectly re
presented; the Douglas coat should not be in the
centre ofthe shield, but in the centre of the second
and third quarters."

Foster on Stodart.
This is a shameless innuendo ; nine new peerages
were created last year, and this statement involves the
theory that only three out of the nine were examined,
and that these happened to be the only ones in which
errors are to be found, — the reader will be able to
judge whether this is probable or not. I may add
that the errors in question are specified in the opposite
column. I regret the mistake in the blazon.

I have already disposed of this paragraph at great
length. The engraving of Earl Home's arms was approved
by his agents. The mistake, however, has its origin
in the difference of blazon between English and
Scottish Heraldry.

76 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
HERE terminates my detailed criticism of the Lyon Clerk Depute, who
concludes his article with some hackneyed remarks upon heraldic art which
require no further notice ; whilst I opine that none of my readers will question
for a moment that he has earned a lasting reputation for rashness. In his
wisdom he may have gleefully supposed that he had killed the snake, but in
his sadness he must penitentially admit that he has not even "scotched" it.
My impression is that when he gets thus far in his perusal he will devoutly
wish that I had indeed taken his flippant advice to confine myself " to the pretty
wide field of English genealogy " as he so prettily terms it, but that wish will
now be suggested by feelings very different from those which originally prompted it.
As I consider that I have made out a strong case in support of my opinions, I
think I may fairly conclude by making an unprejudiced appeal to impartial gene
alogists and critics, as to the worthlessness of " services by jury," when questions
of genealogy extending beyond two or perhaps three generations have evidently
been decided upon ; evidences for which, if they ever were forthcoming, have never
been considered worthy of being preserved in any shape or way. It is well
known that ever since I have made genealogy a study I have resolutely turned
my back upon these unrealities, because this worthless yet pretentious system
has so firmly become an inherent part of Scottish genealogical procedure, that the
Lyon King of Arms does not hesitate to make it the basis for serious transactions.
These results will be found in " Chaos " in my Baronetage.
But I apprehend that not even the greatest enemy to the Lyon Office
procedure would ever have imagined for an instant that it was within the range
even of probability that a proved and registered peerage pedigree, compiled in that
office with all the deliberation incidental to so important a record, and from pre
sumably irrefragable evidence, should be found on examination to contain even a
slip of the pen, much less to be riddled with mis-constructions or to bristle with
mis-statements. With the knowledge that all the business of the Lyon Office incidental to
and founded upon these senseless services must be practically invalid, and with
such an example of pedigree-making as the exposure which this article affords, I
contend that the value of its modern records is reduced to a minimum, that the
opinions of its officers upon these subjects are deprived of the respect to which
they are naturally entitled, and that the very raison d'etre of this public office is
hereby gravely challenged.
To many the accuracy of this particular pedigree may seem a small matter.
But the fact that it is possible to drive a " coach and six " through a Lyon office
pedigree — laden with its own blunders — is surely of some significance. It is a
serious matter that a government office — however obscure it may be — should
allow itself, in the light of this nineteenth century, to be in a position in which
its officers and their clients can justly be held up to ridicule.
J. FOSTER
21, Boundary Road, Finchley Road,
London, N.W. Jtdy, 1882.

llfeter Wore "01$ SoruS."

AMONG the witnesses examined before the Lords' " Committee on claims of Peerage,
etc.," of which the Report has recently been issued, were the Scottish and Irish Kings-
of-Arms, Lyon and Ulster. With the evidence of the former we propose to deal on a future
occasion, confining ourselves for the present to that of the latter, which deals with a singular
document known as Ulster's RolL The searching cross-examination which Sir Bernard
underwent from "My Lords " has been the means of throwing a welcome light on this
hitherto mysterious record, of tearing away the pretentious veil which concealed its true
status, and, in short, of giving the public a peep behind the scenes.
" Ulster's Roll," ran Sir Bernard's evidence, " is a list of the nobility of Ireland, issued
on the authority of Ulster King-of-Arms " (p. 6081). This definition strikes at once the key
note of all that follows, by implying that it rests with Ulster, and with Ulster alone, to decide
whether a man is to be classed among " the nobility of Ireland " or not, whether, in fact, he
is a Peer or not. With this pleasant dream we hope to deal below. Sir Bernard adds that —
" From the first creation of the office in the time of Edward VI. , down to the time of
. Queen Victoria, it has been the invariable duty and custom of the King-of-Arms of Ireland
to prepare a list of the nobility of Ireland, arranged according to their precedence " (608).
(As, however, Ulster states almost in the same breath that these rolls only appear " from the
time of Queen Elizabeth " (608), we are curious to learn how he knows them to have been
issued from the time of Edward VI., or, as he expresses it lower down, "from the institution
of the order " (what order?). Was it simply because he " knew ' (as in 618 and 621), or was
it because he was "positively certain " (as in 614) ? For both these interesting conditions of
mind appear to render evidence superfluous. We would also suggest that "the time of
Queen Elizabeth," which comprises a period of nearly half a century (1558 — 1603), is a
somewhat undefined date for the commencement of this important series. It is clear, how
ever, from Ulster's evidence (608) that these rolls of the nobility, " arranged according to
their precedence" must have been regularly issued by 1614. Will he then explain to us how
in the Parliament of that year a contest as to precedence arose among the Barons, and more
over why that contest was referred not to Ulster King-of-Arms, but to " the commissioners
for executing the office of Earl Marshal of England," and decided by them 1 st January, 1615,'
as appears from his ovm Extinct Peerage (p. 623)? Also, why, when a question arose (in 1627)
as to the true title of the Barony vested in the De Courcy family, the point was referred by
Charles I. not to Ulster King-of-Armsj but to a commission composed of five English Peers
and great officers of State. But now, as to the present authority of this Roll.
(Ulster.) " The authority for making it lies, I consider, altogether in the constitution of
the office of the King-of-Arms " (608).
No evidence was adduced in support of this view, presumably because no such authority is
to be found in " the constitution of the office." The earliest "authority" brought forward
by Ulster is a resolution of the Irish House of Lords, about a hundred years ago (1 ith June,
1778), which clearly implies that these Rolls had as yet never been submitted to the House,
that they were consequently wanting in authority and in a very unsatisfactory condition, that
" the office of Ulster King-of-Arms " stood in need of " regulation " — an opinion which we
devoutly echo — and that therefore "Ulster King-of-Arms should be ordered" to prepare
these rolls. Henceforth it was " the duty and custom " of that officer to do"so. Till then it
may have been his "custom" to do so; but it cannot be proved to have been (as Sir
Bernard asserts) his " duty."
" Resolved, that it is the opinion ofthis Committee that it is highly expedient that certain
Orders, Rules, and Directions should be made and established for the regulation of the office
of Ulster King-of-Arms, and for the more effectually ascertaining the descents of the Peers

"These numbers refer to the official minutes of evidence (12th June, 1882).
* The proofs and evidences brought forward on this occasion are preserved among the records at Lambeth.
Palace.
Collect. k

78 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

of this Kingdom, and the guarding against any imposition upon the Crown or upon the House
of Lords of this Kingdom by any ill-founded claims of Peerage."1 . ..." Resolved, that it is
the opinion of this Committee that Ulster King-of-Arms should be ordered to lay before the
Lords, on the first day of every session of Parliament, a correct list of all the Peers and
Peeresses in their own right of this Kingdom, as far as he can prepare the same, upon the
best information he can obtain, and that he therein do, with the assistance ofthe Clerk ofthe
Parliaments, distinguish such of the Peers as have taken their seats, and such as are minors,
and that such list should thereupon be referred to the Committee of Privileges. . . . .
" Resolved, that it is the opinion ofthis Committee that Ulster King-of-Arms should take
and make up as exact an account as he can procure of the marriages and offspring of the
present Peers and Peeresses of this Kingdom ; and that he do lay the same before this House
in the first week ofthe next session of Parliament, to the end that the same, after^the exa
mination by the Committee of Privileges, may be entered in the books of his office.
This then is the Charter of " Ulster's Roll." It is clear from it that the Roll perse
(i.e., as prepared by Ulster) could have no more authority than any Bill draughted for
presentation to the House. So thought Sir Bernard's examiner (Lord Milltown), who, on
learning that the Roll had to be submitted to the House, observed —
621. I presume that was for their correction and approval?
(Ulster.) " I do not think that ; I think it was for the guidance of the House.
622. That looks as if it were to be revised by the House of Lords?
(Ulster.) " I do not think so ; I think it was merely a form."
Now, pace Sir Bernard Burke, and whatever he may " think," it appears on the face of these /
resolutions that not only was Ulster "ordered to lay before the Lords" his Roll, but (which j
Sir Bernard seems to have overlooked) that it " should thereupon be referred to the Committee]
of Privileges"  "to the end" (as we learn from its fellow-roll), "that the same, after the /
examination by the Committee of Privileges, may be entered in the books of his office." What;
follows ? Clearly that as the clause in its charter, compelling it to be referred to the Com-1
mittee, is no longer complied with, such authority as it derived from that charter is wholly
lost. "Ulster's Roll," we learn, comprises three classes of Peers, severally distinguished by
" a different character of type " : —
(1) Irish Peers who are also Peers ofthe United Kingdom.
(2) Irish Peers who have proved their right to vote.
(3) Irish Peers who have not proved their right (which includes minors).
As to Sir Bernard's modus operandi, we had better quote his own words: —
" W hen I am issuing this roll, I get from the Clerk ofthe Crown and Hanaper a return which
he has received from the House of Lords of every Peer who has proved his right to vote; these
I indicate by a specific mark " (608)  " Before I finish my duty of revising the roll I
write a memorandum to the Clerk of the Crown and Hanaper to make me a return of all the
names entitled to vote that have been admitted in the previous session " (616).
This, so far, is definite1 enough. Sir Bernard applies to "the Clerk of the Crown and
Hanaper," not for a certificate to authorise the insertion of certain names upon his roll,
but merely for a certificate that he may place a certain mark against names already on the
roll. On whose authority are those names there ? Here we come back to the key-note
which runs, as we shall see, through the whole piece, viz., that the roll is issued "on the
authority of Ulster" (608), and quite independently of any proof of right before the con
stituted authorities; such proof only involves the addition of an incidental " mark"!
But no sooner are "my Lords" clear upon this point, than the witness apparently begins
to think he has gone too far.
" Never since I have been in office (I know nothing of my predecessors, but I presume their
practice was the same as my own), have I entered a single title upon that roll without the
certificate from the Clerk ofthe Crown, which is sent to the Clerk ofthe Crown and Hanaper
in Ireland, to authorise its insertion " (608),
"During thirty years I am certain there has never been the addition of a single name to
the roll, except under the authority ofthe House of Lords " (630).
These expressions, "the insertion ofa title," and "the addition ofa name," are unfortunately
so ambiguous as to leave us ingeniously in doubt whether they apply to the insertion of a
1 This seems evidently based on the precedent of the English House, who had gone into Committee 20th
March, 1767, "to consider ofthe most proper means effectually to ascertain the descents of the Peers of
this kingdom, so that the Crown, or this House, may not incur the risk of being imposed upon by any
ill-founded claim of Peerage." (Lords' Journals.)

/

ULSTER BEFORE "MY LORDS." 79
name as succeeding to an existing title, or solely to new creations. But they failed to keep
from " my Lords' " sight the broad fact that on the death of every holder of any Irish dignity
or dignities, Ulster considers himself entitled by virtue of " the constitution of his office " to
insert in his Roll proprio motu the name of the man whom he " knows " to be the rightful
heir to some or all of the dignities, without waiting for any "certificate" whatever to
"authorise its insertion."1 "Moreover, he holds it to be his exclusive privilege to pronounce
any dignity or dignities extinct by erasing them proprio motu from the roll."2 Indeed, he has
had no choice in the matter, — " it was his duty and he did ! " 3
Now there is a certain fable of a fatuous fly, who, perceiving that a wheel on which he
had settled was revolving, assumed that the motion proceeded from himself, till the wheel, in
the course of its revolution, crushed him. We neither anticipate nor wish that Ulster may be
crushed, for we think that his lofty pretensions will merely amuse the Peers. It seems cruel
to dispel his " pleasant dream," as we ventured to term it above, yet we are bound to give
our reasons for differing from his very remarkable assumptions.
By the Irish Act of Union, 39 and 40 of George III. (1800) c. 67, Art. 4, the British
House of Peers have power and authority given them, in Irish Peerage elections, and relative
claims, with right of decision. We conceive then, that this being so, Ulster's Roll has
authority just so far as it is a faithful echo of the House of Peers, and not one inch further,
and that Ulster's initiative in the matter is no greater than that of (say) the editor of
Whitaker's Almanack ! We may divide, therefore, the roll, as at present issued, into two
sections, firstly, those Peers who have proved their right to vote ; secondly, those Peers who
have not proved their right. The former class are legally Peers, in virtue of having proved
their right to vote, not in virtue of being on the roll. The latter class may be genuine Peers,
and may not, their presence on the roll being indicative only of Sir Bernard Burke's personal
opinion, and being worth no more as legal evidence titan the paper on which it is written I
As against this view Sir Bernard maintains the amazing and dangerous proposition that
" every nobleman of Ireland has an inherent right to his peerage dignity, whether his right to
vote has or has not been established " (!)
640. Should you consider an Order of this House to strike off the Ulster Roll the names of -
those who had not proved their right ?
(Ulster.) " Quite the contrary ; I think that every nobleman of Ireland has an inherent
right to his Peerage dignity, whether his right to vote has or has not been established."
Sir Bernard here attempts to withdraw from the cognisance of the House of Lords that
" power and authority " over the Irish Peerage, which, as we have seen, was expressly made
over to them at the Union, they thus succeeding by statute to the supreme authority, in this
matter, of the Irish House of Peers. Let us compare with his rejoinder the reply of
the Lord Clerk Register (the Rt. Hon. the Earl of Glasgow). And be it remembered
that no such authority over the Scotch Peerage has been given (by Statute) to the Lords as
over the Irish. When asked (on the suggestion that all, except brothers or children, who
succeeded to a Scotch peerage should be ordered to prove their right), " Do you consider
that a resolution of the House of Lords is sufficient," he replied — _  "...
" Speaking for myself, I should feel bound to obey it upon such a point as this " (76).
Who then (we invite particular attention to this question) is now the judge of this " inherent
right"? Clearly— in Sir Bernard's opinion— Ulster King-of-Arms. "Ulster's Roll," he
tells us, " is a list of the nobility of Ireland issued on the authority of Ulster King-of-
Arms." In it, when a Peer dies, Ulster King-of-Arms inserts the name of the man whom
he "knows" to be his heir, and there he remains among "the nobility of Ireland,"
" whether his right to vote has or has not been established ! "
With Ulster's words still ringing in their ears — _-
"Never since I have been in office .... have I entered a single title upon that roll
without the certificate from the clerk of the Crown " (608).

1 (Ulster.) " I put Lord Inchiquin at once upon the Roll, because I knew that the title of Inchiquin,
from the limitation of the original patent, had devolved on him" (618).
'(ULSTER.) "It is the action of the King-of-Arms which removes from the Roll an extinct Peerage "(621).
" There is no authority but mine which can erase it from the Roll" (614).
'(Ulster.) "He (Ulster) is enjoined and required to make a return ofthe existing Peers of Ireland" (621).
" I maintain that the Ulster King-of-Arms, by a series of patents from the Crown, is required to take
cognisance of the Irish Peerage ; .... he is called upon now and then (?) to issue lists of the existing Peers of
Ireland, not of extinct Peers, but of existing Peers " (630),

80 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
my Lords were utterly unprepared for the avowal that a man could figure on the Peerage-
roll of Ireland, placed there without any " certificate," on the authority of Ulster alone. Io
none was the announcement a greater surprise than to the Peer most immediately affected.
(Lord Inchiquin.) " You know that this suggestion of mine is simply what takes place
in Ireland. . . . When a Peer dies, his name is struck oft", and witilaneio claimant for tlie
peerage proves his right to -vote he is not added to the roll" (314)- • • • "An Irish Peerclaims
his right to vote, and that establishes him as the Peer he claims to be " (578). .
But now let us listen to Ulster's version, —
618. In the case of Lord Inchiquin's title, when Lord Thomond died, did you at once
place Lord Inchiquin upon the roll? , .. ,
(Ul-STER.) " I put Lord Inchiquin at once upon the roll, because I knew that the v™?*
Inchiquin, from the limitation of the original patent, had devolved on him ; as to whether he
voted or not, I left that to the House."
What a subject is this for an historical fresco to decorate the House of Lords! Ulster
King-of-Arms, as the " fountain of honour," bestowing, in virtue of " the constitution of his
office," peerages of Ireland on those to whom he assigns an " inherent right," and leaving to
the House the "palthry" question of whether the grantees of these dignities should vote or
not ! Or Ulster might even be represented as " Ajax defying the thunder " of the House of
Lords, and refusing to obey an Order of the House to strike his protigh off the roB (see
640). We fear that our experience of Ulster and of his Roll of Irish Baronets would augur
ill for the Irish Peerage, if such pretensions should be allowed. Is it on the ground of
"inherent right" that he persistently sanctions the assumption of the Baronetcies of Barhe-
wall and of Dalton -Fitzgerald ? For their " inherent right "is assuredly inherent wrong.
We now turn to Lord Belmore's pertinent, though illogical, query.
647. Does an Irish Peer derive any advantage outside the mere voting, from being upon
your roll ?
(Ulster.) " It isprimd facie evidence that he is a Peer."
This query, we say, is illogical, because it assumes that an Irish Peer does derive the
advantage of voting from being on the roll, whereas he can derive it only from the authority
ofthe House of Lords, and there are many indeed, as we have seen, upon the roll who have
not the right of voting. This point was made clear by Lord Redesdale.
638. Nobody who is put upon the Roll of Peers can vote, except his right to be upon the
roll has been declared by the House of Lords ?
(Ulster). " No doubt."
Yet even " my Lord Redesdale "* is here guilty of a non sequitur. The House. does not
declare " his right to be upon the roll," but his right to vote. That declaration constitutes
him a Peer ipso facto, whether his name is to be found on Ulster's Roll or not.
But to return to Ulster's opinion of his roll — " It is prima facie evidence that he is a
Peer." .
" The advantage of the list has been incalculable. During the whole time of my being in
office in Ireland it has excluded false claims to Peerages " (60S). ..
It is charitable to suppose that by " claims to Peerages " Ulster means " assumptions of
Peerages," for though the famous Resolution of 1778 declares that the roll was to preclude
" ill-founded claims of Peerage," it is obvious that, as even Ulster admits,2 the Roll cannot
prevent a man from pursuing his claim to a Peerage dignity, which claim may be, and indeed
must often be, " ill-founded."
Conceding then that the Roll only claims to exclude false assumptions of Peerages, we
find that even this claim is absolutely without foundation. Ulster indeed modi-res the above
sweeping assertion by a subsequent statement that
" During the last 30 years there has only been one person, Mr. Swifte, who assumed to be
Lord Carlingford without the slightest right " (645).
But his memory, we fear, is a short one, for only as recently as last year, considerable
attention was attracted by a case in which "Lord Cahir" appeared as prosecutor in an
assault case (12 June, 1881), when we were told that "his lordship" was "advanced in
years." The Barony in question has (according to Ulster's Extinct Peerage) been dormant
since 1858, this being one of those unlucky instances in which Sir Bernard "could not tell
1 (Ulster.) " I think my Lord Redesdale was present" (608).
* If a claimant should arise and prove that he is Lord Netterville .... his title would at once be restored
to the Ulster Roll "(650).

ULSTER BEFORE "MY LORDS." 81
who would be the successor " (see 637). Again, Sir Bernard's own Extinct Peerage provides
us, for instance, with such cases as that of a Lieut. Tracey, who "at present (1866)
.... asserts his right to the title" of Rathcoole, or of "Garret Butler (titular) Lord
Galmoye," who died 1861, and who continued to assume the title after his claim had been
disallowed. And that there should be such assumptions is only to be expected from the
very nature of the Roll. For Sir Bernard's contention is equivalent to saying that if a man's
name is on Ulster's Roll, we know that he has rightly assumed his title, but if it is not on
the Roll, we know that he has assumed it falsely. It is only thus that the Roll can exclude
false pretensions, and prove what Ulster terms its " incalculable advantage." But we, on
the contrary, maintain that the Roll, from its unfortunate constitution and its want of
authority, does not provide this valid test, and is consequently a totally inefficient bar to the
false assumption of Peerages. And this we assert —
(1) Because the presence ofa man upon the Roll does not prove that he is a Peer.
(2) Because the omission of a man from the Roll does not prove that he is not a Peei-
(3) Because cases may arise in which reference to the Roll will not show whether a man
is or is not a Peer.
(4) Because the practice of the Ulster office has not been consistent in this matter.
We propose to treat these objections seriatim.
(1) The presence of a man upon the Roll does not prove that he is a Peer.
We have already established the general proposition that a man is a Peer of Ireland in
virtue of having proved his right to vote, not in virtue of being upon the Roll. Consequently
his mere presence on the Roll is no proof of his right to the dignity. But let us glance at
some specific cases. Ulster admits that he placed Sir Lucius O'Brien on the Roll as Baron
Inchiquin immediately on the death of the Marquis of Thomond. But his right was not finally
established before the Peers till seven years later. Had he been eventually unable to prove his
right to the dignity, he would have borne the title for these seven years without any right,
and the Roll, instead of " precluding " the assumption, would actually have sanctioned it !
Take again the case of Clanricarde. It is no secret that if Lord Clanricarde should leave
no male issue, the Viscounty of Bourke and Barony of Dunkellin'must pass to a very distant
heir male. Sir Bernard has committed himself to the statement that the heir in question-is
to be found in the descendant of Burke of Greenfield,1 and will, in the above case, place this
gentleman " at once " upon the Roll (in accordance with his practice) as Viscount Bourke.
The announcement of this practice, however, was received with dignified amazement.
636. But are you not rather presuming to judge whether a distant relation, is or is not a
legitimate heir ?
(Ulster). " When a Peer dies, whose higher honour has become extinct, but a minor
one still remains, under the limitations of the patent I place on the Roll the inheritor of the
lesser dignity, indicating, however, that he has not proved, his right to vote."
637. Do you make any enquiry to ascertain the facts?
" Immense (!) enquiry ; there is not a single Peer in Ireland as to whom. I could not tell
who would be the successor if he died without issue."
In the Bourke case a claimant would have to prove a pedigree extending over more
than 250 years, nor is it auspicious that the cadet from whom he would derive is said by
Lodge to have died without issue. Yet Ulster, from the above answer, knows who is the
rightful heir, and knows it from " immense enquiry"! Now it is obvious that such a claim as
this would require much time for its investigation. Also, that if the claimant were a minor,
his ri"ht could not even be brought to the test for some years. Lastly, that the claimant might
from want of means, or difficulty of proving his descent, decline to claim a right to vote, and
rest content with his insertion on the Roll, and — as a sequitur, we may be sure — in Burke's
Peerage. That is to say, he would remain, certainly for a long, perhaps for an unlimited,
period an Irish Peer of Ulster's creation, and of Ulster's alone ! To such an. anomaly would
Sir Bernard's system inevitably lead. Nor is this a mere quibble. We are raising the very
practical question of how we are to tell whether a man is, or is not, legally a Peer of Ireland.
Take for example the case of Lord Lisle, who recently pleaded his peerage in bar of pro
ceedings in a civil action. Was he, or was he not, legally a Peer? He figured, indeed, on
Ulster's Roll among " the nobility of Ireland "; he figured as a Peer in Burke's Peerage / he
had in Ulster's opinion, " an inherent right," but — he had never proved.

1 "The Burkes of Greenfield, co. Galway, whose representative, the late G. Burke of Greenfield, was at one
time presumptive heir to the Earldom of Clanricarde" {Parage).

82 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Such instances, besides proving our first point, illustrate also the difficulties which might
arise, should Ulster's pretensions be for an instant allowed.
(2) The omission of a man from tlie Roll is no proof that he is not a Peer.
As the preceding point illustrated the danger of Ulster's claim to " insert," s?_ will V"s
point illustrate the fallacies of his claim to " erase." The latter claim presents two difficulties.
First, it is notoriously more difficult to prove extinction than to prove descent. Secondly,
Ulster professes only to erase a title when he is " positively certain that that title is absolutely
extinct " (614).1 Hence a title maybe extinct, though he cannot ascertain it "positively ; in
that case he would after all have left an " extinct name on the roll." a We have said that
omission from the roll, or even deliberate erasure, is no valid proof that a man is not a Peer.
Take, for instance, the case of Netterville: —
(Ulster.) "The title of Lord Netterville, for example, "(Ulster.) ,: Take, for instance, Lord Netterville; his
will be left out, for I am positively certain name is erased; but if a claimant should arise
that that title is absolutely extinct" (614). and prove that he is Lord Is etter ville ....
his name would at once be restored to the
Ulster's Roll" (650).
Ulster first tells us that the name "will be" erased because he is " positively certain
that that title is absolutely extinct," and then coolly volunteers, as an Irishman only could, the
statement, that if a claimant should arise and prove his right, he will at once restore the
title to the roll ! If this may happen when he is " positively certain," what may we expect
when he merely "" knows" ? Three other typical cases occur to us. The honours of the
House of Butler were wrongly supposed to be under Attainder from 1745 to 1791. Yet,
the family were dejur'e Peers all the time, whether they had heen " erased " from the Roll or
not Take again the case of the Fitzpatrick, who " unquestionably " according to Ulster
himself, (Extinct Peerage, p. ix.,) " ought to be Lord Upper Ossory." Lastly, take the case
of Lord Berkeley. It is believed that he was clearly dejure Earl of Ormonde, of the Boleyn
creation; though he is not to be found on Ulster's Roll, he has obviously every whit as
good a right in equity to be there as any other Peer of Ireland who has not proved his right
to vote. This brings us back to the main point, viz., that if Ulster's Roll is to be anything
more than a record of the opinions of Sir Bernard Burke, if it is to have an official authority,
it must be (as indeed it was presumed to be by the committee till the actual practice was
revealed to them) a faithful record of the decisions of the House of Lords alone, and should
only include those Peers who have proved their right to vote? But Sir Bernard told the
committee frankly that he should disregard any
" Order of the House to strike off the Ulster Roll the names of those who had not proved
their right" (640) ;
and also that
" there is no other means by which the name can be erased but by the Ulster King-of-
Arms. . . . There is no authority but mine which can erase it from the Roll" (614).
These be " prave 'ords ; " but Sir Bernard has, we fear, forgotten a precedent which is
recorded in his own Extinct Peerage ; viz., that, in the Upper Ossory case,
" the Earl of Cavan reported from the Committee appointed lo consider the return ofthe
Lords, that the title of Baron of Upper Ossory was extinct, and Ulster King of Arms was
ordered to leave it out of the list of Peers (p. 210).
This precedent proves that, in this matter of erasure, the " authority " of Ulster is no
greater than that of the pen he wields. And here we would again compare his claims with
the more modest attitude of the Scottish authorities, though their case, as has been shown,
would prove the stronger of the two. The following is from Lyon's evidence on erasures
and insertions in the Scottish " Union Roll " : —
196. (Chairman.) Will you explain what the alterations are which have been made
upon the Roll, and by what authority those alterations have been made?
(Lyon.) " In the first place, alterations were necessarily made in consequence of the
attainders in 1715 and 1745, when a considerable number of peerages were struck off. . . .
1 But why,- then, has he erased Cahir from the Rcll, when he himself tells us that "the Barony of
CAHIR may be still successfully claimed " ? {Extinct Peerage, p. 97.)
* (Ulster.) " If I left extinct names on the Roll, you would have a list, not of the existing Peers, but of
the Peers of Ireland from the first " (614).
» Why should not the simple provision be made, in the case of minors, that their right may be proved for
them immediately on their succession to the title ? The roll would then be an authentic record of the whole
Peerage of Ireland.

ULSTER BEFORE " MY LORDS." 83
Several peerages again emerged from other dignities; that is to say, lower dignities Irom
higher, for instance, the Marquisate of Queensberry from the Dukedom of Queensberry.
262. Can you tell me under what authority these alterations were made?
" They seem all to have been made from time to time under the authority ofthe House
¦ of Lords."
264. I want to know whether the Lord Clerk Register had the duty of carrying out
the order ?
" It was the Lord Clerk Register who obeyed those orders ofthe House of Lords."
Sir Bernard, having " erased " Thomond from the roll, was asked —
622. What remedy would any one have who claimed to be Marquis of Thomond ?
(Ulster.) " He would have to come to the House of Lords to settle that."
623. Practically, although you are not likely to do such a thing, has not the Ulster King-
of-Arms the power to force, any particular Peer to come to the House of Lords, if he strikes
him off the roll ?
(Ulster.) " Clearly, and then he would be restored to the roll, when the House of- Lords
decided he had made good his claim."
The obvious deduction from the above is that the Thomond claimant would be forced
"to come to the House of Lords," in consequence of the erasure of Thomond by Ulster; i.e.,
that had it not been erased, he need never have " come to the House of Lords," but might
have enjoyed his dignity in peace, without proving his right to vote ! We cannot insist too
strongly on the point, that to be on Ulster's Roll is avowedly at present, not equivalent to
having a right to vote. The two rights, however, were persistently confused on this occasion 1
Thus Ulster here says, " He would be restored to the roll when the House of Lords decided
he had made good his claim." His " claim " to what ? To be on the roll, or to vote? For
the former, as we have seen, does not imply the latter. We submit that so long as the roll
is a list, not of those who have proved their right, but of those who in Ulster's judgment (633)
are entitled to it, no Peer's position can be validly improved by insertion on the roll, or
validly destroyed by " erasure."
(3) Cases may arise in which reference to the Roll will not show whether a man is or is
not a Peer.
The theory of Ulster's system is, we admit, admirable. " Knowing," the heir to every
Irish dignity, he is prepared, on the death of any Peer, to insert the name of his successor.
Le roi est mort, Vive le roi I But the best of theories will break down in practice, and
Ulster's has failed most signally. Notwithstanding his boast that
" there is not a single Peer in Ireland as to whom I could not tell who would be the
successor, if he died without issue" (637),
he is not able to name the heir to the ancient Barony of Trimleston, which recently (4 Aug.
1879) became dormant, and consequently inserts it as now held by " — Barnewall." Any
member of the Barnewall family may claim to be this titled abstraction, and his right can
neither be proved nor disproved from an inspection of Ulster's Roll.
(4) The practice ofthe Ulster office has not been consistent in this matter.
This we can prove by a very striking instance. Lord Trimleston died in 1879, "since
which date," says Sir Bernard (Burke's Peerage), " the title has remained dormant, although
a male heir obviously exists." Lord Roscommon died in 1850, "since which time," says
Sir Bernard (Extinct Peerage), " the honours have remained dormant," although " a Dillon is
unquestionably in existence, the rightful heir of Roscommon" (Ib. p. ix.) The two cases
are on all fours, absolutely identical. On what possible or conceivable ground then, we are
fairly entitled to ask, is " — Barnewall " 2 inserted on the Roll, and " — Dillon " excluded,
" Trimleston " retained by Ulster, and " Roscommon " erased ? Sir Bernard " presumes "
that the practice of his predecessors was the same as his own ; 3 yet he must surely be well
acquainted with the Ulster system in 1850, and the principle in the Roscommon case is at
direct variance with his own.
There is much more to be said both of Ulster's Roll, and of the strange evidence which
the Peers elicited, but our readers will probably think that they have been criticised at
sufficient length, and the ambiguous status of this curious document clearly established.
* 624. But until he was put upon the roll by the House of Lords he would not be able to vote? "No."
' This favour shown to the family in the Peerage reminds us of Ulster's sturdy championship of their
Baronetcy, of which the history shows the danger of the principle (whether " my Lord Redesdale was present "
when it was laid down, or not) "that even unsigned entries .... were admissible as evidence" (608).
' " I presume their practice was the same as my own " (608).

C|>e €artooms of Brmonfc itt 3frelanti.
Contributed by J. H. Round, Esq., M.A.

IN a Paper on the Barony of Arklow, which I lately contributed to these pages, I drew
attention incidentally to the Earldom of Ormond, and to the unsatisfactory and
erroneous versions of its descent given, by all genealogists; The Athenmutn did me the
honour of observing thereupon that I had shown "very clearly that the Earldom of Ormond,
which vested in their" (the Butler) "family must be held to date from 1537 instead of from
1328, as has been generally supposed." Mr. Foster also, in his Peerage, has altered the
date ofthe creation ofthis peerage from 1328 to 1541 (the year in which the later Earldom
was confirmed by the Irish Parliament). But as the point is too important to be incidentally
decided, I propose now to discuss it in detail.
The pr-esent moment is most appropriate for such discussion, the Earl of Berkeley
having just died, leaving no issue, and his presumed right to the Irish Earldom having devolved
on an heir female. The same question was recently raised in a somewhat different shape
by the assertion of a Reviewer in Notes and Queries, that Mr. Foster was mistaken in
making Lord Berkeley " de jure Earl of Ormonde," Lynch's authority being quoted for the
statement that the rights of Lord Berkeley's ancestors had been " revested in the crown for
ever." This alleged bar to Lord Berkeley's right I soon disposed of by reference to the Act
from which Lynch professed to quote, but the controversy has led me critically to analyse
the history of the ancient Irish dignities as authoritatively set forth by Lynch in his Feudal
Baronies of Ireland. The enquiry has, I think, been justified by the result; for it has thrown,
as will be seen, grave doubts on the conclusions of this " very learned Peerage Lawyer," as
he is reverently termed by Ulster King-of-Arms.*
The original Earldom of Ormond was one of the six Irish Earldoms created before 1330.
Their names, their limitations, and the dates of their creation are as follows : —
Ulster heirs (general) 7th John, 1205-6.
Carrick heirs (general) 1 Sept. 1315.
Kildare heirs-male 14 May, 1316.
Louth- heirs-male 12 May, 13 19.
Ormond heirs (general) 2 Nov. 1328.
Desmond heirs-male 22 Aug. 1329.
Of the three Earldoms with limitations to heirs-male, Kildare is enjoyed to this day by
the heir-male of the grantee (D. Leinster), Desmond was duly enjoyed till its attainder in
1600, and Louth expired on the death ofthe grantee (1329) without male issue.t
Of the three Earldoms with remainders to heirs-female, Ulster duly passed through
females from Lacy to de Burgh, from de Burgh to Plantagenet, &c. The other two were
the Butler Earldoms. Ormond will be dealt with in detail below, but of Carrick the fate
is unaccountable. I wish to invite particular attention to the form of its creation charter,
for it has not received the attention it deserves, and it suggests some curious questions.
The " Earldoms " of Carrick and Kildare were created within a year of each other, and were
followed by that of Louth three years later. The same remarkable formula is to be found
in the charters of all but the earliest of the six Earldoms.

* Extinct Peerage, p. 621.
f Ulster, in his Extinct Peerage, p. 49, does not assign any limitation to the dignity, but merely states
that, "as he had no issue the title became extinct." As he admits, only a few lines above, that the Earl left
three daughters, " his co-heirs," the contradiction is somewhat striking.

THE EARLDOMS OF ORMOND IN IRELAND. 85

(1) Carrick, i Sept. 1315. (Lincoln.)
The feodum consisted of the castle and manors of Karryk-Macgriffyn, and Roscrea, and
the habendum ran —
" Quod pnedictus Edmundus habeat et teneat prcedicta castra et maneria cum pertinentiis
sibi et hxredibus suis .... sub nomine et honore comitis de Karryk"
(2) Kildare, 14 May, 1316. (Westminster.)
Thefeoditm consisted of the castle and town of Kildare, and the habendum ran —
"Quod priedictus Johannes habeat et teneat sibi et hxredibus masculis de corpore suo
legitime procreatis priedicta castrum et villam" (de Kilda_e)"cum terris redditibus et aids
pertinencies suis, sub honore et no/nine comitis de Kildare."
(3) Louth, 12 May, 1319.
The feodum consisted of ^20 annual rent out of the fee-farm of Louth county, and the
habendum was similar to the last.
" Dederimus, concesserimus, et carta nostra confirmaverimus prsefato Johanni viginti libras „
annui redditus de exitibus comitatus nostri de Loveth in terra prsedicta sub nomine et honore
comitis de Loveth .... ipsumque Johannem in comitem dicti comitatus de Loveth prte-
fecerimus. "
(4) Ormond, 2 Nov. 1328.
The feodum of ^10 was to be held by the grantee and his heirs, "sub nomine et honore
Comitis de Ormound," but with the (additional clause, "dederimus ei nomen et honorem
Comitis de Ormound iri Hibemia, ipsumque Comitem de Ormound prafecerimus et gladio
cinxerimus." (5) Desmond, 22 Aug., 1329.
Its feodum was to be held "sub nomine et honore, Comitis de Desmond," but with the
additional clause, "dederimus ei nomen et honorem Comitis de Desmond in Hibemia,
ipsumque in Comitem de Desmond prafecerimus et gladio cinxerimus"
It should be added that the tail-male charters contained reversionary clauses in favour of
the Crown on failure of the heirs male.
Now ofthe first two charters, which are practically on all fours, that of Carrick, as we
shall see, was simply inept, and never conferred a dignity, while from the Kildare charter*
and from it alone, the successive Earls of Kildare appear to have derived their title. How is
this discrepancy to be accounted for? I can only suggest that by both charters certain lands
were erected into EJarldoms, but without ipso facto conferring the actual dignity ; the latter
being effectively created by subsequent " cincture " or " belting." For if we examine the later
charters, we find they recite the creation of the Earl as something over and above the erection
of the Earldom. It is true that in their case ihe feodum was non-territorial, so they are not
absolutely on all fours. Yet we may fairly compare them with the Ulster charter of 7th John.
" Sciatis nos dedisse et concessisse et hac cartS nostra confirmasse Hugoni de Lasey totatn
terram Ultonise cum omnibus pertinentiis suis, de qud ipsum cinximus in Comitem."
I need hardly point out the importance ofthe conclusion that the charter of the feodum
could not of itself carry the dignity, for it raises the whole question of " belting " v. comitatus.
It was said above that the Carrick charter had simply proved inept This statement
may appear improbable in face ofthe fact, that the "Peerages" have from the first recognised
the title as valid, and, indeed, as having been borne together with Ormond, after the creation
of the latter. To these bold assertions I can only reply that whatever evidence to the con
trary may be forthcoming from Irish sources, I have failed, after a diligent search, to find
any trace whatever of this title being borne by the Butlers. Lynch merely assumes the fact,
and there seems no authority for Lord James' assertion that "Earl of Karryk ....
became the designation of the head of the family until the Earldom of Ormond superseded
it, 1328." The negative evidence is indeed overwhelming, but perhaps the strongest is that
afforded by the signatures of Edmund le Botiller, just before and after his presumed
elevation to " the Earldom of Carrick." The charter, as we have seen, is dated ist Sept
1315. Yet we find him witnessing Royal charters as "Edmund le Botiller justiciarius
noster" on the 12th July, 1314, 10th April, 1315, 16th Dec. 1315, and 4th Feb. 1315-16, his
appellation being wholly unaffected by the said charter. Again, to take ajater instance,
when he was no longer justiciar, we find him in 1319, officially described as " Edmundus
Water pincerna Hiberni_e," in a case before the Court of Dublin citizens, in which his
interests were concerned, and finally we see his son described simply as James, son and heir
of Edmund le Botiller, in a grant of 15 Ed. II. (1321-2, and again as "James le Botiller" in
the Ormond creation charter (1328), from which date he is continuously described as Earl
of Ormond. This being so, we must, I think, presume that the Earls of Kildare derived
their title, not from the charter, but from a subsequent "belting," and that, for some
reason this essential ceremony never took place in the case of the Butlers.
The simple fact that the title was never really conferred will solve the otherwise insoluble
oroblemof its (on the hypothesis of its existence) most mysterious disappearance. As its
collect. l

86

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

feodum the castles of Karrick-Makgriffyn and Roscrea continued in the hands of the Butlers,
it is otherwise incomprehensible why they should have allowed it to be ' superseded i
Lord James Butler expresses it) by a title which completely ignored it, and still more, wny
they did not revive it when precedence was the summum bonum, and when it wouia
ranked them above their rivals of Kildare, and made them in fact the premier earls. ^
Ormond belonged to a class of dignities known in England as "fiscal earldoms , tnat
is to say, its feodum was not a territorial comitatus, but a perpetual fee-farm annuity ; minis
case £xo out of the farm of the city of Waterford.1 - Of this annuity we shall he «»£¦»¦
The Earldom descended in regular succession from its creation till 1515. n0 "e'- °f " ,"r
having ever occurred in the family, so that no question could arise as to tne destination 01
the dignity. But in that year the 7th Earl died, leaving two daughters his co-heirs, tne
position of affairs at his death will be made clearer by a chart pedigree.

I
James, 4th Earl,
d. 1452. I 

Sir Richard
Butler.

I
James,
' Sth Earl, ¦
[Earl of Wiltshire
(E.) to heirs-
male, 1449.] d.
s. p. 1461.

John,
6th Earl,
d. s. p.
1478.

I

Thomas,
7th Earl,
[Baron Rochford
(E.) by writ,
I49S-1
d. 1515. I

Sir Edmund
Butler.

Sir James = Anne
St. Leger I Butler,
I co-heiress.

I
Margaret Butler,
co-heiress.

St. Leger
of Devon.

= Sir William
Boleyne, K.B.,
d. 1505.

Sir Thomas
Boleyne. I

George.

I
Ann.

I
Mary.

Sir James
Butler,
d. 1487.

Sir Piers
Butler,
heir-wale. 1
James.

Thomas, the 7th Earl, says Lynch (p. 86) " having died without issue male, the honours
and estates in England were inherited by his two daughters and co-heirs, Anne and Margaret."
He.re we detect Lynch in one of his careless mistakes. The Earl's only English honour, or
more correctly " dignity," was his Barony of Rochford, which fell into abeyance at his death
without male issue. This Barony, by the way, is wholly omitted from the Extinct Peerage of
Ulster King-of-Arms. Of the Irish Earldom and estates the fate was instructive enough.
The two co-heiresses were widows, widows moreover of Englishmen and of commoners.
The heir-male, " the Red Piers," in addition to all his local prestige, had, to support him,
the anti-feudal feeling of the natives in favour of the heir-male, the preference for an
Irishman-born over unknown, absentees, and the undoubted, but misleading fact, that, from
the accidental circumstance of none of the earls having till then left female heirs, the Earldom
had never passed from the male line. Lastly, the fact that there were two co-heiresses
prevented either of them from assuming the title, which sank the while into abeyance.
Taking advantage of 'all- these circumstances, the heir-male was for the time enabled to
disregard" the plain terms of the charter of creation, and, in direct violation of its " limita
tion," to assume the Earldom. He also seized upon the family estates.
Might was right in those days in Ireland, and the law almost as much 'defied as in our
own. The widowed daughters of the 7th Earl were compelled to acquiesce in their wrongful

1 " During the 15th, 16th, and (part of the) 1 7th centuries, so strongly did the opinion prevail that estates,
fees, or rents were a necessary qualification for the enjoyment of Dignities, that we find in most patents of
creation, grants either of estates or of certain sums payable out of customs or out of the issues of particular
places, expressly for support of such peerages : in the latter case the sum granted is called the ' -feodum sive
annualem redditum ' " (Lynch, Feudal Dignities, p. 189). In this passage Lynch makes a double error, first in
treating this as a late practice, whereas we find it adopted among Ihe earliest cases (as in Louth, 1319),
secondly, in treating it as_ a practice peculiar to Ireland, whereas it was customary in England also, the
Earldom of Wiltshire, for instance, alluded to below, being created, even in 1529, with an annuity of /20
out of the issues of Wilts and Devon..

THE EARLDOMS OF ORMOND IN IRELAND. 87
deprivation, and were destined moreover to be branded by genealogists, — from ignorance Of
the facts or from flattery of the Butlers, — as usurpers of the rights which they eventually
regained ! x They, however, maintained from the first, though the fact has been wholly over
looked, the unequal, and seemingly hopeless, struggle. Lady St. Leger and her heirs had
little or no influence, but her nephew Sir Thomas Boleyn was a rising courtier, and pushed
his claim with vigour.2
It is necessary to glance at its subsequent fate, as it has hitherto been left most strangely
unnoticed, and is moreover an interesting piece of historical bye-play. Sir Piers was so
valuable an ally to the English, and would have proved so dangerous an enemy, that the
government were reluctant to oust him from the Earldom, to which he clung with tenacity.
But in 1520 the Earl of Surrey, Sir Thomas Boleyn's brother-in-law, was sent over to Ireland
as Deputy. Surrey at once conceived a warm friendship for Sir Piers, of whom he wrote
frankly to Wolsey (1520) " he is a wise man, and hath a true English heart." 3 The way
was thus at length paved for a compromise between the contending parties. As early as
September of this year Henry commissioned Surrey to ascertain whether "the Earl of
Ormond " was minded to marry his son (then a quasi-hostage in England for his father)' to
Sir Thomas Boleyn's daughter (the celebrated Ann, then a maid of honour in France), and
promised to talk over Sir Thomas to the compromise. Surrey and the Council " think it
would be advantageous" (6 October, 1520), but the matter hangs fire. Henry, however,
clings to the idea, and we find Wolsey writing to him in November 1521 : —
" On my return I will talk over with you how to bring about the marriage, . . . which will be
a good pretext for delaying to send his son over." 4
Meanwhile he privately recognises the invalidity of the " Earl's " title. He writes to Surrey
in October 1521,
" To propose to Sir Piers Butler, calling himself Earl of Ormond, as of himself, to take the office
of Deputy/5
Wolsey writes to Henry, that he
" Thinks the request made in Sir Piers Butler's letter " (thereupon) " very reasonable ; " *
and Henry signifies to Surrey his intention to appoint " Sir Pierce Butler, pretending himself
to be Earl of Ormond." '
Accordingly, on the 6th of March, 1522, "the Red Piers" was appointed Deputy in
succession to Surrey. With Surrey's departure, the chances of a compromise became fainter.
The pretty Ann Boleyn was indeed brought over from France in 1522, but whether the
daughter was not amenable, or the father hoped that his rising fortunes would secure him
better terms than, such a compromise could afford, the marriage never took place. In .fact,
so resolute became the attitude of Sir Thomas, and so great was now his influence at court,
that we find Kildare warning the King (24 May, 1523) that
"The Deputy has made new bonds with the Irish, especially with O'Keroll, by whose aid he
means to defend his title to the Earldom of Ormond ';" ' • _  - _- 
while his wife writes to Wolsey, the following day, on her husband's behalf, urging that
their great rival
" Is so cruel towards him because Kildare refused to take part with him against the heirs of the late
Earl of Ormond, who pretend " (i.e., assert) " title to the Earldom.""
We thus have abundant evidence of the true condition of affairs, and learn that the
received version is founded on complete misrepresentation. Instead of Sir Piers enjoying
unchallenged his " ancient and rightful " inheritance, we find him usurping the Earldom in
direct violation of its charter, and prepared to resist vi et armis the rightful c__heirs."
1 According to Lodge (followed by Foster), " Sir Pierce, to satisfy the King's pleasure, had been contented
to resign his ancient and rightful title of Ormond," which was restored to the Boleyns, " to the injury of Sir
Piers Butler, the Sth Earl rightfully of Ormond " (according to Ulster King-of-Arms). This, as will be seen,
is a glaring instance of ignorance or misrepresentation.
* Archbishop of Dublin writes to Wolsey, 12th Dec. 1515, (the year of the last Earl's death,) that he
"has been much occupied with the Lord Deputy in Sir Thomas Bullene's cause. Sir Perse Butler, who calls
himself the Earl of Ormond, will not come." The Butlers "desired the cause to be remitted to the common
law in Ireland, which they (the Archbishop and L.D.) thought not meet for Sir T. Bullene." (State Papers.)
' State Papers. * Ibid. » Ibid. ' Ibid. ' Cott. MSS. Titus B. XI,
* State Papers. * " Pretend " was not at that time used in an invidious sense.

"A

$8 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

On the 18th June, 1525, the Butler title of Rochford was revived in Sir Thomas
Boleyn, but as a Viscounty, not a Barony ; but in 1527, the return of his daughter to court,
and Henry's avowed passion for her, greatly strengthened the position ofthe «amlLy- lne
negotiations were still in Wolsey's charge, and articles of agreement were at length drawn up
for the restoration of the co-heirs to their inheritance.1 a ti.
The terms having thus been finally arranged, the restoration was formally effected 17th
February, 1528, by a remarkable document, of which the existence appears to have been
wholly overlooked. It was in the form of an indenture tripartite, of which a duplicate is
preserved in the Public Record Office. The three parties are— the King,— Uzme Ann
Seyntleger, widow, and Dame Margaret Boleyn, widow, daughters and heirs of Sir L homas
Butler, late erle of Ormond,"— "and Sir Pyers Butler, Kt, cosyn and heir male to the said
Thomas, late" (he had been dead 13 years) "erle of Ormond, and James Butler Lsquyer,
son and heir apparaunt to the said Sir Pyers." After reciting that "divers contentions and
variaunces " had arisen between the parties as to the Ormond title and estates, and witness
ing that an agreement has been effected between them, it proceeds —
"That eyther ofthe same two parties to the other graunteth and agreeth by these present
Indentures to our said sovereyne lord, that the said honour, title, style, and dignity of the
erle of Ormond, and the Annuite of^io of the fee-farm of the Citie of Waterford in Ireland,
graunted and assigned for meyntenaunce of the same, shall he from henceforth intirely at the
dispocition, pleasure, and will, of our said sovereyne lord."
Both parties then renounce any present right to the dignity in precisely identical terms, the
Butlers not being recognised as one whit more in possession'than their rivals.
The rest of the" document is devoted to the estates, which seem to have been divided
with the strictest justice, the right of Sir Piers, as heir male, to the manors of Turvey and
Cloncurry, under a special entail of the 4th Ed. III. (1 330-1), being fully recognized, while the
whole of the remaining Ormond estates were restored to their rightful heirs, not, be it observed,
to the Boleyns alone, but'to the two heiresses in strict co-parcenery. By the same indentures
the co-heirs arranged to lease the great bulk of the estates, (reserving the castles of Carrick-
Makgriffyn and Roscrea) to the Butlers for 30 years,2 and there were also, both now and on
subsequent occasions, arrangements ofthe nature of champerty, for the recovery of some out
lying portions from the Irish, " commonly called the wild Irishrie."
The points to which I would invite attention are —
(1) That this transaction was not, as has been supposed, an act of injustice for the
benefit of Lord Rochford (Sir Thomas Boleyn), but an act of simple restitution
in favour of the two co-heiresses, their claims being placed on a perfectly equal
footing, and Dame Anne St. Leger, indeed, being awarded precedence as the
elder. The reversal of the original and true injustice was consummated by the
" Livery of lands in Ireland to Ann Seyntleger and Margaret Boleyn, widows, as
daughters and heirs of Thomas, Earl of Ormond, deceased."3
(2) That "Sir Pyers Butler, Kt, .... and James Butler, Esquyer," are treated
throughout by the Crown as commoners, being not entitled to the Earldom of
Ormond, and there being clearly no other Peerage dignity then vested in the family.
(3) That the Earldom of Ormond thus recognised to be at the disposal of the Crown,
was not merely an Earldom, but was the original Earldom of 1328, with its fiscal
feodum annexed.
(4) That the division of the estates between the co-heiresses, while the title remained in
the king's hands, was in strict accordance with the doctrine that the estates are
divisible, but that the dignity is not, the latter being here considered, following
the original charter, to have fallen into abeyance in 1515, and to lie therefore, in
technical language, ad arbitrium corona, or, as the indenture expresses it, " at the
dispocition, pleasure, and will, of our said sovereyne lord." It will therefore at
once be seen that the co-heirs were not surrendering (as might hastily be supposed)
one jot of their/..-- sanguinis, but were merely recognising, as in duty bound, that
the dignity was for the present in abeyance, — ad arbitrium coronce.
1 1527. Articles of agreement made by Wolsey between Thomas Vise. Rochford and his comparceners,
and Sir Pyers Butler, for the inheritance of the Earldom of Ormond. (Ashm. MSS. 1547.)
2 "A note of such lands as Peers Butler, Earl of Ossorie, and James Lord Butler his son took by lease for
a term of years from Dame Anne St. Ledger, widow, and Dame Margaret Bullen, widow, daus. and Co-heirs
unto Thomas Butler, late Erie of Ormond, .... which said lands were then in possession of the said
ladies and their sonnes aforesaid in the 20th H. VIII." (State Papers.)
* State Fapers,

THE EARLDOMS OF ORMOND IN IRELAND. 8g

The next step was the creation of an earldom of Ossory in favour of Sir Piers Butler, (as
he was duly for the time described,) to compensate him for the loss of the Earldom of
Ormond. This took place on the 23rd February, 1527-8, within six days of the above
indenture, the title being conferred by letters patent in a brilliant gathering at Windsor
Castle.1 Though Henry had at length ventured to deprive this powerful chieftain of the
Earldom he had so long usurped, he took care at the same time to lighten this heavy blow,
and to avoid estranging so staunch an ally. He had made him Lord Treasurer of Ireland
13th May, 1524, and had granted considerable estates to hira and his heirs-male 5th Novem
ber, 1526, and he now hastened to confer on him this new Earldom with all possible
ceremonial splendour.
But in the case of the restored " heirs " there was no such need for haste. Henry, with
characteristic jealousy for the prerogative, resolved that the Earldom of Ormond should
continue for a time in abeyance. It was not till the close of the following year (8th Dec.
1529) that this abeyance was at length determined in favour of the junior co-heir, Thomas
Viscount Rochford.
Two different versions of this creation have successively appeared in Burke's Peerage,
and both, strange to say, are equally wrong.
Burke's Peerage Burke's Peerage
1829. 1882.
Thomas (Sir), who was created 18th June, 1525, Thomas (Sir) K.G., who was created 18th Jone,
Baron and Viscount Rochford, and on the 29th 1325, Viscount Rochford, and 8 Dec. 1529, Eari of
Nov. 1527, Earl of Wiltshire and Ormonde, all in Wiltshire in the Peerage of England.- • In 1527 he
the Peerage of England. had been made Earl of Ormonde, in the Peerage of
Ireland.
In the first version (which contains four mistakes) this Earldom of Ormond is made an
English Peerage, and in both versions its creation is antedated by two years. This is the
more singular in the latter case, as Ulster had only to refer to his own Extinct Peerage to
obtain the right version.
The charter ofthe 8th Dec. 1529 was a double one, and while it granted the Earldom
of Wiltshire in tail-male (with an annuity of ^20 out ofthe issues of Wilts and Devon), it
conferred the Earldom of Ormond in Ireland, with the annuity of £,\o out of the fee-farm
of Waterford, on Lord Rochford et haredibus suis imperpeluum. The varying destinations of
the two dignities have been hitherto a crux to Peerage writers, but the apparent anomaly is
beautifully explained when the true facts of the case are no longer perverted or obscured.
For when we learn that this Earldom of Ormond is identified with that created in 1328, not
only by retaining the same feodum (from which it had not been separated for an instant), but
also by descending with the very same limitation, we see how exclusively these facts agree
with our previous conclusion that it was the original Earldom, of which the continuity had
never been broken, and which was now called out of abeyance in favour ofa rightful heir.
It need hardly be pointed out that by this date it had become the rule to grant earldoms
in tail-male, and it was evidently because the ancient Earldom of Ormonde could not be so
granted that Lord Rochford secured at the same time an Earldom of Wiltshire- for his heirs-
male. The view which I have here advanced is strikingly confirmed by Lynch, who, though
he had as great a horror of an heir-general as Lord Redesdale himself admits (p. 86) that
" On this occasion, following the strict words of the charter granting the Earldom, the
Crown considered that dignity to be in abeyance between the co-heirs of Earl Thomas ; and
in the year 1529, Sir Thomas Bullen, Viscount Bochfort and Earl of Wilts,8 as son of
Margaret, one of the co-heirs, was created Earl of Ormonde to him and his heirs, by which
exercise of the Royal prerogative the abeyance became determined."
We now pass to the year 1536. In the latter part of this year a Parliament met at
Dublin, and passed a statute known as the Act of Absentees. This most interesting docu
ment recites the troubles which had culminated in the late rebellion, and which it attributes
chiefly to the conduct of those members of " the English garrison " who neglected their duty
by being absentees. The_esta.es ofthe most prominent of these offenders were resumed by
this statute, and revested in the Crown. The chief sufferers* by this measure were the Duke

' The ceremony was described by Sir Thomas " Wriotesley," Garter, and there is a copy of his account in
the Carew Papers.
» This is one of the careless slips of our " very learned Peerage Lawyer." Lord Rochford had not become
Earl of Wilts before he obtained the Earldom of Ormond. -

9° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
of Norfolk and Lord Berkeley as co-heirs of the Mowbrays, the Earl of Shrewsbury as heir
of the Lords of Wexford, and " the heires general of the' Earle of Ormond." The passage
in Lynch which refers to this Act, and by which Notes and Queries was so cruelly misled, is
as follows : —
"Sir Thomas Bullen, Earl of Ormond, . . . of the two daughters and co-heirs ofthis Earl,
namely, Anne and Mary, Anne marrying King Henry the Eighth, her rights as the eldest co-heir
came to that Monarch, and afterwards, by a statute in the twenty-eighth year of his reign,
all the rights of the co-heirs of Thomas, Earl of Ormond in Ireland, were resumed. and
revested in the crown for ever " (p. 87).
A passage more grossly inaccurate it is not easy to conceive. In the first place, Anne's
" rights, as the eldest co-heir " of the dignity, passed not to Henry VIIL, but to her daughter
Elizabeth ; secondly, these " rights " were absolutely untouched by the statute, which referred
exclusively to lands, and not to Peerage dignities ; x thirdly, the Earl of Wiltshire and Ormond
was still alive, so that his " heires-general " could not even be in possession of his lands ;
fourthly, the Act does not mention "the co-heirs of Thomas, Earl of Ormond in Ireland,"
(more properly Thomas, Earl of Wiltshire and Ormond,) but simply " the heires-general of
the Earle of Ormond,", that is to say, the heirs of the Ormond estates, i.e. the St Legers and
the Boleyns, as heirs-general of Thomas Butler, Earl of Ormond, who had died . twenty-one
years before. So much for this audacious attempt to pervert the plain words of the statute,
and to dispose in this preposterous manner of the awkward claims ofthe Boleyns.
The Ormond estates, thus forfeited, were not long retained by the Crown. With the
sudden, fall ofthe Boleynes the prospects of the Butlers brightened. Ossory,2 who as
truly as his celebrated descendant deserved the name of " the gallant Ossory," had twice, at
least, by his personal exertions, saved Dublin for England, and Lord James, his no less
gallant son, had been made High Treasurer of Ireland 1532, Admiral of Ireland 1535, and
was created Viscount Thurles by letters patent 2nd January, 1535-6.3 These were clearly
the right men to defend the Ormond estates from the incursions of the King's enemies, and
the Deputy and Council lost no time in bringing their claims before the Crown. They wrote
(20th April, 1537) urging that the forfeited estates should be granted to " the Earl of Ossory
and his son,"* and accordingly, on 23 October, 1537, letters patent were issued, granting
them to "Peter Butler, Earl of Ossory and Ormond, and James Butler, Lord Butler," (N.B.
not Lord Thttrles,) "... to hold in survivorship and to the heirs-male of the body of the
said Peter." 6 Clearly then it was between these dates that Ossory obtained the additional
title of Ormond. Titles and estates were, at this period.neither indissolubly connected, as
they had originally been, nor wholly divorced, as they have now become, but practically, as
in a state of transition, went hand in hand. Thus, on regaining the Ormond estates, the
Butlers would acquire an equitable claim to the possession of an Earldom of Ormond.
What then was this Earldom of Ormond which they obtained, and when was it conferred ?
Taking the latter question first, we are told by Lodge (1754 Ed. ii. 16) that "Thomas
Bullen, Earl of Ormond, dying without issue male, the King, 22nd February, r537, restored
him (Sir Piers) to the title of Ormond." This statement has been faithfully copied by both
Burke and Foster. Now I have pointed out, in my previous paper, that his so dying could
not affect a title descendible haredibus, and that moreover he was not dead. But I would
add that Sir Piers was still "Earl of Ossory" two months later, and that the creation
cannot have taken place so early as Lodge makes it That he ante-dated it is indeed clear
from the Act of 1541, which recites that the creation was by letters patent 29 Hen. VIIL,
i.e., between 21st April, 1537, and 21st April, 1538. It is probable, however, that he has
been here misled by the legal date (compare Thurles above), and that the formal creation was
not effected till 22 February, 1537-8, that is to say, in reality, 1538. The true status ofthis
dignity, however, is of more importance than its date. It is significant enough that in the
letters patent granting the Ormond estates, the grantee is described as " Earl of Ossory and
Ormond" (see above), the precedence here officially awarded to the title of 1527, proving
1 This is incidentally admitted by Lynch himself on p. 219, where he speaks of it as "an Act ....
whereby all the estates of the heirs general of the Earl of Ormond were vested for special reasons in the crown."
1 Sir Piers was,_ of course, always described officially as Earl of Ossory during this period, but Froude most
inaccurately terms him Earl of Ormonde, even when referring to documents in which he is correctly described.
s That is, 2 January, 1536, not 1535, as stated in the modem Peerages. We find him described as " Lord
Butler " and " Lord James Butler," subsequent to this creation.
4 Carew Papers.
* Ibid, vol. 611, p. 10. It should be added that Notes and Queries (6th s.v. 343), by sheer carelessness
made Mr. Foster assign this .transaction to 22nd February, 1537, to which, date he only assigns the " restoration'
ofthe title.

THE EARLDOMS OF ORMOND IN IRELAND. ox
that this Earldom of Ormond was a subsequent and new creation. It is equally significant
that Lynch, in his description of this grant, renders it " Sir Pierce Butler, Earl of Ormond
and Ossory," (p. 87.) But the true clencher, I must repeat, is to be found in that famous
passage in the Carets/ Papers, which makes utter havoc of Lynch, Lodge, and company. I
here append the passage in extenso, as the previous quotation was taken from an abridgment.
" Pearce Butler, afterwards Earl of Ossory and Ormond, upon the death of Thomas Butler,
late Earl of Ormond, was by office" (i.e Inq. p. m.) " found to be next heir male to the
said Earl, and thereupon sued out his livery and was styled Earl of Ormond, as well by the
King's most gracious letters patent as by his grace's letters missive. And now Sir Thomas
Bulleu, Earl of Ormond and Wiltshire, is contented he be named Earl of Ormond in Ireland
setnblably as tlie two Lords Dacre be named, the one ofthe South and the other of tlie North."
(Carew Papers, vol. 608, p. 69.)
We here see that, notwithstanding the tragic fall of the Boleynes, the rights of the aged
Earl of Wiltshire and Ormond were recognised in the fullest manner, not only by acknow
ledging him as rightful Earl, but by seeking his permission for the creation of a fresh Earldom
of the same name. To grasp the true bearing of this transaction we need a wide knowledge
of illustrative peerage precedents. The Dacre parallel was happily chosen. Thomas Lord
Dacre had died in 1458, leaving his eldest son's heiress, as his heir of line, and his second
son as his heir male. On the latter disputing his niece's claim, Edward IV., who had been
appointed arbitrator, confirmed the heiress and her husband in the Barony of Dacre, with
the original precedence, but created the heir-male Lord Dacre (of the North) with prece
dence just below the holders of the original Barony. It is a singular coincidence that both
disputes were of about the same duration, 24 years elapsing in the case of Dacre, and
22 (or 23) in the case of Ormond, between the death of the last undisputed holder and
the creation of a fresh but homonymous dignity in favour of the heir-male. Again we are
reminded by the Dacre precedent of the clearly similar Oliphant case 150 years later. In
this case Charles I. found himself in the same position as Edward IV. in the earlier one,
and seems, in practice, to have followed his precedent. For while confirming the heiress
and her husband in the Barony (though under a different title) with its original precedence,
he conferred on the collateral heir male, a Barony of Oliphant, with precedence just below
the holders of the original Barony.1 But reverting from this Scotch to an English instance,
we have again a most singular parallel in the double baronies of Roos. A short chart
pedigree will make the case clearer.

i I
Edward, 3rd Earl of Rutland. John, 4th Earl of Rutland.
14th Baron Roos, d. 14 Ap. 1587. I
Elizabeth, Baroness Roos, d. 1591, Francis, 6th Earl of Rutland,
mar. Sir W. (Cecil), 2nd Earl created Baron Roos,
of Exeter. , to him and heirs male
| of his body, 12 July, 1616.
William, 17th Baron Roos, \
d. s. p. v. p. 27 June, 1618.
Here the heir male was created Baron Roos, to him and the heirs male of his body in
the lifetime of his cousin, the 17th Baron, who had taken from his grandfather through his
mother, just as the heir male was created Earl of Ormond to him and the heirs male of his
body, in the lifetime of his cousin, the Earl of (Wiltshire and) Ormond, who had taken
from his grandfather through his mother. Here again 29 years had elapsed between the
death of the original holder and the creation of the new dignity in favour of the heir male.
It will be sufficient to allude to such cases as that of Lumley (English), in which it was
decided in 1723 that there were two baronies, one to heirs male, created 1 Ed. VL, and one
(the original one) to heirs general, then and still under forfeiture,— or Sinclair (Scotch), in
which the present Barony, created by patent in 1677, is believed to be co-existent with the
original Barony, of which it has usurped the precedence.
It is imperative to grasp, through such instances as these, the idea of dual and co-existent
dignities, whether or not (in technical language) they seem to " sit on the lap of the other."
For it has hitherto been sought crudely to force the two distinct Earldoms of Ormond into
one and the same dignity, "resigned" by the Butlers in 1527 and "restored" to them ten
years later. The absurdity of this conception can be most clearly proved.

• See Riddell's Peerage Law, pp. 178—184, &c.

92 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

(i) The true original Earldom was not, and could not be '-'resigned" by the Butlers (who
had no longer a claim to it) but was called out of abeyance in favour of the Boleyns, who
rightfully held it to heirs female in accordance with the terms of its charter.
(2) The Earldom obtained by the Butlers in 1537 (1538 ?) was limited to heirs viale,
whereas the original Earldom was to heirs female. .
(3) It could not be (strictly) "restored " to the Butlers, as they had never "resigned
it, and it could not even be transferred to them, until the Boleyns had been deprived of it,
which they never were. In order to extinguish the right of the Boleyns, Lynch was driven
to the desperate resource of perverting (as we have seen at page 90) the Act of Absentees.
(4) The Earldom obtained by the Butlers in 1537 was not only conferred on them by
the sufferance of the holder of the original dignity, but was effectively stamped as a brand-
new title by being strictly limited to the heirs male of the body of the grantee. It was thus
granted in the very same tail as the Ormond estates (see above), and this limitation was con
firmed by the fresh grant of 1603.
The great Earl of Ossory and Ormond, broken down in health by his life-long struggles,
did not long survive his final triumph, dying 26th August, 1539.1 It was not till 1541 that
the true status of the latter Earldom was first brought into question. Parliament met at
Dublin in that year, and the precedence of James (Butler), 2nd Earl of the new creation,
was at once challenged by the Earl of Desmond, the only Earl, curiously enough, who
ranked after the original Earls of Ormond, but before the Earls of Ossory. Of this strife very
curious evidence is to be detected in a letter to the king (28th June, 1548), preserved in
. the English Record Office. Among the signatures of nobles appended to it we find "James
Onnd. and Oss. ; J. of D.," "J. of D " being that of the Earl of Desmond, who squeezed it
in, on a line with his rival's, sooner than yield him precedence by signing beneath him ! But
the Butlers were still in the flush of their triumph, and the Fitzgeralds disheartened and weak.
By the 35 Hen. VIII. (1543-4), cap. 1, this Parliament confirmed the grant of the Earldom in
1537 (with its limitation to the heirs male of the grantee's body), and conferred on it the
"like pre-eminence and auncienty " as the 1328 Earldom (with, it must frankly be admitted,
the ;£io Ormond annuity).2 The moment had been well chosen. The old Earl of Wiltshire and
Ormond was dead ; his Earldom of Ormond was in abeyance, from which it seemed unlikely
to emerge ; his only surviving child had made a love match, and was utterly powerless to raise
a protest, specially before the Irish Parliament. It was under these circumstances that this
Act was passed, as Lodge delicately expresses it, "at the suit of" the triumphant chieftain...
Meanwhile what had been the fate of the Boleyns and the dignities vested in them ?
No portion of this complicated case will prove more instructive than this question, or will
raise nicer points of Peerage law and precedent. For just as Nicolas and the other writers
who have alluded to this case of Ormond have failed, as we have seen, to grasp the relative
status of the Earldoms, or to understand, as we shall see below, the Boleyn barony of Roch
fort, so have they strangely overlooked the effect of those terribly blasting attainders of 1536.
The exact facts seem to be as follows : — On the 15th May, 1536, Anne, Queen of England,
and her brother, Lord Rochfort, were found guilty of high treason by their peers. This
Obviously involved an attainder at common law. This attainder was confirmed by statute
28 H. VIIL, cap. 7. The case then stood thus, — Lord Rochfort and his sister were forfeited
for treason, as regards Ireland, and attainted by statute as well, as regards England.
But they predeceased their father ; had either of them survived him, his Earldom of Ormond
would have been irrevocably lost. As it was, the Earl was only survived by his elder daughter's
child Elizabeth (afterwards queen), and by his younger daughter Mary (Lady Carey). Now
had the Earldom of Ormond been held in tail, Elizabeth's rights would have been saved by
her mother's predecease3 (whether by the statute de donis, or by the fiction of a multiplex
creation), and Mary's a fortiori. Between them the Earldom would have been therefore in
abeyance; but, Ormond being a dignity in fee, the rights of Elizabeth were as completely ex
tinguished as in the case of the Barony of Lumley (1723), with which it was on all fours.
Mary's rights must however have been saved by the predecease of the attainted children, if
Cruise be right (as he surely is) in holding that if an elder brother be attainted, but predecease
his father, without leaving issue, the younger can inherit from his father a dignity in fee,
7
1 This on the authority ofa MS. history penes the Marquess of Ormonde.
2 Though the Boleyne Earldom is not alluded to in the Act, and could not be taken from the lawful heirs,
except by express enactment (if even by that), a question might perhaps arise as to whether it was indirectly
affected. 3 As for instance in the Athole case, 1764.

THE EARLDOMS OF ORMOND IN IRELAND. 93

because he 'can derive his descent from kirn, without claiming through, or even mention
ing, Ivs brother." l It is true that the case of Ormond is further complicated by Mary
inheriting not a right to the whole dignity, but only the junior co-heirship, the senior bein<?
under attainder. Yet it has been decided in the Beaumont case, that one co-heirship is not
attected by the attainder of the other, the attainted one being merged in the crown during
the existence of the attainted line. Such then, I take it, if we may apply the English law of
treason, was the position of this dignity after the Earl's death.' It may be observed that
Henry has, with singular ignorance, been accused of unjustly seizing, on his father-in-law's
death, the inheritance which would have been Anne Boleyn's, although their marriage had
been disallowed and Anne herself forfeited. I need hardly point out that, by the English
Law of Treason, even an attainted person could take, though only for the benefit of the
Crown. Henry did not seize as the husband upon the inheritance of a wife, but as the kine
upon the inheritance of a traitor. .
The subsequent descent of the dignity may be briefly traced. By Elizabeth's accession
to the throne, the senior co-heirship was merged in the Crown by descent, as it had been,
under her father, by attainder. By her death the abeyance was determined/after lasting
65 years, and Lady Carey became sole heiress in her issue, i.e., in George (Carey), 2nd Lord
Hunsdon, who died a few months after, leaving an only child, Elizabeth, wife of Sir Thomas
Berkeley. As Sir Thomas predeceased his father, Lord Berkeley (his widow marrying again),
and as no estates were involved in the Ormond heirship, there was no inducement for the
widow to claim an empty Irish title, which it would in those days have been for an English
woman a sheer anomaly to bear. Her grandson being created Earl of Berkeley in 1679, her
representatives haye never, till within the last few weeks, had any practical incentive to
prosecute their claim, which has only just been divorced from the possession of the English
earldom. But that they long retained a proud recollection of their dormant rights is
shown, for instance, by the monumental inscription 'in Cranford Church, to Elizabeth, Lady
"Here lieth the body of the most vertuous and prudent Lady, Elizabeth Lady Berkeley,
widow, daughter and sole heir of George Carey, Lord Hunsdon, son and heir of Henry
Carey, Lord Hunsdon, son and heir of WiUiam Carey and the Lady Mary his wife, second
daughter and co-heir of Thomas Bullen, Earl of Ormond and Wiltshire, father also of Queen
Ann Bullen, wife to King Henry the VIHth, mother of Queen Elizabeth, late Queen of
England ; which Lady Berkeley, after her pious pilgrimage of 59 years, surrendered her soul
into the hands of her Redeemer the 23rd day of April, A.D. 1635." (Collins' Peerage,
vol. ui., p. 616.) "
I have only space very briefly to glance at the Barony of Rochfort, or Rochford. George
Boleyne, according to Ulster's Extinct Peerage, "was summoned to Parliament in the lifetime
of his father, 5 Jan. 1533, as Viscount Rochford " (p. 59). This statement I believe to be
quite erroneous. He may have been loosely spoken of by what we should now call the
"courtesy title" of Viscount Rochford, his father's minor dignity, but he was summoned to
Parliament, according to Nicolas,' as " Georgio Bullen de Rochford," and we also find him
formally described at his trial as "Sir George Boleyn, Kt, Lord Rochfort" I therefore
believe him to have been summoned in the Barony of Rochfort, and moreover, though
Nicolas treats it as a new creation in his favour, I venture here to differ even from him, and to
deem it a determination in his favour of the abeyant barony of his great-grandfather, who had
been summoned under the same formula as " Thomas Ormond2 de Rochford, chev." This latter
dignity was believed by Nicolas to be still in abeyance between his heirs. I, on the contrary,
hold that it was called out for George Boleyn, in the same manner, to take a precise
parallel as the Barony of Mowbray was called out for Thomas Howard, 1639, in the lifetime
of his father, the Earl of Arundel and Surrey. The resemblance, I submitjs perfect, and,
if my theory be correct, there was but one barony of Rochfort, of which the senioi co-heirship
is by attainder now merged in the Crown, and the junior intact I close my paper, then,
with the question whether, if the iniquitous attainder of the unhappy Lord Rochfort should
be reversed, the Barony might be presumed to vest in his father's heir-of-Iine, who is also, as
I contend, indisputably entitled to the ancient Earldom of Ormond, under the confirmation
of that dignity to Sir Thomas Boleyn, to him " and his heirs for ever."
1 Cruise on Dignities, p. 127.
2 It was customary for younger brothers of Irish Earis to use the family title as an alternative surname.
Thus "Thomas of Desmond," "John of Ormond alias John Butler," etc., etc. M

s} %\>t 5Lp.on £>Hce ann ti)e j^aijorifcanfts jFamtlp.
A REPLY TO GEORGE BURNETT, ESQ., LYON KING-OF-ARMS.
MY readers will remember that I was recently compelled, by some invidious
comments of the Lyon Clerk Depute, to repeat the doubts which, as a
Peerage Editor, I had already expressed on the Marjoribanks pedigrees, compiled
by, and emanating from, the Lyon Office of Scotland. The attack thus rashly
provoked by my critic's indiscreet zeal would seem not only to have effectively
silenced him, but to have been deemed so seriously damaging to' the whole ofthe
Lyon Office, as to have induced Lyon King-of-Arms himself to adopt the very
unusual course (1) of rushing hurriedly into print to uphold its tottering reputation.
It has been my avowed object, throughout this controversy, to elicit from the
officials of the Lyon Office some such proofs and evidences for those pedigrees as
genealogists have a right to expect, or at least those definite data of births,
" marriages, deaths, wills etc., without which no pedigree can possess any real
value, or can have its skeleton statements satisfactorily tested. In dealing with an
ordinary and outspoken pedigree, even though it be supported by no references,
we usually have at least some definite facts to lay hold of, capable of being verified
or disproved. But this slender Marjoribanks descent is as slippery as the proverbial
eel ; it is purposely so constructed as to elude the critic's grasp. Why does the
Lyon Office thus persistently decline not only to adduce proof, but even to com
mit itself to dates ? Can it be that they have neither the one nor the other, and
that "because their deeds are evil, they love not the light " ?
It is plain, of course, lo Lyon, as to his follower, that the battle must be
fought out on the main issue, i.e., Lord Tweedmouth's alleged descent from
Thomas Marjoribanks of Ratho, Clerk Register and Lord of Session. The other
inaccuracies which I pointed out, and one of which at least my opponent has
not ventured to deny,(2) were but side issues, though valuable as illustrating the
trustworthiness (or reverse) of such " proved and registered pedigrees." To these
points I shall revert below.
Lyon has indeed, for very shame, been forced to bring forward, on this main
issue, what he appears to consider proof of a more convincing nature than his
subordinate could produce, but instead of simply proving his case, and thus
demolishing my grave charges, he hastens to take refuge in safe generalities, and
delivers himself defiantly as follows : —
(') " While it is usually undesirable for a public officer to reply in print to accusations levelled against his
official conduct, this rule admits of occasional exceptions." — Lyon King-of-Arms.
(s) Although Lyon states inferentially that this pedigree has been compiled from' "most stringent and
satisfactory proof," yet he deems it prudent at the very outset to provide himself a way of escape from "proved
and registered" blunders by informing us that "infallibility is claimed by the Roman Pontiff only."

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 95
" It is, perhaps, hardly necessary for me (Lyon) to explain that a recorded or authenticated
pedigree, when it contains matter not necessarily within the knowledge of living members of
the family, must at every step be supported by the most stringent and satisfactory proof.
Many pedigrees are refused a place in the Register of Genealogies, or are recorded with the
earlier generations lopped off, though there are strong probable reasons for believing them
to be in toto correct. The strict examination which pedigrees presented for registration have
to undergo in the absence of a contradictory is such as to make an error, particularly in an
important or essential point, extremely unlikely."
" The most stringent and satisfactory proof! " In that case it might indeed
be hoped that such an " error " as a wholly false descent would prove (to say the
least of it) " extremely unlikely." But we do not ask for probabilities based on
general assumptions. We ask for proof. Here, then, at length we extort this
proof: — this (in Lyon's words) " most stringent and satisfactory proof ! "
" We, in fact, find two contemporary merchant burgesses of Edinburgh named James
Marjoribanks, unquestionably related to one another, and one of them son of the Lord of
Session and Clerk Register, figuring largely in documents and records of the period ; and, in
the light of a very much larger range of evidence than Mr. Faster has printed, it may not
always be easy to determine which James a given document alludes to. This identity of
name forms a difficulty in the way of tracing some ramifications of the Marjoribanks family ;
but the difficulty does not extend to Lord Tweedmouth's branch, for this reason among
others, that while the burghal records show that Lord Tweedmouth's ancestor was second
son of one of the two Jameses, this cannot have been the James whose will proves him to
have had no son Joseph, and must therefore be the other, the Qerk Renter's son."
Now Lyon admits that the onus probande rests on the party proving the
descent. Let us then, in accordance with his own practice, submit the above
"proof" to a "strict examination." But to do this we must briefly trace the
genesis of this latest line of defence, for the Lyon Office argument changes as
swiftly as a Proteus.
. The " protoplasm " from which the Lyon Office evolved this " proved and
registered " descent was an entry in the burghal records (ante, p. 67).
" 1602, July 13. The quhilk day in the presence of Johne Robertsoun Deane of Gild
and the Gild Counsaill Joseph Marioribankis, second lawful soune to vmquhile James Mariori
bankis merchant burges and gild brother of this burgh, is maid burge, and gild brother ofthe
same be richt of his said father. Compearand sufficientlie armit with ane furneist hagbuit and
hes given his aith in maner abovewritten and payit for his duetie to the Deane of tlie Gild
xxx* iiijd. Vol. ii.
That this entry, and none other, is the one referred to by Lyon King-of-
Arms is clear, not only from the fact that it is the only one recording the
admission of a Joseph son of a James, but also from the words " second lawful
soune" which Lyon, it will be seen, adopts. — - ¦-
The missing link, it will be remembered, in the Marjoribanks descent was —
proof that Joseph, Lord Tweedmouth's ancestor, was a son of the James Marjori
banks who was son of the Clerk Register. What more easy to assume than that
this " James " was the James Marjoribanks, who was son of the Clerk Register,
and that this " Joseph " was the Joseph Marjoribanks from whom Lord Tweed
mouth deduced his descent? Such was the conclusion at which the Lyon leapt !
Facilis decensus averno — in pedigree making, as in all else, and when genealogy
becomes a matter, as Lyon expresses it, "of guesses more or less probable," it
is not difficult to discover materials for the required descent It was undesirable
however, that this unique James should be unprovided with a date of death.
Here a°"ain nothing could be simpler. It was found that the will of a James
Marjoribanks had been confirmed in _58r. Now as, ex hypotliesi, there was but
one James, this will was clearly his, and he must therefore have died "in or

9° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
before 1581" (to quote the "proved and registered" pedigree).(1) And so this
production was issued to the world in the placid conviction that no being could
arise bold enough to challenge a descent " supported by the most stringent and
satisfactory proof." Greatly therefore were its authors ruffled when, on first
publishing this pedigree in my Peerage, I ventured to append a warning caution,
and to point out that there were at least two James Marjoribanks, of whom
one, the Clerk Register's son, was certainly living in 1576-7, when he renounced
the executry of his sister's will, while the other as certainly died in 1569. I
even ventured further to hint that as the will of the latter James happened to
have been confirmed in 1581, it might fairly be inferred that the Lyon Office
had obtained from this fact the date of death of the former James, and had, in
fact, in its crucible melted them down into one. To this the first and brief
retort was that of the Clerk Depute : — ¦
"We shall only say that James Marjoribanks did not renounce the executry of his sister
Margaret ; Joseph is satisfactorily proved to be son of James, both having been merchant
burgesses of Edinburgh; (*) the James said to have died in April, 1569, never was, as Mr.
Foster gratuitously asserts, identified with James the father of Joseph."
Of this opponent I promptly disposed by printing the renunciation which
he so flatly denied (ante, p. 65). But no sooner has he been thus placed hors de
combat than his chief comes forward to supply his place, and coolly accepts, as
faits accomplis, the "splitting" of his prototypal James and the renunciation of
the executry. The Clerk Depute, it will be noticed, could not rise beyond the
original conception of an only James, but his chief, finding himself compelled to
admit that I had indeed presented them with an unwelcome " little stranger," re
solves boldly to assume that there were only two, as confidently as he had before
assumed that there could only be one. Moreover he would now disown the
pedigree supplied through Lord Tweedmouth to the Peerage editors, and printed
accordingly in Burke. But for my criticisms that pedigree would have continued
to appear till the end of time. As, however, I proved (ante, p. 66) that Symon's
admission entry alone was sufficient to disprove this pedigree, Lyon, driven head
long by me from his outwork, falls back on what he fondly hopes will prove his
impregnable citadel. And to these admissions he has adapted what I have
termed his " latest line of defence."
"We, in fact, find two contemporary merchant burgesses of Edinburgh named James
Marjoribanks, unquestionably related to one another, and one of them son of the Lord of
Session and Clerk Register, figuring largely in documents and records of the period ; and, in
the light of a very much larger range of evidence than Mr. Foster has printed, it may not
always be easy to determine which James a given document alludes to. This identity of
name forms a difficulty in the way of tracing some ramifications of the Marjoribanks family ; '
but the difficulty does not extend to Lord Tweedmouth's branch, for this reason among
others, that while the burghal records show that Lord Tweedmouth's ancestor was second
son of one of the two Jameses, this cannot have been the James whose will proves him to
have had no son Joseph, and must therefore be the other, the Clerk Register's son."
This "most stringent and satisfactory proof" will be seen to resolve itself
into that solitary entry which we have just identified beyond a doubt, and which
had, in the opinion of his subordinate, so " satisfactorily proved " their case. But

(') As I definitely charged the Lyon Office with having thus evolved this date, and as they have neither
denied that charge, nor given any other authority for the date, it may now fairly be inferred that this was
the mode of its fabrication.
O This obviously refers to the protoplasmic entry which was the sole (but "satisfactory) proof" ofthe
descent.

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 97
it will also be consequently seen to rest on four unsupported assumptions, eacli
and all of which are capable of disproof absolute.
(i) That James Marjoribanks, son of the Clerk Register, was a merchant
burgess. (2) That (presuming him to have been a merchant burgess) he was identical
with the " James Marjoribanks " of this burghal entry.
(3) That there were only two (" the two ") James Marjoribanks — merchant
burgesses — living at the time.
(4) That the Joseph Marjoribanks made burgess in 1 602 was the Joseph
from whom Lord Tweedmouth deduces his descent.
Let us take these points seriatim : —
(i) " In the light of a very much larger range of evidence " than I have as
yet printed — in fact, throughout "documents and records" extending from 1550
to 1603, and in which, as Lyon truly observes, this "James, son of the Clerk
Register," figures largely — he is on no single occasion described as a " merchant,"
" merchant burgess," or " burgess." It is for Lyon, then, in the face . of this
overwhelming evidence/" to bring forward "satisfactory proof" of his wholly
unsupported assumption.
(2) This assumption is absolutely disproved by the fact that the " James
Marioribanks " of this entry is described as " umquhile " (Le. already dead) on 1 3
July, 1602, whereas James Marjoribanks, son of the Clerk Register, occurs (being
then alive) in a sasine of 3 Aug. 1603.
(3) Here again, " in the light of a much larger range of evidence " than I have
as yet printed, there are no less than eight entries of James Marjoribanks sitting
in each other's laps. And of the several " Jameses " to whom they refer, three (if
not four) were certainly merchant burgesses.
The Marjoribanks Eight.
(1) James, son of the Clerk Register (see page 64).
(2) James, admitted burgess 1 5 1 6 (see page 66).
(3) James, merchant burgess; will dated April 1569, proved 2 Feb. 1581
(see page 64).
(4) James, son of Symon, admitted burgess 1563 (see page 66).
" (5) James (No. 2), father of Michael, who was admitted-burgess -1564
(see page 66).
(6) James, father of Symon, who was admitted burgess 1571 (see
page 67).
(7) James, father of Joseph, who was admitted burgess 1 602 (see
page 67).
(8) James, notary public, living 1583, son of James, No. 2, and brother of
Michael, No. 5.
We have seen how Lyon, rashly trusting that I could not discover yet
another James, staked his proof on that vain hope, and boldly " went it blind."
That hope having now failed him, he finds himself with six " Richmonds in the
field." Unlike the Lyon Office, I have nothing to fear from the most searching
(') See, for instance, Protocols, Alex. King, vol. ii., fo. 63, 17 Oct. 1550; vol. iii., fo. 51, 12 March 1551 j
vol. iii.. fo. 62, 11 April 1552 ; vol. iv., fo.6, 14 Jan. 1552 ; vol. v., fo. 75, 14 April 1556; A. Guthrie, vol. v.,
fo. 48, 4 Feb. 1578-9; vol. vi., fo. 171, 7 June 1581 ; vol. ix., fo. 42 (and Minute Book, vol. i.) 18 April 15S6;.
vol. xi., fo. 142, 18 Oct. 15S9; vol. xviii., fo. 162, 3 Aug. 1603.

98 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

inquiry; for the clearer the facts arc made, the stronger will my case appear. I
shall therefore on the earliest occasion attempt, though Lyon may deem it
" ultroneous," to set forth the various Marjoribanks pedigrees constructed from
the evidences in my possession.
(4) I have said that this assumption is " capable of disproof absolute ;" and
I think that even Lyon will admit that this expression is not one whit too strong
when I confront him with the following abstract : —
" 1 S97i December 9th. Sasine in favour of Joseph Marjoribanks, merchant burgess of Edin
burgh, and Mariote Symsoun, his spouse, etc., dated at Edinburgh and Kinghoru 31 July
I597-" — Protocols, A. Guthrie, vol. xv., fo. II.
Now this Joseph we identify with the Joseph of the " proved and registered "
pedigree, not " gratuitously," as the Clerk Depute might suggest, but by the fact
of his having " Mariote Symsoun " (see the pedigree, ante, p. 64) for " his spouse."
Here, then, we have her husband, Joseph Marjoribanks, documented " merchant
burgess "in 1597, while the Lyon Office pedigree rests, as we have seen, wholly
and solely on that famous entry alleged to record the admission of this Joseph as
a merchant burgess five years later (1602). I have already been reluctantly
compelled to split Lyon's original and only James. The same fate must now
befall his original and only Joseph ! Which, then, of these Josephs will Lyon
adopt when he again shifts his line of defence ? Will he stand by the Joseph
who is "satisfactorily proved to be son of James (by the 1602 admission entry),
but who was therefore not the husband of Marion Symson ? (for he had been
admitted by 1597;) or will he stand by the Joseph who was her husband, but
who was not the Joseph, son of James, admitted in 1602 ? Let us leave him
impaled on the horns of this dilemma, and exclaiming — to adapt — in the well-
known lines — " How happy could I be with either,
Were t'other dear Joseph away ! "
I have had occasion to point out that those " popular genealogists," so un
luckily denounced by Mr. George Burnett, have evolved, by the "art and
mystery " of the Lyon Office crucible, some curiosities in natural history. Their
" younger brother of a posthumous son " is, they now tell us, only to be num
bered among their " guesses more or less probable," but they cannot deny that
in this Joseph they have produced a " proved and registered " being, who would
be technically described as a "xiphodyme" monster, that is, two individuals merged
in one. That there may be no doubt on this point, I append an analysis of
" Joseph the Xiphodyme " — James Marjoribanks, merchant burgess, =
dead before 13 July, 1602. I
Joseph Marjoribanks, =. Marion Symfson. Joseph Marjoribanks, made burgess 13 July,
merchant burgess before

31 July, 1597, being so
styled in sasine of that
date. From whom Lord Tweedmouth
is admittedly descended.

1602.
" This is the Joseph who is satisfactorily proved
to be son of James, both having been merchant
burgesses of Edinburgh." (Lyon Clerk Depute.')

I leave my readers to imagine what effect this discovery will produce on
Mr. Burnett, and trust I may be pardoned for relieving the tedium of a necessarily

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 99
dreary article by some singularly appropriate lines from Barham's " Black
Mousquetaire." ' '  painting's an art I confess I am raw in,
The fact is I never took lessons in drawing,
Had I done so, instead
Of the lines you have read,
I'd have giv'n you a sketch, should have fill'd you with dread !
G  B  , Esquire squatting up in his bed,
His hands widely spread,
His complexion like lead,
Ev'ry hair that he has standing up on his head,
As when, Joseph Marjoribanks first catching his view,
Now right, and now left, rapid glances he threw,
Then shriek'd with a wild and unearthly halloo,
' Mon Dieu I -J la deux !
'By the Pope there are two 1 ! ! '"
Such, then, is the value of Lyon's " most stringent and satisfactory proof."
He has committed himself to the statement that this famous burghal entry refers to
his James and to his Joseph, and consequently proves them to be father and son.
I have now proved by record evidence that it does not refer either to his James or
to his Joseph, and that he has therefore failed to adduce for the descent he has
compiled one shred or tittle of proof. It is true, that while desperately clinging
to this entry in " the burghal records," the sole and slender foundation, as we
have seen, on which his structure rests, he affects, with a ghastly smile, the tone
of easy confidence, and would imply that he has merely selected it by chance from
the abundant evidence in the Lyon Office. But if this is the worth of his show
"proof," what is likely to be the value of his "others "? "For this reason," forsooth,
"among others!" Nay, Lyon, but this is indeed a well-worn rhetorical device.
I have now submitted the alleged " proof," as I proposed, to a " strict exami
nation." It has been fairly and fully tried in the balance, and all unbiassed
genealogists will, I am sure, admit that it has indeed been found wanting.
But I am prepared to go even further than this. On Lyon, as I have said, must
rest the burden of proving the statements in the pedigree he has compiled ; but
lest he should repeat that " at least " they cannot be disproved by me,"1 I am com
pelled to renew what he is pleased to term my "unsuccessful crusade against the
Marjoribanks pedigree." I repeat, then, in the most unhesitating manner, that
the statement in "the proved and registered pedigree," that James, the son of the
Clerk Register, "died in or before 1581," is not only based on no proof whatever,
but is capable of disproof absolute. That disproof is afforded once for all by
the sasines of 1586, 1589, etc., 1603, referred to on page 97. And lest Lyon
should again recklessly assert that though his James is indeed to be found in a
burgh sasine subsequent to the date of death with which he has been consider
ately provided, yet that it is " not as alive at its date," I here append, for instance, an
abstract of the sasine of 3 Aug. 1603, not as the fullest, but as the latest, and
therefore the most striking : —
1603. August 3rd. "Sasine in favour of James Marjoribanks, son to Mr. Thomas Marjori
banks, his heirs and assignees. In a tenement lying in St. Mary's Wynd, pertaining to James
Marjoribanks, lawful son to the deceased Mr. Thomas Marjoribanks of Ratho, Clerk Register,
on resignation of the said Mr. Thomas Marjoribanks in favour of his said son James Marjori-
- banks and Cristine Cannye his spouse." — Proctocols, A. Guthrie, vol. xviii., fo. 162.
The position of these parties may be made clearer by a short chart pedigree,
deduced from the sasine : —
(') " Such disproof he (Mr. Foster) at least has not furnished."

100 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Thomas Marjoribanks of Ratho,
Clerk Register, etc. ==

(2) Thomas Marjoribanks, (3) James Marjoribanks (stated in the = Margaret Gray, married shortly
the resigner in the above "proved and registered" pedigree after 4 February 1 578-9. Living
sasine, admitted burgess to have died "in or before 1 581") 18 Oct. 1589, vide sasine of
19 March 1606= living at time of above sasine that date, where she is men-
13 August 1603. tioned as "sponsa," {N.B. not
"vidua.")
James Marjoribanks, = Christine Cannye.
"HatMake.,"admitted burgess 30 July 1606.
So much for the " proved and registered " death of James, son of the Clerk
Register. Now let us see what Lyon has to tell us about his wife or wives.
' ' The Clerk Register's son James was re-married (sic), not as Mr. Foster asserts (page 66) (')
after 15S1, but in 1578."
Such is the oracular utterance of Lyon King-of-Arms. It would have been
more prudent had he confined himself merely to contradicting my mis-statement;
for in venturing to substitute the correct date, he comes, as usual, to grief. If his
James were, as he confidently asserts, married in 1578, perhaps he will explain to
us how his modest spouse was "yet in her virginity" 4 Feb. 1578-9 (i.e. l$79)-
Vide sasine of that date, " Jacobo Marioribankis et Margerete Gray ejus spensa
futura in sua virginitate."
But " I wish it distinctly to be understood that the gravamen &> of my com
plaint against" Lyon King-of-Arms is not a mere inaccuracy of date (which
proceeding from such a quarter will hardly surprise the readers who have followed
me thus far), but the deliberate and unreserved assertion that "the Clerk
Register's son James was r_?-married," etc., etc.
" ^-married ! " Why Lyon has not only omitted in his " proved and
registered " pedigree all mention of this marriage with Margaret Gray, of which he
now writes as glibly as if it had been duly set forth in that unfortunate
production, but was not even able to assign one wife (much less two — or more)
to the James he had so ingeniously evolved. For on referring to the famous
pedigree we find that his father's wife is duly entered, and also the wife of his
suppositious son, while opposite his own name we find a most suggestive
blank. How then are we to account for this mysterious omission ? Lyon is pleased
to scoff at what he terms my " boast " that
" The evidence will, I trust, go far to show that I am more conversant with Scottish gene
alogy and the materiel necessary to construct this pedigree than the present authorities of the
Lyon Office " (page 62).
Is he now prepared to repeat that scoff? For behold h'm once more on the
horns of a dilemma ! Either he must confess that he was ignorant of this marriage,
and that therefore " I am more conversant with Scottish genealogy and the
matiriel necessary to construct this pedigree than the present authorities of the
Lyon Office," — or, if he maintains that he was aware of it, he lays himself thereby
open to the charge of deliberately suppressing a fact, which will prove to be
(') It is simply untrue that Mr. Foster asserts James to have " re-married " at all. In. the passage to
which Lyon refers (page 66), the words are "his marriage."
('-) " I wish it then to be distinctly understood that the gravamen of my complaint against Mr. Foster is
not," etc., etc. — Lyon King-of-Arms.

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY.

utterly subversive of his hypothesis, and which it was therefore a vital necessity
for him to keep, at all costs, out of sight. Snppressio veri suggestio falsi ! To
suggest the false descent required, it was imperative to suppress the fatal fact that
the only marriage to be discovered is that with Margaret Gray, subsequent to
4 February 1579. And why is this date so fatal? Because only sixteen years
after this (a«_V?-nuptial) date, namely, on the 28th Jan. 1595, occurs the baptism of
Chrystiane, daughter of Joseph Marjoribanks a) (and Marion Symsoun), the admitted
ancestors of Lord Tweedmouth. Now on Lyon's hypothesis this Chrystiane
would be grand-daughter of James Marjoribanks (son of the Clerk Register), and
yet we here find her baptized within sixteen years of her reputed grandfather's
only recorded marriage (or rather of the above _z«_V.-nuptial date). Moreover
independently ofthis evidence we find her father turning up in 1 597 as a husband
and a merchant burgess, when had he been a son of James and Margaret he
would at the oldest have been but a boy of seventeen !
But Lyon, finding that this awkward date has been ruthlessly dragged into
the light of day, and that it is no longer in his power to ignore either the date
itself, or its consequences, seeks refuge once more in his Protean tactics, and brings
forward the hypothesis of a double marriage, a fact hitherto not even hinted at.
The potent aid of the Lyon Office crucible is here again successfully invoked, and
by simply reversing the ingenious process by which two men, as we have seen,
are melted down into one, he places in that crucible a single marriage, and
triumphantly draws forth two ! But, joking apart, it is surely a most melancholy
and heart-rending fact, that the head of the ancient Lyon Office, in his dual
capacity as chief officer of Arms of all Scotland, and as a hitherto distinguished
member of the " Scottish faculty of advocates," should in his dire dismay have
compelled his better self to stoop to a non-forensic subterfuge so ignominious
and so self-destructive as this ; surely we have here the prototypal " Popular
Genealogist " of page 105.
" Identity of name forms a difficulty in the way of tracing some ramifica
tions of the Marjoribanks family ; but the difficulty does not extend to Lord
Tweedmouth's branch," as Lyon states with rare accuracy ; why then, may I
ask, has he made so egregious a failure in compiling this pedigree ? For, after
(to employ his own words) " making every allowance for mere obtuseness of
comprehension, it is impossible to exonerate him from the charge, of reckless
assertion," when he states that James Marjoribanks, the Clerk Register's son, had
any issue at all. The descendants of the Clerk Register can be traced without
any difficulty from the various sasines and other records ; but in no single docu
ment is there any mention of any issue of James Marjoribanks, son of the Clerk
Register. But there is, if possible, worse to come. Nemo repente turpissimns ! Sub-
1 The following extracts comprise the baptisms of all the children of Joseph Marjoribanks and Margaret
Symsoun, which occur in the city of Edinburgh parish register : —
1 595- Jan- 2S- Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, a daughter named Chrystiane.
1597- Oct- z3- Josephe Marioribankis, merchant; a daughter named Margaret
1600. Jan. 9. Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, a daughter named Jonet.
1602. Jan. 31. Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, a daughter named Isobell.
1604. Mar. 13. Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, a son named Josephe (Andrew Symsoun, merchant, witness}.
1606. Jan. 5. Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, a daughter named Marione.
1609! April 6. Josephe Marioribankis, merchant, and Marion Syme'soune, married , a daughter named Chrystine.
1610! Oct. 30. Joseph Maijoribanks, merchant, Marione Symsone, a dau. named Catharine.
161 2! Oct. 11. Joseph Marjoribanks, baillie, Marione Symsoun, a son named John.
1616 April 4. Joseph Marjoribanks, merchant, Marione Symsone, a daughter named Elizabeth.
Collect. n

102

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

sequent to the disingenuous and unworthy device which I have just unmasked
above, Lyon allows himself, in the teeth of the plainest evidence, to level at me
an accusation so incredibly reckless, as to prove not only that he has searched in
vain for any valid evidence against me, but that in default of such evidence lie
has not hesitated to forge a charge unscrupulously false. These I admit are
strong words, but how else can I fitly describe such a " fabrication " as the

following ?

Burnett on Foster.
" A word about Mr. Foster's new objections to the
recorded pedigree. In his 'Peerage' he admitted,
conformably to that pedigree, that Edward Marjori
banks of Hallyards, who married Agnes Murray in
1685, was father of Edward Marjoribanks of Hall
yards, who married Janet Loch in 1 7 10. His contention
now is that the two Edwards were one, who was
twice married. He has a sensational paragraph headed
'Disproof of the existence of Edward Marjoribanks the
younger,' under which he insists that the so-called
error is, connected with, and greatly aggravated by,
the specification of 1688 in the official pedigree as
the year of the younger Edward's birth. ' This date,'
he says, ' is a fabrication pure and simple,' and ' now
admitted by the Lyon Clerk Depute to be so.' The
reader who has followed me thus far will perhaps not
be greatly surprised to learn that this date of 16S8
has been added by Mr. Foster at' his own hand to
what he calls 'Pedigree No. 2.' It occurs in no
pedigree in the Lyon Office, registered or unregistered,
and in no printed account of the family, except Mr.
Foster's. If Mr. Foster is right in calling it a
'fabrication pure and simple,' this can only be so
in the sense of its being a fabrication of his own.
Putting out of view this ' fabricated ' date, the so-
called 'Disproof of the existence of Edward Marjori
banks the younger ' will be found to rest first on the
^.absence of any register of Edward's baptism, a sort
bf negative evidence to which persons conversant with
Scottish parish registers will not attach much value,
and secondly on a suggestion of motive."

Foster on Burnett.
"Edward Marjoribanks - Janet Loch of Drylaw."
of Hallyards, b. 1688 (Pedigree No. 2.)
Lyon, it will be seen, makes the deliberate charge
that "this date of 1688 has been added by Mr. Foster
at his man hand .... beinga fabrication of his own."
Now the pedigree containing the above statement (date
and all), was (as 1 distinctly stated at page 65) sup
plied by the Lyon Office to Lord Tweedmouth, etc.,
and IT is the "protoplasm " from which I transcribed
the date 1688, as Lyoii knows full well j I can per
sonally vouch that the date was on the pedigree
furnished by Lord Tweedmouth when I made my
transcript. It follows therefore that if a date has been
interpolated and since withdrawn from the pedigree,
that contemptible act must have been carried out wilh
the cognizance of Lyon's noble patron.
It will also be observed that in support of his asser
tion Lyon adds, as to this date 1688, " It occurs in no
printed account of the family except Mr. Foster's."
If this statement — this audacious statement — were
true, Lyon might indeed have some case, but I have
merely to refer him to Burke's "Peerage," 1882 edi
tion, page 1296, where he will find that Edward
Marjoribanks is similarly stated to have been born in
1688, and I happen to know that Sir Bernard Burke
derived his information from the same Lyon Ofiice
document from which I took this thorny date.
I repeat then that, with the exception of this worth
less date, which Lyon himself is now anxious to disown,
there is no evidence by which the Lyon-office Edward
can be brought into esse — if there be any, let Lyon
produce it, as Lyon alone was his creator.

(Note.') " The protoplasm out of which the date 1688
seems to have been evolved is a letter by Mr. Stodart in
answer to one by Mr. Foster, expressing an opinion
that 1688 might very probably be the date of the
younger Edward's birth. It surely exceeds the licence
usually accorded to 'special pleading' to convert a
private expression of opinion of an officer of the Lyon
Court into an official declaration by Lyon, and to
interpolate it in a tabular pedigree alleged to be
official."

This charge is made in the teeth of my explicit
statement (p. 68j that "as a date of birth was given"
(in the Pedigree as above) . ..." I wrote to ask
the Lyon Clerk Depute where I should find the entry
of baptism ' (i.e., proof for the 168S date given in the
pedigree). He replied not "that 16S8 might very
probably be the date," but that (I having asked him
for prooi of this date), it was " all but certain (!) that
his birth took place in 16S8 " (p. 68).

How, let me ask any candid reader, am I to deal with gentlemen who
indulge in such desperate tactics as these ? In the first place, the Lyon Clerk
Depute meets one of my statements with a flat denial, and when. I promptly
quote my original authority, he shirks replying, and retires behind his chief,
authorising him however " to say that he does not retract a line of it."
Lyon himself, in turn, assails another of my statements with an even more
offensive denial, and attempts to convict me by a deliberate assertion, which
fortunately (like his pedigree) is capable of " disproof absolute." Will he- receive
that disproof with similar official nonchalance, and blandly retort that " he does not
retract a line of it"?

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY.

103

We now come to what Lyon describes as the gravamen of his complaint

against me. Burnett on Foster.
Page 299. "I have, perhaps, said more than
enough about the objections to the officially recorded
pedigree, which I would have altogether abstained
from noticing had they stood alone ; it is graver matter
that has induced me to appear in print. I have already
said that one, and only one, Marjoribanks pedigree is
recorded in the Lyon Register. Mr. Foster prints
three separate pedigrees, which he designates Nos. 1,
2, and 3 ; and he deliberately asserts that all three
are recorded or officially authenticated in the Lyon
Register, and No. 3 at a later date than No. I. In
point of fact, No. I is the sole officially authenticated
pedigree. No. 2 is the pedigree in Burke's ' Peerage,'
111 which the clerical slip or misprint in the name of
the Balbairdie ancestor is made the most of as an
accusation against the Lyon Office, and the already
mentioned ' fabricated ' date of 1 688 introduced. No. 3
is a portion of a private manuscript of older date than
Sir Dudley Marjoribanks' (Lord Tweedmouth) applica
tion to have his pedigree recorded."
Page 301. " I wish it then to be distinctly under
stood that the gravamen of my complaint against Mr.
Foster is, not that he has endeavoured to discredit a
proved and recorded pedigree, but that he has set up
two other documents as proved and recorded pedigrees
which he knew not to be such, in order to discredit
the Lyon Office by pulling them to pieces."

Foster on Burnett.
The deliberate assertion in the margin is another
of Lyon's unaccountable inaccuracies, for the following
are the tides ofthe separate pedigrees in full : —
Page 64. "The following is the discredited portion
of the No. r * Genealogy of Sir Dudley Coutts Marjori
banks, Bart.' Recorded in the Lyon Office, Scotland
21 April, 1868." '
Page 69. " The following is the discredited portion
of the No. 2 • Genealogy of Sir Dudley Coutts Marjori
banks, Bart.* From the archives of the Lyon Office,
Scotland. Page 70. "The following is the discredited portion
of No. 3 'Extract of pedigree, Marjoribanks of Mar
joribanks, taken from Lord Lyon's account in Lyon
Office, Edinburgh,' by the Rev. George Marjoribanks,
February, 1882."
Lyon, as we liave seen, stales that "infallibility is
claimed by the Roman pontiff only," but what we ask
fa claimed for Lyon and his follower; surely from the
construction and defence of the Marjoribanks pedigree
it must be a monopoly of fallibh. constructions, fallible
disclaimers, fallible explanations, and fallible charges,
such at least are the tactics which are exposed on every
page of this article. As the above extracts a ford a
complete refutation of Lyon's misstatement, comment
would be " ultroneous."
To my criticisms on the pedigree of the "Balbairdie" branch Lyon retorts that
it merely consists of " guesses more or less probable ;" and yet, in the exuberance
of his imaginative faculty, he cannot refrain from hazarding what he would him
self describe as an " ultroneous " hypothesis. It is singular that he should
himself revel in what he denounces so sarcastically in others.

Foster's Hypotheses.
" Mr. Foster, however, though sensible of the flaw
in his objection as originally put; does not abandon it,
but endeavours to prop it up by a new hypothesis sug
gested by an entry in the Edinburgh Guild Register
m 1563 of a third James, son of Simon Marjoribanks,
on whom he prefers to fix the paternity of Joseph."
•' Mr. Foster may possibly have another hypothesis
ready, that some unknown Simon, and not the Simon
whose will was confirmed in 1583, was father of this
third James."

Burnett's Hypotheses.
"Mr. Foster adduces evidence that Thomas the
second of Ratho was a posthumous child, and argues
that inasmuch as no posthumous child could have a
younger brother, he has triumphantly demolished the
official averment that Balbairdie has become repre
sentative of Marjoribanks of that ilk. Has Mr. Foster,
it may be asked in passing, ever heard of such a phe
nomenon as twins ? 
" Balbairdie's chieftainship of his family is however
by no means bound up with the hypothes:s ofa twin
birth. Various dates and documents, of which the
compiler of the tentative pedigree was evidently not
in possession, strongly suggest the simpler explanation
that John Marjoribanks of Balbairdie was brother of
the Thomas of Ratho who was alive in 1639, and that
Thomas of Balbairdie inherited the family represent
ation as successor to his uncle. But the use which
has been made ofa certain date suggested in a letter
of the Lyon Clerk Depute renders it here incumbent
on me to add that, however probable this hypothesis __
may seem, I am not answerable for it as an official
utterance." Here, then, Lyon in his rich fancy presents us with two original hypotheses.
That of " twins " is singularly audacious in face of the extract I have already
printed, but which I may here again adduce : — -
"30 May 1551. Gift by the Queen in similar terms to the same, but mentioning that the child of
John, now born, is Thomas Marjoribaoks." Register of Privy Seal, vol. xxiv., foi. 68.
The other hypothesis is based on a somewhat free use of the crucible ; for whereas

104 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
in the Marjoribanks pedigree, " Balbairdie " figures as younger brother of our
posthumous Thomas, Lyon, by " guesses more or less probable," lets him down,
in a twinkling, three generations, and makes him for the nonce, great-grandson
of his whilom brother !
So much for two of those ingenious hypotheses, which appear to form, at the
Lyon Office, an excellent substitute for "the most stringent and satisfactory
proof." But are we dreaming, or do we find such expressions in Lyon's paper as,
" Had the Lyon Office pedigree adopted the alternative of one Edward with two
wives" . . . . " Had the recorded pedigree called her Jean," etc. etc.? What
then becomes of " the usual careful investigation " — " the most stringent and
satisfactory proof," etc., etc.? Does it all resolve itself irito tlie adoption of an
alternative f Apparently, we fear, it indeed does in the hands of Lyon and his
merry men.
At page 72 I disproved the statement in the Lyon Office "proved and
registered pedigree" that Joseph Marjoribanks was son of Joseph Marjoribanks,
of Leuchie, and Margaret Sinclair, his wife," by quoting her testament dative; upon
this " proved and registered " blunder Lyon is prudently silent, doubtless in
confirmation of his statement that " Infallibility is claimed by the Roman Pontiff
only." Lyon's re'chauffe" of the Clerk Depute's criticisms on my volume of Scottish
Members need not detain me long. His attack is largely composed of references
to a few clerical errors contained in the annotations ; the most interesting of these
is the reference to the erroneous statement of the knighting of Sir Gilbert Eliott
at the battle of Scone, in 1643 by Charles I.; and as these gentlemen have
hitherto omitted to notify this error in Playfair, and more especially in the
Peerage of Lyon's latest protige", Sir Bernard Burke, I am compelled to conclude
that the Lyon Office has only recently acquired this information, and is eager to
make the most of its brilliant discovery. Lyon, with a singular recklessness, only
equalled by his contempt for accuracy, goes on to state that —
" In the concluding instalment ofthe * List,' issued subsequently to Mr. Stodart's criticism,
there is a prudent abstention from ' identifications ' or those genealogical notices which Mr.
Foster calls ' peculiarly ' his " own ground.' "
As Lyon elsewhere practically admits that the Scots M.P.'s was published at
the same time as Mr. Stodart's article, I fail to see the force of this statement. He
thus heedlessly contradicts his own admission, and it is, moreover, simply untrue
that there is any such abstention " in the concluding instalment." The reason for
Lyon's unworthy innuendo is furnished by his own context, for he has evidently
done his best to find further matter for adverse comment, and has signally failed
to discover more than the transposition of the word "knight," which he considers
startling "to an average well-educated Scotsman."
I now proceed to notice Lyon's passing remarks on the discredited baronetcies
at page 75. Lyon on Foster. Foster on Lyon.
"I trust there is no impropriety in my calling "Itrustthereisnoimproprietyinmycallingattention
attention to a small but telling indication of how little to a small but telling indication of how little he (Lyon)
he (Mr. Foster) is qualified to speak ex cathedrd on the is qualified to speak ex cathedrd on the subject. For as is
subject. A slight knowledge of the history of the house well known 'to an average well-educated Englishman,
of Grant would have sufficed to make him (Mr. Foster) the (sic) always follows and never precedes the word
aware that ' Sweton (') Grant,' which he accompanies or words objected to, and it here refers obviously to
(') " Lyon (ultrcneously) italicises Sweton for a set purpose."

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 105
Lvon on Foster. Foster on Lyon.
wilh a sic, was neither a misprint nor an error of Mr. the words ' recorded by,' calling attention to the fact
Stodart's, the unusual name Sweton (from the classical that Mr. Stodart states the arms to have been ' re-
Suetonius) being notoriously prevalent in this branch corded by' Sweton Grant himself, instead of by the
of tlie Grant family." Lyon Office. Here Lyon is again convicted of that
desperate and reckless misrepresentation, in which, to
use his own words, ' he is too prone to indulge.'
Lyon winds up his article with some complimentary remarks relative to the
Peerage I have compiled, and adds, " His competition with Sir Bernard Burke
has had the wholesome result of stirring up Ulster King-of-Arms to improve
very greatly his annual publication." This " ultroneous " reference to Ulster
gives me the opportunity of reminding Lyon that "misfortune makes strange
bedfellows," and of reprinting some of Lyon's anonymous criticisms — forcible, it
will be seen, and most conscientious — on the works of his friend Sir Bernard Burke,
one of which he is now pleased, in his new-born enthusiasm, to describe as " the
best work of its kind " (!) My readers, after studying the following remarks, will
doubtless be prepared duly to enjoy the sight of Lyon lying down with Ulster.

Popular Genealogists; The Art of Pedigree Making. Edinburgh: Edmonston
and Douglas. 1865. (Mr. Burnett was appointed Lyon, King-of-Arms
1866, and compiled the Marjoribanks pedigree 1868.)

" The volume (Burke's Peerage) opens very properly
with the pedigree of our most gracious Sovereign,
deduced from William the Conqueror, from Kenneth
Macalpine, and from the house of Guelph. The
attentive reader, on glancing over this genealogy,
will soon perceive that it is inaccurate in many
respects, and in particular that it is both redundant
and defective It is redundant in so far as it is
constantly digressing into remote and unimportant
lines of female descent, in order to drag in persons
in the ordinary walks of life who are descended from
royalty, and therefore, it is said, ' entitled to quarter
the royal arms.'
" To return to the Peerage and Baronetage, there
are a few instances in which the ' lineage ' of the
peerage families is tolerably correct, and two or three
in which it is extremely correct ; but unfortunately
these are exceptional cases. Confusion and blundering
are the more general rule, without even an attempt to
preserve consistency in error. I take Scottish instances
in preference, partly because they seem even more
faulty than those of the sister kingdom, and partly
because I have had larger opportunities for testing
them. An average example, not worse than many
others, is the pedigree of the Polwarth family. Lord
Polwarth is the representative of the family of Scott
of Harden, a very early cadet of the house of Scott.
The representative of the male line, progenitor of
Buccleuch, on marrying the heiress of Murdochstone,
in the thirteenth century, altered the original arms,
the stars and crescent, by incorporating with them the
Murdochstone bend, the old Scott coat being retained
by the house of Harden, who branched off prior to the
Murdochstone marriage : —
'An aged knight to danger steel'd.
With many a mosstrooper came on ;
And azure in a golden field,
The stars and crescent graced his shield,
Without the bend of Murdieston.' — Scott.
"The poet is fully bome out in this matter by the
prosaic testimony of seals and charters. The Buc
cleuch succession went in the seventeenth century
through an heir-female, Anne Duchess of Buccleuch,
to her son by the attainted Duke of Monmouth, from
whom the ducal houseof Buccleuch are now descended,

and "are therefore not paternally Scotts. The male
representation of Buccleuch passed to the latest cadet,
Scott of Howpaisley, afterwards of Thirlestane, from
whom descended Lord Napier, and all the various
Napiers who have deserved so well of their country,
who are all paternally Scotts. So long as a male
descendant of the Thirlestane branch is in life, or any
. male descendant of Sir Richard le Scot and the Mur
dochstone heiress, the Harden Scotts can never claim
the male representation of Buccleuch. Sir Bernard
Burke, however, makes Lord Polwarth the heir-male
of Buccleuch, and accomplishes this by putting forth
Thirlestane as a cadet, not of Buccleuch, but of
Harden, and assigning him for ancestor James, fourth
son of Sir Walter Scott of Harden, who 'lived in the
time of James VI. ' Yet in the Family Romance, p.
27 (in a narrative called ' The Heir of Thirlstane,'
which by the way is utterly apocryphal),* the heredi
tary loyalty of the house of Thirlestane is enlarged on
as already 'attested by deeds of arms of ages ' in the
time of James V.; and in the account of the Napier
family in the Peerage we find the Thirlestane branch
of the Scotts traced upwards— correctly enough — to
William Scott of Howpaisley, whose grandson Walter
fell at the battle of Pavia in 1525, more than forty
years before James VI. was born. I may state as the
result of my own experience, that anyone who seriously
attempts to use Burke's Peerage as a book of reference,
will find himself involved at every turn in similar
genealogical paradoxes.
" One of the most unsatisfactory features of this work
is its heraldry, more especially that of the Scotch
peerage families. j[ The verbal blazon and the wood
cut are continually at variance. The best known and
best established differences of cadets are, as a rule,
* A lady of Thirlestane is there fabled to have poisoned her
stepson, the heir of the fam'ly, on the day of his intended mar
riage ; whereupon her husband, tobeggar this wicked lady's son,
spent his whole means in embalming the body of the deceased,
and in funeral feasting of the m/*st riotous description. It can
easily be shown that this young laird survived his stepmother,
and married Mary Lyon of the Glammis family, who survived
him. and appears as pursuer in a reported case in the Court of
Session against her father-in-law. Sir Robert Scott. — Lyar, v.
Scotl. 25th Feb. '623, Durie, p. 50.
t The Lyon King-of-Arms and the Lyon Clerk Depute cor
rected the Scottish blazons for Foster's Peerage.

io6

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

ignored ; sometimes, however, they occur in the verbal
blazon, and not iu the engraving. A coat described as
quartered is in an immense number of instances repre
sented as a plain coat, one of the quarters, and very
generally the least important, being engraved. Occa
sionally the engraving gives all the quarters described,
but quite differently disposed from the description.
The artist has sometimes adopted an obviously wrong
reading of the blazon, as in the coat assigned to Sir
Charles M'Gregor, 'An oak-tree surmounted by a
sword in bend proper,' where the sword rises from
above the tree, surmounting it certainly, but not in the
heraldic sense. Exactly the same coat, crest, motto,
and supporters are now and then assigned to two
families but remotely connected with each other, as in
the case of the Duke of Athole and Earl of Dunmore,
the Earl of Morton and Sir R. P. Douglas of Carr.
To Lord Erskine, who in point of fact bears his
paternal coat of Erskine quartered with Marr, Stewart
of Kirkhill, and Fairfax, we find assigned the pure
coat of Comyn alone, the verbally described coat being
here identical with the engraved one. The same pure
coat of Comyn is given to the Earl of Buchan in the
engraving, but the arms described are his true family
arms. The Duke of Roxburghe's coat is Ker quartered
with Weapont [Vipont ?] in the blazon, and Ker quar-
_ tered with Innes in the engraving. Coats with their
quarters marshalled in so decidedly un-Scottish a
mode, that we are persuaded they never could have
had the sanction of the Lord Lyon, are in various
cases assigned to Scottish families ; an extreme instance
being the coat of Sir W. F. F. A. Wallace of Craigie,
with its nine quarters and three crests.
" Burke's Landed Gentry. The production of such a
book necessarily involves no inconsiderable amount of
labour, and it would be too much to expect that it
should not contain errors, particularly of omission.
But making every al.ow.ance for the difficulties of the
task, it is impossible to say that it has been executed
in a mode that reflects any credit on the head of the
Herald's College of Ireland.
"While the Peerage may be to a slight extent im
proving from year to year, the Landed Gentry is
deteriorating. The successive editions are marked by
a gradual disappearance of families of status and
historical repute, while their places are to a large
extent filled by persons whose sole connexion with
land arises from their having been purchasers of a
few acres in a country where their very names are
unknown. "The immense majority of the pedigrees in the
Landed Gentry, including more especially the Scottish
pedigrees, cannot, I fear, be characterized as otherwise
than utterly worthless. The errors of the Peerage are

as nothing to the fables which we encounter every
where. Families of notoriously obscure origin have
their veins filled with the bloodof generations of royal
personages of the ancient and mythical world. There
are not a few minute circumstantial genealogies of soi-
disant old and distinguished families, with high-sound
ing titles, which families can be proved by documentary
evidence never to have had a corporeal existence.
Other pedigrees contain » small germ of truth eked
out with a mass of fiction, in the proportion of Fal-
staffs bread and sack ; while an extreme minuteness
of detail is often combined with reckless disregard of
dates and historical possibilities. Some of the ana
chronisms encountered are quiteas bold as Mrs. Beecher
Stowe's assertion that Sir William Wallace received
his education at the Grammar School of Dundee."
These are no doubt strong assertions ; but to show the
reader that I am not overstating the facts, two examples
are here selected for analysis, out of a number which
I have examined with similar results ; the first may
serve as an illustration of the wholly, the second of the
partially fictitious pedigree, and each of them will, it
is believed, give the uninitiated reader a little insight
into the art of pedigree-making.
" The reader who has followed me thus far 'will
probably be of opinion that the works which we have
been examining are in no respect worthy ofthe present
condition of genealogical science; It is a remarkable
circumstance that side by side with the laborious and
critical genealogists there should have sprung up a set
of venal pedigree-mongers, whose occupation consists
in garbling truth, and inventing falsehood, — a calling
which they pursue with the most untiring assiduity.
But it is unfortunate indeed that the easy credulity of
Sir Bernard Burke should allow him to be led blind
fold by these obscure persons, whose most palpable
fictions he seldom shows the least hesitation in adopt
ing. Statements which would never otherwise have
obtained a moment's credit, have been allowed to go
forth with the imprimatur of the chief herald of
Ireland, on the strength of which they are relied on by
a large section of the public. In an essay on the
' Landmarks of Genealogy,' appended to the Vicissi
tudes of Families, Sir Bernard Burke includes in his
enumeration of repertories of trustworthy genealogical
information his own Peerage and Landed Gentry j and
both are profusely quoted in books circulating on the
Continent as well as in Britain. Year by year new
fictions, belonging not to respectable legend, but to
vulgar imposture, are obtaining general acceptance
on their authority ; it is therefore high time that the
public should be disabused of their faith in these
books." * Sunny Memories qf Foreign Lands, Letter v_L

In my capacity of a critical Peerage Editor, I have steadily endeavoured to
challenge and discredit the fabrications of those whom Lyon here denounces as
" a set of venal pedigree-mongers, whose occupation consists in garbling truth and
inventing falsehood," but I never for a moment imagined that the necessity
would arise of challenging a *' proved and registered " pedigree recorded in the
Lyon Office of Scotland by its present chief. " But it is unfortunate indeed," to
quote again from the above apposite remarks, " that the easy credulity of" a Lyon
King-of-Arms " should allow him to " enter, as he has done, in the records of the
Lyon Office a descent which has been shown to be totally devoid^ not only of
" most stringent and satisfactory proof," but even of any proof whatever. The
attempts which have been made to bolster up this most visionary descent have
only succeeded in eliciting further and more convincing evidence of its utterly
"reckless disregard of dates and historical possibilities." I submit that the

THE LYON OFFICE AND THE MARJORIBANKS FAMILY. 107
bombastic though impotent replies both of Lyon and of his Clerk Depute betray
a lamentable want, not only of evidence, but even of ordinary accuracy.
They boast that, in their Office, " many pedigrees are refused a place in
the Register of Genealogies, or are recorded with the earlier generations lopped
off." • Why then was this visionary Marjoribanks descent allowed to be solemnly
recorded ? Why were not " its earlier generations lopped off,'* as they have now
been by me ? It is a scandal that an English genealogist like myself, a volunteer
to boot, should be compelled, at no small expense and toil, to do the work of
the Lyon Office, owing to the negligence of its officials. A descent whicli has
successfully run the gauntlet of a " strict examination " by the Scottish Office, has
failed to impose upon an English amateur, who has proved himself "more con
versant with Scottish genealogy . , . . than the present authorities of the Lyon
Office," with all the records of Scotland at their back.
This controversy has now assumed so serious and formidable an aspect,
that my readers, and indeed the Scottish public, will doubtless agree with
me, that the whole transaction should be submitted to a searching investigation
before an impartial public tribunal. Surely this matter will not be allowed to
rest in its present state. Grave charges have here been made against a high
official. They are based on the irrefragable evidence of the public records of
Scotland, and the attempts to disprove these charges have signally and egregiously
failed. This being so, the moral is clear; nor could I express it more fitly than
in the words which Lyon himself borrowed from Leyserus as the motto for his
trenchant attack on the l&ches of Sir Bernard Burke : —
"Falsum committunt viri docti, qui hominibus de plebe nobilitat m, insignia et anti-
quatatem generis adfingunt. . . . Et potest profecto debetque mercenariorum illorum poena
tunc, quam reipublicse valde per eos nocitum, atque fides monumentorum et historia; turbata
est, ad ultimum supplicium proferri."
Savage Club, i November, 1882. J. FOSTER.

tOje peerage of Scotland anti tf)e fou^e of
3Ur&£u
IN dealing with the evidence on the Irish Peerage given before the late Select Committee,
we found that the most important point involved was the anomalous position of
"Ulster's Roll." We now turn to the evidence on the Scottish Peerage, selecting for
critical analysis, not the Union Roll, which is happily free from such peculiarities of
construction, but the views advanced by the Scottish authorities on the jurisdiction of
the House of Lords. We hope to show that these views were not a little coloured by
that "strong national partiality" of which Mr. Freeman speaks (0 as distorting the Scottish
historian's account of the " commendation " of his country to the English King in 924.
That the condition of the Scottish Peerage has been most unsatisfactoryfroni the time
of the Union, if not before it, is a fact too notorious to be gainsayed. Of this the reasons
are not far to seek. They were partly inherent, due, that is, to the complex nature of
Scottish dignities, and partly incidental, as arising, throughout its whole history, from the
want of a competent tribunal with absolutely undisputed jurisdiction over cases in which
its interests were involved. That this latter difficulty undoubtedly existed, even before
the Union of the realms, will be manifest from the conflicting evidence tendered by the
Scottish experts. That, since the Union, it has been experienced in practice and, in
addition, resented from sentiment, is clear not only from the consensus of Scottish Peerage
writers, but from the efforts now being made to remedy this admitted defect. As the
tendency of these efforts is to diminish, to a greater or less extent, the jurisdiction over the
Scottish Peerage now vested in the House of Lords, and to transfer it by legislative enactment
to a local Scottish court, we propose to glance at this change in the existing constitution,
and to show that the jurisdiction of the House of Lords is more strongly grounded than
Scottish patriotism could suffer the witnesses to admit.
Let us first examine the evidence on the Ante-Union jurisdiction in dignities.
The Lord Clerk Register. Lyon King-of-Arms.
(Rt. Hon. Earl of Glasgow.) (G. Burnett, Esq.) .(Eneas Mackay, Esq., LL.D.
156. Lord Ker. Is it within your 223. Chairman. Perhaps you will 535. Lord Balfour. If the Court
knowledge that, before the Union, favour the Committee with your of Session were discovered to have
cases of Peerage were decided by views as to the position of the Court jurisdiction, would there be an ap-
the Scotch Parliament, and not by of Session with regard to Peerage peal to the House of Lords ?
the Court of Session ? matters, first before the Union, and Yes.
There were decided by the Scotch secondly afterwards? 536. Where would you get that
Parliament the cases of Lord Sin- The Court of Session was founded right of appeal from?
dair and Lord Kincardine, the one in 1532. Prior to that there were The right of appeal was a much
before the institution of the Court two supreme tribunals, one of them controverted point before the Union,
of Session, and the other after- the King in Council, and the other but it was asserted in the Declaration
wards. the Lords Auditors of Causes, ap- and Claim of Right ; and since the
157. That proves that in Scotland, pointed by Parliament. This tri- Union, though not distinctly re-
before the Union, the House of bunal was to supersede both of ferred to in the Articles of Union,
Parliament decided Peerage cases them, and did supersede both of them there has been a right of appeal .. .
without reference to tlie Court of as the sole supreme judicatory in in all Scottish causes from the Court
Session? Scotland. of Session to the House of Lords.
Yes; it is quite possible to find 224. Lord Ker. Then these cases 537. You say it was a. controverted
cases decided sometimes in the one referred to by Lord Glasgow in point whether before the Union there
form and sometimes in the other ; answer to a question were previously was not an appeal to the King in
but there are enough of examples to to that ? Parliament fi-om tlie Court of Ses-
show that the conception that the Previously to that the Privy Coun- sion ?
House of Parliament was to judge cil and Parliament seemed to have Yes, before the Union.
in a peerage case was a part of the a sort of co-ordinate jurisdiction ;
old law and practice of Scotland. but what I am referring to is from
158. The Court of Session was 1532, from which date all causes
not the ultimate Court for the de- relating to dignities were exclusively
cision of Peerage cases iii Scotland under the jurisdiction of the Court
before the Union ? of Session. There are cases after
It was not. that date, in which Parliament and
the Privy Council have been applied
to, and they uniformly refused to act.
The two chief official authorities on the subject having thus contradicted each other's
evidence, the Committee are allowed to learn from a private individual that both assumptions
(') Norman Conquest, I. 570, etc.

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 109

are equally invalid, the point at issue having never_ been decided ! It is strange that our
neighbours across the border should so often make bf their historical antiquities a battle-field
on which to display their partisanship, not only against the Southron, but also against each
other. We may notice, in passing, that in support of his contention, Lyon handed in to the
Committee a list of the chief cases decided by the Session, " taken, when not otherwise
stated, from the records of the Court of Session and other public records" (231). That
officer deserves credit for collecting these cases from the original sources of information,
and it is most satisfactory to find that the instances he has selected are precisely those
chosen by Riddell, and that his description of them agrees singularly with the version in
that writer's pages. Out of the ten cases we select the following : —
1842. 1882.
Riddeix's Version. Lyon's Version.
Peerage Law pp *,— 17 Taken from the Records of the Court of Session
& > yf- 3 /• and other public records.
I. Morton. "The Session, the 29th March, 1542, 1. Morton. "Upon the 29th of March, 1542, the
at the instance of James, Earl of Morton, reduced a Court of Session, at the instance of James, 3rd Earl of
Charter of the Earldom of Morton by James V. in Morton, reduced a Charter of the Earldom of Morton
1540,.. . . which had passed, upon his forced re- of date 17 Oct., 1540, granted in favour of Robert
signation, in favour of Robert Douglas of Lochleven." Douglas of Lochleven, on the ground that the re
signation on which it passed had been made on com
pulsion."
5. Strathern. "The same tribunal, the 22nd. 5. Strathern. "In 1633 the Court of Session,
March, 1633, at the instance of the above monarch, at the instance of Charles'!., reduced the service of
reduced the service of William Graham, Earl of William Graham, Earl of Monteith, as heir of David
Strathern, as heir of David Stewart, Earl of Strathern Steward, Earl of Strathern (eldest son of the second
(eldest son of the second marriage of Robert IL), . . . marriage of Robert II.) and the patent or confirmation
together with the patent or confirmation of the same of the dignity granted in consequence of it, finding
by. his majesty, . . . while they found the status in the right to that Earldom to be in the King."
question to be in the King."
6. Oliphant. "Ann, his only child . . . pur- 6. Oliphant. " His daughter pursued a reduction
sued a reduction of the conveyance against Patrick in of her father's resignation before the Court of Session,
the Session. . . . The decision obtains the utmost when the presence, as a spectator, of Charles I., then
force and effect from the presence of Charles I., in in Edinburgh on the occasion of his coronation, was
the character of spectator (then in Edinburgh on the an'open admission by the King," etc.
occasion of his coronation)," etc.
The agreement, it will be seen, is perfect. Lyon, having handed in his list of Peerage
cases, was subsequently asked,
378. Could you name any cases, or give in a list of the cases which were so adjudged
as regards precedency ?
(Lyon.) "I am not sure that I have the materials by me to prepare a complete list, but
I could easily mention some of them," etc., etc.
Strangely enough, Riddell also has failed to compile any such list.
Turning now to the practice subsequent to the Union of the Realms, we would note
that its peculiarities are distinctly traceable to the previous history of the subject. It has
been seen from the evidence how hopelessly discordant are even now the views of the'
Scottish authorities on the supreme jurisdiction in dignities down to the time of the Union.
— the Lord Clerk Register contending that " the Court of Session was not the ultimate
Court" (158), Lyon, on the other hand, that it was "the sole supreme judicatory in
Scotland" (223), and Dr. Mackay, though himself holding that there was a right of appeal
from the Session to Parliament, admitting that " it was a much controverted point before
the Union " (436). It is undoubtedly due to this chaotic conflict that the question was so
carefully shirked in the Act of Union (1707). In the words of Hargrave, quoted by Dr.
Mackay, _
" It might perhaps have been con venient, at the Union, to have erected a forum for
deciding upon claims of Scotch Peerage, and also to have provided that the Crown should
summon the Peers of Scotland to an election of the sixteen by a writ to each Peer, which
indeed was the mode of summoning them to the Scotch Parliaments. But from some jealousy
or difficulty on this delicate subject, or from want of due advertence to it, neither of these
provisions was made, and the Scotch Peerage was suffered to take its chance under a direction
to assemble its members for a choice of the sixteen, by a proclamation of general summons.
Thus it was left to inference how, and by what authority, the claims of and controversies
about Scotch Peerages were to be adjusted."
The most marked peculiarity of Scottish Peerage practice was the admitted absence of
any precedent for claiming dignities by petition to the Crown. This, the recognized English
Collect. 0

"° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
practice, not being extended by the Act to Scotland, the practice to be adopted " was left to
inference," the grounds for that inference being the Scottish practice combined with the
provision in the Act of Union that the Peers of Scotland were to become Peers of Great
Britain, with all privileges thereto accordant save those of sitting and voting. _ It is clear, in
our opinion," that the intention at the time was not to make any violent change in the existing
system or systems, but frankly to recognize that petitions to the Crown were not consonant with
the national practice, and that the jurisdiction in Scottish dignities was merged or gathered
up in that ofthe British House of Peers, whether as succeeding to the Court of Session as
" the sole supreme judicatory," or to the Scottish Parliament as the ultimate Court of Appeal.
It was made abundantly clear by the Committee, whatever may be the national prejudices,
that the spirit ofthe Act, in making the Scottish Peers Peers of Great Britain, was directly op
posed to the determination of their claims by any purely Scottish Court. (J) The Crown and the
Court of Session being thus alike eliminated, there remained nothing but the House of Lords.
We shall hope to show that not only did they at once assume the jurisdiction which had
thus duly devolved upon them, but that there is a continuous catena of evidence for their
exercise of these special powers, and that their peculiar position as a judicatory in the
matter of the Scottish Peerage was not only of distinctly historic origin,, but is to be traced
even to our own days, running like a thread through their whole action, and colouring, even
unconsciously, every step which has been successively taken by the House.
The- Act of Union was only passed in 1707 and on the 22nd December in that year the
Lords resolved that " a list of the Peerage of Scotland as it stood on the ist May 1 767 "
should be laid before them.(2) Thirteen months later they asserted their right to determine
proprio motu claims of Scottish Peers to vote at the Election of the sixteen. The Duke of
Queensberry had been created Duke of Dover in the Peerage of England 26th May 1 708,
and the House resolved 21st Jan. 1708-9, that under such circumstances a Peer of Scotland
would lose his right to vote at the Election. (3)
The Duke's death, 6th July 1 7 1 1, enabled them to take an even harsher step, by resolving
that a Scottish Peer when created a Peer of England was not entitled to a writ of summons
in that dignity.(4) As the late Duke had taken his seat, they could not have so resolved in his
lifetime, there being for the moment no other Peer so situated, but they were now left free to
pass it, and so to prevent the Duke of Hamilton, created Duke of Brandbn 10th Sept. 17 n,
from taking his seat as such. These resolutions having been somewhat cursorily laid before
the Committee, it may be as well to supplement the evidence of Lyon.
205. (Chairman.) There have been from time to time several resolutions ofthe House of
Lords upon the subject of the Scotch Peerages and the right to vote ; can you enumerate
them? (Lyon.) " Yes, there are a good many of them. The first was a general resolution in 1708,0
.... and it was to the effect that a Peer of Scotland who had been made a Peer of Great
Britain, had no right to vote at the Elections. Then there was another which seemed curiously
in contrast with this ; the Duke of Hamilton had been made Duke of Brandon, and it was
found that, from holding this double position, he had no right to sit in Parliament. Then .
again, in 1793, there was a resolution framed, reversing entirely the resolution of 1708 in
regard to the Duke of Queensberry."
206. What is the nature of the resolution there ?
(Lyon.) " The effect of it was to find that a Peer of Scotland, who was a Peer of Great
Britain, had a right to vote."
207. In point offact, were these two resolutions passed in 1708 and 1711, excluding British
Peers, ever acted upon?
(Lyon.) " I think the resolution of 1 708 was acted upon for a considerable time_"
208. There was another resolution, was there not, that a Peer, holding the title ofa British
Peer was not entitled to vote at the Election of Representative Peers ?
(Lyon.) " There was an attempt to enforce the old resolution to that effect later. It seemed
to have fallen into disuse, and shortly before it was rescinded there was an attempt to
revive it."
Let us take the two resolutions separately. First, as to the resolutiou of 1709 (170S
apud Lyon). We might expect the Scottish authorities to tell us from their records how long
it continued in force. Fortunately, however, we can ascertain it for ourselves from the
Petition presented against the votes of Abercorn and Queensberry at the election of i79o.(6)
The petitioner; who was himself in the same ambiguous position, had refrained from voting
because, as he tells us, the original resolution was still in force, no attempt to disregard it
having been made till 1787, and it being then promptly checked. This statement at once
(>) Minutes, 271—276. (f) Lords' Journals. (s) lb. (*~\ Ib
(s) This date is hardly accurate. The resolution was not passed till 21st Jan. 1709. (f) Lords' Journals.

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS, in

disposes of Lyon's assumption that it had " fallen intodisuse," and that " there was an attempt
to revive it" (20S). On the contrary, it was not even challenged till 1787, when the Earl of
Abercorn and the Duke of Queensberry — having been created British Peers in August 1786,
and having as such forfeited their seats as Representative Peers, by resolution of 14th Feb.
1787 — must have attempted to vote at the consequent Election, for we find the House
resolving 18th May 1787 that the resolutions of 1709 should be transmitted to the Lord Clerk
Register " with injunction to him to conform thereto," (l) and again, 21 Ap. 1788, " that it is
the opinion of this House that the Lord Clerk Register and his deputies, acting at the Election
of the Scotch Peers, ought to conform to the resolution of this House, of which they have
had notice by order of this House." (2) It was the famous contested Election of 1790 that
finally brought the question to an issue. Kinnoul, who like Hamilton had received a British
Peerage in 171 1, petitioned the Lords as above, against the votes of Abercorn and Queens
berry being counted, and the Committee thereon reported in favour of the Judges being
consulted as to whether Peers so situated were debarred by any Acts from voting. (3) The
House, tenacious of its privileges, was evidently unwilling to expose its decisions to reversal
at the hands of the judges, and preferred to retrace its own steps by resolving on division <5 th
June 1793, that the votes of Abercorn and Queensberry were good.(*)
Secondly, as to the resolution of 171 1. This resolution was harshly confirmed in the
case of the second Dake of Queensberry and Dover, whose petition for his writ was refused
by the Chancellor, and remitted to the Lords 18th Dec. i7i9.(8) His case was arguedbefore
the House in Committee 12th Jan. 1720, and two days later the motion " that the" Duke of
Dover has a right to a writ of summons to Parliament " was negatived on division. (6) The
Dukedom of Dover became extinct at his death, 22nd Oct. 1778, and the question was not
again raised till the fifth Duke of Hamilton and Brandon petitioned for his writ as Duke of
Brandon in 1 782. The House having thereupon consulted the judges as to whether Peers of
Scotland were debarred, as had been assumed, from receiving Patents of British Peerage,
resolved (6th June) that the Duke of Hamilton was entitled to his summons as Duke of
Brandon. (7) The original resolution had been therefore in force for seventy-one years.
But to return to the action of the Lords. We have seen how effectively they asserted
their rights in 1707, 1709, and 1711. We shall now see how promptly they enforced them
in the specific matter of Peerage claims. For this we would refer to the Dingwall case, a
precedent so remarkable that we may scarcely be believed when we state that it was not even
alluded to in the proceedings of the Select Committee. We cannot wonder that the Scotch
witnesses should have been anxious to keep it out of sight, but we do wonder that not a
member of the Committee could be found to question them on the subject. On the 2nd
March 1710-n, " The House being informed that his Grace James Duke of Ormond hath the title of Lord
Dingwall in the north part of Great Britain called Scotland, and therefore ought to be placed
in the list ofthe nobility of that kingdom, immediately after the Lord Madderly, — It is ordered
by the Lords spiritual and temporal assembled, that it be, and is hereby referred to the
Lords Committee of Privileges to consider thereof, and report their opinion thereafter to thie
House." '
But a difficulty having arisen as to the precedence of the title, the Duke deferred his
claim till he had obtained the necessary evidence, and the next entry is 7 th July 17 14, when
it is recorded that
" Some papers relating to the precedency thereof are ready to be produced at such time as
the House shall please to appomt."
The Committee, having taken the requisite evidence, reported in favour of the title being
inserted in the Roll, with precedency just before that of Cranstoun, — "which report being
read by the Clerk was agreed to by the House."
The Crown, it will be seen, is ignored throughout, is not petitioned, does not remit.
Moreover this decision is not of the nature of advice, asked for by the Crown, and tendered
to it for confirmation^8) but was a decree of the House, based solely on the opinion of its
Committee, to whom it had proprio motu referred the subject, and affecting the Scottish
Peerage directly, without the intervention of the Sovereign. Yet this decision was not

(') Lords' Journals. (2) lb. (f) Ib. &Ib. Q) Ib. (*)Ib. (f) Ib.
(") According to a famous passage in Cruise (Dignities, p. 598), "The resolutions of the House of Peers in
claims to dignities, upon a reference from the Crown, are merely for the purpose of information, — nor can they
be considered as judgments in any sense of the word." But this refers to the English practice

ii2 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
questioned, and the Barony of Dingwall, but for the 1715 attainder, "would have devolved,"
in Riddell's words, " to the' present (1842) Earl Cowper, the heir-general of his grace.(x)
Had this instance been within Lyon's knowledge, it would surely have influenced the
following answer : —
383. From your knowledge ofthe law,- was any decision given by the Committee of
Privileges in a Peerage case supposed in Scotland to be of any validity before it had met with
the approval of the sovereign to whom it had been first referred by petition ?
Lyon. " I do not think it ever was, either in Scotland or in England."
There, however, unrescinded, this decision remains on the Lords' Journals, forming as
such a valid and wholly unquestioned precedent. And here we must reluctantly differ ...
toto from Riddell when he indignantly asserts that,
" The first attempt in England to have a Scottish Peerage claim discussed ... was most
irregular and exceptionable, . . .' in manifest dereliction of received English law and practice,
as they had no authority or sanction from the sovereign .... In these circumstances therefore
this case can form no just or proper precedent." (Peerage Law, p. 28S.)
Now there is no point on which Riddell insists more strongly than that " the Crown from
a remote period had demitted the Peerage jurisdiction" in Scotland,(*) that "in Scotland . . .
the old prerogative of the Crown in judicial matters has been long foreclosed and obsolete,
and certainly lost and superseded in respect to the Peerage cognisance." (3) _ " We now," he
adds, " further discover likewise the incompetency of a reference or delegation by the King
ofa Scottish Peerage claim, upon the petition of a party, to the House of Lords. (?) In his zeal,
• therefore, this great advocate loses sight of his own contention, and while maintaining that a
reference from the sovereign to the lords would he illegal and invalid, the Crown having
inherited no cognizance in. the matter, yet denounces the Lords' procedure as " most irregular
and exceptionable," because not authorised by a reference from the sovereign ! Nay, he even
condemns their action as "in manifest dereliction of English law and practice," while
persistently and successfully asserting the principle that such law and practice could not apply
to Scottish claims of Peerage ! The view which Riddell would not grasp, (though it must
have been that, as we maintain, which was held at the time,) was that, while recognizing the
validity of the Scottish system, the Lords deemed the peculiar jurisdiction of the Court of
Session in dignities to have duly devolved upon themselves now that the Act of Union had
altered the status of the Scottish Peers.
So far,, then, the distinction had been carefully preserved between the English and
Scottish law and practice in Peerage claims ; the former requiring a petition to the sovereign,
to be followed by a reference to the Lords for advice, the latter excluding the sovereign
wholly, and rendering the House, as the supreme court, directly cognizable of the matter.
Clearly then, in tracing the Lords' jurisdiction in cases of Scottish Peerage, we have no right
to limit it, as did the Scottish witnesses(5), by a crude application of the English principle, —
" erroneously applying which principle to Scotland, and supposing that the same law and
practice yet obtained in that county, the English government have evidently been further
intuced to enforce them also in the case of claims to Scottish dignities." (Riddell, Peerage
Law. p. 321.)
On what occasion was this principle first thus erroneously applied ?
(Lyon.) " In the Scotch peerages such a procedure " (i.e. by petition to the Sovereign)
" did not exist before, or for some time after the Union." (276.)
Let lis define more accurately this " some time after." The date of the first precedent
is so important as to be familiar to all students of the Scottish Peerage. In 1723 — 16 years
after the Act of Union — the Somerville claim was referred, upon petition, more Anglico, by
the Sovereign to the Lords. (6) In the same year they similarly decided the case of Colvil of
Culross. Yet, strange to say, these essential precedents were not even alluded to by the Scottish
witnesses !
(') Peerage Law, p. 289. It has since so devolved by the reversal of the attainder in 1871.
(2) Peerage Law, p. 318. (8) Ib. p. 321. (*) Ib. p. 320.
(5) 274. (Chairman.) " I do not understand that as the law now stands, you dispute that, if contested, the
right can only be determined at this moment by the House of Lords ?
(Lyon.) " It is determined by petition to the Queen, the House of Lords only advising the Queen under a
reference!' 534. (Dr. Mackay.) " The Committee of Privileges derives ils jurisdiction, as I understand ii,from the
reference ofthe Sovereign as' its immediate origin."
p) Riddell's Peerage Law, pp. 289, 303, 348.

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE. HOUSE OF LORDS. 113

3S0. Can you mention some of the first instances of claims to peerage upon tho Union Roll
being remitted to the Housi- of Lords ?
(Lyon.) '' The first instance of a peerage which was upon the Union Roll being claimed in
the now usual way, and remitted to the Flouse of Lords, was the case of Eric Sutherland
claiming to be Lord Duffus in 1734."
381. By whom was ic thus remitted to the House of Lords ?
" By the Sovereign."
382. It was on account of a petition being made in the first place to the Crown who referred
it to the House of Lords ?
• "It was."
As it is clear from the context that the object of the Committee was to elicit the date at
which this vital innovation was first introduced in Scottish Peerage claims, it will be seen
that these answers convey a wrong impression, by implying that the procedure by petition
and remit, so bitterly resented by the champions of the Session, was not introduced till 1734,
i.e., twenty-seven years after the Act of Union, instead of, as was the case, sixteen. We venture
to think that the witness quibbled in taking advantage ofthe words "upon the Union Roll,"
that point being obviously wholly immaterial to the important question at issue. Moreover
Duflus was actually not on the Union Roll when claimed, having been expunged therefrom in
consequence of the attainder of 17 15. The claim therefore in this case, just as in those
of Colvil and Somerville, was that the title should be inserted in the RolL Why, then,
were the two latter ignored by Lyon ? But the feature to which we would invite attention
is that the initiatory step in the Somerville case was evidently prompted by the conviction,
even among the Scottish Peers, that the direct jurisdiction in Scottish dignities had become
vested in the House of Lords. Again quoting Riddell's own words, as those of our most
formidable opponent,
"In 1721, the Marquis of Tweedale, an influential nobleman, and afterwards chief
Secretary for Scotland, protested at an election of the sixteen Peers, that the vote of James
Somerville of Drum, as Lord Somerville, should not be admitted, until lie had established his
' right to the dignity in the House of Peers." (Peerage Law, p. 289.)
We shall find that this very formula was rigidly followed, not only forty years later, in the
resolution of 1761, but even a hundred years later, in that of 1822. But though this special
right of cognizance, if at times latent, was thus jealously preserved by the Lords, there now
arose by its side a prescriptive, but originally unconstitutional, practice of claiming Scottish
dignities by petition to the Crown. This encroachment, which Riddell justly denounces as
wholly unwarranted by law, was here effected by George II., through Lord Townshend's
agency, on the false analogy of the English practice.
" It cannot, however, be disputed, that, under the authority of Government, the new form
of claiming Scottish honours by a petition to, and reference from, the Crown has been long
adopted. Motives of public expediency, possibly, seconded too by the inclinations of the
Scottish Peers, may have further upheld the practice ; but whatever may be said in behalf of
its conceived advantages, .... mere expediency is not law, nor may here relevantly rule."
(Peerage Law, p. 305.)
It must be here repeated, at the risk of being wearisome, that the jurisdiction in Scottish
dignities having unhappily been " left to inference," by the Act of Union, Jiad naturally
fallen to the House of Lords, as the forum which, under the peculiar circumstances, could
show by inference the best claim. But Riddell skilfully obscured the question by assuming
that they evolved their jurisdiction, as ordinaries, in this matter from that which, as "Peerage
advisers and not judges,'^1) they possessed in English cases. This being assumed, he easily
proves that they here grossly exceed their powers — " even supposing, as I conceive to be
untenable, that these (Scottish Peerage claims) were in pari ca su with £nglish."(2) But it was
precisely because they were not in pari casu that the Lords assumed these peculiar powers,
the very fact of their acting as ordinaries proving conclusively that these powers were, in
their opinion, derived from the Scottish, and not from the English, practice....
Riddell, however, is not only justified in regarding the procedure by petition and remit
as an innovation, but is doubtless right in attributing its introduction to the concurrence of
" motives of public expediency," with " the inclination of the Scottish Peers," and also, we
. may add, with the interests of the crown.
"We would now glance at the salient instances in which the Lords continued to assert
their rights even after the introduction of this parallel procedure. We find an order of die
House 1 2th June 1739, .

(') Peerage Law, p. 300. (") Ibid.

*'4 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA. -
" requiring them (the Lords of Session) to make up and Uy before this House a roll or list of
the Peers of Scotland at the time of the Union, whose Peerages are still existing, and to state
as far as they shall be able in such roll or list the particular limitations of such Peerages. ( )
This "order" should be carefully compared with the parallel action of the Irish House
in i778.(2) * " Resolved .... that Ulster King-of-Arms should be ordered to lay before the Lords
.... a correct list of all the Peers and Peeresses in their own right of this Kingdom, as
far as he can prepare the same," etc., etc.
The comparison will suggest some curious reflections on the status of the Court of
Session. Passing to 1761, we find the House, on the 6th of March, empowering the Committee
of Privileges to make up "a list of the Peers of Scotland whose Peerages are still continuing,
and to "-summon all proper persons before them.(3) Ten days later the House confirms the
committee's report, summoning .the assumers of the titles of Stirling, Borthwick, Kirk
cudbright, and Rutherford, to appear before them and justify their assumptions.(4) Similar
summonses were subsequently addressed to the claimants of the titles of Wigtown and
Menteith. (s) This remarkable step, taken wholly proprio motu, and enforced without any
authority from the Crown, disposes effectually of the Lord Advocate's argument in the
Oxenfurd case (i733),(6) and of the similar contention advanced by Lyon in his evidence
before the Committee : —
272. Do you not consider that one of the great privileges of the Peers of this country is that
there is no court, or anything which can decide as to their rights, except the House of Lords
itself? (Lyon.) "Those privileges, which the Scotch Peers acquired by the Act of Union, were, no
doubt, subject to the jurisdiction of the House of Lords ; but I think that the question whether
a person who is merely claiming a Peerage is or is not a Peer, is a different matter, and is a
matter which is certainly not directly cognizable by the House of Lords, and which has never
been supposed to be so."
But the Lords went further than this. On successive occasions they ordered the parties
who had so assumed the titles, and had not obeyed the summons to make good their claims,
to lay down those titles and to desist from voting. And this again they did proprio motu.
We next come to the contested Election of 1790. The petitions against votes given at
this election involved a series of decisions on certain claims to titles which lasted some three
years. No vote petitioned against was admitted as good till the Peer who gave it had, in
Lord' Tweedale's words anent the Somerville case (1721), "established his right to the
dignity in the House of Peers." Here again, in direct contravention of the Scottish theory,
we find " the right to the Peerage " (involved in the right to vote) decided as exclusively by
the Lords, as in the original Dingwall case, without any petition to, or remit from, the Crown.
The Ochiltree claimant alone endeavoured to shift the jurisdiction, by a simultaneous petition
and remit, but merely with the curious result of having his two claims tried together by the
Peers, who decided his claim to the dignity on the authority of the Sovereign, and his claim
to vote on their own L But the five cases of Moray, Napier, Belhaven, Newark, and Lindores,
were severally tried by the Lords in their " exclusive capacity," (7) on their merits as peerage
claims. They involved, that is, the right to the dignities, the decision being avowedly based
on the evidence as to the right to the dignity in each case.(8) It has been maintained, it is
true, in a recent work, that the Lindores decision affected only the vote, and not the dignity,
and that " the grounds on which it proceeded " are not known. Both of these assumptions,
however, may be disproved by reference to Riddell. It is notorious indeed that Moray and
Napier are held to this day under the decisions on this occasion, though the Moray decision
has been denounced, by Riddell and others, as unjust. Here, therefore, we must again refer
to Lyon's answer : — :
383. From your knowledge of the law, was any decision given by the Committee of
Privileges in a Peerage case supposed in Scotland to be of any validity before it had met with
the approval of the Sovereign, to whom it had been first referred by petition ?
(Lyon.) " I do not think it ever was, either in Scotland or in England."
This right of the Peers to decide claims of Peerage (through claims to- vote), on petitions
addressed directly to themselves, and without any reference from the Crown, is beyond
(>) Lords' Journals. (2) See p. 78, ante. (3) Lords' Journals. (f) Ib. (s) Ib.
(f) " That there was a great difference between the privilege of Peers that were acknowledged to be such,
and the right- to the Peerage  That they (the Lords) hold no original jurisdiction in any matter of right
whatever." (Riddell's Peera-'e Law, p. 297.)
O Riddell's Peerage Law, p. 934. (") lb., pp. 780-808, 926-7, 934-3 ; 815-818; 835-847; 777-9 ; 779-S0.

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 115
dispute. They had, for instance, struck out the vote of the Rutherford claimant on the
petition of Lord Dumfries, against whom it had been recorded in 1 787 ^(!) and so late as 1832,
when the Stirling claimant had been allowed to vote, they referred to their Committee of
Privileges a petition addressed to them by the Marchioness of Downshire, against his being
allowed to vote or assume the dignity. In this right of petition there was a recognised
remedy against the grievance, so soon as it became practical ; i.e., when a' disputed vote
turned an election. Whether the Scottish experts are ignorant of this 'remeid,' or have
confused it with the distinct right oi protest, Dr. Mackay, at least, seemed strangely 'at sea'
in his evidence. 592. ... Is there any instance within your knowledge of a vote being tendered and
received without protest, the person voting having been subsequently proved not to have
been the proper holder of the title ?
(Dr. Mackay.) " That, I understand, occurred with regard to a claimant of the Stirling
Peerage ; he voted ; I cannot for certain say whether there was a protest."
593. What I wish to find out is whether a vote tendered without protest would be held to
be valid, whether the voter was the proper holder of the title or no ?
(Dr. Mackay.) "If there were no protest, I do not see how you could correct the vote; I believe
.. it occurred, as I have stated, with regard to the Stirling Peerage."
594. That might have occurred with regard to a contested election, and turned the scale,
and there would have been no way of reversing the result ?
(Dr. Mackay.) "That is so, I presume."
We have seen, however, that against this practical danger the right of petitioning the
Lords was a sufficient safeguard. But where a doubtful vote did not affect the result of
an election there was no recognized means of testing its validity. It was to obviate this
difficulty that, in 1822, they passed the Rosebery resolution : —
" That no person, upon the decease of any Peer or Peeress of Scotland, other than the son,
grandson, or other lineal descendant, or the brother of such Peer, or the son, grandson, or
other lineal descendant of such Peeress, shall be admitted to vote .... until, on claim
made on behalf of such person, his right of voting at such Election or Elections shall have
been admitted by the House of Lords"
The peculiar dislike of the Scottish experts to this resolution is due to two facts, —
(1) That it conflicts with their favourite doctrine that a Scottish peerage dignity vests jure
sanguinis.^) (2) That it assumes the right of the Lords to try cases " not springing from a
contested election,"(3) and not therefore to be explained away as merely coming before them
because affecting the constitution of their House. It revives, in fact, the principle enforced
in 1 761-2, and running, as we contend, through the whole practice, that they had direct
cognisance of matters affecting the Scottish Peerage, without any intervention or reference
from the Crown. Here is Lyon's evidence on this obnoxious resolution : —
212. (Chairman.') That brings us down to 1822; there was Lord Rosebery's resolution
in that year ?
(LYON.) "I do not quite see how Lord Rosebery's resolution was meant to act, and I do not
believe it was ever put much into operation. . ... The question occurs, what "lineal
descendant " implies? Does it exclude descent through females? In the case of a Peeress,
the term ' lineal descendant ' would surely not be confined to male descent."  .-__  _
213. But historically ?
(Lyon.) " I do not think the question has occurred, because the resolution has hardly ever
been put into practice  Now what is meant by 'claim made on behalf of such
person ' ? Was it intended that the claim should be made to the Sovereign ? "
214. I presume the meaning was in the ordinary way by petition to the Queen (? Sovereign),
and a remit to the House of Lords.
(Lyon.) ' 'I should also have supposed that was the meaning of it, but I have heard it other
wise interpreted."
But unfortunately for the moral of this channing duet, in which Lyon "supposes " what the
Chairman "presumes," there was at that time not a shadow of doubt as to how this resolution
was meant to work. It revived, as we have said, the precedents of 176T-2, when the Lords
had ordered certain parties to appear before them and make good their claims, and had
forbidden them to vote at the elections till they had complied with this order. Could the
parties affected by the Rosebery resolution have avoided submitting their claims to the
direct jurisdiction of the Lords, they would obviously have done so. They had clearly,
(') Condemning the L. C. R.'s deputies for breach of privilege in allowing this party to vote contrary to
their resolution of 15th March, 1762.
(*) 183. The right to a Scottish Peerage vests without any procedure.
(Lyon.) It does, jure sanguinis.
(J) Riddell's Peerage Law, page 852.

