HERALDS
AND HERALDRY
IN THE MIDDLE AGES
An Inquiry into the Growth of the
Armorial Function of Heralds
IT
ANTHONY RICHARD WAGNER
RICHMOND HEKALD
SECOND EDITION
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
1956
Oxford University Press, Amen House, London E.C.4
GLASGOW NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE WELLINGTON
BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS KARACHI
CAPE TOWN IBADAN NAIROBI ACCRA SINGAPORE
FIRST EDITION 1939
SECOND EDITION PRINTED LITHOGRAPHICALLY IN GREAT BRITAIN
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, OXFORD
FROM CORRECTED SHEETS OF THE FIRST EDITION
1956
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
BESIDES the additions and corrections incorporated in
the text or given in Appendix G, two new Appendices,
E and F, have been added. It is satisfactory that the general
thesis of the first edition seems to have secured acceptance
and the amendments of detail, found necessary by myself or
others, have not affected it. I hope, however, in a future
work on the history of the heralds generally to place the
special subject of this book in a wider perspective.
A.R.W.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I WISH to record.my gratitude, first of all to Professor
V. H. Galbraith, without whose constant help and en-
couragement this book would not have been written, and next,
to the late John Anstis, Garter King of Arms, on whose
unpublished work it is, as will be seen, largely founded; to
the late Mr. Oswald Barron, F.S.A., Maltravers Herald
Extraordinary, and the late Mr. S. M. Collins, F.S.A., who
read and emended the manuscript of the first edition; to
my friend Mr. H. Stanford London, F.S.A., Norfolk
Herald Extraordinary, who read the manuscript of the first
edition and has suggested additions and corrections for the
second; and to all others who have helped me.
CONTENTS
Сядтх I. HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND THE VISITA-
TIONS .....................................................i
Heralds not primarily concerned with coat armour—Gradual development from
incidental knowledge to professional responribility—The latter embodied in the
system of heraldic visitation—Dugdale’s account of visitation procedure—The
system peculiar to England.
Chapter IL THE COMMISSION OF 1530	.	9
The terms of the first royal commission for a visitation, issued to Clarenceux in
1530, imply (x) that the control of arms by royal authority already existed,
(2) that a connexion between arms and nobility and a wealth qualification for
both were recognised, (3) that visitation itself was not a novelty—The circum-
stances which led up co it have therefore to be examined.
Chapter HL HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL .	.	.13
Nature of arms—Appearance early in the twelfth century—Literary evidence—
Seals—Collateral adoption—System exemplified in development of technical
terminology as found first in romances and later in blazoned rolb of arms—
System governing adoption of arms shown by (4) absence of overlapping, (&)
differencing, (r) somewhat later, legal recognition of property in arms—Con-
cessions of arms—Pleas of arms in the court of the Constable and Marshal—
ZetvZ v. Mtrlty c. 1345—Warbeltone and Gorges 1347—Connexion of heralds
with the court.
Chapter IV.	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS .	.	.	25
Earliest mentions in French romances and in connexion with the conduct of
tournaments—Their varied duties—Connexion and rivalry with minstrels—
Their rise, partly at the minstrels’ expense, from vagrant poverty to employment
in royal households before the end of the thirteenth century—Employment as
messengers of war first found in the fourteenth century—Names of office first
appear then—Evidence of Froissart-Provincial authority of Kings of Arms.
Chapter V.	THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS .	41
First account by a herald of his own profession, e. 1400—By Anjou King of
Arms, probably Nicolas Villart—Crimes and misdemeanours of heralds—Their
creation—Coronation of Chariot by Charles V as Montjoye King of Arms of
France—Institution of heralds—Their past glory and present decay—No
mention of armorial duties.
Chapter VI.	HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND THE ROLLS OF
ARMS......................................................46
Heralds1 concern with arms arose from their need to recognise participants in
tournament»—Chretien de Troyes, c. 1170—Tournoi de Chauvency, 1285—
Rolls of Ar пи— Painted and blazoned rolls—Illustrative rolls—Occasional,
general, and local roils—Ordinaries—Indications of authorship—Gelre, Navarre,
and Berry—Geographical arrangement and provincial jurisdiction.
viii	CONTENTS
Chapter VII.	THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH AND THE EN-
ACTMENTS OF 1417.........................................56
Тойон d'Or 4 vereion of the French King of Агпм’ oath, c. 1450, adds to Anjou*8
two dames enjoining armorial survey—Armorials of Berry, Sicily, and the
‘pays de Caux'—Missenland herald, 1421—English King of Arms* oath, 1480
or earlier—Simitar provision in ordinances- attributed to Thomas, Duke of
Clarence, r. 1417—Their authenticity—Possible connexion with the creation of
Garter King of Arms, 1417—Henry Vs order of 1417 regulating the use of ‘cote
armures'—First Chapter of the English Heralds, 1420.
Chapter VIIL	THE GRANTING OF ARMS .	.	.	65
Arms as ensigns of nobility—Imperial concession of 1338—Forms of Im-
perial grant c. 1369 connecting arms -with nobility—Rare grants of arms by
Richard II and Henry VI—Grants of arms by sovereigns common in Germany
but very rare in England because replaced by those of Kings of Arms—Opinions
on the value of heralds* grants—Bartolo de Saseoferrato—dfer Batatifa—
Sicily herald—Nicholas Upton—Four varieties of early patent of arms—(1) con-
firmation—(2) certificate of uniqueness given by поп-provincial Kings of Arms
whose jurisdiction might be questioned—(3) simple grant, with or without citation
of authority—(4) acknowledgement of gentility with grant of arms—Tests and
marks of gentility—Wealth qualification—Henry VIPs support of Garter in the
case of Vaughan and Parker—Evidence of the growth of heraldic authority
during the fifteenth century.
Chapter IX.	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530 .	.	.	83
Wriothesley and Machado—Wriothesley and Benoit—Occasion of controversy
the Visitation Commission of 1 $30—Garter’s objection to its execution—His claim
to be Sovereign in the Office of Anns, to visit and to give patents—Clarenceux’s
counter attack—Garter's alleged grants to vile persons—His roll of 400 grants
identified—Assumptions common to both parties—Visitation not new—
‘Placards1 of Henry VII—The Office books—Coldharbour and the heralds'
charter of 1484—Clarenceux’s narrative of the events of 1530—His success. '
Chapter X.	THE VISITATIONS OF 1530	. roo
Now seen in perspective—Benoit's procedure—Notroy visits ‘virtute officii’—
Deputations—Visitations in Wales In Lancashire—Comparison with later
Visitations.
Chapter XI.	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	.106
Visitation of the North, r. 1500—Ballard’s Visitation of Wales and the Marches,
c. 1480—Visitations, named in Benoit's inventory, by Roger Leigh (143 $-60)
and William Hawkeslowe (d. 1476)—Sir Thomas Holme’s equestrian armorial
—Visitation of London, 1446—7—Sir William Bruges' book of arms of Knights
of the Garter,	1420—Light thrown by Benoit’s inventory on his own Visita-
tions—Identification of those remaining in the College of Arms—A lost Visita-
tion of London—Discovery of a copy by Dugdale—A Visitation of churches—
Defacement of arms wrongfully borne—Descriptions of tombs—The culmination
of heraldic authority—Conclusion.
CONTENTS	ix
APPENDIXES
A, Passages illustrating the early history of heraldry	121
B.	Passage* illustrating the early history of heralds	127
C.	ORDINANCE* OF THOMAS, DUKE OF CLARENCE, FOR THE GOVERN-
MINT OF THE OFFICE OF ЛЕЮ	.	136
D.	The visitation of London, 1530	139
E.	From college of arms ms. st. georce, vol. vi, pp. 72-3	.	147
F.	Benolt’s inventory	.	.	•	.150
G.	Additions and corrections	. 158
INDEX....................................................165
NOTE
The abbreviations CEMRA for my Catalogue of English
Mediaeval Rolls of Arms, 1950, and RCCA for my Records
and Collections of the College of Arms, 1952, have been used.
I
HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND THE VISITATIONS
THE word herald in its modern uses affords a notable
example of linguistic divergence. It is still familiar in
two senses: on one hand the crier, the proclaimer, the sacro-'
sanct ambassador, the messenger of war and peace; on the
other the expert in armorial bearings and pedigrees. We
know vaguely that in older times the same officers united
these attributes, and that in some measure their successors,
though hardly to be found outside these islands, do so still.
But we do not probably reflect much upon the oddity of
such a conjunction, which in its latest phase links the ‘Herald
angels’ with the ‘boast of heraldry’, ‘The Herald and Genea-
logist’ with the ‘Daily Herald’.
How, when, and why did officers whose primary duty
was, as I shall show, to conduct tournaments, come to be
employed on the one hand as messengers in war, and on the
other, first to recognize, then to survey, and at length to
control armorial bearings? This is the question I shall try
in the following pages to answer. Since the nature of English
heraldic jurisdiction at its fullest may be unfamiliar, I shall
begin with some account of the institution which under the
Tudors and the Stuarts at once expressed and maintained
it—the system of heraldic visitation. From the document
which established this system I shall then work back and
consider first the beginnings of heraldry; then the growth
of the theory of property in arms and its regulation by the
Court of the Constable and Marshal; the rise of the heralds
and the development of their functions; and the evidence
for and explanation of their early concern with coat armour.
I shall hope to show that from being at first merely required
to understand such matters, they came in the thirteenth or
fourteenth century to be charged with a duty of survey,
and during the fifteenth to exercise in the king’s name some
measure of control.
The ancestry of the later Visitations I shall carry back
with certainty to the fifteenth century, and with strong
probability at least to the fourteenth and even the thirteenth.
4607	=
г HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS
Finally, I shall bring forward evidence bearing on the cir-
cumstances which led to the issue in 1530 of the first
Visitation Commission, whereby the new order was inaugu-
rated, and upon the manner in which that commission was
put into force.
From the reign of Henry VIII to that of James II Heralds’
Visitations filled a constant and not inconspicuous place in
the social life of England. Between 1530 and 1686, at
intervals usually of about twenty years, the Crown would
issue letters patent, notifying Mayors, Sheriffs, and other
county authorities that Clarenceux or Norroy King of Arms
intended shortly to make a Visitation in his province, to
correct arms unlawfully borne and to enter those borne
lawfully with the descents of those who bore them, and
directing the said authorities to give him all assistance in
their power. The King of Arms would then proceed to the
several counties of his province and either visit the gentry
(and reputed gentry) in their houses, or summon them to
attend him at a neighbouring town.
The procedure of Visitations has often been described.1
The following account, however, by the highest possible
authority on the subject, seems not to have been noticed
by heraldic writers, and may therefore be worth quoting in
full. It is written in a clerk’s hand of the later seventeenth
century on both sides of a leaf2 bound up with other matter
in a manuscript book at Trinity College, Dublin. Internal
evidence shows it to be the composition of an English King
of Arms, who, after visiting as Norroy, had been promoted.
This can only be Sir William Dugdale, Norroy from 1660
and Garter from 1677 till his death in 1686. It is clearly
addressed to an Ulster King of Arms who had asked for
particulars of the manner of making Visitations. The reci-
pient must be either Richard St. George, Ulster from 1660
to 1683, or his successor Sir Richard Carney, who held
office till 1692. The letter may well have been written for
1	See Joseph Edmondson, A Complete Body of Heraldry , 1780, vol. i, pp. 158-60;
James Dallaway, Inquiries into the Origin and Progress of the Science of Heraldry
in England, 1793, pp. 309-19; The Visitation of Shropshire, 1623, Harleian Society,
vol. xxviii, Introduction by George Grazebrook; and a note by the present writer.
in the Society of Genealogists’ Exhibition Catalogue, 1937, pp* 35-7.
2	Dublin: Trinity College MS. F. i. 21, pt. ii, fols, uo-iob.
HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS 3
Dugdale by a clerk owing to his great age. It runs as
follows:
‘1. That the Provincial! King of Armes did auntiently visitt Ex
Officio* going to the houses of the chiefs of Family’s where they took
Notice of their Marriages, and Issue with their Armes, as the Bards
did heretofore in Wales, and of late time if not still in those parts.
‘2. The first Commission for visiting was by King Henry 8 in
2i° of his Reigne, since, once in 30 or 40 Years they have usually had
the like Commissions.
‘3. Note, the Commission is to passe the hand of the Attourney
Generali.
‘As to the management of our visitacions here, these particulars
as followeth have been Observed.
‘1. To obtain from the undershreeve of each County the name
and place of habitacion of every person who maketh use of Armes, or
Stileth himself Gentleman Esquire Knight or Baronett or who is soe
written in the book which every Shrieve hath from the Bayliffs of
each hundred every Yeare commonly called the Freeholders book.
‘2. Next by vertue of the Kings Commission to send out warrants
to the Bayliffs of each Hundred (each warrant to be under the hand
and seale of the Office of the King of Armes [)], to summon every such
person to appeare before the King of Armes, or his lawfull Deputy,
at a certain place (within 6 or 7 Miles distant from his dwelling) and
on a Certaine day and houre, there to manifest what Right, & Title,
he hath to the bearing of Armes, which proof is to be by Grant, or
prescription^ and if by prescription, it is to be shewed from some
auntient Decree, sealed with an Impression of the Armes he pretends
to, or some sculpture upon Tombes and Monuments, Armes in Glasse
windowes, auntient paynted Tabletts, or some such Aunthen ticque
Testimonial! as may demonstrate that his lineall auncestors have
made use of them above 80 Yeares last past at the least.2
‘3. If noe such Title can be made out, then the person is to subscribe
a Disclaymer of any pretence he hath to Armes, or to the Title of
1	Vide infra, pp. n, ioi.
2	An Earl Marshal’s Warrant of the 22nd of November 1668 orders ‘that in all
cases, wherein the Armes claimed by any person or persons appearing before the
said Provincial! Kings of Armes, or their Deputies, in their respective Visitacions
shall not be registred or entred in the Office of Armes, or allowed by some former
King of Armes: or where a Lawfull Grant of the same made by a King of Armes,
shall not bee exhibited, or shall not be made out and proved, either by some antient
Monuments, Glasse Windowes, Impressions of Seales, or other credible Testimony,
that the same Armes have beene borne and used by the Auncestors of the partie
clayming them for the space of sixty yeares at the least, before the time of that
his Clayme; such Armes shall not be allowed or entered’. Coll. Arm. MS. I. 25,
fo. 109b.
4 HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS
Gentleman, a Form whereof the K. of Armes is to prepare, and that
those who subscribe therto doe write their names underneath, as alsoe
their respective places of Residence.
‘4. Whosoever thus disclaymeth to be dismissed without payment
of Fees.
‘5. That a Catologue of the Names of all such who assume the
Title of Gentleman, or a superior Title, and cannot exhibite such
proof of their right to the bearing of Armes as is by the law of armes
required together with the names of such as have under their hands
thus disclaymed, be sett up on the Crosse in the shiere Towne, and
other Townes of Note, and a warrant annexed therto prohibitting the
shreeves, and his successors in that Office thenceforth upon summons
of them upon any Juries, or otherwise, to forbeare the giving of them
that Title, The like warrant to the Bishops Register to a copy of 4 [яг]
Catalogue, which warrants are to bee signed, by the King of Armes
and the scale of his Office, affixed therto.
‘6. In Registring the descents of all such who have just right to
beare Armes, the person entring the descent to expresse the Christian
name of his Ancestors, as far as his own Certaine Knowledge can reach,
with the times of their respective deaths if he can soe likewise of the
respective wife, or wives of each of them as alsoe of every of their
children, sons and daughters, with the Name of the Husband of each
Daughter and of what place and County. The person thus certifying
is alsoe to Expresse his owne age at that time, with the name of his
wife, whose daughter, and of what place and County, likewise the
Name of all his Children and their ages (if he please) especially the
age of his eldest son.
‘7. If the person thus entring his descent, can make out his pedigree,
by any Aunthentique evidence for more descents than the memory
of any man Living can reach: it will be proper to register the same
with a Voucher of those Authorities viz1 auntient writings, notes from
publique records, Registers of Churches, Monumentall Inscriptions,
or what else may be relyed upon, as of Creditt.
‘8. What descent soever shall be thus taken, the person is to sub-
scribe his Name, therto.
‘9. That a perfect Coppie of all such descents, as alsoe of the Armes
therwith entred be fairly transcribed into a book, and kept in the
publique office of the said King of Armes for a Memoriall therof to
posterity—
I know not of any. Earle Marshall in Ireland, therfore it is to
bee considered whether the Lord Lieutenant or his Deputy, or
whosoever else His Majestie shall give power, to call before him
such as be refractory in obeying his Commission.
HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS 5
‘10. In the last visitation here, the K: of Armes hath caused small
Ticketts to be printed with Blanks, wherein the Name of the person
to be Sommoned is to be written and the bayliff of the hundred to send
the tickett to ye house of every such person for which he is to be
gratified.
‘ 12. As for the Nobility, it hath been thought fitt for the King of
Armes or his Deputy (whome he shall have power by the King’s
Commission to constitute) to goe to his house, and their take his
descent and Armes, with such Gratuity as said honourable person shall
think fitt to bestow on him for his Travaile, & paines therin.
‘13. The Fees auntiently taken here in England by the King of
Armes or his Deputy for their registring their descents and Armes of
each degree, hath been for each Gentleman £1 : 5 : :—for an Esquire
£1:15 :—For a Knight or Baronett £2 : 5 :—
‘14. If any Gentleman be decayed in his Estate, soe that he is not
worth a Thousand pounds, it hath been used to enter his descent, &
Armes Gratis.
415. If any person pretend to Armes, but cannot at present make
such proofe therof as he ought to doe, respite is usually given him for
six Months taking his descent Neverthelesse, he paying his Fee.
‘16. When I visited my province beyond Trent as Norroy I usually
entertained all persons which entred their armes and descents, at a
Dinner the same day paying their Ordinary myselfe.
‘17. There are many who assume the Title of Esquire unjustifiably,
care is therfore to be taken that they be not registred by that Title,
unlesse they be the Heires Male or descended from the heire male of
a Noblemans Younger son, or from the Heires male of a Knight, or
that by Long prescription they can shew that their lineall auncestors
were soe stiled.
‘Otherwise that the person be shreeve of a County or a Justice of
peace, and so stiled in the Kings Commission which Title if they have
noe other pretence to it, to cease when they cease to be in those offices.
There are alsoe divers of the Kings Servants, which have the Title
of Esquire by reason of the Offices which they beare, as the Heraulds,
Serjeants at Armes &c:—
This is a sufficient picture of the institution in its heyday.
Between 1530 and 1700 there were naturally changes in the
detail of organization and practice. At first, for example,
the Kings of Arms and their deputies visited the gentry in
their houses, but under Elizabeth and James I this was largely
superseded by the system of summons to the chief town
of the neighbourhood. The form of entry in the Visitation
1 See Appendix G, No. i.
6 HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS
Books developed. The earliest genealogies are in narrative
form. The modern form of tabular pedigree was intro-
duced early in Elizabeth’s reign, probably by Robert Cooke,
Clarenceux, or Robert Glover, Somerset. ‘Church Notes’,
that is, sketches of Arms on tombs and the like, later flower-
ing into detailed drawings of monuments, appear in some
of the earliest books. But the excellent Robert Glover was
the first to enter copies of charters and records in the Visita-
tion Books by way of evidence. The value of the Pedigrees
naturally varies a good deal, depending partly on external
circumstances and partly on the varying industry and com-
petence of the visiting Kings of Arms and heralds. Some of
these have, for better or worse, acquired quite definite repu-
tations. Dugdale and Glover, for example, are reckoned
both industrious and competent, Bysshe capable but idle,
Cooke and Lee industrious but unreliable. Taken all to-
gether, however, the Visitation Books afford a great mass of
genealogical and heraldic information which could have been
gathered in no other way, and to which no other country
can show a parallel.1
But it is not merely the mass of material collected that is
singular. The institution is itself peculiar to England, and
derives from this fact much of what interest it possesses.
The only attempt to apply the English practice elsewhere
was made in Ireland, but clearly the difficulties were too
great, for books of only three Visitations are to be found
in the Dublin Office of Arms.2
1	Ninety or more printed volumes, based on Visitations or purporting to be so,
but often taken from corrupt or diluted copies, attest the value placed on them by
antiquaries. See The Genealogists' Magazine, vol. vi, p. 194, &c., Printed Visitation
and County Pedigrees, by E. N. Geijer, Rouge Dragon. (See App. G, No. 2.)
2	Dublin: Office of Arms. MS. 123. ‘The coppie of a Visitation begunne in
Dublin and some other places of Ireland in the yeare of grace 1568 and the yeares
then next following by Nicholas Narbon Uluester Kinge of Armes and principall
Herald of all the Realme, which Daniell Molineux Ulster etc. caused to be faithfully
coppied out of the said Narbon Ulsters coppie, written most with his owne hande
for that the same did beginne to decay, the tenor whereof ensueth.’
MS. 47, pp. 1-31. A seventeenth-century copy of the same.
MS. 48. ‘A Visitation begonne in the Cittie of Dublin by Daniell Molyneux
Esquire, otherwise called Ulster Kinge of Armes and Principall Herald of all Ire-
land, in the yere of Grace on thousand six hundreth and seven, as foloweth.’
The last entry in this section is. dated 1609, but is followed by a continuation
entitled ‘A Visitation begone in the county of Dublin in Anno Domini 1610 by
Daniell Molyneux Ulster Kinge of Armes & Principall Heraulde of Ireland by
HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS 7
In France, though, as we shall see,1 the medieval practice
closely resembled our own, later developments took quite
another course. The authority of the heralds in armorial
matters decayed steadily through the sixteenth century2 and
in 1615 was transferred to the new office of Juge d’Armes
de France.3 The general surveys of arms made by this office
in the latter part of the seventeenth century took no account
of genealogy or of pre-existing right to arms, and were
indeed little more than a new form of taxation.4
In Scotland, again, we find the word ‘Visitation’ used for
a survey and registration of arms only without reference to
Pedigree. An act of the Scots Parliament of 1592 granted
‘full power and commission to Lyoun king of armes and
his brether herauldis to visite the haill armes of noblemen
baronis and gentlemen borne aftd usit within this realme.
And to distinguische and discerne thame with congruent
differences and thaireftir to matriculat thame in thaif buikes
and Regesteris’ ;5 while the first volume of the existing Lyon
Register is stated in its title to be ‘of the Armes in Scotland
collected, visited, distinguished and authorized’.6
It would be easy to base theories upon English singularity
in thj.s matter. We might see in the development of Visita-
vertue of a commission dated the last of February Anno Regni Regis Jacobi iiiito
Annoque a partu Virginis 1606.’
MS. 49. ‘A Visitacion begunne in the Countie and toune of Weysforde the
15 day of Aprill Anno Domini 1618 by Daniell Molyneux Ulster Kinge of Arms
throughout this Realme by vertue of a commission to him directed dated the last
day of Februarie Anno Regni Regis Jacobi quarto.*
The late George Dames Burtchaell, Deputy Ulster King of Arms, however, used
to state that there were formerly at least twelve volumes of Irish Visitations in the
office (ex inform. T. U. Sadleir, Deputy Ulster King of Arms, vide his article
on ‘Ulster Office Records’ in The Genealogists* Magazine, vol. vi, p. 436). (See
Appendix G, No. 3.)
1	Infra, pp. 57-8.
2	Marc de Vulson, Sieur de la Colombiere, De Г office des Roys d*Armes, des Herauds
et des Poursuvuans. Paris, 1645, p. 52; Coll. Arm. MS., Anstis, Officers of Arms,
Vol. i, p. 20.
3	Paris, Archives Nationales, O1 976, pi£ee 4, Edict of Jan. 1615.
4	Proceedings of the Huguenot Society of London, vol. xv (1936), p. 486. Trench
Noblesse and Arms, by С. E. Lart, pp. 476-88.
s Acta Scot. Pari. (Record ed.) iii. 5545 George Seton, The Law and Practice
of Heraldry in Scotland, Edinburgh, 1863, p. 43; An Ordinary of Arms contained
in the public register of all arms and bearings in Scotland, by Sir James Balfour Paul,
Lord Lyon King of Arms, 2nd ed., Edinburgh, 1903, p. x.
6	Ibid., p. xiv.
8 HERALDIC AUTHORITY AND VISITATIONS
tions a reflection of social and political conditions not found
elsewhere, or even credit the Tudor and Stuart sovereigns
with conscious use of them as an instrument of policy.1 No
doubt they helped to assimilate new families to old traditions
by giving official recognition to acquired gentility. Our
system of granting arms, which is equally our own, may be
thought to tend the same way. On such a view the dates
generally given for the beginning and end of Visitation—
1530 and about 1700—would assume significance.
With such broad views, however, we shall not here be
concerned, and it will be well before committing ourselves
to them to explore more narrowly the nature of this sup-
posed beginning.
1 Cf. Proceedings of the Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural History Society,
vol. Ixxxiv (1938), pp. 69-70, A. W. Vivian-Neal, ‘The Visitations of Somerset^
1573, 1591» Notes on Ralph Brooke’s Manuscript/ pp. 59-99. A. L. Rowse adopts
this view in The England of Elizabeth, p. 248, where he writes, ‘The heralds’ visita-
tions of the counties were a more serious matter than has been supposed: it was no
pleasant thing, especially in a society that attached such importance to prestige, to
have one’s pretensions to gentility publicly exposed and disclaimed. Yet that was
the regular procedure. It was a way of keeping the class distinctions of an hierarchi-
cal society in some sort of order amid so much economic flux, and—perhaps of most
importance—of regulating, though not obstructing, entry to the governing class.’