"6 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
however, no doubt in the matter. We may instance the cases of Morton (1828), Buchan
(1830), Stirling (1832), Duffus (1834), Stair (1841). As Morton is an early precedent, and
is, moreover, not alluded to by Riddell, it may be as well to quote the wording of the
petition, as setting this point at rest : —
" That upon the decease of the late George, Earl of Morton, and Baron Douglas of
Lochleven, the petitioner's cousin, the petitioner succeeded to the Scottish title of Earl of
Morton and Lord Aberdour ; but inasmuch as by a resolution of their Lordships, of date
the 3rd May, l£22, he is debarred from voting at the election of any Peer ¦ ¦ • • until,
upon a claim made to their Lordships, his right of so voting shall have been admitted by their
Lordships, it becomes necessary to address this application to their Lordships." (Lords' Journals;
12th March, 1828.)
A week later the House agreed to the Report of its Committee,
"That it is the opinion of this Committee that George Sholto, Earl of Morton, Lord
Aberdour, hath made out his claim to be admitted as a Peer of Scotland to vote at the
Election of Peers." (Ibid, 19th March, 1828.)
The " supposed " procedure by petition and remit was in fact precluded by the very facts of
the case. For the parties affected by this resolution had no bar to the full enjoyment of
their rights "but that which had been erected by the Lords themselves. Consequently, to
them only could they address themselves for its removal. The dignity not being technically
involved, but only the right of voting which the dignity conveyed, the Crown could not be
appealed to for the removal of a bar which it had not imposed. The means, it may be
added, of enforcing the resolution was clearly provided by the Rutherford precedent,
according to which any official receiving the vote of a party debarred by resolution became
thereby guilty of breach of privilege.
But even Lyon's antipathy to the Rosebery resolution is surpassed by Dr. Mackay's
bravura. While being examined, on the Act of 1847 — which extend. d, as we shall see, the
category of those debarred from voting — he was asked —
486. But for that Act, is there any instance of a Scottish Peer, having duly inherited, being
called upon to prove his claim, unless there was a counter-claim to his peerage? _
(Dr. Mackay.) "There is none; I thought I had answered that inferentially."
And again : —
587. (Chairman.) In point of fact, that resolution was never carried out?
(Dr. Mackay.) "No" (^
All the three Scotch witnesses were closely examined as to their reading of the Act of
1847. While substantially agreeing that its scope was confined to dormant or presumptively
extinct dignities, they do not seem to have noticed the fact that it was an extension of the
Rosebery resolution. This latter was restricted, by the words "upon the decease of," to
cases of succession to an existing dignity, and could not apply to those very claims against
which this Act was directed. These could still be challenged by petition, but only in cases
of contested election; and the object of this measure was to render them, at every election —
in the words of the Act (sec. 3), " whether there shall be any case of contested election or
not" — challengeable by valid protest. They would then come directly before the Lords,
who, without the intervention of the Crown, would decide on the merits ofthe claim. The
words of the preamble are distinct enough : —
"It-is expedient, in order to prevent such abuses, to provide that no person shall be
allowed to vote at such elections in right of any peerage now standing on the said roll, which
has been for some time dormant, until his claim thereto shall have been admitted by the House
of Lords ."
This formula corresponds precisely with those which we discussed above, and must
therefore be interpreted in the same manner. But both the Committee and their witnesses
appear to have been puzzled as to the modus operandi under the Act. The words are —
"And the House of Lords . . . may, in such manner, and with such notice to such parties,
including the person so voting or claiming to appear or to vote in respect of such- title of
peerage, and the person protesting, as the House shall see fit, inquire into the matter raised
by such protest, and if they shall see cause, order the person whose vote or claim has been
protested against to establish the same before the said House."
As this Act " is now," according to the Lord Clerk Register, " the sheet anchor agains*
doubtful votes" (43), it is desirable that on this point there should be no doubt. We
submit that the procedure contemplated by the Act is none other, than that adopted "in 1761,
when the Committee of Privileges having reported in favour of certain parties being summoned
to prove their right, the House made an order accordingly. The practice would therefore

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 117

correspond precisely, the House, as on that occasion, empowering its Committee to consider
the doubtful assumptions of right, and ordering the parties, if so advised, to prove their claim
before them, or, in default thereof, to desist from their claim.
This brings us to the Act of 185 1, on the application of which, as a recent measure, the
Scottish authorities must be well informed. We turn, then, to their evidence, and we find
as follows : — Lord Clerk Register. Dr. Mackay.
"The House of Lords in 1851 passed an Act . . . 584. "... I was going to ask you whether the
in which the principle of the fixed date of 1800 was Act of 1851 has been applied in regard to the fifty
extended in this shape, that the Lord Clerk Register years' clause."
must report the case of any peerage upon which no "I cannot answer the latter question with certainty,
vote had been given for the last fifty years ; but the but I should suppose that it has."
Act did not put it into his power to take any action
in that case, and that Act of 1851 has been practically
inoperative" (43.)
Having now traced, from the Union, the Lords' jurisdiction in this matter, we would
briefly glance at the evidence by which it was sought to bolster up the famous theory that
the Court of Session has retained its jurisdiction over Scottish dignities.
Riddell, as is well known, was the exponent of this extreme view. Dr. Mackay, how
ever, who has made a special study of the subject, did not venture, in his evidence, to agree
with his conclusions. " Some authorities in Scotland are of opinion that the Court of Session still has the
jurisdiction since the Union, which it undoubtedly possessed before it; that was Mr. Riddell's
opinion, a very learned authority upon Scottish Peerage Law ; but / cannot myself express
concurrence in that opinion. I had occasion to consider the question in writing a book upon
the Practice ofthe Court of Session, and I then enquired into the history of the jurisdiction ofthe
Scottish courts, and it appeared to me that since the Union this jurisdiction has not been
exercised by the Court of Session, and that it was difficult to maintain that it still existed, owing
to that disuse." (514.)
On this "burning question" the Lord Clerk Register tendered no opinion, but Lyon did
not hesitate to rush in where his lordship had feared to tread.
(Lyon.) " The ' authority and privileges ' of the Court of Session are reserved by article
19 of the Treaty of Union, and the result of that is that we find that such cases were enter
tained for some time after the Union by the Court of Session." (235.)
The stock cases, however, on which he relied were sharply canvassed by the Committee.
The Lovat case is of course the precedent on which Riddell and his followers mainly found,
though anything but creditable to the Court of Session, which, having assigned the dignity to
the heir female in 1 702,(1) reduced its own decree twenty-eight years later, and assigned it to the
heir male. The poverty (') of the defeated party precluded an appeal to the Lords, and the
decision being recognised as sound per se, apart from the competency cf the tribunal
pronouncing it, it was not challenged on Lord Lovat's trial 1747. It was sought to make the
_iost of this fact, till the chairman brought out its true bearing.
(Lyon.) " The House of Lords must have accepted the judgment, otherwise the judgment
of 1703 would have ruled, which was good until it was reduced, and under which he
was not a Peer " (254)  "I infer from his being treated as a Peer, that the House of
Lords had then accepted it." (255.)
256. He could not have appeared as a Peer, and been tried by his Peers, but for this judg
ment of the Court of Session having been accepted as valid by the House of Lords ?
(Lyon.) " I consider so."
257. • (Chairman.) If there had been no other claimant of the title,' and no previous litiga
tion, would they not have taken the unfortunate Lord Lovat, and dealt with him the same
way? (Lyon.) " Presumably."
That is to say, the Lords merely took him as they found him, as being in possession of
the Peerage, with no one to dispute his title. Again, as to this decision :
242. (Lord Ker.) I think that case was not held to be very valid, and, if I remember
rightly, the question was a matter of private settlement and arrangement eventually ?
(Lyon.) " I know it has been said there was a compromise to avoid appeal, but there is no
record of anything but what is regular in the proceedings  "
244  Eventually the opinion of the claimant, who gained his case before the Court
of Session, was so strong that the tribunal was not altogether competent, that he thought it
better to pay a large sum of money to- his opponent, and make a settlement ; was not
that so?

(') Not 1703, as given by Lyon. (?) "Present narrow circumstances."
Collect.

"8 COLLECTANEA GENEAL0G1CA.

(Lyon.) " I believe there was sume private arrangement with regard to the estates between
the parties, but this did not procede on any idea of the incompetency ofthe Court of Session."
246. Is it within your knowledge that the counsel for the heir male in the Lovat case
admitted a doubt as to the competence of the Court of Session to try it ?
(Lyon.) "A doubt was indirectly suggested about the competency, but the Court sustained
its jurisdiction."
243. I believe Lord Hale (Hailes) and Lord Mansfield at one time thought the Court were
not competent?
(Lyon.) " Lord Mansfield said something to that effect, and there is something like an asser
tion in Lord Hailes' Sutherland case, that the Court was incompetent, but it is questionable
Whether, when the paper was first written, that was in it."
• Why " something like an assertion"? Lord Hailes, according to Riddell (quoting from
the Sutherland case), " explicitly states that .... * the Court of Session rightly, although
incompetently, adjudged the honours.'" (Sutherland case, chap, vi., p. 125.) Bitterly dis
tasteful as this was to Riddell, he dared not throw the slightest doubt upon the passage, but
boldly faced it as follows : —
" He uses ' incompetently ' here in exclusive reference to the jurisdiction, not being aware ( !)
.... that the Session were really competent for Peerage questions."
To those who know how Lord Hailes and his Sutherland case are idolised by the Riddell
school, it is amusing to find his dictum thus coolly put aside when it happens to conflict with
their views.' As Seldon reminded those who appealed to the Early Fathers,— r-" You treat
them as fathers when they are with you, and as children when they are against you!" (*)
Why, we would also ask, does Lyon grudgingly admit that "a doubt was indirectly.
suggested about the competency?" (246.) It was avowedly on this point that the defendant
joined issue,(2) and "after a formal argument in foro contradictorio,(3) the Court rejected the
plea and sustained its jurisdiction. This is the decision which we are bidden to accept, the
court itself being called as the witness to its own competency !
There is more, however, than meets the eye in this same Lovat case. To the few who
are behind the scenes it is well known that Simon Lovat had the best of reasons for applying
to the Session and not to the Lords, and for avoiding an appeal to them at any cost The
Lords, like the Session, would, admittedly, have decided for the heir-male. But was Simon
that heir ? That he had an elder brother, whose extinction was unproved, and who indeed
was presumably alive, was a fact notorious at the time, and one which had long deterred
him from making up his title. Notwithstanding Riddell's denunciations of the laxness of
the English practice,(4) he admits that the Scottish law of extinction was " indulgent " where
there was " no competition," and indeed quotes a case, corresponding precisely with that
of Lovat, in which the Session refused to question the assumed extinction. It may be
added that in the case of Lovat the extinction is still unproved.
Lyon aiso adduced the cases of Oxenfoord and Caithness.
248. There has been no case since then?
(Lyon.) _" There has been none decided since the Lovat case ; in the Oxonfoord case the '
Court considered itself competent."
249. Are you aware that the large sumof £12,000 was paid to avoid an appeal from tlie Court
of Session to the House of Lords /
(Lyon.) " I have heard that there was a private arrangement, but I do not know the true
nature of it."
Lord Galloway, himself a champion of the Session, came to the rescue more than once, and
now gave Lyon the lead for Caithness.
259. (Earl of Galloway.) Then I want to know if there was not a case as late as 1797
in which the Court of Session again declared a man to be a Peer, I may say, almost against
his will ?
(Lyon.) " There was a case amounting not quite to that, but to something very like that
in 1790, where the Court allowed the freeholders of Caithness to prove that Sirl4) James
Sinclair of Mey was dejure Earl of Caithness. He had not assumed the title, but the Court
allowed the proof to be gone into, and the matter was eventually settled by Ms assuming tlie
title of Caithness."
(>) « Well and indubitably proved by Lord Hailes in his celebrated Sutherland case." (Riddell's Peerage
Law. p. 372.) v *
O ' The question concerning the jurisdictioi. ofthe Court of Session was stated for the Defender "
(3) Riddell's Peerage Law, page 285.
(4) Peerage Law, 870-872, etc.
(») Why "Sir James?" Clearly because Lyon here copies from Riddell, who, in calling him "Sir James,"
takes him at his own valuation. (See his petition.) The Scottish genealogists failed to detect that the lh_e
of Mey had assumed the Baronetcy in contravention of their own law of descent 1 (See Foster's Baroneta<v
"Chaos.") * '

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 119

Lyon's statement is equivalent to this, that Sinclair of Mey assumed the title in consequence
of the proceedings before the Court of Session. But he did nothing of the kind. Would
it be believed that, in order to press this case into the support of the Session's jurisdiction,
the witness suppressed the essential fact that James Sinclair, entirely ignoring the proceedings
before the Session, and describing himself only as "Sir James Sinclair of Mey, Baronet,"
formerly petitioned the Crown for the dignity, that his petition was duly remitted to the
Lords, and that he became Earl by decision of the Committee of Privileges, and not in
consequence of any proceedings before the Court of Session ? The Session, in fact, was
simply trying his right to vote as a freeholder, and as such was clearly in the position ofa
Revising Barrister at present. Like him, they could strike off a Peer from the Roll of
Electors^1) as in the Sinclair case they were invited to do, and, like him, they would require
proof that the party objected to was a Peer. But in neither case would this involve the
power to decide on claims of Peerage.
In conclusion, we may observe that there was, at least, a welcome agreement between
the Scottish witnesses on the vital question, that some reform was called for, and that some
test should be imposed as a check on the assumption of dignities.

The Lord Clerk Register.
71. As the law now stands, the
title may be held for generations by
persons who have never taken any
steps whatever to establish their
claim ?
" It may be."
72. It vests jure sanguinis, and
goes from father to son without the
necessity of any legal procedure, un
less there is an objection taken at
the time ?
"Precisely."

Dr. Mackav.
469. What is your opinion in re
spect to Scottish titles and honours ?
is there any formality required in
order to the assumption of a title?
" According to my understanding
of the lavv, none ; the heir succeeds
by right of blood."
470. And it vests without any
formal proceeding?
" So I understand."
471. Is there any form in which
such a right can be challenged, ex
cepting by a competitor or claimant
for the same title?
" Practically at present there ap
pears to be none, and that appears
to me to be a great defect in the exist
ing condition of the law on the sub~
ject." 555. There is nothing whatever
to prevent any one calling himself
by any title he thinks fit ?
"That is so."

Lyon King-of-Arms.
183. The right to a Scottish peer
age vests without any procedure,
does it not?
" It does, jure sanguinis."
184. And therefore I presume
there are a great many peerages in
Scotland which have descended from
father to son without any judicial
proceeding having been taken in the
whole course of the descent ?
"A great many since the union
have descended from father to son,
and a great many to more distant
relations also, where no judicial
proceedings have been taken."
185. Therefore the only occasion
where a peer is liable to protest is
apparently voting at the peers*
election. "Yes, practically, one would
think the question might arise in
many other ways, whether a person
was a peer or not, for in Scotland
there are individuals as to wham it
may be a matter of dispute as to
whether they are peers ; but practi
cally it has been only at elections of
peers that the question has been
raised."
The witnesses indeed even went so far as to admit that every Peer should be called.
upon to prove.(2) But they were reminded by the Committee,(3) that it was not only the heir
ship to the last holder which had to be proved,' but also the validity of that holder's title,
which might (as per evidence) " have descended from father to son " for generations, either
without being tested by a claim to vote (as in the case of Aston of Forfar), or even, when so
tested, to have passed unchallenged. Here we may instance the case of Ruthven, the very
existence of which dignity, as experts know, hangs by the slenderest of threads. We do not
see that such cases will be met by the procedure now proposed, though that procedure
involves so grave a departure from what, as we have endeavoured to show, has been the
recognized theory of the Constitution. ~~
Lastly we would glance at the " Representative Peers' (Scotland) Election Bill, presented
by Lord Stewart of Garlies " (Earl of Galloway). As this measure introduces a change
in the Constitution, and, as such, is certain to be keenly criticised, and as, moreover, this
Act of 1847 has been so variously interpreted, it might be hoped that this important Bill
(') As Lord Headley's name has just been struck off the South Essex Register, following the decision in.
Rendlesham v. Howard. This decision again brings us face to face with the question of Ulster's Roll. Supposing
that the votes of Lord Lisle or "Lord Cahir" should be objected to, would the Revising Barrister accep
Ulster's Roll as proof of Peerage for or against ? Or would he ask if the right had been, legally proved?
CD See 54. 57. 60, 323, 572, « 72—74- etc.

izo COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
would at least prove as clear as it is short. We can only glance briefly at its principle, viz.,
that an "Election Bill" should be officially prepared, in which not only the titles, but the
names of their holders, should be entered, and which should alike exclude attempts to vote
on the part of those who were not on this roll, and protests against the votes of those who
were. The idea is in itself an excellent one, but of its application we would observe as follows :--
(i) That the Bill appears wholly to ignore the case of dignities descendible to heirs of
line. Sec. io. " On the decease of any peer whose name stood on the Election Roll, any person
claiming to be his successor in the honour enjoyed by such peer, may present a petition to
the House of Lords,(') praying them to find that he is entitled to have his name entered on the
Election Roll as successor to such peer," etc.
But how is the son of a peeress to proceed ? He is not the " successor" of a " peer,"
and his mother's name was not " on the Election Roll." What is he to do?
(2) That, the very first section, is so contradictory as to open at once a vista of contention.
Sec I. "The Lord Clerk Register of Scotland shall .... cause to be prepared a Roll
of the existing Peerages and Peers of Scotland, in accordance with their existing precedency on
the Union Roll, to be entitled the Representative Peers Scotland Election Roll, .and which .
shall set out, in addition to the titles of honour held by the Peerage of Scotland, the existing holder
of such title. . . . ."
So far it is at least clear that the list is to be exhaustive, and that all the Scottish" Peer
ages " are to be entered, independent of any question of voting. This then would include
peeresses, though the awkward expression, " Peerages and Peers " plunges us once more into
confusion, which is promptly increased by the words " Peerage of Scotland," where "peerage"
is actually used in a wholly different sense, and would here again include the peeresses 1 But
as if this were not enough, the section proceeds —
" And the Lord Chief Register shall enter on such roll the names of all peers of Scotland
who have voted "(since ljan.1863),. . . "and against whose right to vote no protest has been
recorded within such period. And shall also enter on the Election Roll the names of all peers
of Scotland whose right to the title bome by them has been sustained by the House of Lords
on a reference from the Crown."
Can this latter half of the section be held to void the earlier one ? We cannot find a single
passage in the Bill excluding any of these titles which, in the passage we have above italicised,
are ordered to be "set out " upon the Roll.
(3) That the words " the titles of honour held by the peerage " are very ambiguous.
Would they comprise only the chief titles (in- respect of which the votes are tendered), or
would they also include the minor dignities, among which are often distinct " peerages,"
derived from a different source, and liable at any time to emerge, and descend in a different
line? Or again, would these be entered lower down upon the Roll, according to their
separate precedence ?
(4) That in the case of Mar — naturally the first to occur to us— the Bill, instead of
mending matters, would bring them to a deadlock. For the Earl of Kellie — his " right to
the title " of Mar having " been sustained by the House of Lords on a reference from the
Crown" — must (by sec. 1) be entered on the "Election Roll" under Mar. But the Earl of
Kellie — his "right to vote " for Mar having been repeatedly protested against — must not (by
(sec. 1) be entered on the Election Roll under Mar ! Nor is this all. If he is not to be
entered under Mar, may he be entered under Kellie ? It would seem not, if the section is
to be interpreted strictly. For as only those "peers against whose right to vote no protest
has been recorded" are to be entered, he must in strictness stand excluded as a "peer"
whose right has been protested against. Our readers will doubtless have perceived that the
source of this confusion is the recognition by this Bill ofthe validity of pretests against a decision
ofthe House of Lords.
. (5) That the measure is based throughout on the erroneous principle of leaving the evil
to be cured by the haphazard intervention of individual peers. Thus it- can only check a
wrongful assumption when a protest happens to have been made against it, and not even
then, unless the protesting peer should pursue it before the court.
Sec. 4. "The court, . . . if no appearance be made in support of the protest, may find that
the name ofthe petitioner ought to be inserted in the Election Roll, as if no such protest had
been taken; and if appearance be made in support of the protest, they may proceed to enquire
into the questions raised thereby," etc., etc.
This is a fatal flaw in the measure ; for not only are there cases, as we have seen, in
(') This coincides precisely with our views on the question, as set forth on pp. 115-16.

THE PEERAGE OF SCOTLAND AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 121
which no protest may have been entered, but also the result of leaving it to the volunteer
efforts of individuals to pursue such cases to a decision before the courts is, as proved by
experience (in the words of a member of the Committee), that " what is everybody's business
is nobody's business."
(6) That the Bill leaves it in doubt by whose hands the Roll is to be annually corrected.
Sec 8. Sec ii.
" New Roll to be prepared annually." "New Roll, how to be prepared."
"The Lord Justice Clerk shall, in the year 1884, "The Lord Clerk Register shall, on or bfefore the
and in each succeeding year, on or before the first first day of January in each year, prepare a fresh
day of October, prepare a new Election Roll ; . . . „ Election Roll, in which effect shall be given to all
and the Roll so annually prepared . . . shall, subject alterations and correclimis necessary tkereon."
to any alteration or correction which shall have been
previously made thereon, become final upon the 31st
December in each year."
Though there is abundant provision for empowering the Lord Clerk Register to correct
and revise the Roll, there is none whatever for giving such powers to the Lord Justice Clerk,
though sec. 8 clearly contemplates that corrections are to be made by him !
(7) Our last point is that this Bill is avowedly and unfortunately confined to the pro
cedure at the peers' elections, and that, desirable as it is to improve that procedure, we must
deeply regret that where so important a change is contemplated, the opportunity is not taken
of placing the Peerage of Scotland once for all on a sound footing, that if possible, in both the
sister kingdoms, every peer and every peeress should be above suspicion, their right to their
titles legally proved, and clear as the light of day.

MARJORIBANKS PEDIGREES.— Continued from page 107.
"James Marjoribanks, senior, elected burgess and guild brother __= Christine, dau. of John
14 March, 1516, in right of his wife ; dead in 1548. J Adamson.
James, son and heir Clement, dead^KATHERiNE Michael, admitted^.   ^Margaret, ?Joh_. Robert
** _.' _ .- * _•  11  tj-  _r.._.  t  ____._. ____] ,.„_i,j iTnoDBc* Fimt tc H__xi « Mflwh. I sni_. merchant

J AiUOCIj 9VU BI1U 1I<_.1__ ^_,__,i_._--__,_- a | ww_a^= __•- - • --__.-._-¦.  —  , •  ., .  ti •**
1548, notary public, before 17 May, j KER.future burgess and guild Forrest Faislie
exor. of sister Mar- 1566. I spouse, S brother az June, 1558-9.
garet's will, 1583. I Feb. 1558-9- 1564.

died 31 March, I SON, merchant
1584, will dated I burgess 1568,
12 Dec, 1583. I dead 1572.

John, sasine 17 May, Margaret _5-9,=Duncan Bal- Elizabeth, Mungo John James John, sasine Marion.
iS66, dead before sasine 13 June, four, 1586. 1569. . James. Thomas m^  13 Dec, 1574.
_3 March, 1581. 1586. - Thomson
John Marjoribanks, admitted burgess and guild brother 28 March, 1508, = Margaret-Tod, 1518..
sasine 151 1 (James M., a witness), bailie 1518, had sasine of tomb and stone I
before St. Francis, within the College 6 Nov. 1522, sasine 1526 (Mr. I
Thomas M. and Thomas M. witnesses) ; dead 1543. _ I

William, son John, admitted burgess and guild = Margaret Scott, Margaret = Francis Tennand,
and heir 1542, brother7Aug.i56i,bailielS77, I widow of William I of Muckraw, bur-
dead in 1550. advocateinl586,andthendead, I Ker, 1564. I gess of Edinburgh
sasine 31 Jan. 1560. I • I I5°3-

1  ~ 1 r
John, son and heir, sasine Thomas Mungo, son and heir. _
26 Aug. 1586. (.Continued.

MARJORIBANKS, OF RATHO.

<?

Thomas Marjoribanks, of Ratho, clerk register, made resignation of dwelling house in Bell's = Janet, dau. of John Purves, burgess of Edinburgh.
Wynd to himself and Janet Purves 1 8 April, 1527, had confirmation of charter of the Mains of
Glasfurd 20 Feb. 1534-5. etc., and of Ratho 27 Sept. 1540 ; admitted guild brother in right
of his wife 15 Feb. 1537 ; had the lands of Marjorihanks in Annandale resigned in his favour
by Robert Marjoribanks of that ilk, 19 May, 1556.

Robert, dead
before 1 540.

John, fear of Ratho, = Helen Reid

17 March,
1549, died shortly
before 10 Dec.
1550.

IS49-

Thomas Easter Handaxwood
was settled in conjunct fee
and life rent on his father
and mother 21 May, 154I1
and then on himself in fee,
burgess of Edinburgh 19
March, 1606 _= J 

James, 1550, sasine Bell's •
Wynd 17 Oct. 1550,
exor. to sister Margaret's
will, but renounced 1577,
living 3 Aug. 1603,
sasine.

: Margaret Gray (probably
dau. of Robert Gray, bur
gess), sasine 4 Feb. 1578-9,
then his future spouse,
sasine 18 Oct. 1589.

Margaret, will dated
30 July,
IS73. for
21 Feb.
IS76-7.

I I
Janet 1573.
Bessie 1573.

Thomas, of Ratho, posthumous son, born between 10 Dec. 1550, and 30 May, = Mary Douglas,

1551, had sasine Bell's Wynd 7 June, 1581; admitted burgess of Edinburgh
and guild brother 22 Oct. 1377 ; heir to the deceased Robert, m. 27 March,
1585, portioner of Ratho 7 Dec. 1590 ; he and his wife had charter of Ratho
on resignation, 3 Oct 1604, d. 20 March, 1620, admon. 21 March, 1623.

t m 1 :
John, of Ratho, sasine James, witness to sasine Susanna, of Auld- :
6 Aug. 1607, eldest 20 July, 1607. liston, charter 10
George, witness to con- Dec. 1621, sasine
tract ofsale 24 Jan. 1610. 3 June, 1623.
Margaret, sole extx. of
her mother, 1626.

1604, 1610, died
March, 1626, her
will dated 23 Feb.
1626, at Auld-
liston.

Christine Cannye
(1st wife), m. 8
June, 1602.

: James, of Edinburgh, hatmaker, = Isabel Swan
eldest son, burgess 30 July, 1606, (2nd wifc),m.
a legatee under will of Leonard 7 June, 1619.
Marjoribanks, of Edinburgh,
merchant.

John, bapt. 19 Feb. 1619-20.

I I I | I I
= James, eldest James, of Edinburgh, = Catherine, eldest dau. of William, bapt. 10 June, 1610.

son, 24 May, 1610,
sasine Bell's Wynd
24 Apl. 1622 ; ad
ministered to father's
will ==

son, heir app. hatmaker ; admitted
of Alexander burgess 20 Feb. 1633,
Inglis, of bapt. 4 May, 1606,
Rathonvan. sasine 1634.

Robert Williamson, tailor, Joseph, bapt. 8 Feb. 16 16.
burgess of Edinburgh, by Margaret, bapt. 9 Jan. 1603.
Euphame, bapt. 17 Jan. 1608.
Helen, bapt. 5 Sept. 1C13.

his wife Elspeth Walker j
m. 25 Apl. (contract 19
March), 1633.

T7T

Thomas Marjoribanks, heir of his father James, bapt. 26 Jan. 1634.
John, lawful son ofthe late Thomas M., John, bapt. 15 July, 1638.
of Ratho, in a tenement in Edinburgh, Robert, bapt. 4 Aug. 1639.
17 Aug. 1639 (inq. ret. abb. 842).

Archibald, bapt. 3 July, 1644. Elspeth, bapt. 19 July, 1635. Catherine, bapt. 11 Apl. 1641.
Thomas, bapt. 29 May, 1645. Jonet, bapt. 15 Jan. 1637. Margaret, bapt. 1 Aug. 1643.

MARJORIBANKS OF THAT ILK, FORMERLY OF BALBAIRDIE.

John Marjoribanks, of Balbairdie, in the barony of Bathgate, Linlithgowshire, = Jean Stewart, tutrix nominative
died Jan. 1639, will dated that month and year, confirmed 31 May, 1640. ¦ j - ( of her son Thomas 1639-40. '_ J

Thomas, of Balbairdie, sasine 22 July,
1642 (reg. mag. sig.)=

John, bapt. 17 March, 1626.

Robert, bapt. 11 March, 1627.

Margaret, posthumous dau., bapt. 6 March, 1639

Thomas, of Balbairdie, eldest son, sasine 13 Dec. 1684; purchased lands in West = Anna Seton, m. in
Calder, etc., from Walter, Lord Torphichen, 5 March, 1692, sasines 7 Apl. Edinburgh 15 June,
and 21 June, 1693, etc.; had sasine 27 May, 1696, on charter of the lands and 1676.
barony of Marjoribanks, in parish of Calder, 14 Feb. 1696, d. Dec. 1704.

Thomas, of that ilk, served heir special of =_ Margaret, dau. of late
his father 13 Nov. 1706, in parts of the David Boswell, of
barony of Calder, acted as bailiff in
receiving sasine for Andrew M., of Bal
bairdie, in the lands of Muirstown, in
the barony of Calder, 22 April, 1703, d.
Feb. 171 1, testament dative confirmed
Dec. 1723.

Andrew of, that ilk, writer to the signet, sheriff =_ Christian, dau. of

Balmuto(Contr.8Nov.1708).

principal of the sheriffdom of Bathgate, com
missary of Edinburgh, burgess and guild brother
in right of his wife, 19 March, 17 18, heir special
and heir general of his brother Thomas 9 July,
171 1, bapt. 20 July, 1678, d. 13 April, 1742,
test, dative confirmed 14 Feb. 1743.

James Hay, of
Carriber, m. in
Edinburgh 17
March, 1700.

James, bapt. 29 Dec.
1679.

Ill
Thomas, bnt. 13 July, 1703,
bd. 9 Apl. 1717, aged 15.
James, advocate 10 June,
1727, bapt. 4 Sept. 1705.
John, bapt. 27 June, 1708,
bd. 20 March, 1709.'
Andrew, bapt. 17 Dec. 17 10,
d. 2 Jan. 1 71 1, aged 14
days, and a child still, born,
bd. 3 Nov. 171 1,

Andrew M., of that ilk, :
W.S., served heir general
of his father 2 Aug. 1742,
d. 10 Feb. 1766.

Mary Chalmers
(ist wife),
= Jean (2nd wife),
dau. of Thomas
Boyles, a deputy
clerk of session,
m. at Edinburgh
16 Feb. 1759.

T

Andrew, bapt. 3 Sept. 1745.
Thomas, b. 21, bapt. 28 Apl,
1748.

Thomas, bapt. 16 Oct. Anne, bapt 16 Jan. = David Mony
1718.
Alexander, bapt 7
Feb. 1720.
George, bapt 2 Oct.
1 72 1, living 1742.

1701, m. at Bath
gate 28 Apl. 1725.

Penny,
Pitmillie,
vocate.

of
ad-

/K

Alexander, served heir special of his = Katherine, dau. of Gilbert Laurie,
grandfather, 25 Apl. 1770, of hismother I of Falmont, lord provost of Edin-
1 Feb. 1788, bapt. 29 Nov. 1 750, d. •[ burgh, m. 2 June, 1790.
8 Sept. 1830, A

Margaret, b. 29, bapt. 30 Oct.
1746.

I 1 I I 1 I
Magdalen, bapt.
1 Jan. 1702.
Jean, bapt. 8 Sept.
1704.
Christian, bapt. 7
Nov. 1706.
Grizel, bapt. 24
Nov. 1709.
Margaret, bapt
4 March, 1716.
Rachel, bapt, 30
Apl. 1727.
I
Christian, bapt
28 Aug. 1749.

MARJORIBANKS, OF EDINBURGH

Symon Marjoribanks, burgess of Edinburgh, guild brother in == Janet, dau. of John Graham,
right of his wife, 29 March, 1515, held sasine of a tenement in I 1542, sasine 20 July, 1558.
Edinburgh 3 June, 1531, dead in 1542. '

James, burgess of Edinburgh, son and
heir of the deceased burgess Symon,
28 Nov. 1542, admitted guild brother
2 Oct. 1563, died Apl. 1569, will
dated 8 April, 1569, pr. 2 Feb. 1581.

Symon, exor. of
his father, ad
mitted burgess
and guild
brother 3 April,
I57L

Isobel Dick, 1542, sasine
7 Feb. 1547, proved her
husband's will 1581 ; she
re-married before 28 Sept
1577, to Thomas Weir,
burgess of Edinburgh.

James, son of Isobel Dick,
sasine 28 Sept 1577, died
May, 1603, styled son
and heir of the deceased
Symon M., in sasine in
favour of Joseph M.,bailie
12 Oct. 1603, but this is
probably an error ; testa
ment da,t. given up by his
brother Joseph, jind con
firmed 9 Nov. 1603.

I

Symon, 1558, then "a young man," of
Edinburgh, merchant, burgess 14 Jan.
1562-3, bailie 1569, 1574, overseer to
James, will dated 27 June, 1582 ; will
dated 24 June, 1581.pr.30 Nov. 1583.

Barbara, dau. of John
Fawside, of Edinburgh,
and sister and co-heir
of Alexander Fawside,
IS73, m. between 3 and
25 April, 1562, wife of
John Ker, burgess in
1594-

Janet, dead before
29 J«iy. 1586.

Joseph, bailie 1613, heir
to his brother James,
had sasine 12 Oct. 1603
of same tenement, of which
Symon had sasine 3 June,
1531, as stated above.
(Joseph, 2nd lawful son to
umquhile James, admitted
burgess and guild brother
13 July, 1602.)

4 daus.

Symon,
1568, dead
before 18
Sept 1593.

Clement,
1583, dead .
before 15
Sept 1593.

WrLLlAM, of Edinburgh,:
burgess 1600, aged 15,
1583, then 2nd son,
and then apprenticed to
James Barclay, skinner,
burgess of Edinburgh,
son and heir 1603, dead
before 25 March, 1612.

Ninian, bapt. at Edinburgh 5 Dec.
1596, dead before 17 Jan. 1622,

Tohn, bapt. 7 Oct 1599.

=Mariota, dau.ofJo__n P u r di e,
Herald, by
his wife
MargaretHay.

Christian, wife of
George
Heriot,
younger, goldsmithin 1587.

, I i
Janet, dead
before 8 Ap.
1586.
Katharine, served heir
of niece
Elspeth, 18
March, 1628,
and of her
brother William, 9
May, 1628.

Elspeth, bapt 21 June, 1601,
dead before 1628.

%\>z 3L?on £>ffi'ce in i&etreat
THE struggle which has been forced upon me by the Lyon Office^ and in which, single-
handed, I have had to contend against the official authorities of Scotland, has now
resulted in their final discomfiture, and in the signal failure of their audacious attempt to foist
upon the public a spurious descent which, though officially declared by Lyon King-of-Arms to
have been solemnly "proved and registered," has been shewn by me, from his own confes
sion, to be destitute of any proof whatever. (Coll. Gen., pp. 61—76, 94 — 124.)
This discovery, as so often happens, has led to others of equal significance ; but before
I pass to the consideration of these, and to the circumstances which have recently called
public attention to the views and the doings of Lyon King-of- Arms, I propose to recapitulate,
as tersely as possible, the successive stages of this controversy.
(A.) On the occasion of Lord Tweedmouth's elevation to the Peerage, a Marjoribanks
Pedigree was duly supplied to me for insertion in my " Peerage." It was also supplied to
the editor of a Peerage under the special patronage of the Lyon Office, and was by him
unreservedly accepted. I however felt it my duty, "in my capacity ofa critical Peerage
editor," to append to it the following legitimate caution : —
Foster's Peerage 1882, page 666.
" Lord Tweedmouth, according to some authorities, claims to be descended from Thomas
Maijoribanks, who was a lord of session 1549, with the title of Lord Ratho, etc., etc., through
his son James, who died in 1581, leaving two sons, Symon and Joseph, of Edinburgh,
merchants. In the account referred to there is not even primd facie evidence to favour these
. meagre statements, and it is extremely dubious whether they can be substantiated ; at any
rate, it is believed that the following notes will go far to show that a counter-descent can
easily be constructed from the wills of individuals named."
(B.) The resentment of the Lyon Office at my daring to cast even the faintest doubt on
their accuracy, found vent in a vehement attack fiom the Lyon Clerk Depute. Under cover
of reviewing one of my works, he rashly indulged in the contemptuous retort : —
" Lord Tweedmouth's proved and registered pedigree is not satisfactory to Mr. Foster,
who makes some odd comments. We shall only say that James Marjoribanks did not
renounce the executry of his sister Margaret," etc., etc. (see ante,j>. 65).
Clearly, in his opinion, " proved and registered " was a magic formula which put an end to
all controversy. To illustrate, however, the accuracy of his office, and its superiority to my
own, he condescended to adduce the instance of the executry. That instance was indeed
an instructive one, for it led me, in reply, to print the very renunciation of which' he had flatly
denied the existence.
(C.) Thus challenged to justify my "comments," I printed in Collectanea (ante, pp. 64,
69, 70) three distinct Marjoribanks pedigrees : —
(1) The pedigree to which I had appended the original caution (p. 69);
(2) The pedigree "proved and registered" in the Lyon Office (p. 64);
(3) The pedigree stated to be "taken from Lord Lyon's account in the Lyon Office "
(P- 7°); .
and in these pedigrees I pointed out seven distinct flaws. Chief of these was the base
less allegation that a James Marjoribanks, the assumed ancestor of Lord Tweedmouth,
was identical with a James Marjoribanks, son of Thomas Marjoribanks, of Ratho, Clerk
Register, etc., and that his lordship is consequently descended from Marjoribanks of Ratho,
I showed (ante, p. 66) that not only was there no evidence for this assertion, but that the
original pedigree to which I had taken exception afforded "disproof absolute" of its truth.
(D.) The Lyon Clerk Depute, placed hors de combat by the results of his imprudent step,
had meanwhile fled for comfort to his chief. The latter, apprehendingthe gravity of the
situation, determined to adopt what he himself described as the "usually undesirable course"
of entering, in person, the arena. I thus found myself, an English amateur, face to face with
Lyon King-of-Arms. Strange to say, this mighty potentate proved a most harmless opponent;
Collect. Q

126 COLLECTANEA GENEAL0G1CA.

indeed, I stand indebted to his rash revelations for assurance of the fact that, as I had main
tained, he had no proofs whatever to offer for this "proved and registered" descent. Waving
commenced by disowning the original pedigree, as a position which I had already renaerea
untenable, he fell back on the meagre descent which he had recorded in the register ot nis
office. Destitute, as I have said, ofthe requisite proofs, which could alone vindicate tne
truth of its statements, and which, had they been forthcoming, would instantly have disposed
of me, he first endeavoured, as a substitute for evidence, to create a presumption in nis
favour. This he did by recognizing the gravity of my indictment, and urging that as a descent
could only be entered on " most stringent and satisfactory proof," it was "extremely unlikely
that he should have entered one without it. He also attempted to divert the issue by weakly
suggesting that "at least" I had not afforded disproof of the descent. Feeling, however,
that something more would be expected of him, and that it was incumbent on him alter all
to produce, at least, the semblance of proof for this professedly " proved descent, tie
" struck for himself an evil stroke "
by reluctantly displaying his miserable evidence in the form of an entry from the burghal
records relating to a certain Joseph, son of a James Marjoribanks. This now proved, as
was indeed obvious from the first, to be the sole foundation for the spurious descent But
Lyon, though he professed to deem it conclusive, must have had grave misgivings that
it would not avail to prove his case ; for he hastened once more to create a presumption
in favour of his own accuracy — or rather against mine—by bringing against me certain
reckless charges, with a view to prejudice my reputation. Chief of these, as my *?adere
will remember, was his deliberate though false assertion that a certain date was "added by
Mr. Foster at his own hand, . . . being a fabrication of his own;" and his equally
erroneous announcement that there was no foundation for my statement that the son of
the Clerk Register was mentioned as living in sasines of date subsequent to his proved
and registered death. Having thus given "stringent and satisfactory proof," not, as he
pretended, of the Ratho descent, but of his own unfitness for the post he holds, he ended
by triumphantly advising me to abandon my "unsuccessful crusade against Lord Tweed
mouth's pedigree." . ' .
(E.) To this attack I at once replied, pointing out that the proof on which Lyon relied
involved four separate postulates, " each and all of which are capable of disproof absolute "
(p. 97). This disproof I furnished by convincing evidence obtained from my own researches
in the Public Records of Scotland, and I at the same time shewed that the parentage
even oi Joseph Marjoribanks was as wholly unproved as that of his alleged father James.
"Such, then, is the value of Lyon's " most stringent and satisfactory proof." He has
committed himself to the statement that this famous entry refers to. his James and to his
Joseph, and consequently proves them to be father and son. I have now proved by record
evidence that it does not refer either to his James or to his Joseph, and that he has therefore
failed to adduce for the descent he has compiled one shred or tittle of proof " (ante, p. 99).
Nor was it only on the main issue that I adhered to my impeachment of this pedigree.
My readers will remember the case of the younger brother to the posthumous son (!), and
its other still unpurged delinquencies; but I may again invite attention tb its wholly
unproved assertion that Lord Tweedmouth's ancestor, Edward Marjoribanks of Hallyards,
was not one individual, but two, an "elder" and a "younger." The cumulative evidence is
all against the existence of a second Edward, and in favour of the Edward Marjoribanks
(son of John), who was married in 1685, being one and the same with the " Edward
Marjoribanks" who was married in 17 10; for there is only the baptism of one Edward
of the period, viz., 2nd Oct., 1653 ; but two marriages, viz., ist, 4th April, 1685, with
Agnes Murray (who died "17th March, 1710); 2nd, with Janet Loch, 3rd Dec., 1710;
there is only the burial of one Edward of the period, viz., 8th Dec, 1724. (See Foster's
Peerage, 1883.) Further, there is no admission of an Edward, son of Edward, as a
merchant burgess; whereas Edward, son of John, was admitted a burgess 24th May,
1682 ; and there is no other testamentary proceeding relating to any other Edward than
he who died 1724.
To prove the existence of two Edwards satisfactorily as father and son, there should
be two baptisms, two burgess admissions, two marriages, two burials, and two wills. Saving
the two marriages (which chronologically afford no evidence either way) only one Edward
entry can be discovered in the respective records ; and this is the more significant from

THE LYON OFFICE IN RETREAT. 127

the fact that I have been uniformly able to supply data from these various sources for
several generations of this family.
It will doubtless be urged that all this does not actually disprove the existence of a
second Edward ; but let Lyon produce his evidence for the existence of this second Edward,
especially as the only evidence yet adduced is that date of his alleged birth, which has been
shown (ante p. 68) to have been fabricated for this express purpose.
Having reiterated my grave charges against the "proved and registered" pedigree,
I proceeded to expose the reckless falsity of Lyon's. counter-charges (pp. 99, 102), and the
disingenuous shuffle of his change of front over the marriage or marriages of the composite
Entity, whom he denominates James Marjoribanks. It will be remembered that I ended
my paper with an open and direct challenge.
" Surely this matter will not be allowed to rest in its present state. Grave charges have
here been made against a high official. They are based on the irrefragable evidence of the
• public records of Scotland, and the attempts to disprove these charges have signally and
egregiously failed " (p. 107).
(F.) For five whole months there was no answer to this challenge. Lyon, like his
deputy, was now hors de combat, having brought against me false accusations which he was not
in a position to substantiate. The personnel of the Lyon Office being by this time exhausted,
my opponents were driven to take refuge in the last resource of the vanquished, and to cover
their demoralised retreat by a reckless and random fire. From the safe and obscure recesses
of a Scottish legal, magazine, their anonymous champions have poured forth a torrent of noisy
but vapid criticism.' For five long months were they engaged in ransacking my genealogical
works, and this is the contemptible result of their laborious but " unsuccessful crusade."
" Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus."
Its reckless charges, its daring perversions, its astounding display of ignorance, reveal so
mysterious an affinity to the earlier effusions of the Lyon Office, as to leave no room for doubt
as to the source from which it emanates. Indeed, I should have deemed it beneath me to
reply to this anonymous vituperation, but for the fact that most of it has been " ultroneously "
reprinted by a literary confrere, disappointed that his journal, the organ of the Lyon Office,
should have been passed over on this occasion.
The virulence of this article is easily accounted for when we remember that, having
smarted for months beneath my " grave charges," the Lyon Office is compelled after all to
confess that it cannot rebut them. . Its anonymous champion begins by denouncing me as
the " traducer " of " a distinguished officer of the crown in Scotland," but how does he
attempt to meet the charges which I have brought against that officer, and which urgently
press for a reply? "Partly" (to adopt his own words) "by the adjectives" 'rash,' 'sneer
ing,'. 'absurd;' "but principally by his favourite manoeuvre of discharging a flood of offensive
language."1 The.actual reply is confined to the following, which is discreetly consigned to
a foot-note : —
"The co-existence of three separate recorded Marjoribanks pedigrees in the Lyon Register,
all discrepant and all faulty, was the subject of two papers in the Collectanea, written in Mr.
Foster's peculiar style. The two pedigrees most objected to turned out, however, not to be
Lyon Office pedigrees at all ; and the issue became narrowed to the question whether 'James
Marjoribanks, who was undoubtedly son of Thomas Marjoribanks,' (a Lord of Session in the
sixteenth century,) was identical with 'James Marjoribanks, who was undoubtedly Lord
Tweedmouth's ancestor,' (Collectanea, pt. viii., p. 63,) an identity which Mr. Foster affirmed
' is capable of disproof absolute.' This disproof was (as further explained on p. 66) to con
sist of the proof of a counter-proposition, that Lord Tweedmouth's said undoubted ancestor
' was son, not of the judge, but of one Simon Marjoribanks,' a position which, when Mr.
Foster succeeds in satisfactorily establishing it, will of course set the matter at rest. The
point is one of little interest to genealogists."
Such is the cunning farrago to which the Lyon Office, unable as ever to pfoduce proofe for
its " proved and registered pedigree," is finally reduced. Here is my reply : —
(1) IT IS UNTRUE that I ever spoke of " three separate recorded pedigrees." The only
one of which I spoke as "recorded" fs that which is recognised
by the Lyon Office to have been "recorded" in their Register, 21
April, 1868. (See pp. 64, 69, 70, 103.)
1 I am not responsible for this elegant metaphor, which is culled, like the above epithets, from my critic's
flowers of speech.

"8 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

(3) IT IS UNTRUE that the "two pedigrees most objected to turned out not to be
Lyon Office pedigrees at all." They both originated in that office,
though, as Lyon explains, "only one (of the three) is recorded in
the Lyon Register."
(3) IT IS UNTRUE that "the issue became narrowed to the point," etc., etc. I haye
referred above to the other points which I have challenged or dis
proved. And I still call on Lyon to make good or to retract his
calmnious charge that I have been guilty of " fabrication."
(4) IT IS UNTRUE that my "disproof (of the identity of these two Jameses) was to
consist of the proof of a counter-proposition," etc, etc. • It con
sisted (as may beseen on p. 66) of the fact that the one was dead in
1 57 1, while the other is documented alive many years afterwards.1
Lastly, the writer's contempt for such a question as the identity of the two Jameses
betrays, if real, his utter ignorance of genealogy, and, if assumed, his consciousness of defeat.
It was aptly observed by the Times, on the Annandale Peerage claims, that —
' ' Given the identity of a person named in one charter with a person named in another, and
a genealogist can prove anything."
The merest beginner in genealogy will perceive that, unless this identity can be proved,
the whole descent falls to the ground. And yet, though Lyon has committed himself to the
statement that the descent
" must at every step be supported by the most stringent and satisfactory proof,"
he now, finding himself destitute of proof for the most vital step of all, coolly turns round
and informs us, through his champion, that "the point (oi the said identity) is one of little
interest to genealogists !" Am not I justified, after such a confession, in speaking of his
" final discomfiture " ?
Turning from this humiliating spectacle to those attacks which are designed to divert
our attention from it, we might find it amusing, if it were not pitiable, to observe the desperate
shifts to which my critic is reduced, and the sublime ignorance of Scottish antiquities that is
betrayed in what is termed by the Editor of the Genealogist this "ably written article."
Indeed, we are tempted to apply to this writer his own opening words : —
"There is a time, we are told, for everything; the time has now arrived, we think, when
we must speak out without fear or favour. Scotsmen have got into a habit of receiving with.
a kind of amused wonder all the extraordinary assertions made about their country and
themselves by persons whose conceit in general is only equalled by their ignorance."
Let me first glance at his criticisms of my Baronetage. Here, as might be expected, my
" chaos " is selected as the point for virulent attack. This is only natural, considering for
how many of our false baronets the Lyon Office is responsible. But, as Dr. Mackay, the
Scottish expert, recently deposed before the Select Committee, that
"there is great difficulty in putting down the assumptions of a number of false baronets
who use the title " (Minutes of Evidence, 553),
it is strange that I, as the . only Peerage Editor who has exerted himself to check these
assumptions, should be denounced for so doing by a Scottish writer ! But in the case of my
comments on the Turing assumption, we have an instructive instance of my critic's regard
for truth. It will be observed that he ignores my avowed objection, and deliberately places
a false one in my mouth.
1 My criticisms have already had the wholesome effect of compelling the Lyon Office to abandon the
pedigree I first objected to, and of causing Sir Bernard Burke to revise his version, by expunging, inter alia,
Symon Marjoribanks. But no experienced genealogist, who will take the trouble to examine the extracts
printed on p. 67, will fail to detect the suggestive connection between the two entries : —
(i) " Symoun Marioribanki-1, eldest son of umquhile James Marioribankis ;"
(2) "Joseph Marioribankis, second lawful sonne to umquhile James Marioribankis ;"
or to draw the conclusion that when the spurious descent was first evolved from these burghal entries, Symon
and Joseph were inserted in it as brothers, by a far less rash assumption than that which identified their father
with the Tames Marjoribanks. Thus the former version in Burke was clearly the origmal one, and Symon
(whose existence, as I have shown on p. 66, was in itself fatal to the descent) was prudently, in the later and
" recorded " version, dropped like a hot potato.

THE LYON OFFICE IN RETREAT.

129

Preface to Foster's Peerage, 1SS3.
" The Lyon Office of Scotland, already by far the
most notorious offender in this respect, has added to
its already long roll of Lyon Office (not Nova Scotia)
Baronetcies that of Turing. AslheLyon Clerk Depute has
himself already exposed the origin ofthis most fallacious
claim (see " Chaos "), it is impossible, in the absence
ofthe " most stringent and satisfactory proof, to accept
its admission by an officer of the Crown, even though
he be Lyon King-of-Arms."

JovknalXof Ju'i

...PRUDENCE.

"Year by year Mr. Foster waxes bolder; and the
preface to the new edition winds up with an expression
of astonishment at the audacity of the Scottish Office
of Arms in ofticially acknowledging, in the year of
grace 1882, a Baronet whom . lie — Mr. Foster — had
consigned to ' Chaos Z an act which, in Mr. Foster's
estimation, has filled up the measure of Lyon's ini
quities. 'I shall be curious,' says he, 'to know-
under what designation the Lord Chamberlain will
allow Her Majesty to receive this gentleman, ... if
he desire to be presented, and whether the Home
Secretary will continue to tolerate the vagaries of the
Lyon Office.'"
But the other baronetcy selected by my. critic, tbat of Cathcart of Carleton, enables him to
display even more shamelessly his utterly reckless disregard of veracity. I earnestly invite the
attention of every right-minded genealogist to the deliberate falsehood here penned by the champion
of the Lyon Office. Journal of Jurisprudence.
"Some few baronets are both in the body ofthe
book and in 'Chaos;' and it -is significantly hinted
that if they fail to give Mr. Foster perfect satisfaction
regarding their status, they will be altogether removed
from the former position. One of these is Sir Reginald
Cathcart, of Carleton, regarding whom Mr. Foster in
his ' Chaos ' says : ' Further particulars of the births,
marriages, deaths, and families of the father and grand
father of tlie present baronet are much needed to
substantiate the pedigree in the baronetage.' Con
sidering that the marriage of the father of the present
baronet to Lady Eleanor Kennedy in 1836, and his
death in 1878, are to be found in the newspapers of
the date, that the estates have always descended with
the title, that there has never been a remoter suc
cession than from uncle to nephew (sic), and that the
retours of the different baronets as they succeeded are
in the Chancery Office, open to Mr. Foster's inspec
tion, the paragraph above quoted, with whatever
motive it was penned, cannot be called anything but
a gratuitous impertinence."

Foster's Baronetage.
[" [3l Hugh, capt. of the Hyde Indiaman ; d. at
Killochan in 1770, leaving a son
"Hugh, m. April, 1809, Caroline, dau. of
Conway Montgomery, esq. , and had with other
issue 2 sons.
(1) " Sir John Andrew, s. as 5th Baronet.]
" Sir John Andrew, 5th Baronet, capt. 2nd life
guards, ; b. 18 Feb. 1810 ; d. 25 March 1878, having
m. 5 July, 1836, Lady Eleanor Kennedy, dau. of
Archibald, 13th Earl of Cassilis (M. Ailsa) ; she d.
8 May, 1877, having had, with other issue, a son and a
dau. "(1) Sir Reginald Archibald Edward, 6th and
present Baronet" (p. 110).

"CATHCAKT. Further particulars of birth,
marriage, death, and families of the father and grand
father of the 5th (sic) Baronet, are much needed to
substantiate the pedigree in the Baronetage" (p. 694).

It will thus be seen that my critic, unable to bring forward any true charge against me,
has not shrunk from substituting " \he present (i.e., the 6th) baronet " for my own words, "the
5th baronet," and founding his accusation thereon- That he did so deliberately is, unfortu
nately, clear from the fact that I give (as may be seen above) all genealogical particulars as
to " the father of the present baronet," so that my remark could by no possible misapprehension
be supposed to apply to him ; and a mere glance at the " lineage " will at once show that it
does apply, and with good reason, to "the father and grandfather ofthe 5th (sic) baronet."
So much for this contemptible falsification. I may add, while on the subject, that my reply
to my critics charge, then, is —
(1) IT IS UNTRUE that I speak of "the father and grandfather of the present baronet."
(2) IT IS UNTRUE that I have even "hinted that" the Cathcart Baronetcy " will be
altogether removed from .... the body of the book," unless I am
given "perfect satisfaction." I merely express a wish that this im
perfect pedigree may be supplemented by the usual data.
(3) IT IS UNTRUE that " there has never been a remoter succession than from uncle to
nephew." In the very instance at issue the succession was from
uncle to great-nephew.
(4) By the Roseberry resolution of 1822 (of which my critic has, of course, never heard), a
succession even "from uncle to nephew," and d fortiori from uncle to great-
nephew, was pronounced sufficiently "remote," in the case of Scottish peers, to
necessitate that an heir so succeeding should establish his title by something more
than a "retour;" namely, by a claim before the House of Lords.
(5) As to the worth or rather worthlessness of these "retours in the Chancery Office," I may

i3° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
refer my critic to an able treatise by Mr. W. 0. Hewlett,1 where cases are quoted
in support of the conclusion that retours —
" are in ordinary circumstances entitled to little weight ; they are always ex parte, and frequently
contain erroneous findings " (p. 146).
I think that my readers will now agree with me that my critic, in " the paragraph above
quoted," is guilty of something far worse than the so-called "gratuitous impertinence" which
he falsely lays to my charge. In the yournal of Jurisprudence the succeeding article opens
suggestively with these words : —
" To naiTow-minded mortals there may seem to be something of novelty in the very
suggestion that a lawyer may, after all, have a soul ; and some such may even be inclined to
suggest that the average lawyer would find such a possession an exceedingly inconvenient
companion."
I fear that there are many who will be " inclined to suggest " it in the case of the " distinguished "
lawyer at the head of the Lyon Office, when they find him hurling at me false charges to coyer
his own laches (see p. 102), and stooping, when detected, to the despicable device of making
fresh charges, equally false, under the safe veil of anonymity !
Turning now from my Baronetage to my Peerage, I find three titles selected for special
criticism. With tbat of Tweedmouth— the Marjoribanks pedigree — I have already dealt at
length ; with that of Sinclair I shall deal below. There remains that of Ruthven.
The history of this title is " curious " (to adopt the expression of my critic), and perhaps,
as a whole, unique. As it appeared to me, on reflection, that I was not justified in inserting
•it, as has been the practice hitherto, without any qualifying clause, I gave my reasons in my
present edition for submitting that "it ought to have no place in a Peerage." This, like my
"odd comments" ofthe year before, in the case ofthe Marjoribanks pedigree, gave dire offence
at the Lyon Office, and was similarly gathered up into the next attack to be launched at my
devoted head. But so impatient were my assailants for their anticipated hour of triumph,
that they could not wait for the full attack in the Journal of Jurisprudence, but forestalled it,
so far as Ruthven was concerned, by an ingenious but transparent device.. It would seem
.that more heads than one conspired to evolve this latest Lyon Office manifesto (" Tantm
molis erat Romanam condere gentem"); for it was arranged that "No. 1" of these, under the
pseudonym of " Ignoramus," should open the question in Notes and Queries, and should
be instantly answered by another, writing as " T. T.," who should anticipate their great
discovery contained in the coming attack (see N. & Q., 6th S. vii. 87, 109). The trans
parency of this petty device is illustrated by the following passages : —
Notes and Queries. 3 Feb., 1883. < Journal of Jurisprudence, i March, 1883.
"That Mr. Foster means that she thereby became " That a Scottish peerage is meant, is put beyond
a peeress of Scotland is put beyond doubt by his add- doubt by Mr. Foster s further contention that in con
ing that, in consequence of the English doctrine of sequence of the English doctrine of the indefeasibility
the indefeasibility of peerage not obtaining in of peerage not obtaining in Scotland, the title did not
Scotland, the title did not properly transmit to the properly transmit to the descendants of the lady made
descendants of the lady in question, who nevertheless a peeress by George I., who nevertheless wrongfully
wrongfully assumed it." — Ignoramus. assumed it."
The tissue of misrepresentations contained in these passages has been thoroughly exposed ;
but we learn from them, at least, that this article is, in great part, the work of one who has
aptly described himself as " Ignoramus," and who has in Notes atid Queries invoked the
aid of " readers more learned in this especial department than " — himself !
My opponents could not have made a more disastrous move. While they were rubbing
their hands over the success of their manoeuvre, a note appeared from " G. E. C," convicting
them ofthe worst form of "inaccuracy" in their statements of facts, viz., the suppression of
the whole trath (vii. 153) ; this was promptly followed by an elaborate reply from my friend
and coadjutor, Mr. J. H. Round (vii. 168), in which my critics' fallacies were refuted, their
misrepresentations laid bare, and T. T. proved to be destitute of even "an elementary
knowledge of the peerage law of Scotland." The halting and impotent rejoinder which he
attempted (vii. 229) only served to draw forth from Mr. Round an even more destructive
expose (vii. 290), in which the points advanced in Notes and Queries and in the Journal
were, one by one, mercilessly disposed of, and "the evolution of this pseudo-barony " estab
lished in the most convincing manner.
Referring my readers to Notes and Queries for the vindication of my Ruthven comments,
1 Some Reasons against the Transfer ofthe futisdiction ofthe House of Lords, etc., etc. (Wildy.)

THE LYON OFFICE IN RETREAT.

131

I now address myself to " Sinclair." I shall quote verbatim my critic's paragraph, and I shall
show by analysis how well it illustrates the "astounding display of ignorance " (p. 127) to be
found in this "ably written article."—
Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 121.
Mr. Foster's discovery regarding
the Sinclair peerage is another sur
prise to us, but of a different com
plexion. The view which he sets
forth as novel (l) is familiar to every
Scottish genealogist and peerage
lawyer. It was first propounded by

Mr. Riddell in his Peerage Law
(PP- 54. 55)- A Scottish peerage,
it is well known, was often resigned
to the king to be re-conveyed to a
new series of heirs, who might even
be strangers in blood : a transaction
completed by a Crown charter of
resignation (sic) (z) or confirmation.
Resignation was a necessary step to
divest the original heirs of their
right, and the fact of the resignation
having been made was generally
narrated in the Crown charter, the
only known exception, if it be one,
being the case of Lord Sinclair.-
John, Lord Sinclair, who had no
son, but a daughter married to
Sinclair (5) of Herdmanstoun (4) (very
remotely, if at all, related to her),
executed a " designation " of his
estates and honours to his son-in-
law (sic) (5), bringing in the paternal
relations of the latter under a re
mainder (sic)(6), which took effect
in the next generation. (7) There
is no positive evidence that there
was a "resignation" as well as a
"designation." The "designation"
was, in 1677, confirmed by Charles
II. to the grandson (by his daughter)
of the designer, the confirmation
charter making no explicit mention
of a resignation, though conferring
the precedence of the old title.
. The question raised by Mr. Riddell
was, whether a resignation not nar
rated in the Crown charter could
be presumed to have taken place.
If not, the dignity conferred in 1677
was a new one, and the old title,
which had never been extinguished,
still existed, agreeably to the old
Scottish presumption in favour of
heirs general, in the person of the
heir-of-line. (8) That Mr. Foster
must directly or indirectly have got
this view of the case from Riddell's
work, and not from an independent

(') It is simply untrue that I set forth this " view " as " novel"
in any way whatever. In the passage in my Preface (which my
critic himself quotes on p. 119) I state truly that I have " here
corrected a prevalent misconception arising from ignorance of
the law of treason " (p. 4) ; and in the body of the work " I have
pointed out (at Mr. Round's suggestion) the effect which this
correction has upon the claim of the heir-of-line. But my critic
discreetly ignores this correction, and addresses himself to those
remarks which I neither describe as a "view," nor 'as '.' novel."

(2) "A Crown charter of resignation ( !) or confirmation.'
Scotsmen will receive with something more than "a kind of
amused wonder " this unintelligible blunder of " a person whose
conceit in general is only equalled by his ignorance (p. 113).

(3) " _5i'«clair," the name of the Herdmanstoun family, is
rightly spelt " St. Clair." Riddell, it is true," sometimes spells
it .Sinclair;" but then "our great peerage lawyer was not always
punctilious in his orthography" ! Clearly my critic Writes " from
Riddell's work, and not from an independent examination of the
Scottish records."
(4) "Of Herdmanstoun.'' St. Clair of Herdmanstoun was
not her husband, but her father-in-law. Her husband never
lived to be " of Herdmanstoun."
(5) " His son-in-law." This is a most outrageous blunder.
A mere glance at the patent shews that the "designation " was
to his grandsons. It recites that he " nepotes . . . reliquit, qnibus
designavit ejus titulum honoris," etc. But perhaps " my learned
friend " would render nepos " son-in-law" !
(") "A remainder." An equally wild blunder. The "re
mainder," or "remainders (more correctly "substitutions"), were
only introduced in the 1677 patent, and are not recited to have
formed part ofthe "designation."
(') As these substitutions did not take effect till after the death
of the grandsons of the " son-in-law " (the great-grandsons of the
designer), it is difficult to see how (even on my critic's hypo
thesis) they " took effect in the next generation."

(s) Another careless blunder, or daring misrepresentation. It
is directly contrary to fact that Riddell held it still to exist "in
the person of the heir-of-line." Here are his own words : —
"Query, then is not the original and proper barony of Sinclair,
that of the original Lords Sinclair ... in the present Earl of

132

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 121.
examination of the Scottish records,
is obvious from the circumstance
that, in quoting the charter of 1677,
he adopts all the little differences of
spelling from the register which are
to be found in Riddell's quotation :
our great peerage lawyer, was not
always punctilious in his ortho
graphy. The matter has since been
much discussed, the upholders of
Lord Mansfield's Cassillis dictum
maintaining that the old peerage
had come to an end on the death
of the Lord Sinclair who executed
the designation, in consequence of
the failure of heirs male, (9) as,
according to their theory, no right
could be presumed to exist to it in
the person of an heir female. Four
teen years after writing his Peerage
Law, Mr. Riddell, we have reason
to know, still looked on the question
as one of extreme legal difficulty.
Though it is but natural that a
Foster should rush in where a
Riddell fears to tread, we would
hardly have expected to find Mr.
Foster posing as an adherent of the
" extreme views of Riddell and his
Scottish school." (10)

Caithness, the undoubted heir wale ofthe former, by reason of his
male descent from, and representation of, their common ancestor,
William, Earl of Orkney and Caithness, ' Lord Sinclair 1 . . .
I conceive that, before 1677, the old barony of Sinclair may have
devolved to the Caithness branch, in whom it legally ts, as above
—always holding there to have been no previous resignation. T
Let my critic then speak for himself as to his "old Scottish pre
sumption," and not foist on Riddell his blunder that it still
exists "in the person of the heir-of-line," when, as I have
shewn in my Peerage, " the claims of this line would in any
case be barred by the attainder of the Master of Sinclair
(p. 646).

(») Here again let my critic speak for himself. After Riddell's
admission ofthe existence of an " undoubted heir male," have we
not " reason to know " that the Lyon Office champion is here
writing of what he does not understand?

(10) What on earth have "the extreme views of Riddell and
his Scottish school " on the jurisdiction of the Court of Session
(see Preface to my Peerage, p. 2) to do with'the Sinclair problem?
As a matter of fact, Riddell (as we have seen) here flies in the
face of "the old Scottish presumption," and ignores the very
claim which he is falsely asserted to uphold. But the " ultron
eous " introduction of this quotation is fall of eloquent meaning.
I had pointed out, in the Preface to my Peerage, that Lyon had
adopted " these extreme views " in his evidence before the select
committee, adding that "a change so retrograde as that pro
posed will not meet with much favour." My prediction has now
been amply fulfilled, and Lyon, smarting beneath the conscious
ness of defeat, endeavours to wrench my words from their context,
and apply them " ultroneously " to myself.

* Peerage La-.u, p. 1100.

t lb., p. noi.

The blunders just revealed are the more astounding when we consider that had my critic
(to adopt the words which he is pleased to apply to myself),
" with but a little preliminary knowledge, betaken himself to. the proper source of informa
tion, the Scottish records, he would have readily been able to correct them.1
I have analysed thus ih detail the Sinclair paragraph, that I may afford my readers conclusive
evidence, on the one hand, of the baselessness and the mala fides of the charges thus brought
against me, and, on the other, of the incredible ignorance of those who so rashly bring
them. " I should have deemed it," as I have said, " beneath me to reply to this anonymous
vituperation, but for the fact that most of it has been 'ultroneously' re-printed by a literary
confrere." Now had the Editor of " The Genealogist " merely re-printed it, it might have
been charitably assumed that he was short of "copy," and that he welcomed the chance of
filling his columns by the free use of scissors and paste. He took upon himself, however, to
record his opinion that this attack was "an ably written article."2 Dr.. Marshall, by so
doing, has placed himself on the horns of a dilemma ; for either he must confess that he is
so utterly wanting in the acumen essential to a genealogist, as not to have detected the writer's
many and obvious blunders ; or, if he did detect them, he must plead guilty to having
repeated these charges with a full knowledge of their falsity, and to having praised the article
as " ably written," when he was aware that the reverse was the truth. Unlikely as the former
alternative must appear, I can but be loth to adopt the latter. It might at any rate have been
hoped that Dr. Marshall would have refrained from again compromising his reputation, after

1 This remark applies with peculiar force to the errors in the " proved and registered " Marjoribank
igree, which I was readily able to correct from that very " source of information."

pedigre

Genealogist, vii. 76.

THE LYON OFFICE IN RETREAT. i33

his painful experience on a former occasion, when he had permitted, by a deplorable error of
judgment, a junior member of the College of Arms to attack in his columns, not only myself,
but also two of the most distinguished members of the corporation to which he had the
honour to belong.
I need not stoop to notice the querulous ramblings with which this spiteful paper is
padded. Though its theme is " Mr. Foster as a Scottish Genealogist," it is eked out by
criticisms on my " Lineages " of English Peers and Baronets, although the only charge
which can be brought against them is that the system of arrangement which I have adopted
in my work, and which is avowedly one of its distinctive features, is not that, forsooth, which
my critic happens to prefer ! Of the charges against my Work on the Scottish M.P.'s, I
am tempted to quote the following very suggestive specimen : —
"When, as sometimes happens, the date of a death is twice given, it is as likely as not
to be different each time. Charles Oliphant, member for the Ayr Burghs, is said to have
died on (sic) " 9th January, 1719-20," and in the very next line the date of death is repeated
as 9th December, 1719. Similarly, the date of death of General Skene of Hallyards is on
page 317 first put down as 6th July, 1787, and then repeated in the succeeding line as May,
17S7.
Here we have but another case in which my critic states what is untrue, and what he
knows to be untrue. My readers will remember that the work is composed of two distinct
factors. (1) An Alphabetical List of Members, with their names and parliamentary services, taken
from the official return. (This portion is in large type.)
(2) My own biographical annotations. - (This portion is in small type.)
Now in cases where a man was in Parliament when he died we have in die date of his
successor's election the definite evidence of the official return tbat he was dead before (but
not long before) that date. As this official evidence affords a valuable check on the received
dates of death, I have inserted it, not " sometimes," but systematically, among the official
data as apart from my own annotations. The latter are thus checked and confirmed by it in
every case where this evidence is forthcoming. To take the very first case in my List, of a
Member so dying, I describe Sir J. Abercromby (p. 3)" as M.P. for Clackmannanshire from
1815 " until his death shortly "before n April, 1817," and in my biographical notice of him
(small type) I give the exact date, viz., 14 Feb., 181 7. Subsequently adopting for brevity the
contraction, " s.b.," I state, in the instance of Dr. Charles Oliphant, that he was Member
for the Ayr Burghs "until his death s.b. 9 Jan., 1719-20," and in my biographical notice of
him (small type), I give the exact date, viz., 9 Dec, 1719. Thus we firstly see the untruth
ofthe statement that I assert him to die "on (sic) 9 Jan., 1719-20," and secondly, the mala
fides of the writer, who, perceiving that the two dates are (necessarily) always different (which
could not be the case if inaccuracy were the cause), unscrupulously asserts that they are " as
likely as not to be different each time." Such miserable devices as I have here exposed will
do more than "tend to shake our faith" in the honesty of this "able writer," the champion cf
the Lyon Office
Lastly, I shall glance at the following passage, as aimed undisguisedly at the paragraph
in my Peerage " Preface " which has given, as we have already seen, such dire offence to
Lyon, because its prediction that his "extreme views" would "not meet with much favour"
has now been, and continues to be, so amply fulfilled.
" When he likewise condemns a carefully prepared report of a House of Lords Committee
on the Peerage of Scotland, of which Committee Lord Moncreiff was chairman ; when he
alludes in a sneering tone of superiority to the evidence given before that Committee on
subjects which the witnesses had made the study of their lives, — we have naturally asked.
Who is Mr. Foster ? and what evidence do his Peerage and other books give of his being
entitled to assume such an attitude?"
It is untrue that I condemned the committee's report. I did not even mention it. We have
here one of Lyon's cunning devices for shifting the onus from himselfj by representing that
my criticisms on him were a condemnation of the report ofthe committee. As to my allusions
to the evidence of Dr. Mackay and himself, I beg to refer him to Mr. Hewlett's treatise, where
he will find much of that evidence far more effectually disposed of. I am sorry.to learn that
it was given on "subjects which the witnesses had made the study of their Uves," for we are
thus precluded from the hope that, where their statements were erroneous, as was only too
often the case, it was due to an imperfect acquaintance with the subjects to which they
referred.
Collect. R

^34 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
And now having exposed the true character of this " ably written article," I, in my turn,
" have naturally asked, who is " this anonymous critic ? and " when he alludes in a tone_ of
sneering superiority to " my " Peerage and other books," I ask, " What evidence do his "
criticisms " give of his being entitled to assume such an attitude ? " And when, further to
adopt his own words, my name " is persistently held up to obloquy," and my arduous labours,
" past and present, are alluded to with sneering contempt, by one who loudly asserts his own
superior intelligence, it becomes our duty to inquire who this traducer is, and what real
acquaintance he has with the subject in which he professes himself an expert." *
"And we are now in a position to answer these questions."
" In the first place," we have seen that, finding himself unable to rebut my grave charges
against the Lyon Ofiice, he proclaims that the point so keenly contested by Lyon King-of-
Arms himself, is one " of little interest to genealogists." Secondly, we have seen that, to
cover his discomfiture, he has ransacked my works, English and Scottish, for matter of accu
sation against me, but has been driven in despair to resort to charges demonstrably false,
based on the most reckless perversion of my statements, and misquotation of my words.
Thirdly, we have seen that, in Scottish antiquities, his insipience is only equalled by his con
ceit. " He alludes with disparagement " to . my genealogical works, " and also habitually
displays his ignorance of them. He makes blunders of which a Scottish schoolboy would be
ashamed ; he is in the dark as to " the process by which peerages were re-granted ; 2 (he renders
nepotes "son-in-law"); "and the measure of his acquaintance with Scottish peerage law is
shown by his considering " that the Ruthven entail conveyed the honours which it expressly
ignored, and that such devolution of a peerage dignity " was quite a matter in ordinary
course." s
" It would be an insult " to the editor of the Journal of Jurisprudence to suggest that
this article proceeded from his pen, though the editorial " we " of the anonymous writer
might at first sight have favoured the suggestion. It can only be regretted that, whether from
ignorance, or from a blind confidence in Lyon's infallibility, he opened his columns to a writer
so unscrupulous in the weapons he employs. We have learnt by experience that there is but
one establishment where these peculiar weapons are forged ; and beneath the veil which this
anonymous assailant has so cunningly cast about his person, we detect, by their unerring
witness, a Lyon's cloven hoof. " Who is Mr. Foster ? " crows my critic, with the shrill assump
tion of defiance. He has himself supplied the answer. Mr. Foster is an English genealogist,
who " year by year waxes bolder," to the unfeigned astonishment and dismay of the authorities
at the Lyon Office. He has not been deterred by their " sneering contempt," or by their
" persistent obloquy," from the discharge of what he believes to be his duty as a conscientious
Peerage Editor, . The Lyon Office has only itself to blame if its dealings with genealogy and
with coat-armour, with the Baronetage, and even with the Peerage, have rendered it needful
that a protest should be raised, and that the public should be placed in possession of the
true facts of the case. If it be " bold " to expose those dealings, Mr. Foster must continue
to " wax bolder; " for, unhappily, he has in store, for an unsuspecting public, further and more
startling revelations. Joseph Foster.
1 Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 77.
* By "a Crown charter of resignation" ! (ante. p. 131.)
3 These quotations are all taken from the Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 127.

The Parliament of 1614.
THE List of the Parliament summoned to meet 5 April, 12 James I. (1614), here
printed, is taken from the Kimbolton MSS., and is catalogued in the eighth Report of
the Historical MS. Commission, App. II. p. 28. By permission of the Duke of Manchester
it is now made public, and fills up a most important hiatus in our Parliamentary annals.
The MS. consists of twenty-eight pages, and seems to have been very carefully com
piled The total number of Knights and Burgesses on every page is noted at the foot of
each — inclusive of vacancies — and at the end of the Roll the grand total is stated
By a comparison of the vacancies in the List, with certain data given in the House
of Commons Journals, the date of compilation of the Roll may be fixed within very narrow
limits. Immediately after the meeting of Parliament, the House proceeded with the
business of the contested elections, of which it appears there was an unusual number.
On April 9 it is resolved, " That Sir George Selby, Sheriff of Durham, cannot be chosen Knight of the
Shire for Northumberland ;" and a Writ was ordered fpr the election of a new Knight, which was to be "on the
next County day but one."
April 11. The right of the Attorney-General (Sir Francis Bacon) to sit in Parliament is questioned. A
Report is made, " That there is no law against the Attorney-General sitting ; but that which is against all
Privy Councillors, Solicitor, Sergeant, and all Knights of Shires not Rescants, or not Freemen." It was affirmed,
" That no Attorney was ever chosen, nor anciently any Privy Councillor, nor any that took livery of the King."
Resolved, "That he shall for this Parliament remain in the House, but never any Attorney-General shall serve
for the future." Sir Francis Bacon was, it seems, returned by three different Constituencies — Cambridge
University, Ipswich, and. St. Albans. He elected to sit for the first named.
April 12, a motion is made against a Sheriff of Wales for excluding Mr. Thomas, Recorder of Carmarthen,
who had been elected for that town, the Sheriff making the Return, "Nullus Burgus vocatus Shere Town unde
Burgus eligi possit," whereby it was affirmed, "He may turn out all the Burgesses of Wales."
April 14. Question put, " Whether all Mayors and Bailiffs returning themselves shall be removed ? "
Resolved, "Yea." In consequence of this resolution, " many members are questioned and thrown out for
holding offices."
* April 14. Thomas Perient, Esq.,'returnedfor St. Albans in the place of Sir Francis Bacon, who elected
to serve for Cambridge Uuiversity.
* April 17. Sir Simeon Steward returned for Shaftesbury in the place of Sir Miles Sandys, elected f
Cambridge University.
May 11. Sir Walter Cope and Sir Harry Wallop unseated for Stockbridge, and a warrant issued for a
new choice.* May 12. Sir William Selby returned/or Northumberland in the place of Sir George Selby, whose election
had been declared void.
The approximate date of compilation of the Kimbolton MS. is determined thus :
Thomas Perient is placed in it as M.P. for St. Albans, and Sir Simeon Steward for
Shaftesbury. On the other hand, Sir Walter Cope and Sir Henry Wallop are given as
still sitting for Stockbridge, and the second seat for Northumberland — afterwards filled by
Sir William Selby — is vacant. It follows that the Roll must have been compiled between
17 April, the date of Steward's return for Shaftesbury; and n May, when Cope and Wallop
were deprived of their seats for Stockbridge. The probability is that it would be nearer
the former date than the latter,, inasmuch as the second seat for Ipswich, vacated by
Bacon, upon his selection to represent the University, is still unfilled, and it is unlikely that
the new election was delayed much beyond that of St. Albans, also vacated by him from
the same cause.
It may be remarked that the calculation at the foot of the Roll is not quite accurate.
The total strength of the House at its full complement would be 471 instead of 475.
(? This last should be 476 correctly added.) This is exclusive ofthe Borough of Minehead,
which from some cause or other made no Return to this Parliament, and is not included
in the calculation by the compiler. This number 471, it may be observed, coincides almost
exactly with that given in a Resolution of the House, passed 18 April, in connexion with
a dispute concerning impositions and taxes, in which it is stated, " That this House consists
of about 472, of whom 300 were not in the last Parliament, whereof many are young." The
number 475 (? 476) is obtained by regarding as vacant one seat each at Abingdon, Higham-
Ferrers, Banbury, Bewdley, and Monmouth, whereas these Boroughs were entitled to send
but one member each, and their full Return is recorded on the Roll. The actual
vacancies, when the Roll was compiled, were at Bodmin, Fowey, Northumberland, Ludlow,
Newton (Hants), Ipswich, Cricklade, Anglesea, and Carmarthen — total, 9, instead of
14, as given by the compiler. Whether the whole of these were filled up before the
Dissolution on 9 June following is not quite certain ; but, judging from the case of Northum
berland, it is highly probable that they were. Wm_ Duncombe PlNKa
Leigh, Lancashire. * Blue Book Returns.

•36

COLLECTANEA- GENEALOGICA.

5l20TUtna Stpilitum Com. &\\m. Cft.tatttm et Burses, fcillar gate %\xx--
fforum ac 25aconu. qufnqj. i©ortuum fjenient aa patlfamet gumonit..
aptrt afllesftm. quinqj. Hie gprflfc anno regnf E* jacobi 8nglfe ac
tmobecimo £t fe>cotie ^Ibtj0 1614.
Bedf f Henricus Graye, miles.
( Oliverus Luke, miles.
villa Bedf /Alexandrus St. John, miles. .
( Johes. Leighe, ar.
Buck /ffrancus> Goodwyn, miles.
(Willus. Borlas, miles.
(Thomas Denton, miles.
villa Buck jRadus. Winwood, mil. principal.
\ Secretar.
Burgus f Hencus. Neuill, miles.
Wiccombel Willus. Borlas, ar.
Burgus J Johes. Dormer, miles.
Ailesbury (Samuell. Backhowse, ar.
Berk /ThomasParrymil.'canc.Duc.Lanc. (Henricus Neuill, miles.
villa NoueJRkus. Louelace, miles.
Winsor (Thomas Woodward, ar.
Burgus (ffrancus. Moore, ar.
Readmge (Robtus. Knollis, ar.
Burgus /
Walling- J Careus Reynoulds, miles.
ford. 1 Georgius Symeon, mil.
Burgus \ Robertus Knollis, mil.
Abingdon j (Richardus Carewe, Jun. de
Cornub i Anthony, ar.
( Johes. St. abin, ar.
Burgus \
Dunhevet I Carolus Willmott, miles.
als Laun-/ Willus. Crofte, ar.
ceston J
Burgus • (Ricus. Connock, ar.
Leskerd (Johes. Glanvile, ar.
Lost- /Edrus. Leech, ar.
withell J Hencus. ffann, miL
Burgus ./Thomas Russell, ar.
Truro (Thomas Burgesse, Jun. m'cator.
Burgus (xpoferus Spray, gen.
Bodwyn j
Bur (Robertus KiUegrew, mil.
Helston (Henricus Bulstrood, ar.
Burgus (Radus. Carewe, ar.
.Saltash ( Robtus. Phillips, mil.
Burgus | Georgius Cotton, gen.
Camelford (Robtus. Naunton, ar.

Burgus \
Portpiham ( Edwardus Lewknor, mil.
als. West- j Johes. Harris, ar.
lowe J
rur ) ffrancus. Barneham, mil.
poS FhomaS St Ab*n> tt
Bur (Reginaldus Mohum, miL & Bar.
Eastlowe (Georgius Chudley, ar.
Bur (Willus. Killegrewe, mil
Penrin (ffrancus. Cran'e, ar.
Bur (Willus. Hackwill, ar,
Tregenie (Thomas Mallett, ar.
Bur - (Johes. Woode, ar.
Bossine (Jeromimus Horsey, mil.
Burgus (Anthonius Maney, mil.
St. Ives (Joseph. Killegrewe, mil.
Burgus ) Jonathan Rashley, gen.
ffowey j
Staler U0hes- E11y°"' an
bt: Jer" f Johes. Trott, ar.
mins ) J
Burgus (xpofer. Hodson, ar.
Mitchell (Walter. Hickman, ar.
Burgus (Thomas Trevor, ar.
Nuport (Thomas Cheecke, mil.
Bur. (ffranciscus Vivian, ar.
St. Mawes.t Nicholas Smithe, miL
Bur (Willus. Roll, gen.
Kellingtonj Humfridus Weare, ar.
Cornitb* /WUlus- Lawson, mil.
i_ornub |Thomas penraddock, miL
Civitas (Georgius Buttler, ar.
Carloill (Nathaniell. Tomkins, ar.
Cant4.br J J°hes- Cutt!' 3™-» m.iL
cantabr |Thomas chickley, mil.. .
Villa (Robtus. Hitcham,, miL
Cantabr (ffrancus. Brakin, ar.
Vniu'sitas ( Milo Sandis, mil. and bar.
Cantabr (.franco. Bacon, mil.. Attorn.
rvcT.. / willus- Brereton,. mil.
cestr |Rogerus wibraham, mil.
Civkas
Cestr

(Edrus. Whitby, ar. record.
(Johes. Bingle'y, ar.
n (Henricus Howard, ar.
l»erb |wiUus cauendishe, mil.

* So in MS. Clearly an error for Cumberland.

THE PARLIAMENT OF 1614.

*3t

villa" (Gilbtus. Kneviton, mil.
Derb (Arthurus Turner, ar.
(Edwardus Giles, mil.
(Johes. Drake, ar.
(Johes. Prowse, ar.
(Thomas Martyn, gen.
(Nathaniell. Riche, ar.
(Laurenc Adams, m'cator.
(Willus. Stroude, mil.
Plymouth (Thomas Sherwill, m'cat
Bur Bar- (Johes. Goslyn, in medecinis doc
(Johes. Delbridge, m'cator.
(Warwicus Heale, mil.
(Sampson Heale, ar.
(ffrancus. Glanvile, ar.
Tauestock (Edrus. Duncombe, ar.
Burgus \
Dartmouth (Thomas Howard ) ,
Clifton (Thomas GourneyjmcaL
(Thomas Crewe, ar.
( Ricus. White, mil.
DoRSF-rr jMarvinus Audley, mil.
jjorsett |johes strangwaies, mil.
(Walterus Earle, ar.
(Thomas Walsingham, jun., mil.
(ffrancus. Ashley, ar.
(Georg. Horsley, ar.
(Edrus. Seymor, mil. et Bar.
(Georgius Browne, ar.
Bur Way-(Carolus Ceasar, mil.
mouth (Robtus. Battman, gen.
et
Melcombe (Barnardus Michell, gen.
R. I Johes. Roye, gen.
Bur Brit- (Willus. Bamfielde, mil.
porte (Johes. Jeffery, ar.
(Symeon Steward, miL
(Henricus Crooke, ar.
(Johes. ffreacke, ar.
(Willus. Pitt, ar.
(Johes. Dackombe, ar.
CrofCastle(Jacobus Whitlocke, ar.
p«,.v (Robertus Rich, miL
Ji,ssEX \Richardus Weston, mil.
Bur Choi- f Robertus Barker, ser. ad legm.
Chester (Edrus. Alford, ar.
Burgus J Johes. Sams, mil.
(Carolus Chibourne, ar.
( Harbottellus Grymston,mil.etBar.
(Robertus Maunsfielde, miles
f Johes. Saville, miL
(Thomas Wentworth, mil.
(Robtus. Askwith, Alderman.
(xpofer. Brooke, ar.

Devon
Civitas ExonBurgus
Tottnes Burgus

nestableBurgusPlympton Burgus

HardresBur Berelston

BurgusPoole
Bur Dor
chester Burgus
Lme R.

Bur Shaf
tesburyBurgus
Warham Burgus

Maiden
Burgus Harwich Ebor

CivitasEbor
villa Kingestonr^v-ug< B es> ^lder.
Sup Hull '

Burgus Knares-
burghe Burgus
Scar-burghe BurgusRippon Burgus

(Hencus. Slingesby, miL
| Willus. Beacher, ar.
(Edwardus Smith, ar.
| Willus. Conyers, ar.
(Thomas Posthum. Hobby, mil.
(Willus. Mallory, ar.
f Richardus Williamson, miL

Richmond (Talbot Bowes, ar.
Burgus ( Clemens Cooke, ar.
Heydon (Willus. Sheffielde, ar.
Burgus ) fferdinando ffairefex, miL
briggl" J GeorSius Marshall, ar.
Burgus (Thomas Bellassis, miL
Thuske (Robtus. Yaxley, miL
Burgus J Hencus. Savile mil et Bar.

villaBeverley Glouc

Aldburghe(Johes. Wetherid, ar.
(Edmund. Scott, ar.
(Willus. Towes, ar.
(Willus. Cooke, miL
(Ricus. Barkley, ar.
Civitas (Thomas Machen, ar.
Glouc (Johes. Browne, ar.
Burgus (Anthonius Maney, miL
Cirenester (Robertus Straunge, ar.
Burgus
Tewkes-

1 Tohes. Bowcher, mil.

(Dudleus Diggs, mil.
1 Johes. Ratcliffe, mil.
f Oliuerus Cromwell, miL
(Robtus. Payne, mil.
Jxpoferus Hatton, miL
(Milo ffleetewood, miL
iHenr. Carey miL fil. dm. de
Hunsdon.
Radulpbus Coningsby, miL
(Thomas Perrient, ar.
( Hencus. Ffynch de Grayes Inn,ar.
Hm„ (Jacobus Scudamore, miL
ttEREFF |Herbertus Croftej miL
(Johes. Hoskins, ar.
Johes. Warden, gen,
{Humfridus Baskervile, miL
Thomas Coningesby, ar.
f Petrus Manwood, mil.
(Thomas Walsingham, miL
(Georgius Newman, legm. Doctor.
(Willus. Lbuelace, miL
( Edrus. Hobby, mil.
1 Edwinus Sandis, miL
Bur Maid- (ffrancus. ffane, miL
stone (Johes. Scott, miL
Bur Quin- (Rogerus Palmer, ar.
boroughe (Robtus. Hatton, ar.
Lincolne /Georgius Maners, mil.
Lincolne |Perigrin- Bartue, miL

bury
Hunt
Burgus Hunt Hertf
villa scL
Albani

Civitas HereffBurgus

Kanc
Civitas
Cantuar
Civitas Roffen

138

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Civitas f Thomas Grantham, mil.
Lyncoln (Edrus. Bash, ar.
villa (Anthonius Irby, ar.
Boston (Leonard. Bawtrey, ar.
vii. mag. f Johes. Wray, mil.
Grimsby (Ricus. Toothby, ar.
villa f Richardus Cecill, ar.
Stanford (Johes. Jaye, ar.
Burgus (Georgius Reynill, mil.
Grantham (Ricus. Tufton, ar.
T uirFSTK /Georgius Hastings, ar.
(Thomas Haselngge, mil.
Burgus (Henricus Rich., mil.
Leicestr (ffrancus. Leighe, mil.
LANCASTRiThomas Gerrard> miL
j__ancastr jCuthbe_.tus Hallsall> mil
Burg (Thomas ffanshawe, ar.
Lancastr (Willus. ffanshawe, ar.
Son in)Edwaxdus Moseley, ar. attor.
Andemes (Hencus. Banester, ar.
villa (Edwardus Wymarke, ar.
Leverpoole (Thomas Ireland, ar.
Burgus j Willus. Ashton, ar.
Newton (Rogerus Charnock.
villa (Ricus. Molyneux, jun., mil.
Wigan (Gilbtus. Gerrard, ar.
Burgus (Gilbtus. Houghton, mil.
Clithero (Clemens Cooke, ar.
M (Julius Csesar, miL Cane. Sccrii.
midd |Thomas Lake> mil
Civitas (Humfridus Maye, mil.
Westm. (Edus. Dubbleday, ar.
{Thomas Lowe, mil.
Hencus. Mountague, mil. record.
Nicus. ffuller, mercerius.
Robtus. Middleton, pelleparius.
Mon- (Walterus Mountague, mil.
mouth. (Willus. Jones, de Treowenar.
Bur ) Robtus. Johnson, miles.
Monmouth j
Northt jEd™3- Mountagu, mil.
JNORTHT \Willus. Tate, miles.
PeTr* lwillus- Walter, miles.
boroughe ) Edwardus Wymarke, ar.
villa (Henricus Yeluerton, solicitar.
Northt (ffrancus. Beale, ar.
villa (Willus. Spencer, ar.
Brackley (Arthurus Terringham, ar.
Bur high- ) Rowlandus St. John, ar.
am fferris j"
v ( Gervasius Clifton, mil. et Bar.
1,10X1 {johes. Hollis, mil.
villa Not- (Willus. Gregory, mil.
tingham (Robtus. Stables, alderman.
Bur East- (Willus. Kavendish, mil.
retford { Walterus Chute, mil.

,T (Henricus Beddingfield, miL
Norff |Hamond ie Straunge, mil.
„. .. /Thomas Heme, miL #
^r1 -S • \ Riceus. Gwyn ar. record. Civit.
Norwici | Norwici/
villa de ^Matheus Clerke, ar.
Lynn R. \ Thomas Oxborough, ar. record.
villa , \
Magne I Theophilus ffynch, mil.
Yarne- /Georgius Hardware, m'cat,
mouth j
villa J Willus. Twisenden, mil.
Thetford (fframlington Gawdy, ar.
Bur Cas- J Robertus Wynd, mil.
tlerisinge ( Thomas Binge, ar.
North- } Hencus. Woodrington, miL
umbr J
Villa novi 'n
Castrie (Henricus Anderson, mil.
Super fWillus. Jenison, ar.
Tynam J
Bur ( Willus. Buttoni mil.
Morpeth (Amoldus Herbert, ar.
villa (Johes. Selby, miL
Barwici. (Meredith Morgan, gen.
.- (Anthonius Cope, miL et Bar.
Ox0N {johes. Crooke, mil.
Civitas (Johes. Asheley, miles.
Oxon (Thomas Wenteworth, ar.
Vniu'sitas f DaniellDun i mfl>legm.doctol.
Oxon (Johes. Bennett,] . °
BurWood-(Phus. Carie, mil.
stocke {jacobus Whitlock, ar. record.
bur Ban"}willus. Cope, mil.
(Guido Palmes, mil.
{Basilius ffeildinge, ar.
(Georgius Moore, mil. _
{Edmundus Bowyer, mil.
Bur South- ('Edwardus Coxe, ar.
warke {Richardus Yarwood, gen.
Bur Biech- f Johes. Trevor, mil.
ingleighe {Carolus Howard, jun., mil.
Burgus J Edwardus Howard, mil.
Rygate {johes. Sucklyn, ar.
Bur de (Robtus. Moore,, miles.
Guildford (Georgius Stoughton, ar.
Burgus (Thomas Gresham; miL
Gatton {johes. Brooke, mil..
Burgus (Thomas Grymes, miL
Haselmere{ Willus. Browne, mil.
(Walterus Chetvvinde, miL
{Thomas Crompton, ar.
Civitas (Johes. Egerton, mil.
Leich { Willus. Wingfield, ar.
Burgus (Walterus Deiv'eux, mil.
Staff (Thomas Gibbs, ar.

Rotel

Surr

Staff

THE PARLIAMENT OF 1614.

•39

Burgus \
novi Castri I Edwardus Wymarke, ar.
subtus /Robertus Needeham, ar.
Lynam J
Bur Tam- (Thomas Roe, miL
worth (Percivallus Willoughby, mil.
Salopp |R?gerus Owen, miles.
(Richardus Newport, ar.
villa | Lodovicus Prowde, ar.
Salopp (ffranciscus Barkley, ar.
Burgus \
Brigge als I Johes. Peirse, gen.
Bridg- /Richardus Singe, gen.
north J
Burgus ) Henricus Townesend, mil.
Ludlowe )
maeme I ^ow'andus Lacon, ar.
WenlockeJfidrus-Lawley*ar- villa castri (Thomas Hitchcock, ar.
Epi {Edrus. Littleton, gen.
SouthtonJ^8- Tichbourne mil.
(Willus. Vuedall, miles.
Ciuitas (Willus. Sandis, miles.
Winton {Thomas Billson, miles.
villa (Thomas ffleminge, mil.
Southt {Thomas Cheeke, ar.
Fortes- }!«** Griffith.
mouth {George Ihorpe, ar.
Bur Yarne ( Arthurus Bromfielde, ar.
mouth (Thomas Cheeke, jun., gen.
Bur Peter- (Walterus Tichboure, miles.
fielde {Edrus. Savage, ar.
Burgus \
Newporte (Richardus Worsley, mil.
als f Johes. Searle, ar.
Medena )
Bur Stock- ( Henricus Wallopp, mil.
bridge { Walterus Cope, mil.
Bur } Willus. Hickford, ar.
Newton j
J."r. ) Thomas Norton, mil.
Uinste- > Henricus Breton, ar.
church J
Bur Whit- (Edrus. Barrett, miles.
church {Ricus. Pa wlett, miles.
Bur Ly- (Thus. ffleminge, ar.
mington { Carolus Thinn
villa (Ricus. Venables, gen.
Andeuor { Petrus. Noies, gen.
(Thomas Germyn, miles.
Suff j Robertus Gardyner, mil.
Bur Gippi {Robtus. Snelling, gen.
Bur (Phus. Gawdy, ar.
Dunwici {Hencus. Dade, ar.
Bur (Willus. Cornewallis, mil.
Ortford {ffrancus. Baildon, mil.

Bur Aid- (Willus. Woodhouse, mil.
borough ( Hencus. Glemham, miL
Bur (Robertus Crane, mil.
Sudbury (Hencus. Binge, ar.
Burgus de (Robtus. Drewry, miL
Eye { Huntingdon Colbey, gen.
Som'st (Mauricius Berkeley, miL
I Johes. Pawlett, ar.
Civitas (Thomas James ) , .
Bristoll {johes. Whitsonj mcatores' '
Burgus (Jacobus Ley, mil.
Bathon (Nicus. Hide, ar.
Civitas (Thomas Southworth, ar
Wellen (Sidneus Mountagu, ar.
Bur f Johes. Dun, ar.
Taunton' (Jacobus Clerke, gen.
Bur Bridg- (Thomas Warr, ar.
water (Robte. Halswell, ar.
BurMyne-)
head J"**-
Sussex jWalterus Covert, miles.
(Sampsonas Leonard, ar.
Civitas (Johes. Morley, miles.
Ciecestr (Adrianus Stoughton, ar. Record.
Bur (Thomas Vavasor, mil. mariscall
Horsham (Johes. Middleton, ar.
Bur (Thomas Bowyer, ar.
Midhurst {willus. Courteman, ar.
„ T . f xpoferus Nevill,
Bur Lewis {^cusAmhurstj
Bur ( Carolus Howard, miL
Shoram (Thomas Shelley, ar.
Bur f Johes. Leeds, miles.
Brember { Henricus Shelley, jun., gen.
Bur (Thomas Sherley, mil.
Steyninge { Edrus. firauncis, miles.
Bur East- * Henrjcus Crompton.
fj£^~ f Georgius Rivers, mil.
Bur (Hencus. Spiller, ar.
Arundell {Edwardus Morley, ar.
(Hencus. Dnus. Clifford.
(Thomas Wharton, mil.
Bur f Georgius Savile, miL iun.
Apulby (Hencus. Wootton, miles
{Thomas Howard^miles.
Henricus Poole, miles.
Civitas Wgidius Tooker, ar. Record.
Sarum )R°gerus Gauntlett, gen.
Burgus (Robertus Sidney, miles.

ar. ar.

Westmi.

Wiltes

Wilton (Thomas Morgan, ar.
Burgus f Gilbertiis Raleighe, ar.
Dounton (Johes. Riues, ar.
Bur fEdmus. Ludlowe, mil.
Hindon (Edwinus Sandis, miles.

140

COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Bur r Henr. Ludlowe de Interior Tempi,
Heites- j ar.
bury (Walter. Gowen, gen
Bur (Matheus Ley, ar.
Westbury {Henr. Ley, ar.
Burgus (Edus. Carie, miles.
Calne {Ricus. Lowe, ar.
Bur (Edwardus Baynton.
Vizes { Willus. Kente, gen.
Burgus | Sr Willm. Maynard.
Chippen- j-Rogerus Owen, mil.*
ham / Tho. Culpepper, ar.
Bur Mai- (Rogerus Dallison, miles.
mesbury (Nevellus Poole, miles.
Burgus ^Thomas Munson, miles and Bar.
Crickladej
Bur magne (Egidius Mounpesson, ar.
Bedwyn {Robertus Hide, gen.
Bur Lud- j Carolus Danvers, ar.
gersall (Jacobus Kirton, ar.
Bur vet, (Willus. Ravenscrofte, ar.
Sar. {Willus. Price, ar.

Burgus WoottonBassett BurMarle- burghe
Wigor CivitasWigor Bur Eve
sham BurgusBewdley Bur Droitwich
Warr
CivitasCoventry BurWarwici

I Willus. Willoughby, mil.
j Edw. Hungerford, ar.
(¦ffrancus. Popham, mil.
{Ricus. Diggs, ar.
(Thomas Bromley, mil.
{ Samuell. Sandis, mil.
(Thomas Chettle, gen.
{johes. Cowcher, gen.
(Thomas Bigge, ar.
{Anthonius Laungston, ar.
) Jacobus Button, gen.
- f Edwinus Sandis, ar.
{Radus. Clare, ar.
(Thomas Lucy, mil.
{Ricus. Verney, miles.
(Ricus. Cooke, mil.
{ Sampson Hopkins
(Grevill Verney, ar.
{johes. Townesend, gen.

rT ... (Edwardus Hales, mil
Hastings jJacobus Lasher.'

Winchel- (Willus. Binge, ar.
sey {Thomas Godfrey, gen.
„. (Edwardus Henden, ar.
Kia {Thomas Watson, ar.
Rumnev JArthurus Ingram, miles.
"umney |Robtus wilcock>

BARONES PORTUUM.
„. , (Ricus. Smith, miles.
Hietn {Lyonell. Cranfield, miles.
(Georgius ffanne, mil.
{Robtus. Brett, miles.

Dover

Sandwich I Jhomaf Spmyth' mi!fS-
(Samuell. Peiton, miles.

Anglies (
I
Bealumaris}Willus- Jones> »•
viL Brecon {Johes. Crompton, mil.
Brecon {Carolus Vaughan, mil.
Cardigan {Ricus. Price, mil.
Cardigan }Rot)tus- Wooluerston, ar.
MARiHEN}R°btUS-MaUnSell'miL
vdlla (
Carmthen {
Car" 1 Ricus. Wynne, ar. ¦
NARVON J J '
Yjlla, JNichus. Griffith, gen.
Carn'van ) °
Denbiegh {Symo. Thelwall, ar.
villa, . t JHugo. Middleton, mil.
Denbiegh . &
(Johes. Ayton, ar.t
Ilynte |R0btuSi Ravenscroft, ar.

WALLIA. \. villa fflynte
Gla

[johes. Eyton, ar.

morgan }Thomas Maunsell, mil et Bar.

villa Cardif
Mery-
oneth

[Matheus Davies, gen.
[Elizeus Lloyd, ar.
Sd, weas?"}jacobus Perrott' mil"
Pembr {Johes. Wogan de Wiston, ar.

[Willus. Herberte, mil.

Pembroke }Walterus Deiv'eux' ar'
Mon-
gomery
villa Mon-jj h£s Da ^
gomeiy j J '
Radnor {Jacobus Price, ar.
Radnor (Rowlandus Merrick, ar.

* Apparently a double return. Maynard's name is written over that of Owen.
(¦ The pen has been drawn through this name, etc., in the original.

^jcot&fr (or Spit) ©ffia oi $xmu
ITS WORK— ITS WORTH.
" We have carefully studied the Marjoribanks from the unimpeachable evidence of the public -
case from its commencement. It is with great records." — Alorning Post.
regret that we are compelled to record our opinion "We must admit that Mr. Foster has dis-
that Mr. Foster has completely refuted the proved Lord Tweedmouth's supposed descent
Lyon King-of. Arms .... which, however unwill- from Thomas Marjoribanks of Ratho." — Midland
ingly, we are compelled to describe as a complete Antiquary.
exposure of the time-serving policy prevalent in "He ruthlessly demolishes this precious pro-
the Lyon Office." — The Dundee Advertiser. duction, and displays, in the course of his minute
" The pedigree of Lord Tweedmouth's family, . analysis, a singularly exhaustive knowledge of
which Mr. Foster was called upon to accept, was records beyond the Tweed." — Academy.
received by him with serious misgivings, though " The writer seems to have caught the Scottish
formally 'proved and registered in the Lyon heralds tripping, and it may be hoped that in
Court of Scotland. . . . We may state that, future the • authorities at the Lyon Office will
. when challenged to make good his objections, require more stringent proof of the pedigrees
he proved his case in the most complete manner they register."-— _4A.£«<7M7«.
On the 2nd of August last, Mr. Labouchere, M.P., in moving the reduction ofthe civil
service estimates by .£625, — being the amount voted for the Lyon Office of Scotland, —
observed that he " wished to know the use of maintaining such offices as Lyon King-at-Arms
and Heralds." * The Member for Northampton has but given expression to a wish that is
being very widely felt since the recent disclosures on the working of this Office, and specially
its signal discomfiture in its desperate encounters with myself.
I have already shown in. my exposi of the Marjoribanks case, referred to in the above
representative extracts, that a peerage pedigree of ten descents compiled by Lyon King-of-
Arms, and solemnly recorded in the Lyon Office, can be utterly annihilated by disproving no
less than four out of those ten generations, for —
(1) IT IS UNTRUE that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Edward Marjoribanks
and Agnes Murray — as stated in the "proved and registered
pedigree " of Lyon King-of-Arms.
(2) IT IS UNTRUE ihat Lord Tweeedmouth is descended from Joseph, son of James
Marjoribanks — as stated in the " proved and registered pedigree "
of Lyon King-of-Arms. \
(3) IT IS UNTRUE that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from James Majoribanks, son
of the Clerk Register — as . stated in the " proved and registered
pedigree " of Lyon King:of-Arms.
(4) IT IS UNTRUE that Lord Tweedmouth is descended from Thomas Majoribanks of
Ratho, Clerk Register — as stated in the "proved and registered
pedigree " of Lyon King-of-Arms.
(5) ^T IS UNTRUE that Joseph Marjoribanks of Leuchie was son of Joseph Marjoribanks
. of Leuchie and Margaret Sinclair his wife^as stated in the "proved
and registered pedigree " of Lyon King-of-Arms.
It is now many months since I publicly challenged the authorities of the Lyon Office to
produce any proofs whatever for their "proved and registered" Pedigree. I urged on
that occasion " that the whole transaction should be submitted to a searching investigation
before an impartial public tribunal." This challenge I repeated at a .subsequent stage, after
the attempts of my opponents "to disprove these charges" had "signally and egregiouslf
failed." For it is no answer to the charges which I have advanced to hunt up the errati
and printer's errors in the earlier editions of ray own works and to eke them laboriously out by
the arts of innuendo and invective. Much less is it an answer on the part of Lyon to distort

* Times, 3 Aug. 1833.
Collect.

Ma COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
my words and pervert my charges. I may well adapt the words of a writer in Blackwood when
recently exposing the futility of Mr. Burnett's remarks on the death of Rothesay in his intro
duction to Volume 3 of the Exchequer Rolls of Scotland : —
" Had Mr. Burnett given " Mr. Foster's " passages in full, the gloss he puts upon them would
be self-evident. A case must be very weak the defence, of which necessitates such paltering
with plain language." — VoL 123, p. 799.
I still demand a public investigation, from which I, at least, have nothing to fear, and
on the issue of which I am perfectly prepared to stake my genealogical reputation.
But the public will hardly fail to draw their own conclusions when they learn that the
Scottish Heralds persistently shrink from any such impartial inquiry, and attempt to revenge
themselves for the mortification of defeat by loudly proclaiming in anonymous articles, on
the one hand, that " the point " ( on which they have been worsted) " is one of little interest
to genealogists," * and, on the other, that "the Lyon Office Pedigree slill appears to bef
absolutely unshaken by Mr. Foster's elaborate arguments." i The ipse dixit of an anonymous
writer cannot alter the facts ofthe case, but it is the only refuge left to those who have neither
the courage to meet me in the open, nor the honesty to acknowledge their defeat
That it should have been necessary to have met my charges by retorting upon four
separate occasions and in three different journals, is sufficient evidence of their accuracy, and
impartial critics on this side of the Tweed not only fully understand the real significance of
the counter charges, but are not to be led astray by that red herring which Scotland's greatest
genealogists have tried in combination to draw across the scent, in order to divert official and
public attention from the real question at issue.
Leaving the case of Lord Tweedmouth's Pedigree, and turning to the scandal of
spurious baronetcies, I would remind my readers that in Scotland, as was recently admitted
by a Scottish expert before a Select Committee of the House of Lords, —
" There is great difficulty in putting down the assumption of a number of false baronets
who use the title." — Minutes of Evidence (Dr. .Eneas Mackay), 553.
Here again we may well seek " to know the use of maintaining such offices as Lyon King of
Arms and Heralds." Nay, the unfavourable contrast in this respect which the Scottish
Baronetage presents to the English, has been largely due, I fear, to the action of those very
officers. " In Scotland," says a writer in the Herald and Genealogist (vol. iv., p. 4), " matters, I
am sorry to say, are widely different, and unauthorised assumption of Baronetcies greatly abound.
I have shown in my Baronetage, under "Chaos," that of forty-five discredited baronetcies,
no less than thirty-six are of Scottish origin, and that for these audacious and wholesale
assumptions the Lyon Office is but too often responsible, not onljr directly, by their
actual recognition, as, to take the latest instance, in the case of Turing (see Preface to my
Peerage for 1883), but also indirectly, through the pernicious example thus set by the very
authorities who are specially charged with checking such abuse.
But, worse still, it is not only the Baronetage which has suffered from the influence of the
Lyon Office. In Scotland the very Peerage is in a stateof chronic chaos, as compared with that
of the sister kingdoms. The efforts which have been made ever since the Union to place it
on a sounder and more stable footing, the select committees which are so frequently appointed
to deal with its unsatisfactory condition, are the fruit of English initiative, necessitated by
Scottish neglect. These creditable efforts have been persistently thwarted by the action of
Scottish antiquaries,with the Lyon Office at their head] and the result, as the present Lyon
has himself admitted, is that
".in Scotland there are individuals as tp whom it may be matter of dispute as to whether
they are Peers." Minutes of Evidence, 185 (Mr. Burnett), 2 May, 1882.

* Journal of Jurisprudence, March 18S3. So, too, we are informed by the Edinburgh Review that the
Maijoriljanks Pedigree is •" not possessed of much general interest " (cccxxiii. 256). But the question "is not
whether the Pedigree is of " general interest," but whether it is true or false.
+ The italics are iny own.
% Edinburgh Review, ' cccxxiii. 256. The writer declines even to discuss the. question, but informs his
readers that "the points in question have been ably (?) handled in a recent number ofthe Scottish Journal of
•furisprudence, to which reference may be made by any one who happens to be interested in the dispute." Of
this " ably written article " I have, as my readers will remember, already most effectually disposed.

THE LYON OFFICE. ,43

This lamentable anarchy is due, on the one hand, to an obstinate devotion to that most
unfortunate doctrine, " succession jure sanguinis," which Lyon, in his evidence, so strenuously
upheld. Its fruits are seen in such a case as that of Ruthven, where I have been taunted
.with calling attention to a scandal with which Scotsmen have been familiar for more than
half-a century. I can only marvel that the Lyon Office is not ashamed of such a retort,
which convicts it ipso facto of conscious negligence and of cynical indifference to this crying
scandal. The other cause of these flaws in the Scottish Peerage is to be found in the
peculiar action of the Lyon Office, its incidental and casual " recognition " of titles through
a matriculation of Arms. We have recently seen one effect of such action in the recognition
as " Earl of Mar," of the unsuccessful Mar claimant. Attention has also been called by
Mr. Round to the recognition, on that occasion, of the Barony of Garioch as an existing
title in the Peerage of Scotland.* He has challenged this Barony as a creation of the Lyon
Office, and that challenge has not been answered.
Thus we are driven once more to inquire, with Mr. Labouchere, " the use of maintain
ing such offices as Lyon King at Arms and Heralds."
It might at least be hoped that, in the field of Heraldry, these officers might, if anywhere,
be of use, and that they would protect the rights of coat-armour as jealously as the authorities
of the College of Arms. In this respect their predecessors were active, but it is admitted
even by the present Organ of their Office, that " during the present century .... armorial
assumptions may often have been winked at by the Lord Lyon and his deputes " — witness
the pages of the. Landed Gentry. Unhappily, indeed, they may rather be said to set the laws
of arms at absolute defiance, and do their best to bring them into contempt. Two instances
occur to me of a most reprehensible practice which is peculiarly illustrative of their system. I
mean their, matriculations, in favour of Scottish clients, of English armorial insignia.
(i) Fairfax, baronet. — When Sir Henry Fairfax was created a baronet, 14 March, 1836,
the Lyon Office certified that his arms (which, it may be mentioned, had been
granted by them only three weeks before) were Azure, a chevron between two fleurs
de lis or, etc. His son, the present baronet, registered his pedigree, and recorded these
same arms in the (English) College ' of Arms, 28 Oct., 1874. Two years later, he
• succeeded to a property in Scotland, on condition of quartering the arms of its
former owners, and accordingly matriculated his coat, in the Lyon Office, as Fairfax -,
quartering Ramsay and Montgomerie. At the same time he expressed his desire
"to discontinue the use of the arms then {1836) granted, and to obtain our (i.e.
Lyon's) sanction to use such arms as might indicate his paternal descent from the
family of Fairfax " (!) — which descent, it must be remembered, cannot be established.
Lyon thereupon unhesitatingly " devised " to the petitioner a Fairfax Coat* dex
terously compounded from the Ancient and the Modern Coat of the great Yorkshire
House. How indistinguishable it is from them may be seen on reference to the
illustrations in Burke's Peerage, a work revised by Lyon himself. * Nay, the coat
assigned by Lyon to the Baronet is actually the one which in Burke's Armory is,
with Lyon's co-operation, assigned to Viscount Fairfax ! The true character of such
a transaction as this has been well exposed by the ScottishJo7trnal of Jurisprudence: —
" In the eyes of the large and increasing class of persons who understand the his
torical meaning of heraldry," it " is not a mere piece of foolish vanity, but an offence
in kind not unlike the fabrication of evidence to support a fictitious pedigree. "
(2) Eliott of Stobs, baronet. — When Sir George Eliott, for his memorable defence of
Gibraltar (1787), was created Lord Heathfield in the Peerage of England, he had a
grant, from the English authorities, of special supporters, being those of his father,
differenced by certain distinctions ; he had also the arms of Gibraltar granted to
him as an augmentation to his paternal coat. In 1859 the Scottish Office re-granted
this English augmentation and . these English supporters to a merely collateral
relative, the seventh Baronet of Stobs. In this case it strove, however, to keep
within the letter of the law by an undignified piece of sharp practice, " a piece of
battlement " being substituted for " a mural crown " beneath fhe feet of the sup
porters, and the minute " Gibraltar " in the augmentation being dexterously altered to
" Plus ultra." The result must be described as a " colourable- imitation " of the
original English augmentation, the right to which, it may be added, is actually
vested in Sir F. G. A. Fuller-Eliott-Drake, Bart.

* Notes and Queries, 6th, S. VIL, 390.

144 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

This, however, is not the only device employed by tlie Lyon Office, for invading the
heraldic province of its neighbours, in contemptuous defiance of the laws of Arms. Not
content with matriculating in favour of Scottish clients armorial insignia of English origin, it
is equally ready to oblige English clients with armorial insignia of Scottish origin ! On what
grounds, for instance, could it possibly be justified in bestowing on an English Baronet,
Sir Christopher Baynes, of purely English descent, the much coveted addition of supporters,
to be appended to the coat granted him by the (English) College of Arras? It could only
plead that, in so doing, it was but following the vicious precedent by which the supporters
belonging to the (Scottish) Lords Rutherford were granted to Sir Edmund Antrobus, an
English Baronet, because, forsooth, he had purchased some part of the Rutherford estate !
The right to use supporters is, with us, so strictly limited (a special royal warrant being
required for their addition to a Baronet's coat), that Lyon's dangerous prerogative of granting
them broadcast ex gratia should unquestionably be viewed with most jealous eyes when it
pleases him so to garnish English coats, more especially as this privilege has, admittedly, in
the past, been exercised with no sparing hand.
It would be easy to show that in purely Scottish Heraldry the Lyon Office can be
similarly impeached. Its action in the well-known Haig case will be fresh in the recollec
tion of all,* and its grant of supporters to Sir John Marjoribanks "as representer of Leuchie "
is virtually voided by the simple fact that the grantee was nothing of the kind (See note to
these supporters in my Baronetage). Yet in this it is, as ever, the traditional system of the
Office, rather than its personnel, that is to blame.
Now, surely, these abuses ought to be taken in hand. On the one hand the (English)
College of Arms has a right to make strong official representations to the Earl Marshal, and,
indeed, to the Home Office, when it finds its province thus invaded. On the other, the
unfortunate persons who have paid for these apocryphal grants should be given to under
stand that they are valueless and void if contrary to the laws of Arms, and the Office should
be called upon to purge its register, and return, in such cases, its fees.
We are aptly reminded by the Edinburgh Review that " in the words of an eminent
jurist and herald," — as the writer (who seems fascinated by the Lyon's crown!) is pleased,
unwittingly and right quaintly, to describe the_ present Lyon King-of-Arms, —
" By the civil law (in Scotland), he who bears and uses another man's arms to his pre
judice .... is to be punished arbitrarily at the discretion of the judge."
I would submit that this offence is precisely the one in which Lyon has been " aiding and
abetting " his clients in such cases as those I have quoted above. But when we are further
informed by this " eminent jurist and herald " — ofthe theory that " persons who are descended
from royalty " are " entitled to quarter the royal arms " — that " in Scotland, at least, if any
such individual should be rash enough to act upon the theory in question, the result might
prove somewhat'serious," as • :
(By the civil law) "he who usurps his prince's arms loses his head, and his goods are
confiscated,"
I would suggest that it is the "eminent, etc.," himself who here "loses his head," and justi
fies the confession of Professor Innes, when treating of Heraldry in Scotland, that
" its total and contemptuous neglect in this country is one of the causes why a Scotchman
can rarely speak or write on any of these subjects without being exposed to the charge of
using a language which he does not understand " (Scotland in the Middle Ages, p. 303).
For, in the first place, no one has ever dreamed of suggesting that all " persons descended
from royalty" are "entitled to quarter the royal arms," but only those who share in the
representation of a royal house; and, in the second, the penal offence consists, not in so
quartering the arms, but in "usurping" them, as the antecedents show, in the place of one's
own paternal ones, as was attempted to be done, with Lyon's help, in the case of the Fairfax
arms. It Is, indeed, " a consummation devoutly to be wished," that the consequences of such
usurpation might prove " somewhat serious " to the guilty parties " in Scotland " as elsewhere I
It is now no less than fifteen years since the learned editor of the Herald and Genealogist
(the late Mr. J. Gough Nichols), when congratulating Mr. Burnett on his accession to the
post of Lyon King-of-Arms, added —

See Notes and Queries, 6th, S. VIL, passim.

THE LYON OFFICE. ¦ I4$

We are sure that he would be the last to deny that there is still much room for reform in
matters of Scottish, as well as English, Heraldry ; and that the exercise of all his tact and
judgment as well asynergy will be required to carry out such measures as may be calculated
to restore to its efficient operation this department of our social government."
And yet so inveterate is the system of this Office that it may be doubted whether
matters have much improved since the famous exposi of its method and administration in the
case of Dundas v. Dundas more than a century ago.
Those who are anxious to learn more as to the qualification of that " eminent, etc. " with
whose official services Mr. Labouchere has suggested that we might afford to dispense, may
be referred to his evidence before the Select Committee, as analysed in my own and in Mr.
Hewlett's pages,* and also to a masterly article from which I have afready quoted, dealing
with his work among the. Exchequer Rolls.
"We cannot help expressing the opinion that it is unfortunate that State publications such
as the Exchequer Rolls— intended to provide the public with original materials for historical
study — should be turned into mediums for the ventilation of personal crotchets or pre
conceived opinions  An editor of such volumes is expected to have a fair knowledge
of Scottish history ; but there is • no call that he should set up for being omniscient, and so
putting everybody right on every possible sort of question." f
Returning, however, to my point of departure, the suggestive exposi ofthe Marjoribanks
Pedigree, as " proved and registered " in the Lyon Office, I would express my warm gratifica
tion at the outspoken language of the Edinburgh .- —
"The not unfrequent fabrication of a fictitious ancestry on behalf of wealthy upstarts
naturally reminds us of La Rochefoucauld's happy definition of hypocrisy, • The homage
which vice pays to virtue,' the heralds of the Middle Ages were sometimes inclined to carry
back their pedigrees to a remote period, and to invent a good many ' forbears " for the earliest
ancestor on record. ....
' ' The modern professors of the science of Genealogy are still bolder in their procedure, and
such is the persuasive power of wealth, that in the course of a single week they contrive to
furnish the obscurest novas homo with an historic name, an elaborate pedigree, and a highly
respectable gallery of family portraits." . . . . . . .
'' It is much to be regretted that these unscrupulous adventurers are no longer liable to the
salutary punishment administered to certain framers of false pedigrees ih the sixteenth century
— to wit the loss of an ear."
And I would echo, for the benefit of Lyon King-of-Arms, its happy quotation from his
revered Riddell : —
"True Genealogy is an austere, stern potentate, governing by unswerving rigid laws
founded on truth only, knowing that thereby she can alone act with dignity and advantage ;
and not a reckless, loose nymph or Bacchante, who in her frolics gives vent to every flatter
ing tale and fable, to cajole and undnly elevate the credulous for her own profit and the
amazement of others, to sallies of fancy and imagination."
JOSEPH FOSTER.
* Jurisdiction in Scottish Peerage Cases, 1883. - — ~ 
t " A Tragedy in Scottish History Re-considered " (Blackwood, June 1883).

%xt fjjrjjr* to (Barls of |por? -
BY J. H. ROUND, Esq., M.A.
" It cannot stand with the ordour and consuetude of the countrie to honnour two earlis
with ane title."— James VI. (Nithsdale Patent, 1620).
" Your lordship will perceive how impossible it is for me to recognise the existence of
two Earls of Mar .... I am sorry that I cannot myself admit ,the possibility. ... It is
impossible that the two dignities can co-exist." — Lord Crawford (Earldom of Mar, 1882).
THE SCOTTISH PEERAGE.
To the Editor of The Times.
SIR, — As a protest, signed by several peers of Scotland and by the gentleman who assumes the title of Earl
of Mar, against the provision in the Lord Chancellor's Bill for regulating the procedure at the elections
of representative peers for Scotland, which authorizes the House of Lords, upon a petition presented to the
House, to correct the roll of the peers of Scotland to be called at the elections, has been noticed in several
newspapers, and a. precis oi it was given in the Times of the 12th of April, I hope that, you will allow me to call
attention to the nature of the roll, to the alteration of which by the House of Lords the protesting peers object.
The roll consists ofa list of peers settled under a commission granted by King James VI. in 1606, and of
the peers created since that year. No question exists, or has since the Union in 1707 been raised, as to the
precedency of any of the peers created since 1606, nor as to the precedency of eight of the earls and fourteen of
the lords of Parliament named in the list of 1606, as they had been created by King James VI. before he issued
the commission. There are now only ten earls and eleven lords of Parliament named fn the list in regard to
whom any question could ever be raised, and the Earls of Sutherland and Mar and Lord Borthwick are the
only peers as to whose precedency any question has in fact been raised, as the precedency of the Buchan peerage
was settled by an unopposed Act of Parliament passed on the 28th of June, 1633. The list of 1606, which is
called the " Decreet of Ranking," was prepared upon short notice, and upon such proofs as the peers who
attended the Commissioners were pleased to lay before them ; and it contains so many and such grave errors
as to render it a document of no real authority regarding the true precedency ofthe peers named in it. The
Earldom of Sutherland was found and declared by the House of Lords in 1771 to have been held in regular
succession from WiUiam, who was Earl of Sutherland in 1275, and yet in the Decreet it was ranked after the
Earldoms of Errol and Marischall, which are proved to have been created between 1450 and 1460. It seems
strange, with the knowledge of these facts, that the Duke of Sutherland, as Earl of Sutherland, should be.one
of the protesting lords, and more especially so since his father petitioned the House of Lords to have his place
on the roll as Earl of Sutherland corrected by order of the House. The Earl of Crawford, whose dignity was
created in 1398, was in the list placed after the Earl of Argyll, whose dignity is said to have been created in
1457, and was certainly created after 1455. The Earl of Menteith, whose earldom was created in 1427, was
ranked after the Earl of Enrol, the Earl Marischall, and the earls of Rothes and Montrose, whose earldoms
were created after 1445. The Earl of Caithness, whose dignity certainly existed in T47I, and apparently much
earlier, was ranked after the Earls of Eglinton, Montrose, and Cassillis, whose earldoms were certainly created
after the year 1500 ; and there are errors in the placing of several of the other earls. The errors in placing the
lords of Parliament are also numerous and serious. Lord Maxwell, whose ancestor was a lord of Parliament in
1445, was ranked in the list after eight lords of Parliament whose dignities were created after 1455, two of the
eight dignities having been created in Parliament in 1487. Lord Borthwick, whose ancestor was a lord of
Parliament in 1455, as found by the House of Lords in the recent judgment on the Borthwick peerage claim,
was in the list ranked after the Lords Sanquhar and Yester, the two lords whose ancestors had been created
peers in Parliament in 1487 ; after Lord Ogilvie, whose ancestor was created a peer in Parliament in 1491 ; after
Lord Ephinstone, whose ancestor was created Lord Ephinstone on the baptism of the infant .son of King
James IV. in 1509 ; and after Lord Herries, whose peerage was proved to have been created after 14S6. Lord
Ephinstone was also placed above six other lords of Parliament whose dignities were certainly created, before
the year 1500. ;-~-v
Several other errors in ranking the lords of Parliament might be pointed out, but it is apprehended that a
sufiicient number of mistakes in ranking both the earls and lords of Parliament have been mentioned fo show
that the list, as settled in 1606, is of no real authority or weight in determining the precedence ofthe peerages
of Scotland then in existence. The dignity of Lord Somerville, although certainly in existence in' 1606, is
entirely omitted in the list.
The Decreet of Ranking, which embodied the list referred to, contained a provision that any peer aggrieved
by the place assigned to him might proceed before the Court of Session to have the Decreet amended in his
regard. In 1606 there was no separate House of Lords in Scotland, as all the members ofthe Parliament of
Scotland sat and voted in one House as members of the Parliament ; and the Court of Session, probably as
succeeding to the Court of the Lords Auditors, was allowed jurisdiction in regard to questions concerning the
peerage. The object of the protesting peers seems to be to maintain the appeal as provided for in the Decreet,
but apparently they not only, disregard the fact that the Act of Union declared all the peers of Scotland to be
peers of Great Britain, and to have all the rights and privileges of peers of the realm, and provided that six
teen of them were to sit by election in the House of Lords, but ¦ also' that it has constantly been declared, by
judgments given in the House of Lords on peerage claims, that since the Union the House alone had jurisdiction
on claims to dignities which were before the Union peerages of Scotland. Some of the protesting lords appear
also to be desirous that the Decreet of Ranking should, by means of proceedings to be taken in the Court of

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR ? I47

Session, be so altered as to include as a peer the gentleman who assum-.-. the title of Earl of liar, although,
after a full investigation of the grounds of his claim, the House of Lords decided against his pretensions • and
the Queen, to whom he had inadvertently been presented as Earl of Mar, directed his presentation as Earl of
Mar to be cancelled.
From the earliest period of parliamentary history, the peers of England have insisted upon and maintained
that they were the sole judges of questions of precedency among themselves, and the Courts of Law have on
several occasions declared that they had no jurisdiction on such questions, and that the decision of them per
tained exclusively to the peers. The Act of Union, which made the peers of England peers of Great Britain,
certainly made no alteration in the jurisdiction previously held by them ; and when the peers of Scotland
became also peers of Great Britain, all questions as. to their rights as peers necessarily fell uncfer the jurisdiction
which governed the rights of the other peers of Great Britain, one of which was that their rights as peers should
be alone determined by their peers. Sixteen ofthe peers of Great Britain, whose predecessors were peers of
' Scotland, sit in the House of Lords, and are ranked in the House ; and it would be contrary to every principle
of Parliamentary law that a Court of inferior jurisdiction — a Court composed of persons not their peers — should
determine the place in which any of the sixteen should sit in the House. If such authority were given to the
Court of Session, it might alter the place ofa peer while he was actually sitting in the House. The peers,
however, who so strongly insist upon disallowing the jurisdiction of the House on questions of precedency,
appear to overlook the point that, unless the law were altered to meet their wishes, an appeal would lie from
any decision which the Court of Session might give to the House, and that, upon the hearing of theappeal, the
jurisdiction which they appear so anxious to contravene must be exercised ; and they can scarcely ask that the
decision of the Court of Session should be made binding and conclusive, so as to deprive a peer of the right,
possessed by every other subject of the Crown, of appealing from a judgment of an inferior Court.
There does not, however, appear to be any necessity, in settling a roll to be called at the elections of
representative peers for Scotland, to make any provision in relation to questions of precedency, as, if die names
and tides of the peers were entered alphabetically in the roll, all difficulty in conducting the elections would be
avoided, and questions of precedency might be dealt with according to law as they should hereafter arise.
I remain, Sir, yours faithfully,
Gray's Inn, April 26. WILLIAM O. HEWLETT.
The Scottish Peerage. — Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, using the signature of " Mar," writes : — "The letter on
the Scotch Peerage, signed by a Mr. W. O. Hewlett, an English solicitor, who exposed ignorance on the subject
though he may have achieved his purpose by his name appearing in the Times of May I, demands a brief reply
from me ; for he attacks me especially as one who joined in the protest of the Duke of Sutherland and twenty
other Scotch peers against the Lord Chancellor's Scotch Peerage Bill, which seeks to subject the Union Roll
to be (sie) manipulated by a small committee of English peers, not conversant with Scotch law. The great import
ance of the Decreet of Ranking (the foundation of the Union. Roll), which Mr. Hewlett, for well-known reasons,
tries to vilify, was maintained by Lords Mansfield, Cranworth, and Brougham in the Sutherland and Henries
cases. The ranking was confessedly final ' only according to documents then produced," the Decree providing
for higher rank being obtained through subsequent proofs before the Court of Session, whose authority by the
Treaty of Union (Art XIX.) was upheld unimpaired, as stated in the petition to the House of Lords recently
signed (sic) by the great majority of the leading legal and historical authorities in Scotland against the Lord
Chancellor's Bill. Mr. Hewlett's many errors and fallacies are fully refuted in .the Scotsman of the 25th of April,
(sic) in the Journal of furisprudence and Scottish Law Magazine for May, and in ' The Earldom of Mar during
500 Years, by the late Earl of Crawford and Balcarres, the acknowledged greatest modern authority on Scotch
peerage law. Mr. Hewlett's assertions that I was inadvertently presented at court as Earl of Mar, but {sic) the
presentation was cancelled, and that the House of Lords decided against my pretensions, are emphatically in
correct, as would be proved on reference to the official Gazette, and to the Minutes of the House of Lords,
which show that the Law Officers for the Crown summed up that Lord Kellie, the heir-male, had failed in his
claim, and that the Earldom of Mar descends to heirs-general ; and that (as Lords Cairns and Selbome have
" since admitted in the House of Lords) the decision of 1875, conceding to Lord Kellie a new Mar title, not .
on the Union Roll, and which (sic) the House in 1877 declared they could not place on the Roll, has not dealt
with the ancient Earldom." — Times, loth May, 1883.  ....
I propose to discuss in this paper, not the justice of the Mar decision in 1875, but the
actual stale of the Earldom of Mar, as determined by that decision. These two questions,
though absolutely distinct, have, unfortunately, been hitherto discussed together, and to this
must be assigned most of the confusion in which the second of these questions .has been
involved. For we shall find that this same question— Are there two Earls of Mar ? — practically
hinges on the view we take of the decision pronounced by the House of Lords, and that, if we
loyally accept it, we can arrive at only one conclusion, while, to arrive at any other, we
must decide, at the outset, virtually to "reject and defy it. Accepting, therefore, in letter and
in spirit, the " judgment " of the House of Lords, it will be my endeavour to clear away the
tangled web by which the consequence of that decision has been cunningly obscured, and to
set it in a clear and simple light, for the benefit of those who have not been enabled to
examine the question for themselves, but who are honestly anxious to expiscate the truth, and
to bow to the decision of the House' of Lords when its consequences have been clearly set
Down to the death of the late Earl of Mar and Kellie in 1866, the facts, so far as the
present question is concerned, are happily beyond dispute. It is admitted on both sides that
the Earldom of Mar vested in that nobleman was the only one known to exist, and that it was
the Earldom which figures on the Union Roll. At his death (19 June, 1S66), the state of

148 COLLECTANEA CENeALOGICA.

affairs was this : His heir-male was his cousin, Mr. W. C. Erskine. His heir-of-line was his
sister's son, Mr. J. F. E. Goodeve.* A short Chart Pedigree may make the case clearer :
John Francis, Earl of Mar =
John Thomas, Earl of Mar _= Hon. H. D. Erskine ==
 :  i 

John Francis Lady F. J.==Mr. Goodeve. Lady J. J.=Edward Wilmot- Walter Coningsby
Miller, Earl of Erskine. I Erskine. | Chetwode, Esq. Erskine, Esq., heir-
Mar and Kellie. J  /K nlale-
J. F. E. Goodeve-" Erskine," Esq., heir-of-line.
The late Peer's Earldom of Kellie passed, under the patent, without question, to his cousin
and heir-male. But who was to inherit his Earldom of Mar ? As this dignity was not held
under any Instrument of Creation, its limitation was, so far, an open question. But it is a
well-known maxim of the House of Lords, that the legal presumption in such cases is in
favour of the heir-male. This maxim is based on " Lord Mansfield's law," expressed in the
following dictum .- —
" I take it to be settled, and well settled, that where no instrument of creation or limitation
of honours appears, the presumption of law is in favour of the heir-male, always open to be
contradicted by the heir-female upon evidence shown to the contrary."
This dictum, as is well-known, has been most violently assailed ; but we are not here
concerned with the arguments for or against it. Sufficient for us that it still rules with the
Peers, and that, in accordance with it, the recognised presumption of law was in favour of the
Earldom descending . to Lord Kellie, until contradicted by the heir-female (Mr. Goodeve-
" Erskine "). It is unquestionable, however, that there was a general belief that this Earldom
was descendible to the heir-female, who clenched the question by assuming the title in defiance
of the above presumption of law.
So far this statement of the facts of the case is in complete accordance with that given
by the late Lord Crawford in The Earldom of Mar in sunshine and in shade. Lord Crawford
constituted himself, as is well-known, the champion of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, by whom he
is described in the above letter as " the acknowledged greatest modern authority on Scotch
Peerage Law." As we are specially referred by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine to Lord Crawford's
defence of his position, we may, without question, accept its statements as the best exposition
of his case. Here then is his version of these facts : —
" On the death ofthe late Earl of Mar in 1866, without issue, and leaving (sic) no brother
or brother's issue, the dignity was assumed by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, sister s son and next of
kin, or hgir-at-law, to the deceased Earl. It has been held by the House of Lords, and they
have acted on the view that this assumption was without warrant. Lord Mar " ijje. Mr.
Goodeve-Erskine) "having been, not brother's, but sister's son of his predecessor j. ... the
House, — acting on the traditions handed down from 1762 and 1771, but which (sic) possess
(as I have also asserted) no legal validity, refused from the first to recognise Lord Mar "
(m. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine), " even provisionally as Earl in possession." %
Here we come to the first point of divergence, viz., tlie legal presumption. The House
acting, as Lord Crawford observes, on its traditions, held that the legal presumption was in
favour of Lord Kellie's succession, and that the burden of proving the contrary lay on Mr.
Goodeve-Erskine. Lord Crawford, per contra, argues that the. traditions of the House are
wrong, and that the presumption ought to have been in favour of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's
succession, and the burden of disproving it thrown on Lord Kellie. Without pronouncing
his view to be right or wrong, we must bear in mind that here, as Lord Redesdale observes,
"Lord Crawford sets up his own opinion against Lord Mansfield's,"§ and that we cannot be
called upon to accept, as a legal axiom, Lord Crawford's own view with the consequences which
flow from it. We are here, in fact, confronted with the difficulty to which I alluded at the
outset, viz., the confusion of two distinct questions— (1) the justice or injustice of the
Committee's proceedings, and (2) the consequences flowing from their decision, irrespective
* It may be as well to explain that, so far as Dignities are concerned, there are no "co-heirs" in
Scotland as in England. Where a dignity is heritable by heirs-female, it is wholly vested in the eldest
" heir-portioner " and her heirs. ' ¦
\ Earldom of Mar, I. 3 % lb., I. 12 § Letter on the Earldom of Mar (1883), !>• 5-

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR , 149

of its justice. It is with the latter question, exclusively,, that we are dealing, and we must
therefore accept without dispute the traditional view of the legal presumption held by the
House of Lords. We must, moreover, remember that it was on this view that the pro
ceedings of the Committee were throughout based,* and that it is essential, if we would enter
into the spirit of their decision, to keep steadily in mind the point of view from which that
decision was pronounced.
So far, however, it will be observed, it is only a question oi presumption, — a question on -
whom the onusprobandi should be thrown. The Lords admitted that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine
had a right to disprove, if he could, the presumption in favour of Lord Kellie. The Earl of
Crawford admits that Lord Kellie had a right to disprove, if he could, the presumption in
favour of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine.t
Passing from the legal presumption to the actual claims to the dignity, it will help us to
a clear understanding of the position if We express the rival claims to the disputed Earldom
in the logical form of syllogisms. Mr. Goodeve- Erskine's contention, as repeated and enforced
by Lord Crawford, will then stand thus :
The (existing) Earldom of Mar descends to the heir-of-line.
I am the heir;of-line.
Ergo, The (existing) Earldom of Mar descends to me. •*'
Here we see the advantage of the syllogism. Lord Crawford, by running the two premisses
into one, conceals the petitio principii involved in the major premiss. His words are —
" He was served as one and the elder of the two nearest and lawful heir-portioners in
general to. . . his uncle. According to English usage, a dignity descending to heirs-
portioners or co-heirs falls into abeyance ; but by Scottish law it vests in the eldest heir-
female, and thus the Earldom became vested in Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, the eldest co-heir, as
Earl of Mar. Nothing more was needed to the full and legal establishment of his status and
right " (Earldom of Mar, I. 5).
it will, of course, be perceived that the service in question merely proves the minor premiss,
and that to speak thus glibly of the Earldom of Mar as " a dignity descending to heirs-
• portioners " is simply to beg the entire question.
We now come to Lord Kellie's claim, and we discover by the syllogism that its major
premiss directly traverses and negatives Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's contention : —
The (existing) Earldom of Mar descends to the heir-male.
I am the heir-male.
Ergo, The (existing) Earldom of Mar descends to me.
Here we have the question nettement posie. Was the (existing) Earldom of Mar
descendible to the heir-of-line or to the heir-male ? This was the point which the House of
Lords were called upon to decide. The Dignity in dispute, be it remembered, was simply
the existing Earldom, the Earldom admittedly vested in the late Earl of Mar and Kellie,
the Earldom on the Union Roll.
But the practical and broad issue — " Was the (existing) Earldom of Mar descendible to
the heir-of-line or to the heir-male ? " — involved a sub-issue, viz., Was the (existing) Earldom
of Mar the original territorial and feudal Earldom, or was it a Peerage Dignity created in
1565 ? The former was the contention of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, the latter of the Earl of
Kellie. Here, then, we have both an issue and a sub-issue to be severally decided by the House
of Lords, but both of them relating, admittedly and avowedly, to the one and only existing
Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll, the Earldom of Mar.
In support of my assertion that this was the Earldom claimed by the late Earl of Kellie,
I proceed to quote from the present Earl's " Letter to the Peers of Scotland," and also from
the work of Lord Crawford, the spokesman of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine.
Lord Kellie.
" The investigations to which I have referred resulted, in a few months, in ray father being .
convinced that the Mar dignity as at present existing was limited to heirs-male. . . My father
lost no time in presenting a petition to the Queen, claiming the title of Earl of Mar, on the
grounds. . . that the existing Earldom was created by Queen Mary in the person of John, sur th
Lord Erskine, in 1565, and was limited to heirs-male " (Letter to the Peers of Scotland, 1879).

* " The presumption was held throughout by the Committee for Privileges to be in favour of Lord Kellie
as heir-male, and the onus of disproving Lord Kellie's claim thrown upon Lord Mar (i.e. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine)
as heir-general" (Earldom of Mar, II. 117).
+ *' He (Mr. Goodeve-Erskine) was, and is, entitled to recognition as Earl of Mar fro.n all m.n, till the
heir-male can establish a preferable right " (Earldom of Mar, II. 116.)
Collect. r

15° COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

Lord Crawford.
" It is no less matter of notoriety that the dignity of Earl of Mar was claimed by the late
Earl of Kellie .... on the allegation, ut supra, that the Earldom of Mar on the Union Roll
was not the ancient dignity it had till then been supposed to be, but a new creation by Mary,
Queen of Scots, in 1565 .... descendible, according to the private rule of interpretation
observed by the House of Lords in similar circumstances, to heirs-male of the body of the
patentee, and consequently to Lord Kellie himself" (Earldom of Mar, I. 5).
"Walter Coningsby, Earl of Kellie, the heir-male, claimed the Earldom of Mar by
petition to the Crown, dated 23rd May, 1867  Lord Kellie claimed the Earldom — as a
comparatively modern Earldom, affirmed, as I have repeatedly stated, to have been created
by Queen Mary in 1565 " (lb., II. 116).
Here, then, we have it recognized on both sides that the dignity claimed by the Earl
of Kellie was the ("one and only") existing Earldom. Let us now ascertain from the same
sources what was the decision of the House of Lords on the claim thus made, and on the
plea by which it was supported.
Lord Crawford. -
"Lord Kellie's petition having been referred by Her Majesty to the House of Lords for .
their advice in usual form, the House referred it to the Lords' Committee for Privileges, who,
jmi the 5th February, 1875, came to a resolution in favour of Lord Kellie— -the present Earl,
_K father's successor — based on recognition ofthe preceding plea in the following terms : — ' That
i^s the opinion of this Committee that the claimant .... hath made out his claim to the
honour and dignity of Earl of Mar in the Peerage of Scotland, created in 1565 ' " (Earldom
of Mar, I. 6). Lord Kellie.
" The questions which the Committee were asked to decide were two in number — I. Was
the Earldom of Mar, which now exists on tlie Roll of Scotch peers, and 'was held by the Earl of
Mar and Kellie who died in 1866, a new grant by Queen Mary, or a restoration by her of an
ancient dignity? 2. Was the dignity descendible to heirs-general, or was it limited to heirs-
male?" (Utter to Peers of Scotland).
Lord Crawford.
" The answers of the Committee for Privileges to the two questions formulated by Lord
Kellie, as put to the Committee, may be presented in their simplest form thus : — The
Earldom of Mar which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and which was Iield by the
Earl of Mar and Kellie who died in 1866, was a new creation by Queen Mary, and not the
restitution by her of an ancient dignity ; and, 2, The new dignity created by Queen Mary
was limited to heirs-male of the body, and not descendible to heirs-general. These answers
are based, as I have fully recognised, on the traditional rules and principles of the House of
Lords, adopted since 1762 and 1 771 " (Earldom of Mar, II. 118).
This admission of Lord Crawford's — an admission of vital importance — faithfully and
accurately represents the Resolution of the Committee for Privileges, subsequently confirmed
and acted upon by the House of Lords. Their Resolution decided the two issues distinctly
and severally: —
(1) The issue whether the existing Earldom (which, as we have seen, was admittedly
fhe Dignity claimed by Lord Kellie) was descendible to the heir-male (the claimant) or not ;
this they decided by the words, —
"The claimant . . . hath made out his claim to the honour and dignity of Earlof Mar in
the Peerage of Scotland."
(2) The issue whether the existing Earldom was created in 1565 or not; this they
decided by the rider, —
" Created in 1565."
And that there may be no question as to this being the true and only meaning of the
Resolution, I subjoin, from the " Judgments " of the three Lords, the conclusion at which
they had arrived on the two issues raised, which conclusions were embodied in the above
Resolution, drawn up by themselves. It follows that it is only in the light of their con
clusions that we can interpret the words of their Resolution.
Lord Chelmsford.
"My Lords, upon a review of all the circumstances of the case, I have arrived at the
conclusion . . . that the creation of the dignity by her" (Queen Mary) l'was an entirely new
creation, and there being no charter or instrument of creation in existence, and nothing to
show what was to be the course of descent of this dignity, the primd facie presumption of
law is, that it is descendible to heirs-male, which presumption has not in this case been
rebutted by any evidence to the contrary."
"I am therefore of opinion thatthe dignity of Earl of Mar created by Queen Mary is
descendible to the heirs-male of the person ennobled, etc., etc."

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR ? 151

Lord Redesdale.
_" Under these circumstances, my Lords, 1 consider that the Earl of Kellie has made good
his claim to the Earldom of Max created by Queen Mary in 1565, and that there is not any
other Earldom of Mar nolo existing."Lord Chancellor (Lord Cairns).
" My Lords, I am of opinion that it is clearly made out that the title of Mar, which now
exists, was created by Queen Mary .... And, my Lords, it appears to me that the question, and
the only question in the case, and the question which has caused, as I have said, great
anxiety to myself in the consideration of it, is whether that peerage so created by Queen
Mary should be taken to be, according to the ordinary rule, a peerage descendible to male-
heirs only, or whether, by reason of any surrounding circumstances, that primd facie pre
sumption should be held to be excluded ....
" My Lords, the burden- of proof lies upon the opposing petitioner, and, it not having been
in any way discharged, I am compelled to arrive at the conclusion at which my noble friends
who have already addressed, the Committee have arrived, namely, that this must betaken to be
a dignity descendible lo heirs-male, and, therefore, that it is now vested in the Earl of Kellie."
Having now established, beyond a doubt, that the dignity which was claimed by the
Earl of Kellie, and to which, in the words of the Resolution, "he hath made out his
claim," was the only existing Earldom of Mar, — or, to employ Lord Crawford's words, " the
' Earldom of Mar which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and which was held by the
Earl of Mar and Kellie, who died in 1866,"* — I pass to the " Orders of the House" based
on the above Resolution.
" Ordered, 1. That said Resolution and Judgment be reported to Her Majesty by the
Lords with white staves.
"Ordered, 2. That the Clerk of the Parliament do transmit the said Resolution and
Judgment to the Lord Clerk Register of Scotland.
" Ordered, 3. That at any future meetings ofthe Peers of Scotland, assembled under any
Royal Proclamation for the election of a Peer or Peers to represent the Peerage of Scotland
in Parliament, the Lord Clerk Register, or the Clerks of Session officiating thereat in his
name, do call the title of Earl of Mar according to its place on the Roll of Peers of Scotland
called at such election, and do receive and count the vote of the Earl of Mar claiming to vote
in right of the said Earldom, and do permit him to take part in the proceedings of such
election."
It will be perceived that the third and last of these Orders is in exact accordance with
everything that has gone before. It contemplates no other Dignity than the Earldom of Mar
standing on the Union Roll (" on the Roll of Peers of Scotland called at such election "),
nor indeed could .it do so, in view of the avowed nature of Lord Kellie's claim, and of its
entire recognition by the Committee for Privileges and by the House. But, superfluous
though it may seem, I shall now adduce evidence that the Order has been so interpreted by
those most concerned with it and best qualified to judge.
(i) THE LORD CLERK REGISTER OF SCOTLAND.
This officer at the next election (1876) allowed Lord Mar and Kellie to answer to the
title of Earl of Mar, when called "according to its place on the roll of Peers of Scotland,"
and received his vote " in right of the said Earldom," despite the energetic protests of Mr.
Goodeve-Erskine and his supporters, on the ground that " he had no choice but to obey the
order he had received from the House of Lords, and which was perfectly clear and distinct Z' f
(2) THE PRESENT LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord Selbome).
•.peaking of the order in question (relating to Lord Kellie's Earldom of Mar), Lord
S-ciborne (who had himself been counsel for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine) observed in the famous
debate of 1877 : — " My Lords, I not only say that the natural meaning of these words is
that it should be called according to the actual place which it had upon the Roll ....', the
place which that earldom had and was entitled to upon the existing Roll of Peers  The
decision asserted virtually, though not in form, that there was only one Earl of Mar, and that
there had only been one Earl of Mar since 1565, and that was the holder of the Earldom created
in that year. But upon the Union Roll, and the Roll of the Peers of Scotland, there always
had been an Earl of Mar standing, and tlierefore tlie place of the Earldom of Mar (if there was
only one) upon the Roll of Peers was its existing place upon that Roll, and not any new or
different place." J .
* Earldom of Mar, II. 118. f Earldom of Mar, II. 154.
J Lord Selbome's speech acquires additional importance from being spoken in support of the successful
amendment which has been persistently claimed by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his supporter? as a victory for
their principles,

iS2 ' COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

(3) THE LATE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord Caims).
Speaking of the order in question, in the debate of 1879, the then Lord Chancellor
observed : — "The order of your Lordships' House to the Lord Clerk Register is this : That he is to
call the title ol the Earl of Mar according to its place in the Roll of ihe Peers of Scotland.
He has no authority to put it in a different place ; he must call it in the place where he finds
it ; it is only found in one place ; and when he calls it, and it is answered, he is ordered to
receive and count the vote of the person who has been adjudged to be Earl of Mar and
Kellie in answer to that call. / cannot myself see that any question can really arise as to the
duty ofthe Lord Clerk Register ; the order of your Lordships House speaks for itself; and the
Lord Clerk Regi.ler has nothing to do but to obey it."
This statement of Lord Cairns is of special importance as a reply to the quotation in an
article, — "Jurisdiction in Scottish Peerages,"* — which will subsequently be further noticed,
viz.—" The report of the Select Committee, in whose appointment that debate (1877) resulted,
drawn up by the same noble and learned Lord (Lord Cairns), himself one of the Committee
of Privileges who concurred in the resolution of 1875  remarks,
It may be a question whether under this Resolution it was the duty of the Lord Clerk
Register to call the Earldom of Mar in the place in which the Earldom of Mar actually stands
on the Union Roll, or in what would be the place of an Earldom of Mar created in 1565 ;
but it appears that the Lord Clerk Register called it in the place in which it actually stands
on the Union Roll." ,
Lord Cairns' speech, quoted above, is a sufficient rejoinder to the words here attributed
. to him, and is, it will be seen, in complete accordance with the other authorities quoted.
(4) THE EARL OF CRAWFORD.
Lord Crawford admits that the order directed the Lord Clerk Register " to receive Lord
Kellie's vote as Earlof Mar in response to the summons of the ancient Earldom, thus placing
Lord Kellie in the seat, place, and precedency of his cousin the heir-general, excluding the
latter." t And again, " The order in question intrudes Lord Kellie, as Earl of Mar, under
the alleged creation of 1565, into the place and precedency of the ancient Earldom of Mar,
the only Earldem of Mar on the Union Roll." % Once more, he speaks of it as " The order
upon the plain and obvious sense of which the Lord Clerk Register acted  the order
. . . commanding him to allow Lord Kellie to vote as Earl of Mar in the place of the Earl
dom of Mar on the Union Roll .... an order admitting of no hesitation or question. §
It is clear, ther, from the admission of these four authorities, that the order directed Lord
Mar and Kellie's vote to be received in right ofthe Earldom of Mar standing on the Union
Roll, and that by so doing it identified the Earldom to which he had " made out his claim "
with the (only) Earldom on the Union Roll, the only Earldom, as has been repeatedly shown,
recognised on either side as existing.
But from the instant that we leave this common ground we are plunged into hopeless
confusion. The only means by which we can steer a clear course amid the quibbles and
sophistries by which we shall now be beset- is by keeping an unswerving gaze on the one
fixed point, guided by which, as by a beacon-light, we can never go astray. That fixed
pcint is the existing Earldom of Mar. Here at least we know what we deal with. The
Earldom held by Lord Mar and Kellie who died in 1866, was admittedly the only existing
Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll. This was the Earldom which Lord Kellie claimed,
and to ihis, by Lord Crawford's admission, the Lords held that he had " made out his claim."
My objection to those loose terms, "the ancient " and " the modern " Earldom, is thz? there
is nothing in the meaning of either term to tell us, when it is employed, whether it refeis to
the (only) existing Earldom, the one fixed point from which we must not. allow ourselves to
be decoyed. It is this very ambiguity which has enabled these terms to be used as the thin
end of the wedge for introducing the heresy of a double Earldom, for setting up an existing
Earldom in the person of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, by the side of the (only) existing Earldom
vested in Lord Mar and Kellie (see p. 167).
Holding, personally, a view distinct from that held on either side, — namely, that
objectively there has never been but one Earldom of Mar, though, subjectively (that is,
relatively to its several lines of holders), there have been as many Earldoms as there have
been creations, — I recognise the same Dignity under its. "ancient" and under its "modern"
avatar, and see, even more plainly, the fallacy of these misleading terms. But this would
lead us into the whole controversy, and that is not now our object.
* Journal of Jurisprudence and Scottish Law Magazine, May, 1 883.
t Earldom of Mar, I. 6. % lb., II. 148. g lb., II. 162,

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR ? 153
Lord Crawford's views on (a) the effect, and (b) the validity of the Lords' third Order
afford so excellent an illustration of the method pursued by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's party,
that special attention must be called to them.
His views on the effect of the Order are summarised in the extracts I have given (p. 152).
He asserts that it " intrudes " Lord Kellie's Earldom " into the place and precedency of
the ancient Earldom of Mar " on the Union Roll. Now it was simply unpardonable that
a controversialist, who would not allow the effect of the Mar Resolution to be determined
from anything but its own words — not even from the conclusions on which he admitted it
to be based — should himself not only import into his description ofthis Order the term,
" the ancient Earldom," which is not to be found in it, but should do so in absolute defiance
of what I have shown to be its clear intent ! Why, to assume thus coolly that the existing
Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll, was " the ancient Earldom," was simply to beg
the whole question, and to decide the controversy beforehand. Yet it is on this assumption,
and on this alone, that Lord Crawford's position here rests.
His views on the validity of the Order flow, as a matter of course, from the above views
on its effect. Starting from the assumption that the Earldom on the Union Roll was what he
was pleased to term " the ancient Earldom," and therefore /.ould not be identified with the
" Earldom adjudged to Lord Kellie,"* — an assumption which, whether right or wrong, was
nothing but his own assumption, and was directly opposed, as I have shown, to the Lords'
view — he argues that the Order intrudes a " newly-discovered Earldom "t into the seat of this
" ancient Earldom," and, consequently, that —
" It proceeds upon an assumption that the House had legal power to ordain alteration in
the precedency of the Peers of Scotland ; in other words, as I have said, to tamper with
the Union Roll. . . ; The House of Lords has no legal power to deal with the Union Roll ;
and I shall presently show that the House itself disclaimed such power subsequently to the
issue of the Order here in question, thus admitting that this third Order was ultra vires,
and therefore illegal.''^
But if the House disclaims, as it did disclaim (1877), any legal power" (as the law stands)
" to deal with the Union Roll," how is it that this obnoxious Order remains unresctnded by
the House of Lords, "a thorn " (says Lord Crawford) "in Lord Mar's side, which ought to
be plucked out by those who planted it there ? "§ Why, for the very reason that, in the
opinion of the House, it does not "tamper with the Union Roll," and therefore does not assume
the power which the House has admittedly disclaimed. And if the House holds that it does
not " tamper with the Roll," it follows that (as we have seen), in the opinion of the House,
it "intrudes" no "newly-discovered Earldom," but recognises that the Earldom of Mar
existing on the Union Roll was the Dignity to which Lord Kellie " hath made out his claim."
Thus the conclusion to be drawn from Lord Crawford's argument is> that the House must
have viewed Lord Kellie's Earldom as the Earldom on the Union Roll.
Lord Crawford's arguments on this obnoxious Order afford, as I have said, an excellent
illustration of the method systematically adhered to by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his
supporters. That method consists in persistently confusing two utterly distinct questions :
(a) Is the decision of the Lords right or wrong ?
(b) Accepting that decision "as a competent decerniture"|| (irrespective ofthe question
whether it was right or wrong), how is it intended to affect the Earldom, i.e., the only existing
Earldom, ths Earldom on the Union Roll? Let us now trace the results of that confusion.
The Mar Resolution of the House of Lords is frankly admitted by both sides to have
rested on three propositions —
-"' (1) That the legal presumption was in favour of Lord Kellie's succession to the EarldomH
till the heir- female could prove the contrary.**
(2) That " the Earldom of Mar, which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and which
was held by the Earl of Mar and Kellie who died in 1866, was a new creation by Queen Mary"
(Earldom of Mar, II. 117). . .
(3) That " the new dignity created by Queen Mary" (i.e. as above, the existing Earldom)
" was limited to heirs-male, and not descendible to heirs-general " (Ib.)
Let it be carefully observed that both the Resolution and the Order flowing from it, when

* Earldom of Mar, II. 22. f Earldom of Mar, I. 6. % lb., II. 148. § lb., IL 336.
|| Journal of Jurisprudence (May), p. 243.
IT _>. the existing Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll.
** "The presumption was held throughout by the Committee for Privileges to be in favourof Lord Kellie
_„ heir-male and the onus of disproving Lord Kellie's claim thrown upon Lord Mar " (i.e. Mr. Goodeve-
Erskine) "as heir-general " (Earldom of Mar, II. 117).

as

iS4 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
interpreted by these three propositions, on which they are admitted to rest, are perfectly
consistent and clear, and present no difficulty whatever.
How then is it possible to evade the consequences flowing from this Resolution, which
itself similarly flows from the above three propositions? There is but one honest and
consistent way by which this can be done, and that is by declaring, in the words of Lord
Crawford's " Additional Protest," that the
" Resolution, although confirmed by the Peers and approved of by the Sovereign, is
inoperative, and must be held null and void."*
Unfortunately, however, the way which has been selected is one which most certainly
is neither honest nor consistent. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his supporters have resolved to
accept the Resolution itself " as a competent decerniture," but to reject by a flat and direct
negative each one of the three propositions on which it is admittedly based! They then, on the
one hand, forbid us to interpret the words of the Resolution in the light of the propositions on
which they admit it io be founded, while, on the other, they themselves insist on interpreting it in
ihe light of their direct negation of each .and all of these propositions I A more audacious
device it is not possible to conceive, and yet it can be absolutely established that my state
ment is literally true.
Here are their three assumptions, which, as I have said, severally negative the three
rationes on which the Mar Resolution rest : —
(t) That the legal presumption is in favour of the heiT-general,f and the onus of
disproving it on the heir-male. Consequently, in the case of the Earldom of Mar, X that Mi.
Goodeve-Erskine "was, and is, entitled to recognition as Earl of Mar from all men, till the
heir-male can establish a preferable right "§ to the Earldom.
(2) That " the Earldom of Mar which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers,
and which was held by the Earl of Mar and Kellie who died in 1866," cannot have been
"a new creation by Queen Mary."
(3) That the said Earldom of Mar must be descendible to heirs-general, and cannot luwe been
limited to heirs-male, even had it been (which it was not) " a new creation by Queen Mary."||
These assumptions should be carefully compared with the three propositions which
they respectively traverse, for it will be found that they are the fundamental axioms on
which Lord Crawford based his case, and in the light of which, as I have observed, he
interpreted the Mar Resolution. I propose now to show how the attitude which has been
assumed by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his supporters is entirely based on the application of
these axioms lo the Resolution of the House of Lords, which Resolution, as we have seen,
is admittedly founded on the direct negation of these very axioms !
Here is their argument concisely stated : By the second and third axioms the existing
Earldom (admitted on all sides to be the Earldom on the Union Roll) cannot have been
created in 1565, and cannot be descendible to heirs-male. But the Earldom of Mar to which,
by the Resolution, Lord Kellie " hath made out his claim," is declared to have been "created
in 1565," and to be descendible to heirs-male. Ergo , Lord Kellie's Earldom of Mar cannot
be the existing Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll. (If it is not this, what else can it
be ?) Again, by the first axiom, Mr. Goodeve-Erskine (under the legal presumption in favour
of the heir-general) has a right to the (existing) Earldom till the heir-male , proves a better
right to it. But it has just been shown that the heir-male has not obtained the existing
Earldom at all. Ergo, Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's presumptive right to that Earldom hot having
been even challenged, he is in possession of this, the only existing Earldom, the Earldom
on the Union Roll.1T Q.ED.
Moreover, it follows, as a corollary from this, that as Lord Kellie's Earldom of Mar
is an "aggression upon the unity and integrity ofthe one and only Earldom of Mar standing
upon the Union Roll" (Earldom of Mar, II. r4o), of which, as shown above, Mr. Goodeve-
Erskine is " in legal possession," and as " it is impossible that the two dignities can co-exist "
(lb., II. 222), Lord Kellie's Earldom of Mar is a "phantom. . . . which has no backbone
of its own, and exists only through the force of illegal strain."** Consequently the Mar
* Earldom of Mar, I. 22. + Earldom of Mar, I. 107.
% i.e. the existing Earldom, the Earldom on the Union Roll. § Earldom of Mar, II. 116.
jj " It follows equally that on the hypothesis of a new creation in 1565, the heir-general, and no other,
inherits under it" (Earldom of Mar, II. 251). ..." He would have an equal right  under the alleged
new creation of 1565, founded on by Lord Kellie. ... if it ever had existed " (lb., II. 129).
IT " A peer whose status has not been in the slightest degree legally affected or compromised by anything
which has taken place in the House of Lords or out of it " (Earldom of Mar, II. 222). .
** Letter tp the Scotsman (18 April), appealed to by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine.

ARE THERE TWO FARLS OF MAR 1 i55

" Resolution, although confirmed by the Peers and approved of by the Sovereign, is
inoperative, and must be held null and void"* Q.E.D.
See, then, how logically all follows if we will only accept, as fundamental axioms, the
very assumptions which Lord Kellie denied, and which the House of Lords admittedly
rejected! Let there be no misunderstanding here. Let us say to Mr. Goodeve-Erskine
and his supporters, You have a perfect right to denounce, if you will, the " Resolution and
judgment " of the House of Lords " as a Resolution erroneous both in law and fact,"f or even
more tersely as a " blunder ; " $ but you have not a right, while confessing with your lips that
" as a competent decemiture it must be acquiesced in," § to deny, nevertheless, every one of
the premisses on which you admit that decemiture to be based, and — liaving thus reduced the
Resolution itself to unmeaning and unintelligible nonsense — to proclaim that the nonsense which
you have thus yourselves evolved is the actual meaning of the decision, and to apply to this
nonsense the words of Lord Cairns, that "we ought to be very careful not to go beyond
what the decision actually was I " \\
I repeat that the Resolution, of which the meaning is clear when we interpret it by its
avowed and admitted rationes, becomes " unmeaning and unintelligible nonsense " when we
interpret it by their opposites. For what does its meaning then become? We are asked to
accept as its true meaning that " the Earldom of Mar " to which Lord Kellie had " made
out his claim " was not " the Earldom of Mar " at all, but " a new Mar title not on the
Union Roll," 1T a " newly-discovered Earldom,"** a " creation unknown to Scottish law and
Scottish history. tt And let us remember that this is represented as the real intent and meaning
of tlie Resolution itself, and that we are asked to believe that this Mar Resolution had no
intention of identifying the Earldom of Mar, which it recognised as vested in the Earl of
Kellie, with the Earldom of Mar on the Union Roll Jt (i.e. the only existing Earldom, and
the only one of which the House could take cognisance !)
This brings us to the key of the position, viz, the contention that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine
being " in legal possession " of the " ancient " Earldom, that possession is not disturbed by
Lord Kellie having obtained the "modern" Earldom. §§ I invite the closest attention to
that " equivocation on the facts of the case " |||| (as Mr. Hewlett has well described it) by
which it is sought to establish this contention. What is the meaning of the "ancient" Earldom ?
It is on the precious ambiguity of the term " ancient " that the whole equivocation rests.
Does it mean the Earldom which Lord Chelmsford believed to have " come to an end more
than a century before Queen Mary's time," the Earldom which " existed (in Lord Hailes'
words) before the era of genuine history"? or does it mean the now existing Earldom, the
Earldom vested in the late Earl of Mar and Kellie? Here we have the key to the
" equivocation." It is assumed, as a fundamental axiom, by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his
supporters, that the Earldom of Mar which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and
which was held by the Earl of Mar and Kellie who died in 1866, was, and could only be,
" the ancient Earldom." But, by the admission of Lord Crawford (p. 148), "the answer"
contamed in the Mar Resolution was that —
"The Earldom of Mar which now exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and which was
held by the Earl of Mar who died in 1 866, was a new creation by Queen Mary' ' 
Consequently, when the supporters of that Resolution speak of the "ancient" or "original"
Earldom, they mean by that term, not the Earldom on the Union Roll, but a (hypothetical)
Dignity " older than and different from " IT IT that existing Earldom which the Resolution
declared, as is admitted above, to be " a new creation by Queen Mary." As it was plainly
put by Lord Saltoun, at Holyrood, in 1880 —
* Earldom of Mar, I. 22. t Journal of Jurisprudence (May 18S3), p. 243.
% lb., p. 244. - § lb., p. 243. || lb. IT Mr. Goodeve-Erskine s Letter to the Times.
** Earldom of Mar, I. 6. It seems to be suggested by their hypothesis that the Lords must have held
that Queen Mary conferred the Earldom of Mar in 1565 as a superimposed dignity on a man who was already
in possession of the Earldom of Mar under a far earlier creation !
ft Letter to Scotsman, tit supra.
%± "Mr. Hewlett is therefore on every ground wrong in contending that the decemiture of 1875 has
legally settled the question that the old Earldom is extinct, or that the title of 1565 adjudged to the present
Earl of Mar and Kellie is to be identified with the Earldom on the Union Roll" (Journal of Jurisprudence,
May 1883, p. 244).
§§ "The decision of 1875, conceding to Lord Kellie a new Mar title. . . . has not dealt with the ancient
Earldom '; (Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's Letter to the Times. See also Lord Crawford's work, passim).
||l| Jurisdiction on Scottish Peerage Claims (1883).
\% Earldom of Mar, II. 306.

IS6 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

"If there was another Peerage of Mar, if there was an older Peerage, and if the old
territorial Peerage of Mar did not come to an end in 1377, then Mr. Goodeve-Erskine could
claim that Peerage, and could go before the House of Lords and there establish his claim."
Or, as the Lord Clerk Register has lately expressed it (see p. 161) —
" It really turns upon the existence of a particular peerage at all. "
Thus, when Mr. Goodeve-Erskine tells us that "the decision of 1875. ... has not dealt with
the ancient Earldom,"* or when the Journal of Jurisprudence declares that it "did not
necessarily extinguish the ancient Earldom," these statements may be perfectly true in the
above sense ofthe term (the sense in which it is understood by the House of Lords), — viz., an
Earldom of which the very existence has yet to be proved, — but they are not true, if by "the
ancient Earldom " they mean, as they do mean, the existing Earldom, the Earldom on the
Union Roll. For to assume that this latter Dignity is necessarily " the ancient Earldom " is
to beg the whole question. This was just the very issue that, as Lord Crawford admits (p. 148),
was raised before the Committee in the Mar case, and was decided against Mr. Goodeve-
Erskine.t The House of Lords have, throughout been perfectly consistent in their views.
Treating the Dignity claimed by Lord Kellie as the (only) existing Earldom of Mar, they
insisted on Mr. Goodeve-Erskine styling himself, not Earl of Mar, but " claiming to be Earl
of Mar," while the claim to the Earldom was pending, and when that Earldom had been
adjudged to Lord Kellie, they proved that, in their view, it was the only one existing, by
ordering Mr. Goodeve-Erskine to drop even the style — " claiming lo be Earl of Mar." As it
was expressed by the present Lord Chancellor, when opposing Lord Galloway's motion
(14 June, 1880), he
" Rested his objections to the course now proposed on this fact, that there was, on the
Union Roll, only one Earl of Mar ; there had never been more than one, and it must be
determined judicially that there existed another Earldom of Mar before their Lordships
could rescind the order and adopt the motion, which proceeded essentially upon the assump
tion that there was another."
It is of such vital importance to obtain a clear grasp of this pivotal point, " the ancient
earldom," that it may be as well to illustrate it by the only case which affords some parallel
to its peculiar features. I refer to " the Earldoms of Ormond in Ireland," of which I have
afready treated in these pages. In that case, as in that of Mar, we have, on the one hand,
an existing Earldom, descendible to heirs-male ; itself created in the sixteenth century, but
ranking as of earlier date. So far the correspondence is complete. On the other, we have
in both cases an Earldom, homonymous, but earlier in date, known in the case of Ormond,
and asserted in the case of Mar, to have been descendible to heirs- of-line. And in both
cases this earlier Earldom has neither been held, nor even recognised as extant, for more than
three centuries.:}: But at this point begins a wide divergence, for, though the earlier (or
Boleyn) Earldom of Ormond has so long remained unclaimed, there is a very strong
presumption that it is not extinct, but merely dormant. But in the case of the earlier
Earldom of Mar, we not only stand on the most precarious ground, but we have even " the
certainty " (as Lord Crawford admits) that it must inevitably be pronounced extinct when (if
ever) it is claimed. And the reason of this divergence is not far to seek. For the existence
of the Boleyn Earldom of Ormond would, if recognized, be in no way incompatible with the
co-existence of the Butler Earldom. But as to the two Earldoms of Mar, Lord Crawford
himself hastens to assure us that "it is impossible that the two dignities can co-exist"
Indeed the existence of either is incompatible with that of the other, and consequently, as he
confesses, "It is beyond question that the award for Lord Kellie, as expressed in the Resolution,
was based exclusively on the view that the ancient dignity had ceased to exist."
We are enabled by this comparison to form a clearer idea of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's position.
For we see that the heir-general of the Earls of Berkeley, in whom is now vested the right to
the Boleyn Earldom of Ormond, would be infinitely more justified in assuming that Dignity
and proclaiming herself " in possession " of the same, than is Mr. Goodeve-Erskine in so
assuming his hypothetical Earldom of Mar. The persistent contention that, by Scottish law,
he succeeded,/.^ sanguinis to his uncle's Dignity, is wholly based, we must remember, on the
hypothesis that the Earldom which he has assumed — " the ancient Earldom" — was the Dignity
vested in his uncle. But by Lord Crawford's admission, the House of Lords has decided that
* Letter to the Times. -f Earldom of Mar, II. 117, 118.
% According to the decision of the Lords that the existing Earldom was that of 1565. (" The decision
asserted virtually, though not in form, that there was only one Ear) of Mar, and that there had been only one
Earl of Mar since 1565, and that was the holder ofthe Earldom created in that year."— Lord Selkorne). '

Are there two earls of mar i

157

FarwiS? >-y ^ ln , Un-Cle Was a " new creation by Queen Mary,"* and not << the ancient
£,anoom. Consequently, if we accept the Lords' decision, that contention falls to the ground.
t m. ?!"¥ n°^ ?hi,wn how the case tra]y stands> when c,eared from sophistry and quibble,
I must deal, as briefly as possible, with the latest effort to obfuscate the truth.
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, in his letter to the Times, announces that Mr. Hewlett "expressed
ignorance on the subject," and that
.v"*?* many errors and fallacies are fully refuted in the Scotsman ofthe 25th of April, in
the Journal of Jurisprudence and Scottish Law. Magazine for May; and in ' The Earldom of
Mar during 500 years,' by the late Earl of Crawford."
As Lord Crawford was dead before Mr. Hewlett wrote, and as the Scotsman of the 25th (sic)
AprU contains no allusion to the subject, this passage will give us no high idea of Mr. Goodeve-
fcrskine s accuracy. The Scotsman of the 18th April contains a violent letter on the Earldom
<bu. without alluding to Mr. Hewlett), to which I shall refer anon ; and there remains the
Article in the Journal. This article may certainly, in one sense, be described as " ably
written, for its author contrives, in the case of Mar, to convey a series of false impressions,
without actually committing himself to falsehood,— save, indeed, in the case of the Lord
Clerk Register's evidence, where the "suppressio veri" is eked out by something stronger
than a mere " suggestio falsi." Here is the Lord Clerk Register's evidence, and the garbled
version of it in the Journal side by side.
cr r _, ,5In.I__rl?,OF EviDENCfi- ' Journal of Jurisprudence.
148. Lord Ker.] " Taking the matters as they stand, « The noble Earl who now holds the ofiice of Lord
without going into this question, supposing there was a Clerk Register, in his evidence before tbe Select
doubt with reference to the right of a Peer claiming to Committee of 1882, was asked his opinion of how his
vote, what course do you think is open to him in a predecessor ought to have acted on receiving such'an
case Uke this, where there has been a claim as in the «--/_.-, and his reply was,— 'Whoever had the misfortune
two Earldoms of Mar ; what would happen to the to be Lord Clerk Register at that time would have to
other Earl of Mar, supposing he has a fair claim? " act upon his own judgment as to whether there was a
L. C. R.j — " Whoever had the misfortune to be prima' facie probability of there being an older
Lord Clerk Register at that time would have to act Earldom of Mar ; and if so he might be incliued to
upon his own judgment as to whether there was a receive the vote  It would be a question of ex-
pnm& facie probability of there being an older Earl- treme difficulty and delicacy, and I am extremely
dom of Mar ; and if so he might be inclined to thankful that it has never fallen to my lot to admin-
receive tbe vote ; but on the other hand, if he thought ister it.' "
that the Acts defining the 1800 limit, and the decision
of the Committee of Privileges, and other consider
ations, rendered it wrong to receive « double vote for
the same title, although in u totally different plane,
he would then be obliged to refuse the vote. ¦ It would
be a question of 'extreme difficulty and delicacy, and
I am extremely thankful that it has never fallen to
my lot to administer it."
It will be observed that the Lord Clerk Register's reply was not an answer to a question
" how his predecessor ought to have acted on receiving such an order," but how he or his
successor " would have to act " ; and it will moreover be seen from the suppressed passage
(printed in italics) that he never contemplated the idea of Lord Mar and Kellie's vote
being refused when " Mar " was called on the Roll of Peers. What he did contemplate
was the contingency of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, not as the holder of the existing Dignity,
but as the claimant of "an older Earldom of Mar" (of which the very existence was a matter
of doubtful probability) — a Dignity for which no vote had been tendered in the present cen
tury (or, indeed, at any other time), and which consequently came under the provisions of
the Act of 1847, — tendering his vote when " Mar" was called in right of his dormant (if
not extinct) Dignity. For in whatever place the title were called, he might always consider
that it applied, and applied only, to the (dormant) Dignity which he claimed.t That I
have here correctly interpreted the Lord Clerk Register's view, is proved by the reply he
had previously given when pressed to recognise Mr. Goodeve-Erskine as a Peer, and not as
" a*claimant for a Peerage."
L. C. Register]... They (the Protests) had relation to the case of a claimant for a Peerage
who was not present.
Lord Brabourne] Is it right to call the gentleman in question a claimant to a peerage?
* Earldom of Mar, II. 118.
t This was pointed out in that Report of the 1877 Committee, to which we are so constantly referred :
" It would be in the- power of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine to answer to the name, in whatever
order of precedence it was called, or to claim to vote as Earl of Mar, irrespective of any
calling of the name."
Collect. u

i53 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
L. C. Register] I haidly know how to express it otherwise of a gentleman who sincerely
believes himself to hold a very ancient Earldom. I wish, of course, to speak of him with all
possible respect, but I am obliged to use tlie word " claimant."*
Similarly, even in the 1877 Report, to which the writer in the Journal triumphantly refers, we
find the Committee, as Lord Crawford complains, " determinedly bent on representing^ Mr.
Goodeve-Erskine as a daimant,"X as indeed they were bound to do, holding that Lord Kellie
had " made out his claim " to the only existing Earldom, and, consequently, that if there
were an " older and different " Earldom to which Mr. Goodeve-Erskine. had a right, it could
only be a dormant one, which had yet to be claimed. Frankly recognising that Lord Mar
and Kellie's object was —
• " That Mr. Goodeye-Erskine should not be allowed to answer to the title of Mar whenever
it may be called, or to tender his vote,"
the Committee observes that —
"It is clear that no mere, alteration of the place on the Roll, when the title of Maris
called, would have this effect,"
and reports that there are—
" Precedents of Orders made by the House, forbidding individuals to take upon themselves
the title or the dignity of particular Scotch peerages until their claim shall have been allowed
in due course of law.
but that the Act of 1847 has now superseded the necessity for such orders, and has provided
an effectual rem ady for the annoyance : —
" The Report of the Committee of the House made in 1847, as to the question of what
steps should be taken to prevent persons from voting at Elections of Representative Peers
for Scotland, who are not entitled to do so . . . . was followed by the Statute 10 and II Vict.
c. 52, and this Statute appears to the Committee to have now provided a definite and
practical mode of preventing the vote of any person improperly claiming a title of Peerage
in Scotland being received or counted at any election."
Let it be bome in mind that the " Order " of the House of Lords in 1875 " must neces
sarily have referred," as 'Lord Cairns expressed it, to the only existing Earldom, the Earldom
on the Union Roll (See p. 16*6). It speaks of "the Title of Earl of Mar" (i.e. the only
existing title), and orders the vote of Lord Kellie, as " the Earl of Mar," to be received {as
Lord Crawford frankly admits) " in fight of the said Earldom." We shall find that the
Report ofthe Select Committee of 1877 was emphatically based upon the same view. This
Report similarly contemplates the existence of one, and only one, Earldom — " tlie Earldom
of Mar" (Seep. 150). It hints, indeed, at a possible . doubt as to the correct place upon the
Roll in which that Earldom (as being a creation of 1565) should be called, but it "does not
recognise the existence of any other Earldom on the Roll. A desperate effort, however, is
made by the Journal of Jurisprudence (p. 243) to persuade us that the Report was, in
Ulster's words, " apparently based on the non-identity of the title on the Union Roll with
that of 1565 " ! The device employed is, as usual, a flagrant suppressio veri.
Report of Committee. Journal of Jurisprudence.
"Where since the Union a title has been established " Where since the Union a title has been established
to a Scotch peerage not on the Union Roll, the peer- to a Scotch peerage not on the Union Roll, the peer
age to which the title has been so established has been age to which the title has been so established has been
placed upon the Roll in its proper precedence, ac- placed upon the Roll in its proper precedence ac
cording to the Resolution of the House. And, on ¦ to the Resolution of the House. .... It may be a
. ... oilier hand, where a title has been established to a question whether, under this Resolution, it was the
Peerage already entered on the Roll, a note has been duty of the Lord Clerk Register to call the (sic)
made opposite the peerage on the Roll, stating the title Earldom of Mar in the place," etc., etc. (See f.
that has been thus established to it" .... It maybe ISO.)
a question," etc., etc.
It will be observed that the Committee here narrate, incidentally, the practice in the case
of titles (a) not on the Roll, (b) on the Roll. But by the daring suppression of the passage
in italics, the Journal endeavours to convey the impression that the Committee viewed
the Earldom of Mar, to which Lord Kellie had " made out his claim." as a "peerage not
on the Union Roll " !
It is also asserted in the Jour?ial that this Report "recognises that a claim may yet be
competently made by the heir-general 'to an Earldom of Mar older,' etc. etc.,"t but the true
purport of the passage is, it will be seen, very different. The Report views Mr. Goodeve- .
Erskine in the light of any other claimant to a Peerage, who should assume a dormant (if not
extinct) title to which he has not proved his right, and, so viewing him, lays down that
* Minutes of Evidence, p. 15. ] Earldom of Mar, II. 221. J Journal of Jurisprudence, p. 243.

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR? iS9

his case is provided for by the Act of 1S47, which Act was based on the Report ofa Cum-
mittee that —
" The return of Representative Peers to the House of Lords may be affected, and the
public subjected to frauds, by the conduct of persons acting as Peers of Scotland, who are
not justly entitled to the honours they assume/'
The practical danger,.it urges, of his so exercising the rights of Peerage is obviated by the
safeguard that (under this Act) it is "competent for any two Peers to protest against his
claim," to vote in right of the Dignity he has assumed, and so to compel him to establish his
right to it,* with the certainty, as Lord Crawford frankly admits, that if he tenders his vote,
two peers will be prepared to protest against it . . . .,. and the further certainty that, till the
House formally abjure its traditional rules, it will decide against the law of Scotland and
himself!" f
I trust I have now sufficiently unmasked the equivocation contained in the term "the
ancient Earldom of Mar," and have established that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his supporters
have no right to take expressions which refer to that term in its sense of a dormant (if not
extinct) dignity, and then apply them to it in the very different sense which they are pleased
to place upon it themselves. Even if we admit with the Journal of Jurisprudence that the
" Resolution and Judgment " of 1875 has not
"legally settled the question that the old Earldom is extinct" (244),
we must clearly see that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine has no more right to assume the title of that
Earldom than the claimant of any other peerage dignity of Scotland who has not yet
established his claim. As he was reminded by the Lord Clerk Register, at Holyrood, in
1876, — " At present you are only a Peer of your own creation, and that creation I cannot
recognise here." J
But why, then, it may be asked, when it is in Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's power to put an
end to the chaos which he has himself created, by putting his pretensions to the test, does
not he (following the praiseworthy precedent of the titular " Earl of Banbury ") take steps
to establish his claim ? As Lord Redesdale has on this point well observed, —
" The present claimant particularly refused to take the necessary steps to prove his right to
the ancient earldom, when resisting the claim of the present Earl of Mar, and when his doing
so would not have been attended with any additional expense. The traditional doctrine of
the family has been to go on claiming the ancient earldom, and protesting against its not being
allowed, in the belief that their right to it would, by degrees, be very widely accepted, but on no
account to attempt to apply for a legal decision on the subject " (Letter on the Earldom of Mar,
1883).
There is the very best of reasons why Mr. Goodeve-Erskine should refuse to establish
his claim to the title which he persists in assuming, namely the " certainty," as Lord Crawford
expressed it, that the House must decide against his pretensions. And why is there this
" certainty '! beforehand ? Because the question has been already virtually, though not formally,
decided, and because it is only by a legal quibble that this hypothetical dignity can be even so muck
as claimed. Thus Lord Selborne, who had himself been counsel for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine,
observed, in the House of Lords, speaking as Lord Chancellor (ist July, 1880) : — .
" Whatever else was doubtful, this was certain, that Lord Cairns " (then Lord Chancellor),
" Lord Chelmsford " (a former Chancellor), " and the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees,
grounded their decision on reasons absolutely inconsistent with the hypothesis of there being,
at the date of the Decreet of Ranking, two Earldoms of Mar. If they had not believed that
the evidence then before them proved the extinction, and failed to prove the restoration, of the
ancient Earldom of. Mar, it would have been impossible for them to hold that a Mar Peerage
was created in 1565."
And here are Lord Crawford's own words, emphatically recognizing the same fact : —
"// is beyond question that the award for Lord Kellie, as expressed in the Resolution, was
based exclusively on the vieio that the ancient dignity had ceased to exist." §
How, then, it may be asked, can this dignity be even claimed, if it has thus been-
practically decided to be extinct ? Merely by the legal quibble, triumphantly set forth by
* "Viewing the claim of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine as a claim to an Earldom of Mar older than and different
from that which, according to the Resolution of the House, was created by Queen Mary in 1565, it would,
in the event of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine claiming at any future election to vote in respect of such older and
different Earldom of Mar, appear to be competent for any two peers to protest against his claim, and the
proceedings would thereupon be transmitted to the House, and it would appear to be in the power o the
House to call upon Mr. Goodeye-Eiskine to establish his claim to such older and different Earldom."
f Earldom of Mar, II. 222. X Earldom of Mar, II. 58. § Earldom of Mar, I. 6.

160 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Lord Crawford, that the avowed grounds (or rationes) of a decision which is itself legally
binding, are not themselves of any legal force, though their recognition is essential to the
conclusion embodied in the actual decision.
Let it then be most distinctly understood that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, though he assumes
this title, dares not vindicate his pretensions to the dignity by tendering his vote as Earl of
Mar before the assembled Peers of Scotland.
It has now, I trust, been clearly established, that if we are prepared loyalty to accept tlie
Mar Resolution and Order, with the consequences flowing therefrom,—
(a) Lord Mar and Kellie is in legal possession of "the Earidom of Mar, which now
exists on the Roll of Scottish Peers, and which was held by the Earl of Mar and
Kellie, who died in 1866."
. (b) That Mr. Goodeve-Erskine is, in the eye of the House of Lords, a claimant to a
certain Peerage Dignity, of which he persistently assumes the title while refusing
to establish his claim.
(c) That the said Peerage Dignity is, in the view of the House of Lords, " the ancient
Earldom of Mar," in the sense of that feudal and territorial dignity which, the
Committee for Privileges held as proved, had become extinct some time before
XS65-
(p) That its extinction not having been formally stated in the Resolution, it is technically .
competent for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine to advance a claim to that dignity, though
with the "certainty" that the House of Lords must inevitably declare it to be
extinct.
These conclusions, it will be seen, amply vindicate the soundness of the decision
pronounced by the learned Head of the College of Arms— curiously described by Lord
Crawford as "the present King-of-Arms for England"* — when applied to by the Lord
Chamberlain (in re the presentation of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine as Earl of Mar) as to the -
consequence of " the decision of the House in favour of Lord Kellie," t on Mr. Goodeve-
Erskine's assumption. Lord Kellie having " made out his claim to the Honour and Dignity
of Earl of Mar," X that "Honour and Dignity," it was pointed out, could not be yested in
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine. It was accordingly pronounced by the Lord Chamberlain that his
" presentation as such was inept." § This announcement is still in force, and Mr. Goodeve-
Erskine is well aware that he cannot be recognized at the Court of his Sovereign as
holding the title which he persists in assuming, although it has been decided to be vested
in another. It cannot be too often repeated, in view of such statements as that " no man lays claim
to his dignity," || that Lord Kellie has both laid and " made out his claim to the Honour and
Dignity of Earl of Mar," that Honour being the existing Earldom (whatever the date of its
creation), which was the Honour, and the only Honour, in dispute between the heir-male
and the heir-of-line. Lord Kellie having, as heir-male, successfully " made out his claim " to
that Honour, Mr. Goodeve-Erskine can only be regarded — and was so regarded by the Select
Committee of 1877 — as the claimant " to an Earldom bf Mar older than and different from " If
the existing Earldom. He has therefore first to prove that this mediseval earldom (a duplicate
title unheard of for centuries) is not extinct (as the Law Lords held), but merely dormant.
And if he could succeed in proving this thesis, he would still have to prove in addition that
he is the individual now entitled to it.
Above all, let it be remembered, that if, as we are so often and so triumphantly reminded,
the House of Lords has not legally pronounced an opinion on this hypothetical and duplicate
title, it is because the House was only called upon to deal with the one. known and existing
Earldom of Mar, which Earldom is declared to be vested in Lord Kellie. The onus probandi
is not thereby lightened, but rests, on the contrary, heavier than ever on the shoulders of
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, for he has not only to establish his claim to this title, — " the ancient
. Earldom of Mar," — but he has also to establish, before he can do so, that the title itself is
hot extinct. As it was well expressed by the Lord Clerk Register before the Select
Committee, "it really turns upon the existence ofa particular peerage aiall."** It is not to
be wondered at that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine prefers the simpler method of unauthorized
assumption, and that, to quote his own words at Holyrood, " I make, no claim to that old
* Earldom of Mar, I. 13. § Earldom of Mar, I. 13.
t lb. II Letter to Scotsman oi 24th April.
j Mar Resolution, If Report of Committee of 1877.
** Minutes of Evidence, 143.

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR t 161
earldom, by the advice of my counsel, being already in possession" (!). Prompt and apposite
was the reply of the Lord Clerk Register : " You have not established your right to it, and
till you have established your right you cannot be received here." *
Lord Crawford complained, with some bitterness, that
" The application at the Lord Chamberlain's instance ought to have been made to the
Lord {sic) Lyon of Scotland, and not to the English (sic) Garter."
But it would obviously have been nothing but a solemn farce to have referred, for the
consequences of the Lords' decision, to an officer who had himself prejudged the case, and
whose recognition of the claimant as Earl of Mar had been set at nought and reversed by the
decision in question. Lord Crawford, in fact, like many other Scotchmen, attached an undue
importance to a " recognition " by a " Lord Lyon King" (!) . . . " a clear recognition and
judicial affirmation, as by the supreme judge in his special court of arms and chivalry." t
He might with advantage have remembered the words of his great master : —
" As for the Lyon he was but a Judex Pedaneus (i.e. qui ad alioriim pedes sedet et sese eis
accommodat), and underling of the constable, who (Lyon) crouched before the civil court,
who controlled his proceedings (as they did those of the constable), most incumbent certainly
in our days,— while they purged his record of faulty matriculations, and signally castigated
him for his misdeeds." J
Indeed it would seem that the Mar matriculation of 13th Oct 1866 (Register of Arms,
vii. 46), imperatively calls for some public correction. To leave it standing on the Lyon Register
is to maintain the judgment of Lyon King-of-Arms 19. opposition to that of the House of Lords.
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, it will be remembered, was allowed, not as heir of tailzie to the Erskine
estates (for Lord Kellie was that heir), nor even as "representer"of Erskine, Earl of Mar,
but as \eo nomine) Earl of Mar, to matriculate as his own the coat of the Earls of Mar standing
on the Lyon Register, with its supporters and other appendicice. Now my gravamen is not so
much against this matriculation as against Lyon's subsequent action. What that action
should have been is fortunately not a matter of question, as it should have been determined •
by the precedent of the Clan Chattan case (1672), which presents an exact parallel. In that
case the then Lyon had designated M'Pherson of CItiny in a Patent of Arms (note that it was
a Patent) as " the true and only representative of the ancient and honourable familie of the
Clan Chattan," and assigned him the consequent supporters. But on the Privy Council
deciding, shortly after, that this designation belonged to M'Intosh, Lyon at once, bowing to
this decision, matriculated Cluny's Arms as those of " Duncan M'Pherson of Cluny," merely,
and without the supporters. And if the present Lyon King-of-Arms should refuse to follow
this official precedent, it cannot be that the Peer who has been declared by the House of
Lords to be the rightful Earl of Mar is left without "remeid of law." Surely this matricula
tion can be brought, by advocation, before the Session, and Lyon, as in Cuninghame v. Citn-
yngham (1849), compelled to reduce it. For even if, as in the Macdonell case (1826), the
Peer in question, from want of title and interest, should be denied a locus standi so far as the
coat is concerned, it must be competent for him to quarrel the designation and the supporter *,
as trenching; on his own Dignity. And, lastly, if Lyon should still be pleased to assign to
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, not as " Earl of Mar," but as " representer " of Erskine, Earl of Mar,
the coat of the Erskine Earls of Mar, I may point out that, by the law and practice of Scottish
Heraldry, this should be done by a fresh Patent, and not by a mere matriculation as in 1866.
It would seem that Lyon sought consolation for his discomfiture, and for the rejection
of his Earl by the House of Lords, in the effort to foist the pretensions of his protigi on an
unsuspecting public, through the medium of a Work under his special patronage, the
Peerage of Ulster King-of-Arms. Sir Bernard Burke is careful to inform us that —
. " In matters concerning Scotland, Lyon King-ofArms, whose knowlege of Scottish Peerage
law and Peerage incidents is unsurpassed, never fails me. My warmest thanks are also due
to Mr. R. R. Stodart of the Lyon Office. "—Preface to Burke's Peerage, 1883.
The result of this co-operation is clearly seen in the following comment on the Mar judgment
and its consequences. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, we are told,
"Contends that that judgment cannot disturb him in his possession of § the ancient
Earldom of Mar. The House of Lords has since then, on the Report of a Special Committee,
refused to alter the precedence of the Earldom of Mar on the Union Roll, the Report being,
* Earldom of Mar, II. 152. f Earldom of Mar, 1. 300. " J Riddell's Peerage Law (1842) p. 4.
§ That is to say, as we have seen above, his claim fo, and assumption of, that duplicate and presumably
extipct title. .

i6z COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
apparently, based on the non-identity of the title on the Union Roll with that of 1565,* and
it is, on various grounds (!), difficult to avoid the conclusion that the nephew and heir-of-
line of the late Earl of Mart 's tne lawful possessor of the ancient Dignity "J (Burke's
Peerage, 1883, "Mar").
Such are the grounds on which Sir Bernard Burke aids and abets Mr. Goodeve-Erskine lo
masquerade as Earl of Mar. But, whether from the invertebrate attitude of the most benign
of modern Heralds, or from the fact that Lyon is responsible for " Mar," and Ulster for
" Mar and Kellie," it will at once be seen, on comparing the accounts of these two titles,
that they respectively espouse the opposing contentions, thus causing Ulster to contradict
himself in the most hopeless and impotent manner. Under "Mar and Kellie " (p. 871) he
accepts, without question, the decision of the House of Lords, and informs us that Lord
Erskine, " For great services to Queen Mary, was by her, on 29 July, 1565, made Earl of Mar.
This Earldom he traces, as held by his descendants, down to the late Earl of Mar and the
present Earl of Mar and Kellie, repeating of their title, at the end of the account,
" Creation. Earl of Mar, 29 July, 1565."
• And yet, only on the preceding page, we are calmly informed, to our utter bewilderment, not
that Lord Erskine was created Earl of Mar 29 July, 1565, but that
" After an investigation into his rights, (he) was restored by Queen Mary in 1565 to the
Earldom of Mar, of which his ancestor was declared to have been unjustly dispossessed, and
was thereafter recognised as Earl of Mar " (.).
And we eventually learn, of this Earldom, that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine " takes " (a delicate
euphemism for assumes) " the title of Earl of Mar as heir-general ! " The climax is reached
when to the Earldom so " taken " there is assigned a
' ' Creation— Before 1014. Allowed precedence in Decreet of Ranking and on Union Roll "
(Burke's Peerage, p. 870).
That an existing "Earldom" should have been "created" before 1014 (!) is sufficiently
amusing to any one who has the slightest acquaintance with history, but that it was allowed
the precedence of that date (for such must be the meaning of this obscure phrase) " in
Decreet of Ranking and on Union Roll," is a statement which can only be described as
outrageous, in face of the very notorious fact that the Earls of Mar continuously protested
against such precedence having not been allowed them !
But if Sir Bernard Burke admits, as he does admit (p. 871), that the title vested in the
late Earl of Mar and in the present Earlof Mar and Kellie was a title created on the 29 July,
1565, as was decided by the Committee for Privileges, it follows that the title "taken" by Mr.
Goodeve-Erskine, the title created "before 1014," cannot, on Sir Bernard's own showing,
be the title vested in the late Earl of Mar, and must be the hypothetical and duplicate title
of which the very existence, as we have seen, has yet to be proved, in the teeth not only of
common sense, but also of Lord Crawford's own contention that " it is impossible that the
two dignities can co-exist."§ We see then that Ulster has even less ground for admitting
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine as Earl of .Mar than for admitting any other ofthe numerous class of
claimants to Scottish Peerages. It is therefore deeply to be regretted that, as an Officer of
Arms, he should take advantage of his high official position to sanction and encourage the
usurpation of this title by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, when the existing Ea.rldom is, by his own
' admission, vested in the Earl of Mar and Kellie, and when no other Earldom of Mar has
even been proved to exist..
The last point to which I need address myself is the persistent perversion and misinterpre
tation of the action of the House of Lords in 1877. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine asserts in his letter
to the Times —
"That " (as Lords Cairns and Selborne have since admitted in the House of Lords) "the
decision of 1875 conceding to Lord Kellie a new Mar title not on tlie Union Roll and which
the House in 1877 declared they could not put on the Roll, has not dealt with the ancient
Earldom."
And Sir Bernard, as we have seen, commits himself to the statement that,
* This statement, as will be shown below, is at direct variance vvith'fact.
t Whose Earldom has passed to the Earl of Kellie.
X i.e. the hypothetical Earldom, " older than and different from " that vested in his uncle, the Earl of Mar,
and now in his cousin, the Earl of Mar and Kellie.
§ Earldom of Mar, II. 222.

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR? 163

"The House of Lords .... refused to alter the precedence of the Earldom of Mar on
the Union Roll, the Report being apparently based on the non-identity ofthe title on the Union
Roll with tha! of 1565.
Now Lord Kellie having, by the Mar Resolution, " made out his claim to the honour
and dignity of Earl of Mar in the Peerage of Scotland," petitioned the House in 187.7 that
the existing title having been decided to have been "created in 1565," it might in future be
called " in the precedence declared and established tinder the resolution and judgment of
this right honourable House," its precedence on the Roll being too high for its date of creation
as above determined.* "But his petition met with overwhelming opposition, and was
rejected, Lord Selborne, on that occasion, urging its rejection."t It-is of the utmost
importance that we should clearly realize the grounds on which its rejection was urged, for it
can be absolutely shown that the rejection of this petition, so ostentatiously paraded as an
admitted victory for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, was directly due to the strenuous opposition of
the late and the present Lord Chancellor, who, so far from favouring Mr. Goodeve-Erskine' s
contention, repudiated it in the most emphatic manner, and based their action upon that very
repudiation, and upon their unqualified acceptance of the Earl of Kellie as holding tlie Earldom
of Mar which stands on tlie Union Roll I ¦
Lord Crawford admits, of their speeches on this occasion, that —
"Their views, checked by the Report ofthe Select Committee appointed, as we shall see on
the suggestion of the Lord Chancellor, must now be considered as those of the House, for all
practical purposes. J .... This Report was presented to the House of Lords, and ordered to
be printed on the 27th July, 1.877 • an(l the House thus placed the seal of its approbation and
acceptance ofthe views expressed by Lord Selborne in part and by Lord Cairns in toto, upon
the important question discussed in the debate of the 9th July." §
Lord Crawford also describes the Report as —
" Recognising the existence of the {sie) Earldom of Mar as a new creation, and not a
restoration, in the person of John, Lord Erskine, in is65."||
We see then how false is the bold pretence that the debate and report represent a victory
for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, and we shall now see how gravely misleading is the audacious state
ment in Mr. Goodeve-Erskine's letter that " the House in 1877 declared they could not put"
Lord Kellie's "new Mar title" on the Roll.lf and how contrary to fact is the assertion put
forth in Burke's Peerage that the Committee's report was —
" Apparently based on the non-identity of the title on the Union Roll with that of 1565."
It is frankly admitted by Lord Crawford that —
" Both Lord Selborne and the Lord Chancellor laid it down as the indispensable basis of
discussion that the decision of r87S must be considered as final, right or wrong, and not to
be questioned .... This, I may observe, was practically indorsing Lord Redesdale's
opinion on the question of jurisdiction, and echoing his words — ' I do not enter into the
question whether that decision was right or wrong ; it was the decision of the House.'" **
Here I may p'oint out that this is precisely the standpoint which I have adopted through
out this paper. The expressions of both the speakers upon this point were so emphatic that
they deserve to be reproduced —  
Lord Selborne. Lord Cairns.
" We are all very well aware that, before that de- " After the most careful and patient investigation,
cision and afterwards, there had been various persons your Lordships! Committee for Privileges were of
who had entertained a different opinion upon the opinion that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine had not substan-
merits of the question, but your Lordships, I think, Hated his claim to the Earldom of Mar .... My
will hold that it having been determined in one par- Lords, that conclusion having been arrived at by the
ticular way by a resolution of your Lordships' House, Committee for Privileges, and confirmed by your
that is a determination whicli, so far as it goes, is Lordships' House, I apprehend, is conclusive for all
binding upon your Lordships, and that this discussion purposes in this House ; and I was somewhat sur-
must proceed upon that assumption .... The truth prised to hear not long ago the noble Earl .... set
is we have no business at all to go into such discussion. at absolute defiance the conclusion at which the Com-
TThe House has decided, and that which it has decided mittee had arrived, and the conclusion which had been
is law " confirmed by this House."

• For the errors of precedence in the Decreet of Ranking and (consequently) on the Union Roll, see Mr.
Hewlett's letter printed above. Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, unable to disprove them, can only retort that Mr.
Hewlett " tries to vilify" the Roll, forgetting that Riddell has himself denounced its errors in far stronger
t Outline statement of facts bearing on the Mar Peerage, issued ex parte Mr. Goodeve-Erskine.
+ Earldom of Mar, II. 187. § lb., II. 221. || Ib. f See above.
** Earldom of Mar, II. 1S8.

104 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
_ These words are of marked significance in view of the fact that the Earl of Crawford
similarly "set at absolute defiance the conclusion at which the Committee had arrived," not
only by recognising, like Sir Bernard Burke, Mr. Goodeve-Erskine as " Earl of Mar," but
also by denying Lord Mar and Kellie on the very title-page of his work, not merely the
Earldom of Mar par excellence, but even any Earldom of Mar whatever !*
The resolution was opposed by the learned Lords on four several grounds — two of them
special, and two of them general.
(a) Special. [i] That instead of strengthening it would, in effect, weaken the decision of 1875,
which decision must remain final and inviolate.
" It is, in the first place, not really consistent with what was resolved by the House in ^
1875, and. in the second place, if it were carried, it would, instead of supporting and fortifying
the authority of what was then done, tend as much as anything could do. to destroy and to
throw discredit upon it  The authority of your Lordships' decision, instead of being
supported, would be really impeached and impugned if this resolution were to be adopted
.... The effect ofthe resolution would really be to introduce a second Earl of Mar into the •
Roll .... and in that way to encourage instead of repelling the idea that there were two
Earls of Mar. Anything really more destructive ofthe authority of the decision of 1875, /,
for my own part, cannot conceive " (Lord Selborne).
[2] That the Earldom to which Lord Kellie had " made out his claim" was the
Earldom standing on the Roll, and that, therefore, no change was required.
" The decision asserted virtually, though not in form, that there was only one Earl of Mar,
and that there had been only one Earl of Mar since 1565, and that was the holder of the
Earldom created in that year f . . . . Now, my Lords, this title of Mar is one whici} has
been enrolled and registered by the House ever since the Act of Union. It is one which
stood on the Roll at that time, as it stands now, in the precedence given to it by the Decreet
of Ranking . . . ." (there are) " no precedents whatever for taking away hom. an existing
peerage, which the principle of the decision determined to be the only existing peerage at that
time, its actual place and precedence whatever that might be upon the Roll .... and your
Lordships having. decided that that Earldom" (i.e. the Earldom on the Union Roll) "was
merely created in 1565, are surely not now going to take away the precedence which for more
than two centuries the Earls of Mar enjoyed " (Lord Selborne).
These words, spoken by Lord SelborneJ in this same debate of 1877 should be
carefully compared with the dexterous assertion of Mr. Goodeve-Erskine
that Lord Selborne has
"Admitted in the House of Lords (that) the decision of 1875, conceding to Lord Kellie a
new Mar title not on the Union Roll (!), and which the House in 1877 declared they could
not place on the Roll, has not dealt with the ancient Earldom."
As a matter of fact, when Lord Galloway (14th June, 1880) urged the House to
declare that Mr. Goodeve-Erskine was in possession of
" The Earldom of Mar, standing on the Union Roll of Scotland, .... the said Earldom
having been in no way affected by the resolution of this House, on 26th February, 1875, which
conceded to the Earl ofKellie an Earldom of Mar of 1565,"
the motion was vehemently opposed by Lord Selborne (then Lord Chancellor)
as " absolutely unprecedented in any case of either an English, Scotch, or
Irish Peerage."
(b) General. [1] That it is not competent for the House, under the guise of an ordinary reso
lution, " to pronounce a judicial decision affecting rights of Peerage."
" It is at least exceedingly doubtful whether what the noble Duke asks your Lordships to do
is within your legitimate powers ; and I put it to you whether anything could more tend to
discredit the decision which was come to two years ago than that your Lordships should take
a course not clearly justified by precedent, and not clearly within your constitutional powers "
(Lord Selborne).
" Your Lordships, by assenting to it, would run the risk of doing what I feel certain your
Lordships would only do by inadvertence, namely, under the guise of passing a resolution,
really make that which would be a judicial, or if not a judicial, a" legislative-, declaration;
.... We ought to be very careful not to go beyond what the decision actually was. ....
* " The Earldom of Mar .... in reply to an address .... by Walter Henry, Earl of Keltic."
+ That is, the Earldom to which Lord Kellie had " made out his claim."
X It must be repeated that Lord Selborne had actually been counsel for Mr. Goodeve-Erskine against
Lord Kellie's claim. " "

ARE THERE TWO EARLS OF MAR? 165

It would be entirely re-opening the decision which was arrived at if you were to pass this
resolution ; .... and therefore it would be doing what I took the liberty of saying at the
outset, your Lordships, in this view of the case; were asked todo, namely, under the shape of
a resolution of this House, to pronounce a judicial decision affecting rights of peerage" (Lord
t_*AIRNSy« It will be observed that this point turns, not on the merits of the case but on a
general constitutional question. The words, "We ought to be very
careful not to go beyond what the decision actually was," so unscrupu
lously wrenched from their context by the writer in the Journal of
Jurisprudence, were specially applied to a particular resolution, and were
specially addressed to the House of Lords as apart from the Committee
for Privileges. The Lord Chancellor did not, as pretended, by these words,
refer to, or limit, the functions of that Committee.* What he did question
was the right of the House thus to usurp those functions.
[2] That, as the law then stood, it was not competent for the House to alter the
precedence inter se of the titles on the Union RolL
" It appears to me a question of a very grave and serious importance whether yonr Lord
ships have any such right to interfere with the existing precedence upon the existing Roll of
Scottish Peers, Mar or any other, as this resolution claims .... I must say that my in
quiries, so far as I have been able to carry them, lead me to entertain a most serious doubt
whether it would not be against the spirit of Acts of Parliament upon the subject for your
Lordships to assume any such jurisdiction " (Lord Selborne). f
Here again it will be seen the question is purely one of law and precedent, and
has nothing to do with the merits of the particular case in point. As
efforts have been made by the opponents of the Lord Chancellor's Bill to
represent that it directly traverses the above contention by giving the
House of Lords power to refer such matters of precedence to its Com
mittee for Privileges, it may be as well to point out that the Lord
Chancellor merely questioned the jurisdiction possessed by the House
under the existing laws. To confer the jurisdiction in question on the
House by special legal enactment is therefore the natural sequel, rather
than the contradiction, of the contention quoted above.
We have seen that Lord Selborne, so far from basing his opposition
" On the non-identity of the title on the Union Roll with that of 1565," {«. that of Lord
Kellie),
based it on the fact oi their absolute identity. We shall now see that their absolute identity
was asserted with equal vigour by the Lord Chancellor (Lord Cairns). Here are the words
of the learned Earl, spoken in the House of Lords : —
" In that Roll of Peers there is one entry, and only one entry, ofthe Earldom of Mar. It
may be in its wrong place, or it may be in its right place. I have nothing to do with that.
It is there, and it is only in one place, and to that place this Resolution " (»>. that the. . . .
* Earl of Kellie. . . . hath made out his claim to the honour and dignity of Earl of JMar in the
Peerage, of Scotland, created in 1565) "must necessarily have referred, for there was
nothing else that il could have referred to. Therefore the Order of your Lordship's House to
the Lord Clerk Register is this : That he is to call the title of the Earl of Mar according to
its place in the Roll ofthe Peers of Scotland, . . . and when he calls it, and it is. answered,
he is ordered to receive and count the vote of the person who has been adjudged to be Earl of
Mar and Kellie in answer to that call. " — Speech in the House of Lords, 1 1 July, 1879.
And after this we are coolly informed by the organ of the Scottish Bar that — •
" Mr. Hewlett is, therefore, on every ground wrong in contending. . . that the title of 1565
adjudged to the present Earl of Mar and Kellie is to be identified with the Earldom on the
Union Roll" (!) — Journal of Jurisprudence, May, 1883.
* "Nevertheless, -is Lord'Cairns said, .... 'we ought to be very careful not to go beyond what the
decision actually was.' .... An additional argument .... against the power proposed to be given to the
House to tamper with the Union Roll is that it may be made use of by Committees of Privileges to do what
Lord Cairns deprecated, to 'go beyond what the decision actually . was ' " (Journal of Jurisprudence, May,
1883). f This opinion is in complete accordance with the Committee's Report, that — "The Committee have not
•been able to discover any precedents for altering the precedency of the Peers of Scotland on the Union Roll."
But,- it is added, " The Committee do not hereon desire to express an opinion that, in. aproper case, the House
would not have power to make an order to that effect."
Collect. y

1 66 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
But desperate as is this effort of the Journal of Jurisprudence to " kick against the pricks " of
Lord Cairns' words, it is fairly outdone by that veracious personage, whose effusions are
appealed to by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine, and who writes under the eccentric pseudonym " One
of the blood of Dugald Stewart." By him we are deliberately informed, in a letter
to the widely-read Scotsman,* that —
" Lord Cairns has also shown, in the House of Lords, that the title given to Lord Kellie
is not ' the Earldom of Mar on the Union Roll,' so that it must be new."
And the same impression is conveyed by Mr. Goodeve-Erskine himself when he tells us, in
his letter to the Times, that Lord Cairns has —
"Admitted in the House of Lords (that) the decision of 187s, conceding to Lord Kellie a
new Mar title not on the Union Roll, and which the House in 1877 declared they could not
place on the Roll, has not dealt with the ancient Earldom."
How are we to reconcile these statements with the above emphatic declaration of Lord Cairns
that the Earldom of Mar adjudged to Lord Kellie was the Earldom, and the only Earldom,
standing on the Union Roll ? It can only be effected by a device so_ unscrupulous that it
might well seem incredible. Lord Cairns had begun the very speech in which he made the
above declaration by setting forth the case' of his opponents, the case he was about to shatter.
By a glaring error in Hansard's Report, the views he thus set himself to expose were
represented as his own I This Report being twice quoted against him by Lord Galloway in
the House of Lords, it was pointed out by Lord Cairns and others how erroneously he had
been reported. But . that this point may be cleared from even a shadow of doubt, I append
the Report of what Lord Cairns did say, according to no less an authority than Lord Crawford
himself: — KThe view of the noble Lord (Lord Huntley), who has just spoken upon that subfect, I
understand to be this : that the peerage which is called on the Roll the Mar Peerage is not
the peerage which, according to the view ofthe noble Lord, has been adjudged by this House
to the Earl of Mar and Kellie." — Earldom of Mar, II. 424.
Having thus unmasked the paltry device by which Lord Cairns is represented as holding
the very views which he set himself emphatically to condemn, I need- not refute at greater
length the fallacies of a cause which relies on such practices as these, but may trust that it
has now been shown to the satisfaction of every candid reader that, under the decision of the
House of Lords in 1875, the Earl of Mar and Kellie is in actual possession of the only Earldom
of Mar standing on the Union Roll.
The question discussed in this paper, and answered absolutely in the negative, has been
the very practical and important one — "Are there two Earls of Mar? " Strange to say, on
this fundamental point Mr. Goodeve-Erskine and his supporters cannot even agree amongst
themselves ! Sir Bernard Burke, indeed, recognises two Earls of Mar, but Lord Crawford
found it "impossible .... to recognise the existence of two Earls of Mar." t Per contra,
tine Journal of Jurisprudence hold the Committee of (sic) Privileges responsible for "the
awkwardness of there being now (in consequence of their blunder of 1875) de Jure two
Earldoms of Mar instead of one " (p. 288). Surely, it is little less than shameless for' those
who are endeavouring to set by the side of the existing Earldom of Mar a duplicate and
hypothetical Dignity of which not even the existence can be proved — to complain that there
are now (in consequence of their action) " two Earldoms of Mar instead of one " ! The
responsibility for the " awkwardness " thus caused must lie, not with the Committee for
Privileges, but with those who, misliking the decision of that Committee, have taken upon
themselves to denounce it as a "blunder," and (as the then Lord Chancellor observed,
speaking in the House of Lords) to " set at absolute defiance the conclusion at which the
Committee had arrived, and the conclusion which had been confirmed by this House."
J. H. ROUND.
* 18th April, 1883. Quoted in "Opinion of the Public on the Lord Chancellor's Bill," issued ex parte
Mr. Goodeve-Erskine. ¦j- Earldom of Mar, I. 23.

ianmg ol §tailrfMt of JreeW,
" Accipe nunc Danaum jnsidias, et crimine ab uno
Disce omnes." '
I PROPOSE to call attention, in the following pages, to a public scandal of very grave
import, and of, I believe, unparalleled character. Its subject is the assumption of a
Peerage Dignity by a line of Commoners in no way entided to it, and the gradual recognition
of that wrongful assumption, in the accidental absence of any counter-claimant, culminating
in the acceptance of this line of Commoners as undoubted Peers of Scotland. The unique
features of this extraordinary case, which distinguish it from all similar wrongful assumptions,
are these : — In the first place, by a fortuitous combination of circumstances, it has alone
survived to our own times, while its fellows have expired one by one. In the second pla-.e,
it not only originated in a joke, and was long ignored as beneath serious notice, but was, even
when it had begun to secure recognition, mercilessly shattered and laughed to scorn by the
greatest authorities of the age. That, this being so, no steps should have been taken to put
a stop to so flagrant a scandal, was surely strange and discreditable enough. But infinitely
stranger and more discreditable is the conduct of those who, though well acquainted with
the notorious circumstances of this assumption, have deliberately set themselves to defend
its validity, and to thwart the effort that is now being made to place the public in possession
of the facts.
Obvious as is the importance of such a case perse, it is not only for its own sake that
an inquiry is most urgently demanded. It is of real importance as a test case for gauging
the merits and investigating the principles of that new school of Scottish antiquaries, who,
breaking away from the time-honoured traditions handed down by a Hailes," by a Riddell,
by a Maidment, and still brilliantly represented by the genealogical achievements of the
Deputy Keeper of the Records of Scotland, are devoting themselves as eagerly to the propa
gation of the false, as did their great predecessors to the discovery of the true. The almost
incredible devices resorted to by this school will be vividly illustrated in the course of this
inquiry, and from the nature of its insidia here laid bare, an excellent opinion may be formed
of its peculiar, principles and method.
In dealing with this case, our only difficulty is to find anything to say about it that was
not said by Riddell when he disposed once for all of this bare-faced assumption more than
half-a-century ago.* For fortunately, though in the eyes of that great writer it was " too
trivial and flimsy for criticism,"t he condescended, in view of the success it had attained, to
examine exhaustively the " apologies " % on its behalf, and to" demolish with grim satire the
feeble sophistries of its supporter.
The facts of the matter are, however, so few that it may be well to repeat them as briefly
as possible, before passing to the efforts that are now being made to justify the assumption of
the title, and to perpetuate this grievous imposture.
" It is agreed," says Riddell, " upon all hands that the Barony of Ruthven of Freeland was
conferred in 1651 upon Sir Thomas Ruthven, of Freeland, after whose deattrit descended to
David his son, who, dying without issue in 1701 or X704,§ the male line ofthe Patentee failed."
But even the date of the creation is not certain, and the Patent itself has long disappeared.
Indeed there is no proof of its having ever been preserved. Unfortunately it was not
registered when granted, doubtless o>ving to the tumult of the time (which may also, very
possibly, account for its loss), " nor is there even a copy of such patent, nor any docquet or
* Remarks on Scotch Peerage Law (1833), p. 133-143- t lb., p. 142- J lb., p. 136.
S Riddell points out, that though 1701 is the date given m Douglas's Peerage (1764), yet in the Peerage
(17 16) of Crawford, " a contemporary of David," the date is given as 1704. 1701, however, is the date now
adopted (Burke's Peerage).
Collect. z

168 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

sign manual thereof." * We have therefore no contemporary clue to its contents, save " a
manuscript of note in the Advocates' Library," t in which the Dignity occurs,^in a list of
creations, as having been granted to Sir Thomas Ruthven " and to his heirs-male." % I need
Hardly observe that, as Riddell reminds us, in cases where the contents of a patent are un
known, the law (as laid down by Lord Mansfield, and as accepted and acted upon by the
House of Lords) always presumes a limitation to the heirs-male of the body. Such presump
tion is, in Lord Mansfield's words, " always open to be contradicted by the heir-female upon
evidence shown to the contrary;" but in this case, not only is no such evidence forthcoming,
but such evidence as there is distinctly negatives the hypothesis that an heir-female could
succeed ! §
There is no suggestion of a resignation or re-grant ; and it is a remarkable fact that in
the entail ofthe Ruthven estates, made by the second Lord, when he had succeeded to the
title, there are stringent provisions for the use by the substitutes of " the surname and arms
of Ruthven without any change thereof," but no allusion whatever to the honours. It
was precisely because Lord Ruthven knew that his honours would become extinct at his
death, that he made such careful provision for the perpetuation of the family surname and
arms. ||
At this point a pedigree of the parties mentioned will serve to make the case clearer.
Sir Thomas Ruthven, of Freeland, created Lord Ruthven of Freeland 1651, d. 1673 =
jj : j— ¦ — j | (a)«
David (2nd) Lord Sir William Cun- = Anna Ruthven = William Cun- Elizabeth = Sir Francis Jean Ruthvex, suc-
Ruthven.of ceeded her brother in
Redcastle, the Ruthven estates,
Forfar, et. nnm. April, 1722.

Ruthven, entailed yngham, of Cun- (l)styied "Lady (2) ninghame, of Ruthven
the Ruthven estates ynghamhead, Bt. I Craigends," in Craigends, d.
1674. d. s.p. 1701 m. 1661, d. 1671. I the Ruthven en- s.p.
(? 1704). I tail (1674,1, dead
.. I in 1689. ,,,
I (B) 1(C) I " I
Sie William Cunyngham, of Cunyngham- Col. James Johnson, of Graitney. = Isabel Elizabeth Anna

Kt.

head, Bart., served heir to his father (in special) Assumed surname and arms of
30 March, 1672, to his mother (in general) 21 Ruthven (in lieu of Johnson) on
March, 1689. Assumed surname and arms of his wife succeeding her cousin Sir
Ruthven (in lieu of Cunyngham) on succeed- William (Cunyngham) Ruthven
ing nis Aunt Jean in the Ruthven estates (under in the Ruthven estates (under the
the entail of 1674) in 1722, d. s.p. Oct. 1722. entail of 1674).

Ruthven, Ruthven. Ruthven.
d. June,
1732. * The letters within brackets refer to
the order of succession to the Ruth
ven estates under the entail of 1674.

I 0>)
James (Johnson) Ruthven, succeeded his mother in the Ruthven
estates; served heir to David, last Lord Ruthven, as "James
Ruthven of Ruthven." Y
On the death of the second and last lord, his nephew, Sir William Cunyngham, became
his heir-at-law ; but his estates, passed to his sister Jean, under the entail of 1674. It is not
till some twenty years after his death that we obtain the first definite evidence of an attempt
to assume the extinct title. *T On the 9th September, 1 721, his sister caused herself, as
"Jean, Lady Ruthven," to be served heir in special to him, in the Ruthven estates. But
so cautious and tentative was the assumption at first, that, only a few weeks afterwards, "as
if," says Riddell," apprehensive of the scrutiny of the Bench; she, in her petition to the Court
of Session, on the 4th of November, 1721, for recording the entail, is only modestly styled
Mrs. Jean Ruthven." It may be added, that some months previously she had executed an
assignation as " Jean Ruthven," ** and that she also made her will as "Mrs. Jean Ruthven "ft
•It would seem, then, that this lady, so far as we can see, was personally anxious to assume the
title, but did not venture, even in that easy-going age, to do so in legal documents, which
might, even in Scotland, have been invalidated by her use of a style to- which she was not
entitled. * "G.E.C." (Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 153). f Riddell (p. 14.1). X -#¦• P; *42-
§ The expression " heirs-male " in the said MS. would (as is well-known) h_ Riddell's opinion (based
upon Scottish practice), be equivalent to " heirs-male ofthe body," — it having neveiyih Scotland, received the
constructioa placed upon it, with us, in the Devon case, — and would thus exactly coincide with, and confirm,
the recognised presumption of law. But even if interpreted to mean "heirs-mare, whatsoever," it would
obviously be equally fatal to the pretensions of an heir-female.
|| See below, p. 176.
\ I reserve the story of the Coronation summons for consideration below.
** " A general clause in assignation granted by said Jean Ruthven to the said Mrs. Isabel Ruthven . . - •
which assignation is of date 27 April, 1721 ; recorded in Sheriff Court books of Perth, 27 Aug. 1722"
(Dunkeld, vol. iii. fo. 75).
¦ft " Testament-dative oi Mrs. Jean Ruthven, of Freeland, who died in April last : given up by William
Ruthven alias Cunyngham, of Freeland, executor- dative, as nearest of kin," 2 August, 1722 (lb., voL ii., fo-353).

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. 169

Pass we now to Sir William Cunyngham, who succeeded, on her death, to the Ruthven
estates, .and who had also been heir-of-line of the Ruthvens (of Freeland) ever since his
uncle's death. He now, in compliance with the terms of the entail, assumed the " surname
and arms of Ruthven," but though now both heir of line and of tailzie, made no attempt to
assume tlie title. Thenceforth he was known, not (as is asserted in Burke's Peerage and
Notes and Queries), as Sir William " Cunningham-Ruthven," but as Sir William " Ruthven
alias Cunyngham," being so documented 2nd August, 1722, when he gave up his aunt's
will (vide supra), and also in his own will.* He was also, subsequently, about the time of
his death, named a commissioner for the land tax in Ayrshire, under the designation, simply,
of " Sir William Cuningham of Cuningham-head." t It is absolutely certain, therefore, that
he never assumed the title. The significance of this fact will be insisted upon below.
But on " his less scrupulous cousin Isabel " % succeeding, at his death, to the estates,
she resumed the attempt initiated by her. aunt, and styled herself " Lady Ruthven." Under
this style she gave up his will, 28th March, 1723 ; on which occasion also she caused her
aunt to be documented "Jean, Lady Ruthven."§ Yet, significantly enough, more than three
years later, she gave up, under the humble style of " Mrs. Isabel Ruthven," the " additional
inventory " of her aunt, here ambiguously documented " Lady Jean Ruthven." || It would
seem that eventually she herself adopted, in her own will, the same ambiguous style.1T She was
however, greatly encouraged in her attempt by the lax practice ofthe time, which enabled her
to procure a summons, as a peeress, to the Coronation of George II. (1727). " In a jesting way
she said that this was her patent, and that she would preserve it, as such, in her charter-
chest." ** This incident does but confirm that which indeed is sufficiently obvious from the
hesitating character of the assumption, namely that even as far back as this (a period long
anterior to the burning of Freeland) there was no patent in possession of the family, — or
none at least that they could venture to produce in support of their assumption of the
honours. The case, in fact, was on all fours with that of the Barony of Duffus.
That dignity was created not many months before this Barony of Ruthven, and its Patent
was similarly lost, presumably in the confusion of the time. At the death of Lord Duffus in
1827, he left a nephew, his sister's son, who became his heir-of-line, just as Lord Ruthven
left Sir William Cunyngham, his sister's son, as his heir-of-line. And after the death of Sir
William, his cousin Isabel stood, of course, precisely in his shoes. The parallel between
her as Lord Ruthven's niece, and Mr. Rudd, as Lord Duffus' nephew, is complete. But in
the Duffus case there happened to be also an heh-male of the body of the grantee, and that
gentleman as
" direct heir-male of the body of the first lord, and second cousin of the last, thereupon
assumed the dignity, according to the noted presumption of the lords in favour of such
identical heir under the circumstances." ft
Mr. Rudd, as heir-of-line, could not venture to assume the title. It was only competent for
him to demand that the heir-male should be constrained to prove his right, as he hoped to
be able to establish his own claim. But as Mr. Hewlett has well observed, he 
" took no proceedings to establish his claim ; nor is it known on what grounds he sought
to exempt the Peerage of Duffus from the principle of law governing the descent of Scottish
Dignities, when the instrument of creation does not exist, or the contents of it are unknown." XX
Nor is it known, let us add, in the corresponding case of Ruthven, for the assumption of its
honours having, in homely language, " not a leg to stand upon," that title has been extinct in
the eyes of the law, as now understood and acted upon, for the last 180 years !

* " Testament dative of Sir William Ruthven alias Cunyngham of Cunynghamhead, who died October last."
Given up 2Sth March, 1723 (lb., vol. ii., fo. 383.) He is also so documented in the deed here quoted by
t " Act for granting an aid to His Majesty," etc., etc., passed in the Parliament beginning October 1722
(" Public General Acts of George I.," p. 240).
± "CE.C.,"ut supra. _ § Ut supra.
f " Additional Inventory of Lady Jean Ruthven, given up by Mrs. Isabel Ruthven, spouse to Col. James
Ruthven alias Johnstone of Graitney," 20th Oct. 1726 (Dunkeld, vol. iii., fo. 75).
¦r Cap below*
** Note of Lord Hailes on Douglas' Peerage, quoted by Riddell Cp- *42). See below, p. 183.
¦j-f Riddell's Peerage Law (1842), p. 919. XX Hewlett on Scotch Dignities, p. 37.

170 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Even after this the Ruthven assumption was still for a time uneasy.' Mr. James (Johnson)
Ruthven, on succeeding his mother, "Mrs. Isalel Ruthven," alias "Lady Isabel Ruthven,"
alias Isabel Lady Ruthven," in June 1732, gave up her will under the second of these styles
(19th September, 1732), not as James, Lord Ruthven, but as " James Ruthven, of Ruthven,"
Esquire, * and was served heir (in special) to his uncle David, three months later (9th
December, 1732), under the same humble designation.t It is not till late in the following
year that we find him styling himself (in a private deed) " James, Lord Ruthven." J He
also now attempted, though very cautiously, to homologate his pseudo-title by voting at the
elections of Peers. " Very cautiously," I say, for during his long career, he only voted, on
an average, at one election out of every three. The reason of this will be explained below.§
But, meanwhile, let us observe, for it a most remarkable fact, that the family were unable
to secure the insertion of their title in any of the " Peerages " of the time. Riddell points
out that Crawford, in his Peerage (17 16), proclaimed it to be extinct, and that
"Neither in Chamberlain's list of the Scottish nobility in 1726, or in any list before the .
middle ofthe seventeenth century [i.e., 1764], is there mention of the peerage of Ruthven"
(p. 146).
It may be added, that in none of the successive editions of the British (afterwards the Scots)
Compendium, — a work praised by Riddell as more accurate and trustworthy than Douglas || —
down to, and inclusive of, that of 1764, is this pseudo-title to be found. Let us take, for
instance, the edition of 1741 as being issued after the report of 1740, of which I shall have
more to say below. We cannot say that it errs on the side of strictness' when we find it
recognising the assumption- of Newark by the Anstruthers, and of Lyle by the Montgomeries,
and even admitting the right of the male claimant to the keenly contested title of Rutherford.
These are but instances of the notorious looseness which then prevailed in the assumption
of Scottish titles, and in the recognition of these assumptions by the public. It is singular
that Ruthven, now, it is to be hoped, the solitary survivor of these assumptions, was deemed
at the time so exceptionally flagrant that it could not even obtain the recognition accorded
to Newark, to Rutherford, and to Lyle !
It was left to Douglas, " author," says Riddell, " of one of our very incorrect and faulty
Peerages ... a most indifferent Peerage writer, and little, indeed, to be ever trusted in
the main," If to accord to this title its first but most timid and qualified recognition (1764);
he states that " James . . . hath voted, as a peer at several elections," but cautiously guards .
•himself by the saving clause : —
" If (sic) the honours were to the heirs-general of the patentee's body, this lord's title to the
peerage is indisputable."
Eventually, as we know, this clause dropped out, and the suggestion developed into a
comfortable, though absolutely unfounded, hypothesis. But here we come at once to the
fatal flaw, which makes utter havoc of this assumption. The reason why the three above
assumptions had obtained recognition, while Ruthven had not, was that they were, at
least, consistent in themselves, while Ruthven was not. Lyle was consistently claimed as
descendible tb heirs-of-line ; Rutherford as descendible to heirs-male ; Newark as descendible
to heirs-of-line (under an alleged regrant). But the Ruthven honours had been inconsistently
assumed, first as descendible to heirs of entail, and then as descendible to heirs-of-line. It was
therefore impossible, in the face of these facts, to construct a consistent story. Here is
the gist of the whole matter. It was only by deliberately falsifying the facts that it would be
possible to construct a consistent story, and to homologate this audacious assumption.
Douglas was equal to the occasion. Less honest, as Riddell observes, than Crawford,*"
he plainly saw that in order to establish the more convenient of the two hypotheses, namely
that " the honours were to the heirs-general," it would be necessary, on the one hand, rigidly
* "Testament-dative of Lady Isabel Ruthven, spouse to Col. James Ruthven, of Graitney ; she died in
June last. Given up by James Ruthven of Ruthven, Esquire, her son as executor-dative " (Dunkeld, vol. iii.,
fo. 420). t Register of special services for co. Perth. It will be remembered that his aunt had been served heir as
" Jean, Lady Ruthven. " (lb.)
± December 14th, 1733 (Riddell, p. 141). § See pp. 183-4.
II Peerage Law (1842), p. 948. ^f Peerage Law (1842), pp. 990, 1021.
** "Crawford, the Peerage writer, although not the most acute or accurate of men, yet far honester than
Douglas " (p. 137).

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. 171

to suppress the fact that they were first assumed by the last lord's sister, who was not his
heir-general, and, on the other, to keep out of sight the fact that they were not assumed by
Sir William Cunyngham, who was. He therefore, says Riddell, —
" Very blameably represents things in such a manner as to lead any one to believe that,
upon the death of David in 1701, Isabel had succeeded as heir-general .... but this
is only one of the many devices resorted to by this most accommodating and flattering of
, genealogists " (p. 140).
Let it then be remembered that the wrongfulness of this assumption is proved not only by
the arguments of its critics, but also by the fact that its very defenders were unable to reconcile
it with the truth.
One is fairly startled at the audacity of the story which " this most accommodating and
flattering of genealogists " concocted in the face of the facts. Blandly ignoring both the
heir-of-line (Sir W. Cunyngham) and the heir-of-entail (Mrs. Jean Ruthven), he asserts
that David, second Lord Ruthven, was succeeded by his niece Isabel, 'who was neither the
one nor the other I * She was, however, to improve the story, erected into his " heir-general."t
But there was still needed a finishing touch, to invest this construction with artistic merit.
Douglas was not the man to shrink from it. The circumstances of the case prove, as I have
observed, that the family, when endeavouring to assume the honours, can have had no
patent in their possession which they could produce in justification of that step. It was
now, however, alleged by Douglas that the patent which would have proved their right had
been in their possession at the time, but had since been unfortunately burnt ! Its loss, as
Riddell sarcastically observes, was
" Attempted to be accounted for by the conflagration of the house of Freeland some years
previous to 1764, when it actually has been supposed to have perished in the flames " (p. 134).
Here again it is essential to bear ih mind the actual circumstances of the assumption, for it
is obvious that the Patent, even had it been so preserved (an allegation for which no evidence
is vouchsafed), could not, at one and the same time, have destined the honours to the heir-of-
line, and have destined them to the heir-of-entail, to the exclusion of the heir-of-line.
Consequently no possible patent could have satisfied the requirements of the case.
The admittedly garbled version thus constructed by Douglas — that "very veracious
and faithful ^account," as Riddell sarcastically terms it, — appeared in an even more
confident form in Wood's edition of his work, whence, in due. course, it passed unquestioned,
and still gathering strength at each fresh stage, within the sacred portals of "Burke's
Peerage." " Et monstrum infelix sacrata sistimus arce. "
There, sanctioned by a Crown official, and consequently extorting from a too credulous
public a more implicit acceptance with every fresh edition, it continued to appear un
changed till a few' weeks ago, and might, to all appearance, be doing so still, but for the
circumstances which I am about to narrate.
Mr. Foster, in his Peerage for 1883, expressed his earnest desire to " invite attention to
the unsatisfactory status of the Barony," X and, indeed, fearlessly submitted-" that it ought to
have no place in a Peerage. § This outspoken utterance gave the direst offence to those
whom I have described as the new School, — the worthy successors of their own countryman,
the " most accommodating and flattering " Douglas. It might have been supposed that an
honest effort to call attention to so crying a scandal would be deemed, in the case of a
Peerage editor, not only justifiable, but highly meritorious. Indeed, Riddell, though not a
Peerage editor, and, therefore, not compelled to allude to this subject, thus vindicates his
action in so doing : —
" In alluding to this subject, the author is only discharging a duty imperative upon every
Scotch antiquarian, of correcting flagrant error ; and nowhere does it abound so plenteously
as in the works of our Peerage writers, who, to use tlie words of Chalmers, in the ' form '
of 'fiction,' are 'continually darkening the clear, without clearing the dark' .... In
such circumstances there is, unfortunately, no other remedy for the evil than that impartial
and unflinching spirit ol severe investigation that was first adopted by Lord Hailes, without
reference to weaker biasses or prejudices, either public or private, which has been the means
of fixing many points both connected with our history and our laws " (p. 133).

*" Isabel, Baroness Ruthven, who succeeded her uncle David, the second lord, and had summons as a
baroness to the coronation of George I., and also of George II."
+ " Supposed to be to heirs-general as an heir-general succeeded in 1701 " (Wood's Douglas, ii. 685).
X Preface, p. 4- § " Ruthven," p. 611.

172 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Mais nous avons change tout cela. The new school of " Scotch antiquarians," so far from
feeling it a duty to correct "flagrant error," openly devote their energies to defending 'it with
might and main, and to thwarting, to the utmost of their feeble power, fhe followers of the
fearless Riddell ! Incredible as this assertion may doubtless appear, I now proceed to prove
that it is absolutely and literally true.
Mr. Foster was promptly assailed for his honesty, the attack being commenced in Notes
and Queries, of course by an anonymous correspondent —anonymity is a feature of " the new
school " — signing himself, most appropriately, Ignoramus.* This conveniently paved the
way for another anonymous correspondent, who accused Mr. Foster of having " blundered
glaringly," and undertook to set everybody right-t His own blunders having been mercilessly
exposed, and his defence ofthe assumption easily shattered^ he returned .to the charge with
fresh mis-representations, — the favourite weapon of " the new school " — bringing with him
a third anonymous champion.§ On this occasion their discomfiture was so signal that they
attempted no further reply. || Meanwhile, a fourth anonymous champion was confidently
repeating, in the Journal cf Jurisprudence,^ those threadbare sophistries in support of the
assumption which were being severally demolished in Notes and Queries, as Riddell had
demolished them half a century before. It was at this point that Mr. C. H. E. Carmichael,
" a student " of these matters, he informs us, for " more than twenty years," intervened in the
discussion, of his own accord, as a supporter of the Ruthven assumption ! ** Now it is easy
enough to sneer at indignant language, but, after all, there is a time for speaking out in the
cause of truth and honesty. When one finds, as I have found, Scotchman after Scotchman,
instead of following Riddell's noble example, and discharging what he terms their " impera
tive duty," coming forward in defence, not merely of error, but, as Riddell- reminds us, of
" 'flagrant error," championing without a blush a fraud so notorious as to be scouted by Lord
Hailes and scorned by Riddell, — when one finds them, I say, doing this, and so conscious,
moreover, that the.facts are against them, that they are driven, as I shall show, to the despica
ble device of misrepresenting the views and misquoting the words of those who are striving
for the truth, it is surely time to speak plainly, and to call such conduct by its right name.
Now as Mr. Carmichael is anxious to remind., us that he has been "a student" of these
matters for " more than twenty years," tt I must decline to insult him by suggesting that he
has not read his Riddell. Yet this places us in an awkward, nay most painful, position. For
if my critic has read his Riddell, as in simple justice we are bound to believe, he cannot
plead ignorance of Riddell's expose of the " apologies " — for such is his scornful term — that
have been offered i_i defence of this assumption. It would be, then, unhappily, in the full
consciousness that this assumption was a notorious and "flagrant " imposture, in the full con
sciousness that it has been pronounced. to be so by the greatest authorities on the Peerage
Law of Scotland, that Mr. Carmichael has deliberately lent his support to this audacious
attempt tp vindicate that imposture, and has proclaimed his belief in the truth of that which
every real student of these matters well knows to be false ! . From this dilemma there is
no escape. Mr. Carmichael, as I have said, of his own accord, joined in the discussion in Notes
and Queries, and I shall refer to his observations in detail below. For the present it will be
sufficient to say that, finding himself worsted at all points (not, let me add, by any arguments
of my own, but simply by the inexorable evidence of the facts),tt he discovered that, like his
predecessors, he was hors de combat, and hastened to quit the field. But, to veil his dis
comfiture, he endeavoured to cover his retreat by the following singular arguments. First,
his ipse -ft"*// that the Ruthven title (having been recognised by " the Acts ofthe Parliament
of Scotland down to 1693") was "still a peerage in 1883." Second, his seniority to myself.
Third, his disinclination to continue the discussion. Fourth, " other demands upon my
time."§§ Finding that my opponent, to disguise his own retreat, bad misquoted my words,
misrepresented my views, and recklessly, more Scotico, impugned my conduct, I felt com
pelled, in simple justice to myself, not only to clear myself from these unjust aspersions,. but
to point out that Mr. Carmichael's singular arguments had nothing to do with the question
in dispute, the assumption of the Ruthven honours, and were merely intended to raise a
cloud of dust, behind which he might effect his retreat. Had this reply appeared, the matter
* Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 87. f lb., p. 109. J lb., pp. 153, 168. § lb., p. 229.
li lb., p. 290. % J.ntmal of Jurisprudence and Scottish Law Magazine, March, 1883.
** Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 470. f-j- lb., 6th S., viii., 152.
%% lb., viii., 27. §§ lb., 6th S., viii., 151-2.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OP PREELAND. 173

might there have ended, but I am compelled to state, though with the utmost reluctance, that
(under exceptional circumstances and in most courteous terms) it was refused admission to
Notes and Queries. It wis obviously impossible, after so prolonged a controversy, to permit -
the suppression of these closing remarks, which would have finally clenched the whole matter,
and these pages being, fortunately, ever open to the voice of truth and justice, the present
paper is the result.
As with Mr. Foster, in the case of the Marjoribanks pedigree, I ask for nothing more
than a fair fight. I hereby challenge Mr. Carmichael, or any other votary of " the new
school " who is not ashamed to sign his name, to discuss this question freely and fairly, in
these pages, or in any others that he may prefer, with the sole stipulation that, if he enter
upon the controversy, he shall not discover, in the midst of it, a disinclination to pursue the
subject, or a sudden anxiety to " back out " !
Now it is a singular and truly significant circumstance that Mr. Carmichael, though he
so quickly discovered that he had no time to carry on the open and public controversy,
in which he had himself entered, found time, not only to join in others, but to compose and
transmit to Sir Bernard Burke certain "interesting and useful communications,"* which
have strangely coincided with a most starding transformation in Sir Bernard's account of the
Ruthven assumption, which varies in toto from that hitherto given by him, and the comments
on which, oddly enough, embody Mr. Carmichael's views I If the pulpit has been described
as " coward's castle," what shall we term Burke's Peerage ?
I now propose to deal seriatim with the " apologies " in these quarters, in defence of the
assumption (a) in the Journal of Jurisprudence, as repeating and summarising those ofthe
anonymous contributors to Notes and Queries ; (b) in Mr. Carmichael's observations ; (c) in
Burke's Peerage for 1884, as representing the latest and presumably the most complete case
for the defence. .1 hope to show that every argument of importance to be found has not
only been answered and exposed by Riddell, but is well known to have been so by those who
have now revived them, "as if they had not, and never could be, impugned.
The anonymous writer in the Journal-of Jurisprudence repeats the arguments, and, indeed,
the very language of Ignoramus and T.T. t In his eagerness to obscure the main issue, by
misrepresenting, as usual, Mr. Foster's views, he begins by informing us that
" A Scottish barony created by George I., seven years after the Union, and that by writ
of summons to his coronation, is a novelty alike to Scottish and EngHsh readers,"
and by ridiculing such an idea as " beyond measure startling." X Here, at the very outset
he rashly over-reaches himself, and ultroneously strengthens Mr. Foster's case. For we know
from Lord Hailes that it was precisely such a document, a writ of summons to a coronation,
that the so-called " Lady Ruthven " proclaimed
" was her patent, and that she would preserve it. as such, in her charter-chest, (and) what
she said in earnest is now seriously insisted upon." § -
Mr. Foster, finding that this coronation summons was indeed the only " patent " that could
be discovered for the existing title of Ruthven, wittily classed it as a " coronation barony," ||
that " ought to have no place in a Peerage." In justly ridiculing, this plea for the assumption,
which, in Lord Hailes' words, " is .now seriously insisted upon," the eager writer unluckily
forgot that he was emphasising Mr. Foster's own case t
He then proceeds to set forth the following argument in the face ofthe facts, for which,
however, he professes to have " betaken himself to the proper sources of information, — the
Scottish records." "The patent, which was unrecorded, was burned with the house of Freeland in 1750; and
it is from collateral evidence only that we can gather what its terms were. The death,
unmarried, ofthe second Lord Ruthven in 1 701, and the retention of the title on the Union
Roll, with other facts which need not be particularized, indicate that its limitation-was wider
than tp heirs-male of the body. But was it simply limited to heirs-of-line, or did it contain,
like a good many other Scottish patents about its date, a power to the patentee, perhaps to
his son also, to select an heir ? or was there an express limitation to the heir or class of heirs
on whom Lord Ruthven should entail his estates? Be that as it may, David, Lord Ruthven,
and his sisters acted as if the patent had contained some provision such as we have suggested ;

* Preface to Burke's Peerage, 1884.
t Vide supra for this mysterious connection between the anonymous effusions in Notes and Queries and
those which simultaneously appeared in the Scottish Journal. , „„ , ,
+ P 120. § Vide supra.- |[ Peerage (1883), p. 611.

174 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Lord Ruthven entailed his estates in terms indicative of his belief that he was entailing his
honours with them." *
Let us examine, piecemeal, this tissue of sophistries.
(D
"The patent, which was unrecorded, was burned with the house of Freeland in I7S°-"
This " avowal " (as Riddell terms it) is persistently repeated in the hope that it may be
accepted as an historic fact Against it, the circumstances of the case, as I have shown,
afford the strongest possible presumption. For it there is not vouchsafed one scrap of
evidence. (2)
" It is from collateral evidence only that we can gather what its terms were."
The writer here discreetly ignores (a) that the accepted presumption of law assumes
it to have" been to heirs-male of the body, until otherwise demonstrated ; t (b) that
the only real " collateral evidence " is that afforded by the above quoted MS., asserting a
limitation to "heirs-w.«/«" (i.e.,-teste Riddell, to heirs-male of the body). So much for the
" collateral evidence." (3)
" The death, unmarried, of the second Lord Ruthven in 1701, and the retention of the
title on the Union Roll, with other facts which need not be particularised (!), indicate that
its limitation was wider than to heirs-male of the body."
Allowing for the peculiarities of Scottish grammar, it would seem that the two facts here
" particularised " are really to be taken as one, the fact that the title was retained on the Roll
after the extinction of the Patentee's male issue. This argument was fully disposed of by
Riddell, who replied,
"That it is not declared by the articles of the Union that the Union Roll is to be a
fixed and established standard, as above asserted  Neither is that Roll drawn up with
exactitude ; besides Ruthven, it contains the names of Peerages that did not exist at the
time, ahd, after the period ofthe Union, it was not the custom to withdraw Peerages from the
Roll when they had become extinct " (p. 136).
In proof of the true value of the Union Roll, it is, I think, sufficient to observe that this
highly-vaunted rex rotulorum on the one hand retained such titles as Abercrombie and
Newark— the former notoriously extinct for more than twenty years, the latter also extinct,
though assumed by the heir-of-line through a fraud which the House of Lords eventually
exposed ; and on the other, omitted such extant titles as Somerville, Dingwall, and Aston of
Forfar ! And even had the Roll been free from such error, its retention of a title, it should
always be remembered, was merely an admission that its extinction had not been demon
strated, and was not a " recognition " that if had been validly assumed by any particular person.
Thus the retention on the Union Roll of the titles of Ochiltree and Spynie did not "recog
nise" their assumption by the Aytons and the Fullartan any more than the similar retention
of Ruthven " recognised " its assumption by the so-called " baroness." Such is the value of
the argument from the Roll, and so little will it avail to " indicate," far less to prov£ the point.*
(4)
" But was it simply limited to heirs-of-line? " . .-
This hypothesis is disposed of by the exclusion of Sir W. Cunyngham, and by the
* P. 120.
f Riddell, though so vigorous in his denunciations of this presumption when applied to earlier creations,
admits that this Barony " being thus created long after the introduction of patents, no argument derived
from territorial practice can evidently here avail, even supposing it could apply " (p. 135). This effectually
disposes of Mr. Woodward's contention apropos of the Ruthven assumption (Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 168,
229), where he tells us he " had thought that if there was any one of Lord Mansfield's whims which was
universally discredited by students of Scottish Peerage Law, it was this . . . . A reference to Mr. Riddell 's invalu
able work on the Scottish Peerage is sufficient to establish this " (!)
X "As a striking corroboration ofthe remarks already made as to the carelessness and inaccuracy of the
Union Roll, may be mentioned the case of the Peerage of Aston of Forfar," etc:, etc. :. "Nay Douglas
himself virtually confesses the uncertainty of the test, for he, at the same time, observes that the Lords of Session.
in their report, 'found the titles of no less than twenty-five Peers of that Roll dubious ' — so little reliance is
there to be placed upon it ! " (Riddel, Scotch Peerage Law, pp. 143, 136). See also below, pp. 184, 186.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. 175
contention of our opponents themselves that " a female who was not the heir-of-line was in
possession in 1707, when the title was placed on the Union Roll," *
(5)
" Or did it contain, like a good many (?) other Scottish patents about its date (?), a power
to the patentee, perhaps to his son also (!), to select an heir ?"
The suggestion that such a power was conferred on "his son " can only be described as
desperate. The writer knew that the power of nomination was not conferred on a future
generation. And as to the suggestion of nomination at all, it involves the assumption that
the successive holders of the title must have taken exclusively as " ares of tailzie " under a
nomination per expressum to the honours. On this hypothesis their case would be on all
fours with that of the Earls of Errol. Now we know that on Lord Errol's tide being
challenged in 1796, the Lords refused to confirm it to him till he had produced the original
nomination (for awhile missing) under which alone he took. Here, then, we have an
ominous precedent for the Ruthven title when challenged, if, as would now seem, there is
not a phantom of evidence for the existence of any such. nomination, or even of a clause in
the Patent (or of any regrant upon resignation) warranting the same !
As to the random statement that " a good many (?) other Scottish patents about its
date (?) " contained a clause constituting such faculty of nomination, reference is here made,
if we may judge by the " collateral evidence " of the anonymous contributor to Notes and
Queries, to the famous case of Rutherford.t This they doubtless think a potent precedent
from its notoriously and exceptionally ample terms. Let us apply it, then, to the case of
Ruthven. (1) In the Rutherford case the faculty is duly instructed; in the Ruthven case it
is a mere guess. (2) In the former case, it was exercised by the patentee (to whom it was
granted) ; in the latter, it would have been exercised by the patentee's son (to whom it was
not granted). (3) In the former case there was a nomination to the honours ; in the latter
there was none. (4) Over and above these fatal differences, the Rutherford nomination, as
Riddell has most judiciously observed, —
" Cannot .... as nevertheless has strangely happened, be quoted or referred to as a
proper rule or illustration in the matter of peerage conveyancing, especially in limitations.
It can never be a fit subject of technical or fair precedent ; nay, to appeal to it in a case for
support, with this mew, would betray a confession of the -weakness, indeed desperate character
of the latter." X .... It at the utmost can but save itself, without attempting to save or
assist elsewhere .... Indeed, as I said, to allude toil is an absolute confession of defeat." §
(6)
" Or was there an express limitation to the heir or class of heirs on whom Lord Ruthven
should entail his estates ? "
Even if there was, this could not help matters, for the estates were not entailed by " Lord
Ruthven " (i.e., the patentee), but by his son; and it was pointed out by Riddell that a
limitation to " heirs of entail could only, even on the most favourable construction, refer to
entails executed before the death of the patentee ; for it would be absurd and preposterous to
hold that they could be competent thereafter ! " (Peerage Law, p. 204). But in addition to
this, there is no trace whatever of such limitation, and there is the fact that the second lord
would surely not have insisted in his entail as he did, on the adoption by the successive substi
tutes, of the family " surname and arms," if the estates had actually conveyed the honours
(i.e., the title). (7)
" Be that as it may."
Now here is the gist of the whole matter. Even if we conceded to the apologists of
this assumption carte blanche to construct for themselves an imaginary limitation to suit their
requirements, it is not in their power to construct any single hypothesis that shall be consistent
with the known facts.
" Be that as it may " ! Can we ask for a more lamentable confession of defeat? It was so
in Notes and Queries; it was so in the Journal of Jurisprudence ; it is so now in Burke's
Peera^ei So inconsistent with itself was this assumption, so hopeless is the case for its
defence that its champions cannot, dare not, even suggest any one limitation that would justify

* Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 109. t -#•> 6th S., vii., 109.
X Peerage Law (1842), p. 901- § *°-> P- i°12-
Collect. a a

176 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
it! In vain we challenge them to take their stand by any imaginary limitation they may
prefer, that we may know what we have to deal with. They dare not. The writer in Notes
and Queries leaves it in doubt : —
" That the limitation  included heirs-general, or gave a power of nomination,
there can be no doubt."
The writer in the Journal leaves it in doubt : —
"Was it simply limited to heirs-of-line, or did it contain a power to select an heirl"
Burke's Peerage is bolder still, and runs the two limitations simultaneously (!) :—
" Collateral proofs exist that heirs-female were not excluded, and there are grounds far
surmising (!) that a power of nomination in some shape was conferred with it."
Now what does all this mean? Simply that the defenders of this assumption find that
no one limitation will serve their turn, and that they are compelled to uphold the two
alternately, just as suits their purpose ! After all, it is difficult to say which course is the
more dishonest, — that of Douglas, who boldly declared for a limitation to heirs-of-line, and
solved the difficulty by simply altering the facts that were irreconcilable with that hypothesis;
or that of his successors, who, unable to conceal that the title was assumed by an heir-of-
entail, to the exclusion ofthe heir-of-line, begin by proclaiming that
" The title was evidently destined to pass along with the estates, and did so,"*
and then, having thus embraced a limitation to heirs-of-entail, and not to heirs-of-line, coolly
turn round and assure us that the right of her successors was beyond doubt, because they were
heirs-of-line !
" Supposing that the right of Jean, Lady Ruthven, was questionable, no such doubt rests
on the succession after her death, as all the subsequent holders were heirs-of-line of the
original grantee " (Ib.)
" We find the daughter of the second sister in enjoyment of the title, whose status, inasmuch
as she was both heir-of-line and heir-of-entail (or nomination), was, so far as we (I) can see,
beyond legal doubt" (Journal of Jurisprudence).
" To whom (as being heir-of-line, as well as of nomination or entail), any doubts suggested
regarding her aunt's status have no application " (Burke's Peerage).
To such sorry shifts are those driven who would strive to pursuade us, with Mr. Car
michael, that Ruthven is " still a peerage in 1883 " !
(8)
" David, Lord Ruthven, and his sisters, acted as if the patent had contained some provision
[which?] such as we have suggested.f Lord Ruthven entailed his estates in terms indicative
of his belief that he was entailing his honours with them."
This statement need not detain us long. There is but one reply to be given, a reply
which it is always painful to make, but which is rendered, alas ! too often necessary by the
peculiar and " happily rare " tactics of the new school of Scottish genealogists. In this
deliberate assertion, which would indeed be important if true, there was notx and the writer
knew there was not, one word of truth. The actual words of the clause in question are quoted
elsewhere by the companion writer,$ and could not, by the wildest flight of imagination, be
supposed to refer to the Ruthven honours. Nay, the injunction that the successive substitutes
were to assume " the surname and arms oi Ruthven," is practically destructive of the hypothesis
that they could inherit the honours. If it were needful to illustrate this- obvious fact, we
could do so at once by comparing the terms with those ofthe irritant and. resolutive clauses
in the famous entail ofthe Mar estates (1739). It was there provided that the. Mar honours,
being then under attainder, the successive substitutes should, " be obliged, in all time after
their succession, to assume and constantly use and bear the surname of Erskine, and take
and carry the arms, which before the attainder of the said John, late Earl of Mar, were worn
by the family of Erskine and Mar.§ Here we have a case in which, as. in that of Ruthven,
the use of the " surname " and " arms " is enjoined on substitutes who could not, under the
circumstances, succeed to the honours.
* Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 109. t Every one of which I have in turn concussed.
X Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 109. Entail executed 26th October, 1674 (Register of Taillies, co. Perth.)
§ Mar Case, Minutes of Evidence, p. 272.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. \ii
Such are the results of our analysis of this amazing paragraph. We cannot be
surprised, however, that the organ, which allowed itself to rely, in the Mar question,
upon arguments, which as I clearly demonstrated, were based on the suppressio veri, *
should now admit into its pages this painfully disingenuous defence. The passage well
deserves our close attention ; firstly, from its appearance in so authoritative a quarter — The
Journal of Jurisprudence and Scottish Law Magazine; secondly, from its significant resem
blance to the attack simultaneously hazarded in Notes and Queries ; thirdly, from its equally
significant resemblance to the story now adopted by Burke's Peerage. No unbiassed person
could compare the three without detecting the same inspiration (and almost the same
language) in them all. But as the writer in Notes and Queries betrayed his acquaintance
with Riddell's " discussion " on the subject,t it is obvious that the authors of these three
manifestoes cannot plead ignorance of the fact that the arguments on which they now profess
to rely, were scattered to the winds half a century ago by him in whom the students of the
Peerage Law of Scotland recognize their greatest master.
I now turn from the Journal of Jurisprudence to the criticisms of Mr. Carmichael. Aa
Mr. Carmichael took exception to my language as " happily rare " in Notes and Queries, I
shall here adopt the far severer language employed by Riddell, in his great work on Peerage
Law, when similarly, though under infinitely less provocation, animadverting on the " strange
and preposterous inductions " of the hapless Alexander Sinclair." j
Mr. Carmichael, in his first communication, advanced three points. §
(0
"Mr. Round is evidently ans-ious to impress upon us a thesis which is advanced by
Mr. Foster in his Peerage, that there is no indefeasible nobility of blood in Scotland. I must
take leave to except to this view."
On reference to the Peerage, it will at once be seen that no such "thesis " is to be found
there. Mr. Foster merely enunciates the well-known maxim that " the English doctrine of
the indefeasibility of peerage" (not, it will be observed, the "indefeasible nobility of blood," as
Mr. Carmichael "palpably misstates "|| the expression) "does not obtain in Scotland."
Riddell lays on this point repeated stress, pointing out the " marked discrepancy " in this
matter between the Peerage Law of Scotland and that of England : —
" For "Lord Erskine held that ' when once the blood of a man is ennobled by sitting in
that [i.e., the English] House, nothing but delinquency can deprive his posterity of the honour
 For if a person 'was once summoned to Parliament, and sat, his blood was
ennobled, and his title and dignity descended to his heirs.' " f
But as an instance ofthe " marked discrepancy," in this respect, ofthe Scottish practice,
he adduces the case of Lindsay of Edzell, who had " sat in Parliament as Earl of Crawford,"
but who " conveyed the Earldom to another." Thereafter
" His posterity were held to be quite disennobled, and dwindled down to the rank of mere
commoners."**
Mr. Foster very properly called attention to this principle, as did Riddell himself in this very
case,ff as establishing the most important point that it is perfectly competent, even now, to
challenge the Ruthven assumption, and that the posterity of the assumers, as in the Edzell
instance, may at any time be " quite disennobled." But Mr. Carmichael, resenting this
inexorable conclusion, would divert our attention from it by an "utterly irrelevant " Xt
disquisition on
" The pre-existent baronial status of our Lords of Parliament when as yet the dignity of
Lord of Parliament was not."
What on earth can this have to do with the assumption in the eighteenth century of a title
created in the seventeenth? "It is, indeed, tiresome and unedifying to pursue" Mr.

* Ante, pp. 157. IS8. etc- t IK 6th S., viii., 198. X Peerage Law (1842), pp. 1006-1046.
§ Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 470. || Riddell's Peerage Law, p. 1009. \ Peerage Law, p. 106.
** lb. p. 104. So too in his earlier work (Scotch Peerage Law, p. 125, sq.) he points out that prescription
can in no way fortify a " usurped possession or assumption by a stranger, " in accordance with which principle,
in the case of the Lindores title, "its assumption from 1736 to 1793 clearly went for nothing, and was no obstacle
to the investigation that ended in the refutation of the right."
++ " Case of the Barony of Ruthven " (Scotch Peerage Law, p. 142). XX Peerage Law, p, 1008.

178 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
Carmichael "in such a course," * though I had occasion incidentally to correct his gloss on
Sir George Mackenzie's words, t " As I may have occasion also to observe elsewhere, the
drift or logical relevancy of the worthy gentleman's ratiocination is not always quite
apparent," J and most certainly not ifl this case. What, indeed, has the technical
" ennobling " of the blood conferred by peerage, which is here spoken of by Riddell and
Mr. Foster, to do with the heraldic " nobility of blood," which is totally unconnected with
peerage? It was Riddell who spoke, under similar circumstances, of
"A distinction which it seems in vain to drive into Mr. Sinclair's pericranium, which here,
as well as elsewhere, is in no small degree mystified and is eluded, and argues with the aid
of shadows." § (2)
"Mr. Round casts doubts upon the burning of the Place of Freeland."
Now here again I am compelled to observe that Mr. Carmichael must indeed be at loss for
arguments if he is reduced to attributing to me a suggestion which I had most emphatically
never made. Here are the words to which Mr. Carmichael referred : —
" As to T. T's assertion that the report was made before the patent was burnt, let me
remind him that he had not produced one shred of evidence for the persistent but unsupported
assumption that the original patent perished when Freeland House was burnt in 1750. Nay,
what evidence have we for its having ever been preserved there, at least after the extinction
of the male line in 1701 ? "
I still ask for contemporary evidence, not that Freeland House was burnt, but that tlie patent
was in it when it was burnt Till that evidence is forthcoming there is nothing to prove
that the patent was in existence at the time, or, indeed, at any time after 1 651 . Mr. Carmichael,
unable to supply this evidence, first contends that
" It is far more credible that a Scottish peer's country seat should have been accidentally
destroyed by fire than that the peer himself should have set fire to it in order to burn a
supposed inconvenient -document, or should have falsely alleged that his House was so
destroyed,— -which seems to be the dilemma led up to by Mr. Round's language." ||
It will be seen that I had not made, or even seemed to make, any such suggestions, and the
misrepresentation was, I fear, simply intended to divert attention from the lack of the above
evidence. When I had called attention to this misrepresentation, Mr. Carmichael was then
not ashamed to assert that my " language certainly seemed (1) to convey such doubts."^ I
need not point out that here again Riddell was, at least, as sceptical as- myself, not as to
"the burning of the place of Freeland'" (on which I had thrown no doubt), but as to the
destruction of the patent on that occasion. But then, as Riddell aptly observes, apropos of
poor Mr. Sinclair, —
" Nothing certainly is easier, or less operose, than to write or discuss after Mr. Sinclair's
summary fashion, nearly always without reference to any authorities **.... But, in lieu
thereof, full, rigid, and inexorable scrutiny, in matters of fact and precedent, is what we
ante omnia desiderate, especially owing to the darkness that environs us by the .... flattering
fables and illusions, with not a little of the national tendency ascribed by Dr.. Johnson,
so copiously palmed in our details, even of law, as well of history, public and private,
upon whatever scale it may be directed. In the same way, with bitter and. repulsive fruits
and ingredients, painful and irksome, lucubrations of the kind often produce wholesome
and excellent results — in this instance by the expiscation of truth." ft
But there may be those who would reckon " the expiscation of truth " not among " the
wholesome and excellent results," but rather among the " bitter and repulsive fruits " of that
full, rigid, and inexorable scrutiny," on which, undeterred by Mr. Carmichael and his allies,
I shall continue, as did Riddell, to insist. (3)
" I can only say that I certainly think that the Lords of Session, whether their, return to
the order of the Lords spiritual and temporal of June 12, 1739, be considered a " fiasco " or
* Peerage Law, p. 1009.
t By pointing out that though Sir George included among the "Barons" the. "commissioners for the
shires," he did not include, as Mr. Carmichael would have it, the "lesser barons," who were represented by
them (Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., p. 471 ; viii., 23, 152). 1 invite a comparison of the passages referred to.
1 Peerage Law, p. 1010. § Peerage Law, p. 1015. || 'Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 470.
*{ lb., viii., 151. ** Peerage law, p. 1042. ft Peerage Law, j>. 708.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. i79

not, would have made some remarks upon the Freeland peerage had they felt it necessary to
do so. That they did not seems to me evidence that they saw no occasion for any such
remarks as they did append to other titles." *
Mr. Carmichael must be well aware that Riddell disposed of this "apology," as he terms it,t
more than half-a-century ago. He replied, —
"That the Lords in their very report X confess their inability ' to give any reasonable satis
faction touching the limitations of the Peerages that are .stfll continuing,' owing t.o various
deeds affecting them, that are very difficult to be found upon record, and sometimes are not
preserved at all. "
Mr. Carmichael, however, iri support of his argument, urges that " on two titles, those of
Findlater and Seafield, the Lords of Session did make some observations" relating to their
peculiar limitations. We ought really to feel indebted to Mr. Carmichael for calling our
attention to this case, for if the " Lords of Session " considered these limitations so peculiar
as to demand special notice, they would indeed a fortiori have deemed it necessary to call
attention to the limitations of that extraordinary Ruthven Patent, which is at once " believed "
to have been to heirs-of-line, and yet "surmised " to have been to heirs of (posthumous !)
entail, in order to account for a succession which even its own defenders are compelled
significantly to describe as " curious " and " abnormal." § Why then, let us by all means ask,
did they not similarly allude to this even more wonderful limitation? Surely, for the most
excellent and sumcient reason that, while the Seafield and Findlater limitations were before
them, tlie Ruthven limitation was not. For Mr. Carmichael forgot to mention that both the
Findlater and Seafield Patents were on record in the Great Seal Register, and that the
Ruthven Patent was not. Now let us remember that the " Order " to which Mr. Carmichael
refers instructed the Lords of Session
" to state, as far as they shall be able, in such roll or fist, the particular limitations of such
Peerages." ||
And let us also remember, that such being their task, they reported themselves unable, in
the case of some Peerages, to append particulars of the limitation, owing to its not being on
record. What then is the natural,. and, indeed, the only, conclusion to be drawn from these
authoritative data? Simply that in the cases of Findlater and Seafield they appended
particulars of the limitation, because it was before them, and that, in the case of Ruthven,
they did not, because it was not before them. In other words, their silence is evidence, as
I originally contended, that they "had never seen the Ruthven patent, and had not
even any proofs of its limitation." IT For let us remember, as I added (in the passage mis
represented by Mr. Carmichael), that we have only " a persistent but unsupported assumption "
for evidence that the patent was still preserved at the time Thus, then, the cases of
Findlater and Seafield, so far from strengthening, as Mr. Carmichael hoped, his argument
in the case of Rjithven, are actually destructive of the hypothesis to which he clings, that the
patent was still preserved at the time ofthis report 1** And this striking conclusion springs
from the fact that those titles differed from that of Ruthven, in that their limitations were on
record. Mr. Carmichael, 
" who has omitted all mention of this rather important fact ... is thnsfelo de se, and has
cut his own throat by the instrument which he eagerly handles, but thus so treacherously
deceives him." ff
So much for the instances of " Findlater and Seafield," and for their bearing on the case of
Ruthven. We are reminded of Riddell's merciless words, when Mr. Sinclair had ventured
on a similar argument.
"The preceding, thus irresistible, new instances of Mr. Sinclair, in his opinion, ... in
sensibly remind us of the sticks carefully planted by the stripling, in the fond belief that they
were trees, and about to produce the best and the choicest fruits. In the same way, I fear,
we must regard what the worthy gentleman has thus planted in the field of controversy, as an
equal failure, — metaphorically but as barren sticks, as melancholy scarecrows in the desert
waste of his exposition — emblems, alas ! of his bootless, thongh glorious, attempt — to remain
only till they be blown down by the first zephyr 1 Not only so, but as his instances, besides
rebelliously and unnaturally ruining his own cause, choke and preclude healthy vegetation ;

* Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 470. f .&»&/* Peerage Law, p. 136.
X Report ap. Acts of Sederunt, 349. S Notes and Queries, 6th ^>., vii., 109.
|| Lords' Journals. if Notes arid Queries, 6th S., vii., 290.
** lb., 6th S., vii., 470 ; viii., 151. See also supra, p. 169. ft Riddell (Peerage. Law, p. 1009).

180 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
they are utterly unprofitable, and fail to be forthwith plucked out, and extirpated by the
husbandman." *
But independently ofthe bearing ofthis Report on the question ofthe preservation of
the Patent, it is also necessary to gauge the value of its evidence per se, as it is so persistently
and confidently appealed to by the apologists of the Ruthven assumption. It was claimed
by the writer in Notes and Queries that
"the important points of the Ruthven case are, first, that the male line having failed in 1701,
the title was retained on the Union Roll 1707 .. . second, that in their elaborate report in
1740, made before the patent was burnt, the Lords of Session recognised the right of an
heir-general to the barony."
But, alas for this writer, these two "important points" are, as I observed, mutually- de
structive ! For, by his own showing, the Session's report " recognised the right of an
heir-general" in 1740, while, in 1707, the Union Roll "recognised (if, indeed, it recognised
anything) the right of one who," as he had himself admitted, " was not the heir of line" ! t
Yet, so terribly weak is the case for the defence, that this oft-slain argument is now in Burke's
Peerage invoked as confidently as ever ! The " elaborate report " of the Lords of Session
here reappears as their " careful enumeration," though when it had last done duty, many -
months before, I had effectually demonstrated to those who invoked it its true character
and worth. It must be remembered, in the first place, that the Lords' Order was very precise in its
terms. It is very singular that the present learned Lyon, though he claimed, when examined
before the Select Committee^ to be " conversant " with this Order and Report, should have§
described its subject, in evidence, as " the state of the Scotch Peerage generally," || a state
ment which will be seen to be distinctly misleading on comparing it with the Order itself.
Nor must I omit, while on this subject, to express my surprise that Mr. Burnett should have
allowed himself, speaking as a lawyer, to describe this " Order " as "a remit" % When we
remember that the jurisdiction of the Session in Dignities, as, in such cases, the competent,
and, indeed, the only'proper court, was one of the main subjects before the committee,** and that
Mr. Burnett avowedly espoused the views of its most strenuous. champions, it is most unfortunate
that he should have happened to substitute for " Order " a term which would imply, as is well
known, a formal recognition by the House of Lords of the Court of Session as the competent
and, indeed, the only proper forum in matters of Peerage.
" The technical acceptation of the term ' remit ' naturally implies by way of compatibility,
the handing over, or rather restoring, a plea from an improper Court to the true one . . .
The legal import of ' remit,' therefore, is now plain, and, coupled with the declared com
petency of the Session in Honours, it can only denote, in respect to such inheritance, the
handing over a case ofthe kind to them, as the just and legal authority." tt
But to return. Though the Lords of Session were only ordered by the House of Lords " to
state as far as they shall be able ... the particular limitations," they had^o confess them
selves, even so, unable to give any reasonable satisfaction touching the limitations," and the
Report was, therefore, as I expressed it, a " fiasco," so far as concerned this its essential
object. With regard, moreover, to its retention of Ruthven, it must be remembered that
it was not an original inquiry, but was avowedly based on the Union Roll, as, indeed, is illus
trated by its omission of Aston, though a title then extant and actually borne. Lastly, I
pointed out that, as to its worth as evidence, Riddell had been reluctantly compelled to
admit that it contained "" inadvertencies and misconceptions,":}::?: while Lord Crawford, whose
cherished authority my opponents must accept as conclusive, disposes of this imfortunate
document in these emphatic words : —
"The difficulty found by the .Lords of Session in 1740 . . . merely shows the extra
ordinary ignorance that existed on the question at that time in Scotland. ... I may add
* lb., pp. 1016-17. t Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 109.
J Select Committee on Claims of Peerage, etc., 1882. § Minutes of Evidence, p. 386.
U lb., p. 200. T " There was a remit from the House of Lords to the Court of Session." 3. ioq.
** See paragraphs 10 and 12 of its Report (pp. 4, 5).
ft Riddell's Peerage Law, pp. 37, 39. He also refers, on p. 1003, to the "meaning I apply to the term, in
remits, and references, by other tribunals, to the Session in cases of honours, as in that of Rothes," etc In
the Rothes case here alluded to, the Privy Council " doe remit the said mater in debate to the Lords of Session,
to be discust by them'J'(p- 939)-
XX Notes and Queries, April 14th, 1883.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. 181

that the report was drawn up exclusively by Duncan Forbes of Culloden ... he was more
acquainted with constitutional law than with matters of genealogy, . . . that he had no
power to call for evidence, but drew up the report from his own knowledge, practically
single-handed, and during the intervals of official work ; and that his colleagues of the
Session, in whose joint names the report was sent, had nothing to do with it except adoption,
signature, and transmission to England, while the report possesses no judicial character '* *
" 1 have shown that tlie report of the court of Session- in 1740 was the work merely of one
man, and has no judicial, or even official, authorityZ'X
It was after I had quoted this exposi oi " the Lords of Session " and " their elaborate (!)
Report in 1740," that my opponents, unabashed, in Burke's Peerage, proudly paraded it
as a " careful enumeration " !
So much for the evidence of this Report, which it has been necessary to discuss at some
length from the importance which it has been sought to attach to it Against these stern
and crushing facts Mr. Carmichael can only give us his ipse dixit — " / can only say that /
certainly think," etc., etc. It is a singular circumstance that this characteristic ego appears
no less than twenty-one times in thirty-seven short lines-t If I may venture to quote once
more the apposite words of Riddell, my critic
"predicates, nay decides, rather amusingly, in abstruse points, like a lawyer, or even
chancellor, with an ex cathedra air . . . himself with high complacency, and wondrous
good-luck, alone clairvoyant and right." §
But I have yet to glance at Mr. Carmichael's second communication. The writer begins
by urging that he
"must, in limine, decline having had any idea, of ' bolstering up a psuedo-barony.' ** ||
I need only invite a reference to my paper, where it will be seen that here again my
words are misquoted, and that I had merely ventured to express my "regret" that one who
had been a student of these subjects for more than twenty years "should have espoused sa
hopeless a cause as tlie defence ^this psuedo-barony." fl" As my critic, in defectu rationum, seeks
refuge in condemnations of my language, I may at least claim that he should quote it cor
rectly. " For me, at least," Mr. Carmichael then adds, " the Ruthven peerage is still a
peerage in 18&3." With mere ipse dixits, of course, we need not trouble ourselves to deal.
What we here ask for is evidence and proof.
It will be seen, on reference to my critic's communication, that, in lieu of this, he
brings forward these singularly relevant arguments : (1) his seniority to myself (2) his dis
inclination to continue the discussion, (3) his objection to my language, (4) his lack of time.
It is difficult to see what light these throw on the assumption of the Ruthven honours.
As to my age, I readily, like Pitt, plead guilty to " the atrocious crime of being a young
man." As to the second point, as Mr. Carmichael can
"see so little benefit to be derived from discussing these questions with a school which
seems to assume that where any Scottish peerage case presents some apparent (!) difficulties,
the existence of such difficulties is to be ascribed to grave moral faults in the peers themselves
— suppression and destruction of documents and the like," 
that he is disinclined to " conclude " the discussion, I would remind him that my. only
suggestion as to the Ruthven patent was that possibly
" all this confusion sprang from the early loss of the original patent, possibly in the very
troubles which followed close upon its grant." **
It was Riddell, and not I, who described the Newark re-grant as " apparently a fabrica-
cation."tt It was Riddell, and not I, who denounced the "clumsy obreption,":j_£ by which
the Oxenford honours were "surreptitiously introduced "§§ into the .charter which "Lord
Oxenford" founded on, and who pronounced his conduct in the claim to have been "aptly
compared ...... to that of a murderous animal 1"|||| Bnt perhaps the " school " to which.
my critic alluded was indeed the school of Riddell. In that case, his aversion to it is most
natural though it has generally been considered a school to which it would be an honour to
belong. Thirdly, if Mr. Carmichael's objections to my language made him unwilling to
continue the discussion, why did he, ultroneously and without a shadow of provocation, enter

* Earldom of Mar, II., 26-7. fib., IL, 94. X Notes and Queries, 6th S., viii., 152.
§ Peerage Law, p. 1042. || Notes and Queries, 6th S;, viii., 151. f _"5_, 6th S., viii., 27.
** lb., p. 28. tt Peerage Law, p. 779. Jti5,p. 63. §§ Id., pp. 294, 377. |JIt H>„ p. 63.

i82 - COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
the lists against me ? He knew my language when he thus joined in the controversy, as well
as when he 'sought an excuse for his retreat. Fourthly, Mr. Carmichael pleaded
" other demands upon my time far more imperative than correspondence with Notes and
Queries"
Again I ask, why did not this objection occur to Mr. Carmichael when he joined pf his
own accord in the discussion? Let me remind him that I, too, "must write in the midst of
other demands upon my time, far more imperative " than that of disproving an assumption,
in the validity of which he has recorded his belief, but which Riddell himself has scornfully
denounced as "too trivial and flimsy for criticism 1"
"Veritas temporis filia," are Mr. Carmichael's " farewell words " to me. Alas ! would
that it were so ! But take this very case. In the " last century," as Riddell loftily observes
of this assumption, "the nature of the claim was known, and sufficiently appreciated by
antiquarians." * Yet the title which was ridiculed by a Hailes had survived to be scorned
by a Riddell, and (thanks to the insouciance oi Scottish heralds) to be unblushingly defended,
" in the fulness of time," as a genuine dignity in the Scottish peerage !
Before taking leave of Mr, Carmichael's communication, it will be necessary to call
attention to the extraordinary instance he has selected in illustration of the danger involved
in. that "inexorable scrutiny" of which we claim the right. For, in Riddell's words,
" We still meet with the same luckless attempts at illustration, and equal miscarriage, owing
to undue haste and inadvertence ; and in the absence of thorough and original investigation
into the cases he adduces in support of his conclusion." t
For thus argues my critic on the loss of the Ruthven patent : —
" It is really a mere accident that other seventeenth century Scottish patents, as to the
existence of which there has never been any doubt expressed, were not similarly lost to us.
The Breadalbane patent— one which might be thought to call for particular care, from the
very extensive' and special powers granted therein — was not registered (sic) for years after it
had passed. Just a little carelessness among servants, and we might have been told to-day
that Breadalbane was a "pseudo-earldom." J
It would not be easy to conceive a more unlucky illustration. For (apart from the fact
that the Ruthven difficulties spring not so much from the loss of the patent as from the fatal
circumstances of the assumption itself) there happen to have been adjected to the Ruthven
patent, as is well known to experts, resolutive clauses of an extraordinary if not unique
character, involving, in a certain case, the loss of half the titles. It therefore appeared a
question, even to Riddell, whether, if the patent were rigidly construed, Breadalbane would
not indeed be now a " pseudo-earldom " ! So far, then, from there being a special inducement
to " register " (or rather to " registrate ") the patent, it was the very preservation of its con
tents that might prove fatal to the existence of the title.
Pass we at length to Burke's Peerage, the apologist's latest refuge. In limine (as
Mr. Carmichael would say), the point that here strikes us is the startling transformation
wrought in Ulster's account of this title. The old adaptation of Wood and Douglas had
comfortably done duty, year after year, until the appearance of the present edition, in which
the "wholesome and excellent results" ofthe scepticism displayed by Mr. Foster and myself
are seen in the disappearance of this venerable friend, and the substitution of an entirely
different story, and a carefully elaborated defence. As an illustration of this wonderful
volte face, I need only quote the two versions of the critical assumption, by female claimants,
on the extinction of the male line.
Burkfs Peerage, 1883. Burke's Peerage, 1884.
David, 2nd baron, a lord of the treasury, d. with- David, 2nd lord ... He entailed his estates,
out issue in 1701, when the barony devolved upon etc., etc. . . . Dying unm. 1701, he was s. by his
his niece, The Hon. Isabella Ruthven, as ist youngest sister Jean, who, as Baroness Ruthven
baroness. made up her titles to the estates, and whose right to
the peerage was unchallenged in her lifetime. She
d. unm. 1722, and the next holder ofthe title was her
niece, Isabel, Baroness Ruthven.
That is to say, that at this, the critical point of the whole, we are now asked to accept a
version differing in toto from that hitherto given us with unhesitating confidence! This
* Scotch Peerage Law p. 142. f Peerage Law, p. 1017. X Notes and Queries, 6th S-, viii., 151.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. 183

_>

would alone be significant enough, but when we come to such a phrase as " the next holder
of the title," we are tempted to smile at so painful an attempt to combine confidence with
caution.* It may also be observed that Jean, the first assumer, did not make up her titles
" as Baroness Ruthven," but having procured herself to be served heir as "Jean, Lady
Ruthven," petitioned to have the entail recorded as "Mrs. fean Ruthven." t
It should be observed that there is no allusion here to the earlier or later Coronation
Summons, once deemed so potent an argument. The explanation of this is as follows : —
Douglas proclaimed that the above Isabel " had letters as a Baroness to the coronation of
both King George I. and II." But now that it has been decided, if I may use the expression,
to " run " Jean as the " first baroness," it is obviously unadvisable to adduce such summons
of her niece " as a baroness " in her o .vn lifetime. But in any case the argument from the
coronation summons has been met and disposed of by Riddell.t It has moreover been
shown by me, that the evidence of such summons in proof of " possession " was founded in
vain, in 1733, by the titular " Viscount Oxenford," who unsuccessfully appealed to his
"summons to be present at the coronation of his present Majesty, which is super
scribed by his Majesty, and signed by the Earl of Sussex, depute Earl Marischal of England."§
This case is conclusive. It may be added, however, in further illustration of " the legal
insignificance " of such summons, that in England there had been summoned, as " Baroness
Cromwell," to the two preceding coronations, a lady who, as in the case of Ruthven, had
assumed the honours without right, on the extinction of the male line. It is important to
notice that in the English case, " the salutary check," as Riddell terms it, ofthe intervention
of a writ of summons operated in bar of the assumption of the title by that lady's son and
heir. In the Scottish case, there was no such check, and, consequently, the " usurpation ""
has been continued to our own day.
It will be found instructive, and not a little amusing, to compare the "lineage" which
has hitherto figured in Burke's Peerage under " Ruthven," with that which has now been
constructed for it. This latter commences" -with the imposing statement that — "This (sic)
historically famous family of Ruthven " is " Saxon by descent." As a matter of fact, " this "
family of Ruthven, during the century and a half of its separate existence, seems to have been
in no way " historically famous," that description applying exclusively to the other and elder-
House. Moreover, one would be glad to know what authority, if any, there is for the state
ment that the. family is " Saxon by descent," or whether the writer refers to a descent " before
the era of genuine history." But to confine ourselves to the assumption of the Ruthven
honours, we learn that the only argument here advanced beyond those with which we have
already dealt, is that of '
" the votes given without protest by the third and later lords at Holyrood, at a time when
every dubious vote was challenged."
To this Riddell loftily replied that " the legal insignificance of such circumstances " was.
" self-evident." || But as this, like the other "apologies" for the title, is here so skilfully
worded as to mislead the public, it is necessary that I should point out that so far from
" the third (alias " the fourth," alias " the fifth") Lord " having
"voted at nearly all the elections of representative peers after his succession in 1732 till his
death in 1783,"
as was positively asserted in the first instance, 1 we find, on testing this important statement,.
that there were some thirty elections within the above period, and that of these he only voted
at eleven, or about one out of every three ! The apologists have not again ventured on the
assertion which I had thus disproved,** but they repeat their dexterous argument that other-
wrongful votes " were challenged " ; tt whereas the Ruthven votes were " given without
protest, "tt To this I need only reply, as I replied before —

» The object of this phrase is the evasion of the fact that Sir W. Cunyngham survived his aunt, but did
not assume the title. His existence has always been a sore trouble to the apologists of this assumption. At one
time they asserted his mother to have died without issue. Then they simply ignored that issue. Lastly, they
now recognize his existence, but ignore the fact that he survived his aunt.
f Vide supra. X Scotch Peerage Law, p. 137. § Robertson's Proceedings, p. 137.
|| Scotch Peerage Law, p. 142. f Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 109.
** Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 292. tt •#'•! P- 23<J- tt Eurke's Peerage, 18S4.
B B

184 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.
" Wrongful assumptions were challenged in one of two ways— (i) by a counter-claimant,
as in Oxenford and Rutherford — this was the normal and more frequent method, but could
not apply to Ruthven, as there was no counter-assumption to raise the question ; (2) by the
vote happening to turn the scale at a contested election, as in Newark and Lindores. This
was a very exceptional method, and the only important occasion on which it was enforced
was the famous election of 1790, at which Lindores and Newark voted, but Ruthven (then a
minor) did not. We thus perceive that it was from special circumstances that the Ruthven
assumption escaped challenge, whereas in the above four cases these circumstances did not
exist.'**
It may be added, that on the very first occasion when Mr. James (Johnson) Ruthven voted
as Lord Ruthven at an election of Peers (21st September, 1733). tne name actually next on
the list is that of Lord Rutherford, under which title George Durie of Grange voted on
that occasion, without protest, although his assumption was a notorious imposture, and was
subsequently exposed through the accidental circumstance that in this case there was a
counter claimant, which there was not in the case of Ruthven.t So much, then, for this
misleading statement, of which I had exposed the fallacy months before.
In short, the whole of the elaborate "apology " that has now been inserted m Burke's
Peerage is itself the confession, however tardy and reluctant, that this titleis not as others.
Moreover, the significantly close resemblance between the lines of defence in the fournal of
Jurisprudence and in Notes and Queries, and between those in Notes and Queries and in Burke's
Peerage, can leave no reasonable doubt that they all proceed from the same quarter,^ and it
follows that the compiler of this elaborate defence must have been perfectly aware that his
" apologies " had been refuted over and over again. Therein lies my gravamen. From
the days of Douglas, this ancient " apology " has ever striven to elude our grasp by
assuming fresh metamorphoses, so that, when exposed in one, it may re-appear in another.
Its latest and most exalted appearance is beneath the official insignia oi Ulster, but there, too,
it must be hunted down : —
aXX rj toi irpama-Ta \itav yever ^vyeraos
airap areira Spdicwv /cat iropSaXts tjBk /xiyas avs
yiyvtro 8' vypbv vhtop kcll SefSpeov vij/nriTr]Xov.
r;/xeis 8* aore/-.<£«os Z^pp-tv tetXtjoti ^v/xu.§
It is, I repeat, against the compiler of this account that my present criticisms are directed,
for, as to Ulster himself, I am willing to believe that he may not be conversant with this
subject, and may have trusted to the " useful and interesting communications " of those
who profess themselves to be so. It is obvious, however, that in future editions this plea
will be available no longer.
Now what is the moral of this extraordinary case ? Does it not afford the most vivid
illustration of. the deplorable results of that unfortunate system, to which the majority^ of
Scotchmen, with unaccountable perversity, would still fondly cling ? Every well-meaning
effort of the English authorities to introduce a more rational and effective procedure has been
persistently thwarted and foiled. Passing over the earlier efforts of the Lords, including the
Order of 1739 (so imperfectly, as we have seen, obeyed), we find that in 1767, they formed
themselves into a Committee to consider the state of the Peerage, " so that the Crown
or this House may not incur the risk of being imposed upon by any ill-founded claim of
Peerage." [| On which Riddell observes : —
" There was, it must be admitted, great necessity for these steps. The Roll of the Scottish
Peers adopted since the Union being inaccurate and carelessly adjusted .... Owing there
fore to ... . the unre vised and exceptionable state and condition of that Roll, and want of a
peremptory form and due establishment of Peerage rights upon the demise of a Peer and
accession of his heir .... it has been practicable for any one, though a mere stranger, to
* Notes and Queries, 6th S., vii., 292 (14th April, 1883). t Robertson's Proceedings, p. 135, etc
X Take, for instance : —
Notes and Queries, 10th Feb., 1883. Burke's Peerage, 1884.
"The patent was not recorded in the Great Seal "The patent is unrecorded, and its precise terms
Register at the time. That omission was not after- are unknown, as it perished in 1750? when Freeland
wards remedied, and unfortunately the original Patent House was burned. Collateral proofs exist that heirs-
perished when Freeland House was burnt in 1750. female were not excluded, and there are grounds for
That the limitation was wider than to heirs-male surmising that a power of nomination," etc., etc.
of the body, and included heirs-general, or gave a
power of nomination," etc., etc.
§ Odyssey, iv. 459. || Lords' Journals.

THE BARONY OF RUTHVEN OF FREELAND. ' 185

answer and vote, under some vacant dignity at Peerage elections. Hence the late preposterous
intrusion and annoyance of the pseudo Earl of Stirling, and certain individuals as little
entitled, with untoward and perplexing consequences at least, that have been felt, a door
being thus opened, to use the purport of the resolution in 1767, for imposing upon the Crown
and the Peers by ill-founded claims." *
The source of the evil, as is well known, was
"That after inauguration or accessory solemnities of a Peerage constitution, there was no
parliamentary form by which its descent was articulately guarded or defined .... There
was the intervention of no writ of summons, as in England, individually to the heir of a
Peerage, on the demise of a predecessor, affording a salutary check to undue assumption and
usurpation." t
Passing over, for the moment, the Rpseberry Resolution (1S22), of which the principle
proved unsatisfactory in practice, we come to the Report of 1847, with these remarkable
expressions : —
"It is believed that the Peerage of Scotland is the only body invested with important
privileges in this kingdom, without any provision being made for testing the right of those
who may claim to exercise them ; whereby not only the dignity of this branch of the Peer
age is compromised, but the return of Representative Peers to the House of Lords may he
affected, and the public subjected to frauds by the conduct of persons acting as Peers of
Scotland, who are not justly entitled to the honours they assume. This state of things has
been long felt to be a great evil and grievance."
Coming down to the present day, we learn from the evidence before the Select Com
mittee (1882) that matters are not one whit better. The Lord Clerk Register admitted in
evidence that " As the law now stands, the title may be held for generations by persons who have never
taken any steps whatever to establish their claim." t
And even Lyon conceded that still
1 ' In Scotland there are individuals as to whom it may be a matter of dispute as to whether
they are Peers." §
And yet, now that efforts are at length being made to place matters on a better footing,
and to remedy this great, this admitted evil, we all know how these efforts have been received.
In the first place, the Scottish experts before the committee (I here refer to Messrs. Burnett
and Mackay) devoted themselves to the exaltation of the principle
"That, by the law of Scotland, titles of honour vest jure sanguinis without the necessity of
any formality or judicial proceeding on the part of the holder." ||
It is unnecessary to specify the cause of this devotion, and its connection with a certain
Peerage case. But attention may be called to the extraordinary evidence tendered on the
Roseberry Resolution, IT and to Lord Crawford's similar antipathy to that, "illegal" and
" outrageous Resolution," ** which cut the ground from under the precious doctrine, from
which alone, admittedly, springs this " great evil and grievance." In the second place, the
proposal to embody in a Bill the suggestion of the Lord Clerk Register himself that there
should be " a committee, appointed by the House of Lords to re-adjust the Union Roll," a
suggestion which had been received with " applause " by the assembled Peers at Holyrood,tt —
evoked a storm of patriotic wrath, and " a Protest signed by several peers of Scotland, and
by the gentleman who assumes the title of Earl of Mar," tt
* Peerage Law (1842), pp. 643-3.
t Ib. It will be remembered that, even in Ireland, no Peer can vote at elections of Representatives till he
has proved his right to do so.
X Minutes of Evidence, 71. § Ifi. \S$.
|| Report, par. 3. It would be interesting to learn whether Scottish Heralds would apply this charming
doctrine to courtesy titles of honour, and if they would not, on what ground the prefix " Honourable " is
assigned by Lodge, Dod, etc., to the sisters of " the present Peer," without "the necessity of any formality,"
such as that Precedency Patent, which has not hitherto been supposed to "vest jure sanguinis!"
f Vide supra, pp. 115-6. ** Earldom of Mar, IL, 158-9.
ft Scotsman, 23 Dec, 1876; Earldom of Mar, IL, 160.
XX Mr. Hewlett's letter to the Times (ante, p. 146).

*86 COLLECTANEA GENEALOGICA.

" Against the proposals embraced in the Lord Chancellor's Bill, now before Parliament,
by which power would for the first time in the history of Scotland be given to the Com
mittee of -Privileges to alter the Union Roll, which Roll was accepted at the Union." *
There is no accounting, of course, for tastes, but one would scarcely have imagined that any
Peers of Scotland would have shown themselves so anxious to retain the present unfortunate
system, — a system destitute of any "salutary check to undue assumption and usurpation," t
— or to preserve in what Riddell terms its " unrevised and exceptionable state " that " inaccu
rate and carelessly adjusted" Roll.t which they are pleased to proclaim "an authentic list"
and " the Constitutional Roll of the Scotch Peerage." Let me commend to their study the
words of that great lawyer, so infinitely better qualified than themselves to pronounce an
opinion on its worth : —
"The Union Roll, if truth and accuracy are to be here respected, and Peerage rights-
possess a tithe of that value and importance which they seem anciently to have done, calls
loudly for correction and amendment. It has been transmitted to us in no solemn or authentic
form, owing to the well-known hurry and distraction of the moment, when lesser interests
were sacrificed to greater, adopting the gross errors in the Decreet of Ranking in 1606, while it
is otherwise faulty and exceptionable, .... retaining, as it besides does, a copious list of
nonentities, through the insertion of extinct peerages. Previous to the Revolution, on a
Peerage ceasing to exist or only merging in another, an order was issued for its being
expunged from the Roll ; but this obvious and salutary step, which might exclude the preten
sions of impostors at elections of the Sixteen Peers, who have not been wanting on such
occasions, and reception of undue votes, with the attendant trouble and perplexity, has
latterly been omitted." §
I must not close this essay without emphatically observing that it is not intended to cast
the least blame, or to make any unfavourable reflection whatever on the conduct ofthe de
scendants of those by whom the honours were assumed. As was justly pointed out by Mr.
Freeman, in his essay on " Pedigrees and Pedigree-makers," we have no right to call for
criticism from those whose pedigree is in question. It is but natural and fitting that all men
should defend the inheritance which comes to them from their fathers. It is not to them that
the blame attaches. Those whose conduct is rightly impugned are the authorities whose duty it
surely is (if, that is, they have a duty at all) at least to call attention to so grave a scandal,
and to exert themselves to check it to the utmost of their power, rather than, by implication,
to defend and excuse it. And far more guilty are those whose offence is not one of
tfinission but of .wttmission, who though well acquainted, by their own confession, with the
true circumstances of the case, have shamelessly striven, as I have clearly shown, to mis
represent the facts and to obscure the truth. To them and to them alone is due the
appearance of the present paper. It was not till they had themselves raised the question by
two successive attacks upon Mr. Foster that their crudities were first exposed, and that not
by me. If the controversy which they so wantonly and ultroneously provoked should result
in disastrous consequences to that cause which was so unfortunate as to have them for its
champions, they will have themselves alone to blame for all that has happened.
" Non tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis
Tempus eget."
Lastly, it must be remembered that, in this paper, I have brought no new charge, I have
advanced no fresh thesis. I have but vindicated the views on this question that were
publicly enunciated by Riddell more than half a century ago. I have endeavoured to show
that the opposition to those views, so strangely revived among his own countrymen, is unable
to adduce any fresh arguments, and relies solely on those venerable " apologies " that he had
himself crushed in his giant grasp. If there be any subject which, in the interest of the
public, one is entitled to discuss fully and freely, it is surely such a question as this. For
this is no mere Academic controversy. The practical question is here raised, whether, in
the words of the Lords' Committee of 1847, "the public "is not in danger of being " sub
jected to frauds," and whether such steps should not at length be taken, as unquestionably
they can be taken even now, as will render such " frauds " impossible for all future time.
J. H. Round.
* " It is not declared by the Articles of the Union that the Union Roll is to be a fixed and established
standard, as above asserted ; so far from this, there is not a word upon the subject ; and, on the contrary, it has
both been altered and innovated upon on various occasions. Neither is that roll drawn up with exactitude."
— Riddell: " Scotch Peerage Law," p. 136.
t Riddell (Peerage Law, p. 644). J Ib. § lb. p. 171.
|| Through their connection with Burke's Peerage.

PEDIGREES CONTAINED IN THE
HERALDS' VISITATIONS
AND OTHER MANUSCRIPTS IN
THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Abaron_ri_, of Castle Cary, Somerset, 1141.
f. 122b. 1385. f. 40b. 1445. f. 169.
1559. f. 19*. Add. 12,477. f. ob.
Abarrow, of N. Chadforth, Hants, 1544. f. 175.
Abbitott, v. Sabbltott.
Abbington, of Overcompton, Dorset, fr. Kent,
888. f. 53A 1046. f. i8i_i. 1092.
f. 31b. ii53.'f. 7S*. u66.f.44_i. 1451.
i.736. 1539. f. 42. 2186. f. 21.
„ of Dodeswell, Glouc, fr. cos. Camb.
and Wore, 1041. f. 31. 1191. f. 26.
1543. ff. 22/.. 163.
„ of Brockhampton, co. Wore, 5814.
f. 243.
„ of Hindley, co. Wore, fr. Herefords.,
5841. f. 5.
Abbot, or, Abbott.
„ of Guildford, Surrey, 1046. f. 92.
1147. f. 135. 1397. f. 131. 1430. f. 141.
1433. f. 121. I56i.f. 79*. Add. 4963.
f. 157. 16,279. p. 443.
„ of Hartland, Devon, n 63. f. 113.
IS38. f. 4-
„ of Luffincott, Devon, 1 164. f. 39*$.
„ ofWraye,Devon, 1080. f. 202. 1 163.^23.
„ of London, 1476. ff. 204. 352.
„ of Salisbury. Add. 24,458. f. 280.
„ — Kent, fr. Surrey. Add. 16,279. P- 443-
„ or, Aletb, Cornwall, 4031. f. 79*.
Abbys, of Buxton, Norfolk, 1 1 77. f. 1 72b . 1552.
f. 138. 4755- f- 73- 5189. f. 64. 6093.
f. 173. Add. 19,816. f. 56.
Abdey, of East Mailing, Kent, fr. co. York.
1548. f. 1425. Add. 5532. p. 157.
„ — Derbys, 2109. f. 36. 4600. p. 30.
„ —Kent, 1548. f. 3. 4108. f. 64.
Abdy, of London, fr. co. York, 1444. f. 13. Add.
5533. p. 22.
„ of Kingston-upon-Thames, fr. co.
York. 1046. f. 66. 1 147. f. 103b. 1430.
f. 108b. 1433- f- 37<*- 1397- f- 104*.
1561. f. 155- Add. 4963. f. 1303.
Abeeu, of London, 1476. f. 231b. Add. 5533.
p. 231.
Abeii, of London, fr. Northants, 1476. f. 337.
„ of Bungay, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
f. 13.

Aberle, see Abraball.
Abington, — Herts, 1043. f. 30. 1352. f. 4. i486.
{.3b.
Abney, of Willesley, co. Derby, 1537. fl 26*.
1093. f. 62_>. 6104. f. 89.
„ of Leicester, 11 80. f. 108. 1 187. f. ogb.
1189, f. 663. 1431. f. 58. 6183. £ n*.
„ of Newton, co. Leicester, 1180. f. 107.
1189. f. 66-5. 1431..: 58. 6183. £11*.
6125. S. iod. no.
„ of Audley, co. Staff, 6104. £ 1.
Abot, v. Aletb.
Abraba.ll, of Abrahall, co. Heref., 1081. f. 42.
H39.f. 126. 1140. ff. 453. 104*. 1159.
ff. 45*. 58*. 1442. f. 45*. 1532. f. 118.
1545. ff. 53_>. 86. 115. Add. 19,815.
f. 39*.
„ of London, fr. Herts, 1476. £ 133 b.
,, — co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 27. 42. 70. 1543.
£68.
A'Brett,— v. Brett.
Abtofte, — Derbys. Egert. 996. £ 41*.
Acciom, of Moreby, Yorks, 805. f. 3. 1394. p. 70.
1415. £ 72. 1420. ff. 55_>. 103*. 1487.
£ 200*. 1499. £ 37_\ Add. 18,011.
£ 74A
Art-am, of Pelynt, Cornwall, 1079. £ 19*.
Acbeson, of Gosford Castle, co. Armagh, Bart.
Add. 23,693. ff. 15, 16.
Acborne, — Kent, 1084. f. 134. 1 135. £ 120. 1406.
£ no.
Ackett, V. Hackett.
Ackiand, of Goodley and Hawkridge, Devon,
1080. f. 51. 1 163. ff. \oob. 135*. 1164.
£ 6.
„ ofChittlehampton, Devon, 1 163. £ 53*.
Ackworth, of Lawford, Essex, 1137. £ 24. 1432.
£ 16*.
Acres, — Lancashire, 1553. £ 107*.
Acton, of Weaverham, Cheshire, 21 19. £ 239.
„ of Acton, co. Glouc, 1041. ff. ob. 10.
46. '
„ of Burton and Langhope, co. Glouc,
1 543- * 9°-
„ of West Haddon, Northants, 1094.
£29*. n84.f. 20b. n87.f. 51. 1188.
p. 61. 1553. £ 65*. 6066. £ 78. B

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Acton, of Aldenham, Salop (Lord Acton),
615. ff. 22o/>. 228. 1396. f. 16. 1472.
f. 5. 1982. ff. 775. 153. 6172. f. 7b.
Add. 14,314. ff. 7^620. 20,017. f. 115*.
„ of Acton Scott, Salop, 1241. £ 14*.
1396. £ 17. 1472. f. 5... 1982. £ 148.5.
6172. f. 6b. Add. 14,314. f. 63. 21,017.
ff. 96*. 97.
„ ofRibbeford, co. Wore, 1043. £ 17.
1352. £ 4*. i486. £ ib. 1566. £ 36*.
5814. ff. 7b. 8. Add. 12,479. *• 71-
19,816. £ 107*.
„ of Sutton, co. Wore, 1982. £ 67.
5814. ff. ib. 2. Add. 19,816. £ 106.
„ of Acton and Amersley, co. Wore,
1043. £ 32b. 1077. £ 62. 1 1 73. £ 54.
1566. £ 156*. 1415. £ 119. 1439.
f- 37- 1570. £ 60. 6128. £ 43. Add.
12,479. f- 23b.
„ of Bockleton, co. Wore, 1043. ff. 23.
26 (a. b.) 1352. ff. ifi. 24. i486, f. ib.
1566. £ 36*. 5814. ff. 7b. 8. Add.
12,479. ff. 243.71. 19,816. f. 104*.
., of West Aston, co. Wicklow. Add.
23.693. £ 19.
„ — Yorks, 1487. f. 102&
„  12109. i.dib.
Adair, Lord Waveney. Add. 19,114. £ 36.
23.693- f- 26.
Adam, of Tydd St.Giles's, I. of Ely, 1043. f. 95*.
1401.fr. 37*. 81. 1534. ff. 50*. 105.
6769. £ 29. 6770. £ 51. 6774. f. 100.
6775. £ 101. Add. 4962. ff. 34. 76*.
„ of Maryburgh, co. Kinross. Add.
14,836. ff. 250. 251.
„ or, Polgwest, co. Camb., 1079. f. 168.
1 142. f. 164. 1 149. £ 164. 1 162. f. 166.
Adams, of Fenne, Devon, 1399. £ 115.
„ of Saffron Walden, Essex, 1541.
£ 202. ...
„ of Ely, 1 187. £37.
„ of Welton, Northants, 1094. £ 179&
1184. £ 174*. 1553. £110*.
„ of Cleeton and Kaynham, Salop, 615.
£234. I24i.£ 19*. 1472. £7. 1982.
£ 151. Add. 14,314. f. 84.
„ of Longdon, Salop, fr. Kent, 615.
ff. 229^.234. 1241. £ 42. 1396. £ \ob.
1472. £ 1. 1982. £ 162. 6172. f. 7.
Add. 14,314. f. 63b.
„ oi the Moor, Salop. Add. 14,314.
£ 130-
„ of Cambleforth, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 176*.
„ of Worsborough, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£207.
„ ofOwston, Yorks, 1487. £40315. 4630.
p. 1. Add. 26,739. f. 19.
„ pf New Romney, Hants, 5829. £ n.
„ — London, 1476. f. 215*.
„ — London, fr. Salop, 1445. f. II. 1476.
£ 142. Add. 5533. p. 20.
„ —Staff., I24i.f. 141. 1396. £12. 1472.
£ 2. 6128. £ 103.
Adamson, of Haldworth Bank, co. Derby. Add.
24.458- f- l5o-

Adcock,— Warwick, 1167. f. 44*-
Adderiey, of Blackhaugh, Staff., 1077. ff.35. 365.
1173. f. 2&(a. _>.). 1415. f. 114- 1439-
ff. 7b. 51. 1570.fr. 10. 8i/5. 6104. f. ib.
6128. £25. 21 13. f. 90.
„ of Coton, Staff., 1570. ff- 10. 53*. 1077.
£ 36b. 6060. £ 19. 6104. f. 2.
„ or, Alderley, of Waddington, War-
wicks., fr. co. Staff., 1100. £ 83. 1167.
f. 931.. 1563. ff. 114*. 235*. 6060. f. 19.
„ of Chesterfield. Add. 24458. f. 244*.
„ of Innishannon, co. Cork. Add.
23.693. f- 30-
Addington, of Leigh, Devon, fr. London, 1080.
£ 7b. 1 163. £ 182.
Addison, of Chilton Hall, Suff. Add. 1 9, 1 14. f. 49.
Adeane,of Wallingford, Berks, 2156.fr. 97»_. 98.
Adlce, of Fortmarnock, co. Dublin. Add.
23,693. £ 23.
Adkins, of Northampton and Overston, North
ants, 1094. f. 197. 1 184. £ 192. 1553.
£ 139*.
Arlington, of Adlington," Lane, 891. f. 93.
1437. f. 117. 1468. f. 28*. 1549. £ i8<5.
2086. £ 63. 6159. f. ob.
Adwick, of Ardsey, Yorks. Add. 24,458. £ 33 ib.
Adye, or, Hayday, of Weston, Hereford, fr.
London, n 40. £ io_». 1159. f. 10b.
1442. £ 10*. 1545- £ 15*. 1546. £ 10b.
„ of Southwark, Surrey, fr. Kent, 1046.
£47. 1 147. £ 69. 1397. £85. 1430.
£ 7b. 1433. £ 74.". 1 561. f. 133. Add.
4963. £ 90*5. 12,478. £ 276.
Adya, of London, fr. co. Heref., 1476. f. 14315.
Affleck, of Dalham, Suffolk (Bart). Add. 19, 114.
f- 53-
Afibrdby, of Billesley, co. Line, 1097. ff. 78b. 82b.
1 190. ff. 3i_i.49_\ 1484. £ i5_>. 1550.
f. 53-
de Affreton, Baron of Norton, 4204, f. 44*..
Agar, Visct. Clifden, &c. Add. 14,839. ff. 166.
167. 168. 23,693. ff. 11. lib.
Agard, of Foxton, co. Derby, 1537. £ 41b.
Egert. 996. f. 60.
„ of Sudbury, co. Derby, 8io.f'j2b. 886.
£62. io93.f. 54. 1415. f. 134*. 1537.
ff. 42. 1 1 2b. 21 13. £. 106b. 6104. f. 88.
Egert. 996. £ 60.
„ of Broughton, Northants, 1553.
f. 260*.
Agaunt, of Cardiff, 155. f. 14. 1 177. f. 593.
1449. £ 79.
Ager, v. Ancber.
Agmondisha-n, of Heston, Middx., 1551. f. 93*5.
Add. 4964. f. 94*3,
„ of Rowbarnes, Surrey, 1147. f. 89.
1430. f. 94. 1433. f. i8r_i. 1 561. f. 47«
Add. 14,311.. £47.
„ of Petworth, Sussex, 1562, f. in.
5839. £88.
Agnis, &c, — Suffolk. Add. 19,114. £ 75.
Aguiiion (a rebellious baron). Add. 19,114. £ 77-
Aikin, of London, &c: Add. 24,458. f. 45^.
Aikman, of Cairny and Brambleton, N.B.
Add. 14,837. £ 107.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Ainslie, of Pilton, n.b. Add. 14,836. £ 297.
Ailesbury, v. Aylesbury.
Ainswortb, of Plessington, co. Lane, 1437.
£ 84. 1468. £ 71*. 1549. £ 17b. 2086.
£ 31. 6159. £ 8b.
„ oi Blackburn, co. Lane, and of Lon
don, 4204. £ 155*.
Atskeii, of Warcop, Westmorland. Add. 24,458.
£ 163m.
Aislabie, of Rotherham and London. Add.
24,458. £ 48*.
Ake, v. Aske.
Akeland, of Morley, Surrey, 1 561. £ 218.
Akeroyd, of Foggathorpe, Yorks, 1487. £ 455*.
„ of Halifax. Add. 24,458. f. 244*.
Alabaster, — Devon, 3288. £ 149. 5185. f. 5.
„ of Hadleigh, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
£ 87.
de Aibaianda, — Cornwall, 1164. £ 66.
Albainer- Cheshire, 1535. £ 288*.
Aibaney, of Kingsholme, co. Gloucester, 1041.
£ 55*. 1385. f. 72. 1559. £ 103.
„ of London, 1463. £ 26.
Albany, — Salop, 1046. 17*. 1397. £ 55*. 1420.
£45*. 1433. £52*. 1561. f. 24.
„ ofWhittington, Salop, fr. peds, 1241.
- £ 59_\ 1396. £ 13. 1472. £ 3.
„ of Bagshot, Surrey, 1 147. £ 42. 1397.
£ 55*. 1430. £ 45*. 1433. £ 52*. 1561.
£25.
„ of Oxsted, Surrey, fr. London, 1046.
£18. 1 147. £ 42(5. 1397. £ 56. 1430.
£46. 1433. f. 52.5. i56i.f.24.
de Aibinl, Earl of Arundel. Add. 19,1 14. £ 96.
Aichorne, of Catsfield, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076.
\ £34*. 1084. £97. 1 1 35. £83. 1194.
\f. 76. 1406. £39. 1562. f. 166-5. 5829.
\£ 149. 6164. £ 67.
„ \of Boughton," Kent, fr. Sussex, n 06.
£ 95*. 1432. £ '237. Add. 5507. p. 217.
5526. p. 174. 23,750. £2.
Alcock, of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. i.yob. Add.
19,114. £ 104.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1476. £ 412.
„ of Mansfield. Add. 24,458. f. 244*.
„ of Canterbury, 5528. £ 1 57*.(«w.)
„ of Burdwood, Surrey. Add. 23,695.
£ 131.
„ of Wilton, co. Wexford. Add.
23,693. ff. 20. 21. 23,700. £ 138.
„ — Cambridge,i_94. £105. 1562. £8*.
Aidam, of Warmsworth, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 266*.
Aiday, or, Aide, of Chequer and Sandwich,
Kent, 1106. £ 32*. 1432. £ 193k 1548.
£ 82*. 2198. f. ii7(5. 5528. £ 100*.
Add. 5507. p. 87. 16,279. P- 422.
Aldburgb, of Aldburgh, Yorks, 805. ff. 4 to 6(5.
1394- PP- I39- J92- I4I5- f- 21. 1420.
ff. io2(5. i4i<*- 1487- n". 95*. 234. 1499.
f. 34- 463°- P- 3- Add. i4.3°9- f- 42.
18,011. £ i6o_\ 26,739. ff- 20. 20*.
Aidcroft, of Manchester. Add. 24,458. £ 31 5.
Aid eby, or, Adelby*— Suffolk, 1449. £ 12*. 1484.
£42. 1560. £16.

Aidelyme,- — Cheshire, 1535. £40*.
Aldelyn, als. Traylebewe, of Worc. Add.
19,816. f. loib.
Aiden, of Newton Longvile, Bucks, 1 102. £ 38*.
1 1 51. f. 37*. 1 193. £ 38(5. 1234. £ 5*.
1391. £ 41*. 1533. £ 127*.
Alder, of Alnwick, Northumberland, 1 1 53. f. 56-'.
1448. £50*. 1554. £ 1 195.
Aiderford, of Salford and.Somerford, Warwick,
fr. co. Wore, 1 100. £ 250. 1167. £ 17*.
1563. £ 41*. 6060. £ 38.
„ of Knightwick, Wore, fr. co. War.,
1043. f. 29. 1352. £ \b. i486, f. 1.
1566. £ 93*. 5814. £ 22*. 5841. f. 2b.
Add. 19,876. £ 107.
Alderley, v. Adderley.
Alderman, of Belstead, Suff. Add. 19,114.
£io8-(;..).
Aidersey, of Aldersey, Cheshire, 774. f. 16. 1045.
£ 97*. 1424. £ 10. 1505. £ 10. 1535.
ff. 39-1. 219A 2119. ff. 32. 34_». 2142.
£ 78*. 2187. f. 16. 2230. £ 32. Add.
5529. p. 2.
„ of Chester, 21 19. ff. 32b. 346. 35*.
2142. £ 78*.
„ of Horton, Cheshire, 21 19. f. 35.
„ of Spurstow,Cheshire, 1424. £9.5. 1505.
f. ob. 1535. £39. 2119. ff. 32*. 33*.
37. 2142. ff. 48b. 78b. 2187. f. 16.
2230. £32. Add. 5529. p. 2. 29,782. £67.
„ of Bredgar and Sutton Valence, Kent,
fr. Chesb. 1 106. £ 1S0. 1432. £ 295.
Add. 5507. p. 36S. 5526. p. 375.
23.75°- f- 3-
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1476. £ 160&.
Alderson, of Eckington, co~ Derby. Add.
24458. £ 159.
„ of Lowestoft. Add. 19,114. £ 114.
Aldestrey, of Staff., 1439. f. 28.
„ — Derby, Egerton, 996. f. 8o_>.
Aidbam, of Shimpling, Norfolk, and Brome,
Suffolk, 1 177. f. 121. 1552. £ 46. 1560.
£ 312. 5189. f. 35*. 4755. f. 18*.
6093. p. 44. 6166. p. 49. Add. 11,388.
p. 69.5. 14,309. f. 114. 19,114. £ 121.
19,816. f. i6(5.
Aldous, of Huntingfield, Suff. ' Add. 19,114.
£ 127.
Aidred, of Foulmire, co. Cambs, 6830. p. 76.
„ of Rotherham, Yorks. Add. 244.58.
£8.
Aidrieb.of Man Green, Norfolk, 1552. f. 2461?.
4756. f. 45-
„ of Norwich, 1552. ff. 59*. 246*.
„ of Hesset, Suff. Add. 19,114. £ 133.
„ of Rumburgh. Add. 19,114. f. 133.
„ of Stowmarket- Add. 19,114. £ 133.
Aldwarke, of Aldwarke, Yorks, 4630. p. 2. Add.
26,739. f- '9*-
Aidwortb, of Rushcombe, Berks, 1483. f. 691?.
153a f. 46*. 1532. f. 112. 6173. £4.
Add. 14,284. p. 35.
„ Visct. Doneraile. Add. 23,687. f. 52*.
23,693. £ 13.
Alefounder, of Ipswich. Add. 19,1 r4- f- 151.
B 2

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS' VISITATIONS

Aleigb, v. leigb.
Aleman, of Stadley, Yorks. Add. 26,739. f- 29-
Alen, or, Allen, of St. Wolstan's, co. Dublin
(Bart.) Add. 23,684. £ 58. 23,693. f. 10.
Aletb, or, Abot, — Cornwall, 4031. f. 70b.
Alexander, of Winstanton, Cheshire, fr. Kent,
774. f. i6_>. 1045. £ i09->. 1424. £ 10b.
1505. £ 10b. 1535. £ 40. 2119. £ 122.
2187. £ 15. 2230. £ 31*. 5182. p. 4.
Add. 29,782. £ 7.
„ of Winchester, 1544. £ 164*.
„ of Baddingham, Suff. Add. 19,114.
£ 161.
„ of Ipswich, 19,114. £ 161.
Alford, of Hall Place, Berks, fr. Bucks, 1076.
£69. 1084. £139. 1 135. £125. 1406.
£ 115. 1532. £ 73. 1562. £ 194*.
4109. £ 64. 6173. f- 4h. Add. 4961.
£ 57. 14,283. £ 57.
„ of Sussex, fr. Berks and York, 1076.
£69. 1084. £139. 1135. £125. 1406.
£115. 1562. £194*. 4109. £64.
„ of Meux, Yorks, fr. co. Denbigh, 1076.
f. 69. 1084. £ 139. 1 135. £ 125. 1406.
f. 115. 1487. £ 432<5. 1562. f. 194*.
4109. £ 64.
„ — London, 1560. f. 84.
„ — London, fr. co. Warw., 1476. £ 408*.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. f. 46.
,, — Sussex. Add. 19,114. £ 180.
Aifreton, — Derby, 21 19. £ 129b.
„ — Notts, 1082. ff. 65b. 66. 1400. f. 71.
21 19. £ 129b.
Alft-ey, of Gulledge, Sussex, 1076. £ 186(3.-'.).
6164. ff. 27*. 28.
„ of Guestling and Potmans, Sussex,
1076. £ 149(5. 1084. £ 60. 1 135. £ 46.
1 194. £ 39. 1562. £ 131*. 1406. f. 10.
4109. £ 54. 5829. £ 100. 6164. f. 85*.
Alicock, of Sibbertoft, Northants, from Staf
fordshire, 1094. f. 204*. 1 184. f. 199*.
1 187. £ 14. 1188. p. 9. 1553. £ 146.
Allngton, of Suffolk, 1484. £ 45. 4204. ff. 52.
106*. Add. 19,816. £ 83.
„ of Westley, Cambs, 1043. £ 104A
1187. £ 63. 1188. p. 85. 1401. ff. 1*
80*. 1534. ff. ob. 102b. 6769. f. 5.
6770. ff. 8*. 9. 6774. £ 18. 6775. f- io.
6830. pp. 5. 36. Add. 4962. ff. ib. 2.
„ of Horsheath, Cambs, and Swinhope,
Line, &e, 2156. ff. 67. to 69. Add.
19,114. f. 206, &c.
„ — Cheshire. Add. 5529. p. 3.
Alkington, of Oswestry, Salop, 1241. f. 61.
1396. £ 14*. 1472. £ 9. Add. 14,314.
£ 23.
Allan, of Stutton, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
£i83.(;;..)
„ of Framsdon, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
£ 183.
AUanson, of London, from co. pal. Durham,
1463. £68. '
„ of Bramham, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 222.
„ of Middlesex, 1096. f. 12S. 1476. £429.

Aiiardice, of Aberdeen. Add. 23,686. f. 26*.
Allen, v. Alen.
„ Viscount. Add. 14,839- f- "r-
„ of Borden, Kent, 1 106. £17*. 1432.
£ 182. 1553. £ 170. 2I98- f- 102*.
6104. £ 89. Add. 5507. P- 59- 5526.
p. 30.
„ of Sheppey, Kent, 5528. £ 151.
„ of Bures, Suffolk. Add. 19,114. f- 184.
„ of Grantham, fr. co. Staff., 1097.
£59. 1 190. f. 23. 1484. f. 23. 1550.
£ 149*.
, of Burrow, co. Leic, 1180. £ 144*.
1 189. £ 1 io*. 1 195. f- 76- H3>- f- 102-
6125. ff. 82b. 1016. in. 6183. ff. 75*.
121.
„ of Croxton, co. Leic, 11 80. f. 148*.
1 189. £ 112. 1431. £ 103*. 6125.
£104. 6183. f. n8_5.
„ of Whetstone, co. Leic, 1180. £73.
1 187. £122*. 1 189. £53*. 1431- f- 45-
6125. ff. 82. 118. 6183. £75.
„ ofWrainton, Somerset, i_4i.f. 103.
1445. £ 142. 1559. £ 328*.
„ of Brindley, Cheshire, 1535. £ 41b.
6104. £ 12.
„ of Trevaldwyn, Salop, fr. Staff.,
1 241, £ 132. 1396. £ 15.
„ of Berkhampstead, Herts, 1433.
£21*. 1504.fi. 59*. 100. 123. 1546.
£ 44*. 6147. £ 46.
„ of Standon, Herts, 1504. ff. 100. 123.
„ of Streatley, Berks, 1483. £ 72*.
1530. £ 52*. Add. 14,284. p. 53.
„ of Brokehouse, co. Staff., n>3.
£ 1020. 6128. £ 17*. /
„ oi Mansfield Woodhouse, Notts. Add.
24,458. £ 304. /
„ of Greenhead, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£51*.
„ of Palmerstown, Ireland. Add.
23,693. £ 17.
„ —co. Cambridge, 1043. £ 77. 1534.
£ 81*. Add. 4962. £ 57.
„ — London, 1096. ff. 38. 61. 1463.
ff. 36. 30.
„ — Hants, 1476. £ 414*.
„ —Staff., 1077. £ lb. 1 173. £ 66.
1415. f. 106b. 1570. £ 23b.
„ or, AUeyn, of Farnham, Suffolk,
155. £19*. 891. £20. 1560. £191*.
„ or, AUeyn, of Calne, Wilts, fr.
Suffolk, 888. £ 23. 1111. £ 87*.
1 181. £ 36. 1443. £ 212*. 1565. £ 38.
5184. p. 31.
„ or, Aleyn, of Dulwich, Surrey, fr.
Bucks, 1046. £58. 1 147. £ n. 143°-
£ 12. 1433. £ 85-5. gib. 1307. £ 9°-
1561. £ 150*. Add. 4963. ffi. 14*. 15-
12,478. £ 36.5.
„ or, Alleyne, of Willen, Bucks,
1234. £13. 1533. £194.
Alle st on, — Northants, 1480. £ 56.
AUestry, of Alveston, co. Derby, 6104. £ 88*.
Egert. 996. £ 80*. Add. 24458. £ 250*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

AUett, of Iwood, Somerset, fr. co. Line, 1141.
f. 115. 1445. f. 159. 1559. f. 244.
AUeyn, v. Alien.
„ of Bampton, Devon, fr. Suff., 1080.
£306. 1 163. £200*.
„ of Hatfield, Essex, 1083. £ 67. 1137.
£129. 1432. £135*. i54i.f.79. 1542.
£ 186. 6065. £ 127.
„ of Haseleigh, Essex, 1542. f. 23b.
„ of Eastfield, Essex (Bart.) Add.
14,290. £ 92.
„ of Whiston, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
£ 249.
Alleyne, or, AUen, of Little Leighs, Essex
(Bart), 1 1 37. £ 68*. 1 140. £ 24*. 1 1 59.
£24*. 1432. £61*. 1442. £ 24.". 1545.
£35. Add. 19,114. £ 194.
„ of Haldesley, Essex. Add. 19,815.
f. 20*.
of Icklingham, Suffolk. Add. 19,1 14.
£ 190.
„ —r(AUyn), Line Add. 14,311. £ 96.
AUin, V. Anguish.
Allison, of Pardsey Hall, Cumberland, 1536.
£ 29.
„ of Hastingleigh, Kent, fr. Essex, 1548.
£65.
„ —Yorks. Add. 24458. £ 88b.(m).
Aiimery, of London, fr. Lincolnshire, 1476.
f- 315-
Allot, of Thurlow Parva, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
£ 246.
„ of Bentley, Yorks, &e, fr. co. Derby,
4630. p. 5. Add. 24,458. £ 113*.
26,739. ff. 21. 21*.
„ of Criggleston and Conisbro', Yorks.
Add. 24458. ff. 113*. to 115. 26,739.
£ 20*.
„ of Bilham Grove, co. Yorks. Add.
24,458. £114.
„ of Micldefield and Greenfield, Suffolk.
Add. 24,458. £ 113*.
„ — Line, 1097. £ 73. 1484. £ 12.
All win, — Salop, 1 24 1. f. 80.
Ally, or, Aiye, of Gussage St. Andrew, Dorset,
888. £ 41*. 1046. £ 225. 1092. f. 19*.
1 153. £ 73. 1 166. f: 67. I45i.£ 106.
1539. £ 10*. 2186. £ 9.
Aimack, of Melfort, Suffolk. Add. 19,114. £ 247.
Aiman, of Pevensey, Sussex, 1076. £42. 1135.
£ n*. 1 194. £ 5*. 1406. £ 4*. 1562.
£ 81. 6164. £ 50.
„ of Warbleton, Sussex, 1084. £ 26.
1 135. £ 12. 1 194. £ 6. 1406. f. 5.
1562. £ 80*. 5829. f. 74*.
Aime,— Kent, 1548. £ 168.
Aimer,— Cheshire, 1535- f-3i-
Almey, of Badby, [Northamptonshire, fr. co.
Leic, 1094. £ 184*. 1184. £ 179*.
1553. £ 114.
Almott, of Creding All Saints, Suffolk. Add.
19,114. f- 249-
Ainote,— co. Cambridge, 1401. £ 15*. 1534-
£ 91.

Alpbe, — Hants, fr. London, 1139. f. 27*. 154-)..
f. 92.
Aipbe, — London, n 39. f. 27*. 1544. f. 92.
Alpbew, of Boreplace, Kent, 1 548. f. 1 10. Add.
5532. p. 41. 16,279. p. 432.
Alport, of Cannock, Staff., 6104. £ 2*.
„ of Overton, Cheshire, 1535. £ 237.
Alpram, — Cheshire, 1045. f. 107. 1505. £ 10*.
1535. £40. 5182. p. 3. Add. 5529. p. 1.
Aired, v. Alured.
„ of Tannington, Suffolk, 1560. £ 187*.
Alsop, of Alsop, — Derby, 1093. £ 99. 1 1 53. £ 93.
1537. f. 107*. 4106. f. 90*. 6592. £ 29*.
Egert. 996. f. 49*. Add. 24458. ff. 190*.
250*.
„ of Butterley, Derby, Egert. 996.
£ 59*.
„ of Markfield, Leic, fr. co. Derby,
1180. f. 69. 1187. f. 121*. 1189. £84.
1 195. £ 91*. 1431. f. 75*. 6125.
ff. 70*. in. 6183. f. 71*.
„ of Shiercliffe Hall, Yorks. Add.
24458. £ 236.
„ of Hognorton, Staff., 6128. £ 65.
Aisopp, of London, fr. co. York, 1463. £ 59.
Alston, of Odell or Woodhall, Beds, fr. Suff.,
1390. ff. 25**. 26*. 1531. £ 162*. 4600.
p. 69*. Add. 19,114. £ 257.
„ of London, fr. co. Suff., 1476. £ 135*.
„ of Topesfield, Essex, fr. Suff., 1542.
£ 73*-
Altbam, of Markhall, Essex, fr. co. York, 1541.
£ 191*.
„ of Acton, Middx., fr. co. York, 1551.
£ 117*.
„ of Oxe'y, Herts, fr. co. York, 1546.
£ 138*.
Alured, or, Aired, of Kingston-upon-Hull, fr.
Suff., 1394. p. 95. 1415. f. 81*. 1420.
ff. 31*. 72*. 1487. f. 242*. Add. 18,01 1.
£ 91*. 24,458. £ 239*.
„ of New Hall, Yorks, 805. f. 7.
Al ward, of Ipswich. Add. 19,114. f. 290. &c
Alway, of Streatley, Beds, fr. Devon, 1080.
£ 356*. 1097. f. 31*. 1390. f. 20*. 1531.
£13. 2109. f. 28*. 4600. p. 40. 5186.
p. 4. Lansd. 864. p. 40.
Alwood, of Chesterfield, &e Add. 2445S.
f. 40*.
Alwoodley, of Alwoodley, Yorks. Add. 26,739.
£ 29*.
Aiye, of Tewkesbury, co. Glouc, fr. co. Wore,
1041. f. 105*. 1543. £141*.
Amadis,— Devon, 1538. £ 279*. 3288. ff. 157*.
173. 5185. £5*.
AmbervHe,— K.ent, 1548. £ 71*.
Ambrose, of Ambrose Hall, co. Lane, 891.
£ 80*. 1468. f. 52. 1549. f. 18. 2086.
£46. 6159. £9.
Amcotts, of Astrop and Were Temple, co. Line,
1097. £ 108*. 1 190. £ 94*. 1484.
£31*. 1550. £ 159*.
„ of Lincoln. Add. 14,309. ff. 80*.
81*.
A-Meredlth, see Meredith.