II
THE COMMISSION OF 1530
MOST recent accounts of the Visitations open abruptly
with the Letters Patent issued by Henry VIII to
Thomas Benoit, Clarenceux, on the 19th of April 1530.1
They were not entered on the Patent Roll, but their contents
are known from the Privy Seal Warrant (dated 6th of April),
and from a contemporary certified copy of the Letters Patent
contained in Benoit’s Deputation to Hawley, to which refer-
ence will be made later.2 The latter runs as follows:
‘Henry by the grace of god kyng of England and of France Defen-
sour of the faith and Lord of Ireland. To all maner noble estates as
well spirituall as temporall of what estate degree or condition they or
any of them be beryng armes. And to all Mayers Shyreffes Baylies
constables and all other our Officers minysters and subjectes these our
letteres hering or seing and to euery of them gretyng. Forasmocheas
our trustie & welbeloved Thomas Benoit otherwise called Clarencieux
Kynge at Armes of the South Este and West partyes of this our Realme
from the ryver of Trent Southwarde nowe by our especiall licence
entendith by waie of noblenes to visite amonge other your Armes and
Conysaunces and to reforme the same yf yt be necessarye and requisite,
and to reforme all false armorye & Armes devysed without auctoritie
marks onlawfully sett or made in scochens squares or lozengis Whiche
scochens squares or lozenges be tokyns of noblenes and them to deface
& take away wheresoever they be sett, and the same to take for his
oune behoff whether it be in stone wyndowes plate or any other maner
of wyse sett, and all suche as sett upon churches or other places baners
Standerdes Penons or cotes of armes not havyng auctorite so to doo;
and also over this to take the note of your discentes according to his
othe and bonde made at his creacyon in this partie. And also the said
Kyng at armes to gyve to any persone or persons spirituall the whiche
be preferred by grace vertue or connynge to rowmes and degrees of
honor & worshipp armes accordyng to their merites And likewise to
any person or persons temporall the whiche by the service doon to
us or to other that be encreased or augmentid to possessions & riches
hable to maynteyne the same So that they be not issued of vyle blood
rebelles to our persone not heritiques contrary to the faithe But men
of good honest Reputacyon, And all suche whiche shal be enoblished
1	Letters and Papers of Henry PHI, vol. iv, pt. iii, nos. 6314, 6347.
2	College of Arms Muniment Room, box 25, no. 17. See infra, p. 102.
10	THE COMMISSION OF 1530
to have their armes regestred in the Erie Marshalles boke And his
seale to be putt to overy patent whiche shalbe graunted at all tymes.
We therfore woll & not only exhorte you but also commaunde you
and every of you that unto our said servaunt in full execucion of that
whiche belongith to this his affayres & auctorite in all and singuler
the premisses Ye will shewe unto hym all the favour with your ayde
and assistance yf he require you in all that you goodly may as ye tender
our favour and the honour and weale of noblesse in this behalf
Inhibiting by this our present wryting all other our Officers of armes
what degree soever they be not to meddle nor intromytte them with
noon of theise his affayres in any of the thinges aforsaid nor to meddle
with any intyermentes or funeralles at any tyme from hensforthe nor
with the libertyes proffyttes nor other emoluments apperteignyng to
the said kyng at armes within his saide provynce without his especiall
lycence and auctoritie by hym graunted in that behalff and that appar-
ently to appere Willing and graunting by these our letteres that the
same shalbe at all tymes in full power strengthe & effecte nowe and
hereafter whyle our saide servaunt lyvith and to execute his visitacions
in his said provynce when soever he thynketh best to employe hym
therunto In witness wherof we have caused these our letteres to be
made patentes. Witnes our self at Wyndesore the Nynteneth day of
Aprill the one and twenty yere of our Reigne.’
The terms of this document presuppose a system already
well developed. Three points in particular stand out. First,
the regulation of arms and their use by Royal authority is
not a novelty. ‘Armes devysed without auctoritie’ are un-
lawful, and machinery exists on the one hand for preventing,
on the other for legalizing their use. The executive officer
for this purpose is already the King of Arms of the Province,
in this case Clarenceux, though his subordination to the
Marshal is indicated by the clause directing that arms granted
shall be ‘regestred in the Erie Marshalles boke’. The
granting of arms to proper persons is, however, within the-
King of Arms’ own competence, and there is no suggestion
that he need obtain the Marshal’s sanction for this. Regis-
tration was necessary for purposes of record, and the heralds
being at this date unincorporate and without a fixed home,
it would be natural to entrust their registers to the super-
vision, if not the custody, of their superior officer, the
Marshal.
The second point of interest concerns the nature of a
THE COMMISSION OF 1530	11
grant of arms and the qualification for it. The connexion
between arms and nobility has passed through so many
phases and has in recent times been discussed with so much
vehemence, that it is necessary to examine evidence on the
point with great care. At first sight, however, it does appear
that the writer of the Letters Patent looked on nobility and
the bearing of arms as necessarily connected. Arms for
him are ‘tokyns of noblenes’, and the recipients of Patents
of Arms are ‘enoblished’. If this be accepted, the qualifica-
tion laid down for such ennoblement becomes of special
interest, for it is essentially, and without evasion or pretence,
pecuniary. ‘Good honest Reputacyon’ is indeed required,
and men ‘issued of vyle blood’, ‘rebelles to our persone’, and
‘heritiques contrary to the faithe’ are expressly excluded.
But the core of the matter lies in the condition put first in
order, that the Kings of Arms shall give arms only to persons
‘the whiche by the service doon to us or to other that be
encreased or augmentid to possessions & riches hable to
maynteyne the same’. We shall see later that the exact
income which qualified was laid down.
The third point, and the one which here concerns us most,
is the clear implication that Visitation was not a novelty.
It is stated that Benoit intends ‘to visite amonge other your
Armes ... to reforme all false armorye . . . and also over
this to take the note of your discentes according to his othe and
ionde made at his creacyon. The fact is that the purpose of
the Letters Patent was not to authorize a Visitation, which
was in fact part of the routine duty of a provincial King of
Arms,1 but to assist its execution by requiring the local
authorities to help Clarenceux in all ways that they could.
This interpretation I hope to justify, and my justification
falls into two parts. In the first I shall try to show how the
association of heralds with what we now call heraldry, at
first accidental and slight, became by stages close and official.
In the second I shall bring forward evidence of the events
and motives which immediately provoked the issue of the
Letters Patent of 1530.
1 Cf. Dug-dale’s statement, supra, p, 3.
Ill
HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF THE
CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL
WE are happily not called on here to discuss in detail
the vexed question of the origins of heraldry.1 Doubt-
less it had forerunners not in our sense heraldic at all.
National and military emblems go back to a remote past.
From the predynastic emblems of Upper and Lower Egypt,
and the Roman eagles and legionary ensigns, down to the
Dragon standard of the English, mentioned as early as
Nennius and as late as Edward III, and depicted on the
Bayeux tapestry, the descent is probably continuous.
On the other side the personal mark or device, as used
on seals, traces as long a lineage from Sumeria and Egypt,
through Assyria, Greece, Rome, and the Frankish kings,
to the date when heraldry first appears on them. The man-
ner of this appearance forbids us to derive the heraldic from
the seal device. The latter at this date is the owner’s own
portrait (usually on horseback), and the first appearance of
heraldry in seals is not on its own footing, but merely as a
part of this portrait, on the shield hanging from the knight’s
arm or the nag upon his lance.
True heraldry I would define as the systematic use of
hereditary devices centred on the shield. National and per-
sonal devices without the element of inheritance are, there-
fore, not heraldry, though they are frequently its forerunners.
So soon as shields were painted (and there is evidence that
they were so in the eleventh century) the difference between
the painting of one and another would inevitably make them,
upon any given occasion, possible means of recognition,
independently of whether or not one man habitually used
one device always, or changed freely from this to-day to that
to-morrow. The Bayeux tapestry shows a number of shields
painted with devices, and it seems unsafe to infer from their
crudeness and occasional seeming inconsistency that they had
no heraldic character. A line in the Chanson de Roland,
Escuz unt genz de multes conoisances/
1	See Medieval England) 2 ed.
2	Ed. Lton Gautier, 21 ed., Tours, 1894, i. 3090.
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL 13
suggests that shield devices were already used as means of
recognition. From about 1150 until towards the end of
the century, when descriptions of heraldry grow more pre-
cise, this word ‘conoisance’ is the normal term for arms.*
Wace, writing about 1160, attributes their use to the Nor-
mans at Hastings1 and earlier,2 and indeed to an older
legendary past.3
In the Romance of Thebes^ written about 11 co, Melampus
wears as ‘conoissance’ a checkered surcoat and bears a shield
half white, half red.* Wace‘s account of Arthur’s shield, in
the Roman de Brut, finished in 1155, suggests deliberate
adoption, for he tells us that it bore a picture of the Virgin
Mary, ‘for honour and for remembrance’ ;s while the account
of his crest—a dragon—seems to make it inherited from
his father.6 Since this is probably the same Dragon ensign
of the Britons to which Nennius seems to allude two and
a half centuries earlier,7 it is possible that we may have here
an actual instance of a process that must have been common,
the conversion, namely, into heraldic form of a pre-existing
royal or tribal emblem. Another example is the fleur-de-lis
which, as a decorative form, is of immense antiquity, but
came probably to be used as an ensign of royal power. On
the seal of Henry I of France (1031-60), as on that of Otto I8
(965) and his successors, it heads the sceptre. On the seal
of Louis VII (1137—80) a single fleur-de-lis is displayed as
a badge; but the йогу shield of France is not found until
1223.9 The heraldic use of the imperial eagle has a similar
history.10
From seals we have evidence for the use of heraldic
devices on shields in France, England, and Germany as
* (See App. G, No. 4.)	1 Appendix A (i).	» Appendix A (2).
- Appendix A (3).	* Appendix A (4).
s Appendix A (5)*	6 Appendix A (Q.
? Nemrn Historia Britomtm, ed. Joseph Stevenson, English Historical Society»
London, 1838, p. 83.
8 Otto Poese, Die Sirgel der deulschen Kaiser and Konige, vol. i, 1909, PI. VII,
no. 4.
* Society Nationale des Antiquairra de France, M&noires, tomexxxvii, pp, 39-88,
‘Le Blason d'aprfe les sceaux du Moyen-Age’, par G. Demay.
10 Encyclopaedia Britannica, nth ed., vol. xiii, art. ‘Heraldry’ by Oswald Barron,
p. 312. It appears on the seal of Conrad II in 1028} Posse, supra "ей., Pl, ХШ,
do. 2.
14 HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
early as the second quarter of the twelfth century. We can
safely call them heraldic because they are inherited by the
first bearers’ descendants. The elaborate researches of Smith
Ellis1 and others have brought to light nothing that can
safely be called heraldic (in our sense) of earlier date than
this, unless it be the strikingly similar system of family
devices prevalent in Athens in the sixth and fifth centuries
before Christ;2 which, however, died away without posterity
or traceable connexion with the heraldry of the Middle Ages.
Mr. Geoffrey White has dated between 1136 and 1138
the making of the first seal of Waleran, Count of Meulan
and Lord of Worcester.3 On the seal (inscribed sigillum
gualeranni comitis mellenti) the shield and horse trapper
are cheeky; on the counterseal (inscribed sigillum gualer-
anni domini wigon), shield, trapper, and lance flag are
all cheeky.4 Of Waleran’s second seal, dating from 1141
or 1142, there are two impressions in the British Museum.
On the better of these the chequers can still just be traced
on the trapper of the seal and on the trapper and lance flag
of the counterseal.3 An old drawing of this same seal, made
by or for Elias Ashmole, shows the chequers also on the
shield and helmet in the seal and on shield and surcoat in
the counterseal.6 We may be warned by this example not to
assume too hastily that armorial bearings have never been
present on a seal, merely because they are not now visible.
A seal, which may be earlier but has not, Г think, been
proved so, is that of Waleran’s maternal uncle Ralph, Count
of Vermandois (1116-52).7 The shield in this has its inner
side to the spectator, but the lance flag seems to be cheeky,
like that or Waleran. In Douet d’Arcq’s catalogue the
1 William Smith Ellis» The Antiquities of Heraldry* London» 1869.
2 Vide С. T. Seltman, Athens; Its History and Coinage before the Persian Invasion*
Cambridge» 1924, pp. xvii, 19-37; and Chase» ‘Shield Devices of the Greeks’» in
Harvard Studies* vol. xiii (1902)» p. 126.
3 Rpyal Historical Society* Transactions* 4th aeries» vol. xiii, p. 62; Complete Peerage*
vol. vii» Appendix I» p. 737. (See Appendix G» No. 5.)
< Engraved in Millin de Grandmaison’a Aniiqtdtfs Nationales* vol. iv, Art. XLIX,
PP- i7> *9-
* Brit. Mils. Harleian Charter 45» i. 30»
6 Brie Mm. MS. Lansdowne 203» foL 16b.
7 Douet d‘Arcq, Collection de Sceaun* Archives de Г Empire, Inventaires et
Documents* Paris» 1863» tome 1» p. 427» no. 1010; G, Demay» Costume au Mayen Age*
p. XII, fig. 59
THE CONSTABLE "AND MARSHAL 15
charter which bears the seal is dated 1135, but upon what
grounds is not apparent. As, however, a second seal of this
Count, showing both flag and shield cheeky, is found on a
charter of 1146,1 the former seal must be earlier at any rate
than this.
The special interest of these two, apart from their date,
is that the cheeky coat was clearly inherited by Waleran
from his mother’s family (the later Counts of Vermandois
bore cheeky), and was moreover borne later (with differ-
ences) not only by his own descendants, but by those of
his mother’s second marriage, the families of Warenne and
of the old Earls of Warwick?
The two early seals showing the chevronny shield of
Clare are now well known. Both must be dated between
1141 and 1146. That of Gilbert, Earl of Pembroke, is
known only by drawings ;3 but of that of his nephew, Gilbert,
Earl of Hertford, an actual impression was found by J. H.
Round among the Duchy of Lancaster records.4
The existence of heraldry in other parts of Europe at
this date is proved by the appearance of armorial bearings
on seals of Amadeus III of Savoy in 1143,5 of Henry the
Lion, Duke of Saxony, in 1144,6 of Ramon Berengar of
Provence in 1150,7 of Ramon Berengar IV of Arragon in
1157,8 and of Welf VI, Marquis of Tuscany and Prince
of Sardinia, in 1152.9
Earlier than any of these is an historical reference to arms
which must probably be considered truly heraldic. John
of Marmoutier, in his life of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count
of Anjou, written about 1170, gives a detailed description of
his ceremonial knighting by Henry I of England, upon
1 G. Demay, Inventaire des Sceaux de Г Artois et de la Picardte, Paris, 1875-7,
p. 7, 00. 38.
* Vide Smith Ellis, supra cit.f p. 179; Anthony R. Wagner, Portcullis, Historic
Heraldry of Britain, 1939, p. 46.
3	B.M. MS. Lansdowne 203, fol. r5b» Upton, de Studio Militari, ed. Bysshe,
1654, Notae, 89; A. R. Wagner, supra cit^ pp. 36-7; Medieval England, 2 ed.
4	Grants in boxes A, 157; ArckaeoL J, li, 1894, pp. 43-8; Medieval England, 2 ed.
5	Archives Hfraldigues Suisses, 1925, pp. i-i6j Medieval England, 2 rd.
6	Information from D. L. Galbreath, Esq.; Medieval England, 2 ed.
7	Blancart, Tomographic des sceaux et bullet des Archives difartementales des
Bauches du RAtee, Marseilles et Paris, i860; PL II, no. r; Medieval England, 2 ed.
8	Ferrin de Sagarra, Sigillografia Catalana, i, PI. V, fig. 1; Med. Eng., 2 ed.
• Archives H/raldipses Suisses, 1916, p. 57 j Medieval England, 2 ed.
i6 HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
his marriage to the latter’s daughter Maud in 1127.1 * In
the course of this a shield bearing golden lioncels was hung
about his neck—‘Clipeus, leunculos aureos ymaginarios ha*
bens, collo ejus suspenditur’; and even the shoes that were
put upon his feet were so charged—’Pedes ejus sotularibus in
superficie leunculos aureos habentibus muruuntur’. Later, in
a fight he is described as ’pictos leones preferens in dypeo*.
Now there is at present in the Museum at Le Mans an
enamelled plate, said to have been formerly over Geoffrey’s
tomb in the cathedral there, and showing him holding a
shield of these very arms—azure six lioncels or—and wear-
ing a pointed cap charged with a like lion.3 Planchi argued
from a passage in Sandford’s Genealogical History that the
person depicted might after all be not Geoffrey, but William
fitz Patrick, Earl of Salisbury.3 Mr. Geoffrey White, how-
ever, has lately brought forward arguments for the tradi-
tional identification which appear conclusive.4 The enamel
was probably made either at Geoffrey’s death in 1151 or in
his lifetime. It is noteworthy that Geoffrey’s bastard grand-
son, William Longespie, Earl of Salisbury, bore these same
arms, while his own son, William Fitz Empress, the younger
brother of Henry II, who died in 1163, bore a single lion.5
I cannot leave this subject without referring to an alleged
occurrence of arms on a seal, which dates some years eanier
than any of those yet mentioned, and which may, not impos-
sibly, be genuine. Pierre Francois Chifilet, a generally reli-
able authority, speaks in 1656 of having seen a number
of seals of Hugh II, Duke of Burgundy from 1102 to 11426
(in Coulon’s catalogue not one is noted). Of the one which
interests him he has seen only one example, on a charter
1 Ckroniques det Comtes d* Anjou et des Seigneurs d*Ambaite, publifes par Louis
Halpheu et Испё Poupardin, Paris, 1913» p. 179.
3 C. A. Stochard, The Monumental Efgies qf Great Britain,1817, p. 1. (See App.
G, No. 6.)	» 7- Brit. Archaeol. Assoc., i, 19-39.
♦ Notes and Queries, 1930» pp. 113-144 J93J> PP’ *49-50- (See App. G, No. 7»)
5 Nurthassts. Record Society, vol. iv, 1930. Facsimiles of early charters from
Northamptonshire collections by Professor F. M. Stenton, no. vi, p. 34; Journal
of the British Archaeological Association, rot xii, 1846, p. 100; Heralds* Commemora-
tiw Exhibition 1484^1^34, Illustrated Catalogue <936, no. 99, p. 694 Anthony R.
Wagner, Portcullis, Historic Heraldry of Britans, I939> p. 40-
6 Lettre tootchant Beatrix Comtosse de Chalon, par le pta Pierre Francois Chiffiet,
de la Compagnie de Jesus, Dijon, 1656, pp. 36, 185.
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL 17
of 113 i. This shows a non-armorial shield and no lance or
flag. The Duke’s most usual seal shows a lance flag bendy,
or perhaps rather paly, of six; this is not dated. Of a third
be has seen only one example, attached to a charter of the
Abbey of St. Benignus, Dijon, dated the 16th of February
11 об.1 In this the lance flag is, as he describes it, ‘chargie
au dessus de 1’Ecusson aux six pieces de Bourgongne’; and
his engraving shows a bendy shield of sixteenth-century
shape set diagonally on the flag. Clearly the engraving is not
accurate, and has in fact been drastically assimilated to the
engraver’s own ideas; but a comparison with others of its
date and quality suggests that it may really represent some-
thing armorial, bearing some relation to the later arms of
Burgundy.
These instances suggest that something like true heraldry
was coming into being m the first half of the twelfth century.
Round, following another line of argument, came to the
conclusion ‘that the reign of Stephen was the period in
which heraldic bearings were assuming a definite form’,
and at which, probably, they were introduced into England.
This conclusion he reached by an ingenious and convincing
piece of reasoning, tending to show that a group of similar
coats used by the families of Say, Vere, Clavering, and Beau-
champ of Bedford, whose ancestors were all connected by
marriage with the great Geoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of
Essex, must have been adopted by them from his coat and
in his lifetime.2 King Stephen’s well-known fondness for
the tournament in this connexion is significant, as will appear
later.
As the twelfth century proceeds, heraldry on seals grows
steadily more frequent,3 and by its end is well established.
For the earliest verbal descriptions of arms we must turn
to the early French Romances, where they occur not infre-
quently. Comte de Marsy,4 who analysed much of this
* Ibid.>p. 177. D. L. Galbreath regarded there readings of early reals by such as
Chiffiet with scepdctsm. 2 J- H. Round» de MandennUet P- 392»
3 Fide Archives Mralditpus Saisses, toL ▼, 1*97» pp- 69-79, ‘Les plus anciemres
armomet fran^aires’ (1127-1300)» par L. Bouly de Lesdain; L- Galbreath,
Handbikhlem der Heraldic, Lausanne 1930, pp, jy-20; TAe Genealogists' Mqgaxae,
Vol. Tli, p. Z22.
* Mfacires de la SociM Nationals de Antipudres de France, 5 iime S6rie, tome ii,
♦607	c
18 HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
evidence, found that the first recognizable descriptions are
of devices painted on helms. A little later, in the second
half of the twelfth century, the principal charges of the
shield begin to be specified. By 1200 the indications are
fairly full, and by 1250 are sufficient to enable us to recon-
struct the arms. By 1270 a technical jargon is fully formed
and regularly used.
Before this date we meet in England with the oldest of
our Rolls of Arms. Such a document as Glover’s Roll,1
compiled about 12^4, affords the clearest proof that the
practice of heraldry was by that date both widespread and
systematic. The arms of twenty Earls and nearly two hun-
dred lords and knights from all parts of England are given.
The lost original contained both paintings and blazons (i.e.
descriptions) of the arms, and the latter add further proof
in the flexible and well thought out technical vocabulary
employed. The order of blazon—field, main charge, subor-
dinate charges—is a fixed convention. Established techni-
calities include three colours—goules, azur, sable; two con-
ventional fields—veree, ermyn; many technical names for
linear figures and divisions—fesse, barre, bende, cheveron,
labell, chief, danse, cotise, bordure, saultoir, esquartele, pale,
party, masculee, burelee, barre, gerony, engrele, endente,
frette, oundee, oundee de long; with several other more or
less elaborate terms of art.
Most striking of all are the indications that system already
governed the adoption of arms. Among the 218 Coats of
Glover’s Roll we find only five instances1 in which one coat
is borne by two individuals, and in at least two of these
an explanation on grounds of connexion by blood or tenure
can be suggested. Fifty years later, in the poem of the
Siege of Caerlaverock, we read how the author saw that
pp. 169-212, Lt Langagt htraldique au XHlt alcle dans les pohnes d*Adentt U
par M. le Comte de Many.
1	A Roll of Arms compiled in the reign of Henry III, ed. Nicholas Harris
Nicolas» 1829, from Coll. Arm. MS. L. 14» fols. 38-42, a copy of the lost original
made in 1586 by Robert Glover, Somerset Herald.
2	Quarterly or and gules—Le Conte de Mandevile and William de Say (cousins);
Gules three escallops or—Herbert le Chamberlyn and Martin Chamberlyn; Mas-
cally ermine and gules—Richard de la Rokeie and Thomas le fitzWilliam; Barry
or and gules—Alayn le fitz Brian and Robert le Savage; Argent a chief gules—
William de Forte de Vivonia and Maheu de Columbera.
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL 19
Brian Fitzalan and Hugh Poyntz bore identical banners
of barry or and gules, whence a dispute arose between
them.1
But this is to anticipate. Not less striking in Glover’s and
later rolls than this absence of overlapping is the frequency
of significant similarity. That the members of one family
would normally distinguish their several coats by making
«mall alterations and additions has always been well known.
Camden observed further that ‘About this time did many
Gentlemen begin to bear Arms by borrowing from their
Lords Arms of whom' they held in Fee, or to whom they
were most devoted. So whereas the Earl of Chester bare
Garbes or wheat sheafs, many Gentlemen of that Country
took wheat sheafs’, and so forth.2 Less obvious, but not
less certain, is the collateral adoption of like arms by families
linked by intermarriage. Smith Ellis3 worked out many
examples of this and came to original and interesting con-
clusions. But as unhappily many of his genealogical and
other assumptions were incorrect his work needs revision
and has not received the attention it deserves.
A specially interesting group of connected arms, that of the
Quarterly coats, which derives almost certainly from Geoffrey
e Mandeville, Earl of Essex, has been referred to already.
Seyler quotes three German charters of the second half
of the thirteenth century which record concessions or agree-
ments between private persons touching the bearing of their
arms. The first, dating between 1267 and 1276, is an agree-
ment between different branches of the house of Hadstatt
as to how the old banner of Hadstatt is to be borne by them
in various contingencies of succession.4 The second, dated
the 2nd of February 1286, is a Grant made by Bruno,
Bishop of Brixen, with the consent of his chapter and vassals,
to his nephew Count Conrad von Kirchberg, of the right
to bear his crest.5 The third is a declaration made on the
1	Appendix A (7).
2	Яеямод ed. 1674» P- 277.	3 The Antiquities of Heraldry* 1869.
+ Geschichie der Heraldii* bearbeitet von Gustav A, Styler> Nttrnberg, 1885, p. 8 r 1,
'Naeh dem Original im Staatsarchiv zu Basel von Herrn Dr. Theodor v. Uebenau
im Monatsblatt der k.k. heraldischen Gesellschaft Adler 1884, no. 45 mitgetheilt’.
Ibid., pp. 811-12/Origmal-Urkuude im fUratl. Fttntenberg. Haupt-Archive
zu Donaueschingen. Anzeiger f&r Kunde deutacher Vorzeit. 1865, no. 1.’
20 HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
Sth of September 1293 by Ekkho von Liechtenberg that
his uncle Jordan von Murach had granted him inter alia
the right to use his crest.1 These documents suffice to show
that, m Germany at least, there was already held to be
property in arms at this date. For the fourteenth century
in Germany such documents are not uncommon. In Eng-
land none has been brought to light earlier than the 20th of
July 1347, when Michael, Lord Poynings, granted to Sir
Stephen de Valoynes ‘unam crestam videlicet caput draconis
hiantis de ermyne cum duabus alis extensis de ermyne’;2 or
the 6th of January 1347/8, when Robert, Lord Morley,
Marshal of Ireland, ceded to Robert de Corby and his heirs
the arms which he had himself inherited from Sir Baldwin
de Manners.3 But a licence of the 15th of May 1317*
empowering Edmund, Lord Deincourt, to alienate certain
lands and reciting that he had desired thereby to perpetuate
his name and arms, seems to imply a similar intention and
attitude, as does a charter of Robert Bruce dated at Berwick
the 7th of November 1324 granting lands to Sir Robert
Keith with remainder ‘propinquioribus heredibus masculis
predict! Roberti de Keithe militis cognomen et arma predicta
principaliter gerentibus’.5 In England as in Germany such
documents are not infrequent in the late fourteenth and
early fifteenth centuries.