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Amery, v. Emery.
Amherst, of Bayhall, Sussex, fr. Ken* 1076.
£ 177. 1084. £ 117. 1135. £ 103
1 194. f. 96. 1406. £ 61. 1562. £ 176*.
4109. f. 65*. 6164 f. 20.
Amore, — Berks, 1532. f. 46*. 6173. f. 7. Add.
4961. £ 6S. 14,283. f. 68.
Amory, V. Damerle, Damory.
„ of London, fr. Devon. Add. 5533.
p. 184
„ of Bunratty, co. Clare. Add. 23,693.
£ 23.
Amy, of Abbington, Cambs, 1043. £ 101*. 1401.
£ 45. 1504. £ 94*. 1534. £ 60. 6769.
£ 36. 6770. £ 65. 6774 £ 61. 6775.
£ 45. 6830. p. 113. Add. 4962. £ 41*.
Amyas, of Netherton, York, 805. £ 8. 4630. p.
18. Add. 26,739. ff- 28*. 29.
„ of Reepham, Norfolk, 1552. £ 198.
„ of Repps, Norfolk, 4756. £ 75*.
,, of Henstead and Beccles, Suffolk.
Add. 19,114 £.302.
Amyce, of Tilbury, Essex, from co. Somerset,
1 137. £43. 1432. £34*. 1484. £57. 1541.
£20.
Amydas, of London, 1 137. £ 22*. 1432. £ 15.
1 541. £ 217*.
Amye, of London, 1504. £ '94*.
Amys, of Rickinghall, Suffolk. Add. 19,114.
£ 306.
Anderson, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1 153. £ 42*.
1 168. £48*. 1397. £ 245*. 1540. £ 130.
„ ofNewcastle-on-Tyne,ii53.ff. 53. 55*.
1171. £ 45. 1448. ff. 22*. 46. 1554.
ff. 13. 53*. 108. Add, 12477. ff. 13*.
\\.(a. b.)
,, of Penley, Herts, fr. London, 1546.
£ 90*. 6147. £ 55.
„ of Broughton, co. Line, 1550. f. 216*.
„ — Sussex, 1562. £ 45.
„ — Beds, 1487. £ 238*.
Anderton, of Anderton, co. Lane, 1468. £ 53*.
1549. £ 21*. 2076. £ 14*.
Andrew, of Rotby, co. Warwick, fr. Northants,
1100. £ 65*. 1167. £ 62*. 1563. £ 85*.
6060. £ 115.
„ of Charwelton, Northants, &c, 2156.
ff.78. 78*. 6066. ff. 38*. 39.
„ of London, fr. co..Wore, 1476. £ 337*.
„ of Lathbury, Bucks, fr. Herts, 1102.
£36. 1 139. £139*. 1 1 51. £34*. 1 193.
£36. 1429. £70. 1533. £68*. 5832.
£11. 5181.P.76. 5833.£68*. 5868.f.4*.
„ or, Andrewes, of Hitchin, H erts, 1 504.
£73. 1546. £71.
Andrews, of Awston, Devon, 1399. £ 116.
„ of Hambury, co. Worc, 1043. £ 14.
1352. £ 1. i486. £ 2*. 1566. £ 23.
5814. £ 3^- 5841- f- 1. Add. 19,816.
£ 109.
„ of Longdon, Wore, fr. Northants,
1566. £ 154*.
„ of Ryburgh, Norfolk, fr. Suff., 1177.
£ 143*. 1552. ff. 81*. 83*. 4755. £ 46.
5189. £ 47- 6093. p. 117. Add. 19,115.
£ 2. 19,816. £ 35.

Andrews, of Darcy Lever, co. Lane Add. 23,686-
f . 40.
„ of Baylam, Suffolk, 155. £ 59- 1177-
£ 28. 1 149. f. 32. 156°- f- 33-
„ of Bury St. Edmunds, 15;. £ 53*.
891. £ 19. 1 103. f. 25. 1177- f- 24*.
1449. £ 29*. 1569. £ 30.
„ of London, 1077. £ 44- io94- ff 85*.
86. 87*. 1 173. £ 36*. 1 184. ff. 82*. 83.
84-5. 1444. £ 77*- *463- f- 5*- I553-
ff. 214. 215*. 1570. £ n. 6128. f. 42.
„ of London, 1476. £ 136*.
„ of Freefolk, Hants, 1043. £ 36. 1544.
f. 44. 5814. £ 3ib.(m.) 5865. £ 25*.
„ of Meriden, co. Warwick, fr. co.
Wore, 1 100. f. 1 15. 1 167. f. 155. 1563.
£ 226. 6060. £ 192*. .
„ of Blisworth, Northants, 1084. £ 19.
1094. £80*. ii38.f.52*. 1184. £77*.
1 187. £55. 1553. f. 212.
„ of Carlton, Northants, 890. ff. 8. 32.
41. 1084. f. 19. - IQ94- f- 78. 1 138.
£46. ii7i.f. 17. 1184. f. 75> "87-
ff. 54*. 58*. 71. 1188. pp. 68. 99. 1553.
£ 210.
„ of Harleston, Northants, 1094. f. 82*.
1 184. £79*. 1553. £214*. 2156. £81*.
„ of Starton, Northants, 1094. £ 84.
1 184. £81.
„ of Daintry, Northants, 2 1 56. £ 83.
„ — Sussex, 1562. f. 16*.
„ — Norfolk, 1 137. f. 64*. 1432- f- 57-
„ —Essex, n 37. £72. 1432. £65.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 61*.
Anes, of London, 1463. £ 37*.
Angell, of Crowhurst, Kent, fr. Northants,
Add. 16,279. p. 438.
„ of Southwark, Surrey, fr. Norfolk,
1046. £ 50. 1 147. £ 79. I397- f- 88.
1430. £ 86. 1433. £ 86. 1561. £ 142*.
Add. 4963. £ 100. 12478. £ 34.
„ of London, 1147. £ 33. 143°- f- 3°-
Add.4963.f- 38.
„ of London, fr. Northants, 1476.
ff. 262*. 390. Add. 5533. p. 174-
Angerstein, of Weeting, Norfolk. Add. 19,115.
£ 13.
AngevUle, or, AungeviUe, of Theddelthorpe, co.
Line, 1097. f. 47. 1136- £ 6*. 1190.
£ 74. 1484. £ 16. 1550. ff. 75- 147*-
Add. 14,309. £ 65*.
„ lord of Willoughby. Add. 19,115.
£ 16.
Angevine,— Surrey, 1561. £ 49.
Anguish, v. Allin.
„ of Great Melton, Norfolk, 1552. £ 84
„ of Foulsham, Norfolk, 4756. £ 48.
„ of Somerleyton, Suffolk. Add.
19,114. ff. 197, 199- 19,"5. f- 3»-
Anion, of London, fr. Chesh. Add. 5533. p. 200.

Anketell, of Shaftesbury, Dorset,

f. 47-

1046. £ 234. 1092. £ 52*. n53- C- 79-
1 166. £ 28. 145 1. ff. 46. i9°- '539-
£ 25*. 2186. £ 16.
of Anketell's Grove, co. Monaghan.
Add. 23,693. £ 14.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Anketiu, of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 427*.
Anlaby, of Etton, Yorks, 1394. p. 79. 1415.
f. 76. i420.f.6i. 14S7. f. 277. Add.
18,011. f. 80.
„ of Thorpe Basset, Yorks, 1487. £ 276*;
„ of Anlaby, Yorks, 805. £ 10.
Anne, of Towcester, Northants, fr. cos. Oxon and
Wore, 890. p. 28. 1 138. £ 40*. 1187'.
£ 34 1 188. p. 37. 1553. £ 26*.
„ of North Aston, Oxon, 808. f. 47.
1095. £ 46*. 1412. £ 101. 1556. £ 156*.
5187. f. 47. Lans. 880. £ 37*.
„ of Hewell Grange, co. Wore, 6066.
f. 73-
„ of Frickley, Yorks, 805. £ 12. 1394.
p. 274. 1415. £ 35. 1420. £ 196*. 1487.
£ 126*. 1499. £ 22. 4630. p. 7. Add.
18,01 1. £ 216*. 26,739. ff- 22. 22*.
Annesley, of Annesley, Notts, 1082. £ 66*. 1400.
. £71*.
„ Earl Annesley. Add. 14,839. £ 142.
„ Viscount Valentia. Add. 14,839.
ff. 12-16.
„ of Maidenhead, Berks, fr. Notts,
1081. £ 3*. 1 139. £ 134. 1532. £ 37.
4204. £ 30*. 5822. £ 26. 6173. £ 3.
Add. 4961. £ 59. 14,283. £ 59.
„ of Newport Pagnell, Bucks, fr. Notts,
1 102. f. 106*. 1 139. £43. 1391. £ io8i5.
5832. ff. 4.43. 1533. £ 44*. 5 181. p.
10. 5868. £61.
„ of Brookend, Oxon, and Cornwall,
fr. Notts, 808. £ 25*. 1095. £ 54*.
1097. £ 5. 1480. £ 17*. 1556. f. 84*.
1557. £85. 5187. £32*.
„ — Bucks, 1 102. £ 107. 1 1 39. £ 43*.
1391. £ 109. 5181. p. n.
„ — Add. 24,458. £ I32*.(w«.)
„ or, Ansiey, of Shaftoe, Northumber
land, 1153. £ 54*. 1448. £34 1554.
£ 78*.
Annet, of Canterbury, 1548. £ 78.
AnsceU, or, AnsteU, of Barford, Beds, fr. Dev.,
1097. £ 23. 1390. £ 12. 1531. £ 45*.
2109. £ 20. 4600. p. 23. 5186. p. 7.
Lansd. 864. p. 23.
Anstruther of tbat ilk. Add. 14,836. ff. 305.
307.
„ of Balcaskie (Bart) Add. 23,684
£14*. 19,115. £42.
„ of Inverkeithing, N.B. Add. 14,837.
£ 207.
Anthony, of London, 1096. £ 36*. 1444 f- 19-
1463. £ 23. 1504. £ 98. Add. 5533.
p. 94
„ —Devon, 1538. £ 306*.
Anton, of Lincoln, fr. cos. Hants and York,
1550. f. 117.
„ —Hants, 1532. £ 53. 6173. £ 47-
Antren,— Cornwall, 1079. £ 236*. 1 162. £ 91*.
4031. £ 79*-
Antrewon,— Cornwall, 1079. £ 153*. 1142.
£ 144*. 1 149. f. 144*. U62. £ 147*.
Antrobus, of Knutsford, Cheshire, 1535- *"• 41-
Add. 5529. p. 1.

Antrobus, of Aldenham, Herts, fr. Chesh., 1546.
f. 71*.
„ of London, fr. Chesh., 1476. f- 438<5.
Anvervile, — Yorks, 1487. f. 344.
Ap Harry, Ap Howell, Ap John, Ap Parry.
Ap Powell. Ap Ree-., Ap Rhese, Ap
Richard, Ap Thomas, see Howell,
John, Parry, Powell, Rees, Richard,
Thomas.
Apiin, of Banbury. Add. 19,1 15. £ 48.
Appleby, of Appleby, co. Leic, 1180. £ 6*.
1 187. £ 99*. 1189. £ 9. 1431. £ 2.
6125. £ 1 1. 6183. £ 12.
„ of Clovelodge and Hartington, Yorks,
1487. £ 460*.
„ —Notts, 1400. £ 40*. 1555. £ 72*.
„ — Derby, 1093. £ 27*. 1 153. £ ior.
I537- f- 5b. 2134. £ 16. 6592. £ 23.
Egert. 996. £71.
„ — Chesh., 1535. ff. 101*. 102.
Appleford, of Norwich, 1552. £ 118*.
Appieton, of South Benfteet, Essex, fr. Kent,
1 137. £ 52. 1432. £ 43*. 1541. £ 62*.
6065. f. 128.
„ of Kettlebaston, Suffolk, fr. Essex,
1560. £318*.
„ of Waldingfield, Suff. Add. 19,115.
f-S4-
„ — Devon, 1091. £ 103. 1538. f. 238.
„ of America. Add. 19,115. f. 54.
„ — Baronet (extinct). Add.ia,ii5.£54.
„ or, Apulton, of Waldingfield, Suff.,
891. £ 15*. 1449. ff. 28. 104. 1560.
£ 131.
Appletree, of Deddington, Oxon, 1556. f. 147*.
1557. £ 104*.
Appiewhaite, of Pickenham Hall, Norfolk.
Add. 19,115. £68.
Appieyard, of Dunston, Norfolk, 1177. f. ro2*.
1552. £ 18*. 4755. £ 8*. 5189. £ 23.
6093. p. 18.
„ of East Carleton, Norfolk, 6166. p.
39. Add. 11,388. p. 65*. I4.3°9.
£ 104. 19,816. £ 9.
„ of Burstwickgarth, Yorkshire, 1394.
pp. 15.96. 1415. £ 82. -.1420. £ 74.
1487. £ 295*. Add. 18,011. £ 93.
„ of Butterwick, Yorks. Add. 29,783.
£ 63*.
„ of York, 805. £ n.
„ of Ulceby, co. Line. Add. 24,458.
£ 176*.
„ of Dunston, Norfolk, 4204 £ 145.
„ of Bracon, Suff. Add. 19,115. £72.
„ —Suff., 1449. £ 39*. _.
„ — Dorset, 1153. £ 42. 1168. £ 44.
1397. £ 255*.
Apsley, of Pulborough, Sussex, 1076. f. 134&
1562. £63*. 5829. £58*. 6164. f. 95*.
Add. 23,693. £ 37.
„ of Thakeham, Sussex, 1076. £ 1340Z
1084 £ 125. 1135. f. in. I4o6.£ioi.
1562.fr. 8. 29*. 63*. 5829. ff. 2*. 24*.
6164. f. 96."

8

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Apuidrefeid, of Faversham, 5528. f. 85;^.
Araas, or, Arvas, of Prideaux, Devon, 1080.
f. 106*. 1 163. f. 173.
Arbalaster, or, Arblaster, of Longdon, Staff.,
1077. £ 41*. 1 173. £ 33*. 1415.
£ 117. 1570. £ 55*. 6104 £ 12*.
6128. £ 51.
Arcbard, of Lizard, Cornwall, 403 1. £ 79*.
Arcedeckne, of Glevering Hall, Suff. Add.
19,114 £ So.
Archbold, of London, fr. Lincolnshire, 1476.
£ 78*.
„ of Timolin, co. Kildare, &c. Add.
23,693. £ 22.
Archdale, of London, fr. cos. Oxon and Staff.,
1476. £ 368. Add. 5533. p. 69.
„ of Abbots, in Darsham, Suff. Add.
19,115. £85.
Archdall, of Castle Archdall, co. Fermanagh.
Add. 23,693. £ 29.
Archdeacon, of Kilkenny. Add. 24458. £ 35*.
„ of Carbellymore, co. Waterford. Add.
23,684. £ 66.
„ — Add. 14,309. £ 54. 21,017. £ 92*.
Archdeckne, of co. Galway. Add. 23,686.
£ 42*.
Archer, or, de Boys, of Theydon Garnon, Essex.
1 541. £ 74*. 6065. f. 122. Add.
24458. £ 328.
„ of Colchester, Essex, 1137. ff. 15. 20.
1432. ff. 6. 7*. 1 541. £ 3.
„ of Flowton, Suffolk. Add. 19,115.
£ 89.
„ of Semer Lodge, Suff. Add. 19,115.
£ 89.
„ of Barton Mills, Suff. Add. 19,1 15. £89.
„ of Tamworth, co. Warwick, 1100.
ff. 25. 91. 1 167. ff. 17. 112*. 1563.
£ 1 5*. 6060. £ 37.
„ of Netherthorpe, Oxon, fr. co. War
wick, 1480. £ 57. 1557. £49*.
„ of Hanley, Wore, fr. co. Warwick,
1566. £ 145*.
Arches, of East Hendred, Berks, 1801. £ 19.
1139. £ 68*. 1532. £ 19*. 4108. £ 18.
5822. £ 16*. 6173. £ 36*. Add. 4961.
£ 43*. 14,283. £ 43*.
„ — York, 1415. £ 41.
de Archis, baron of Grove, 4204. £ 45.
de Arcis, — Add. 19,115. £ 107.
de Arden, — Northants, 6066. ff. in. 118. 118*.
121.
Arden, v. Chambers. of Parkhall, co. Warwick, 1100. ff. 29*.
62. 1 167. ff. 20*. 51, 56. 1563. £ 5.
6060. ff. 44. 93. to 98.
of Rickmansworth, Herts, 1234
£ 113*. 1504 f. 131. 1547. £ 41.
of Cottesford, Oxon, 1095. £ 59*.
1007.1.7. 1556. £164.
of Enstone, Oxon, fr. co. Warwick,
1556. ff. 65. 152. 6166. p. 151. Add.
11,388. £ 184*.
of Drayton, Oxon, 2156. £ 50. 4204.
£ 152. 6060. £2*.

Arden, of Rodburne, Northants, 1187. £ 79.
„ of Watford, Northants, 890. p. 25.
1094. f. 123. 1 184. f. 120. 1 187. ff. 33,..
84*. 92*. 1188. p. 36- ^Sl- f- 23*.
6066. £ 70.
„ of Longcroft, co. Staff., 6104. f. 3.
„ —Kent, 1 548. £3. 4108. £64*. Add.
14,307. £ 2.
„ — Lane, 1437. £ 118.
„ —Notts, 1400. £ 86*. 1555. £ 138.
„ —Glouc, 1041. f. 53- *543- f- 72*.
Arderne, of Hawnes, Beds, fr. Chesh., 1097.
£32. 1390. £21. 1 531. £12*. 2109.
£29. 4600. p. 41. 5186. p. 5. Lansd.
864. p. 41.
„ of Chichester, fr. Chesh., 1076. f. 14*.
1562. £ 180*. 6164. £ 45.
„ of Elford, Staff., 1077. ff. 71*. 82*.
1173. ff. 63*. 745. 1415.fr. 113A. 120*.
122*. 1570. ff. 64*. 72*. 6104. £ 27.
Add. 29,783. £ 29*.
„ of Alderley, Cheshire, 1535. £ 42.
2142. f. 57*. 2r87. f. 7*. '
„ of Arden, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 11*. 24.
1505. ff. n*. 23. 1535. ff. 42& 49.
2142. ff. 57. 139; - 2187. £ 7. 2230. f.
30*. Add. 29,783. f. 24*. -
„ of Timperley, Cheshire, 774. £ 15.
1405. £ 96*. 1424. £12. 1505. £12.
1535. ff. 43*. 68. 89. 2142. £ 61.
2187. ff. 9. 74_5. 133. 2230. £ 34. 5182.
pp.6. 121.
„ of Finborough, Suffolk. Add. 19,115.
£ 112.
„ — Devon, 3288. £ 163*.
„ —York, 1487. £ 344.
Ardes, of Sherington, Bucks, 1139. £ 81.
1533- f- 33*- 5181. p. 47- 5832. f- 4*-
5868. £ 39*.
Ardres, — Camb., 1401. £ 15*.
Argall, of East Sutton, Essex.fr. London, 1541.
£ 137. Add. 16,279. f- 429-
„ of Much Baddow, Essex, fr. Kent.
1083. £ 71*. 1137. f. 114*. 1432.
£ no*. 1 542. f. 94*. 6065. f. 1 12. Add.
14,290. £ 96*.
Argentine, — Camb., 1 40 1. £ 15*. 1534. f. 91.
2156. ff. 69. 70. 4204 ff. 14 107. 108*.
118. 6774.fr. 15*. 32*. 6775. f. 15*.
Add. 4962. f. 14*. *
„ of Halesworthj. Suff. Add. 19,115.
£ 117.
Argun, — York, 1415. £ 90.
Arkebus, — Linc,ri90. £ 44*. 1484 £10. 1550.
£36*.
Arkinstall, of Wilbraham, I. of Ely, Camb.,
1043. £ 78*. 1401. £ 65. 1534- f- 8.
6769. f. 17*. 677a. £ 32. 6774. £ 82.
6775. £ 85. 68.30. p. 49. Add. 4962.
£ 61.
Arkwright, of WiHersIey, co; Derby. Add.
24458. £ 10S. 28,113. £ '3^-
Armiger, of Caningtonj Suff.,891. £ 32. 1449-
£ 44*. 156a. f. 275. 1820. f. 33*.
Add. 19,115. £ 147.
„ of Dagworth, Suff., 1560. £ 275*.
„ of Otley, Suff. Add. 19,115. f- 147-

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

6147.

4755- Add.

Armitage, of Kirklees, Yorkshire, 1487. £ 401.
4630. p. 10. Add. 26,739. ff 24*. 25.
„ ofThick Hollins, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£ 177*.
„ of Almondbury, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 178.
„ of Doncaster. Add. 24458. £ 205*.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1441. £ 78*.
1476. f. 293*.
Armorer, of Belford, Northd., n 53. £ 51*.
1448. £ 45*- 1 554- f- 103-
Armstrong, of Corby, Lincolnshire, 1097. £ 97.
1 1 90. £62. 1484. f. 27*. 1550. £173*.
„ of Burbage, co. Leic, 6125. £ in*.
„ of Wyssall, Derby, 886. £ 3.
„ of Malton, Yorks. Add. 19,1 15. £ 161.
Armyne, of Osgarby, Line, fr. Yorks, 1 190. £
37*. 1484 £33*. 1550. £91*.
Arneway, — Chesh., 1241, £ 138. 1472. £ 9*.
6172. £ 21*.
„ — Staff.,i24i.f. 138. 1472. £9*. 6172.
£21*.
Amey, of Chaulbery, Dorset, 1166. £ 66.
1451. £105. 1539. £156. 2186. £3.
Arnold, of Chilwike, Middx., 1433. f- 24- 15°4-
£61*. 1546. £46. 1551. £7*.
£ 47*.
„ of Cromer, Norfolk, 1552. £ 6.
£ 81. 5189. £ 68*. 6093. £ 183
19,816. £64.
„ -of Lowestoft Add. 19,115. £ 163.
„ —Camb., 1043. £ 107*.
„ — Glouc, 1041. £ 54*. 1543. £69.
Arnwood, of Arnwood, Hants, 1 1 39. £ 26*.
1544 £ 88*.
Aron, of Drayton, Salop, 1241. ff. 103*. 136*.
1396. £ 14*. 1472. £ 4.
Arrowsmith, of Huntingfield Hall, Suffolk,
155. £ 12. 1 103. £78. 1449. £ 65*.
1560. f. 86*.
Arscott, of Abbots Bickenton, Devon, 11 63.
£ 119.
„ of Annery, Devon, 1163, £ 180*.
„ of Ashwater, Devon, 5185. £ 6*.
„ ofDunsland, Devon, 889. £ 138. 1080.
£ 58. 1091. £ 50*. 1163. £ 184*.
1164 £ 37*. 1399. £ 95. 1538. £ 157*.
5185. £ 6*. 5840. £ no*. 5871. £ 33.
„ of Holdsworthy, Devon, 5185. £ 6.
„ of Tetcott, Devon, 1080. £ 57*.
1163. £176*. 3288. ff. 67. 151. 5185.
£6*.
„ of West Budleigh, Devon, 1 1 63. £ 2 14
„ of Cornwall, fr. Devon, 1079. £ 121*.
1142.fr. 17. 88*. 1149. ff. 17*. 89*.
1 162. ff. 18. 93*. 4031. f. 82.
Arthlngton, of Arthington, Yorks, 805. £ 17.
1487. ff. 8. 70*. 141 5. £ 20*. 1499.
£25. 4630. pp. 12.-15. Add. 18,011.
£157*. 26,739. ff. 26-27.
of Castley, 1394. pp. 187. 195. H'S-
£ 20*. 1420. £ 138*. 1487. ff. 8. 70*.
1499. £ 25. 4630. p. 14. Add. 26,739.
£ 26*.
of Knottingley, Yorks, 1540. £ 124*.

Arthur, of Clopton, Somerset, I385.f. 72. 1 559.
f. 101*.
„ of Doncaster. Add. 24,458. f. 144*.
„ of Limerick. Add. 23,689. ff. 5a. 6a.
„ of Gt. Cabra, co. Dublin, &c. Add.
23,693. ff. 24, 25.
„ — Glouc, 1041. ff. 43. 55*. 1543. £74.
Arundell, Earl of, v. Fitz-Alan, Baubigny.
n —Earl of, 1 167. £ 12. 1566. £ 102*.
2109. £ 72*. 1076. ff. 213*. to 215.
Sloane, 1429. £70*.
» — Lord A., of Wardour, 1073. £ 333.
2156. £ 98*. Add. 14,309. ff. 69*; and
70.
„ —1080. £ 377*. 1091. £ 53. 1538.
£ 161*. 3288. £ 151*. 5840. £ 20*.
5871. £ 13*. Add. 14,309 ff 25*. 96*.
14,311. ff. 36*. 37. 73*.
„ of Blaybell, Cornwall, 4031. £ 72*.
„ of Camborne, Cornwall, 1079. £ 80*.
ri42. £ 80. 1 149. £ 79. 1 162. £ 83.
„ of Lanherne, Cornwall, 1079. £ 79*.
Il42.f.4o*. 1149. ff. 35*. 3g*. U62.
f. 41*.
„ of Ley, Cornwall, 1079. ff. 27. 78.
„ of Talverne, Cornwall, 1079. £ 80.
4031. ff. 76. 83. Add. 14,315. p. 93.
„ of Trerice, Cornwall, 1073. £ 63. 1079.
f. 78*. 1096. f. 56. 1 142. £ 157*. 1 149.
£ 157*. 1162. ff. 1*. 159*. 4031. ff. 71.
73. 75*. 81*. Add. 14,307. f- 135*.
„ of Chidiock, Devon, fr. Cornwall,
1076. ff. 124. 169*. n66. £ 56*. 1451.
ff. 92*. 196*. 1539. £ 146. 6164 £ 17*.
„ — Essex, 1541. £ 212*.
„ —Herts, 1234. £ 152. 1504 £ 1.
1546. £ 5*. 6147. £ 7*.
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 58. 64*.
Arvos, — Somerset, 1385. £ 32. 1559. £ 7*.
Arwennake, — Corn. vail, 4031. £ 74*.
Ascough, of Abbot's Holme, Cumb., 1536.
£ 41*. 3391. £4*.
„ of Lacra, Cumb., 1536. £ 43*.
„ of Blyborough, Line, fr. Cumb.,
1097. £ 61*. 1 190. £ 26*. 1550. £ 66*.
1484. ff. 6. 26.
„ of Bullen, Line, fr. Rutland, 1097.
£ 48*. 1 190. £ 59*. 1484 £ 2Q(a.b.)
„ of York, 157a £ 13*. 4630. p. 19.
Add. 26,739. 29*-
„ — co. Derby, 6952. £ 6*.
„ or, Aiscough, of Pott Grange and
South Kelsey, Line, fr. co. York, 1097.
£62. 1136. ff. 5(fl.*.) 6. 1190. £56*
1550. ff. 78*. 79*.
„ or, Ayscougb, of Nuthall, Notts., fr.
co. Line, 1082. £64. 1400. £35. 1555.
£ 62.
Ash, of London, fr. Devon, 1476. £ 319*.
„ of London, fr. cos. Leic. and Derby.
1476. £ 421*.
„ — co. Warwick, 1476. £ 199.

IO

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS' VISITATIONS

Ashawe, or, Asbehow, of the Hall, co. Lane,
891. f. 81*. 1437. f. 9. 1468. f. 16.
1549. f. 19. 2076. f. 17. 20S6. f. 65.
6159. £ 10*.
Ashbroke,— co. Warwick, 810. £ 1.
Ashburnham, of Ashburnham, Sussex, 1076.
ff. 2. 122. 1084 £ 120*. 1 135. f. 106*.
1 194 £ 99*. 1406. £ 95*. 1484. f. 67*.
1562. £ 15*. 4109. ff. 10*. 11. 5829.
ff. 10*. 11. 6164. ff. 7*. 31. Add.
19,114 £ 176.
„ of Ashburnham and Scotling, Sussex.
Add. 14,311. ff. 19. 64
„ of Bromham, Sussex, 1106. £ 222.
I484f. 67*. 1562. £ 16. 5829.fr. 10*.
11. 6164. ff. 7*. 31*. Add. 5507.
P- 390.
Ashby, of Chellaston, Derbyshire, 1093. £ 83*.
21 19. £ 95. 6592. £ 8.
„ of Loseby, co. Leic, 1180. ff. 8. 31*.
1 1 87. £ 100*. 1 1 89. £ 47. 143 1.
ff. 31*. 39. 6125. ff. 13*. 44. 112*.
6183. ff. 14*. 45.
„ of Quenby, co. Leic, 1 180. ff. 7*. 89*.
1187. £100. 1189. £ 52. I43_.f. 39*.
6125. ff. n*. 112*. 6183. £ 12*.
„ of Harvile and Breakspeares, Middx.,
1551. £94. Add. 4964. £ 94
„ of Lowestoft. Add. 19,115. £ 181.
„ of Northants, 1 187. ff. n. 80. 86*, 90.
1188. p. 3.
„ — Bucks, 1102. £ 84. 1151. £ 83.
1 193. £ 84 1 391. £ 90.
„ or, Esseby, of Worleston, Cheshire,
21 19, £ 121*.
Ashcombe, of East Pennon, Som., 1 141. £ 106.
1445. £144*. 1559. £231*.
„ of Alverscott, Oxon, 1480. £ 56. 1557.
£46*.
„ —or, Ayshcombe, of Lyford, Berks,
1530. f. 53*. 1532. £ 94. 1483. £77.
6173. £ 3*. Add. 4961. £ 30. 14,283.
£ 30. 14,284. p. 57.
Ashe, v. Ashley.
„ of Tykenham, Som., 1559. £ 95.
„ of Barton, Devon, 1535. f. 312.
„ of Clyst Jomison, Devon, 1080. f. 46*.
1 163. £ 11*.
„ of Ashford, Derby. Add. 28,1 13. £ 16.
„ of Weldwinding, Herts, 1546. £ 58.
I55I- *¦ 63.
„ of Comerd Parva, Suffolk. Add.
19,115. f. 186.
, „ of Ashefield, co. Meath, &c. Add.
23,693. ff. 27, 28.
„ —Yorks, 1394. p. 344*.
„ — or,Esse, of Ashburton, Devon, 1091.
£27*. 1538. £37.
Asheldaxn, — Hants, 1 544. £ 196.
Asheldon, — Somerset, 1385. £ 32. 1559. £ 7*.
Ashenden, of Canterbury, 5528. £ 129*.
Ashenhurst, of Ashenhurst, co. Staff., 1570.
f.90*. Add. 28,113. £48.
„ of Berd, co. Derby, 1093. ff. 126*. 127.
Asher,— Staff., 6128. £ Ip8.

Ashfield, of Chesham, Bucks, 1 102. f.'i 1. 1 136.
f. 4- 1151. f. 9. 1193. f. 10. 1391.
f. 12. 1234. f.S. 1533. f. 167*.
„ of Acton, Middx., fr. Suff., 1551.
£ 116*.
„ of Shipton, Oxon, 808. £ 30*.
„ of Heythorpe, co. Warwick, 1 100.
£ 54*. 1 167. £46*. 1563. £80*. 6060.
£ 86.
„ of Gossopdale, 6104 £ 90.
„ of Stowlangtoft, Suffolk (Bart), 1 1 06.
£ 217. 1432. £ 323*. 1560. £ 218*.
Add. 5507. £82. 5526. £453. 19,115.
£ 189.
„ of Ewelme, Oxon, 808. £ 14. 1095.
£ 32. 1412. £ 92*. 5187. £ 18*. 6166.
p. 153. Lans. 880. £ 24*. Add.
11,388. £ 185*.
„ of Rowlewright, Oxon, 808. £ 32.
1095. £ 31*. 1097. £ 4. 1556. £ 68*.
5187. £ 19.
„ —co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 48. 1 159. £
47*. 1442. £47*. 1545. £38*. Add.
19,815. £ 4ib.(m.)
Ashford, of Ashford, Devon, 1080. £ 325. 1091.
£ 48. 1 163. £ 251. 3288. £ 130.
4204 £ 165. 5185. £ 7. 5840. £ 56*.
5871. £ 23. Add. 14,315- P- 04-
„ ofWonvell, Devon, 889. £ 80. 1080.
£ 410*. 1091. £ 48. 1399. £ 48. 1538.
£ 150. 3288. £ 35. 5185. f. 7*. 5840.
£ 56*. 5871. £ 23.
Ashley, of Wimborne, Dorset, fr. Wilts, 886.
£ 42*. 1046. £ 226*. 1092. £ 25. 1 1 53.
£ 74. 1451. ff. 151. 163*. 1539.
ff. 10*. 12. 2186. £ 10. Add. 14,315.
p. 152.
„ of Damerham, Wilts, fr. Dorset, 888.
£ 40*.
„ of Nashill, Wilts, fr. Hants, 1 165. £ 79.
1443. £ 178*.
„ of Pauls Cray, Kent. Add. 24458.
f- 333-
„ of London, 4204 £ 86b.(m.)
„ —Surrey, 1397. £ 141. 1430. £ 124.
Add. 14,311. £ 56.
„ — Devon, 1091. £ 122.
„ —Suffolk. Add. 19,115. £ 203.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 63*.
„ or, Ashe, Glouc, 1041. £ 34. 1543.
£ 25*.
Ashman, of Calne, Wilts, fr. Hants, 888. £ 21*.
nil. £ 83*. n8i.f.33. 1443. £212.
1565. £ 35. 5184 p. 51-
„ of Lymington, Hants, 1544. £ 125.
Ashmoie, of Lichfield, Staff., 6104 £ 3*.
Ashmore, of St. Mary Stoke, Suffolk. Add.
19,115. £ 205.
Asholf, — York, 1394. p. 215. 1415. f. 25. 1420.
£ 155*. 1487. £ 164.
Ashthorpe, — Lincoln, 1 190. f. 94*. 1 550. £ 160.
Ashton, of Gleane, co. Leic, fr. Hunts, 1180.
£ 148. n87.f. 139. 1189. £ in. 1195.
£ 74*. 1431. £ 102*. 6125. ff. 103*.
118. 6183. £ 120*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

n

Asbton, of Kinwoldmarsh, co. Derby, fr. co.
Lane, 886. f. 31. 3093. f. 12. 1153.
f-93- 1537- f- 33*- 2ii3-f. 102. 2134.
f. 42*. 6592. f. 24*. Egert. 996. f. 60*.
Add. 28,113. £ 44.
„ of Hathersage, co. Derby. Add.
28,113. ff. 14. 159. 2445S. £ 107.
„ of Penketh, co. Lane, 1437. £ 21.
1468. £ 32*. 1549. £ 17. 2086. £ 93*.
6159. £ 8. Add. 12477. £ 35.
„ of Middleton, Lane, 1435. £ 24.
1437. ff. 9*. 42*. 1468. £ 32*. 1549.
£ 16. 1564. £ 26. 2086. ff. 30*. 58*.
59. 6159. £ 76. Add. 12,477. f- 47*-
„ of Shepley, Lane, 1468. £ 32. 1549.
£ 20*. 2086. £ 13*. 6159. £ 7.
„ of Ashton, Lane, 1437. £ 16. 1549.
£ 15. 6060. £ 87.
„ of Bamfurlong, Lane, 1437. £ 18.
„ of Chadderton, Lane, 1468. £ 31*.
1549. ff. 15*. 142*. 2086. £ 23. 6159.
£ 6*. Add. 12,477. £ 39.
„ of Crofton, Lane, 1549. £ 21.
„ of Great Lever, Lane, 1549. £ 16*.
2076. £ 17*. 6159. £ 7*.
„ of Clubcliffe, co. York, 4630. p. 17.
Add. 26,739. f- 28-
„ of Woolton Hall, Cheshire. Add.
24,458. £ 81*.
„ of Bradney, co. Derby. Add. 24458.
£ 107.
„ of Doncaster. Add. 24458. £ 107.
„ —Devon, 1 153. £85.
„ — Suffolk. Add. 19,115. £ 2I2(;«).
„ -rco. Lane, 1100. £51. 1 167. £43.
1550.ff.24. 94*. 1535. £ 118*. 1563. £21.
„ or, Ayston, of Sheering, Essex,
1083. £ 2. 1137. £ 115. 1432. £ in.
1542. £ 115*. Add. 14,290. ff. 15. 87*.
Ashurst,— co. Lane, 1437. £ 98. 1549. £ 24*.
6159. £ 12. Add. 14,314. £ 64.
Ashwell, of London, fr. Beds, 1476. £ 105*.
Add. 5533. p. 219.
Ashworth, of Heyford Warren, Oxon, fr. co.
Lane, 1480. f. 48. 1557. f. 37b.
„ of Bury, co. Lane Add. 24458.
f- 315-
Aske, of Aughton, Yorks, 1 171. ff. 40*. 50. 1394.
p. 76. I4l5.f.74*. 1420. £58*. 1487.
ff. 202. 204. 1499. £ 37*. Add. 18,011.
ff. 74. 77*. 26,739. £ 27*. 29,783.
ff. 49. 49*.
„ of Owsthorpe, Yorks, 1394. p. 63.
1415. £71*. 1420. f. 55. 1487. £203*.
„ of Aske, Yorks., 805. ff. 14. to 16*.
„ —or, Ake, Line, 1190. £ 38*. 1484.
£ 12*. 1550. f. 237*.
Asketin, V. Astin.
Askwith, of Barrowby, Yorks, 1487. £ 148. Add.
29,783. f- 58*.
of Newstead, Yorks, 1394. p. 148.
1415. £ 9*. 1420. £108*. 1487. £ 148.
Add. 18,011. £ 129.
„ of Osgodby, Yorks, 1487. £ 1 50*.
' ofYork,8o5.£i9-

Aslack, of Carrow, Suff. Add. 19,115. f. 208.
Aslackby, of South Dalton, Yorks. Add. 14,309.
f- 39-
„ of Barton, Yorks., 1571. ff. 229*. 242.
Aslake, of Holme, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 139*.
1552. £ 77. 4755. £41. 6093. £ 126.
Add. 19,816. f. 31*.
Asline, of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 162*.
Aspali, of Lackford, Suffolk, 1449. *• 93- 1484.
ff. 44. 48. 1 541. £ 203*. 4204 £ 226*.
Add. 19,115. £ 214.
Assemundelaw,— Cumb., 1536. £ 21.
Assey, of Beccles, Suff. Add. 19,116. £ 220.
Astbury, — Chesh., 1535. £ 270*. 2119. £ 209.
2187. f. 131.
Astell, of Cley, Norfolk, fr. co. Staff., 1177.
£ 153. 1552. £ 107*. 4755. £ 54*.
5189. £55. 6093. £147*. Add. 19,816
1.42.
Asterby, v. Bsterby.
Asthorpe, of Camelerton, Somerset, 1445.
£ 192*.
Astin, of Chevening, Kent, 1548. £ 137. Add.
5532. p. 80.
„ or, Asketin, of Peckham, Surrey,
1548. £ 146*. Add. 5532. p. 117.
Astley, of Pateshull, co. Staff., 1077. £ 40. 1173.
ff. 59*. 64*. 1415-f. 120*. 1439. ff. 33.
34. 1570. ff. 39*. 63. 6104. £ 4*.
6128. ff. 3*. 4.
„ of Wood Eaton, Staff., fr. Salop,
6104. £ 4.
„ of Weybread, Suff. Add. 19,115.
£ 224
„ — Lord Hastings, &c Add. 19,115.
£ 226.
„ of Aston, Salop, fr. co. Staff., 1241.
ff. 16. 145. 160*. 1396. £ 13*. 1472.
£ 3*. 1983. £ 11*.
„ ofNordley, Salop, 1241.fi 160*. 1396.
ff. 14. 212*. 1472. £ 8. Add. 14,314.
ff. 38*. 91*.
„ of Stakes, Lane, 1437. £ 83*.
„ of Maidstone, Kent, 1 106. £ 161*.
1432. £ 282. Add. 5507. p. 327. 5509.
£ 32. 5526. p. 328.
„ ofWolvey, co. Warwick, 1100. £ 107.
1167. £ 141. 1195. £ 102. 1563.
£ 173*. 6060. £ 178. 6128. £ 97*.
„ of Preston and Whitehaven. Add.
24458. £ 42.
„ — Derby. Egert. 996. f. 6*.
„ —Northants, 1187. £ 86*.
„ or, Estieigh, of Writtle, Essex, fr.
Norf., 1541. £ 128*.-, 1542. £ n*.
6065. £ 37*.
de Astley. Add. 14,309. £ 8.
Aston, of Park Hall, Staff., 886. f. 63. 141 5.
£ 120. 1570. £ 15*. Add. 5509. £ 2*.
„ of Tixhall, Staff., 1077. £ 64*. 1 100.
£110. 1 173. ff. 56*. 114 1415.fr. 120.
134*. 1439. £15*. 1570. £15*. 2109.
£84*. 21 13. f. 80*. 2156. £62*. 6104
£ 5. 6128. ff. 1. 42*. 104 Add. 14,311.
£ 19*.

12

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Aston, of Aston, Cheshire, 774. f. 15*. 1045.
f. 102,5. 1424. f. 1 1. 1505. f. 1 1. 1535,
ff. 46*. 1051.. 20S*. 2 1 19. ff. 203. 205*.-
208*. 2142. ff. 25. 119*. 2187. £15*.
2230. £32. 5182. p. 5.
» of Farnham, Surrey, fr. Cheshire,
1046. £ 118. 1 147. £ 153*. 1397.
£ 157. 1430. £ 159*. H33- f- 146.
1 561. £ 198. Add. 4963. £ 157*.
„ of Norfield, co. Worc, fr. Chesh.,
1566. £ 122*.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff., 1476. £ 415.
„ of Beaulieu, co. Louth. Add. 23,693.
£ 8.
,, —Lane, 1549. £ 79.
Astrey, or, Austrey, of Harlington, Beds, fr.
Herts, 1097. f. 30*. 1390. £19*. 1433.
£ 17*. 1504 £ 56*. 1531. f. 13*. 2109.
£27*. 4600. p. 38. 5186. p. 6. 6147.
. £ 41*. Lansd. 864. p. 38.
„ of London, 1463. £ 33*.
At Beke, or, Xiegbourn, see Bek.
Atbrooke, v. Brooke.
Atcomb, — Cornwall, 1 164. £ 65.
At Bene, v. Bene.
At Fenn, v. Penner.
Atford, v. Ford.
Atgate, v. Weston.
Atgrove, v. Grove.
At-Hall, v. Hall.
Athenry (Baron), v. Bermingham.
Atherley, of Winchester, 11 39. £9.
„ of Blackhall, co. Staff., fr. co. Derby,
1077- f- 33-
Atberold, of Burgh, Suff. Add. 19,115. £ 233.
Atherton, of Atherton, co. Lane, 805. £ 20.
1468. f. 73. 1549. ff. 20. 150*. 6159.
£ n*. Add. 29,783. £ 80.
„ of Fritton, Yorks, fr. co. Lane, 1394
p. 34 141 5. f. 59. 1420. £ 36*. 1487.
£250. Add. 18,011.. f. 55*. 26,739.
£ 27*.
„ of Baldon, Oxon., 1557. f. 50.
„ of Cretingham, Suff. Add. 19,115.
£ 238.
„ — Salop, 1 1 87. f. 20*. 1 188. p. 18.
Athorpe, of Beilby, &c, Notts. Add. 24,458.
ff. 51*. 329.
At-Howe, v. Howe.
Atkins, of Stanmore, Middx., 1551. £ 41*. Add.
4964. £ 41*.
„ of London, fr. Herts, 1476. £ 466.
„ of Norwich, 1552. £ 199*.
„ — Somerset, 1 165. f. 42. 1443. £124*.
Atkinson, of Nottingham, 1400. £ 71*. 1555.
£ 1 10*.
„ of Woburn Daincourt, Bucks, 1102.
£ 16. 1 151. £ 14. 1193. f. 15. 1234.
£ 43*. 1391. £ 16*. 1533. £ 170.
„ of Stowell, co. Glouc, fr. Oxon, 1041.
£ 118*. 1543. £ 169.
„ of Little Cattail, Yorks, 1487. £ 484
4630. p. 16.

Atkinson, of Leckford Hall, Suff. Add. 19,115.
f. 241.
„ of Oxford and co. Glouc, 1556.
ff. 133*. 134.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1476. ff. 258*.
360*. Add. 5533. ff. 177*. 178.
„ of Cangort, King's co. Add. 23,693.
£ 12.
„ — co. Durham, 1542. ff. 67. 217.
„ — Sussex, 1562. £ 45.
Atmore, v. More.
At-stone, v. Stone.
Attcburch, v. Church.
Atleze, — Kent, 1548. £ 33.
de Aton. — Add. 14,309 f. 33.
Aton, Lord, 1487. £ 102. 2109. £ 65.
Atsea, of Kent, 5528. £ 72. Add. 14309. £ 57*.
Atslow, of Downham, Essex, fr. Beds, 1083.
ff. 2*. 79*. 1137. £ 134. 1542. £ 172.
Add. 14,290. ff. 14 102*.
Atte, of Trewen, Devon, 1091. £ 59 1538.
f-93-
Atterhill, V. Hill-nan.
Attehooke, v. Hooke.
Attebeatb, v. Grendon,
Attesley, — Warw., 1 167. f. 49*. 1563. £ 211.
Atton, — Derby, 6592. £ 8*.
,, — Glouc, 1041. £ 57.
Atwater, of Charing, Kent(.«), 5528. £ 119.
Atwell, of Legbourne, co. Line, 1097. £ 100*.
1 190. £ 16*. 1484 £ ob. 1550. £ 23.
1555. £89*.
Atwill, of Mamhead, Devon, 1080. £ 49*. 1 163.
£ 14.
„ of Walkhampton, Devon, 1080. £ 50*.
1 163. £ 103*.
Atwood, v. Wood.
„ of Beach, co. Glouc, 1543. £ 155*.
„ of Broughton, Salop. 1241. £ 152*.
1396. £ 15. 1472. £ 10.
„ of Loxley and Uttoxeter, Staff., 6128,
£ 106.
„ of Sherehampton, Glouc, fr. co.
Wore, 1041. f. no. 1543. £ 155.
„ of Littlebury, Essex, 1083. £ 70*.
1 137. f. 131. 1432. £ 139*. 1542.
£ 235. Add. 14,290. ff. 16. 95*.
„ of Aspal, Suffolk, fr. Beds, 155.
£ 8. 1103. f. 36. 1 177. £34*. 1449.
£ 37*. 1560. f. 43*. Add. 19,115.
£ 249.
„ of Ickham, Kent 5528. f. 76.
„ of Framlingham,. Suff. Add. 19,115.
£ 249.
„ — Somerset, 1559. £ 142.
„ — Sussex, 1562./. 65*. 5829. f. 6ob.(m).
„ — Hants, 1 139. £ 29.
Atye, of London, 1476. £ 116.
„ of Kilburn, Middx., 155 1. £ 113.
Atzar, V. Edgar.
Aubermond, — Salop, 1 396". £ 1 44*.
de Auberville, — Suffolk. Add. 19,115. £ 255.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

13

Aubrey, of Chadenwick, Wilts, 1166. f. 54.
1443. f. 14*. 1539. f. 140*.
„ of Hereford, fr. London, 1 140. ff. 101*.
105*. 1545.1.110*.
„ —Middx., 1433. £ 24*.
Aucber, of Borne, Kent, fr. Essex, 1 106. £ 201*.
1432. £311. 1484. ff. 68*. 311. 1548.
£178. Add. 5507. p. 190. 5526. p. 420.
5532- p. 138. 23,750. ff. 4*. 5.
„ of Waltham, Essex, 4204. £ 167.
„ or, Ager, — Suffolk, 1484. £ 48*.
Auckinton,— Salop, 1424. £ 149. 1 505. £ 147*.
1535. £ 282. 2187. £ 133*. 5182. p.
117.
Audley, v. Tucbett.
„ Earl of Castlehaven, 1135. £ 37*.
1 194. £ 30*. 1406. £ 70*. 1562. £ 56*.
„ Lord, 104 1. £ 49*. 1073. £267*. 1 187.
ff. 10*. 89*. 1424. ff. 12*. 55. 1505.
ff. 12*. 55. 1535. ff. 45. 263. 2119.
ff. 89. et seq. 2142. ff. 37. 47. 2187.
ff. 13*. 104b. 105*. Add. 14,309. ff. 77.
94*. 16,279. ff 220. 360. 19,115.
£260. 19,816. ff. 17*. 83 to 85.'
„ of Gransdon, Hunts, 890. £ 45. 1075.
f. 23. 1 179 £ 49. Cott. MS. Jul. F. viii.
£ 23.
„ of Boston, co. Line, fr. co. Derby,
1097. £ 89. 1 190. £ 32*. 1484. £ 23.
1550. £20*.
„ of Clapton, Northants, 1 138. £ 21*.
„ of London, 1546. £ 137*.
„ of Houghton Conquest, Beds, fr.
Essex, 1531. f. 104. 4600. p. 71*.
„ of Swaffham Market, Norfolk. 1177.
£122*. 1552. £48*. 4755. £20. 5189.
£ 36. 6093. p. 49.
„ of St. Ives, Hunts, fr. Suss., 890.
£ 45*-
„ of Berechurch, Essex, 1432. £ 163.
1541. £ 114*. 1542. £ 6. 6065. £ 59.
„ — Sussex, 890. £ 45*. 1 1 77. £121*.
1552. £ 48.
„ —Northants, 6066. £ 58*.
„ —Kent, 1468. £ 127. 1096. ff. 152*.
»59-
„ —Oxon, 1556. £ 99.
„ —Devon, 3288. £ 149*. 5185. £65*.
Audrey, of Fillongley, co. Warwick, 6060. £ 200*.
Audyn, or, Adeyn, of Dorchester, 1539. £ 198*.
Auferton, — Derby, 1093. £ 18.
Aughton, of Adlington, co. Lane, 891. £ 91.
1468. £ 49. 1549. £ 19- 2086. £ 61*.
6159. £ 10.
„ of Meoles, co. Lane, 1549. £ 70.
6159. £ 5°-
Aunby, of Sherwood Hall, Yorks, 1487. /• 120.
4630. p. 9 Add. 26,739. f- 24
Auncell,— co. Line, H90.f. 9. 1484 f- 19- »S5°-
£ 32<*-
—Wilts, mi. f. 94*- 1 181. £6*. 1443-
£ 118*.
Aunclcw, of Hoden, co. Worc. Add. 12,479
£ 18*.

nn

Aunger, v. Hanger.
„ — Cambridge, 1401. f. 8. 1534. f. 14.
6774. f. 25. 6775. f. 8. Add. 4962.
I. o.
„ — Dorset, 1092. ff. 116*. 117.
Aunsham, of Heston, Middx., 4204. f. 140.
Aunsted, of London, 1096. £28*.
Auste, — Northants, .890. £ 42.
Austen, and Austin.
„ of Shalford, Surrey, fr. Herts, 1046.
£ 73. 1 147. ff. 1 1 3*. 155*. 1 397. £ 1 1 2.
1430. ff. 119*. 161*. 1433. £ 104.
1561. £ 53*. Add. 4963. £ 137*. 5533.
£263*. 14,311. £ 76*.
„ of Chelsworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,115.
£ 27L
„ of Southwark, Surrey, 156L £ 4.
Add. 4963. £ 196*. 5533. £ 276.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 423.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, &e, 1476
£ 305*.
„ of Bexley and Tenterden, Kent, 1 106.
£ 100*. 1432.. £ 238*. Add. 5007.
p. 228. 5526. p. 186. 23,750. f. 4.
„ of Broadford, Kent Add. i6,279p.
39a of Dover, Kent Add. 5532. p. 117.
of Kent, 5528. ff. 104*. 131.
of London, fr. Surrey and Herts,
1444. £18.
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,115. £ 273.
Austrey, v. Astrey.
„ of Somersham, Hunts, fr. London,
1075. f. 45*. 1 179. £ 93. Cott. MS.
Jul. F. viii. £ 45*.
„ of London, 1096. £ 18.
Aveline, of Frogmore, Berks, ioSr. £ 5. 1139.
£114*. 1532. £15*. 6173. £5*. Add.
496 1 . p. 66*. 1 4,283. f. 66*.
Aveneil, — Norfolk, 1 177. £ 136. 1552. £ 98*.
5189. £ 22. 6093. £ 143.
Avenon, of London, from co. Wore, 1096. £ 96*.
1463. £2. 1504. £107*.
de Averengis, — Berks, 1139. £ no.
Averes, of London, 1 137. £ 62*. 1432. £ 55*.
Averey, of Fillongley, Warwick, 1 100. £ 1 18*.
1 167. £ 159. 1563. £ 197*.
„ of Enfield, Middx., fr. Somerset, 1468.
£ 130*.
„ of Mells, Somerset, 1141. £ 43. 1385.
£ 62. 1445. £ 62*. 1559 £ 61.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. £ 260.
„ — Middx., 1096. £ 148.
Awmer, — Cheshire, 2187. £ 139-
Awnsham, — Middx., 1551. f. 94*. Add. 4964.
£ 94*.
Awood, v. Wood.
Awslter, of Southall, Middx., 1468. £ 128*.
Ayerst, of Kent, 5528. £ 130*.
Ayleff, V. Ayliffe and Ayloffe.
„ ' of Chiswell, Essex, 1 54 1. £ 201.
„ oi Skeres, Hants, 1544. £ 174. 5865.
£ 47.

H

PEDIGREES IN THE HFRALDS VISITATIONS

Aylesbury, of Wiverton, Notts, 1082. £ 66.
1093. f. 18. 1400. f. 70*. 1555. f. 109*.
„ of Ederiston, co. Warwick, 1100.
£ 17. 1 167. £ 11. 1563. £35. 6060.
£ 25.
„ — Camb., 1534. £ 123*. 2156. £ 48.
Add. 14,309. £ 23*. 23,6S7.f. 122*.
„ —Leic, 1435. £ 37.
„ — Bucks, 5181. p. 71. 6128. £ 90.
„ — Norf., 1552. £ 190.
„ — Northants, 890. ff. 14*. 25. 1094. £
6*. 1171.fr. 33.36*. 1184. £ 6*. 1 188.
p. 35- "87-f-33- 1553- f- 64
Ayleswortb, of St. Stephens, Kent, fr. co.
Glouc, 1 106. £ 168*. 1432. £ 28*.
Add. MSS. 5507. p. 341. 5526. p. 352.
Ayiett, of Braxted and Coggeshall, Essex,
1542. £ 203*.
Ayleway, of Tainton, co. Glouc, 1543. ff. 173*.
174-
„ of Forest of Dean, fr. co. Glouc, 1480.
£ 51*. 1557. £ 40*.
Ayliffe, v. Ayleff, Ayloff.
„ of Brinkworth, Wilts, 1165. £ 27*.
1443. f- 16*.
„ — Surrey. Add. 14,311. £ 27*.
Aylmer, v. Elmer.
„ Baron. Add. 14,839. ff. 209 to 211.
„ of Donadea, co. Kildare (I.Bart.), &c,
&c. Add. 23,685. ff. 104.-109.
„ of Painstown, co. Kildare, &c. Add.
23,693. ff. 31, 32.
„ — Suffolk, 1449. £ 50*. 1560. £ 155*.
Add. 19,115. f. 276.
„ or, Aylemere, Devon, 1982. £55.
Aylmes, — Kent. Add. 16,279. p. 218.
Ayloffe, v. Ayleff, Ayliffe.
,, of Meldrith, co. Camb, fr. Essex, 1534
£ 138*.
,, of Wennington, Essex, 4204. £ 98*.
„ of Braxted and Brettayns, Essex
(Bart), 1 137. £43*. 1432. £35. 1541.
£ 70*. 1542. £ 86*. 6065. £ 25. Add.
19,115. £285.

Aylward, of Batheley, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 148*.
„ of Shankhill, co. Kilkenny. Add.
23,693. f. 18.
„ — Somerset, 1141. £ 100*. 1445.
£ 139*. 1559. £ 226.
„ —Wilts, n n, £83*.
„ — Hants, 1544. f. 125.
Ayiwin, of Treford, Sussex, 1084. f. 104. 1135.
£ 90. 1194. £ 83. 1406. £ 46. 1562.
£ 170. 4109. £ 69.
„ of Lewes, Sussex, 1076. £ 207*.
Ayleworth, of Tackley, Notts, fr.co. Glouc, 808.
£ 21*. 1556. ff. 82. 102. 5187. £ 27.
„ of Ayleworth, co. Glouc, io4i.£ 116*.
1543. f- 55*-
,, of West Hanway, Berks, fr. Oxon,
1483. £ 113*. 1350. £ 68. Add. 14,284.
p. 92.
„ of Canterbury, 5528. £ 148*. Add.
23,750. £ 6*.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 92*.
Ay ns comb, of Mayfield, Sussex, 1076. £ 46*.
1084 £ 133*. 1 135. £ 119*. 1 194
£ 134. 1406. £ 109*. 1562. £ 185.
6164. £ 1.
Ayott,— Northants, 1 1 87. ff. 85*. 87*. 88. 1 553.
£ 64 6066. £ 63*.
Ayre, of Wotton, Devon, io8o<. £ 272*. 1 163.
£ 129.
„ — Cambs, 2198. £ 3.
„ —Yorks, 1394. p. 259. 1415. £ 32.
1420. f. 185*. 1487. £ 316.
„ or, Eyre, of Dewstowe, Cornwall,i079
£ 135. 1142. £ 114 1 149. £ 115.
1 162. f. 119.
„ or, Eyre, of Ely, co. Camb, fr. caDerby,
1043. £ 94*. 1401. £ 37b, 1534. £ 50*.
6769. £ 28. 6770. £ 48*. 6774. £ 53*.
6775- f- 37*- 6830. p. 84. Add. 4962.
f- 34-
Ayscough, v. Ascougb.
Aysterly, of Croxby, co. Line, 1550. £ 53.
Ayston, v. Ashton.
Ayton, of Ayton (Bart.) Add. 23,686. £ 23*.
„ of Eccles, Suffolk. Add. 19,115. £ 290.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

>$

B

Baard, — Essex, 1 137. £ 41. 1432. £ 31*.
Baber, of Chew Magna, Somerset, 1077. £ 44*.
1 141. £ 94 1445. £ 128*. 1559 £ 218.
„ of Rogelbery, Somerset, 1385. £ 35*.
1445. £ 181*. 1463. £ 5*. 1559. £ 11.
„ of St. George's, Somerset, 1141.
f. 93*. 1445. £ 129*.
Babham, of Turvile, Bucks, fr. Berks., 1 102.
f. 21. 1136. £ 14*. 1151. £19. 1533.
£ 170*. 1 193. £ 20. 1234 £ 16*. 1391.
£ 22.
Babington, of Dethick, co. Derby, 1093. ff. 66*.
84 i486. £ 58. 1537. £ 115. 6592.
ff. 22*. 87*. Egert. 996. ff. 61*. 66*.
„ of Ottery St. Mary, Devon, fr. Nor
thumberland, 889. ff. 67*. i53(«-*0
1080. £ 391*. 1091. £ 43*. 1399. £ 39.
1538. £ 131. 5185. £ 9. 3288. £ 46.
5840. £ 45. 5871. ff. 6. 20.
„ of Temple Rothley, co. Leic, fr. co.
Derby, 1180. £ 155. 1187. £ 140*.
1 189. £ 76. 1 195. £ 84 1431. £67*.
6125. ff. 107. 117. 6183. f. 124.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff. 1476. £ 51*.
,, of Rampton, Notts., fr. co. Derby,
1082. £ 64 1400. £ 82*. - 1555. £ 130.
„ of Kiddington, Oxon, fr. Northum
berland, 808. f. 45. 1095. £16*. 1412.
£ 82*. 1556. f. 150*. 5187. £ 47*-
Lansd. 880. £ 13*.
„ of Tynmore, Staff., 1077. £ 61*.
1 1 73. f. 53*. 1570. £ 59*. 6104. f. 38.
6128. £ 4.
„ of Chorley, Surrey, 1046. ff. 84*. 96*.
1397. ff. 123*. 135*.
„ —Sussex, 1484. £ 61.
Babtborpe, of Babthorpe, and Osgodby, York,
805. fil 21. to 23*. 1394. PP- 66. 184
_4i5.f.7o*. 1420. £52*. 1487. £215*.
Add. 18,011. £71*.
Bach, of Stanton, co. Derby, 6104. £ 92*.
Bacheler,— Kent, 5528. £ 112. Add. 16,279.
p. 164
„ of West Rudham, Norfolk, H77-
£147*. 1552. £92*. 6093. £137*.
Back, or Bake,— Cornwall, II 49. £ *7- "62.
£ 17*.
Backhouse, of Swallowfield, Berkshire, fr. Cum
berland, 1483- ff 66*. 67. 1530. £
44*. 1532. £ 130. 6173- f- l7- Add.
14,284. p. 30.
„ of London, fr. co. Cumb., 1096.
£ 27*. 1444- f- 49- J463- f- 36*. Add.
5533. p. 44.
„ —Cumberland, 1504. £ 87*.
Backus, of Trumpington, Camb., 1043. £ 74-
1401. £ 56. 1534- f- 74- 6769 f- 14-
6770. £ 27*- 6774- f- 73-, 6775- £ 76.
6830. p. 107. Add. 4962. £ 52.

Bacon, of Weston, Bucks, fr. Norf., 1102.
£ 102*. 1 139. f. 40. 1391. £ 105*.
1533. £ 45*. 5181. p. 2. 5832. £ 31.
5868. £ 50.
Bacon, of Harleston, Norfolk, 155. £ 54. 1177.
ff. 47. 58. 98*. 1499. ff. 68. 75. 1552
ff. 12*. 228*. 1560. ff. 60*. 247. 4755
£ 5. 5189. £ 28*. 6093. p. 6. 6166
p. 37. Add. 11,388. p. 64*.
„ of Shipdenborn, Norf. Add. 19,826.
£ 15*.
„ ' of Northall, Herts, 1504. £ 18*.
„ of London, 1463. £ 4*. fr. Norf.,
1476. £ 264 fr. Suffolk.
„ of Norwich. Add. 19,816. £ 6*.
„ of Burton Latimer, Northants, fr.
Suff., 1094. £ 215*. n84f. 210*. 1553.
£179
„ of Oldfield. Add. 24458. £ 182.
„ of Twyford, Hants, 2156. £ 15*.
„ of Drinkstone and Redgrave, Suff.,
155. £ 9*. 1 103. £ 39. 1177. £36*.
1449. £ 40. 1560. f. 142*. 1820. £ 28.
Add. 19,116. p. 5 to 130.
„ of Hessett, Suff, 891. £ 16*. 1177.
£59 1449 £53. 1560. ff 235*., 239.
1820. £ 38*. Add. 19,116. p. 5 to 130.
„ of Whiteparish, Wilts., 888. £ 4.
nn. £ 38. 1139. f. 8*. 1181. £ 9.
1443. £ 213. 1544 £ 7i- 1565. f- 8.
5184 p. 20.
„ —co. Camb., 1401. f. 8. 1534. f. 14.
6775. £ 8. Add. 4962. £ 8.
„ — Essex, 1 137. f. 49. 1432. £ 40*.
„ — Hants, fr. Wilts, 1 139. £8*. 1544.
£71-
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,311. £ 35*.
Badby, of Hawley, Kent, fr. Suff. Add. 5507.
p. 411.
„ of Bury, Suff. Add. 19,116. £ 131.
Badcock, of Shebbeare, Devon, fr. Corn., 1080.
£ 258*. 1 163. £ no*.
„ of Much Bentley, Essex, fr. Corn.,
1083. £68. 1 137. £ 130. 1432. £137.
1542. £ 207*. Add. 14,290. £ 93*.
Badeley, of Chediston, Chelmsford, &c. Add.
19,116. ff. 134 143-
Badger, v. Baghot.
Badham, of Waldingfield, Suff. Add. 19,116.
I 145-
„ of Rockfield, co. Cork. Add. 23,693.
ff 49*, 5°-
de Badlesmere, — 1153. £ 93*. 4204. £ 55.
5528. £ 3*. Add. 19,1 f 6. £ 149.
Badweli, of Badvvell, Beds, 1531. £ 10*. 2109.
£ 31. 4600. p. 25.
„ of Boxtead, Suffolk. Add. 19,116.
f. 161.
Bafford, of London, 1096. f. 85*.

i6

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bagenal, of Dunleckney, co. Carlow. Add.
23,693. ff. 61 to 63, 103 to 107. 23,686.
f. 28.
Bagesover, — Salop, 1241. f. 103*.
»agg, of Plymouth, 'fr. Salop., 1080. £ 286*.
1 163. £ 146. 1538. f. 302.
Bagguley, or Balgey, of Ashton, co. Derby,
1093. £ no*. 1 153. £ 93. Egert. 996.
f. 45*-
,, — Cheshire, 1424.fr. 86*. 121*. 1505.
ff. 84*. 85. 1535. ff. 63*. 97*. 186.
2142. £ 51*. 2187. ff. 10. 72*. Add.
5529 PP- 6. 44-_
Baghot, or Badger, of Leicester, fr. co. Glouc,
1 180. £ 105. 1 187. f. 131. 1 189. £ 65*.
1431. £ 57. 6125. ff. 77. in*. 6183.
£ 94.
„ or Badger, of Hall Place, co. Glouc,
1041. £ 37. 1 191. £ 32*. 1543. £ 30*.
Baginden, — Dorset, 145 1, f. 163*.
BagnaU, of Newcastle-under-Lyne, Staff., 1077.
£ 106*. 1173. £ 96*. 1415. £ 127*.
1570. £ 40*. 2230. £ 32. 6128. £ 38.
Add. 5529. £ 1 1*.
Bagot, Baron Stafford, 1535. £ 130*.
„ of Lichfield, 1173. £ 127*.
„ of Bromley, Staff, 886. f. 57*. 1077.
£ 13*. 1173. £ 12*. 1415. ff. 109*,
130*. 1439. f- l8- 1570. ff- 30, 45*.
6128. ff. 6*. 7. '21 13. ff. 77. 79.
„ of Blithfield, Staff., 1077. £ 13*. 1 173.
£ 56*. 141 5. £ 109*. 1439. f- J8-
1573. £ 30. 6128. f. 7.
„ of Nurney, co. Kildare, &c. Add.
23,693. f. 46.
Bagshaw, of Farewell, Staffordshire, fr. co.
Derby, 1077. £ 81*. 1173. £ 73*.
1241. ff. 63. 124*. 1415. f. 122. 1570.
£ 70*. 6128. £ 82*. Add. 14,314. ff. 54*.
SS(a.b.)
„ — Herts, 6147. £ 17*.
Bagsbawe, of Abney, co. Derby, 886. £ 20*.
1093. £ 26*. 1241. ff. 63. 124*. 1484.
£ 36*. 1537. f. 40. Add. 14,314. ff. 54*.
5S(a.b.) 28,113. £44.
„ of Ridge, co. Derby, 1093. £27. 1 1 53.
£ 93- 1537. £20*. i486. £60*. 1484.
£ 36*. 2 1 1 3. £ 97*. 2 1 34. £ 27*. 6 1 04.
£ 93. Egert. 996. £ 38. Add. 24,458.
£ 58*. 28,113. ff *5- 44 45- 106. 107.
„ of Ford, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
£ 57*. 28,113. £ 16.
„ of Wormhill and the Oaks. Add.
24,458. £58.
„ of London, 1 094. £ 2 1 1 *. 1 5 5 3. £ 1 74.
11S0. f. 135*. 1 189. £ 105. 1431.
£96*. 6125. £ 95*. 6183. £113.
Baildon, of Derby, 6104. £ 91*.
„ of Baildon, Yorks, 805. £ 25. 1394.
p. 214. 1415. f. 25. 1420. f. 155. 1487.
£182. 4630. p. 21. Add. 26,739. ff. 30*.
to 31c. Add. 18,011. £ 175*.
„ of Kippax, 4630. p. 23. Add. 26,739.
£ 32.
Bailey, of Serne, Somerset, 1141. £ 126. 1445.
£ 172*.

Bailiff, of Tytherton, Wilts, fr. Somerset, 1165.
f. 24*. 1443. f- I07*-
Bainbrldge, of Durham. Add. 24,458. £ Ii6;«
,, of Lockington, co. Leic, 1180.
ff. 130. 139. 1 187. £ 134. n89.£ 101.
1431. £ 92*. 6183. £ 107*.
„ of Hendfellow House, co. Durham,
1540. £ 161.
,, — Yorks, 1394. p. 25.
Baines, of Leeds. Add. 28,113. £ 164*.
Baker v. Xadd.
,, of New Windsor, Berks, fr. Cheshire,
1483- ff 134*- 136. 1530. ff. 74*- 77b
Add. 14,284. p. in. 119.
„ of Penn, Bucks. Add. 24,458. £ 336*.
,, of Sissinghurst, Kent, 1076. £ 153.
1084. f. 32*. 1 106. £ 74*. 1 135. £18*.
1 137. £ 27. 1406. £ 12. 1432. f. 222*.
1541. f. 21*. 1548. £ 176*. 1562. £89.
6065. £ 40. Add. 5507. pp. 177*. 178.
5526. p. 136. 19,116. £ 171. 23,750.
ff. 8. 76.
,, of Maidstone. Add. 5507. p. 185.
„ ofHawkhurst,Kent Add. 5528. £74*.
„ of Groombridge, Kent, 1106. £ 199.
1432- f- 309 Add. 5526. p. 415. 23,750.
£8*.
„ of London, fr. Norf., 1476. £ 2S2.
„ of London, &e, fr. Kent, 155 1. £ 3*.
„ of Smallborough, Norfolk, fr. Suff.,
1552. £235*. 4756. £74*.
„ of Walton, Norfolk, fr. Suff., 1552.
£ 180. 4755. f. 94 5189. f. 30. 6093.
£ 209*. 4756. f. 74*. Add. 19,816.
i.77.
„ of Terington, Norfolk. Add. 19,816.
£ 21*.
„ of Aldesworth, Notts. 886. £ 51.
1082. £64*. 1400. £-14. 1555. £ 30*.
„ of Hanwood, Salop, 1 241. f. 139*.
1396. £ 50. 1982. £ 28. Add. 14,314.
£7*.
„ of Stubton, Suff. Add. 19,1 16. £ 164.
„ of Westhorp, Suff. Add. 19,116.
£ 174.
„ of Wrentham, &c, Suff. Add. 19,116.
£ 176.
„ of Battle and Mayfield, Sussex, 1076.
£185. 1084. £39. 1135. £ 25. 1194.
£ 19 1406. £ 18. 1562. f. 77*. 6164
£ 27. 5829. £ 71*.
„ of Withyham, fr. Sussex, 1084 £ 39.
1135. £ 25. 1194. £ 19. 1406. £ 18.
1562. £ 77*. 8153. f. 161.
„ of Northfield, co. Wore Add. 19,816.
£ 121.
„ of Buers Gifford, Essex, 1541. £ 21 1*.
1548. £ 173.
„ — Herts, 1504. £ 9*.. 1546. £ 5.
6147. £ 7.
,, — Essex, 1111. £ 36. 1181. £ 10.
1443. £ 115.
„ —Kent, 1415. £ 133*. 5528. [t. 65
6128. £ 13.
„ — Norfolk, 1 177. £ 134. 1552. £ 70
Bakewell, of Wakefield, &e Add. 24458. £ 9.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

i7

Baiam, of Ely, 6830. p. 51.
» of Beauford Hall, co. Camb. Add.
19,816. f. 22.
,, of Walsoken, Norfolk, 1177. £ 106.
1 552. £ 23*. 4755. £ 26. 5189 f. 38*.
6093. p. 63. 6166. p. 57. Add. 11,388.
p. 73. 19,816. ff. 178. to 181.
„ of Benstide House, Suff. Add.
I4,309. £ 122*.
Baiche, of Horton, Somerset, 1141. f. 122.
1445. £ 167*. 1559. f. 248*.
Balders, of Elsington, Norfolk, 1177. £ 104*.
1552. £21. 4755. £ 25*. 6093. p. 60.
6166. p. 56. Add. 11,388. p. 72*.
19,816. £ 21.
Baldington, of Adderbury, Oxon, 1556, £ 99*.
„ of Shiptoh, 5187. £ 43*.
Baldry, of Ipswich. Add. 19,816. f. 186.
„ of Stowmarket, 155. £ 68*. 1 137.
£ 35*- 1398. £ 3- 1432- f- 26.
Baldwin, of Redheath, Herts, 1546. £ 117.
„ of Southampton, 11 39. £ 37. Add.
14,309. £ 82.
„ of" East Bergholt and Assington.
4309. £ 121. Add. 19,116. f. 191.
„ of Mildenhall. 1560. £ 316*. Add.
19,116. ff. 193- 195-
. „ of Stoughton, Hunts, fr. Hants, 1075.
£ 25*. 1 179. £ 54. Cott. JuLF. viii.
£ 25*.
„ of Coventry, fr. Essex. 1100. £111.
1167. £ 146*. 1563. £ 184. 6060.
£ 184*.
„ of Aylesbury, Bucks, 1043. £ 27. 1533.
£ 15. 1566. £ 85*. 5814 £ 20.
„ of Diddlebury, Oxon, 1241. ff. 58. 9*.
1396. £ 21*. 1472. ff. 14*. 15*. 1982.
£ 21. 6172. ff. 12*. 17*. Add. 14,314.
ff. 56. 102*.
Bale, of Carlton and Humberston, co. Leic,
1 180. £97. 1 187. £ 127. 1 189. £ 60.
1431. £ 51*. 6183. f. 85. 6125, £ 116.
Balfour, of Denmiln, co. Fife (N.S. Bart.). Add.
¦23,684. £ 14- 23,687. £ 27.
Balguy, see also Baguley.
„ of Duffield, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
£130*. 28,113. £41.
„ of Aston. Add. 28, 1 1 3. £ 42.
de Salioll, Staff., 1077. £ 105*. Add. 19,116.
'ff. 200. 202. "
Ball, of Long Stanton, co. Camb., fr. co. Lane,
1043, £ 107. 1401. £ 30*. I534- f- 40.
6769. £ 40. 6770. £ 72*. 6774. £ 46*.
6775. £ 30*. Add. 4962. £ 27.
of Bickley and Erby, Cheshire, 1535.
" £66*. 21 19 ff. 181*. 182.
of Boughton, Cheshire, 21 19. £ 184.
" ot Chester, 2163. f. 81.
',' of Warswall, Cheshire, 2 1 19. £ 1 83.
"„ of Dublin. Add. 23,688. £ 90*.
of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 159.
of Mamhead, Devon, 10S0. £ 346*.
" 1 164. f- 54-
of Warrington, co. Lane, 1468. £ 97.

Ball, of Scottow, Norfolk, fr. cos. Derby and
Suff., 1552. f. 200.
„ of London, fr. cos. Northampton and
Warr., 1444. f. 35*. 1476. f. 105. Add.
5533. p. 112.
„ of Newcastle-on-Tyne, fr. co. Lane,
1554. £131*.
„ of Hadleigh, Suf£ Add. 19,116.
£ 2 low.
Ballard, v. Barrett.
„ of Horton, Kent, &c, 1 548, £ 180.
„ of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. £ 437*.
„ of Southwell, Notts, fr. Kent. 1400.
f- 59- '555- f- 88*.
„ of Wymsall, co. Leic. fr. co. Line.
1189. £14*. I43i.f.7. 6125. £118.
„ of Wadhurst, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076.
ff. 166. 167. 203. 204. 1084. £ 100.
1 135. f. 86. 1 194. £ 79. 1406. £ 42.
„ — Cheshire. Add. 5529. p. 11.
„ — Salop. Add 14,314. £ 54*-
BaUet, of Hatfield, Essex, fr. Suff. 1542. f.
74*.
„ of Ufford, and Melton, Suff. 1560. £
294*. Add. 19,116. £ 213.
Baium, — Devon, I09i.f. 122.
Bamborough, of Rendlesham, Suff., fr. co. Line
155. £40*. no3.f- 594, 1177. £ 52.
1449. £ 44*. 1560. £ 64*.
Bamburgh, of Howsam, Yorks., fr. co. Line.
805. £ 26. I394 p. 54. 141 5. £ 64.
1420. f. 42*. 1487. f. 289*. Add.
18,011. £ 61*. 19,116. £219.
Bamford, of Bamford, co. Lane, 1437. £ 33*.
„ of Pulehill, York. 4630. p. 24. Add.
26,739. f. 32*.
Bamforth, of Fulwood and Sheffield, Yorks.
Add. 24458. ff. 153*. 154*.
Bamme, of Gillingham, Kent, 1504. £ 121.
1548. f. 175*. Add. 16,279. p. 433.
Bampfyide, or Barafieia, of Poltimore, Devon,
889. f. 144*. 1080. f. 228*. 1091.
£ 119. 1 163. £ 62*. 1399. £ 101.
1538. f. 267*. 3288. ff. 33. 73. 5840.
f. 118. 5871. £ 35. Add. 14,309- f- 7*.
„ of Hardington, Somerset, 1 141. £ 101.
1385- f- 33*- 1445- f- H°- 1559- ff
2, 226*.
„ of Turnworth, Dorset, 1539. f. 77.
„ —Berks, 1139. £ 135*.
„ — Kent, Add. 16,279. P- 22°»
„ —Staff., 1 1 73. £ 103*.
BamviUe, of Chester, 1424 ff. 124*. 125. 1505.
ff. 123*. 124 1535. £71. 2163. £ 86.
2187. ff. 14- 31*. ._.
„ —Staff. 141 5. £ 133. ~~
Banbury, of London, 1077. £ 61. 1173. £ 53.
1570. £ 63. 6128. £ 3*.
„ —Hants, 1544 £ 113*.
Banester, or Banister.
„ of Idsworth, Hants, 1544. £ 23*.
5865. £ 24.
„ of St. John's, Middbc fr. Hants. 1468.
£ 136. D

i8

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Banester, of the Bank, co. Lane, 805. f. 27.
891. f. 91*. 1437. f. 24. 146S. f. 264.
1549. f. 29*. 2076. f. 15*. 2086. f. 61.
4204. ff. 87. (m), 131. 6159. f. 16*.
„ of Darwen, co. Lane, S91. £ 87.
1468. f. 28. 1549. f. 30. 2086. f. 35*.
6159. £ 17.
„ of Walton, co. Lane, Sloane, 1429.
£ 92*.
,, of Epworth, co. Line, fr. co. Lane
1550, £ 120*.
„ of London, fr. c. Lane 1476. £ 249.
„ of Bosworth and Upton, co. Leic. fr.
co. Staff. 1180. £ 118. 1 187. £ 122.
1 189. f. 91. 1431. £ 82*. 6125. f. 81.
6183. f. 74.
„ of Passenham, Northants, 1553.
£ 263.
„ — Northants, 1102. £ 80*. 1151.
£79*. 1 193. £80*. 1234. £22. 1391.
£ 87. 1533. ff. 16. 18*.
„ of Stainton, York, 1394. p. 19. 14 15.
£ 23. 1420. f. 147*. 1487. £ 141.
Add. 18,011. £ 167.
„ of Lacon, Salop, 615. £231*. 1241.
ff- 34, 35 (a *)•. 1472- ff 44 (« *) 45.
1982. ff. 21, 64*, 67, 162*. Add.
14,314. ff. 20. 122*.
„ of Walford, Salop, 1241. £ 10. Add-
14,314. £ 28.
„ of Croydon, Surrey, fr. co. Lane,
1046. f. 26*. 1 147. f. 18*. 1397. f. 64*.
1433. f. 62*. 1430. £20. 1561. f. ri6*.
Add. 4963 £ 24. 12478 f. 19*.
,, — Beds. fr. co. Lane 1531. £ 158.
Banke, of Bank Newton, Yorks, 1487. £ 69.
4630. p. 25. Add. 26,739. f- 33-
„ of Quixley, Yorks, 1394. p. 14.
1415. f. 20. 1420. f. 136*. 1487. f. 6*.
4630. p. 71. Add. 18,011. £ 155*.
28,739 f- 58*.
„ of Allerton, Yorks, 805. £ 29.
„ of Craven, Yorks, 1571. £ 224.
Bankes, of London, fr. co. Lane 1476. £ 453*.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff. 1476. f. 454.
„ of London, 1504. f. 103*.
„ of Peckleton, co. Leic. fr. Midd.
1 180. f. 104. 1 187. £ 130*. 1 189.
£ 61*. 1431. £ 53. 6125. £ 76.
6183. £ 93.
„ of Hadstock, Essex, £ co. York
1 541. f. 60.
„ of Withersfield, Suff., 1560. f. 333.
Banks, of Revesby, co. Line Add. 28,1 13. f. 21.
Bant, — Cornwall, 1 142. f. 21. 1149. f. 21.
1 162. f. 22.
Banyard, of Stukey, Norfolk. 1 177. £ 146.
1552. £90*. 4755. f. 48, 5189. £49*.
6093. f. 130. Add. 19,816. f. 36*.
Baran, of Wells, Somerset, 1141. £ 86. 1445.
f. 122*. 1559. f. 213*.
Barber, of Hertford, fr. London, 1234. f. 145.
1504. f. 163. 1547. £68.
of Adderbury, Oxon, 1480. £ 60*.
1557- f. 53-

Barber, of Bury, Suffolk, 891. f. 11*. 1560.
f. 172. Add. 19,116. f. 228.
„ of Fressingiield, Suff. Add. 19,116.
£ 232.
„ of Uggeshall, Suff. Add. 19,116.
£ 234.
„ — Somerset, 11 73, f. 36*.
Barbor, of Flashbrooke, co. Staff., 1415. £ 112. '
1535. £ 126*. 1570. £ 40. 6104. ff. 5*.
6. 6138. £ 38*.
Barbour, of Doncaster, 141 5. £ 34- I42°> f- 193*.
Barby.of Washfield, Devon.fr. Northants, 1080.
£223*. 1163. £55*.
Barclay, of Bury Hill, Surrey, and of Leyton,
Essex. Add. 19,116. £ 237. 244.58.
ff. 101*, 102.
Bard, of London, fr. co. Line Add. 5533. p. 173.
„ of North Kelsey, co. Line, 1097.
£63*. 1 190. f. 44. 1484. £10. 1550.
£51*.
Bardolfe, — Norfolk, 1041. ff. 9*. 45*. 1 177. f.
J39*- 1552. f. 77. 6093. £ 126. Add.
19,116. £ 242.
„ of St. Michael's, Herts, 1547. £ 2*.
„ of Harpenden, Herts, 1433. £ 14
1504. f. 53*. 1 546. £ 37. 6147. £ 37*.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff., 1444. £ 83*.
1476. £ 219*.
Bardsey, of Bardsey, co. Lane, 1541. £ 60.
1549. f. 162*.
„ of London, fr. co. Lane, 1476. £ 195.
„ of Shrewsbury, 1396. £ 30*. 1472.
£ 24*.
Bardus, of Mansfield Woodhouse, Notts. Add.
24458. f. 302*.
Bardwell, of Southwold, Suff., 891, £ 28. 1449.
£185. 1484. f. 50. 15(10. f. 11*. Add.
19,116. f. 272.
„ — Northants, 890. p. 9. 1094. £ 105.
1184. £ 102. 1 187. f. 28*. 1188. p. 29.
1553. £ 10. 5829. f. 83.
Barentyne, of Plumpton, Sussex, 1084 £ 122*.
1 135. f. 108*. 1194.fr. 101*. 118. 1406.
£97*. 1562. ff. 19*. 48. 5829. £42*.
Earfoote,— Somerset, 1385. £54*. 1445. £211*.
1559. £35*.
Barford, of Wisham, co. Leic, 6125. £ 118*.
Bargrave, of Bifrons, Kent, I ro6. £ 7*. 1432.
£174. 1548. f. 51*. 2198. £92*. Add.
5507. pp. 39. 40 (a.) 5526. p. 12.
„ of Canterbury., Add. 23,750. £7.
Barham, of Barham, Kent, 1 548. ff. 119 163*.
1484. f. 67. 21 56. ff. 30. and 31*. Add.
5532. p. 107.
„ of Boughton, Kent, fr. Sussex, 1106.
£ 181. 1432. f. 294*. 1484. £ 67.
1566. f. 20*i Add. 5507. p. 369. 5526.
p. 376. 23,750. £11.
„ of Maidstone,. 1548.f-.26. 2156. £80.
Add. 5532. p. 24.
„ of Teeson, Kent, 1531. £ 84*. Add.
16,279. P- 341-
„ of Canterbury. Add. 5528. £ 138-}.
„ of New Windsor, Berks, fr. Surrey.
Add. 14,284. p. 139.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

»9

Barham, of Wandsworth, Surrey. Add. 4963.
f 74
Barker, of Chesham, Bucks, 1102. £7*. 1139.
£ 100. 1151. £ 5*. I234 £ 56*. I39i.f.
8. 1 193. £6*. 1533.fr. 12*. 164*. 174.
„ of Horwood, Bucks, fr. Northants,
1 102. f. 27*. 1 1 5 1. f. 26. 1 193. f. 27(a.b.).
1234. f. 31*. 1391. ff. 30*. 31.
„ of Southley, Bucks, 1102. £43*. 1151.
£42*. 1 193. £ 43*. 1234 £48. 1391.
£46*. 1533. £ 133*.
„ of Culworth, Northants, 1553. £246*.
„ of Anstey, co. Warwick, fr. Berks,
6060. £ 176.
„ of Coventry, Warwick, fr. Berks,
1109. £ 106*. 1167. £ 140. 1563. £96*.
„ of Sunning, Berks, 1483. £ 63*. 1530.
£ 36*. 37. 1532. ff. 14*. 135*. 6173.
£ 12. Add. 14,284. p. 11.
„ of Monkrigg, Essex, 1083. £ 61. 1137.
£126*. 1432. £130. 1542. £ 7. 6065.
£ 121. Add. 14,290. f. 86.
„ of Barlow, Chester. Add. 24,458.
£ 52*.
„ ofDore, co. Derby, 1093. £ 117. 1153.
£ 93*. i486. £ 57*. 1537. £ 91*. Egert
996. f. 26*.
„ of Sheldon, Derby. Add. 24458.
£ 59*. 28,113. £ 137-
„ of Bakewell, co. Derby. Add. 24458!
£ no.
„ Potter Newton, co." Derby. Add.
24,458. £ 229*.
of Chigwell, Essex, fr. Berks, 1541.
ff- 59 133-
„ of Fairfax, co. Glouc. Add. 24,458.
ff. 84*. 85.
„ of Chartham, Kent, fr. Suff, 1548.
£89.
, of London, 1560. £ 225. 1820. £ 19.
„ of London, fr. Bucks, 1476. f. 459*.
„ of London, fr. Essex and Yorks., 1476.
ff. 225*. 342*.
„ or, Coverall, of Colehurst, Salop,
1291. £ 93*. 1396. £ 19*. 1424- f- 57-
1472. £ 12*. 1476 £320. 1505. £57.
1535. f. 167*. 21 19. f. 137.
„ of Hamon, Salop, 1241, ff. 12. 23*.
107*. 1396. ff. 19*. 269*. 1472. £ 12*.
1982. ff. 29. 36. 76. 148. Add. 14,314.
£99*. 21,017. £ in.
„ of Grimston Hall, Suffolk. Add.
19,116. £282.
of Bocking Hall, Suffolk, and of
" Kilcooley, co. Kilkenny. Add. 19,116.
£ 286.
„ of Bildeston, Suff., 1449- f- 86*. 1560.
£ 211*.
„ of Ipswich, 1449- f- 59*- JS6°-
£ 264. 1820. £ 37.
of Frimley.Suff., 1 560X264. i82Q.£37.
of Clare Priory, &c, Suffolk. Add.
" 19,116. ff. 304-318. 329
of Dronfield, Yorks, and of Drayton,
" Salop (Bart). Add. 24458. £ 94*.

»n

» n»

Barker, — co. Leicester, 6125. f. 118.
„ or, Taylor, — CO. Clouc, 5533. p. 123.
Barkesdale, of Newbury, Cheshire, 1424. f. 61*.
1505. f. 61. 1535. £136*.
Barkesworth, or Basforth, of Thormanby,
Yorks, 1394. p. 152. 1415. f. n. 1420.
f. 11 1. 1487. f. 301*. Add. 18,01 1. £ 132.
„ of Thorp, Yorks, 805. £ 30.
„ —Suffolk. Add. 19,116. £ 331.
Barkham, of Merrifield, Dorset, 1 166. £55*.
1451. £ 90. 1539. f. 144*.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1444 £ 74.
1476. £ 248.
„ of Withersdale, Suffolk. Add. 19,116.
£277. — Essex, 1083. £ 24. 1542. £ 65*.
— Norfolk, 1504. £ 95*.
Barkley, &e — v. Berkeley.
Barksted, of London, fr. co. Staff. Add. 5533.
•p. 206.
Bariee, of Albery, Essex, 1 54 1. £ 187.
of E-senham, Essex, 1541. £ 182.
of Stapleford, Essex, 1541. ff. 37. 199.
or Barley, of Clavering, Essex, &e,
1504. f. 72. Add. 19,116. £ 332.
Barleigh, or Borleigh,— Dorset, 1 166. £3*. 145 1.
£ 12. 1539. £ 90*.
Barley, of Barley, co. Derby, 886. £ 36b. 1093.
£39. ii53-f-93- 1537- £ no*, i486.
£ 37. Egert. 996. ff. 20*. 41*. Add.
28,113. ff. 21*, 23.98*.
„ of Dransfield, Woodhouse, co. Derby,
886. £ 34*. 1093. £ 33. 1537. £ 37.
2113. £ 103. 2134. £ 47*. 6592. £ 32*.
Add. 28,113. £ 24.
„ of Bibsworth Hall, Herts,
£147. I504.f.i62. I547.£65*.
£149-
„ of Woodsome, Northants, 1 1 87.
1188. p. 91.
„ — Surrey, 1561. £ 19*.
Barling, of Kent. Add. 5528. £ 92.
Barlow, of Stoke, co. Derby, 886. £ 11*.
£70. i486, f. 54*. 1537. £7.
£ 15. Egert. 996. £ 32*.
„ of Calcutta, Bart. Add. 23,684.
ff. 125. 129.
„ of Chichester, fr. Chesh., 1076. £ 67.
1540. £ 53. 1562. £ 193*. 6164 £ 18.
„ of Sheffield. Add. 24458. £ 266.
„ ofLondoh,outafYorks. Add.19,116.
£ 341.
„ of Barlow, co. Lane, 1549 £ 27. 1468.
£ 13. 2086. £ n *. 6159. £ 15*. Add.
12,477- f- 37*.
„ —Hants, fr. co. Pemb., 1 139. £ 22*.
1544. £ 58*.
Barmby. of Yoxford, Suff. Add. 19, 1 16. £ 348
Barnaby, of Colchester, 1137. £ 41*. 1432.
£32*. 1 541. f. 58*.
Barnake, or Barnack, — Cheshire, 1424. £ 32*.
1505. £ 31. 1535- f- 85*. 2187. f. 36.

12341550.£ 66.

1093.
6592.

20

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Barnake, v. Bernake, or Barnaek.
„ co. Leic, 1 1 80. f. iS*. 11S9. f. 19*.
1431. f. 12*. 6125. f. 26. 6183. f. 27.
„ or Barnaek, — Northants, 890. £ 1 8*.
1171. £ 31. 1187.fr. 35.74. n88.pp.
38. 101. 1553. ff. 164. 203.
„ —Notts, 886. f. 52*. 1400. ff. 26. 70*.
Barnard,— Lord Willoughby. Add. 19,116. £ 352.
„ of Spilsby, co. Line, 1550. £ 139*.
„ of Bridford, Notts, 1555. f. 158*.
„ of Pirton, Oxon, 808. £ 8*. 1095.
£27*. I4i2.f. 89*. 1556. £149*. 5187.
£ 12. Lansd. 880. f. 21*.
„ of Downside, Somerset, 1 141. £ 108*.
1445. ff. 147*. 202. 1559. £ 232*.
'„ of Sheffield. Add. 24458. £ 268.
„ of Hull and South Cave. Add. 24,458.
£ 221*.
„ — Essex, fr. co. York, 1 137. £ 50*.
1432. £ 41*. 1541. f. 104*. 6065. £ 74.
„ — co. Derby, 1093. £ 73*. Add.
5509 ff. 17*., 19*.
Barnardiston, of Northill, Beds, fr. Suff., 1097.
£ 30. 1390. £ 19. 1531. £ 17. 2109.
£27. 4600. p. 37. 5186. p. 9. Lansd.
864. p. 37. Add. 19,1 16. £ 371. 28,1 13.
£ 9*.
„ of Witham, Essex, fr. Suff. 1083. £ 25.
„ of Ketton, Suff, 155. £ 65*. 891.
£21. 1449. £ 57*. 1484. £43*. 1560.
£ 120. Add. 19,116. £ 356.
„ of Brightwell, Suff. Add. 19,116.
f. 356. to 369.
„ of Ryes, Suff. Add. 19,116. £ 373.
„ of London, fr. Essex and Suff.
1476. £ 322.
„ — co. Line, 1097. £ 108. 1 190. £ 93*.
1484. £ 31*.
Barnby, of Barnby Hall, Yorks., 805. £ 31. 1394.
p. 254. 1415. £ 31. 1420. £ 182
1487. £ 122*. 4630. p. 20. Add. 18,011.
£ 202.
„ of York. Add. 14, 309. £ 63*. 26,739.
ff. 30. 30*. 38*.
Barne, of London, 1463. ff. 52*. 54. 65. 1476.
£ 406*. 1504. ff. 116*. 175*. 1541.
f- 193-
„ of Sotterley, Suffolk. Add. 19,117. £ 1.
Barneby, of Acton, co. Worcester, fr. Salop,
1043. £ 30. 1352. £ 3*. 1396. £ 90*.
i486. £ 3*. 1566. f. 95*. 5814. ff. 4*.
24*. Add 19,816. £ 103*.
„ —co. Glouc, 1543. £ 35.
Barnes, of Bedbum, co. Durham, 1 153. f. 37*.
1168. f. 20*. 1397. f. 217*. 1540.
£ 73*.
„ Bishop (of Durham), 805. f. 33. Add.
18,011. f. 46.
„ of Tallon, co. Wore, 1043. £ 33.
1566. £ 114. 5814. f. 36.
„ or, Bernes, of Soame, co. Camb.,
1401. £ 86. 1534. f. no. 6774. £ 105.
6775. £ 106. Add. 4962. £ 80*.
„ of Duntishcourt, Dorset', 1166. £ 5*.
1451. £ 14*. 1539. f. 93*. '

Barnes, of Thoby, Essex, fr. Surrey, 1137.
f. 29. i4S4.f. 53*. i433-f.2i*. 1541.
f. 112.
„ of Allerton, Yorks, 1394. P-- 8. 1415-
£ 50*. 1420. £ 27. 1487- f- 177-
„ of Wadsley, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£ 185*.
„ of Woolwich, Kent, 1106. f. 163.
1432. £ 282*.
„ of London, 1096. £ 52*. 1463. £ 12*.
Baraesdale, of Barwick, Norfolk, 1552. £ 151.
6093. £ 182.
Earnesley, of Tresley, co. Staff., 1077. £ 105.
1 173. £ 95. 1415. £ 129*. 1570. £ 79*.
6104. £ 6*. . 6128. £ 87*.
„ of Barnsley Hall, co. Wore, 1566.
£ 153*-
„ of London, fr. co. Staff., 1476. £ 158
„ of Lambeth, Surrey, 1046. £ 104*.
1 147. £ 167. 1397. £ 143*- 1430.
£ 173. 1433. £ 134*. 1561. £ 184.
Add. 4963. f. 177.
Barnston, of Churton, Cheshire, 1 535. £ 54
Barnett, — Herts, 1 546. £ 57*.
Barnewall, Visct. Kingsland. Add. 14,839.
ff. 73- 74-
„ Lord Trimsleston, 1425. £ 150.
„ of Turvey, co. Dublin, 1425. f. 122.
„ of Crickstown, co. Meath, Bart.
extinct. Add. 23,685. ff. 122. 126.
Barneys, of Finchingfield, Essex, 1137. £ 36*.
1432. £ 27*. 1548. £ 168*.
Barnfield, of Newport, Salop, 1241. £ 105.
1396. f. 23. 1472. f. 16. 6172. £ 21.
Barnham, of Hollingborne, Kent, fr. Hants,
1 106. £189*. 1432. £301. Add. 5507.
P-79- 5526. p. 396. Add. 23,750. £ 12.
,, of Odiham, Hants, 1544 £ 130*. ,
,, of London, fr. Hants, 1463. £ 53.
„ of Bilsington, Surrey. Add. 14,311.
£ 11.
Barnhouse, of Marshe, Devon, 1080. £ 332.
1091. £ 78. 1164. £ 57*. 1538. £195*.
5871. £4*.
„ — Beds, 2109. f. 90.
Barnwell, of St. Albans, iHerts, 1504. £ 19*.
1546. £ 6b. 6147. £ 12*.
„ of Cransley and Mileham, Northants,
fr. co. Galway, 890. p. 16. 1094. £ 60*.
1138. £43*. 1171. £18*. 1184-f. 56*.
1187. f- 45- "88. p. 55. 1552. f. 232.
1553* f- 33- 4756. £ 86*. 6066. £ 73*.
Add. 19,1 17. £ 10. 24,458. f. 74*.
Baron v. Barne.
„ of Plymouth, Devon, 1080. £ 347.
„ of Stoke, Devon, 889. f. 130*. 1080.
£ 430*. 1091. £ 105*. 3288. £ 1 10*.
5871. £ 31*
„ of Redivale, co. Lane Add. 24458.
f. 314.
„ of Honelestone (?). Add. 14,309. f. 100
„ of Windsor, Berks, fr. co. Wilts,
1483. £ 133*. 1530. £ 80. Add.
14,284. p. 126.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

21

Baron, of Trumpington, co. Cambs, 1043.
f. 111*. 139 r. f. 40*. 1401. f. 89.
1534 f. 114. 6830. p. 109.
„ .of Layer Britton, Essex, 1083. f. 37*.
1137- f- 120. 1432. ff. 50. 119. 1541.
£ 102. 1542. £ 102*. Add. 14,290. £71*.
„ of Low Lay ton, fr. London, 1083
£ 72*. 1 137. £ 132. 1432. £ 141.
1542. £ 77. Add. 14,290. £ 97*.
de la Barre, — London, 1476. £ 24.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 8.
Barre, — Northants, 1 1 87. ff. 83*. 94*.
Barrell, of Isleworth, Middlx., fr. Suff. and
Heref., 1468. £ 125. Add. 4964. f. 94.
19,117. £ 18.
Barret, of Cratfield, and of Bury, Suff. Add.
19,117. £ 20«. 19,118. £ 13.
Barrett, v. Ballard.
„ of Deforden, co. Cambs, 1043. £ 93*.
i4oi.f.72. 1534 £ 95*., 6769. £ 27.
6770. £ 47. 6774. £ 91. 6775. £ 92.
Add. 4962. £ 67*.
„ of Penquite, Cornwall, 4031. £ 76*.
„ of St. Sampson, Cornwall, 1142.
£136*. 1 149. £136*. 1 162. £ 139*.
„ of Tregarne, Cornwall, 1079. £ 179*.
1 142. £ 34*. 1 149. £ 33*. 1 162. f. 35*.
4031. £ 77*.
„ of Sherbourne, fr. Wilts, 1539. £ 3*.
„ of Aveley, Essex, 1398. £ 11*. 1541.
£ 21*. 6065. f. 40. Add. 5509. f. 14.
„ of Filbeche, Kent. Add. 16,279.
p. 222.
„ ofWimsoIe, co. Leic, 1180. £ 70
1 187. £ 122. 1 189. f. 83*. 1 195. f. 89*.
1431. £ 75. 6125. £ 72*. 6183. £ 73*.
„ of London. Add. 19,117. f. 33.
24458. £167.
„ of Blithborough and Westhall, Suff.,
1163. £ 89. 1 177. £ 74. 1449- ff- 48*.
78. 1560. f. 106*. Add. 19,117. £ 22.
„ of Doncaster. Add. 24,458. £ 299*.
„ of Castlemore, co. Cork. Add.
23,685. £36.
„ — co. Cambridge, 1401. £ 88. Add.
4962. £ 82*.
„ —Wore, 1396. £ 59.
Barrington, V. Barentyne.
„ Viscount. Add. 14,839 f- "7-8.
, of Barrington, Essex, 1100. £ 87.
1 137. ff. 40*. 41. 1 167. £ 105*. 1 195.
£ 71- I432- f- 31** I54I- ff- J8*. 40*.
1542. £ 227. 1563. £124*. 6065. £24.
of Hatfield Broad Oak, and of
" Messing, Essex. Add. 19,117. £ 34.
—Sussex, 1084. £ 45*- 1194.fr. 24*.
108. 1562. £22*. Add. 14,311. £ 18*.
Barron, of Flokersbrook. fr. Chesh., 2156. £ 44
Barrow, or, Burrow, of Colehampton, Devon,
889. £ 27*. 1080. £ 373- 1091. f. 51.
5840. £ 10*. 5871- *• "• „ ,
of Walden, Essex, fr. co. Camb.,
" 1542. £125.
of Potterspury, Northants, fr. Chesh.,
" 1094. £ 200*. 1184 f. 195*. 1553.
f. 156*.

Barrow, of Shipdam, Norfolk, fr. co. Line,
1177.fr. 119*. 169*. 1552. £43. 4755.
f. 17. 5189. f. 34*. 6093. pp. i. 200.
of Westhorpe, Suff., 1560. f. 236*.
„ of Bamingham, Suff., out of Line
Add. 19,117. £ 44.
„ of Gazeley, Suff. Add. 19,117, £ 47.
„ of Bollingham, co. Heref., 1 140. £ 8.
1 159. f. 8. 1442. £ 8. 1545. £ 14-5.
Add. 19,815. £5.
„ of Collington, co. Heref., 1140. £ 3*.
1 1 59. f. 3*. 1442. £ 3*. 1545. £4*.
„ of Hinxhill, Kent, 1548. £147. Add-
5528. f. 62. 5532. p. 40*.
„ of Chester and Churton, co. Chesh.,
1535. ff. 65. 131. 21 19. £180. Add.
5529. p. 12.
„ — Hants, 1043. f. 66. 1401. £ 32. 1534.
42. 6769. ff. 9*. 17. 6770. £ 20*. 6775.
£32. 6830. p. 33. Add. 4962. £28*.
„ —co. Glouc, 1 041. £ 66.
Barry, Earl of Barrymore. Add. 14,838. ff. 68.
to 71*.
„ Lord Barry, 1425. f. 31*. 32. 34*. 35.
„ of Dublin (extinct Baronet). Add.
23,685. £ 60. 23,687. £ 187.
„ of Skilkerran, co. Cork (extinct
Baronet). Add. 23,685. £ 171.
„ of Thurston, Chesh., 1535. £ 154*.
„ of Bickington, Devon, 1080. £ 56.
1 163. £130. 1399. £77*.
„ of Bindon, Devon, 889. £ 69. 1080.
£ 56. 1091. ff. 44. 95. 1399. £ 40*.
1 538. £ 1 36*. 5 1 85. f. 10*. 5840. £ 89.
5871. f. 21.
„ of Winscott, Devon, 889. £ 117.
1091. f. 95. 1425. f. 36. 3288. £ 36.
Add. 14,315. p. 70.
„ of Sevington, Kent, 1484. £ 68.
1532. f. I15*. 1548. ff. 23*. 177*. Add.
16,279. pp. 371-377-
„ of Ensham and Thamey Oxon, 808.
£27. 1095. £51*. 1097. £7*. 1480.
£ 61*. 1556. £ 88*. 1557. £ 55*.
5187. £34*.
„ of Syleham, Suff. 1449. £ 13. . .1560.
£15*. Add. 19,117. ff. 66. to 72.
„ — Beds., 2109. £ 63.
„ —co. Derby, 1093. £ 126. Egert 996.
£ 20.
„ —Essex, 1 137. £ 66*. 1432. £ 59*.
1 541. £99
„ —Hants, 5865. £ 38*.
„ —Norfolk, 1 177. £ 139*. 1552. ff.
77. 172*. 6093. £ 126.
„ — co. Staff., 6128. £ 90*.
Barsham, of Oxwick and Colkirke, Norfolk,
1552. f. 131. 4204. £182*. 4756. £59.
„ — Essex, 1 137. £ no*. 1432. £ 105.
Add. 19,117. f. 75.
Bartholomew, of Bickton, Hants, 1139. £ 12*.
1544. ff. 32. 178.
Barthropp, of Hackeston and Parham, Suff.
Add. 19,117. ff. 77 to 79.
„ of Hollesley, Suff. Add. 19,117. £ 81.

22

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Barttelot, or Bartlett.
„ of London, 1463. f. 'J>. 1551. f. 46*.
„ of Senbury, co. Glouc, fr. co. Wore,
1041. £ 25. 1191. f. 22*. 1543. £4.
„ of Wisborough Green, Sussex, 1076.
£95. 10S4. f. 45. 1 135. f. 31. 1 194
£ 24. 1406. f. 63. 1562. f. 37*. 6164.
£ 61.
„ of Bodland and Stopham, Sussex,
1043. £ 109*. 1076. £ 95. 1084. £ 45.
JI35- f- 3i- 1 194 f- 24. 1406. £ 63.
1562. £ 37*. 5829. £ 32*. 6164. £ 61.
6769. £ 43. 6770. ff. 62*. 63.
Bartlett, of Redlead, Sussex, 1084. £ 44*.
1 135. £ 30*. 1 194. £ 23*. 1562. £61.
5829. f. 56.
Barton, of Weobly, co. Heref., 1 140. £ 27.
1545. £ 37*.
„ of Barton, co. Lane, 891. £ 71*. 1 139.
£ 43. 1468. £ 30. 1533 £ 56*. 1535.
£29. 1549 £ 31*. 2086. £ 54 21 19
£138. 2142. £117. 5i8i.p. 80. 5832.
p. 46. 5868. f. 44. 6159. £ 18*. Add.
5529 P- 37- 12477. £ 24.
„ of Smithills, co. Lane, 1468. £ 30*.
1549. ff. 32. 93. 2076. £ 17. 2086. £ 24.
6159. £ 19. Add. 12477. £ 42.
„ of Stockerston, co. Leicester. Add.
5509. £ 26*.
„ of Estcott, Northants, 1553. £ 79.
„ of Stoke, co. Staff., 810. ff. 1*. 10.
1570. £ 44. 6128. £ 19.
„ of Diddlestone, Salop, 1241. £ 146*.
1472 £ 22*.
„ of Grimston, Suff. Add. 14,309.
£ n*.
„ ofWoodbridge, Suff. (the poet). Add.
19,177. f- 84
„ of Cawton, Yorks, 1394 p. 129.
1415. £ 91*. 1420. £ 93*. 1487. £ 195*.
Add. 18,011. £113*.-
„ of Fritton, Yorks, 2086. £ 59.
„ . of Newton-on-Derwent, Yorks, 1394.
p. 84. 1420. f. 67. 1487. £ 195. Add.
18,011. £86.
„ of Whenby, Yorks, 805. ff. 34 to 38.
1394 p. 23. 1415. £ 39. 1420. £ 17.
1487. £ 194. 1499. £ 36. Add.
i8,oii.£6.
Bartram, of Barlastone and Cocknage, co.Staff.,
1077. £ 76. 1173. f. 68. 1415. £ 122.
1570. £66*. 6128. f. 57.
Barweii, of Ransome, co. Derby, fr. co. Leic,
Egert. 996. f. 80.
„ co. Leic, 1041. £ 114*. 1543. £ 27*.
Barwick, of Westhorpe, Suff. 891. £ 10. 1449
ff. 50.64*. 1552. £187*. i56o.f. 154*.
Add. 19,117. £ 91.
„ of Wilcott, Wilts, fr. Northumb., 888.
f. 19. mi. ff. 86. 92. 1 181. p. 35.
1443. £ 214*. 1565. f. 30*. 5184. p. 18.
Barwick, of Doncaster. Add. 24,458. £ 301.
„ —Essex, 1 137. f. 74*. 1432. £67*.
„ —Notts, 1555. £ 162*.
Barzey, — Salop, 1 396. £ 250*.

Base, of Benhall, Suffolk. Add. 19,117. £ 94.
Basford, of St. Albans, Herts, 810. f. 2.
„ — co. Line, 1097. £ 63. 1190. f. 45.
Bash, of Stansted Bury, Herts, 1504. £ 17*.
1546. ff. 5. 50. 6147. £ 7.
Basing,— Bucks, 1533. £ 36.
„ —Rutland, 1558. £ 56. .
„ —Essex, 1 137. £ 48*. 1432. £ 40. 1541.
£ 170.
Baskerviie, of Cardworth. co. Leic, n 80. £ 20*.
1 189 £ 24. 1431. £ 17*. 6125. f. 30.
6183. £31.
„ of Erdisley, co. Heref., 1140. ff. 9. 18.
27. 37. 46. 75. 1159.fr. 9. 18.27.37.
46. 75. 1442. ff. 9. 18. 27. 37. 46. 78.
1544. £ 52*. 1545. ff. 14. 35*. 46. 88*.
2156. ff. 66 to 67*. 5865. £ 27*. Add.
19,815. ff. 7. 31(7/-). 12*. to. 14. f. 21.
ff. 66-68.
„ of Pontrillas, co. Hereford. Add.
19,815. £ 67*.
„ of Wolvershill, co. Worc, 1566. ff. 41.
104*.
„ of Sunningwell, Berks, fr. co. Heref.
1483. £ 79*. 1530. £ 56*. 1532. £ 72*.
4204. £ 206. Add. 14,284. p. 66;
„ of Whitington, Cheshire, 1535. £ 73*.
„ — Salop, 1 241. £ 66*. 1396 f. 253*.
Add. 14,314 £ 3*.
Baskett, of Dewlish, Dorset, n66_ £ 21*. 1451.
£ 36. 1539. £ 109. Add. 14,315. p. 158.
„ of Allington, Hants, and the Isle of
Wight, 1544. £ 122.
„ of Chichester, Sussex, fr. Dorset.
1076. f. 78. 1084. £ 68. 1 1 35. £ 54
1 194. f. 47. 1406. f. 126*. 1562. f. 139*.
5829. £ 117. 6164. £ 56*.
Basnet, of Coventry, of London, of Bath, and
of Nottingham. Add. 24458. f. 85*.
Baspole, or, Basepoole, of Beeston, Norfolk,
1 177. £ 164. 1552. £ 128*. 4755. £68*.
5189 £58*. 6093. f. 165*. Add. 19,816
f- 51-
Bassano, of London, 1476, £ 156*.
„ of Waltham, Essex, 1542. £ 127*.
Basse, of London, 1444. £ 33. Add. 5533.
p. in.
Basset, or Bassett, of Drayton,. &c. (lord of
Parliament), 1352. £ 25. 1400. £ 71*.
i486. £ 15*. Add. 14,309 £ 23*. 19,1 17.
£ 103.
„ of Flamborough,.Beds, 2109, £ 73*.
„ of Tehidy, Cornwall, 1079. £ 124.
1 142. £ 90*. 1149; £ 91*. 1162. f.95*.
„ of Langley, ca: Derby, i486, f. 45*.
1537. £ 106*. Egert. 996. ff. 13*. 62*.
„ of Sapcotes. co. Derby, 8io_. f. 6*.
1093. ff. 36. 90*. 1400. £ 79. 1555. ff.
37. 122. 6159. £ 40*.
„ of Umberleigh,, Devon, 1080. £ 343*.
1091. £ 122. 1538. £297. Add. 12479.
£ 46.
„ of Yewley, co. Glouc, 1041. f. 20.
1 191. f. n. 1543. £ 9*.
„ of Weldon, Notts., 1400. £ 70*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

23

Basset, or Bassett, of Fledborough, Notts.
10S2. f. 64*. 1093. ff. 34. 57*. 1400.
17*. 1415- f. 108*. 1555. ff. 37*. 150*.
1570. f. 8*.
,, of Blore and Grindon, co. Staff, fr.
co. Derby. 1077. £ 18*. 1173. ff. 15*.
17*. 18*. 79 1415.fr. no. 124. 1439.
ff. 45*. 46 (a. b.) 1484. £ 34*. 1535.
£ 129. 1562. £ 7. 1570. ff. 30*. 47 (a. *.)
6128. ff. 5. 52. Add. 14,309. £ 79.
„ of Netherall, Suff. Add. 19,117.
£ 107.
„ Baron Haddington (Cheshire), 1424.
f. 96. 1505. £ 94*. 1535. £ 212*.
2ii9.£69*.
„ of Bassett, Cheshire, 1535, £ 45.
2187. f. 150*.
„ of North Luffenham, Rutland, 1094.
£248. n84f. 243. 1558. £28. 3391.
£ 116*.
„ —Essex, 1 1 37. £ 45. 1432. £ 36*.
1484 f. 57-
„ — co. Derby, fr. co. Staff. 1484. £ 34*.
6592. £ 4.
„ — Salop, 1982. ff. 114. 115.
Bassingborne, of Woodhall, Herts, Sloane,
1429 £ 51*. 1449. £ 44. 1534. £ 16.
2109. £72*.
Bassisford, of Barham, Kent. Add. 16,279.
p. 436. (m).
Bastard, of Dunham, Norfolk, 1552. £ 24. 6093.
p. 65.
„ of Watlington, Norfolk, 4755. £ 26*.
„ of West Winch, Norfolk, 1 1 77. £ 106*.
1552. ff. 24. 66*. 5189. £ 39. 6093.
p. 95. 6166. p. 57. Add. 11,388. p. 73.
14,309. £ 123*. 19,816. f. 22*.
„ of Gerston, Devon. 1080. £ 241*.
1 163. £83.
„ of Duloe, Cornwall, 1079. £ 68. 1142.
£ 23*. 1 149. £ 23*. 1 162. £ 24*.
Baston, co Line, 1550. £ 179.
Bate,ofBoylstone, co. Derby. Add. 19,816. £ 65*.
„ of Jurdenthorpe and Greenhill, co.
Derby. Add. 24458. £ 301*.
„ of West Lathe, Yorks., fr. co. Lane,
805. £ 38. 1394. p. 136. 1415- f- 93*-
1420. £ 99*. 1487. £ 328. Add. 18,011.
£ 120.
,, of Lydd,&e, Kent. Add. 5528. £ 180.
„ —Norfolk, fr. co. Derby, 1552. £ 153*.
4755. f. 82*. 5189. £69. 6093. £ 186.
„ —co. Lane, n 53. £ 83*.
Bateman, Viscount. Add. 14,839. £ 127.
„ of Hartington Hall, co. Derby, &c,
6104. £ 93*. Add. 24,458. £ 109*.
28,113. ff 17*. and 18. ff. 49 and 49*.
,, of Flixton, Suff., 155. £ 29*. 1103.
£87*. H77-f-73- 1449 f- 7o. 15°°.
£105*. Add. 19,117- f- H9
Bateman, —Kent. Add. 5528. £ 151*.
of London, fr. co. Derby, 1444. £ 14.
1476. £ 134- Add. 5533- P- 23.
Bates, of Blaxhall, Suff. Add. 191 17. £ 133-

Bath, Add. 24,458. £ 144*. (.._).
de Bath, Add. 19,117. f. 135.
Batham, — Essex, 1137. f. 45. 1432. f. 36*.
Bathurst, of Lechlade, co. Glouc, fr. Kent,
1041. £ 112. 1543. £ 16S*. 1548. £ 177.
„ of Charlton, Berks., fr. Kent. 1483.
£ 1 1 1*. 1 530. £ 65*. Add. 14,284. p. 87.
„ of Horsmonden, Kent Add. 23,750.
ff. ob 10.
„ of Catchlade, Kent Add. 16,279.
p. 119.
„ of Finchcox, Kent, 1106. £ 196.
1432. £ 306*. Add. 5507. p. 162.
5526. p. 409.
„ of Franks. Kent, no6. £ 183
1432. £ 296. Add. 5507. p. 161.
5526. p. 383.
„ (Notes & M. I.) Add. 14, 835. £ 83*.
Batt, of Okewell Yorks, 4630. p. 26. Add.
26,739 f- 33*-
Batte, — Kent, 1548. f. 171*.
BatteU, of Farnham, Surrey, 1394. f. 53.
1420. f. 34*. is6i.£ 13.
» — Essex, 1137.ffi.4i*. 58. 1432. f£ 32.
50. 1541. f. 102. 6065. £ 137*.
„ als. Skipwith, of Yorks, 2156. f. 71.
Batteley, of Bekiston, Kent. Add. 5528. £ 171.
„ oi Bury St Edmunds. Add. 24,458.
£ 139-
„ of Rumburgh, Suff. Add. 19,117.
£ 144.
Batten, of East Garston and Ardington, Berks,
1483. £ 116*. 1530. £ 52*. Add
14,284 p. 52*.
„ or Battin, of Dunslaad, Devon, 1080.
£58. logi.f.so*. ri42.£ 17. ii49.£i7*.
1162. f. 18. 1 163. £ 184*. 1164. £ 37*.
1538. £159. 5871.fi 33. Add. 14,315.
p. 50.
Battersby, of Harrabeare, Corn-wall, fr. co.
York, 1079. f. 60. 1142. £ 7. 114a
£8*. 1 162. £8*.
BattSscom.be, of Veeres Wotton, Dorset, 1166.
£ 12*. 145 1. f. 12. 1539 £ 97A.
1541. f. 214.
Battle, of Sheffield. Add. 2_f4581£ 54*.
„ of Dewsbury, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£ 147.
„ of Woodbridge, &c, Suff. Add.
19,117. £ 151.
Battiscroft, of Bexwell, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 93*.
1552. £ 208.
Battisford, of Chesterton, co. Cambridge, 1043.
£ no*. 1534. £ 117.
„ — Suffolk. Add. 19,117. £ 155.
Battishiii, of West-wick, Devon^" 889 £ 133*.
1080. f. 38. 1091. f. 99. 1163. £ 10*.
1399- f- 91*- 1538- f. 230. 3288. £36*.
5185. £11*. 5840. £ 107. 5871. £32.
Baugh, of Twining, co. Glouc, 104-. £ 105. 1543.
£ 137*-
Baugh, of Milcombe, Oxon, 148a £58. 1557.
£ 48.
„ of Aldencourt, Salop, 1396 £ 28*.
1472. £ 20*. 1982. £ 4.

24

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

savant, of Chester, 1535. f. 65*. 2163. f. 85.
de Bavent, (lord of Parliament). Add. 19,117.
£158. .
Bavent, of Billesley, Suff. Add. 19,117. £ 161.
„ —Somerset, 1 141. £ 97*. 1385. £ 29.
1445. £ 136*. 1559. ff. 4. 223*. Add.
12477. £ 65*.
Baver,— Staff., 6128. £ 41*.
Bawde, of Walgravej Northants, 1094 £ 209*.
1 1 84. £ 204*. 1 5 53. £ 1 70.
„ of Hadham, Suff. Add. 19,1 17. £ 169.
„ of Harwold, Beds, fr. Herts, 1097.
£13*. 1390. £ 2*. 2109. £9*. 4600.
p. 4. 5186. p.- 8. 6066. £97. Lansd.
864. p. 4
„ —Herts, 1043. f. 1 10. 6770. £ 60*.
„ of Somerby, Line, 1097. £ 70. 1 190.
£ 33*. 1484. £ 6. 1550. £ 9**.
„ —Sussex, 1 194. £ no*. 1562. £25*.
„ — Northants, fr. Beds and Herts,
1187. £49*. 1 188. p. 59.
Bawdrey, of Boston, co. Line, 1097. £ 43*.
Bawne, of Kilham, Yorks, 1487. £ 492.
Bas,— Kent. Add. 5528. £ 187.
Baxter, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1171*. £ 48.
1554. ff. 16. 142*.
„ of Corbridge, co. Durham, i.53.
£41*. 1397. £241. 1540. £120*.
„ of London, 1096. £ 66.
„ of Cromer, Norfolk, 1177. £ 93*.
1552. £207*.
„ of Rainthorpe, Norfolk, 1552. £ 181.
4755. £ 94*. 5189. £ 17. 6093. £ 211*.
„ ofStannow, Norfolk, 11 77. £ 147. 1552.
95*. 4755. £ 50. 5189. £ 16*. 6093.
f. 140. Add. 4961. f. 22*. 14,283,
£22*. 19,816 £38*.
„ of Fomsett, Norfolk, 4756 £ 70. Add.
19, 816 £ 78*.
„ of Mendham, Suff. Add. 19,117. f.
174.
„ of Burton Latimer, Northants,
fr. co. York, 1553. £ 259*.
„ of Bolton upon Deame, Yorks, 805.
f- 39
., of Sharphill, Yorks, 1394. p. 230.
1415 £ 27. 1420. £ 165*. 1487. £ 184*.
Add. 18,011. £ 186.
„ of Attercliffe, Yorks, 24,458. £ 91*.
Bayford, — Dorset, 1092. £ 49.
Bayles, of Wilby, Suff. out of Yorks. Add.
19,117. £ 179
Bayley, of Woodford, Essex, fr. co. Derby, 1542,
£ 130*.
„ of Hope, co. Line, and of Manchester.
Add. 24,458 £ 66.
„ of Lower Lyde, co. Hereford. Add.
19,815, ff. 5. (m). 61*. 75*.
„ of Ducklington, Oxon 1557. £12.
„ of Shrewsbury, 1241. ff. 63*. 115.
139*. 1396. ff. 43*. 219*. 334. 6172.
ff. 13*. 22*. Add. 14,314. £ 56*.
„ of Echilhampton, Wilts, 1165. £ 45*.
1443. £ 133*.

Bayley, of Stowford, Wilts, 888, f. 26. 11 11.
f. 54*. 1 181. f. &p-b. 1443- f- 215- 1565
f. 45*. 5184'p. 38.
„ of Wingfield, Wilts, 1165. f. 76. 1443.
f. 175*-
'„ of Maydwell, Northants, 1553. £ 79*.
„ of Ireland. Add. 23,686 £ 45.
„ —co. Hereford, 1 140. ff. 67*. 84*. 1 1 59.
ff. 8. 66*, 84*. 1442. ff- 8. 69*. 87*.
1545.fr. 15.71.83.
Bayly, of the Isle of Wight, 1544. f. 13- 5865.
£ 14*.
., of Mervyle, Hants, 1 544. f. 36*. 5865.
£ 34*-
„ of Louth, co. Line, 1550, £ 133.
Baylie, of Mendham, Suff. &c. Add. 19,117.
£ 183, &e
Bayly, of Hoddesdon, Herts, 1234 f. 147*. 1504.
f. 162*. 1546, £ 134- 1547- f- 66.
„ of Standen, Herts, 1547. £ 43-
Bayman, of Marlesford, Norfolk. 1449. £ 87*.
1560. f. 175. Add. 19,117. f- 188.
Baynard, of Lackham, Wilts, fr. Essex, 888.
£ 15. mi. £52. nSi.f. 18*. 1165.
ff. 31. 78. 1443. f- 31- I565- f- 24.
5184. p. 46.
„ of Speckeshall, Suff. 1449. £ 75*.
1560. f. 60*. Add. 19,117- f- 191.
Baynbridge, v. Bainbrldge.
of Snotterton, co. Durham, 1 171. £ 66.
„ 1540. f. 41*.
„ of Wheatley Hill, co. Durham, n 53.
£ 36. 1168. £ 14*. 1171. £ 69. 1397.
£ 211. 1540. £ 31*.
„ of London, fr. co. York. 1476. £ 3C9.
Bayne, of Middlemore, co. York, 1487. £ 392.
Baynes, of Harefield-pl., Middlx. Add.
23,684. £ 142.
, of Suffolk, fr. Yorks. Add. 19,117.
£ 208.
Baynham, of Westbury, co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 27.
(a.b.) 1101. i. 24*. 1543. ff. 7*. 177*.
4204. £ 229*.
Bayning, of Bentley, Essex, Visct. of Sudbury,
1073. £ 248*. 6065. £ 27. Add. 5533.
p. 245. 19,117. £211.
Bayntun, of Bromham, Wilts, 1111. £ 77.
1165. ff. 7*. 41. 1181. £ 19. 1443.
£ 32*. 1565. £ 25: 5184. p. 48.
„ of Sarum, Wilts, 1443. £ 34b.
Bayton, — Salop, 1241. £ 150*. 1472. £ 27.
Beadham, of Morland, Westld. Add. 23,686.
ff. 181*. and 188.
Beake, v. Beke and Beeke.
„ of Haddenham, Bucks, fr. Berks. 1 102.
£ 61*. 1151. £ 60*. 1193. £ 61*. 1234
£ 36*. I39i.£ 65*. 1533. £153. Add.
5528. £ 171.
„ of Mitcheldever, 1449. f. 34. 1560. £
35*-
Beale, of London, fr. Kent, 1476. ff. 168*. 326*.
„ of Bildeston &e, Suff. Add. 19,117.
£ 222.
„ of Woodbridge, Suff. 1449. f. 103*.
Add. 19,117. £229.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

25

Beale, of Barn Elms, Surrey, 1561. f. 65.
,, of Woodhouse, Yorks. fr. cos. Line,
and Kent, 1487. £ 440*. 4630. p. 4*.
Add 26,739. f- 45-
„ —Kent. Add. 5528, f. 143*.
Beaies.of Chediston, Suff. Add. 19,117. £ 229.
Beamond, of Tresingham, Warwick, n67.f. 26-
-1563. £ 31.
Beane, v. Bayne,
„ of London.fr. co. York, 1476. £ 181*.
Beard, of Beard, co. Derby, 886. £ 33. 1093-
ff. 38*. 126*. 1153. £93*. 1537. £ 35-
2113. £ 103. 2134 £ 45*. 6592. £ 20*.
Egert. 996. £ 63. Add. 28,113. £ 22.
„ of Killington, co. York. Add. 24,458.
f- 330.
„ of Aberton and Cuckfield, Sussex,
1076. £ 53*. 1084. £ 137. 1 135. £ 123,
1 194. £ 137*. 1406. £ 113. 1563.
£ 189*. 6164. £ 43.
„ of Quainton.Bucks. fr. co. Line, 1 102.
£25*. 1151. £ 23*. 1193. f. 24*. 1234.
£ 18*. 1391. £ 27*. 1533. £ 172.
Be are, of Pengelly, Cornwall, 1097. p. 49.
„ —Devon, 1097. p. 68.
Beart, of Ipswich, 1560. £ 256*. Add. 19,117.
£ 238.
Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, and Ld. of
Abergavenny. 1 137. £ 35. 1 187. ff. 60*.
83. 1188. p. 80. 1398. £ 2*. 1432. £
26. 1484. £ 55. 1541. £ 12*. 1545. £
105*. 4204. £ 13*. 4600. £ 66. 6065.
£ 1*. Sloane. 1429, £ 70. Add. 14,309.
ff. 44. 74*., and 75. 19,1 17. £ 241.
„ Baron of Hache, &c, 1095. £ 29*.
1097. £ 4*. 1385. £ 23. 1412. £ 90*.
1559. ff. 63*. 95. 2156. £40*. and 41.
Lansd. 880. £ 23*. Add. 19,1 17. f. 247.
„ Baron Woodhey, 1535. £ 102.
Lord, 1 187. £ 83. 1545. f- 105*.
6128. £ 62*.
„ Baron Bedford, 1531. £ 135- 2109.
£ 85. Add. 14.309- f- 47-
„ of Higham, Bucks, 1533- f- 61*.
„ of Bymer, Cornwall, 4031. £ 79.
„ of Chiton, Cornwall, 1079. ff. 105*.
106. 1 142. ff. 69.82*. 1 149 ff. 68.
82*. n62.ff. 72.86*. 4031.fr. 72. 78*.
Add. 14,315- p. I2°-
„ of London, fr. Northants, 1476.
f. 373*- • „ , _
„ of Bletsho, Northants, 1 187, £ 79*-
„ of Holte, Northants, 1 187. £ 83 (a *).
of Oakley. Add. 19,117. £ 256.
of Bromham, Wilts, im. f. 77.
1443. £ 33-
—co. Leic, 1 180. £ 68. 1195. £ 98.
" 1532. £ 132.
—Cumberland, 1536- f- i.(*») 2156.
" £ 62*.
Beauchamp-Proctov, (Bart.) Suffolk. Add.
19,117. £261.
Beauchen, of Beauchen's Hayes, Dorset, 1166.
£ 12*. I45L f- 2I- JS39- f- 97*-

Beaufort, of Guy's Cliffe, Warwick, 6060.
ff. 8. and 42*.
„ • — Duke of Somerset. 1187.fr. 81*.
82. 2109. £8. 4204. £195. Add. 14,311
£35*.
Beauforest, of Dorchester, Oxon, 808. £ 3.
1095. £ 7. 1 139. £ 53. 1412. £ 76*.
1556. £ 22*. 5187. f. 5*. 6166. p. 142.
Add. 11,388. £ 178.
„ — Glouc, 1 102. £ 119*. 1 139. £ 53.
1391. £ 121*.
Beaufoy, of Edmonscott, co. Warwick, fr.
Oxon, 1 100. £ 15. 1 167. ff. 8*. 66.
1563. £31*. 6128. £59*.
Beaumes, — Hunts, 1075. f- 35*- H79- ff 16. 74.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. ff. 7*. 35*.
Beaumont, — Earl of Leicester, 1073. £ 283*.
3288. £ 157. Sloane, 1429. £ 50.
„ Lord (Visct.), 21 13. ff. 105*. 106.
Add. 19,116. £ 244. 19,117. £ 262.
&c.
„ of Gittisham, Devon, 889. ff. 71*. 72.
1080. ff. 328*. 396*. 1091.fr. 44*. no.
1163. £ 257*. 1399 £ 42. 1538.
ff. 139*. 272. 297*. 3288. ff 74*. 127.
168. 5185. ff. 12 (a. *.) 13. 5840.fr. 49.
125*. 5871. ff. 21. 39. 41*. Add.
14,315- P- 3-
„ of Barrow, co. Derby, fr. co. Leic.
»537- f- 39*-
„ of Rochester, fr. Suffolk, no6. £ 66.
1432. £ 218*. Add. 5507. p. 15a
5526. p. 119. Add. 23,750. £ 15.
„ of Thrinkston, co. Leic, 1180. £ 121*
1 189. £ 38*. 1431. £ 31. 6183. f.
102*.
„ of Thruston, co. Leic, 1 180. £ 31.
1189. £ 34*. 1431. £ 28. 6125. £ 42.
„ of Cole Orton, co Leic, fr. co.
Northampt, 1180. £ 32. 1187. ff 114.
134* 1 189. £ 38. 1431. ff. 28. 31.
6125. ff. 44. 117*. 6183. ff. 45. 101*.
„ of Grace Dieu, co. Leic, 1 180. £ 121*.
1189. f. 38*. I43i.f.3_. 6183. £ 102*.
„ of Stoughton, co. Leic, 1180. £ 121.
1187. £ 135. 6125. £ 117*. 6183.
£ 102. Add. 19,117. £ 279.
„ of Hackney, Middx., fr. co. Leic.
1468. £ 133.
„ of Bildeston, Suff. Add. 19,117.
ff. 287-9.
„ of Hadleigh, Suff. Add. 19,117.
ff. 291-3.
„ of Witnesham, Suff. Add. 19,117. £
301.
„ of Beaumont Hall, Suff., 155. £ 4.
1103. £45. 1177. £ 41. 1449 £ 73.
1560. £ 52.
„ of Catton, Yorks, 1487. £ 430*.
„ of Fangfoss, Yorks, 1487. £ 431*.
„ of Whitley, Yorks, 1487. £ 456*.
4630. pp. 36.— 39. Add. 26,739. ff- 39
to 41*.
„ of Mirfield, Yorks, 4630. p. 41. Add.
26,739. ff 42- 42*.

26

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Beaumont, — Warwicks., I ioo. f. 34*. 6060.
f. 6*.
de Beaupre, — Suffolk. Add. 19,117. f. 303.
Beaupre, v. Bewpere.
„ of Wittersham, Kent, 5528. £ 74*.
„ of Well, Norfolk, 1449. £ 64*. 1552.
£188. Add. 5509. £ 17.
„ —Beds, 1097. £ 13. 1390. £ 2. 1531.
£ 152. 2109. f. 9. 4600. p. 2. Lansd.,
864. p. 3.
„ — Cornwall, 4031. ff. 70*. 79. 79*.
„ — co. Hereford, 1 140. £21. 1 1 59. f. 21.
1442. £ 21.
Beauservice, — Hants, 1544 £ 58.
de Beauvoir,— Suffolk. Add. 19,117. £ 308.
Beavot, of So. Kirby, Yorks, 1487. f. 456. 4630.
p. 42. Add. 26,739 ff 43- 44*-
Bebington, of Chorley, Cheshire, 1535. £ 59*.
Bee, or, Bek, 1476. £ 41. Add. 19,117. £ 315.
Beche,— Staff., 6128. £ 76.
Becbam, of Sandon, Staff, 886. £ 59.
Beckfield,, ofWorthyn, Salop, 1241.fi. 138,139*.
1472. £ 10*.
Bechington, — Cheshire, 1415. £ 133. 1535. £
71. 2187. £ 14
Beck, of Needham Market, &e, Suff. Add.
19,117. £ 321.
„ of London. Add. 19,117. £ 320.
Beckering, — co. Derby, 886. £ 26. 1093. £ 35.
1534 £ 124. 1550. f. 166*. 2134. £ 36*.
Egert 996. ff. 67*. 68.
Beckett, of Cartuther, Cornwall, 1079. ff- 21*. 38
4031. ff. 72. 73. 75. Add. 14,315- P- 78.
„ of Littleton, Wilts, 888. £ 19*.
mi. £ 94*. 1165. £ 37*. 1181. ff. 6*.
23. 1443. £ 118*. 1565. £ 32*. 5184.
p. n.
„ of London, 1076. £ 54*. 1463. £ 15*.
„ — Cheshire, 1505. £ 62.
Beckingbam, of Hoveton, Norfolk, fr. Wilts,
1552. f. 156. 4755. f. 83. 5189. £70.
6093. £ 187. Add. 19,816. £ 66.
„ of Pudlicott and Stonesfield, Oxon,
808. pp. 22*. 36. 1095. £ 23*. 1097. f.
3*. 1412. f. 87. 1556. £ 57*. 5178. £
28*. 6166. p. 149. Lansd. 880. f. 18*.
Add. 11,388. £ 183.
„ — Essex, fr. Wilts, 1 137. f. 79*. 1432.
£73. 1541. £ 97*. 6065. f. 126.
„ — Kent. Add. 5507. p. 191.
Beckham, of Narford, Norfolk, 1177. £ 94.
1552. £ 210. 4756. f. 60.
„ — Salop, 1241. f. 151*.
Beckwith, of Aikton, co. Yorks, 1487. £ 404*.
4630. p. 33. Add. 26,739. f- 37*-
„ of Clint, Yorks, 805. £ 41. 1046. £42*.
1147. £ 70. 1394 p. 193. 1397. £ 80*.
1415. ff. 21. 44*. 1420. £ 142. 1430.
f-77- H33- f- 76. 1487. £212*. 1 561.
£ 133*. 4630. p. 29 Add. 4963. £ 92.
12,478. £ 29 18,011. £ 161. 26,739.
ff- 35 to 36*.
„ of Nutwithcote, co. Durham, fr. York
shire, n 53. £ 36*. 1 168. £ 18*. 1397.
£ 209 1540. f 70*.

Beckwith, of Selby and Stillingfleet, Yorks,
1394 p. 64. 1415. f. 69*. 1420. f. 52.
1430. p. 32. 1487. f. 213*. Add. 18,011.
£71. 26,739. £37.
„ of York. Add. 24458. £ 206.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. £ 82*.
Beconsall, of Beconsall, co. Lane, 1468. f 74
1549. £ 35. 2076. £ 15* 6159 £ 21.
„ of Moyles Court, Hants, fr. co. Lane.
1544 £ 177-
Bedell, of Writtle, Essex, 1 137. £ 48*.
„ of London, &e, 1476. £ 193. Add.
19,117. £325.
„ of Wollaston, Northants, 890. £ 41.
„ of Hamerton, Hunts, fr. Northants,
890. £ 41. 1075. f- l7' ll79' *¦ 38*.
Cot. Jul. F. viii. £ 17.
Bedels, or, Bedie, — Bucks, 1102. £ 84. 1391.
£90. 1533. £190.
Bedemore, or, More, — Cornwall, 4031. f. 77*.
Bedeneli, of Leamington, co. Durham, 1 1 53.
£ 52. 1448. £ n*. 1554 £ 31.
Bedford, of Newbury, Wilts, mi. £ 15. 1443.
£66*.
„ of Sarum, fr. Beds, IT&5. £ 3*.
„ of Huntingdon. Add. 24458. £ 313.
Bedick, — Dorset, 1451. £ 192
Bedingfeld, of Bradborne, Kent, fr. Norf., 1548.
£ 126. Add. 5532: p. 81.
„ of Dover. Add 5528. £ 177*.
„ ofCoulsey Wood, Suff. Add. 19,117.
f-347-
„ of Erswell and- Quiddenham, Norf.,
ii77-f- 125- i552-f-73- 4755- f- 38.
5189. £ io(a.b.). 6093. pp. 52. 104.
„ of Home Hall, Norf, 1552. £ 53*.
4755. £ 20*. 5189. £ 9. 6093. p. 29.
6166. p. 43. Add. 11,388. p. 66. 19,117.
£372.
„ of Oxboro', Norf, 4756. £ 30. Add.
14,309. £ 117*. 19,117. £329 19,816.
£ 18.
„ of Bedingfeld, Norf, 1552. £ 56*.
1560. f. 198*. 1820. ff. 36*. 40*.
4755. ff. 22*. 45*. 6093. p. 53. 6166.
p. 52. Add. 11,388. p. 71. 19,117.
f- 343-
„ of Buxton, Norf, 1552. £ 195*.
„ of Ditchingham, Norf, fr. Suff.,
1 177. £ 94*. 1 552. £ 2 1 r. Add. 19,1 17.
ff 349 to 365-
„ of Ellingtony Norf;, fr. Suff., 1552.
£ 88. 6093. p. 23*, Add. 19,117.
£ 368.
„ of Wiggenhall St. Mary's, Norf.
Add. 19,1 17. £ 347. I9;8i6. £ 29*.
„ of Whighton, Norf, 4756. £ 35^.
Bedlowe, v. Bledlow.
„ of co. Louth, out of Devon, 1425.
£ 123.
Bedo, of Putney, Surrey, fr. co. Denbigh, 1046.
£ 209*. 1397. £ 180*. 1433. f. 167*.
1 561. £ 242*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

27

Bedow, v. Hill.
j> — Salop, 19S2. f. 130.
Bee, of Basingstoke, Hants, 1544. £ 4. 5S65.
£ 8. 6128. £ 87.
» —Sussex, 1504. £ 88*. 3288. £ 159.
5185. £ 14 6128. £ 87.
de la Beech, 1102. £57. 1151. £ 56. 1193.
f- 57- I39I- f- 61. 1533. £ 150*.
4202, £ 238*.
Beecher, of Bletchingley, Surrey, 1430. £ 21*.
,, — London, 1096. £ 40*. 1463. ff. 4*.
13. 1504. £ 90*. Add. 16,279. P- 43'-
Beeke, of Tene, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 122*. 124.
1505. ff. 121*. 123. 1535. £ 169*.
2119. £ 69*. 2142. £ 25. 2187. £ 11*.
Add. 5529. pp. 6. 63*.
„ or, Becke, — Staff., 1415. £ 133. 1570.
ff. 18. 28. 6128. £ 60.
de la Bere,— 5865. £ 38*.
Beeson, of Canterbury. Add 5528. £ 180*.
Beeston, of Holton. co. Line, ' fr. Cheshire,
1550. £ 83.
„ of Beeston, Yorks., 805. ff. 43 to 44*.
x394- P- 235. I4i5.£ 28. 1420, £170*.
1424. ff. 11. 25. 1430. £ 28. 1487.
£ 272. 1505. ff. 11,24. I535- ff 78.
116. 159. 252. 2119. ff. 102. 225*. 226.
2142. £ 46*. 2187. £ 26*. Add. 5529.
p. 10*. 18,011. £ 190*. 26,739. ff. 34.
34*-
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,118. £4.
„ of London, 1096. £ 43.
„ of Shrewsbury, 1241. £ 138*. 1396.
f. 49*. 6172. £ 22.
Beigbton, of Wirksworth, co. Derby. Add.
24,458. £ 148.
„ of Bradfield and Hill Top, Yorks.
Add. 24458. f. 147*.
Beilby, of Micklethwaite, Yorks, 4630. p. 34.
Add. 26,739 ff 38, 38*.
Beisine,— Salop, 1424. £ n. 1505. £ II. 1535.
£ 1. 2187. £ 16. Add. 5529. £ 11*.
Bekard, of Beilby, Yorks, 1415. £ 100. 1420.
£ 238.
Beke, V. Beake.
„ of White Knights, Berks. Add. 12,479.
£ 3*.
„ of Dorchester, fr. Kent, 1 166. £ 3*.
1451. £ 12. 1539. £90*.
Baron of Eresby, 4204. f. 55*. Add.
14,309. £86*. 19,117. f. 315.
' of South Repps, Norf, 1177. £ 163.
1552. £126*, 4755. £67*. 5189. £61.
6093. £ 163*. Add. 19,816. £ 50*.
Bekeieey,— Cornwall, 4031. £ 74.
Bekeswell, or Shordich, of Bekeswell, 1 177.
£129. 1552- f-61*- 4755- f- 33- 5189
£ 19. 6093. pp. 21, 70. 6166. p. 63.
Add. 11,388. p. 76. 14,307- f- 130*.
Belcher, of Guilsborough, Northants, fr. co.
Staff., 1094. ff 132, 199*- 1 i°o- ff 26*.
27. 1167. f- 18 (a b). 1184. ff. 129,
194*. 1187. f- 37- n88.p.4i. 1553-
f. 154*. 6066. £ 108*.
of Lamport, 1094. £ 133- "87. £ 40.
" u88.p.47- 1553- f- 69*-

Belcher, of Geddington, Northants, 6066. f. 109.
„ of Orllcsbury, Northants, 6060. f. 40.
„ of Boughton Malherbe, Kent. Add.
5528. £ 140*.
Bele, — Cheshire. Add. 5529. p. 7.
Beifield, of Studham, Herts, fr. London, 1433.
£21**. 1504^. 60. 1546. £45. 1547.
£ 1*. 6147. £ 46*.
„ of Whittington, co. Derby. Add.
24458. £ 244.
Belford,— Yorks, 1394 p. 174 1415. f. 17*.
Beigrave, of Belgrave and Blaby, co. Leic, 810.
£ l7(a.b.). 890. £ 23. 1 1 53. £ 55*.
1180. ff. 5*. 36*. 37. 1187. ff. 113. 120.
1189. ff. 15. 44. 1431. £ 36*. 1448.
£ 47. 1554. £ in*. 4204 £ 227*.
6125. ff. 5. 42*.46*. 64*. 114. 6183. ff. 6.
43*. 47*. 65*.
„ of North Kilworth, co. Leic, 810
£ 17. 1 180. £ 61. 1189. ff. 15. 44.
1 195. £ 92. 1431. £ 37. 6125. ff. 46*.
114. 6128. £109*. 6183. £47*.
Belhouse, of Aveley, Essex, 1398. £ 12. 1541.
£.22. 1560. £175*. 6065. £40.
„ of Great Stanwaye, Essex. Add.
5509. £14. 19,118. £12.
Belke, of Boughton Blean, Kent. Add. 5528.
£83.
Belknap, — 1 541, £42*. 1982. £ I. 5509. ff. 2. 9.
Add. 14,311. £ 19*. 23,750. £ 41*.
Bell, of Lawrence Waltham, Berks, fr. Bucks,
1532. £ 103*. 6173. £ 13. Add. 4961.
£52. 14,283. £52.
„ of Writtle, Essex, fr. co. Glouc. 1 137.
£ 87*. 1432. £ 81*. I54i.£ 69 6065.
£60. "
„ of Sandhurst, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 88*.
1543. £ 94.
„ of Bennington, co. Line, 1097. ff. 60*
84. 1190. £ n. 1484 £21. 1550. £70*.
„ of London, 1476. ff. 255. 303.
„ of Bellasis, Northumberland, 1 153.
£54*. 1448. £35. 1554. £79*.
„ of Otwell, Norf., 1552. p. 188. 4756.
£ 85.
„ of Hawleigh, Suffi, 155. £ 28*. 1103.
£35*. H77.f.34. 1449 f- 35- 1560.
£38*; Add. 19,118. £ 19
„ of Uggeshall, Suff. Add. 191 18. £21.
„ oi Ditton, Surrey, 1 561. £ 259.
„ of Nutfield, Surrey, fr. Kent, 1561.
£ 81.
„ of York, 1487. £ 303. Add. 26,739
£ 45*-
„ of Overton, Yorks."~ Add. 24,458,
£ 47*-
„ of co. Fermanagh, and Kinnaber
Castle, co. Montrose. Add. 23,688. f. 84.
„ — Herts, 1544. £ 14
Bellamy, of Sudley, Bucks, fr. Midd. 1533. £ 87.
„ of Harrow, Middx., 1551. £ 5.
„ of London, fr. co. Wore, 1476. f. 104.
„ of Lamcote Grange, Yorks, 1487. £
485*.

28

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

ff. 58. 131. 1538.
1399 f. 81. 3288
5840. £ 92.
67. 1415. f. 69*.

Bella-aqua, co. Staff., 1415. f. 124. 1570. f. 38.
6128. f. 73.
Beliaport, — Salop, 1100. 114*.
Beliassls, of Morton, co. Durham, 805. £ 46.
1153. £36. 1168. £15. 1397. £ 215.
1540. £ 68*.
„ of Newborough, York, 1073 £ 363*-
1 171. £ 44- 1394- P- 162. 1415. £ 13-
1420, £ 119*. 1487. £ 445*. Add.
i8,on. £ 139*. 29,783. ff. 85. and 86*.
Bellay, of Paxton, Hunts, £ co. Som. 1075. £ 59*.
1 179. £ 121. Cott. Jul. F. viii. £ 59*.
Add. 19,118. £27.
Beliers, of Kirkby, co. Leic, 1180. £ 15. 1187. £
105*. n89.£ 17. 1400. £ 26. 1431.
£ 10. 1551. £ 7. 6125. £ 27. 6183. £ 28.
Bellew, of Hunshaw, Stockley, and Alverdis-
colt, Devon, 889. £ 121. 1080. £ 61
1091. £ 101. 1 163.
£ 233. 1567. £ 26.
£63. 5185. £14*.
„ —Yorks, 1394. £
1420. £ 53.
„ of Dublin. Add. 23,685. £ 51*.
„ Lord. Add. 23,684. £31.
„ of Barmeath, co. Louth (I. Bart.) &c
Add. 23,684. ff. 37b. and 38.
Bellingham, of Crookhall, co. Durham, 1 171.
£68*. 1540. £34*.
„ of Bromby Wood and Manton, co.
Leic, 1097, £ 94*. 1 19b. £ 65. 1484.
£26. 1550. £ 54
„ of Helsington, Northampton, 1435.
£24. 1564. £26.
„ of Churchfleet, Sussex, 1484. £ 66.
1562 £ 28. 5829 £ 23.
„ of Erringham, Sussex, 1076. £ 77*.
1084. £ 67. 1 135. £ 53. 1 194. £ 46.
1406. £ 125*. 1562. ff. 138*. 196*.
4109. £22. 5829. £116. 6164. £55*.
„ of New Timber, Sussex, 1076. £ 74.
1084. £ 65. 1 135. £ 51. 1194. £ 44.
1406. £ 123*. 1562. ff. 60. 137*. 5829.
£113. 6164. £55.
„ of Orcheston St. George, Wilts,
fr. Westm., 888. £ 28*. mi. £ 57*.
1181. £ 56*. 1443. £ 218.
5184. p. 26.
„ — Sloane, 1429. £ 44*.
p. 109. 14,309 £ 84*.
Bellman, of Earlsham, Norf,
19,118. £28.
BeUmayne, of Dallamore, Devon, 1080. f. 246*.
1163. £ 88. _
Beliot, of Moreton, Cheshire, 1424. £ 32. 1439.
£ 10. 1535. £ 66. 2142. f. 116.
BeUott, of Downton, Devon, fr. Cheshire and
Wilts, 1080. £ 238. 1 163. £ 80.
Belsham, of Newport-Pagnell, Bucks. Add.
24458. £ 46.
de Bellomonte. Add. 19,118. p. 32.
Belson, of Brill, Bucks, fr. Oxon, 1429. £ 76*.
1533. £46*. 5181. p. 95. 5832. £ 21.
5868 f. 20.
„ of Aston Rowan ts, Oxon, 808. £ 37*.
1095. £ 45*. 1097. £ 8. -1 194. £ 105.

1565. f. 48.
Add. 5532.

&c. Add.

1412. f. IOO*. 1556. f. T2I. 1562. f. 8*.
5187. f. 41*. Lansd. 880. f. 36*.
Belson, of Kingston Blunt, Oxon, 1556. f. 122*.
Belt, of Bossall. co. York, 4630. p. 47. Add.
24458. £ 223*.
Belton, of London, 2156. £ no. 5865. £ 16*.
Beltyng, of Godmersham, Kent, 1548. £ 168*.
Add. 5528. £ 72*.
le Belward, Baron of Malpas, 1505.fr. 95. no.
1535- f- 81.
Belward, of Mettingham, Suff. Add. 19,118.
f- 35-
Beman, —Norf, &c, 1552. £ 27.
Benbow, of Newport, Salop, 1241. £ 120. 1396.
£ 34*. 1472. £ 29*.
Bence, of Aldeburgh, &e, 1449. f> lxo*. Add.
19,118. f. 35.
Bendish, of Steeple Bumstead, Essex (Bart.
ext), 1083. £ 6. 1 137. £ 134- 1398.
£ 12*. 1541. £ 22*. 1542. £ 184*.
6065. £ 15*. Add. 14,290. £ 40. 19,118.
£ 47-
„ of Southmore, Essex. Add. 19,118.
£ 63. 24,458. £ 103.
„ of Congham, Norf, &c, fr. Essex,
1552. £ 121. 4756. £ 80.
„ of Witchingham, Norf, 1552.
f-135-
,. — Norfolk, 1552. ff. 197*. 227*.
Bendlowes, of Bradfield, Essex, 1083. £ 43.
1 137. £ 122*. 1432. £ 124. 1541,
£ 208*. 1542. f. 108*.
„ of York. Add. 24458. f. 213.
„ — Sussex, 1194 £ 105. 1562. £ 8*.
Benevile, of Buckley, co. Hereford, 1545. £ 1.01.
Benger, of Dover and Hougham, Kent, fr.
Wilts, 1 106. £ 60. 1432. £ 215. Add.
5507. p. 140. 5526. p. 109. 23,750.
£ 14*.
Benham, — Hants, 1 139. £ 6.
Beninden, — Beds, 2109. £ 55*. Add. 5528. £
69 (m).
Beningfeid, Eustace, of London, 4204. £ 86(.«). '
Benington, of Benington, co. Line, 1097. £ 85.
ngo.f. 29. 1484. £ 22. 1550. £ 167*.
Benjafield, — Add. 19,118. £ 66.
Benne, of Newport Cranley, Surrey, fr. Essex,
1096. £ 73*. 1 147. £.77*. 1430. £ 84*.
1463. £ 34*. Add. 4963. £ 97*.
Bennet, of Barnstone, Cheshire, 2142. f. 162*.
„ Earl of Tankerville. Add. 14,835.
f- 33- 19,118. £ 72.
of Littleover, co. Derby, 6104. £ 92.
of Chudleigh, Devon, 1080. £ 199.
1 163. f, 19*.
of Boston, co. Line, 1097. £ 109*.
1550 £ 176*.
of Uxbridge, Midd., fr. Berks. 1551.
£ 136. Add. 4964. £ 136.
of Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1448. f. 58.
of Babraham, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 70.
of Rougham, Norfolk. Add. 19,118.
£ 84.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

29

Bennet, of Lambeth, Surrey, fr. Sussex, 1046.
f. 209. 1397. f. 180. 1433. f. 167.
1561. f. 241*.
,, of Morden, Surrey, fr. 'Berks, 1046.
f. 7- ii47- f- 4- 1397- f- 45- H3o. £ 4-
1433- f- 43- 1561. £ 94*. Add. 4963.
£ 6*.
;, of Barton-on-Humber. Add. 24458.
£ no*.
Bennett, of Windsor, Berks, 1483. £ 134*. 1530.
£ 85. Add. 14,284 £ 140.
„ of Beckhampton, Bucks, 1391. £ 128*.
„ of Lawhitton, Cornwall, 1079. £ 66*.
1142. £23. ii49.f.23. 1162. £24.
„ of Newhall, Essex, fr. Herts, 1083.
£ 69 1137- f- 130*. I432- f- 138.
1542. £ 75*. Add. 14,290. £ 94.
of Tiptree Priory, Essex, fr. Hants,
1083. £28*. 1137.fr. 123. 130*. 1432.
£124*. i54i.£i86. 1542. £73. 6065.
£71. Add. 14,290. £ 77.
„ of Baldock, Herts, 1081. £ 62*. 1532.
£90*. 5822. £46. 6i73.£ 11*. Add.
4961. £ 21. 14,283. £ 21.
of London, fr. Surrey, 1444. £ 59*.
1463. £ 45- 1562. f-59 Add. 5533. P- 85.
„ of Attlebro', Norfolk, 1552: £ 154-
4755. £82. 5 189. £69*. 6093. £185*.
Add. 19,816. £ 65.
of Sutton, and of Hemsly, Norfolk.
Add. 19,816. £ 65.
of Norton Bavent, Wilts, 888, £ 32*.
1092. 61. im. £ 67. 1153. £ 80.
1166. £ 34*. 1 181. £ 60. i443-f- 219*.
1565. £ 53*- 5184- P- 44-
„ of Pyt House, Wilts, mi. £ 96.
1443. £ 12.
„ or Skerne, Yorks, 4630. p. 562.
Benning, of Tottenham, Middlesex, 1468. £ 140.
Benolt, — Northants, 890. p. 4. 1084. £ 16*.
1187. £ 16*. 1188. p. 13. 1553- f- 90-
Benson, of Hugill, Westmoreland, 1435. £ 19*.
1564. £ 19*.
„ of London, fr. York, 1476. £ 334*-
Add. 24,458. £ 121*.
„ of Knaresborough. Add. 24,458.
£ 121*.
„ of Salisbury. Add. 24458. £ 279*.
de Berated,— Add. 19,118. £ 91.
Bent, of Cosby, co. Leic, n 80. £ 114 11 87.
£ J31*. 1189 £ 72*. 1431- f- 64.
6125. f-79 6183. £96.
of Enderby, co. Leic,, 1 180. £ 113.
1187. £131*. 1189 f.72- I43i- ff 63.
64. 6125. £80. 6183. ff 96- 97-
of Frolesworth, co. Leic, n 80. £ 113*.
" 1189 £ 72. I43L f- 63. 6125. £ 8.
6183. £ 97-
of Narborough, co. Leic, 1180. £ 113.
" 1 187. f. 132.
Benthal, of Benthal, Salop, 1241. £ 57*. 1396.
ff47*.27i. 1472- f- 4i*- 6172. £12*.
Add. I4.3H- f- 57- 24458. f- 157*.
Bentley, of Derby, fr. co. Staff. 1093. £ 16*.
Se" 1,53. £94 i486. £27. 1537- f- 96.
Egert. 996. f- 39*-

Bentley, of Holborne, Middx., 1093. f. 115.
1551. f. 6t.
„ of Weelsby, co. Line Add. 24,458.
£ no*.
„ of Rothwell, Yorks. Add. 19,118.
£ 97.
„ — Cheshire, 1424 £ 32.
„ — co. Staff. 1439. £ 10. 6128. £ 16.
Benwine, of London, 1476. £ 70.
Benyon, of Aldingborne, Sussex, 1084. £ 148*.
1 135. f. 136*. 1406. £ 87. 1562. £ 80.
5829. £ 74.
„ of Ash, Salop ; of London, and of
Shrewsbury. Add. 24,458. £ 98.
„ — Suff. Add. 19,117. £308.
„ or Ap Einion, of Shrewsbury, 19S2.
£ 27.
Bercheles, — Cheshire, 2230. £ 28.
Berdwell, of Herling, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 100.
Bere, of Pengelly, Cornwall, 1097, £ 94. 1142.
£ 61. 1 149. £ 60. 1 162. £ 64. 4031.
ff. 72. 73.
„ of Trevedoe, Cornwall, 1079. ff. 38.
94*. 1 149. £26*. 1 162. £28.
„ of Franckmarsh, Devon, 1080. £ 59.
1 163. ff. 163*. 201. I535.f.282*. 5871.
£ 42.
„ ofHuntsham,Devon,3288.f. 143 (a ).
5185. £ 13*.
„ of Dartford, Kent, 1106. f. 207*.
. 1432. £ 317. 2156. £ 32*. Add. 5507.
p. 288. 5526. p. 432. 5532. p. 112.
Add. 23,750. £ 13*.
„ of Gravesend, 1 106. £ 6. 1432. £ 173.
1548. £ 47. 2198. £ 91. Add. 5507.
p. 36. 5526. p. 10.
„ — Sussex, 1076. f. 52.
de la Bere, of Southam, co. Glouc, fr co.
Heref., 1041. £ 106. 1543. £ 144*.
„ of Kinardesley and Turburton, co.
Hereford, 1140. ff. 13. 55*. 1159. ff. 12*.
54*. 1442. ff. 12*. 17*. 55*. 1545.
£ 19*. 1982. £ 94*. Add. 14,314.
£ 21*. 19,815. £ 9.
„ — 1091. £ 80*. 1538. £ 202. 4204.
£113*. Add. 19,815. ff. 49*. 50
Berenger, of Owburne and Iver, Bucks, fr.
Wilts, 1 102. £ 46*. 1139. £ 89*. 1193.
£ 46*. ,1391. £ 49*- x429 £ 73- *533-
ff. 3*. 136*. 1548. £ 132*. 5i8i.p. 34.
5832. f. 14. 5868. £ 13.
Beresford, v. Besford.
„ Marquis of Waterford. Add. 14,838.
ff. 148. to 151. 19,118. £ 109. 23,688.
f-93-
„ of Londonderry. Add. 23,750. ff. 10*.
and 18.
„ of Bentley, co. Derby, fr. co. Staff,
886. £18*. 1093. £47. 1153. ff. 93*.
94. 1484. £ 36*. 1537. £ 17*. 2113.
£ 97. 2134. f. 25*. 6104 f. 94. 6592.
£ 20*. Egert. 996. ff. 40. 42*.
„ of Euston, co. Derby, 1537. £ 94
„ of Newton Grange, co. Derby, 1093
ff. 47*. 48*. i486, f. 29*. 1537. £ 94*.
3113. £ in.

3o

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Beresford, of Squerries, Kent, &e, fr. co. Derby,
1106. f. 192*. 1433. f. 304. 1548.
f. 66*. Add. 5507. p. 129. 5526. p. 402.
5532. p. 127.
„ of Shakerston and Nelston, co.
Leic, 1 180. £ 127. 1 187. f. 133. 1 189.
£ 97. 1431. £ 88*. 6125. £ 116*.
6183. £ 105.
„ of London, 1476. £ 141.
„ of Kenton, Notts, 1400. £ 94. 1555.
£ 149
„ of Beresford, co. Staff., 1043. £ in.
1173. £83. 1401. £ 15*. 1415. £ 126.
1534. £91. 6128. £41.
„ of Taunton Castle, Somerset, 1445-
£ 232.*
Berestaii, — Cheshire, 1535. ff. 101*. 102.
Berewe, of Felcourt, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 20*.
1191. £ n*. 1543. f. 10*.
Beridge, of Algarkirk, co. Line. Add. 24,458.
£ 141.
„ — Leic, 1480. £ 41. 1557. £ 16.
Beriffe, of Colchester, 1083. £ 75*. 1 137. ff. 86*
133. 1432. ff. 80. 144. 1542. £ 58.
Add. 14,290. £ 100.
Berington, of Streatley, Berks, fr. co. Heref.,
1081. £ 7*. 1139. £ 115. 1532. £ 22*.
5822. £ 5*. 6173. £ 10*. Add. 4961.
£ 45*. 14,283. £ 45*.
„ of Bradwall, Cheshire, 1424. £ 27.
1505. £26. 1535. ff. 230. 275. 2187.
ff. 97. 121. Add. 5529 p. 7.
„ of Hereford, 1 140. ff. 49*. 62. 1159
ff. 49*. 61. 1442. ff. 49*. 62. 1545.
£ 54. Add. 19,815. ff. 43*. 44.
„ of Methall and Shrewsbury, 1241.
£ 97. 1396. ff. 45*. 46. 1472. £ 40.
1982. £ in. 6172. £ 18.
Berkeley, Earl of, 1073. £ 273. Add. 19,118.
f.115-
„ Lord, 2156. £ 91*. 4204. ff. 13*. 189.
SI. 1429. £ 71.
„ of Cotheridge, co. Wore, &c, 1566.
£117. 5814. £74.
„ of Cubberley, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 19.
1543. £9. 2156. £51.
„ of Dursley, co. Glouc, 4204. £ 106.
. „ of Stoke Gifford, co. Glouc, 1041.
£ 119*. 1 173. £ 36*. 1543. £ 169*.
2109. £ 85. 6128. £ 62*. 23,694.
£ 251*.
„ or Barkeley, of Wymondham, co.
Leic, 1 180. £ 3. 1 1 87. £ 97, n 89.
£37. 1 190. £92. i43i.f.30*. 1433.
£ 28*. 6125. ff. 3*. 112. 6183. £ 5.
Add. 14,309. £ 98.
„ of London, fr. Shrop., 1476. £ 126*.
„ of Cressage, Salop, 615. £218*. 1241.
£ 28.
„ of Shrewsbury, 1396. £ 46*. 1472.
£41. 6172. f 8. Add. 14,314. £ 94.
„ of Bruton, Somerset, 1141. £ 107*.
1385. f. 25. 1445. f. 146. 1559. f. 64*.
5814. £ 26.
of Tybenham, Somerset, 5814. £ 64*.