All this points to the existence, if not of control, at least
of organization. We have, therefore, to consider whether
at this early date the Marshal or the heralds had any respon-
sibility in matters of this kind, or if not, how and when they
came to acquire it.
The Marshal and his senior colleague the Constable
were in the main military officers, having authority over the
army in the field,6 though both, and the Marshal especially,
1	Geschicfa*	p. 812,'Hund, bayr. S tarn men bu ch III. In: von Frey-
berg, Sammlung historischer Schriften Bd. HL S- 458. VergL Gesch. d. H.S. 3x8/
2	Coll. Arm. MS. Vincent 86. Ralph Baron of Stafford granted a crest to hie
cousin Esmond de Mortayn 20 Jan. 1346/7, Proc. Soc. of Antiquaries, 2nd Series,
xxiii, pp. 464-7.	3 Camden's	ed. 1674, pp. 286-7.
♦ Patent Roll 10 Edward II, p. 2, m. ijj.cited in Hearne's Curious Discourses, ed.
1775, vol. i, p. 14г. s TAf Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. i, pp. 122-3.
6 Cf. Bloch Boot of the Admiralty, ed. Sir Travers Twiss (Rolls Series), vol. ъ
p. 45Ъ citing the Ordinances of War made by Richard II at Durham in 1385,
from Brit. Mus. MS. Cotton, Nero D VI, fob 89: ‘Primeiement, qe toutes maneres
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL ai
had duties in the King's Court also. Both offices go back
to the reign of Henry I. ‘A military court', writes Vernon
Harcourt,1 ’nominally, at all events, under the control of
the constable and marshal of England, is in existence at
least as early as the reign of Edward I.' The limits of its
jurisdiction were often doubtful and had more than once to
be defined by special enactment. A statute of the thirteenth
year of Richard II thus laid them down:
‘To the Constable it belongs to have1 knowledge of contracts
touching deeds of arms and war out of the realm, and also of things
touching arms or war within the realm which cannot be determined
or discussed at common law, with other usages and customs thereunto
belonging.’2
This definition would clearly cover inter alia such disputes
as that quoted of Brian Fitzalan with Hugh Poyntz, if they
should go so far that legal settlement were needed. Disputes
of this kind would be most likely to occur when knights
from different regions were gathered at one place for a
length of time. Sieges and tournaments best fit this condi-
tion, and over both the Constable and the Marshal presided.
Thus their Court would naturally acquire jurisdiction in
armorial causes. From the first half of the fourteenth century
on, we know that it did in fact hear such causes. The earliest
instance known to me belongs to the time of Edward Ill’s
siege of Calais, that is, between 1345 and 1348. But the
evidence is not contemporary, being contained in deposi-
tions given in the case of Level v. Morley, heard before
Commissioners appointed by the Constable Thomas of
Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, at various times and
places between 1386 and 1391.
Thomas, Lord Morley, and John, Lord Level of Titch-
marsh, both claimed the arms ‘dargent ove un leon rampant
de sable corone et enarme dore’, the latter by descent through
his grandmother from the Lords Burnell.3 And both parties
de gentx, de quel nadon, estat, ou condidons qils soient, soient obeisantt a nostre
seignur le Roy, a son Conestable et Mateschall, sur quantque xls purront fbrfaire
en corps ou en biens?
1 L. W. Vernon Harcourt» His Grace the Ste<ward and Trial of Peers, 1907,
.p. 362.	* Appendix A (8).
3 P.R.O. Chancery Miscellanea, 6/1, and State Papers 9/10, fob. 3-44^ College
of Arms MS., Processus in Curia MaiescaUi, vol. i; Cemflete Peerage, vol. ix, p. arc.
22 HERALDIC ORIGINS AND THE COURT OF
claimed in their own favour a judgement given by the Con-
stable and Marshal upon a similar dispute between their
respective ancestors, Nicholas, Lord Burnell, and Robert,
Lord Morley, during the said siege of Calais. It may prob-
ably be inferred from the reliance placed upon the recollec-
tion of those who had been present that no written record
of these proceedings or judgement existed. The same story
in the main was told by a large number of witnesses.
Monsieur Nicholas de Burnell challenged the arms of
Monsieur Robert de Morley, whereupon the Earl of North-
ampton, then Constable, and the Earl of Warwick, then
Marshal, sat ‘tribunalement’ in the church of St. Peter out-
side Calais, and gave judgement that Monsieur Robert de
Morley for the deeds of honour and prowess performed by
him in many mortal battles under the said arms should for
his life continue to bear them, but that after his death they
should go to the Lord Burnell and his descendants be wholly
excluded. One witness, however—John Broys,1 aged 65
years—adds particulars of special interest. While the case
was before the Constable and Marshal, he says, the king
himself, to avoid the combat and other evils which might
arise therefrom, took the cause into his own hands, and soon
after the said Constable and Marshal gave judgement accord-
ing to the king’s will and command. He added that owing
to the number of people present in the church he himself
could not hear the judgement distinctly, but immediately
afterwards, he saw and heard a herald named Lancaster,
at the command of the Constable and Marshal, make public
proclamation that the arms had been adjudged as stated
above.
It is interesting to find a herald associated with the Court
so early, but of no significance for our present inquiry since
there is no suggestion that he took part in the trial itself.
In the proceedings of the Level v. Morley case of 139J,
however, we find two Kings of Arms, ‘Le Roy Vaillant
heraud’, aged 60, and ‘Le Roy Aquitaigne heraud’, aged 70,
giving expert evidence, apparently to the effect that arms
cannot be given away or alienated. Unluckily we have here
to rely on a quotation by Anstis from a manuscript in his
1 Coll. Arm. MS., supra cit., pp. 143-7.
THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL 23
own possession, which he considered contemporary, but of
which the present whereabouts is unknown to me.1
Against this evidence of the Constable’s and Marshal’s
early jurisdiction must be set that of a remarkable charter,
known to us by an engraving made by George Vertue before
1729 from the original, then belonging to Peter le Neve,
Norroy. The present whereabouts of the original seems not
to be known, and I have been able to trace only a single
impression of the engraving, which has found its way in
some unexplained manner into one of Ashmole’s manuscripts
at Oxford.2 It reproduces with apparent accuracy a charter
dated at the siege of Calais on St. Margaret’s eve (19 July),
1347, by which Henry, Earl of Lancaster, Steward of Eng-
land, William de Clinton, Earl of Huntingdon, Reynold
Cobham, Walter, Lord Mauny, and Stephen de Cosington,
commissioners appointed by the king to try and judge ‘toutes
manieres de batz darmes et heaumes de dayntz son host en
son siege devant Caloys’, adjudging the arms ‘lozenge dor et
daszeur’ to Johan de Warbeltone against Tibaud Russel
alias Gorges. There is no mention of the Constable or
Marshal. The solution of this seeming discrepancy may,
however, be that these commissioners were appointed as
deputies or assistants to them. This view is supported by
the answers of several witnesses in Level v. Morley., who,
being asked who were present at the church of St. Peter,
answered Henry, Earl of Lancaster, the Earl of Pembroke,
Lord Stafford, Sir Guy de Bryan, Sir Walter de Mauny,
and others. Many of the sittings in the Lovel and Morley,
Scrope and Grosvenor, and Grey and Hastings cases were
1	Coll. Arms, Anstis’s MS., Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 157, note (13): ‘In MSto.
Coaetaneo A. 23. penes me. p. 7b bis.
‘In the case abt. Arms between Lovell and Morlee (1395) Que Armes ne poient
estre donez ou alienez etc. le Roy Vailland d’age lx ans etc.
‘Le Roy Aquitaigne heraud d’age 70 aims. etc. et iterum examinee en dit page,
‘Le Roy Vaillant heraud d’age lx anns.
‘Le Aquitaigne Roi heraud d’age Ixx anns.*
This MS. was Lot 444 in the Anstis Sale of 1768, and was apparently bought
in for 3.L 6d.
Cf. Coll. Arm. MS., Processus in Curia Marescalli, vol. i, p. 332, where Edward
de Acton deposes ‘qe armes ne purroient ascunement estre alienez selonc droit
darmes’; and p. 340, where Hildebrand Barre ‘dit qe armes ne poent nullement
estre alienez, et ceo de custume & le droit darmes come il dit*.
2	Ashmole MS. 1137, fo. 164.
24 COURT OF THE CONSTABLE AND MARSHAL
before Deputies and not the Constable and Marshal them-
selves.
On the 3rd of August 1408,1 Master John Reppeley,
notary of Norwich, aged 50 years, one of the witnesses for
Hastings in the case of Grey v. Hastings in the Court of the
Constable and Marshal (Court of Chivalry), deposed at
Norwich that he had heard ancient men at arms and heralds
of arms discussing the matter then in question and concluding
that, according to the law of arms as used in England,
Hastings was the nearer heir to his ancestor the Earl of
Pembroke because he and his father, grandfather, and great-
?randfather had always borne the undifferenced arms of
tastings as belongs to a next heir.
The approximate date at which the heralds began to
acquire official standing in relation to this Court may be
inferred from a comparison of two recensions of a document
entitled ‘The Order of Battel in the Court of Chivalry’. The
older, which is in French and purports to be drawn up by
Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, Constable from
1376 to 1397,2 assigns the broken armour of the combatants
to the Constable as his fee. The latter, of fifteenthcentury
date, gives it to the heralds.3
1	Coll. Arm. MS., Processus io Curia Mare&calli, vol. ii, p. 491.
2	Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. Sir Travers Twiss (Rdb Series), vol. i, :87b
P- 32*>
3	Ibid., p. 329; and Archac&gia9 vol. Ivii, p. 66.
IV
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
HAVING carried the history of the Marshal’s armorial
function to a point where it touches that of the heralds,
we must turn back to the latter’s early history. Heralds
seem not to occur in our Records before the reign of Edward I
but for a full century earlier mentions of them in French
romances and poems are common enough to give us a fair
notion of their duties and status.1 Almost all these mentions
link them with tournaments, of which the conduct seems to
have been their special province. In regions where the
tournament was not in use, we find, according to Paul
Meyer, no mention of heralds.2 They were sent beforehand
to proclaim tournaments. Thus, in October 1285, Maigniens,
the King of Heralds, was sent from Chauvency to Mont-
mddy by his master Louis de Looz, Count of Chiny, to
proclaim the jousts shortly to be held at the former place.2
His message done, the King of Heralds returns home with
his answer, which in turn is proclaimed by a herald to the
assembled throng.4 Heralds would precede or accompany
their lords to the joust. Thus Guillaume de Dole is described
as escorted by no less than two hundred.2 They proclaimed
the name of each combatant at his entry.
A dont oTssi^s les hiraus
Crier le nons des deus vassaus6
writes Jakemes.
Li hera
Qui des vaillanz crie le ban,
Chretien de Troyes calls them.7
1	See Edmond Faral, Les Jongleurs en France att mayen Age, Paris, 1910, pp.
270-1.
2	Romania, tome xi, 1882, p. 36.	3 Appendix В (i).
4	Appendix В (2).	5 Appendix В (3),
6	Le Romain du Castelm de Couci et de la dame de Fayel par Jakemes, Edition
^tablie & faide des notes de John E. Matzke par Maurice Delbouille, Soriltl des
andens textes fran^ais, Paris, 1936} 11, 1138—9. The editor dates the composition
of this poem lace in the thirteenth or early in the fourteenth century.
7	Der L&uuenritter (Ckevalirr au Zwr), ш Christian <uon Troyes, ed. Wendelin
Foerster, Halle, 1887 j 11. 2204-5. The editor data this poem between 1164 and
XX74-
26	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
If the poems can be trusted, their proclamation often in-
cluded laudatory comment.1 They cheered the combatants
as they fought.2 They were expected to recognize them and
to know their characters and histories. The author of the
Chauvency poem tells us how he questioned Bruiant the
herald, asking ‘who each one was, and of what land’.3 While
the jousts were in progress the heralds would talk among
themselves of the combatants’ merits.4 They would attend
the ladies who were watching, and answer their questions
about the knights.5 Nor were their duties confined to the
joust itself. They would act as familiar counsellors and
masters of ceremonies to their lords and to the knights of
their company.
When the Chatelain of Coucy had spent a whole night
in singing and diversion, his herald told him to go to bed
for he would be calling him early in the morning. And when
morning came, the heralds roused up the whole company
of knights and told them it was time for church.6
Throughout their early history the heralds and the min-
strels are closely linked, as colleagues or as rivals. In the
poetical life of William the Marshal, written before 1226,
we read 'of them assisting together at a fight in Normandy
in 1173.7 And though, as the editor, Paul Meyer, observes,
‘On voit que nous sommes id en pleine fantaisie. Le pobte
raconte un tournoi et non une action de guerre’, the associa-
tion of heralds and minstrels, in the tournament if not in
war, is none the less historical. In our own records, heralds
and minstrels are regularly classed together for payment of
wages and liveries, the exchequer clerks not always troubling
to distinguish one from the other. The Statutum Armorum,
whereby at the request of the Earls, Barons, and Knights
of England new laws for the conduct of tournaments were
laid down about 1292, contained a clause forbidding any
King of Heralds or of minstrels to carry hidden arms or
any arms save pointless swords, and bidding the Kings of
the Heralds wear their coats of arms	only.8
1 Appendix В (4).	2	Appendix В (5).
3 Appendix В (6).	4	Appendix В (7).
3 Appendix В (8).	6	Appendix В (9).
7 Appendix В (io).	• Appendix В (n). (See Appendix G, No. 8-)
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	27
A household account of 1277 records a gift of twelve
pounds made by the king to Hertelin, King of the Heralds
of Germany, a fiddler of the King of Germany, and a herald
of arms of Germany;1 while another of 1290 shows pay-
ments to several foreign heralds present in England for the
celebration of the marriage of the king’s daughter to the
Earl of Gloucester.2 In 1338 a wardrobe account records
a payment to Master Conrod, King of the Heralds of Ger-
many, and ten other minstrels of divers other great lords
of Germany, for making minstrelsy before the king at Christ-
mas.3 In the same year Andrew Norrois or -Norreys is
mentioned as a King of Heralds, yet in 1348 we find a
payment to Master Andrew Roy Norreys, Lybekin the
piper and Hanekin his son, and six other minstrels of the
king.4 In spite of this close association of heralds and
minstrels, we shall see that there was at times bitter rivalry
between the two professions.
At Chauvency the author of the poem was told by a
herald that knights, minstrels, heralds, all spoke well of
him.5 If Meyer’s interpretation of an incident in the poetical
History of William the Marshal be accepted, the good or
bad opinion of the heralds was something to be reckoned
with. About 1182 attempts were made to estrange from
the Marshal his patron the young king Henry. One of the
calumniators is faying to convince a certain Raoul deHamarz
that the Marshal’s great reputation for valour is undeserved
and springs only from the fact that whenever he takes part
in a joust a certain Henry le Norrois, supposed by Meyer
to be a herald, follows him crying 'God aid the Marshal’.6
Later the Marshal is banished from court and spends his
time in jousting. The young king hears of his prowess
from an eye witness, Baudouin de Bethune. 'But’, says he,
’have you not seen le Norrois cry after him, God aid the
1 Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol i, p. 40; and Register of the Order of the Garter,
vol. i, p. 283, citing a household account of 6 Edward L
2 Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 40; Register of the Order rf the Garter, vol.
i, p. 302. (See Appendix G, No. 9.)	> Ibid., p. 283.
* Issue Roll, Michaelmas, 22 E. HI: ‘Magistro Andxeae Roy Norreys, Lybekino
le Piper et Hanekino filio suo et sex alii* Mcnestrallis Regis in denariis eis liberatis
de dono Regis in subsidium expensarum auarum 55$, <d.’
5 Appendix R {12).
« 6 Appendix В (13).
28	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
Marshal?’ ‘No, sire, nor was he present.’ ‘But is the Marshal
then capable himself of deeds of chivalry?’ ‘What, sire?
He is one of the best knights in the world.’1
Meyer thinks that, though the explanation of the Mar-
shal’s success given to Hamarz is ‘assez pulrile’, it is likely
that the Marshal had made a point of enlisting the support
of heralds, ‘qui contribuaient certainement pour beaucoup
й repandre le renom des chevaliers. . . . Les hlrauts Itaient
les journalistes de l’£poque, et il pouvait fitre avantageux de
se concilier leurs bonnes graces.’2 As we shall see, many
heralds led a wandering life from court to court and even
from country to country, mingling always in what may be
called chivalric circles; so that their opportunities for both
collecting and spreading news of feats of arms and those
who performed them would be ample. Froissart bears ample
witness to the use made by heralds in his day of their
opportunities in this direction.3 That the Marshal had culti-
vated the heralds is suggested by an incident earlier in the
poem. About 1i80, at the time of his estrangement from
the young king, the Marshal attended a tournament at
Joigny. When it was over, the ladies joined the knights in
dancing to a song which the Marshal sang:
О simple voiz et о doz son.
When he had done, a young singer (that is, perhaps, a
minstrel) newly made a Herald of Arms, began to sing a
new song with the refrain, ‘Marshal, give me a good horse!’
The Marshal had his own horse brought, and as a party of
the jousters came up, rode at one of them, unhorsed him,
and gave his horse to the ‘little herald*; who thereupon
returned to the dance, saying, ‘See, what a horse! It is the
Marshal who has given it to me.’4 Meyer at one time sug-
gested that this herald might be identical with the author
of the poem, and both perhaps with Henri le Norrois.5 But
if the author, as he seems to, refers to himself as Jean,6 he
can scarcely be Henri le Norrois. In his edition of the poem
1 Romania, tome xi, 1882» pp. 22-74; L'Hfctoire de Guillaume le Marlchai, par
Paul Meyer, p. 38.
* L'Histoire de Guillaume le Mar&bal, tome in, Introduction» p. xlvi.
3 Infra, p. 48.	♦ Appendix В (14).
s Romania, tome xi, pp. 38-9.	6 L 19195*
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	29
Meyer drops this suggestion, but thinks the author may have
been present at a tournament about 1180, which he says
he saw either as jongleur or herald.1
Other poems of this kind have been attributed to heralds.
Faral believed that Jacques Bretel and Sarrazin, authors
respectively of Le Tour not de Chauvency and Le Roman
de Ham, were heralds;2 while Langlois suggested that
Jakemes, author of Le Castelain de Couci, might be one,3
and Scheier discusses the possibility of Adenet le Roi having
been a King of Heralds. In all these cases the principal
ground was the familiarity thought to be shown with matters
armorial.
Later writers, however, tend to take another view. Del-
bouille, the latest editor of Jacques Bretel* and Jakemes,5
thinks the former more probably a minstrel and the latter
‘un petit seigneur sans grande fortune’; and the general view
seems to be that Adenet was minstrel and not herald. A
later poem of undoubted heraldic authorship is the life of
the Black Prince by the herald Chandos.6
The chief reason against thinking Jacques Bretel a herald
is his moderate but evident dislike for men of that profession.7
He is friendly indeed with Bruiant, their king, and occa-
sionally speaks well of others, but his comments in the
main are disparaging. They are boorish and deceitful, he
says,8 and no one is greedier than a herald in pursuit of his
perquisite of broken armour.’ He speaks in complimentary
terms, however, of the minstrels, and in particular of a
certain Henri de Laon.10 The special interest of this refer-
ence is that Henri de Laon11 is known as the author of a
1 L’Histoire de GtdUaume le Marshal, tome iii, p. xii.
*	Edmond Faral, Les Jongleurs en France au moyen dge, Faris, 19x0, p. 205*
>	Ch, V. Langlois, La SocM fran^aise au XIII* s&cle d*aprls dix romans
eTaventurr, p, 1З7.
♦	Le Taurnoi de Chauvency, pp. Ivii, ba.
5	Le Romain du Castelain de Court, supra rtf., p. Ixxv.
6	Life of the Black Prince by the Herald of Sir John Chandos, edited from the
manuscript in Worcester College with linguistic and historical notes by Mildred K.
Pope and Eleanor C. Lodge, Oxford, 1910»
7	Le Toumoi de Chasrvency, p. lx.
s	Appendix В (15).	« Appendix В (хб).
10	Appendix В (17).
11	Conjectured to be the same who appears in Paris taxation returns between
1292 and 1297 as ‘Henri de Laon, menestrel’. Le Toumrt de Chauvency, p. xciii.
30	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
satirical poem, the Dit des HyrausJ- consisting mainly of
abuse of the heralds.' The tournament, he complains in
effect, has become professionalized. Jousters now think of
nothing but winning prizes, instead of, as formerly, proving
their prowess and capacity for the responsibilities of war.2
Tournaments now resemble parliaments, and soon advocates
will be wanted to appeal against the sun or the weapons, as
they do for hired champions at judicial combats.3 They last
so long that poor knights are ruined and can no longer
compete, nor can they approach the great lords on account
of the size of their retinues. Worst of all, every knight has
to maintain three or four heralds and cannot get rid of them.
So, says the author ironically, one must be enterprising, and
it is his own wish to become a herald; for there is no pro-
fession more convenient for an idle, greedy man, nor any
in which one may talk so much and do so little.4 The grow-
ing elaboration of tournaments was evidently bringing the
heralds, who specialized in their conduct, into increasing
request and prominence at the expense of their more old-
fashioned rivals the minstrels.
Another poem of the later thirteenth century, Li Contes
des Hiraus ,of Baudouin de Condi,5 has a similar burden.
The author tells us how on a journey he was hospitably
received at the house of a rich knight who was a great patron
of minstrels. The knight’s servant has told him how hard
it is to find true minstrels now, and how many impostors
there are going by the name of heralds. At the house a
herald who sees that Baudouin is received with more warmth
than himself shows resentment. He was dressed, says Bau-
douin, in canvas like a windmill, which formerly only the
most favoured heralds wore. In those days heralds used to
roam over hill and dale ill clothed in their coats of arms,
suffering heat in summer and cold in winter, to wherever
tournaments might be held, to Denmark, Scotland, or Ire-
land, from Holland, Flanders, or Brabant. But now they
1 Edited and discussed by Arthur 14ngfors> in Romania, tome xliii, 1914,
pp. 216-23.	3 Appendix В (18).
з Appendix В (19).	* Appendix В (ao)«
s Dits et Contes de Baudouin de Condi et de son /Is Jean de Condi publii . . -
par Aug. Scheier, Bruxelles, 1866, tome i, pp. 153-735 and Histoire Lettindre de
France, tome xxiiij Paris, 1856, pp. 267-72.
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	31
have put aside their rags, their ‘hiraudie’, and dress as well
as knights.1 When the herald had abused him thoroughly,
Baudouin asked him who he was. ‘What is that to you ?*
answered that beast, ‘I am a herald.*2 The argument turns
to blows, of which Baudouin has the better, whereupon he
is rewarded with presents by the master of the house.
Not the least interesting point in the poem is its evidence
that heralds, like minstrels, often led that wandering life
which bore such rich fruit in medieval life and letters. Fixed
employment they no doubt preferred when they could find
it. The Marshal’s young herald, and Bruiant and his brother
kings, who enjoyed this security, can be taken for types of
success in their profession. Indeed, it is likely that the dignity
of King of Heralds was normally associated with a fixed
allegiance. How, at this date, it was attained or conferred,
we cannot tell. In the fourteenth century, as we shall see,
there were ceremonies of creation and coronation which only
a sovereign or his deputy could perform. Similarly, there
were oaths and initiation ceremonies for the lower ranks of
pursuivant and herald. It is possible that the words in which
the Marshal’s herald is brought on the scene—
un(s) chantereals
Qui ert hirauz d’armes nov(e)als3
indicate something of the sort as early as the twelfth century.
The later investitures included the putting on the herald
of a coat (tabard) or escutcheon of his master’s arms.4 Now
Baudouin de Condi seems to refer to the wearing of armorial
coats when he writes of heralds* ‘cotes armoires’;5 and at
Chauvency
Bruiant despoille sa garnatche
Que d’armes estoit painturee,
Daldz 1’estache 1’a race.6
Anstis thought that the ‘houces des armes’ of the Statutum
Armorum7 were no other than ‘the Surcoates of Arms’, worn
by the heralds ‘in the same form that their Founders used
them in Battles and Feats of Arms’.8
» Appendix В (xi).	1 Appendix В (ял).	3 hrfra* p. 131.
* Infra* pp,	s See Appendix В (xi), L 476.
6 Le Tc/urnti de Chairveney, 11. 298-300.	7 Supra* p. 26.
8 Register of the Order 0/ the Garter* vol. i, p. 295- See also Appendix G, No. to.
32	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
We shall have later to discuss a charter of Peter, King of
Heralds North of Trent, dated the 18th of March 1276.
Here we need only note that the attached seal when complete
showed a shield charged with three crowns.1 Later instances
suggest that it was customary for early Kings of Arms to
bear crowns in this way as an ensign of their office, which
it seems unlikely they could venture upon without some
royal or princely warrant such as their own formal creation
or coronation would afford. Bois Robert, King of the Heralds
of France, sealed with three crowns in 1318 ;2 while Guiot,
King of the Heralds of Champagne, attached to a receipt for
wages dated the 18th of November 1355'a seal of a banner
of three crowns impaling a lion3—perhaps an early instance
of the impalement of personal with official arms. These
indications, although singly slight, give, when taken together,
some ground for dunking that the conception of heralds as
a distinct order, which prevailed in the fourteenth and later
centuries, may have been older than this and even perhaps
coeval with the first notices we have of these officers* existence.