Berkeley, of Wixoe, Suff. Add. 19,118. f. 120.
„ of Bradley, Wore, 5814. f. S3*.
„ of East Barnet, Herts, fr. co. Glouc,
1234 £ 151*. 1504. £ 169. 1547. £ 88.
„ — Cornwall, fr. Devon, 1079. £ 155.
1 142. £ 145*. 7149. £ 145*- 1 162.
£ 148*.
„ Of Vine, Hants, 1544. f- 5\
„ —Devon, 889 £ 105*. F0S0. £ 62.
3288. £118*. 5185. £11. 5871. ff. 30.
39*. Add. 5528. £ 148.
„ — co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 19*. 11 59.
£ 19*. 1442. £ 19*. 1545. £ 26. Add.
19,815. £ i5*(«2).
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 60*. 64*. 1543.
ff. 40*. 41. 74*. 147. Add. 14,315.
£ 150.
„ — co. Leic, 1 106. £ 113*. 1432.
£ 247*. Add. 5507. p. 253. 5526.
p. 212.
BerkroUs, — co. Hereford, 1 140. f. 54. 1 1 59.
£53. 1442. £54. 1545. £ 58. Add.
14,314. £ 4*. 19,815. £ 48 (m.).
Bermingham, Lord of Athenry. 1425. £ 161-
163. 2109. £ 52;
„ Earl of Louth. Add. 14,838. £188. to
193-
„ — co. Staff., 6128. £ 63.
Bernake, v. Barnake.
„ of Woodthorpe, co. Line, 1097. f. 43.
1190. £ 69*. 1484. £ 19*. 1550. ff. 31*.
45. 60*.
„ of Bernake, Northants, 6066. £ 131*.
„ of Tattershall, 2156. £ 43*.
„ —Norf, 1552. £ 193.
„ — Beds, &c, 1097. f. 13. 1390.
£2. I53i.£ 151*. 1552. £193. 2109.
£ 9. 4600. p. 3. Lansd. 864. p.3. Add.
14,309 £23. 19,1 18. £122.
Bernard, of Isleham, co. Camb., 1534. £ 2.
„ of Margaretting, Essex, fr. London,
1542. £9*.
„ or, Barnard, bf Upton St. Leonard,
co. Glouc, fr. Northants, 1041. ff. 32*.
36. ii9i.f.28*. 1543. £24
„ or,Barnard, of Abington, Northants,
890. £ 5. 1084. £ 19*. 1094. £ 90. 1 138.
£53. 1 171. £17*. n84.£87. 1187.
ff. 25*. 93*. 1 1 88. p, 26. 1 541. £ 174
1542. £ 9*. 1553. £ 4. 6066. £ 39.
„ of Akenham, Suff.,155. £ n*. 1103.
£42. 1 177. £38*. 1449. f. 42*. 1541.
£174. 1542. £9*. 1560. ff. 49. 113.
-Add. 19,118. £ 1261
„ of Brampton, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 131.
„ of Yoxford, SufE Add. 19,118.
f- 133-
„ of Palace Anne, co.. Cork. Add.
23,688. ff. i6> 85*. 86*.
Berners, v. Barneys and Bourchier.
„ of Finchingfield, Essex, 1083. £ 6*.
1 137. £ 134*. 1432. £ 146*. 1542.
£ 186*. Add. 14,290. f. 41.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

3*

Berners, or, Earners, of Sherfield, Herts., fr.
Surrey, 1234. f. 120*. 1504. f. 146.
1546. f. 1 16*. 1547. f. 21*.
„ of Wolverstone, Suff. Add.. 19,1 18.
£ 140., &c
,, — Surrey, 1043. £ 56*.
Berney, of London, fr. Norf, 1096. £ 13*.
1463. £ 35.
„ of Gunton, Norf, 1177. £ 94. 1552.
£209*.
„ of Reedham, Norf, 1552. £ 233*.
4756. £ 10. Add. 19,118. ff. 86. 161. 165.
Berow, of Yelford, Oxon, 1480. £ 16. 1557.
£84*.
Berry, or, Berrie, of Colleton and Chittle-
hampton, Devon, 1080, £ 18*. 1163.
ff. 2. 143.
„ of Eastleigh and Lobb, Devon, 1080.
ff. 20. 338*. 339, 1 163. ff. 127. 192.
„ of Eston, co. Leic, 6125. £ 55*.
6183. £ 125.
„ of Queenborough, co. Leic, 1180.
£ 156. 1187. £ 117. 1189. £ 75*.
1195. £ 87. 1431. £ 67. 6125. £ 118.
„ of Lydd, Kent, 1 106. £ 119 1432.
£ 250*. Add. 5507. p. 264 5526.
p. 223. 23,750. £ 13*.
„ or, Berie, of Whissendyne, Rutland,
1558. £11*.
„ of Ludlow, Salop, fr. Devon, 1396.
£ 29. 1472. £ 23. 1982. £ 24*.
„ —Norfolk, 1560. £ 83.
„ —Suffolk. Add. 19,118. ff. 181. to
183.
„ —Warwick, 1094. £ 139- Il84
£136. n87.f.53*. 1188. £ 66.
Berryman, of Berry, Devon, 1080. £ 224*.
1 163. £ 52*.
Bertram, of Mitford, Northumb., 1554. £ 133.
Berwick, of Gaiters, Yorks. Add. 18,01 1. £ 138.
„ of Thornton, Yorks, 805. £ 47.
„ of Sutton,Yorks,i394-p.i6o. 1415.
£ 12*. 1420. £ 118. 1487- f- H9
Berwis,— Cumberland, 1536. £ 14- 3391- *"• 5-
Beseley, of Skelton, Yorks, 805. £ 48. 1394.
p. 153. I4!5- f- "• J420. f. 112.
1487. f. 138. Add. 18,011. £ 133.
Besford.or, Beresford, co. Glouc, 1543. £ 42.
,. of Besford, co. Ware, 5814 £ 33.
Besmead v. Pesmead.
Bessels,of Bessels Leigh, Berks, 1139. £ no.
Best, of Eynesbury, Hunts, 1045. f- 29*. 1179
f. 62. Cott. Jul. F. vm. £ 29*.
of Landimore, Halifax. Add. 24458.
" £ 25*.of Allington Castle, Kent, no6.£ 146.
" 1432. £ 178. 1548. £ 58*. 2198. £996.
Add. 5507. p. 53*- 5526. p. 24. 23,750.
£ 14.
of Chatham. Add. 5528. £ 121.
of London, 1476. ff 144*- 347-
of Acham, Salop, 1241. £ 62. Add.
14,314. ff- 39*. 54-

Best, — Yorks, 6104. f. 22.
Bestney, of St. Albans, Herts, 1504. f. 64*.
1546.fr. 14*. 58*.
Bestwick, of Spelmonden, Kent, fr. Chesh. 1 106.
£ 171*. 1432. £ 288*. 1504 £ 96*.
1548. £44*. Add. 5507. p. 351. 5509.
£ 15. 5526. p. 358. 23,750. £ 17.
Besyn, — co. Wore, 1566. £ 125*.
Betham,orBethom, of Ashendon, Bucks, 1 102.
£106. 1 139. £ 44. i39i.£ 108. 1533.
p. 46. 5 181. p. 9. 5832. £.30*. 5868.
£ 49*.
„ of Adwell, Oxon, 808. f. 21. 1556.
£ 91*. 5187. £ 26*.
„ of Towcet, Hants. Add. 23,686 £ 202.
„ of Rowington, co. Warwick, 1 100. f.
70*. 1167. £ 71. 1563. £ 92*. 6060.
£ 116*. Add. 23,686. £ 182*.
„ of Betham, Westld. Add. 23,686.
S. 184 and 188 to 191.
„ of Little Strickland, West Add.
23,686. ff. 182 and 188.
„ Ulster King of Arms. Add. 19,118.
f. 190.
Bethans, of Monmouth. Add. 24,458. £ 3,33*.
Bethell, of Winchester, 1 199. £ 7. 1 544. £ 69A
„ of Ellerton, Yorks, 1394 p. 167.
I4i5.f. 14*. 1420. ff. 123*. 216. 1487.
L77. Add. 1 8,01 r. £ 143*.
„ of Alne, Yorks. Add. 24458. £ 2n_5.
„ of Rise, Yorks, 142a. f. 216*. Add.
24,458. £ 211*.
„ of Swindon, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£.211*.
„ — of Yorks, 805. £ 49.
Bettenham, of Shorland, Kent, 1 106. ff. 122*,
167. 1432. ff. 254, 288*. Add. 5507.
pp. 269, 338. 5509 £34^. 5526. pp. 248.
. 349- 5532. p- 36*- 16,279 P- 21.
23,75°- f- 16.
Bettenson, of Delahay, Essex, fr. co. Staff.,
1 541. £ T94*. Add. 5507. p. 378.
„ of London, 1476. £ 410*.
Bettes, of Chatteris, co. Camb., 1043. £ 77-
1401. £ 62. 1534 £81*. 6769. £ 16.
6770. £ 30*. 6774. £ 78. - 6775. £ 81.
6830. p. 52. Add. 4962. £ 57.
„ of Irmingland, Norfolk, 1177. £ 174.
1552. £ i6_|-5. 4755.L85*. 5189 f.71*.
6093. £ 192*. Add. 19816. £ 70.
Bettesworth, of Chithurst, Sussex, 1076. £ 15*,
1084. f. 129. 1 135. ff. 89. 115. 1406.
£ 105*. 1562. £ 181.
„ of Fyning and Fitz Halls, Sussex,
1076. £15*. 1084. £129. 1135.fr. 89.
115. 1 194. £ 82. 1406. ff. 45. 105.
1562. ff. 169*, 181.
„ of Milland, Surrey, 5829 £ 157.
Betts, of Southampton, 1139. £ 4. 1544. f. 64.
8156. f. n.
„ of Wortham, Suffolk. Add. 19,1 rS.
£ 200.
„ bf Yoxford. Add ig,riS. f. 213.
Betton, of Berwick, Salop, 1396. f. 31. 1472.
£.25.

32

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bevau, of Rougham, Suff. Add. 19,118. f. 216.
Bevans,-— co. Hereford, 1140. f. lot*.
Sever, of Sheffield, and of Thurlston, Yorks.
Add. 24458. £ 170.
Bevercotts, of Ordsall, Notts, 1555. f. 151.
Beverley, of Blandsfield, Virginia. Add.
24,458. £ 100*.
„ of Ganstead and Selby, Yorks, 14S7.
£ 441. 4630. p. 44. Add. 26,739 ff
44. 44*.
„ —Wilts, 888. £ 1.
Beversbam, of Holbrooke, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 219 (tn).
Seville, of Killegarth, Cornwall, 1079. £ 37b.
4031. ff. 72. 73. 74. 80*. 82*. Add.
I4.3I5- P- 124.
„ of Chesterton, Hunts, 890. £ 43;
1075. ff. 3. 4*. 5. 18*. 19 («.*.) 1 179.
ff. 4*. — 10. 40*. — 42. Cott. Jul. F. viii.
ff. 5. 18*.
Bewe, of Trevedoc, Cornwall, 1142. £ 27.
Bewffo, of Seaton, Rutland, 1558. £ 51.
Bewicke, of Barsham, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 220.
Bewley, of London, fr. Kent, 1444. £ 42. 1476.
£ 79*. Add. 5533. p. 75.
Bewpenney, — Devon, 889. £ 146*.
Bewpine, — Cheshire, 1535. £ I.
Bewprey, — Salop, 1241. £ 152*. 1396. £ 164.
1982. £ 122.
Bewshin, of Cottles, Wilts, fr. Dorset, 888.
£ 32*. mi. £ 66. 1181. £ 28*.
1443- f- 219. 1565. £ 53. 5184. p. 44.
de Bexton, — Cheshire, 1535. £ m*. 2119.
£ 102.
Biaple, of Barnstaple, Devon, 1080. £ 438.
Bickerstaffe, of Croydon, Surrey, 1046. £ 16.
1 147. £ 43. 1397. £ 54- H30. £ 46*.
'433- f- 53- r56i- f- 103. Add. 1247S.
£ 10.
Blckersteth, Lord Langdale. Add. 19,1 18. £ 224.
Bickerton, — rCheshire, 1535. ff. 64*. 121*. 186.
268*. 2187. £ 114. Add. 5529. p. 11.
„ of Gaynes Park, Essex, fr. co . Warw.,
1541. £117. 6065. £86.
„ of Bridgnorth, Bart. Add. 23,685.
£ 30*.
„ of Beeby, co. Leic, 1180. £ 122*.
1 187. £ 132*. 1189. £91*. 1431. £83.
6183. £99*. 6125. £11 1*.
„ — co. Derby, 21 13. f. no*.
Bickley, or, Birkley, of Chidham, Surrey, fr.
Hants, 1562. £ 114. 1194. £ 129*.
5829. £ 90*.
„ of London, 1476. £ 286.
Bickiiffe, of London, 1444. £ 73. Add. 5533.
f-58.
Bicton, — Cornwall, 1079. £ 62*.
Biddick,— co. Durham, 1540. £ 151*.
Bidlake,— Devon, 1080. £ 253*. 1 163. £97.
Biddulph, of London. Add. 5533. p. 146.
„ of Cheshire. Add. 5529. p. n.
„ — co. Derby, 21 13: f. no*.

„
„

Biddulph, — co. Staff, 1077. ff. 91*. 92. 1173.
£83.% 141;. f. 125*. 1439. f. 54. !57o.
f. 77*. 6104. f. 22*. 6128. f. 20.
Bidwell,of Thetford, &c Add. 19,1 18. £ 227.
Bigg, of Shalford and Redgewell, Essex, 1542.
£ 128*.
„ of Stransfield, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 238.
„ of Hain's Hill, Berks, fr. Kent, 1483.
£ 70. 1530. f. 47. Add. 14,284. p. 37.
„ of Lench Wyke, co. Wore, 5814.
f-35-
Biggen, of Norton, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
167*.
Biggs, of Aldington, co. Worc fr. co. Glouc.
1043. £ 32. 1566. £115.
Bigiand, — Essex, 1 137. £ 75. 1398. £ 14*. 1432.
£68. 6065. £41.
Bigod, or, Bygod, Earl of. Norfolk, 1073. £ 30.
1094. £121. n84. £ 118. 1187. £68*.
1188. p. 89. 1425. £ 134. £ 1552. £ 41.
6066. £ 67. Add. 19,1 18. ff. 6. 241.
„ • of Berthorp, Yorks, 805. £ 50 to 54*.
of Settrington, Yorks, 1499. £ 38.
of Skagelthorpe, Yorks, 1394. p. 118.
1415. £ 89. 1420. £ 88*. 1487. £ 314*.
Add. 18,01 1. £ 108. 29,783. £ 91*.
Blgsby, of Stowmarket. Add. 19,1 18. £ 269.
Biigay, — co. Derby, 6104. £ or.
Bill, v. Bylle,
„ of Farley Hill. Add. 24458. f. 314*.
„ or Byle, of Santon, Cornwall, 1079.
£191*. 1 142. £ 2. 1 149. £ 2. 1 162.
£2.
Billesby, of Billesby, co. Line, 1097. £ 59*.
1 190. ff. 12.23*. 1484. ff. 14.15*,
1550. £ 42*.
„ —Middx., 1551. £ 15.
Billett, or, Byllott, — Devon, 1 163. £ 226*.
1433. £ 32. 1561. £ 42*. 3288. f. 125*.
5185. £46*.
Billing, of Hanger, Cornwall, 1079. f- !36*.
1 142. £ 1 1 5. 1 149. £116. 1 162. £ 120.
„ of Diddington, Oxon, 80S. £ 38.
1556. f. 9S*. 5187. £40*.
„ — co. Line, 1097. £ 88*. 1 190. £17*.
1484. £ 24. 1550. f. 22*.
„ — Northants, 890. £ 32. 1094. £130*.
1184. £ 127*. 1188. £ 53. i4oo.f.59*.
1533- f- 8.
Billingford, of Blackford, Norfolk, 1177. £ 97*.
1552. £ 1 1. 4204. f. 144*: 4755. £ 5*.
4756. £ 52. 5189. £. 29. 6093. p. 9
6166. p. 37. Add. 11,388. p. 64.
14,309 £ 101. I9,ir8. £273. 19,817.
£ 7.
Billingham, — Cheshire, 1535. £ 118*.
Biliingsley, of London, 1.141. f. 74*. 1145.
£ 108*. 1559. f. 201*.
„ —Kent, 1096. £ 35. 1463. f. 40*.
1476. £ 71*. 1504. f. 88.
„ —Salop, 1241. £ 115. 1396. £23*.
1472. ff. 16*. 17. 6172. f. 22*. Add.
21,017. f- 107*-
Biiiington, — Cheshire, 1504. £ 65. 1546. £ 59.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

33

Biiiio. Add. 24,458. ff. 348*. 349.
Eilsonn,— Hants, 1544. f. 164*.
Bindlosse, of Borwick, co Lane, 1549. f. 23*.
» of Rye, Sussex, 1076. f. 91.
„ of Burnishead, Westmlnd., 1435. £ 1.
1564 £ 1.
Bindon, of Rockmount, co. Kildare. Add.
23,693- f- 75-
Bingham, Earl of Lucan. Add.14,839. ff. 239.241.
„ of Bingham's Melcombe, Dorset,
888. £ 48. 1046. £ 236. 1092. £ 2.
1153. ff. 69. 74. 1166. f. 78*. 1451.
ff. 128*. 189 1539 £ 27*. 2i86.f. 17.
„ of Bingham, Notts, 1400. f. 69*.
1555. £ 126.
„ of Barking, Essex, fr. Notts, 1083.
£ 14. 1 137. £ 138. 1432. £ 153.
1 541. £ 154*. 1542. £ 197*. 6065.
£ 146*. Add. 14,290. £ 54,
„ of Sutton Bingham, Somerset, 1445.
£ 189*.
„ of Southwark, Surrey, fr. Notts, 1046.
£56. H47.£i25*. 1397. £94. 1430.
£ 131*. 1433. f. 89. 1 561. £ 148*.
Add. 4963. £ 151. 12,478. £ 40.
„ of London, 1476. f. 375.
„ — co. Line, 1097. £ 42. 1 190. £ 73.
1484. £ 28*.
„ —co. Derby, 1093. f- 124-
Bingley, of London, fr. Notts, 1476. £ 418.
„ of Blythe, Notts, 1082. £ 64*. 1400.
£ 84*. 1555. £ 133*.
Birch, of Ordsal and Ardwick, Lane Add.
24,458. ff. 10. 28i7>.
„ (Bart.) of The Hasel, co. Lane Add.
24,458. £336.
„ of Ludlow, Salop, fr. Lane, 1241. £
119*. 1396. f. 29*. 1472. £ 23*.
„ of Milsan, Salop, fr. Staff, 1396. £ 30.
1472. £ 24.
„ of Gray's Inn, 1504. £ 106.
„ of Yoxford, Suff. Add. 19,118.
ff. 277-9.
„ — Beds, fr. co. Lane, 2109. £ 40. 4600.
p. 61.
„ —Essex, 1432- f- 35-
Birchells, of Birchells, Cheshire, 1424. £ 31*.
1 505 . £ 30*. 1535. £ 63. 2 142. £ 107*.
2187. ff. 28. 101*.
Eirchensty, v. Birsty.
Birchett, of Goodhurst, Kent, fr. Sussex, 1 106.
£ 2 1 2. 1432. £ 32 1 • Add. 5507. p. 326.
5526. p. 441. 23,750. £ 37*.
,, of Radcliff, Middlx., 1468. £ 131*.
Elrd, V. Burd. or Byrd.
of Byerton, Bucks, fr. co. Heref., 1 102.
" £4*. 1 1 36. £ 8*. ii5i.£ 2*. 1193.
f.3*- I39i- f- 5- 1533- f- 162.
of Tremere, Cornwall, 1 142. f. 020.
" 1 149 £61*. 1 162. f. 65*.
of Pireth, Cumberland, and co. Line,
" 1536. £6*. 3391. £ 1*.
of Littlebury, Essex, 1083. £ 12*.
" 1 137. f- 137- '432- f- I5i*- '541-
£ 241. 1542. f- 195- Add. 14,290. £ 51.

Bird, of Standon Place, Essex, 1083. £ 57*.

1 137. f. 125*.

33. f. 12S.

f. 127. Add. 14.290. f. 82*.
„ of Wootton-under-Edge, co. Glouc.
1041. ff. 94*. 116. 1543. f. in*.
„ of Broxton, Cheshire, 1505. £ 50*.
1535. ff. 61. no*. 121. 216*. 21 19.
£ 134. 21S7. £ 45.
„ of Cherleton, Cheshire, 1424. £ no*.
!535- f- 150*. 6104. £ 23*.
„ of Clopton, Cheshire, 1 424 £28*. 1 505.
£27*. 2187. £25. 1535. £62.
,, of Crewe and Yowley, Cheshire, 1424.
£27*. 1505. £26*. 1535. £251*. 2142.
£ 91*. 2187. £ 24*.
„ of Pinchbeck, co. Leic, fr. Cumb.,
1536. £ 6*. 1550. £ 69*. 3391. £ 1*.
„ of Hackney, Middlx., fr. Cheshire,
1463. £ 40. 1468. £ 141.
„ of Ashton and Beynton, Northants,
1553. f. 261*.
„ - of Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1554. £ 145*.
„ of Gaseley, Suffolk, 155. £ 31*. Add.
19,118. f. 284.
„ of Yoxford, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 280.
„ of Thornthorpe, Yorks., 1394. p. 122.
1415. f. 91. 1420. £ 92. 1487. £ 335-5.
Add. 18,01 1. £ 112.
„ — co. Derby, 1093. f. 38. 6952. £ 8.
„ — Norfolk, 1558. f. 42.
„ — Sussex, 1545. £ 123.
Birkbeck, of Orton, Westld. Add. 24458.
£ 188.
Birkbye, of York, 1487. £ 398*.
Birkenhead, of Crowton, Cheshire, 1535. ff. 78*.
in. 2142. £142*. 2187. £ 27*. - Add.
5529. p. 12.
„ of Huxley, Cheshire, 1424 £ 31*.
1535- ff 7s*- ni. 2142. £142*. 2187.
£ 27*. Add. 5529. p. 12.
„ of London, fr. Flints., 1476. f. 131*.
Birkin,— Yorkshire, 1394. p. 215. 1415. £25.
1487. £ 164.
Birkley.t'. Bickley.
Birks, of Handsworth. Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£264. 28,1 13. £ 81.
Birks, of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 157. (m.)
Birley, of Winnards, Surrey, 1397. £ 150.
Birsty, or, Eirchensty, of Arundel, Sussex, fr.
Kent, 1076. £ 21*. 1084. £ 90. 1135.
£76. 1 1 96. f. 69. 1406. £ 81. 1562.
£ 159*. 4109. f. 68*. 5829. £ 143.
6164. £ 10.
Birte, of Candell Marche, Dorset, 888. £ 54*.
1046. f. 182. 1092. £ 26*. 1153. £ 74*.
1451. £ 185. 1539. f. 43*. 2i86.f. 20*.
„ — Devon, 1091. £ 103. 1538. £238.
3288. £ 64.
Birtwistle, of Amcote Hall, co. Lane, 1468.
£ 72*. 1549. f. 34. 2086. £ 32*.
Bischoff, of Leeds. Add. 24,458. £ 7*.
Bishop, of Cold Ashe, Devon, 889. £ 124*.
1080. £ 426*. 1091. £ 99*. 1399.
£ 83*. 1538. £ 231. 5185. £ 15. 5840.
£ 96* F

34

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bishop, of Chilcomb, Dorset, 1166. £ 4.
1451. f. 12*. 1539. f. 91*.
„ of Hol way, Dorset, 1539. f. 181*.
„ of Burford, co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 48
„ of Affordby, co. Leic, 6060. £ 84.
„ of Hemswell, co. Line, 1 5 50. £ in.
„ of London, 1476. £ 177. Add. 5533.
p. 249
„ of Yarmouth, 1177. £ 165*. 1552.
£32*. 4755. £ 70*. 5189. £63*.
6093. £ 169. Add. 19,816. £ 53.
„ of Hestley HaU, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 289.
„ of Harleston, Suff. Add. I9,n8.£ 292.
„ of Henfield, Sussex, 1084. £ 150*.
1135. £ 138*. 1194. £ 121. 1406. £
89*. 1562. £ 54*. 4109. £ 43. 5829.
£ 47. 6164. £ 37*.
„ ofParham, Sussex, 1076. £ 199. 6164.
£ 37*.
„ of Oxhill, co. Warwick, 1100. £ 103*.
1 167. f. 134*. 1 195. £ 113*. 1563.
£ 168*. 6060. £ 172.
„ of Pocklington, Yorks, 805. £ 64.
1394 p. 81. I415. f. 77. 1420. £65.
1487. £ 217. Add. 18,011. £ 84.
„ — Essex, £ 1 137. £73*. 1432. £66*.
1541. £ 34*.
„ —Hants, 1483. £ 66*. 1530. £ 44*.
Add. 14,284. p. 30.
„ — Salop, 1241. £ 124*.
,, — Warwicks., 1 100. £ 52*. 11 67.
£ 44*.
Bishopston,— Northants, 1 187. ff. 87b. 88. 89.
92-5.95. 6066. ff. 58. 63*. 114.
„ — co. Warwick, 1 100. £ 46*. 1 167.
£ 38*. 6060. ff. 87*. 88.
Bisley, of Abingdon, Berks, 1483. £ 74*. 1530.
£ 42. Add. 14,284. p. 25.
Bisse, of Batcombe, Somerset, 1 141. £ 99.
1445. £13. 1559f.no*.
„ of Hull Bishop, Somt, 1141. £ 4*.
„ of Spargrove, Somt, 1141. £ no*.
1445. £ 12. . 1559 £ 236*.
BisseU, of Barkeswell, co. Staff, 6128. £ 97.
Biston, of London, fr. co. Line, 1463. £ 1 5*.
Bitton, of Uggeshall, Suff. Add. 19,1 18. £ 300.
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. £ 20. 1191. £ 11.
1543. £9*.
„ or, Biiton, Surrey. Add. 14,311. f. 13*.
Six, of Bapchild, Kent. Add. 5507. p. 387.
Blachford, of Chichester, Sussex, fr. Dorset,
1076. f. 66*. 1084. £ 63. 1 135. £ 49.
1 194. £ 42. 1406. f. 122. 1562. ff. 136.
193. 5829. £ in. 6164. £ 72*.
Blachley, of Bury, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 303.
Blackali, — Cornwall,fr. Devon, ii42.f. 9*. 1149.
f. 10*. 1 162. £ 10*.
Blackamore, of Over, Cheshire. 1535. £ 79*.
Blackborne, co. Durham, 1153. £ 36*. 1168.
£20. 1397. £217. 1540. £ 29*.
Blackborough, of London, 1083. £ 35. 1137
£119 1432. £116. 1542. £ n.

BlackUurn, of Marrick Abbey, Yorks. Add.
24.458. f. 173.
Blackdon, of Blackdon, Devon, 1079. f. 30.
1080. £ 274*. 1163. £ 127*. 4031.
f.75-
Blackenhaii,— Cheshire, 1535. f- 216*. 6128.
£9
Blacker, of Salisbury, Wilts, 1 165. f. 95*.
1443. £ 17*.
Blackerby, of London, &e Add. 19,118. f. 306.
Blacken, of Tring, Herts, fr. Bucks, 1504. f. 20.
1546. £ 15.
„ of Woodcrofte, co. Durham, 1 153.
£38. 1168. £24. 1171. £67*. 1397.
£ 220*. 1540. £ 36*.
„ — co. Glouc, ii4o.£ 27. 1 1 59 f. 27.
1442- f- 27- 1533- f- 9o.
Slacken, or Brakett, co. Leic, 1 180. £ 8b.
1189. £ 48. 1431. £ 40*. 6125. £ 15.
6183. £ 16.
Biackey, of Blackey Hall, co. Lane, 1549.
£35*. 6159. £23.
Blackball, of Cowick, Devon, roSo. £ 204.
„ ofTotness,Devon, 1080. £203*. 1163.
£ 28*.
Blackman, of Ensham, Oxon, 1095. £ 48. 1556.
£ 119.
Blackmonster, — co. Glouc, 1041. £ 58.
Blackmore, of Bishops Nympton, Devon, 10S0.
£ 319*. 1 163. £242*.
„ ofTenderden, Kent Add. 5528. £ 193.
Blacknall, of Abingdon, Berks, fr.Bucks, 1532.
£ 65*. 6173. £ 12*. Add. 4961. £ 3*.
14,283. £ 3*.
„ or, Blakenhall, of Wing, Bucks,
1139. f. 80. 1429 £ 75. 1533. f£6<5_ 91.
2156. f. 54. 5832. £ 3. 5868. £ 16. -
„ of Eaton, Notts, 1400. £ 64*. 1555.
£ 99*.
„ of London, 1444. £ 24S. 6128. £76.
Add. 5533. p. 103.
„ — Northants, 11 87. £ 54.
Biacknell, of Oulton, Suff. Add. 19,118. f. 310.
Blackney, of Cropley Hall, Herts, 1546. £ 59.
Biackshaw, of Adlington, Cheshire, 1535. £ 64.
Blackwall, of Blackwall, co. Derby, 1093. £ 99*.
1 153. £ 108*. 1484 £38. 1537. £43*.
1982. f. 112. Egert 996. £ 64
„ of Staple, co. Derby. Add. 28,113.
ff. 10*. and 11.
„ of Dethick, after, of Mansfield Wood-
house, Notts. AcM. 28,1 13.fr. 8. and 10*.
„ of London, 1-096. £ 126*. 1444. f- 41*.
Add. 5533. p. 185,
Blackwood, Earl of Dufferin. Add. 23,684.
£ 30*. 23,700. ff. r*. 5<5. 7*. 13*.
Bladen, of Hemsworth, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 202.
Bladlowe, of London, 1432. £ 28. 1535. f. 248*.
Bladwell, 1/. ESodwell.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. f. 69*.
Blagden, of Apscourt, Middlx., 15-51. £ 53*.
Stage, v. Blague, and Blake.
,, or, Biagge, of Rochester, Kent, 14S4,
£ 44*- 1 548. £ ioo*. 1560. £ x 19*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

35

Blagrave.of Bulmarsh Court, Berks, fr.co. Staff,
io8i.f. 6. 1 1 39. £76*. 1483. ff. 62*.
125. 1530. ff. 35. 36*. .533. f. 39.
5822. £ 3 6173. £ 7*. Add. 4961. £61.
1 4,283. £61. 14,284. ff. 8. 1 2.
,, of London, fr. co. Staff., 1046. £ 86.
1397- f- 125. 1433. £ 116*. 1 55 1. £ 59.
„ of Reading, Berks, 1433. £ 1 16*. Add.
24,458. £ 352.
., — Northants, 1097. £ 50*. 1484. £ 14.
Blague, of Horningsheath, Suff. Add. 19,118.
f- 313.
Blair, of Inchyra, Perth. Add. 14,837. £ 109.
„ of that Ilk. Add. 14,836. ff. 183. 185.
„ ofAdamton. Add. 14,836. f. 187.
„ of Ardblair, N.B. Add. 14,836. £ 177
„ of Pittendreich, N.B. Add. 14,836.
£ 179.
„ of Balthyock, N.B. Add. 14,836.
f. 173-
„ of Glassclune. Add. 14,836. £ 181.
„ of Lavenham, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 320.
Blake,, of Combleford, Cornwall, fr. Devon,
1079. £ 119*. 1 142. £ 85*. 1149.
£85*. 1 162. £89*.
„ of Little Baddow, Essex, 1137. ff. 34
82*. 1432. ff. 24*. 76. 1 541. £ 85.
6065. f 103.
„ of Estontowne, Hants, 1544 ff. 135*.
182*. of Hales House, Middlx., 1551 . £ 78.
„ or Biage, of Wynboltsham, Norf.,
1 177. £ 150. 1552. £ 100. 4755. £ 32.
5189. f. 41. 6093. p. 72. 6166. p. 62.
Add. 14,307. £ 130. 19,816. £ 25*.
„ of Swaffham, Norf, 4204 £ 43.
„ of Planchfield, Somt, 1141. f. 107.
1 163. £ 225*.
„ of Penn'ells, Wilts, 888. f. 14*. nn.
£ 50. 1 181. £ 17. 1 165. £ 80*. 1443.
£180*. 1565. £22*. 5184. p. 42.
„ of London, 1476. ff. 124. 129*. Add.
24,458, £ 22*.
„ Lord Wallscourt. Add. 23,687. £ 40.
'„ of Menlough Castle, Galway, Bart.
Add. 23,685. ff. 35*. 53- 83. 93*.
141. 142*. 23,686. ff. 26. 87. 23,687.
£ 140. 23,688. £ 88.
„ of Athenry. Add. 23,687. £ 58.
„ of Ballintolber, co. Galway. Add.
23,686. £ 31.
„ of Tower Hill, co. Galway. Add.
23,688. £ 100.
• of Twizel Castle, co. Durham and.
*' of Ireland. Add. 23,689. ff. 194 198*.
„ — co. Line 1550. £ 233*.
_, — Hants, 1544 ff 135*-
—Suffolk (bart). Add. 19,118. £ 324.
Blakeney, or Blackney, of Sparham, 1 177.
£ 173*- ISS2- f- 139 4755- *¦ 73*-
5189 £ 64*. 6093. £ 174 Add. 19,816.
£ 56*.
of Abbert, co. Galway. Add. 23,710.
" £ 118*.

Blakeney, of Mt. Blakeney, co. Limerick. Add.
23.710. ff. 1 17*. 1 19.
Blaker, of Portslade, Sussex, 1076. £ 30*.
10. £ 92*. 1 135. f. 78*. 1 194. £ 71*.
14. £ 84. 1562. £ 163. 5829. £ 145*.
6164. £ 14*.
Blakeway, of Bridgnorth, 1241. £ 114.
Blakey, of Huntingfield, Suff., 1560. £ 128.
Blaklston, of Gibside, co. Durham, 1168.
ff. 13*. 47. 1 171. £ 73*. 1397. £ 207.
„ of Great Chilton, co. Durham, 1 153.
£42*. 1 168. £47. 1 171. £73*. 1397.
£244. 1540. £21*.
„ of Sadberge, co. Durham, 117 1. £ 74.
1540. £ 23*.
„ of Seaton, co. Durham, 1 153. £ 40*.
n68£ 36*. 117 1. £ 73*. 1397. £ 234*.
1540. £ in*.
„ of Thornton Hall, co. Durham, 1 540.
£ 23.
Bianehard, of Cheveley, Berks, 1532. £ 84*.
6173. £ 16. Add. 4961. f. 6. 14, 28.
£6.
Bianehard, of Katherine's Court, Somerset,
1141. £ 102. 1445. £141. 1559. £227*.
„ of Heveningham, Suff. Add. 19,118.
£ 339-
„ — Cornwall, 4031. f. 72.
Blanchcote, of Chester, 1535. £ 296*. 2187.
£144-
Blanck,— Surrey, 1463. £ 6*. 1504. £ 125*.
Bland, of London, 1476. £ 153*. Add. 24,458.
£99*.
„ of Virginia, U.S.A Add. 24458.
ff. 99*. 100.
„ of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 100.
„ of Hudenham, Cambridge, fr. co.
York, 1534 f. 118.
„ of Applestock, Notts, 886. £ 53*.
1137. £ n8. 1400. £44. 1432. £ 118.
I54i.£i96*. 1555. £75.
„ of Kippax, Yorks, 4630. p. 50. Add.
26,739 *• 47-
„ of Goldington, Notts, 1555. £ 164.
„ of Melton, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 337.
„ — Middlx., 1551. £ 23*._ Add. 24,458.
£ 100*.
Blashfbrd, of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 30*.
Blast, of Crawley, Sussex, 1562. £ 83*. 5829.
£ 49-
Blaumonter, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 79.
Eiaztone, of Horncastle, co. Line fr. co. York,
1550. £ 129*.
Blayds, of Ranby Hall, Notts. Add. 24,458.
ff. 72. 157. 241*.
Blayney, Baron. Add. 14,8397 £ 196.
„ of Over Kingson, Hereford, 1 140. £ 7.
1159. f. 7. 1442. f. 7. 1545. £ 12.
Add. 19,815. £4
„ — Berks, fr. co. Montgom., 1483.
£ 71*. 1530. £ 50. Add. 14,284. p. 47.
Bieadon, of Stoke Hall, Suff. Add. 9,118.
f-344-
Blechinden, of Simnells, Kent, 1548. f. 125.
Add. 5532. p. 88.

36

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bleehinden, of Birchington, Kent. Add. 552s.
f. 114.
Bledlow, or Bedlow, Bucks, 1 102. fo. 60*.
1 1 51. fo. 59*. 1 193. £ 60*. 1234. f.
66*. 1391. £ 64*. 1533. f. 196*.
„ of London, 1546. £ 57*. 1551. £62*.
Biencow, of Marston, Northants, 1094. £ 171.
1184 £ 166. 1553. £95.
Blenkinsop, of Bellaster, Northumberland,
1153. £ 54*. 1448. £ 35*. 1554. £ 80*.
„ of Blenkinsop, 1153. f, 56*. 1448.
£ 55*- 1554- f- 124*.
„ of Birtley, co. Durham, 1 171. £ 71.
1540. f. 28.
Blennerhasset, of Horning, Norfolk, 1552.
£158*. Add. 19,118. £ 359.
„ . of Norwich, 1552. £ 158. 4755. £ 84.
5189. £70*. 6093. £189. Add. 19,816,
67*.
„ of Blomham, Beds, fr. Norf, 1531.
£ 120.
„ of Hernoe, Norfolk. Add. 14,309.
£ 10.
„ of Barsham, Suff, 155. f. 61. 1103. £
69*. 1 1 77. £ 60. 1449. £99. 1560. f.
75*. Add. 19,118. £ 352.
„ of Blennerville, co. Kerry. Add.
23,689. £ 225. 23,693. ff. 85-95.
„ — Berks., 1081. £ 64*.
Bierick, — Devon, 889, £ 57. 1080. £ 186. 1091.
£39*. 1 163. £ 25. 5871. £ 18.
Blesby, of Winch, Norfolk, 1552. £ 97.
„ co. Line, 1550. £ 86*.
Blewett, of Colan, Cornwall, 1079. £ 2*.
„ of Holcombe Regis and Broadcliffe,
Devon, 889. £ 146. 10S0. f. 326*. 1091.
£ 120. 1 141. £ 72. 1 163. £ 254*.
1385. £ 7*. 1399. £ 102*. 1445.
£ 102*. 1559. £ 198. 1567. ff. 31*.
32. 3288. ff. 74. 104*. 142*. 1538.
f. 268*. 5185. ff. 15*. 16. 5840. £ 119
5871. £ 35*. Add. 12477. £ 57.
„ of Cottsham, Somt, 1385. £48*. 1445.
£ 183*. 1559. £ 27*. Add. 12,477. f- 53-
„ of Grenham, Somt, 1445. ff. 182*. 183.
1559 f- 37*- Add. i4,3"5- P- 132.
„ — Sussex, 1 194. £ 104 1562. £ 11*.
„ or, Bluet, of Harlaxton, co. Line,
1097. £69*. 1 190. £ 33. 1484. f. 5*.
1550. f. 7*.
„ or, Bowen, of Rippinghall, Staff., 1077.
£ 46. 1 173. £ 38. 1415. £ 116. 6128.
£ 41*.
„ „ — Surrey. Add. 5829. £ 7.
14,311. £7*.
Bligh, of Bodmin, Cornwall, 1079. £ 182*. 1 142.
£ 21. 1149. £ 119. 1162. £ 123.
„ of Botathen, Cornwall, 1079. £ 184.
1142. f. 118. 1149 £ 21. 1162. £ 22.
„ of Cranstock, Cornwall, 1079. f. 116.
„ Earl of Darnley. Add. 14,838. ff. 132.
133-
Blinckarme,— co. Line, 1468. £ 141*.
BUss, of Brandon, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 370.

Blitl-field,— co. Staff., 1077. f. 14*- "73- f- 13*-
1415. f. 108*. 1570. f. 9*. 2113. f. 79.
6128. £7.
Biobold, of Mendham, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 374.
Blocke, of Yoxford, Suff. Add. 19,118. £ 376.
Elodwell, v. Bladwell,
„ of Oswestry, 1241. £ 160. 1982. £ 25.
„ of Thurlow, Suffolk, 155. ff. 43- 66*.
891. £ 14*. 1103. £ 19*. n77- f- 20.
1449. £ 25*. 1560. £ 25*. Add. 19,118.
£ 378.
Blois, of Cockfield Hall. Suff. Add, 19,118.
£ 386.
Blome, of London, 1444. £ 25. 1476- £ 252.
Add. 5533. p. 37.
Blomer, of Cowley, co. Glouc, 1543. £ 164*.
„ of Heythrop, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 71.
1543. £ 87*.
„ — Kent. Add. 5507. p. 191.
Blomfield, of Stonham Aspal, Suff. Add.
19,119. f. 18.
„ of Bildeston, Suff. Add. 19,119./. 14.
„ of Baddingham, &c, Suff. Add.
19,119 £ 5.
„ of Bury, Suff. Add. 19,119. £ n.
Blond, — Warwicks., 1 5 50. £246*.
Blonde, of London, 1096. £ 94*.
Bicsse, of Stratford-Ie-Bow, Middlesex, fr. Suff.
1468. £ 132*.
„ of Boxsted and Ipswich, 1560. £ 282.
„ of Ipswich, &c, 1560. £ 282. Add.
19,119. £33.
„ of Dublin. Add. 23,688. ff. 97. 114-
Biouk, of Sheffield. Add. 24458. £ 151.
Blount, Lord Mountjoy, 888. £ 51 (a. *.) 1073.
£ 218*. 1092. f. 66*. 1 153. £ 81*.
i55o.f.78. 1562. £100. 2113.ff.107*.
108. 4204 ff. 33. 194. -
„ oflver, Bucks, fr. Glamorgan, 1533.
ff. 75. 109*.
„ of Maiden, Essex, 1541. £ 25*. 6065.
£ 164.
„ of Maugersfield,co. Glouc, 1041. £ 42.
„ of Hanes Castle and Hereford, 1140.
£ 54*. 1 1 59. £ 53*. 1442. £ 54*
1545- f- 59*-
„ of Kinlet, co. Hereford, 1545. £ 100*.
1559 £ 67*. 5814. £ 28*.
„ of Yeo, co. Hereford, 615. £ 222*.
1140.fr. 95*. 101. 1 159. £ 95*. i24i.ff.
8, 39, 131*- 1396. ff. 41*. 95*. 201*.
271*. 1442. £ 98*. 1472. £ 37. 1545.
£ 101. 1982. ff. 82*. 98. 160*. Add.
14,314. £ 98*.
of Kekingwike, Salop. Add. 19.816.
£ 114.
of Tittenhanger, Herts, fr. co. Staff.,
1234. £ 137. 1504. ff. 71*. 93*. 154.
1 546. £ 67. 1 547. £ 39*. 6147. £ 57*.
of London, 1096. £ 14*. 140a £ 27.
1555. £49*.
of London, fr. Salop, 1096. £ 83*.
1463. f. 14.
of Enstone, Oxon, 808. f. 33*. 1556.
f. 84 5187. £ 39*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

37

Blount, of Mapledurham, Oxon, 1556. f. 161.
., of Wigginton, Oxon, 1480. f. 41*.
1557. f. 16*.
,, of Burton, Staff. 1077. £ 62. 1093.
£62. 1173. f- 54- 1415- ff 119. 133*.
H39 f- 37- 1537- £ 41. 1570. ff 14
00. 21 13. £ 109*. Add. 14,309. ff. 86*,
87, 96. 6128. £ i3(a. *.)
„ of Grindon, co. Wore, 1566. £ 12*.
Add. 19,815. ff. 48*, 49.
„ of Soddington, co. Wore, 1043. £ 40.
1352. £ 35*- 1543- ff 153. 187. 1566.
ff. 2. 70. 21 13. £ no.
„ — Northants, 6066. £ 115*.
— co. Warwick, 1543. ff. 153*. 187.
—Yorks, 1487. £ 397.
Blower, of Reading, Berks, fr. co. Leic, 1483.
£ 71*. 1 530. £ 50*. Add. 14,284. p. 48.
„ of West Ham, Essex, fr. Suff. 1542.
£ 84*.
„ of London, fr. Suff, 1444 £ 88.
Bloyon, of Cornwall, 1097. £ 13. 1390. £ 2.
1531. £ 152. 2109. f. 9. 4031. ff. 78*.
80*. 4600. p. 3. Lansd. 864. p. 3.
Bludder, of Flanchford, Surrey, fr. co. Lane,
1046. £ 34. 1 147. f. 49. 1397. £ 72.
I430.f.54 1433. £ 69. I56i.f. 123*.
Add. 14,311. £ 76.
BludweU, v. Blodwell.
Bluet, v. Blewett.
Blund, of Ixworth, Suff. Add. 19,119. f. 52.
Blundell, — Visct. Blundell. Add. 19,1 19. f. 59.
„ of Cardington, Beds, 1531. f. 123*.
of Crosby, co. Lane, 891. £62. 1468.
£45. 1549. £33. 2086. f. 94*. Add.
12477. f- 29*.
„ of Ince, co. Lane, 1437. £ 79*. 1468.
£45*. 1549. £33*. 2086. £95. Add.
12477. f. 30.
„ —Kent, 1 106. £ 31. 1432. £ i92*-
219S. £ 116. Add. 5507. p. 84. 5526.
p. 53. 16,279 p. 215.
„ of Barton, Oxon, 1556. £ 148*.
„ —Cheshire, 1424 f- '7*- J535- f- 3»-
Blunden, of Castle Blunden, co. Kilkenny.
(I.Bart.) Add. 23,685. f. 120*. 23,687.
f. 158.
of Bishop's Castle, Salop, 615. £ 220*.
1241. £ 45*. 1396- f- 21. 1472. £ 14-
1982. £ 75. 6172. £ 11. Add. 14,314.
£ 123*.
Blundeston, of Houghton, Notts, 1082. £ 65.
1400. £ S6. 1555- f- W- Add. 19,119.
£67.
„ —co. Derby, 1093. £ 52*.
Blundeville, Earl of Chester, 1535- f- 2*.
of Newton. Norfolk, 1093. f. 101.
" 1 177. £ 164- 1400. £ 54- 4755- f- 68*.
i486.f. 31. '537- f- 85*- 1552. £ 129
5189. £61*. 6093. £166. Egert. 996.
£7*. Add. 19,119 f- 43-
of Brunsted, Norfolk. Add. 19,816.
" £ 51*-
Blundus, of Lewes, 1484 '• 49*- Add. 14,309
£ 14-

Blunt, of Charlton, Kent, 1106. f. 199*. 1432.
f. 309*. Add. 5507. p. 115. 5526.
p. 416. 23,750. f. 19*.
„ of London, 1433. f- 65*.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. ff. 73*. 144*. 2187.
£138.
„ —co. Line, 1097. £ 93. 1 190. £67.
1550. f. 174*.
„ — Northants, 1 187. £ 93*.
„ of Ireland, fr. co. Wore, 1425. f. n6.
„ of Bolton, co. Kildare. Add. 23,693.
£79
Blyant, — Suffolk. Add. 19,119. £ 73.
Blyatt, — Essex, 1137. £75.
Blyke, of Astley, Salop, 1241. £ 1606. 1396.
£ 14. 1472. £ 8. Add. 14,314 £ 91*.
Blythe, of Burchet, co. Derby, 6104. £ 94*.
„ of Norton, co. Derby, 1093. £ 123*.,
1537. f. 46*. Egert. 996. £ 65. Add.
24,458. f. 105*.
„ of Strarrston, or Straxton, co. Line,
1097. £ 56*. 1 190. f. 77. 1484. £ 15*.
1550. f. 117*.
„ of Barnby, co. York, 1394. p. 236.
1415. £ 36*. 1420. £ 69. 1487. £ 123.
1571. £ 161: 4630. pp. 20-48. Add.
18,011. £ 20. 26,739. PP- 45, 46. 28,113.
f- 33*-
„ of Paulfield, in Holdernesse, Yorks,
805. f. 65.
„ of London, 1476. £ 431*.
„ —co. Staff., 6128. £65*. .
Blytheman, of New Lathes, Yorks, 4630. p. 51.
Add. 26,739. P- 647*.
Board, or, Boord, of Cuckfield and Linfield,
Sussex, 1084. f. 1 1 3. 11 35. f. 99. 1 194.
£ 92. 1406. £ 55. 1562. £ 71*. 5829.
£65*.
Boardman. Add. 24,458. £ 133*.
Boare, — Kent, 1548. £ 185*.
Boby, of Alcester, co. Warwick, 6060. £ 162*.
Bocking, of Ash Bocking, Suff, 1 5 5. f. 47*. 1 103.
£93*. 1 177. f. 78. 1449. f. 49*. 1560.
ff. in*. 192*. Add. 19,1 19. £ 81.
„ — Beds, 2109. f. 58*.
Boddington, of London. Add."24458. ff 271*.
272.
Boddy, — Essex, 1541. ff. 47*. 134*. 6065. £ 83*.
Bode, or Boade, of Rochford, Essex, 11 37. £58.
1398. f. 14*. 1432. £ 50. 1541. £ 102.
6065. f. 41. Add. 5526. p. 108.
„ of Rayleigh, Essex, fr. co. York, 1 137.
ff. 73*. 74*. 1432. ff. 66*. 67*. 1541.
ff. 34*. 165.
„ of Feversham, Kent, fr. Essex, 1106.
£ 59. 1432. £ 214. Add. 5507. £ 138.
5526. £ 107. 23,750. ff. 24*. 25*.
Bodenham, of Rotherwas, co. Hereford, 1 140.
£556. ii59.f. 54*. I442.f.55*. 1545.
f. 60*.
„ of Hereford. Add. 19,815. £ 49*.
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. £ 64*. 1543.
£ 74*.
Bodkin, mayor of Portsmouth. Add. 8154.
£ 53>»-

38

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bodley, of Dunscombe and Exeter, 1046. f. 64*.
1147. f. 93_>. 1164. f. 42*. 1397. f. 104.
1430. f. 98*. 1433. f. 96*. 1538.1298*.
1561. f. 154*. 5871. f.41. Add. 14,311.
£ 13*.
„ of Streatham, Surrey, 1046. £ 65.
1 147. £ 93*. 1397. £103*. 1430. £98*.
1433. £ 96*. 1 561 . £ 1 54*. Add. 4963.
£112*. 14,311. £43*.
Bodrugan, — Cornwall, 4031. f. 786.
Boffe, — Essex, 1 137. f. 50. 6025. f. 125.
Bogan, of Hempston, Devon, 1080. £ 200*.
1 163. f. 25*.
Bogas, or, Boge, of Denham Hall, Suff., &c,
1560. £ 203*. Add. 19,1 19. ff. 90. 93.
Bogg, of Sutterton, co. Line, 1550. £ 163.
Bohun, Earl of Chester, 2187. £ 131.
„ Earl of Essex. Add. 19,119. £ 96.
„ Earl of Hereford, 1484. £ 61*. 6592.
£ 8*. Cotton. Jul. F. viii. £ 57*. Add.
19,119 £99.
,, or Boham, of Dryby, co. Line, 1082.
£ 65*. 1097. ff. 64*. 85. 1190. ff. 29.
76*. 1484. ff. 10*. 22. 1550. ff. 46.
167*.
„ of Beccles and West Hall, Suff. Add.
19,119. £ 120. 24458. f.75.
„ of Midhurst, Sussex, 1562. ff. 32*.
53*. 73*. Add. 14,311. £93. 19,119.
£ 116.
„ of Cholmondeston and Fressingfield,
Suff., 155. £6. 1 103. £43*. 1 177.
£ 39*. 1 560. £ 50. Add. 1 9, 1 1 9. £ 1 1 7.
„ — co. Hereford, 1 140. f. 69. 1 159. £ 68.
1442. f. 71. 1545. f. 72. 4204. £ 158*.
Add. 14,309. f. 25*.
„ — Sussex, 5829. ff. 27*. 48*. 67*.
BoUeau, of Dublin, and Tacolneston, Norfolk,
Bart. Add. 19,119. £ 130. 23,689.
f. 213.
Bois, see Boys.
Bokenbam, of Woodham, Essex, 1542. £ 137*.
„ ¦ of Nettlestead and Livermere, Suff.
Add. 19,119. f. 159.
„ of Thornham, Suff. Add. 19,119.
£ 161.
„ of Norwich. Add. 19,119. f. 163.
Bokiil, of Darsham, Suff, 1177. £ 123. 1552.
£ 49*. 6093. p. 51. Add. 19,119.
£184.
Bokilton,— co. Wore, 1043. £ 23. 1566. f. 36*.
i486. £ 1*. 5841. £ 1*.
Bold, or Bould, of Codington, Cheshire,
1043. £ 82. 1401. f. 9. 1534. £ 22*.
1535. £208. 2142. f. 50. 2187. £81.
6770. £ 12*. 6775. f. 9. Add. 4962.
£9.
„ • of Upton, Cheshire, 774. £ 18. 1424.
ff. 19*. 20. 1505. ff. 18*. 19. 1535.
£ 62*. 2142. ff. 50. 66*. 2187. £ 27.
5182. £21. Add. 5529. f. 6.
„ of Bold, co. Lane 1437. f. 17. 1468.
£47*. 1 549. £27*. 2086. £92. 6159
£16.
„ — Cheshire, 2230. f. 28*.

Boldero, of Bury St. Edmunds, &c, 1 177.
f. 36. 1560. f. 255. 1820. f. 39.
„ of Fornham St. Martin's, Suff.
Add. 19,119 f. 190.
„ of Ixworth, Suff. Add. 19,119. £ 194.
„ of South Cave, Yorkshire. Add.
24458. £221*.
Boidington, of Banham, Suff. Add. 19,119.
£ 200.
de Bolebec, — Add. 19,119. £ 201.
Boleyne, Earl of Wilton, &c. Add. 19,119.
£ 203.
„ of Blickling, Norfolk. Add. 19,119.
£ 205.
Bole, of Limington, Somerset, 1141. f. 100.
1445. £ 139*. 1559. £ 226.
BoUes, see also Bowles.
BoUe, of Gosberkirke, co. Line, 1 190. f. 81. 606a.
£78*. Add. 19,119. £ 268.
BoUes, of Osberton, Notts, fr. co. Line, 1400.
£ 48. 1555. £ 79. 6592. £ 24*.
„ of Haugh, co. Line, 1097. £ 57. 1 100.
£ 8*. 1 190. £ 86*. 1484. £ 29*. 1534
f. 24. 1 550. £ 54*. Add. 14,31 1. f. 14*.
„ ofBull Hall, Suff. Add. 19,119. £ 207.
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. £ 58.
Boiling, see also Bowling.
„ of London, fr. Yorks, 1476. ff. 42. 308.
BolUngbrook, of Stallingborough, co. Line,
1097. f. 49*. 1 190. f. 61*. 1484. £ 29*.
1550. f. 80*. 1570. £ 14.
„ — Yorkshire, 1394. p. 259. 1415.
£ 32. 1420. £ 185*. 1487. f. 316.
Add. 1 8,01 1. f. 206*.
Bollinghull, or BuUinghull, — CO. Staff, I077.
£ 43. 1173. £ 35. 1415. f. 114*.
1570. £ 57. 6128. £ 55.
Bolnehurst, — Beds, 4600. p. 67.
Bolney, of Wetheringsett, Suff., 155. £ 55*.
1103. £31*. 1177. £ 30*. 1449. £34.
1560. £ 35*. Add. 19,119. £ 210.
„ of Tilehurst, Berks, 1532. £ 106.
6173. £ 15. Add. 4961. £ 55. 14,283.
£55.
Bolstred, — Oxon, 1167. £ m.
Bolt, — Cheshire, 1397. £ 212*. 1540. £ 54.
Bolter, of South Creake, Norfolk, 1552. £ 64*.
Bolton, see Boulton.
„ of Barking,. Essex. Add. 19,119.
£ 212.
„ of Offord, Hunts, 1075. £ 24. 1179.
£50*. Cott. Jul. F. viii. f. 24.
„ of Cranwich,- Norfolk, Add. 19,119.
£ 215.
„ of Boyland„ Norfolk. Add. 14,309.
£ no.
„ ofBurston, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 117. 1552.
f- 39 4755- f-r4- 5189 £33*. 6093.
p. 35. 6166. p. 45. Add. 11,388. p. 67*.
19816. £ 13,
„ of Wilton, Norfolk, 6093. £ 135.
,, of Sheffield. Add. 28,1 13. f. 134.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1476. f. 424*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

39

Bolton, of London, 1096 f. 104. 1476. f. 444.
Add. 5533. p. 151.
„ of London, fr. co. Warwick, 1476.
f. 150*.
„ of Woodbridge, Suff., &e 1177.
f. 78*. Add. 19,119. £ 217.
„ —co. Lane, fr. Wilts, 1549. £ 138*.
Bonaby, of London. Add. 14,311. £ 66*.
Boncastle, of Wellhouse, Berks. Add 14,284.
p. 17.
Bond, of Bray, Berks, fr. Northmb., 1532. £ 146.
„ of Earth, Cornwall, 1079. ff. 139.
247*. 1 142. £ 124*. 1 149. £ 125*.
1 162. £ 129*. 4031. f. 81*.
„ of Saltash, Cornwall, 1079. £ 31*.
1 164. £70. 4031. £ 73.
„ of Blackminster, Dorset, 1 166. £ 76*.
1451- f- 124*. 1538- £ 3"*- 1539
f. 167*.
„ of Dorchester, 1166. £ 40. 145 1.
£65. 1 539. £127.
„ of Lutton, Dorset.fr. Cornwall. 2186.
£ 3*.
„ of Scatterford, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 86.
1543- f- 81*.
„ of London, 1077. £ 44*. 1173. £ 36*.
1548. £ 71*. 6128. f. 41*.
„ of London, fr. Somerset, 1096. £ 99.
1463. £ 5*. 1476. £ 32.
„ of Fulham, Middlx. fr. Northumb.,
1551. ff. 97. 114*. Add. 4964. f. 97.
„ of Bury St. Edmunds. Add. 19,119.
£ 229.
„ of Harleston, Suffolk. Add. 19,119,
£ 236.
„ of Thorpe, Surrey, fr. Northumb.,
1 56 1. f. 52*.
„ of Wardesland, co. Warwick, 1 100,
£38*. 1 167. f. 30*. 1559. £64. 1563.
£ 47*. 6060. f. 20.
„ of Coolamber.co.Longford (I.Bartxt).
Add. 23,687. £ 134
„ of Newton, co. Longford. Add.
23,684. £ 81.
„ —Surrey, 1397, f. 74-
„ of co. Armagh. Add. 23,693. £ 45.
Bonfoy, of Hayes, Middlx., 1096. £ 152*. 1468.
£ 127.
Bonham, of Valence, Essex, 1542. £ 36*. Add.
19,119. £243.
„ —Hants, 1 1 39. £ 6. 1 544- ff 37*- 68.
122. 5865. £ 35.
„ —Kent, 1 137. f- 40*. 1432- f- 31-
1484. f. 57. 1541- f- Io8*-
Bonington, of Borrowcote, co. Derby, 6104.
£ 95. Egert. 996. £ 64.
Bonnell, of Isleworth, Middlx., 146S. £ 139.
Bonner, of Dunham, Cheshire, 1424. f. 132.
1505. f. 131.
or Eyddeil, of Swarford, Oxon, fr.
" co. Glouc, 1556. £ 133-
of South Petherton, Somerset, 1141.
" £ 45. 1445- f- 67*. 1559 f- 174*.
de Bonville, Lord Harrington. Add 19,119.
£ 246.

Bon vile, Lord, 61 59. f. 40*.
,, of Chewton, Devon, S89. ff. 125*.
153*. 1080. f. 62. 1091. ff. 91. 92.
1538. ff. 170. 217*. 307. 3288. £ 165*.
„ of Modbury, Devon, 889. £ 58. 1080.
£ 381*. 1091. ff. 39*. 91. 92. 1399.
£31. 1538. £107. 5185. £16*. 3288.
£ 37. 5840. £ 34*. 5871. £ 18.
„ of Dillington, Somerset, 1 559. f£ 81*.
96*.
„ — Salop, 1429. £ 44*.
„ —Beds, 2109 £ 90.
„ — Cornwall, 1 164. f. 85.
Bonwicb, — Surrey, 1504 £ 25. 6147. £ r7*.
Bonython, of Bonython and Carclew, Cornwall,
1079. f 40. 1149. £ 149. 1162. £ 152.
4031. £70*. Add 14,315. p. 99.
„ of St. Colomb, Cornwall, 1079
£212*. 1142.fr. 38*. 149. Ii49f.37*.
1 162. £ 39*.
Booker, of London, fr. co. Lane, 1096. f. 128*.
1476. £ 271*.
Bookey, of cos. Kildare and Wexford. Add.
23,688. £ 75*.
Boone, of Barking. Add 19,119. £ 249.
Boorne, of Battle, Sussex, 1194. £ 121*. 1562.
£ 55. 5829. £ 49*.
„ —Kent, 1484. f. 63*.
Soosey, or, Beusie, of Springfield, Essex, 1542.
f- 93-
Booth, of Sawleferry, Beds, fr. co. Derby, 1531.
£62*. 2109. £14*. 4600. p. 14. Lansd.
864 p. 14.
„ of Barkham, Berks, 1483. f. 65*.
1530. £ 42*. Add 14,284. p. 26.
„ of Fawley Court, Berks, fr. co. Derby,
io8i.f.4. ii39.£6i*. i532.f-5*. 4108.
£ 38*. 4204. ff. 115. 116. 5822... 3*.
6173. £ 8*. Add. 4961. £ 44*. 14,283.
£44*.
„ of Reading, Berks, fr. co. Derby,io8i.
£4*. 1 1 39 £ 72*. 1532. £30. 5822
£ 4. 6173. £ 9 Add 4961. f. 46.
14,283. £ 45*-
„ of Dunham, Cheshire, co. Lane, 1396.
£ 232*. 1424. £ 18. 1449. £ 101. 1504.
£ n*. 1505. £ 17. 1535. ff. 193. 276.
218*. 1546. £64. 2ii9f.68*. 2142.
ff. 19*. 20. 46. 79*. 89. 2187. £ 18.
Add. 5529. £ 1 8.
„ of Eccleston, Cheshire, 2142. ff. 48.
78*. 80*. 86*. 5182. £ 23. Add. 5529.
£18.
„ of SuIIey, Cheshire. Add 5529 £ 18.
„ of Twemlow, Cheshire, 1424. £ 27.
1505. £ 26. 2142. £ 79*7'
„ or, Bouthe, of Old Durham, 1153.
£37. 1 168. £ 13. 1 17 1. £69*. 1397.
£214. 1540. ff. 3L 67.
„ of Barton, co. Lane, 1468. £ 73*. 1535.
£ 75. 2076. £ 14. 2142. £ 79*. 6159.
ff. 21*. 34*. Add. 5529. £ 18.
„ of Salford, 1437. f. 10*.
„ of Goxhill and Wotton, co. Line,
1550. £ 114*.

4o

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Booth, of Middle Soyle, co. Line, 1097.
f. 50. 1 190. f. 58*. 1484. ff. 9. 28*.
1550. f. 73*.
n of Oakham, Rutland, 1094. f. 238.
1184. £ 233. 1558. f. 16*. 3391. £ 120*.
„ of Ecclesfield, Yorks. Add. 24,45 b.
f. 169*.
„ of Hansworth Woodhouse, Yorks.
Add. 24,458. £ 207.
„ of Harrow, Middlx. fr. co. Line 1 551.
£ 75*-
,, of Ludlow, Salop, fr. Lane, 615. £ 222.
1241. £ 12*. 1396. f. 44*. 1472. £ 39.
1982. ff. 13*. 148. Add. 14,314. £ 103.
„ of Shrubland Hall, Suffolk, out of
Lane Add 19,119 £ 253.
„ of Pontefract, &c, Yorks, 4630. p. 49.
Add. 26,739. P- 46*-
„ — Cheshire. Add. 29,782. £ 8*.
„ — co. Derby, I53i.£62*. 2109. £ 14*.
4600. p. 14. Lans. 864. p. 14.
„ — Kent, 1476. £ 290.
„ — co. Glouc 1 04 1. £ 67*.
Boothby, of Ashbourne, co. Derby. Add.
19,119. £257. 19,121. f. 154.
„ of Tottenham, Middlx. fr. Essex,
1468. £ 125*.
„ of London, 1476. ff. 28*. 413. 6104.
ff. 23. 95*. Add. 5533. p. 180.
„ — co. Leic, 6104. £ 23.
Bor, of Drynagh, co. Wexford, &c. Add. 22,699.
£ 19*.
Boraston, of Aldenham, Herts, fr. co. Wore,
1504. £ 17. 1546. £ 7*.
Borehead, of Welby, Suffolk, 1560. f. 205.
Borewardsley, of Esselegh, Salop. Add.
21,017. f-99*.
Borley, v. Barley.
„ — Kent, 1484. £ 61.
„ — Suffolk, 155. £ 52. 1 177. £ 21.
1449 f 27.
„ —Wilts, 1484. £ 61.
Borne, of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 185.
Borough, Baron Borough. Add. 16,279. p. 332-
„ of Borough Green, co. Camb., 1401.
£ 36*. 6774. £ 52*. 6775. £ 36. Add.
4962. £ 33.
„ of Castle Fields, co. Derby. Add.
24,458. £ 39.
„ of Limehouse, Middlx., fr. Devon,
1551. £ 126*. 1561. f. 66*.
„ or, Burgb, of Mowthwy, Salop,
1241. £ 88. 1396. ff. 50*. 67*. 95.
1982. £ 8. Add. 14,314. ff. 19. 43.
„ of Borough, &c, Yorks, 1394. pp.
21. 78. 1415. f. 38*. 1420. £ 16.
1487. £ 51*. 1499. f. 30*. Add. 18,01 1.
£5*.
„ of Richmond, Yorks, 805 f. 6*.
„ — Cheshire, 1424. £ 11.
Boroughs, of Rotherham and Gilthwaite, Yorks.
Add. 24458. £ 306*.
Eorrard, of Clifton, Bucks, 1533. f. 197*.
„ — Hunts, 1075. £41. 1 179. £85.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. £41.
Borrett, of Stradbroke, &c, Suffolk. Add.
19,119. £ 262.

Borrett, of Wilby, Suffolk, 19,119. £ 270.
Borrow, of Wickham Brook, Suffolk, fr. London,
1560. f. 124.
Borrowdale, of Newmarket. Add. 19,119.
£ 284.
Borrowes, — Surrey, fr. Middlx., 1433. £ 116*.
„ of Giltown, co. Kildare, Bart. Add.
23,685, £ 138. 23,689. f. 293a.
Borstal!,— Bucks, 1533. f. 79*.
Borthwick, of Cruickstown, co. Westmeath.
Add. 23,686. £ 35*.
Borton, of Bury, Suffolk. Add 19,1 19. £ 287.
Bosanquet, of Forest House, Suffolk. Add.
19,119. £293.
Boscawen, of Tregothnan, Cornwall, 1079.
ff. 12. 44. 1164. £66. 4031. £79*.
Bosgrave, of Ranhall, Beds, fr. Godmanston,
Som., 1097. f. 19*. 1390. £ 8*. 1531.
f. 55*. 2109. £ 16*. 4600. p. 16*.
5186. p. 32. Lansd. 864. p. 16.
Bosley, of Longdon, Staff, 6128. f, 16.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. £238. 2187. £99*.
Boss, see Boffe.
„ of Berton, Bucks, 1234 f. 50*. 1533.
£ 131*.
Bossaverne, of St Just, Cornwall, 1079. £ 2.
1142. £ 102. 1149. £103. n62.f. 107.
Bossawsack, — Cornwall, 1079. £ 133*. 1142.
£109*. 1 149. £ no*. 1 162. £ 114*.
Bossley, of Bakewell, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
£59*. 28,1 13. f. 137.
Bossourth, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 73.
Bostock, of Abingdon, Berks, fr. Cheshire, 10S1.
£ 8*. 1 139. £ 116*. 1483. f. 74*. 1530
£42. 1532. £ 56*. 21 19. ff. 41*. 42.
5822. f. 6*. 6173. £ 9*. Add. 5529.
£ 5. 14,284. p. 24.
„ ' of Belgrave, Cheshire, 21 19. £ 45.
2187. f. 137*. Add. 5529. £ 5.
„ of Bostock, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 20*. 21.
96*. 1433. £ 65*.. 1505. ff. 19*. 20. 95.
1535. ff. 73. 89. 21 19. ff. 42*. 43*. 132*.
2187. ff. 9*. 137*. 5182. ff. 16. 122.
Add. 5529. ff. 4. 5. Add. 29,782. £ 12.
„ of Churton, Cheshire,. 1424. ff. 22. 32*.
1505. ff. 21.31. 1535. ff. 74. 168. 2119.
ff. 42*. 45. 2187. f. 138. 5182. ff. 17.
102. Add. 5529. £5.
„ of Holt, Cheshire, 1535. £ 241. 2119.
f. 44*.
„ of Huntington, Cheshire, 1535. ff.
73*. 92. 2187. £37.
„ of Huxley, Cheshire, 1535. ff. 73*.
293. 21 19. £46. Add. 5529. £ 5.
„ of Mobberley, Cheshire, 1424. £ 22*.
1505. f. 21*. 1535. ff. 73*. 162. 2119.
ff. 42*. 45*. Add. 5529 f. 5.
„ of Morton, Cheshire, 2119. £ 43.
,, of Moulton, Cheshire, 1424 £ 21*.
1505. £ 20*. 1535. £745. 21 19. £ 44.
2142. f. 58*. Add. 5529 £4.
„ of Tattenhall, 1535. £ 73*. 2119.
£ 46.
„ of Moreton Say, Salop, 1241. £ 66*.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. ff. 131, 217*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

4i

Bostoek,— co. Glouc. 1041. £ 52. 1543 ff
3S*. 73-
., — co. Derby, 6592. f. 14*.
Boston,— Essex, 1541. £ 12. Add 14,314.
£ 16.
Eosustow, of Levan, Cornwall, 1079. £ 115*.
1 142. £ 78*. 1 149 £ 77*. 1162. f. 81*.
4031. £ 79*.
Bosnm v. Bozum.
Bosvile, of Honsborough, Northants, 1 187. £ 68.
1 1 88. p. 94.
„ of Bradborn, Kent, fr. co. York, 1 106.
£ 191. 1432. £ 301*. 1548. £ 27*.
Add. 5507. p. 1 1 1. 5526. p. 398. 5532.
p. 152. 16,279 PP- "2. 157- 23,750.
ff. 26*. 27. 29,783. f. 53*.
„ of Eynsford, Kent, 1 106. £ 217. 1432.
£323*. 1548. £28. Add. 5526. p. 453.
,, of Edlington, Yorks. Add. 29,783. £52.
„ of Braithwell, Yorks, &e, 4630. pp. 62
to 67.
„ of Chevet, 1400. £ 30. 1555. £ 54.
1 57 1 . £ 203*. 4630. p. 59. Add 26,739.
£ 52*. 29,783. £ 52*.
,, of Conisborough, 4630. p. 58. Add.
26,739. ff 51*- 52-
„ of Gunthwaite, 1415. £ 31. 1420. £
181*. 1487. ff. 317*. 318*. 4630. p. 60.
Add. 18,011. £ 201*. 26,739. PP- 53-
54-
„ of Warmsworth, &c, 1394. p. 270.
1415. £ 34. 1420. £ 193*. 1487. f. 320.
1463. p. 64. Add. 18,011. f. 214. 26,739.
pp. 55. 55*.
,, of Wortley, Yorks, 4630. p. 63. Add
26,739. p. 54*.
„ of Ardsley and Newhall, Yorks, 805.fr.
60 to 63*. 1394. pp. 87. 283. 287. 1415.
ff 35*- 78*- 1420. ff. 66*. 202*. 207.
1487. ff. 296*. 317*. 318*. 4204. f. 101.
4630. p. 52. Add. 18,011. ff. 221. 224
26,739 PP- 48 to 51. 54 29,783. £ 51*.
„ —Cornwall, 403 1. £ 71*.
„ — Sussex, 1 194 £ 101*. 1406. £97*.
1562. £ 19*.
Boswell, of Auchinleck, N.B. (Bart.) Add
14,837. f. 127.
„ of Balmuto, N.B. Add. 14,836. ff.
301 and 303.
Boswydell, — Devon, 1091. £ 53. 1538. f. 161*.
Boteler v. Butler.
„ Baron of Wem. Add. 5509. £ 2.
or Butler, of Sharnbrooke, Beds., fr.
Yatton, 1097. £ 14- 1390. £ 3- *53i-
£ 84. 2109. £ 10. 4600. pp. 5. 6. 66*.
5186. p n. Lansd. 864. p. 5.
or Butler, of Fenn Drayton, co.
" Camb., fr. Hunts, 1043. £ 96*. 1401.
f 77- 1534 £100*. 6769. f. 30. 6770.
£ 53- 6774 f- 9»- 6775. £ 97. Add.
4962. £ 72*.
of Parkham, Devon, 1080. £ 10.
" 1 163. £ 156*. 1538. f- 290. Add.
14,3'5- f- 52-
or Butler, of Bishop's Auckland,
" Durham, fr.co. Lane, ii7i.f-73- *540.
£ 24-

Boteler v. Butler.
„ or Butler, of Old Acres, Durham,
1 1 53. f. 42*. 1 1 6S. f. 47*. 1 397. f. 244_\
„ or Butler, of Burchell, Essex, fr. co.
Beds., 1 1 37. f. 99. 1 432. f. 93*. 1541.
£159*. 1542. £212*. 6065. £ 135.
„ of Hatfield and Woodhall, Herts,
ii4o.f. 106. 1234. f. 154. 1504 ff. 4*.
25. 1546. £ 8*. 1547. £ 90*. 2156.
£33*. 6147. ff. 10*. 18. Add 19,121.
£ 298. 21,017. ff. 79*. 80.
„ of Stapleford, Herts, 1 547. £ 92*.
„ of Chalk, Kent, fr. Essex. Add.
5507. p. 381*.
„ of Teston, Kent. Add. 5507. p. 380.
„ of Ludlow, Salop, 1241. £ 122*.
„ of Old Clee, Somerset, 1141. £ 6*.
1445- f- 19*-
„ of Croydon, Surrey, fr. Herts, 1 147.
£ 19. 1430. £ 21. 1433. f- 63. 1561.
£ 117. Add. 4961. £ 25. 12478. f. 20.
„ — co. Glouc, 1543. f. 40*. 1 561.
£ 258. Add. 14,311. ff. 36, 53.
de Botetourt, Lord. 2156. f. 62*. Add 19,1 19.
£ 294
Botetort, of Weobley, co. Staff., 886. £ 63.
1570. £ 16. 6128. ff. 15*. 62*.
„ —Notts, 886. f. 63.
„ — Northants, 1 1 87. f. 82.
Boteville, Botefeld, or Thinne, Surrey. Add.
14,31 1. £32*.
Bothom, of Leicester, fr. Derbyshire, n 80.
£ 117*. 1189. £ 89*. 1195. £ 91.
1431. £ 81. 6125. £50. 6183. f. 51.
Botreauz, Baron, 2 1 56. £ 146*.
„ of Alcester, co. Warwick, 5814 ff. 61*.
62*.
„ — Cornwall, 1142. f. 20. 11 49. £ 20.
1162. £ 21. 4031. f. 79.
— Wilts, n 65. f. 76*.
Bonerel, of Botterel Aston, Salop, 615, £ 213*.
1241. £ 67. 1396. £ 45. 1982. ff. 21.
79*. Add. 14,314. ff. 6*. ob. 21,017.
ff. 108*. 109.
Bottry, of Bury St. Edmunds, Suff., 891. £ 23*. .
Boughton, of Woolwich, Kent, 1484 £62. 1548.
£21*. - 
„ of Aufford, co. Warwick, 1563. £ 231.
„ of Cawston, co. Warwick, 890. £ 22.
1187. £ 71. 1 189. £ 49*. 1431. £ 41*.
„ of Coughton. co. Warwick, 1563.
£ 22.
„ — Warwickshire, 1100. ff. 31*. 57*.
1 167. ff. 23. 49*. 1563. £211.
Boulton V. Bolton.
Bonn, of Bakewell, Derby. Add. 28,1 13. £ 25*.
Bountaine.of Hagworthingham;co. Line, 1550.
ff. 136*, 233*.
„ — Salop, 1472. £36*.
Bountey, — Herts, 1504. £ 93*.
Bourchier, Earl of Bath, 6592. £ 9.
„ Lord Fitzwarren, 1080. £ 377*. I091.
£33. 1164. £2. 1394. p. 4. 1420.
£32*. 3288. ff. 132*. 151*. 5185.
ff. 18*. 35*. 5840. £20*. 5871. f. 13*.
Add. 21,017. £97*. C

42

PEDfGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bourcbier, Lord Berners, 805. f. 78. 1552. f. 190.
„ Earl of Essex, 1073. f. 73*. 1 100.
f. 84*. 1167. f. 99*. 6060. f. 139. Add.
14.3=9 f- 75*- 19,1 '9 f- 3i3-
„ of Lovedowne and Starnbridge,
Essex, fr. co. Wore, 1083. £ 32*. 1542.
£ 131*.
„ of Bristol, 1 141. £ 96. 1445. £ 133.
1559. £221.
„ of London, 1 241. £62*. Add. 14,314
£40.
„ pf Whepstead, Suffolk. Add. 19,119.
£ 326.
„ of Benningborough, Yorks, 1394.
p. 5. 1420. £ 33. Add. 18,011. ff. 51*.
52.
„ — Berks, 1532. £ 17*. 4108. £15.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. £ 45.
„ —Notts, 1555. £3.
Sourke, Marquis of Clanricarde, 1425. ff. 1 52- 1 54.
„ of Clanwilliam, lord of Castlecomer,
1425. ff. 74. 75 and 85. Add. 23,710.
f- 173-
„ Lord of Connaught, &c, 1425. ff. 155.
156. 158.
„ Earl of Kent, 1425. £ 195.
„ Viscount Mayo. Add. 14,838. ff.
340-343- H,839- ff 35-37-
„ Earl of Ulster, 1425. £ 194.
Bourne, of Sharsted, Kent, 1106. £ 50*. 1432.
£ 208. Add. 5507. pp. 121. 121*.
5526. .p. 90. 5532. p. 44*. 23,750.
£ 24.
„ of Westville, Kent. . Add. 5 5 28 . f. 1 1 9*.
„ of Ashover, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
f- 79- ._.
„ of Bobbingworth, Essex, 1541. £ 58.
1542. £ 167. 6065. £ 84.
„ of Chesterfield. Add. 24,458. £ 72.
„ of Manchester. Add. 24,458. £ 70*.
„ of Chesterton, Oxon, 808. ff. 8*. 40*.
1095. £ 39*. 141 2. £ 97*. 1480. £ 54
1557. £ 44. 5187. f. 1 1*. 6166. p. 145.
Lansd. 880. f. 30*. Add. 5509. £ 10.
11,388. f. 180.
„ of Wendlebery, Oxon, 1556. £ 35,
„ of Street, Somerset, fr. Bucks, 1385.
£ 44 1445. £ 225. 1559. £ 22. Add.
12,477. £ 8*.
„ of Wells, 1 141. £ 17*.
„ of Winscombe, Somerset, 1445. £ 31*.
1559 £78*.
Bouteflower, of Linton, Kent. Add. 5528.
£ 76*. (m.)
Eoutevelein, — Northants, 1553. £ 131*.
Bouverie, — Kent, 5480. £ 74*. Add. 19,119
£329
Bovey, of Alcester, co. Warwick, 1100. f. 97*.
1 167. £ 126*. 1563. f. 157*.
„ — co. Glouc, 1041. f. 75.
de Bovine, of Letheringham, Suff. Add
19,119 £330.
Bowater, of London, 1476. £ 382. Add cc«
£209. ~ ' "¦"'

Bowdicb, — Dorset, 1 166. f. 61. 1451. £ 99.
1539. f. 151*.
Bowdler, v. Getbin and Bidge.
„ of Oswestry and Shrewsbury, 1241.
£ 56*. 1396. f. 32. (a. *.) 1427. ff. 26.
27*. 1982. ff. 4*. 5*. 58. Add. 21,017.
£67*.
„ of Shrewsbury and Ireland, 4204.
£ 147*.
„ of Ludlow, 615. £ 235*. 1241. ff. 34.
36. 1396. £ 237. 1472. ff. 25*. 26*.
19S2. £ 58.
Bowdon, of Bowdon, co. Derby, 1093. £ 100*.
1153. £94*. i486. £61. 1537. £45*.
Egert 996. £ 39. Add. 28,113. £ 45.
„ of Beightonfields, co. Derby. Add.
24458. £251.
„ of London, 1550. £ 161.
Bowellsworth, of Dransfield, co. Derby, 1 537.
£118.
Bowen, of London, fr. co. Denbigh, 1476.
£ 467*.
Bower, of Oxenfeild, co. Durham, fr. co. Lane
1 153. t. 42*. 1 168. £ 48*. 1397.
£ 245*. 1540. £ 130.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 359.
„ of London, fr. Wilts, 1476. £ 240*.
„ of Alverton, Somerset, 1445. £ 34
1559 f- 153-
„ of Wells, 1 141. ff. 19. 82*. 1445. ff.
33*. 34*. 1559. £ 210*.
„ of Donhead St Andrew, 888. £ 35.
1092. £ 32*. 1 1 1 1. £ 65*. 1 1 53 £ 75*.
1165. £ 39 1166. £ 82*. 1181. ff. 44*.
57. 1443- f- 122. 1451. £ 135*. 1539.
£ 175. 1565. ff. 57. 125. 5184 p. 10.
„ of Lavington, Wilts, 1 181. £ 6.
„ of Sarum, Wilts, 1 181. £ 6*.
„ of Brodston, co. Glouc, 4204. £
229*.
„ of Bridlington, and of Killerby, co.
Yorks. Add. 24.45S. £ 224.
Bowerman, of Hemiock, Devon, 889. £ 68*.
1080. £ 392*. 1091. £ 43*. 1399. £
39*. 153S. £ 131*. 3288. £ 37*. 5185.
£ 19. 5840. £ 46. 5871. £ 20*.
„ of Wells, fr. Devon, 1141. £ 77.
1385. £ 61. 1445. ff. 113*. 199*. 1559.
ff. 44. 1 18*. Add. 12,477. £ 60*.
Bourman, of Brooke, Hants, 1544. £ 141*.
5865.fr. 32.44.
Bowes, of Barnes and Stretlam, Durham, 1 153.
£ 35 («.*.). 1 168. ff. 7. 9. 1 171. £ 65.
J394- f- 7- I397- ff 205. 210*. 1487.
f- 353- 1540. £ 50*. Add. 23,688. £ 78.
29783. £ 57*-
„ of Bromlev, Essex, fr. co. York.
1 137. £ 22*. 1432. f. 15. 1484. £ 52.
1541. £ 217. 1542. f. 148. Add. 19,1 19.
£ 339
„ of London, 1096. f. 90*. 1463. f. 14*.
„ of Elford, Staff. 1077. £ 83. 1173,
£75. 1415. £ 122*. 1570. £.73. 6104.
£ 24*.
„ of Wayneham, Suff., 155. £ 65.
„ of York. Add. 24458. £ 222*.'

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

43

Bowes, of Ellerbeck, Yorks, 1487. f. 352*.
Bowen, v. Blewett.
,, of Wrentham, Suffolk. Add. 19,119.
f- 345-
,, — Cheshire, 1424. f. 55. 1505. £ 55.
„ —Notts, 1400. £ 88. 1555. £ 141.
Bowker, of Barton, co. Lane, 1 549. £ 163*.
Bowl, of Miler, Cornwall, 1142. £ 163*. 1149.
£ 163*. 1 162. £ 165*.
Bowler, — co. Lane 2076. £ 16.
Bowles, v. BoUes.
„ of Wallington, Herts, 890. £ 47*.
1504. £ 9*. 1546. £ 5. 6147. ff. 7. 18*.
„ of Sawtrey, Hunts, fr. Herts, 890.
f.47*-
„ of Chislehurst, Kent, fr. co. Line,
1 106. £129*. 1432. £257. Add. 5507.
p. 268. 5509. £ 37*. 5526. p. 264*.
23,75°. f- 26.
„ of Rushall, co. Warwick, 1077. £ 46*.
1 173. £ 38*. 1415. £ 115*. 1563.
£ 43*. 1570. £ 12. 6060. £ 39*.
„ of Sarum, Wilts, fr. Kent, 1443.
£ 38.
„ —Salop, 615. £ 209*. Add. 14,314.
£ 124
Bowling v. BolUng.
„ of Bowling, Yorks, 4630. p. 83.
Add. 26,739. P- 65-
Bowser, of Stone, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 95. 1543.
£ 112.
Bowyer, of Denham, Bucks, fr. London and
Sussex, 1102. £ 42*. 1151. £41*. 1193.
£ 42*. 1234. ff. 1*. 4. 1391. £ 45*-
1533. £ 103*.
„ of Knolle, Devon, fr. London, 1080.
£ 327*. 1 1 63. £ 257.
„ of Deane, Dorset, fr. London, n 66.
£19 145 1. £33*. 1539 £107.
„ of Hoo, Hants, fr. Sussex, 1544. ff. 4
75*. 5865. £ 8.
„ of Bosworth, co. Leicester, n 80.
£132. n89.f. 103. 6125. f. 93. 6183.
£ no.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff, 1504 ff. 18*.
104*.
„ of London, fr. Sussex, 1476, £ 216*.
„ of Broad Heath and Knypersley, co.
Staff., 1077. £ 22*. 1173. ff. 21*. 121*.
141 5. £ 112*. 1439 £ 10*. 1552. £ 70*.
1570. £ 51*. 6104. £ 26. 6128. ff. 7*.
49*. 87.
of Camberwell, fr. Sussex, 1046.
£ 58*. 1 H7- f- 84*. 1397- f- 96*-
1430. £ 89*. 1433- ff 35- 9o*. 1561.
£30. Add 4963- f- 5*- 12,478. £ 41*.
14,311. £ 80*.
of Charlewood, Surrey, fr. Sussex,
" 1046. £ 29. 1 147- f- 22. 1397. £ 67.
1430. £ 24 1433- f- 64- 1561. f- 222.
Add. 4963- f- 5-
of Chichester and Leythorne, Sussex,
" 1076. £132. 1084 £ 49 H35- f- 36-
1 194. £ 29 1406. £ 69. 1562. f. 43*.
6164. £ 94- „ , _ .
of Petworth, Sussex, and Denham,
ucks, 5829 £ 38.

Bowyett, — Bucks, 1 136. f. 6*.
„ — co. Line, 1097. f. 47.
Boxsted, of Boxsted, Kent, 4204. £ 50*. Add
191 19 £ 353.
Boyd, — (Ireland). Add. 23,700. ff. 123* to 126.
BoydeU, of Dodleston and Handley, Cheshire,
1535. ff. 72. 181*. Add. 5529. £ 12*.
Boyland, of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 395*.
„ of Boyland, Suff., 1449. £ 87. 1560.
£175*. Add 19,119. ff. 360. 361.
„ or Boland, — co. Staff, 1549. f. 53.
6159 £ 39*.
„ —Norfolk, 1552. £39.
Boyle, Earl of Cork, 2109. £ 47. Add 14,838.
ff. 23. 29.
„ Earlof Shannon. Add. 14,838. £ 166.
„ of Maresmore, co. Glouc., 1041.
£ 103*. 1543. £ 132*.
„ of Hereford, 1 140. £ 93*. 1159.
£ 93*. 1442. £ 96*. 1545. f. 72*.
Add. 19,815. ff. 84*. 85.
Boynon, — Salop, 1982. £ 114*.
Boynton, of Burton Agnes, Yorks, 805. ff. 68 to
71*. Add. 18,011. £ 7.
„ of Sedbury, Yorks, 1394 pp. 15. 21.
141 5. £ 39. 1420. ff. 16*. 18. 1487.
£ 307*. 1499. £ 30. 1571. ff. 189*.
192. Add. 18,011. £ 6. 26,739. £46.
„ of Barmston, Yorks. Add. 26,739.
pp. 44*. 45.
„ of Rawcliffe, Yorks, 4630. p. 68.
Add 24458. £ 176*. 26,739. p. 57.
de Boys, or de Bosco, of Assington. Add
19,119 £ 133.
Boys, or Bois (see also Arcber).
„ of Wely, Hants, 1139. £ 17*. 1544.
£ 81.
„ of Hawkhurst, Kent, 1 106. f. 104*.
1432. £241. Add. 5507. p. 233. 5526.
p. 194. 5532. p. 109. 23,75a ff. 22*.
23-
„ of Hoade Court, Kent. Add. 5507.
P- "5*
„ of Nonington, Kent, 1106. £ 47.
1432. £ 204 1435. £ 25*. 1548.
£ 169. 1564 £ 27*. 1562. £ 28.
Add. 5507. pp. in***. 113. 23,750.
£ 20* to 22.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 244*.
„ of Bume, co. Line, 1550. £ 194b.
„ of Rollesby, Norfolk, 1177. ff. 123.
180. 1552. ff. 50. 147. 4755. £ 78*.
5189. ff. 37. 67*. 6093.-P. 51. ff. 13a*.
179*. Add. 19,816. £60.
„ of Harrow, Middlx., 1 551. £ 5. 1560.
£36*.
„ of Oldstock, Somerset, 1046. £ 58*.
H4i.f. 89. 1147. f. 84*. 1430. £89*.
1433. £.35. 1445. f. 126*. 1559 f. 216*.
1561. £ 36. Add. 4963. £ 5*. 14,311.
£ 80*.
„ —Kent. Add. 5528. ff. 18 to 56.

44

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Boys, of Brakes Hall, Suff. Add. 10,119.
f- 135-
„ of Nettlested, Suff, out of Yorks.
Add. 19,119. £ 138.
„ of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 190.
„ —Bucks, 1533. f. 87.
,, — Devon, 3288. £ 141. 5185. £17.
„ — Suffolk, 1449. £97*. 1560. ff. 3. 101.
Boystard, — Northants, 890. f. 15. 1094. £ 105.
1 1 84. £102. 1 187. £ 28*. 1 1 88. £29
1553- f- 10.
de Boy ton. Add. 19,119. £ 365.
Boyton, of Walden, Essex, 1177. £ 179*. 1552.
£146. 4755. £78. 5189. £67. 6093.
p. 36. 6166. p. 46. Add. 1 1,388. £ 68.
14,309. f. 1 10*.
„ of Salle, Norfolk. Add. 19,816. £ 59*.
Boyvme, — Northants, 2109. f. 34*.
„ —Notts, 1555. £ 152.
Boxe, of London, fr. Oxon, 1096. £ 72*. 1463.
£5. 1476. £447.
Bozam, of Wissingsett, Norfolk, 1 177. ff. 118.
149. 1449. £ 58*. 1552. ff. 40*. 97*.
4755. £51. 5189. £49. 6093. £141*.
Add. 19,119 £ 368. 19,816. f. 39.
„ of Wenley, Norfolk, 1552. f. 206*.
„ —Essex, 1 1 37. £ 76. 1432. £ 69.
Bozom, — Beds, 2109. £ 62.
,, — Warwickshire, 1100. ff. 33*. 41.
1 167. f. 25*. Add. 14,309. £ 12.
Bozon, — Herts, 1546. £ 147*.
„ or Bozum, of Bozom Soyle, Devon,
1080. f 436*. 1091. f. 39. 1 163. f. 218*.
1538. £280. 3288. ff. 120*. 136. 151.
5871. f- 38.
„ —Notts, 2156. f. 68*.
Bozun, of Hele, Devon, 1538. £ 306*.
„ —co. Camb., 1534. f. 20.
„ — co. Line, 1550. f. 4*. 1560. £ 5.
Bra, of Trewarles, Cornwall, 4031. £ 79.
Braban, of St. Colomb, Cornwall, 1079. £ 166*.
1 142. f. 162*. 1 149 £ 162*. 1 162.
£ 164*.
Brabant, — Somerset, 1046. £ 58*. 1433. £ 35.
1 561. £ 30. Add. 4963. f. 5*.
Srabazon, Earl of East Meath, 2109. ff. 47*.
„ Earl of Meath. Add. 14,838. ff. 56
to 64.
„ — of New York, co. Mayo, Bart.,
Ext. Add. 23,685. f. 128. 23,687.
£ 148.
„ of Ardee, co. Louth (now Earl of
Meath), 1425. f. 39.
„ of Sproxton, co. Leic, 1139. £ 85.
1 180. £ 24*. 1187. £109. 1189. i. 27b.
1429. £ 71. 1431. f. 21. 5181. p. 66.
5832. f. 60. 5S68. f. 58. 6183. £ 36*.
6125. £ no.
„ — Salop, 6172. £ 2.
Brabin, or Barabin, — Cornwall, 1 142. £ 124*.
1149. f. 125*. 1162. £ 129*.
Brabourne, of London. Add. 19,119. £ 372.
Brace,— co. Wore, 1043. f. 30*. 1352. £ 19*.
i486. £ 14.

Bracebridge, of Kinsbury, co. Warwick, 1 100.
f. 7*. 1167. f. 4. 1180. f. 22. 1187.
£ 10S*. 1 189 f. 25. I43«- f- 18*.
1563. £ 14. 6060. £ 18*. 6125. £ 33*.
6183. £ 34*.
Bracey, of Thame, Oxon, fr. co. Wore, 1480.
£ 25. 1557. f. 96.
„ of Dordall, co. Wore, 1566. ff. 101.
125*. 167. Add. 12,479 ff. l8- 80.
„ —co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 40*. n 59.
£40*. 1442. f. 40*. 1545. £49*. Add
19,815. £ 34*(»0-
Brackenbury, of Denton, co. Durham, 1 147.
£10*. 1397. f. 43*. 1430. £ 11*. 1433.
£ 41*. 1499. £ 29*. 1540. £ 145*. Add.
4963. f. 14*. 14,311. £80.
„ of Geddington, Northants, fr. Kent,
890. £ 34*. 1094. £ 148*. 1 1 38. £ 21.
1 171. £ 17*. 1 184. £ 145*. . 1187. £38.
1 188. £ 43. 1553. £ 60*. 6066. £ 108.
Add. 5528. £ 12.
Brackin, of Chesterton, co. Cambs., 1043- £ 71.
1401. £ 53. 1534. ff. 24 68*. 6769 £ 12*.
6770. £ 24*. 6774. £ 69 6775. £ 73.
6830. p. 88. Add. 4962- £49.
Bradborne, of Bradborne, Cheshire, 1535. £ 88.
„ of Hough and the Lea, co. Derby,
886. £ 7. 1093. f. 89. 1 153. £94. i486.
£46. 1537. £4*. 21 13. £ 93. 2134.
£ 14*. Egert. 996. ff. 14. 62.
„ of London, IC96. £ 106*. 1476.
£ 108*.
Bradbrldge, of Lambeth, Surrey, fr. Sussex,
1046. f. 205. 1397. £ 17*. 1433. £ 164*.
1561. £ 238*.
Bradbury, of Ollersett, co. Derby, 886. £ 33*.
1093. £ 39*. 1 1 53. £ 94. 1394. p. 273.
1420. f. 196. 1537. £ 36*;. 2ii3-£i03.
2134. £ 46*. 6592. £ 21. Egert. 996.
£38*. Add. 28,113: £46.
„ of Littlebury and Wickham Bonhun,
Essex, 11 37. f. 96. 1432. £90*. 1484.
£ 57*. 1541.fr. 50. 156*. 6065. f. 107.
Add. 19,119. f. 374.
„ of Braughing, Herts, fr. co. Derby,
1546. £ 123.
„ of London, fr. co. Warwick, 1463.
£ 37*.
„ — Essex, i4or. £ 18. 1534. £ 27*.
6774. £ 35. 6775. f- l8- Add. 4962.
p. 16.
Braddock, of Adbaston, co. Staff., 1077. f. 40.
1241. f. 140. 1439. «"¦ 33*- 35-
„ — Norfolk, 1552. f; 10*.
Braddyll, of Whalley, co Lane Add. 12477.
£ 48*.
„ or Brad hull, of Brocklioles, co.Lane,
>437- f. 3i- 1468. £70*. 1549. £30*.
2086. f. 29*. 61.59. £ 17*.
Bradfield, of Guisnes, Cheshire, 774. f. 17*.
1045. f. 98. 1424 £ 22*. 1505- f. 21*.
1535. £291*. 2142. £33. 51S2. f. 19.
Add. 5529. ff. 13. 18*.
„ — Devon, 3288. £ 128*.
Bradford, of Lee, co. Hereford, 1 140. f 91.
1 1 59. £ 91. 1442. £94. i545-f.54*-
„ of Ludlow, Salop. Add. 19,815. f. 82.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

45

Bradford, of Doncaster. Add. 24,458. f. 247*.
„ als. BraiHortb, of Warmfield, Yorks,
805. £ 72.
„ of Bradford, Northumberland, 1 1 53.
£53. 144S. £ 21. 1554. £49.
„ of Stanley, Yorks, 1394. p. 241. 1415.
£ 29. 1420. £ 173*. 1487. £ 115*.
4630. p. 69. Add. 18,011. £ 193*.
26,739 f- 57*-
Eradgate, of Peating, co. Leic, from Surrey,
1431. £ in*.
Bradley, of Bradley, co. Lane, 891. f. 85. 1468.
£ 58. 1549. £ 32*. 2086. £ 38. 6151.
£ 19*.
„ of Ainsworth, co. Lane Add. 24,458.
£ 18*.
„ of Louth, co. Line, 1 190. £80. 1550.
£ 203.
„ of London, fr. Salop, 1476. £ 103.
of Hinton, Salop, 1982. £ 113.
„ of Coventry, co. Warwick, fr. Yorks,
noof. 104 1 167. £ 136. 1563. £ 169.
6060. £ 172*.
,, of Bradley and Betham, Westmore
land, fr. co. Lane, 1435. f- 20. 1564.
£ 20.
Bradney, of London. Add. 24458. f. 87.
Bradshaw, of Mooreborne, co. Leic, from co.
Lane, 1180. ff. 22*. 116. 1189. £ 25*.
1 187. £ 108*. 1431. £ 19. 6125. ff.
34 no. 6183. £ 35.
„ of London, fr. Derbyshire, 1476. £
103*.
„ of Eyam, co. Derby. Add. 28,113.
. £ 46*.
„ of Aspal, co. Lane, 1549. £ 131.
„ of Bradshawe, co. Lane, and of Mar-
pie, Cheshire, 1437. £ 58. Add.
28,113. £ 63*.
„ of Haigh, co. Lane, 891. f. 68*. 1437.
£ 57. 1468. £ 58*. 1549 £ 31- 2086.
£ 74*. 6159. £ 18. Add. 12,477. f- 43*-
„ of Southwold, Suff. Add. 19,119.
f- 379
„ of Cleveland, Yorks, 1394. p. 140.
141 5. £ 95*. 1420. £ 103*.
„ —Derbyshire, 886. £ 13*. 1093. ff.
17.61*. ii53-f-94*- i484-f-35*- '486.
£24 1537- »• 9*- 21 13. f. 95. 2134.
£ 20*. 6592. ff. 7*. 16. 22*. Egert. 996.
£64*.
., —co. Line, 1484- f- 35*-
— Northants, 6066. £ 1 1 1*.
Bradstock, or Bredestoke, of Wichampton,
Dorset, fr. co. Wore, 1166. f. 58. 1092.
£30*. n53-f-75- i45!-f-94*. 1539-
£ 148*.
Bradstone,— co. Glouc, 1041. £ 38. 1 191. £ 33.
1543. £ 31*-
Bradstreet, of Bentley, Suff. Add. 19,119 £
383- of Dublin (I. Bart.) Add. 23,685. £
" 116*. 23,687. £ 158*. 23,689 £285.
Bradway, of Potslipe, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 22.
1 191. £ 20. 1543. £12.
Bradwell,— Cheshire, 2 142. £ 63.

Bragden, of London, 1463. f. 26*.
Brag»tt,of Dodmore, Salop, 1396. f. 130. Add.
14,314- f- 85.
Braham, of New Windsor, Beds, fr. Surrey,
1483. £ 137. 1530. £ 85. Add. 19,1 19.
£ 389-
„ of Wickham Skyeth, Suffolk, 108 1.
£ 64*. 1560. £ 262*. Add. 19,1 19.
f- 393-
„ of Ash, Suff. Add. 19,119. £386.
„ of Brantham, Suff. Add 19,119.
£ 391.
„ of Wandsworth, Surrey, from Suff.,
1561. £ 28*.
BraUesford, of Brailsford, near Tapton, Derby
shire, 1093. ff. 42. 90*. 91. 97*. 1 153.
£94*- 1484 £38. i486, f. 40. 1537.
f- 93*- 1562. £7. 6104 £96. Egert.
996. £ 27*. Add. 14,309. £ 79.
„ of Semer, Yorks, and London. Add.
24,458. ff. 246*. 323*.
,, of Southwell and Blidworth, Yorks.
Add. 24458. £322*.
„ of Staveley, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 322-5.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. £ 114*. 21 19.
£69*.
„ — co. Staff., 1415. f. 132. 1570. £ 46*.
6128. £76*.
Braiswortb, — Suffolk. Add. 19,120. £ 245.
Braithwaite, of Kendal. Add. 24458. £ 117(1/1.).
Braleforth, — CO Line, 1484. f. 38.
Brames, of Kent. Add. 5528. £ 127*.
Bran-ball, of Sheffield Add. 24458. £ 180*.
Brammal, of Storrs, Derby. Add 24458.
£ 180*.
Brampton, of South Reston, Line, fr. Norfolk,
1550. £ 221.
„ of London. 1432. £ 328*. 1548.
£30-
„ of Attilbro, Norfolk. Add. 14,307.
£ 125.
„ of Blow Norton, Norfolk, 4755. £ 17.
6093. p. 27. 6166. p. 42. Add 11,388.
p. 66*. 14,309. £ 106*.,
„ of Brampton, Norfolk. 1177. £ 109*.
1552. ff. 32*. i62.(a *). 4755. ff. 84*.
85- 5189. £ n. 6093. £ 191*. Add.
19,816. ff. 12.69.
„ of Letton, Norfolk, 1177. £ 108*.
1552. £43*. 4755. £ n. 5189. £ 12.
6093. p- 38. 6166. p. 48. Add. 1 1,388.
p. 69. 14.309- f- in- 19,119- £404.
19.816. £ 15*.
„ of Westwick, Norfolk, 1177. £ 109.
1552. f. 27*. 4755. £ 29*. 5189. £ 12*.
6093. p. 69. 6166. p. 59 Add. 11,388.
p. 74. 19,816. £23*.
„ Lord of Kinlet, Salop. Add. 21,017.
ff. 82*. 83.
_, — Essex, 1137. £ 70. 1432. £ 63.
1541. f. 63*.
„ or Brompton, — Hereford, 1 140. ff. 34.
roo*. 1 1 59. £34. 1442. £ 34. 1545.
| ff. 24-5. 98. ioi.

46

PEDIGREES IN THE HER ADDS VISITATIONS

Brampton, — Salop, 1241. f. n. 1396. ff. 53*.
96*. 201*. 19S2. ff. 9*. 63. 67*.
„ — Suffolk, 1484. f. 47.
Bramshott, — Hants, 2109. £ 56*.
„ — Surrey, 5829. £ 27*. 83*. Add.
14,311. £93.
,, — Sussex, 1562. £ 32*.
Bramspith, of Heppam and Upton, 1550.
£118.
Sramstone, of Boreham, Essex, fr. London,i54i.
£ 175*. 1542. £ 154*. 6065. £ 87*.
„ of Skreens, Essex. Add 19,120.
ff. 1. 6.
„ — Essex, 1096. £ 50*. 1463. £31*.
Branch, of London, fr. Norfolk, 1096 £ 70*.
1463. £ 6. 1541. £ 36*.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, 1504. £ 124*.
1046. f. 86*. 1397. £ 125*. 1433.
£ 117.
„ or Braunch, of London, 1433. £ 117.
Add 19,120. £ 12. 24,458. f. 352.
„ — Somerset, 1 141. £ 112. 1445. £ 154.
1559 f- 238.
Brand, v. Brend.
„ Lord Dacre. Add. 19,120. £ 17.
„ of Little Birch, Essex, fr. Suff., 1542.
£ 180*.
„ of Griston, Norfolk, 1177. £ 169*.
1552. £ 176*. 4755. £ 91. 5 189. £ 72*.
6093. £ 200.
„ of Branston, co. Line, 1 550. £ 16.
,i oi London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. £ 176.
, of Hemniston, Suffolk. Add. 19,120.
f- 35-
„ of Edwardston, Suffolk. Add. 19,120.
f. 23.
„ of Polstead, Suffolk. Add. 19,120.
£ 25.
Srandestone, or Bradstone, — Northants,
1 187. ff. 77*. 93. 96. 1 188. p. 106.
1553. £ 16. 6066. £114*.
„ of Lapworth, co. Warwick, fr. co.
Leic, 1 100. £ 47. 1167. £ 39. 6060.
£ 74
Brandling, of Felling, co. Durham, 1 1 53. £ 39.
1 168. £ 25**. 1397. £ 223*. I540.f. 87.
„ of Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1171. £ 48*.
1554. £ 16*. Add. 12477. f- I2*.
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,120. £ 43.
Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, 1079. £ 163*. 1102.
£ 82*. 1 103. £ 97. 1 142. £ 156*.
1149. £ 156*. ii5i.£8i*. n62.£ 158*.
1193. £ 82*. 1234 £ 23*. i39i.£ 88*.
1532. f. 50. 1533. £ 39 4204. £ 158*.
5868. £ 48. Add 19,120. £ 47.
— Bucks, 1533. £ 190*.
— Hunts, 1075. £ 41. 1179 £ 85.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. £41. SI. 1429. £ 44*.
—Kent. Add. 5507. p. 65*.
— co. Leic, 1043. £85. 1401. £61*.
1534. £ 81. Add. 4962. £ 56*.
— Norfolk, 1552. £ 190*.

Brandreth, of Shenstone, co. Staff, 6104. f. 24.
Brandsby v. Bransby.
or Redenhall, Norfolk. Add. 19,120.
£81. 23,686. £29*.
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,120. £ S3.
Brandt, of London, 1476. f. 293.
Brane, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 79*.
Bransby, of Okebanke, Yorks, 1394. p. 146*.
141 5. £ 10. 1420. £ 107*. 1487. £ 139*.
Add. 18,011. £ 128*.
„ of Bransby, Yorks., 805. £ 74.
Bran waite, of Laverham, Suff, &c. Add. 19,120.
ff. 87. 90.
Branthwayte, of Hethel, Norfolk, 4756. £ 76*.
Braose, (Baron). Add. 14,309. £ 13*.
„ (Lord Abergavenny), 1982. £ 96*.
„ — Lord of Brecknock, &c, 1425. £ 140.
„ of Gower, Westneston, Sec, 4204.
£ 189
„ or Brewse, — 2 1 56. ff. 86*. 87.
Brassey, or Bressey, of Bulkeley, Cheshire,
1424. £ 28. 1505. £ 27. 1535. £ 53*.
2142. ff. 8i.(<z.*.) 84. 2187. £ 23*. Add.
5529 £13.
„ of Tiverton, Cheshire, 1424 ff. 28*.
29*. 1505. f. 28*. 1535. £ 53. 2142.
ff. 81*. 83. 2187. £ 19 2230. £ 35*.
„ of Wistaston, Cheshire, 1424 £ 30.
1505. £ 29. 1535. £ 52*. 2142. £ 84.
2187. £ 18*.
Brasyer, — Suffolk. Add. 19,120. £ 95.
Brathwayte, of Ambleside and Warcop, West
moreland, 1435. £ !*• 1564 £ 1*.
„ of Beaumont, co. Lane, 1437. £ 29.
Bratton, of Bratton, Somerset, 1 163. ff. 212. 213.
1445. £ 190*.
Drawne, — Add 23,750. f. 31.
Braxstone, of Plymouth. Add. 8154. f. 68.
Bray, or Bray e.
,, — Lord, 1424. £ 23*. 1433. £ 179*.
1484. £65. 1505. £22*. 1535. £225.
1 561. ff. 44*. 67*. 257*. 1562. £ 16*.
6066. £ 131*. Add. 4963. £ 73. 5509.
£ 2. 14,309. f. 17*. 14,311. ff. 48*. 52*.
„ of Halliwell, co. Line, 1097. f. 70.
., of Trenwith, Cornwall, 1079. £ 18*.
,, of Tresudian, Cornwall, 1079. f- 239*-
1142. f. 79. 1 149. £ 78. 1 162. £ 82.
6128. f. 86*.
oi London, 1180. £ 74. 1431. £ 8.
6125. £ 5. 6128. £ 109*. 6183. £ 6.
„ of London, fr. co. Hereford, 1476.
£ 226*.
„ of Steyne, Northants, 1553. £ 245*.
„ of Barrington, Oxon,. 1041. £ 81*.
1083. £ 56. 1097. £ 6. 1480. £ 55.
1543. £54**. 1556. £146. 1557. £45*.
„ of Eton, 1562. £ 16*.
„ of Cobham, Surrey, 1046. £ 120.
1 147. £ 156*. 1397. £ 158*. 1430
£163. 1433. £ 147. 1561. f. 199. Add
14,311. £49.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

47

Bray, or Braye.
,, of Ewell, Surrey, 1 147. f. 100. 1430.
f. 105. 1433. f. 146*.
„ of Shere, Surrey, 1430. £ 162*. Add.
14,311. £49
„ of Stoke D'Abernon, Sussex, 5829.
£ 1 1.
„ of Andover and Appleshaw, Hants,
4204. £ 216.
„ — Beds., i53i.£ 125*.
„ — Devon, 1536. £ 21.
„ — Kent, 1484. £ 65. Add. 16,279
P- 439
„ —Northants, 1 187. £93. I40i.£ 12*.
6066. £ 114
„ — co. Warwick, 1 100. £ 50. 1 167. £ 42.
„ —co. Wore, 1566. £ 128.
de Braybrooke. — Add. 19,120. £ 97.
Braybrooke, — Lord, 1 097. £ 4*.
„ of Brightwaltham, Berks, fr. Suff.,
108 1. £ 8. 1 139. £ 115*. 1532. £ 52*.
1557. £ 27. 5822. £ 6. 6173. £ n.
Add. 4961. £ 53. 14,283. £ 53.
„ of Shinfield, Berks, from Suff. Add.
12479 f- 8.
„ of Long Crendon, Bucks, fr. Suff.,
1533. £ 91*.
,, of Braybrooke, Kent. 4204. £ 107*.
Add. 14,309. £ 76*. 16,279. PP- 327-
359
„ — Cheshire, 1535. f 102.
„ — Northants, 890. ff. 28*. 29. 1171.
f. 25. 1553. £ 48.
„ —Wilts, 1 1 1 1. £ 77. 1443- f- 33-
Brayles, v. Cotlif.
„ —Northants, 1 187. £ 14*- u88. p.
10. 1553. £ 30*.
„ or Brailes,— Salop, 1092. f. 56. I ioo.
£35. 1 167. £27. 1241. £ 101*. 1451.
£ 168. 1563. f. 30*. 2186. £ 29
Bray tie, v. Bottost.
„ of Aston, Cheshire, 21 19. f. 1 19 2187.
£ 66*.
„ of Dean, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 26*.
1 191. £24 1543. £20.
Braynton, of Stretton, Hereford, 2156. £ 67.
Braytoft, of Coventry, co. Warwick, 1401. f. 88.
1534 f. 125*. 6774. £ 107. 6775. £ 108.
Add. 4962. £ 82*.
,, —Essex, 1541. f- 22.
—co. Line, 1097. £ 42*. 1082. £ 69*.
" 1 190. £72*. 1400. £12*. 1484 £ 20.
1550.fr. 44*- 84- 1555- f- 26*.
Brearhaughe, of Brearhaughe, Yorks, 4630.
p. 743. Add 26,739. PP- 457*- 458* to
460.
Breche, —Suff. Add. 19,120. £ 105.
Brecher, or Brother, of Kelvedon, Essex, fr.
Somerset, 1 137- f- 9°*- H32- f- 84 i54i-
£ 68. 6065. f. 159*-
Brecknock, —Oxon, 1556. £ 15-
Bree,-Suffolk. Add. 19,120. £ 106.
Brencbley, of Benenden, Kent, 2 109. £ 56.
Brend, of Beccles, Suff., 155- '• 27- "77. f- 70*.
156a £ 104*-

de Brendball, — Add. 19,120. f. no.
Brent, of Hunisbrooke, Dorset, fr. Somerset,
1539. f. 184*.
„ of Charing, Kent, 1484. £ 68. 1548.
£ 116*. Add. 5526. p. 243. 5532. p.
59 16,279. p. 14.
„ of Wilsboro', Kent Add. 5509. £ 32*.
„ of Cossington, &e, Somerset, 1389.
£34. 1559.fr. 9 45.
„ — Cornwall, 4031. £ 76*.
Breres, of Brockhall, co. Lane, 1437. ff. 94 96.
Brereton, of Ashley, Cheshire, 1424 £ 16. 1505.
£15. 1535. £ 43. 5182. £12. Add.
29,783. ff. 28. 28*.
„ of Barrell, or Kiddington, Cheshire,
1535. £ 69*.
„ of Brereton, Cheshire, 1045. £ 99*.
1415. £ 44*. 1424. ff. 14. 36*. 1505^. 13*.
1535. ff. 67(0. *.) 69. 95. 96. 114. 281.
2119. ff. 85. 228*. 2142. £ 51. 2187.
£ 20. 2230. f. 33. 5182. ff. 11. 14.
1487. ff 9. 52*. Add 29,783. ff. 28.
28*. 
„ of Eccleston, Cheshire, 1424. £ 17.
1505. £ 16. 2142. £ 38*. 2187. £23.
Add. 5529. £ 13. 29,782. ff. 8. 10.
„ of Handford, Cheshire, 1045. f- i°4-
I424. £ 16*. 1505. £15*. 2187. £ 23.
2230. £ 28.
„ of Malpas, Cheshire, 1424. £ 14*.
1505. £14. 1535. £ 68*. 2187. £21*.
2230. £ 34. 5182. £ 13.
„ of Tatton, Cheshire, 1424 ft 15*. 99.
1505. £ 97*. 1535. ff. 69. 192. 206.
„ of Harlow, co. Derby. Add. 24458.
£59*.
„ of Burras, Salop, fr. co. Denbigh,
1 241. ff. 107*. 129. 1396. ff. 49. 296.
„ of Yard, Somerset, fr. Cheshire, 1 141.
£ S7(a. *.) 1445- f- 83. 1559. ff. 139.
187*.
„ of Norwich, 1552. £ 207.
„ of Halton, Staff, &c^ 141 5. £ 135.
1472. £ 9. 6104. £ 25.
„ of Mitcham, Surrey, fr. Cheshire, 1046.
£4*. 1 147. £ 3. 1397. £ 42*. 1430-
£ 3. 1433. £ 42*. 1561. £ 93*. Add.
4963. £ 4-
„ — Suffolk. Add. 19,120. £ 112.
„ of Carrigslany, co. Carlow, &c. Add.
23,693. £ 69.
„ of Ireland. Add. 24,458. £ i89(m.)
Brerewood, of Chester, 1535. £ 65*. 2163.
f-87. ' "
Bressey v. Brassey.
„ of Wotton, Beds., fr.- Cheshire, 1300.
f.26*(*),
Bretarghe, of Bretarghe Holt, co. Lane, 1468.
£ 75. 1549 f- 133*.
Bretland, of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 30$b(m.).
Brett, of Quainton, Bucks, fr. Som., 1 102. £ 69.
1151. £ 68. 1193. £ 69. 1391. £ 73.
1533. £ 156.
„ of Davenham, Cheshire, 1535. £ 293.
„ of Hereford, 1 140. £ 104*.

43

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Brett, of Rotherby, co. Leic, 11S0. £ 155*.
1 187. f. 141. 6125. f. 107*. 61&3.
f. 124*.
„ of London, fr. Devon, &c, 1096.
£ 64. 1463. £ 26.
„ of Edmonton, Middlx., f r. Som., 155 1.
£ 108.
„ of Keele and Wistanton, co. Staff,
1077. £ 25*. 1173. £ 24*. 1415. £ 113.
1570. £22. 6104. f. 26*. 6128. £37*.
„ —co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 104*.
„ — Suff. Add. 19,120. £ 122.
„ — Sussex, 1076. £ 222*.
Srettingham, of Mendham, Suff. Add. 19,120.
£ 129.
„ — Kent, 1548. £ 160*.
„ —Northants, 3288. £ 154.
Bretton, or Breton, of Walton, co. Derby, 886.
£26. 1093. £ 35. 1537. £28*. 2134.
£ 36*. Egert. 996. £ 67*.
„ of Great Wichingham and Felming-
ham, Norfolk, 1177. £ 173. 1552.
£ 139*. 4755. £ 74 5189. f. 65. 6093.
£ 174*. Add. 19,816. £56*.
„ of Barwell, co. Leic, fr. London,
1 180. £ 115*. 1 187. £ 115. 1 189.
£88*. 1195. £99*. 1431. £ 80. 6125.
ff. 47*. no*. 6183. £48*.
„ of Teken, Northants, 890. £ 15.
1094 ff. 123*. 190. 1 138. f. 42. 1 171.
£ 19*. 1184. ff. 120*. 185. 1187.
£'34*. 1188. p. 37. 1553. f. 25. 6066.
£71-
„ of Monkton Farley, Wilts, fr. Essex,
888. £27*. mi. £56*. 1181. f. 56.
1443. £ 217*. 1565. f. 47. 5184. p. 26.
„ — Hants, 1544. £25*.
„ — Staff., 1077. £ 29. 6128. f. 42*.
Brettrldge, of London, fr. Bucks, 1476. £ 164*.
Brewer, of Ditton and West Farley, Kent,
1548. £ 83*.
„ of Maidstone, Kent. Add. 5528.
£60*.
„ of London, fr. Som., 1444. £ 21. 1476.
£ 306. Add 5533. p. 96.
„ — Sussex, 1076. £ 222*.
Brewin, of N. Dighton, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£70.
Brewse, of Wenham and Whittingham, Suff.,
fr. Norf., 891. £ 21*. 1449. f- 55*-
1560. £ 122. Add. 19,120. £ 133.
„ of Topcroft, Norf, 4756. £ 36*. Add.
19,120. £ 135.
„ of Bramber, Sussex, 1 562. £ 6*.
Brewster, of Marston Trussell, Northants, 1553.
£ 125.
„ of Welford, Northants, 1094. £ 188*.
1 184. £ 183*. 1553. £ 125.
„ of Wrentham arid Rushmere, Suff,
1560. £248*. 1820. £ 38. Add. 19,120.
£ 161.
„ of Wickham Market. Add. 19,120.
f. 171.
Brewyer, of Tor Bay, Devon, 11 87. f. 18.
1 188. p. 14. 3288. ff. 156. 157.

Breynton, of Stretton, co. Hereford, 1140.
f. 62*. 1 1 59.. £61*. 1442- f- 62*. 1545.
f.67. Add. 19,815. f. 56*.
Breyshford, — co. Derby, 1093. £ 42.
Brickenden, of Inkpen, Berks, fr. Kent, 1483.
f. 120. 1530. £ 46. Add. 14,284. p. 33.
Brickhill, or Brickbull, — Cheshire, 1045.
£ 103. 1424. £ 118. 1505. £ 117.
1535 £240. 2187. ff. 101*. 123. 5182.
£ 86. Add. 5529. f. 58.
Bridger, of Worminghurst, Sussex, 1076. £ 160*.
1084. f. 62*. 1 135. £ 48*. 1194 f- 41*.
1406. £ 120*. 1562. £72. 5829. £110*.
6164. £ 72.
Bridges, Brydges or Bruges.
„ Lord Chandos, 104 1. ff. 18. 19. 65.
1073. £ 317*. 1 191. f. 14*. 1543. £8*.
4204. ff. 230*. 237. 5832. £ 12. 5868.
£7.
„ —co. Glouc, 1041. £ 115*. 1543. ff 8.
43*. Add. 12,479. £37*. 14.309. £50*.
„ of Chelmsford, Essex, 1083. £ 73*.
1 137. £ 132. 1432. £ 1-42. 1542. £ 44*.
Add. 14,290. £ 98.
„ or Bruges, of Westham, Essex, 1 137.
£81. 1432. f. 74*. 6065. £ 129. 1 541.
£ 78*.
„ of Lee, co. Heref., 1140. £ 81. 1141.
£42*. 1 159. £81. 1442. £84. 1445.
£ 64 1545. £ 86*. 1 559. £ 173*.
„ of Standon, co. Heref., 2156. £ 66.
„ of Dyrriock, co. Heref. Add. 19,815.
£ 72.
„ of Fingley,, Oxon. &c, 1095. £ 53*.
1097. f. 3*. 1556. £124*.
„ of Estington, co.Wore, fr. co. Heref.,
1566. £ 13*.
„ of Sheffield. Add 24458. £ 156*.
258.
„ of London, 1463. £ 47*.
„ — Kent. Add. 5528. £ 192. 16,279.
p. 221.
Bridgman, — Earl of Bradford. Add. 19,120.
ff. 209. 217. 21,017. f- 109*.
„ of Dean, co. Glouc, io4i.£ 22. 1191.
£ 16*. 1543. £ 14*. 1563. £79*. 1566.
£ 172*.
„ of Powton Ct, co. Glouc, 4204. f. 230.
„ — Suffolk, 1472. £ 35. 1982. £ 18.
6172. f. 12. Add. 14,314, £ 61. 19,120.
£ 215.
Brldlowe, — Essex. Add 14,290. £ 76*.
Bridman, — -Beds, 1559.fi 224.
Bridmer, —Wilts, 1166. f. 30*.. 145 1. £ 52*.
Bridon, — Suff. Add. 19,120. £ 220.
Brlgge, of Salle, Norfolk. 1 177. £178*. 1552.
£ 145. 5189. £ 661 4755. f. 77. 6093.
£ 178*. Add. I9,8l6..ff. 59. 94*. 95.
Brigginshaw, of Hayes, Middlx., 1468. f. 127*.
Briggs, of Rickmansworth, Herts, fr. co. Yorks,
1234 £ 141*. 1.504.. f: 143. 1547. £ 6.
„ of Ernstree, Salbp, fr. Norfolk, 615.
£ 233*. 1241. ff. 13*. 22*. 1396. £ 43.
1566. £ 104*. 1982. £ 153*. Add.
14,314 f- 102*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

49

»

Briggs, of Norwich. Add. 19,120. f. 222.
„ ofCalmire, Westmorland, 1435. f. 19.
1564 £ 19.
„ of Old Malton, Yorks., fr. Westmor
land, 1487. ff. 415. 427.
,, — co. Glouc Add. 12479. £ 6.
Brigham, of Cannon Jude, Oxon, 1480. £ 44.
1557. £ 13.
„ of Brigham, Yorks., 805. £ 75. 1394
pp. 113. 115. 1415. £87*. 1420. £ 84b.
1487. £ 310. Add. 18,011. £ 103*.
Brighouse, of Colby, co. Line, 1550. £ 104.
Bright, of Staveley, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
£153. 28,113. £78.
„ of Talmach Hall, Suff. Add 19,120.
f. 225.
„ of Nether Hall, Suff. Add. 19,120.
£ 228.
„ of Graystones and Staveley. Add.
24458. ff. 151*. 152.
of Sheffield. Add. 24458. £ 152.
of Horelow, or Whorlow. Add.
24,458. ff. 152 and 153.
„ of Bristol and of Worcester. Add.
24458. £ 34.
„ of Badsworth and Carbrooke, Yorks.
1420. £ 218*. 4630. p. 70. Add.
26,739. £ 58.
Brightbridge, of I ver, Bucks, 1 102. £ 45*.
Ii39.fi 42*. 115i.fi 44*- Ii93.fi 45*-
i39i.fi 48*. i429.fi 72*. 1533. fi 2*.
5181. p. 8. 5832. £ 10*. 5868. £ 10*.
BrightweU, of Chersley, Bucks, 11 39. £ 140.
1429. £ 70*. 1533. ff. 30*. 72. 5i8r.
p. 63. 5832. ff. 12. 38*. 5868. ff. 7.
36*.
Brimton, — Berks, 1532. £ 3.
Brinckburst, of Great Marlow, Bucks, fr. Berks.
1102. £ 52. 1151. £ 51. 1193- f- 52.
1234. £ 58. 1391. £ 50. 1533- f- x44
Brind, of Wanborough, Wilts, 1165. f. 20*.
1443. £ 100.
Brindesiey, of Brindesley, Notts, 1082. £ 49
1400. £ 79*. 1555- f- I23-
Brindley, of Wistaston, Cheshire, 1424. £ 30.
1504. £85*. 1505. £29. 1535. £52*.
2119. ff. 76*. 118. 119. 2142. £ 76*.
2187. £ 18*.
„ —Cheshire, 1535- f- 3'. 2230. £ 35.
„ —Suff., 2119.fi 118.
Brlnkley— Bishop of Cloyne. Add. 19,120.
f. 236.
Brinley,— co. Staff., 1476. fi 383*-
Brisco, of Crofton, Cumberland, 1536. £ 9*.
3391. fi 4*-
of Aldenham, Herts, fr. Cum., 1504.
" fi 63. 1542. f- 105- 1546. f. 54*. I547-
£47*. 5186. p. 50.
of St. Mich-els, Herts, 1547. f- 44*-
of Yarwell, Northants, 1094. £ 223*.
" 1184.fi 218*. 1553- f- 230.
of Oakham, Rutland, 1558. £ 36*.
" 3391. £121.

Ruggles-Brise, of Spains Hall, Essex. Add.
19,120. f. 240.
de Briseworth. — Suff. Add. 19,120. fi 24S.
Bristow, of Pitsey, Essex, fr. Surrey, 1 542. £.53.
„ of Sacombe, Herts, 1546. £ 103*.
„ of Stoke, Northants, 1553. £ 82.
Britain, — co. Derby, 1484. £ 37*.
Brither, — Essex. Add. 12477. f. 52*.
Brithen, — Somerset. Add. 12477. £ 52b.
Britt, or Brite, of South Mapleton, Dorset,
1092. £ 11*. 1153.fi 71*. 145 1. £ 18S.
1539.fi 51*.
Brittiffe, of Sotherton, Suffolk, &c Add
19,120. £ 232.
Britton, — Essex, 19,120. £ 120.
de Briwere. Add. 14,309. £ 59(w.)
Briwere, — Derby. Add. 28,113. £ 64*. (7«.)
Broadbent, of Sheffield. Add. 24458. f. 100*. bis.
„ ofWoolley.Yorks. Add24458.fi 335.
Broadgate, of London, fr. co. Warr. 1476.
fi 235*.
Broadhuxst, V. Brodhurst.
„ of Mansfield, Notts. Add 24458.
f. 87*.
„ of Halifax, Bath, &c. Add. 24458.
f. 71.
Broadley, of Dover. Add. 5528. £ I05.(w).
Brocas, of Beaurepaire, Hants, 1544. ff. 113*.
149*.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. fi 225*.
„ — Dorset, 1451, £ 193*.
— co. Lane 1435. fi 19.
—Somerset, 1141. £ 98. 1385. £ 29.
1445. f. 137. 1559- ff 4- 224 Add.
12,477. f. 65*.
„ —Suffolk, 1449. f. 95-
„ — Surrey. Add. 14,31 r. £ 60*.
„ —Wilts, 5184 p. 11.
„ — Yorks., 142a £ 121*.
Brock, of Colchester, 1541. £ 94*-.
„ of Worlingworth, Suff., fir. Essex,
1560. f. 319*. 1820. £ 2a
„ of Blythborough, Suff. Add 19,120.
£277.
Brockedon, of London, fr. Devon, 1476. £ 173.
Brockes, of London, 1444- f- 79*-
Brockesborne, of Bradfield, Essex, 1137. f. 37.
1432. f. 28. 1541. fi 23. Add 19,120.
£ 321.
Brocket, of West Leyton, Suff., fr. co. Herts.
155. £ 12*. 1103. £76. 1177. £ 63*.
1449. £ 66*. 1560. £ 86. Add 19,120.
£ 280.of Wingale, Essex, fr. Herts, 1137.
f. 101*. 1432. £ 96- I54I- ff 45- 179-
of Whethamstead and Brocket Hall,
" Herts, 1504. fi 11. 1546. £ 11. 62*.
102. 1547- fi 48.
„ of Co.icott, Herts, 1547. f. 50*.
„ of London, fr. co. Herts. 1476. f. 436.
Brockholes, of Claughton, co. Lane. Add.
12,477. fi 23*.
_ of Hoton, co. Lane, 1437. ff. 32. 56.
H

»

5°

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Brockhull, Brockhill, or Brockholes.
„ or Selling, of Aldington, Kent, 1 106.
f. 150*. 1432. f. 271. 1548. f. 129*.
Add. 5507. p. 310. 5526. p. 306. 5532.
P-35-
,. — Essex, 1398. £ 21.
,, — Oxon, 1095. £ 36*. 1556. f. 26*.
,, —Suffolk, 155. £ 18. 1 177. £ 13*.
1449 £ 20*. 1560. £ 17.
„ — Sussex, 5829. £ 83*.
Brocklesby, of Glentworth, co. Line, 1097.
£ 115*. 1190. £ 51*. 1484. £ 32*.
1550. £ 231.
de Brockley,— Suff, 19,120. f. 284.
Brockman, or Brokeman, of Faulkburne,
Essex, 1 137. £ 85. 1432. £ 78*. 1541.
£ 64. 6065. £ 38*.
„ of Beechborough, Kent. Add. 5507.
,£.195*
„ of Newington, Kent, 1106. £ 83*.
1432. £ 229*. 1548. f. 22*. Add. 5507.
p. 195. 5526. p. 152. 5532. p. 21.
23,750. £ 29*.
„ of Lyminge Hill, Kent. Add. 5528.
£ 80.
Srockesborne, — Bucks, 1102. £ 60*. 1151.
f. 59*. 1 1 93. £ 60*. 1234. £ 66*.
1391. £ 64*.
„ of Bradbume, Essex, 1137. £ 37.
1432. fi 28. 1541. £23.
Brookweil,— Salop, 1982.fi 121.
Brodfleld, v. Cooke.
Broderick, of Langford, Berks, 1483. fi 83.
1530. fi 60*. Add. 14,284. p. 75.
Brodrick,— -Viscount Midleton. Add. 14,839.
ff. 103. 104.
Brodie (Bart.). Add. 19,120. fi 287.
„ of Mansfield, Notts. Add. 24,458.
£ 89.
Brodhurst,— Cheshire, 1535. £ 66.
Brodnax, of Godmersham, Kent, 1 106. £ 84.
1432. £ 228*. Add. 5507. p. 196. 5526.
p. 153. 5528. £ 136*.
Srograve, of Bickingham, Cornwall, 1079.
£163*. 1 142. £ 156*. 1 149. £156*.
Ii62.fi 158*.
-,, of Braughing, Herts, fr. Kent, 1546,
£ 86*.
„ of Hammels, Herts, 1547.fi 36.
„ of Beckenham, Kent, fr. Herts, 1 106.
£ 130. 1432. f. 257*. Add. 5507.
p. 227. 5509. £ 35. 5526. p. 265.
23,750. f- 30.
„ of Kirkby, co. Leic, 1550. fi 148*.
„ of Wappenham, Northants, 890.
£ 11. 1094 £ 107*. 1138. £ 31*.
1171. £ 18. 1184. £ 104*. 1187.
£ 29*. 1188. p. 30. 1553. £ 207.
6066 £45*.
Brohe, — Salop, 1982. £ 113.
de Brokedish, — Suff. -Add. 19,120. £ 316.
Brome, v. Broome.
Bromer, — Dorset, 1092. f. 49.

Bromfield, of London, fr. Cheshire, 1476. £ 300.
„ of London, fr. Essex. Add. 5533.
p. 117. 29,782. f. 32.
„ of Bullingboro', co. Line, 1550. £ 41.
Bromflete,— Lord Vesey, 1487. £ 102. Add
29,783. f. 5.
Brombaii, of Stevington, Beds, 1 531. f. 114*.
4600. p. 78*.
„ —Cheshire, 1424. fi 45*. 1505. f. 44*.
1535. fi 118*. 2187. £48*.
Bromham, or Broombam, Surrey, 1046. £ 97*.
1 147. fi 155. I43°- f- i6*- I433- fi 128.
1561. f. 180.
Bromhead, of Lincoln (Bart.). Add. 23,685.
fi 32.
„ of Nether Bradfield, Yorks. Add.
24458. fi 180.
de Bromley, of Cheshire. Add. 29,783. f. 17*.
Bromley,— Lord Montford. Add. 14,835. fi 90.
„ of Mitley, Cheshire, 1241. ff. 18. 41*.
59 75- J396- ff 36. 317. 1472. ff. 31.
— 34. 1982. ff. 76. 150*. 2187. £ 29*.
6172. £ 15. Add. 5529 £ 8. 14,314
£ 112*.
„ of Nantwich, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 10*.
26*. 1505. ff. 10*. 25.?. 1535. ff. 40.
57*. 2119. fi 112. 2187. ff. 15. 30*.
5182. fi 4*. Add. 29,782. fi 7.
„ of Norbury, Cheshire, 1424. f. 26.
1505. fi 25. 1535. ff. 57. 58. 163. 2142.
£31. 2187.fi 29. Add. 5529. fi 8.
„ of Basford, Cheshire, 1535. £ 56*.
„ of Chetilton, Cheshire, 774. f. 17.
1 106. £ 8. 1424. ff. 23*. 25*. 26. 1505.
ff. 22*. 25. 1535. ff. 57. 95. 167*. 283.
1548. £ 52. 21 19. £ in. 2142. £ 31.
2187. ff. 28*. 30. 2198. £ 93. 5182.
f- 9- 55°7. f- 40. 5526. £ 13. Add
5529- fi 8.
„ of Hampton, Cheshire, 1535. f. 209.
2119.fi 113. 2187. fi 82. Add. 5529.
£ 8.
„ of Holt and Shrawardine, Salop.
Add. 21,017. ff. 99*. 100.
„ — Devon, 3288. £ 169.
„ — Essex, 6065. £ 76;
„ — Herts, 1234. £ 140*. 1504. £ 140.
1547. fi 29.
„ — co. Staff., 1415. £ 126. 1570. ff. 12.
31*.
„ —Suff. Add. 19,120. £ 334.
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,31 1. £ 33*.
„ — co. Wore, 1566. £ 125*.
Brompton, of Brompton, Somerset, 1559. £ 87.
Bromwlcb, of Bromsgrove, co. Glouc, 1041.
£ 24. 1 191 . f. 22. 1543. ff. 1 7. 61*. 67*.
Add. 19,815. £ 44*. 45.
„ — Hereford, 1 140. ffi 50*. 107*. 1159.
£ 49**. 1442. £ 50*. 1545. £ 55*.
4204.fi in.
„ — co. Leic, ii8o.fi 27*. 1187. £ no*.
1431. £ 24*. 6125. £ 39 6183. f. 40.
„ — Salop, 1396. £ 220.
„ —Wilts, 1165. £ 39*. 1443. £122*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

5i

Bromwlcb,— co. Wore, 1566. f. 167.
Bronde, — see also Brand.
„ of Greyston, Northants, fr. Suff.
Add. 19,816. fi 75.
Brookbank, of London, 1439. f- 53*-
„ of Alford, co. Line, 1550. £ 208*.
Brooke, — Lord Cobham, 1484. £ 47*. 2109.
£ 62*. 6066. £ 42. Add. 14,309. £ 85.
14,311. fi 17- 16,279. pp. 327. 344-355-
19,120. f.336.
„ of Norton Priory, &c, 4204. fi 54.
Add. 29,783. fi 45.
„ of Mere, &c, Cheshire. Add. 29,782.
ff. 14*. 16*. 29,783. fi 45*.
„ of Leighton, Cheshire, 774 fi 17*.
1180.fi 35. 1187.fi 114*. 1189.fi 40.
1401. £ 73*. 1424. £ 18*. 1431. £ 33.
1505. £ 17*. 1535. £92. 2119. fi 130*.
2142. ff. 122*. 127*. 2187. fi 135 (<..*.).
2230. ff. 28. 35*. 5182. ff. 7. 8. Add.
4962. fi 69. 6125. fi 46. 6183. £ 47.
29,783. £ 44*-
„ of Whitchurch, Hants, 1 139. fi 37.
1544 £ 186*.
„ of Hartlip, Kent, 1106. £ 17. 1432.
£ 181*. 2198. £ 102. 4108. ff. 63*.
64. Add 5507. p. 58. 5526. p. 29.
14,307. ff. 3. 5. 16,279 p. 362. 23,750.
£28*.
„ of London, fr. Suff., 1476. fi 203*.
„ of Oakley, Northants, 890. fi 27*
1094. fi 3*.. 1138. fi 24. 1171. fi 18.
1 1 84. fi 3*. n 87. fi 42. 1 1 88. p. 49.
1553. fi 46*. 6066. £94.
„ of Church Stretton and Cotton,
Salop, fr. co. Staff, 1241. £ 64. 1396.
£ 51*. 1472. £ 42*. 1982. £ 21. 6172.
£13*. Add. 14,314. £40*.
„ of Glastonbury, Som., 1 141. £ 15*.
1445. fi 29. 1559. fi 150*.
„ of Hastier, Staff, fr. co. Derby,
1077. ff. 30*. 71*. 83. 1 173. ff. 26*. 63*.
75. 1415. fi 1 136. 1570. ff 51- 65. 73-
2156. fi 55. 6104 fi 27. 6128. fi 52*.
„ of Aspal, Suff, fr. Som., 1560. fi 125*.
Add. 16,279. pp. 364. 366.
„ of Ash, Suff., 1449- *"• 40*. 1560.
£150. Add. 5528. fi 121. 14,307. fi 5.
„ of Nacton, Suff., 1560. £ 317*.
of Gateforth and Hunmanby, co.
Yorks. Add. 24,458. f- 268*.
„ of Drightlington, co. Yorks., 805. £ 77.
„ of Leeds. Add. 24,458. £ 112*.
w of Masham, Yorks. Add. 26,739.
P- 59
of Dodsworth, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
" £ 172*. 26,739- P- 59*-
of Ufford, Suff. Add. 19120. ff. 348.
" -356. of Woodbridge, Suff. Add. 19,120.
" ff 352. 354-
Westerfield, Suff. Add. 19,120.
" f-358.

Brooke, of Blythborough, Suff., &c. Add.
19,120. f. 362.
„ of Barrow Grove, Som. Add. 19,120.
£ 366.
„ of Worlingworth, Stiff. Add. 19,120.
£ 368.
„ —Suffolk, 155. fi 57*. 1560. £112.
de Capell Brooke (Bart.). Add. i9.120.fi 292.
23,684. ff. 150. — 164. 23,686. £96*.
„ of Colebrooke, co. Fermanagh (Bart.)
Add. 23,685. £90*.
„ of Brookesborough, co. Fenn. Add
23,685. £ 41.
„ of Dublin, notes. Add 23,693. ff. 66.
67.68.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 14*. 4600. p. 14
Lansd. 864. p. 1 5.
„ (At Brooke) — Bucks, 1533. £ 90*.
,r — Devon, 3288. ff. 122*. 134*. 135.
5185.fi 74.
„ — Essex, 1504. ff. 10. 95. 1546.fi n*.
„ — Kent. Add. 5528. ff. 71*. 104.
14,307. f. 8.
„ — Notts, 1400 fi 32.
Brooker, of Maydeken and Barham, Kent, fr.
Sussex, 1 106. fi 22. 1432.fi 185. 154S.
ff. 88. 178*. 2198. fi 107. Add 5507
p. 68. 5526. p. 39. 16,279 P- 427-
23,750. fi 29.
„ or Browker, of Southwark, Surrey,
1046. fi 51. 1147.fi 80*. 1397. £ 89.
1430. f. 87*. 1 561. f. 144. Add 4963.
£ 101*. 12,478. £ 35.
Brookes, of Wanting, Berks, 1483. £ 1 n*. 1530.
£65. Add. 14,284. p. 85.
„ of London, 1463. £ 45*.
„ of York (Bt.) Add. 24458. £ 214.
Brookesby, of Broughton and Stapleford, co.
Leic, 1180. £ 150. 1189. £ 113. 1195.
£ 76*. 1431. £ 104*.
„ of Shollesley, co. Leic, 11 80. ff. 26.
123. 1 1 87. ff. 109*. 133. 1189.fr. 29.
90*. 1 195. £ 86. 143 1. ff. 22*. 82.
6125. ff. 36*. 113*. 6183. ff. 37*. 800.
„ or villiers, — co. Leic, 1 189. £ 17.
1431. fi 10.
„ of Kilvington, Notts, fr. co. Leic.
1400. fi.77. 1555. fi 115*.
„ — ca Lane, 1549. fi 44*. 6159 £ 33.
Brooksbank, of Elland, Yorks. Add 24,458.
£337*.
„ of Helaugh, Yorks, Add. 24,458. £338.
Brome, V. Broome.
„ of Badesley, co. Warwick, and North-
enden, Cheshire, 2119.fi 173*. 6060. £
58.
„ of Calverton, Notts, from Yorks,
1400. fi 76*. 1555. fi 117.
„ of Clifton, Oxon, 1480. fi 18. 1556.fi
100*. 1557. £ S6*.
„ of Halton, Oxon, fr. Co. Warwick,
80S. £42. 1556. fi 99. 5187. fi 42*.
„ of Brome, Salop, 1982. ff. r_.o*. 42*.
Add 14,314- f- 57-

52

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Erome, of Hopesay, Salop, 1241. f. 61*. 1396.
f. 48*.
„ of Woodbridge, Suff. Add. 19,120.
f. 329
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,120. £ 327.
„ of Woodlose, co. Warwick, 1167. £
29 1563.fi 7.
„ of Salop, Cheshire, &c. 4204. fi 2*.
„ of Kent Add. 5528. £ 90*.
Broomhead, of Sheffield, Yorks. Add. 24458.
f. 162*.
„ of Revel Grange, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£91.
Broomhin, of Bamford, co. Derby. Add. 24,458
£ 265.
Broster, of Chester. Add. 23,688. f. 74.
Brothers, of Knoell, Wilts, 1165. f. 16. 1443.
fi 83.
do Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk. Add. 19,121.
f-5-
Brough, of Thoroton, Yorks. Add. 24458
fi 235*.
Broughton, of Tuddington, Beds, 1083. fi 77*.
1097*. £ 12*. 1 137. f. 133*. 1390.
fi 1*. 1432. fi 145. 1531. fi 151*.
2109. fi 9. 4600. p. 3. 51S6. p. 12.
Lansd 864. p. 2... Add. 14,290. fi 28.
„ of Wokingham, Berks, fr. co. Staff,
1483. £ 65*. 1530. f. 43. 1532. fi 91*.
6173. f. 14*. Add. 4961. £ 22. 14,283.
£ 22. 14,284. p. 27.
of Chester, 2163. £ 88.
of Warisbrightley, Devon, 1080.
£ 303*. 1 163. £ 190*.
of Orsett, Essex, fr. co. Staff., 1541.
£ 67*. 6065. £ 121*.
of Godmanchester, Hunts., fr. Lane,
1075. £ 37*. 1179. fi 78. Cott. Jul.
F. viii. fi 37*.
of London, fr. co. Staff., 1476. fi 334.
of Lowdham, Notts. Add. 24,458.
fi 193.
of Seaton, Rutland, 1558. f. 8. 3391.
f. 116.
of Broughton and Hanley, Salop,6i5.
fi 212. 1241. ff. 58*. 78. 1396. ff. 24*.
27*. 289*. 1472. ff. 19. 21*. 1982.fr.
101*. I24(rt. *.) 141. 6172. ff. 9 12*. 15*.
Add. 14.314.fr. 9. 130*. 14,290. fi 101*.
19,121. fi 9.
of Beckley, Salop. Add. 19,816.
fi 113-
of Sampford, Somerset, 1 14L.fi 9*.
1385. f. 58. 1445- ff 23- 205*. 1559.
£ 41. Add. 12477. £ 58*.
of Broughton, Staff., 1077. £ 39. 1 139
£ 106*. 1 173. £ 30. 141 5. £ 119*.
1439 *• 55- i57o. £ 60*. 2113. £ 88.
6128. £ 6. Add. 21,017. fi no.
of Longdon, Staff., 1077. fi 38.
ii73.f.3i. 1415.fi 114 1570^.54*.
21 13. fi 88. 4204. fi 207*. 6128. fi 6*.
of Whittington, Staff, 6104. fi 63*.
of Denston, Suffolk. 4204. ff. 186.
194*.

Broughton, of Cawston, co. Warwick,' 6060. ff.
4S. 48*.
„ —Dorset, 1153. f. S4*.
„ —co. Hereford, 1140. fi 43*. 1159.
£ 43*. 1442. £ 43*.
„ — Kent, 1484. £ 62.
„ —Add 14,307- f- I3&
„ —Salop, 1982. fi 149*. Add. 14,314.
fi 97.
Brounker, or Branker, of Melksham, Wilts,
888. fi 23*. nn.fi 72*. 1 165. fi 48*.
1 1 8 1. fi 32. 1 443. fi 1 35*. 1 565. fi 39*.
5184. P- 42.
Browker, v. Brooker.
„ of Littleton, Middx., 146S. fi 129*.
de Browe, — Cheshire, 1535.fi 125*.
Browne and Brown.
„ v. X>e Brune.'Weare."
„ . Marquis of Sligo. Add 14,838. ff.
280-282.
„ — Earl of Montague, &e, 1397. f.192.
1073. fi 232*. 4204. fi 205*. 5829.
fi 56. Add. 14,309. ff. 71. 71*. 14,311.
fi 62*.
„ — Viscount Montague, 1562. £ 62.
„ — Lord Orar_more,&cAdd.23,693.f.3*.
„ of Palmerstown, co. Galway (I. Bart)
Add. 23,685. £ 59*. 23,687. £ 167.
„ — Sir Wynstone. Add. 14,309. £ 64*.
„ of Wycomb, Bucks, fr. Wilts, 1533.
£ 207.
„ of Beaconsfield, Bucks, and London.
4204. £ 121*.
„ of Upton, Cheshire, 1535. £ 54*.
„ of Marsh, co. Derby, 1093. £ 9a
1 1 53. £ 94*. i486. £ 59 1537. f. 43.
2134. £ 17. Egert. 996. £ 37.
„ of Snelston, co. Derby, 886. £ 19
1093. ff. 49. 82. 89*. 1 1 53. £ 94*..
1484. £ 36. i486. £ 34*. 1535. ff. 219*.
220. 1537. £ 18. 21 13. £ 97. 2134.
fi 26. 2187. fi 85. 6104. fi 96*. 6592.
fi 20. Egert. 996. fi 63*.
„ of Colehampton, Devon, 1091. f. 29.
„ of Brownshirlashe, Devon, 889. fi 100.
1080. fi 407. 1091. fi 77b. 1399.fi 63*.
1538. f. 193. 3288. fi 38*: 5185. fi 19*.
5840. fi 72*. 5871. fi 28.
„ of Bradle, Dorset, 1 166. £76. 145 1.
£ 122*. 1539. £ 165*.
„ of Frampton, Dorset, 888. fi 6i*.
1092. fi 29*. 1153. fi 75. 1 166. f. 39.
1451. fi 63*. 1539.fi 59*. 2186. fi 23*.
„ of Colchester, Essex, fr. Midd., 1 137.
fi 89 1432. fi 83-. 1449. f- 73- I54I-
fi 101. 1542. ff. 55. 237*. 1560. f. 53.
6065. fi 65*.
„ of Weald Hall, Essex,, 1542. ff. 24*.
57*. 6065. fi 96*.
„ of Fidlers, Essex, 1541. fi 131. 6065.
fi 92.
„ of Flamberds, Essex, fr. Surrey, 1541.
fi 135*. 1542. £ 100*. 6065. f. 79.
Add. 14,290 fi 35.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

53

Browne and Brown, of Ingatestone, Essex, 1541.
f. 219*.
„ of Langynhow, Essex, 1484. f. 53.
„ of Hathfield, co. Glouc, 1041 fi 80.
I543- fi 46.
„ of Nibley, co. Glouc, fr. co. Line,
1041.fi 117. 1543. fin 5.
„ of St. Ives, Hunts, fr. London, 1075.
fi 44- 1179. £ 90. Cott. Jul. F. viii.
£44.
„ of Ashford, Kent, 1532. fi 98*. 1548.
f. 35- 6173. £ 13*.
„ of Canterbury. Add 4961. £ 35.
5507. p. 396. 14,283. £ 35.
„ of Horton Kirby, Kent, 1096. £ 62*.
1 106. £ 184*. 1397. fi 1 18. 1430. fi 89.
1433. fi 297*. 1463. £12. 1484. fi 64.
Add. 5507. p. 61. 5526. p. 386. 5532.
p. 71, 14,311. fi 62. 16,279. pp.104.
417-
„ of Croft, co. Line, 1550. fi 131*.
„ of Hill, co. Line, 1097. fi 42. 1190.
£ 72*. 1484. ff. 12. 28*.
„ of Stamford, co. Line, 890. £ 46.
1094. fi 22. 1 138: fi 18. 1171.fi 23*.
n84fi 22. 1187.fi 4«*. 1188. p. 45.
1553. fi 41.
„ of Stepney, Middlx., 1468.fr. 115*.
122*.
„ of London, fr. Bedf., 1476. fi 249*.
„ of London, fr. Bucks., 1463. fi 10*.
„ of London, fr. Chesh. and Flint, 1476.
£ 377*.
„ of London, fr. Derby, 1476. f. 78*.
„ of London, fr. Essex, 1444. fi 77.
1463. fi 36. 1476. ff. 207*. 449.
„ of London, fr. Hunts., 1476. fi 270*.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. fi 187*.
„ of London, fr. Suff. 1096. fi 15. 1463.
£ 12*.
„ of Porlond, Norf. 4756. £ 42*.
„ of Elsing, Norf, 4756. fi 66. Add.
19,118. fi 173.
„ of Walcott, Northants, fr. Rutland,
1553- f- 253*-
„ of Cotton, Salop, 1241. fi 97.
„ of Morfield, Salop, 1241. fi 54 1472.
f.21.
„ of Backwell, Som., fr. Wilts, 1 141.
f.92. 1445. fi 127*. 1559. £242*.
„ of Blonorton, Suffolk. Add. 19,121*.
24.
„ of Woodbridge, Suffolk, &c. Add.
19,121*. 26.
„ of Benhall, Suffolk. Add. 19,121*. 28.
„ of Kelsale, &e, Suffolk, out of Nor
thumberland. Add. 19,121*. 30.
„- of Rendham. Add. 1 9, 1 2 1 . fi 37.
'„ oi Higham, Suff. Add. 19,121. fi 41.
of Bury St. Edmunds, Suff. Add.
19,121. fi 4°-
-Bohun, of Eccles, Suffolk. Add.
" 19,121. ff. 46 and 48.
of Walton, Suff., 1449 *"• 94- 1560.
" i.m-

Browne and Brown, of Berford, Suff, 2156. fi
35*-
„ of Leistons, Suff. Add. 19,121. f. 19.
„ of Spexhall, Suff. Add 19,121. £ 22.
„ of Beechworth, Surrey, 1 147. ff. 81*.
82.83*. I397- f- n7*. 1430. fi 88*.
1 561. £11. Add. 14,311. ff. 25*. 62.
16,279 p. 439^.)
„ of Shalford, Surrey, 1397. fi 193.
„ of Kerford, Sussex, 1562. f. 83.
5829*. 76.
„ of Tavistock, Sussex, 1076. ff. 198*.
199 6164. f. 37.
„ of Wilton, Wilts, 1165.fi 55*. 1443-
£ 150.
„ of Little Frome, co. Wore, 1043.
fi 17*. 1352. fi 26. 1486. fi 17. 1566.
fi 105.
„ of Pershore, co. Wore, 1566. £ 131*.
„ of Mortimer, co. Wore, 584 1 . f. 2.
„ of Wyke, co. Wore, 5814. ff. 2. 73*.
„ —Essex, 1 106. £ 135. 1234. £ 152.
1432. £ 260*. 1504. £2. 154S.fi 6.
1548. ff. 43. 176. Add 5507. £ 286.
16,279. PP- 35- 224
„ — co. Hereford, 1 140. ff. 10*. 37*.
1 1 59. ff. 10*. 37*. 1442. ff. 10*. 37*.
„ —Norfolk, 1552. £ 152. 156a fi 104*.
„ —Northants, 1449. £ 43. 1560.
-f. 48*.
„ —Notts, 1400. £ 92*. 1555. ff. 26*.
146.
„ — Rutland. Add. 14,311. f. 35.
„ —Salop, 1396. £ 176. 1982. £ 85*.
„ — Surrey, 1 561. £ 18*.
Brownell, of Sheffield Add. 24458. £151.
Browning, of Lees, Cheshire. Add. 5529. £72*.
„ of Cowley, co. Glouc, 104 1. f. 100.
1543. £ 125.
„ or Bruning, of Seagry, Wilts, fr.
Dorset, 888. fi 24*. 1092.fi 49. mi.f.
71*. nSi.f.43*. -443.f.2i6*. 1565.
£41. 5184. p. 43.
Brownlow, of Kirkby, co. Line, 1 190. £ go.
i550.fi 153.
„ of Enfield, Middlx., 1551. £ 71*.
Brownrigg.of Willisham, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
£ 52.
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,121. £ 50.
„ of Park Annesley, co. Wexford. Add.
23,688. ff. 79 to 83.
Erownsmith, of Lavenham, Suffolk. Add.
19,121. f. 59
Browre, of Donhead, Wilts, 1443. fi 218*.
Broxfaolme, of Corringham, co. Line, 1550. fi
98*. . ~
„ of Otesby, co. Line, 1097. f. 98*.
1190.fi 19*. 1484. fin.
Broy, — co. Camb., 1401. fi 15*. Add.4961.fi 14*.
Bruce, v. Bruse.
„ of Pickering, Notts, 1400. £.93. 1555.
£ 146.
„ of Wenham, Suffolk, and of Norfolk*
2156. £ 87.
„ of West Acton, Sussex, 2156. £ 86*.

54

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bruce, of Clackmannan. Add. 14,836. £231.
„ of Earlshall, &c, N.B. Add. 14,837.
f- 173-
„ of Blair Hall, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi
237-
„ of Kinross, &e, N.B. Add. 14,836.
fi 239.
,, of Kennet (Lord Balfour). Add.
14.836. fi 235.
„ of Stenhouse, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi
233.
Sruche, or Briche, — co. Lane, S91. fi 95. 1468.
f. 44*. 1 549 f- 34*. 2076^.15. 2086.
fi 101*. 6159. fi 21.
Brudenell, Earl of Cardigan, &e, 1073. fi 374.
„ of Stoke Mandeville, Bucks, fr. Oxon,
1102. fi 20*. 1136. £ 14. 1139. £ 81*.
1151.fi 18*. 1193.fi 19*. 1234. fi 16.
1391. fi 21*. 1429. fi 75*. 1532. fi 70.
1533- ff 5*- 90. 4108. fi 33. 5832. fi
iS*. 5868. fi 17*.
„ of Doddington, Hunts, 890. p. 50.
1075. f- 40*. 1 179 f> 84*. Cott. Jul. F.
viii. £ 40*.
„ of Stanton Wyvill, co. Leic, n 80. £
98*. 1187.fi 129*. 1189.fi 62. 143 1.
f.53*. 6183.fi 89
„ of Deane, Northants, 890. fi 26*.
1094 ff. 36. 39. 1138.fi 22*. .1184.fi
35. 1187.fi 21*. 1188. p. 19. 1241.fi
64 1396. £273*. 1472. £42*. 6066.
ff. 81. 82. Add 16,279. P- 210.
„ of Stoke, Northants, 1094. £ 101*.
„ of Glaston, Rutland, 1094. ff. 36*. 39.
1 184. fi 35. 1558. fi 53*. 3391. fi 121.
„ —Beds, 2109. ff. 32*. 76*.
„ —Hants, 1544 fi 1 19*.
„ — co. Lane, 6159. fi 33-
„ — Oxon. Add. 16,279. P- 210.
Bruges, V. Bridges.
„ of Edgeborough, Bucks, fr. co. Glouc,
1102. fi 26. 1151. f. 24 1193.fi 25.
1234. fi 20. 1391. fi 28. 1429. fi 70*.
1533. fi 172*. 5832. £ 12.
Bruley, of Waterstock, Oxon, 808. £ 46. 1094.
£159 1095. £42. 1184. fi 156. 1187.
fin*. 118S. p. 4. 1412. fi 98*. 1556.
fi 152. 5187. fi 45- 6066. fi 101*.
Lansd., 880. fi 34*.
Brumston, of Preston, Kent. Add. 5528. f. go.
Brunskiii, of Hadley, Middlx., 1468. fi 125*.
1551. fi 122.
Brunt, — Northants, 1 187. fi 76*. I iSS. £ 109.
Brunts, of Bridgford Hill, Notts. Add.
24,458. f. 242.
de Brus. Add. 14,309. ff. 4*. 85.
Bruse, v. Bruce.
„ Lord, — Cheshire, 1535. £ 38.
„ or Brunse, of Sutton Courtney, Berks,
108 1. fi 28. 1532. fi 3. 4108. fi 6. Add.
4961. £ 72. 14,283. f. 72.
„ of Chatteris, co. Cambs., 1534. £ 116.
„ of Exton, Rutland, 11 79. fi 29. 4204.fi
47. 6159.fi 40*. Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 13.

Bruse, of Pembroke and Gower, Salop,. 1241..
ff. 71. 102. 1396. f. 295.
„ — Devon, 3288. fi 157.
» — co. Line, 1097. ff. 42. 104*. 1 190. ff.
72*. 94. 1484. ff. 28*. 30*. 1 550. fi 24*.
„ —Rutland, 1553. fi 253. 6159. fi 40*.
„ —Yorks, 1394. p. 85. 1415. fi 78.
1420. fi 65. 1487. fi 292. 4204. f. i67(>«).
Add. 18,011. fi 84*.
Brushford, of Bridgway, 4204. fi 228.
Bruton, or Breton, of Heavitree, Devon, 1080.
£ 340*.
„ of London, fr. co. Warr., 1444. f. 19*.
Add. 5533. p. 94.
Bruyn, of Stapleford, Cheshire, 774. £ 17. 1045.
£106*. 1424. £.30*. 1505. £29*.
1535 f- 51- 2142. fi 63*. 2187. f. 25*.
2230. fi 34*. 5182. fi 20.
„ of Tarvin, Cheshire, 1424. f. 31.
1505. ff. 30. 75*. 1535. f. 51*. 2187.
ff. 26. 66*.
„ 'of Farnham, Surrey, 1046. f. 27*.
1561.fi 5.
,, — Essex, 1541. fi 9. 2156. fi 37.
„ — Kent, 1548. fi 63^.
Brwge, or Ap John, of Tndloge, Salop, 1982.-
fi 101.
Bryan, of Wrotham, Kent, fr.co. Leic, 1 106.
fi 3. 1432. fi 170*. 1548. £ 40. 2198.
£ 88. Add. 5507. p. 30. 5526. p. 5.
23,750. fi 28.
„ of Bullingbroke, co. Line, 1550.
fi 140*.
„ of Langhern, Salop, 1396. fi 325.
„ of Battle, Sussex, 1076. fi 44*. 1084
fi 102. 1135.fi 88. r194.fi 81. 1406.
fi 44. 1562. fi 173*. 4109 £.61*.
5829. fi 154 6164 fi 51*.
„ of Dublin, &c. Add 23,686. f. 26*.
23.693- f- 77-
„ — co. Glouc, 1543. fi 80*.
„ — Surrey. Add. 14.311.fi 73b.
Bryant, — Kent. Add. 5528. fi 169*.
Bryce, of Donington, Somerset, 1141. f. 120.
J385- f- 53- 1445- ff 165*. 214. 1559.
f.34 Add. 12477. fi 56.
Brydiman, of Tingrave, Beds, 1531. fi 159*.
Bryers, of Hampton, Yorks,, 1394. p. 198.
Buck, of Ely, co. Camb., 1334. fi 132.
„ of Wisbeach, co. Camb-., fr. co. York,
1043. fi 88*. 1401. fi 53; 1534. f. 69*.
6769. fi 24. 6770. fi 41*. 6774. f. 69*.
6775. fi 73*. 6830. p. 92. Add. 4962.
f. 49*.
„ of Bibury, co. Glouc, 1041. f. 19*.
1191. fi 14. 1543. ffii. 8.
„ of Rochester, Kent, fr. Hants and
Berks, 1106. fi 29*. 1432; fi 191*. 219S.
fi 1 14*. Add. 5507. p. 81. 5526. p. 50.
23,75o. f- 33-
„ of Hamby Grange, co. Line, 1550,
f. 76*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

55

Buck, of Nash, co. Wore, 1043. f. 15. 1352.
f. 2*. i486. £3. 1566. f. 25*. 5814.
fi 5- 5841- f- 3*- Add. 19,816. f. 10S.
„ of Sheffield, Yorks. Add. 24,458. fi 100*.
„ of New Grange, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£49.
„ — Northants, 1 187. fi 15. 1188. p.n.
6066. fi 104.
„ — Salop, 1241. fi 57*.
Buckenham, of Yoxford, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
fi 72.
Buckhurst, of Sutton, Kent. Add. 5528. fi 181.
Buckland, of Edgecott, Northants, 1094.
fi 158*. 1184.fi 155*- n87.fi 53. n88.
p. 65.
. „ of West Harptree, Som., 1 141. fi 79*.
1445. fi 115*. 1559. fi 205*.
„ — co. Glouc, 1543. fi 8*.
Buckle, of Banstead, Surrey, fr. Westmoreland,
1046. fi 210. 1 147. fi 108. 1397. fi 181.
1430. fi 10*. 1433. fi 172*. 1561.
£ 243. Add. 4963. £ 134.
„ and Barlee, of Yoxford, Suffolk.
Add. 19,121. £ 73.
Buckler, of Wolcomb Maltravers, Dorset, 888.
£50. 1 153. £69. 1 166. £3. 1451.
£10. 1539. £35*. 2186. £19.
Buckley, of Buckley, co. Lane Add 24458.
£ 241.
„ — Westmoreland. Add. 5533. p. 106.
Bucknell, of Creke, Northants, 1094. fi 188.
1 184. fi 183. 1 187. fi 48. 1 188. p. 60.
1553. fi 120*. 6066. fi 99*.
Buckton, of Hemswell, Yorks, 805. ff. 80. 81*.
1420. fi 79. 1487- f- 54*. 155°. f- 87*-
Add. 18,011. f.97*.(.«)-
„ of Beningholme, Yorks, 1171. fi 43*.
1554 fi 138*.
Buckworth, of Wisbeach, co. Camb., 1043.
f.63*. 1534.fi 46*. 6769. fi 8. 6770.
fi 18*. 6774.fi 51. 6775.fi 35. 6830.
p. 43. Add. 4962. fi 31*.
Buckyate, of Buckyate, Devon, 1080. fi 244.
1091. fi 34. 1 163. fi 86*. 1538. fi 76.
3288.fi 97. 5840. fi 23. 5871.fi 14*.
Budokeshide,— Devon, 889. fi 81*. 1079. fi 20.
1080. fi 413*- i°9i- f- 56- J399- f- 49
1538. fi 165. 3288. fi 55. 5185. f.23*.
5840. fi 57*. 5871- f- 23*-
Buffkyn, of Looseam and Gore Court, Kent,
1548. £ 81*. Add. 5507. p. 412.
of Barkham, Sussex, 1076. £ 3r.
i084.fi 94*- n35.fi 80*. 1 1 94 fi 73*-
1406. £ 36*. 1562- f- J74- 5829.
fi 146*. 6164. fi 69.
Bugan, or Buging, of St. Kerne, Cornwall,
1079.fi 107*. n42.fi 75*- n49f.74*.
1 162.fi 78*.
Sugge, of Harlow, Essex, fr. London, 1 137.
ff66*.67. 1432-fi 60 (a.b.) I54i.£8i*.
1542. fi 158. 6065. fi So.
of Bedworth, co. Warwick, fr. Essex,
" 1563. fi 229.
of Lakenheath, Suff. Add. i9,i2i.f.8o.

Bug-go, — Norfolk, 1432. fi 90.
„ or Bougge, — Notts, 11 80. f. . 29.
1189.fi 33*. 1431.fi 27. 6125. f. 40*.
6183. fi 41*.
Buggin, of St. John's (Middlx.), 1551, fi 134.
Bulbeck, of London, fr. Som., 1546. fi 93*.
„ of Kingston, Som., 1559. ff. 128. 134*.
„ — co. Staff., i415.fi 119*. 1570. £38.
6128. £ 73.
„ —Surrey, 1 187. £ 19. n88. p. 15.
Bulbrooke, of Drinkstone, Suffolk, 1449. £ 53*.
1560. ff. 160*. 232. Add. 19,121. £ 85.
Bulnncb, — co. Hereford, 1 140. f. 39. 1 1 59. £ 39.
1442.fi 39.
Bulkeley,— Visct. Bulkeley. Add 14,839. ff. 69.
71.
„ — Add. 21,017. fi 113.
j, of Odell, Beds, fr. Cheshire, 1531.
f. 128*.
„ of Beaumaris, Cheshire, 1241. fi 154*.
1505. £.44-5. 1535. £ 48*. Add. 5529.
fig*.
„ of Bickerton, Cheshire, 1241. £ 107.
1396. fi 136*. 1424. ff. 23*. 24 (a. *.) 26.
1505.fr. 22*. 23*. 1535. fi 50*. 21 19.
£ 159. 2142. ff. 73*. 138. Add 5529.
£9*.
„ of Braxton, Cheshire, 1535. £ 47*.
2187. £ 39*. Add 5529. £ 9*.
„ of Bulkeley, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 23*.
24*. 26. 1505. ff. 22*. 23*. 27. 1535.
ff. 40. 48. 256. 283. 2142. £ 138. 2187.
£ 14*. Add. 5529. fi 9*.
„ of Cheadle, Cheshire, 2119. fi 159*.
„ of Eaton, Cheshire, 1535^.48. 2187.
£43*. 4204. ff. 218*. 219. Add. 5529.
£9*.
„ of Porthamell, Cheshire, 1535. £ 49.
„ of Stanlow, co. Derby, 1535. fi 167.
Add. 24458. fi 105.
„ of Wore, Cheshire, 1424. fi 24. 1505.
£ 23. 1535. ff. 50. 167. 168. 2143.
£ 138*. Add. 5529. fi 9*.
„ of Bin-gate, Hants, fr. Cheshire, 1 139.
f. n*. 1544. fi 7*. 2119. f- 158*.
5865. f. 10*.
„ of London («..) Add. 24458^.81.
„ of Stoke, co. Staff., 6104. fi 27*.
„ of Wbittington and Standlow, co.
Staff. Add. 24,458. fi 107.
„ of Whiteparish, Wilts, fr. Cheshire,
888. fi 2*. nil. fi 40. 1 181. fi 45*.
1443.fi 213*. 1565. £ 10. 5184 p. 22.
BuU, of Hertford, fr. London, 1433. £ 8. 1504.
ff. 42*. 56. 1546. £ 29*.- 1547. £ 68*.
6147. fi 30.
„ of Hockwold, Norfolk, Ii77.fi 170*.
1552. fi 177. 4755- f- 9i- 5189. t 62.
6093. fi 200*. Add. 19,816. fi 75*.
„ of Headington, Oxon, fr. Somerset,
148a £ 47*. 1557. f- 33-
„ of Shapwick and Wells, Somerset,
1 fr. Dorset, 1141. £ 75. 1445. £ no.
i 1559 1 203.

56

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Bull, of Sproughton, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
fi 89.
Bullaker, of Southampton, 1544.fi 154*.
Sullen, Earl of Wiltshire, 1081. fi 45. 1139.'
fi 113*. 1425.fi 64. 1484. fi 61*. 1504.
fi 55-
„ of Blickling, Norfolk, 1 177. ff. no.
171. 185. 1552. ff. 164. 203*. 6093.
fi 192.
„ —Beds, 2109. fi 80*.
„ — Salop, 1241. fi 57.
1, — Suffolk, 1484. fi 47.
Buller, of Shillington, Cornwall, fr. Som., 1079
fi 194. 1142. fi 57*. 1 149. fi 56*. 4031.
fi 82*. 1162.fi 60*.
„ of St. Albans, Herts, fr. Norfolk, 1234.
fi 125*. 1504 fi 151*. 1547. fi 10*.
„ of Barkston, co. Line, 1550. fi 137*.
„ of Wood, Somerset, 1385. fi 35. 1445.
f. 237. 1559 fi 9*. Add. 12477. fi 66.
„ — Dorset, 1451. fi 194.
• „ —Hants, 5865, fi 28*.
Bullock, of Aberfield, Berks, io8r. fi 6*. 1139
ff. 71*. 88*. 1532. fi 27*. 5822. fi 4*.
6173. fi 8. Add. 4961. £ 60. 12479
£ 4. 14,283. £ 60.
„ of Thomborough, Bucks, fr. Berks,
1 139 fi 88*. 1533. ff. 35. 75*. 5181.
p. 32. 5832. fi 45. 5868. fi 43.
,y of Darley, co. Derby, 886. fi 35. 1093.
fi 106. 1153.fi 94*. 1537. fi 37*. Egert.,
996. £50*. Add. 24458. £ 105. 28,113.
£ 17.
„ of Ouston, co. Derby, 1093. £ 41.
"53- f- 97*- i486. £ 39*. 1537. £ 42*.
21 13. £ 103. 2134. £ 48. 6592. £ 24.
Egert, 996. fi 24*. Add. 24458. fi 105.
28.113.fi 17.
„ ofNortonandofBrampton,co.Derby.
Add. 24458. fi 104*.
„ of Greenhill and Staveley, co. Derby.
Add. 24458. fi 105.
„ of Much Totham, Essex, 1 541. fi 115.
6065. fi 64.
„ of Wigborough, Essex, 1137. fi 51*.
1432. f. 43.
„ of London, 1463. fi 50.
„ of Sidnell, Salop, 1241.fi 150*. 1472.
fi 27. Add. 14,314. £ 125.
„ of South Holme, Yorks, 1487. £ 494*.
Sulmer (Lord), 1571. f. 86. 6070. £ 292. Add.
18,011. £ 121.
„ of Tursdale, co. Durham, 1 153. f. 35*.
1168.fi 7*. 1171.fi 71*. 1397. fi 205*.
1415. fi 17. 1420. fi 129. 1540. ff. 26.
57-
„ of Levening, Yorks, 1394. p. 119.
141 5. fi 89 1420. fi 89. 1487. fi 339.
1499. fi 26. Add. 18,011. fi 108*,
„ of Pinchinthorpe, Yorks, 1394 p. 136.
i415.fi 93*. 1420. fi 100. 1487. fi 339*.
„ of Uppisland, Yorks, 805. f. 82.
.. —Beds, 2109. f. 71*.

Bulstrode, of Upton, Bucks, fr. Beds, 890, f. 26*.
1094. f. 37. 1102. ff. 44. 121*. 1139.
f. 50*. 1151.fi 43. 1187.fi 21. n88.
p. 19. 1193. £ 44. I391- ff- 47- 123.
1532. £ 70. 1533. ff. 90*. 106*. 132*.
4108. fi 33. 5181. p. 81. 6173. fi 18.
Bulstrode, — Beds, 1 102. fi 121*. 1139. f. 50*.
1391. fi 123. 5181. p. 81.
„ — Kent. Add. 16,279. P- 211.
„ — co. Wore, 1043, fi 19. 1566. fi 45.
Bulteel, of London, 1476. fi 320*.
Buiton,— co. Line, 1550. fi 233.
Buiwer, or Balling, of Wood Dalling, Norfolk.
1177. ff. 1806. 181. 1552. ff. 113*. 148.
153- 4755- ff 79 82. 5189. fi 25.
(a. b). 6693. ff. 153. 180*. 185. Add.
19,816. ff. 60*. 65.
„ of Whitgift, Yorks. Add. 24,458. fi
35(;/_).
Sunbury, of Stanney, Cheshire, 774. fi 18. 1045.
fi 96. 1424. fi 17*. 1505. fi 16*. 1535.
ff. 55-566. 77*. 2119.fi 227. 2142.fr.
85.88*. 2187. fi 31. 5182.fi 10. Add.
5529. fi 10*. 19,121. ff. 100.-106.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1444. fi 22*.
1476. fi 404*. Add. 5533. p. 99.
Bunce, of Charing and Challock, Kent. Add.
5507. pp. 289*. 289**.
„ of Boughton and Ottringden, Kent,
1 106. fi 137*. 1433. fi 262*. Add. 5507.
p. 290. 5509. fi 40. 5526. p. 280. 23,750.
fi 35-
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. fi 186.
Add. 5533. p. 35.
Bungey, of Ickham, Kent, fr. Norfolk, 1106. fi
138*. 1432. fi 263*. Add. 5507. p. 292.
5526. p. 282. 23,750. fi 35*.
„ of Harbledown, Kent. Add. 5509. fi
42. 5528. fi 140*.
„ of Dorking, Surrey, fr. Kent and
Norfolk, 1046. fi 70*. 1 147. fi 116.
1397.fi 109*. 1430. fi 122. 1433. ff. 103*.
106*. 1 561. fi 163. Add. 4963.fi 14*.
12478. fi 53*.
Bunny, of Ryton and Newsham, co. Durham,
1 1 53. fi 42. 1 168. fi 44. 1397. fi 255*.
1540. fi 123*.
„ of Newland and Newton, Yorks,
805. fi 86. 1394. p. 54. 1415.fi 61*.
1420. fi 39*. 1487. ff. 288*. 452. ' 1499.
fi 43. 4630. p. 76. Add. 18,011. fi 58*.
24458. ff. 139 140. 26,739. ff. 61*. 62*.
Bunting, of Middleton, Kent. Add. 5528. f.
60 (vi).
„ of Snettisham, Norfolk. 1177.fi 153.
1552. fi 108. 4755. fi 55. 5189.fi 44*.
6093. fi 148. Add. 19,816. fi 42.
„ of Rotherham, Yorks. Add. 24458.
fi 308.
Burbage, of Hayes Park Hall, Middlx.,
1433. £ 5*. 1504 fi 40. 1546. ff. 26*.
69*. 1551.fi 55*. 6147. fi 27.
„ — co. Durham, 1171. fi 80.
Burchinshaw, — Somerset, fr. London, 1385.
fi 14*. 1559 fi 1 30.
Surd, of Eistock Green, Salop, 1241. f. no.
„ of Chester, 2 1 63. f. 84.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

57

Burden, of Foremark, co. Derby. Add. 28, 11 3.
f- 33-
» of Huncote and Sheppey, co. Leic,
810. fi 10*. 1094. fi 128. 1171. fi 33.
n8o.ff. 12.96. 1184. fi 125. 1187.fr.
16. 102*. 1 188. p. 12. 1 189 ff. 23, 59
1431. ff 16*. 50*. 6125. £ 20*. 1553. £
63*. 6183. ff. 21*. 86*.
„ of Loseby, co. Leic, n 80. ff. 10. 13.
1187. ff. 101*. 102*. 4204 £ 88. 6125.
£ 17*. . 6183. £ 18*. 6066. fi 105.
„ of London, fr. co. Line, 1476. fi 123*.
,, of Arrow, co. Warwick, 1100. fi 14.
1167.fi 9. 1563. fi 28.
,, of Bramcote, co. Warwick, 1100. fi
37*. 1167.fi 29*. 1563. fi 225. 1 180.
p. 13. 1 187. fi 128. 6060. fi 15.
„ of Burthwaite, Yorks, 1394. pp. 253.
257. 1415.fi 31. 1420.fi 180*. ,1487.
fi 78. 4630. p. 81. Add 26,739. ff. 64.
64*. 29,783. ff. 87. 87*.
„ of Denby, Yorks, 805.fr. 87.90. 1394.
pp. 251. 257. 1415.fi 30*. 1420.fi 180.
1487. £77*. 4630. p. 79. Add. 18,011.
ff. 200. 201. 26,739. ff. 63. 63*.
„ of Gainsborough, Yorks, 141 5. £16.
1420. £ 126. 1487.fi 75*. 1420. fi 209*.
Add. 18,011. £ 145.
„ of Woolley, co. Yorks. Add. 24458.
£75*.
„ (now Weldon), of Dunmore, co.
Carlow. (I.Bart.) Add. 23,684. fi 27.
23.685.fi 57. 23.687.fi 185.
„ —co. Derby, 886. fi 6*. 1093. fi 87.
1484. fi 34*. 2134. ff. 13*. 18. 6592. fi 4.
„ — co. Line, 1484 £ 34*.
Burden, of Burdon, Devon, 1 164. £40. 4031.
ff 74- 79
Burdon, of Helmedon, co. Durham, 1 168. f. 17*.
1397. £208. 1540. £70.
Bur es, of Acton, Suffolk. Add. 1 9, 1 2 1 . £ 1 3 1 .
Burfordr— Kent, 1 548. £ 153.
de Burgate,— Suff. Add 19,121. £ 144-
Burges, of Creyton, co. Line, 1550. £ 228*.
„ of London, 1430. fi 48*.
„ —co. Glouc, 1543- f- 49*-
„ —Kent. Add. 5507. p. 84.
„ —Northants, 1094. £ 94*. 1 187. fin.
n88.p.3- 1553- P- ! 27*.
Surgess (Lamb), Bart.,— Suff. Add 19,121.
fi 149
Burgesse, of Truro, Cornwall, 1079 fi 120.
1 142. £87. 1 149- *• 88. 1 162. £92.
de Burghe, of Burgh Green, co. Camb., 1043.
f 56*. 1401. £ 16. I534- ff 9i*- 132*.
Add. 4962.fi 15- 5528.fi 7-
(formerly coppinger.) Add. 19,121.
fi 154-
Burgh, v. Borough and Richmond.
Earl of Ulster, 1982. fi 94- 2109 fi
" 81*. Add. 19,121. fi 156.
Earlof Clanricarde, &c, I073.fi 227*.
" Add. 14,838. ff 14. 21.

Burgb, Lord, 1 394. p. 290. 1420. fi 209*.
1571. ff. 48*. 204*. SI., 1429. f. 100.
Add. 18,011. f. 225*. 19,121. ffi 15J
and 160.
„ (Sir John, Knt.), Salop., 4204 £ 107.
Add. 21,017. fi 86*.
„ of Southwark, Surrey, fr. co. York,
1046. £ 49*. 1 147. £ 76*. 1397. £ 87*.
1430. £ 83*. 1561. fi 141*. Add. 4963.
f.98*. 12,478. fi 33.
„ of Thornecombe, Surrey, fr. co. York,
1046. f. 28. 1433. fi 30*. 1561. f.37.
„ of East Hawkswell, Yorks, 1394.
p. 181. 1415. fi 19*. 1420. ff. 135*.
209*. 1487. fi 68. Add 18,011.
fi 154*.
„ of Walton, Yorks, 1394 p. 67. 1415.
£ 69*. 1420. £ 53.
„ lord of Knaresboro', Yorks, 805.
ff. 91 to 94*.
„ of Newcastle, co. Limerick. Add.
23,695. £99*.
, — Essex, 1 541. £76*.
„ — co. Hereford, 1545. fi 109.
„ — co. Leic, 1180.fi 5*. i.i89f.i5.
1431. £ 7*. 6125. £ 4*. 6183. £ 5*.
„ —Northants, 890. p. 2.
„ —Staff., 2109. £ 61*. 6128. £ 109*.
Burghau, — Cheshire, 1424 £ in. 1505. £110.
Burghersh, Lord, — Suff. Add. 19,121. £ 179.
Burghui, of Thinghill, co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 39.
1 159 £39. 1442. £ 39 1545. £ 47.
Add 14,314. £ 56. 19,121. £ 195.
19,815. fi 33.
Burgoyne, of Sutton, Beds, 1097. £ 26. 139a
£ 15. 1531. f. 31*. 2109. fi 23. 4600.
p. 29. 5186. p. 31. Lansd, 864. p. 29.
„ of Stanton, co. Camb., 1043. £ 103.
1 139. f. 105*. 1401. £ 6. 1534 £ 19*.
2156. fi 102. 6769. fi 37*. 6770.fi 13.
6774 fi 23. 6775. fi 6. Add. 4962.
f.6.
j, of Allington, Devon, 1163.fi 112.
„ of Bideford and South Tawton,
Devon, 889 fi 131*. 1080. £ 55. 1091.
£98. 1 163. fi 138*. 1399. £90. 1538.
£228. 3288. £66. 5185. £20. 5840.
£ 104*. 5871. £ 31*.
„ of Quicks Wood, Herts, fr. co. Camb.,
1546. £ 146*.
„ of Long Stanton, Suffolk. Add.
19,121. £ 199.
„ — Kent, 6060. ff. 6. 6*. Add 16,279.
p. 336.
„ —co. Warwick, 1100. fi 33*. 1167.
£ 25*.
„ —Suffolk, 1560. £ 113*.
Burke, of Glinsk, &c. (I. Bt). Add. 23,685.
£ 84. 23,687. £ 146.
„ of Marble Hill, co. Galway. (I. Bart.)
Add. 23,684. £ 78*. 23,685. £ 7(m).
23,687. £ 157.
„ of Killiarunarie, co. Galway. Add
23,686. £ 30. I

58

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Burke, of Clough, co. Galway, son of Glinsk.
Add. 23,685. f. S3*.
„ of Castle Connell, co. Limerick, 1425.
£ 29.
„ — co. Galway, 10S1.fi 66*.
Burkitt, of Sudbury, Suffolk. Add. 19,121. £ 203.
Burlacey, or Borlacey, of Marlowe, Bucks,
fr. Cornw., 1193. £ 1. 1533. £ 62*.
Burley, of Wokingham, Berks, 1139. £ 88. 1532.
ff. 14*. 16. 1553.fi 224*. 1556. fi 13.
1 561. fi 232*.
„ of Greenhill, co. Derby. Add. 24458.
£ 149*.
„ of Midleton Hall, Hants, fr. Wilts,
1139.fi 19. I544.fi 83*.
„ Bromcroft, Hall, Salop. Add. 19,121.
£ 207.
„ of Pembridge, Salop. Add. 14,309
£54*.
„ of Bromscroft, Staff., 1077. £ 66.
1415. fi 120*. 1570. £ 33. 6128. £
42*.
„ of Asterley and Malehurst, Salop.
Add. 21,017. ff. 91 & 92.
„ of Pirford, Surrey, fr. Devon, 1046.
- f. 192. 1 147. fi 163. 1397. fi 163.
1430. fi 169. 1433. fi 151. 1561.fr. 10.
197. Add. 4963.fi 174-5.
„ of Whistley, Wilts, 888. fi 1 2. mi.
£49. 1 181. fi 49. 1443. fi 214. 1565.
£18*. 5184. p. 34.
„ oi Ecclesfield, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
fi 149*.
„ —Bucks, 1 139. fi 88. 1533. fi 44.
5181. p. 89. 5832. fi 57. 5868. fi 55.
„ — Salop, 1241. ff. 64*. 109. 148. 1396.
£ 55. 1982. fi 59. Add. 14,314. fi 1*.
„ —Surrey, 5814. ff. 45. 59. to 61. Add.
14,311. fi 33. 2i,oi7.f. 90*.
Suriimachi, of London, 1476. fi 55*.
Buriz, of Depden, Essex. 1560. £284*. Add.
19,121. fi 213.
Burnaber, — Yorks, 1420. fi 34*.
• Burnaby, of Watford, Northants, 890. fi 14.
1094 fi 122*. 1138.fi 39. 1184.fi 119*.
1 187. fi 33*. 1 188. p. 36. 1553. fi
23*. 4204. ff. 64. 65*. 131*. 161*.
6066. fi 70.
„ of Churchover, Warwickshire, fr.
Northants, 1100. f. 83. 1167. fi 95*.
1563. fi 115*. 6060. fi 134*.
„ of Waver, co. Warwick, fr. Northants,
1563. fin 5*.
de Bumaviiie, of Bailham, 1552. ff. 81*. 83*.
Add. 19,121. f.218.
Burneby, of Burneby and Bratton, Devon, 889.
fi 138*. 1080. fi 217*. 109 1. fi 82*.
1163. £ 47*. 1399. £ 96*.. 1538. £ 208.
3288. £ 38. 5185. £ 22. 5840. £ 1 12.
5871. £ 33*.
Burnell, Lord, 2109. £ 85. Add. 14,309. ff. 87*
to 89. 19,121. fi 222.
„ of Brinsham, co. Glouc, 1041. fi 117.
1543.fi 115*.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. f. 94

Burnell, of Stanmore, Middlx., 1468. fi 130*.
„ of Winckbome, Notts, fr. London,
1093. fi 101. 1400. fi 54. i486, fi 31.
1537. fi 85*. 1555.fi 82*. 2i13.fi 105.
Egert, 996. £ 7b. .
,, of Acton Burnell, Salop, &c, 2156.
ff. 63. 63*.
„ of Baschurch, Salop, 1241. £ 148*.
1396. £ 33*. 1472. fi 28*. 1982. fi 57*.
„ of Holgate, Salop, 1396. fi 34- 1472.
fi 29. 1982. fi 55*. SI., 1429. fi 69*.
Add. 14,314- f- 53-
„ of Newton, Salop, 615. fi 223*. 1241.
fi 40. Add. 14,314- f> 7*.
„ of Stafford, 6128. fi 62*.
„ of Shrewsbury. Add. 21,017. f. 69.
„ —Cheshire, 2187. £ 147*.
„ —Devon, 1080. £ 236.
„ —Norfolk, 1177. £ 164. 1552. £ 129.
„ —Wilts, 1165. fi 76*. 1443- fi 104*.
Burnet, of Braintree, Essex, fr. co. Camb., 1542.
£ 113*.
„ of Norwich, 1552. £ 80.
„ of Sandal Magna,Yorks. Add. 24,458.
fi 112*.
„ of Leys (N.S. Bart) Add. 14,836.
ff 35- 37- 23,685. fi 24*.
Burre, of Barking and UphalL Essex, 1137.
fi 23. 1432. fi 15*. 1484. fi 52*. 1541.
f.8o*. 6065. C 71*.
„ of London, fr. Somerset, 1476. fi 77..
„ —Essex, 1385. fi 54*. 1445. fi 2 1 1*
1559- f- 35*-
Burr, Vice-President United States. Add.
19,121. fi 226.
Burrell, Lord Gwydir. Add. 19,121. fi 230!
„ of Saltash, Cornwall, 1 164. £ 60.
„ of Howtell, Cumberland, n 53. £ 56.
1448. £ 49*. 1536. ff. 4*- 37*- 1554- fi
116*. 3391.fi 4*.
„ of London, 1476. fi 325*.
„ of Berwick, Northumberland, 1554.
fi 6.
„ of Chertsey, Surrey, 1046. £ 119*.
1 147. f. 159*; 1397. £ 159. 1430. £
165*. 1433. fi 148-. 1561. fi 201*. Add.
4963. fi 174.
„ of Cuckfield, Sussex, 5829. f. 125*.
„ —co. Line, I546.,f. 119*.
Burrington, of Sandford, Devon, 1080. £ 198*.
1163. £ 16.
Surrougb, of Sandwich, Kent, 1 196. fi 108.
„ of Wickham Btaok, Suffolk, 1560.
fi 124. Add. ig>l2i. fi 235.
Burroughes, of Long Stratton, Norfolk. Add
19,121. fi 240.
Burrow, of Chesterfield. Add. 24458. fi 72*.
Burshell.ot Guildford, Suurey, 1046. fi 84. 1147.
fi 133- 1397- fi 123. 1430. £ 139.
1433. fi 115*. I561.fi 174.
Burston, of London, 1476. fi 463.
Burton, v. "Wallop.
„ of Bradboume, co_ Derby, 6104.
£98.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

59

Burton, of Dronfield, co. Derby, fr. co. Staff.,
1093. f. 128. 6104. ff. 97*. 98. Add.
24,458. ff. 77*. 78.
,, of Derby. Add 2445 8. f- 63*.
„ of Whittington, co. Derby. Add
24,458. fi 247.
„ of Braunston, Leic, 1094. fi 238*.
1184. f- 233*. 1558. fi 17. 3391. £ 117.
,, of Lindsey, co. Leic, 810. ff. 1*. 10.
1180.fi 30. 1187. fi in. 1189.fi 34.
1431.fi 27*. 6125. fi 40. 6183.fi 41.
„ of Stockerston, co. Leic, 1 180. fi 115.
1 187. £ 108. 1 189 £ 86*. 1 195. £ 90*.
1431.fi 78. 6125.fi 33. 6183.fi 34.
„ of Cotes, co. Line, 1550. fi 124
„ of London, fr. cos. Notts and York,
1096. fi 53. 1463. £ 16. 1476. ff. 76.
344- 353-
„ of Longnor, Salop, 615. £ 233. 1396.
ff. 44. 124. 1983. ff. 7*. 21. 153*.
6172.fi 7*. Add. 14,314. £ 51.
„ of Falde and Tutbury, Staff., 1439.
£7. 6128. fi 61*. Add 4964. fi 148.
„ of Carshalton, Surrey, 1046. ff. 4. 68.
1147. fi 14. 1397. fi 42. 1430. fi 15-
1433. fi 40*. 1561. fi 91*. 4204. fi 57.
Add 4963. fi 19.
„ of Bourne, Sussex, 1076. fi 196*.
1084 f. 48. 1 135. fi 34. 1 194. fi 27.
1406. fi 66*. 1562. ff. 19. 41*. 4109.
fi 33- 5829. fi 36*. 6164. fi 36*.
„ of Wilton, Wilts, 1 1 1 1. fi 82.
„ of Ingmanthorp, Yorks, 1394. p. 190.
1415. fi 21. 1420. fi 140*. 1487.
£ 387*. 1550. fi 116*. 4630. p. 75.
• Add. 18,01 1. fi 159*. 26,739. f- 61.
„ Of Kinsley, Yorks, 805. fi 95 to 99*.
1394. p. 18. 1415. fi 39. 1430. fi 18.
1487. fi 388*. 1499- f- 43. . 4630. p. 73-
Add. 26,739. ff. 60. 60*.
„ of Threapland, Yorks, 1487. fi 497.
„ of Burnett, Yorks, 6070. fi 3 17.
„ of York. Add. 18,011. fi 7.
„ of Cherry Burton, Yorks. Add.
24,458. £ 220*.
„ of Pollacton, co. Carlow, Bart. Add.
23,685. ff. 1 14. 1 14*.
„ —Somerset, 1385. £ 31.
Burtsall,of Bungay, Suffolk. Add. 19,121. £ 250.
Burward, of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
fi 253.
Burwardesley*— Cheshire, 1424. fi n. 1505.
fin. 1535- f-i-
Burwash, of London, fr. Kent and Sussex,
1476. fi 243.
, —Beds, 2109. ff. 81*. 83.
'„ —Kent, 2 1 56. fi 65. Add. 5528. fi 99.
—Salop, 1982. f. 92*.
Surwell, of Sutton, Suffolk, 1560. fi -245*.
Add. 19,121. £ 264.
of Rougham, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
" £ 258.
., —Herts, 1504. fi 14-
fcurWoodr-Suffolk. Add. 19,121. £ 270.

Bury, of Tuddington, Beds, fr. Bury Hall, co.
Lane, 1097. f. 29*. 1390. fi iS*.
1531.fi". 17*. 19. 2109. f. 36*. 4600.
p. 36. 5186. p. 15. Lansd-, 864.
p. 36.
„ of Meldrith, co. Cambs., fr. Beds,
1043. £ 87. 1401. £ 70. 1534. £ 90*
6774. £ 87. 6775. £ 90.
„ or Berry, of Berrynarber, Devon, 889.
fi 110. 1080. ff. 336*. 421*. 1091.
£ 89. 1399. £ 72. 1538. £ 214*. 1567.
£ 24. 3288. ff. 68. 133. 5185. ff. 20*.
21. 50*. 5840. £ 82. 5871. fi 31.
„ of Colly ton, Devon, 889. f. 115*.
1091. ffi 42. 93*. 1 163. fi 241*. 1399.
£76. 1538.fi 220*. 3288. £70, 5185.
£ 21*. 5840. £ 87. 5871. £ 37*.
„ of Grantham, co. Leic. Add. 24458.
ff. 283*. 284. 285.
„ of Eastwood, Essex, 1542. £ 51.
„ of Hertford, 1504. fi 14.
„ of Culnaham, Oxon, 1095. £ 63*.
1556. fi 103.
„ of Worlingham, Suffolk, fr. Essex^i55.
£29. 1 103. fi 78*. 1 1 77. £66. 1449.
£76*. 1560. £88*. Add. 19,121. £ 272.
„ or Marshall, of Barton, co. War
wick, 1100. £ 82. 1167. £.94. 1195.
£ 106. 1563. £ 114. 6060. £ 132*.
„ of Shannon Grove, co. Limerick-
Add. 23,693. £ 83.
„ of Ballybegan, Ireland, 4204. f. 47*.
Busbridge, of Hareman, Sussex, 1076. £ 3.
1084, £ 38. 1135. £ 24. 1194. fi 18.
1406. fi 17. 1562. fi 128. 4109. £ 73.
6164. fi 8.
Busby, of Addington, Bucks, 1234. f. 57*.
1533.fi 143.
„ of Barley thorpe, Rutland, 1094. £ 244.
1 184. £ 239. 1 558. fi 23*. 3391. fi 1 17.
Bush, of Wendlesham, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
fi 283.
„ of Stoford, Wilts, 888. £ 22*. 1111.
fi 86*. 1 1 Si. fi 39*. 1443. f. 215*.
1565. £ 37. 51S4. p. 53.
„ — Somerset, fr. co. Carmarthen, 1385.
£.15. 1559 fi 58. .;-
Bushbury,— co. Staff., 6128. f. 26.
BusheU, v. Busseii and Fawkes.
„ of Brodmerston, co. Glouc, 1041. fi 62.
1 100. fi 90. 1 167. fi 1 12. 1543. f. 42*.
1563. f. 133*. 6060. ff. 59-61.
„ of Whitby, Yorks, 1487. fi 464.
„ or Busseii, of Bradley, Devon, 3288.
ff. 147 (a. *.) 166*. 5185. fi 22*.
„ — co. Warwick, fr. co. ""Glouc.,! 100.
ff. 16. 48. 49*. ior*. 1 167. ff. 9*. 40*.
41*. 132*. 1563. £ 67*.
Busk, of Fords Grove, Suffolk. Add. I9,r2r.
£ 277.
„ of Leeds, &c. Add. 24,458. f. 6.
BusseU, or Fowhes, of Drymarston, co. War
wick, 1 100 fi 49. 1 167. fi 4r.
„ of Cleeve, co.Worc, fr. co. Glouc,
1566. f. 127*.

6o

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Busseii, of Finborough Hall, Suffolk. Add.
19,121. fi 279.
Bussey, of Cheston, Herts, fr. co. Line, 1546.
fi 129*.
„ of Haugham, co. Line, 1097. fi 69.
1 190. fi 47*. 1484. fi 4. 1550. fi 5*.
„ — Cheshire, i535.fi 235*.
„ — Surrey, 1561, fi 258*.
Bustard, of Adderbury, Oxon, fr. Devon, 1095.
fi 50*. 1097. fi 2*. 1556. fi 118.
Busvargus, of St. Just, Cornwall, 1079. fi 151*.
1 142. fi 142. 1 149 fi 142. 1 162. fi 145.
Butcher, of Bungay, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
f.285.
„ of Bristol, merchant. Add. 24,458.
f.82*.
„ of Sutton-in-Ashfield, &e, Yorks.
Add. 24,458. fi 89.
Buthey, of Bury St Edmunds. Add. 19,121.
£ 290.
Butler, v. Boteler.
„ Earl of Ormond, 1425.fr. 79. 82.86.87.
1484. fi 61*. 2109. fi 82*. Add. 14,309.
fi 26. 19,121. £ 292.
„ Earl of Lanesborough. Add. I4>838.
fi 172 to 174.
„ Earl of Carrick Add 14,838.
ff 154- 155-
„ Viscount of Tulliephelme, 1425.fi 83.
„ Viscount Mountgarret, 1425. fi 93.
Add. 14,838. ff. 1. to 4.
„ Baron Cahir, 1425. fi 88. Add.
14,839 fi 189
„ Baron of Bransfield, 1073. fi 39S.
„ Lord Dunboyne, 1425. ff. 89*. 90.
91. 92. .
„ Lord of Sudeley, 1531. fi 125**.
1541.fi 42. Add. 14,309. fi 5*.
„ of Garryhundon, co. Carlow. (I.
Bart). Add. 23,685. fi 34*. 23,687.
ff. 142. 143.
„ of Polston, co. Kilkenny, 1425. ff. 87.
94.
„ of Wilton, co. Kilkenny. Add. 23,710.
fi 92.
„ of Newtown, Queen's Co. Add.
23,710. fi 93.
„ of Priesttown, co. Meath. Add.
23,695. ff. 70*. 71.
„ ofBramblestown. Add. 23,685. f.65.
„ of Kilcash, 1425. fi 84.
„ of Slewardagh, 1425. fi 89.
„ of Ardmagh, 1425. fi 85.
„ of Bansigh and Knocktopher. Add.
23,690. fi 61.
„ bf Fishmoyne, co. Cork. Add. 23,688.
f.99.
„ — Ireland. Add. 23,687. fi 6.
,, of Biddenham, Beds, 1097. fi 14*.
1390. fi 3*. 1531. fi 86*. 2109. fi 10*.
4600. pp. 6*. 80. 5186. p. 10. Lansd.,
846. p. 6.

Butler, of Chipping Wycombe, Bucks, fr. co.
Lane, 1102. f. 55*. H39- f- 81. 1151.
f.:54*. 1 193. f- 55*- 1234- f. 65*.
1391. fi 59*. 1533- ff- 33*- 148*. 5'8i.
p. 29 5832. fi 41*- 5868. fi 39*.
„ ¦ of Parkham, Devon, 1538. £ 290.
Add. 14,315. p. 52-
„ of Hanley, Dorset, 1092. £ 78. 1 166.
£ 29*. 1451. f- 5i*- 1539 f- "7*-
„ of Badminton, co. Glouc, 1041.
ff. 25. 69 85*. 1043. fi 39 1543- f- 65*.
„ of Yeaton, Herts. Add. 14,309 £5*.
„ of Gravesend, 1548. £ 173*.
„ of Rochester and Herendon, 1106.
£48*. 1401.fi 27. 1432. fi 206. 4108.
fi 65*. Add. 4962. fi 24*. 5507. p. 1 17.
5526. p. 86. 14,307. f-3- 23,7So.
f-33*-
„ of Sandwich, Kent. Add. 14,307. £4*.
„ of Bewsey, co. Lane, 1468. £ 38*.
1505. fi 34*. 1535. ff.66*. 188. 1549.
£ 26. 2086. £ 88. 3142. ff. 51 to 63.
2187. £ 37. 6159 fi 14. SI., 1429.
f-95*-
„ of Kirkland, co. Lane, 891. fi 72*.
1437- f- 77- r4°8. fi 38. 1549. f- 26*.
1562. fi 77. 2086. £ 43*. 6159. fi 14*.
„ of Rocliff, co. Lane, 1549. fi 24. 2076.
f. 14*.
„ of Cotes, co. Line, 1550. fi 121.
„ of Mandville, Norfolk. Add. 23,710.
fi 92*.
„ of Aston, Northants, fr. co. Hereford,
890. fi 13*. 1094. ff. 39.44*. 148*.
1138.fi 36. 1171. fi 19. 1184.fi 40*.
1187.fi 31. 1 188. pp. 31. 43. 1553.
ff. 103*. 248*. 6066. fi 84*.
„ of Preston Capes, Northants, fr. co.
Lane, 890. fi 15. 1094. ff. 109*. no.
1138. fi 42*. 1171. fi 19. 1184. fi 107.
1 187. fi 31. 1188. p. 31. 1553. fi 116.
6066. fi 71*.
„ of Carlton, Notts. Add. 24,458.
ff. 302*. 303.
„ of Worthington, Oxon, fr. Northants,
808. ff. 10*. 40*. 1095. fi 15*. 1412.
f.82. 1556. fi 37. 5187. fi 14*. 6166.
p. 146. Lansd, 880. fi 12*. Add.
11,388. fi 180*.
„ of Oakham, Rutland, fr. Yorks, 1094.
fi 236*. 1184.fi 231*. 1558. f. 14*.
3391. £ 115*.
„ of Sudbury, Suff. Add. 19,121. fi 300.
,, of Croydon, Surrey,. 1046. f. 25*.
1397. fi 63*.
„ of Coventry, co. Warwick, fr. co.
Lane, 1 100. fi 105. 1167.fi 138. 1563.
fi 155*. 6060. fi 173*.
„ of Langley, Wilts* fr. co. Lane, 888.
fi 22. im. fi 85. 1181.fi 39. 1443.
fi 215. 1565. fi 36*. 5184. p. 52.
„ of Wick, co. Wore, 1043. £ 14 1352.
£ 2. 1481. £ 1. 1566. £ 21. 5814.
£ 3. 5841-fi 3, Add. 19,816. f. 113*.
„ —Derby, 1093. f. 27*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

61

Butler,— Herts, 2109. £33*. 2156. £58*.
,, —Staff., 886. f. 62*. 6128. f. 65*.
„ —Suffolk, 1449. f. 12*. 1484. fi 4:
1560. fi 16.
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,311. fi 20.
Butsed, of Butsed, Devon. Add. 14,315. p. 36.
Butte-wick, of Bury, Suffolk, 1084. fi 105.
1 135. fi 91. 1 194. fi 84. 1406. fi 47.
1562. fi 171.
Sutterworth, of Belfield, co. Lane, 1437. fi 13.
Add. 24458. fi 29S.
„ of Manchester. Add. 24,458. fi 65.
„ of Sheffield and of NobbsHall, Yorks.
Add. 24458. fi 163*.
„ of London, fr. co. Lane, 1476. fi 409*.
Buttery, of Marston, Northants, 890. fi 12.
1094. fi 134. 1 138. fi 32. 1 171. fi 18*.
1184. fi 131. 1187. fi 44*. 1188. p. 53.
- 1553-fi 146.
Buttery, or Buttey, of Bury St. Edmunds,
Suffolk, 1449. fi 51. 1560. fi 156.
Buttevile, — Northants. Add. 14,311. £24.
Button, — Dorset, 1451. £ 114. 1539. fi 57*.
2186. fi 28.
„ — co. Glouc, 1543. fi 186*.
„ or Grant, of Alton, Hants, 1443.
fi 40*. 1544. fi 183*. 1565. fi 58*.
Butts, of the Bache, co. Hereford, fr. Salop,
1545. fi 122*.
„ of Spring Grove, Kent. Add. 5507.
p. 65*.
„ of Feversham,Kent Add. 5528. fi 145.
„ of Bromley, Kent, fr. Norfolk, 1106.
fi 130*. 1432. f.258. Add. 5507. p. 279*.
5 509. fi 38. 5526. p. 266. 23,750. fi 34.
„ of Garboys, Norfolk, 1552. fi 225*.
6093. p. 23.
„ of Thornage, Norfolk, &e Add.
19,121. fi 323. 19,816. fi 32.
„ of Hartest, Glemsford, Suffolk, &c.
Add. 19,121. fi 318.
„ of Chertsey, Surrey, 11 47. fi 159.
1397. fi 159*. 1433. fi 147*. 1561.
fi 199*. Add 4963. fi 167.
„ of Dorking, Surrey, fr. Norfolk, 1046.
fi 28. 1430. fi 165. 1433. fi 29*. 1561.
fi 35. Add. 4963- f- 83*.
„ — Norfolk, 1 177. fi 141*. 1553.
fi 201*. 4755. fi 43- 5l89- £29*.
6093. p. 96.
Butvilleyne, of Flordon, Suffolk. Add. 19,121.
fi 34o.
Buxton, of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. fi 450.
„ of Brassington, co. Derby, 6 1 04. fi 98*.
„ of York. Add. 24,458. f. 222*.
of Bilboro' and of Acaster, Yorks, of
Longstonand Bakewell, co. Derby, of
Ashbourn and Nottingham. Add
24,458. ff. 228*. 229.
of Dickleborough, Norfolk, 1552.
£205*. 4756.fi 77-
of Tibbenham, Norfolk, 1552. fi 206.
' Add. 19,121. fi 345-
Byckome, of Crowne, Somerset Add. 14,315.
p. 146.

Bydon, of Shakelford, Surrey, 1046. £ 27*.
1561.fi 43*.
Byelby, of Killerby, Yorks, 1487. f. 493. 1571.
fi 223.
Byerly, of Pickhill, Yorks, 1487. fi 454*.
„ of Newcastle-on-Tyne. Add. 24458.
ff. 25*. 26.
Byfieet, of Bratton, Somerset. 1141. £ 36^.
1445. fi 58*. 1559. fi 165*.
,, —Hants, 1 1 1 1. fi 73. 1 181. £ 55. 1565.
£ 40. 5184 p. 2.
Byham, of Selworthy, Somerset, fr. co. Monm.,
1141.fi 64*. 1445. fi 94. 1559. £ 194*.
Bylle, v. BUl.
„ —Herts, 5865. fi 19*.
Byliett, or Billet., Cornwall, 1433. £ 32. 1561.
£ 42*.
Bynd, of Carshalton, Surrey, 1046. £ 27. 1 147.
fi 14*. 1397.fi 65. 1430. fi 15*. 1433.
ff. 23. 59. 1561. fi 112. Add 4963.
fi 19*. 12,478. fi 16*.
Byne, of Rowdell, Sussex, 1076. f. 51*. 1084.
£ 132*. 1 135. £ n8*. 1 194 £ 136.
1406. £ 108*. 1562.fi 187*. 6164 fi 42.
Byng, — Viscount Torrington. Add 19,121.
fi 353-
„ of Granchester and Wrotham, Kent,
1106. fi 31*. 1432. fi 193. 2198.fi 116*.
Add. 5507. p. 85. 5526. p. 54. 5532.
p. 27. 23,750. fi 37.
Byrde, v. Bird.
„ —Staff., 6128. fi 97*.
Byrley, of Wymarsh, Surrey, 1 561. fi 10.
Byrne, — Lord de Tabley. Add. 23,685. fi 55.
23,684. fi 22*. 23, 686. fi 22. 23,693.
ff. 97. 102.
„ of Cabinteely, Ireland Add 23,69a
£76.
Byron, of Salford, co. Lane, 1437. fi 34.
„ of Clayton, co. Lane, 1437. £ 63.
1468. £ 54*. 2086. fi 10*. 2156. fi 121*.
6159.fi 15-
„ of Newstead, Notts, fr. co. Lane,
886. fi 46*. 1400. fi 6*. 1499. fi 20*.
1555. fi 6.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. fi 129.
„ — co. Lane, 805. ff. 56. 58. 886.
fi 63*. 1077. fi 18*. 1173- f- 17*.
1415. ff. no. 134*. 1439 £ 46*. 1562.
£ 77. 1552. £ 168. 1570. £ 16. 5829.
£71. 6128. £5.
„ — Yorks, fr. co. Lane, 1394. p. 20.
141 5. fi 39. 1420. fi 16*. 1487. £381.
Add. 18,011. £ 5*.
Byrye, of Eastleigh, Devon, 889. £ 140*.
1091.fi 118. 1399.fi 99. 1538.fi 265*.
3288. fi 69. 5840. fi n4. 5871. f. 34.
Bysshe, of Burstow, Surrey, 1046, fi n. 1137.
fi 118*. 1147.fi 20. 1397. fi 49. 1430.
ff. 22.81*. 1432. fi 116. I433.fi 47-
1561.fi 97. Add. 12,478. £ 4. 14,311.
£75-
„ of Worth, Sussex, 1046. fi 10*. 1076.
£83. 1147.fi 20*. 1397. fi 48*. 143a
•fi 22*. 1433. fi 47*. 1 561. £ 98*.
6164 fi 35*. Add, 12,478. £46. 14,311,
£76.

62

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

C.

Cabell, of Buckfastleigh, Devon, 1163. f. 37.
1080. fi 211*.
cachmaid, of Bigsweare, co. Gloucester, 1543.
fi 80*.
Cade, of Dunsland, Devon, 1080. f. 58. 1163.
fi 184*.
„ of Tremington, Devon, 10S0. fi 287.
1 163. fi 144*.
, of Aldenham, Herts, fr. London, 1504.
fi 10*. 1546. fi 12*.
Cadman, of Strood, Kent, 1106. fi 67. 1432.
fi 219. Add. 5507. p. 146. 5526. p. 121.
23,750. fi 40.
„ of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 161.
28,113. fi 60.
Cadogan, Lord. Add. 14,835. £ 84 19,122.
ff. 3. to 9*.
Caduii, — co. Gloucester, 1041. £ 55*. 1385.
£ 72. 1559 £ 103.
Cadwallader, of Brampton, Salop, 19S2.fr. 100*
141*.
Cadwell, or Kadweii, — Kent. Add. 5528. fi 170.
Caesar, of Rochester, Kent, 1 106. fi 154*. 1432.
£ 274. Add. 5507. p. 316. 5526. p. 314.
23,750. ff. 1. 41.
„ of Tottenham, Middlx. 1551. £ 67.
Add. 4964. fi 67.
„ —Berks, 1532. fi 93*. Add. 4961.
fi 25. 14,283. fi 25.
Cage, of Brightwell, Bucks, fr. Suffolk, 1533.
fi 101*. Add. 19,122. f. 15.
„ of Long Stowe, co. Camb.,fr. Suffolk,
1043. fi 59*. 1096. fi 80. 1401. fi 19.
1534. fi 28*. 6769. fi 6. 6770. £ 15.
6774. £ 36. 6775. £ 19. 6830. p. 10.
Add. 4962. £ 17.
„ of Woodford, Essex, fr. co. Camb.,
1542. ff. 35*. 116.
„ of Frethern, co. Glouc, fr. London,
1041. £ 120. 1543. fi 170*.
„ of Hormead, Herts, fr. London, 1234.
fi 119. 1504. fi 136*. 1546. fi 99*.
1547. fi 63*.
„ of Milgate, Kent. Add. 16,279.
p. 219. 19,122. fi 19. &c.
„ of Birsted, Kent, 5480. fi 49.
„ of Pakenham, Suffolk, 1096. fi 80.
Add. 19,122. fi 19. &e
„ of Thames Ditton, Surrey, 1147.
fi 166. 1397. fi 170. 1430. fi 172.
1560. fi 237*. Add. 4963. fi 176.
de Cailil. Add. 19,122. fi 34.
de Caincto. Add. 19,122. fi 36.
Calamy, — Suffolk. Add. 19,122. fi 41.
Calcott, of Calcott, Cheshire, 774. fi>i8*. 1045.
f. 97. 1424.fi 37*. 1505.fi 36*. 1535.
£ 95*. 1582. £ 26. 2142. £ 52*. 2187.
fi 39- 2230. fi 31*. Add. 5529. fi 16.
„ of Calthorpe, co. Leic, fr. Oxon
and Berks, 1 189. fin*. 1431. £ 4.

Calcott, of London, fr. Northants, 1444. £ 12.
1476. £ 433. Add. 5533. p. 21.
„ of Hooknorton and Wilscott, Oxon,
808. ff. 9. 39. 1095. fi 18*. 1412.fi 83*.
1556. £ 40*. 5 187. £ 12*. 6166. p. 147.
Lansd. 880. £ 15. Add. 11,388. £ 181.
„ of Whitwell, Rutland, fr. Berks, 1558.
£ 10.
„ of Preston Montford, Salop, 1396.
£ 77*. 1472. £ 53. 1982. £ 13.
caicrofte, of Chesterfield, co. Derby, 1093. £ 18.
1537. fi 27.
Caldebeck,— Essex, 1541. ff. 26*. 32. 203*. 1546.
f.83*.
„ — Suffolk, 1449. fi 26*. 1560. fi 322.
Caidecote, of Caldecote, Rutland, 4204 fi 143*.
„ — Somerset, 1445. f- 239-
„ — Sussex, 1076. fi 120*. 6164 £ 88*.
Calder, of Muirtown, co. Moray (N.S. Bart.).
Add. 23,685. ff. 25 and 27*. 23,686.
£32.
Caldwell, of Horndon, Essex, fr. London, 1542.
fi 65.
„ of Leicester, fr. cos. Worc and Staff,
1180.fi 141. 1187.fi 138. 11S9.fi 102.
1431.fi 93*. 6125. ff. 98*. 117. 6183.
£115*.
„ of London, 1140.fi 22. 1 159. £22.
1443. fi 22. 1545. fi 34.
„ of Rolleston, co. Staff., 1439. fi 50*.
6104 fi 25*. 6128. £78.
„ of Upton, co. Wore, fr. co. Staff.,
1043. £ 20. 1352. £ 3. i486. £ 2*.
1566. £ 47*. 5814. £ 10*. 5841. fi 4.
„ of Castle Caldwell, co. Ferm. (I.
Bart.). Add. 23,685. fi 118. 23,687.
fi 154. 23,689. ff. 303*. 305*. 23,693.
fi 129.
Calew, v. Calo.
Call, of Melton, Norfolk, 1 177. £98. 1552.
£11*. 4755. fi 8. 5189. fi 24. 5823.
£ 61. 6093. p. 15. 6166. p. 38. Add.
11,388. p. 65. 14,309. fi 102. 19,816.
fi 8*.
„ of Framlingham, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk,
1560. fi 276. Add. 19,122. ff. 48 to 51.
caun, — Cornwall, 4031. fi 79;
CaUant, of Maidstone. Add 5528. fi 188.
Cailey, of Highway, ca. Wore, fr. London,
888. fi 22. 1043. fi 44*. mi. fi 84*.
1165.fi 20. 1181. f. 33. 1443. ff. 99.
222*. 1565. fi 36. 5184. p. 52. 5814.
fi 37*.
CaUibutt, of Castle Acre, Norfolk, 1552.fi 161*.
4755. fi 85. 5189,. fi 71. 6093. fi 191.
6774. fi 65. 6775. fi 49. Add. 4962.
f.45*. 19,816. £.68.
Calmady, of Wenbury, Devon, 1080. £ 75. 1142.
£20*. H49.f. 20*. 1162. £21*. 1 163.
ff.94. 172.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

63

Calo, or Calew, of Micheldean, co. Glouc,
1191.fi 36*. 1543. f. 33*.
caiston, of Littlecott, Wilts, 2156. fi 74*. Add.
14,311. fi 28*.
Calthorpe, of London, fr. Norfolk, 1096. fi 81*.
„ of Calthorpe, Norfolk. Add. 14,309.
fi 68. 19,816. fi 48*.
„ of Cokethorpe and Hickling, Norfolk,
&c, 1552. fi 228*. 4756. fi 27. 6093.
p. 115. Add 19,122. ff. 56 to 74.
„ or Caithrope, of Antingham, Nor
folk, 6093. fi 159*.
„ of Thorpe Market, Norfolk, 1 1 77.
fi 160*. 1194.fi 142. 1552.fr. 121*. 122.
1562. fi 203. 4755. fi 63*. 5189. fi 59.
„ of Barnwell, Somerset, fr. London,
1141. fi 77*. 1445. £ 114. 1559. £ 202*.
„ —co. Derby, 21 13. £ 103*.
„ —Norfolk, 1177. £ 185. 1552. fi 187.
SI., 1429. fi 51*.
„ — Suffolk, 1484. fi 47. 1060. fi 142*.
Caiton, of Milton, Berks, 1532. fi 96. 6173.
fi 26. Add. 4961. fi 29*. 14,283. fi 29*.
„ of Catworth, Hunts., fr. London, 1075.
fi 17*. 1179. fi 39. Cott. Jul. F. viii.
£ 17*.
„ of Sheffield, &c. Add. 24458. ff. 88*.
193-
„ —co. Derby, Egert. 996. fi 46*.
Caiumbers, of Hale, Lane, 4204 fi 18 (.«.)
Calvedon,— Devon, 1538. fi 282*. 587 1, fi 42.
Calveley, — Bucks, 1533. fi 34*.
„ of Lea, Cheshire, fr. co. York, 1424.
ff. 32*. 77*. 1505. ff. 31. 77. 1535.
ff. 50*. 85. 2076.fi 18. 21 19. ff. 108.
et seq. 241*. 2142. ff. 76. 132. 149.
2187. fi 36. Add. 29,782. fi 13.
„ of Saughton on the Hill, Cheshire,
2119.fi 108*.
Calverley, of Littleborne, co. Durham, fr. co.
York, 1 153. fi 35- II08- fi i°- J397-
£ 212. 1540. £ 64*.
./ or scott, of Calverley, Yorks, 805.
£ ioo(«)- ii7i.fi 47- 1394- P- 16.
141 5. fi 39*. 1420. fi 18*. 1487. f- 389*.
1489 f- 43*. 4630. PP- 85- 735 to 741.
Add. 18,011. £ 7*. 26,739 ff. 66. 66*.
451 to 456.
Calvert, or Calverly, of Cockerham, co.
Lane, 1437- £ 7o.
„ of Brandish Lodge, Suffolk. Add.
19,122. ff. 109 to 112.
„ of Danby Wiske, Yorks, 1487. £ 284*.
„ of Kipling, Yorks, 1487. £ 424
calwoodieigh, of Uplowman, Devon, 1163.
£ 245*- , .
Calyn,— Norfolk, 1552. £ 5*-
de cam.— co. Glouc, 1141. £ joo. 1445- £ 138*.
1543. f- 185- J559 ff 225*- 2°3-
Cambell, V. Campbell.
Camber, of East Tilbury, Essex, 1137. fi 18*.
1432. £ 6*. 1541- £ 0.
Camborne, or Painter, of Deverell Cornwall,
1079 fi 236*. 1142.fi 86*. 1149.fi 87*.
1162.fi 91*-

Cambridge, or Clarke, — co. Staff., 6128. fi 109.
Cambroy, of Slretton, Salop, 1241. f. 164. 1396.
fi 151. 1982. ff. 7. 122.
Camden, of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. fi 40*.
„ — co. Lancaster, 1437. £ 29.
Cameil, of Diss, Norfolk. Add. 19,122. £ 117.
„ — Somerset, 1147.fi 118. 1397.fi 141.
1561. £ 10*. Add 4963. £ 142. 14,311.
f-56-
Cameron, of Lochicl, N.B. Add. 14,836. £ 317.
Camilla, or Camyll, Cornwall, 1079. £ 15.
4031. £ 78.
Camocke, of Layer Marney, Essex, 6065. £ 165*.
„ of Maiden, Essex, 1541. fi 68*.
camoys, Lord, 1562. £20*. 5829. £ 3. Add.
14,311. fi 90. 19,122. fi 122.
Campayne, or Champayne, of London, 1 046.
fi 87.
CampbeU, of London, fr. co. Line Add. 5533.
P-63-
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1096. £ 23*.
i504.fi in*.
„ of Aberuchill (Bt). Add 14,836. £ 53.
„ of Ashnish, N.B. Add. 14.837.fi 209.
„ of Auchinbreck (Bart). Add 14,836.
£57.
„ of Barbreck, N.B. Add. 19,122.
ff. 133 to 135.
„ of Calder, N.B. Add. 23,686. £ 25*.
„ ofDrumsna, co. Leitrim. Add 23,693.
£ 123.
Campe, of Coney Hatch, and London, 155 1.
fi 126. Add. 4964. fi 126.
Campion, v. Champion.
„ of Combwell, Kent, fr. London, 1046.
fi 214*. 1 106. fi 107*. 1397. £ 185*.
1432. f. 243. 1433. £ 171*. 1561.
£ 236. Add. 5507. pp. 239, 24a 5526.
p. 200.
„ of London, fr. Essex, 1096. £ 126*.
1444 £41. H76. fi 395- Add 5533.
p. 74.
„ of Putney, Surrey, fr. London, 1046.
f.215. 1397.fi 186. 1433. £172. 1561.
£ 236. Add. 14,311. £ 75*.
„ —Essex, 1076. £ 7. 1096. £ 126*.
1166. ff. 5. 87. 1444. £ 41. 1451.
£14 1476.fi 395. 1539.fi 93- 1562.
fi 179*. Add. 5533. p. 74
Cam ville, of Creeke, Northants, 11 87. ff.65. 80.
86*. 95. 1 188. pp. 86. 105. 6066.
ft 48*. 61*. 112.
„ — co. Warwick, 1 1 80. £ 12. 6125.
fi 21. 6183. fi 22.
Camyll, v. Cameil.
„ of Shapwick, Dorset, 1451. £ 163.
1539. fi 10. 2186. fi 8*.
Candeler, of London. 1096. fi 33*.
Cane, of London, fr. co. Warwick, 1444. £ 17.
Canham, of Mildenhall, Suffolk. Add 19,122.
f. 141.
canning, of Elsenham, Essex, fr. co. Warwick
1542. £ 78*.

64

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Canning, of Foxcott, co. Warwick, noo. fi 72*.
1167.fi 75. 1563. fi 7*.
„ — Suffolk. Add. 19,122. f. 144.
Cannon, of Rettendon, Essex, 1541. fi 195*.
Canteis, of Birchington, Kent. Add 5528.
f.79*(w).
Canterbury, of Tethewy, Cornwall, 4031. fi 74*.
de Cantilupe,— co. Warwick, 1 566. fi 127*.
Add. 19,122. ff. 148 to 150.
Cantlow,— 1548. fi 68. 1553. fi 83. 5509. fi 14*.
Cantreli, of Wokingham, Berks, fr. Suffolk,
1483. fi 64*. 1530. fi 38*. 1532. fi 113*.
6173. fi 27. Add. 4961. ff. 23. 24 14,283.
£ 23. 14,284 p. 16.
„ of Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, fr.
Norfolk and Bucks, 1560. £ 202*.
„ of Hemingston, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
£159.
Capdow, of High Easter, Essex, 1541. £ 48.
Capehurst, of Capehurst, Cheshire, 1535. fi 166*.
2142. fi 160*. Add. 5529 £ 35.
Capon, of Dennington, Suffolk. Add 19,122.
fi 180.
de CapeU, — co. Cork. Add. 23,684. fi 164.
Capell, — Earl of Essex. Add. 19122. ff. 165
to 172.
„ of Morton, co. Derby, fr. Herts,
1093. fi 106. 1537. £ 49*. Egert. 996.
£ 54-
„ of Freaning and Raynes, Essex,
fr. Suffolk, 1 137. fi 83*. 1432. fi 77.
1542. fi 169*.
„ of Rookwoodshall, Essex, 4204. fi 33*.
„ of Little Haddani, Essex, fr. Suffolk,
1073. fi 427*. 1234. fi 152. 1504. fi 1.
1546. fi 5*. 1547. fi 38*. 6065. fi 96.
6147. fi 7*.
„ of Essington, co. Glouc, fr. Heref.,
1041.fi 118*. 1543. fi 134
„ of How Capel, co. Hereford, 1440.
ff. 11*. 80*. 1 1 59. ff. 9*. 11*. 80*. 1442.
ff. 9*. n*. 83*. 1545. fi 16*. Add.
19,815. fi 71*. (»«).
„ of Swanswick, Somerset, fr. Essex,
* 1 141. fi 98*. 1445. fi 137*. 1559. £224*.
„ —Add. 14,309. £ 17*.
cappe, of Leeds and York. Add. 24,458. fi 47*.
Capper, of Stanton Lacy, Salop. Add. 14,314
fi 82.
,, of Buskey, Herts. Add. 19,122.
ff. 184 to 187.
Cappes, of Strumpshaw, Norfolk, 1552. fi 155*.
4755. fi 82*. 5189. fi 69*. 6093. fi 186*.
„ of Akeley, Norfolk. Add. 19,816.
fi 66.
Carboneii, of Badingham, Suffolk, 1449. fi 12*.
1484. fi 42. 1560. fi 16. Add. 19,122.
p. 196.
Carby, — co. Line, 1097. fi 1 10. 1484. fi 32.
1550. ff. 212*. 219*.
Carden, or Cawarden, — Cheshire, 1535. fi 94*.
21 19. fi 99. Add. 5529 fi 17*.
„ of Newland, co. Kildare. Add.
23,685. fi 166*.

Carden, of Templemore, co. Tipperary (I. Bt.)
Add. 23,685. ff. 65*. (».:) 165.'.
„ or C awar den, — co. S taff., 1415.fi 1 30.
1570. £ 37. 6128. £ 14*.
„ or Kardiff,— Cheshire, 1535. f. 178.
Cardiffe,— co. Warwick, noo. £ 50. 1 167. f. 42.
Cardigan, v. Coke.
Cardinaii, of Much Bromley, Essex, 1137.
ff. 76. 80. 1432. ff. 69 7.3*. 1 541. fi 77-
1542. fi 105*. 6065.fi 115. Add. 19,122.
ff. 210 to 213.
„ of Hadleigh and Wenham, Suffolk,
1560. fi 287*. 1820. fi 15.
„ — Sussex, 1562. fi 94
Caresby, — Add. 14.309. fi 37.
Caresweu, of Careswell, Devon, 1091. f. 109.
1538. fi 249*, Add. 14,315. p. 29.
„ of Odihanv Hants, 5865. £ 9.
„ or Casswell, of London, Jr. cos.
Northants and Staff., 1476. £ 228*.
„ or CaversweU.— Suffolk, 1 535, f. 277.
2156. £ 466. 6l28.ff. 105. 140*.
Carew, v. Throckmorton.
„ Earl of Totness, 1425. ff. 65 to 68.
„ Lord. Add. 16,279, p. 212.
„ of Anthony, Cornwall, 889. £ 33*.
243. 1079. ff. 58*. 1080. ff. 78. 376*.
378. 1091. f. 33. 1142.fi 4*. 1149
fi 4*. 1l62.fi 4*. 153&. fi 63. 3288.
ff. 34. 123. 5185. ff. 2415..65*.
„ of Bickleigh, Devon, 889. fi 136.
1080. fi 77. 1163.fi 240. x399- £ 93*-
1538. ff. 63. 294*. 3288. ff. 39. 123 to
124*. 161. 162. 5840. £109. 5871.fi 32*.
„ of Haccomb, Devon, ioSa f. 78.
1091.fi 31*. 1 163; £ 29 1399 f. 16.
1538. fi 63. 3288. ff: 39. 149*. 151*. 156.
157. 161. 162. 1567. £ 22*. 5840.
ff. 15*. 20. 5871. fi 13 (a. b.)
„ of Ottery Mohun, Devon, 5185.
ff. 25. 72*.
„ of Romford, Essex, fr. Kent, 1542.
fi 231*.
„ of Bury, Suffolk, 1484. £ 41*.
„ of Beddington, Surrey, 1046. £ 3.
1 147. fi 2. 1397. fi 41.. 1430. f. 2.
1433. fi 39- 1561. ff. 17. 252. Add.
4963. fi 3. 14,311- £ 61 (a. *.) 14.309-
fi 34-
„ of Ballynamona' and Lismore, co.
Waterford. Add 23,693. ff. 167. 169.
„ — co. Lancaster, 6159. fi 74
„ — Suffolk. Add. 19,122. £217.
„ — co. Warwick, noo. £45. 1167.fi 37.
Carey, v. Cary.
Carhurta, — Devon, 1091. £ 104, 5185. £ 38*.
5871. £ 3i-
Carkeredge, of Godmersham, Kent, 1 106. £ 66*.
1432. £ 218*. Add. 5507. p. 151. 5526.
p. 120. 23,750. £ 39*.
Carleill, V. Carllell,

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

65

Carlell, of Barham, Kent, 1106. f. 3.*. 1432.
fi 196. 2198. f. 120*. Add. 5507. p. 93.
5526. p. 62. 23,750. f. 37.
Carlton v. Charleton.
de Carleton,— Yorks, 805. fi 108. Add. l8,OII.
fi 140.
Carleton, — Visct, Dorchester, 1073. fi 253*.
Add. 23,688. fi 47*.
„ of Linton, co. Camb., fr. Cumb., 1043.
fi 101*. 1401.fi 43. 1534. fi 57*. 6769.
£ 35*. 6770. £64*. 6774 fi 59. 6775.
fi 43. 6830. p. 22. Add. 4962. fi 39*.
„ of London, fr. co. Line and Surrey,
1444 fi 64. 1476. fi 168. Add. 5533.
P- "5.
„ of Wollerstan, Northants, fr. co. Line,
890. ff. 5*. 10. 1084. fi 29*. 1094. fi 91*.
1 138. fi 54. 1 171. fi 20*. 1 184. fi 88*.
1187. fi 26. 1188. p. 27. 1553.fi 5-
6066. fi 40*.
„ of Brightwell, Oxon, fr. co. Line,
808. ff. 6*. 41*. 1095.fi 5*- 1412.fi 75.
1504. £ n. 1546. fi 57*. 1556.fi 17*.
6166. p. 142*. Lansd, 8S0. fi 4. Add
11,388. fi 177*.
„ of Guisons, Sussex, fr. Cumb., 1076.
£119. 1084. fi 35. 1135.fi 21. 1194.
fi 15.' 1406. fi 14*. 1562. fi 126. 4109.
£ 72. 5829. £ 135*. 6164. £ 77*.
„ —Yorks, 1415. £ 14*. 142a £ 120.
1571.fi 211.
Carlton,— Norfolk, 1 1 77. fi 117. 1 5 52. £ 39*.
4755. fi 14. 6093. p, 35.
Carlieii, of Brosterfield, co. Derby. Add. 24,458.
ff. 79*. 80.
„ —Yorks, 1487. fi 102*.
Carlille, of Taunton, Somerset, 1385. fi 62*.
1559. fi 48. Add. 12,477. fi 62*.
Carlingford v. Swift,
Carlyle, of Sewerby, Yorks, 1420. f. 77.
Carmarden,-i-Londan, 1096. fi 75*. 1476.
t 291.
„ of Hoxton, Middlx., 1551. £ 82.
Carminow, of Fentengollen, Cornwall, 1079
£ 42*. 1 164. ff. 66. 77. 4031. ff 71-
. 74*. 79. Add. I4.3I5- P- 95-
„ —Herts, 1546.fi 67*.
„ —Middlx., 1551. fi 29
„ —Somerset, 1385. fi 32*. 1559 £ 8.
carnaby, of Halton, Northumberland, fr. Cumb.,
1153. f- 57- 1448. ff 18*. 57- 1554-
ff. 44*. 45. Add. 12,477- f- 20.
Carnsew, v. Thomas.
of Philley, Cornwall, 1079 ff. 2. 201.
1 142. fi 44*. 1 149- f- 42*- 1 162. £ 45*.
4031. ff. 72*. 82.
Carnsuyow, of Trentryse, Cornwall, 4031. ff- 77*-
80*. Add. I4,3'5- P- * '7-
Carpender, of London, fr. Kent. Add. 5533.
p. 189.
Carpenter, —Earl of Tyrconnell. Add. 14,838.
ff. 208 to 210.
of London, fr. Surrey andco. Heref.,
" 1476. fi 229*.
of London, fr. Sussex, 1476. fi 457.

Carpenter, of Toft, Norfolk. Add. 19,122X243.
„ of Tynsead's Court, Wilts, 1165.
f.36*. 1443. fin 7*.
„ of Scotton, Yorks, 141 5. fi 44*.
„ — co. Glouc, 1137. fi 59*. 1432.fi 51*.
1531.fi 137. 1543. fi 81. 2109. fi 38.
4600. p. 32.
n — co. Hereford, 1140.fi 13*. 1 159.
£ 13*. 1442. £ 13*.
Carr V. Kerr.
„ — Earl of Somerset, 1073. £ no*.
„ of Tewkesbury, co. Glouc, fr.
Northumb., 1543. £ 140.
„ of Sleaford, co. Line, 1097. £ 92*.
1190. £ 66*. 1484. £ 25. 1550. ffl 9. 179.
Add. 14,283. £ 92.
„ of Hillingdon, Middlx., 1551. £ no.
„ of Ford, Northumb., 1554. £ 143.
„ of Newcastle, Northumb., 1171.fi 45.
1554. £ 15.
„ of WoodhaO, Northumb., 1448. £ 16*.
„ of Chichester, Sussex, 1076. £ 19.5.
„ of Hag Hall, Yorks, 1487. fi 466*.
„ of Birley Edge, Yorks. Add 24458.
£179*.
„ of Stannington, co.York. Add 24458.
£ n6.
„ of Cledmond, co.Carlovv. Add.24458.
£35*-
„ — Suffolk, 104L £ 34. 1 191. £ 29.
1543. fi 25*.
„ —Yorks, 1487. £ 357*.
Carrant, or Carraunt, of Winterborne, Wilts,
fr. Som., 888. fi 4. nil. £.30. 1181,
£5. 1443. £220*. 1565. £2. 5184.
P-3-
Carreu, of Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey,
1046. fi 198. 1397. fi 169 1561. fi 77.
„ of Tangley, Surrey, fr. Kent, 1433.
f. 157. 4204. fi na Add. 14,311.
_fi 14. 86*.
„ of Harting, Sussex, 1076. fi 91*.
1084. £69*. 1106. £134*. 1135. £55*.
1194. £ 48*. 1406. fi 56. 1432. £ 260*.
1562. £141. 5829. ff. 55*. 118*. 6164
f. 60. Add 5507. fi 285. 5526. fi 274*.
16,279- £ 35-
Carrington v. Smith.
carrington, afterwards Smith, of Rivenhall,
Essex, &e, 4204 £ 125.
n- of Carrington, Cheshire, 1424. £ 36*,
1505. £35*. 1535. fi 96. 2119.fi 194*.
2142. £ 1 16*. 2187. £ 38. Add 5529.
£ 13*-
„ of Swanton, Yorks, 1487. £ 422*.
„ — Cornwall, 403 1 . f. 8 1 *.
„ — Essex, 1 137. fi 72. 1432.fi 65.
E541. fi 55*. 6065. fi 44.
carrique, of Tooting, Surrey, fr. Oxon and co.
Glouc, 1046. fi 54. 1147.fi 92. 1397.
£92. 1430- fi 97- H33- f- 87. I56r.
£ 146*. Add 4963. fi no*.
„ 6fGlandine, co. Kerry. Add. 23,693.
£ 175- K

.66

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Carroll, of Macduff, co. Wicklow. Add. 24458.
f. 117.
Carrowe, of London, fr. Essex, 1463. fi 24.
Carsey, of Reresby, co. Line, 1097. fi 93*.
1 190. fi 66. 1484. f. 25*. 1504. fi 9.
1546. fi 52*. 1550. ff. 41*. 67.
„ of South Barow, Norfolk, 1 177.
fi 121. 1552. fi 46*. 4755. £ 18*. 5189.
£ 35*. 6093. p. 45. 6166. p. 50. Add.
11,388. p. 70.
„ of Dickleborough, Norfolk. Add.
14,309. £ 115. 19,816. £ 17.
Cart, pf Herrinthorpe. Add. 24458. £ 67.
Carter v. Easelden.
„ of Higham and Offley, Beds, 1531.
£ 186*.
„ of St. Collomb, Cornwall, 1079. £ 139.
1 142. £ 124*. 1 149. fi 125*. 1 162.
fi 129*.
„ of Garston and Hatfield, Herts, 1546.
fi 124-5. 1547. fi 70*.
„ of Smarden, Kent. Add. 5528.
ff. 68*. 161.
„ of London, fr. co. Hereford, 1476.
£ 328*.
„ of Melton, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
ff. 250 to 252.
„ ¦ of Kelsale, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
£ 254
„ of Hollybrook, co. Dublin. Add.
23.693- £ I27.
Carthew, of Benacre, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
S. 260 to 266.
„ — Devon, 1091. fi 53. 1538. fi 162.
Cartwright, of Washborne, co. Glouc, 1041.
fi 104*. 1543. fi 137.
„ of Normanby, co. Lincoln, fr. Notts,
1550. fi 112*.
„ of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1444. £ 62.
1476. fi 364. Add. 5 533. p. 89
„ of Ossington, Notts, 1400. fi 63.
1555- f-93*-
„ ¦ of Ixworth Abbey, Suffolk. Add.
19,122. fi 277.
„ of Newland, Yorks, fr. Salop, 1487.
f.452.
„' —Bucks, 1533. 1.79*.
Cams, of Asthwaite and Kendal, Westmoreland,
1435. ff. 7*. 34*. 1468. fi 63. 1549.
fi 36. 1564 ff. 7*. 37*. 2086. fi 56*.
6159. fi 24*.
carver, of Halesworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
fi 279
„ of Morthen, Yorks. Add. 24458.
ff. 51*. 192.
Carvile, of Milforth, Yorks, 4630. p. 87.
„ of Nun Monkton, Yorks, fr. Dorset,
1487. fi 463*.
Carwitbam, of Panston, Devon, fr. Cornwall,
889. fi 102*. 1080. fi 408*. 1091. fi 81.
1092. fi 98*. 1 142. fi 68. 1 153. fi 87.
1399. fi 65*. 1538.fi 203*. 3288. f.33*.
5185. fi 27*. 5840. fi 75*. 5871. fi 28*.
Cary, — Earl of Dover, Monmouth, &e, 1073.
ff. 178. 201*. Add. 19,122. ff. 221 to 227.

Cary, — Baron Hunsdon, 10S0. fi 376. 1139.
fi 113*. 1 187. fi 62*. 1538. fi 82*.
1546. f. 120*. 2109. fi 2. 3288. fi 151.
4204. fi 43*. 5871. fi 13*. SI., 1429.
fi 50*. . Add. 14,309. £ 15*. 19,122.
ff. 221 to 227.
„ of Launceston, Cornwall, fr. Devon,
1079. ff. 64.218. 1 142. ff. 12*. 18. 1149.
ff. 13*. 18*. 1162. ff. 13*. 19.
„ or Carey, of Bradford, Devon, 1080.
£86*. 1163.fi 50*.
„ of Carey, Devon, 889. fi 119*. 1399.
fi 79*. 3288. fi 51*. 5840. £91. Add.
14,315. p. 16.
„ of Cockington, Devon, 889. £ 42*.
1082. ff. 245. 380. 1091. ff. 33. 34*.
1 163. ff. 73*. 87. 1164.fi 14. 1399.
fi 21*. 1538. ff. 77*. 306*. . 3288. f. 40.
1567. fi 23. 5185. £ 27. 5840. £ 23*.
5871. £ 15.
„ of Tibbenham, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 167.
„ of Langton Budville, Somerset, 1141.
£ 56*. 1445. £ 82*. 1559. £ 184*.
„ of Halesworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
£ 236.
„ ' of Huntingfield, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
£239
„ of Dungiven,. co. Tyrone. Add.
23.693- ff- J3ito 135.
„ — Yorks, 14 1 5. fi 75*. . 1420. fi 60.
Casborne, of Pakenham, Suffolk. Add 19,122.
fi 286.
Caser, of Bury St. Edmunds. Add. 19,122.
f.291.
„ or Cayser, of Hollingborne, Kent,
1548-. fi 130. Add. 5532. p. 84
Casingham, of Rolverden, Kent. Add. 5528.
t.68(m).
Cason, of Aston Bury, Herts, fr. co.C-tmb_, 1547.
fi 80*.
Cassey, of Cassey Compton, co. Glouc, 1394.
p. 219. 1415. fi 25*. 1420. fi 158*.
1543. fi 51. 6128. fi 26*.
„ of Addisbury, Salop, 1241. fi 102.
,, — Herts, 1504. fi 19.
„ —Sussex, 1076. fi 132. 1084. fi 50:
1 135. fi 36. 1 1 94. ff. 29 120*. 1406.
fi 69. 1562. ff. 43*. 51*. 6164. fi 94.
„ — co. Wore, 1043. f, 31.
Castelion, of Benham Valence, Berks, 1081
fi 13*. 1139.fi 119. 1532.fi 45*. 5822.
fi 10*. 6173. fi 23*. Add. 4961. fi 36.
14,283. fi 36.
Castell, of Olney, Bucks, fr. Surrey, 1102. fi 40.
1 15 1. £ 39 1 193. £ 40. I234 f. 55.
1391. £ 43. 1533. £ 128.
„ of Haddenham, co. Camb., fr. Hunts,
1043. fi 78. 1401. fi 63* 1534 £ 84
1547.fi 61*. 6769. fi 15*. 6770, fi 31*.
6774.fi 80. "6775. f- 83. 6830. p. 57.
Add. 4962. fi 59 o f s/
„ of Hatley, co. Camb., 1043. fi 66b.
1401. £ 29 1534. f. 39. 6769. fi 10.
6770. fi 21. 6774. fi 45. 6775. f- 29.
6830. p. 30. Add. 4962. fi 25*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

67

Castell, bf Woodham Walter, Essex, 1083.
f. 35*. 1137.fi 115*. 1432.fi 112. 1542.
f. 101. Add. 14,290. fi 69*.
„ of Glatton, Hunts, fr. Northants,
890. p. 41*. 1075. fi 53. 1 179. fi 109.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 53.
„ of Raveningham, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 95.
1552. £ 213.
„ of Norwich, &c Add. 19,122. £ 295.
„ of Peterborough, Northants, and
Hunts, 890. £ 41*.
CasUlton, of Rattlesden, Suffolk, fr. Surrey,
891. fi 30*. I397.fi 195*- 1449 £54.
1560.fr. 125. 130*. 1561.fi 50*.
Castillion, Skerne.or Steward, CO. Line, 1 5 50.
£ 237*. 4630. P- 562'.
Castle, of London, 1046. fi 71.
„ of Rougham, Sussex, Add 19,122.
£ 30°.
castieford, of Wisperdale, Yorks, 1394 p. 258.
141 5. £ 31*. 1420. £ 184*. 1487. £
324*. Add 18,011. fi 204*.
„ of Darley Hall, Yorks. Add. 24458.
fi 207.
Castlehaven (Earl of) V. Audley. „
Castleton v. "Welby.
of Rattlesden, Suffolk, 891. fi 30*
1449 £ 54- 1560. ff. 125. 130..
—Suffolk (Bart)., 1397- £ 195*- I5fii-
f. 50*. Add 19,122. ff. 303-306.
„ of Ditton, Surrey, fr. co. Line, 1397
£ 195*. 1561- £.5°*.
Castlyn, of London, fr. co. Derby, 1096. £ 81.
caston, of Clifton, co. Worcester. Add. 12,479
Caswell, of Hampton, Middlx., 1468. £ 130.
catcher, of London, 1096. £ 94*. 1476. £ 33>-
cater, of Uffington, Berks, 1081. fin*. 1139
f.6o*. 1532. f- 2. 5822. fi 9*- 6173.
£ 20. Add. 4961. f- 52*- 14,283- f- 52*-
,, of Leicester, 1180.fi 2.
caterlck, of Carleton and Stanwick, Yorks,
1171.fi 2*. 1394- P- 173- HIS- £ 17*.
1420. £130*. 1487. £189*- I540.£ 164
Add. 18,011. fi 149
catesby, of Hardmead, Bucks, fr. Northampt
1102.fi 79*. ii39-f-9i. 1151- <• 78*.
1193.fi 79*. 1391- f- 86. 1429 t- 79
ISof3 Ashby, Northants, 890. £ 6. 1084.
" f2i*. 1094. £95- "38-fi 55- ,»7i.
f 20*. n84£92- n87.ff. 77 («•*•)
79*. 80. 81. 83. 87 (a.b.) 92*. 93- 95*-
1188. p. 106. 1553- f- 16. 6066. ff. 42*.
50-52, 53*. 56- 62. 63. ~
of Hinton, Northants, 890. fi 12*.
" 1138.fi 35- n7i. f-2i. n87.fi 24*..
1188.P.24. 1553- £ 17-
of Whiston, Northants, 1094. fi 97*-,
" 1 184. f- 94*. "87- f- 96*. "88. p. 108*.
tee3.fi 18*.
of 'seaton.Rutland.fr. cos. Northampt.
" and Warr. io94- £ 95- »84. £ 92. 1558.
f iih ^391. £ I2I-
of Knoll co. Warwick, noo. fi 118.
" 1,67. fi 158. iS63.f. 195*- 6060.fi 195*.

Catesby, of Lapworth, co. Warwick, fr. co.
Northampt., 1 100. ff. 43*. 4.6*. 1 167.
ff. 36 (a. *.) 38*. 1563. fi 60*. 6060.
ff. 3. 87*.
„ — Northants, &c, 2156. ff. no*, in.
6066. fi 112. Add 5528. £ n*.
„ — Rutland, 1094. fi 98. 1 184 fi 95.
1187.fi 96*. 1188.fi 108*.
Catberall, or CateraU.
„ of Little Mitton, co. Lane, 891. £
92*. 1468. f. 21. 1549. £ 38. 2086. £
38*. 6159. fi 27.
„ of Horton and Broxton, Cheshire,
1535. ff. 91*. 236*. 2187. ff 39*. 88*.
„ of Hallom, Yorks, 1487. £ 433*.
„ of Newhall, Yorks, 4630. p. 88. Add.
26,739- P- 67*.
„ of Rawthmell, Yorks, fr; co. Lane,
1394. p. 199. 1415. £ 23. 1420. £ 147.
1487. fi 100. Add 5509. £ 26*. 18,011.
£ 166*.
Catbway, of Wysoll or Neysoll, co. Glouc,
4204 fi 230.
Catling, of Stanway, Essex.- Add. 19,1 22. £ 328.
Catlyne, or Catelln, of Nevvenham, Beds, fr.
Raunds, Northants, 1097. £ 36.
1531. fi 10. 2109. fi 32. 4600. p. 47.
5 1 86. p. 46. Lansd., 864 p. 48.
„ of Kirkby Cane, Norfolk, 4756. fi 56*.
Add. 19,122. ff. 3.13-318.
„ of Raunds, Northants, 890. fi 19*.
1094. fi 138. 1 138. fi 48*. 1 171. £ 21.
1184. fi 135. 1187.fi 53*. 1188. p.66.
1553. fi 183*. 6066. ff. 122*. 123.
caton, of Rumburgh, Suffolk. Add. 19,122.
£ 330.
Caucefieid, of Aldingham, Northants, 1094.
£153. 1184.fi 150.
Caulfeild, Earl of Charlemont 2109. £ 54
Add 14,838. ff. 228-233.
Caulx, — Cornwall, 4031. fi 78.
„ —Somerset, 1385. £ 65. 1445. £ 196.
1559. £ 51. Add. 12477. £ 63.
Cause v. -Cause.
„ —Yorks, 1394 p. '215. 1415. £ 25.
1420. £ 155*. 1487. £ 164. Add 18,011.
£ 176.
„ — Essex, 1432. £ 62.
Causton, or caston, of Ipswich, Suffolk, fr. co.
Durham, 1560. £ 20J. 1820. £23. Add.
19,122. £ 334
„ or Cawston, of Oxsted, Surrey, ifr.
Kent, 1147.fi 157*. I43°- 1 163*. Add.
,.. -. 16,279 P- 435-
Cave, of Bagrave, co. Leic, fr. co. Northampt,
V. •"¦,-' noo. fi 96*. 1171.fi 20. 1180. ff. 81*.
1 ';. -.: 85. 1 187. fi 126. 1 189. ff. 49. 56.
("'..""••' 1 195. fi 100. 1431. ff. 41. 47*. 1504.
v. ;¦-. .. f. 11. 1553. fi 32*. 6183. fi 84. >
'¦>. ! Zn Z: oi Horsepool Grange, co. Leio., fr.
\ \ Northampt, n8o. fi 83. 6125. fi n8*.
* \6183. fi 84.
¦„ ; ' : of Ingarsby, co. Leic, 1180. ff. 86.
¦'.... 96. 1187. fi 127*. 1189. f. 50*: . 1195,
fi72. 1431.fi 42*. 6183. £8_ :

68

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Cave, of Pickwell, co. Leic, fr. co. North
ampt, 1180. fi 85*. 11S9. f. 50*. 1431.
fi 42*. 6183. f. 84.
„ of London," fr. co. Warr. Add. 5533.
p. 88.
„ of Okeley, Northants, 1 187. fi 71*.
1553. fi 31*.
„ of Stanford, Northants, fr. co. York,
890. ff. 22. 54 1138. fi 12. 1171. fi 20.
1 187. ff. 10*. 70*. 1 188. pp. 2. 97.
1553- f- 32-
„ of Waterstock, Oxon, fr. Northants,
808. ff. 7. 37. 1095. fi 20*. 1412. fi 85*.
1556. fi 50*. 5187. fi 10*. 6166. p. 147.
Lansd, 880.fi 16*. Add. 11,388. fi 182.
„ of South Cave, Yorks, &c, 2156.
£ 126.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 76.
„ — Cornwall, 4031. £ 78.
„ — Somerset, 1559. fi 93*.
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,311. fi 80.
Caveley, — Cheshire, 1424. fi 77*. 1505. fi 77.
Caveii, of Trehaverock, Cornwall, 1 142. fi 35.
1149 f- 34- IJ62. fi 36. 4031. fi 78.
Add. 14,315. p. 118.
„ of Saxmundham, Suffolk. Add 19,122,
ff 339-342.
Cavenagh, of Clandonnagh, &.c, co. Carlow,
1425. fi 1 1 1.
Cavendish, of Chatsworth, co." Derby, fr. Suff.,
1073. ff. 123*. 198*. 1093. fi 13. i486.
£ 53. 2134. fi 42. Egert, 996. fi 19.
Add. 28,113. fi 48*.
„ of Cavendish, Suffolk, 1560. fi 330*.
1562. fi 76*. Add 19,122. ff. 345-348.
„ ofFrimley St. Martin, Suffolk. Add.
19,122. ff. 349, 350.
„ — Essex, 1137.fi no*. 1432.fi 105.
Caverswell v. Careswell.
Cawarden v. Carden.
Cawood, of London, fr. co. York, 1096. fi 101.
„ —Yorks, 1420. £ 49. Add 18,011.
£ 116.
Cawoodley, of Cawoodley, Devon, 889. f. 142.
1091. £ 117. 1399. £ 99*. 1538. fi
263*. 3288. £ 45*. 5185. £ 28. 5840.
£115*. 5871. fi 34.
Cawson, of Pelham, Herts, fr. Essex, 1504 £
14*. 1546. £ 50*. 6147. fi 19*.
cawthorne, of Cawthorpe, Yorks. Add. 14,309.
fi 61.
Cawton, of Thirsk, Yorks, 1487. fi 466.
Cayser v. Caser.
Cay, of Botesdale, Suffolk. Add. 19,122. fi 381.
Caythorp, — co. Line, 1097. fi 48*. 1 190. fi
59. 1484. £ 29*. 1550. fi 80.
„ —co. Staff, 1570. fi 13*.
Cecil, Lord Burleigh, &e, 1073. ff. 106. 241*.
1 140. ff. 57*. 59 1 159. ff. 56*, 58.
1400.fi 51. 1432. £40*. 1442.fr. 57*. 59.
1545. ff. 62*. 63*. 1555. fi 80. 2109. fi
91*. SI., 1429. £ 54*. Add. 14,835. f. 9.
„ \ Lord Ros, 1397. fi 124*. 1505. £ 73.
. 1424 £ 73*.

CecU,— co. Leic, 1 180. fi 4. 6125. fi 6. 6183.
£?•
„ —Norfolk, 1 177. £ 178. IS52- f- 144-
4755. fi 76*. 5189. fi 66*. 6093. fi 177.
Add. 19,816. fi 58.
ceely, of St. Ives, Cornwall, fr. Som., 1079 fi
127*. 1142.fi 99. 1162. fi 104.
„ (cely) of Kingston, Surrey, 1561. fi
48*. Add 14,309. ff. 60. 66*.
Caesar, of Bennington, Herts, fr. London, 1546.
£127*. 1547. £85.
Chabnor, of Mouseley, co. Hereford, 1 140. £
98*. 1545. fi 104*.
Chace v. Chase, of Chesham^Bucks,ii02.f.50*.
1 151. fi 49*. 1193. f- 50*- I234- f- 57-
1391. fi 53*. 1533- f- 142.
Chadderton (see Cbatterton).
„ of Timperley, Cheshire, 774. fi 15.
1424. fi 12. 1535. ff. 43- 210. 5182. f.6*.
„ of Portsmouth, Hants, 8154. £ 63.
„ of Chatterton, co. Lane, 1 100. £ 51.
1549. £ 142*. 1563- f- 74-
„ of the Leigh, co. Lane, n 67. £ 43.
1437. £ 8.
„ of Medhurst, co. Lane, 1549 £ 41.
6159. £ 29.
„ — co. Derby, 1093. £ 40& i486. £ 39*^
1537. £ 80. Egert., 996. £ 25.
Chadweli,— Wilts, 1 166. fi 20*. 145 1. £ 35*.
1539. fi 108*.
Chadwick, — co. Lane, 1 173. fi ior*. 6104. fi 28.
„ of Chadwick and Heley Hall, co.
Lane, 1437. fi 107*. 146S. fi 94.
Cbaffln, of Bulford, Wilts, mi. £ 64*;
„ of Sarum, Wilts, 1 165. £49*. 1443.
P- 139-
„ of Scales Clevedon, Wilts, 888. f. 31-
mi. ff. 64*. 65. 1 165. £56*. 1181.
£ 28. 1443. fi 138*. 1565. fi 51. 5184.
p.6.
Chafy, — Suffolk. Add. 19,122. p. 391.
Chakers, — Bucks, 1533. fi 6*.
Chaldecott, of Quarleston, Dorset, 1092. fi I*.
1153.fi 69. 1166.fi 24*. i451.fi 40*.
1539.fi in*.
Chaiions, — Beds, 2109. fi 90.
„ —Devon, 1538. fi 307.
„ — Somerset, 1559 fi 96*.
Chaloner, of Chester, 1535, ff. 87. 155*.
„ of London, noo. fi 50*. 1 167. £42*.
„ of Stantons and Ghiltingtoi-, Sussex,
1076. fi no. 1084 £ 77. 1135. fi 63.
1 194. fi 56. 1406. fi 26*. 1562. ff. 37.
46. 147. 5829. ff. 40*.. 129*. 6164. fi 87.
,, of Trenmontes, Sussex, 1076. £ 187.
1562. fi 130. 6164. £28*.
„ of DamaU, Yorks. Add 24,458.
fi 154
„ —Hants, 5829. fi 32;
„ — Kent. Add. 5528. £ 129*.
„ — Yorks, 6070. £ 307.
Chamber, of Wolsty Castle, Cumberland, 1536.
£ 5*. 3391. £ 4*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

69

Chamber, of Cleadon, co Durham, fr. Westm.,
11 53- f- 39- n68. fi 27. 1397. fi 225.
1540.fi 91.
„ of Dagenham, Essex, fr. Westm.,
1542. ff. 67. 216*.
„ of Gloucester, fr. Herts, 1543. fi 129*.
„ — Middlx., 890. fi 30*.
Chamberlain, or Splcer, of Normanton, Beds,
1531.fi 93*-
„ (Chamberlayne) of Donnington
Castle, Berks, fr. Oxon, 1532. fi 99
6173. fi 28*. Add. 4961. fi 38. 14,283.
fi 38.
„ of Gedding, co. Camb., 1401. fi 27.
1534. fi 37. 6774. fi 43. 6775. fi 27.
6830. p. 8. Add. 4962. fi 24*.
„ of Lyndhurst, Hants, fr. Oxon, 1544.
£ 189.
„ of Geding, Kent, 1548. £ 175.
„ (chamberlayne) of Newton .Har
court, co. Leic, 1 180. £93. 1 187. fi
125*. 1189.fi 87*.. 1195.fi 103. I43i-
~ fi 79. 6183. fi 82.
„ of London, 1444. fi 26. 1476. £ 27*.
Add 5533. P- 38.
,, (chamberUn) of London, fr. Som.,
1476. fi 211.
„ (chamberlaine) of Barnham Broom
and Ellingham, Norfolk, 1177. fi 115*.
1552. ff. 36*. 37. 1560. fi 57. 4755-
£ 12*. 4756. £ 73. 5189. £ 32.
6093. p. 31. Add. 19,123. pp. 397 to
400. 19,816. fi 11.
,, (Cbamberlayne)of Sherborne, Oxon,
fr. co. Line, 1480. fi 23*. 1556. £ 93*.
1557. ff. 29*. 93*. 105*. Add 14,309.
ff. 49*. 50.
„ of Stratton Audley, Oxon, 1480. £ 9
1557. ff. 74*. 105*.
„ of Wickham Castle, Oxon, 1 5 57. fi 30.
„ (chamberlyn) of Astley, co. War
wick, fr. Oxon, 1 100. fi 80. 1 167. £91.
1563. £ in*. 6060. £ 130*.
„ (Chamberlayne) of Thoralby, Yorks,
805. fi 106. 1394 p. 120. i415.fi 89*.
1420. £90. 1487. fi 265*. Add. 18,011.
£ IIQ. _ -
„ of Bristol (m). Add. 24,458. £ 333*.
„ - —Bucks, 1533- £ 199*-
—co. Meath. Add. 23,686. fi 26.
„ — SL, 1429 f- 46.
Chambers, or Arden, of Sprotton, co. Derby,
1093. £ 52*.
of Little Markhill, co. Hereford, fr.
co. Worc, 1545- £ "7*-
• -" of Barkway, Herts, fr. Cumb, 1504
ff. 15*. 76. 1546. f- 76*. 1547- f- 62*.
of Selling, Kent, 1548. £ 71*- Add
. " 5528.fi 175*- ..or*
of Gaddesby, co. Leic, 810. fi 19*.
" 1180.fi 27*. 1187.fi no*. 1431. £24*.
6125. ff. 39 7i*- l J4- 6183. fi 40.
of London, I444- £ 42*. Add 5533.
" p. 68.
of London, fr. co. Staff, 1096. £ 26*.
" 1444. fi 50. Add. 5533- P- 46.

Chambers, of Hackney, Middlx., 1468.' fi 133*.
1556. fi 15*.
„ of Spretton, Notts, 1400. fi 86*. • 1555.
£ 13S.
„ of Petton, Salop, 808. ff. 9. 39 1095.
£ 18*. 1396. £ 80*. 1412. £ 83*. 1556.
£ 41. 5187. £ 12*. Lansd, 880. £ 15.
Add 21,017. £ 108.
„ of Shrewsbury, Salop, 1241. f. 76*.
6172. £ 15. Add. 14,314. £ 53*.
„ of Baxby, Yorks, 1487. £ 203.
„ • of Whitwood, Yorks (m). Add
24,458. £ 141*.
„ — Kent, 1548.fi 71*.
„ (Cbambur) — Hunts, 1075. *• °7-
1179.fi 114. Cott Jul. F. viii. £ 56.
de Ia Chambre, of Radmile, Sussex, 5829 £ 126*.
chambre, of Hawthorn Hill, co. Armagh. Add
23,699. £ ix.
„ of Camow and Shelah, Wicklow, &c
Add 23,699. £ i. to xii.
diamond, of Lancells, Cornwall, 1079. £ 62.
1142. fi 14. 1162. £ 15. 1 149. £ 15.
4533- £38*. 4Q3i.£82. Add 14,315.
P- 123.
Champanti,orCiarapanti,of Feldhowe, Hants,
fr. London, 1139. fi 3. 1544. fi 60.
Champayne, — Kent, 1548. fi 167. Add. 16,279
p. 430.
„ — Dorset^ 1539.fi 7*-
„ — co. Hereford^ 1140. £ 103.
Champernon, of Ins worth, Cornwall, 889. £
. 107*. 1079. fi 184*. i09i.fi 88. 1538.
£ 213*. 3288. ff. 62*. 70*. 138*. 151
(a. *.). 4031. ff. 72. 78*. 5871.fi. 29*.
34*-
„ of Cliff St George, Devon, 5185.
£ 29 (a. *.).
„ of Dartington, Devon, 108a ffi 213*.
245- 37s- 415*- 1091. fi 96. 1 163.
ff. 39*. 87. 1538. £ 223. 5871. £ 13*.
6128.fi 13*.
„ ofModbury, Devon, 1091.fi 61. 1538.
£166. Add 14,315. p. 31.
champion, or Campion, of Reading, Berks,
fr. Surr, 1 139. £ 116. 1483. £ 116.
153a fi. 70*. 153*. £ 130*. 6173. £ 20*.
5822. £ 7*. Add 4961. £ 62. 14,283.
£ 62. 14,284. p. 100.
„ or Champayne, CO. Leic, II 80.
£ 29. 1187. £ in*. 1189. £ 33*. 1431.
£27. 6183. fi 41*. 6125. ff. 40*. 118.
„ of Wit-iam, Essex, fr. London, 1083.
£ 27*.
„ ofthe Isle of Wight, Hants, fr. Surrey,
1544 £ 132.
„ of London, 1096. f. 42*. 1463. £ lb.
„ of Godalming and Guildford, Surrey,
fr. Sussex, 1046. £ 93. 1397. £ 132.
1147. £136. 1430.fi 142. 1433. £122.
1561. £ 70*. Add 14,31 1. £ 77.
„ —co. Staff, 1077. £ 52*.
Cbampnes, of Tavistock, Devon, 1 163. £ 139.
„ of Uffcolme and Barnstaple, Devon,
1080. £53*. 1iu3.fi 117*.

7°

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Champnes,of Frome Selwood, Somerset, 1559.
f. 97*-
„ of Orchardleigh, Somerset, 1141.
£39. 1445. fi 57*. 1559.fi 98.
„ — Kent, 1548. fi 107*. Add. 5532.
p. 29
Champneys, — Bucks, 1 1 02. fi 27*. II5r. £ 26.
1193. fi 27. 1234. £31*. 1533. i.i66b.
Chance, of Bromsgrove, Staff. Add. 24,458. p.
31-
Chandos, — co. Derby, 1093. £ 42.
„ — co. Hereford, 1041. fi 19. 1i91.fi
15. 1543. £ 9. 2156. fi 51. Add.
12,479 fi 37.
„ — Salop, 1396. fi 144*.
„ — co. Staff, 1415. fi 132. 1570. fi 46*.
6128. fi 76*.
Cbannell, — co. Line, 1097. fi 49*. 1 190. fi 61*.
1484. fi 29*. 1550. fi 80*.
„ — co. Staff, 1570.fi 13*.
Channon, of Tallaton, Devon, 1080. fi 31 1*.
Il63.fi 207*.
Chantmarrell, — Dorset, 1451. fi 167*. 1539
fi 61. 2186. fi 29
ChantreU, of the Baits, or Bache, Cheshire, 774.
fi 18*. 1424. fi 38. 1505. f. 37. 1535.
ff. 76*. 93*. 1582. fi 24. 2142. £ 72*.
2187. £41. 2230. £ 31*. Add.5529.fi
14*. 14,283. fi 91*-
„ of Faxton, Northants, 1187. fi 56.
1553. fi 234.
„ - —Devon, 3288. fi 156*.
ChapUn, of Tathwell, co. Line Add. 19,122.
p. 419.
„ of Newenham, Northants, 1094. fi 179.
1 184. fi 174. 1553. fi 109*. 6066. fi
137*. - -
Chapman, v. Felton.
„ of Ely, co. Camb., fr. Herts, 1043.
ff. 66. 8o(a. *.) 1401. ff 32. 64*. 1534.
fi 85*. 6774. fi 81*. 6769. fi 18. 6770.
fi 34 6775. fi 84*. 6830. p. 94. Add.
4962. fi 60*.
„ of Wickham, co. Camb, 1401. fi 69.
1534 fi 89*. 6770. fi 33*. 6774. fi 86.
6775. fi 89 6830. p. 53. Add. 4962. fi
65.
„ . of Liskard, Cornwall, 1079. £ 163.
1 142. fi 170*. 1 149. fi 170*. 1162.fi
172*.
„ of Resprin, Cornwall, fr. Devon, 1079.
fi 70*. 1 142. ff. 27*. 28*. 1 149. £27.
1162.fi 28*.
„ of Hole, Devon, 1 164. fi 17.
„ of Rushden, Herts, fr. co. York, 1 504.
fi 129.
„ of Ware, Herts, fr. co. Camb, 1 167.
fi 31- *433- £ 7*- 1504 £ 43- 1546.
£ 29 6147. fi 30*.
„ of Boughton Blean, Kent. Add
5528. £ 123*.
„ of London, fr. Herts and co. York,
1476. fi 160.
n of London, fr. Kent and co. York,
1096. fi 47. 1476. fi 69.

Chapman, of Sulingham, Norfolk. Add 19,816.
f. 10*.
„ of Rainthorp Hall, Norfolk, 1177. f.
116. 1552. fi 38. 4755. fi 13. 5189.fi
32*. 6093. p. 32. 6166. p. 44. Add.
11,388. p. 67. 14,309. fi 108*.
„ of Loudham Hall, Suffolk. Add.
19,122. p. 423.
„ or Barker, of Sibton, Suffolk, 1 560. fi
262.
„ of West Hampnet, Sussex, 1076. fi
141. 1084. fi no. 1 135. fi 96. 1 194.
fi 89. 1406. fi 52. 1562. fi 122. 4109.
£ 67. 5829. £ 101. 6164 £ 98.
„ of York, 1487. £ 466.
„ of Killua, co. Westmeath (I. Bt) Add
23,685. ff. 40. 167*. 23,689. fi 287*.
Chappell, — co. Camb, 1075. f.40*. 1179.fi 84
Cott Jul. F. viii. fi 40*.
„ of South Molton, Devon, 1080. fi
300. 1163.fi 185*.
„ of Whitston, Devon, 1091. ff. 127.
128.
„ of London, fr. Devon, 1476. t 88*.
„ of Portishead, Somerset, 1141. fi 92*.
1445. fi 128. 1559 fi 243.
,; of Ireland. Add. 23,693. fi' 125.
Charde, or Chare, of London.fr. co. Leic, 1476.
£ 211*. Add. 5533. p. 155.
Chardge, of Wavenden, Bucks, 1 102. £ 37*.
1 1 5 1. £ 36*. 1 193. fi 37*. 1 391. £ 40*.
I429.fi 84 1533. fi 178.
Charingworth, — Northants, 1187. fi 85*.
Charke, of London, 1476, fi 254 1535. 1 162.
Charles, of Tavistock, Devon, 889. fi 22. 1080.
fi 366*. 1091.fi 27.. 1399 fi 8. 1538.
fi 36. 1567. fi 20*. 3288. ff. 23. 25*.
173. 5185.fi 28*. 5840. £6. 5871.fi
10. Add. 14,288. fi 7.
„ of Kettleburgh, Norfolk. Add. 19,122.
p. 427.
„ — Yorks, 805. £ 107. 1415. £ 26.
1420. fi 160.
Charlton, of Sandiacre, co. Derby, 6104. fi 99*.
Egert, 996. fi 77.
„ of Luxford, co. Hereford. Add.
2445s- f- 334
„ of Rolvedon, Kent. Add 5528. f.
180.
„ • (Charleton) of London, fr. Salop,
1476. ff. 48*. 329.
„ Lord Powis, — Salopj 1396. £ 66*.
„ of Apley, Salop, 1241. ff. 51. 104*.
1396. ff. 56. 64*. 1472. £ 35. 1535. £
167*. 1982. ff. 18*. 64*. 6172. £ 12.
Add. 14,314. £ 61.
„ Of Tern, Salop, 1396. £ 79*.
„ -co. Leic, 1189 £46. 1431. £ 38.
„ (Charleton, or Carlton) — Middlx,
1 106. £ 135. 1432. £ 260*." Add 5507.
£ 286. 16,279. P- 36.
,, — Oxon, 1480. fi 46*. 1557. fi 34.
„ — co. Worcester, 1566. £ 125*.
Charman, of Bury St. Edmunds. Add. 19,123.
p. 8.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Ii

C.harndo-n, — Cornwall, 1079. fi 95.
Channells, of Sriarsdon, co. Leic, and of co.
Warr, 1093. fi 117*. U8o. fi 83*.
1 n87.fi 97- n89.fi 55*. 1431- £47.
6060. fi 34. 6125. ff. 3. 112. 6183. fi 4.
Egert, 996. fi 46*.
„ of Bedworth, Northants, 1187. fi 83.
„ of Elmesthorpe, co. Warwick, 1 100.
fi 23*. 1167.fi 15*.
Ctiarnock, of Holcott, Beds, 1097. £ 31. 1390.
1 £ 20. 1531. £ 16. 2109. £ 28. 4600.
\ p. 39. Lansd, 864. p. 39.
. „ of Charnock, co. Lane, 891. f 82*.
4 1437. £ 10. 1468. £ 36. 1549.fi 37.
f 2086. fi 59*. 6159. fi 25*.
• „ of Farrington, co. Lane, 1468. fi 36*.
„ of Leyland, co. Lane, 891. fi 86*.
1437. fi 101*. 1468. fi 37. 1549. fi 37*.
2086. f. 66*. 6159. fi 26.
„ — co. Warwick, 1391. fi 116.
Charteris, of Amisfield, N.B. Add. 14,836. £135
Chase, v. Chace.
„ of Stone, Kent, fr. Bucks. Add.
5507. p. 407.
deChasteUn, — Essex, 6065. fi 138. Add. 19,123.
p. 12.
Chatfieid, of the Grove and Bedyles, Sussex,
1076. fi 12*. 1084. ff. 51. 86*. 1135.
ff 37- 72b. 1 1 94 ff. 30.65*. 1406.
ff. 70. 80*. 1562. fi 47*. 4109. fi 37.
5829. ff. 42. 139*. 6164 fi 48.
Chatterton (see Chadderton).
„ of Eston, Sussex, fr. Hants, 1 194. fi
118*. 1562. £ 48*. 4109. fi 37*. 5829.
fi 43-
„ — co. Camb, fr. co. Lane, 1401. £ 73*.
1534- £ 97- 6774 £ 92*. 6775. fi 93*.
Add 4962. fi 69.
Chator, of Byckirk, co. Line, 1097. fi 101*.
1190.fi 15. 1484. fi 10*. 1550. fi 175*
Cbattock, — Dorset, 145 1, fi 190*. 1539. fi 73.
2186. fi 15.
Chaucer (Chauser) — Beds, 2109. fi 90*.
„ (chawser) — co. Camb, 1401. fi 36*.
6774 £ 52*. Add. 4962. fi 33.
„ —Kent. Add. 5532. p. 123.
Chaumond, of Colton, Yorks, 4630. p. 89. Add
26,739 £ 68.
Cbauncy, of Shenfield, Essex, fr. Herts, 1541.
£ 92*.
, (cbauncey)of Sawbridgeworth,Herts,
' 1433. f- 8*. 1504. fi 43*- 1546-fi 30.
1547. fi 24*. 6147. fi 31*.
(Chauncey) of Yardley, Herts, 1547.
fi 84 6147- f- 23*-
of Shipdham, Norfolk, fr. Wilts, 1 177.
" fi 119 1552. f.42*. 4755- f- 16*. 5189.
f.33*. 6093. p. 40- 6166. p.49. Add.
11,388. p. 69*. 14,309 f- "2. 19,816.
(chauncey) of Edgecote, Northants,
" -890. £ lib. 1094 £ 112. 1 138. fi 33*.
1 139. fi 103. 1171. f. 22. 1184.fi 109.
1 187. fi 55- 1188. p. 71. 1533- £40*.
I553. fi- 13- 5 181. P- 74 5832. f. 52*.
5868. £50*. 6066. f. 47-

chauncy, of Upton, Northants, 2109. fi 61*.
„ (Chauncey)— Kent, 1548. f. 145.
„ (Chauncey) — Yorks, 1433. fi 3*.
Chaundelor, of Lynsfield, Kent, 1484. fi 65*.
Chaundler, of Hyde Barton, Hants, 1544 fi 124.
Cbauntrell, of Flaxton, Northants, 6066. ff.98*.
99
Chaworth, of Annesley.co.Derby. Add. 24,458.
fi 79 28,113. fi 32*.
„ of Wiverton, Notts, fr. co. Derby,
1082. fi 65*. 1093. fi 18. 1400. fi 71.
i486, fi 58. 1555. fi 108*. Egert.. 906.
£ 60*.
„ — Bucks, 5832. £ 4*.
„ —co. Derby. Add. 28,113. £ 10.
„ — Northants, 1187. f. 74 1553.
fi 203.
„ —Oxon, 1556. fi 159.
» — Surrey. Add 14,311. £ 52.
Chaytor.of Butterby.co. Durham.fr. Northumb,
1 168. fi 31*. 1 171. fi 75*. 1397. £ 229*.
1540. fi 18.
„ of Croft, Yorks, fr. co. Durham, 1171.
fi 75- 1420. fi 194*. 1487. ff. 498. 499*.
Add. 18,011. fi 215.
„ —co. Leic, 1189.fi 46: 143 1. £38.
Cheadle, — Cheshire, 1424. fi 86*. 1505. ff. 85.
120*. 1535. fi 976. 21 19 fi 147. 2142.
fi 44 2187. fi 10. 2230. £30*. Add.
5529 £ 15*.
Cbeape, of Rossie, N.B. Add. 14837. £ 235.
„ of Wellfield and Strathtyrum, N.B.
Add. 14,837. £ 237.
Checkford, of Leaston, Dorset, 1166. £ 77*.
1451. fi 126. 1539.fi 169.
Cheddar, of Bristol, 1982. fi 1 13.
„ — co. Glouc, 1 04 1. fi 57.
„ —Herts, 1504. fi 1*. 1546. £6.
„ — Somerset, 1982. f. 113.
Cheeke, of Debenham, Essex, 1 137. £ 61. 1432.
fi 53*. 1449. fi 89 1 541. fi 35*. 1560.
f. 69*. Add. 19,123. pp. 22 to 25.
„ of Pirgo, Essex, fr. Hants, 1541.
£ 113*. 1542. £ 59*. 6065. £9*. Add.
19,123. p. 27.
„ of Newport, Hants, 1544. £ 51*.
1562. fi 59. SI, 1429. £ 43*.
„ of Bruton, Somerset, 1141. £ 44.
1445. fi 65*. 1559 fi 174.
„ of Bludhall, Suffolk, 155. £ 64 891.
£24 1 103. £66. 1 177. £ 57*. 1449.
ff. 68. 69. 1560. £ 69.
Cheesman, of Dormans Well, Middlx., and of
Kent, 1546. £67*. 155 1. fi 28*. 5829.
fi 26.
Cbeerers, of Kilyan, co. Galway: Add. 23,686.
fi 25*.
Chelmicke, or Chelmwyke, of Ragdon, Salop,
1396. f.63 (<..*.). 1472. fi 49. 6172.
fij*.
Chelscombe, — Kent, 1548. fi 145*.
Chelwortb, — Somerset, 1141. fi 113*. 1445.
£155*. 1559 £239*. .
Chenduit,— Cornwall, 1079, £ 223. 4031. £ 72*.

72

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Cheney, of Chesham, Beds, 2109. fi 32*.
„ or Cbeyney, of Tuddington, Beds,
fr. Sheppey, Kent, 1097. f. 12*. 1390.
fi 1*. 2109. ff. 8*. 9. 91 (a. *.) 4600.
p. 2. 5186. p. 13. Lansd, 864. p. 2.
„ or Cheyney, of Woodhey and Arding-
ton, Berks, fr. Kent, 1081. ff. 14. 15. 16.
1 139. ff. 120*. 135*. 1532. £ 131*.
5822. £ n*. 6173. £ 24*. Add 12479.
£ n.
„ or Cheyney, of Chesham Bois.Bucks,
1102. fo. 12. 1136. fi 12*. 1 1 39. fi 80*.
1151. ff. 10. 91. 1193.fi -n. 1234-
£9 1391. fi 13. 1429 fi 78. 1533.
f.8*. 5181. p. 68. 5832. fi 22*. 5868.
fi 20*.
„ of Fen Ditton, co. Camb, 1534.
fi 124*. 2156. fi 68*. 4204. ff. 107. 118.
„ of Willaston, Cheshire, 21 19. fi 51..
„ of Meynell Langley, co. Derby. Add.
24,458. £ 157. 28,113. ff. 21. 92.
„ (cheyney) of Ottery, Devon, 1 080.
£ 192. 1 163. £ 221*. 1550. £ 199.
3288. £ 122*. 5185. £ 30*.
„ (Cbeyney) of Pinhoe, Devon, 3288.
£ 145. 5185. £ 31.
„ or Cheyney, of Higham, Kent, 1 106.
£ 50. 1 153. £ 84 (a. *.) 1432. £ 207*.
1484 £ 63*. 1504. fi 70. 1548. fi 182.
Add. 5507. p. 120. 5526. p. 89. 5532.
p. 70*. 5829. ff. 54*. to 57*. 14,309.
£ 16*.
„ or Cheyney, of Sittingbome, Kent.
Add. 5532. p. 135.
„ (Cheyney) of Sheppey, Kent, 4204.
£ 122. SL, 1429. fi 54. Add 5528. fi 8*.
„ (cheyney) of Tresham, Northants,
1094. fi 36*. 1187.fi 21*. -n 88. p. 19.
„ of Cralle and Higham, Sussex, 1562.
ff. 59*. 62*. 4109. fi 48.
„ or Cheyney, of Uphaven, Wilts, fr.
Berks, 888. f 12*. 11n.fi 49*. 1181.
fi 49*. 1443. fi 221*. 1565. fi 19*.
5184. p. 39.
„ of Thorngombald, Yorks, 805. fi
109 («.) 1394. p. 98. 141 5. fi 82*.
1420. fi 75*. 1487.fi 303*. Add. 18,011.
fi 94*. 29,783. fi 64*.
„ — co. Derby. Egert, 996. fi-68.
„ — Sussex, 1106.fi 219. 1432. fi 325.
Add. 5526. p. 457.
„ (Cheyney) — Norfolk, 1552. fi 190.
„ (Cheyney) — co. Staff, 1570. fi 63*.
6128. £ 91.
Chenouth, of Mogion, Cornwall, 1079. £ 238*.
1142.fi 82. 1149.fi 82. n62.fi 86.
Cherry, of Camberwell and Lambeth, Surrey,
1046. fi 61. 1147. fi 90*. 1397. fi 100.
1430. fi 95*. 1433. fi 93*. 1 561. fi
152. Add. 4963. fi 109*. 12,478. fi 44*.
Cheryton, — Devon, 3288. fi 156*.
Cbeseldine, of Uppingham, fr. co. Leic, 1094.
fi 149*. 1180. fi 11. 1184. fi 244*.
1189.fi 14. 1431. fi 6*. 1558. ff. 1*.
2. 4 339'- f- "5- 6125. ff. 19. 110.
6183. ff. 20. 102.

Cheseldine (Cbeselden) of Walden, Northants,
1 1 80. f. 70*. 1 1 87. f. 122. 1 189. f. 54*.
143 1. f. 46. 1553. f. 249*. 6125. ff.7(..
118*. 6183. fi 72.
„ or chestiedon, — Devon, 889. fi 146*.
1091. f. 120. 1538. fi 268*. 3288. ff.
74*. 142*. 5871.fi 35*.
cheseii, of Laughton, co. Hereford, 1545 fi
106*.
Chesham, of Chesham Bois, Bucks, 1533. fi 8*.
2109. ff. 32*. 91. >
Cbeshuii, of Baldfield, Essex, 1541.fl 214*.
Cheshunt, — Beds, 2109. fi 61.
Chester, v. BlundevUle, Bohun, Ger vis,
Keveliock, Lupe, IMCescbines, Sc ott,
or Calloway.
„ Earls of, 1424. fi 3 (a. *.). 1505. fi
3(a.b.). 1535. ff. 37.38. 2119.fi 69
(a. b.). 4204. fi 134. Egert, 996. f.
56*. Add. 19,114. £ 18. 29,782. ff.
2*. 3.
„ of Filsworth, Beds, fr. London, 1531.
£ 154-
,i of Chicheley, Bucks, fr. London, 1 102.
£78*. 1151.fi 77*. 1193.fi 78*. I39i-
£85. 1533. £ no*. Add 19,123. p.
40.
„ of Lee, Essex, fr. co. Durham, 1542.
£ 29*.
„ of Amesbury and Barton Regis, co.
Glouc, 1041. fi 109*. 1543. fi 152.
„ of Royston, Herts, 1546. fi 73*.
1547. fi 13*.
„ of Blaby, co. Leic, fr. Herts,
1180.fi 94. 1187. fi 99. 1189. ff. 46*.
88. 1431. ff. 38*. 79*. 6125. ff. 8. 1 10.
6183. fi 9.
„ of London, 1096. fi 38*. 1463. fi 1.
„ of London, fr. Somerset, 1476. fi 339*.
„ —co. Staff, 6128. £ 108.
Cheston, of Mildenhall, Suffolk, 1560. fi 196,
Add. 19,123. p. 44.
Chetham, — co. Lane, 155. fi 21*. 1 103.
fin*. 1177.fi 14. 1449 fi 21. 1560.
fi 17*.
„ of Nuthurst and Crumpsall, co. Lane,
1437. fi 87*. 1549 fi 41*. 6159.fi 29.
Add. 24,458. ff. 133*. 134.
„ of London, fr. co. Lane, 1476. fi 246*.
„ of Bury, Suffolk, fr. co. Lane, 155.
fi 21*. 1103.fi n*. n77.fi 14. 1449.
fi 21. 1060. fi 17*. Add. 19,123. p.
47-
Chetilton, — Cheshire, 774. fi 17. 1424. fi 26
(a.*.). 1505. fi 25. 1535. £95. 2142.
fi 31. 2187. fi 29 2230. fi 30*. 5182.
fi 9. Add. 5529. fi 15*.
„ —Salop, 1396. £-36*. 1472. fi 31*.
ChetUng, or Chitting, of Wortham, Suffolk,
fr. Norf, 155. fi 7. 1 103. fi 38*. 1177.
fi 36. 1449 fi 38*. 1560. fi 184. Add.
14,309. fi 40*.
Chetwood, of Warkworth, Cheshire, 1535.
£ 90.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

13

Chetwood, of Worleston, Cheshire.fr. co. Staff,
774- fi 18*. 1424. f. 34. 1505. fi 33.
1533- f- 34*- 1535- f- 90*. i5S2fi 27.
2143. ff. 75*. 76. 2187. fi 37*. 5832.
fi 44- 5868. f. 42. Add. 5529.fi. 14.
„ of Reis, Salop, 1241. fi 112. 1535.
fi 174 2187. fi 66.
„ of Oakley, co. Staff., 1173. fi 130*.
1439 f- 22*. 1533. fi 34*. 1570. fi 85.
2156. ff. 1 14* to 119. 5186. pp. 55. 56.
5832. fi 44. 5868. fi 42. 6104. fi 28*.
„ — Bucks, 1 1 84. £ 99*. 1 1 87. fi 27*.
1 188. p. 28. 1 194 fi 103. 1553. fi 7*.
Cbetwynd, — Kent. Add. 14,839. fi 99.
„ of Denston, co. Staff, 11 73. ff. 81.
124*. 1439. f- 24. 6128. £ 9.
„ of Ingestre, co. Staff, 1535. ff. 126.
269*. 1570. £ 76*. 6128. £ 107.
„ (chetwind) — co. Hereford, 1140. £
101. 2156. £ 53*.
„ (Chetwind)— Essex, 1 137. £ 41. 1432.
£ 31*-
Chevallier, of Aspal, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
pp. 50 to 57.
Cbeverell. — Salop, 1241. £ 101*.
„ — co. Warwick, 1 100. fi 35. 1 167. fi
27. 1563. £ 30*.
Chevin, — Kent Add 16,279. P- 43°-
Cheyne, — Hunts, 1075. £ 56. 1 179. fi 1 14.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 56.
Chibborne, or Chilborne, of Messing Hall,
Essex, 1541. fi 207*. 1542. £ 183.
„ —Kent. Add. 5507. p. 384.
ChibnaU, of Felmersham, Beds, fr. Astwood,
Bucks, 1097. £ 20*. 1390. £ 9*. 1 53 1.
£53. 2109. fi 17*. 4600. p. 18. 5186.
p. 33. Lansd, 864. p. 18.
„ of Astwood, Bucks, 1102. fi 115*.
1 139. f.48. 1391. fi 118*. 1429. £ 69.
1533. £ 47*. 5181. p. 20. 5832. £ 7*.
5868. f. 1*.
„ of Orlingbury, Northants. fr. Bucks,
1094 £ 212*. 1184. fi 207*. 1553.fi
227*.
Chicher— co. Camb, 1401. fi 15. 1534- fi 26*.
6774. £ 32. 6775. £ 15. 6830. p. 7.
Add. 4962. £ 14
„ —Kent. Add. 16,279 p. 434-
n —Northants, 1094. £ 156*. 1184. £
153*.
Chicheley (Chlchley) of Wimpole, co. Camb,
fr. co. Northampt, 1401. £ 15. 1534
fi 26*. 6774 f- 32- 6775. fi 15. 6830.
p.- 7. Add. 4962.fi 14
of Higham Ferrers, Northants, 1094.
" £156. 1184.fi 153- 1480. fi 33*- I557-
f 9. 2109 £ 44. 2156. ff. 76. 128.
4204 £ 240. Add 5507. £ 106.
(Chichely)— co. Glouc, 1543- £ 8*.
" (chichely) of London, 1449 £ 23.
" 1541. fi 39*- '433- £ 22*. 1561. £ 13*.
Add. 14,3". ff z3*. 95*-
Chichester, Earl of Donegal, &c. Add 14,838.
ff. 74 to 80.

Chichester, of Arlington, Devon, 889. fi 113.
10S0. fi 81*. 1091. fi 45*. 1 163. ff.
141*. 142. 1896. 1399. fi 74. 1538.
fi 272*. 1567. f. 23*. 3288.fi 78. 5185.
fi 32*. 5840. fi 85. 5871. ff. 21*. 37.
41*.
„ of Hall, Devon, 889. fi 109*. 1091.
£87. 1399 fi 71. 1538. f. 274. 3288.
fi 78. 5185. fi 32. 5840. fi 81*. 5871.
fi 30*.
„ of Raleigh, Devon, 889. ff. 72*. 73.
1080.fi 81*. 1091.fr. 45*. 83. 87. 1163.
fi 187*. 1399. fi 74. 1538. fi 272.
3288. ff. 78. 156*. 168. 5185. fi 13.
5840. ff. 85. 125. 5871. ff. 21*. 39. 41*.
,, of Tavistock, Devon, 108a. £ 81*.
1 163. fi 187*.
„ of Wid worthy, Devon, 1080. £ 81*.
1 163. fi 211*. 1399. f. 43. 3281. fi 77*.
5185. fi 31*. 5840. fi 50. 5871. £ 21*.
„ of Melbury, Dorset, fr. Devon, 1166.
fi 49. 1451- fi 81. 1539. fi 135.
Cbideock, of Chideock, Dorset, 145 1. fi 196.
„ — Berks, 1 139. fi 135*. 2156. £70.
„ (Cbediocke) — Herts, r504.fi 1. 1546.
fi 5*-
Chidieigh,— Somerset, 1385. fi 33. 1559. fi 2.
„ (chidiey) — Cornwall, 1079. £ 38*.
Cbidlowe,— co. Warwick, 1 100. £ 65. 1 1 67. £ 62.
ChUcott, of Stowcombe, Somerset, 1141. £ 66b.
1445. fi 96*. 1559. £ 196.
Child, of Newton, Dorset, 1 r66. £ 72*. 1451.
fi 117. 1539. fi 161*.
,. (Chyide) of North Minims, Herts, fr.
Surrey, 1 546. f. 129.
„ (Chylde) of Chiswick, Middlx, fr.
Surrey, 155 1, fi 89*. Add. 4964 fi 88.
„ (Childe) of Turnhani Green, Middlx.,
i551.fi 90*.
„ of Enston, Oxon, from co. Wore,
1556. f 168.
„ of East Sheen and Wimbledon,
Surrey, 1046. £ 213. 1147. £ 130*.
1397. £ 184. 1430. fi 136*. 1433. £171^
1561. £ 247*. Add. 4963. £ 153.
„ (Childe) of Turlaston, co. Warwick,
1 100. ff. 49*. 101*. 1 167. ff. 41*. 132*.
1563. fi 167. 6060. fi 169*.
„ (Childe) of Northwick and Sheley,
co. Wore, 1043. fi 26*. 1352. £ 5*.
i486. £ 4. 1566. fi 75*. 5814. £ 67*.
5841. f- 5*.
„ (chUde)— co. Glouc, 1041. £ 62.
„ — Middlx, 1046. £213. 1147. £131.
1397. £ 184 1430. £ 137- 1433- £ 170*-
1561. £ 247*. ,.
Childersley, — Devon, 889. fi 148. 1538. £ 246*.
5185. fi 43*-
ChiUam, or Chilham, of Drogheda. Add.
23,693. fi 177-
Chilton, of Sandwich, Kent Add 5528.
fi 181*. (m.)
n — co. Line, 1550. £ 86*.
„ —Suffolk. Add. 19,123. pp. 72 to 75.
Chimerton,— Cornwall, 4031. f.79 i

74

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Chineil,— co. Derby. Egert, 996. f. 80*.
Chinett, — co. Staff., 1439. fi 28.
Chippenham, of Hereford, co. Hereford, 1 140.
fi 1. 1159.fi 1. 1442.fi 1. 1545. fi 1.
Chippingdale, of Leicester, co. Leic, fr. co.
York, 1180.fi 112. I187.fi 106*. 1189.
fi 71. 1431. fi 62*. 6125. ff. 29*. no.
6183. £ 30*.
Chisenball, or Cbisnall, of Chisnall, co. Lane,
891. £ 88. 1437. £ 25*. 1468. £ 22*.
1549. fi 39*. 2086. fi 64 6159. fi 28.
Chittenden, of Hawkhurst, &c. Add. 5528. fi
168.
chitting, of Wortham, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
p. 83.
Cblttock, of Wortham, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk, 891.
£11. 1449. fi 45*. 1560. fi 154 Add.
19,123. p. 87.
Chitwood, — Essex, 1 137. fi 72*. 1432. fi 65*.
Cbiver, of Quemberford, Wilts, 1165. fi 34*.
1443-f- H3*.
Cblverton, of Paul, Cornwall, 1079. fi 55*.
1 142. f.96*. 1149. f- 97*- "62. fi
101*. 4031. fi 77.
„ of Trehunsie, Cornwall, 1079. fi 56*.
1 142. fi 2*. 1 149 f . 3. 1 162. fi 3*.
„ of Chiverton, Devon, and of Corn
wall, 1091. ff. 128*. 129.
„ of London, fr. Cornw, 1476. £ 1 19*.
Choke,* or Cholke, of Avington, Berks, fr.
Som, 1081.fi 10*. 1139.fi 64*. 1483.
fi 118*. 1532. fi 9*. 1530. fi 49. 4204.
ff. 141 to 142*. 5822. fi 8*. 6173. fi 22.
Add. 4961. fi 63. 12479. fi 12. 14,283.
fi 63. 14,284 p. 45.
Chokke, or Cbakke, of Yatton and ' Long
Ashton, Som, 1141. fi 20*. 1445.
f-37*- I559fi 105.
Cholmondeley, Marquis. Add. 14,839. ff.
77.78.
Cholmley, or cholmondley, of Cholmondleigh,
Cheshire, 21 19. ff. 50*. 51. 2142. fi
161*. 2187. fi 33. Add. 29,782. fi 9.
„ or Cholmondley, of Chorley, Che
shire, 1396. £ 242. 1424. ff. 33*. no*.
1505. ff. 32*. 109*. 1532. £ 25. 1535.
ff. 57. 81 (a. *.) 82*. 83. 167*. 216*.
2119. ff. 46*. 48. 2142. fi 161*. 2187.
fi 28*. 2230. £ 29.
„ or Cholmondley, of Tiverton,
Devon, fr. Surrey, 1080. f. 93*. 1 163.
f.234.
„ of Chidingley, Herts, 1546. fi 137.
„ (cholmeley) (Bart.), of Easton, co.
Line Add. 23,685. fi 32*.
„ of London, fr. Surr, 1476. fi 370*.
„ of Highgate, Middlx, 1551. fi 99.
„ of Coppenhall, co. Staff, 1077. fi 63*.
"73- f- 55*- !4i5- ff- 119 (a. *.) 132*.
1535. fi 83*. 1570. fi 63*. 2187. fi 33*.
6128 fi 14.
„ of Bletchingley, Surrey, 1046. fi 37.
1 147. fi 55. 1397. fi 75. 1430.fi 61.
1433. £ 70. 1561. £ 125*. Add. 4963.
£ 68*. 12,478. fi 24.

Cholmley, or cholmondeley, of Bransby, Yorks,
1394. p. 156. 1415. f. 11*. 1420. fi 113.
1487. f. 365*. SI, 1429. f- 94*- Add
14,309 ff. 14*. 15. 18,011. fi 134.
„ of Golston, Yorks, 1499 fi 25. 1571.
fi 212.
„ of Skewsby, Yorks, 1487. fi 366-}.
„ of Whitby, Yorks, 1487. fi 367.
„ — co. Camb. 1401. fi 61. 1534.fi 79*.
Add 4962. £ 56.
— Yorks, 805. £ 112. Add. 14,309.
£39
Cholwell, of Lodisford, Devon, 1080. £ 261*.
1163. £ 115.
Chope, of Edmondstown, co. Meath. Add.
23,693- £ Hi- («*•)
Choppin, of Coddenham, Suffolk. Add 19,123.
p. 92.
Chorleton,— co. Staff, 1439. fi 55.
Chorley, of Chorley, co. Lane, 891. £ 84*.
1437. fi 45*. n8*. 1468: £ 17. 1549.
£ 38*. 20S6. fi 64*: 6159 £ 26*.
„ of Preston, Lane, and of Diss, Nor
folk. Add. 24,458. £ 42-
chome, — Somerset, 1 ioa.fi 18*.
Chowne, of Fairland, Kent, nc6 fi 31. 1432.
fi 192*. 2198. £116. Add. 5507. p. 84.
5526. p. 53.
„ of Frogfurle, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076.
£112*. 1084 fi 79. 1 135. £ 65. 1 194.
£ 58. 1406 fi 29. 1562. fi 149. 5829.
fi 132. 6164. £ 91.
Christenstowe,— Devon, 889.fi r4£- 1091. £ 107.
1538. fi 246*. 5 185. fi 43*.
Christian, of Herborow, Northants, 1 187.
£ 69*. 1 188. p. 90.
Christmas, of London, fr. Surrey, 1476. £ 64*.
Add. 5533. p. 36.
Chudleigh, of Stroud, Dorset, fr. Devon, 888.
£ 57*. 1451. £ 179. 1539. £ 53. 3186.
f.25.
„ of Ashton, Devon, 889. fi r8. 1080.
fi 11. 1091. ff. 25*. 112. 1163.fi 156.
1399. fi 106. 1538. fi 253*. 3288.
fi 144 (a. *.) 5185. ff. 33. 68*. Add.
14,315. p. 135.
Owne, or chume, of Shenley, Herts, fr. Kent,
1504. fi 134. 1234. £ 116*. 1547.
£ 77*-
„ —Kent, 1504. fi 26*. 1546. fi 2*.
Church, of Nantwich, Cheshire, 1535. £ toob.
21 19. fi 183.
„ of Earles Colne, Essex, 1137. £ 140*.
1432.fi 157*. r54iJf. 147*. 1542.fi 146.
6065. £ 995.
„ of Springfield, Essex, 1542. £ 101*.
„ of Petton, Salop, fr. Cheshire^ 1396.
£ 78. 1472. £ 53*. 1982. fi 12*.
„ of Hem_ngsr_anerSuffoIk. Add. 19,123.
P- 95-
Churchar, of Sii nf old, Sussex,, fr. Surrey, 1076.
fi 18*. 1084. fi 88. 1135.fi 74. 1194-
fi 67. 1406. f. 85. 1562. £ 156*. 4109.
fi 59*. 5829. fi 141. 6164. f. 46.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

75

Churchill, of Muston, Dorset, 1 166. fi 2*. 1451.
fi 9*. 1539. f. 89*.
„ of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
P- 99
,, — Devon, 889. fi 94*. 1538. £ 180*.
5185. fi 42*. 5871. fi 26*.
Churchman, of London, 1476. fi 359*.
Churchyard, of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add
19,123. p. 102.
Chursdon, or Xelong, CO. Glouc, 1 04 1, fi 55.
1543. fi 40.
Chute, of Bethersden, Kent, 1106. fi 108*. 1432.
£ 243*. 1548. £ 36*. Add 5507. p. 241.
5526. p. 202.
„ of London, fr. cos. Suffolk and Kent,
1476. £ 426*.
„ —Surrey, 1096. £ 159
Chynton, — Cornwall Add. 14,315. p. 107.
Cifrewast, — co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 10. 46.
Clagett, of London, fr. Kent. Add. 5533. p. 239.
Clamford, — Kent, 1 548. £ 177.
Clanvowe,— co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 10. 46.
Clapham, of Barnstaple, Devon, 1080. £ 264*.
1 163. fi 12a
„ of London, fr. Northants and Yorks,
1476. fi 193*. Add 5533. p. 234.
„ of Helpstone and Peterborough,
Northants, fr. co. York, 890. f. 33*.
1094. fi 146*. 1 138. £61. 1 171. £ 19*.
1184. £ 143*. 1187. £43. 1188. p. 51.
1553. £ 52. 6060. ff. 129*. 130.
„ of Willinghall, co. Warwick, fr. co.
York, noo. £ 107*. 1167. £ 141*.
1 195. £ 112. 1563. £ 174*. 6060.
fi 178*.
„ of Beamsley, Yorks, 805. ff. 121 to 123.
1 171. ff. 19*. 55. 1394- P- 24 1415-
£ 40. 1420. fi 20. 1487. fi 162. 4630.
p. 95. Add. 18,011. fi 8*. 26,739.
ff. 71.72*.
„ of Leeds. Add. 24,458. fi 20*.
„ —Yorks, 1415- £ 99*. H20. £ 237*.
Add. 24458- £ ii-
de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, &c, 1425.
ff. 59 137. 4204 ff 55- 164. Add.
14,309. ff. 32. 91*. 19,123. pp. 108
to 114.
Clare, of Lansladron, Cornwall, 4031. fi 71.
of Colwell, co. Worc, 615. fi 238*.
1043. fi 49 1241- £ 3°*- I396- £ 74-
1566. fi 118*. 1982. £ 158*.
„ —Suffolk, 1484- £ 42.
—co. Warwick, noo. £ 48. 1167.
£ 40*.
ClareU, of Clarell Hall, Yorks, 4630. p. 94
Add. 14,309. £ 35*- 26,739 f- 7o*.
Clarke, of Ardington, Berks, 1081. fi 15*. n»
£ go*. 1532- £ 54*- 5822. £ 12*.
6173. £ 23- Add. 4961- f- 27*. 14,283.
fi 27*. 14,284 P- 97-
of Dondon Court, Bucks, fr. co. Leic,
" 1 139 f- 9°*- J483- f- "4*. 1530.
fi 69. 1429 f- 79 1533- f- 10*. 5181.
p. 88. 5832. f- 25. 5868. fi 23.
of Higham, Bucks, 1533. fi 61*.

Clarke, of Wycombe, Bucks, 1 1 39. f.46.
„ of Ratcliff, Bucks, 4204. fi 26*.
„ of Snailvvell, co. Camb. Add. 19,123.
p. 145.
„ of Hough, Cheshire. Add 29,782.
f. 16 (m.)
„ (Clark) of Ashgate, co. Derby,
6104. £ 101. Add. 24458. fi 74.
„ (Clark) of Somersal-, co. Derby,
1093. £26. 1153. fi 95. i486, fi 41*.
1537. fi 48*. 6104. £ 99. 6592. £ 1*.
Egert, 996. fi '22*. Add. 24458. fi 77.
„ (Clark) of Chesterfield, co. Derby.
Add 24,458. ff. 244. 332.
„ of Avington, Hants, 1544. fi 165*.
„ of Hereford 1140. fi 80*. 1 1 59. fi 80*.
1442.fi S3*. 1545. f.87*. Add. 19,815.
£ 71*.
„ of Bredgar, Kent, 1 106. fi 49. 1432.
fi 206*. Add. 5507. p. 118. 5526. p. 87.
„ of Farnham and Canterbury, Kent.
Add. 16,279. P- 448.
„ orwoodchureh, of West Hale, Kent,
4204. £ 25. Add 16,279. P- 428-
„ of Aldington, Kent. Add 5528. £ 86.
„ (ciark) of Leighton Buzzard, co.
Leic, and of Fenny Compton, co.
Cambs. Add 24,458. ff. 333*. 334
„ of Ledenham, co. Line, 1097. ff. 65*.
96*. 1 190. ff. 42. 64*. 1484. £ 7*.
1550. ff. 10*. 71*.
„ of London, 1504. fi 101.
„ of Wraxham, Norfolk, 4756. £ 18*.
„ of King's Lynn, Norfolk, 4756. £ 52*.
„ oi Potterspury and Stanwick,
Northants, fr. Devon, 809. fi 25. 1094.
£17*. 1138. £17*. 1171.fi 22*. 1184
- £17*. 1187.fi 38*. 1 188. p. 44 1553.
£ 155*. 6066. £ 88*.
„ of Worton, Oxon, fr. Som, noo.
£ 94_>. 1 167. £ 119 1556. fi 140*.
1563. f. 145.
„ of Shrewsbury, Salop, 1 241. fi 116
1396. fi 89*.
„ of Bristol, Somerset, fr. Salop, 1559.
£ 124*.
„ of Long Sutton, Somerset, fr. co.
Glouc, 1141.fi 52. 1445. fi 77*. 1559
ff.41. 88*.
„ of Norton, Somerset, 1 141. fi 9*.
1445. fi 23.
„ " of Beccles, Suffolk. Add. 19,123. pp.
149 to 152.
„ of Mellis, Suffolk. Add 19,123. p.
153-
„ of East Beigholt, Suffolk. Add.
19,123. p. 161.
„ of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
p. 169
of Bagshot, Surrey, fr. Kent, 1046. fi
98. H47- ff 98*- 154*- 1397- f- 137-
1430. f. 160*. 1433. fi 127*. 1561. fi
179*.

76

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Clarke, of Merton Abbey, Surrey, 1046. fi 63.
1397. fi 102. 1430. f. 103*. 1433. fi 98*.
1561. f. 157*. Add. 4963.fi 127. 12,478.
fi 48*. 14,31 1- f- 79
„ ¦ or Woodchurch, of Salford, co. War
wick, fr. Kent, 1 100. fi 66&. 1 167. fi 65.
1563. fi 88*.
„ of Bucksford, co. Warwick, 6060. ff.
14 14*.
„ of Stanley, Yorks. Add. 24,458. fi
72*.
„ of Attercliff, Yorks. Add 24,458.
fi 58.
„ — Jervoise, Bart. Add. 24458. fi 72*.
„ (Clark) — Cheshire, 1505. fi 95. 1535.
fi 189*. 21 19. ff. 69 (a. *.).
„ of Dublin. Add. 23,686. fi 38.
„ Humphrey (family of) — Ireland.
Add. 23,686. ff. 4*. 7*.
„ — Cornwall, 1079. fi 15. 4031. fi 78.
„ —Devon, Add. 14,284. fi 53.
„ — Herts, 1504. ff. 10. 95. 1546. fi
11*.
„ of Walkern and Ashwell, Herts, 1234.
fi 130*. 1504. fi 164*. 1547. ff. 59. 61.
„ — Middlx, 1086. fi 21. 1096. fi 5.
„ — Norfolk, 1552. f. 115.
„ —Northants, 1094. fi 125*. 1 1 87. £
15*. 1188. p. n. 1429 fi 84*.
„ —co. Staff, 1077. fi 8. 1 173. fi 7.
1415. fi 106*. 1570. fi 24.
„ —Suffolk, 1 137. fi 52. 1432. fi 43*-
1541. fi 62*. 1560. fi 141. 6065. fi 128.
„ — co. Warwick, fr. Oxon, 1 100. fi 94*.
1 1 67. fi 119. 1563. fi 145. 6060. fi
157.
„ (Clark) — co. Worcester, 1566. fi 14.
Clarkson, of Kirton, Notts, 1400. fi 46*. 1555.
fi 77.
„ of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add.
19,123. £ 180.
Claver, of Oving and Foscott, Bucks, 1 102. fi
67. 1139.fi 92*. n51.fi 66. 1193.fi
67. 1234. fi 40*. 1391. fi 71. 1533. fi
31*. 5i8i.p. 35. 5832. fi 39*. 5868.
f- 37*.
de Clavering, Lord of Parliament. Add
19,123. fi 189
Clavering, of Callaley, Northumb, 1 1 53. fi
55*. 1448. fi 46*. 1554 fi 95*.
„ — Cheshire, 1424 fi 55. 1505.fi 55.
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,311. f. 8.
Claveshay, of Cory Rivell, Somerset, 1385. fi
53*. 1445. fi 211. 1559. fi 34*. Add.
12.477. fi 57-
ciaviii, of Steple, Dorset, 11 66. ff. 25*. 77.
1451. ff. 43*. 125. 1539. ff. 113. 168.
Clavor, of Sterstone, Norfolk, 1552.fi 188*.
Ciaxton, of Hallom, co. Durham, 1540. fi 45*.
„ of Old Park, co. Durham, 1 153. fi
34*. 1168.fi 6. 1171.fi 71*. 1397.fi
202. 1540. fi 25*.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. fi 287*.
„ of Kirton, Notts, fr. co. York, 1555. fi
165*.

ciaxton, of Bedminster, Somerset, fr. co York,
1 141. f. 88*. 1445. f. 126. 1559. f.
215*.
„ of Cheston, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk, 155.
fi 16. 1103.fi 74. n77.fi 62. 1449.
fi 77. 1560. fi 84. 1820. ff. 30. 36*.
„ of Livermere, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
pp. 197 to 206.
—Yorks, 1487. fi 355*.
Clay, of Crich, co. Derby, 1093. £ 117*. 1537-
£ 50. Egert, 996. £ 46*.
,, (ciey) of Theobalds, Herts, 1546.
£ 69*.
„ of London, fr. Salop, 1476. £ 292.
„ of Sherbrooke, &c, Notts. Add
24,458. fi 191*.
„ of Sheffield. Add 28,113. fi 134
„ de le Fells, Salop, 1396. fi 81*.
Clay brook, of Swatcliff, Kent.fr. Middlx, 1 106.
fi 88*. 1432. fi 233. Add. 5507. p.
205. 5533. p. 72.
Claypoole, of Northburgh, Northants, 1094. fi
225*. 1 184. fi 220*. 1553. fi 194.
de Claydon,— Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p. 217.
Clayton, Lord Sandon. Add. 19,123. p. 222
to 225. 23,710. ff. 177. 179.
„ of Thelwall, co. Cheshire, fr. Lane,
1424 ff. 35*. 36. 1505. ff. 34*. 35. 1982.
fi 138. 2142. ff. 60. 89*. 2230. fi 31*.
Add. 5529. fi 14*.
„ of Clayton, co. Lane, 1437- fi 45-
1468. fi 77. 1549. ff. 42*. 146*. 6159.
f. 296.
„ of Appleby, co. Line, 1550. £ 104*.
„ of Lea, co. Line, 1550. £ 113.
„ of London, from. co. Camb. and fr.
Essex, 1444. fi 67. Add. 5533. p. 130.
„ of Enfield Park, Middlx. Add.
24,458. £ 98 (m.)
„ of Yoxford and Sibton, Suffolk. Add.
19,123. pp. 233 to 237.
„ of Bedfield, Suffolk. Add 19,123. pp.
243 to 245.
„ of Wakefield, Yorks, 1487. £ 148*.
„ of Okenshaw, Yorks, 4630. p. 99.
Add. 26,739. £ 73*-
„ of Whitwell, Yorks. Add. 24,458. £
267*.
„ of Moyallow, co. Cork. Add. 23,693.
£113-
„ — Bucks, 808. fi 43*.
„ — co. Staff, 1077. fi 52. 6128. fi 26.
Cleare, of Kilbury, co. Tipperary. Add. 23,693.
fi 139
Cleator, — co. Durham, &c. Add. 23,690. fi 70.
ciee, of London, fr. Salop, 1476. fi 47.
Clegg, of Manchester and London. Add. 24,458.
ff. 72*. 314.
Clegher, — Cornwall, 4031.fi 80.
clement, of Plymouth, Devon, fr. Dorset, 1080.
f- 347-
„ of Itamin, Kent, 1484 fi 62*.
„ of Leverton, co. Line, 1097. fi 84
1190.fi 11. 1484.fi 21. 1550.fi 70 (<..*.).

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

77

Clement, of Longham, Norfolk, fr. co. Line,
H77- fi 94*. 1552. fi 2T2*.
Clements (Earl of) Leitrim. Add. 14,839. f. 277.
23,687. fi 54*.-
Clench, of Bridgnorth, Salop, fr. Dublin, 1 241.
fi 108*. 1396.fi 70. 6172. fi 21. Add.
14,314. fi 96.
„ (Clinche) of Bealings and Holbrook,
Suffolk, fr. Essex, 1560. fi 233*. 1820.
ff 32*. 33- Add. 19,123. pp. 247 to 257.
„ of Creting, Suffolk, fr. Essex, 891.
fi 32*. 1449. fi 41*. 1820. fi 32*.
Clephane, of Carslogie, N.B. Add 14,836.
f.309
Clenhui, of Clennell, Northumb, 1153. fi 52.
1448. fi 12*. 1554. fi 32*.
de Clerbeck, — Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p. 265.
Clere, of Ormsby, Norfolk, 1139. £ 113. 1177.
£ 157*. 1552. ff. 117. 184. 4755.fi 61.
4756.fi 12. 5189. fi 57*. 6093. fi 154*.
Add. 19,816. ff. 46*. 47*.
„ of Stokesby, Norfolk, 1552. fi 184
„ of Blickling, Norfolk. Add. 19,123.
pp. 272 to 279.
„ —Suffolk, 1484. fi 47.
Clerk, of Liston Shields, N.B. Add. 14,837.
f.87.
„ of Pennycuick, N.B. (Bt.) Add.
14,837. fi 85.
Clerke, — Kent, 1076.fi 200*. 1084.fi 152*. 1135.
£ 140*. 1 194. fi 142. 1562. fi 203.
„ of Forde, Kent, 1 106. fi 4. 1548.
fi 49*. 1432. fi 171. 2198. fi 89. Add.
5507. p. 32. 5526. p. 7.
„ of Wrotham, Kent. Add. 5532. p.
103. 14,309- £ 36*.
„ of Rowley, co. Leic, 1189. £ 51*.
143 1. £43*.
: „ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 198.
„ of Edmonton, Middlx, fr. Westm,
1468. fi 127.
„ of Rowley, co. Staff, 6128. fi 97.
„ —Cheshire. Add. 16,279 £ 233.
Ciervauix, of Croft, Yorks, 805. £ 114. 1394-
p. 296. 1420. fi 195- 1487- f- 302*.
1 57 1. fi 204. 6070. fi 213. Add. 18,011.
fi 215. 29,783. fi 68*.
Cleseby,— Beds, 2109. fi 72.
„ —Norfolk, 1552. fi 5*-
Cliffe, of Ingatestone, Essex, fr. Devon, 1083.
fi 70. 1 137. ff 98. I3L 1432. ff 92*.
139 1541.fi 158. 1542. fi 92*. 6065.
fi 98*. Add. 14,290- fi 95-
de Clifford,— Lords, SI, 1429- ff 49*- "o*-
Add. 43°9- f- 27*-
Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, 1073. fi 62*. 4204.
ff. 56. 60*. 4630- P- 90. Add 26,739
pp. 68* to 70.
of Kintbury Eaton, Berks, fr. Wilts,
" 1081. fi 23. I483- £ "7*- i53o. fi go.
1532. fi 40. 4108. f- 34- Add. 14,284.
P-47- of Chudleigh, Devon, fr. Wilts, 1164.
" f.36.

Clifford, of Frampton, co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 55.
66. 1073. f. 62*. 1543. fi 66*.
„ of Bobbings, Kent, 1 548. f. 1 13*. Add.
5509. fi 10. 5532. p. 39.
„ of Brakenbury, co. Line, 1097.
fi 105. 1 1 90. fi 94. 1429. £ 110*.-
1484. fi 30*. 1550. fi 203*.
„ of Weedon, Northants, 1094 fi 195.
1 184. fi 190.
„ of Boscombe, Wilts, 1165. £ 66*.
1443. £ 168*.
„ — Beds, 2109 ff. 57 (a. *.)
„ — Oxon, 141 2 £ 102*.
„ — Surrey, 1 561. £ 19.
Clifton, of Leighton, Hunts, fr. Som, 1075.
£ 2*. 1 179 fi 3. Cott. Jul. F. viiu fi
2*.
„ of Westby, co. Lane, 891. fi 72.
1424 fi 736. 1437. £ 89. 1468. £ 37*.
1549. fi 40. 2086. fi 42*. 6159. fi 27*.
Add. 12,477. f- 76.
„ of London, 3288. fi 128. Add 5533.
p. 69.
„ of Buckenham, Norfolk, 2156. fi 44.
5189. fi 54. Add. 19,123. p. 287.
19,816. fi 45*.
„ of Fakenham, Norfolk, 1552. fi 94*.
4755. fi 49*. Add. 19,816. £ 38. "
„ of Toft Trees, Norfolk, 1177.fi 137-
1552. fi 74*. 4755- £ 4o. 5189. £ 14*.
6093. p. m.
„ of Walsingham, Norfolk, 1177. f.
140*. 1552. fi 112. 4755. fi 58*. 6093.
fi 151*.
„ of Testers, Norfolk. Add 19,816. f.
3i-
„ of Hodsock, Notts, 886. fi 41*. 1400.
fi 9. 1420. fi 72*. 1555. £ 10. 2109.
£ 75*. SI, 1429. fi 45*. Add. 14,309.
ff. 92*. 97*. 28,113. £36.
„ — co. Derby, Egert, 996. fi 68*.
„ —Somerset, 1415. fi 16*. 1420. £
126*.
„ — co. Staff, 1415. £ 129*. 1570. £79.
„ — Yorks, 1394 p. 18. 1420. ff. 17*.
126*. 1487. fi 382.
Clinton, Lord, Earl of Lincoln,. &c, 1073. £95*.
1094 fi 67*. 1184. fi 63*. 1 187. £ 72*.
1188. p. 95. Add. 14,307. £ 133.
19,123. p. 293.
„ of Eastnor, co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 45.
1159 fi 45- 1442. fi 45- 1545- £53-
Add. 19,815. £ 39.
„ of Badesley, co. Warwick, noo. ff.
35. 49 1 167. ff. 27. 41. 1563. fi 30*.
6060. ff. 23*. 54.
„ of Colshull, co. Wore, 1566. f.
127.
„ — co. Glouc, 1543. fi 153*.
„ — Salop, 1982. fi 115*.
„ —co. Staff, 1077. fi 19*. 1439. £ 45*.
Clippesby, of Clippesby, Norfolk, 1552. £ 152*.
2109. fi 62. 4755. fi 81*. 5189 fi 69.
6093. fi 184*. Add. 19816. fi 64*.
„ — Essex, 1 137. fi 76. 1432. fi 69.

7»

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

ciissoid, — Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p. 296.
Clitheroe, — co. Lane, 1487. f. 280*. 4204.
f. 42*.
„ of London, 1096. fi 68*. 1444. fi 43.
Add. 5528. fi 73. 5533. p. 75.
Clive, of Copton, Kent, fr. Cheshire, 1 106. fi
27. 1432.fi 189. 2198.fi 112. 1548.
fi 63*. Add. 5507. p. 59. 5526. p. 45.
„ of Huxley and Wolverton, Salop,
1241. ff. 2*. 25. 1396. ff. 60. 76*. 290*.
1424. ff. 32*. 34. 1472. fi 52. 1505. ff.
3i- 33*- I535- ff 93- '68. 170. 296.
1982.fr. 50. 52. 154*. 2187. ff. 26. 35.
2230. fi 32. 6172. fi 7*. Add. 14,314.
fi 62. 14,839. fi 222. 2i,oi7.f. in.
29,782. £ 12*.
Clobbert, — Berks, 1532. £ 141.
Clobery, or Cleobnry, of Bradstone, Devon,
889. fi 88*. 1080. fi 12*. 1091. fi 75-
1 163. fi 168*. 1399. fi 55*. 1538. f.
188. 3288. £ 79 5185. fi 34 5840.
£64. 5871. £25.
„ of London, fr. Devon, 1476. fi 140.
Clod e shall, — Beds, 2 1 09 fi 92*. 6066. fi 1 14
„ — co. Hereford, 1140. fi 40*. 11 59.
£40*. 1442. fi 40*. 1545. fi 49*.
„ — co. Lincoln, 1 187. fi 92*.
„ — Northants, 1 187. fi 92*.
„ (ciodshau) — Oxon, 1556. fi 152.
„ -^-co. Warwick, noo. fi 29*. 1167.
£ 21.
Clopton, of Liston, Essex, 1083. £ 7. 1137. ff.
25. 134*. 1432. £ 147. 1449. £ 57*.
1541. £ 182*. 1542. £ 187. 1560.
£ 3*. 6065. £ 31. Add 14,290. fi 41*.
„ of Snitterfield, co. Glouc, 1041/f . 38.
1 191. fi 33*. 1543. ff. 3. 69*. Add.
14,314 fi 43.
„ of Groton, Suffolk, 1820. £ 16.
„ of Kentwell and Keddington, Suffolk,
155. £ 32*. 1 103. ff. 5*. 19. 1 177.
ff. 16. 19*. 1449. £ 16. 1484 £ 45*.
1560. £ 3*. SL, 1429. fi 52*.
„ of Ketton, Suffolk, 1449. fi 15*.
„ ofMelford, Suffolk, 1103.fi **• H77-
fi 6*. 1820. fi 16. Add. 19,123. pp.
300 to 312.
„ of Sudbury, Suffolk, 1560. fi 3*.
„ or Cocksfleld, of Clopton, co. War
wick, 1 1 00. ff. 20*. 40. 1 1 67. ff. 13. 32*.
1563. fi 49. 6060. ff. 59. 64.
„ — co. Camb, fr. Suffolk, 1043. fi 96.
1401. fi 83*. 1534. f- 105*. 6775.
fi 103*. Add. 4962. fi 79.
„ — Cheshire, 1424. fin. 1505.fi 11.
1535. fi 1.
„ —Devon, 5185. fi 31.
„ — co. Leic, 810. fi 12.
„ —Sussex, 155. fi 33.
„ — co. Worc, 1566.fr. 87*. 125*.
Close,— Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p. 345.
de Clotherham, — Yorks, 141 5. fi 14*. 1420.
fi 120. 1571. fi 210*. Add. 18,011.
fi 146.