Seyler, who collected the early German references to
heralds, was unable to find any occurrence of the actual
word ‘herald’ before about 1367, when Peter Suchenwirt
in his poem of Leutold von Siadeck writes that
Ftlrsten, grafen, freyen
Der namen hdrt chreyen
Von der eralden, persewant,
Der wappen volger Tribliant.*
He came, however, to the conclusion that the same officers
arc certainly intended by the names of ‘Garzune’ (i.e. ‘gar-
dens’), ‘Crogiere’, and ‘Wappenknaben* or ‘Knappen von
den Wappen’. The two former names appear as early as
the twelfth century, but from about the third quarter of
the thirteenth century are superseded by the latter two.®
Seyler’s German quotations are parallel with the French
1 Infra, p. 40.	1 Arabia, Register of the Order of the Garter, voL i, p. 455;
Officers of Arms, vol. iii, p. 502 b.
Austis, Register of the Order of the Garter, voL i, p. 455; Officers of Arms, vol.
iii, p. 5:0b, citing- Chirambault, Titres Orig., vol. xxviii, fo. 2051. See also Appen-
dix G, No. 11.
* Gustav A, Seyler, Geschiehse der Heraldic. N Ora berg, 1885, p. 25. See abo
Appendix G, No. 12.
> Ibid., pp. 19-25.
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	33
ones given above, but perhaps rather less informative. like
them they relate mainly to tournaments.
We have noticed the entries of gifts made by Edward I
in 1277 and 1290 to visiting foreign heralds.1 The earliest
notices yet found in the household accounts of this king’s
own heralds belong to the latter year, and record payments
made for their summer and winter robes (twenty shillings
for each) to little Robert and Nicholas Morell, Kings of
Heralds.2 It is possible that exhaustive searches in the
Liberate Rolls and Pipe Rolls might produce somewhat
earlier entries.
The next development of the heralds’ status and duties be-
longs, so far as our evidence goes, to the reign of Edward Ш.
So far their activities seem to be confined to the tournament
and its accessories. For the usual later view—that heralds
were from the first messengers of war and peace—we have
found no evidence at all. From Edward Ill’s reign on,
however, we shall see them entrusted, though sparingly at
first, with military and diplomatic duties of steadily growing
importance. Our public records and the pages of Froissart
tell the same story. On the first page of his Chronicle the
latter acknowledges his obligation to ‘auciins rois d’armes
et leurs mareschaus qui par droit sont et doient estre juste
inquisiteur et raporteur de tels besognes’ for much informa-
tion respecting noble deeds of arms performed in the great
war between France and England.3 Elsewhere he cites
heralds’ authority for particular incidents, as when he tells
the story of how March King of Arms brought news of the
peace of 1394 to Richard II, ‘sicomme le hlrault nommd
Marche ou le Roy Marche me dist depuis a grant loisir en
chevauchant aveuc luy ens ou royaulme d’Angleterre’.4
It is clear how what we may call the heralds’ primary
function first led to their employment as messengers. On
St. George’s Day, 1344, Edward III celebrated his determina-
tion to round an order of knighthood by holding a joust at
1 Supra, p. *7. * Anstis, Officers of Arms» vol. i, p. 40J Register of the Order of
the Garter, vol. i, pp. 30* and 439, citing a Household account of 18 Edward L (See
App. G, No. 13.)
3 (Ewvres de Froissartpubliees aver les variaxtes des divers manuscrits, par M. le
baron Ketvyn de Let ten hove, 1867-77, tome it, p. 7.
< Ibid., tome xv, p. xzj.
4607	h
34	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
Windsor, ‘et pour ce que la feste fuist sceue et conneue par
toultes marches li roys engles 1’envoya publyer et denunchier
par ses hiraux en Franche, en Escoce, en Bourgoingne, en
Flandres, en Braibant, en Allemagne et partout jusqu’en
Lombardie’.1 In April 1366 Froissart was at Brussels and
met there the heralds of the kings of Denmark, Navarre,
and Arragon, and oF the Dukes of Lancaster, Bavaria, and
Brunswick, who had come to a joust which the Duchess of
Brabant was holding.2
The first instance that I can cite in which an English
herald figures as a messenger of war is a not unworthy one.
It is no less than the opening scene of the Hundred Years
War in Froissart’s narrative. On the morning of Monday
the 13th ofApril 1338, Edward III was at Westminster with
Robert of Artois, the Earls of Lancaster, Pembroke, and
Kent, and others, when there came a herald well known to
the king and the barons; and he was English and was called
Carlisle (Froissart writes it Cardoeil), for the king had made
him herald during his expedition in Scotland and. had given
him that name. This herald had been out of England five
years travelling through the world, and had been in Prussia,
in Ifflant, and at the Holy Sepulchre, and had returned by
Barbary to Spain, where he had stayed some while with the
King of Spain during his expedition in Granada, and now
brought with him letters from the King of Spain to the King
of England. He had come thence by way of Navarre and
the King of England’s territory in Gascony, where he found
a state of war subsisting between the vassals of the Kings
of France and England. The lords of Gascony ‘qui pour
Englds se tenoient’ and the town of Bordeaux gave him
letters to the king, whereupon he had made such good speed
that, embarking at Bayonne, he had come in five days and
four nights to Southampton, and thence had ridden in a
day and a half to London and the king.
‘Liquels roy et tout li baron orent au premier grant joie, car bien il
savoient qu’il avoient de lui pluiseurs nouvelles. Quant li roys engles
vit le hiraut devant lui que, grant temps a, n’avoit veu, se dist: “A bien
viengne, Cardoeil. Or nous dittes de deli le mer et des lointains pays
1	(Euvres de Froissart publiees a<uec les variantes des dvvers manuscrits, tome iv,
p. 204.	2 Ibid., tome i, p, 152.
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	35
Oii vous aves estet depuis que nous ne vous veymes, car moult en
desirons a savoir.” “Monseigneur,” dist li hiraux, “vous lires ou
feres lire, s’il vous plest, ces lettres, et puis je vous en diray de pluiseurs.
car il у en a de telles qui moult vous touchent.” Lors ouvri li roys
aucune des lettres et regarda ens.’1
This is our first evidence (so far as I know), not only for
the employment of an English herald in this way, but for
the calling of one by a name of office. The evidence, happily,
is as plain as possible. The king had given this man the
name Carlisle when he created him herald in the course of a
Scottish campaign (probably that of 1327 when he passed
near Carlisle, for that of 1333 is excluded by the statement
that in 1337 this herald had been abroad five years). Frois-
sart has, however, an earlier notice of a Scots herald. In
1333, when the king was at Alnwick, ‘uns hiraus d’Escoce,
qui s’apelloit Dondee’, came before the king and his lords
and announced that he was sent by some of the prelates and
lords of Scotland to ask for a parley.2 None of the heraldic
authors whom I have consulted can cite earlier authentic
mentions in any country of heralds by their names of office.
In England they appear one by one as Edward Ill’s
reign proceeds. In 1338 payments were made to Andrew
Norreys or Norrois, King of Heralds,3 and it is likely, though
not certain, that this is equivalent to the later title Norroy,
which at all events makes undoubted appearance in letters
patent of the 12th of January 1386 granting fees and robes
to ‘Johannes March unus heraldorum nostrorum ad arma
Rex Noreys’.4 We have seen Lancaster herald proclaiming
the decision in the Lovel and Morley case in or before 1348.5
From 13546 we meet with payments to William Volant,
King of Heralds, a title probably identical with the later
Vaillant.7 Froissart mentions ‘un hiraut qui s’appelloit le
Roy Faucon’ and was ‘hiraus au roy d’Engleterre’ in 1359;8
1	Ibid., tome i, p. 394 (ed. Simeon Luce, tome i, pp. 377-8).
2	Ibid., ed. Simeon Luce, tome i, p. 323.
3	Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 75; and Register of the Order of the Garter,
vol. i, p. 300, citing a Wardrobe account of Easter, 12 Edward III, and Issue Roll
of 12 Edward III, 19 May.
* Patent Roll, 9 Richard II, m. 21, p. 2; quoted by Anstis, Officers of Arms,
vol. i, p. 83.	.	s Supra, p. 22.
6 Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 157, citing Issue Roll 28 Edward III, &c.
7 Supra, pp. 22-3.	8 Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome vi, p. 428.
зб	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
and our own records have numerous later references to
Falcon King of Arms. In 1364 the news of the battle of
Away was brought to Edward III, Froissart tells us, by
‘ungs varies poursieuevans armes, qui avoit estet a la bataille et que
li roys engles fist tantost hiraut, et li donna le nom de Windesore, et
moult grant profit: par lequel hiraut nommet Windesore je fui
enfourmet de ceste bataille et de i’ordonnanche, sicomme vous aves
oy chy-dessus recordes, car j’estoie a Douvres au jour qu’il у vint et
que les nouvelles у furent premierement sceues.’1
Chandos herald, author of the poetical life of the Black
Prince,2 who was first in the service of Sir John Chandos
but after his death in that of the king, is first mentioned by
Froissart in 1366.3 In 1377, he tells us, Richard II, after
his own coronation at Westminster, ‘fist che jour quatre
contes et neuf chevaliers . . . et fist Camdos le hirault roy
d’armes d’Engleterre’.4 This is not only our oldest notice
of the creation of an English King of Arms, but seems
further to imply that Chandos was given a pre-eminence
over other English Kings of Arms, such as Garter was later
accorded here and Montjoye enjoyed in France. Of the
latter office, the first mention I have found is a statement,
in a document to be discussed later, that Chariot, who had
been King of Arms first of Cyprus and then of Artois, was
crowned Montjoye roi d’armes de France by Charles V,
who reigned from 1364 to 1380.5 There are, however, one
or two earlier references to Kings of Heralds of France.6
In 1377 Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, appears to
have created John Othelake his herald by the name of
March. On Edmund’s death in 1381, Richard II took him
into his own service,7 and in 1386 we find him referred to
as ‘Johannes March unus heraldorum nostrorum ad arma
1 Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome vii, p. 65.	2 Supra, p. 29.
3 Froissart, ed. Simeon Luce, supra cit., vol. vi, p. 216.
* Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome xvii, p. 566.	5 Infra, p. 43.
6 Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol.i, p. 40, quotes from a household account payment
in 1290, ‘Regi Grey Hune, qui est Rex Haraldorum in partibus Franciae' (see also
Register of the .Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 302), and Baron du Roure de Paulin,
Les Rois, Herauts et Paursuvvants d'armes, Paris 1906, quotes from MS. Clairambaut
902, 2 fo. 147, a payment of 16 Nov. 1346 to Gobert de Gondebegon, roi des h£rauts
de France.
7 Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 825 Close Roll, 6 Richard П, m. 25.
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	37
Rex Noreys’.1 In 1394 Froissart, who knew him personally,
calls him ‘ung herault que on appelloit Marche et roy
d’armes d’Angleterre’.2 It appears that prior to the institu-
tion of the office of Garter King of Arms in 1417 the status
of principal King of Arms in England existed but was not
attached to any one office, depending perhaps on royal
favour or on individual seniority, as the precedence of the
heralds’ and pursuivants’ places does to this day. In France
down to the middle fifteenth century the title ‘roy d’armes
des frantjois’ seems to have been borne as often as not by
another king than Montjoye.3
The heralds’ advance in status during this period is marked
by a gradual increase in the importance of the duties en-
trusted to them. Dundee, in 1333, is merely sent to ask for
a parley; no letter or statement of terms is entrusted to him.
Carlisle, in 1338, is entrusted with important letters, but
perhaps for no other reason than that he was personally
reliable and was travelling in the right direction. In the
same year, however, we find a payment by Edward III to
William herald of the Duke of Gelderland, ‘misso ad di-
versas partes Alemanniae in negotiis regis’.4 In 1339, at
Buironfosse, the same herald was sent to the King of France
with a verbal challenge to battle, which being accepted ‘se
parti li hiraux et prist congiet au roy et as seigneurs qui li
donn^rent grans dons et biaux draps, et s’en revinf en 1’ost
des Engles et recorda tout ce que vous aves oy’.5 In 1359,
before the battle of Cocherel, the Captal de Buch, meeting
with King Falcon by chance, sent him to parley for him
with Prie the herald of the Archpriest.6 In 1376 Hereford
herald is sent to Flanders ‘in secretis negotiis regis’.7 Here-
after such entries are frequent. Heralds are regularly sent
with letters to foreign sovereigns, and with instructions to,
1	Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 83; Patent Roll, 9 Richard II, m. 21, p. 2.
2 Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome xv, p. 122.
3	Armorial de France . . . -par Gilles le Bouvier, dit Berry, premier roi d'armes
de Charles VII, Roi de France . . . publie . . . par M. Vallet (de Viriville), Paris
1866, pp. 5-8. See also Appendix G, No. 14.
4	Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. iii, p. 533, citing a Wardrobe account of
12 Edward III.
5	Froissart, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome iii, p. 38.
6	Ibid., tome vi, p. 428.
7	Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. ii, p. 721, citing Issue Roll Easter 50 Edward III.
38	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
or in the retinue of, ambassadors. From 1425 onwards
Gilles le Bouvier, Berry, was often employed by Charles VII
of France as a fully accredited ambassador,1 while in England
William Bruges was employed as a diplomat and his father
Richard Bruges may well have been. In 1449 Henry VI
speaks of sending John Smert, Guienne, afterwards Gar-
ter, ‘in oure Ambassiate into divers Countries out of this
Our Reaume’,2 while Roger Machado, Richmond, Nor-
roy, and Clarenceux, was employed as an ambassador by
Henry VII. His own memorandum tells us how, for exam-
ple, on the 12th of June 1489 ‘le Roy envoia monsieur
Robert Cliffort chevalier et Richemond Roy d’armes de
Norroy en embassade vers monsieur de Rieux Marichal
de Bretainge’.3 This development culminated, as we shall
see later, with Machado’s successor as Clarenceux, Thomas
Benoit.4
An obscure but not unimportant question is that of the
original nature of the Provincial authority of the Kings of
Arms. There is much earlier evidence for its existence than
there is for its nature, and we must therefore work backwards
from evidence of relatively late date. Sicily herald, in his
treatise written between 1434 and 1458, tells us that the
Office of Arms or heraldic profession was first instituted
by Julius Caesar, and proceeds to expound details of this
institution which, of course, belong really to his own time.
Having explained the nature of pursuivants and heralds he
proceeds:
‘Item, et pour ce que la humaine fragility est encline a mal et que de
grand multitude sans ordre s’ensieult confusion, adfin que 1’institution
desditz heraulx, si noble et tant- expediente a la chose publicque et al
honneur de chevallerie, ne feust blesciee et mainsprisiee par la multi-
plication dudit office, 1’empereur ordonne que en chascun royaulme
et chascune province et marche feust ordonne ung herault honneste
et discret, couronne par le roy ou prince dudit pays ou province, lequel
soit appelle roy.’3
1	Armorial. . . par . . . Berry, supra cit., pp. 8-12.
2	Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, p. 190; Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i,
p. 348.	3 Coll. Arm. Arundel MS. 51, fo. 69.	4 Infra, pp. 85-6.
5	Parties inedites de I'cewure de Sidle heraut d'Alphonse V roi d'Aragon, marechai
d'armes du pays de Hainault, auteur du blason de couleurs, precedees d’une lettre
en forme de preface, et d’une introduction, par feu le P. Roland, de la compagnie
de Jesus, Mons 1867, Soc. des Bibliophiles Beiges, Publication No. 22, p. 58.
THE RISE OF THE HERALDS	39
We learn further on that at a tournament, the King of
Arms of the march in which it was held was entitled to a
larger share of the heralds’ perquisites than his brethren.1
From the somewhat earlier document, which I shall sum-
marize in the next chapter, we learn further that after his
coronation a King of Arms must choose one from among
his heralds to be Marshal of Arms of his March or King-
dom.2
These statements leave the nature of this jurisdiction so
vague that we can say of it three things only: that it was
conferred by the ruler of a kingdom or province upon his
King of Arms by the act of crowning him; that it was
limited geographically to such province and extended not
only over the junior heralds of its ruler, but in some measure,
at least, over the heralds of other rulers when within its
boundaries; and that it gave a right to a specially large
share of the fees and perquisites belonging by custom to the
Officers of Arms as a body.
We shall see that in the fifteenth century a kind of King
of Arms was created who was by definition non-provincial,
that is, he had no province or marches. There is every
reason to think that this was an innovation and that before
1415 no King of Arms was without his March. We have
noted a reference to Norroy in 133 83 and perhaps to Claren-
ceux in 1334.4 I know of only one earlier reference to a King
of Arms by a territorial style. This is a charter now in the
British Museum5 whereby ‘Petrus Rex hyraudorum citra
aquam de Trente ex parte boriali’, Peter, King of the Heralds
on this side Trent, from the north, acknowledges receipt
from Sir John, son of Sir Ralph de Horbury, of twenty
marks of silver in full payment of all debts owed to him from
the beginning of the world down to the 18th of March
1276. The seal is now broken and shows only the corner of
a shield charged with a crown. But about 1625, when the
charter belonged to Sir Richard St. George, Clarenceux, a
copy of it was made by Philpot, Somerset,6 with a sketch of
1	Ibid., p. 94.
2	Infra, p. 43.
3	Supra, p, 35.
3 Supra, p. 35.	4 See Appendix G, No. 9.	5 Harley Charter, 54, g. 44.
6 Coll. Arm. MS. Philpot, P.b.14, fo. 4.
40	THE RISE OF THE HERALDS
the seal showing a shield charged with three crowns and the
inscription ‘s. petri de ... . bur’. Spelman1 quotes this
charter as evidence for the existence of provincial Kings of
Arms under Edward I. Though the wording of it is singular,
its appearance leaves little if any doubt of its authenticity.
1 Glossarium, s.v. Heraldus.
V
THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS
SO far we have had to put together our account of heralds
1 out of incidental mentions, references, or hostile com-
ments. But late in the fourteenth or early in the fifteenth
century we come to an account written by a herald of the
life and duties of his own order. The only copy known to
me of this document is contained in one of the Rawlinson
manuscripts in the Bodleian Library.1 It was known to
Anstis,2 but has never before, so far as 1 can learn, been
quoted or referred to in printed works on heraldry. This
copy is of middle or early fifteenth-century date. But the
document itself must have been written within a few years
of 1400, and is thus a whole generation earlier than the
oldest treatise on heralds by a herald hitherto noticed, that
of Sicily herald,3 which cannot be earlier than 1434. It is a
letter addressed to his ‘Noble et tres honnoure et mon tres
redoubte seigneur et tres cher amy’ by a King of Arms of
the March of Anjou and Touraine, who states that his
elevation to that office took place in May 1389. Probably
he is to be identified with ‘Nicolas Villart, dit Calabre, roy
d’Anjou’, who was a party to the foundation charter of the
9th of January 1406, whereby the French heralds acquired
the chapel of Petit St. Antoine,4 and to the ordinances
thereupon made for its governance,5 which laid down, in
the absence of the King of Arms of Frenchmen, ‘que noble
et honnourable personne le roy d’Anjou gouvernera et con-
duira ledit office et joyra des previleges a ce appartenans
jusques a ce qu’il soit retourne’—a provision indicating
Anjou’s seniority. He was party also to the French heralds’
petition made to their king in 1408 for redress of certain
1 Rawlinson MS. C. 399, fols. 76-80.
2 Coll. Arm. MS., Officers of Arms, vol. iii, p. 489a.
3 Parties inedites de Г oeuvre de Sidle he'raut d' Alphonse V roi d'Aragon, marechai
d'armes du pays de Hainault, auteur du blason de couleurs, precedees d’une lettre,
en forme de preface, et d’une introduction, par feu le P. Roland, de la compagnie
de Jesus, Mons, 1867. Publication no. 22, Societe des Bibliophiles Beiges. Supra,
p. 38.	4 Ibid., pp. 99-105.
5 Ibid., pp. 105-7.
42 THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS
grievances.1 This letter consists of answers to seven ques-
tions respecting heralds which the said ‘seigneur’ had asked,
and bears every mark of authenticity. The writer’s convic-
tion that he has himself lived to see the decay of chivalry
and the herald’s profession is striking and may be contrasted
with the theoretical and even fantastical attitude often found
in the fifteenth century.
The letter begins with an apology by the writer for his
slowness in answering. His first answer tells us that the
crimes of heralds (if they should commit any, which God
forbid) are cognizable by the Constable, or him failing by
the Marshals, the Admiral, the Marshal of the Archers, and
the local justices, in that order; that if a herald should slander
a nobleman (a thing the author has never known to happen),
he must recant before those who heard him and before the
king, and then in a public place, being brought thither by
the provost marshal, have his shield of arms and his robe
taken off him, be deprived of his office for life, and imprisoned
as a perjurer. We learn that it had become sadly common for
pursuivants, whose persons were of course sacred, to spy
out military plans for their masters when they were sent on
embassies to the enemy—a thing contrary alike to faith,
honour, reason, and the law of the Office of Arms; that the
ancient high estate of the office was so fallen that now every
little captain of a fortress had his own pursuivant who wore
his arms even in the king’s court. We learn, perhaps with
surprise, that it was an essential part of a herald’s duty to
be a messenger for lovers and to keep their secrets and their
honour safe, though only when their love was in the way of
lawful marriage; from love of other kinds he must honour-
ably and graciously depart. We learn how a pursuivant is
created, that he must be able to read and write, that he takes
no oath, but his lord gives him a name according to his
fancy, and a shield of his arms in gold or silver to wear on
his breast, and that he is a probationer and, if he fails to
give satisfaction, is to lose his office without dishonour; and
that lately the writer has heard of a newfangled custom of the
lords to baptize their pursuivants with water in silver cups
which they give them, a practice against which the writer
1 Parties inedites de Г oeuvre de Sidle heraut d'Alphonse V roi d'Aragon, pp, 107-15.
THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS 43
has argued to the king himself, but without success. We
further learn how heralds are created (though the writer
protests that he ought not to have to deal with this, since
he has already given his correspondent a book on the subject
which he should still have by him), that after they have taken
an oath, of which the full text is given, their lord used to
invest them with a coat of arms, but recently a custom has
arisen for him to baptize them with a little wine of his
lordship from a cup of silver gilt. Lastly, we are told how a
King of Arms is crowned, how his oath is the same as a
herald’s save for an additional clause whereby he under-
takes to render an account and make fair division of the
largess which he receives on behalf of his brethren; that the
writer had seen no herald’s coronation so noble as that of
Chariot, who had been King of Arms first of Cyprus and
then of Artois, when he was crowned Montjoye King of
Arms of France, by King Charles V at Paris. Of this he
gives a lively description, and adds that the same Chariot
administered the oath to him, the writer, when he was made
King of Arms of the March of Anjou and Touraine on the
1 st of May 1389, the same day on which his masters King
Louis (of Sicily) and the Prince of Tarentum were knighted
at St. Denis. So we may see, he says, by the example of
Charles V, how a king who honours his King of Arms of
France honours himself. He then, in a passage of some
obscurity, seems to say that he has heard that the King of
England makes still more of the crowning of his heralds,
and that when they are crowned they join his counsellors,
by reason of the many embassies on which they have gone
in accordance with ancient custom, and are much honoured
among the lords and persons of rank. Soon after his corona-
tion, he continues, a King of Arms must choose from among
his heralds one to be created Marshal of Arms of his March
or of the Kingdom, by the king in a manner specified. His
discourse ends with an account of the changes of custom
and ceremony since the days when Julius Caesar or Alexan-
der—he is uncertain which—first created heralds; for this,
having lost his book, he has to rely on memory. These
ancient princes held their heralds in great honour and made
them sit before them at table, but those who came after
44 THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS
sent them out to war, to observe and judge meritorious
deeds. Later still arose the custom of raising a white flag
and sending heralds under its protection with letters or
messages to the enemy, wearing the coats of arms of their
princes, and sworn to betray no military secrets; a condition
which, he says, still is, or ought to be, observed upon oath
or honour, under great penalties, as it was by the good
herald Tancarville. Later, he says, according to his book,
when the Christian faith had come to them through the
apostles, the first princes chose twelve of their ancient knights
and esquires to be heralds, the same number as that of the
apostles. For as the apostles were the beginning of the faith,
so by these twelve honourable men, honour and valiance
in arms were increased and upheld. Next the princes chose
from the twelve heralds one to be King of Arms, who must,
of course, from the nature of his duties be able to read and
write. He would be crowned by his sovereign, would sit
at his high table, and if he were not a knight already would
be made one by his coronation. Of the manner of the corona-
tion the writer has learned much from Montjoye, the King
of Artois, Bourbon the herald, and other ancient heralds.
He remembered hearing that Ougreflfort the herald was,
for the dignity of his crown, given by his prince the privilege
of bearing his arms crowned for his life, and the crown was
either gold with a silver border, or silver with a gold border,
and without stones. He remembered, too, as a pursuivant
being told by a man of Poland that he had at home a book
of ordinances which told how in the Emperor’s wars against
the King of Hungary a challenge was given before the
Emperor, who crowned his King of Arms, and he thereupon
knighted one of the champions at his entry into the field,
whereby may be seen the honourable state of the office of
King of Arms at that place and time. From this estate it
has by degrees fallen, and is falling, and will continue to fall,
by reason of the low condition of those appointed to it.
Therewith the writer bids his lord a polite farewell.
From all this emerges a fairly clear picture of the status
and duties of the ‘Office of Arms’ or heraldic profession in
the last quarter of the fourteenth century. From the conduct
of tournaments it had grown to include embassies of war and
THE ANSWERS OF ANJOU KING OF ARMS 45
peace, with a kind of general professorship of the science
of chivalry. Though the little captains of fortresses might
have their pursuivants, the great Kings of Arms were favoured
servants of the Kings of France and England, and we may
now perhaps say that the writer was over-pessimistic in
prophesying their rapid decline. There is only one omission:
the heralds’ concern with what we now call heraldry is not
so much as mentioned.
VI
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND THE ROLLS OF ARMS
WE have seen how the earliest references to heralds
connect them with the tournament, on which it seems
that in the beginning all their duties centred. The tourna-
ment itself is first heard of in the eleventh century, and by
the twelfth had grown to full popularity. Its appearance
thus coincides with, or but shortly precedes, that or heraldry,
with which, I submit, it may not improbably be causally
connected. By gathering in one. place knights unknown to
one another, m circumstances which required that they be-
readily distinguished by each other and by onlookers, tourna-
ments would make some system of cognizances almost neces-
sary; while the rule of devolution and inheritance to which
the bearing of these cognizances soon conformed merely
followed the prevailing feudal pattern.
The earliest descriptions of shields, crests, and banners
in the romances are inexact, casual, and at times inconsistent,
the equivalent in words of the Bayeux Tapestry pictures. In
time they grow more detailed, however, and about the be-
ginning of the thirteenth century begin, as we have seen,
to approach technical precision.1 The blazon of a knight’s
arms comes to be an integral and almost necessary part of
the description with which he is brought on the scene, and
especially so, perhaps, when the scene in question is a
tournament. This being, as we have seen, the moment of
the heralds’ proclamation also, it is by natural sequence
that in the romance of the ‘Castelain de Couci’, the descrip-
tion of liis arms as he entered the tournament is followed
immediately by the heralds’ recognition and acclamation
of him.* The heralds, clearly, recognized the arms. That
they were from the first expected to do so is shown by an
incident in a poem of Chretien de Troyes, the first writer
whom I can cite as mentioning heralds at all. It is in his
1 Le Langage heraldigue an Xllle edcle done lee folmes d*Adenet le Rri, par
M. le Comte de Many, M6moireade la Sod6t£ Nationale des Antiqoaues de France,
dnquibne вёие, tome ii, i88t, pp- 169-212, p. 191. Sttpra, pp. 17-18.
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS 47
romance of Lancelot, *Le Chevalier de la Charette’, written,
according to Wendelin Forster, between 1164 and 1174.
Lancelot has been released from captivity on parole to attend
a joust in disguise. He is lying disarmed on a bed in a poor
lodging, having hung his shield up at the door. To him
enters a herald of arms barefoot and wearing only a shirt
because his coat and shoes are pledged at the tavern. He
sees the shield, but—contrary, it is clear, to expectation:—
is unable to identify it.1 It is unlucky that the first recorded
act of the first recorded herald should be his failure to recog-
nize a shield of arms 1 But it is made quite clear that he was
expected to be able to do so. (See also App. G., No. 15.)
The poem of the Chauvency tournament of 1285, already
so much quoted, brings out clearly the fact that heralds
were expected to recognize the combatants. Bruiant and
Maigniens, the Kings of Heralds, spend a great part of
their time answering questions about knights’ identity; and
their faces being covered by closed helms, they could know
them only by their arms. An incident which shows how the
heralds prided themselves on their skill in recognition occurs
when the author recognizes a certain knight of Hainault
and cries out his name, whereupon a herald asks him who
the devil made him so clever at ‘hiraudie’.2 The whole
poem is so full of blazons of arms that Menestrier, in his
famous treatise, begins with it his list of heraldic works;3
while—following him, no doubt—Louis-Pierre d’Hozier,
in 1736, opens his advertisement of a public register to be
called ‘Armorial General de la France’, commanded by the
king’s authority, with the preamble that, since the use of
arms was first established in France under royal authority,
as a special and public mark of the nobility, to distinguish
them from the common sort of men, there have appeared
in different ages several works of this kind, whereof among
the oldest known is the manuscript containing the blazoned
arms of knights present at the jousts held at Chevanci in
1285.*
1 Appendix В (24).
1 Appendix В (26).
J Le Veritable Art du Blflson et forigme det Armatriet, par le R. P. CI. Francois
Menestrier, de la Compagnie de Jesus, Lyon, 1672, pp. 16—19.
* Paris, Archives Nationales, O1. 976, pitce 24 bis.
48 HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS
The oldest-known manuscript of the poem is the Bodleian
MS., Douce 308. It is of fourteenth-century date, but
M. Delbouille, the most recent editor, gives reasons for
believing that the miniatures contained in it, which include
many paintings of the combatants’ arms, represent a tradi-
tion coeval with and independent of that of the text.1 They
supply correctly several coats therein referred to but not
blazoned, and correct two which are blazoned wrongly.
Delbouille’s own theory is that Bretel, the author, ‘eut un
collaborateur charg6 de noter les armoiries’, and this none
other than Bruiant, the King of Heralds, ‘qui accueille
J. Bretel au chateau et 1’aide I identifier les seigneurs ргё-
sents, grace i la grande compdtence dont il dispose en fait
“d’armes et de chevalerie” *.
It is probably safe to assume that by the end of the
thirteenth century knowledge of armory was an essential
part of a herald’s qualification. At the same time this was a
sort of knowledge that many must have shared with him.
Walter of Hemingburgh tells us that at Evesham in 1265
it was Earl Simon’s barber, ‘Simonis speculator Nicolas
barbitonsor ejus, qui homo expertus erat in cognitione armo-
rum’, who identified the banners of the approaching army
for his master, and—to his master’s destruction—was misled
by them.2
We have, therefore, to try to trace the steps by which
the herald progressed from special knowledge to professional
responsibility and control. Rolls of Arms have been already
mentioned. We must now examine them more closely and
try to determine their probable authorship.
In 1881 there appeared in The Genealogist3 a ‘Reference
List of <he Rolls of Arms’, compiled by James Greenstreet
and Charles Russell. This was a pioneer work not yet
superseded, but since the date of its appearance so much
new material has come to light that a new Catalogue of the
Rolls is now badly needed.4 Surviving original Rolls are
rare; fewer than twenty are known dating from before 1400.
1 Tourwi de Chau^ency^ pp. xxviii-xxix.
2 Chronicon domini Walteride Hemingburgh, ed. Hans Claude Hamilton, English
Historical Society, Ixmdon, 2848, vol. i, p. 323.
3 Vol. v, pp. 1-18, 94-104, 168-79.	♦ See App* G, No. 16.
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS 49
Tudor and Stuart heralds, however, were assiduous in copy-
ing the much larger number of originals surviving in their
time, and to them accordingly we owe the preservation of a
great mass of evidence for early armory. Many Rolls, in-
deed, were copied repeatedly, and our difficulty often is to
know whether what seems a new discovery is in fact so, or
merely a variant version of some Roll already known.
Greenstreet’s tale of some 130 versions of 40 genuine
Rolls older than 1500 could already be expanded to some
370 versions of some 100 Rolls, nor has the limit of explora-
tion been nearly reached. It is surprising how not merely
new versions of known Rolls, but wholly new Rolls, con-
tinue to appear, and further, how large a proportion of
new coats some of these new Rolls contribute. In these
circumstances the remarks which follow can be only tentative.
The first broad division of the Rolls is into Rolls of painted
shields, Rolls where the arms are only blazoned, and Rolls
where they are both painted and blazoned. The next, and
most important for our purpose, separates Rolls composed
for their own sake from Rolls in which the arms are merely
added to other matter by way of illustration or adornment,
as in the margins of chronicles, cartularies, liturgical books,
and even account rolls; the Matthew Paris marginal shields
and the so-called Harleian and First Calais1 Rolls are ex-
amples of what we may call Illustrative Rolls. This whole
group we may exclude from consideration as almost certainly
not the work of heralds. What is left over falls into four
main kinds, which I shall call Occasional Rolls, General
Rolls, Local Rolls, and Ordinaries. Occasional Rolls give
the arms of those present on particular occasions, generally
battles, sieges, or tournaments. The Roll of in knights
present at Falkirk on the 22nd of July 1298 is the oldest
English Roll of this class, but it is closely followed by those
of Galloway, Caerlaverock, and Stirling. In the next reign
we have Rolls of a tournament held at Dunstable in 1308
and of the battle of Boroughbridge in 1322; and under
Edward Ш Rolls of another tournament at Dunstable, of
the Scottish campaign of 1335, and of the sieges of Berwick
and Calais. Several Rolls of which, for want of a heading,
1 If this be a genuine Roll at all, which is doubtful.
В
5o HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS
the occasion is unknown to us, ought probably to be placed
in this class. It is worth noticing that most of the occasional
Rolls, owing, no doubt, to the necessity for haste, are in
blazon only, without paintings.
Now we have marked the link between heralds and tour-'
naments, and have noted the presence of a herald at the
siege of Calais. When we add to this that Edward. I is the
first King of England known to have maintained heralds,
and that his reign is the golden age both of occasional and
of general Rolls of Arms, it may not appear wholly rash to
suppose that some of these, at least, were heralds’ work.
By general Rolls I mean that largest class of all, beginning
usually with Prester John, the King of Jerusalem, and the
Emperor of Rome; continuing with as many foreign rulers
as the compiler could muster; and from them proceeding
to the Earls, lords, and knights of England, arranged in
no particular order and selected on no intelligible plan.
Sometimes, as in Glover's Roll, the foreigners are omitted;
sometimes, as in Walford’s and the Fitzwilliam, they include
not only sovereigns but lesser lords. Occasionally, as in the
Dering Roll, there is a marked predominance of some one
locality (in that instance Kent and Sussex). In some, all
the names are of one date; others include those of deceased
persons. As time goes on, we meet with Rolls which seem
to be no more than compilations from older collections of
various dates with perhaps a few contemporary coats added.
Most of these general Rolls were painted; a few of them
were both painted and blazoned. One or two are of high
artistic quality, the residue commonplace or crude.
In this class marks of authorship are hard to find. No
single purpose or origin can be inferred. We have, however,
an important piece of positive evidence in the deposition
made by Sir Robert de Laton on behalf of Sir Richard Scrope,
on the 17th of September 1386 at York, in the course of
the famous suit of Scrope versus Grosvenor in the Court
of Chivalry.
Sir Robert de Laton, aged 52 years and armed 32, de-
clared on oath that his father, who was an old man, aged 70
years, long engaged in wars abroad and, in time of peace,
in tournaments, had commanded him to write in a schedule
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS 51
all the arms that he had learnt from his ancestors, of Kings,
Princes, Dukes, Earls, Barons, Lords, Knights, and Esquires,
whereof they had knowledge and memory, and of those who
came and bore their names at the Conquest: ‘Entier queux
il me fist escrier lez armez de monsieur Richard Lescrope
et plusours autres.’1
Against this may be set a passage in the poem of ‘Pierce
the Ploughman’s Crede*a written a few years later, about
1394. The author is describing a house of Dominicans.
Wyde wyndowes y-wrought у-written full thikke,
Schynen with schapen scheldes to schewen aboute,
With merkes of marchauntes y-medled bytwene,
Mo than twenty and two twyes y-noumbred
Ther is non heraud that hath half swich a rolle.
The natural possessor of a roll of painted shields is clearly
at this date a herald. To the same year belongs what is
perhaps our earliest evidence of the reference of a heraldic
question to an English King of Arms. Froissart tells us
that in 1394
‘Je trouvay Marche le herault, si luy demanday: “Marche, dittes
moy de quoy Henry- Cristede s’arme, car je 1’ay trouve bien courtois
et gracieux, et doulcement il m’a record^ la maniere du voiage que
le roy d’Angleterre a Ait en Irlande et 1’estat de ces quatre toys
d’lrlande qu’il ot, sicomme il dist, en son gouvernement plus de quinze
jours.” Et Marche me respondy: “Il s’arme d’argent a ung kieviron
de gheules a trois besans de gheules, deux dessoubs le kieviron et ung
dessus.” Et toutes ces choses je mis en retenance et en escript car pas
ne les vouloie oublier.’3
This March must be John Othelake.4 A year later, in 1395,
we have the evidence of Vaillant and Aquitaine Kings of
Arms on a point of heraldry.5
The'Local Rolls of Arms form a small, but for my purpose
an important, group, since they are the forerunners and
may be the- ancestors of Visitations. The arms in a local
Roll are either grouped by localities or belong only to one.
1 The Scrtye and Grvrvenor Controversy, ed. Sir N. Harris Nicolas, 1829, vol. i,
p. xii, vol.», p. 300.
3 Early English Text Society, 1867, ed. Skeat, IL 17£-9. I am indebted for
this reference to Oswald Barron, F.SA., Maltravers Herald Extraordinary.
3 Ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, tome xv, p- x8i. See also App. G, No. 17.
♦ Supra, pp. 36-7.	5 Supra, p. 22.
52 HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS
The outstanding member of this class is the great Roll of
Bannerets and Knights, commonly called the Parliamentary
Roll from its having been printed by Palgrave with the
Parliamentary Writs.1 It is in blazon, numbers i,i io coats,
and was apparently compiled about 1312. The first 169
names are those of the King, the Earls, and the other
Bannerets, after whom come Knights arranged by counties
from Cornwall to Lancashire. These are followed by great
lords deceased, and the Roll ends with 66 knights probably
omitted by accident from their proper places under the
counties. It is worth noting that the sequence of counties
does not conform with the later grouping into Kings of
Arms’ Provinces.
This Roll formed the foundation of others. A version
enlarged by additions made towards the end of the reign
of Edward III has been printed;2 and it seems that some
of the sections formed the basis of later compilations for
single counties.
Only one independent English collection comparable with
the Parliamentary Roll is at present known to me. This was
contained in a book at one time in the College of Arms but
now lost, of which a facsimile, made about 1640 for Sir
William Le Neve, Clarenceux, is in the Society of Anti-
quaries’ Manuscript 664.3 For want of a better name I
call it the County Roll. It was compiled, apparently, in the
time of Richard II, and contains 696 coats belonging to ten
counties, Cheshire, Lancashire, Derbyshire, Shropshire, Staf-
fordshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Kent, and Sussex.
For the most notable example in this class, however, we
must cross the Channel. There is, I think, no need to
emphasize the close ties which linked the medieval heraldry
of England with that of the Low Countries and France, or
to justify argument from continental analogies. The great
Armorial compiled by Heynen, called Gelre,4 Herald of the
1 Vol. i, p. 410. Edited as ‘A Roll of Arms of the Reign of Edward the Second’,
by Sir N. Harris Nicolas, 1829; and by Oswald Barron in The Genealogist, New
Series, vols. xi and xii. CEMRA, pp. 42-3.
2 Nomina et Insignia Gentilitia Nobilium Equitumque sub Edoardo primo rege mill-
tantium, edited by Edward Rowe Mores," Oxford, 1749. CEMRA, pp. 46-50.
3 Vol. iv, fols. 1-22, Roll 16. CEMRA, pp. 68-9.
4 Wapenboek ou Armorial... publie ... par M. Victor Bouton, Paris and Brussels,
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS 53
Duke of Gelderland from about 1369 to 1400, now pre-
served in the Royal Library at Brussels, is in many respects
the most remarkable heraldic manuscript in existence. The
Armorial portion of this work covers the greater part of
Europe, and contains more than 1,800 painted shields (many
with crests), grouped by kingdoms and lordships. The
English section alone contains 78 shields, many with crests.
No English Roll of Arms gives crests till a century later.
M. Bouton, the enthusiastic editor, believed he could prove
from internal eviden’ce that Gelre was at Сгёсу and Poitiers
and had travelled as far afield as Scotland and Spain.
The two great French Armorials linked with the names
of the heralds Navarre and Berry must next be mentioned.
The date of the former1 was fixed by the late Professor
Prinet to one of the years between 1368 and 1375.2 The
best manuscripts are headed ‘Armorial du heraut Navarre,
maitre heraut de tres noble ... Roy de France ...’. Dr. Paul
Adam-Even identifies the author as Martin Carbonnel, King
of the Heralds of Charles the Bad, King of Navarre from
1349 to 1387, and conjectures3 that either he may subse-
quently have entered the service of the King of France, or
the later copyists may have altered his title. The principal
manuscript, now in Paris,4 is of 61 vellum leaves painted
with 1,264 shields, 1,249 being those of the Kings of France,
the Princes of the blood, and the Barons, Bannerets, Bache-
lors, and Knights of France, and 15 those of foreign sove-
reigns. The French Arms are grouped geographically under
eight heads; namely, France, Normandy, Champagne and
Burgundy, Brittany and Maine, Anjou and Touraine, Ver-
mandois and Beauvoisin, Artois and Courboyais, Flanders
1881, tome iv. And see Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliothtque Royale de
Belgique, Tome douzieme, Heraldique-Armariaux, par Fred Lyna, Bruxelles, 1936,
no. 7516 (15652-6), pp. 132-50. My information respecting the date now assigned
to this Roll I owe to Mr. D. L. Galbreath, and see Die Wappenrolle won Zurich,
ed. Merz and Hegi, 1930, p. xxxv, note (3).
1	Armorial de Trance de la fin du quatorzieme siecle, publie d'apres un manuscrit
de la BibliothZque Imperiale et annoti par M. Dcuet-d'Arcq. Extrait du Cabinet
Historique, Paris, 1859, and Paul Adam-Even, *L* Armorial du Heraut Navarre.
Partie inedite et corrections*, Nou^velle Retuue Heraldique.
2	Bulletin Archeologique, 1915, pp. 171-80. ‘Recherches sur la date du plus ancien
armorial fran^ais’, par M. Max Prinet. 3 In a letter to the writer.
4	Biblioth^que Nationale, fonds fran^ais, no. 14356.
54 HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS
and Hainault; while each section has two parts, containing
Bannerets and Bachelors respectively.
Berry’s Armorial1 is more ambitious. Like that of Gelre,
it attempts universality and includes, besides France, Ger-
many, Spain, Scotland, Italy, England, and the East. The
total number of shields exceeds 1,900 and of these some
1,500 are French. Gilles le Bouvier, called Berry, Roi
d’Armes de France, was a great man among heralds and a
considerable figure in the general history of his age and
country. He was born in 1386 at Bourges, came up to
Paris in 1402, and was named and created herald by King
Charles VII in 1420. Soon afterwards the king created him
King of Arms of the country and March of Berry. He was a
trusted and favoured servant of his sovereign, who seems
to have given him that pre-eminence among the heralds of
France which at later and earlier dates was commonly en-
joyed by Montjoye Roi d’Armes. He was author of a
Chronicle of Charles VII, a History of Richard II of Eng-
land, a Chronicle of Normandy and its Recovery, and a
Geography, in addition to his Armorial. He died probably
about 1455.
The French portion of this Armorial, compiled about
1450, is divided like Navarre’s into eight regional divisions,
six of which are here explicitly styled ‘Royaultds d’Armes’,
or Kings of Arms’ Provinces, and the remaining two—
Normandy and Anjou—‘Duchi£s d’Armes’. Geographi-
cally, however, they do not entirely correspond with those
of Navarre, being respectively France, Berry and Touraine,
Picardy, Normandy, Anjou, Champagne, Guyenne, and Brit-
tany. The distinction of Bannerets and Bachelors is no
longer made. A certain number of crests and war-cries are
given.
Now these three Armorials, of Gelre, Navarre, and Berry,
have in common three significant characters. Each is an
outstanding example of its kind, each is arranged on a
regional plan, and each is known to have been compiled by
a King of Arms. I wish to suggest that this combination is
1 Armorial de France, Angle terre, icosse, Allemagne, Italie et autres puissances»
Compost <uers 1450par Gilles le Bou<uier, dit Berry,premier Roi d'Armes de Charles FIZ,
Roi de France» Texte complet publie » » » par M. Vallet (de Viriville), Paris, 1866.
HERALDS, HERALDRY, AND ROLLS OF ARMS 55
not merely fortuitous, but that from early times it was a
recognized part of a King of Arms’ duty to have knowledge
of the arms of persons within his sphere of activity, and that
by the end of the thirteenth century it would already be
natural for him to fulfil this duty by making written and
painted records on a systematic plan.
It is remarkable how from the earliest times Rolls of Arms
have been continually copied and recopied. The respect
felt for them as records is shown by the way in which
copyists from the fourteenth century onwards often, instead
of adapting the form of the shield and charges to the fashion
of their own day, imitated minutely the antiquated style of
their original. We have early evidence of the participation
of heralds in this work of copying. There is, at Vienna, a
copy of the so-called Compiegne Roll of about 1270, com-
pleted in 1405 by Claes Heynen, then Beyeren, but formerly
Gelre King of Arms.1
1 ‘La Noblesse Неппиуёге au Toumoi de Compiegne de 1238’, by Armand de
Behault de Dornon, in Annales du Cercle Archeologique de Mons, tome xxii, 1890;
citing Vienna, Imperial Library, MS. I, no. 3297—Hist. prof. 51, fo. 30, ‘Explicit
iste liber per manus Beyeren, quondam Gelre armorum Regis de Ruyris, anno
Domini MCCCCV in professo sancti Johannis Baptiste.* This manuscript is a copy
made c. 1500 of the Coenen van Gravelot MS. which is Beyeren’s autograph. Bee-
laerts v. Blokland, in his ‘Beyeren quondam Gelre’, reached the conclusion that
Beyeren was identical with the author of the Armorial de Gelre (p. 52) and not, as
Bouton had thought, his son.
VII
THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH AND THE ENACTMENTS
OF 1417
THE text of the heralds’ oath given by Anjou King of
Arms agrees closely with a form known in France as
late as the seventeenth century,1 and fairly closely with that
still used in England a century later. The King of Arms’
oath, by his account, was identical with this save for one
additional clause touching the division of largess. Sicily
herald, writing at some date between 1434 and 1458, tells
the same story,2 but I shall hope to show that in England by
this date important new clauses had already been added to
this oath, and that these same additions had been adopted
in France by about the middle of the century or earlier.
Du Cange in his Glossary quotes at length a tract, which
he attributes to Toison d’Or King of Arms, on the creation
and coronation of Montjoye Roi d’armes des Francois.3 The
Toison d’Or intended is certainly the first holder of that
office, Jean Lefevre, seigneur de Saint-Remy, who was
created in 1430 and died in 1468. Loredan Larchey in his
introduction to Toison d’Or\ great Armorial seems to refer
to this tract as contained in Arsenal MS. 4655/ and an
identical copy of middle fifteenth-century date, definitely
attributed to Toison d’Or, is contained in Bibliotheque
Nationale MS. 2399s.5
The new clauses relevant to our inquiry are two in
number, the thirteenth and the fourteenth:
‘Item, le bon plaisir du Roy sera, que vous yres par toutes les
provinces et marches de ce Royalme, ainssy que on le vous donnera
par escript, en la compaignie de notables Roys d’armes et Heraux avec
la commission du Roy par ses Lettres Patentes & tous les Princes,
Contes, Vicontes, Barons, Baneres, Bacellers, et auttres notables
1	Marc V ulson, Sieur de la Colombidre, De Г Office des Roys d'Armes, des Herauds,
et des Poursuiuans, Paris, 1645, pp. 113-20, cites it as formerly used at the creation
of Mountjoye King of Arms.
2	Parties inedites de l'ceu<vre de Sidle heraut, supra cit., pp. 92-3.
* Glossarium adscriptores mediae et infimae Latmitatis, s.v. ‘Heraldus’.
4 Ancien armorial djuestre de la Toison d'Or et de I'Europe au 15е sidle... par Lore-
dan Larchey, Paris, 1890, p. xi. s Information from Dr. Paul Adam-Even.
ENACTMENTS OF 1417	57
homines tenans dignites et. aultres fiefs nobles quelz qu’ilz soient,
desquels par leurs docibles instrumens et previleges seullement pour
savoir la noblesse de son Royalme, et lesquelles sont les plus anchiennes,
et de ceulx faire ung extrait a lasson [la fa^on] d’un livre a par soy de
chascune marche, ou seront leurs noms et surnoms, les crois [crys] et
leurs armes, blasons et tieres [timbres] naturels.
‘Item, que depuis ce que de trois ans en trdis ans une foys vous
acquitteres de faire assambler tous les Roys d’armes de ce Royalme en
ung lieu par Connestable ad ce ordonne. Et avoec ce deves avoir par
escript la congnoissance de tous les Nobles chascun de sa marche, tant
Princes que Seigneurs et aultres pour lors vivans, et comme dit est,
leurs noms, surnoms, blasons, timbres et nobles fiefs, tant de par e.ulx,
que de par leurs femmes, adfin que le Roy soit souvent informe de la
Noblesse de son Royalme.’1
We have here an instruction for the making of heraldic
Visitations as explicit as that of Henry VIII in 1530. They
are to be made march by march every three years and are to
produce returns of noble tenures and of the names, arms,
crests, and ‘cris de guerre’ of the tenants. There is evidence,
too, that about the second quarter of the fifteenth century at
any rate, this command was obeyed. The Armorial of
Berry, so far as it relates to France, fits most of these pro-
visions. Sicily herald himself compiled a book of blazoned
arms entitled Recueil des armes des roys, pairs et seigneurs de
France et autres roys et seigneurs de plusieurs pays, faict par
Sicille, herault, mareschal d' armes de Hainault, demeurant en
la bonne ville de Mons; pris en parti dans le recueil de Verman-
dois, herault du noble roy Charles de France. Faict en Гап
MIIIF vingt-cinq.z
A mid-fifteenth-century manuscript, which has been in
the College of Arms since 1690 at least and was the subject
of a correspondence between Camden and Peiresc in 1618,
is thus entitled:
‘Cest livre devise la circuite du pays de Caux et combien il a de tour
et les abbayes prieures chanoineries qui у sont et qui les fonda et en
quel temps et quelx corps sains у sont saintis a chacune place et avec
1	Given also by Marc Vulson, supra cit.f pp. 118-19.
2	Le Blason des couleurs en armes, IPvrees et devises par Sicille herault d'Alphonse V,
Roi d'Aragon, publie et annote par Hippolyte Cocheris, Paris, i860, p. xx; citing
Bibliothique Imperiale, fonds de Colbert, no. 9385, 3, 3, a seventeenth-century
transcript, and Parties inedites de Venture de Sidle, supra cit., p. xixj citing Bibl.
Imp. fonds fran^ais 4366.