Clotworthy, of Clotworthy, Devon, 889. fi 120.
1080. fi 296. 1091. ff. 87. 97. 1 163.
fi 182*. 1399. fi 80. 153S. f. 225*.
5185. fi 34*. 3288. ff. 80. 159*. 5840.
fi 91*.
Clough, of London, fr. Denbigh, 1096. fi 100*.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. fi 74*.
„ of Hockstone and Minsterley, Salop,
1241. fi 68. 1396. fi 69. 1472. fi 50.
Add. 14,314. fi 61*.
„ of Badwell Ash, Suffolk. Add 19,123.
p. 348.
„ of Thorpe Stapleton, Yorks, 1420.
fi 156. 1487. fi 175. 4630. p. 98. Add.
18,011. fi 176*. 26,739. P- 73-
„ of York. Add. 24,458. fi 238*.
Clovile, of Clovile Hall, Essex, 1137. ff. 35*.
84 1432. ff. 26*. 77*. 1.541. £ 64*.
1542. £ 43*. 6065. £ 51&, 6066.
£ 41*.
„ — Northants, 1094.fi 94*. 1184. fi 91*.
1 187. fi n. 1 188. p. 3. 1553. £ 127*.
Clowes, of London, 1476. fi 68*.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1476. fi 356*.
„ of Broughton, co. Lane. Add. 24,458.
fi 134-
Clubbe, of Ipswich. Add. 19,123. pp. 354 to
357-
„ of Hoxne, Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p.
358.
Cludd, of Arnold, Notts, fr. Salop, 1400. £ 58.
1555.fi 87*.
„ of Orleton, Salop, 615. fi 238*. 1241.
£ 43. 1396. ff. 70*. 71*. 1982. £ 162*.
4204.fi 139. 6172. £10. Add. 14,314.
ff. 54. 65*.
Clun, of Clun, Salop, 1241. £ 164*. 1396. £ 89.
2156. £ 36*.
Clutterbuck, of Stanley Regis, co. Glouc,
1041. fi 98. 1543. fi 119
„ of Ingatestone, Essex. Add. 19.123.
p. 364.
Clutton, of Carden and Nantwich, Cheshire,
1424. fi 39*. 1505. fi 38*. 1535. £ 84*.
21 19. ff. 161. 162.
Clyatt, of Ipswich. Add. 19,123. p. 371.
Clyborne, of Hay Close, co. Cumb., fr. Westm.,
1536.fi 32*. 3391.1.3.
„ of Kellerby, Yorks, fr. Westm, 1394.
p. 173. 1415.fi 17. 1420. £130. 1487.
£ 53. Add 18,01 1- fi 148*. 29,783.
fi 60.
Clynt,— Hants, 5865. fi 18.
Clyste, — Devon, 3288. fi 140.
Cobb, of Sharnbrook,, Beds, fr. Sandringham,
Norfolk, 2109. fi.35. 4600. p. 53.
„ of Swasreton, Hants, 1139. f. 30.
1544.fi 94-
„ of Hackney, Middlx., fr. Norfolk,
1551. fi 52. Add. 19,816; f. 68.
„ of Burnham Sutton, Norfolk. Add.
19,816. fi 31.
„ of Peterbridge, Norfolk, and of
Middlx, 1552. fi 160. 4755. £• 84*.
6093. p. 1 14.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

79

Cobb, of Snettisham, Norfolk, 1177. £ 138*.
1552. ff. 76. 88*. 4755. fi 40*. 5189.
fi 22*. 6093. p. 113. Add 19,816.
fi 36.
,, of Somerton, Norfolk, 6093. p. 1 14.
„ of Sandringham, Norfolk, 1550. fi 83*.
1552. fi 89*. 4756. f.82.
„ of Adderbury, Oxon, fr. Norfolk,
1480. fi 59 1556. fi 149 1557. £ 50*.
„ of Ixworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,123.
fi 37*.
„ —co. Staff, 1570. fi n. 6128. fi 42.
Cobbold, of Ipswich. Add. 19,123. ff. 378. 389.
Cobbs, of Aldington and Faversham, Kent,
1 106. £ 168. 1432. fi 285*. 1548.
£ 94. Add. 5507. pp. 339. 340. 5526.
P-35I-
„ of Reculvers, Kent, 1548. fi 94. Add.
5507- P- 34o.
„ of Romney, Kent, 1548. £ 94. Add.
5507. P. 340.
Cobbam, v. Brooke, Oldcastle.
„ (Lord). Add. 14,309. £ 7*. 16,279.
PP- 326. 357- 398.
„ of Belluncle, Kent. Add. 16,279.
p. 329.
„ of Randall, Kent. Add. 16,279. PP-
367-399-
„ of Rochester, Kent. Add 16,279.
p. 33°.*
„ of Sterborough, Kent. SI, 1429. ff.
49. 100. 101. Add. 16,279. P- 331-
Cobley, of Brightley, Devon, 1091. £ 49. 1538.
£ 154*. 3288. fi 89. Add. 14,315. p. 60.
„ or CoUey, — co. Leic, 11 80. fi 32*.
1189. fi 39*. 6125. fi 44*. 6183. fi 45*.
Cocke, of Launceston, Cornwall, fr. Devon, 1079.
£117. 1142.fi 86. 1149.fi 86. Il62.
fi 90.
„ (cock) of Prittlewell, Essex, 1541.
£ 199*.
„ of Broxbourn, Herts, 1433. £ 2.
1476. £ 208*. 1504. £ 13*. 1546.
ff. 18*. 46*. 4204. £ 102*. 6060. £ 131*.
6147. £ 21*.
„ (cock) of Littlebury, Kent, 1548.
£ 131*.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. £ 356.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk. Add. 5533.
p. 144.
„ of London. Add. 24,458. ff 347- 347*-
of Lillingbome, co. Staff, 1077. fi 46.
1173. fi 38. 1415. fi 115*. i57o. fi 12.
, (Cock, or Cockes) of Kirkby Mona-
chorum, co. Warwick, fr. Herts, noo.
fi 81*. 1 167. ff 19*- 92. 1563- f- 112*.
(cockes) of East Harptree and Rode,
" Somerset, 1141.fi 113*. 1445- £ 155*-
1559- f- 239*-
(cock) of Barsham, Suffolk. Add.
" 19,123 pp. 403 to 406.
Cockayne (Visct. Cullen). Add. 14.839. ff. 61
to 63.
of Cockayne Hatley, Beds, 1097.
" f32*. 1390. fi 21*. 1531.fi 7*. 2109.

ff. 29*. 33*. 34. 4600. pp.42. 51. 5186.
p. 17. Lansd, 864. p. 42.
Cockayne, of Ashbourne, co. Derby, 886. fi 5*.
1093. ff. 86 (a. b.) 87. 88. 1153. £ 95
(a.b.) 1484 ff. 34*. i486, ff. 44 to 45*.
49- 1537- f- 3*- 2113.fi 99- 2134.
fi 12*. 6592. ff. 4. 31. Egert, 996.
ff. 1 1*. 12 to 13*. Add. 28,113. ff 18*.
19*. 20. 28(m).
„ (cockeyn) of London, 1096. fi 07b.
1476. fi 257*.
„ —co. Staff, 1077. £ 18*. 1439 £46.
,, -co. Warwick, 1563. £25*.
Cockeram, of CoUumpton, Devon, 1080. £ 313.
1163.fi 211.
„ of Purbeck, Dorset, fr. Devon, 1166.
£ 25. 145 1. £ 42*. 1 539. £ 112*.
„ of Hampstead, Mfddb., 1551.fi 64-5.
„ — Yorks, 1487. £ 220.
Cockerell, of Buxhall, Suffolk. Add 19,124.
PP- 47 to 50.
„ of Staxby, Yorks, 1487. £ 478.
„ —Herts, 1504. £ 14. 6147. fi 17.
„ — Oxon, 1556. £ 102*.
Cockesey, or Cookesey, — Beds, 2109. £ 73.
„ —Cheshire, 1093. £ 27*. 1535.fi! 103.
245. 2119.fi 5°- 2142. £95*. Add.
5529. £ 64*.
,, — Salop, 1241.fi 102. 1396. £ 295*.
„ of Holt, co. Warwick, 6139. £ 18*.
Cockett, of South Mimms, Herts, fr. Suffolk,
1433. £ 1 1. 1546. £ 33. 1504. £ 49*.
6147- f- 33-
„ of Bromthorpe-, Norfolk, fr. Herts
and Suffolk, 1433. fi 2 1£. 15 52. £185*.
6147- f- 45*-
„ of Walterton, Norfolk. Add. 19,123.
£ 410.
„ of Worcester, fr. Suffolk, 1566. f.
164*.
de Coekfleld, — Suffolk. Add. 19,123. p. 416.
Cockfield, — co. Line, 1097. £ 49*. 1190. £61*.
1484. £ 29*. 1550. £ 80*.
„ — co. Staff, 1570. £ 13*.
cockfryn, of Osborne, co. Warwick, 1 10a £ 28.
1167.fi 20.
Cockin,— Yorks. Add 24458. £ 148*.
cockman, — Kent Add 5507. p. 65*.
Cooks, of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1476. £ 314.
Cocksedge, of Drinkston, &c. Add 19,123.
p. 432 to 437.
Cockshead, of Chimley, Devon, 1080. £ 318*.
1163.fi 242.
Cockshutt, of Huthwaite, Yorks_- Add. 24458.
ff. 100*. to 101.
Codington, of Ixworth, Suffolk. Add 19,123.
P-443-
Codd, of Boxley, Kent Add. 5528. fi 185*.
Coddington, of Aldford, Cheshire. Add. 5520.
£ 65*.
„ —Cheshire, 1424. f.m. .505. £ no.
1535. ff. 102*. 217. 252. 2119 £ 162*.
Add. 5529. fi 15*.

8o

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Code, of Breage, Cornwall, 1079. f. 132*. 1142.
fi 105. u49.fi IO°- IID" f- no-
„ of Morval, Cornwall, J079. £ 187.
1 142. fi 59. 1 149. fi 58. 1 162. fi 62.
4031. ff. 75. 78.
Codrington, of Doddington, co. Glouc, 1041.
fi 56. 1543. fi 67*.
„ of Codrington, Somerset, 1385.fi 46.
Codun, of Weston, Suffolk, 1103. fi 86*. 1177.
fi 72. 1449. fi 70*.
Coe, of Coe Hall, co. Camb, 6774 fi 107*.
Coeii, of Depden, Suffolk Add. 19,124. £ 1.
Coffin, of Portland, Devon, 1091. £ 115*. 1538.
ff. 259*. 292*. Add. 14,315. p. 56.
„ of Portlinch, Devon, 10S0. £ 87*.
1093. fi 61. 1 163. ff. in*. 118*. 1 164.
fi 15.
Cogan, of Baunton, Devon, 1425. fi 72. 3288.
fi 132. 5185. fi 35*.
„ of London, fr. co. Dorset and Oxon,
1476. fi 194*.
„ of Oxford, fr. Som, 808. fi 11.
1095. fi 10*. 1412. £78*. 1556. fi 30*.
5187. £ 15. 6166. p. 144. Lansd,
880. £ 8*. Add 11,388. £ 179*.
„ of Chard, Somerset, 1141. £ 45*.
1445. £ 68. 1559. fi 175*.
„ of Mountague, Somerset, 1559.
fi 120*.
„ of Munster, 1425. fi 53.
„ of Portmannock, co. Dublin. Add.
23,686. fi 45*.
Cogenho, — Bucks, 1533. fi 36.
CoggeshaU, of Coggeshall, Essex, fr. co.
Hereford, 1137. fi 21*. 1432. fi 14
1398. fi 6*. 1 541. fi 15. Add. 5509
£ 17*. 19,124. £ 5.
„ (cogshuli) of London, 1041. £ 58.
„ of Fornham, Suffolk, fr. Essex,
1449. fi 61*. 1560. ff. 165*. 213*. Add.
19,124. pp. 8 to n.
Coghill, of Bushey, Herts, fr. London, 1234.
fi 132*. 1504. fi 161. 1547. fi 34
„ of Blechingdon, Oxon, fr. London,
1480. fi 32*. 1557. fi 10*.
„ of Knaresborough, Yorks, 1420.
£ 214. 1487. fi 471*. 4630. p. 100.
Add 26,739 p. 74.
Coghull, of Broxton and Coghull, Cheshire,
1535. ff. 101*. 102. 207*.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. fi 252. Add. 5529
fi 17*.
Coghlan, or, x_tao coghlan, of Killcolgan, King's
Co. Add. 23,688. fi 50. 23,693. fi 137.
Coke, of Trusley, co. Derby. Add. 24458.
fi 131*. 28,113. £31.
„ of Holker, Norfolk. Add. 19,124 pp.
21 to 30.
„ of Brookehill Hall, Derby. Add.24,458.
£132. 28.113.fi 30.
„ of Ampton and Bury, Suffolk. Add.
19,124. p. 31.
„ —Surrey, fr. Cornwall, 1433. fi 33*.
1 561. fi 41*.

Coke, or Cardigan, — co. Warwick, noo. fi
47*. 1 167. fi 39*. 1 187. ft'. 79*. 96.
Cokenage, — co. Staff, i077.fi 75*. Ii73-f- 67*.
1415. fi 122. 1570. fi 66*. 6182. fi 57.
Coker, or Cocker, of Strethill, Cheshire, fr. co.
Line, 1424. £ 39 1505.fi 38. 1535.
fi 94. 1550. fi 23*. 2142. fi 95*. 2187.
fi 32.
„ of Ashbosham, Dorset, 888. fi 43.
1046. fi 227*. 1092. fi 14. 1153. fi 71*.
1166 fi 43. 1451. ff. 36*. 70*. 1539.
fi 14*. 2186. f. 10*. 4631. £ 78*.
„ of Maypowder, Dorset, 888. £ 63*.
1091.fi no. 1092. fi 23. 1153.fr. 73*.
78. 1 166. fi 48. 1451. fi 78. 1539.
fi 62*. 2186. fi 30.
„ of Bicester, Oxon, 1557. fi 38*.
„ of Hook Norton, Oxon, fr. Berks,
1097. fi 3.
Colbecb, — Salop, 1241. fi 136*. Add. 21,017.
fi 69*. " .:..-..,
Coibeck, of Tempsford, Beds, 1097. fi 25. 1390.
fi 13. 2109. fi 22. 1531.fi 39. 4600.
p. 27. 5186. p. 29. Lansd, 864 p.
27.
coibome, of Bratton and Wythehill, Somerset,
1141.fi 116. 1445. fi 160. 1559. fi 245.
„ of Bramford, Suffolk, 4755- fi 100*.
Add. 19,124. p. 54.
Coibrand, of Marsfield, co. Leic, fr. co. War
wick, 1 189. fi 51 (a. *.). 1431. fi 43.
6125.fi 118.
„ of Dudley, co. Staff, 6128. fi 97.
„ of Lewes and Chichester,- Sussex,
1076. fi 172*. 1084 fi 156. 1135.fi 144
1194.fi 113*. 1406.fi 134. 1562. fi 32.
5829.fi 27. 6164 fi 18*.
Colbrooke, of Lorywell, Devon, 1091. fi 101.
1538. fi 233.
„ (Colbrook) — Cornwall, 4031. fi 71*.
Colby, of Banham, Norfolk, 1177. fi 116*. 1552.
ff. 38*. 115. 4755. fi 13*. 5189. f.33-
5823. fi 61. 6093. p. 33. 6166. p. 44.
Add. 11,388. fi 67*. 14,309. fi 109.
19,124. fi 58. 19,816. fi 12*.
„ ofBumdish, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk, 155.
£ 26*. 1 103. ff. 58*. 84*. 1 177. ff. 51.
70. 1449. f- 67*. 1560. fi 98*. 1820.
fi 30*. Add. 19,124. fi 58. 23,689.
fi 243.
„ of Brockford, Suffolk. Add. 19,124.
fi 63.
„ — co. Warwick, noo. fi 38*. 1167.
fi 30*.
Colchester, of Gray's Inn, 1557. fi 96*.
Colclough, of London, fr. ca Staff., 1096. £ 17.
1463. £ 28*.
„ of Ingleton, co>. Staff, and of London,
1415.fi 130*. 1570. £31*. 6104.fi 29.
6128. fi 70.
„ of Tyntern Abbey, co. Wexford (I.
Bt.) Add. 23,685. f£ 39 41. 23,688.
fi 48*. 23,693. ff. 183 to 186.
ColdaU,— Kent, 1548. fi 107*.
coidham, of Shering, Essex, fr. Suffolk, 1542.
fi 160.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

81

Coidham, of Anmer, Norfolk, &c. Add. 19124.
fi 72.
„ of Norwich. Add. 24,458. f. 277*.
„ of Bury, Suffolk. Add. 19,124. p. 75.
„ of Compton, Surrey, fr. Sussex, 1046.
fi 117. 1147- f- 151*. 1397. fi 156.
1430. fi 157*. H33- f- 145- 1561.
£ 193**- Add. 4963. fi 10. 14,311.
fi 69*.
„ of Midhurst, Sussex, 1076. fi 9*.
1084. fi 86. 1 135. fi 72. 1194. fi 65.
1406. fi 79*. 1563. fi 174*. 5829.
fi 139. 6164. fi 4.
Coldingham, of Banham, Norfolk. Add.
14,309. fi 105*.
Coldwell, — Yorks. Add. 24,458. fi 29.
Cole, Earl of Enniskillen. Add. 14,839. ff. 151
to 153.
„ of St. Cleer, Cornwall, 4031. fi 78.
„ of Slade, Devon, 889. fi 45. 1080.
fi 380*. 1091. fi 35. 1399. £ 22*.
1538. ff. 52. 84*. 1567. £ 22. 3288.
fi 89*. 5840 fi 24*. 5185. ff. 36. 46.
5871. fi 14*.
„ of Wolsworth, Devon, 1538. £ 292.
„ of Colchester, Essex, 11 37. £ 54*.
1432. £ 46. 1541. fi 17*.
„ of Farnham, Essex, fr. Devon, 1432.
fi 165*. 1542. ff. 27*. 160*.
„ of Walden, Essex, 1083. fi 13. 1137.
fi 137*. 1432. fi 152. 1542. fi 195*.
Add. 14,290. fi 52.
„ of Northey, co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 61*.
90*. 1543. fi 104*.
„ of Shenley Hall, Herts, f r. co. Yorks,
1547. fi 43*.
„ of London, 1 149. fi 21.
„ of Shrewsbury, Salop, 1 241. ff. 73*.
95. 1396. ff. 84*. 252*. 6172. fi 14*.
„ of Nailsea, Somerset, fr. co. Glouc.
and fr. Essex, 1141.fi 26*. 1445. fi 45*.
1559. fi 158.
„ of Petersham, Surrey, fr. Devon and
Middlx, 1046. fi 196. 1 147. fi 30.
1397. fi 167. 1430. ff 33- 79*- 145-
1433. fi 155. 1561. fi 208*. Add.4963.
fi 32.
„ of Southwark, Surrey, fr. Suffolk,
1046. £46. ii47-f-72*. 1397-fi 84
1433.fi 78*. 1561.fi 136. Add.4963.
fi 94*. 19,124. p. 78.
„ — Cornwall, 1079. fi 14*.
„ —Dorset, 1079. fi 152. 1142. fi 142*.
1i49.fi 142*. n62.fi 145*.
„ —co. Worc, 1566. fi 141*.
Colebrooke, of Bath (Bart). Add. 23,684.
ff. 114 to 120.
Colemore, of Birmingham, 1 100. £ 98. 1 167. £
126. 1563. fi 156*. 6060. fi 161*.
Coles, of Preston, Hunts, 1075. fi 54*. H79-
fi 112. Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 54*.
Colfe, of Canterbury, Kent, 1 106. fi 175*. 1432.
fi 291*. Add. 5507. p. 359. 5526.
p. 366.

Collamore, of Braunton, Devon, 1080. fi 79*.
1163.fi 190. 32S8.fi 156*.
„ of Uplomyn, Devon, 1080. fi 80*.
1163.fi 233.
coll-in, of Boughton, Kent Add. 5528. f. 85*. (m).
Collard, or Callard, of Southcot, Devon, 889.
fi 158. 1080. ff. 416*. 425. 437. 1091.
ff. 64 102. 1399. £82*. 1538. fi 235*.
3288. fi 58. 5185. fi 24. 5840. f. 95*.
„ — Cornwall, 1079. fi 32*.
„ — Devon, 1080. if. 425. 1538. fi 169*.
5185.fi 37*. 5871.fi 24.
„ of Canterbury. Add 5528. f. 171*.
(//..)
c olios, of Parkbury, Herts, fr. co. Worc, noo.
£96*. 1167.fi 123*. 1546. fi 114*.
1547. f- 5'-
„ of Barton, Somerset, 1385. £ 19.
1559. £ 60.
„ of Hampton, co. Warwick, fr. co.
Worc, 1 100. fi 78. 1167.fi 85. 1563.
fi 96.
„ of Lye, co. Worc, 1566. £ 120.
,, of Braunsford Court, co. Wore,
5814 £ 73*.
„ pf Hampton in Arden, Warwick, &e,
6060. fi 137.
Colleton, of Exeter, Devon, 1080. fi 225.
1163.fi 58*.
Coilett, of Feversham, Kent. Add 24,458.
£ 98 (m).
„ of Chelsea, Middlx, fr. co. Glouc,
1468. f. 139*. SI, 1439. £ 46.
„ of Highgate, Middlx, 1468. £ 137.
„ of Grundisburgh, Suffolk, fr. Bucks,
155. fi 38.' 1103.fi 61*. 1177.fi 53*.
1449. £74*. 1560. fi 350. Add. 19,124.
p. 94.
„ of Woodbridge, Suffolk. Add 19,124.
pp. 86 to 93.
Colley, v. Cobley.
„ of Ebnowe, Cheshire. Add 5529. fi
23*.
„ of Ware, Herts, fr. Cheshire, 1433. fi
4*. 1504. fi 39 1546. fi 25*. 6147.fi 25.
„ of Glaston, Rutland, 1094. £ 252.
1184. f. 247. 1558. ff. 13*. 35
„ (collie) — co. Warwick, noo. £ 55.
1 167. fi 47.
„ of Carbery, King's Co., 1425. £ 108.
„ of Edenderry. Add. 14,838. £ 200.
ColUer (coliyer) of Podle Trenchard, Dorset,
1166. £ 4*. 1451. fi 13*. 1539 fi 93*.
„ of Darlaston, co. Staff., 1077. ff. 26*.
27. ii73.fi 25*- 1415- £ "3- i57o.
ff. 21*. 53. 6104. fi 29*. 6128. ff. 37.
in*.
CoUimore, of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1476.
£256*.
„ of Lydd, Kent. Add. 5528. £ 108*.
(m.)
eollin, of Highlands, &c, Essex. Add. 14,290.
£56. M

82

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Colling, of Hampte, Cornwall, 1079. fi 91. 1142.
fi 55*. 1149.fi 53*- 1 162. f. 57-
Coliingham — Surrey, 1046. f. 217*.
CoUlngs, of Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, fr.
Norfolk.891.fi 9*. 1449. fi 38*. 1560.
fi 148*.
Collingwood, of Eslington, Northumb, 1153.
ff. 52. 56. 1448. ff. 14*. 48*. 1554.
ff. 6. 36*.
„ of Rayley, Northumb, 1 153. fi 51*.
1448. fi 14*. 1554. fi 30.
Collins, of Betterton, Berks, 1483. fi 112*. 1530.
fi 67. Add. 14.284. p. 89.
„ or CoUis, of Brad well, Bucks, fr. co.
Wore, 1 102. fi 104*. 1 139. fi 41*.
1391.fi 106*. 1533. fi 27. 5181. p. 6.
5832.fi 36. 5868. fi 34
„ of Barneshill and Offvvell, Devon,
1080. fi 84*. 1 163. ff. 37*. 247*.
„ or Coiien, of Braxtead, Essex, 1541.
fi 225.
„ of High Laver, Essex, 1083. £ 15.
1 137. ff. 60*. 138*. 1398. fi 5. 1432.
£ 53- J54T- £ 221. 1542. £ 199*. 6065.
£ 165*.
„ of Theydon Garnon, Essex, 139S. £ 5.
1433. £ 154 1542. fi 200*.
,, of Beauchamp Radings, Essex. Add.
19,124. p. 105.
„ of Buds, Kent, 1106. fi 198*. 1432.
fi 308*. Add. 5507. p. 180. 5526. p.
414.
„ of Hythe, Kent, 1106.fi 166. 1432.
fi 284*. 1548. fi 40*. Add. 5507. p. 335.
5526. p. 347.
„ of Sittingbourne, Kent, fr. Sussex.
Add. 5507. p. 206.
„ • of Maidstone. Add. 5528. fi 99 (;//).
„ (Collyns) of London, 1476. fi 3 10.
„ of Stretton, Salop, 1 241. ff. 14. 164
1396. ff. 21. 151. 1472. f. 5*.
„ or Brockton, — Salop, 1241. fi 58*.
1472. £ 21*.
„ (Collyns) of King's Norton, co.
Staff, 6128. fi 97*.
„ of Brightling, Sussex, and of Kent,
1076. ff. 145*. 148. 1084. fi 57. 1135.
fi 43. 1 1 94. fi 36. 1406. £76. 1562.
£ 109. 4109. £ 52*. 5829. ff. 85*. 86.
6164. £ 83*.
„ of Burwash, Sussex, 1076. fi 147.
„ — Dorset, mi. fi 76. 1181. fi 44
„ —co. Hereford, 615. fi 220*. 1241.
fi 58*. 1396. £ 78*. 1472. £ 14. 1982.
ff 35- 75*-
„ —Herts, 1433. £ 2*. 1546. fi 21.
6147. fi 22*.
Collinson, of London. Add. 23,686. fi 186.
„ of Sproughton, Suffolk. Add. 19,124.
p. 107.
Coins, of Tralee, co. Kerry. Add. 23,60-.;
£ 155.
Colloworth,— Northants, 1 187. fi 64*. 1188.
P- 75-

Collye, of Glaston, Rutland, fr. co. Leic, 1094.
f. 252. 11S4. f. 247. 1558. ff. 13*. 35.
Collyer, of Buckholes, Essex. Add. 24,458.
fi 292*.
Colman, of Tiverton, Devon, 1080. fi 313*.
1163.fi 210*. -
„ of London, fr. Kent,. 1476. fi 373.
„ of Burnt Ely Hall and Waldingfield,
Suffolk, 1560. fi 241*. Add. 19,124,
p. 114.
„ of Hacheston, Suffolk. Add. 19,124
p. 119
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,124. p. 121.
„ of Calais, Surrey, 1430. fi 62*.
Colmore, or colemore, of Durham, fr. co.
Warwick, 1 1 53. f . 40. 1 168. fi 33. 1397.
ff. 214*. 231. 1540. £ 103.
„ of Colmore, Somerset, fr. co. Dorset,
1 141. £53. 1445. f. 79. 1559. £183.
Coinstt, of Combley, Hants, 1544. £ 140*.
Colombeil, of Darley, co. Derby, 886. £ 22*.
1093. £45. 1 1 53. ff. 95*. 115. 1537.
£ 24. 1982. £ 95. 2113. £98*. 2134.
fi 31*. 6592. ff. 13. 31. Egert, 996.
fi 85*.
„ of Stancliffe, co. Derby, 1093. fi 19.
i486, fi 32*. 1537. ff 14*. 82*.
Coiqult, of Foye, Cornwall, 1079. fi 146*. 1 142.
fi 137. 1 149. fi 137. 1162. fi 140.
Colquhonn, of Luss (Bart;). Add. 14,836.
fi 17.
„ of Tillyquhoun (Bart). Add. 14,836.
fi 21.
„ of Camstrodden, N.B. Add. 14,837.
fi 103.
„ of Kenmure, N.B. Add. 14J837.
fi 105.
„ of Colridge, Surrey. Add 14,311. f.
87.
Coishiii, of Chigvvell, Essex, 1541. fi 212*. 2156.
fi 112*.
„ — co. Staff, 6128. £ 91.
„ — Surrey. Add. 14.3n.fi 14.
„ — Sussex, 1562.fi 19.
Colston, of London, 1171. f. 28*.
„ of London, fr. co. Line, 1096. fi 57.
1463. ff. 16*. 45*.
„ of Bristol, Somerset, fr. co. Lane,
1559 fi 68*.
„ —co. Line, 1 171. £ 28*.
Colte, of Little Munden, Herts. Add. 24458.
fi 275*.
„ of Rickmansworth.Herts, 1234. fi 141.
1504. f. 142*. 1547. fi 4.
„ of Melford, Suffolk, fr. Carlisle, 155.
fi 20. 1103.fi 9*- 1177.fi 12. I449-
fi 19. 1484. fi 46. 156a. fi 12*.
„ of Colt Hall, Suffolk. Add 19,124.
pp. 128 to 135.
„ (colt) — Cumbd., 1.37. fi 69. 1432.
fi 62. 1 541. fi 84.
Colthurst, of Little Warford, Cheshire. Add.
24,458. £ 44

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

83

Colthurst, of Hinton, Somerset, fr. Wilts and
Yorks, 1385. f. 42. 1445. fi 236. 1559.
fi 20. Add. 12,477. f- 7-
„ of Ardram, co. Cork (I. Bt.). Add.
23,685. fi 117*. 23,687. f. 152. 23,689.
fi 287.
Coltman, of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. f. 39*.
Columbell, of Darley, co. Derby, 886. fi 22*.
1093. fi 45. Add. 24,458. fi 56*.
28,113. £ 45*-
„ of Blyton, co. Line, fr. co. Derby,
1550. £ 109.
de Columbers (a Lord of Parliament). Add.
19,124 p. 141.
de Colvllle, of Newton, &e, Suffolk. Add.
14,309. fi 31. 19,124. pp. 152 to 160.
Colvile, of Newton, co. Camb, 1043. fi 64.
1401. f. 26. 1534. fi no*. 6769. fi 8*.
6770. fi 19. 6775. fi 26. 6830. p. 18.
Add. 4962. fi 23 (a. *.). 28,113. fi 66*.
„ of Tadlow, co. Camb, 1043. fi 86*.
1401. fi 57*. 1534 fi 74*. .6769. fi 23.
6770. fi 39*. 6774. fi 73*. 6775. fi 76*.
6830. p. 87. Add; 4962. fi 52*.
„ (CoivlUe) of Cranbrooke, Kent. Add.
5528. fi 167*.
„ (ColviUe) of Hornby, co. Line, 1097.
fi 71. 1 1 90. £ 34. 1449. ff. 32. 87.
1534. £ 1*. 1550. £ 8*. 1560. £ 175*.
„ (Coiyiiie) of Bitham Castle. Add.
5509. ff. 17 to 19*.
„ of Cuxwold, Yorks, 14S7. £ 220.
i415.fi 73*.J
„ of Dale, Yorks, 1487. fi 234. 1394. p.
139. 141 5. fi 95. 1420. fi 103.
„ (colvllle) of Newtown, co. Down.
Add. 23,699. ff. 67. 67*.
„ — Beds, 2109. fi 64*.
„ (Colvyle) — Northants, 890. fi 4*.
„ —Notts, 1400. f. 79. 1555. £ 122.
„ —Yorks, 805.fi "7- H'5- £ 87- 1420.
£ 91. 1487. fi 348*.
Coivin, of Little Bealings, Essex. Add. 19,124.
fi 175-
coiweii, of Warley, Essex.fr. co. York, 1541.
fi 242*.
„ of Feversham, Kent, and co. Worc,
fr. co. York, 1 106. £ 136. 1432.
£ 261*. 1548. ff. 103. 146. Add. 5507.
p. 287. 5526. p. 277. 5532. p. 66.
—co. Worc, fr. co. York, 1566.
fi 160*.
Colwich, of Berwicki co. Durham, fr. Middlx. and
Surrey, 1540. fi 165.
— co. Derby, 6104. f. 100.
" -co. Staff, 1535- £192.
Colyn, —Cornwall, 4031. fi 76.
Combe, of Cheddington, Bucks.fr. Herts, 1 102.
fi 70. 1151.fi 69. 1 193. £ 70. 1234.
fi 52*. 139i.fi 74- 1533- f- 157-
of Hemel Hempstead, Herts, fr.
" Middlx, 1433- f- 13- 1504- f- 51*.
1546.fi 36. 1547- £2. 6147. £36*.

Combe, of Norton Ferrers and Tisbury,
Somerset, 11 41. fi 65*. 1445. f- 95*-
1559. fi 195*.
„ of Old Stratford, co. Warwick, 1 100.
fi 86*. 1 167. fi 105. 1195. £ 104.
1563. fi 123*. 6060. fi 144.
„ of Wasperton, co. Warwick, noo. £
74. 1167.fi 77*. 1563. fi 99*.
Comber, of Wotton, Surrey, fr. Sussex, 1046. £
88. 1397. fi 127. 1433. fi 118. 1561.
. fi 171.
„ or Cumber, of Alington, Sussex,
1076. ff. 108*. 178. 1084. fi 75*. 1135.
fi 61*. 1194.fi 21*. 1406.fi 25. 1562.
fi no. 6164 ff. 23. 32*.
„ of Horsfield and Shermanbury,
Sussex, 1084. fi 42. 1135.fi 28. 1562.
fi 9*. 5829. fi 4*.
„ of East Newton, Yo.ks. Add 24458.
fi 173*
Comberford, of Comberford, co. Staff, 141 5. £
114*. 1439. fi 45. 1570. ff. 57. 71*.
6060. fi 26. 6128. ff. 55. 67.
„ or Cumberford, of Kingsbury, CO.
Warwick, noo. f. 17*. 1167. £ n*.
1563. fi 36.
„ — Suffolk, 1449, £ 73. 1560. £ 52..
Comberwcrth (lord of), 1415. £ 90.
„ — co. Lincoln, 1097. £ 64. 1190. £
45*. 1484. £ 10*. 1550. fi 48*.
Combes, of Guildford, Surrey. Add 4963. £
139*-
„ —Somerset, 1445. £ 112*.
Combridge, of Cold Harbour and Hawden,
Kent. Add. 16,279. p. 3S6.
Comerford, of Cork, after of London. Add.
23,684. fi 16.
„ of Ballymacken. Add. 23,684. £ 107.
Compton, Earl of Northampton, 1073. £ 119.
1094. fi 136*. 1 184 fi 133*. 1 187.
fi 47*. 1 1 88. pp. 59. 85. 124r.fi 89.
1396.fi 91. 1420. fi 24. 2109.fi 92».
6066. fi 66. SI, 1429 fi 54. Add
14,309. fi 19.
„ of Hartpury, co. Glouc, fr. Wilts,
1041.fi 23. 1191.fi 21*. 1543. ff. 16.
„ of Compton, Hants, 1544. fi 125.
„ of Peirsden, Hants, 1 139.fi 36. 1544-
fi 105*.
„ of Beckington and Newton, Somerset,
1559. fi 109*.
„ of Cannington, Somerset Add.
14,315. p. 136.
„ of South Petherton and Wighbeare,
Somerset, 1141. ff. ioo7'i2o*. 1385. £
34*. 1445. ff. 139*. 166*. 235*. 1559.
ff. 10*. 226. 242. Add. 12,477. £ 4*.
„ of Brambletye, Sussex, 1076. £ 169*.
6164. fi 17*.
„ of Helington, Wilts, 4204. fi 47.
„ — co. Durham, 154a fi 147*.
„ —Hunts, 1075. fi 8*. Ii7g. £ 18*.
Cott Jul. F. viii. fi 8*.
„ —co. Leicester, 810. fi 12.

84

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VlSTFATlVMS

Compton,— co. Staff, 886. £ 64.
„ — Surrey. Add. 14,311. f. 65*.
„ —Wilts, 1 1 1 1. fi 83*. 51S4. p. 17.
ComviUe. Add. 14,309. £ 8.
Comyn, of Durham, 1 153. fi 43. 1168. fi 51*.
1397. fi 248*. 1540. fi 138.
„ or Chiicott, of Isleworth, Middlx,
1468. fi 138.
„ of Kilbryde, lord of Great Fakenham,
Suffolk. Add. 19,124. p. 178.
„ of Limerick, &c Add. 23,689 fi 9.
Conder, of Ipswich. Add. 19,124. p. 185.
„ of Leeds. Add. 24,458. fi 7.
Coney, or Cunney, of St. Albans, Herts, 1234.
fi 140. 1504. fi 139*. 1547. fi 9*.
„ of Bassingthorpe, co. Line, 1077. fi
44*. 1097. fi 68*. 1173.fi 36*. 1190.
fi 47. 1463. f 5*. 1484. fi 7. 1550. fi
3*. 6128. fi 42.
„ of Whissendine, Rutland, fr. co. Line,
1094 fi 243*. 1 1 84. fi 238*. 1558. fi
2*. 3391.fi 115.
Congalton, of that ilk, N.B. Add. 14,837. fi 181.
Conghurst, of Conghurst, Kent, 1548. fi 46.
Add. 5532. p. 42*.
Congleton, of Flower, Northants, 1138. fi 45*-
1187.fi 53- 1188.P.65. 1553. £ 35.
Congreve, of Stretton, co. Staff, noo. £21*.
1173.fi 113. 1439 f- 16- 1563. fi 34.
6060 fi 30. 6104. fi 30.
Coningsby, Lord, &c. Add. 19,124. pp. 191-
195. 19,815. fi 23*.
, of North Mims, Herts, fr. co. Warr.
1504. ff. 29. 69. 1546. fi 17*. 1547.
fi 46.
„ of Neen-Savage, Salop, 1241. fi ior.
1396. fi 87*. 1472. fi 46*. 6172. fi 18*.
Add. 14,314. fi 69*. 19,815. fi 24.
„. (connesby) of Nele.Suffolk, 1449. £ 37-
„ of the Chapel, co. Warwick. Add.
19,815. ff. 24*.
„• _ of Morton Bagot, co. Warwick, 6060.
fi 7. Add. 19,815. fi 25.
„ of Buray, co. Wore, fr. co. Hereford,
1566. fi 107*. 5814. fi 27*. Add. 19,815.
f.26*.
„ — co. Hereford, fr. co. Warwick, 1 140.
fi 29*. 1159.fi 29*. 1442.fi 29*. 1545.
fi 119. Add. 14,307. ff. 14. 3*. to 144.
„ — co. Warwick, noo. fi 49. 1140.
£ 29*. 1159 £ 29*. 1167.fr. 37. 41.
. 1442. £ 29*. 1545. fi 1 19.
„ . — co. Wore, 1043. ff. 26. 30. 1352.
fi 3*.
Connook, of Treworgy, Cornwall, 1079. fi 182.
1 142. fi 55. 1163. fi 57. 1 149 fi 53.
Conolly, of Ireland. Add. 19,124. p. 196.
Conquest, of Houghton Conquest, Beds, 1097.
fi 29. 1390. £ 18. 1531. fi 22. 2109.
• f.26. 4600. p. 35. 5 1 86. p. 26. Lansd.
864 p. 35.
Conradus, of London, 1476. f. 358.
Conran, of Newton Ho., co. Louth. Add. 19,124.
p. 200.

Conroy, of Dublin. Add. 23,694- £ 99*-
or O'lWulconry, of Ireland. Add.
23,694. fi 180 to 185.
Constable, of Chester, Cheshire, 2142.fi 171.
„ of East Bergholt, Essex. Add. 19,124
pp. 201-204.
„ of Burton and Upsall, Yorks, 1394.
pp. 10*. 31. 1415. ff. 53*.-55- 1420.
ff. 22. 29*. 1487. fi 236*. Add. 26,739.
p. 81. 29,783. pp. 83-84*.
„ of Caythorpe, Yorks, 1487. £ 241.
Add. 29,783. £ 75*.
„ of Catfoss, Yorks, 1394 p. 221. 1415.
£ 25*. 1420. fi 159*. 1487. £ 242.
Add. 18,011. £ 180.
„ of Cliffe, Yorks, 1487. £ 240. Add.
29,783. fi 75*.
„ of Dromanby, Yorks, 1394. p. 138.
1415.fi 94. 1420. fi ioi*.. 1487. fi 238*.
Add. 18,011. fi 122*. 29,783. fi 75.
,, of Flamboro', Yorks, 1571. £ 221.
SI, 1429. fi 47*. Add. 18,011. £ 143.
29783. ff. 74. 73*.
„ of Everingham^ Yorks, 1394. p. 292.
1171. f. 3. 1400. ff. 8. 15*. 1415.
ff. 90*. 94*. 14.2Oifi.123. 1487. fi 239
^555- ff 33*- 152- Add.29,783. £ 74*.
„ of Halsham, Yorks, 14 15. fi 54 (a. *.)
1394. p. 31. I420;f.29*. 1487. £236*.
Add. 18,011. ff. 48*. 49.
„ of St. Sepulchres, Yorks, 1394. pp. 31.
95. 141 5. ff. 54. 72*. 83. 1430. ff. 29*.
72*. 74*. 1487. £ 236. 1499. £ 38*-
Add. 18,011. fi 93*. 24,458. £ 239*.
29,783. fi 84*."
„ ofSherburn, Yorks, 14r5.fi 90. 1420.
fi 90*. 1487. fi 238. Add. 18,011.
fi 1 10*. 29,783. fi 75*.
„ of Hatfeild, Yorks. Add 29,783.
fi 76.
„ of Kexby, Yorks. Add. 29,783.
f.75-
„ of Wassand, Yorks. Add 29,783.
fi 76.
„ — Yorks, 805. fi 132 to 1366. *
„ — Herts, 1504. fi 27. 1546. £ 3.
Constantine, of Hinton, Salop, 1 241, ff. 67*.
162*. 1396. £ 163. 4204. £ 139.
6172. fi 28. Add 14,314. £ 65*.
Convars, of Winchelsea, Sussex, 1 194. £ 130*.
1562. fi 115*. 5829. fi 93.
Conway, Visct. — 1073. fi 246*:
„ of Theydon Mount, Essex, fr. co.
Warr., 1137. £ 143*. 1432. £ 160*.
„ of Arrow, ca Warwick, 1 100. £ 14.
1 167. fi 9. 1563, fi 27k 6060. £ 15*.
„ of Cloghane, co. Kerry. Add. 23,693.
£ 159.
Conyers, Lord, 1551. £.50*. 2109. £ 71&.
„ of Horden, co. Durham, 1171 £ 68*.
1540. £ 32*. 4204. £ 160*.' Add
1 8,01 1. fi 56. 23,694. fi 145.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

85

Conyers, of Layton and Sockburn, co. Dur
ham, 1 1 53. fi 35. 1 168. fi 6*. 1397.
fi 203*. 1 540. ff. 47*. 54*. Add. 18,01 1.
fi III. 29,783. fi 78*.
„ of Sockborne, co. Durham, 141 5. £
87. 1420. £ 91. 1487. f. 349. Add.
19,124. p. 215.
„ of Wynyard, co. Durham, 1171. £ 72.
1540. fi 27.
„ of Barnet, Herts, fr. co. Durham,
i546.fi 127.
„ of London, fr. co. Lane or York.
1096. ff. 89*. 95*. 1463. fi 17.
„ of Bowlby, Yorks, 1487. fi 350.
„ of Castleton. Add. 23,693. £ 179.
23,695. ff. 99*. 101.
„ of Hornby, Yorks, 1394. p. 36. 1415.
ff. 59*. 95*. 1420. £ 37. 1487. £ 6*.
1499. £ 32. 1540. fi 32. Add. 23,688.
fi 52. 29.783.fi 78.
„ of Hutton Conyers, Yorks, 1394 p.
37. Add 29,783. fi 78*. " -
„ of Marske, Yorks, 1394. p. 139.
141 5. fi 95. 1487. fi 234. 1499 £ 31.
Add. 29,783. fi 78*..
„ of Whitby. Add. 29,783 fi 79.
„ " of Ormesby, Yorks, 1394. p. 140.
1420. fi 104. 1487. fi 234
„ of Pinchinthorpe, Yorks, 1385. fi 62*.
1559. fi 48. Add. 12477. fi 62*.
„ or Norton, of Norton, Yorks, 1171.
fi 79 1394- P- 37- 141 5- £15*. 1420.
£ 124*. 1487. ff. 345. 497*.
„ of Northallerton. Add. 24,458. £ 220*.
„ (Coniers) of Yorks, &c 805. ffi 124
to 131*.
„ .—Beds, 2109. ff. 64 (a. *.) 72.
„ —Kent. Add. 16,279. pp. 333. 337.
„ — co. Line, 1190.fi 61. 1484. fi 30.
1550. fi 78.
„ —Suffolk, 1449 fi 57. 1560. fi 76*.
Conyngham, Marquis. Add. 14,839. fi 262.
Cooe, or Coo, of Gestingthorpe and Pattiswick,
Essex, 887. fi 16. 1 137. fi 20. 1432. £
4*. 1541. £ 187*.
„ of Witham, Essex, fr. co. Suffolk,
1083. ff. 64*. 65. 1 137. ff. 128. 129.
1432. ff. 133- 135- 1542. ff 91- 185*.
Add. 14,292. £ 89*.
„ of Groton, and Boxford, Suffolk,
891. fi 7. I449- f- 31*- 15610. fi 267*.
1820. £ 15. Add. 19,124. p. 217.
(Coo) of Copford, Suffolk. Add.
14,290. £ 91.
of Lambeth, Surrey, fr. Middlx,
" 1046. £ 156*. 1561. £ 184*. 1147.
£ 139- '397. £ 145*- *433- £ 135-
Add. 4963- £ l6°*.
Cooke, of Milton, co. Cambr, 6060. £ 146.
of Trerise, Cornwall, fr. Devon. 1079.
" £ 142*, 1 142. *• '32*. n49 £ 132*.
1 162. fi 136*-
of Trusley, co. Derby, 1093. £ 100.
" 1537- £47*- 6104. ff. 77. 100*. Egert,
996. f- 57-

Cooke, of South Molton, Devon, 10S0. f. 92.
1091. fi 53. 1163.fi 255*-
„ of Thorne, Devon, 8S9. fi 67. 1080.
£ 91*. 1091. £ 43. 1 163. fi 199*.
1399.fi 38. I538.ff. 129. 161*. 3288.
fi 45. 5185.fi 36*. 5840. fi 43*. 5871.
£20*.
„ of Chisenhall, Essex, 1542. £ 120.
,, of Gidea Hall, Essex, 11 37. £ 49.
1432. fi 40*. 1541.fi 42*. 1542. fi 88.
2156. fi 45*. Add. 5509. fi 8*.
„ of Pebmarshe, Essex, 1083. fi 32.
1 137. £ 142. 1398.fi 14*. 1432. fi 160.
1542. fi 171*. Add. 14,290. fi 14*.
„ of Rotherfield andThundersley,Essex,
fr. Kent, 1 137. ff. 75. 76. 78*. 1398.fi
14-5. 1432. fi 72. 1541. fi 100*. 6065.
1 133*. Add 14,31 1. fi 19*.
„ of Highnam, co. Glouc, 1041. £ 81.
1543.fi 48*.
„ of Bexley and Mount Mascal, Kent,
fr. Sussex, noo. fi 29. 1106. f. 133.
1432. £ 26a Add. 5507. p. 282. 5509.
£39- 5526. p. 271.
„ of Manchester. Add. 24458. £ 52*.
„ or Erodfleid, of Burbage, co. Leic,
Ii80.fi 71. 1187.fi 122*. 1189.fi 22.
1431.fi 16. 6125. ff. 81*. 118*. 6183.
^74*.
„ of London, 1077. £ 61. 1173. fi 53.
1415.fi 118*. 1570. fi 63. 6128. fi 3*.
„ of London, fr. Essex, 1476. fi 198*.
„ of Godwicke, Norfolk, 4756. fi 33.
„ (Cook) of JEdith Weston, Rutland.
Add. 24458. fi 43*.
„ of Bristol, Somerset, 1141. fi 28*.
1559- £ '59*.
„ of Armitage, co. Staff, 6138. fi 98*.
„ of Bury St. Edmunds and Langham,
Suffolk, 891. fi 17*. 1449. fi 54*. 1560.
ff. 119. 257. Add. 19,124. p. 227.
„ of Cratfield, Suffolk, 155. fi 17. 1 177.
ff. 39*. 62*. 1449. fi 77*.
„ of Linstead, Suffolk, 155. ff. 6. 16*.
1103. ff. 43*. 77*. 1177- f- 65, 1449
£66. 1552. fi 35. 1560. fi 89. 1820.
£ 26. Add. 19,124 £ 223.
„ of Badwell Ash, Suffolk. Add
19,124. fi 229.
„ of Toxford, Suffolk, Add. 19,124.
£243.
„ of Semer, Suffolk. Add 19,124. p.
246.
v of Roskington, Sussex, 1562. fi 32*.
„. of Shipley and WesfTaring, Sussex.
1076. fi 1045. 1084 fi 75. 1135.fi 61.
1 194. f 54. 1406. fi 24*. 1562. ff. 145*.
197. 6164. £73*. Add. 14,311. fi 93.
„ of Westburton, Sussex, 1076. fi 94
1084.fi 43*. 1 135. fi 29*. 1 194 fi 22*.
1562. fi 38. 4109. fi 30. 5829 ff. 27*.
33. 48*. 6164. fi 62.
„ of Wickham, Sussex, 1076. £ 78*.
r084.fi 43*- «35.f-29*. 1194, £22*.
1562. £ 53*.

S6

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

»>

Cooke, of Heene, Sussex, 5829. fi 125.
„ of Rugby, co. Warwick, fr. Camb.,
1 100. f. 88*. 1 167. f. 108*. 1563. fi 6*
,, of Sarum, Wilts, 4204. ff. 88*. 106*.
160*. 5 1 84. p. 16.
„ of Wheatley, near Doncaster, Yorks}
1420. fi 218. 4630. p. in. Add. 26,739
p. 80.
„ (cook) of Shiercliffe Hall, Yorks.
Add. 34,458. fi 164
„ (cook) of Craven. Add. 24,458.
fi 38*.
„ ofFethard, Ireland. Add. 23,693.
fi 119.
—Beds, 2109. fi 89*.
— Dorset, 1451. fi 190*. 1539. fi 73.
2186. fi 15.
„ —Hants, 1544. fi 48*. 5865. fi 24*.
„ — Norfolk, 1 1 77. fi 117*. 2109. ff.
62 (a. *.) 63.
„ (Cook) —Northants, 1553. fi 19.
„ —Salop, 1241. fi 143.
Cookesey, of Little Wolverton, co. Wore, 5814.
fi 19*. 5841. fi 6*.
„ of Evesham, co. Wore, 1043. fi 26*.
1352. fi 6*. i486. £ 4*. 1 566. fi 80.
„ —Beds, 2109. fi 73.
„ —co. Derby, 1093. fi 27*.
Cookson, of London, fr. co. Durham, 1476. fi
394-
Cookworthy, — Cornwall, 1079. fi 184*.
„ — Devon, 1091.fi 114*. 1538. £ .256*.
5871. fi 24*.
Cooper v. Cowper.
„ or Cowper, of Sapcote, co. Leic, fr.
Chesh. and co. Lane, 1 180. fi 56. 1 1 89.
£ 75. 1195. £ 73*. 1431. £ 66*. 6125.
ff. 60. no*. 6183. fi 60.
of London, fr. Shrop., 1463. fi 38.
„ of Thurgarton, Notts, 886. fi 47.
1171.fi 81. 1400. fi 80. 1555. fi 123*.
Add. 24,458. £ 198*.
„ — Salop, 1 241. fi 147*.
,, of Ludlow and Steventon, Salop, 1241.
fi 121*.
„ of Rockborne, Somerset, 1559. fi 79.
„ of Worlington, Suffolk. Add. 19,124
p. 249.
„ of Yoxford and Woodbridge, Suffolk.
Add. 19,124. p. 255.
„ of Cobham, Surrey, fr. London, 1046.
fi 198*. 1397. fi 169*.. 1433. fi 157*.
1 561 . fi 205. Add. 4,963- £ 1 33*-
„ of. Ardsley, co.. Yorks. Add. 24458.
£ 112.
„ of Brackley. Add. 24,458. fi 133*.
„ of Gogar (ex-Bart.). Add. 23,684. fi
II*. 23,687. fi 24*..
Coote, of Valence, Essex, fr. Norfolk, 1541. fi
37*.
,, of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 326.

Coote, of Bio' Norton, Norfolk, 1177. f. 113.
1552. fi 31*. 4755. fi 10. 5189. f. 316.
6093. p. 23. 6166. p. 41. Add. 11,388.
£ 66. 14,309. fi 105. 19,124. p. 264.
19,816. fi 10.
„ —Suffolk, 1177.fi 80*.
„ Earl of Bellamont, &e 14,838. ff.
102-4. 258-260.
„ of Ballyclough, co. Cork, &e (I. Bart).
Add. 23,685. fi 144*.
Copcott, of Gadsden, Bucks, 1533. £ 80.
„ of Pirton, Herts, fr. Oxon, 1504. £
128.
„ of Horspath, Oxon, 808. £ 47*.
5187. £ 46*.
„ of Pirton, Oxon, 1556. £ 4.
Cope, or Coife, of Guisnes, Cheshire, 774. £ 17*.
1045: £ 98. 1505.fi 21*. 2142. fi 33.
2330. £ 33*. 5182. fi 19. Add. 5539.
ff. 13. 18*.
„ of Aston, Essex, 1433. fi 88. 1541. £
16*.
„ of Bedenham, Hants, fr. Oxon,
1544 fi 24. 5865. fi 24*.
„ of Banbury and Hanwell, Oxon, 1555.
fi 108*.. 1556. fi 158*. 6104. fi 30*.
„ or Coape, cf Coapes Ashby, North- ,
ants, fr. Oxon, 890. fi 13; 1094. fi 46.
1 138. f. 35*. 1 171. ff. 22. 33*. 1 184. fi
42. 1 187. ff. 31*. 62. 1188. p. 33.
1553. ff. 19 21*. 6c66. £ 85..
„ of Bury St. Edmunds. Add. 19,124.
p. 269.
„ of Drummally, co. Armagh, &c
Add. 23,689. f. 244
Copenhall, — Cheshire, 1535.fi 104.
,, —co. Staff, 6128. fi 105.
Coperam, — Yorks, 14S7. f. 220.
Copland, of Yoxford, Suffolk. Add 19,124. pp.
272-277. 282.
Copledike, of Horam, Suff, 155. fi 55. 1103.fi
35. 1177.fi 33*. 1449. fi 36*. 1552.
fi 211*. 1560. fi 43. Add. 19,124. pp.
283-288.
„ of Harrington and Tynton, co. Lin
coln, 1097. f. 56. 1177.fi 94*- 1190.
fi 21. 1484. fi 16*. 1534. fi 123. 1550.
fi 12*.
Copleston, of Bowden, Devon, 889.fi 84*. 1080.
£ 424*- 1091. fi 64 1399. fi 51*. 1538.
fi 169*. 3288. fi 60. 5840. fi 60. 5185.
fi 37*. 5871.fi 24.
„ of Copleston, Devon, 889. ff. 61. 125*.
1080. fi 62. 1091. ff. 40*. 91. 1163.fr.
104. 191. 1164 fi 6*. 1399. fi 84*.
1538. ff. 135. 222. 3288. fi 59. 5840.
fi 97*. 5185. fi 37. 5871. ff. 17*. 39*.
Add. 13,479. £ 60. 14,315- P- 14-
„ of Wear Gifford, Devon, 1080. £ 63*.
1163. £ 158.
,,. of Woodland, Devon, 889. £ 126*.
1080. £ 425. 1399. £ 86*. 3288. £ 59*.
5840. £ 98*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

87

Copleston,. of Ynstowe, Devon, 889. fi 104.
10S0. fi 62*. 1 163. f. 188. 1399. ff. 66*.
68. 3288. ff. 60*. 65. 5840. ff. 76*. 78.
5871. ff. 28*. 30.
,, of Eggesford, Devon, 889. fi 119.
1080. fi 425*. 1091.fi 95*. 1399. fi 78*.
1538. fi 222. 3288. fi 65*. 5840. fi 90*.
5185.fi 38.
„ of Exeter, Devon. Add. 14,315. p. 5.
„ of Kindon, Devon, 10S0. fi 61*. 1096.
fi 127.
„ of Upton Pyne, Devon, 1080. fi 63.
1163.fi 64.
„ of Nashe, Dorset, n 66. fi 62. 145 1.
ff. 99*. 171. 1539. ff. 64. 76. 2186. fi
31. Add. I4,3'5- P- i°3-
„ —Somerset, 1559. fi 109.— 4204. fi
194*.
Copley, of Gatton, Surrey, 1046. fi 30. 1 147. fi
23- 1397 f- 68. 1430 fi 25. 1433 fi 64*.
1561.fi 117*. Add. 4963. fi 27. 12,478.
fi 20*.
„ of Roughway, Sussex, and Surrey,
H94fi 124*. 1562. fi 86. 5839.fi 79
„ of Berdon, co. Wore, fr. Suffolk,
1043. fi 25*. 1352. fi 6. i486, fi 4.
1566. fi 79*. 5814. fi 18*. 5841. fi 6.
„ of Batley, Yorks, 1394. p. 17. 141 5-
ff. 39. 40. 1420. ff. 17*. 19 (a. *.). 1487.
fi 386. 1499. ff. 40*. 42*. 4630. p.
101. Add. 26,739 PP- 74*- to 76*.
of Doncaster, Yorks, 4630. p. 105.
Add. 18,011. fi 8. 26,739. PP- 77- 77b.
„ of Skelbrook, Yorks, 4630. p. 113.
Add. 26,739. p. 82.
„ of Sprotborough, Yorks, 1487- f- 38*.
4630. p. 104. Add. 26,739. P- 76*.
„ of Wadworth, Yorks, 4630. p. 107.
Add. 26,739. p. 78.
„ —Essex, 1137.fi 49
„ —Herts, 1504. fi 55.
„ —Yorks, 805.fr. 138 to 142. i499f- 42*.
coppack, of Stockport. Add. 24,458. fi 44
Coppine, of Markyate Cell, Herts, 1234 fi 115*.
1504. fi 133. 1547- £ 76*. Add. 19,124.
p. 312.
coppin, of Kent. Add. 5528. fi 114*.
Coppindale, — 4204 £ 23'*-
copping, of Norwich, Norfolk, H77- £ 94*.
1552. fi 212.
of Bramfield, Suffolk. Add. 19,124.
p. 314-
coppinger, of Derington, Kent, fr. Sussex.
Add. 16,279- P- 437-
of London, fr. Suff, 1476. fi 108.
of Boxhall, Suffolk, 155. fi 58. 1103.
" f 29 1177.fi 28*. 1449. fi 31. 1560.
I 34. 1820. fi 18*. Add. 19,124- PP-
322-337-
coowood, of Totteridge, Herts, 1433- £ 4*.
Copwoo ^ { ^ ^^ f 2^ 6j47_ f ^
corbett, of Atherton, Cheshire, 1535- ff x°i.
167*.

Corbett, of Leighton, Cheshire, 1535. f- 227*.
2187. fi 97. Add. 5529. fi 16.
„ —Kent. Add. 5532. fi 138. 16,279.
p. 430.
„ —Kent, fr. Shrop. Add. 5507. p.
192.
„ of Newenham, Kent, 1548. fi 167.
„ of Barton, co. Leic, fr. Shrop. 1 1 80.
fi 136. 1187.fi 124. 1189.fi 96. I43I*
f.87*. 6125. ff. 72. in. 6183. fi 73.
„ of Wanlip, co. Leic, fr. Shrop, 1180.
ff. 9*. 25. 1 187. ff. 107*. 109. 1189.fi
28. 1431. fi 21*. 6125. ff. 15*. 35.
no. 6183. ff. 16*. 36.
,, of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. fi 156.
„ of Newington, Middlx., fr. Shrop.,
1551.fi 77.
„ of Framlingham,Norfo_k, 5823. C.60*.
„ of Sprowston, Norfolk, 1 177. fi 101.
1552.fi 15*. 5189. fi 29. 4755. fi 6*.
4756. fi 1. 5823. fi 60*. 6093. p. 12.
Add. 14,31 1- f- 33*- I9>8i6. fi 7*.
„ of Little Dunham, Norfolk,6o6o_ £ 7*.
„ of Clipsham and Stretton, Rutland,
fr. Shrop, 1094. £ 235*. 1 184. £ 230*.
1558.fi 10*. 3391. fi 115*.
„ of Belso, Salop. Add. 14,314. £ 26.
„ of Caws, Salop, 1241. £ 8. 1395. £
96*. 1982. ff. 63. 96. 6172. £ 5*. Add.
5507. £ 192. 14,314- £ 25.
„ of Hampton, Salop, 1241. £ 106.
1396.fi 102.
,. of Lea, Salop, 615. fi 225*. 1241. ff,
9. 23*. 64*. 1396. ff. 92*.tOI03*. 138.
171*. 269*. 1982.fr. 21*. 64*. 65. 154.
159. 6172. fi 5*. Add. 14,314. ff. 25.
26 (-..*.)28*. 43. 21,017. £ 72*.
„ of Leighton, Salop, 1241. £ 7*.
„ of Long Norley, Salop, 615. £ 232*.
1096. fi 98*. 1396.fi 98. 6172. fi 56.
„ of Moreton Corbet, Salop, 1396. f£
53*. 94. 1546. fi 17. 6060. fi 92*.
6172. fi 5*. Add. 14,314. £ 27*. 19,124.
p. 36. 21,017. ff. 86*. 87*. 90*. 93*.
„ of Newton, Salop, 1396. £ 102*.
„ of Pontesbury, Salop, 1241. £ 147*.
1396. fi 343. 1983. £ 34-
„ of Stoke, Salop, 1396. £ 93, Add
21,017. fi 95*.
,, of Willaston, Salop, 1241. £ 131*.
1396.fi 271*.
„ of Salop. Add. 14,309 ff. 51 to 52.
„ of Honford, co. Staff, fr. Chesh,
1077. fi 84*. 1 173. fi 766. 1415. £
122*. 1570. fi 35*. 6128. fi 72*.
„ of Assington, Suffolk. Add 19,124.
P- 355-
,, of Thorp Hall, Wilby, Shelton Hall,
&c,Suffolk. Add 19,124 pp.357to 362.
„ of Meriden, co. Warwick, fr. Shrop,
noo. fi 56. 1167.fi 48. 1563. fi 217.
„ of Huthwaite, co. York. Add. 24458.
£ 323-

88

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Corbin, qf Hall End, co. Warwick, fr. co. Staff,
iroo.fi 119*. 1167. f. i6t. 1533^.62.
I563. fi 12. 6060. f. 2lO.
„ — Salop, 1241. fi 55*. 1396. fi 218.
Add. 14,314. fi 44*.
Corby, — Kent. Add. 14,311. fi 20.
Cordeboef, of Mendlesham, Suff. Add. 19,124.
P- 375-
CordeU, of Long Melford, Suff, 155. fi 31*.
1 103. fi 4*. 1 177. ff. 8*. 116. 1449. fi
14*. 1552. f. 16*. 1560. ff. 2*. 143.
2156. fi 69. 4755. fi 7*. 5189. fi 28*."
6093. p. 14*. 6166. p. 38. Add.
1 1,388. p. 64*. 14,309 £ 101*. 19,142.
P- 379
„ of London, 1096. fi 92*.
„ of Enfield, Middlx., 1463. fi 54*.
i551.fi 15*.
„ of Norwich. Add. 19,816. fi 8.
„ — Cheshire. Add. 14,311. £ 95*.
Cordray, of Chute, Wilts, 888. fi iS. mi.fi
90. 1165.fi 72. 1 181. fi 22. _443.fi
174*. 1565. ff. 28*. 62*. 51S4.fi 56.
Cordy, ofWorlingworth, Suff. Add. 19,124. p.
388.
Corham, or Coram, of Ottery, Devon, 1080.
£ 314. 1 163. £ 213*. 1538. £ 301.
5871. fi 41.
... „ of Barton, Hants, fr. Devon. 1544.
fi in*.
Corindon, of Bratton, Devon, 1080. fi 250.
1 163. fi 96. .
Corindye, — co. Lincoln, 1 1 73. £ 36*.
Corken, of London, fr. Berks, 1476. f. 282*.
CornhiU, — Middlx., 1504 fi 69*.
Cornelius, of Nacton, Suff. Add. 19,124. p. 391.
de Cornerd, of Cavendish, Suff. Add. 19,124.
P- 395-
Corne wall, of Havcrell, Essex, 1137. f. 48.
1432. fi 39*. 1541. fi 105*.
„ of Willesden, Middlx, 155 1. fi 63.
„ of Grafton Park, Northants, fr. Sus
sex, 890. fi 7. 1094. fi 99*. 1 138. fi 58.
1171.fi 21*. 1184.fi 96*. 1187.fi 27.
1 188. p. 25. 1553. fi 6*. 6006. fi 43.
„ —Baron Burford, 1097. fi ob. 1 140
fi 108*. 1396. fi 91. 1982. fi 93*
Add. 14,314. fi 125*.
„ of Kinlet, Salop, 1140. ff. 34. 100*.
n 59 ff- 34- 48*- 1 241. fi 8. 1396.
fi 201*. 1443. ff. 34 48*. 1545. ff. 98.
101. 1982. ff. 67*. 96. 98. 6172. ff. 16*.
29*. Add. 14,314 f- 125*- 19815. fi
42*.
„ of Berington, Salop, 1140. 1. 48
1545- £ 39*-
„ or Rawlins, of Higham, Suffolk, fr
Bucks. 1449. £ 102. 1560. £ 177*.
„ -co. Derby, 1093. £ 85. 21 13. £
107*.
_, —Oxon. Add. 14,311. fi 33*.
—Somerset, 1385. fi 33*. 1559. ff.
1*. 87.
,, —co. Staff, 1415. fi 134.

Corney, of Steeple Barton, Oxon, fr. co. York,
1480. ff. 4. 4*. 1557. fi 66*.
Cornish, of London, fr. Devon, 1476. fi 460*.
Cornwallis, Marquis. Add. 19,124. pp. 40-418.
„ of Ordsall, Notts, fr. London, 1400.
ff. 50. 89 90. 1555. fi 141*.
„" of Arowton, Suffolk, 1560. £ 45.
„ of Brome, Suffolk, fr. London, 155.
fi 24. 1 103. ff. 36*. 37. 1 1 77. £ 35.
1484. fi 48*. 1560. ff. 44. 341. 2156.
fi 57. Add. 14,835- £ 57*- (Ml).
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 72*.
„ — Essex, 1 1 37. fi 22. 1432. fi 143.
1541. fi 8.
Corona, — Cheshire, 1535, ff- 71. 97*. 1424
fi 86*. 2187. ff. 31*. 35*. Add. 5529
fi 44. 29,783. fi 24.
Corraace, of Rougham, Suffolk. Add. 19,125.
p. 2.
Corry, Earl of Belmore. Add. 14,839. £ 266.
Corsett, of Wraye, Devon, 1080. £ 203. n 63
£ 23.
Cory, — Devon, 1080. fi 29S*. 1163. fi 1S4.
1 561. fi 40.
„ of Yarmouth. Add. 19,125. p. 10.
,. of Crindelford and Bramerton, Nor
folk, 1552. fi 23L 4756. £ 90.
„ of Whalesborough, Surrey, fr. Corn
wall, 1433. fi 34. 1 561. fi 40.
Coryn, of Kenwyn, Cornwall, 1079. £ 143.
1 142. £ 133*. 1 149- £ 133*. 4031. f-
74-
Coryton, or Coringtou, of St. Ives, Cornwall,
1079 fi 57. 1 142. fi 5*. 1 149 fi 6.
1 162. fi 6.
„ of Coryton, Cornwall, 1079. fi 23.
1 149. fi 131*. 1 162. fi 84*. 4031. ff.
75. 78*. Add. 14,315. p. 36.
Cosby, of Stradbally, Queen's. Co, 1425. £ 107.
Cosgrave, — Bucks, 1091. fi 53. 1538. £ 161*.
Cosin, — Essex, 1 1 37. fi 54*. 1432. fi 46.
„ (Cosyn)— Salop, 615. fi 223*. Add.
14,314. fi 7*.
Cossen, or XVSaderne, of Penzance, Cornwall,
1079. £ 167. 1142. fi 163. 1149. fi
163. 1 162. fi 165.
Cossington, of Cossington, Kent, 1548. £ 186*.
5185. £ 49
„ of Aylesford, Kent. Add 5532. p.
61.
„ —Surrey, 1147. fi 31, 1430. fi 34.
Costabadie. Add. 24,458. ff. 101 (».). 238*. 239.
Coste, — Northants, 1171. fi 25.
„ (Cost)— co. Warwick, I ioo. £ 55.
1167.fi 47- 6060. fi 89*.
Coster, — Bucks, 1396. £ 60.
Coston, of Greenford, Middlk, fr. co. Line,
1551. fi 112*.
„ of Corston, Salop, 1396. fi 71*. Add
14,314 fi 112.
Costyfe,— co. Staff, 1077. £' 52*:

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

89

.y.

Cosworth, of Cosworth, Cornwall, 1079. fi 209*.
1 142. fi So*. 1 149. f. 79*. 1 \6i. fi 83*.
4031.fi 83.
„ of London, fr. Cornwall, 1096. fi 56.
1463. fi 8*. Add. 24458. fi 347*.
Coteel, of Tarling, Essex, fr. London, 1083. fi
426. 1 137. fi 122*. .1432. fi 123*.
1542. £ 109. Add. 14,290. fi 76*.
„ — London, 1096. fi 131*. 1476. fi
266*.
Cotes, of Hanslope, Bucks. Add. 19,815. fi 83.
„ of Chester, fr. co. Staff, 2187. fi 34*.
Add. 5529. fi 14.
„ of Knighton, co. Leic, fr. co. Staff,
1180. ff. 57. 60. 1187. fi 120. 1189. fi
77 (a. *.) 1 195. ff. 82.97*. 1431. ff.
68*. 69. 6125. ff. 61. 64. 1 1 1. 6183. ff.
62.65.
„ of Woodcote, Salop, fr. co. Staff,
1241. fi 70*. 1396. fi 83. 1533. fi 88*.
1982. fi 49. Add. 14,314. fi 60. 19,815.
f.82*.
„ — Bucks, 1140.fi 91*. 1i59.fi 91*.
1442. fi 94*.
„ of Lee, co. Staff, 11 73. fi 102.
Cotgrave, of Cotton, Cheshire, 774. fi 19. 1424.
£ 50*. 1505. £ no. 1535. ff. 217.
256. 2142. £ 29*. 2187. £ 36*.
„ of Hargrave, Cheshire, 1424. £ 37.
1505. fi 36. 2119.fi 136. 2187. fi 36*.
„ of Stubbs, Cheshire, 1424. £ 29.
1505.fi 28. 2187. fi 36*.
Cother, or Tather, Salop. Add. 14,314. fi 86*.
Cotlif, or Brayles, Beds, 2109. fi 61*.
Cotney.'of Lanrake, Cornwall, 4031. fi 77*.
Cottam, of Tarnacre, co. Lancaster, 1437. £
100.
Cotter, of Rockforest, co. Cork (I. Bart.) Add.
23,685. ff. 34 120. Add. 23,686. fi 36.
23,687. fi 155-
of Cork. Add. 23,689. fi 286.
Cotterell, of Garnons, co. Glouc. (Bart.)' Add.
23,685. fi 22. /
„ of South Repps, Norfolk, 1552. fi 196.
4756. fi 74*-
„ (cottrell)— Devon, 1 163. fi 226.
Cottesford, of Launton, Oxon, 1480. £ 31*.
1557. £ n*.
Cottesmore, of Brightwell. Oxon, 1095. £ 50.
,-- — - 1097. fi 2*. 1187. fi 11*. 1188. p. 4
1556. fi 117*-
Cottle, of North Tawton, Devon, 889. £ 131.
1080. ff. 103*. 104. 1091. £ 104. 1 163.
£ 129*. 1 164 f- 16*. 1399. fi 8S*.
i538.fi 241. 3288.fi 76*. 5185. £38*.
5840. £ 102. 5871. £ 31.
of Cricklade, Wilts, fr. Devon, 1165.
" £ 14*. 1443- £ 81.
cottlnebam, of Trevallyn, Salop, fr. Cheshire,
1241. £ 137*- 1472. £ 6*.
cottington, of Frome, Somerset, 1141. £ 38.
1445. fi 56*- 1559-f- i°7*.
of Hanworth, Lord, 1073. fi 411*.

Cottington, — CO. Glouc, 1041. fi 19*. 1191. fi
14. 1543-fi I-
Cotton, of Okingham, Berks, fr. Devon, 1483 £
64. 1530. £ 38. Add. 14,284. p. 15.
„ of Pitleston, Bucks, 1234. £ 9*. 1533.
fi 209.
„ of Lanwade, co. Camb., 1043 ff. 53^.
105*. 1401. ff. 4. 5. 1534. fi 15A.
6769. fi 2*. 6770. f. 4*. 6774. ff. 21.
22*. 6830. p. 3. Add. 4962. £ 4.
19,125. pp. 22-35.
„ of Combermere, Cheshire, 1535. f.
89*.
„ of Cotton, Cheshire, 1424. £ - 38*.
1505. fi 37*. 1535, £ 89. 21 19 £ 132.
2142. f. 85*. 2187. ff. 40b. 137. 5182.
ff. 121. 122.
„ of Huntingdon, Cheshire, 1535. £
91*.
„ of Lachmanbank, Cheshire, 1424. f.
145*. 1505. fi 144*. 1535. ff. 285. 296.
5182.fi 115.
„ of Ridware, Cheshire, 1424. £ 13S/.
1505. £ 137*. 1535. ff. 88 (a. b.) 275*.
5182. £ 102. 6592. ff. 13*. 14*.
„ of Saughton, Cheshire, 2187. £ 40.
„ of Bright Waltham, Sackvile, Essex,
fr. Chesh. 1542. £ 5*.
„ of Clavering, Essex, fr. Suffolk^ 154 1.
£ 43*-
„ of Hornchurch, Essex, 1542. £ 60.
„ oi Panfield, Essex, 1137. £ 109*.
1432. fi 104*. 1541.fi 43*--
„ of Wl_ittington,co.Gloi_c, fr. Cheshire,
1041. f. 52. 1543. ff. 38*. 72*. 121*.
„ of Warblington, HantSi 1544. £
112*.
„ of Flamstead, Herts, fr. Bucks, 1547.
£74*.
„ of Conington, Hunts, 890 £ 43ft.
I075.fi 13. 1179.fi. 28*. 6060 ff. 149.
150. Cott. Jul. F. viiL £ 13. Add
14,309. ff. 5. 36.
„ of Hadlow, Kent, 1106. £ 178. Add.
55o7. P- 356. 5526. p. 371. 5532. p.
146. - —
„ of Loughton, co. Leicester, fr. cos.
Cheshire and Staff, 1 1 80. £ 139*. 1187.
£137. 1189.fi 107. n95-fi75- 143*-
f. 98*. 6125. f£ 97. 116*. 6183. f.
114.
„ of Burton, co. Lincoln, fr. co. Staff.,
1550. f. 109*.
„ of London, fr. Shrop, 1504. f. 102.
„ of London, 1476. £ 319.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, T476. £ 218*.
„ of Stratford-le-Bow, Middlx., fr. co.
Gloue 1 55 1. fi 57.
,, of Alkington, Salop, 1241. £ 72. 1396.
£ 72*. 3288 fi 171.
„ oi Cotton, Salop, 1241. £ io*. 13961.
£200. 1982. £66*. 3288. ff. 163*. 167.
Add. 14,314. £ 58*.
„ of Penegoes, Salop, 1241. £ in.
'»

po

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Cotton, of Exeter and Shabrook, Devon, 1080.
fi 329*. 3288. f. 171.
„ —co. Staff, 1400. p. 33. 1555. £
57*.
„ of Crakendish, co. Staff, 6104. fi 7.
,, of Crackmarsh, co. Staff., 6128. fi 34.
„ of HamstallRidware, co. Staff, 6128.
£ 32*. Add. 29,782 fi 40. 29,783. ff.
42. 42*.
,i of Barton, Suffolk, fr. co. Camb,
1449. £59. 1560.fr. 292*. 325*. 1820.
£ 22*.
„ of Ipswich, Suffolk, fr. Essex, 1560. £
292.
„ of Woodcott, co. Warwick, fr. Hunts.,
noo. £ 90*. 1 167. £ in*. 1195. £
115. 1563. fi 134*.
„ of Nether Denby and the Haigh.
Add. 24,458. fi 30*.
„ of Beverley, Yorks, and of Hackney,
Middlx. Add. 24458. £ 31.
Couchman, of Cranbrook, Kent, and of Lon
don, 1 106. £ 124*. 1432. £ 255. 1548.
£ 69. Add. 5507. p. 273. Add. 5509.
£36. 5526. p. 252. 5528. fi 188*.
„ of Tooting. Add 5507. p. 383.
Coundon, of Willerby, Yorks, fr. co. Durham,
1487. fi 494.
Courcy, Lord of Kinsale, 1425. ff. 69, 164, 168.
2156. fi 13*5*. Add. 14,839. ff. 180-181.
.Courte, of Walverton, Warwick and London,
4204. fi 133*.
Courthope, of Stodmarsh, Kent, 1 106. fi 213.
1432. fi 321*. 1548. fi 18. Add. 5507.
p. 336. 5526. p. 443. 5528. ff. 70,118.
16,279 p. 392.
„ of London, 5871. fi 5. f
„ of Wiley, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076. fi
62*. 1084. £ 149. 1135.fi 137. 1406.
fi 88. 1562. fi 79*. 5829 fi 73.
Courtenay, Marquis of Exeter — Devon, 3288.
fi 152. 5840. fi 33
„ Earl of Devon — Devon, 1139. £ 26.
Add. 4963. £ 49*.
„ ' of Bibeley, Devon. Add. 14,315.
p. 11*.
„ of Molland, Devon, 889. ff. 113*. 116.
1080. £ 89. 1091. ff. 39 84. 1 163. £
194. 1164.fi 3- 1385. fi 18. 1399. ff.
74*. 76*. 1538. ff. 63. 208*. 1559.
£ n*. 3288. ff. 75*. 155*. 171-172.
1567. fi 30. 5840. ff. 85*. 87*. 5185.
£ 39- 5871- £ 37 4204. £ 122*. Add.
14,309. ff. 44*. 45.
„ of Molton, Devon, 1080. f. 90*. 1163.
f. 143*.
„ of Okehampton, Devon, 3288. f, 157
„ of Powderham, Devon, 1080. fi 89.
1091. ff. 39. 84 1 164. fi 3. 1538. fi
210*. 3288. ff. 171*. 172. 1567. fi 30.
5840. fi 17*. 5871. fi 17. Add. 14,315.
p. 1 1.
„ of Penkevell, Cornwall, 1 149. fi 28.
Ii62.fi 99**.

»

Courtenay, of Lanrake, Cornwall, 1079. fi 172*
1142. f. 95. 1 149. f. 96. 1162. fi . 00
4030. fi 77. Add. 14,315- PP- 77- 85.
„ of Tremmure, Cornwall, 1142.fi 29.'
1 149 fi 28*. 1 162. fi 30. 4031. ff. 75.
76*. 81. 82*.
„ of London, fr. Devon, 1096. fi 130.
1476. fi 107.
„ — Kent. Add. 16,279. P- 22°.
„ descended from C. of Aughagallan,
co. Antrim. Add. 24458. fi 16.
Courtman, Courteis, or Balwell, — Devon,
3288. fi 156*.
Cousyn,— Salop, 615. fi 223*. Add. 14,314. f. 7*.
de Cove, — Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p. 68.
CoveU, of London, 1476. fi 133.
Coventry, Lord, 1073. fi 380.
of Grange, Cheshire, 2187. fi 41*.
of Mollington, Cheshire, 1535. £ 100.
„ of Newhouse, Cheshire, 1535, ff. 99*.
205. 2187. fi 42. Add. 5529. £ 17.
„ —co. Warwick, 1504. £ 117*.
Covert, or Court, of North Petherton, Somerset,
1385.fi 17. 1559, £59.
„ of Godstone, Surrey, fr. Sussex, 1046.
£41. 1147.fi 64*. 1397. £ 79. 1430.
fi 70*. 1433. fi 72*. 1 561. fi 130*.
Add. 12,478. fi 26*. 14,311. ff. 64.
93-
„ of Hascomb, Surrey, 1046. fi 113.
1 147. ff. 101*. 148. 1397, fi 152. 1430.
fi 154. 1433/ff. 30. 142. 1561. ff. 8*.
.36. Add. 14,311. fi 57*.
„ of Abberton, Sussex, 1076. fi 24
1084. ff. 43*. 92. 1135.fi 78. n94.fi
71. 1406. fi 83. 1562. ff. 54. 162*.
6164 fi 1 1*. Add. 14,31 1. ff. 64. 93.
„ of Slaugham, Sussex, 1106. fi 155*.
1432. fi 274*. 1562. fi 33. Add. 5507.
s-v P-3I8. 5526. p. 316.
J, of Sullington, Sussex, 1562. £ 52*.
\ 5829.fi 47*.
„ ' of Twyneham, Sussex, 5829. fi 145.
Covin, of Parham, Suffolk, 1560. £ 196*. Add.
19,125. p. 77.
Coward, of Wells, Somerset, 1141. £ 17. 1445.
ff. 30* 31. 1559. £ 152.
Cowdray, of Heriott, Hants, 1544- £ 35*.
5865. £ 34.
Cowell, or Cowbalgh, of Dungworth Storrs,
Derby. Add. 24,458. £ 180*.
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,125. p, 77.
Cowley, of London, fr. co. Staff, 1476, £ 201*.
Cowlin, of Trenguenthen, Cornwall, 1079. fi
112. 1 142. fi 77*. 1 149. fi 76*. 1 162
fi 80*. 4031. f. 79*.
Cowper, v. Cooper.
„ of Bray, Berks, fr. Hunts, 1081. £ 13.
1139. £ 72. 1532. £ 35. 5822. £ 10.
6173. £ 22*. Add. 4961. £ 54*. 14,283.
£54*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

91

V

./'

Cowper v. Cooper.
„ of Luddenham, co. Leicester, from
Northants, 11S0. fi 106. 1187. ff n8*.
131. 1 189 f.57*. 1431.fi 49. 6125. ff.
59*. 76*. 6183. ff. 60*. 93*.
„ of London, 1463. f. 50*. 1476. £ 22.
„ of Runcton Holme, Norfolk, fr. co.
Camb, 1552. fi 52*. 4756. fi 47*.
„ of Arthingworth, Northants, 1553, fi
85.
„ of Ponfort, , Salop, 1396. fi 138.
19S2. fi 33*.
„ of Cobham, Surrey, fr. London, 1 147.
fi 107*. 1430. fi 112*. 1534. fi 115.
„ of Temple Elfant, Surrey, 1 561. fi
62*. Add. 12,478. fi 57.
„ of Chichester and Ditcham, Sussex,
fr. Hants, 1076. fi 71. 1084 fi 34.
1 135. fi 20. 1194.fi 14. 1406.fi 13*
1562. fi 125. 6164. fi 53.
„ of Pankhurst, Sussex, 1076. fi 153.
1084 fi 32*. 1135. fi 18*. 1194 fi 12*.
„ of Strood, Sussex, 1076. fi 96*.
1084 fi 36. 1 135. fi 22. 1 194. fi 16.
1406. fi 15. 1562 £ 126*. 5829. fi
155-
„ of Tadcaster, co. Yorks. Add.
24458. fi 222.
„ —co. Staff, 1077. fi 72*. 1 173.
fi 64*.
Cox, Bishop of Ely. Add. 19,125. p. 81.
„ of Hanwell, Beds, 2109. fi 89*.
„ of Colshill, Berks, 1483. fi 62*.- 1530.
fi 33*. Add. 14,284. p. 4.
„ of Beamond, Herts, fr. co. Monmouth,
1234. fi 114. 1433. fi 22. 1504. ff. 61.
131*. 1546. fi 45*. 1547. fi 1. 6147.
fi 47-
„ or cockes, of London, fr. Somerset,
1096. fi 155. Add. 5533. p. 198.
„ of Bramffeld, Salop, 1396. fi 82.
„ of Churchill, Somerset, 1141. £127.
1445. fi 166. 1559.fi 313*.
„ of Wells, Somerset, 1141. fi 86. 1445.
fi 123- 1559 f- 254*-
„ of Chichester, Sussex, and of Herts,
fr. co. Monmouth, 1076. fi 12. 1084. fi
87. 1 135. fi T1 H94- f- 66. 1406.fi
84*. 1562. fi 155. 5829. fi 140. 6164.
fi 47*.
of Dunmanway, co. Cork (I. Bart.)
Add. 23,685. fi 96*- f- 102*. fi 103.
coxweU, of Absington, co. Glouc, 1041. fi 112*.
1543. fi 168.
coves, of North Okenden, Essex, fr. London
and co. Monmouth, 1083. fi 38. 1137.
ff 105.120*. i432.ff 99*- "9*- I54I-
fi 162*. 1542. fi 45- 6065.fi 146. Add.
14,290. fi 72.
Coyney, or Coyne, of Weston Coyney, co. Staff,
yandofShrop,io77.fii2*. ii73-£»*.
1415. £ 130*. 1439 £ 12. 6104 £ 7*.
6128. fi 58.
Coyter-Suffolk. Add. 19,125. P- 84

Coytemore, of London, fr. co. Carnarvon, 1444.
f. 34. Add. 5533. p. 114.
„ —Salop, 1241. fi 149.
Crabb, of Castlewich, Cornwall, 1079. f. 61*.
1 142. fi 1 2. 1 149. fi 1 3. 1 162. fi 1 3.
„ of Tregerthick, Cornwall, 1079. fi 2.
„ of Kesgrave, Suffolk. Add 19,125.
P. 92.
Crabbe, the poet. Add. 19,125. p. 94.
Crabtree, of Halesworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,125-
p. 114.
„ of Bradford, Yorks. Add. 24458. £
116*.
Cracberode, of Toppesfield, Essex, and Norfolk,
1541. fi 95*. 1542. £ 71. 6065.fi x32.
Add. 19,135. p. 117,
Cracroft, of Cottenham, co. Camb, fr. co. Line,
1043. f 68*. 1401. £ 52. 1534. £ 68*
6769. fin*. 6770.fi 10*. 6774 fi 68.
6775- fi 72. Add. 4962. £ 48*.
„ of Cracroft, co. Line, 1097. £ 82.
1 190. fi 2. 1484. fi 20. 1550. fi 161*.
Cradock, of Weston, Cheshire, 1424. £ 102.
1505. £ 101. 1535. fi 211. 2142. £
140*. 2187. £ 83*. Add 5529. £ 16.
„ of Bosworth, co Leicester, fr. North
ants, 1180.fi 103*. 1187.fi 99*. "89.
fi 62*. 1431. fi 54. 6125. fi 10. 6183.
£ n.
„ of London, fr. co. Northants, 1476.
£136.
„ of London, fr. co. Staff, 1476. £
232*.
„ of Wilkes, Salop, fr. co. Staff. Add.
14,314 f- 69.
of Newton, Somerset, iSS9-ff. 83*. X36.
of Stafford, co. Staff, 1173. ff. 104.
130. 1439 f- 23-
„ of Wickham Brook, Suffolk, fr. co.
Staff, 1560. fi 299. Add. 19,125. p. 132.
„ of Chichester, Sussex, fr. Hants and
Glamorgan, 1076. fi 159*.
.„ or Newton, — Cheshire, 2142. £ 109.
Craford, or Crayford, of Mongeham, Kent,
1 106. £ 40. 1432. £ 200*. 1484. £ 67.
1531. £ 140*. 2198. £ 125. Add. 5507.
p. 102. 5526. p. 71.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 464
Crakenthorp, — Westmoreland, 1171. £ 66.
1540. £ 43-
Cralle,— Sussex, 1532. £ 131*. 5829. £ 54*./*.
„ —Kent. Add. 16,279. p. 408.
„ —Surrey. Add. 14,311. £ 20*.
CramUngton, of Cramlington, Northumb,
H53- £ 55*- J448. £ 42. 1554- £ 9L
cranage, of Cotton, Cheshire, 1535. £ 97.
„ of Pypeley, Salop, fr. Cheshire, 1241.
£ 154*-
Crane, of Loughton, Bucks, fr. London, 1 102.
fi 69*. 1151. f.J68*. 1193. f.69*. 1234^
£51. I39I- f- 73*- 1533- £157*.
of Camborne, Cornwall, 1079. £ 8.

n »

pa

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Crane, of Stoneham, Suffolk, 155. fi 34. 1103.
f. 1. 1177.fi 7. 1449 ff 13- 88. 1484.
f. 42. 1560. ff. 8*. 176*.
„ of Chilton, Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p.
135-
„ —Norfolk, 1552. fi 183.
Cranewell, — Suffolk, 1449. fi III.
Cranfield, Earl — 1073. fi 146. 4204 f. 4*. Add.
14,311. fi 84. '
Cranford, of South Newton, Northants, 1094
fi 148. 1184 fi 145. 1187. ff. 56. 77
87*. 89. 93*. 1 188. p. 72. 6066. fi 137.
„ of Newington, Oxon, 6066. ff. 1 1 5. 1 1 7 .
„ of Ashby, co. Warwick, 1 100. fi 48*.
Ii67.fi 40. 1188. p. 105. 6060. £65*.
•Cranmer, of Canterbury. Add. 5528.fi 135. (m.)
„ of Aslacton, Notts, 10S2. fi 67b. 1400.
£32. 1555. fi 56*.
• „ of London Hall, Suffolk, fr. co. Warr,
1476. £ 419 Add. 19,125. p. 149.
eras, of Trewreve, Cornwall, 4031. £ 80.
Craster, of Craster, Northumb, 1 153. £ 54.
1448. fi 27. 1554. fi 64.
Crathorne, of Crathorne, Yorks, and of co. Line,
1394. p. 143. 1415. £96, 1420.fi 106.
1487. fi 269*. Add. 18,011. fi 127.
„ of Saleby, co. Line, from co. York,
1096. fi 97*. 119a £20*. 1484 £27*.
1550.fi 174
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1476. fi 172.
Craven, of Appletreewick, Yorks, 1073. fi 361*.
4630. p. 115. Add. 14,835. £76. 26,739.
P- 83.
„ of Leveninge, Yorks, 1487. £ 309.
Add. 18,011. ff. 109. 206.
Crawfurd, of Crawfurdland, N.B. Add. 14,837.
fi 95-7.
„ of Jordanhill, N.B. (Bart.) Add
14,837. f- 93-
Crawley, of Someries, Beds, 1531. fi 157. 4600.
p. 27.
„ of Maldon, Essex, 1432. fi 101.
Cray, of Wichford, co. Camb, 1043. fi 76. 1534.
fi 78. 6769. fi 15. 6770. fi 29*. 6774.
fi 76. 6775. fi 79. 6830. p. 105. Add.
4962. fi 55.
Creake, or Crooke, — Essex, 154 1, £ 71*.
Creed, of Bury, Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p. 159.
Creigbton, Earl of Erne. Add 14,839 £ 161.
de Creke, — Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p. 164.
Creke, of Bolnehurst, Beds, fr. Rickmansworth,
Herts, 1097. £ 21. 1390. £ 10. 1531.
£ 54*. 2109. £ 18. 5186. p. 34. Lansd.
864. p. 19.
n or Creake, of Kirtling, co. Camb,
1043. fi 99*. 1401. fi 41- I534- fi 54
1560. f. 323*. 6769. fi 33*. 6770. fi 56*.
6774- £ 57- 6775. fi 41. 6830. p. 82.
Add. 4962. fi 37*. 19,135. p. 166.
„ of Boughton and Shoreham, Kent.
Add. 16,279 p. 413.
Creon, or Croun. Add. 23,686. f 201*.
Creaacre, of Barnboro, Yorks, 4204.fi 101. 6070.
-'". -.f. 113.

de Crespigny, Bart. Add. 19,125. pp\ 178-1S3.
23,685. f. 29.
Crespin, of Hilton, Hunts, fr. Dorset, 1075.
£23*. 1 179. fi 50. Cott. Jul. F. viii. ;
f 23*.
Cressener, — Norfolk, 1 177. fi 118. Add. 19,125.,
pp. 190-197.
Cressett, of Upton, Salop, 1241. fi 79. 1396.
fi 86*. 1982. ff. 7*. 21. 64*. 6172. fi 15*.
Add. 14,314. fi 64*.
de Cressingham, — Suffolk Add 19,125. p.
198.
Gresswell, of Edale, Derby, fi 28,113. f. 102.
„ of Farneham, Hants, 1 139. fi 33*.
1443. fi 31*.
„ of Hackfield, Hants, 1544. fi 100*.
„ of Odiham, Hants, 1544. fi 8.
„ of Purston, Northants, fr. Cheshire.
1094.fi 169. noo. fi 71. 1184.fi 165.
1553- £ 93-
„ of Cresswell, Northumb., 1554. fi
135*-
„ of Wolverhampton, co. Staff, 1173.
fi 120. 1439. fi 25*. 6128. fi 105*.
„ of Nun-Keeling, Yorks, fr. Northumb,
1394- P- 99- i4'5- f- 83. 1420. fi 76.
14S7.fi 312*. Add. 18,01 1. fi 95. 29,783.
fi 64.
„ —co. Derby, 1153.fi 95.
de Cressy, — Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p. 202.
Cressy, of Harpden, Herts, 1433. fi 14 1504.
fi 53*. 1546. fi 37. 6147. fi 38.
„ of Blyborough, co. Line, fr. Notts,
I550.ff. 97. 195*.
„ of Hodsock, Notts, 886. £ 42. 1555.
£ 10. 2109. fi 75*.
„ of Holme,' Notts, fr. co. Yorks, 886.
fi 42. 1082. fi 67*. 1093. fi 23. 1400.
fi 16*. 1555. fi 35*. Add 24,458.
, ff. 118*. 119*.
"\ „ - of Oldcotes, Notts, 1400. £ 49. 1555.
£79*. Add. 24458. fi n 8*.
„ of Birkin, Yorks, 14S7. fi 96. 4630.
p. 108. Add. 24458. £ 118*. 26,739.
p. 78*. ;
„ —Northants, 1553. £ 64.
Creswick, of Batoughleigh Derby. Add.
28,113. ff. I2<_*-I29."
de Crevequer, — Suffolk. Add. 19125. p. 215.
de Creting,— Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p. 209.
Crewe, of Aston, Cheshire, 2119. fi 76*. * ..
„ of Cholmston, Cheshire, 1390.fi 26(a). ^\-v
1041.fi 118. 1424.fi.40. 1505^.39. 1535.
£98*. 1543. fi 127. 2119.fi 77*. 2I42-
fi in*. 2187. ff.38*. 45*. 141*. 5186.
,P- 57-
„ of Crewe, Cheshire, 1535. ff. 121*.
251*. 2119.fi 73-
„ of Grafton, Cheshire, 2187. £ 85. •
„ of Holt, Cheshire, 2 119. ff. 79*. 80.
Add. 24458. fi 48.
„ of Malbro', Cheshire, 21 19. ff. 73b.
¦ 77b.
„ of Nantwich, Cheshire* 2 1 1 9. fi 74.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Crewe, of Pukroft, Cheshire, 1535. ff. 52*. 98.
?n9.fi 77. 2lS7. f. ,4lA Adi
f- 15- Add. 29,783. fi 20*.
„ of Steyne, Northants, fr. Cheshire,
I553- fi 257*. Add. 14,309. fi 34*.
„ —Bucks, 1151. fi 50*. 1193, £ 5I£.
1234.58*. 1533-fi 145*.
Crewer, of Cawton, Yorks, 1394. p. 147. I4iS.
fi 10. 1420. fi 108. 1487. fi 61*.
Crewse v. Cruse, of Liskeard, Cornwall, fr.
Devon, 1079 fi 186. 1 142. fi 70. 1 149.
f. 69.
„ of St. Garrons, Cornwall, 1 162. £ 73.
„ of Chimley, Devon, 889. fi 52.
„ of Crewes Morchard, Devon, 889.
fi 115. 1080. fi 65*. 1091.fi 86. 1 163.
ff. 71*. 240*. 1399. fi 75*. 1538. ff.
2ii. 282*. 3288. fi 80*. 5185. £ 40.
5840. fi 86*. 5871. fi 37*.
„ of Fotheringhay, Northants, fr. Berks.
and Devon, 890. fi 25*. 1094. fi 19*.
1 138. fi 19*. 1171. £ 21*. 1 184. fi 19*.
1187. fi 41. 1 188. p. 47. 1553. fi 443.
6066. fi 89*.
„ (Crews) — Beds, 2109. fi 61*.
Crewkerne, of Chilley, Dorset, 888. £ 59. 1092.
£36*. 1153.fi 76. 1451-fi 172. 1539
f. 59*. 2186. £ 26.
Creyke, of Cottingham, Yorks, 1487. £ 270*.
„ of Marton, Yorks, 1394. p. 109. 1420.
£ 83. Add. 18,011. fi 102.
„ of Rawmarsh and Marton, co. York,
Add. 24458. fi 225*.
Criche, of London, 1504. fi 100*.
„ of Walton, co. Derby. Add. 24458. fi
294*.
Crlchley. Add. 24,458. fi 250*. (/;..)
Crick, of Little Thurlow, Suffolk. Add. 19,125.
p. 221.
crickett, of Smith's Hall, Suffolk. Add. 19,125.
p. 225.
de Crlcketot,— Suffolk, 1484. fi 49*. Add
14,309 fi 14 19,125. p. 229. /
Crimes, of Buckland, Devon, 10S0. fi 287*.
1097. fi 135. 1 142. fi 114, 1 149. fi
115. 1 163. fi 147.
„ (crymes) of Peckham, Surrey, fr.
London and Suffolk, 1046. fi 60. 1 147.
fi 87. 1430. fi 92. Add. 4963. fi 106*.
12,478. fi 43*. 14,311. fi 46.
CrioU V. Xeriell.
de'criol,— Suffolk, 4109. £ 47*- Add. 19,125.
P- 235-
Cripps, of Cheadle, Cheshire. Add. 24458. £
49
Crispe, or cripps, of Charde and Clive Court,
Kent, fr. Oxon, 1106. fi 84*. 1432. fi
230. i548.fi 41*- Add. 5507. p. 197.
5526. pp. 154- 208. 552S. fi 143.
16,279. P- 409
of Dover. Add. 5532. fi 94
" of London. Add. 5507. fi 199.*
" 0f London, fr. cos. Glouc. and Leic.
" 1476. ff 35*- 299*- Add. 5533. p. 223.

93

Crispe, of Copcott, Oxon, 1095. fi 6b. 1007
fi S*. 1556. f. 165.
„ of Bury St. Edmunds. Add. iq.i^x;
p. 243.
„ of Ore, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076. f
119*. 1084 £83. 1135.fi 69. 1 194.
ff. 62. 105. 1406. fi 33. 1562. ff. g*.
105*. 4109. fi 57*. 5829. £ 136. 6164.
£ 80.
,, —Hants, 1504, £ 104
,, —Salop, 1241. £ 97.
n —Yorks. Add. 5507. £ 199.*
Criste,— Somerset, 1385. £ 60*. 1559. £ 47.
Critcblaw, of Wrexham. Add 24458. £ 17*
Crochrode, of Cavendish, Suffolk, fr. Essex. 8qi
18. 1449 fi 52*. 1820. fi 17*. v '
Crocker, of St. Ann's, Cornwall, fr. Devon 1070.
f. 137*. 1 142. f. 124 1 149. £ I2r
1 162. fi 129. 3
Crockhay,— Yorks, 1 142. fi 121*. 1 149. £ I22*.
1162.fi 126*.
Croft, of Croft, co. Hereford, 4204. £ 207
5814. fi 25. Add. 19.815. ff. 27A-29
„ of Peckleton, co. Leicester, 1180. f
95*. 1 187. fi 128. 1 189 fi 59. U3I.
£50*. 6183. £86*. ^
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 339.
„ of Stillington, Yorks. Add 24__k8
£ 176. ***>°.
„_ —co. Hereford, 1140, ff. 14*. 34.
1 159 ff 14*. 34. 1442. ff. 14*. 34.
I545.£ 24*. Add. 19.815.fi ro*. (tn).
Crofte, — Suffolk, 1043. fi 92*.
„ of London, 1562. fi 59.
Crofton, of Lisdarne, co. Roscommon. Add
23,685. £ 88.
„ of Mote (I. Bart). Add. 23,685. ff.
10. 58*. 140*. 159. 23,687. ff. =0. 52
&82. m-115*. J 3
„ —Cumb, 1536.fi g*.
Crofts, of London, 1476. £ 234.
„ of Felmingham, Norfolk, 1552. £
180*. 4755. fi 94 4756. £ 68*. 5189.
£ 30. 6093. £ 210*. Add 19,816, £
78.
„ of Bardwell and Saxham, Suffolk,
1449. ff. 60. 61. 1484. £44*. 1560.fi
164. Add. 19,125. pp. 247.-254.
„ —Somerset, 1385. £ 13. 1559. ff. 56*.
67*.
„ (and -Wentworth), 4204. £ 122. («.)
Croke, of Chilton, Bucks, 1102. ff. 7. 68* 114
1 139 £ 5i- H36. £ 15*. 1 151. ff. 5.
67*. 1153.fi 90*. 1451.fi 195. xigi
ff.6.68*. 1234. ff. 52. 56. 1391.fr. 7*.
72*. 123*. 1533.fi 113*. Sr8r. p. ?3
„ of London, fr. Bucks, 1476. fi 433*.
Croker, or Crocker, of Lyneham, Devon 880.
£ 54*. 108a. £ 259*. 1091. ff. 38. 5q£"
1399. ff. 29. 1163. fi no. 1538.fr. 04
104. 3288. fi 81. 5185. £40*. S8i6.
£.31- 5871. £ 17.
„ of Battisford, co. Glouc, 1041. £ roi*
1543. £ 130.

94

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Croker, of Hooks Norton, Oxon, fr. Berks,
1095. fi 41. 1412. fi 98. 1556. f. 123*.
Lansd, SSo. f. 34.
Cromarche, — Cheshire, 1535. f. 97.
Crombrig, — Kent. 1484. £ 62*.
Cromer, of Tunstall, Kent, fr. Herts, 1484. fi
63*. 1548. fi no*. Add. 5509. ff. 10.
14*. 5528. £ 12*. 5532. p. 136. 14,309
f. 17.
„ of Aldenham, Herts, 1504 £ 116**.
,, — Suffolk, 1449. fi 95*. 1560. fi 189*.
Cromie, of Mullins, co. Cork (I. Bart.). Add.
23,689. fi 288.
„ of Stacummie, co. Kildare (I. Bart.).
Add. 23,687. fi 149*.
Cromleyn,— co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 7*. 49.
Crompton, of Wood End, co. Derby. Add.
24458. fi 8*.
„ of Derby. Add. 24,458. fi 9.
„ of Chorley and Bolton, Lane Add.
24458. fi 9
„ of Breakmet, Lane Add, 24,458.
fi 18.
„ of Old Hall, co. Lane. Add. 24,458.
fi 18.
„ of Hounslow, Middlx, 1551. fi 123*.
Add. 4964. f. 123*.
„ of Checkley and Stone Abbey, co.
Staff, fr. London, 1077, fi 74*. 1 173.
ff. 66*. 131. 1415. fi 121. 1439. fi 20.
1570. f. 38*. 6128. fi 70*.
Cromwell, or Williams, of Hinchinbrooke,
Hunts, 890. p. 38. 1075. fi 36*. 1 179.
f. 76*. Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 36*. Add.
19,125. p. 263. 24458.fr. 95*. 98. 102*.
„ of co. Line, 1097. fi 43*. 1190. fi 70.
1484. fi 19*. 1550. fi 60*.
„ of Tattershall, Notts, 1555.fi 3- 2156.
f-43*- - ..
„ — co. Camb, 1073. £ 302*. 1043. fi '
69. 1401. £ 49. Add. 14,309. £ 92*.
„ —Devon, 1091. £ 107*.
Crooke, of Sheffield. Add. 24458, fi 187*.
„ —Essex, 1542. £ 37*.
„ — co. Leicester, 6125. fi 16.
„ — Oxon, 1480. ff. 25. 30*. 1556. fi 45*.
1557. fi 20*. Add. 24,458. fi 344.
Crooker, or Crewker,— co. Derby, 11 80. fi 22.
1 189. fi 25. 1431. ff. 18*. 38*. 6125.
£ 33*-
Croone, of London.fr. co. Hereford, 1476. fi 270.
Cropbuil, of Tuxwell, Notts, 2156. fi 65.
„ — Salop, 1982. fi 92*.
Cropiey, of Clerkenwell, Middlx, fr. co. Camb,
1468. fi 141*.
„ of Rockell's Hall, Suffolk. Add.
19,125; p. 268.
„ —Bucks, 1391. fi 79.
„ —co. Camb, 1075. fi 26. 1 179. fi 55.
Cotton. Jul F. viii, fi 26.
Crosbie (e. Clandore). Add. 14,838. ff. 300. 303.
23,684. ff. 24. 25. 23,687. ff. 56. 83*.

Crosbie, of Crosbie Park, co. Wicklow.
Add. 23,684. f. 59.
„ , of Arclfert (Bart.). Add. 23,689. f.
233-238.
„ (crosbye) of Windridge, Herts. 1234
. fi 146*. 1504. £ 141. 1547. £ 79*.
Croseman, of Cross, Cornwall, 1079. fi 57*.
1142. fi 3. 1 149. fi 3. 1 162. fi 3.
Crosholme, of Ashby, Northants, 1 188. p. 105.
„ — co. Warr, 1 100. fi 48*. 1167.fi 40.
Crosier, of Newbiggen, co. Durham, 1153.
fi 37b. 1 168. f. 21*. 1171. fi 73. 1397.
fi 218. 1540. fi 24*.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. fi 225 (a. b.)
„ —Northants, 11 87. fi 73*. n 88. p.
100.
„ — Surrey, 1561. fi 257*. 6066. £ 131*.
Add. 14,311- £53-
Crosse, of CoUumpton, Devon, 6066. £ 83.
„ of Liverpool!, co. Lane, 1437. £ 94.
1468, £ 34*. 1549. £ 40*. 2o86_ fi 89*.
6159. fi 28*.,
„ of Charieng, Somerset, 1559. fi 85*.
„ of Halesworth, Sec, Suffolk. Add.
19,125. p. 275.
„ .of Little Finboroughj Suffolk. Add.
19,125. p. 281.
„ of Holt, co. Wore, 1043. £' 26*.
1352. fi 6*. i486, fi 4*. 1566. £ Si.
„ — co. Camb, 1043. fi 67.
„ — Salop, 1982. fi 32*.
„ of Ireland. Add. 23,693. fi 171 (.«).
Crossing, of Exeter, Devon, 1080. £ 345*.
Crossland, of Crossland Hill, Yorks, 4630. p.
114. Add. 26,739. p. 82*.
„ of Hemsley, Yorks, 1487. £ 424.
Crosland, of Cartworth, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
£ 148*.
Crossley, of Preston, Cheshire, 1535, £ 279.
N . „ of Scaitcliffe, co. Lane Add. 24,458.
fi 121*.
Crost,— Salop. Add. 14,314. fi 6*.
Croston, — co. Lane, 1415. £ 34*. 1420. f. 195*.
1187. fi 121.
Crouch, of London, 1476. ff. 403. 469.
„ — Kent, 1504. fi 26. .6147. £ 18.
Croughton, of Clare, Suffolk. Add. 19,125. p.287.
„ — Cheshire, 1535.fi 1 1*:
Crowder, of Liverpool and of Brotheriaii^ York.
Add. 24,458. fi 61.
Crow, of Brasted, Kent, 1548; fi 185*.
Crowe, of East Bilney, Norfolk, 4756. £ 58*.
„ of East Soham,.Su_folk. Add. 19,125.
p. 290.
„ of Yaxley, Suffolk. Add. 19,125^.293.
„ of Crowe's Hall, Suffolk, 4756. 54*.
Crowfoot,of Beccles, Suffolk. Add. I9,i25.f.296.
Crowland, — Hants, 5865. fi 16&
„ — Kent, 1548. £168*.
Crowley, of Stourb'ridge> co. Wore Add.
19,125 fi 300.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

95

Crowther, of Ludlow, Salop, 1241. ff. 58. 126.
1396. fi 24*. 1472. f. 21*. Add. 14,314.
fi 87.
„ of London, fr. Shrop, 1476. fi 35.
,, — co. Staff, 141 5. fi 116.
CroxhuU, — Beds, 2109. fi 81*.
Croxton, of Chester, 21 19. fi 212*.
„ of Croxton, Cheshire, 2119.fr. 21 i(a.b.)
212. 213. 2142.fi 35. Add. 5529 fi 16.
» of Ravenscroft, Cheshire, 1424. fi 35.
1505. fi 34 Add. 5529. fi 16.
Croydon. Add 24458. fi 146. (m.)
Crudd, — co. Camb, 1043. fi 100. 1401. fi 38.
1534. fi 49*. 6770. £ 58. Add. 4962.
£34*. ;
Crump e, of Southwold, Essex, 1542. f. 32*.
„ of Maidstone, Kent. Add. 5507. p. 95.
5528. £ 162*.
„ co. Lane, 1549. £ 107.
_ „ of Stonelinck, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076.
fi 200*. 1084 fi 152*. 1 135. £ 140*.
1 194. £ 142. 1406. £ 91*. 1562. fi 203.
Cruse, v. Crewse.
„ of London, 1444. fi 25*. Add. 5533.
P- 37-
Cruso, of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 442.
„ of Lynn. Add. 24458. fi 108*.
Crust, — Cheshire, 1535. fi 225*.
Crux, of Sheldwich, Kent. Add. 5507. p. 404.
„ — Salop, 1982. f. 50.
Cubitt, of Catfield Hall, Norfolk, Add. 19,125.
pp. 304-309
Cuddon, of Shaddingfield and Weston, Suffolk,
1560. fi 159*. 1820. fi 33. Add. 19,125.
pp. 312-321.
Cudmore, of Loxbeare, Devon, 1080. fi 312*.
Ii63.fi 210.
„ of Kelvedon, Essex, fr. Devon, 1541.
fi 228*. 1542. fi 222*.
Cudner, of London, 1 476. fi 62*.
Cudworth, of Werneth, co. Lane, 1437. , fi 81.
1468. fi 27. 1549 fi 36*. 2086. fi 19.
6159 fi 25. /
„ of Southolt, Suffolk. Add. 19,125.
p. 326.
Cuffe, of Critch, Somerset. 1141. ff. 71. 136.
1385. fi 49*. 1445- ff I01*- 2l8*-
1559 fi 29. Add. 12,477. fi 55-
„ EarlDesart. Add. 14,839 ff- 157-8-
. ,-,/ " " of Elm Hall, co. Mayo. Add. 14,838.
' -' £ 323-
cuffoid, of Basing, Hants. 1544 fo. 173*-
Culiile, — Northants, 6066. £ 119.
culcheth, of Culcheth, co. Lane, 891. £ 67*.
1468. £ 35- J549- ff 25- 68. 2086.
£71*- 6159 f- 49-
CuUiford, of Queen's Camel, Somerset, from the
IsleofPurbeck, 1141.fi 130*. 1445- £
177. 1559- £258*.
—Devon, 1 166. £ 78. 1451- f "6*.
" I539- f- l69*-
culling, of Woodland, Devon, 1163. £ 195*.

Cullow, of Tintagell, Cornwall, 1079. £ 93*-
1142.fi 58. 1149.fi 57. n62.f.6i.
Cuiium, of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. £ 143.
„ of Hawsted, Suffolk Add. 19,125.
ff- 33Q-335-
Culme, of Holland, Devon, 889.fi 128*. 10S0.
£ 306*. 1091. £ 101*. 1163. £ 201.
1538. fi 234*. 1399. fi 86. 3288. fi 77.
5185. fi 41. 5840.fi 100. 5871.fi 40*.
„ of London. Add. 5533. p. 158.
cuimer, of Monckton, Kent Add. 5528. fi 90*.
Cuipeper, of Exton, Beds, 2109. fi 80.
„ or Colepeper, of Aylesford, Kent,
1106. fi 13. 1432.fl 177*. 1484 fi 62*.
1548. fi 57. 1556. fi 144: 1561. £ 20*.
2198. fi 98. Add. 5507. p. 50. 5526. p.
21. 5532. p. 14*. 14,311- ff 79 88*.
16,279, P- 340.
„ of Bay Hall, Kent. Add 5507. p.
163*.
„ of Bridgebury, Kent, 1106. £ 72*.
1432. fi 221. 1548. fi 153. Add 5507.
p. 163. 5526. p. 132.
„ of Wakehurst, Kent, 1076. £ 171*.
1084.fi 41. 1106. fi 73*. 1135.fi 27.
1 194 fi 21. 1432. fi 222. 1484 fi 65.
1548. fi 152*. 1562. fi 6. Add. 5507.
p. 164. 5526. p. 134 5829. £ 2.
6164. £ 21.
„ of Ingham, Norfolk, fr. Kent, 1 177. £
164*. 1552.fi 129*. 4755. fi 69. 5189.
fi 61*. 6093.fi 166*. Add. 19,816. f.
51*.
„ of Exton and Conington, Northants,
I553- £ 253-
„ or Colepeper, of Fodington, or
Fogingtoh, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076. £ 45.
1084. £ 101*. 1 194 £ 80*. 1135.fi
87*. 1406. £ 43*- 14S4. £ 62*. 1504.
£83*. 1562. £169. 5829 fi 153*. 6164.
£ 52.
„ (Colepeper)— Cheshire, 1535. £ 189*.
,, — Essex, 1476. £ 245*.
,, — co. Warwick, 1 167. £ 64*.
Cumberton,— Beds, 2109. fi 61.
Cumming, of Altyr, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi 319.
„ of Auchy, N.B. Add 14,836 f. 323.
„ of Logie, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi 321.
„ of Relugas and Presly, N.B. Add.
14,836. f. 335.
Cunningham, of Caprington (Bt.) Add. 14,836.
£ 263.
„ (Cnnynghame) of Milncraig (Bt.)
Add. 23,684. fi 10*. 23,687. £ 25*.}
„ (Cuningham) of co. Donegal. Add
23,693- £ 109.
„ (K.C.B.), of Eye, Oakley, &e Add.
19,125. p. 347.
Cunliffe, of Acton, Denbigh (Bt.) Add. 24,458.
£ 16.
„ of Billington, co. Lancaster, 1549 f.
140*.
„ of Hollings, co. Lane, 1468. £ 93*.

96

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Cunliffe, of London, fr.co. Lane. 1476. ff. 154*.
176*.
„ —co. Derby, 1093. f. 37*.
„ (Owen Cunliffe). Add 24458. fi 133*.
Cuntry, or Coutry, of Reculvers, Kent, 1 106.
fi 19*. 1432. fi 183. 2198. fi 104*.
Add. 5526. p. 34.
Cupper, of Glimpton, Oxon, fr. Shrop. 1095. £
57*. 1097. £ 6b. 1556. £ 127.
„ of Ludlow and Stanton Lacy, Salop,
1396. £ 73*.
„ of Lovington, Somerset, 1141. £ 131.
1445- £ 177*. 1 559- f- 259*-
Cure, of Newington, Surrey, 1046. fi 204 1397.
fi 175. 1433. fi 162*. 1561. £ 246*.
Curling, of Fordwich and Thanet, Kent, 1 106.
£ 24 1432. fi 187. 2198. £ 109. Add.
5507. p. 72. 5526. p. 42.
Currer, of Hollin Hall, Yorks, 1487. £ 477.
4630. p. 112*. Add. 26,739. £ 80*.
„ of Skipton, Yorks. Lansd.,900. £ 406*.
Curt els, of Clye and Toynton, co. Line, 1550.
£ 185*.
„ of Pill, Cornwall, 1079. £ 16. 4031.
£70*. Add. 14,315. p. 119.
„ of Newton, Norfolk, 1 177. fi 135.
1552. fi 72. 6093. p. 103.
„ or Holme, — Cheshire, 1 535. fi 154*.
Curtis, — Kent, 1 106. fi 99*. I432.fi 239. Add.
5507. p. 226. 5526. p. 184.
Curwen, of Camerton, Cumb. 1394. pp. 16. 20.
1415. ff. 39. 40. 1420. ff. 18*. 19*.
1487. ff. 80*. 81. 1499. £ 48. 1536.
ff 33*- 34- IS7I- £ 192*. Add. 18,011.
ff.7*-8.
„ of Stubbe, co. Lane, 1437. £ 69.
„ of Poulton Hall, co. Lane 1437. fi 29.
„ of London, fr. Cumb. 1476. f. 344*.
Curzon, of Croxall, co. Derby, 886. £ 24. 1093.
£11*. 1400. fi 91. i486, fi 58. 1537.
fi 25*. 2134. fi 33*. 6592. fi 23. Egert
996. fi 66. Add. 28,113. £ 71.
„ of Kedleston, co. Derby, 886. fi 24*.
1093. ff. 7*. 8*. 9 (a. *.) 42. 79*. 81*.
i486, ff. 33*. 34*. 35. 36. 1537. fi 26.
2113. fi 101. 2134.fi 34*. Egert. 996.
ff. 9*. 10*. 11. i6*.-i8. Add. 19,125.
p. 367.
„ —Norfolk, 1 1 77. fi 117. 1552. fi 39.
6093 p. 35. Add. 19,125. pp. 354 to
357-

Curzon, of Letheringsett, Norfolk, 1177. f.
151*. 1552. f. 103. 4755. fi 52*. 51S9.
fi 50*. 6093.fi 144*. Add. 19,816. fi 40*.
„ of Beckhall, Norfolk, . fr. co. Derb.
1552. fi 102*.
„ of Waterpery, Oxon, fr. co. Derby.
808. fi 1*. 1095. £ 9*. 1412. £ 78.
1480. £ 5. 1556. fi 28*. 1557. fi 69*.
5187. £ 3*. 6166. p. 144. Lansd. 880.
£8. Add. 11,388. £ 179.
„ — Northants, 1 188. p. 105. 1187. ff.
80. 86*. 91. 95 (a. *.)
Cusack, of Kilstirr, co. Meath, 1425. f. 63.
„ of Ireland. Add. 23,686. £ 18*. (tn).
Cusack-Smith,— (I. Bart). Add 23,685. £ 58.
Cush, of Braunton, Devon, 3288. £ 156*.
Cuss, of Fifield, Wilts,- 1165. fi 97*. 1443. £
197*.
Cust, Earl Brownlow. Add. 14,835. £ 221.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk, Add. 5533. p.
190.
CntcUff, of Ilfordcombe, Devon, 1080. £ 303.
1 163. £ 188*.
Cutcliflre, — Somerset, 1141. £ 48*. 1445. £ 72*.
Cutiar, of Orraland, N.B. Add. 23,686. £ 35*.
Cutler, of Bloherby, co. Leic, 1 1 So. £ 93*.
1187. f. 98. 1189. fi 36*. 1431. fi 30.
6125. ff. 5*. no. 6183. fi 6*.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1444. ff. 57.
68. 1533. fi 132. Add. 5533. p. 86.
„ of Eye, Suffolk, fr. London, 155. fi
56*. 1103.fi 33. 1177.fi 32. I449.fi
35. 1560. f. 37. Add 19,125. p. 370.
„ of Sprowton, Suffolk, 1560. fi 302*.
Add. 19,125. pp. 372. 375.
„ of Field Head, Yorks, 1487. fi 482.
„ of Stainborough, Yorks, 1093. fi 16*.
1487. fi 438. 4630. p. 109. Add. 26,739.
PP- 79-79*-
Cutts, or Cutt, of Childersley, co. Camb,
fr. Essex and Kent, 1043. £ II2- 1401. f.
\/io. 1504. fin. 1534 fi 24. 6774.fr.
,\ 5. 27. 6775. fi 10. 6830. p. 6. Add.
4962. fi 9*.
„ of Debden, Essex, 1 137. £ 92. 1432. f.
86*. 1541.fr. 155. 171*.
„ of London, fr. cos. Staff and York,
1476. fi 100.
„ oi Beeingbery, Kent, fr. Essex, 1548.
£ 89*. Add. 5528. £ 9*. ,
„ —Surrey, 1561.fi 19. < ~" ' -. _
„ of Bell Hagh, Yorks. ' Add. 24458. >
fi 161. (.«).

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

97

D.

Daa, — Cheshire, 1535. f.59*. Add 29,783. fi 38*.
Dabernon, of Donsland, Cornwall, 1 142. fi 17.
1449. £ 17*. 1162.fi 18.
„ of Bradford and Drewsteington, Devon,
889. fi 148. 1080. fi 58. 1 163. fi 184*.
1 164. fi 37*. 3288. fi 137. 1538. f-
246*. 5185. fi 41*. 5871.fi 36.
„ of Stoke Dabernon, Surrey, 11 87. fi
73*. 1 188. p. 100. 1561. fi 257*. Add
14,309. fi 18*. 14,311. ff. 53. 60*.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. fi 225*.
Dabbetott, or Abbetott,— co. Warwick, 1 100. fi
48. 1 167. fi 40*. 6060. fi 68.
- „ or Dabyton, of Redmars, co. Here
ford, 1 140. fi n. 1159.fi n. H42.fi
11. 1545. fi 24
„ (Dabitott)— Salop, 615.fi 238*. 1241.
fi 30*. 1396. fi 74-
„ —co. Worcester, 1043. fi 49- 'S66- f-
118*.
Daborne, of Guildford, Surrey. Add. 4963.
£38*.
Sabridgecourt, of Langdon Hall, co. Warwick,
fr. Hants, noo. ff. 18*. 23. 1167. ff. 13.
14*. 1563. fi 40*. 2156.fi 140*. 6060.
ff. 30*. 33.
of Strathfield, Hants, 1544. fi 40*.
5S65.fi 36.
„ ofOssington, Notts, fr. Hants. 1400.
fi 15. 1555- £3i*.
„ —Northants, 1187. £ 64*. 1188. p.
74-
Daccombe, of Corfe Castle, Dorset, 1 166. £ 25*.
1451.fi 43*- 1539- f- "3-
„ of Hogford, Dorset, 1 166. ff. 79*. 83.
„ of Kingston, Dorset, 1166. fi 68*.
1451.fi 108*. 1539- £iS8.
„ of Rushton, Dorset, 888. £ 47*. 1046.
fi 234*.of Stapleton, Dorset, 888. fi 45-
890. fi 40*. 1046. fi 231*. 1092. f. 41.
1 153. f- 77- '451- ff I3°- J36. 160*.
1539. ff. 20*. 171*. 2186. fi 14.
(Dackomb)— Hunts, fr. Dorset, 890.
£ 40*.
TSaore, v. rynes and Xennard.
Lord. Add. 14,309 ff- '9*- 89
Lord, of the South. Add. 19,126. ff.
1-4. Baron, of Gillesland. 4204- £ 120.
Dacres, Lord-Add. 16,279 P- 378.
of Cheshunt, Herts, 1137. £ 6i*-
" 1432 £51*- 1504- £22. i54i.t «3.
1546 £48*. I547- f- 67*. 6147. £i3*.
-co. Staff, 1424- f- 66. 1505. £ 65*.
._ _/_!' of Witton, Norfolk, 1 177- *• *79&- \$S*-
Dade' fii45*. 475S-f-77. Si89-£67. 6093.
f. xyg. Add. 19,816. £ 59*.

»»»

Dade, of Shaddingfield and Tannington
Suffolk, fr. Norfolk, 1560. £ 309*. 1820
£ 33*-
D'aeth, v. Death.
Dagg, of Treweggett, Cornwall, 1079 £ 138.
1 142. fi 118*. 1149.fi JI9*> n62.fi
123*.
Dakins, of Stubbing Edge, co. Derby, 1093. fi
33*. 1 153. fi 96. 1486.fi 37*. 1537.
fi 53*. 6104 fi 82. Egert. 996. £ 21*.
Add. 24458 £ 245*. 28,113. £ 16.
„ (Dakeyne) of Darley, co. Derby.
Add 28,113. fi 70*.
„ of Linton, Yorks, fr. co. Derby, 1394.
p. 91. 1487. ff. 177*. 427*. 1550. fi
86*. Add. 18,011. fi 105.
„ of Long Cowton, Yorks., 1487. f.
178*.
„ (Dackins) — Salop, 1241. fi 125.
Dade, of Fannington, &c, Suffolk. Add 19,126.
ff. 7-1 1.
de Dagworth, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. fi 20.
Dalre, of Bungay, Suffolk Add. 19,126. fi 134.
Dalacarnall,— Northants, 890. fi 35*.
Dalby, of Reading, Berks, fr. co. Warwick, 1483.
fi 70*. 1530. fi 48. Add. 14,284. p. 41.
„ (Dalbee), of Mutford, Suffolk. Add.
19,126 fi 31.
„ or Dabie, of Brookhampton, co.
Warwick, noo. fi 108. 1167.fi 142. 1195.
fi in. 1563. fi 175*. 6060. £179.
„ — Beds, '2109. £ 60*.
Dale, of Winkle, Cheshire, 1535. fi 123.
„ of Bakewell, co. Derby. Add 24458
ff. 248. 251. 28,113. fi 245(7/?).
„ of Ashborne, co. Derby. Add. 24,458
fi 251*. 28,113 fi 67.
„ of Flagg, co. Derby. Add. 24,458. ff.
248. 251. 28,113. ff. 103. 120. 121.
„ of Clavering, Essex, fr. co. Somerset,
1432. fi 91*. 1541.fi 48*. 6065. fc.107*.
„ of Walden, Herts, 1043. £ 59*. 1401.
fi 19 1534- f- 29. 1546 £ 100. 6769 £ 6.
6770. £ 15. Add 4962. fi 17.
, , of London, fr. Cheshire and Northants,
1463.fi 66.
„ of London, fr. Somerset, 1463. fi 31.
„ of Dale Hall, Suffolk. Add. 19,126.
£ 33-
„ —Berks, 1532. £ 106*.-, Add 4961. £
65. 14,283. fi 65. 14,311. £35.
DaUing, or Dollenge, of Worth, Dorset, 1166.
fi 75. 1451. fi 121*. 1539. fi 164*.
„ of Bungay, Suffolk, Bart. Add 19,126.
fi 38.
DalUson, of Kirmington and Langston, co. Lin
coln, 1097. fi 107. 1 190. £ 6*. 1484.
£ 31. 1550. fi 177*.
„ of Scotney, co. Lincoln, ngo. £ 7.
o

98

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Dalmahoy, of that ilk (Bart.) Add. 14,837. fi
215.
Dalrymple, of Hailes (N.S. Bart.). Add. 23,684.
fi 15*.
Dalston, of Dalston, Cumberland, 1536. fi 5.
3391. fi 1*.
„ of Warcop, Westmoreland, 1435. f. 3.
1564- f- 3-
Dalton, of Hildersham and Wratting, co. Camb,
1043. fi 63. 1401. fi 28. 1534 fi 37*.
6769. fi 7*. 6770. fi 17*. 6774. fi 44.
6775. fi 28. 6830 p. 37. Add. 4962. fi 25.
„ of Derby, co. Derby, 6104, fi 80*.
„ of Thornham and Besham, co. Lane,
891.fi 94. 1437. fi 32*. 1468. fi 76.
¦-- 1549- f- 134*.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1096. fi 61*.
1463. fi 23*.
„ of Sherborne, Northants, 1094. fi 126.
1184.fi I22*. 1 187. fi 15.
„ of Bury, • Suffolk. Add. 19,126. ff.
42-44.
„ of Kingston-upon-Hull, Yorks, 1394.
p. 91. 1415. fi 81. 1420. ff. 71. 2376.
1487. fi 234*. Add. i8.on.fi 90. 29,783.
fi 88.
„ of Heath, Yorks. Add. 26,739. £ 98*.
„ of Slemmingford, &c, Yorks. Add
24,458 fi 210*.
Daitrey, of Fulsutton, Yorks. 1487. fi 498*.
Daly, of Killcleagh, co. Westmeath. Add.
23.693- f- 229.
,, of co. Galway. Add. 23,686. fi 34*.
Dam ant, of Eye, Suffolk- Add. 19,126. fi 49.
Damene ville — co. Glouc. 1543. fi 186*.
Damer, Lord Mil-town. Add. 14,839. ff. 215-216.
Damerell, — Cornwall, 1 142. fi 59. 1149.fi 58-
Il62.fi 62.
Dameron, of Westerfield, Sussex. Add. 19,126.
£53-
D'Amory, Baron. Add. 19,126. £ 61.
Dauterie, or Amery, of Chappell, Devon, 1080.
£ 305*. 1 163. £ 194*.
Damory, or Amory, of Catherington and Yate,
co. Glouc, 1041. fi 84*. 1543. fi 64.
Danby, of Billesby, co. Lincoln, fr. co. York.
1ji50.fi 147.
„ of Farnley, Yorks. 4630. pp. 132. 133.
134. Add. 26,739. £ 92-
„ of Great Langton, Yorks, 1 394. p. .1 79.
1415.fi 19. 1420. fi 133*. 1487. fi 2S7*.
1499. £ 44. 4630. p. 132. Add. 18,011.
fi 152*.
„ of Knaresborough and Braworth,
Yorks, 1394. p. 202. 1415. fi 23. 142O.
fi 148. 1487. fi 285. Add. i8,on..£
167*.
„ of Scruton and Thorpe, Yorks, 805.
ff. 144. 145*. 1394 pp. 180. 293. 1415.
£ 18*. 1420. fi 134. 1487. fi 286. 1499.
fi 44. 4630. pp. 132. 133. Add. 18,011.
fi 153. 26,739 fi 91*.
„ ofYafforth, Yorks, 1394. p. 14. 14 15.
fi 95*. 1420. ff. 63*. 103*. 1487. fi 285.
Add. 18,011. fi 125,

Danby,— Salop, 1241. f. 147*. 1982. fi 34.
Dancer, of Modreeny, Suffolk (I. Bart.). Add.
23,684. fi 36*. 23,685. f. 6ob.(m).
23,687. fi 183.
sand, of Mansfield, Notts, fr. Cheshire, 1400.
fi 75- 1555- f- "3- Add. 24458. f.
442*.
Dandy, or Danny, of Lanreth, Cornwall, 1079.
fi 90*. 1 142. fi 54. 1 149. fi 52. 1 162.
f.56.
„ of Combs and Ipswich, Suffolk, 1560.fi
300*. Add. 19,126. ff. 112. 116.
Dane, of Heme, Kent, 1106. fi in*. 1432. p.
246. Add. 5526. p. 208.
„ of London, fr. Herts. 1096. £ $3*.
1463- £ 5-
„ of Bristol and Wells, Somerset, 1385.
£ 44*. 1445. £ 224*. 1559. £ 23*.
Add. 12477. fi 9 -
Danforth, of Framlingham, Suffolk. Add. 19,126.
f.67.
Daniell, of Daresbury, Cheshire, 774. fi 19*.
1045. fi 102. 1424. fi 49. 1505. fi 49.
1535. ff. 113. 217*. 21 19. ff. 104*. 106*.
2142. ffi 25*. 128. 2187. fi 43. 5182. "
fi 32. 
„ " of Tabley, Cheshire, 1424. £ 48*.
1505. £ 48*. 1535. £ in*. 2119. fi
102*. 2142. fi 49. 2187. £42*.
„ of Tideswell, co. Derby, i486. £ 33*.
Add. 28,113. £51.
„ ¦ of London, fr. Beds, 1476. fi 335.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476 fi 254*.
„ of Bedminster, Somerset, 1 141. fi 126.
1445. fi 173- 1559 £253-
„ of Acton, Suffolk, 1 5 5. fi 30*. 1 103. fi 3.
1 177. fi 7*. 1449 £ 14. 1560. £ 9*.
1820. fi 17. Add. 19,126. ff. 69.70.
„ of Stoke-by-Clare, Suffolk, fr. co.
'"'.. Cheshire, 1103.fi 17*. 1177.fi 18*. '449-
fi 24*. 1560. fi 24.
„ of St. Margarets, Wilts, fr. co-
. Cheshire, 888. fi 5*. nil. fi 47. 1165.
fi 72*. 1 181. fi 48. 1443. fi 177. 1565.
fi 16. 5184. p. 33.
„ of Beswick, Yorks, 1394. p. 80. 1171.
fi 46. 1415. fi 76*. 1420. fi 62. 1487.
ff. 218*. 219 Add. 18,011. fi 81.
„ — Beds, 2109. ff. 62. 90*.
„ — co. Staff, 1415.fi 132*. 1570. fi 44. - •¦ •
6128. fi 19. ":
„ (Danyen) — Sussex, 1 546. fi 52. " " v_. ~'v_.
Daniers, of Bradley, Cheshire, 1 505. fi 120*.
1535.fr. 63*. 97*. 21 19. ff. 101*. 104.
105*. 107. 2142. fi 44. 2187. fi io.
Add. 5529.fi. 19..
„ of Chenrytree Hurst, Cheshire, 21 19
f. 102.
Dannerse, — Oxon. Add. 14,315. p. 80.
Dannett, of Westhope; Salop, fr. co. Leic,
1341. £ 77. 1982. f. 1. 4204. £ 139*.
Add. 14,314. f. 65.
„ of Dannett Hall, Surrey. Add.
14,311. fi 19*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

99

Dannett, or Dannatt,— co. Leic, 1 1 So. ff. 27*.
34- 1 187.. f. 114*. 1 189. ff. 31. 42.
6125. ff. 39. 45*. 1431. fi 35. 6183.
ff. 40. 46*.
Dansie, of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. £ 93*.
Danvers v. Davers.
„ of Worminghall, Bucks. Add. 14,309.
~- £78.
,, of Swithland, co. Leic, 11 80. fi 52*.
1187.fi 118. 6125.fi 58*. 6183^.59*.
Add. 28,113. f- H7*.
„ of Blisworth, Northants, fr. Oxon and
Wilts, 890. fi 22. 1094. ff. 159. 161*.
1184. ff. 157. 158*. 1187.fi 12. "88.
p.4. 1553- £217-
„ of Liverpool and Bath. Add
24,458. £ 281.
J, or Davers, of Adderbury, Oxon,
1557.fi 88*. 1480. fi 19*.
„ of Colthorpe and Banbury, Oxon, 808.
fi 46. 1095. ff. 36. 43. 1097. fi 2.
1 139. fi 52*. 1 180. fi 19*. 1 189. fi 20*.
1412. ff. 95*. 99*. 106. 1431. fi 13*.
1556. fi 43. 1557. f- 16. 4031. fi 73*-
4204. ff. 65. 161*. 238*. 6066. fi 101*.
Lansd. 880. fi 35. Add. 1 1,388. fi 181*.
„ of Culworth, Oxon, 808. fi 45*. 1095.
fi 43. 1102.fi 27*. 1151.fi 26. 1193.
fi 27. 1391. fi 30*. 1412. fi 99- .1480.
fi 41. 1533. fi 173*. 2156. fi 77*.
„ of Morton, Oxon, 1557. fi 32*.- 1480.
fi 46.
„ of Prescott, Oxon, 808. fi 8.
„ of Clare, Suffolk, fr. Bucks, 891. fi 14.
1449. £ 5°*. 15°°- *"• '55*.
„ of Rotherfield, Sussex, 1562. £ 86*.
Daras, — Salop, 1396. £166.
Darbishire, of Manchester. Add. 24458. £
70*.
Darby or Derby, of Walton, co. Leic, 11 80. £
9*. 1187.fi 101*. 1431. fi 10*. 6125.
fi 16*. 6183. fi 17*.
„ of Bennington, co. Lincoln, 1097.fi
85. 1190.fi 29. 1484. fi 22. 1550.fi
167*. y
of Tuddenham and Bury'St. Ed
munds, Suffolk, 1560. fi 266*. 1820. fi
21.
„ of Bramford, Suffolk. Add.19.126.fi
81.
„ of Framlingham, &c, Suffolk. Add.
19,126. ff. 83. 84
Darcy, Earl Rivers, 1073. fi 187*.
— - -„ Lord, of Aston, Yorks, 1073. fi 289.
1 171. fi 43*- J394- PP- 7- 36. 1415- ff
49.59*. 1487.fi 6*. 1420.fi. 24* 37-
2156. £89. 4630. PP- "6. 126. Add.
26,739. ff. 83. 89
of Chiche, Essex.fr. London, H37-J.
" 38 1432. fi 30. 6065. fi 4- Add.
19,126. ff. 89.91-
of Tiptree, Essex, fr. London, 1 541. £
" 72*. I542.fi 91*-
of Addington, Northants, fr. co. York,
" 8go.fi 39 1094 £115. n84.fi 112.
1 187. fi 46*. "88. p. 57- 1535- f- 43*-
,553. fi 185. 6066.fi 64*.

sarcy, of Toleshunt, Essex, 6065. fi 5*.
—Beds, 2109. f. 71*.
— co. Derby, 1093. fi 125*. Egert.
996. fi 20.
— co. Lincoln, 1097. £ 49. 1190. £ 61.
1484. f. 30. 1550. fi 78.
— co. Staff, 157a fi 14
—Yorks, 805. fi 148. 157*.
of Platten, co. Meath, &e, 1425. ff.
76. 77. 118. 1429. fi 44. Add. 23,686.
£ 22.
Darell V. Darrell.
Dares, of Loddon, Norfolk, i552.fi 159*. 4755.
fi 84*. 5189. fi 70. 6093. f. 190*. Add.
19,816. £ 68.
Darington, of Spaldwick, Hunts, 890. £ 48.
Darkenold, of Canterbury, Kent, 1484. fi 64*.
1548.fi 160.
-Darlaston, — Cheshire, 1535. £ 180.
„ -^co. Staff, 21 13 £ 1 10*. 6128. £ 20.
Darley, of Northill, Cornwall, fr. co. York,
1164.fi 61*.
„ of Buttercrambe, Yorks, 1394 p. 55.
1415. £ 64*. 1420. £ 43*. 1487. £
290*. Add. 18,011. £ 626. 24,458. £
240.
„ of Ardsley, Yorks, 805. fi 143.
„ or Derley, co. Derby, 1982. fi 95*.
1394. p. 55. 1415. £ 646. 1420. £ 44.
1487. £ 290*. Add. 18,01 1. £ 63.
Darling, of London, fr. co. Warwick, 1476. £
286*.
„ of Hull. Add 24458. £ 58.
Darlington, Kent. Add. 16,279. p. 335.
Darnell, of Essendine, Herts, fr. London, 1546.
£ 105. 1547. ff, 42. 84*. 6147. fi 56*.
„ of Thomholme, co. Line, 1097. fi
, 44*. 1190. ff. 68. 71. 1484 ff. 6.12.
/ " 1550.fi 91.
I „ of London. Add. 5533. p. 82.
Barrell and Darell.
„ of West Woodhey, Berks, fr. Wilts,
1532. fi 99*. 4108. £ 34 6173. fi
31*. Add. 4961. £ 37*. 14,283. fi 37*.
„ of Fulmer, Bucks, 1102. £ 90. 1151.
£89. 1 193. £90. 1234. £12. 1391.
£96. 1533. fi 193.
„ of Crowan, Cornwall, 1079. fi 163*.
1142. £ 156*. 1149, £ 156*. 1162.fi
158*.
„ of Cale Hill, Kent, 1 106. fi 206. 1432.
£ 316*. 2156. ff. 74*-76*. 4204. £ 193. '
Add. 5507. p. 88 (a.*.) 5526. p. 429.
- 5532- p. 114.
„ of Scotney, Kent, 1076. £205. 1106.
£ 221*. 1432. £ 326. 1484. £ 62*. Add
5507. p. 389. 14,311. ff. 25*. 28*.
„ of Radford, Notts, fr. Ken^ 140a £
45- J55S.fi 75*-
. „ of Littlecote, Wilts, fr. co. York, 1443.
£224. 5184. p. 14.
„ of Richmond Hill, Surrey. Add.
23,680. £ 109.

100

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Darrell, of Sessay, Yorks, 1394. p. 45. 1415.
f. 63*. 1420. f. 40. 1487. fi 297*. Add.
iS.on.ff. 59,61*. 26,739 fi 93*. 29,783.
ff. 55*. 56.
» . — Northants, 1553: fi 219
„ — Oxon, 1556. fi 45*. 1557 fi 91*.
Darvill,— Yorks, 1 5 50. fi 237.
Dashwood, of Peyton Hall, Suffolk. Add
19,126. ff. 99-103.
„ of Beccles, Suffolk. Add.19.126.fi
105.
Dassctt, or Darsett, ot Hill Morton, co. War
wick, noo. fi 58. 1 167. fi 50. 1563.
. ff. 90. 232*. 6060. fi 13.
„ or Darsett, of Riccall, Yorks, fr. co.
Warr., 1394. p. 62. 1415. fi 67. 1420.
£ 49*. 1487. £ 197*. Add. 18,011. fi
68*.
Daston, of Hinton and Ipsley, co. Warwick,
¦ 1 100. fi 54. 1 167. fi 46. 1563. fi 78**.
6060. £ 85.
,, — co. Glouc, 1041. £ 62.
Daubigny, Earl of Arundel, 1041. £ 7.
Daubeney, of Upton-on-Severn, Co. Wore,
ff. 5814.fi 15. 5841. £ 7. Add. 19,816.
£ 107.
„ of London, 1096. £ 69. 1463. £ 32*.
„ of Sarington, Norfolk, fr. co. Line,
1177. fi 155. 1552. fi 109. 4755.fi 56*.
5189. fi 55*. 6093.fi 149. Add 19,816.
f.43-
„ of Cirencester, Worc, 1043. fi 24. 1352.
fi 7. 1486.fi 4*. 1566 fi 68*.
„ —co. Lincoln, 1097. fi 45. 1 190. fi 85.
Dauncy, of Saffron Walden, Essex, 1541. fi 241.
Daunsey, or Dauntesey, of Brinsop, co. Here
ford, 1 140. ff. 4. 37*. 97*. i 1 5 9. ff. 4. 37* .
1442. ff. 4. 37*. 1545. ff. 5. 46*. 59.
Add 19,815. ff. 1. 31*.
„ or Dauntesey, of Lavington, Wilts,
888.fi 14. 1165.fi 42*. 1181.ff.30. 51.
1443 fi 35*- 1532. fi 21*. 1565. £ 22.
5184 p. 40.
Daunt, of Oldpen, qo. Glouc, 1041. f.44 1191.
£ 18*. 1543. fi 29.
Davalles, — Devon, 1091.fi 123.
Davenant, of Davenant's Lands, Essex, 1 137.
fi 109. 1432. fi 103*. 1398. fi 22*.
1541. £ 176. 1542. £ 71*.
Davenport, of Henbury, Cheshire, fi 891. fi 99*.
1424. £ 46. 1505. £ 45. 2142. fi 54*.
1535. fi 119. 2142. ff. 54. 129. 2187.
fi 49*. 5182. fi 28. Add. 29,782. fi 45.
29,783. ff. 21. 44. ;
„ of Welltrougb, Cheshire, 1424. f . 47*.
1505. £ 47*. 1535. £ 118. 51S2. £ 29
2142. fi 129*. 2187. fi 51. Add. 29,782.
f.45-
„ of Woodford, Cheshire, 1424. fi 47.
1505. fi 46. 1535.fi 119*. 2119.fi 175,
2142. ff. 45*. 51*. 129*. 2187. £ 50*.
„ of Bromhall, Cheshire, 891. fi 96*.
1424. fi 45*. 1505. fi 44*. 1535. ff.
118*. 182. 2119. fi 229*. 2142. fi 129.
2187. fi 48*.

Davenport, of Baguley, Cheshire,' 21 19. fi 234.
„ of Blackhurst, Cheshire, 21 19. f. 174.
„ of Calveley, Cheshire, 1424. fi 46*.
1505. ff. 31. 45*. I535- ff "6*. 117*.
182. 218. 2076. fi 18*. 2119. ff. 233*.
241*. 2142. fi 129. 2187. £.50* 2230.
£ 35*. Add. 29,782. f. 45.
„ of Chester, 891. £ 96*. 2142. £ 130.
„ of Chorley, Cheshire, 2 119. £ 234.
„ of Davenport, Cheshire, 1535. £ 117.
2142. £ 57. 223a fi 32. 2 1 19. fi 234*.
2142. ff. 59. 107. 130. 2187. fi 47*.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire and co. Leic,
1476. fi 402*. 1551.fi 129*.
„ of Coventry, co. Warwick, fr. Cheshire,
1100.fi 109. 1167.fi 144. 1563. fi 179*.
6060. fi 181.
„ of Lavington, Wilts, fr. Cheshire, 1 443
fi 223*.
„ — Salop, 1241. fi 18.
Daventrce,— Bucks, 1 187. ff. 93. 95. 1 1 88. p.
105.
Davers, v. Danvers.
„ of Chamber House, Bucks, 1102. fi
118*. 1139. fi 52*. 1391.fi 124.
„ of Dauntesey, co. Hereford, 1041. ff.
58. 64*. 1073. fi 174*. 1140. fi 54 1159.
fi 52*. 1442. fi 53*. 1545. fi 59.
„ of London, 1096. fi 28*.
„ of Rougham, Norfolk. Add. 19,126.
ff. 121-124.
„ of Clare, Suffolk Add. 19,126. fi 126.
„ of Culworth, co: Warwick, noo. fi
41*. 1167. £ 34. 6060. ff. 21. 67.
„ — co. Wore, 1 1 80. fi 19*. 1189. fi
20*. 143 1. fi 13*.
Daves, of Affordby, co. Warwick, 1 167. fi 44*.
David, — Hereford, 1 140. fi 109.
Davis, of Berecourt, Berks, 1483. £ 127. 1530.fi
58. Add. 14,284, p. 70.
XX.„ of London, 1476. fi 179.
*L of- London, fr. co. Wore, 1476. fi
X170*.
„ (Davies) of London, fr. Devon, 1476.
fi 284.^
of London, fr. co. Leic, 1096. £ 159.
Add. 5533. pp. 161. 166.
„ of London, fr. Salop., 1476. £ 85*.
„ of Marshe, Salop, fr. co. Montgom,
615. £ 237*. 1241. £ 38. . 1396. fi
103*. 1982.fr. 103*. 161*. Add 14,314.
fi 120.
„ of Whitchurch, Salop, 1241. £ 144.
„ of Tickenham, Somerset, fr. co. Car
marthen, 1 141. 30. 1445. fi 48*. 1559.
fi 160*.
„ of Droitwich, co. Wore, fr. Shrop.,
1566. fi 168*.
„ —co. Glouc, 1543. fi 75.
„ —co. Hereford, 1545. fi 121*.
„ (Davys) of Carrickfergus, and of
Hampstead, go. Dublin. Add. 23,693.
ff. 216.217.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

101

Davis and Davys, of Ireland. Add. 23,700.
ff. 152*. to 161*.
Davillers, of Erwarton, Suffolk. Add. 19,126.
f- 139
Dayville,— Suffolk, 891. fi 28*. 1449. £ 56. 1560.
ff. 40. 306*.
Davilcs, of Morland, Devon, 889. £ 96*. 1080.
£405. 1091. fi 69. 1399. fi 60*. 1538.
fi 179*. 3288. fi 81*. 5185. fi 42. 5840.
fi 69*. 5871. fi 27.
Davy, of Trewetheneth, Cornwall, 4031. fi 80.
„ of Crediton, Devon, 1163. fi 65*.
„ of Midland and Sandford, Devon,
1080. fi 96. 1 163. ff. 20*. 223.
„ or Dewy, of Beauford, Devon, 1164.
fi 45*-
„ of Maidstone, Kent, fr. Norfolk, 1 106.
fi 174. 1432. fi 288*. Add. 5507. p. 348.
5526. p. 363.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 96.
„ of Geyst, Norfolk, 1552. ff. 83. 257.
„ of Gunthorpe, Norfolk, 1 177. ff. 48*
(...*.) 136. 1552. ff. 72*. 98*. 4755. fi 51.
4756. fi 81. 5189. fi 21*. 6093. fi 142*.
Add. 19,816. fi 39.
„ of Norwich, Norfolk, 1552. fi 259.
„ of Stanfield, Norfolk, 11 77. £ 135*.
4755- £ 37*- 5189 £ 4i*. 6093. p. 105.
Add. 19,816. fi-29*.
Davy, of Hoxne, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. fi 143.
„ of Onehouse, Suffolk. Add. 19,126.
£ 147.
„ of Rumburg and Yoxford, Suffolk.
Add. 19,127. ff. 149. 150.
„ of West Hall, Suffolk Add. 1 9, 1 27. ff.
151-154.
„ of Mileham, Suffolk. Add.19.127.fi
156.
„ of Hamham, Wilts, 1165. fi 2. 1443.
fi 48*. .
„ -co. Staff, fr. Norfolk, 1476. £ 96.
Dawes, of Stapleton, co. Leic, 1077. £ no.
1 173. £ 100. 1 180. £ 62*. 1 187. £ 120*.
1 189. fi 79*. 1 195. fi 94*- 1241. fi 149*.
1431. f.71. 6125. ff. 65*. iii- 6183.fi
66*. Add. 5509. fi 26*. " .
„ of London, 1077.fi no. 1173.fi 100.
„ of London, f/. Norfolk, 1476. fi 388*.
„ of York Add. 26,739. fi 96*.
„ of London, fr. cos. Staff, and Beds.
- Add. 5533- P- '47-
'" oawkes, of Dover. Add. 5528. £ 64*.
Dawley, of Ibsley, Hants, 1544. £ 178*.
Dawnay, of Cowick and Sessay, Yorks, 805. ff.
146-147*- 1394- PP- 45- 46*. 1415- £
62. 1420. fi o(a. *.) 1487. ff. 256*.
298. 4630. p. 128. Add. 14,839. ff. 81.
82. 18,011. ff. 59*-6i*. 26,739. ff. 89-
91. 29,783. ff. 50*. 51.
—Devon, 1080. fi 103. 1091. £ 70.
" 1538. fi 180*. 5871. fi 27.
Dawson, Earl of Dawtrey. Add. 14,839 £ 169
Earl of Portarlington. Add. 14,838.
" fi 326.

Dawson, of Nantwich, Cheshire, 1424. fi 90*.
1505. fi 89.
„ of Unthank, co. Durham, fr. West
moreland, 1 1 53. f. 41. 1 168. fi 41*.
1397. fi 240. 1 540. fi 1 19.
„ of Burgh, Suffolk Add. 19,126. fi 166.
„ of Edwardston, Suffolk. Add 19,126.
fi 168.
„ of Framlingham, Suffolk. Add 19,126.
fi 170.
„ of Copley, co. York, Add 24458. fi
1 17*.
„ of Azerley, Yorks, 4630. p. 137. Add
26,739- f- 94-
„ of Ripon, Yorks, 1487. fi 444. '4630.
p. 138. Add. 26,739. f- 95*.
„ of Spaldinghohne.Yorks, 1394. p. 130.
1415.fi 91*. 1420. fi 94*. 1487. fi 331.
Add. 18,011. fi 114*. 29,783. £ So.
„ of Leeds and Morley, Yorks. Add.
24,458. fi 24*.
„ of Wakefield. Add 24458. fi 205.
„ of Ireland. Add. 23,686. £ 3.
Dawtrey, of Woodcot, Hants, fr. Sussex, 1 139.
£ 6*. 1544. ff. 16. 68*. -5865. £ 15. 8156.
fi 13*.
„ —Kent, fr. Sussex, 1484. £ 66.
„ of Moorhouse and Petworth, Sussex,
1076.fi 122*. 1084. fi 23. 1194.fi 3.
1135. fi 9. 1406. fi 2. 1484 fi 66. 1562.
£23. 5829. fi 18. 6164. £78.
„ ofElslack, Yorks, 1394. p. 205. 1415.
£ 23*. 1420. £ 149*. 1487. £ 154.
„ — Surrey. Add. 14,311. £64
Day, or Dee, of Bray, Berks, from Salop, 1532.
£103. 6173. fi 32*. Add. 4961. £ 51.
14,283. £51.
„ of Windsor, Berks, fr. Bucks, 1532. £
16*. Add. 4961.fi 50*. 14,283. fi 50*.
„ of Wisbeach, co. Camb, 1043. f. 95.
1401. fi 24*. 1534. fi 34*. 6769. fi 28*.
6770. fi 50. 6774. f. 41*. 6775, fi 24*.
6830. p. 89. Add. 4962. fi 22.
„ of Henings, Kent, fr. London, 1548. t
164.
„ of Dorking, and Rusham, Surrey,
1046. fi 77. 1147.fi 122. 1397. fi 116.
1430. f. 128. 1433. fi 109. 1561. fi 167.
„ of Hallon, Salop, 1982. fi 76.
„ of Newport, Salop, 1982. fi 36.
„ ofWefield, Salop, 1241.fi 78*_ Add.
14,314. f 59*-
„ of Yoxford, Suffolk Add 19,126. £
177-
„ the Printer. Add. i9.126.fi 179
„ of Wilford, Wilts, 1165.fi 51*. 1443.
142*.
„ —co. Derby, 1 137. fi 19. 1432. £ 7*.
Daylwyn,— Somerset, 1385. fi 14. 1559. fi 57*.
Dayrell, of Lillingstone, Bucks, 1 102. ff. 81*.
102. 1139.fi 39*. 1151.fi 80ft. Ii93.fi
81*. 1234. fi 22*. 1391. ff. 87*. 164.
1533.fi 48*. 5181. p. I. '
„ pf Bilton, Yorks. Add, 14.309. fi 60*.

102

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Dayrrays, — Northumb, 1 153. fi 52. 1448. fi 13.
1 554- f- 33*-
Deacon, of London.fr. Somerset, 1476. fi 91*.
„ of London, fr. co. Worc, 1476. f. 49*.
Deacons, of Newton and Wasperton, co. War
wick, fr. Beds, 1 100 fi 74. 1 167. f 78.
1563. f.98. 6o6o.ff. 122. 123.
Deane, Baron Muskerry. Add. 14,839. fi 265.
„ of Beeley, co. Derby, fr. co. Staff.,
1093. fi 1 14 1 1 53. fi 96. 1 537. fi 54*.
Egert. 996. fi 47*. Add. 28,113 £ 45*-
„ of Newton Patrock, Devon, 1080. f.
293. 1163.fi 169*.
„ of Dynes, Essex, fr. co. Lane, 1 137. f.
•44*. 1432. fi 36. 1541.fi 107.
„ of Maplestead, Essex, fr. co. Lane,
6065. fi 64*. 1542. fi 107.
„ of Gosfield, Essex, 4204. fi 175.
„ of Great Dean, co. Glouc, 1041. fi 28.
1 191. fi 24*. 1543. fi 7*.
„ , (Dean), of Deneland, Hants,- 1463.
fi 53*. 1544. ff. 78*. 173.
„ of Mattingley, Hants, fr. Berks, 1 544.
fi 151*.
„ of Barrowby, co. Lincoln, 1 190. f. 36.
1550. fi 8*. 1560.fi 5.
„ of Tilney, Norfolk, 11 77. fi 107. 1552.
£ 25. 4755- £ 27*. 5189- f- 39 6093.
p. 64. 6166. p. 58. Add. 11,388. p. 73*.
19,816. fi 23.
„ of Mawdelyne, Norfolk. Add. 14,309.
fi 123.
„ or wood, of Codsall, co. Staff, 1439
fi 9*. 6128. fi 77. ,.
„ of Stutton, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. ff.'
195-198.
„ (Dean), of Saltingstall, Yorks, 1487.
fi 341*-
„ — Berks, 1532. fi 104*. 6173.fi 88.
Add. 4961. fi 54 14,283. fi 53*. v
„ — Kent Add. 14,311. fi 20. 16,279. p."
421.
„ — Suffolk, 1552. fi 203. Add. 19,136.
ff. 192-194.
„ of Dromore, co. Cork, &c. Add.
23,693. ff. 199 201.
Death, or D'aeth, of Dartford and North Cray,
Kent, 1106.fi 127. 1432.fi 255*. Add.
5507. p. 275*. 5526. p. 259. Add.
5509 £ 37-
Debancke, of Hartshorne, co. Derby, 1093. fi
in. 1537. fi 120.
Debden, of Brampton, Suffolk, 1560. fi 307*.
Add. 19,126. fi 209.
Debenham, of Wenham, Suffolk. Add. 19,126.
fi 211.
Deck, of Bury, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. fi 216.
Deckling, — Kent. Add. 5532. p. 135.
Dee, of Chichester, Sussex, fr. Shrop, 1076. fi
67*. 1084. fi 126. 1 135. fi 112. 1194.
fi 140. 1406. fi 102. 1562.fi 194. 4109.
fi 62.
Deedes, of Hyfhe, Kent Add. 5,528. fi 136.
Degge, of Derby, 6104. fi 115.

Degge, of Colton, Staff. Add. 24458. fi 235*.
Beicrow, de Crial, or de Crow, of London, fr.
Suffolk. Add. 5533. p. 199.
Deincourt, Barony of. SI. 1429. fi 69.
„ co. Derby, 886. fi 9. 1093. fi 27*.
1537.fi 5*. 2134. fi 15*- Egert.996.fi
71.
„ —Yorks, 1415. ff. 61. 97*. 1420. ff.
38*. 235*. 1487. fi 250*.
¦ „ (d'-Byncourt), — Line, ic97.fi 116*.
1 190. fi 51. 1484. fi 33.
De ia Chambre, of Radmile, Sussex, 1076. fi
107*. 1084- fi 58. 1 135. fi 44 1 194.
fi 37. 1406. £ 77. 1562. £ 146*. -5829
£ 126*. 6164. £ 32.
De la Cross,— Devon, 10S0, £ 245. 1 163. £ 87.
Delaford, — Devonshire, 1 163. ff. 23. 226*. 3288.
£ 136*.
Delabay, of Shepreth, co. Camb., 1401. fi 16.
1534. fi 91*. 6769. fi 3*. 6770. £ 7.
6774. £ 33. 6775. £ 16. Add. 4962.
£ 15.
-,, of Lynn, Dorset, 1539. £ 180.
„ of Arkeston, co. Hereford, 1 1 59. £ 19.
1442. fi 19. 1545. fi 124*.
„ of Spaldington, Yorks, 6070. fi 84*.
„ — Cornwall, 4031.fi 72.
„ — Northants, 1 187. fi 95.
„ —Sussex, 1562. ff. 57*. 95.
Delahyde, of Moyclare, Ireland. Add 23,693. f.
227.
Delamare, of Markhay, Bucks, 1 139. ff. 85.
100. 1429. fi 71. 1533. ff. 12*. 71. 5181.
p. 67. 5832. fi 59. 5868. fi 57.
„ — co. Hereford, 1545. fi 113.
„ — Norfolk, 1552.fi 62*.
„ —Notts, 1400. fi 15. 1555. fi 32.
„ — co. Warwick, fr. Glamorgan, noo.
fi 22. 1 167. ff. 14*. 37*.
De la DXere, of Aldermaston, Berks, 1 139. ff.
85. 100. 1532. fi 51*. 1544. fi 40*. 4108.
fi 29. 5865. fi 36.
„ ^pf Bradwell, Essex. Add. 19,126.
fi 227. .
Delane, of Elphn, co. Roscommon. Add.
23,686. fi 39.
Deiany, of Ireland (Notes.) Add. 23,685. fi
174*.
Delap, of Antigua. Add. 23,690. fi 6o(m).
Delapinde, of Battle Hall, Kent, 1548. f. 127.
Add. 16,279. p. 410.
Delariver, of Bransby, 1394. pp. '13. 147.
1415. ff. 10. n*. 40*. 1420. ff. 20*. 30.
108. 1487. ff. 61*. 173. 1499. £ 24.
Add. 18,011. f. 39*.
Delavale, or Daliander, of Buckland, Surrey,
1046. £38. 1 1 47. fi 56. 1397. fi 76.
1430. fi 62. 1433. f- 71- 1561. fi 127.
Add. 4963. £ 69*. 12478. £ 25.
„ of Seaton Delaval, Northumb., n 53.
£51*. 1171. fi 80b. 1448. fi 7*. 1554.
fi 22*. 6093. fi 87. 14,839. ff. 282-284.
Delaune, of Sharsted, Kent, fr. London. Add
5507. p. 385.

AND MANUSCRIPTS. IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

103

Delaware, v. West.
„ Lord. 1073. fi 270*. 1982. fin 5*.
SI. 1429. fi 71*. Add. 16,279. p. 420.
De Xlgne. — Add. 19,126. fi 282.
Delony, of London, 1463.fi 37*.
Delves, of Doddington, Cheshire, fr. co. Staff,
1045. £ i°8- 1424. fi 48. 1505. fi 48.
1535. ff. 105*. 106. 2142. ff. 63. 145. 149.
2187. fi 44. 2230. fi 31. 5182. fi 35.
Add. 29,782. fi 45*. 29,783. ff. 35. 35*.
„ of Knutsford, Cheshire, 2142. fi 147.
„ of Crediton, Devon, 1080. fi 235*.
1163.fi 71.
„ — co. Derby, 1093. fi 66*.
Delwood, — co. Camb, 1043. fi 104. 1401. £ 71*.
Add. 4962. fi 67.
Dempster, of Pitliver, co. Fife. Add. 14,837. fi
189.
Denardeston, or Denston, of Denardeston,
Suffolk. Add. 19,126. 326.
Denby, of Denby, Yorks, 1487. fi 77J
de Dene, lord of Buckton, Kent. Add. 5509.
f.2.
Deneband, of Henton, Somerset, 1385. fi 34.
1559 fi 8*.
„ — Kent, 1548. fi 116*.
Denebaud,— Devon, 1091. fi 40*. 3288. fi 42.
587i.fi 19
Deneres, — co. Hereford, 1140. fi 108.
Denford, of Lambome, Berks. 108 1, fi 24*.
1532. fi 11.
D'Engaine, v. Engalne.
„ of Brumsted, Norfolk, fr. co. Camb,
1 177. fi 165. 1552. fi 131*. 4755- £
69*. 5189. f. 63. 5823. £ 59. 6093. £
167*. Add. 19,816. fi 52*.
de Denham, — Suffolk. Add. 19,126. fi 340.
Denham, of Borestall, Bucks, 1 1 39. fi 80*.
1234 £ 22. 1391. fi 87. 1533. ff. 16.
186. 5181. p. 30. 5832. fi 31*. 5868.
fi 29*.
„ of Bevercotes, co. Derby. Add.
28,113. fi "6*.
„• of Egham, Surrey. Add. 12478.fi 18.
„ — co. Camb, 1401.fi 36. Add. 4962. fi
32*.
„ —Devon, 1080. fi 377*. 3288. fi 15 1*.
5840. £ 20*.
„ of West Shields (N.S. Bart.) with
remainder to the heirs male of his sister.
Add. 23,684. fi 15. 23,686. fi 37.
Denison, of Kilnwick, Yorks, &e Add. 24,458.
fi 174. '
^- - Denman, Lord. Add. 24458. f- 228*.
-'•¦' . of Bakewell, co. Derby. Add. 28,113.
fi 34*-
of East Retford, Notts. Add. 23,687.
- fi 123.
of New Hall Grange, Yorks, 1394. p.
" 259 1415. f- 32- H20. fi 185*. 1487.
fi 315*- I57I- f- l63- 6070*. 84*. Add.
18,01 1. £ 206*. 26,739. f- 93*-
of Tickhill, Yorks, 4630. p. 134
¦nenne, of Denne Hill and Kingston, Kent, 1 106.
ff 85. no*. 1432- ff 230*. 245. Add.
5507. pp. 198- 245- 245* 246. 5526. pp.
155 206. 5528. ff. 168. 171*.