58 THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH AND THE
ce tous les noms armes crys et sournoms de tous les seigneurs et nobles
homines qui sont de present et les noms et armes de cheux qui у sont
este au temps passe dont les dits noms et armes sont faillis et avec ce la
creacion de chevalerie et comme seigneurs et gens nobles doivent
gouverner et en especial princes et gens de grant auctorite et la creacion
de lordre des heraux et poursuivants et comme ils se doivent gouverner
et ce qui apartient a leurs offices et le blason darmoirye avec plusieurs
armes dempereurs Roys Dues seigneurs et barons de France.’1
It is hard to doubt that this is a herald’s compilation. The
treatises which it includes on heralds and chivalry appear to
have much in common with those of Sicily herald.
Between France and England we may note in parenthesis
a German document of similar date and purport. By Letters
Patent of the 7th of August 1421 (perhaps the earliest of their
kind and country) Frederick, Margrave of Meissen and
Count Palatine of Saxony, created one John his herald by
the name of Missenland, reciting as among his virtues that
‘quos autem vilibus pravis et inhonestis operacionibus innudatos seu
obfuscatos certitudinaliter experitur eosdem juxta demeritorum suo-
rum exigentiam decentibus accusacionibus et improperiis non formidat
corrigere et opportunis modis intendere ut eosdem discecione et
agnicione diversorum armorum et signorum tanta semet ipsum dili-
gencia exercet ut condigne consignet et appropriet que arma qualiaque
clenodia unicuique conveniant et competant condecenter’.2
The clauses in the oath taken by the English provincial
Kings of Arms at their creation, corresponding with those
cited from Montjoye’s, are similar in purport but less ex-
plicit. I shall hope, however, to show that their origin can
with probability be taken back to an earlier date. I quote
them from a copy in a book of arms and precedents com-
piled about 1480 by William Ballard, March King of Arms.3
‘Thirdly ye schalle do your fulle deligens to have knawlege of alle
the noble gentylmen within your marche whyche schuld bere cotis in
1	Coll. Arm. MS. M19; Heralds* Commemorative Exhibition 1484-1934,
Illustrated Catalogue X936, no. 29, pp. 46-7. (See also App. G, No. 18.)
2	G. A. Seyler, Geschichte der Heraldik, supra cit., p. 826; citing J. G. Horn,
Lebens u. Helden-Geschichte Friedrichs des Streit baren, seines Stammes erster Chur-
furst xu Sachsen (Leipzig, 1733), S. 848 f.
3	Coll. Arm. MS. M 3 (Ballard’s Book, infra, p. 138), fo. 15; Heralds* Com-
memorative Exhibition 1484-1934, Illustrated Catalogue 1936, no. 67, pp. 57-8;
the Oath is also given in The Black Book of the Admiralty, ed. Sir Travers Twiss
(Rolls Series), vol i, pp. 295-7. (See also App. G, No. 19.)
ENACTMENTS OF 1417	59
the ffeild in the presence of our soverein lorde his lieftenant offycers or
commissaries and them with theyre issue truely register and suche
arms as they here with the differens due in arms to be yifyn and yf they
hold any service by Knyghttes fee wherby they schuld do the kyng
service for defence of his londe.
‘Forthly ye schalle not be straunge to teche pursevant or herauld ne
to ease them of suche dowtes as they schalle moeve to you and suche
as can not be eased by you ye schalle schew unto the Constable and yf
any pursevant axe any dowte ye schalle aske hym fyrst wheder he hathe
desyred any of the herauldis to instructe hym in the same And yf he say
nay ye schalle lymitte hym to on of them and ellis ease hym yf ye can
if ye be there present. Also ye schalle kepe fro monethe to monethe in
your marchis or within the precincte thereof your chapiters to then-
crease of connyng in thoflice of armes. And the dowtes that there can
not be eased ye schalle moeve to the Constable.’
The third obligation, to have knowledge of the gentry
within his march and to register their arms and descents, is in
fact the same that is referred to in Benoit’s Visitation Com-
mission of 1530, where it speaks of his intention ‘to visite ...
your Armes . . . and ... to take the note of your discent es
according to his othe and bonde made at his creacyon’.
Although, so far as I know, no copy of this oath survives
which can be dated earlier than the reign of Henry VI, the
substance of the clauses cited is contained in a document of
great interest, which must, if genuine, date from between
1417 and 1421. It is in French and bears the title—Ordi-
nances and statutes made by the most high and mighty prince
Thomas of Lancaster, son and brother to the most noble
Kings of England and France, Duke of Clarence, Count of
Aumerle, High Steward of England, and Constable, &c.,
for reformation and good government in the Office of Arms.1
Thomas of Lancaster, second son of Henry IV, was
created Duke of Clarence in 1412; he was Constable of the
Army in 1417, and was Lieutenant General of the Army in
France and Normandy from that time till his death in 1421.
It is to be noted that he was never Constable of England;
but nevertheless his special concern with, and interest in,
the heralds seems to be clearly proved by documents of
unquestioned authenticity. He is indeed an important figure
in heraldic history. By letters dated at Caen, the 3rd of
1 Appendix C.
6o THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH AND THE
September 1417, he determined the relative precedence of
the heralds and the sergeants at arms.1 By letters dated at
the same place ten days later (the 13 th of September 1417)
he confirmed to the heralds certain fees due to them on the
display of banners by Bannerets (a right which may be
connected with the existence of Rolls of Bannerets’ Arms).2
He was likewise owner of a copy of the Parliamentary or
Great Roll of Arms.3
It was probably in his honour, too, as Anstis conjectures,4
that the name Roy d’Armes des Clarenceux (later Claren-
ceux King of Arms, and signifying, presumably, King of
Arms of the people of Clarence, by analogy with Roy
d’Armes des Norreys, King of Arms of the north country-
men) was given to the King of Arms of the southern pro-
vince. The title first appears in the notice of ‘Guillaume
Horseley autrement dit Roy d’armes des Clarenceux’, as
present at the Chapter of the Heralds held before Rouen on
the 5th day of January 1419/20.5 Anstis suggests that
^Leicester King of Arms had previously held the southern
province.
The ‘Ordinances’ now in question are undated and con-
tain thirteen clauses. Garter King of Arms of the English
is to enjoy the privileges of Sovereign in the Office of Arms.
The other Kings of Arms and heralds are to reverence one
another like brothers. Garter generally, and the other Kings
of Arms in their own provinces, are to endeavour to have
knowledge of all noble and gentle men dwelling therein, and
especially those who ought to bear coats in the service of the
king, his lieutenant, or commissaries, and to register their
names, arms, and issue with proper difference. None of the
four Kings of Arms is to give arms to any manner of person
within the province and marches of any of the others, except
1	Coll. Arm. MSS. Arundel 63 (26), fo. 52, and Vincent’s Presidents, p. 865
Oxford, MSS. Ashmole, 764, fo. 82 and 857, ff. 19 and 498: printed in Anstis,
Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. ii, p. 322, and Guillim (ed. 1724), Appendix,
p. 54.
2	Coll. Arm. MSS. L 6, fo. 130, Vincent’s Presidents, p. 83 and Ceremonies,
iii, fo. 265 British Museum MSS. Cotton, Faustina E 1, fo. 197, and Tiberius
E VIII, fo. 177, Harley 69, fo. 8b, Lansdowne 285, ff. 47b and 210b, Add. 34861,
fo. 60b.	3 Coll. Arm. MS. M 14, fo. 1.
* Coll. Arm. MS. Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. i, pp. 101-2.
5 See p. 64 infra. (Sec also Appendix G, No. 20.)
ENACTMENTS OF 1417	61
they be registered in (the register of the first King of Arms,
or that of the King or Arms of the March in which the arms
are given, and this is to be done at the cost and trouble of
him who gives or him who receives them within six weeks
after they are given, under pain of a fine of a hundred shil-
lings sterling to be paid by him who gives them. No herald
is to give arms without the licence and seal of the first King of
Arms or the King of Arms of the Province, nor are arms to be
given to any vile or dishonest person. No search for arms is to
be made without similar licence. The first King of Arms
generally and the others in their provinces are to hold Chapters,
and they are to resolve the doubts of heralds and pursuivants
or, if necessary, refer them to the Constable. In each Chapter
doubts are to be moved and resolved for the increase of
knowledge. Officers of Arms are to frequent good company
and to apply themselves to the study of books of good man-
ners and eloquence, of chronicles and accounts of honourable
deeds of arms, and of the properties of colours, herbs, and
stones, so that they may be able justly and suitably to assign
to each person the arms that belong to him. No herald is to
conduct a funeral or put on his coat of arms without the
licence of the first King of Arms or King of Arms of the
Province. Any complaint by one Officer of Arms against
another must be made in the first instance to the company
of the Kings and Officers of Arms, or that failing to the
Constable, but in no case to any outside person. Finally, all
solemnities and the acts of noblemen in performing feats of
arms are to be registered by the first, or failing him, a pro-
vincial King of Arms, with the assent of the other Officers
of Arms, and before any such solemnity notice of its nature
is to be given in a Chapter.
It will be seen that, if this document is genuine, a well-
developed system of provincial jurisdiction and Visitation,
and a disciplined organization of the Officers of Arms under
the Constable, together with a transformation of the Kings
of Arms’ authority, from its primeval extension over
nothing more romantic than the heralds of their several
provinces into their later sovereignty over the disbodied
essences of armorial bearings, can be definitely carried back
in England to the first quarter of the fifteenth century. Its
62 THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH AND THE
authenticity is discussed by Anstis.1 We shall have here-
after to consider the first episode in the long drawn out
controversy between Garter and the provincial kings. Here
it will suffice to say that the provincial kings from Benoit
onwards objected to this document because, in their view, it
favoured Garter unduly at their expense. Benoit especially
opposed the claim of Garter to be Sovereign in the Office of
Arms, which is here admitted. Anstis refers to the con-
troversy under James I, when,
‘Sir John Borough Garter having cited these Orders of Thomas of
Lancaster Constable, the Provincial King answered, There was never
any Constable of England so called, and that there was no Copy of
these Regulations antienter than the Time of Hen. VII, and would
thence infer, that these Orders were supposititious; to which Sir John
replied, That he never alledged that this Duke was more than Great
Steward of England, and Constable of the Host; that these Orders
were recorded in a Book of the then Norroy (with whom he disputed)
which was wrote in 1477, 14 Ed. IV, at the Request of Waltier
^Bellingier Ireland, who is there said to have been an Officer of 55
years standing, and therefore (as he urges) might in Probability re-
member the Making of these Orders, that Sir Thomas Wriothesley,
who was an Officer of Arms above 120 years before the Time of his
writing this Reply, saith these Orders were made by the King’s
Command, and that the Authority of them was antiently allowed, in
so much as the Officers of Arms at their first Entrance were sworn to
observe them, which was even owned by Benoilt Clarenceux, in the
Reign of Hen. VIII, in several Parts of his Answer in his Contest
with the then Garter.’
‘It will not be denied,’ continues Anstis, ‘that this Thomas of
Lancaster Duke of Clarence was at that time Constable of the Host, that
there are several ancient Copies of this Decree, many of them fairly
wrote on Velome, and that at the Bottom of some latter ones there is
the2 Subscription of three Kings and three Heralds, dated the 23rd of
May in 15 H. VIII, promising the Observance of every Article of
them, and upon Examination this Decree will be found to contain
little more than is strongly implied in the Institution of Garter, and
allowed by the Constitutions made by the Officers of Arms themselves
in their Chapter held at Roan, and in several other antient Treatises,
and that these Orders too agree with the concurring practice of the
Officers of Arms in Forreign Kingdoms.’
1	Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. ii, pp. 323-4. (See App. G, No. 21.)
2	He cites ‘L.6.1, p. r6ib penes Ed. Dering Baronet’.
ENACTMENTS OF 1417	63
These arguments appear sound, so far as they go, and,
failing new evidence to the contrary, we may accept the
Orders of the Duke of Clarence as genuine. They fit in
with, and supplement well, evidence derived from unques-
tioned sources. Their validity, as coming from a mere
Constable of the Host, is more doubtful, but they seem in
fact to contain little or nothing contrary to subsequent
practice and enactments.
This and the other two enactments of the Duke of Clar-
ence follow closely on two acts of King Henry V, with which
they must surely be connected. It will be remembered that
the two dated documents were issued at Caen on the 3rd and
the 13 th of September 1417 respectively. At a date not
exactly known, but which must have been shortly before the
4th of July 1415, Henry V created the new office of Garter
Principal King of Arms of Englishmen, and appointed to
it William Bruges, who had held previously the offices of
Chester herald and of Guienne King of Arms.1 The new
office had a double character. As Principal King of Arms
Garter enjoyed the same preeminence among, if not authority
over, his brother Kings of Arms, as Montjoye had long
possessed in France: while as King of Arms of the Order
of the Garter he held a position then unparalleled though
soon to be so by the Duke of Burgundy’s creation of Toison
d’Or in 1431.2 Inevitably the creation of Garter detracted
somewhat from the standing and privileges of the provin-
cial kings. Something of what had been their authority
must now become his. If the details had been carefully
thought out and formally determined, all should have been
well. But Henry V had little time, and Garter had in con-
sequence to fight with the provincial kings for three cen-
turies before the disputed limits of his jurisdiction could
be fixed.
The Close Roll for the fifth year of Henry V3 contains an
enactment dated at Salisbury on 2 June 1417, which evinces
the king’s interest in armorial matters, and which must
1 Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. ii, pp. 322, 327-8.
2 Ancien Armorial equestre de la Toison d’Or, supra cit., p. 63.
3 Close Roll, 5 Henry V, m. 15, in dorso; Rymer’s Foedera, original edition, vol.
ix, pp. 457-8; Hague edition, vol. iv, pt. ii, p. 201.
64	THE KING OF ARMS’ OATH
probably both have increased the duties and enhanced the
authority of the heralds therein. It is a letter addressed to
the Sheriffs of Hampshire, Wiltshire, Sussex, and Dorset,
commanding them that; whereas in recent expeditions
abroad many persons had taken to themselves arms and
tunics of arms called ‘Cotearmures’, when neither they nor
their ancestors had used such in times past; proclamation
should be made that no man, of whatever station, rank, or
condition he might be, should take to himself arms or tunics
of arms, unless he should possess or ought to possess-the
same by ancestral right or by the grant of some person
having authority sufficient thereunto; that all, except those
who had borne arms with the king at Agincourt, should on
a certain day declare their arms and by whose grant they had
them, on a fixed day to persons named or to be named for
the purpose, under pain of exclusion from the expedition
then about to start, loss of their wages and defacement of
their said arms and tunics called ‘Cotearmures’.2
t We must now turn to two matters linked closely with
Visitation which are dealt with in the Duke of Clarence’s
Orders—the holding of Chapters and the granting of arms.
The importance of Chapters is that they first gave legal form
and practical efficacy to the heralds’ corporate life. The first
Chapter of the Kings of Arms and heralds of England was
held on Friday the 5th of January 1420, before Rouen,
during the siege of that city by Henry V, several copies of
its resolutions being preserved.1 Three Kings of Arms and
four heralds were present, and their deliberations issued
mainly in the institution of a common seal, of an oath of
admission, and of a benevolent fund for decayed members
of their order, the last to be paid for with the large sums of
money hitherto spent on banquets to celebrate the creations
of heralds and Kings of Arms.
If this was actually not only the first Chapter recorded but
the first ever held, we may suppose that it followed shortly
after the Duke’s Orders and was held in fulfilment of them.
1 french version*. Coll. Arm. MSS. 2nd L 14, fo. 211b; L 6, fo. 131; Ceremonies
iii, fo. 20; Vincent’s Presidents, fo. 69; British Museum MS. Add. 4101, fo. 37.-
English Version*. Coll. Arm. MSS. 2nd L 14, fo. 216; Vincent’s Presidents, fo. 77;
British Museum MS. Add. 4101, fo. 71.	2 (See App. G, No. 22.)
VIII
THE GRANTING OF ARMS
WE have already cited certain early alienations of arms
as evidence that, late in the thirteenth or early in the
fourteenth century, arms could already be looked upon as
property. Not much later we begin to find evidence that
they could be regarded also as marks of privilege, dignity, or
nobility, meet to be granted by imperial or royal authority.
By letters patent of the 21st of May 1338 the Emperor
Lewis made what is possibly the first recorded grant of
arms to an individual (though it must be allowed that it
partakes of the nature of a cession by an owner of part
of his own coat).1 It is made to two brothers, ‘Jacobus
Princeps et legatus noster et Fenzius miles, fratres, nati
quondam nobilis viri Alberti de Prato, Lunicianae et sacri
Lateranensis Palatii Comites’, for their faithful service; and
grants them the right to bear, in wars, tournaments, and
other fit places, on baldrics, shields, and other apparel, ‘a
crown of the arms of our Duchy of Bavaria as it is painted
in these presents’, upon the head of their arms of a yellow
lion, which they bear (as they assert) and have borne by
grant from their father, and this freely and without hin-
drance of any man, and so that none shall take from them
these said arms so granted under pain of the Emperor’s
vengeance.2
In the formulary compiled by Johann von Geylnhusen, as
registrar of the Imperial Chancery under Charles IV from
October 1366 to November 1369,3 are three forms of docu-
ment which in different ways distinctly imply a theory of
necessary connexion between nobility and the bearing of
arms. The first is for a document rendering the recipient
1 D. L. Galbreath believed that all grants of arms before c. 1390 were ‘cessions
by the owner of part of his coat*.
2 Appendix A (9);
3 G. A. Seyler, Geschichte der Heraldik, p. 339.
66	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
capable of enfeoffment and ends with a clause implying
that the bearing of arms and crests is a privilege of noblemen,
and that among noblemen there is property in particular
coats acquired by priority of use.1
The second is for a grant of nobility and arms. In recog-
nition of the grantee’s ‘nobilitatem moralem’, he is created.,
‘nobilem et militarem et tanquam de nobili genere pro-
creatum’ and is granted in confirmation of his own and his
heirs’ nobility a device of arms, of which the blazon follows.2
The third is a different form for the same purpose, and
declares in its preamble that legitimate titles of nobility
proceed from the Imperial throne as rays from the sun, and
all ensigns of nobility hang on the Emperor’s majesty, so
that none is given except it comes from him.3
Bartolo di Sassoferrato, in his Tractatus de Insigniis et
Annis, writes that he has seen many arms granted by this
Emperor Charles IV—to himself among others.4
The oldest surviving grants of arms by the Kang of England
are of somewhat different character and later date. Letters
Patent of Richard II, dated the ist of July 1389, recite that
‘Whereas a French knight, as we are informed, has challenged one
of our lieges, Johan de Kyngeston, to perform certain deeds of arms
with him, We, in order that our said liege may be received honourably
and may be able to perform the said deeds, have received him into the
estate of Gentleman, and have made him Esquire, and will that he be
known by Arms and bear them henceforth as follows, Argent a
chapeau azure with an ostrich feather gules.’5
Four years later, on the 22nd of October 1393, the same
king granted letters patent to Otes de Maundell, which
recite that King Edward III had by letters patent granted to
Peter de Maundell and his heirs ‘quod ipsi portare possent
Arma de Goules cum Tribus Leopardis de Auro, quolibet
eorum portante quandam Coronam de Azura circa Collum,
ad differentiam Armorum Infantum et Filiorum praedicti Avi
nostra’, but, the said letters patent having accidentally been
lost, the same grant is repeated to Otes the said Peter’s son.6
1 Appendix A (io).	2 Seyler, pp. 342-3.	э Appendix A (11).
4	Bysshe, In FUcholaum Uptonum Notae, London, 1654, p. 6.
5	Appendix A (12).
6	Rymer’s Foedera, tome vii, p. 756; Patent Roll 17 Richard П, p. 1, m. 15.
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	67
On the 12th of January 1393/41 Richard II granted
Thomas Mowbray, Earl Marshal, the right of using for his
crest ‘unum leopardum de auro cum uno labello albo qui
de jure fuit Cresta filii nostri primogeniti si quern pro-
creassemus’, with the difference of ‘unam Coronam de
Argento’ in place of the label.
Grants of arms by the English Crown are at all periods
very rare. A few such grants to subjects of that Crown in
France under Henry VI are entered on the Gascon Rolls;2
and the same king made grants of nobility and arms to his
Colleges of Eton and King’s, Cambridge,3 and to certain
clerks employed in the works there.4 Edward IV granted
arms for use in England to Lewis de Brugges de la Gruthuse
when he created him Earl of Winchester in 1472.5 6 As Sir
George Sitwell has observed, all these early grants ‘are in
their essence letters of ennoblement, and a distinction is
always drawn in them between the principal object, which
following the French form is usually nobilitare nobilemque
facere, and the addition of arms in signo hujus ndbilitatis'^
The German Wappenbrief or grant of arms by the
Emperor or other sovereign is common enough from the
fifteenth century on. The rarity of grants by the Crown in
England is owing to their replacement by grants by the
Kings of Arms, a form of grant almost unknown on the
Continent. The first explicit reference to such granting
seems to occur in the treatise on heraldry which bears the
name of Johannes de Bado Aureo, and which the writer tells
us he began at the instance of Anne, Queen of Richard II,
and therefore not later than 1394. The author’s name has
usually been taken for a Latin translation of ‘John of Guild-
ford’ (de Fado Aureo), but Mr. Evan J. Jones has sought to
make out a case for attributing the book to Sidn Trevor, who
became Bishop of St. Asaph in 1394 and died in 1410 (ex-
plaining the pseudonym thus: tref = town == tun = badus;
1 Rymer, tome vii, p. 763; Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1391-6, p. 350.
2 Rymer, tome x, p. 718; tome xi, pp. 101, 765.
3 Society of Antiquaries, Heraldic Exhibition Catalogue, Plate XXVI and
No. 199.
* Herald and Genealogist, vol. i, pp. 135, 137.
s Rymer’s Foedera, tome xi, p. 765; Patent Roll, 12 Edward IV, p. 1, m.n.
6 The Ancestor, vol. 1, pp. 80-1.
68	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
or = aureus).1 ‘Who can give Arms?’ he asks; and answers,
‘A King, a Prince, a King of Arms, or a Herald, as Bar-
tholus says.’2
The reference to Bartholus is interesting, though not
quite accurate, for Bartholus does not mention Kings of
Arms or heralds. The person meant is the famous jurist
Bartolo di Sassoferrato, already mentioned as having him-
self received a grant of arms from the Emperor Charles IV.3
His Tractatus de Insigniis et Armis seems to have been written
shortly before his death in 1356,4 and is the earliest-known
treatise on heraldry. In it he considers the question of the
right to bear arms. The arms of dignity borne by princes
may not, he says, be borne by any other; but any man may,
assume arms by his own authority, for arms were invented,
just as names, to distinguish one man from another.5
He next asks whether a man can be prevented from
bearing arms which another already bears. It seems, he
says, that he can so bear them, because one man may take
another’s name. Against this is the fact that what is ours
cannot be taken from us without our own act; but then this
refers only to the possession of physical objects, and two
shields of the same arms are not one thing, but two similar
things. He suggests as a solution first, that a man whose
arms are assumed by another can prevent or seek to prevent
him if he himself is thereby injured; secondly, that a third
party who is injured by such an assumption can take similar
action; and thirdly, that a judge who sees a possibility of
scandal arising therefrom can forbid it. He proceeds to
quote a case in which the same coat was borne by two men
without injury done by either to the other; that, namely, of
a German who went to Rome in time of indulgence and
found an Italian bearing his arms. He wished to make
complaint but could not, ‘tanta est enim distantia inter
utrunque locum’.6
1 Mediaeval Heraldry, Tractatus de armis of fohannes de Bado Aureo, An
enquiry into the authorship of a fourteenth century Latin treatise, by Evan J. Jones,
University College, Cardiff, South Wales, privately printed, N.D.
2 Appendix A (rj).	3 Supra, p. 66.
4 Bysshe, In Nicholaum Uptonum notae, 1654, p. 17; The Ancestor, vol. i, p. 84.
5 Appendix A (14).
6 Bysshe, lac. cit., pp. 7-8.
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	69
Later he asks what is the value of having arms granted by
a prince; and answers that first they are of more dignity, as
we say of a will made in the prince’s presence; secondly,
that the bearing of them cannot be prohibited; thirdly, that
if two men have taken the same arms and neither can prove
priority of use, ‘praefertur ille qui a principe habuit’; and
fourthly, that if in an army or elsewhere the question of
precedence arises, ‘debent praeferri illius arma quae a
principe sunt concessa’.1
It is clear from the way in which the matter is argued that
all these questions were debatable. Thirty years later we
find somewhat different views expressed by a French writer.
Нопогё Bonet, Prior of Selonnet, seems to have written his
book on the law of war, entitled L'Arbre des Batallies, be-
tween 1382 and 1387.2 The edition of Nys is based on a
manuscript written in 1456, but a comparison with the fine
copy in the British Museum3 written at the beginning of the
fifteenth century for Jean, Due de Berry, shows no material
variations in the passages which concern us. The translation
into Scots, made in 1456 by Sir Gilbert of the Haye, does,
however, contain references to heralds not found in either of
these versions.
Bonet makes the same distinction as Bartolo, considering
first arms which are adopted as the ensigns of dignities, such
as the eagle for the Imperial dignity, the fleur-de-lis for the
house of France, the leopard for England, and the like for
other kings, and moreover for lesser dignities, as Ermine for
the Duke of Brittany, the cross argent for the Count of
Savoy, and others whether Princes, Marquesses, or Vis-
counts. And these arms no man whatever ought to bear or
set up in his house or town, save he who is chief lord in that
dignity. And if any man were to transgress this law he
would be punished. For this reason it is that the brothers
and kinsmen of kings bear their arms with a difference.4
1 Ibid., pp. 8-9.
2 L'Arbre des Batailles d*Honore Bonet, publie par Ernest Nys, juge au tribunal
de premifcre instance d’Anvers, associe et secretaire adjoint de 1’institut de droit
international, 1883; Gilbert of the Haye’s Prose Manuscript, (a.d. 1456), vol. i,
The Buke of the Law of ArmjfS or Buke of Bataillis^ ed. J. H. Stevenson, Scottish
Text Society, 1901,. p. Ixv. (See also Appendix G, No. 23.)