Dennis, of Camraleigh, Beds, 2109. fi 90.
., of Menhiniott, Cornwall, fr. Devon,
1079. fi 177*. 1142. fi 9. 1149.fi 10.
1 162. fi IO.
„ of Holcombe, Devon, 889. fi 148.
1091. ff. 92. 107. 1399. fi 103. 3288.
ff. 57. 135. 140*. 5182.fi 44. 5840.fi
120. 5871.fi 36.
„ of Mattcott, Devon, 889. fi 96. 1080.
ff. 102*. 404. 1091. fi 70*. 1163. £
123*. 1399. £ 60. 1538. £ 181*. 5185.
£43. 5187. £27.
v of Orleigh, Devon, 889. fi 94. 1080.
ff. 103. 403*. 1091. £ 70. 1 163. £ i6_j-5.
1399. fi 58*. 1538. fi 180*. 3288: fi 48.
5185. fi 42*. 5840. fi 67*. 5811. £26*.
Add. 14,315. p. 43.
,, of Padstowe, Devon, 88g. £ 90. 1091.
£ 73. 3288. £ 106.
„ of Raleigh, Devon, 889. ff. 58. 153*.
1538. £ 217*.
„ of Allyston and Gloucester, ca Glouc,
1041. ff. 46*. 50*. 1543. ff. 37*. 39*.
„ of Pulcherchurch, co. Glouc, 1543. £
75*.
„ of Shahkling, Hants, 1544. £ 149*.
„ — Somerset, 1559. £ 96*.
„ (Dennys)— Hunts, 1075. f. 36*.
1 1 79 £ 76*. Cott. JuL F. viii. £ 36*.
Dennison, of Newcastle-on-Tyne. Add 24458.
£ 26.
„ of Semer, Yorks. Add. 24458. ff. 37*.
174.
Denny, Earl of Norwich. Add. 19,126. ff. 285-
288*.
„ of Waltham, Baron, 1073. £ 185*.
„ of Howe, Norfolk, 1177.fi 169. 1432.
fi 51*. 1541. £83. 1552. ff. 172.254*.
4755. fi 89*. 5189 fi 73. 6093. fi 197.
Add. 19,816. fi 73.
„ of Heydon, Norfolk. Add. 19,816. £
44-
„ of Bawdsey, Suffolk. Add 19,126.
fi 290.
„ of Beccles, Suffolk. Add 19126. £
292.
„ of Eye, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. £ 304.
„ of SwefHing, Suffolk Add. 19,126.
ff. 306. 307*.
„ of Yoxford, Suffolk. Add. 19,126. £
294.
„ of Tralee, co. Kerry (I. Bart ) Add.
23,684. ff. 4*. 5*- 23,685. ff. 69-73.
23.693- ff- 203-213. 23,694 £ 193*.
Denseli, of Wear, Devon, 1091. £ 59. 1394. £
263. 141 5. £ 33. 1420. £ 189. 1538.
£ 93-
• „ (Denshull), or Densyll, of Houghton,
Notts, fr. Cornwall, 1082. £ 71. 1555. £
5'-
Denston, — Beds, 2109. £ 9. 4600. p. 2.
Dent, of Newcastle-on-Tyne. Add. 12,477. £ 15.
Dentitb, — co. Hereford, 1 140. £ 10. 1442.fi a*.

io4

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Denton, of Hillcsdon, Berks, 1 102. f. 87. 1 140.
fi 42. 1151. f. 86. 1159.fi 42. I)[93-
fi 87. 1234. fi 26. 1391.fi 92*. 1442.
fi 42. 1533- f 99*- 1545- £ 5**. 5832.
fi 51*. Add. 19,815. £36.
„ of Tunbridge, Kent, fr. Cumb, n 06.
fi 192. 1433. £ 303. Add. 5507. p. 136.
5526. p. 401.
„ of London, fr. Cumb, 1476. £ 324*.
„ of Amersden and Hampton Poyle,
Oxon, fr. Berks, 808. ff. 6*. 41*. 1412.
£74*. 1480.fi 18*. 1556.fr. 137*. 1537.
fi 87*. 5187. fi 44. . 5814. fi 27.
„ . of Blackthorne, Oxon, 1480. fi 19.
1557. fi 88.
„ — Berks, 4108. £ 34.
„ — co. Leic, 1 180. fi 3. 1 1 89. £ 37.
1431. £ 25. 6125. £ 3*. 6183. £5.
„ — co. Line, 1546. fi 126.
Denune, of Catbole, N.B. Add. 14,837. fi 125.
Denver, — Devon, 1541. fi 149.
Denys, of Tannington, Suffolk. Add 19,126. ff.
330-332.
Derby, Earl of— Northants, 1 1 87. fi 62*. 3288.
fi 157*.
„ of London. Add. 16,279. p. 335.
Dereham, or Derham, of Brimlaw, co. Durham,
fr. Norfolk, -n 53. fi 40. 1168.fi 34*.
1397. f. 232*. 1540. fi 109.
„ of Crimplesham, Norfolk, n 77. fi
129*. 1552. fi 64. 4755- £34- 5l89-
• fi 41*. 6093. p. 81. 6166. p. 59. Add.
11,388. p. 74*- 14.307 £ 125*. 19,816.
ff. 26*. 83-5.-85.
„ —Surrey, 1504. £ 69*.
Derebaugb, of Baddingham, Suffolk Add.
19,126. fi 310.
„ of Godgrave, Suffolk. Add.i9.126.fi
312.
„ of Colston Hall, Suffolk, 1560. fi
208.
Dereburst, — co. Glouc, 1041. fi 20*. 1191.fi
n*. 1533- £ 41- 1543- ff 7*. 10*.
berfek.— Surrey, 1561. £ 64.
bering, of Westham, Essex, fr. Middlx. 1542. £
221.
„ of Liss, Hants, fr. Kent, 1139, £ 28.
1544. fi 90.
„ of Pevington, Kent Add. 5507. p.
131. of Surrenden and Egerton, Kent.
1 106. fi 157*- 1432. ff 275*.-28o,
Add. 5507. p. 321. 55o9- ff io, 28-30*.
5526. pp. 232. 320. 5532. p. 59. 14,31 1-
£ 29*. 16,279. pp. 3*. to 12. 394. to 404.
., of Lyminge, Kent. Add. 5528. £ 91.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. f. 43?.
of Petworth, Sussex, fr. Kent and
" Somerset, 1194. f- 127- 1562. ff. 28*.
98. 5829 ff. 23*. 83*.
of Dublin, out of Kent. Add. 23,693.
£ 221.
Desminiers, of Ireland, &c. Add. 23,688. £ 89.
and 89*.

Despencer v. Spencer,
Despotine,— Suffolk. Add. 19,126. f. .323.
Dethick, of Bridesall, co. Derby, 886. fi 25*.
1093. ff. 7*. 73. 108. 1153. ff. 96. 101*.
1180.fi 54*. 1 187. fi 135*. 1537- ff
24*. 80*. 6125. fi 90*. 6183. fi 103*.
6592. fi 23*. Egert. 996. fi 34.
„ oi Lee, co. Derby. Add. 21,017. f.
104*.
„ of Newhall, co. Derby, 886. £ 23.
1093. fi 37*. H53- fi ioi*. I537- ff
24*. 80*. 21 13. fi 100. 2134. f. 32*.
6592. f. 7*. Egert 996. ff. 52*. 66*.
„ of Amerstone, co. Durham, 1153.fi
36*. 1168.fi 15*. 1397. fi 216*. 1540.
f. 69*.
„ " of London, 1096. fi 19. . •
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. £ 54*.
„ of Wonrtegay, Norfolk, fr. co. Derby,
1177. £ 130*. 1552. £ 66. 4755. £ 35.
¦4756. £87. 5189. f.43. 6093. p. 95.
„ of Wereham, Norfolk. Add 19,127.
ff. 2-4
„ of Dethick Hall> - Norfolk. Add.
19,816. fi 27.
„ of Sagebury, co.Worc, fr. co. Derby,
1043. fi 37. 1566. £ no*. 5814 £ 31*. .
Add. 12479. fi 20*. 19,819. fi 112.
„ — Bucks, 11 39 fi 44. 1551.fi 91.
„ — Cheshire, 2.1 19, £ 68,
„ — Herts, 1504.fi 82.
„ — co. Staff, 886. £ 64*. 1077. £ 19*.
1 173. ff. 17*. 18*. 1415. £109. 1439
ff. 45*. 46*. 1570. £ 30*. 6128. £ 52.
Deve, of Earlsham, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. £ 7.
Devenish, of London,. fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 394*.
„ (Devenishe) of Hellingley, Sussex,
1194. £ 115. 1562. £ 36*. 5829. ff. 31*.
94*.
Devereux, Earl of Essex, 1073. £ 92*. noo. ff.
'. 30*. 84*. 1 167. ff. 22. 100. 1563. fi
119*.
„ \ Lord Ferrers, of Chartley, 2156. fi
64*,
„ Viscount Hereford. Add. 19,127.
ff. 9 13.
„ of Castle Bromwich, co. -Warwick,
noo. ff. 30*. 84*. \ 1 167. ff. 22. 100.
1563. fi 119*. 6o6o_ff. 45*. 46. 138*.
„ — co. Hereford, 1140.fi 40*. n 59 fi
40*. 1442. ff. 13. 40*. 1545. fi 49*.
„ — Salop. Add 14,314. £ 43. " «^
„ of Waterford. Add. 23,684. £ 66. )'Y
Devioke, — Cornwall, K>79; £ 174. 4031. £ 76*.
De Visher, of London, 1476. fi 50*.
Devy as, — Yorks, 2086. fi 28.
Dewcakriges, — CO. Lincoln, T550. £ 167.
Dewen, of Gwynear, Cornwall; 1079. £ 133.
1 142. £ 104. n49.fi i°5. 1 162. fi 109.
D'Ewes, of Stow Hall, Suffolk. Add. 19,127
fi 19
Dewhurst, or Duburst, of Cheshunt, Herts,
1234. fi 143. 1504. fi 144*. 1547. f.
98*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

105

Dewhurst, of Dewhurst, co. Lancaster, 1437. fi
97-
Deyvili, of Cuckwold, Yorks, 1394. p. 150. 1415.
£ 10*. 1420. £ 109*. 1487. £ 160.
Add. 18,011. £ 130*.
Devyll, — Bucks, 1 533. fi 57*.
D'Eye, of Eye, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi 33.
Deynes, of Coddenham, Suffolk. Add. 19,127.
fi 40.
Diamond, of Tiverton, Devon, 1080. fi 323.
1163.fi 246.
Dlchfieid, of Chelmsford, Essex, fr. Cheshire,
H37- fi 37*- 1432. fi 28*. 1541. fi
96*. 6065. fi 1256.
„ of Ditton, co. Lane, 1468. fi 46*.
1549. fi 43. 2086. fi 102*. 6159. fi
30*.
,, or Dychor, of Shawbury, Salop,i24r.
fi 79*. 6172. fi 15*. Add. 14,314. fi
60*.
Dichford,— co. Warwick, noo. fi 35. n67.fi
27. 1563. £ 30*.
„ — co. Worcester, 1092. fi 56. 1153.fi
79*. 1451. fi 168. 2186. £ 29. 6060.
f. 54.
Dick,— Beds, 2109. £ 56*.
„ of Braid, N.B. Add. 14,836. £ 265.
23,687. £ 24*.
„ of Craighouse, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi
267.
„ of Grange, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi 269.
„ of Prestonfield (Bart.) 14,836. ff.
271-273.
Dickens, of Bobbington and Morehall, co. Staff,
1077. fi 63. 1173. ff. 55. 118*. 1415.fi
120. 1439. £ 29*. 1570. fi 36. 6128.
fi 72.
„ of Copdock, Suffolk. . Add. 19,127
f- 47-
Dickenson, of London, fr. co. Lane, 1476. fi
425*.
„ •• of Bradley, co. Staff, 1173- £ 100*.
1439 £ 26.
,, of Northowram, Yorks, &c Add
24,458. £ 19*.
Dickins, of London, fr. co. Staff, 1476. £ 250*.
Dickinson, of Rotheram, Yorks. Add. 24,458. £
297*.
Dicklestonr— co. Glouc, 1043. £ 27*. 1352. £
1^  86.fi 7. 1566.fi 87. 5814. ff.
/ -33-
Dickons-Tor- Samford, Beds, 2109. £ 91*.
„ of Marston. Beds, 1531. fi 98.
of Astwood, Bucks, fr. Beds, 1429.
" f.69*. 1533- f-48. 5832. £ 8. 5868.
£ 2.
(Diccons), of Burton, co. Warwick,
" 1100.fi 53- 1167- £ 45-
Didier, of Canterbury. Add, 5528. fi 147.
Didsbury, of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 107.
¦nieby, Earl of Bristol, 1073. fi 142. .
Digby, £¦ Bafon Add< _4(83g ff -93__95_
of Gothurst, Bucks, fr. Rutland, 1 193.
" f.34- 1234-fi 33- I39I- £37.

Digby, of Coleshill, co. Warwick, 1100. fi 12.
1167. f. 6. 1180. ff. 20. 33*. 53. 1187.
fi 106*. 1189.fi 4'- H3I. ff. J3- 34-
2109. fi 83. 6060. fi 21. 6125. ff. 28*.
41*. 113*. 6183. ff. 39*. 43*. Add.
19,127. ff. 51-53.
„ of Holwell and Welby, co. Leic,
1180.fi 149*. 1 187. fi 118. 1 189. ff.
12*. 112*. 1195. fi 78. 1431. fi 104,
6125. £ 58. 6183. fi 59.
„ of Ravenstone, co. Leic, 6125. fi
57*. 6183. fi 58*.
„ of Tilton, co. Leic, 1180. fi 24.
1 189. fi 27. 143 1. fi 20*. 6104. fi 8.
6125. £ 43.
„ of Kettleby, co. Line, 1188. p. 66.
1189. £ 20. 1431. £ 5.
„ of Batheley, Norfolk, fr. co. Leic. and
London, 1177. fi 148*. 1552. fi 98.
4755- fi 5i*- 5i89- £ 50. 6093. fi 143*.
Add 19,816. £ 40.
„ of Mansell Woodhouse, Notts, fr. co.
Leic, 1400. £ 29*. 1555. ff. 53*. 147*.
„ of North Luffenham, Rutland, fr. co.
Leic, 1094. fi 247. 1 1 84. fi 242. 1558.
£ 27.
„ of Seaton, Rutland, fr.co. Leic, 1094.
£249. 1184.fi 244. 1558.fi 31. 3391.
fi 120*.
„ of Barnes, Surrey, fr. co. Line, 1 147.
£ 120. 1397. £ 188. 1430. fi 126.
„ Northants, 890. p. 71. 1094. fi 10*.
1171.fi 30*. 1187.fi 50.
Digges, of Newington and Reigate, Surrey, fr.
Kent, 1046. fi 2. 1 147. fi 24. 1397. fi
39*. 1430. f.26. 1561.fi 146. Add.
14,311. fi 30.
„ of Marlborough, Wilts, fr. Kent, 1 1 65 .
£ 18*. 1443. fi 95.
„ . of Barham and Chilham, Kent, 1 106.
fi 75*. 1433.fi 223. 1484. fi 67. 1548.
£ 61. Add. 5507. pp. 179. 179*. 5526.
-/ p. 138-
Diggles, of Booth Hall, Cheshire, and of Liver-
pooL Add. 24,458. £ 65*.
uighton, of Hocks tone. co. Line, fr.co. Yorks,
1550. £ 102*.
„ of Stourton, co. Line, 1097. £ 53*.
1550. fi 182. 1484 fi 31.
„ of Wynsby, co. Line, 1097. fi 53.
1484. ff. 27. 3o.(a. *.) 1550. £ 182.
„ of London, fr. cos. Line and Yorks,
1476. £ 63*.
„ of Lee, Wilts, 5184. p. 49.
„ of Worcester, from co. Line, 1566,
£ 162.
„ —Herts. 1097. £ 53_v
„ — CO. Warwick, 1 ico. fi 65. Il67.fi
62. 1563. fi 84.
Dikering, — Yorks, 1420. £ 126
Dilke, of Goteby, co. Leic, 1180. £ 126*.
1189.fi 95*. n95.fi 107. 6125. fi 91*.
6183. fi 104*.
„ -of Maxtoke Castle, co. Warwick, fr.
co. Leic, noo. fi 82*. 1167.fi 95. 1195.
£ 107. 1563. fi 20*. 6060. ff. 87. 133*.

io6

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Dilkes, of Castlemartyr, co. Cork. Add. 23,693.
fi 2! 6.
Dillington, or Tillington.of Dillington, or Till-
ington, Hants, 1544. fi 18*. 5865. fi 17.
„ of Knighton, Hants, 1544, fi 160*.
Dillon, Earl of Roscommon, 1425.fi 121.
„ Viscount Dillon. Add. 14,838. ff. 19
to 25.
„ of Newton Ferrers, Devon, 889 fi 79
1080. fi 412*. 1091. fi 48*. 1399. fi 48*.
1425.fi 73. 3288. fi 44*. 5185. fi 45.
5840. fi 57. 5871.fi 22*.
„ of Wroughton, Devon, fr. Ireland,
889. fi 108*. 1399. fi 70. 3288. fi 44*.
5840. fi 80. 5871. fi 30.
„ of Bratton, Devon, fr. Ireland, 889. ff.
65*. 108. 1080. ff. 1S6. 279*. 1090. ff.
42*. 81*. 1093. fi 31. 1 163 fi 137*.
1399 f- 36*. i486, fi 30*. 1537. fi 51*.
1538. fi 125*. 3228. fi 44. 5185. fi 45.
5840. fi 41*. 5871. £ 20. Egert 996. fi 8.
,, — of Hart, Devon, 10S0. fi 280. 1 163.
fi 137*.
„ of Farthingoe, Northants, fr. Devon.
1094. fi 48*. 1 1 84. fi 44*. 1 1 87. fi 50*.
1188. p. 61. 1553. ff. 75*. 765. 6066.
fi- 66*.
„ of Shenley, Bucks, fr. co. Derby, 1102.
fi 74 1 1 51. fi 73. 1193.fi 74. 1234.
fi 19*. 1391. £ 80*. 1533. £ 181*.
„ of Ireland. Add. 23,693. ff. 234. to 244.
Dinghill, — co. Glouc, 1041. fi 55*.
Dingley, v. Dyneley.
„ of Southampton, Hants, 1544. fi 154.
„ of Wolverton, Hants, 1544. fi 145.
1562.fi 59. 5865.fi 22.
„ of Chilham, Kent, fr. co. Wore, 1 106.
fi 52. 1432. fi 209*. Add. 5507. pp.
123*. 134. 5509 fi 14. 5526. p. 93.
23,750. fi 8
„ — co. Hereford, 1 146. ff. 27. 48. 1 159.
ff. 27. 48. 1442. ff. 47. 48. 1545. fi 38*.
Add. 10,815 ff. 41*. 42 (/«).
Dlonisell, — Cornwall, 4031. fi 74.
Dirdo, of Gillingham, Dorset, 1 165. fi 95. 1443.
fi 197. 1451. fi 141*.
Dirwyn, Or Derwyn — 889. fi 155. 1091. fi 93.
3288. fi 149*. 5185. fi 65*. 5871. f.
6*.
„ — Somerset, 1559, fi 3.
Discipline, of Bury, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi
56.
Disheborne, of Boston, co. Line, 1097. f 79.
Disney, of Milford Castle, Bath. Add. 24,458.
fi 291*.
„ of Norton Disney, co.'Line, 1097,
ff. 52*. 67. 106. 1 190. fi 82*. 1400. fi
12*. 1484.fi 7. 1550. ff. 10. 61*. 1555.
fi 27.
Diston, of Sheffield. Add. 24458. fi 49*.
Dive, or Dyve, of Bromham, Beds, fr. co.
Northampton, 1097.fi 23*. 1390.fi 13*.
2109.fi 20*. 4600. p. 24 5186. pp. 19.
-20. Lansd. 864. p. 24.

Dive (Dyve), of Kinnerby, co. Line, S10.
fi 1. 1097. fi 67. 1 150. fi 62.
„ — Leic, 810. fi 1.
„ — Northants. Add. 14,311. fi 54.
„ — Warwick, 6060. fi 77*. (.«.)
Di_t, of Wickmere, Norfolk, 1 177. fi 156. 1 552.
fi 115*. 4755- f- 60. 5189.fi 57. 6093.
fi 153*. Add. 19,816. fi 46.
Dixie, of Bosworth, co. Leic, fr. Hunts, 11 80.
fi 79. 1187.fi 123*. 1 1 89. fi 47*. 143 1.
fi 40. 6125. ff.85*. 115*. 6183. £ 78*.
„ of Brampton, Northants, fr. Herts,
1553. fi 86.
Dixon, of Durham. Add. 24458. fi 26.
„ of Braughing, Herts, fr. co. Durham,
1234 £ 132. 1504. £ 155. 1547. fi 65.
„ of Hilden, Kent, 1106. £ 196*. 1432.
£ 307. Add. 5507. p. 157*. 5526. p.
4io. 5532- P- 63.
„ of Rolleston, co. Leic, n8o. fi
144. 1187.fi 138*. 1189.fi no. H9S-
f. 80. 1431. fi 101*. 6125. fi 101.
6183.fi 118.
„ of London, 1401. £ 13. 1534. fi 3*.
1536. fi 16. Add. 4962. fi 12.
„ of Enfield, Middlx, fr. co. Yorks.
1468. fi 141.
,, of Wymondham, Norfolk, fr. Herts.
1 177. fi 151. 1552. fi 202.
„ of Wadworth and Ecclesfield, Yorks.
Add. 24458. fi 50*.
„ ofWhittington. Add. 24,458. fi 192*.
„ of Worsborough, co. Yorks. Add.
28,113. fi 80*.
„ — Bucks, 1 391. fi 80.
„ of Ireland (Bart). .Add. 23,693. ff.
244. 258.
Dixweii, of Brome, Kent, fr. co. Warwick. Add.
5507. p. 403.
/ „ of Watford, Northants, fr. co. War
wick, 1094. fi 187*. 1184. £ 182*.
1553. £ 133*.
„ of Church Over, co. Warwick, fr.
Beds, noo. fi 89. 1167. £ 108.
„ of Coton, co. Warwick, noo. £ 19*.
1 167. £ 13*. 1 563. fi 221*. 6060- fi 38.
Do, of London, 1167. fi 109.
Dobbs, of London, 1463. fi 53*^
„ —Hants, 1544.fi 173I
DobeU, of Street, Sussex, 1076. Js-v^io. 10S4.
fi 28. 1 135. fi 14. 1194. £ 8. 1406.
£5*. 1562.fi 122*. 4109.fi 70. 5829.
£ 101*. 6164. £ 98*.
Dobbins, of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1476. £ 263*
Dobson, of Gainsborough, co. Line, 1400. £
72*. 1550. £ 165*. 1555. fi 112.
Dockwra, of Fen Ditton, to. Camb, 6830. p.
102.
„ of Fulborne, co. Camb., fr. co. York,
1043. fi 102. 1401. fi 31. 1534. £ 40*.
6769. £ 36. 6770. £ 65*. 6774. fi 47.
°775. fi 31. 6830. p.. 64. Add. 4962.
fi 27*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

107

Dockwra, of Totteridge, Herts, fr. co. Yorks,
1504- £ 6b. 1546. fi 8. 1547. ff. 14.
84*.
„ — co. Dorset, 1153.fi 87.
Docson, or Dotson, of Heye, Cornwall, 1079. fi
119. 1142.fi 84*. 1149.fi 84*. 1 162.
fi 88*.
Docton, or Doketon, — Devon, 1080. £ 264. 1 163.
£ 116.
Dod, of London, fr. Cheshire, 1096. £ 36. 1463.
£ 12.
Dodd, of Bickerton, or Smithfield, Cheshire,
1424. £ 50*. 1505. £ 50*. 1535. £ 121.
5182. fi 30.
„ of Broxton, Cheshire, 774 fi- 19. 1045.
fi 107. 1241. £ 131. 1424. £ 50. 1504.
fi 89 1505. fi 50. 1535. fi 121*. 1547.
fi 33*. 2142. ff. 56*. 106. 2187. fi 45
(a.b.) 2230. ff. 29*. 33. 5182. ff. 30. 31.
„ of Chester, 2142.fi 102.
„ of Cholmley, Cheshire, 21 19 fi 193*.
„ of Edge, Cheshire, 1424. £ 49*. 1505.
£ 49*. 1535. £ 120*. 21 19. ff. 186*.
193. 2142. ff. 100*. 101. 2187. ff. 44*.
46*. Add. 5529. £ 21.
„ of Shocklache, Cheshire, 1535. fi 123.
2119.fi 185. 2142. fi 29*.
„ of Cromwell, Notts, 1400. fi 18. 1555.
fi 38.
„ of Cloverley, Salop, 1241. £ 76. 4204
fi 139. Add. 14,314. ff. 65*. 105*.
,, of Petsey, Salop, 1241. fi 140. 1396.
fi 106*.
„ of Godstone, Surrey, fr. Cheshire,
1561. ff. 74. 101*.
„ of Tanridge.Surrey, fr.Cheshire, 1046.
fi 14*. 1147.fi 40. 1397- f- 52*. I43°-
fi 43- 1433- £ 37- 1561. ff 72*. 99*-
Add. 12,478. fi 8.
Dodding, of Conishead, co. Lancaster,fr. Westm,
1437. fi 7$.
Doddington, of Doddington, Salop, 615. fi 219.
1241. fi 24. 1982. fi 152*. 6172. fi 7*.
Add. I4,3I4- f- 27.
„ of Doddington, Somerset, 1385. fi 69.
Add. 14,315. p. 145-
„ of Loxton, Somerset, 1 141. £ 78. 1445-
fi 114*. 1559 f.82*.
„ of Woodland, Wilts, fr. Somerset, 888.
fi 30. 11n.fi 62. 1443.fi 223. I565- £
50*. 5184- P- 29.
, .-co. Staff, 6104. fi 29*.
-Dodesbam,— Devon, 889. fi 152. 1080. fi 355.
5871. f- 5*- , ,
—Somerset, 1385. fi 21. 1559. fi 51*.
Dodge, of Stockport, Cheshire, 1424/- H5*.
1505. fi 144- 1535- ff i22*- 28°*- 3l87-
fi 124*.
of Camphurst, Kent, 1548. fi 177-
of Mannington, Norfolk, fr. Kent,
" ii77.fi 153*- 1552. f- 108*. 4755- £
55*. 5189.fi 55- 6093. £ 148*. Add.
19,816. £ 42*.
Dodingselles,-Notts, 1400 £ 33*.
4e Dodmaunston. Add. 21,017. ff 85*-86.

Dodmore, — Salop. Add. 14.314. fi 85.
3-<_iison, of Kirby Overblows, Yorks. Add.
24,458. fi 176.
Dodsworth, of Stranton, co. Durham, fr. co.
Yorks, 1 1 53. fi 41 . 1 168. f. 41. 1397. f.
239*. 1540. fi 118*.
„ of Badsworth, Yorks. Add. 26,739.
£ 96.
„ of Fowelby, Yorks, 1394. p. 38.
„ of Thornton, Yorks, 1394 pp. 19. 1801
1415. £ 18*. 1420. £ 134*. 1487. ff.
67*. 352. Add. 1 8,01 1. £ 153*. 24,458.
£ 99
Doggett, of Wrengey, Norfolk, 1177. £ 145*.
1552. £ 86*. 4755. fi 47. 5189. fi 48.
6093. fi 127. Add. 14,309. £ 84. 19,816.
£ 36.
Dolbeare, — Devon, 1080. fi "243. 1091. fi 34.
1163.fi 86*. 5871. £ 14-5.
Dolben (Bart.). Add. 19,127. £ 70.
Dolman, of Shawe, Berks, 1483. £ 122& 1530.
fi 39*- 1 532. fi 98. 6173. fi 29*. Add.
4961. £ 33*. 14,283. £ 33*. 14,284.
p. 19.
„ or Dowman, co. Camb, fr. Herts,
1043. £ 100. 1401. £ 37. 1534. fi 49.
6769. fi 22. 677a fi 57*. 6774. £ 53.
6775- f- 37- 6830. p. 67. Add 4962.
£ 33*.
„ or Dowman, of Newnham, Herts, fr.
co. Yorks, 1546. £ 123*.
„ of Badsworth, Yorks, 4630. p. 140*.
Add. 26,739. ff. 97. 97*.
„ of Pocklington, Yorks, 1394. p. 55.
1415.fi 64. 1420. fi 43. 1487. £244*.
Add. 18,01 1. £ 62.
„ of Spaldington, 805. £ 158.
DomviUe, of Lyme, Cheshire, 774. £ 20*. 1045 .
£106. 1505. £51. 1424. £51. 1535.
ff. 109. 218*. 2187. fi 43*. 2230. fi 30.
5182. fi 36. Add 5529. £.20. 29,782.
£45*. 29.783.fi 18.
„ of Mobberly, Cheshire, 2187. fi 114*.
„ of Oxton, Cheshire, 2187. £ 44.
„ of Templeogue, co. Dublin (J.P.).
Add 23,686. fi 31*.
DoncasUe, of Wellhouse, Berks, 1530. ff. 38*.
73*. 1483. ff. 123. 132*. Add.4961.fi
94*. 14,284. p. 107..
Done, or Donne, of Crowton, Che-hire, 1535. £
III. 2187. fi 70.
„ of Utkinton, Cheshire, 1424. ff. 42*,
43(«. *.) 1505. ff. 41*. 42(a. *.) 1535.
ff. 110(0. *.) in. 177. 287. 2142. £ 62*.
2187. £ 70. 5182. fi 39. Add. 5529 fi
37. 29,782. fin.
„ of Flaxyards, Cheshire, 1424. £ 43*.
1505. fi 42*. 1535- ff no*. 182*. 2142.
£ 34*. 2187. £ 70. 2230. £ 28*. 5182.
£ 40.
„ of Oulton, Cheshire, 1535. ff. no.
128*. 2187. f£ 52*. 70. 128*. 5182.
£ 39-
„ (Donne), of London, 1091. £ 107*.
1096. £33. 3288. £137*. 5185. £45*.

io8

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Done, of Norwich. Add. 19,127. ff. 71-73.
„ — Salop. Add. 14,314. fi 18.
Donbam, of Kirtlington, Notts, 1082. fi 68.
x394- P- 19- 1400. fi 88. 1415. fi 40*.
1420. fi 20*. 1487. fi 172*. 1499. f- 21-
1555. £ 141. Add. 18,011 £ 39*.
Donlngs, of Rye and Chichester, Sussex, 1 194.
fi 119. 1562. fi 49. 5829. fi 43*.
Donnington, — Yorks, 1 171. fi 39. 1394 p. 13.
1415. fi 40*. 1420. fi 21. 1487. fi 163.
1499. £ 36*. Add. 18,011. fi 41.
Donnyng, or Boring-, — CO. Camb, I043. £ 108.
6769. £ 41*. 6770. £ 63*.
„ — Sussex, 1043. fi 108. 6769. fi 41*.
6770. fi 63*.
Donovan, of Framfield, Surrey. Add. 19,127.
£ 76.
Donsiand, — Cornwall, 1142. £ 17. 1149. £ 17*.
Dopping, of Ireland. Add. 23,693. £ 223.
Dorington, of London, 1444. fi 76. 1476. f. 463*.
„ — Yorks, 155. fi 22. 1103. fi 12*.
1177.fi 15. " •
Sonne (XH.X.) Add. 14,835. f. 69*.
Dormer, Earl of Carnarvon, 1073. £ 216*.
„ of Eythorp, Bucks, fr. Oxon, 1 139. £
101*. 1429. £ 79*. 1533. £11*. 5832.
£ 26*. 5868. £ 24*.
„ of Peterley, Bucks, 1 102. £ 60. 11 51.
£59. 1234. £ 66. 1391.fi 64. 1 193.
fi 60.
„ of Shipton Lee, Bucks, 808. fi 6.
1095.fi 36*- n02.fi 24. 1 151. fi 22.
1234. fi 17*. 1 391. fi 24*. 1193.fi 23.
1412.fi 96. 1533. fi 171*. 5187. fi 9.
„ of Wycombe, Bucks. Add. 14,309.
f.64.
„ of Fulham, Middlx., fr. Bucks, 1551.fi
127*. Add,. 14,311. ff. 36. 37.
„ of Great Melton, Suffolk Add. 14,309.
fi 103*.
„ — co. Leicester, 1 189. £ 16.
„ —Oxon, 1 139. £ 101*. 4204. fi 103.
„ — Salop, 1241.fi 107*.
Dorward, — Norfolk, 6093. fi 125. Add. 5509.
fi 17*.
Dotchen, of Beely and Wych, co. Wore, 1566.
£ 159.
Doughty, of Boston, co. Line, fr. co. Derby,
1550. £ 125*.
„ of Hanworth, Norfolk, 1552. fi 52.
4756. fi 47-
„ of Theberton, Suffolk. Add. 19,127.
fi 82.
„ of Hawkington, Yorks, 1394. p. 230.
1415.fi 27. 1420.fi 165*. 1487.fi 184*.
Douglas, of Kelhead (Marquis of Queensberry).
Add 23,687. ff. 20-25*.
„ of Glenbervie (Bart.). Add. 14,836.
fi 13-
„ of CaldecottHall,Middlx. Add.19,127.
fi 80.
„ of Ernslaw (Ireland). Add. 23,686.
fi 19. (m).

Dove, of London, fr. Suffolk. 1096. f. 39*. 1463.
„ of Ulviston Hall, Suffolk. Add 1 9, 1 27.
fi 88.
„ of Gosbeck,Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi 90.
Dover, of Ipswich. Add. 19,127. ff. 97. 98.
Dow, of Stradbrooke, Suffolk, 1449. fi 95.
Doway.— Devon, 3288. fi 132. 5185. fi 35*.
Dowdaii, of Monktown, co. Meath, &c Add.
23,693. ff. 189. to 195.
DoweU, of Over, co. Glouc, fr. Somerset, 1041.
fi 144. 1543. £ 114.
„ (Dowie), of Dunsbery, co. Glouc,
1543. fi 39*.
Bowker, of Chesterfield, co. Derby. Add 24,458.
fi 72*.
Downe, of Pilton, Devon, icSo. £ 281. 1091. fi
103. 1163.fi 144-
„ or Downes, of Hyde Parva, co. Here
ford, 1 1 40. fi 1 5*. n 59. fi 1 5*. 1 442. fi
15*- 1545- £ 23*. Add. 19,815. £ n*.
„ of Lenham, Kent Add. 5528. £ 68*.
(m).
„ oi Bodney, Norfolk, 1 177. £ 95. 1552.
£213*. •
„ of Great Melton and Wremplingham,
Norfolk, fr. Suffolk, 1177.fi 102. 1552-
ff. 17*. 37*. 4204. £ 145. 4755. ff.
8.(a.b.) 13. 5189. ff. 15. 32*. 6093. pp.
16.39. Add. 11,388 p. 65. 19.127.fr.
101-104. 19,816. ff. 8*. 12*.
„ of Cobham, Surrey, 1046. £ 105.
1147.fi 63. 1397- f-" 144- 1430. fi 69.
1433. fi 30. 1561. fi 36*. Add.4963.
fi 84.
„ — Cornwall, 1164. £ 62. 1538. £ 238.
Downehall, of Geddington, Northants, 890. £ 28.
1094. fi 26. 1138. fi 25. 1171.fi 23.
1184.fi 26. 1 187. fi 37*. 1188. p. 42.
1553. fi 46. 6066.fi 93.
-Bownes, of Windsor, Berks, fr. co. Glouc, 1483.
fi 135*. 1530. fi 78. Add 14,284. p.
121.
„ of Taxall, Cheshire, 1424. f. 52. 1505.
fi 52. 1535. fi 106*. 2142. ff. 60*. 90*.
91. 2187. f. 46. 2230. fi 31. Add.
5529. fi 3o*.
„ of Evenwood, co. Durham, 1 1 53. fi 39.
1 168. fi 27*. 1397. fi 225*. 1540. fi 92*.
„ of Lcndon, 1241. fi 1. 1396. fi 320.
,, of London, fr. Devon, 1476. f. 80.
Add. 5533. p. 70. -^
„ of London, fr. Suffolk and Norfolk, ^sj
1476. fi 428*.
„ of Manchester and Sheffield. Add.
24,458. £ 156*.
„ Bishop of Cork. Add. 23,693. fi 197.
Downing, of Hickford, Bucks, 1391. fi 73.
„ of Lexham, Norfolk, fr. Essex, 1 177.
fi 95. 1552. fi 214*.
„ of East Hatley, Suffolk. Add.19,127.
ff. 1 1 1-1 13. \
„ of Spexhall, Suffolk. Add.19.127.fi .
115.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

109

Downing, of Fulwood, Wilts. Add. 28,113. fi
133.
„ of Cork. Add. 23,693. f. 231(1/1).
Downton,— Bucks, 1553. fi 88*.
,, — co. Hereford, 1140.fr. 4491*. 1159.
ff. 44. 9i*. 1442. ff 43*. 44- 94*- 1545-
ff. 80*. 100. Add. 19,815. ff. 38. 82*.
„ — Salop, 615. fi 212. 1241. f. 70*.
1396. fi 104*. 1982.fi 49. Add. 14,314.
fi 60.
„ of Worc. Add. 19,816. ff. 1 10*. 113.
Dowrish, or Dowrich, of Dowrich, Devon, 1080.
fi 101. 1163.fi 43. 5185. f.46.
„ of Heathbarton, Devon, 1163. fi 61.
3288.fi 30*.
Dowse, of Moore Court, Hants, 11 39. fi 13*.
1544-fi 53*.
Dowsing, als. smith, of Peasenhall, Suffolk
Add. 19,127. ff. 125-127.
Dowstow, — co. Line, 1550. fi 233*.
Doyle, (Bart.). Add. 23,685. fi 49.
Doyley, of Turvile, Bucks, 1102. fi 12*. 11 36.
fi 12*. 1151.fi 10*. 1193.fi 11*. 1234.
fi 10. 1533. fi 168*.
„ (D'Oyley),of Hack Norton,Northants,
n 87. fi 93. 6066. fi 115.
„ of Adderbury, Oxon, 1480.fi 20. 1556.
fi 104. 1557. fi 89*.
„ of Chiselhampton, Oxon., 1480. fi 61.
1556. fi 103*. 1557. fi 54*.
„ of Meriton, Oxon, 808. f. 15. 1556.
fi 107. 5187. fi 19*.
„ of Stodham, Oxon, 1480. fi 24. 1556.
fi 108. 1557. fi 94.
„ of Pond Hall, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk,
1560. fi 336.
of Stoke D'Oyley, Suffolk. Add.
19,127. fi 129.
„ of Shottisham (Bart.). 1552. fi 185.
Add. 19,127. ff. 130-142.
„ of Ranton, Surrey. Add. 14,311. fi
89*.
„ —co. Camb, 1401. f, 4 Add. 4962.
f-4-
„ — Essex, .541. fi 43*.
Doyngell,— Cornwall, 1079. fi 95. 2156. £ 84*.
Drake, of Ashe, Devon, 1163. ff. 227. 228. 1567.
fi 28*.' 3288. fi 125*.
„ of Buckland Drake, Devon, 1080. fi
65. 1163.fi 145.
of Hertford, Devon, 1080". fi 64. 1163.
ff. 226*. 258*. 5185.fi 46*.
„ of Pratshead, Devon, 1 163. fi 253*.
of London, fr. Hunts, and Somerset,
" 1463. fi 26. 1476. £ 132.
of Hardley, Norfolk, 1177. £ 101*.
" 1552. fi 17-4755- £ 7- 5189 fi 21. 6093.
f. 13. 6166. p. 61. Add. 1 1,38s. p. 75.
14,307. fi 127- 19,816. fi 8.
of Axniouth, Somerset, 1141. £ 46*.
" 1445. £70. 1559 f-177-
of Hadleigh, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. £
154-

Drake, ofReigate, Surrey, fr. Devon, 1040. fi
7*. 1147.fi 34*. 1397. fi 456. 1430.
£ 37*- 1433- £ 45*- 1561. fi 96. Add.
4963. fi 40*. 12,478. f. 2*.
„ of Barnoldswick, Yorks, 4630. p. 142.
Add. 24458, ff. 115*. 288*. 26,739. fi
98.
„ of Halifax. Add 24458. ff. 289.
2S9*. 290.
„ of Horley Green. . Add. 24458.
fi 289*.
„ of Hadleigh, Suffolk. Add 24,458.
fi 290*.
„ of Shipden, of Rochdale, and Halifax,
&c. Add. 24458. fi 115*.
„ of York, &c. &c. Add. 24458. fi
116.
Drsnsfield, of Stubbs Walden, Yorks, 1394 p.
23. 1415. fi 40*. 1420. fi 20*. 1487.
fi 162*. 1499. fi 32. 4630. p. 145.
Add. 18,011. £ 39*. 26,739. £ 99.
„ of West Bretton, Yorks, 4630. p. 139.
Add. 26,739. £ 96.
Draper, of Marlow, Bucks. 1391. £ 101. 1533.
fi 84.
. „ of Culland, co. Derby, fr. Hants,
6104. fi 81.
„ of Cromwell, Kent, 1 106. fi 131*. Add.
5507. p. 248. 5526. p. 268.
„ of Melton Mowbray, co. Leic, fr. co.
Flint, and Notts, 810. fi 19. 1180.fi
28. 1187.fi no*. 1189.fi 32*. 1431.
fi 26. 6125. £ 38*. 6183. fi 39*.
„ of London, fr. Kent, 1476. fi 290.
„ of London, fr. Notts, 1096. fi 89.
1444 f- 78.
„ of Colbrook, Middlx, 1 5 5 1 . £ 34 Add
4964. £ 34.
„ of Newcastle, Northumbd. fr. London,
1153. £ 56. 1448. £ 49. . 1554. £ 115*.
' * „ of Flintham, Notts, 1082. f. 68*. 1400.
£78. 1555.fi 121.
, „ of Worthen, Salop, 615. fi 221*. 1241.
fi 6*. 1472.fi 10*. 1982.fi 151*. 6172.
fi 5. Add. 14,314. ff. 28*. 49. 136*.
„ of Camberwell, Surrey, fr. Notts,
1046. fi 59 1 147. fi 85. 1397.fi 97.
1430. fi 90. 1433. fi 91. Add. 4963.
fi 6. 12,478. fi 42. 14,311-. ff. 80*. 96.
Drax, of Hackney, Middlx, 1468. fi 134.
„ of Woodhall, Yorks, 1 171. ff. 47. 53*.
1394. p. 256. 141 5. fi 31*. 1420. ff.
183*. 207. 1487. f. 316*. 4630. p. 144.
Add. 18.01 1. fi 203*. 26,739. f. 98*.
Draycott, of Loscoe, co. Derby, 1093. fi 1 19.
1153.fi 96*. 1537, ff.-52*. 59*. 6104.
fi 81*. Egert. 996. fi 44*.
„ of Painsley, co. Staff, 886. fi 56*.
1077. fi 16*. 1093. fi no*. 1415. f.
135- 1537. f- 50*. 1570. ff. 48*. 71*.
2113. f.91. 6128. fi 18. Egert 996. fi
51. Add. 24458. fi 325*.
Drayner, of Cranbrooke, Kent, 1484. £ 68*
1548. £ 141*. Add. 5528. £ 165. 5532!
p. 124.

no

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

©rayner, or Dragoner, of Hoxton, Middlx, fr.
Kent, 1550. fi 137. 1551.fi 43. Add.
4964- fi 43-
Drayton,— Norfolk, 1 1 77. £ 1 72 . 1552.fi! 37*.
„ of Cranford, Northants, 1094. fi 148.
1 184 fi 115. 1 187. ff. 56. 93*. 1 188. p.
72. 6066. fi 1 15.
„ of Kent. Add. 5528. fi 67.
Dreff, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 80.
Dresser, of Laxfield, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi
159
Drew, of Broxbourne, Herts, fr. Devon, 1234, fi
112*. 1504. fi 130. 1547. fi 40.
„ of Melford, Suffolk. Add.19.127.fi
162.
,, of South Broome, Wilts, 1165.fi 40.
1443. fi 123.
„ — Hants, 1544. fi 116*.
Drewe, of Exeter, Devon, 1080. fi 97*. 1163.
£ 24.
„ of Higham, or Norton, Devon, 889, fi
134*. 1080. fi 432. 1091. fi ico. 1399.
fi 92*. 1538. fi 232. 5840. fi 108.
5871. fi 32*. 32S8. fi 29*. 5185. fi 48.
„ of Morchard, Devon, 1080. fi 96.
1163.1.209. 5185. fi 47*.
„ of St. Leonard's, Devon, 889. £ 19.
1080. fi 363*. I091.fi 26. 1 163. fi 24.
1399. fi 11*. 1538. fi 27. 5840. £4.
3288. fi 21. Add. 14,288. fi 10*.
„ of Sharpham, Devon, 1080. fi 244*.
1163. fi 86*. 1567. fi 20*. 5181. fi 47.
„ —Hunts, 1075. fi 14. 1 179. fi 31*.
Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 14.
Drewell, of Exeter, Devon, 1080. £ 358*. 1091.
£25. 1538. fi 21.
„ of Little Gidding, Hunts, 890. fi 40.
„ — co. Camb, 1401. fi 6. 1534. £ 20.
Add. 4962. £ 6.
„ —Herts. 1546.fi 147.
de Driby,— Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi 167.
Driby,— co. Line, 1550. fi 45.
Drokensford,— Essex, 1398. fi 20*.
Druforde, of Lamborne, Berks, 1 139. fi 64.
Drury, of Heughley, and Chalfont St. Giles,
Bucks, fr. Suffolk, 1094. ff. 36*. 39.
1184.fi 35. 1187.fi 21*. 1188. fi 19.
1533- £ 8.9*.
„ of Swaffham, co. Camb, fr. Norfolk.
1043. fi 99- 1401. f- 46. 1534.fi 113-
6769. fi 33- 677o. fi 55*- 6774. fi 62.
6775. fi 46. 6830. p. 73. Add. 4962. fi
42*. 19,127. fi 200.
of Tendring, Essex, fr. Suffolk, 1083.
" fi 63*. 1137- £ 127*- 1432- £ 132. 1541-
f. 137*. 1542. fi 226. 6065. fi 65. Add.
14,290. fi 88*.(;«.)
„ of Colne, &c, Hunts. Add. 19,127.
ff. 172-176.
„ of Docking, Norfolk, 4756. fi 64.
of Rougham, Norfolk, 155.fi 60. 891.
fi 29. 1449. fi 58. 1484-f- 44- 2109.
fi 44*. Add. 19,127. ff. 189-199.

Drury, of Hawstead and Lawshall, Suffolk,
155. f. 48*. 891. f. 22. no3..fi 23*.
1449. f. 81*. Add. 19,127. ff. 177-187.
„ of Beesthorpe, Suffolk, 1449. fi 64.
1484. fi 48. 4756. fi 62.
„ of Pulborough, Sussex, 5829. fi 115.
,, of Watergate.near Chichester.Sussex,
fr. Shrop, 1076.- £ 76. 1086. £ 66.
1 135. fi 52. 1 194. fi 45. 1406. £ 121.
1562. £ 101*. 6164. fi 57.
„ (Drewry), — Surrey. Add. 14,311. fi
10.
„ —Wilts, 1 141. fi 125*. 1559. fi 252*.
Drummond, of Hawthornden, N.B. (Bart.)
Add 14,837. f- 233.
Dryden, of Canons Ashby, Northants, fr. co.
Cumb, 1094. fi 113*. 1171. £ 23. 11 84.
fi no*. 1187.fi 24. n88.p. 21. 1553.
£ 13*. 6066. fi 48.
Dryland, of Devington, Beds, 2 109. £ 75.
„ of Feversham, Kent, 1484. £ 64.
1548. £ 33*. Add. 5528. £ i38*.(w/.)
Dryley,— Surrey. Add. 14,311. £ 36.
„ —co. Staff, 6128. £ 65*.
Drywood, of Okenden, Essex, 1083. £ 20*.
1 137 £ 131*. 1432. £ 140. 1542. fi
235*.
„ of Upminster, Essex, 1083. fi 66*.
1137.fi 128*. 1432. fi 134*. 1542.fi
225*. Add. 14,390. fi 91*.
„ of Shapstone, Essex. Add. 14,290.
ff. 63. 96.
Dubber, of Beechworth, Surrey, fr. Oxon, 1046.
fi 21*. 1147.fi 48. 1397. fi 59*. 1430.
fi 52. 1433. fi 56. 1 561. £ 107*. Add.
4963. fi 58. 12,478. fi 13.
Duboyes, of London, 1476. fi 384*. Add. 5533.
p. 100.
Ducie, of London, fr. Staff, and Suffolk, 1096. fi
163*. 1504 fi 112*. Add. 5533 p. 205.
„ (Bucy), — co. Staff., 6104. fi 9.
Duck, of Exeter, Devon, 1080. fi 230. 1163. £ 66.
„ of Teddington, Middlx, fr. Norfolk,
1551.fi 53.
„ of Hermesby, Norfolk, n 77. £ 95.
1552. fi 214.
Duckett, of Aylesbury, Bucks, 1533. fi 93*.
„ of London, 1096. fi 88. 1463. fi 3*.
1541. fi 200*. '•-,
„ of Grayrigg, Westmoreland, 1435. £
n. 1564 fin.
„ of Caulston, Wilts, fr. Notts, 1165.
fi 81. 1443. fi 182.
Duckworth, of Manchester. Add 24458. fi
3i4*.(.».)
Duddlngston, of Sandford, N.B. Add 14,837
£ 147. .
Dudley, Lord North,. 15044 £ n.
„ Duke of Northumberland, 1073. fi
283. 5829. fi 27*.
„ of Harrald, Beds, fr. Northants,
I53i.£ 145*.
„ of Yanwath, Cumb., 1536. £ 40*.
3391. £4*. ' ""

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

in

»udiey, of Chopwell, co. Durham, fr. North
umb, 1 153. fi 41*. n63.fi 43*. 1397.
fi 255. 1540. fi 123.
>, of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. fi 447*.
,, of Newington, Middlx, 1551. fi 104*.
» of Clopton, Northants, 890. fi 26.
1094. fi 20*. 1 171. fi 22*. 1 184. fi 20*.
1 187. £ 41*. 1 1S8. p. 48. 1553. £ 187.
6066. £ 90.
„ of Tibbington, co. Staff, 2109. £ 73*.
6128. £ 25*.
„ —Salop, 1244 £ 107*.
,, — Surrey. Add. 14,311. £ 93.
„ — Sussex, 1562. fi 32*.
„ —Wilts, 1443. fi 33. 5184. p. 13.
,, — Yorks, 141 5. fi 75*. 1420. fi 60.
Dudmaston, — Salop, 1241. fi 52.
Dudson, of Whitley, Berks, 1483. fi 79. 1 530. fi
55*. Add. 14,284. p. 63.
Duff, Earl Fife. Add. 14,836. £ 119. 14,838.
ff. 196-198.
„ of Drummuir, N.B. Add. 14,836. £
118.
Duffleld, of Medmenham, Bucks, 1 102. £ 109.
1139. fi 45*. 1429. fi 70. 1391.fi in.
1533. ff. 49. 134*. 5181. p. 27. 5832.
fi 9 5868. fi 8.
„ —Hants, 1 139. £ 37.
Duffin, — Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi 239.
Dugdale, of London, fr. co. Lane and Wilts,
1476. fi 366*.
„ of Shustoke', co. Warwick, fr. co.
Lane, noo. fi 95*. 1167.fi 121*. 1563-
£ 150*.. 6060. £ 158*.
„ —Berks, 1483. £ 134*. 1530. £ 74*.
Add. 14,284. p. 111,
Duke, of Otterton, Devon, 1080. £ 142*. 1163.
£ 251.
„ of Powerhayes, Devon, 3288. £ 119.
5185. £ 48*. 5840. £ 42*.
„ of Prynne, Devon, 889. fi 66. ioSwr
fi 388*. 1399. fi 37*- 1538. fi I3i-
3288. fi 82*. 5840. ff. 42*. 43-
„ of Ottery St. Mary, Devon, 1091. fi
41*. 1399 fi 37- I538.fi 120. 5840.
£ 42*. 587-1. £ 19*.
„ of Cossington, Kent, fr. Devon, 1548.
£ 1S6*. Add. 5528. £ 147*. 16,279-P-
447.
„ of Benhall, Suffolk. Add. 19,127. ff.
242-246. of Brampton and Shaddingfield, Suf-
" folk, 155. fi 25*. 1 103. fi 82*. 1 177. fi
68*. 1560. ff. 96*. 293*.
of Worlingham, Suffolk, 1 103. f. 84.
" 1 1 77. £ 69*. 1 560. £ 293*.
of Richmond, Surrey, fr. Kent and
" Dorset, 1046. £ 104. 1147- £ 30*.
1397. £ 143- i43o. £ 33*- 1433- £
132*. 1 561. ff 59- 183- Add. 4963. fi
32*. 14,311. fi 24
of Lake, Wilts, fr. Devon, 1165. fi 65.
" 1443- £ 152*.
— Beds, 2109. fi 56.

Duke, — Suffolk, 1046. f. 31. 1177. £ 168*.
1552. f. 174*. 1561. fi 58*. 6093. f.
199.
Dukenfieid, of Dukenfield, Cheshire, 774. fi 19.
1424. fi 51*. 1505.fi 51*. 1535.fi 107.
2142. fi in. 2187. f. 46*. 2230.fi 31*.
. 5182. fi 37. Add. 29,782. fi 45*.
„ of Portwot, co. Lancaster, 2076.fi 14.
Dumbleton, of Brockhampton, co. Worc, 1566.
£ 105. 5814 £ 25. 5841. £ 5.
Dunbar, of Cumnock and Westfield. Add.
14,836. ff. 101. 103.
„ of Durn(Bart). Add. 14,836. £ 107.
„ of Grangehill, N.B. Add 14,836. fi
105.
„ of Hempriggs (Bart.). Add 14,836.
£ 109.
„ of Mochrum. Add. 14,836. ff. 97. 99.
Dunbridge, of London, io8l.fi 5. Ii39.fi 114*.
1532. fi 15*. 6173. fi 6. Add.496_.fi
67. 14,283. fi 67.
Duncalfe, of Foxherst, Cheshire, 1424 ff. 52*.
63. 1505. ff. 52*. 62*. I535.ff. 113*.
150. 2142. fi 107*. Add 5529 fi 21*.
„ (Duncan), of Ottringham, Yorks, fr.
Cheshire, 1394 p. 94. 1415. fi 81*.
1420. fi 72. 1487. fi 210. Add. 18,011.
£ 91.
Dunche, of Little Witnam, Berks, ioSi.f. 17*.
1139. fi 121*. 1483. fi 75*. 1530. f.
53*. 1532. fi 49. 5822. fi 13*. 6173.
fi 30*. Add. 4961. fi 28. 14,283. fi 28.
14,284. p. 56.
Duncombe, of Battlesden, Beds, fr. Much Brick-
hill, 1531. £ 152*.
„ of I vingho Aston, Bucks, 1 102. £ 63*.
1139. £44*. 1151.fi 62*. 1193. £63*.
1234. £ 37*.
„ of Much Brickhill, Bucks, 1 102. ff.
35.42. 1151.fi 34. 1 193-fi 35- 1234-
ff 34*- 55*-
„ of Whitchurch, Bucks, 1 102. £ 26*.
H36. fi 13*. 1139. £44 1151.fi. 24*.
41*. 91. 1 193. ff. 25* 43. 1234. £ 20*.
1391. ff. 29*. 38. 45. 67*. 1533. ff. 16*.
18*. 173. 5181. pp. 12. 58. 5832. _L
32*. 54*. 5868. ff. 30*. 52*.
„ of London, 1476. fi 314*.
„ of Shalford, Surrey, fr. Beds and
Berks, 1046. fi 1 16. ii47fi 151. 1397.
fi 155. 1430. fi 157. 1433- £ 144*-
1561.fi 233*. Add. 4963. £163*. 14,311.
£ 69
„ of Doddington, Oxon, fr. Bucks, 1557.
£ 96*.
Dundas, of that ilk. Add. 14,836. ff. 155 and 157.
„ of Arniston (Viscount Melville). Add.
14,836. £ 165.
„ of Blair, N.B. Add. 14,836. £ 167.
„ of Dudingstone, N.B. Add 14,836.
fi 161.
„ of M^nour. Add. 14,836. £ 163.
„ of Llanelly, co. Carnarvon (Bart).
Add. 14,836. ff. 163 and 164.

112

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS' VISITATIONS

Dundas, of Newliston, N.B. Add. 14,836. fi
159
Dungworth, of Hurst, Yorks. Add. 24,458. f.
185*.
Dungy, of Hartland, Devon, fr. Cornwall, 1 164.
£ 39
Dunham,— co. Derby, 6592. £ 9.
„ —Notts, 1077. fi 46. 1 1 73. fi 38.
1415. fi 116. 6128. fi 41*.
Dunke, of Hawkhurst, Kent. Add. 5528. fi 98*.
Dunkin, of Canterbury. Add. 5528. £ 182.
Dunmoii, or Dumoll, of Wadhurst, Sussex, fr.
Kent, 1076. £ 155*. 1084. fi 62. 1135.
fi 48. 1194.fi 41. 1406. fi 120. 1563.
fi 134 4109. fi 28*. 5829. fi 109. 6164.
fi 86*.
Dunn, — Essex, 1541. fi 36*.
„ of Halifax, Yorks. Add. 24,458, fi 58.
Dunne, of Brittas, Queen's Co. Add. 23,686. fi
44*.
Dunningham, of Hadleigh, Suffolk. Add.
19,127. fi 258.
Dunstavile, alias Castlecombe. Add. 14,309. £
70*.
Dunston,— co. Staff, 1173. £ 77*. 1415. £ 123*.
6128. fi 34*.
Dunthorn.of Dennington, Suffolk. Add. 19,127.
fi 266.
Du Port, or Port, of Sheepshead, co. Leic,
1164. fi 19. n8o. ff. 25*. 84. 1187. fi
125. 1 189. ff. 28*. 57. 1431. ff. 22. 48*.
6125. ff. 36. 88. 116. 118*. 6183. ff. 37.
81*.
Durant, of Yarnton, Oxon, fr. Rutland, 808. fi
24*. 1556. fi 83*. 5187. fi 31.
„ of Cottesmore, Rutland, fr. Sussex,
1558. f. 40*. 2156. fi in*. 3391. fi 118!
5828. fi 19*.
„ — Middlx, 1 103. fi 97*.
„ — Hants, 1544. fi 109*.
„ (Durrant), — Sussex. Add. 16,279. fi
389 ' *
D'Vrban, — Suffolk. Add. 19,127. fi 273.
Durham, of Hurst, Berks, 108 1. fi 53*. 1 139. fi
74*. 1532. fi 29. 4108. fi 25.
„ of Ardounie, N.B. Add. 14,837. fi
141.
„ of Luffness, N.B. Add. 14,837. £145.
„ of Pitkerrow, Largo, &c, N.B. Add.
14,837. fi 143.
Durneford,— Cornwall, 1079. fi 187. 1 149. fi 58.
Durward, of Barking, Essex, 1137. fi 75*. 1432.
ff. 68*. 76*.
„ (Dureward),— Suffolk, 1484. fi 46.
Add. 19,127. fi 281.
Dusslng, of Bramerton, Norfolk, 1177. £ in.
1552. fi 29.
Duston.— co. Leic, 1 180. fi 76. 6125. f.83*.
6183. fi 76*.
Dutton, of Chester, Cheshire, 1535. fi 115*.
2119.fi 20. Add. 5529. fi 19.
„ of Dutton and Halton, Cheshire, 1045.
fi 102. 1424. ff. 33. 41*- 42*- 51*. I5°5.
ff. 32. 40*. 41*. 51*. 66*. 1535. ff. 107.
114. 145*. 211. 2076. fi 18*. 2119.fr.

18.-20*. 23. 26*. 27. 76. 203. 2142.fi
63. 2187. ff. 83*. 128*. 129*. 5182.
ff. 33. 34. Add. 5529. ff. 19*. 37- 5°-
29,783. ff. 25*-27.
„ of Frodsham, Cheshire, 2 1 19. £ 2 1 .
„ of Hellesby, Cheshire, 21 19. £ 21*.
„ of Chesterfield, co. Derby. Add.
24,458. ff. 244*. 245*.
„ of Chedworth.co. Glouc, 1543. £ 121.
„ of Sherborne, co. Glouc, fr. Cheshire,
1041.fi 53- 1543- £73*.
„ of Isleworth, Middlx, fr. Cheshire,
1551. fi 72.
„ of Cloughton,Yorks, fr. Cheshire, 1394.
p. 167. 1415. ff. 11*. 15. 1420.ff.113.
124 1487. fi 166*. 1535. fi 115. 21 19.
fi 24 Add. 18,01 1. fi 144. 29,783. fi
61*.
„ or warburton, — Cheshire, 1424- fi
142*. 1505. f.141*. I535.fi2oo*. 2119.
fi 18. 2142.fr. 15*. 17-
„ co. Lane, 6159. fi 75*.
Dycer, of Hackney, Middlx, fr. Suffolk, 1468 fi
133. Add. 19.127. fi 284.
Dyer, of Stoughton, Hunts, 1075. £ 31b. 1179.
fi 67. Cott. J id. F.viii. fi 31*.
„ of Malborowe, Devonj 1080. fi 212.
1 163. fi 40*:
„ of Aldbury, Herts, 1433. £ 13*. 1504.
£ 53. 1546. fi 36*. 6147. fi 37.
„ of Tottenham, Middlx,fr.Wilts,i46S.
ff. 120*. 121*.
„ of Bratton, Somerset, 1141. fi 105*.
1445. fi 120. 1559 fi 231.
„ of Sharpham Park, Somerset, 1 141. f.
So*. 1385. fi 65*. 1445.fi 118. 1559.
fi 206*.
„ of Street, Somerset, 1141. fi. 127*.
1445. fi 120*. 1559. ff. 66b. 118.
„ of Wimalton,' Somerset, 1559.fi 84*.
N ,jDyke, of London, fr. Kent, 1476. £ 317*.
„ (Dike), of London, fr. co. Yorks, 1476.
£72.
„ of Horham, Sussex, fr. Kent, 1076. fi
162.
„ —Sussex, 1084. £115. 1 1 94. fi 94.
1 135. fi 101. 1406; f. 59. 1562. £ 33*.
Add. 14,311. £ 92*.
Dykes, of Beccles, &c, Suffolk. Add 19,127. fi
288. ,
Dymoke, of Scrivelsby; co. Line, 1097. f. 55.
1190.fi 75*. 1484. fi 19. r55a.fi. 58*,
80*. 2156. fi 74. 4204. fi 147. Add.
14,309. fi 33*.
—co. Staff, 6128. ff.,106. in.
„ — co. Warwick, 1-476. £ 171.
Dyneley, v. Dingley,
„ of Charlton, co. Worc, 1043. £ 25*.
1352. fi 7*. T486, fi 5. 1566. f. 77b.
5814. fi 18*. 5841. £ 7*.
„ of Bramhope, Yorks, 1394. p. 212.
141 5. £ 25. 1420. £ 154. 1487. £ 156*.
4630. p. 135. Add 18,011. £ 174*.
26,739 ff. 93, 94. ..

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

"3

Dyneley, of Melborrie, Yorks, 1394. p. 78. 1415.
fi 76. 1420. fi 60*. 1487. fi 156. Add.
iS.oii. fi 79*.
„ of Swillington, Yorks, fr. co. Lane,
1394- P- 208. 1415.fi 24. 1420. fi 151.
1487. fi 155. Add. 18,011. fi 171*.
„ — Essex, 1 541. ff. 13. 21*.
Dynham, or Dinham, of Wortham, Devon, S89.
fi 86. 1080. £ 216*. 1091. £ 67. 1 163.
£46*. 1399. fi 53*. 3288. f.82. 1538.
fi 177. 5185. fi 44*- 5840. fi 62. 5871.
£24*. Add. I4,3°9- f- 96*.
„ —Kent, 1548. fi 104
„ —Dorset, 1092. fi 55. 1153. fi 79*-

Dyne, of Kent. Add. 5528.fi 166.
Synu., of Heydon, Norfolk, 1177. fi 155*- !552
fi 109*. 4755. fi 56*. 5189. fi 56. 6093.
fi 131*-
Dyon, of Tathwell, co. Line, 1 550. £ 52.
Dyott, of Lichfield, co. Staff, 1173. fi 89*. 6104.
£ 8*. 6128. fi 105*.
Dyson, of Diss, Norfolk. Add. 24458. ff 277*.
278.
„ of Inkbarrow, co.Worc, 1 566. fi 138*.
5814. £ 78.
Dyster, of Bures, Suffolk. Add 19,127. £ 61.

ii4

PEDIGREES IN IHE HERALDS VISITATIONS

33.

Eachard, — Suffolk. Add. 19,128. p. 2.
Bade,— Suffolk. Add. 19,128. p. n.
Eagle, of Lakenheath, Suffolk. Add. 19,128.
p. 16.
Eakins, of Northall, Herts, fr. Hunts, 1234.
£ 118*. 1504. £ 136. 1547. £ 26.
Earde, — Kent, 1 102. fi 36. 1151. £34*. 1193.
fi 36. 1391. fi 39. 1429. fi 70. 1533.
£69. 5832. fin*.
Earlesman, of Westover, Hants, 1544. fi 158.
Earth, of Minoll, Wilts, 1 165. fi 4*. 1443. fi
67*.
Easslng, of Wymondham, Norfolk, fr.' Kent,
5,189 f- 31.
East, of Radnage, Bucks, 1 102. £ no. n 39.
£ 46. 1391. £ 112. 1429. £ 69*.
1533-fi 5o. 5181. p. 14. 5832. ff. 8*.
32. 5868. ff. 3. 30.
„ of London, fr. Beds, 1476. fi 407*.
„ — Suffolk (Bart.) Add. 19,128. p. 20.
Eastday, or Estday, of Saltwood, Kent, 1 106.
fi 89*. 1432. fi 233*. Add 5507. p.
207*. 5526. p. 162.
Eastfleld, — London, fr. co. York. 1504. £ 119.
Eastofte, of Eastofte, Yorks, 4630. p. 146. Add.
18,011. £ 275. 26,739. ff 99*- IO°-
Eastwood, of Hayton, Notts, 1400. fi 46. 1555.
fi 76*.
De Eton, of Cheshire. Add. 29,782. fi 27.
Eaton, of Stetchworth, co. Camb. Add. 19,128.
f.28.
„ of Goostrey, Cheshire, 1535. fi 131*.
Add 24,458. fi 2876.
„ of Stockport, Cheshire, 774. £ 27*.
1505. £ 140. 1535. ff. 131*. 287*.
2187. ff. 132*. 133. 5182. fi 105. 2119.
fi 82.
„ (Eton,) of Springfield Hall, Essex, fr.
Salop, 1432. fi 44. 1 541. fi 84*. 6065.
fi 101*.
„ of Grappenhall, Lane, and of Man
chester. Add. 24,458. ff. 76. 287*. 288.
„ of Seven Oaks. Add. 24,458. fi 287*.
„ of Dover, Kent. Add. 5528. fi 60.
„ of Brockhole, Northants, 1094. fi 144.
1553. fi 236.
„ of Eaton and Marshe, Salop, 1241. fi
14.
„ (Eton), Northants, 890. fi 9. 1094. £
105. 1 184. fi 102. 1187.fi 28*. 1 188.
p. 29. 1553. fi 10.
Ebden, of Fressingfield, Suffolk Add. 19,128.
PP- 32, 33*-
Ebswortby, of Ebsworthy, Devon, 1080. fi
289*. Il63.fi 149*.
Eccles, of Tidwell, co. Derby. Add 24458. fi
149.
„ of that ilk, and Kildonan, N.B. Add ,
14,837. fi 101.

Eccie stone, of Eccles tone, co. Lancaster, 146S.
fi 48. 1549. fi 43*. 2086.fi 81*. 6159.
fi 32.
„ <3f Elsham, co. Lincoln, fr. co. Lane,
1550. fi 103.
„ of Winchelsea, Sussex, 1194. fi 131.
1562. fi 1 16. 5829. fi 92*.
Echingham, of Witherfield, Essex, fr. Middlx,
1432. £ 39.
„ of Echingham, Sussex, 1562.fi 100.
Echlin, of Ireland (Bart.) &e Add 23,684 fi
26*. 23,694. ff. 12-15.
Eddowes, of Whitchurch, Nantwich, Chester,
Shrewsbury, Salop, and of Wrexham,
Salop. Add. 24,458. ff. 27*. and 28.
Eden, of West Auckland, co. Durham, 1171. £
75. 1540. £ 18*.
„ or Edon, of Ballindon, Essex, fr.
Suffolk, 1083. f. 7*. 1137. £135. 1432.
£ 147*. 1542. fi 187*. Add. 19,128.
pp. 45-47.
„ or Edon, of Sudbury, Suffolk, 1 55. fi 35.
1103.fi 1. 1177.fi 6. 1449. fi 79*. 1484
fi 43. 1560. ff. 207. 227*. 1820. fi 15*.
Add. 14,290. fi 42*.
„ —Yorks, 1484. fi 61*. 6070. fi 281*.
Edensor, of Derby. Add. 28,1 13. ff. 28. 29.
„ — Beds, 2109.fi 58.
Edgar, of Gt. Glemham, Suffolk, 1449. fi 89*.
1560. fi 251*. 1820. ff. 23*. 25. Add.
19,128. pp. 55-65.
„ of Ipswich, Suffolk, 1560. £ 251*.
1820. £ 25.
„ or Atgar, of Eye, Suffolk, 1560. fi
338*.
Edgbury, or -Wilkinson, of Deptford, Kent, fr.
co. Denbigh, 1106. fi 209*. 1432. fi
319 Add 5507. p. 317. 5526. p. 436.
Edgcombe, of Bodringham, Cornwall, 1079. fi
^83*. 1142./. 42*.' 1 149. £ 41*. 1 162.
fi 43*. 1164.fi 71. 4031. fi 80*. Add.
14,835. fi 93. ...
of Lamerton, Devon, 1080. fi 132*.

1163.fi 99

.

of Plymouth, Devon, 1080. fi 134.
1 163. f. 106*. V.
„ cf Tavistock, DevonJv 1080. fi 133.
1163.fi 106.
Edge, — Notts, 6104. fi 9*.
„ or Hawkins, — Salop, 615. fi 230.
1241. fi 5*. 1982. fi 149*. Add. 14,314.
£97.
„ of Suffolk. Add. 19,128. pp. 76-78*.
Edgerley, of Milton, Oxon, 808. fi 23. 1095.
fi 32*. 1412.fi 93. 1556. fi 48. 51S7.
fi 30. 6166. p. 148. Lansd. 880. fi 25.
Add. 11,388. f. 182.
Edgeworth, of Lisard, co. Longford. Add.
¦23,694. ff. 3 and 4.
„ of Longwood, co. Meath. Add.
23,686. fi 38*..

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

"5

Edmerston or Emerston,— Cornwall, 1 164, fi 58.
Edmonson, of York, Yorks, 1487. fi 399*.
Edmonds or Edmunds, of Winslow, Bucks, 1 102.
ff. 58*60*. 1151.fi 57*. 1193.fi 58*.
1234. ff. 36. 66*. 1391. ff. 62*. 64*.
1533- ff 83*. 152*. 196*. 1557. fi 16.
„ of Cambridge, co. Camb, 1043.
£ 89*. 1534. £ 73*. 6769. £ 24*.
6770. fi 42*. 6774 f- 72*. "6830. p. 119.
Add. 4962. fi 83. V y
„ of Truro, Cornwall, fr. Rutland, 1079.
fi 108*. 1 142. fi 73*. 1 149. fi 72*.
1162.fi 76*.
„ of Plymouth, Devon, fr. Wilts, 889.
fi 102. 1080. fi 408. 1091. fi 80*. 1399.
fi 65. 1538. fi 201. 3288. fi 83. 5185.
fi 50. 5840. fi 74*. 5871. fi 28.
„ of Bossington, Hants, fr. Sussex,
1544 fi 187*.
„ of London, fr. Suffolk Add. 5533.
p. 101.
„ ofDeddington, Oxon, 808. f.26. 1137.
fi 37. 1480. fi 41. 1556.fi 88. 5187.
£33-
„ of Bayley^ Court, Sussex, 1076. £ 20*.
1084. fi 88*. 1135.fi 74*. n94.fi 67*.
1406 fi 86. 1562. fi 157. 5839. £141* ,
6164. £ 9*.
„ of Worsbrough, Yorks, 1420.fi 219.
4630. p. 159. Add. 24458. fi 74. 26,739.
£ 107*.
„ — Cheshire, 1535. £ 248*.
„ — Middlx, 155 1. £ 62*.
Edolphe, of Hinxhill and St. Radigund, Kent,
1 102. £36. 1 106. ff. 62. 81. 1 139.fi
139*. 1151.fi 34*. 1193.fi 36. I39I-
fi 39- 1432. ff 216. 227. 1533. fi 69.
5832.fi n. Add. 5507. pp. 144. 189.
5526. pp. 113. 149 5532. P- 122.
„ of New Romney, Kent. Add. 14,309.
£6.
Edwardes, Baron Kensington. Add. 14,839. £
248 (m).
Edwards, of Swaffham, co. Camb , fr. Middlx,
1534. £119 .
of Wisbeach, 1043. £ 83. 1401. f.
65*. 1534.' ff. 86. 112*. 6769 fi 19.
6770. fi 36. 6774. fi 82*. 6775 fi
85*. 6830*. p. 125. Add. 4962. fi
61*. /
' of Eaton, Cheshire, fr. co. Denbigh,
I535- f- 132-
of Lalant, Cornwall, 1079, ff. 2. 144.
noo. fi 1. 1 143. f- 135- 1149-f- J35-
n63f. 138. 6060 f. 79*.
of Exeter, Devon, 1080. fi 48*. 1 163.
" fi 13*.
of Allerton, Hunts, fr. Northants,
" IQ75- f- 54*- ll79- f- II2- Cott- J1?1-
F. viii. fi 54*-
of Dartford, Kent, fr. Cornwall, 1076.
" fi 203. 1548- £ 185- Add. 5328 fi 151.
of London, fr. co. Camb, 1444. fi 14*.
" 1476. fi 460. 1532. fi 17- - Add. 5533.
p. 24 ¦

V

Edwards, of London, fr. co. Denbigh, 1476, fi
67*.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. fi 130*.
„ of London, fr. Sussex, 1476. fi 30.
„ of London, fr. Wales, 1476. fi 318*.
Add. 5533. p. 162. " •
„ of Liddome, Salop, 1 241. fi 137.
1396. fi 109. 1982.fi 2.
„ of Shrewsbury, Salop, 615. fi 229.
1241. ff. 33*. 114. 156. 1396. ff. 60.
105*. no*. 1982. ff. 66. 159*. 6172.
fi 9. Add. 14,314 fi 118*.
„ of Wrexham . and Stanstead, Salop,
4204. fi 239.
„ of Portslade, Sussex, fr. London, 1076.
fi 48*. 1194. fi 135. 1562. £ 186*.
6164. £ 2.
„ of Framlingham, &e, Suffolk. Add.
19,128. pp. 90*. 91.
„ of Castle-Gore, co. Tyrone. Add
23,694. £ i7(m).
Edwin, of Holmer, co. Hereford,' 1140. £ 69*.
1159. If. 68*. 1442. £ 71*. 1545. £
76. Add. 19,815. £ 63*.
Egbaston, — co. Leic, 1 1 89 £ 46*. 1431. £ 38*.
Egerton, Earl of Bridgwater, &c, 1073. fi 112*.
„ Baron Ellesmere, 1472. fi 48.
„ of Adstock, Bucks, fr. co. Staff, 1 102.
fi 71*. 1151.fi 70. 1 193.fi 71*. 1234.
fi 53- I39I- £ 75*- 1533- £ 159*.
„ of Betley, Cheshire, 1077. £ 18*.
1173. £ 17*. 1415. £ no. 1439. £
46*. 1535. ff. 95. 127. 2119 ff. 51*.
229. 2142. ff. 22*. 23. 2187. ff. 52. 53.
2230. fi 29. 6128. fi 5.
„ of Caldecote, Cheshire, fr. Norfolk,
i424f. 57*. 1505.fi 57*. 1 535- ff 127*.
267*. 21 19. ff. 52*. 228*. 2142. £
21*. 2187. £ 52.
„ of Christleton, Cheshire, 1424. £ 58.
1505. £ 58. 2230. £ 32.
„ of Dodleston, Cheshire, 1424. £ 56*.
1505. £ 56*.
„ of Newhall, Cheshire, 2187. fi 52**.
„ of Oulton, Cheshire, 1424. £ 56*.
1505. fi 56*. 1535. ff. 128. 216*. 2119.
ff. 53*. 228*. 2142. fi 22. 2187. fi 52*.
„ of Ridley, Cheshire, 1137. £ m*.
1424. f. 56*. 1432 fi 106*. 1505. fi
56*. 1535. fi 129. 2119.fi 54. 2187.
£ 52*. 5182. fi 42. Add 5529. fi
18*.
„ of Wrinehill, Cheshire, 1045. fi 101.
1424. fi 57. 1505. ff. 57. 109*. 1535.
ff. 101*. i25*.-i26*. 252. 275*. 2119.
ff. 52. 228*. 2142. ff. 22. (a. b.) 46.
(a. *.) 52. 60*. 63. 2187. fi 52. 2230.
fi 29. 5182. fi 41.
„ or Malpas, Cheshire, 1505. ff. 95.
109*. 1535- ff 127* 128. 2187. ff. 52.
52*. 2142. £ 21*. Add. 5529. ff. 18*.
23*.
„ of London, fr. Cheshire, 1096. £ 55.
1463- £ 9-
„ of Newborough, co. Staff., 6128. £ 40.

n6

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Egerton, of Walgrange, co. Staff, 6128. fi 99.
„ — co. Hereford, 1140. fi 15. 1159.fi J5-
1442. fi 15. 1545. fi 22*. Add 19,815.
£ n.
„ —Salop, 1982 £ 49*.
Eggardon, of Eggardon, Dorset, 1 166. £ 41.
1451. £ 66. 1539. £ 128*.
Egioke, of Egioke, co. Worcester, 1043. fi 24.
1352. fi 8. i486, fi 5*. 1566. fi 71*.
5814. ff. 16. 71. 5841. £ 8. "
Eglesfield, of Farmanby, Yorks, 1487. £ 398.
1171.fi 45*.
„ of Mappleton, Yorks, fr. Cumb, 1394.
p. 101. 141 5. ff. 78. 84. 1420. fi 78*.
1487. fi 327*. Add. 18,01 1 £ 97*.
„ —Essex, 1541. fi 78. 1548. fi 141.
6065. fi 1 15*. Add. 5533. fi 90.
„ —Kent, fr. Essex, 1548. fi 141. Add.
5532. p. 90.
Egieston, of Wootton Underwood, Bucks, fr. co.
Lane, 1102. fi 22. , 1151. £ 20". 1193.
fi 21. 1234. £ 21. 1391. £ 23. 1533.
£ 171.
Eglionby, or Aglionby, — Northants, I ioo. £
95*- 1 1 67. £ 122. 1563 fi 151. 6000.
fi 159.
Egmanton, — co. Lincoln, 1550. fi 237*.
Ekins, of Chelveston, Irchester, Isham, Ranee,
Ringsted, Twywell, and Weston Favell,
Northants. fr. Hunts, 1553. £ 266.
Eland, of Carlinghowe, Yorks, 14S7. £ 465.
4630. p. 149. Add. 26,739. ff 101*, 106.
„ of Kingston-upon-Hull, Yorks, 1499.
£ 39
„ de — Northumb, 1448. fi 44*. 1554
fi 101.
Eicock, of Stockport and Whitepoole, Cheshire,
1535- £ 132*. Add. 29,782. f. 16. (tn)
„ oi Barham, Kent. Add. 5528 fi 175.
„ of York and Newby. Add. 24,458. fi
328*.
„ — Hunts, 1 147. fi 19 1430. fi 21.
1433. fi 63. 1561. fi 117. 1140. f. 106.
Eld, of Syford.co. Staff, 1173.fi 99- J439. £ 21*.
6104. fi 10.
Eldred, of Colchester, Essex, fr. Suffolk, 1432.
£ 162*. 1542. £ 182.
„ of London, fr. Norfolk, 1476. £ 206.
„ of Kentsell, Norfolk, 6093. p. 88.
„ of Great Saxham, Suffolk. Add.
19,128. pp. 93*-95*.
„ of Ipswich, &e Add. 19,128. pp.
96*-99-
Elers, — Suffolk. Add. 19,128. p. 105.
Elfeck, of Seaford, Sussex, 1076. £ 184*. 6164.
£ 26*.
Elford, of Mawnan, Cornwall, fr. Devon, 1079.
£ 109. 1 142. £ 72*. 1 149. £ 71*.
1 162. £ 75*.
„ of Shipstor, Devon, 1080. fi 291.
1 163. £149.
Eifred, of Hoo, Sussex, 1076. £ 27*. 1084 fi
131. 1135.fi 117. 1406.fi 107. 1562.
fi 183. 4109. fi 62*.

Eliotb, of Middleton, Yorks, 1394 p. 84. 1415.
fi 77*. 1420. fi 64*. 1487. f. 226*.
Add. iS.on.f. 83*.
Eliston, of Gillingham, Essex, 1083. fi 38*.
1 137. fi 120*. 1432. fi 120. 1542.fi
95*. Add. 14,290. fi 72*.
„ of Monks Ely, Suffolk Add. 19,128.
PP- 133-135-
Elkington, of Cathorp, co. Leic, 1180. fi 52.
6125. fi 56*. 6183. fi 57*.
„ of Shawell, Leic, 11 80. fi 107*.
1187.fi I3»*. "89. fi 69. 1431. £ 60*.
6125. ff. 78*. 1 1 1*. 6183. £ 95*.
„ of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 85.
Eiiacott, of Milbury, Devon, 1080. £ 182. 1163.
£ 14*.
EUerker, of Ellerker, Yorks, 1394. p.71. 1415.
£ 73. 1420. ff. .29*. 56. 1487. f. 205.
Add 14,309. £ 39*. 18,01 1. £ 75.
„ of Risby, Yorks, 1394. p. 88. 1 171.
£ 41*. 1415. ff. 79*. 8r. 1420. ff. 68*.
71. 1487. ff. 206*. 234*. 1499.fi 40.
Add. 1 8,01 1. £ 87*.
„ of Yolton, Yorks, 1487. £ 397*.
„ — Herts, 1504. £ 8.
Eiues, — Devon, noo. £ 5*.
Ellinbridge,— Kent, 1 548. £ 121.
„ — Surrey, 1 56 1. fi 29.
EUingworth, of Mitcham, Surrey, 1397. fi 73*.
1561. £ 16*. Add. 4963. £ 65*.
Eliot, of London, fr. Herts, 1476. £ 57.
EUiot, of London, fr. Surrey, 1476. £ 387.
„ of Stobs (N.S, Bart), also of Peebles
(Bart.), and Lord Minto. Add 23,684.
£ 16*. 23,686. £ 32*.
Elliott, — (Elyot) of Carlton, co. Camb. Add.
19,128. p. 112.
„ (EUyott,) of Faringdon, Devon, 1399.
£112.
„ of Port Eliot, Cornwall, fr. Devon,
1079. £ 188. 1 142. £ 1. 1 149. fi 1.
1 1 62. fi 1**.
„ of Tavistock, Devon, fr. Surrey, 1080.
fi 242*. 1163.fi 86.
„ of New Land, Essex, fr. Herts and
Yorks, 1 137. fi 62. 1432. £ 54. 1 54 1.
£ 86*. 6065. fi 103*.
„ of Boxsted, Suffolk, 156a fi 209. Add.
19,128. p. no. ,
„ of Albury, Surrey,, 1561.fi 263.. Add.
14,311. £ 66. -^
„ of Busbridge, Surrey,- 1046. £ 219.
1 147. fi 96. 1397. fi 19a. 1430. £101.
1433. ff. 23*. 177*. 1561. £ 22. Add.
4963. £ 1 14. 14,3*1. £ 44.
„ of Godalming, Surrey, 1046. £ 1 14*.
1147. fi 96. 1397. fi 153*. 1430. fi 101.
1433. ff. 23*. 142*. i5,6r. £ 22. Add.
4963. fi 114. 14,311. fi 44.
„ — co. Hereford, 11 40. £ 98.
„ —Yorks, 1532. £ 143.
ElUs, of Haughgreene, Cheshire, 1535. £ 133.
„ —Kent, 1551. £ 78*. 1532. £ 115*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

117

EUis, of Kennington, Kent, 1484. fi 63*. 1548.
fi 23*. Add. 16,279. p. 436.
„ of Swineshead, co. Line, 1097. fi 1 1 5*.
1190. fi 26. 1484. fi 29. 1550. fi 35*.
„ (EUys), of Gray's Inn, fr. Yorks, 1487.
f. 291.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1476. fi 150.
„ of Weathorpe, Suffolk. Add. 19,128.
p. 120.
„ of Orford, Suffolk. Add. 19,128. pp.
120-124.
'„ of Somerleyton, &c, Suffolk Add
19,128. p. 126.
„ of Barnbrough, Yorks, 1394. p. 89-
1415. fi 79 1420. fi 68. 1487. fi 300.
Add. 18,011. fi 87.
„ of Barnsley, Yorks, 1394, p. 63. 1415.
fi 71*, 1420.fi 55. Add. 24458.fi 163*.
„ of Kiddall, Yorks, 1394. p. 241. 1415.
fi 29. 1420. f. 174. 1487. fi 300*. 463a
p. 157. Add. 18,011. £ 194. 24458.
£ 174*. Add. 26,739. f- 10°*.
„v of York, fr. co. Cumb, 1487. £ 299*.
Add. 24,458. £.182*.
„ of Sheffield. Add. 24458. £ 189.
„ or Elys, of Kent. Add. 5528. £ 61.
„ of Devonshire, 6060. fi 9.
Ellison, of Newcastle, Northumb. Add. MS.
12477. fi 16.
„ of Epworth, co. Line Add. 24458.
fi 132*.
„ of Thome, and of Sheffield, Yorks.
Add. 24,458. fi 49*.
EUson, of Barnham and Overing, Sussex, 1076.
fi 195. 6164 fi 34*.
Elmedon, co. Durham, 1 171. fi 71*. 1540. fi 26.
Elmer v. ___ylmer.
„ or Ayimer, of Much Hadham, Herts,
fr. Norfolk, 1546. fi 91.
„ or Alymer, of Risby, co. Lincoln, fr.
Norfolk, 1550. fi 135*.
Elmes, of Lilford, Northants, fr. Oxon, 890.
fi 24*. 1094. fi 21*. 1102.fi 60*. 1138.
fi 18. 1151.fi 59*. 1171.fi 23*. 1184.
£21*. 1 187. £40*. 1 188. p. 45- 1234.
£ 66*. 1391. fi 64*. 1533- ff "i. 196*.
1553. fi 'Ai. 4204 fi 231. SI. 1429
fi in.
of Greene Norton, Northants, 6066.
" f.91.'
„ of Bolney, Oxon, 80S. fi 33. 1556.
£83. 5187.fi 39
Elmham, of Westhorp, Suffolk. Add 19,128.
P- 137-
Elmbirst, of Worsbro'dale. Add. 26,739 £ 101.
Elmrugge, of Fakenham, Norfolk. Add. 19,128.
p. 143-
Elmsal, of Thomhill, Yorks. Add. 24458. £ 208.
Elmy, of Nettlested, Suffolk, 1560. fi 210. Add.
19,128. pp. 147-148*.
Elmytone, of London. Add. 5528. fi 146*.
Einor, of Sandwich, Kent. Add. 16,379. p. 162.
of London, fr. Kent, 1476. fi 125.

Elrington, of Carleton Hall, co. Camb, 1043.
fi 63. 1401. fi 2S. 6769. fi 7*. 6774.
fi 44. 6775. £ 28. Add. 4963. fi 25.
„ of Wolcomb Maltravers, Dorset, 888-
f. 50*. 1046. fi 239. 1092. fin. 1153.
fi 71*. 1451.fi 153. 1539. fi 33. 2186.
t 18.
„ of Birch Hall, Essex, 1542. fi 220*.
„ of Bulbroke, Essex, 1541. fi 183.
„ of Witherfield, Essex, 1137, £ 47*.
1484. £ 43*. 1541. £ 105.
„ of Hackney, Middlx., 155 1. £ 105*.
„ — Beds, 2109. £ 89*.
„ — Essex, 1504. £ 3*. 1546. £ 5. 6147.
£7.
„ — Sussex, 1 194 £ no*. 1562. £ 25*.
Elsing, of Cornwell, Oxon, fr. co. Camb., 1557.
£ 100*.
Elstob, of Foxton, co. Durham, 1153. £ 41*.
1168. £ 42*. 1171. £ 75*. 1397. ff.
24i*-242. 1540. £ 17.
Elston, of Ribleston, Bucks, 1533. f. 72*.
Eltoft, of Farnhill, Yorks,fr. co. Durham, 1171.
£51*. 1394. p. 213. 1415. fi 25. 142a
fi 154-5. 1487. fi 112*. 4630. p. 158.
Add. 18,011. fi 175. 26,739. f- 107*.
Elton, of Ledbury, co. Hereford, fr. Cheshire,
114a ff. 2. 33. 1 159. ff. 2. 33. 1442.
ff. 2. 33. 1545. fi 44. Add. 19,815.
£27. *
„ of Frisby, co. Line, 1097. £ 56.
1550. £ 13*.
„ of Portsmouth, 8154 £ 56.
„ — Cheshire, 1424. £ 141. 1535. £
140*. 2187. £ 54.
„ — Surrey, 1397. £ 188*.. 1561. £ 250*.
Eltonhead, of Eltonhead, co. Lancaster, 891. £
66. 1437. fi 114- 1468. fi 57. 1549. f.
44. 2086. fi 99 6159. £32*.
„ — co. Derby, Egert 996. £ 61.
Elwes, of Barton Court, Berks, 1483. £ 120*.
/ 1530. fi 45. Add. 14,284. p. 31.
„ of London, 1234. fi 132*. 1504. f.
161*. 1547.fi 66*.
„ of London, fr. Notts, 1096. £ 100.
1476. ff. 267. 441. . ....
„ or He-wish, of Brockston, Notts,
1082. £ 69. 1400.fi n*. 1555. fi 22*.
„ of Stoke Coll, Suffolk. Add. 19,128.
PP- i54*-i 59*-
Elwick, of Seaton, Yorks, fr. Northumb., 1394.
p. 86. 1415. £77*. I420.£66. 14S7.
£221. Add. 18,01 1. £85.
Elwyn, of Statisfield, Kent Add. 5528. £ 84.
(»..).
Elyn, of Langydrake, Cornwall. Add 14^15.
p. no.
Eman, of Windsor, Berks, fr. London, 1483. £
135- .5130- f-86.
„ of London, fr. co. Line, 1476. fi 61*.
Emery, or ___mery, of Little Baddow, Essex,
1083. fi 43*. 1 137. fi 123. 1432. £ 125.
1542. £ 119. Add 14,29a fi 77*.
Emes, of London, fr. Berks. Add 5533. p. 225.

n8

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Emiy, of Aldeburgh, Suffolk. Add. 19,128. p.
171.
Emmot, of Minton, Salop, 1241. fi 61*.
Empson, of Goole, Yorks. Add. 26,739 £ 108*.
„ — Northants, n 87. £ 87. 6066. £
121.
Emyly, of Helmedon, Northants, 1094. £ 171*.
1 184. fi 166*. 1553. fi 96*.
Enderby, of Stratton, Beds, 1531, fi 27*. 2109
fi 21.
Endesonere,— co. Derby, Egert. 996. fi 14.
Endesore, of Comberford, co. Staff, 1077. £ 43.
"73-£3S- 1415- fi 114*- 1570. fi 57-
6128. f. 55.
Enfield, — Middlx, 1 137. fi 41*. 1432. fi 32.
6065.fi x37*-
Engaine, of Teversham, co. Camb, 1401. fi 16.
1534. £ 91*. 6769. fi 3*. 6770. fi 7.
6774. fi 33. 6775. fi 16.
„ — Beds, 2109. f. 92.
„ — Essex, 1541. fi 219. 1562. fi 53.
5829. fi 48.
„ or ingaine, — co. Lincoln, 1097. fi 85.
1 190. fi 29. 1484. £ 22. 1550. £ 167*.
„ — Notts, 1400. £ 70*.
„ — Suffolk. Add 19,128. p. 175.
De Engham. Add. 14,309. fi 23.
Engham, or Edingham, of Great Chard, Kent,
1484 fi 68. 1548. fi 80.
„ or Edingham, of Goodnestone, Kent,
1 106. fi 58. 1432. fi 213*. Add.
5507. p. 135(0.*). 5526. p. 105. 5532.
p. 74. 24458. fi 343*.
England, KINGS OF, 2156. ff. 89*. 90. 101-103.
„ of Welton, co. Hereford, 1094.fi 179*.
n 84. fi 174*. 1553. fin 1.
Englar, of Carshalton, Surrey, fr. Sussex, 1046.
fi 25. ,1397. fi 63. 1433. fi 58*. 1561.
fi no*. Add. 4963. fi 167*. 12,478.
fi 15*. 14,311. fi 66*.
Engiebert, of Sherborne, Dorset, 1539. £ 185*. *
Englefield, of Englefield, Berks, 10S1. fi 20*.
1139. fi 122*. 1187. fi 21*. 1188. p. 19.
1483. fi 69*. 1484. fi 66*. 1530. fi 46.
1532. fi 55*. 4204. ff. 196, 196*. 5S22.
fi 14. 6173. ff. 34*. 35. Add. 4961.
fi 93. 14,284. fi 33.
„ or Znglefieid, — co. Warwick, noo.
fi 45. 1 167. fi 37. 1563- f- 63*.
English, of Broadinche, Devon, 1080. fi 309*. ¦
1163.fi 204*.
„ of Puddimore Milton, Somerset, fr.
Wilts, 1385. fi 71*.
„ of Kingswood, Wilts, fr. Cumb, 1 1 65.
£84. 1181. £66*. 1443. fi 184.
„ —Salop, 1241. fi 14. 1396. ff. 16*.
324*. 1472. fi 5*. 1982. fi 41.
Ensigne, of Wyndham, Norfolk, fr. Kent, 1177.
fi 103. 1552. fi 19 4204. fi 145*. 4755.
fi 9. 6093. p. 19. 6166. p. 40. Add.
11,388. p. 65*. 14,309. fi 104*. 19,816.
f.9*.
Ensor, of Exning, Suffolk. Add. 19,128. p. 189.
Ent, of Sandwich. Add. 5528. fi 189. (m.)

Enthie, — Cornwall, 403i.fi 76*.
Entwiseii, — co. Lancaster, 1094. £ 37. 1549. f.
44*. 6159.fi 33.
„ — co. Leicester, 1180. fi 8*. 6125. fi
14*. 6183.fi '5*-
Enys, or, Emys,— Cornwall, 1079. fi 201*.
1 142. ff. 156. 161. 1149. ff 156. 161.
1 162. ff. 158. 163.
Erdeswicke, of London, 1463. fi 31*.
„ of Sandon, co. Staff, 886. f. 59. 1077.
fi 105*. 1173. fi 95*. 1180. £ 34.
1189. fi 27. 1415. fi 131. 1431. fi 20*.
1535. ff. 130: 227. 273. 1570. fi 44*.
2113. fi 80. 2156. fi 82. 2187. fi 98.
6125. fi 43. 6128. fi 79*. 6183. fi 44.
Erisey, of Erisey, Cornwall, 1079. fi 160*. 1 142.
.fi 155. 1149. fi 155. 1162. fi 157.
4031. fi 73. Add. 14,315- P- i°2.
Erie, of Charlborough, Dorset, fr. Devon,- 888.
fi 41*. 1 166. £20. 1451. ff. 35. 161*.
162. 1539. ff. 10. 108. 2186. fi.8*.
„ — Sussex, 1552. fi 189*.
Ernley, of Witham, Wilts, fr. Sussex, 888. fi 16*.
1 1 1 1. fi 81*. 1 165. fi 74*. 1561. £ 74*.
1 181. fi 55. 1443. £ 29*. 1565. fi 26.
5184. p. 49.
„ of Emley, Sussex, 10S4.fi 120. ii35>
£106. 1194.fi 99. 1406. £95. 1562.
fi 35*. 5829 fi 30*.
„ of Charlbery, Dorset.fr. Sussex, 1 166.
fi 13. 1451.fi 22*. 1539. fi 99.
Erpingbam, of Erpingham, Suffolk. Add.
19,128. p. 193.
Errington, of London, 1096. £ 120. 1476. fi
294*.
„ of .Denton, Northumb, n 53. fi 56*.
1448. fi 55. 1554 fi 97.
„ of Errington, Northumb, 1 1 53. fi
54 1448. fi 28*. 1554. fi 66*.
„ of Ponteland, Northumb, 11 53. £ 5 1.
1448. £45.
„ of Heele, Wilts, fr. Northumb, 888. fi
2. mi. £31*. 1165. £ 54. 1181.fi
5*. . 1443. fi 146. 1565. fi 3*. 5184
p. 4
Erskine, of Torry, N.B. Add 23,684. fi 105.
Erynfeld, — Cornwall. Add. ^4,315. p. 127.
Escote, of Escote, Yorks, ii7r. fi 51*. 1571. fi
228*. \
EsdaUe, of Cotherstone House, Yorks. Add.
24,458. fi 275.
Esmonde, of Ballynastra (I. Bart.) Add. 23,684. ~.
ff. 32-34 and 36. 23.6S7.fi 179 to 183.
Esse, v. Ashe.
„ of Sowton, Devon, 1091.fi 118. 1538.
fi 307*. 5185. fi 50*. 5871. £ 34.
„ of Thewborough, Devon, 889. £ 94.
1091. £ 70. 1538. £ 180*. 3288 ff. 122.
156*. 5185. £ 42*. 5871. ff. 26 (a.b). 27.
29.
„ of Bokeland Chelow, Devon, 5185-
£51-
„ ofBuckenhall, Oxon, fr. Devon, 1095.
£ 52. 1097. £ 7*. 1556. £ 118*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

119

Esse, v. Ashe, of South Petherton, Somerset,
1 141. f- 119- 1385- £ 57*- 1445- ff- 164-
205. 1559. fi 42. Add. 12,477. fi 59*.
Esseby, — Cheshire, 1535. £ 98.
„ — Northants, 11 87. £ 80.
De Essex, Baron of Rayleigh. Add. 19,128. p.
198.
Essex, of Lamborne, Berks, fr. Middlx, 108 1. £
19*. 1 139. £67*. 1532.fr 17*. 18. 5822.
£ 15*. 6173. £ 35*. Add 12,479. £ 6*.
„ of London, 1463. £ 49*.
Essington, of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1476. £ 281.
Add. 5533. p. 163.
Estcote, — Dorset, 1153. £ 86*.
Estcott, of Launceston, Cornwall, 1164 £ 65.
4031. £ 75.
Estcourt, or De la Estcourt, of Tetbury, CO.
Glouc, 1543. £ 158*.
„ of London, fr. Wilts, 1476. £ 371.
Esterby, or Asterby, of Howton, co. Lincoln,
1550. £ 190. .
Estmond, — Dorset, 1539. £ 87*.
Eston, of Holme, Beds, 1097. fi 28. 1390. fi 17.
1531.fi 25*. 2109. fi 25. 4600. p. 33.
5186. p. 48. Lansd. 864 p. 33.
„ or Easton, of Eston, Devon, 889. fi
127. 1080. fi 427*. 1399; fi 87. 1091.
fi 103*. 1538. fi 239. 3288. fi 83*.' 5185.
fi 49*. 5840. fi 99. 5871. fi 40.
„ of London, fr. Surrey, 1476. fi 227*.
,, — co. Lincoln, 1097. £ 78.
Estotevile,— Yorks, 1 394. p. 108. 1415. £ 86*.
2156. fi 70*.
„ of Hunmanby, Yorks, 1487. £ 428.
„ of Knaresborough, Yorks, 4630.
p. 160. Add 26,739. £ Io8.
De Ethelston,* of Ribleton, Cheshire. Add.
29783. £ 38*.
Ethelston, — co. Lancaster, 1437. fi 56.
Etheridge, of Chevenhall Hall, Suffolk. Add.
19,128. p. 203.
Etherington, of Rillington, Yorks. Add. 24458.
£ 227.
Etton, of Golds'tone, Salop, 1982. £ no*.
Ettrick, of Barford, Dorset, 1 166. fi 66*. 145 1.
fi 105*. 1539. fi 156*.
„ of London, fr. Dorset, 1096. fi 154*.
Eure, Lord— Yorks, 805. ff. 165-168. 1073. fi
304*. 1171.fi 46*. 1394- P- Hi- «420.
£ 105. 1487. fi 426*. 2156. fi 81.
Add. 18,011. ff. 125*. 126*.
of Heyford Warren, Oxon, 1480. fi 50.
1557- f-37-
—Beds, 2109. fi 65.
Eustace, Visct. Baltinglass. Add. 23,710. fi 93*.
of Cradoxtown, co. Kildare. Add.
23,710. fi 93*-
of Harristown, co. Kildare, Ireland.
" Add. 23,694- ff 8- 10.
Evan, of Windsor, Berks. Add. 14,284. p. 142.
«„»,.« of Marsh Gibbon, Bucks, 1102. fi 85*.
Evans, d™ ^ . .^ f g^ 12^ f. 2^
1391.fi 91*. I533- £192*-

Evans, of Bontes Hall, co. Derbv. Add. 24458.
fi 36.
„ of Manchester and BristoL Add.
24,458. fi 26*.
„ of Gloucester, from co. Montgom,
1041.fi 118*. 1543. fi 133*.
„ of Neath, co. Glam., 1140.fi 90. 1159.
fi 90. 1442. fi 93. 1545. fi 86. Add.
19,815. fi 81.
„ of London, fr. Wales, 1476. £ 295*.
„ ofTuddenham, Norfolk. Add 19,128.
£ 207.
„ of Northope, Salop, 615. £ 240*. 1241.
£ 41.
„ of Shrewsbury (Salop), 1396. £ 107.
1982. £ 10*.
„ of Treveleth, Salop, 1396. £ 108. 1982.
£11.
r. of Worcester (co. Worcester). Add
12479. fi 44.
„ of Hawkedon, Suffolk. Add 19,128.
£210.
„ of Linstead, and of Cratfield, Suffolk,
Add. 19,128 ff. 212-214.
„ Baron Carbery. Add. 14,839. £ 206.
„ of Miltown, co. Cork, &c. Add.
23,694. fi 5-
„ — Salop, 1241. ff. 91. 113. 139. 142*.
1396. ff. 109*. 174*. 1982. fi 139. 6172."
fi 22. Add. 14,314. fi 122.
Eveieigh, of Holcombe, Devon, 889. fi 55.
1080. fi 383. 1091. fi 40. 1399. fi
31*. 1538.fi 109. 3288. fi 84 5185.
f. 51*. 5840. fi 35. 5871. fi 18*.
EveU, — Salop, 1982. £ 102.
Evelyn, of Godstone, Surrey, 1 147. £ 44. 1397.
£ 57. 1430. £ 48. 1433. £ 52*. 1561.
£ 39*. Add 12,478. £ 11.
„ of Long Ditton,' Surrey, 1046 £ 19.
1147. fi 147. 1397. fi 56*. 1430. fi
48. 1433 ff. 33. 54. 1 561. £ 39*. Add
12,478 fin. i4,3-i. fi 82*.
„ of Wotton, Surrey, 1046. £ 112*.
1147. fi 147. 1397. fi 151*. 1430.fi
'53- 1433- f-141*. 1561.fi 66. Add
14,311. £ 83.
„ —Wilts, 1561. £ 39*. 1397. fi 57.
1430. fi 47*. 1433. fi 53*. 1561. fi
39*. Add. 14,311. fi 82*.
Everard, of Beeston, Beds, fr. London, 1097. fi
25*. 1390. fi 14*. 1531. fi 34*. 4600.
p. 28. 5186. p. 30. Lansd 864 p. 28.
„ of Aston Thorold, Berks, 1081. fi
18*. 1139.fi 119*. 1532. fi 19.
„ of Hawden, co. Camb, 1401. fi 87.
Add4962.fi 81*. -
„ of Wisbeach, co. Camb, 1401. fi 35*.
1534. ff. 46*. 122*. 6774. fi 51. 6775.
£35-
„ of Walthambury, Essex, 1137. fi 85*.
1432. fi 79 1 541. ff. 49*. 61. 1542.
ff. 48. 74 1570. fi 84. 6065. fi 54*.
„ .of Hether, co. Leic, 1180.fi 123*.
143 1. fi 84*. 6183. fi 100*.

120

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Everard, of Newbold and Peckleton, co.
Leic,, 1 1 So. fi 97*. 11S7. fi 100.
1189. f. 60*. 1431. fi 53. 6125.fi 13-
6183.fi H-
„ of Shenton, co. Leic, 1 180. ff. 7.
27. 49. 1 1 87. fi 1 33. n 89 ff. 30*. 93.
1431- f- 24. 6125.fr. 1 2*. 33. 38. 6183.
. £39
„ of Sutton, Line. Add. 14,309. £
120*.
„ of Gillingham, Norfolk, fr. co. Camb,
1 177. £ 175. 1552. £ 165. 4755.fi
*7- 5189 fi 20*. 6093. £ 193*. Add.
19,816. £ 71.
„ of Walpole, Norfolk, fr. co. Line,
1 177. £ 105. 1552. £ 21*. 4755. £
25. 51S9 £ 20. 6093. p. 61. 6166.
p. 55. Add. 11,388. p. 72*. 19,816. fi
20*.
„ of Yelvertoft, Northants, fr. Suffolk,
890. £ 19*. 1 138. £ 48. 1171. fi 23*.
1553. fi 36*.
„ of Whittington, co. Staff, fr. co. Leic,
1077. £ 40*. 1173. £ 32*. 1415. £
117. 1439. £ 48. 1570. fi 80. 6128
£ 49. SL 1429. fi 54*.
„ of Hawden, Suffolk, 1560. fi 272.
„ of Linstead Suffolk, fr. co. Camb,
155. fi 13. 891. fi 27*. 1103. fi 76*.
1 1 77. fi 64. 1449. ff. 57*. 82. 1560.
fi 87. 1820.fi 31.
„ of Kent Add. 5528. fi 117.
„ of Fethard, co. Tipperary. Add.
23,694 ff. 1. 2. . .
„ of Randalstown. Add. 23,694. fi 20.
Evering, of Evering, Kent, 1106. fi 118*. 1432.
fi 252. Add. 5507. p. 263. 5526. p.
222. 5532. p. 132. Add. 5528. fi in*.
De Everingham, — Suffolk. Add. 19,128. fi 226.
Everingham, of Barton-upon-Humber, co. Lin
coln, fr. co. York, 1550. £ 116*. SI.
1429. ff. no*, m*. .
„ of Laxton, Yorks. Add. 29,783. £
46*.
„ of Birkin, Yorks, 805. ff. 159-164.
1394 pp. 14*. 215. 1415. ff. 25. 40*.
90. 1420. fi 21. 1487. fi 164. 1499.
fi 22*. 4630. p. 163. Add. 18,011. fi
41. 26,739. ff- 109-110*. 29,783. fi
46*. of Rockesley, Yorks, 1487. fi 375*.
4204. fi 160*.
„ of Stainborough, Yorks, 4630. p. 165.
Add. 29,783. fi 46*.
„ of Wadsley Hall, Yorks, 1487. fi
163*.
Everington, of London, 2109. fi 36. 4600. p.
30.
Eversfield, of Denn, Sussex, 1076. fi 127. 1084.
fi 104*. 1135. fi 90*. 1194. fi 83*.
1406. fi 46*. 1562. fi 91. 5829 fi 94
6164. fi 78*.
Everton, or Everdon, of Battisford, Suffolk, fr.
co. Staff, 155. fi 42*. 1 103. ff. 50. 63.
1177. ff. 44*. 55. 1449 fi 46*. 1560.
fi 56. Add. 19,128. fi 230.

Everton, of Colshill, co. Warwick, 1 100. fi SS*.
1 167. fi 109. 1563. f. 128*. 6060. fi
146*.
Everdon, — co. Glouc, 1 041. fi 68.
Every, of Eggington, co. Derby, 6104. f. 85.
Add. 23.686. fi 86.
„ of Cothay, Somerset, fr. Devon,
1 141. fi ib. 1445. fi 7*. 1559.fi 140.
Evesham, of Willington, co. Hereford, 1 140. fi
67. 1159.fi 66. 1442. fi 69. 1545.fi
70. Add. 19,815. ff. 61-62.
Evington, of Spalding, co. Line, fr. co. Leic,
1550.fi 159
„ of Enfield, Middlx, fr. co. Line, 1468.
fi 126*. 1551. fi 26.
Evors — Salop, 1982. £ 33*.
Evyas, of Morston, Kent, 1484. fi 63b.
Ewbancke, of Durham, co: Durham, n 53. £ 39.
1397.224*. 1 168. f.26*. 1540. fi 89*.
Ewen, of Reydon, Suffolk. Add. 19,128. £ 233.
Ewens, of Suddon and Wincanton, Somerset,
1 141. £ 104*. 1445. £ 143*. 1559. £
230.
Ewer, of Lees Langley and Cheshunt, Herts,
1234 £ 138*. 1504. fi 138. 1546. fi
— - 112. 1547. fi 4*.
„ of London. Add. 19,128. p. 239.
24458. fi 272. (.«).
Ewerby, of Brackenborough, co. Line, 1097.
fi 104*. 1190.fi 94. 1484. fi'30*. 1550.
fi 203*.
Exherst, of Ash, Kent, 1106. fi 32*. 1432. fi
193*. 2198.fi 117*. Add 5507. p. 87.
Eyfford, of Brykeley, Devon. Add 14,315^. 55.
„ of Hawlysbury, Devon. Add. 14,315.
p. 54-
Eyland,— Berks, 1532. fi 64*. SI. 1429. fi 46.
Eyncourt, of York, 141.5. fi 61. 142a fi 38*.
1487. fi 250*.
-Synes, of Charlbery, Oxon, fr. Shrop, 1557.
£ 80*.
„ of Bawsley, Salop. Add. 14,314. £ 9*.
,, -co. Worcester, 1566. £ 138. 5814.
£ 79
Eynion, or Onyon, — co. Glouc, 1041. ff. 27. 28.
1 191. £ 24*. 1543. f£ \b. 177*.
Eynsford, of King's Peon, co. Hereford, 1140.
£26*. 1159.fi 26*. 1442. f.26*. 1545.
ff 14 36.
„ —co. Worcester, 1566. fi 41.
Eyre, of Burnham, Bucks, 1102. fi 8*. 1 1 39. ff.
85*. 138*. 1151.fi 6*. 1193.fi 7*. 1136.
ff. 1. 2*. 1234 fi 3. 1391. £ 9*. 1429.
£ 72. 1533- f- 1. 5181. p. 25. 5832.
£ 12*. 5868. £ 7*.
„ (Ayre), of Ely, co. Camb, 2198. £ 3.
„ (Ayre),— Yorks, 1341. p, 259. 141 5.
£ 32. 1420. £ 185*. 1487. fi 316.
„ of Hathersedge, Cheshire. Add.
24,458. ff. 125. 129.
„ of Crookhill, co. Derby, 6104. fi 83*.
Add. 24,458. fi 125

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

121

Eyre, of Hassop, co. Derby, 1093. £ no.
i486, f. 53*. 1537. fi 56*. 6104.fi 84
(a. *.) Egert. 996. f. 31*. Add. 3445S.
fi 128*. 28,113. ff 42*. 57*. 58.
» of Highlowe, co. Derby, i486, fi 54*.
2 1 1 3. fi 94*. 2 1 34. fi 1 8*. Egert. 996.
fi 31*. Add. 24458. fi 125*. 28,813
ff. 54. 54*-
„ of Newbold, co. Derby, 1537. fi 55*.
Add 18,011. fi 217*.
„ of Padley, co. Derby, 886. fi 11*.
1093. ff. 70. 74. 1153.fi. 96*. 97. 1484
fi 35. i486, fi 54*. 1537. ff. 6*. 55*.
2113.fi 94-5. 2134. fi 18*. 6592. fi 15.
Egert 996. £ 32*. Add. 24,458. £ 125*.
28,113. ff. 12*. 55*.
„ of Rowler, co. Derby, 6104. 82*.
„ of Shalton, co. Derby, 6104 £ 83.
„ of North Lees, co. Derby. Add.
28,113. £55.
„ of Bradway, co. Derby. Add 24458
£ 128*.
„ of Bramley Hill, co. Derby. Add
24458. ff. 93*. 129.
„ of Peniston, co. Derby. Add 24,458.
£ 126.
„ of Hope, co. Derby Add. 24,458. ff.
124*. 125.
„ of Micklefield, co. Derby. Add.
24,458. fi 124*.
„ of Holden and Grainsford, co.
Derby. Add. 24458. fi 124*.
„ (Ayre), of Wotton, Devon, 1080. fi
272*. 1163.fi 129.
„ of Belton, co. Leic, 1180. fi 141*.
1187.fi 138. n89.fi 106*. 1431.fi 98.
6125. ff. 99. in*. 6183. £ 116.
„ of Kensington, Middlx, fr. Wilts,
1468. £ 138. .
of Normanton, Notts, 1082". £ 69
1400. £ 18*. 1555. £ 39 Add- 24458.
£ 126. 28,113. £ 56*.
„ of Rayton, Notts, 1400. ff. 46*-47.
1555. £ 77*. Add 24,458- f- 126.
„ ' of Kiveton, Notts. Add. 24,458. fi
126*. 28,113. fi 57-
„ of Rampton and Grove, Notts. Add.
24458. fi 126*.
of Drorifield Woodhouse, co. Derby.
Add. 24,458. fi 127*.
ofHighfieldco.Derby. Add. 24,458.
fi 127*.
of Woodhay, co. Derby. Add. 28,1 13.
"" " fiss*-

Eyre, of Offerton, co. Derby. Add. 28,1 13. fi 56*.
„ of Bubnell, co. Derby. Add. 28,113.
f. 56*.
„ of Rowten Grove, Notts. Add
28,113. fi 25.
„ of East Bergholt, Suffolk. Add.
19,128. £ 244.
„ of Bromham, Wilts> 1165. £ 90. 1443.
f. 192.
„ of Chalfield, Wilts, 1443. fi 147.
„ of Sarum, co. Wilts, 1 165. fi 54*.
„ of Wood Hampton, Wilts, 888.
fi 31*. mi.fi 63. 1165. £75*. n8l.
f. 59. 1443. £ 147. 1565. ff. 51*- 52.
4204. £ 1 59*. 5148. p. 30.
„ of Bramley, Yorks, 4630. p. 162. Add
26.739.fi 109.
„ of Ketton, co. Yorks, fr. co. Derby,
1394, p. 276. 1415. fi 35. 1420. fi
. 197*. 1487. fi 458.
„ of Cleckheaton, co. Yorks. Add.
24,458. fi 203.
„ of Galway. Add. 23,686. fi 34*.
23.694.fi 7.
„ (Ayre), — Cambs, 2198. £ 3.
„ (Aye)' Yorks, 1394. p. 259. 1415,
£ 32. 1420. £ 185*. 1487. £ 316.
„ (Eyres), of London, fr. Berks, 1476.
£ 208*.
,, of London, fr. co. Line, 1476. £ 215.
Eyston, of East Hendred, Berks, 1139. £ 68*.
1081, fi 19. 1483. ff. 72. 112. 1530.
ff. 51*. 65. 1532. £ 19*. 5822. £ 16*.
6173. fi 36*. Add.4961.fi 44. 14,283.
£ 44. 14,284 pp. 51. 86.
„ of Eyton, Cheshire, 1535. £ 131.
„ of Gaddesby, co. Leic fr. co. Staff.,
1180.fi 131. 1187.fi 136. n89fio6*.
1431. £ 88. 6125. fi 92. 6183. £ 109.
„ of Diddlestone, Salop, 615. £ 222*.
1241.fi 54*. 1396. fi in*. Add 14,314.
£29.
„ of Eyton, Salop, 1241. ff. 74*. 100.
1396. ff. 1 1 16. 112*. 122. 1982. ff. 54*.
121*. 138. 6172. £ 12. Add 14,314.
ff. 2*. 66. 105*.
„ of Marshe, Salop, 1982. fi 164. 1241.
fi 47. 1396. ff. 122. 260*. Add 14,314.
ff. 41*. 78*. 133.
„ of Ruabon. Add 29,782. fi 35*.
„ —co. Staff, 6128. fi 96.
„ — co. Warwick, 1041. fi 114b. 1543.
£ 27*.

122

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

S*.

Fabian, of London, fr. Surrey, 1476. fi 440.
„ — Wilts, 1 181, fi 19*. 1443. fi 32*.
rachell, of Colley, Berks. Add. 12,479. fi 3.
Fagge, of Feversham, Kent Add. 5528. ff.
93.93*. 16,279 p. 426.
Fairclougb, of London, fr. Herts, 1476. fi
375*.
„ of Fairclough and Weston, Herts,
1547. f- 32*. 1546. fi 89.
„ of Hevenmgham, Suffolk Add.
19,129. p. 1.
Fairfax, Lord, 2186. ff. 8080*. Add 24458. fi
343-
„ of Cunsby and Swarby, co. Line,
1 190. fi 79*. 1550. fi 206*.
, of Deeping Gate, co. Line, n 87. fi
37*. 1 188. p. 42.
„ of London, fr. co. Line, 1096. fi 65*.
1463.fi 11*.
„ of Walsingham, Norfolk, fr. Suffolk
1552. fi 47.
„ of Bury, Suffolk. Add. 19,129. pp.
5-12.
„ of Denton, Yorks, 1571. fi 42*. 4630.
p. 170. Add. 26,739. fi 113*.
„ of Steeton, Yorks, 1394. p. 60. 1415.
fi 68. 1420. fi 49. 1487. £ 25 5. 1499. fi
35. 4630. pp. 169-172. Add. 18.01 1.
fi 67*. 26,739 ff. H3-"5.
„ of Walton and Gilling, Yorks, 1 171. fi
38*. 1394. pp. 12. 76. 141 5. ff. 40*.
67*. 1420. £ 21. 1487. £ 254*. 1499.
£ 34*. 4630. p. 166. Add. 18,011. fi
41. 26,739. ff. 1 1 1-1 12*.
„ —co. Camb, 6830. p. 131.
Fairthwait, of London, 1424. fi 66. 1505. fi
65*.'
Faiconer.or Fauconer, of Thurcaston, Cheshire,
1535. fi 88. Add. 29,783. fi 40.
„ or Fawconer, of Coggenho, Northants,
fr. Hants, 890. fi 5. 1084. fi 30. 1094,
fi 90*. 1138.fi 53*. 1171.fi 24*. 1 184.
fi 87*. 1187.fi 24*. 1 188. p. 3. 1553.
fi 4*. 6066. fi 40.
„ ¦ or Fawknor, of Kingsclere, Hants,
1139.fi 22. 1544- fi 85*. 5865, fi 37*.
„ (Fawkener), of Allerton, Hunts, fr.
Sussex, 1075. fi 16. 1179. fi 36. Cott.
Jul. F.viii. fi 16.
„ (Faulkner), of London. Add. 19,129.
fi 85.
„ (Fawconer), of Ridware, Staff, fr. co.
Leic, 6128. fi 33*.
„ (Fawconer), of Lawstock, Wilts, fr.
Hants, 1 165. fi 9*. 1443. fi 75*.
„ (Fawkner), — co. Leic 2113.fi 75*.
Add. 14,314. fi 29*..
Faldo, of Okley, Beds, 1531. fi 93*. 2109. fi 39.
4600. p. 59.
De Falesham, of Peasenhall, Suffolk. Add.
19,129. p. 22.

Faikiner, of Annmount (I. Bart.). Add 23,685.
fi 36*. 23,687. ff. 86,175. 23.689. fi
•292*.
Falkingham, of Northall, YorkSj 4630. p. 174.
Add. 26.739.fi "S*.
FaUowes, — Cheshire, 1535.fi 141*.
Falwell, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 74.
Fane, or Vane, of Badsell and Tunbridge, Kent,
1073.fi 158. 1548. fi 75- Add. 5532.
pp. 158-161. 14,311. fi 14*.
Fansbaw, of Parsloes, Essex, fr.co. Derby, 1541.
fi 245. 6665. fi 3*.
. „ of Ware Park, Herts, fr. co, Derb,
1504. fi 13. 1546. fi 53*. 6147.fi 8*.
Fanston, of Downton, Wilts. 1165. £ 7. 1443.
£ 72. • - .
Parbraoser— Kent Add 5528. fi 62b.
Fareway, — Somerset, 1559. fi 131.
Farweii, of London, fr. Dorset, 1476. £ 253.
Farewell, of Hill Bishop and Holbrooke,
Somerset, 1141. £ 109*. 1385. fi 16.
1445. ff. 148*. 189 1559.fi. 58^. 126*.
Farington, of Lingard, co. Lane, 891. fi 79*.
1468. fi 40*. 1549. fi 46. 2086. fi 47.
6i59 f- 35-
„ of Little Farrington, co. Lane, 891.
fi 86. 1468. fi 56. 1549. fi 45. 2076. fi
15*. 2086. fi 66. 6159. £ 34*.
„ of Ribbleton, co. Lane, 891- £ 70*.
1437. fi 101. 1468. fi 40. 1549.fr. 42*.
45*. 2086. fi 45*. 6159. fi 35.
„ of Werden, co. Lane, 1437. fi 20.
1 549. fi 46*. 6159. fi 34*. Add 12477.
ff. 46*. 47.
„ of London, 6128. fi 78*.
„ of London, fr.. co. Lane, 1476. ff.
265*. 321.
„ of London, fr. Sussex, 1096. f. 46.
'1463. £ 26*.
„' of Chichester, Sussex, fr. co. Lane,
1076. fi 194. 6164. fi 34.
„ — Cheshire, 1424. £ 35*. 1505. £
34*. \x
„ — co. Hereford, 114a. fi 22. n 59. fi
22. 1442. fi 22.
Farley, of Bosbury, co. Hereford 1 545. £ 93*.
'„ of Westminster. Add. 19,129 £29.
„ —Derby, 1153. fi 102.
Farmer, of Ratcliffe, co. Leic,. 1 180. £ 127*.
1 187. fi 133*. 1189J fi 97*. 1431. fi
89 6125. fi 119*. 6183. fi 105*.
„ of London, fr. co. Leic. and Line,
1096. fi 148*.
„ of London, fr. Northampt, 1241. fi
4*. 1396. £ 310*.. 1982. fi 164. Add.
14,314. fi 124.
„ of Lincoln's Inn Fields, fr. co. Leic,
1468. £ 122.
Farnaby, of Kippington, Kent Add 5507. p.
41. 5528.fi 104.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

123

/

Farnden, of Sedlescomb, Sussex, fr. Surrey,
1076. fi 217*.
Farnham, of Quarndon, co. Leic, 810. f. 17*.
1 1 80. fi 47*. 1187.fi 116*. 11S9.fi
114*. 1431.fi 106. 6125.fi 53. 6183.
Farquhar (N.S. Bart.). Add. 23,688. fi 107.
Farquharson. of Inverey, N.B. Add. 14,837. fi
213.
„ of Invercauld, N.B. Add. 14,836. f.
327-
„ of Finzean, N.B. Add. 1 4,837. £ 205.
Farrant, or Ferrand, of Mitcham, Surrey, 1046.
£6*. 1 147. £ 2*. 1397. £44*. 1430.
£ 2*. 1433. £ 42*. 1 561. fi 94. Add
• 4963.fi 3*-
Farrar, of Atton, Cheshire, 1535. fi 141.
rarre, of Eastwood and Bursted, Essex, 1541.fi
65*. 1542. fi 135.
Farr, of North Cove, Suffolk Add. 19,129. p. 33.
parr ell — co. Longford, 10S1. ff. 66*. 67.
Farrent, of Lutterworth, co. Leic, fr. Bucks
and Hunts, 1180.fi 150*. 1187.fi 139-
1 189. fi in*. 1431. fi 103. 6125. ffi
103. 119*. 6183. fi 120.
Farrer, of Great Amwell, Herts, fr. co. York,
1234. fi 117*. 1504. fi 135. 1547. fi
28*.
„ of London, fr. co. York, 1444. fi 70.
Add. 5533. p. 52. Add. 24458. fi 195*.
„ 'or Ferrer, of Brewly, Surrey, fr. cos.
Line, and York, 1561. i. 169*.
„ of Westwood, Surrey, fr. cos. Line
and York, 1046. £ 80*. 1397. £ 119*.
1433. fi 112.
„ of Ewood, Yorks, 4630. p. 177. 6070.
p. 113*. Add. 26,739. fi 117.
Farringdon, of Farringdon, Devon, 889. fi 70*.
1080. fi 395*. 1091. fi 44*. 1 163. fi
226*. I399.fi 41. 1538. fi 138*. 3288.
ff. 52. 117*. 126*. 5185. fi 52. 5840.
fi 48(a.*.) 5871. fi 21.
Fasham, of Deal, Kent. Add. 5528. fi 120.
Fashin, of Southampton, 1139. fi 2*. 1544 fi
59*. /
Fastolfe, of Ipswich, Suffolk, 1820. f. 23.
„ of Pettow, Suffolk, fr. Norfolk, 155. fi
63*. 1103.fi 68*. n77.fi 59 '449.
ff. 47*.' 94*. 1560. fi 74. 1820. £18*.
Add 19,129. pp. 47-52.
„ of Caistor, Suffolk. Add. 19,129- P-
, -- 43-
„ of Nacton, Suffolk. Add 19,129. p.
46. or raistoffe,— co. Warwick, noo. fi
57. 1167.fi 49 1563- f- 66*.
Fauconberg, Lord,— 1415- £ 60- 1420. t 37.
1487. fi 6*. Add. 29,783. fi 79*.
of Beccles, Suffolk. Add. 19129. £
79-
Fauconbridge, of Cuckney, Notts. Add. 29,783.
£80. of Ottrington, Yorks, 805. ff. 169-172.
'' 1487. fi 37 J- Add- 1 4,309- £ 72*.

Paukeleroy, or Fockeroy, — Somerset, 1385. f.
32. 1559. f. 7/1.
Paunce, of Rochester, Kent. Add. 16,279. P-
380.
Faunt, of Foston, co. Leic, fr. co. Hunts, 11 80.
£14. 1187.fi 103*. 1189. £19. 1431.
£ 12. 6125. ff. 22*. 113. 6183. £ 23*.
„ of Cannons, Middlx, 1551. £ 54.
„ — Surrey, 1046. fi 16. 1147. fi 38*.
1397. f- 54- I433- fi 53- 1561. fi 221.
Add. 12478. £ 10.
Pauntieroy, of Fountleroy's Marshe, Dorset,
888. £ 55*. 1092. ff. 21. 53*. 1 153. ff.
73*- 79- 1451- £ 183*. 1539. £ 47*.
2186. fi 22.
Faussett, of Rochester, Kent. Add. 5507. p.
305*.
raven, of Normanton, Yorks. Add 24458.
£ 209.
Faversham, — Kent Add 5532. £ 77.
pavion,— Essex, 1432. fi 17*.
Fawdreii, — Hunts, Cott. Jul. F. viii. fi 30.
Fawether, of Halesworth, Suffolk. Add.
19,129. fi 87.
Fawkes, of Farnley and South Duffield, Yorks,
1394. p. 64. 1415. fi. 69. 1420.fi 51.
1487. fi 199*. 4630. p. 175. Add.
18,01 1 fi 70. 26,739 £ 1 r6.
„ — co. Hereford, 1043. £ 23.
Fawne, of Hadlow, Kent, 1 106. fi 222.
Fawsett, of Norwich, 1531. fi 93*.
Faxley, of Blakesley, Northants. 6066. f.46*.
Pay, of Westmeath. Add. 23,686 fi 21*.
Pazakerley, of Fa.zakerley, co. Lane, 1437. fi
80. 1468. fi 77*. 1549. fi 25*.
Feake. of Godstone, Surrey, fr. Norfolk. 1046.
fi 20. 1147. £ 46. 1397- £ 58. 1430.
fi 50. 1433. fi 54*- 1561. fi 104. Add.
12478. fi 1 1*.
„ (peke), of London, fr. Norfolk, 1096.
£ 119-
Fearne. (Fern), of Snitterton and Hognaston,
Derby. Add 24,458. £ 36. 28,113.
£ 24*.
„ (perne) of Parwich, co. Derby, 1093.
ff. 63. 103*. Egert 996. £ 69.
„ or perne, of Temple Bell Wood, co.
Line, fr. cos. Derby and Essex, 1 190.
£89*. 1550. ff. 171. 221.
„ of Grackemarsh, Staff, fr. co. Derby,
1077. £ 68*. 1 173. £ 60*. 1415. f. 120.
1570.fi 68. 6104. fi 16*. 6128. fi 21*.
„ of London, fr. co. Line, 1476. fi 308*.
Pending tr. Fielding.
„ Earl of Denbigh, 1073. fi 136. 2109.
£46. Add. 14,838. ff. 50. 54 19,129.
pp. 178-181.
„ of Newnham, co. Warwick, 1 100. ff.
5*. n. 1 167. ff. 4*- 5- 1563- f- 11.
6060. ff. 8*. 9.
Feld, v. Field,
„ of Westminster, 1553. fi 42.
Feibrigg, als. Bigod, Suffolk. Add. 19,129
£.91.

124

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Felgate, of Stonham, Suffolk, 891. f. 35*. 1449.
f. 30. 1560. fi 147s.
„ of Kettleboro' and Yaxley, ' Suffolk.
Add. 19,129. pp. 101. 104.
FeU, of Attercliffe, Yorks. Add. 24,458. fi 207*.
Fellingsham, of Stanwell, Middlx, 4,204. £ 35*.
Felmersham, of Creake, Northants, 1094. £
188. 1 184. £ 183. 1187. fi 48. 1188.
p. 60. 1553. fi 120*. 6066. fi 99*.
Pelmingham, — Norfolk, 1552. fi 180*. 5189.
fi 30.
Feitham, of Mutford and Hawlesworth, Suffolk,
1560. fi 241. Add. 19,129. p. 108.
Felton, of Wastrey, Salop, 1982. fi no. 6128.
fi 107*.
„ or Chapman, of Glemsford, Suffolk,
1449. £ 83*. 1560. £ 171.
„ of Playford, Suffolk, 1449. ff. 84 90*.
1560.fi 173*. 4204. £3 1*. SI. 1429.
£53. Add. 19,129. pp. 119.-129*.
„ — Northumb, 1415. £ 36*. 1420. £
211*.
Fenay, of Fenay, Yorks, 4630. p. 181. Add.
24,458. £ 145. 26,739. ff- ll9- JI9*.
Feningham, — Beds, 2109. fi 82.
Fenn, of London, fr. Suffolk, 1476. fi 50.
„ of Norwich. Add. 19,129. p. 149.
„ —Middlx., 1504. fi 36. 1546. £ 126.
Fenner, of Roseashe, Devon, fr. Somerset,
1080. £317. 1163.fi 243-
„ or At Fenn, of Crawley, Sussex, 1 562.
£ 83*. 5829. £ 76*.
„ —Westmoreland, 1435. £ 26. 1564
£ 28.
Fenr other, — of London, 1536. fi 20*. 1562.fi 15.
Fenton, of Fenton, Notts, 1082. fi 69*. 1400.
ff. 12*. 64. 1555. ff. 26*. 98*.
„ of Crake, Yorks, 1394 p. 159. 1415.
£12*. 1420.fi 116. 1487.fi 192. Add.
18,011. fi 137- 29,783. fi 61.
„ of Leeds, &c. Add. 24458. fi 67*.
of Gleadleys and of Sheffield, Yorks.
Add. 24458. fi 188*.
Fenwick, of London, fr. Northumb, 1476. fi 38*.
„ of Longshawes, Northumb., 1448. fi
40*. 1554 fi 21.
„ qf Meldon, Northumb, 1448. fi 27*.
of Stanton, Northumb, n 53. fi 55.
1448. £36*. 1554. fi 21*. 6592. fi 18.
„ of Wallington, Northumb, 1153. £
53*-
„ of Butterley, Northumb, n 53. £ 53.
1448. ff. 23. 58.
„ of Brinkbourne, Northumb, 1448. fi
33- n53.£54*. 1554- £ 54-
„ of East Haddon, Northumb, 1153.
fi 54_5. 1554. £22.
Fenys & Pinnis,— Kent Add. 5528. f. in.
Ferby, of Paul's Cray, Kent, 1 106. £ 182*.
1432. £ 295*. Add. 5507. p. 370.
5526. p. 382. 5532. p. 100.
, of Rusham, Surrey, H47- £ 122.
1430. fi 128. 1433. fi 109. 1561. fi
167*.

Feremsby. — York, 1415. fi 45-
Fermingham, of Crowshall, Suffolk, fr. London,
1449 fi 95-
Fermor, of East Barsham, Norfolk, 1552. fi
240. 4756. fi 88*.
„ of Easton Neston, Northants, fr.
Oxon, 890. fi 2*. 1084. fi 16*. 1094. fi
167. 1138. £49. 1 1 84. £ 163. 1187.
£17. 1188. p. 13. 1553. £89
„ of. Welches, Sussex, 1076. £ 154.
1084. £ 31. 1 135. £ 17. 1 194 £ 11.
1562. fi 88. 1406. fi 8. 5829 fi 81*.-
6164 fi 81.
Permour, als. Godfrey, of Lydd, Kent. Add.
5528. fi 74
Feme, v. Fearne 
Fernewold, — Kent, 1484. fi 65*.
Ferneley, of Monasterevan, co. KildaTe. Add.
23,693. fi 94.
Fernley, of Creeting, Suffolk, 155. fi.57*. 1103.
fi 29*. 1 177. fi 29. 1449. fi 32*.
1560. fi 34*. 1820. fi 12*. Add. 19,129.
fi 154-
„ —Beds, 2109. fi 76*.
Ferrand, of Carlton, Yorks, 1487. fi 453*.
4630. p. 179. Add. 26,739. ff u7*. II8*.
Ferrer, of London. Add. 14,315. p. 4.
Ferrers, Earl of Derby, 1425. fi 139.
„ Viscount Hereford, 1394. p. 4*. 1420.
fi 32*.
„ Lord, of Chartley, 1073. fi 92. . 2113.
fi 85. 6128. ff. 22. 94.
„ Lord, 1191.fi 36*. 1543. fi 33*. 1982.
fi 92*. 2109. ff. 66. 81*.
„ of Groby, Northants, 11 87. fi 94
21 13. fi 85*. 6128. ff. 23. 94*. SI.
1429. fi 68*.
„ of Lockesley, Staff, noo. fi 117.
1167.fi 156. 1563. ff. 45*. 192*. 2109.
fi 68*. 6128. fi 94. Add. 21,017 f-
104*.
„ of Cookham Lowebrook, Berks, fr
Bucks, 1483. fi 132*. 1530. fi 74.
1532. fi 144*. '6173. fi 95. Add.
4961. fi 25*. 14,284. p. no.
„ of Fiddington, co. Glouc, fr. Wilts,
1041. fi 104. 1 191. fi 36*. 1543. fi :
136*. .,-<:.
„ of Polesborne and St. Albans, Herts; v
1546. fi 81. 2113. fi 87. 6128 fi 22. " >
„ of London, fr. Berks, 1476.fi 134*. '¦¦'
„ of London, fr. co. Glouc, 1476. fi
169.
„ of London, fr. Wilts. 1696. fi 103.
,, of Baddesley, co. Warwick, noo ff.
4*. 45. 59*. 1 102. fi 19*. 1 15 1. fi
15*. 1 167. fi 3. (a. *.) 1234. fi 46*.
1391. fi 20*. 1533 fi 58*. 1563 ff.
25*. 220*. 2113 fi 86*. 2156. fi 62*.
6060. ff. 10*. n. 6128. fi 22*. Add.
5509. fi 2. 16,279. P- 438 (a.)

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

125

i-V

Ferrers, of Tan_worth, co. Warwick, 886. ff.
. 66*. 1093. fi 87. 1484. fi 34*.
i486, fi 45*. 2109.fi 84*. 21 13. f. 86.
6128. ff. 15*. 22*. 94*. 6592. ff. 3. 4.
Add. 14,311. ff. 19*. 20.
„ —Devon, 889. fi 45*. 3288. fi 169.
„ —Middlx., 1532.fi 93*. Add. 14,283.
. £ 25*.
Ferresr— Cheshire, 2 142. £ 62*.
Perrier, of Yarmouth. Add. 19,129. ff. 168.
171.
Ferris, pf Ashton Keynes, Wilts, 888. £ 10*.
1181. £ 14.' 1443. £ 224*. 1565. £
14. 5184 p. 32.
Fetheraton, of LangWathby, Cumb, 1457. £
231*.
„ of Ardagh, co. Longford. (I. Bart)
Add. 23,687. £ 150.
Fetherstonhaugb, of Stanhope Hall, co.
Durham, 11 53. £ 38. 1168. £ 22*.
1 171. £ 66*. 1397. £ 219. 1540.fr.
41. 46*. 77*.
„ of Fetherstonhaugh, Northumb, 1 1 53.
£ 56*. 1448. £ 54*. 1554. fi 123*.
Fettipiace, of Bessells Leigh, Berks, 1081. fi
22*. 1 139. ff. 46. 78. 109. 1483. f.85.
,1530. fi 61*. 1532. ff. 40. 143*. 5822.
fi 17*. 6173. £ 38. Add. 4961. £ 10*.
14,283. £ 10*. 14,284. p. 78.
„ of Childrey, Berks, 1483. £ 115.
1530. £ 68*. Add 14,284. p. 95.
„ of North Denchworth, Berks, 1081. fi
23*. 1139.fi 61. 1530. fi 64. 1483.fi
no*. 1532. fi 3*. 4204. fi 191. 5822.
£18*. Add. 4961. £ n(a.*.) 12479.
fi 7*. 14,283. ff. n(«.*.j 12. 14,284.
p. 83.
„ or, Phetttplace, of Swinbrook, Oxon,
808. fi 14. 1095. fi 32. 1412. fi 92*.
1480. fi 43*- 1556. f- 7o*. 1557- fi 14-
5187. fi 18*. Lansd. 880. fi 24*.
rewtereu, of Downe, Salop, 1396. fi 118*.
Picham, — , Yorks, 1415. f- 26. 1420. £ 160.
De la Field, of Ireland. Add. 23,690. ff. 74.
75. 77 (notes).
Field, of Nonington, Kent. Add. 5528. £ 186.
of London. Add 24458. £ 102*.
(m).
„ of Ipswich. Add. 19,129 p. 175.
„ of Warwick, &c. Add. 24,458. ff
273*. 274.
of Ardsley, Yorks. 1394- f- 23*.
" 141 5. £27*. 1420. £ 166*. 1487.fi
114b. Addi8.on.fi 187. 29783.fi 60.
of Horton, &c, Yorks. Add. 24,458.
" ff. 203*. 204.
of Bradford, Yorks. Add. 24,458. f.
ll6*. ofPagenhall, co. Glouc, 1041. fi 97.
" 1543- f- "7*-
—Bucks, 1504 fi 62.
—Dorset, 1539 £ 3-
—Kent, 1041. fi 24. 1191. fi 22.
" 1543- £ 17-

Field or Feild, of Ardsley, Yorks, 1 394. p.
233. 1415.fi 27*. 1420. fi 166*. 1487.
fi 114*.
Fielding, V. Feilding.
„ of Canterbury. Add. 14,835. fi 12*.
„ of London, fr. co. Lane, 1504 £ 107.
Fiennes, Lord Dacres, 1 139. £ 112. 1484. £64*.
5829. ff. 6. 7. 50*. SI. 1429. £ 100*.
Add. 5528. £ 2*. 14,311. ff. 7*. 74.
19,129. pp. 184-187.
„ Lord Saye and Sele, 1073. £ 238*.
1 102. fi 27*. 1151.fi 26. 1 193. fi 27.
1234. f- 31*- I39L f- 3°*- 1533- £
173*. 2156. fi 77*.
Fifield, or love, of Bromley, Kent, fr. London,
1 106. fi 131*. 1432. £ 259. Add.
5507. pp. 247. 248. 5526. p. 268.
5532. P- 69
„ or Lowe, of London, 1463. £ 45.
„ or Xowr— co. Glouc, 1041. £ 107*.
1543. £ 146*.
Figg, or Pyge, of Shipton and Winslow, Bucks,
fr. Essex, 1 102. ff. 27. 103*. 1 139.
ff. 41. 50. 1234. £ 31.. 1391. ff. 30.
104*. 1429 £ 73. 1533. £ 49*. 5181.
p. 4. 5868. £ 12*.
FUbeche, — Kent. Add. 16,279. P« 222.
FUgate, of Stonham AspalL Add 23,689. f. 284.
FUilode, of Alveley, Salop, 1241. £ 55*. 1396.
ff. 14 218. 1472. £ 8. Add. 14,314. £
91*.
Flikin, of Tattenhall, Cheshire, 774 £ 20*. 1045.
£ 109. . 1424. £ 60. 1505. £ 59*. 1535.
ff. 142. 219&. .2187. £53*. 5182.fi 43.
Add 5529. fi 26*.
Filioii, of Old Hall, Essex, fr. Dorset, 1083. fi
41*. 1137. f. 122. 1432. £ 122*. 1541.
£ 125*. 1542. £ 106*. 6065. £ 57.
Add 14,290. £ 75*. 19,129 p. 196.
FiliioU, of Knight's Street, Dorset, 888. £ 39*.
1046. £ 222. 1092. fi 5. 1 166. f. 83*.
1 153. fi 70. 1451. ff. 136*. 149. 1539.
fi 2*. 2186. fi 4*.
Plimer, of London, fr. Kent, 1476 fi 221.
„ of Sutton, Kent, 1 106. £ 188*. 1432.
£ 300. Add. 5507. p. 105. 5526. p.
394- 5532- p. 115.
Pinch, Earl of Winchilsea, &c, 1073. ff. 209*.
414*.
„ Earl of Aylesford. Add. 19,129. pp.
198-201.
„ of Kempley, co. Glouc, fr. Bucks,
1041. £ 120*. 1543. £ 173.
„ of Redburn and St Albans, Herts,
1546. £ 131*.
„ of Kensington, Middlx.,fr. Kent, 1468.
ff. 114. 115.
„ of Coldred, Kent, 1041. £ n. no6.
£35. 1432. £ 195*. 2198. fi 120. 1484.
£ 66*. 6065. £ 95. Add. 5507. p. 92.
5526. p. 61. 552S. ff. 103. 137*. 14,311.
fi 9*. 16,279. P- 4^4.
„ of Grovehurst and Eastwell, Kent,
1391. £ 128. 1548. fi 2a

126

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Finch, of Linstead, Kent. Add. 16,279. p.
462.
„ or Herbert, of Eastwell, Kent, 1 106.
£ 78*. 1432. £ 225. Add. 5507. p. 56.
5526. p. 144.
„ or Herbert, of Kingsdowne, Kent,
fr. Sussex, 1 106. £ 16. 1432. £ 1 80*.
2198. fi 101. Add. 5507. p. 184. 5526.
p. 27.
„ of Croydon, Surrey, 1147. fi 18. 1397.
fi 44*. 1430. fi 18*. 1433.fi 61. 1561.fi
114*. Add. 4963. £ 23*. 12478. £ 18.
,, — co. Line, 1550.fi 167.
„ —Salop, 1396. fi 327.
Pincham, of Owtwell, co. Camb, fr. Norfolk,
1043. fi 60. 1401. fi 36. 1534. fi 47*.
. 1552. fi 63*. 6769. fi 6*. 6770. fi 9*.
6774 fi 52. 6775.fi 36. Add.4962.fi
32(a.b.). 19,129. fi 29*.
Fincber, of London, fr. Bucks. Add. 5533. p.
203.
„ • of Wednesbury, Staff. Add 24,458.
fi 27.
Findaii, of London, 1550. fi 161.
Finderne, — Essex, 1 1 37. fi 36*. 1432. fi 27*.
Finett, of Soulton, Kent, 1 106. fi 187. 1432.
fi 299 Add. 5507. p. 89.
Fineux, of Hougham, Kent, 1 106. fi 34. 1432.
fi 194*. 1548.fi 61. 2198. fi 119. Add.
5507. P. 90. 5526. p. 59. ' 5528. fi 1 1 1.
5532. pp. 31- 148.
„ —Beds, 2l09.fi 51-
„ — Surrey. Add. 14,311. fi 26*.
Finney, of Sheffield. Add. 24,458. £ 154.
Flppen, or Fitz-Pen, of Truro, Cornwall, fr.
. Devon and Dorset, 1149 £80. 1162.
fi 84.
Firebrace, of Long Melford, Suffolk, Add.
19,129. p. 208.
Firman, of London, 1476. fi 164.
Firmin, of Hawkedon, Suffolk. Add. 19,129.
pp. 217-219.
„ of Yoxford, Suffolk. Add. 19,129 p.
221.
Fishacre,— Devon. 1091. fi 115. 1538. fi 258.
Fishborne,— co. Durham, 1550. fi 124.
Pishbourne, of New Windsor, Berks, fr. Notts,
1483. fi 134 1530. fi 76. Add. 14,284.
p. 114.
Fish (I. Bart.) Add. 23,687. fi 122.
Fishe, of Southill, Beds, 1531. fi 146*.
„ of Hatfield and Little Ate, Herts,
1547- ff 55- 57-
Fisher, of Alderways, Beds, 2109. ff. 66 (a.b.)
68*.
„ of Childrey, Berks, fr. co. Glouc,
1483. fi 113. 1530. £67.
„ of Wisbeach, co. Camb, 6775. £ 17*.
„ of Rawthorne, co. Derby, Add.
24458. £ 88*.
„ Low Leyton, Essex. Add 23,686.
£ 29*.
„ or Pitcher, of Chilton Coridover,
Hants, 1 139. fi 22*. 1544. fi 5&.

Fisher, of Bugdon and Lottesford, Herts,
fr. co. Staff. 1504. ft". 75. 77*.
„ of Maidstone, Kent, 1106. fi 17S*.
1432. fi 293*. 1557. fi 60*. Add.
5507. p. 365. 5526. p. 372. 5532. p.
131-
„ of London. Add. 5533. p. 62.
„ of London, fr. co. Cheshire, 1476. fi
438.
„ of London, fr. cos. Glouc. and Herts,
1476. fi 294.
„ of Fulham, Middlx., fr. co. Staff.,
1 55 1. ff. 17*. 62*.
„ — Middlx,, fr. co. Worc, 1-531. f. 167.
„ of Buntingford, Norfolk, 1552.fi 182*.
„ of Hartwell Park, Northants, fr. Salop,
890. £ 6*. 1094 £ 99. 1 138. fi 55*.
1 171. f 24*. 1-184. f- 96. • 1 187. £ 26*.
1 188. p. 24. 1553. fi 5*.
„ of Mansfield, Notts. Add 24,458. £
88*.
„ of Ludlow, Salop,, fr. co. Wore, 1396.
£ 1 19. Add. 14,314. & 140.
„ of Packington, co. Warwick, fr. Salop,
noo. fi 2. 1167. ff. 2*. 71*. 1180. fi
21. 1189.fi 24*. 1431.fi 18. 1563.fi
9. 6060. ff. 3*. 43. 6125. fi 32*. 6183.
fi 33*-
„ or Hawkins, of Warwick, noo. fi 13.
1167. fi 7. 1563. fi 23. 6060. fi 22#.
„ (Bishop of Salisbury). Add. 19,129.
fi 229.
„ of Oulton, Yarmouth. Add 19,129.
p. 232.
„ of Lidham- Weeke, Wilts, fr. Berks,
1081. ff. 24*. 25. n 39. £ 64. 1165.fi
25*. 1443. fi 109. 6173. £ 44.
„ of Sheffield, Yorks. Add. 24458. £
258.
„ — Beds, 1 504. fi 69*.
„ — Cheshire, 1535.. fi 257*. 21 19. fi
125*.
„ — Essex, 1557. fi 60*.
„ — Herts, 1546. fi 57*.
Fiske, of Studhow, Herts, 1234 £ 142*. 1504.
fi 144. 1547. £98. \
„ of Laxfield and Rattlesden, Suffolk.
Add. 19,129. p. 241.
„ of Shimpling, Suffolk. Add. 19,129.
p. 246.
Fitch, of Brason Head, Essex, IJ37, £ 77. 1432. ¦
fi 70. 6065. fi 72.
„ of Canfield, Essexj 1432. fi 95*. 1541.
ff. 45. 66*. 6065. £ 72.
„ of Garnetts, Essex; 1 398. fi 1 8*. 1 542 .
£49.
„ of London, fr. co. Derby, 1096. £ 129.
Fltton, of Bollyn, Cheshire^ 1188. £ 17. 1535.
ff. 139. 207. 276. 1549; fi 112*. 2187.
ff. 18. 142*. 2n9.fi 68*. 5182.fr. 23.
83. 6159.fi 75-
„ of Carden, Cheshire, 1535. £ 140.
2187. £ 142*.

AND MANUSCRIPTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

127

Pitton, of Gosworth, Cheshire, 1424. ff. iS.
59- 115. 1505. ff. 17.. 58*. 115*. 1535.
ff. 171. 139*. 227*. 281. 2142. fi 80.
2187. ff 54*- 59*- 5182. ff. 23. 83.
Add 5529. fi 27.
„ of Pownall, Cheshire, 1424 fi 112*.
2142. ff. 107*. 108. 2187. fi 95.
„ —co. Lane, 1437. fi 124*. 1549. fi
106*.
Pitts, — Kent. Add. 16,279. P- 220.
PItz, of Elsworth, co. Camb, fr. Essex, 1043. fi
84. 1401.fi 58*. 1534. fi 75*. 6769.
fi 19*. 6770. fi 37. 6774. fi 74*. 6775.
. fi 77*. 6830. p. 93. Add. 4962. fi 53*.
„ of Fitzforde, Devon, 889. £ 99. 1080.
£405*. 1091.fi 78*. 1164.fi 2*. I399-
fi 63. 1538. fi 194. 3288. fi 84*. 5185.
fi 52*. 5840. fi 72. 5871. fi 28.
„ of Tavistock. Add. 14,315. p. 42.
„ — Somerset, 1385. fi 27. .
Fitz-Alan, Earl of Arundell, 155. fi 45. 1073.
£ 30*. Add. 19,129. p. 258. 21,017. £
30*.
Fitz-Alwin, of London, 1504. fi 114*.
Fltz-Eustace (Viscount Baltinglas), 1425. £
102.
„ of Shenley, Bucks, and of Hawsted,
Suffolk. Add. 19,129. £ 267.
Fitz ElUs, of Lechland, Surrey, 1548. £ 75.
Add. 14.311.fi 14*.
Fitz-Geoflrey, Baron of Berkhamstead, 1425. f
130.
„ of Blackburn Hall, Beds, 1097. fi
16. 1390. fi 5. 2109. fi 12. 1531. fi
74*. 4600. p. 9. 5186. p. 27. Lansd.
864. p. 9.
„ of Clapham, Surrey, 1097. fi 22*.
1390. f.11*. 2109. fi 19*. 1531. £ 50*.
4600. p. 22. 5186. p. 27.
„ of Rushden, Northants, fr. Beds, 1094
£217*. 1184.fi 212*. 1553. fi 182*.
Fitz-Gerald, Duke of Leinster, &c, 1425. fi 146.
2109. fi 83. (all.). Add. 14,838. ff, .1-12.
„ Earl of Desmond, 1073. fi 298*. 1425.
ff. 40-50. 142. 145. 2109. ff. 82*. -83*.
„ —Surrey, 1081; fi 66b. Add. 14,31 1.. £
79. .
„ of Cletslish (I. Bart.). Add. 23,68 j.f.
82*. (notes).
„ of Castle Ishen. Add. 23,686. £ 98.
„ - of Allon, co. Kildare. Add. 23,689
£ 293a.
" of Puncher's Grange, co. Kildare.
Add. 23,689 fi 294
" The Knight of the Valley," 1425.
" fi 56.
of Pilton, 1425. f- 48.
, of Knockmoane, 1425. fi 49.
Fitz-Oerard,— Cheshire, 1535. fi 189*.
Fitz-Gibbon, of the Great Wood, co. Cork,
1425- f- 57-
The White Knight, 1425. fi 55.
ritz-GUbert, Lord of Clare, 2156. fi 64*.
¦p itz-Bardinge, Lord Berehaven. Add. 23,710.
ff. 131*- 132-

Fitz-Henry, of Camelton, Beds, fr. Essex,
1531. f. 112*.
Fitz-Herbert, of Cotherall, co. Derby, 1093. fi
66*.
„ of Norbury, c. Derby, 1093. fi 112.
1484. fi 39. 1537.fi 59*. 6593. ff. 13*.
14*. Egert. 996. £ 52.
„ of Somersall, co. Derby, 808. £ 45.
886. ff. 35*, 37. 1093. ff. 40. 97. 1 1 37.
£112*. 1153.fi 97*. 140c-.fi 5*. 1432.
fi 107*. 1484. ff. 34*. 38*. 39. 1537. £
38. 1541. £21*. 2113.fi 103*. 2134.
£ 48*. 6104. fi 86. 6592. ft 17*. 19.
Egert. 996. fi 51*.
„ of Tissington, co. Derby, 1093. ff. 47.
97. i486, fi 29*. " 1537. £ 95*. 6104.
fi 85*. Egert. 996. ffi 57. 81. Add.
23,686. fi 85*. 24,458. £ 58*.
„ of Bagbroofce, Oxon, fr. Herts, 1480.
£3. 1557. £64*.
„ of London, fr. co. Leic, 1476. £
363-
„ of Etwall, Staff, 1415.fi no*.' 1570.
£72. 2113.fi 90. 2156.fi 46*.
„ of Norbury, Staff, 1077. fi 16*. 1173.
fi 15*. 1415. f£ 109. no*. 1439. f.27*.
1570. ff. 49. 72. 21 13. ff. 72*. 90. 6128.
ff. 21. 59*.
„ of Upsall, Staff, 1077. £ 17*. 14 15.
£109*. 1570. fi 49. 6128. £.20*.
„ — Dorset, &__., 145 1. £ 193*. SI. 1429.
100. Add. 5509. £ 14.
Pitz-Hugh, of Wildon, Beds, 1097. fi 21*. 1390-
fi 10*. 1531. £ 52. 2109. £ iS*.
4600. p. 20. 5186. p. 25. Lansd. 864.
p. 20.
„ ¦ of Wavendon, Bucks, fr. Beds, 1 102. £
113. 1 139. fi 49*- I39i.fi n6. 1533.
£33. 5 1 Si. p. 22. 5832. £43*. 586S.
£ 41*.
., of Walcot, Oxon, fr. Beds, 1 556. £ 176.
„ — Salop, &e, 1396. £ 219. 1982. £ 42.
2156. £ 92*. Add 29,783.£ 61*.
Fitz-iva, or Pitz-rves,of Lanneskely, Cornwall,
4031. ff. 70*. 77*. 79*.
Fitz-James, of Radleigh, Somerset, 1539.fi 196.
Add. 14,315. p. 149. _..__ 
„ — Devon, 3288. fi 142*.
Pitz-John, De Burgh, Earl of Ulster. Add.
19,129. p. 274.
Pitz-Dewis, — Suffolk, 155. fi 44*. 5829. £ 82*.
„ of West Horndon, Essex. Add.
19,129. p. 278.
Fitz-DZaurice, Earl of Kerry, &e, 1425. ff. 52. 70.
Add 14,838. ff. I28-I3a 24458. f. 214
(m). _
Fitz-IMchol, or Fitz-M- icholas, CO. Glouc, I041.
ff. io. 46. 1543. fi 175*.
Fitz-xngeii, Baron Halton, Cheshire, 1424.
f. 67.
Pltz-Osborne, of Somerleyton, Suffolk, 1449. £
72. 1560. fi 89*.
Fitz-btho,— Suffolk. Add 19,126. p.. 56.
Fitz-Ottes, — Beds, 2 109. p. 85.
„ . —Staff, 6128. £ 62*-

128

PEDIGREES IN THE HERALDS VISITATIONS

Fitz-Patrick, Earl of Upper Ossory. Add.
14,838. ff. 160. 161.
Fltz-Raphe, — Beds, &c, 2109. £ 82. 2156. £
64. Add. 19,816. fi 82.
„ — Norfolk, 1 177. fi 115*. 1552. fi 36*.
Add. 19,129. p. 290.
„ — Suffolk, 1449.fi 100. 1560. fi 308.
„ — co. Warwick, noo. fi 57. 1167.
fi 49 1563. fi 66*.
Fitz-Randolf, of Langton Hall, Notts, 1400.
ff.58S.58*.
„ or RandaU, of Spennithorne, 1487. £
332. 1534. fi 132*.
Fitz-Richards, — London, 1504. fi 115*.
Fitz-Rogon, — Devon, 3288. fi 142*.
Fitz-Roy, Duke of Grafton. .Add 19,129. pp.
298-302.
Fitz Simon, Lord of Rede. Add. 19,129. fi 323.
„ —co. Camb. 1043. fi 106. 140i.fi 3.
6770. fi 5. 6774. fi 20*. 6775. £ 3*.
-' Add.4962.fi 3*.
„ — Herts, 1504. fi 12*. 1546. fi 62*.
„ —Essex, 1137. fi 35*. 1432. fi 26*.
' 1541.fi 109.
Fitz-Suriam, Lord of Dunmore, Ireland, 6066.
p. 119
Fitz-Swayne, — Essex, I54I, fi 38*.
Fltz-Vrse. Add 19,129. £ 326.
Fitz-'Wake, — Cornwall, 4031. £ 76.
Fitz-waiter, Baron, 1073. £ 66*. Add. 19,129.
P- 330.
' „ — Devon, 889. ff. 105*. 125. io8o.fi
63. 1091. fi 91*. 1538. £170*. 2156.
£64 5185. fin. 5871. ff. 30. 39*.
Fitz -Warren, Earl, 6592. fi 9.
„ — Lord, 155, fi 22. 1177. £15.
„ —Cheshire, 1535. £ 45.
„ —Devon, 3288. £ 132. 5185.fr. 18*.
35*-
„ —Essex, 1542. fi 237*.
„ —Salop. Add. 14,314. fi 115.
Fitz-'WiUiam, Viscount, of Merrion. Add.
14,839. fi 57.
„ Lord, 1487. £ 362*. 1571. £ 203*.
Add. 14,838. ff. 124-127.
„ Baron Greystock, 2109. fi 68*.
„ of Kempston, Beds, fr. co. York,
1531. ff. 93. 135*. 2109. fi 42. 4600.
p.64.
„ of Gainspark, co. Line, 1541.fi 14*
6065. fi 33*. 6066. fi" 66.
„ — co. Line, 1097. fi 58. 1190.fi 21*.
1484. fi 30. 1487.fi 360. 1550. ff. 89.
155. - *
„ of Clayworth, co. Line, 1550. £ 179*.
„ of Scampden, co. Line, fr. Essex,
1550.fi 162*.
„ of Glapthome, Northants, fr. Essex,
1094. fi 220. 1184. fi 215. 1187. fi
66*. 1188. p. 91. 1553. £229*.
„ of Aldwarke, Yorks, 1487. £ 364.
1561. ff. ob. 18*. 4630. p. 198. Add.
4963. £ 48*. 14,31 1. £ 62*. 26,739. ff-
1 3 1 . 1 3 1 *. Egert. 996. ff. 67*. 68.

Fitz-Wiliiam, of Bentley, Yorks, 1487. £ 362.
„ of Eln^y, Yorks, 1487. £• 360*.
„ of Mablethorpe, Yorks, 1487. fi 363*.
„ of Sprotborough, Yorks, 1394-PP. 22.
287. 1415. fi 39 1420. ff. 17*- 207. 1487.
fi 360. 4630. p. 193. SL I429. fi 107*.
Add 14,309. fi 43*- 18,011.--. 6*. 224.
26,739. ff- 128-130*.
„ of Woodhall. Yorks, 4630. p. 198.
Add. 26,739. ff *3i- '
,-, —Devon, 1080. fi 377*. 1091. fi 33.
3288. fi 151*. 5871. f- 13*- 5840 £ 20*.
Fltz-With, of Shotteswell, Northants, 1187.
£ 83*.
Piackett, of Hanson Grange, co. Derby, 1093.
£ io9*.
Flaherty,— Ireland. Add. 23,686. fi 27*.
Plamanill-w— SI. I429- f- 99-
Flamborough,— Yorks, 1415./. 16. 1420.fi 125*.
1487. fi 384*- .
Flamock, or Flamoke, of Buscane^ Cornwall,
1079. fi 104*. 1142.fi 123. 1149.fi 124.
1 162. fi 128. 4031. ff. 71*. 77*- Add.
14.315- PP- 104- 120.
Flams tead, Earl of, 2 109. fi 84*.
Flam ville, of Aston, co. Leic, 11 80. t 28*.
1 189 £ 33- I43I- £26*. 6125. fi 41.
6183. fi 42.
Flanders, — co. Leic, 810. £ I*.
Flay, of Chalden, Devon, 1080. £ 344*. Z'ff"
Fleet, of London, 1476. £ 379*.
Fleete, of Chartham, Kent, 1432. £ 267*. Add.
14,311. fi 20*.
„ of Blean, Canterbury, &c. Add
5528. ff. 131*. r32. 167*.
„ —Yorks. Add. 24458. fi 343*.
Fleetwood, of Missenden, Bucks, fir. co. Lane,
1 102. fi 59. 1 1 51. fi 58. 1193- £ 59-
1391. ff. 63. 98*. 1533. £72*. 5832.
f.53*. of Hemworth, co. Lane, 891. £ 76.
„ "" of Penwortham, co. Lane, 1437. fi
119 1468. fi 55. 1549- ff 7o*. 152.
2086.fi 56. 6159.fi 35*.
,j of Rossall, co. Lane, 1437.fi 9°. J536-
fi 36. v
„ of Winsford and Wood Dalling, Nor
folk. Add. 19,13a p. 3. > ,
„ of Woodstock, Oxon, fr^~co. Lane,
1556. fi 166*. > .
„ of Colwich, Staff, fr.co. Lane, 157a,
fi 86. 6104 £11*.
Fleming, Lord Slane, 1425. ff. 101. 14S-149.
„ of Landeth, Cornwall, 889. £57. 1079.
£88. 1 142. £47*. 1149, fi 45*. 1162.
fi 48*.
„ of Warley Place* Essex, 1432. £ 164*.
1542. fi 228*.
„ of Stoneham, Hants* 1544. ff. 37*.
126. 138. 5865. fi 35,
„ of London, fr. co. Cork, 1476. fi 287.
^ .-.„ of Sharleston, Yorks, 4630. p. 188.
"- Add. 26,739. ff 122*. 123.

YALE UNIVERSITY

102213990b