3 Royal MS. 20 C. viii.	4 Appendix A (15).
70	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
The next chapter approaches more controversial ground,
with the question whether one not of their blood can bear
at will the arms of ‘gentilz homes, soient barons ou petis
terrienz’.
‘And so we must consider this question well, for I cannot in my
authorities find it satisfactorily treated. The first class to be con-
sidered are those barons and other gentlemen who bear arms which
were granted of old to their ancestors by gift of the Emperor or by
Kings their sovereigns. And one authority says that no other man
ought to bear such arms, except he be of that blood. And I believe
he says truly if he means within that country which is subject to him
who gave them. But if the King of France had given a lion argent to
my house for arms, what wrong would a German be doing if he bore
the same arms in Germany?’1
Bonet, it will be seen, sets the value of princely grants
decidedly higher than Bartolo.
There is, however, another sort of arms ‘les quelles
chascun a pris a son plaisir’; and a man may change these
^at will, just as he may his name. The more doubtful case
must, however, be considered of two men taking one coat:
‘My father has taken for his pleasure arms of a cow gules and three
stars in chief, and another man of our district in no way related to my
father desires to take these very arms because they please him greatly.
My father would say him nay. I ask you whether he can.’2
At first sight, on the analogy of names which can be taken
freely, it seems that my father can do nothing. Consider,
however, on the other hand the analogy of ‘choses com-
munes’, which belong to no one, such as birds, fishes, and
wild beasts. They belong to him who first takes them. So
has my father first taken arms which before belonged to no
one, and ‘nos maistres’ therefore conclude that he should
not tolerate their assumption by another:
‘For such arms as these were invented to distinguish families, and
this would make no distinction but confusion. Accordingly the prince
should take care that none of his subjects inflict any such dishonour or
injury upon another. But it seems that a man who takes arms to the
dispossession of another, does so to insult and injure the first bearer,
and to cause contention and strife, for which the sovereign should
provide a remedy.’з
1 Appendix A (16).	2 Appendix A (17).	3 Appendix A (18).
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	71
Sir Gilbert of the Haye adds:
‘Bot, and mony men bare ane armes, how suld ony man, harralde
or othir, knaw men na geve the honoure of giide dede till him that had
honourabily derservit it, or to geve lak and dishonour till cowartis, or
flearis fra bataillis. And tharfore, in all sik debatis the prince suld ger
sett remede, and, gif ony complaynt war, se be harraldis and men of
knaulage quha-had rycht quha wrang and do justice.’1
The notion that arms belong to nobility seems here en-
tirely absent, though implied at an earlier date in the
phraseology of actual grants; and this may perhaps be
characteristic of the juristic as against the chivalric point
of view. With Sicily herald, however, this notion appears in
a treatise, and is, moreover, connected with the armorial
function of the heralds. He is setting out ‘les drois et
previleges appartenans aux officiers d’armes du royaulme de
France, comprins en ce Haynau, Brabant, Flandres, Hol-
lande, Zeelande, et ce qui est par deca de le Rhein; Savoye,
le Daulphine, Langhedocq et Prouvence’.
At tournaments they had to nail up the shields of arms,
banners, pennons, and helms, of the competitors, and were
entitled to fees therefor. Before doing so, however,
‘they must swear on the oath which they owe to nobility, that all
those who joust under the banner over which they have control, are
gentlemen and noblemen on four sides, each in his own right; for
otherwise they could not be received there. And therefore it behoves
them to know and learn of what sort they are, before they enter them
in the tale of combatants.’2
Already then in France only noblemen of four quarterings
might take part in ‘tournois jur£s’, and it was the heralds’
duty to examine their credentials. A good example may be
seen in the treatise on the conduct of tournaments written
about 1450 by King Rene of Anjou, where the King of
Arms brings from his master the Duke of Brittany, the
challenger, to the Duke of Bourbon, the defendant, a parch-
ment roll painted with the shields of arms of his team of
eight knights and esquires. A contemporary miniature
shows him actually presenting the roll.3
1 Ed. Stevenson, supra cit., p. 279.	2 App. A (19). (See also App. G, No. 24.)
3 '(Ewures choisies du Roi Rene, avec une biographic et des notices par M. le
Comte de Quatrebarbes et un grand nombre de dessins et ornements, d*apr£s les
72	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
We learn from Sicily herald elsewhere, however, that
there was another sort of tournament called ‘tournois volun-
taires’, at which ‘there is no gentleman so small but at
such a tournament he can pass and be received; and they
may freely bear their crests—those who have crests—if it
seem good to them, or any other device graven upon their
helms and on their horses’.1
Another of the heralds’ privileges set out by Sicily is most
significant. All those who are ennobled owe their ‘bon
voloir’ to those of the Office of Arms who are present at their
ennoblement. In other words, a gratuity is expected. And
if it is sufficient these Officers of Arms are bound to enter in
their books and registers the names and arms of those newly
ennobled, whether they continue to use arms , assumed by
them prior to their ennoblement, or whether they have new
arms given them by the emperor or king who ennobled
them, that there may be a memorial thereof for their suc-
cessors in time to come, recording in what year and where
.it took place; and further they must enter such arms in their
due degree and order. For the more ancient nobility ought to
precede that which is of less antiquity, without respect of
persons or wealth.2
The fees thus paid would be the fees of honour upon
ennoblement still received by the English heralds at the
beginning of the twentieth century. The record made would
be an ‘occasional’ roll of arms or visitation. And, if certi-
ficates of the entries were given by the heralds, they would
be such patents of arms as we shall have soon to consider.
This derivation would account, too, for the definite and rigid
way in which the granting of arms was from the first
attached to the Kings of Arms’ provincial authority.
The arguments of Bartolo and Bonet are repeated with
some modifications and additions in the heraldic treatise in-
corporated in several manuscripts with the book on the laws
of war written about 1440 or earlier by Nicholas Upton,
Canon of Salisbury and Wells, and dedicated to Humphrey,
Duke of Gloucester. The heraldic treatise, too, is generally
tableaux et manuscrits originaux’, par M. Hawke, Paris 1849, tome ii, Traicttt de la
forme et de*vis d'ung Tourney, p. 5, Pl. III.
1 Appendix A (20).	2 Appendix A (21).
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	73
considered Upton’s. Bysshe, however, noticed the close
relation between this work and the earlier treatise already
mentioned, which bears the name of Johannes de Bado
Aureo; and Mr. Evan Jones, who, as I have said,1 identifies
De Bado Aureo as Bishop Si6n Trevor, argues that the
‘Upton’ treatise is simply a revised edition by Trevor of his
earlier work, later incorporated by Upton without acknow-
ledgements. The writer speaks of arms taken by men’s own
authority,
‘as in these days we see openly how many poor men through their
service in the French wars have become noble, some by their prudence,
some by their energy, some by their valour, and some by other virtues
which, as I said above, ennoble men. And many of these have upon
their own authority taken arms to be borne by themselves and their
heirs;’2
and he considers that arms so taken, though valid (if no one
else has. taken them first), must be of less authority and
dignity than arms granted by princes. It is noteworthy, in
view of facts to be noted later, that in his view these assump-
tions are preceded by the acquisition of nobility. He cannot
approve the opinion of some who say that heralds can give
arms, but reckons such of no greater authority than those
taken by a man for himself.3
Now it is likely that the assumptions of arms in the French
wars here mentioned were among those which provoked
Henry V’s order of 1417 to the sheriffs. It has been sug-
gested already that this order may be linked with the creation
of the office of Garter and the heraldic ordinances of Thomas,
Duke of Clarence. Some twenty years after this date we meet
with what are probably the oldest known authentic heralds’
patents of arms,4 the first of a series which, too, it is tempting
to link with these enactments. These we must now examine.
1 p. 67 supra. (See also App. G, No. 25.)	2 Appendix A (22).
3 Nicolai Uptoni de Studio Militari, ed. Bysshe, 1654, pjx 58-9, 258.
4 I have $0 far failed to trace to its source a statement made by the learned
Francis Thynne, Lancaster herald, in his ‘Discourse of the Duty and Offiqe of an
Herald of Arms’ (3rd of March 1605; Hearne's Curious Discourses, 1775, v°l- b
p. 159), that ‘Bardolfe Haraldus Armorum virtute officii concessit Roberto Bay-
narde, ut liceat sibi et heredibus suis impressionem filae et Lambeaux in Scutis
Armorum suorum omittere’. This he dates 1398-9. It would thus be the earliest
herald’s ‘patent of arms’ and further remarkable for being made by a mere herald,
not a King of Arms. (See Appendix G, No. 26.)
74	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
And it is interesting to find, in what seems to be the oldest
made by a provincial King of Arms, explicit recognition of
the practice of alienation of arms by private persons—a
practice condemned, it will be recalled, by several deponents
in the Level n. Morley proceedings of 1395.1 This is in a
grant made in 1440 by Roger Leigh, Clarenceux, to Thomas
May of Kent, of arms to be borne, according to the custom
and law of arms, by himself, his heirs, and his assigns.2
From this date on, however, we possess a fairly full series
in whose varying forms and phraseology we may discern
these officers’ own view of their powers and duties growing
by degrees more definite and comprehensive.
I have found it useful to group these early patents into
four main kinds. First, the confirmation off arms—the
petitioner, being uncertain of his ancestral arms, has re-
quested the King of Arms to search the books and rolls of
his records for them, which the said King of Arms has done
and has found them to be such and such, which accordingly
he confirms to the said petitioner by these his letters patent
under his seal. The oldest example known to me is of the
year 1445.3 The earlier patents in this class make no special
mention of the authority on which they rest. It is, however,
worth noting that of the six or seven known patents of John
Wrexworth, Guienne King of Arms, whose jurisdiction
would probably be doubtful, four fall into this class, where
they might well be least liable to offend his brother kings.
That a provincial King of Arms’ special rights within his own
marches were held to apply as strictly to the granting of arms
as to precedence at jousts, is proved by the interesting Patent,
dated the 16th of July 1482, by which Sir Thomas Holme,
Clarenceux, granted arms to the ‘Confraternitie founded in
the Chapell of the Guyld Hall within the City of London’,
afterwards the Company of Parish Clerks.4 This recites that
‘Where as Waltier Bellenger othrewise called Ireland King of
Armes of the Land of Ireland had yeven & graunted by his letteres
undre his signe & seel of his Office . . . the Armes heraftre folowing
1	Supra, pp. 22-3.
2	Coll. Arm., Register of Nobility and Gentry, vol. ii, p. 269.
3	Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. vi, p. 277.
4	Heralds' Commemorative Exhibition 1484-1934, Enlarged and Illustrated
Catalogue, 1936, no. 63 (p, 55) and Plate XXXVI. (See App. G, No. 27.)
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	75
havyng noon auctoritie by vertue of his said Office eny suche or othre
Armes to distribute or yeve to eny personne or personnes fraternitie
or place within the precincte of my Jurisdiccion, that is to say within
the said Southe parties of antiquitie lymited & prefixed, I nevertheless
seing the unlawfulle & insufficient graunt have utterly adnulled &
dampned the same and wol that it be frustrate & voide & of noon effect.
And at thinstaunce request & desire of the said Masters I the said King
of Armes by the power & auctoritie to myn Office in this partie
annexed & attributed seeing & considering their good & laudable
disposicions set & grounded upon honeur & nobles have yeven &
graunted unto them & their successours the same Armes so to them
before yeven & graunted as above.’
This same Thomas Holme seems to have been the first
provincial King of Arms to be so created by letters patent
under the great seal of England, when he became Clarenceux
by Patent dated the 1st of August 1476.1 Thereby he was
confirmed also in the enjoyment of such annual liveries as
were enjoyed by any other King of Arms or herald in the
time of King Edward III. This clause, which has been
repeated in all succeeding patents, suggests that in 1476
certain features at least of the then existing heraldic estab-
lishment were believed to date from that reign.
My second class of patents of arms is the smallest and, in
some ways, the most interesting. It contains perhaps one
patent only, but that one, issued by William Bruges, the
first Garter, to the Drapers of London, on the 10th of March
1438/9,2 is the oldest (and one of the finest) known to sur-
vive. The wording is remarkable; it recites how, the king
having granted his mystery of Drapers a charter of incor-
poration, the notables of the said mystery, wishing to do all
that might redound to its honour, had requested the said
Garter to devise them an ensign ‘en forme de blason’, which
they alone might bear, on their common seal and otherwise;
which accordingly he, the said Garter, has devised for them
and hereby certifies that no other person in the isle of Britain
is bearing the same. Not a word of granting or authority.
Garter has simply invented a device which from his special
knowledge he can certify to be unique.
1	Recited in Inspeximus of 17 Feb. 1484, Patent Roll 1 Richard III, p. 2. m.4.
2	The History of the Worshipful Company of the Drapers of London, Oxford, 1913,
vol. i, pp. 221-4.
76	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
Only two other patents which I have met with contain
this ‘certificate of uniqueness’, namely, those issued by
Wrexworth, Guienne, to Thomas Aleyn in 14581 and to
William Swayne2 in 1461. Both these, however, are grants,
that is, they contain the clause ‘I have devysed yeven and
graunted’, though there is no mention of the authority
whereby the grant is made.
Now it could be, and probably was, argued by Clarenceux
and Norroy, that Guienne, like Ireland when he granted to
the Parish Clerks, was acting ultra vires in granting arms to
Englishmen. It is possible therefore that Guienne took care
to protect himself by so drawing his patents that he could,
if necessary, argue that they were not grants but merely
confirmations or certificates depending rather on- special
knowledge than on special authority. But if the right to
grant was held to derive from the provincial authority the
same objection might be made to grants by Garter, who had
no province, and in fact so late as 1530 we find Clarenceux
asserting3 that ‘the sayde Garter hathe no provynce limityd
to hym wherefore he aught not to geve any pattent of armes’
and that Thomas, Duke of Clarence, never
‘gave any such actoryte to Garter yt he sholde geve any Armes or
graunt of noblesse under the seale of hys Armes nor under the Seale
of hys office of the Gartyer nor also hath no such Seale geven nor
grauntyd by no actoryte for the executyng of the same but yt he hath
untrewly takyn & usyd the same uppon hys owne highe presumcyon
nor also any such grauntes to shewe for hym selfe But only uppon hys
owne surmyse whereby it shall appeare yt he hath of longe tyme
wrongfully usurpyd uppon all the officers of Armes and also desevyng
many of the kyngs sugettes in gyvyng of them Armes And in takyng
of them grete rewards for the same unlawfully don the which apperyth
to hys no lyttell shame and Reproves for the which so doyng he ys
worthy to have &c.’
This, of course, was an ex -parte plea, not upheld by sub-
sequent judicial decisions. But if Clarenceux could seriously
maintain this view in 1530, it is more than possible that the
1	Birmingham Heraldic Exhibition, 1936. Catalogue no. 697. Original lent by
the Trustees of Peterborough Museum.
2	Miscellaneous Grants of Arms, ed. Willoughby A. Littledalex. 1926 (Harl. Soc.,
vol. Ixxvii), pt. ii, p. 192.
3	P.R.O. State Papers (1) 73, fo. 187, <vide infra, chap. ix.
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	77
first Garter in 1439 may have had some doubt about the
scope of his unhappily ill-defined authority. Whatever doubts
Bruges may have felt, were put behind him by John Smert,
his son-in-law and successor, when in 1456 he devised, or-
dained, and assigned arms to the Tallow Chandlers of London
‘par vertu de lauctorite et pouoir annexez et attribuez a mon
dit office de Roy darmes’.1 Even so, however, his claim
remained less explicit and positive than that of the contem-
porary Clarenceux. Smert’s formula implies that the power
of granting was inherent in the office of King of Arms as
such. William Hawkslowe, Clarenceux, however, in several
grants, of which the earliest I have noted was made in 1467
to the Cooks of London,2 relies explicitly on ‘the power and
auctoritie by the kinges goode grace to me in that behaulfe
comitted’.
These ‘simple grants’, with or without authority cited,
form my third class of patents. The fourth is for the present
inquiry the most interesting of all. Sir George Sitwell
asserts3 that the heralds ‘were never authorized by the
Crown to make a gentleman’, and this may perhaps be
literally true. Nevertheless, in the controversy of 1530 be-
tween Garter and Clarenceux,4 we encounter such phrases
as ‘to be enobled to have armes’, ‘actoryte to Garter yt he
sholde geve any Armes or graunt of noblesse’, ‘grauntes of
innoblying by gyfte and graunt of the sayd Garter’—genti-
lity and nobility being, at this date as earlier, at all events for
this purpose, interchangeable terms. And, as we have al-
ready seen,5 King Henry VIII himself, in the Visitation
Commission of 1530, refers to those persons to whom
Clarenceux may grant arms as ‘all such which shall be
enoblished’.
The actual wording of patents of this class makes the
position clearer. The oldest known to me was issued in 1450
by the well-named John Smert, Garter, to Edmond Mylle.6
It begins with a preamble declaring that valiant and virtuous
1	Catalogue of the Heraldic Exhibition at Edinburgh, 1891, Plate V.
2	Coll. Arm. MS. Philpot ©, fo. za: Guienne had granted to the Cooks in 1461
(ibid., fo. 1).	3 The Ancestor, vol. i, p. 81.
* Infra, p. 97.	s Supra, p. 9.
6 See Appendix A (23). A translation is given in Miscellaneous Grants of Arms,
ed. Willoughby A. Littledale, 1926 (Harl. Soc., vol. Ixxvii), pt. ii, p. 149.
78	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
men deserve to be rewarded not only personally but by
conferring on their descendants tokens of honour and
gentility, namely, blason, helm, and crest. Therefore Garter,
being apprised both by common report and trustworthy
information that Edmond Mylle has so comported himself
that he deserves, both himself and his posterity, to be ad-
mitted to the company of ‘ancient, gentle and noble men’,
for remembrance ‘de celle sa gentillesse’, has devised, or-
dained, and assigned for him and his heirs blason, helm, and
crest.
This form, in French or English, is adhered to closely in
all the patents of this class. The implication is that nobility
or gentility is something which a man born without it can
by the manner of his life acquire, and that a King of Arms,
acting upon proper testimony, is qualified to judge that it
has been acquired and to signify the same by granting to the
newly acknowledged gentleman a coat of arms, the proper
ensign of gentility. If asked by what authority he did so, a
provincial king at any rate would no doubt have quoted that
clause in his oath taken on creation whereby he undertook
to have knowledge of the gentlemen within his marches and
to register their arms and descents. If a gentleman came
into being under his nose, as it were, it must clearly be his
duty to recognize the fact.
One is curious to know what the tests and marks of
gentility were held to be. For the reign of Henry VIII at
any rate,' it is possible to extract a precise answer from three
complementary documents. The first is the Visitation Com-
mission of 1530 already quoted,1 which tells Us that arms
may be given ‘to any persone or persons spirituall the
whiche be preferred by grace vertue or connynge to Rowmes
and degrees of honor & worshipp’, and ‘to any person or
persons temporall the whiche by the service doon to us or
to other that be encreased augmentid to possessions &
riches hable to maynteyne the same So that they be not
issued of vyle blood rebelles to our persone nor heritiques
contrary to the faithe But men of good honest Reputacyon’.
This is somewhat indefinite. But our second piece of
evidence, taken from the often quoted controversy of Garter
1 Supra, p. 9.
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	79
and Clarenceux in the same year, is more specific. Claren-
ceux accuses Garter inter alia of giving arms ‘to bound men
to vyelde persones not able to uphold the honor of nobles’.1
Garter in the course of his denial states
‘that he hath not admyttyd any person for hys parte but suche as he wyll
at all tymes justyfy approve good able and sufficient accordyng to the
ordynences and custumes therefore provided and hadde which use and
custume was that everye persone beynge of good name and fame and
good Renoune And not vyle borne or Rebells myght be admyttyd to
be enobled to have armes havynge landes and possessyons of free tenure
to the yerlye value of X pounds sterlinge or in movable goods iii c. li.
sterlynge And also take avowance or assurance of sum noble men or
notable personage for hys dyscharge whiche sayd ordynence the sayd
Garter hath all waye Ensued And further the sayde Garter saythe yt
he knowethe no person to be more unworthye nor of lesse reputacion
to whom at any tyme he hathe geven any pattent of armes then ys the
sayd Benoit Clarencius.’2
The third document is an order of Charles Brandon, Duke
of Suffolk, Earl Marshal from 1524 to 1533, laying down
‘what fees Kinges of Armes shall take for pattentes when
they shall ennoble any persone with Armes’.3 It differs,
however, from Wriothesley’s evidence in that while it lays
down fees (£6. 13л 4<У. and respectively) to be paid by
the possessors of ‘one hundreth poundes of land or fees’ or
‘in moveable goodes one thousand markes’, it likewise
assigns lower fees (^6 and £5) for ‘all other beinge of sub-
stance under the same vallour’. There is a parallel scale for
ecclesiastical persons.
I have found no earlier evidence of the manner or stages
by which this admirably precise valuation of gentility was
arrived at. But the story of the combat between Hugh
Vaughan and Sir James Parker shows that the heralds’
policy in the matter of ‘enoblishment’ did not always meet
with general approval. This occurred at a joust held before
Henry VII at Richmond in 1492. The chroniclers refer to
the incident because Vaughan was so unfortunate—or so
1	State Papers (i) 73, fo. 182, wide infra, p. 90.
2	Ibid., fo. 204b.
3	Coll. Arm. MS. Hare I (or R 36), fols. 1795-80, being a copy made 20 Oct.
1591 ky Richard Lee, then Richmond and afterwards Clarenceux, from the original
in the hands of Robert Cooke, Clarenceux.
8o	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
careless—as to kill his adversary. The heralds’ interest was
engaged by another aspect of the matter. Hugh Vaughan
was one of the king’s Gentlemen Ushers. When he sought
to take part in the jousting, as Benoit tells us, ‘the noble men
yt strove yt day wolde not suffer the sayd Heughe Vaughan
to ron yt daye nor to be one of there company saynge he was
no gentylman nobled to bere armes’.1 Vaughan thereupon
produced as proof of his gentility a patent of arms which had
been given him by John Writhe, Garter—a patent which is
still extant. Of what happened next we have conflicting
accounts from Wriothesley and Benoit. The former tells
us that
‘uppon the syght of the whiche patent the sayd kyng alowed and ad-
mitted yt in open iustes sayng that the grante made by hys pryncypall
offycer of armes and by the auctoryte of hys offyce was hys owne acte
and graunte. And upon that lycensid them to runne at whych the
said Sir James was slayne.’2
Benoit, on the other hand, asserts that
nthe which sayd lordes & knyghts that there Ranne dysaprovyd the
sayd grauntes of in noblyng by gyfte and graunt of the sayd Garter
sayng yt was to hyghe a thyng for Garter to enoble any person excepte
the party had the kynges hygh graunt uppon the same. And so thys
controversy so holden beteune them was brought before the kynges
grace there beyng to beholde the sayd Justice & tryhumpe the officers
of Armes there gevyng there attendance. And there hys grace havyng
greate favor to the sayd Hughe Vaughan gave hym lycence to ronne.
And there grauntyd hym & gave to hym actoryte to beare the same
armes uppon the whiche graunte of the kyngs grace the sayd noble
menne were content yt the sayde Hughe Vaughan sholde runne yt day
& to be one of there company at the sayd tyme Sir James Parker was
slayne & so under thys sorte Hugh Vaughan was enobiyd and not as
Garter hath devysed hys artycle to upholde hys office & also hys
wronge usyng. And so yt playnly apperyth by the sayd artycles yt the
actoryte of Garter was utterly defetyd disalowed and voyde.’s
The original patent, dated 3rd of April 1492 (now the
property of Sir Richard Burbidge, Baronet, and on loan
at the Victoria and Albert Museum), is almost identical in
form with the Mille patent of 1450 and others of this class.
1	State Papers (i) 73, fo. 187b.
2	Ibid., fo. 179. (See App. G, No. 28.)
3 Ibid., fols. i87b-8.
THE GRANTING OF ARMS	81
It may be remarked that Benoit’s objection (if he was con-
sistent) was not to patents of this kind as such, only to
Garter’s making them, since he himself granted in this
form.1
The first unquestionable confirmation by authority of
Garter’s right to grant arms that I have found is contained
in Henry VIII’s new Garter statutes of the 23rd of April
1522,2 wherein it is laid down that Garter shall have the cor-
rection of arms, crests, cognizances, and devices unjustly and
unlawfully used and borne, and also power and authority from
the Sovereign to grant arms, crests, cognizances, and devices
to such persons as by their ‘virtuous merets and valiant
deeds are sufficient and worthy to have and bear them, ac-
cording to ancient custom, and thereof he shall issue letters
patent’.
The bearing of all this upon our main inquiry must now
be considered. It seems likely that the enactments of 1417,
by enhancing the dignity of the heraldic establishment
through the creation of the office of Garter, by laying upon
the Kings of Arms a formal duty of armorial survey, and by
forbidding in the king’s name the bearing of arms without
proved right, started the train of events which in due course
led to the Commission and the Visitations of 1530. The
corresponding enactment in France, to which reference has
already been made, may have come a little earlier or a little
later. In any event, the course of events on the two sides of
the Channel was very different. In France the heralds’ autho-
rity, which had already faded by the sixteenth century, was
in 1615 taken wholly from them and given to the new
office of Juge d’Armes; while in England it grew steadily
for two centuries, and though weakened by the Civil War and
the Revolution, has retained some vitality even to this day.
We have seen how, during the fifteenth century, that form
of Patent of Arms which can most properly be called a grant
came to be issued by the Kings of Arms with growing
formality and frequency. During the same period we have
evidence of corporate action by the heralds in the holding
1	Cf. Grant to John Juyll of Bowden, Co. Devon, 23 Feb. 1531/2. Coll. Arm.
MS. R 36, fo. 160. ’
2	Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 351.
4607	G
82	THE GRANTING OF ARMS
of at least one Chapter to settle a point of armorial practice.1
Norroy, confirming arms in 1494, states that he has ‘serched
in divers ancyent bookes and rolles pertayning to my said
office’.2 The Duke of Clarence’s Orders of 1417 enjoined
the Kings of Arms to keep registers of their patents and to
take knowledge of arms within their Marches, and each
provincial king at his creation swore to do so. Finally, the
Commission of 1530 speaks of Visitation as an accustomed
practice and connects it with this clause in the oath. We
must now, therefore, consider whether we can find positive
evidence of the actual making of Visitations at this period,
and if so, of their nature and fate.
1	On 18 Feb. 14745 Francis Sandford, Genealogical History of the Kings and
Queens of England (1707 edition), p. 234; and Coll. Arm. MSS'. L 1, fo. 15; and
Vincent’s Presidents, p. 164.
2	Confirmation to Richard Blakwall, 8 Aug. 1494, Coll. Arm. MS., Register
of Nobility and Gentry, vol. ii, pp. 668-9.
IX
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
THE great controversy of 1530 between Garter and
Clarenceux has already been cited without much ex-
planation. A more particular account must now be given of
the two parties and their quarrel. Sir Thomas Writhe or
Wriothesley, created Garter by Patent dated 26th of January
1504/5, was son of John Writhe, who was successively
Falcon, Norroy, and Garter, succeeding John Smert as third
holder of the last-named office by Patent dated the 6th of July
1478. Thomas Writhe began his heraldic career when, at
the investiture of Arthur, Prince of Wales, in 1489, he was
created Pursuivant to that prince by the name of Walling-
ford. Anstis remarks that
‘though this Officer was advanced to this Employment by the Mono-
syllable Surname that his father used, yet he disliked the shortness of
it . . . and therefore augmented it with the high Sound of three
Syllables, which added nothing to the Smoothness in Pronunciation,
and after some Variations in the Spelling, he at last settled upon
Wriothesley.’
For his first five years as Garter, Wriothesley had as his
colleague in the office of Clarenceux one Roger Machado,
who had, as Wriothesley himself tells us, come in to the
realm with Henry VII,1 whose herald he had been, by the
name of Richmond, when he was Earl of that place. He was,
according to Lant, a Frenchman.2 He was created Claren-
ceux by Patent dated 24th of January 1493/4, and held this
office till his death, which seems to have occurred in 15 io.3
Benoit asserted that on the death of John Writhe
‘yt was the pleasor of the kynges grace to geve the sayd rome & office
1	Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 367.
2	Coll. Arm. Arundel MS. XL, fo. 8, ‘The Observations and Collections of
Tho: Lant, Portcullis (1588-97) concerning the Office and Officers of Armes . . .’
And Anstis, in Coll. Arm. MS., Officers of Arms, vol. iii, p. 108, writes, ‘The
Common Tradition is that he was a native of Bretagne in France and came hither
Richmond Herald with Henry Earl of that place.’ There is, however, evidence which
seems to suggest that he was Leicester herald under Richard III, cf. Anstis, Officers of
Arms, vol. iii, pp. 108 and 112, and Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 168.
3	Coll. Arm. MS., Officers of Arms, vol. iii, p. no.
84	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
of Garter to the sayd Machado Clarencieiis, the sayd Machado con-
syderyng hys greate age & also hys wekenes refusyd the sayd office of
Garter. And so the sayd Machado Clarencyeus remembryng the
greate love that was betwene the sayd John Wrythe alias Garter, suede
to the kynges grace for Thomas Wrythe son of the said John Wryoths
[ley, struck out] that he myght have the said office of Garter. And so
by the sore suete of the said Machado was the sayd Thomas Wryoths
[ley, struck out] made Garter.’1
So much Wriothesley in effect admits, but Benoit goes
on to say that an arrangement was made whereby Machado,
though continuing Clarenceux, was to enjoy the emolu-
ments of the office of Garter for life, only paying a small
pension out of them to Wriothesley who was Garter in name.
Wriothesley answers that, on the contrary, he himself en-
joyed the emoluments and paid out of them to Machado only
twenty marks yearly, ‘which xx marks was not half the Fees
of the said Garter as the sayd Clarenceux untruly saith’.
On the 20th of January 1508/9,2 Wriothesley and
Machado made an indenture between them whereby
Machado made over to Wriothesley ‘the full power and
auctorite that the said Roger hath in all the said South
partyes of thys reaulme by reason of the said office of Kyng
of Armes concernyng enterementes confirmations and
gyftes of patentee of armys’, promising to confirm all
Wriothesley’s acts in this respect. Wriothesley promising
in return to pay him four pounds sterling yearly. Machado
was also to hand over his seal of arms to Wriothesley, so that
he might seal such patents with it, and the latter was em-
powered to appoint a person who should seem good to him
to sign them on Clarenceux’s behalf.
Benoit and Wriothesley in their contentions put different
complexions upon the arrangement. Benoit asserts that
Machado proposed it on account of ‘hys greate age & feble-
nes’, both as ‘most nessessarye & also most profitable’, and
argues that ‘so yt plainly appearyth that the sayd Thomas
Wrythe alias Garter had no actoryte within the Marches or
1	P.R.O. State Papers (i) 73, fo. 196, quoted with slight variations from another
copy by Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 367.
2	Coll. Arnjs MS., ‘Heralds’, vol. iii, fo. 1136. A copy of the original indenture,
then in the hands of Sir Henry St. George, Richmond, made and certified by
William le Neve, Norroy, n Aug. 1634.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	85
Provynce of the sayd Clarencyus but by the vertue & power
of the Indenture of Machado Clarencyus’.1
Wriothesley, on the other hand, maintains that Machado,
having already four years before handed over to him the execu-
tion of his office, ‘perceiving and considering the resort and
the proffit that Garter had for the guifts of the patents of
Armes and also for interments’, asked for this new arrange-
ment as a favour,
‘wheruppon the sayd Garter, consideryng the good mynde that the
sayd Machado did beare both unto Sir John Wriothesley alias Wrythe,
Garter, father unto the sayd Garter that now is, and also that the sayd
Machado Clarenceux gretly favoured him in his suite for the obtayning
of his sayd office of Garter, the sayd Garter was contented with the
same desire and request and thus covenanted with him and passed by
Indenture betwene them.’2
The discrepancy is not of much importance.
About two years later Machado died, and by letters
patent bearing date the 30th of January 1510/11, Thomas
Benoit, Norroy, was appointed to succeed him as Claren-
ceux. Benoit was a native of Calais, and therefore bilingual.
Partly perhaps for this reason, and partly, no doubt, because
he showed himself a discreet and able diplomat, Benoit was
much employed in foreign embassies. As we have seen, the
employment of heralds as ambassadors grew from small
beginnings under Edward III to full development under
Henry VII. It continued till the reign of Elizabeth, when
it ceased save for a final flicker in the Civil War. Occasional
missions to confer the Garter on foreign potentates have,
however, carried on a shadow of the tradition. Machado
and Benoit were perhaps the only Officers of Arms to be
employed on embassies of the first importance. With Benoit,
however, duties of this kind filled so large a part of his life
that the wonder is that he found time to concern himself
with matters of armory. In the course of his quarrel with
Garter he says,
‘Yt was the pleasor of the kyng my master to send me offten &
dyverse tymes into the partes by yonde the see whereas I was as much
1 State Papers (1) 73, fols. 196, 196b.
2 Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, pp. 367-8.
86	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
without the Realme as within, whereby I was dryven to make unto
me a debute, whereas I thought none so mete as Garter bycause he
knew best in what sort to do honor & Ryght of the office And also of
all noble men & to both our honestyes.’1
Wriothesley was indeed sent abroad occasionally,2 but it
is clear that he spent the greater part of his life at home and
was free to devote himself to his heraldic studies, duties, and
emoluments. There is no question of his competence as a
herald. Numerous painted books and rolls of arms, and
books of precedents and pedigrees compiled by him, show
a comprehensive love and knowledge of the subject. The
same can be said of Benoit, though his output was naturally
much smaller. Both, indeed, stand out as notable figures in
heraldic history. ‘Lord Stafford’, Anstis tells'us, ‘in his
allegations in Parliament for proceeding the Lord Talbot’,
quoted Wriothesley as ‘the best Herald, that ever was since,
or many Years before’.3 He did not lack worldly success.
He was able to build a great house in Red Cross Street,
r Cripplegate, adjoining Barbican House, called Garter
House, and in the top of it a chapel called ‘Sanctae Trinitatis
in Alto’.4 The progress of his family, begun by his father
and continued by himself, was carried to greater heights by
his nephew Thomas (son of his brother William Wriothes-
ley, York herald), who in due course became Lord Chan-
cellor, Knight of the Garter, and Earl of Southampton.
For many years Thomas Wriothesley’s ambition had free
scope. We have seen how, while still a young man, he was
made Garter through the interest of Machado, his father’s
friend; and how Machado as Clarenceux was content to be
a sleeping partner, leaving to Wriothesley the exercise of
both offices. Benoit, who succeeded him, was for many
years so much abroad that he too was glad, as he himself
admits,5 to agree with Garter by indenture to make over to
him the duties and a share of the profits of his office during
his absence.
1	State Papers (i) 73, fo. 193.
2	Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 372.
3	Ibid., p. 373.
4	Ibid., p. 373: Wever’s Funeral Monuments, p. 554; Stow, Survey of London,
ed. C. L. Kingsford, vol. i, pp. 302-3; and London Topographical Record, vol. x,
pp. 124-5.	5 State Papers (1) 73, fo. 193.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	87
During the same period there were no fewer than six
holders of the office of Norroy. Christopher Carlisle died
in 1510 having had a privy seal to be Clarenceux on the
4th of November in that year, which, on account of his death,
never passed the Great Seal.1 Benoit was actually appointed
to succeed him by Patent dated the 20th of November,2 but
on his death was promoted Clarenceux. John Young,
Somerset, was thereupon made Norroy, by Patent of the
24th of January 1510/11,3 and was in turn followed by
Thomas Wall, Lancaster, appointed by Patent of the 21 st of
May 1516.4 Both of these, says Wriothesley, ‘desired the
sayd Garter, that they might be in like manner joyned with
the sayd Garter in their Provinces for the profits of both the
parties’.5 John Joiner, appointed in. 1522, enjoyed his office
less than a year and was succeeded by Thomas Tonge, who
was in office at the date of the great contention.
The occasion of this controversy was none other than the
granting to Benoit of that very ‘Commission for Visitation’
of the 19th of April 1530 from which our inquiry began.6
Wriothesley complains that
‘he and all hys predecessors havyng the offyce of Gartier .. . hath con-
tinued and used by himselfe alone, and sometyme wyth the other
kynges of armes at the plesure of the said Gartyer, to geve armes, make
visitacions, ordeyne and devise interrmentes, withowte interupcion of
any person, untyll now of late by the untrue surmyse and prejudicial!
suet of the said Clarenciaux’ ;7
and for this and other reasons set out he claims that the said
letters patent
‘owght not of ryght to be put in execucion, but to be, &c. And he
for hys dysobedyons and untrue surmyses contrarye to his othe to
have, &c.’8
The copy on which I mainly rely, one of several more or
less complete, is preserved among the State Papers in the
Record Office, and seems to have been made in 1562 from
1 Coll. Arm. MS. Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. ii, p. 235.
2 Ibid., p. 243.	3 Ibid., p. 243.	4 Ibid., p. 251.
5 Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 368.
6 p. 9, supra,
7 State Papers (1) 73, fo. 180.	8 Ibid., fo. 177.
88	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
original rolls then in the hands of William Hervy, Claren-
ceux.1 Part of Garter’s ‘Replication’ is, however, there
wanting and is supplied from the Cottonian manuscript,
‘Faustina E.I’.2 First come the articles of Wriothesley’s
accusation of Benoit, then Benoit’s very lengthy reply, and
finally Wriothesley’s somewhat shorter ‘Replication’. In the
course of these long-winded accusations and counter accusa-
tions many statements are made and precedents cited of the
highest interest for an historian of English heralds. There
are, of course, contradictions, but in the main they prove on-
analysis to be divergences in interpretation, rather than
direct disagreements upon fact. An indifferent judge must,
I think, conclude that both parties in their conclusions go
somewhat beyond what is warranted by the actual evidence
which they adduce.
The main points of Garter’s case are that he is Sovereign
in the Office of Arms and all England is his Province,
throughout which he has always had the right and indeed
the duty of making Visitations, giving Patents of arms and
conducting funerals, with or without the provincial kings,
as he pleases; that these latter are merely his Marshals,
permitted to give patents and visit only with his consent and
subject to registration of their acts with him, and this they
have admitted by agreeing with him by indenture for a share
of profits; that these facts of his pre-eminence are established
by the Ordinances of Thomas of Lancaster, Duke of
Clarence, to which Benoit at his creation as Clarenceux
swore obedience and signed his name, and likewise by the
terms of several ‘Placards’ granted for Visitation, signed and
sealed by several princes including Henry VII and Henry
VIII; and that his right to ‘enoblish’ was confirmed by the
king himself on the occasion of the contest of Vaughan and
Parker. He invites Benoit to produce evidence of any
Visitation made by Clarenceux without Garter’s presence or
consent; finally he asserts that Benoit has obtained the
Patent now in dispute by his ‘untrue surmyse and preju-
dicial! suet’, requests that therefore it be either cancelled or
1 State Papers (i) 73, fo. 200: ‘Here endeth the ij Rolles which I had of
Clarencieulx Harvie 1562/
2 Brit. Mus. MS. Cotton, Faustina E.I, fols. 2485-51, 266-85.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	89
have a clause inserted reserving Garter’s rights, and that a
Patent be granted himself ‘to exercyse generally his rome ...
not inhybytyng the other foure kynges of arms’.
Benoit begins his answer with a detailed and most
damaging narrative of the circumstances which led to the
granting of the Patent. Evidently thinking attack the best
defence, he goes on to controvert each of Wriothesley’s
points and to carry the war into the enemy’s camp by making
grave charges of misbehaviour and fraud. For a subject to
call himself sovereign, he says, is treason to the king; any
pre-eminence that Garter has is merely of primacy, not
sovereignty, and derives solely from his connexion with the
Order of the Garter. The records of the Chapter at Rouen
show that the provincial kings, so far from being marshals
to Garter, had marshals of their own. The requirements of
the ordinances that each King of Arms should have know-
ledge of the arms of gentry in his Marches can apply only to
the provincial kings (who undertake this duty by their oath
on creation), and not to Garter who has no province. The
alleged registration of their patents with Garter by the
provincial kings has only this basis of fact, that in John
Writhe’s time, when the heralds possessed Coldharbour and
kept their books there, Garter was indeed in charge of the
house and library, but each king had his own particular
appointed place in it. Benoit implies that Garter has in-
serted clauses favourable to his contentions in his own copies
of the Duke of Clarence’s Orders and in other books, and
further accuses him of keeping for his private use books
belonging to the office which were formerly in his father’s
charge at Coldharbour and thereby denying him (Benoit)
access to precedents which would have been of value in
proving his case. As for the Ordinances which Garter says
he signed, he admits his signature and oath to keep the
Ordinances of the office, but he asserts that Garter has added
to them without any agreement of Chapter—and his oath
was not one of obedience to Garter. The indentures made
with Garter by himself and his predecessors, so far from
showing that they had no right of visitation but by Garter’s
licence, show on the contrary that Garter had none except
by theirs. He says that Machado made his indenture
90	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
because of age and feebleness, and the others only because
Garter had all the office books in his possession and they
could make no good visitation without them; quotes a
‘Placard’ issued to Wriothesley and Machado to show that
its wording gives the former no pre-eminence; gives, as we
have seen, an account of the affair of Vaughan and Parker
at variance with Garter’s; and argues that Garter’s request
for the insertion of a saving clause in Benoit’s Patent is a
piece of insolence to the king, and his request for a new
patent for himself an admission either that his existing rights
are not what he has claimed them to be, or that he has in the
past trespassed on those of his colleagues. He declares his
readiness to show that Visitations have been made by
Clarenceux alone, and later traces his office. and that of
Norroy to the reign of Edward III.
His most serious accusation against Garter is made in the
course of his story of the events which led to the granting of
the Patent of 1530, and is that Garter gave arms ‘to bound
fmen to vyelde persones not able to uphold the honor of
nobles’. Garter, in his ‘Replication’, rebuts this charge by
asserting that
‘he hathe delyveryd a role unto the kynges hyghnesse wherein ys
conteyned the names and armes of suche as hathe ben passid and ap-
proved by the auctoryte of hys sayd office of Garter, and not only suche
as the sayd Garter nowe beyng hathe graunted but also suche as hath
ben admittid and acceptid by the graunte of hys predecessors to hys
knoledge, to the number of iiijc and above, of the whiche Role
Clarencius hathe a coppye’;1
and he goes on to cite the qualifications for gentility ‘accord-
yng to the ordynences’ to which reference has been made
above, saying to that he has never admitted any one not
covered by them.
I believe that I have been able to identify two extant
copies of this roll of four hundred grants. One of these is a
vellum roll now belonging to the Society of Antiquaries,2
painted on the front and part of the back with 420 shields in
84 rows of 5 each. Above each shield is the owner’s sur-
1	State Papers (i) 73, fols. 204-204b.
2	Society of Antiquaries’ MS. 443. A facsimile of this, made for Sir William
Le Neve, Clarenceux, about 1645, is in Soc. Ant. MS. 664, vol. vi, fols. i-8b.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	91
name, sometimes with a Christian name and county, and in
the majority of cases with one of the following references—
‘H VI’, ‘E IIII’, *H VII’, ‘H VIII’. These I take to indicate
Henry VI, Edward IV, Henry VII, and Henry VIII, and to
refer to the reign in which the grant was made. The style of
this roll is markedly similar to that of others associated with
Thomas Wriothesley, and it seems probable that we have
here his original. Mr. Mill Stephenson and Mr. Ralph
Griffin, who read a paper on this roll before the Society of
Antiquaries,1 dated it about 1540, mainly on the ground of
an identification of the fifty-seventh coat, that of ‘Bele
episcopus’, as that of John Bell, Bishop of Worcester from
1539 to 1543. In fact, as the other version makes clear, this
is Thomas Bele, Bishop of Lydda in partibus, and Suffragan
of London from 1521 to 1 £28.2 Certain coats said to have
been granted by Christopher Barker, Garter from 1536 to
1550 (notably no. 370), would, if really so, be inconsistent
with a date in Wriothesley’s lifetime. But the explanation
is in several cases that the coats are entered in a book
wrongly supposed to consist entirely of grants by Barker,
and in one or two perhaps that Barker regranted or con-
firmed arms already granted by Wriothesley.
The other copy, preserved in the Muniment Room of the
College of Arms,3 is a paper roll with the arms roughly
tricked. The names and coats agree in the main with the
other copy, but there are some variations, and against a
number of coats is noted ‘Clar B’ or ‘G W’ (that is, ‘Claren-
ceux Benoit’ and ‘Garter Wriothesley’). The handwriting of
this roll closely resembles that of Benoit, and I suggest that
it may be his copy referred to in the proceedings.
If my identification is accepted, the roll in its two versions
becomes a source of prime importance for our knowledge of
early patents of arms.
The rest of Garter’s Replication is concerned mainly with
the question of his Sovereignty in the Office and the nature
of the obedience owed him; with claiming arrears of profit
due to him from Benoit by their indenture; with impugning
1 Archaeologia, vol. Ixix, pp. 61-110. (See also App. G, No. 29.)
2 Stubbs, Registrant Sacrum Anglicanum, Oxford, 1897, p. 202.
3 Coll. Arm. Muniment Room, Box 15, Roll 25.
92	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
Clarenceux’s right to visit in Wales; and with asserting that,
so far from keeping the books which his father had, he and
his brother William, by their father’s command, handed
over all that belonged to the office to Machado in the
Chapter House at Blackfriars in 1504; that these are now in
the hands of Benoit; and that such books as he and his
brother have were their father’s private property, save for a
roll of knights of the reign of Henry VII and a book of
liveries of the Office of Arms signed by that king which
Machado handed back to his custody, and which he is
ready to restore to the office.
This general summary of a lengthy document has been
given for the sake of the light it throws on the heralds’ own
view of their armorial rights and duties at this date. - Certain
passages, however, which illustrate the development of
Visitations must be dealt with in more detail. The first
point of interest is the clear assumption made by both parties
that Visitation, in the sense of taking cognizance of the arms
aryl descents of the gentry within one’s Marches, is a right
or duty inherent in the character of a King of Arms—or at
least of a provincial King of Arms. There is no suggestion
that it is or needs to be enjoined by a special instrument—
Placard or Patent. Visitations are made, as later writers
express it, ‘virtute officii’. Placards and Patents make their
conduct easier and more thorough by enlisting the services
of the king’s officers in the Counties. The reformation and
correction of arms unlawfully borne might perhaps not be
possible without their help, but there is no suggestion that
this was originally an essential part of Visitation. It may
here be noted that simultaneously with Benoit’s Visitation
of the South in 1530, following the issue of his Patent,
Thomas Tonge, Norroy, his colleague, visited the North,
with, so far as is known, no such aid.1
We have, on the other hand, the explicit references to
Placards signed and sealed by Henry VII, Henry VIII, and
(more doubtfully) other princes. They were no doubt
warrants sealed ‘en placard’ with the Privy Seal or the Signet.
No record of them seems to exist among the scanty records
of the Privy Seal at this period, but this is only to be
1 Surtees Society, vol. cxxii, Visitations of the North, ed. F. W. Dendy, p. xvii.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	93
expected. Benoit quotes the opening words of one for
Wriothesley and Machado—‘Forasmoche as our trustye &
well beloved Thomas Garter & Rychemonde Clarencieulx
Kings of Armes, by our speciall lycence entendinge, &c.’—
which suggest that their content may not have differed much
from that of Benoit’s Patent.
Later references to these ‘Placards’ or ‘Signets’ tell us the
date of one of them and give a clue to their ultimate fate.
On the 5th of February 1595, William Dethick, Garter,
drew up a statement of his complaint against Clarenceux,1
in the course of which he tells us that ‘the Second principall
matter now in question is concerning the general visitation
in euery province, which Garter challengeth as due unto his
office of principal! king of armes’. This claim he supports
first by the Ordinance of the Duke of Clarence, and secondly
‘by use and practice’. Under the second head he writes:
‘A licence was made to Garter principall king of Armes & Rich-
mond alias Clarencieulx, by King H.7 to visitt the Armes and cog-
nisances of Gentry & to reform the same yf it were necessarie according
to their oath and bond made at their creacions. An°. 14.H.7. . . .
Hearupon Sir Thomas Wriothesley knight alias Garter principall king
of Armes made a generall visitacion over bothe the Provinces, as by a
great and large booke of the same visitacions made by him may appear.’
Against this in the margin is written ‘Sir Jno. Writh alias
Garter did visitt before Sir Thomas’.
A slightly earlier document dated 17th of May 1586 and
entitled ‘The answer of Clarenceulx and Somerset to the
reasons lately exhibited to the right honorable Sir Francys
Walsingham knight her Majesties principall Secretary by
Yorke Herald in defence of the iniurious letters patentee by
him lately procured for the rome of Garter’,2 contains this
passage:
‘ Whereas he saith these signets first signed by kinge H. the 7. and
Kinge H. the 8. to Garter and Clarencieulx, the antiquitie wherof
with the danger to lose the same beinge extant or exemplified in no
other place or office. Garter doth committe to your Honour’s con-
sideration and favour.’
1	Coll. Arm. MS. Arundel XL (Lant’s Observations, supra cit.), fols. 17-26.
2	British Museum MS. Cotton, Faustina E.I, fo. 206; and see also Edmondson,
Complete Body of Heraldry, vol. i, p. 147.
94	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
If the ‘Placards’ were handed over to Walsingham it seems
unlikely that he ever returned them.
The two accounts of the fate of the Office books are worth'
quoting at length.
‘Where as’, says Benoit, ‘Garter desyryth that Clarencyous King
of armes may have in comaundemente to shew any actoryte that he
had before the tyme of kyng Henry the Vth. Ryghtwell knowyth the
sayd Garter that ther was a house appoynted to the offyce of Armes
for to have therein there studdes & lernynges wherein lay all there
bookes of the offyce of Armes & all such constitucions actorytes &
privileges graunted & geven to the sayde offyce of Armes by ryght
noble princes in tymes past and also augmented by the ryght noble
Ducke of Clarence Constable & Hyghe Stewarde of England the
which house was Colherberd the which house with all the bookes &
ordenances & actorytes as above ys wrytten was in the kepyng of thys
sayd Garteres father & also hole in hys governaunce. And so when the
sayd house was taken from the offyce of Armes the fadyr of the sayd
Garter that now ys had delyveryd to hym all the bookes & ordynences
& privyleges belongyng to the sayd offyce of Armes the which bookes
ordynences the sayd Garter had home to hys oune house. And after
the dethe of the sayd Garter Syr Thomas Wrythe hys sonne that nowe
ys Garter hath the sayd bookes & ordenances in hys kepyng the which
none of the offyce of armes cause but suche bookes as he hath trans-
latyd forth of the sayd bookes to hys oune singuler use weale & profette
and from the generail profette of all hys company wherffore the sayd
Garter havynge all thes bookes & aunssyaunt actorytes and Records in
hys oune hand may be bold to byd any other officer of armes to bryng
forth any actorytes to lay agaynst hym.’1
Another passage in his statement adds a little detail.
‘In the sayd house’, he says, ‘every kyng of armes had hys place
severall for hys oune lybrary & every kyng of armes ar bounde to
regestre or cause to be regestred all such dedes of nobles as they geve -
within there provynces to be in the Regestre of there owne provynce
& not in the regestre of Garter. But bycause there lybraryes were all
in one house and the sayd Garter’s father had all the governaunce of
the sayd house the sayd Garter sayth that the sayd kynges of armes
sholde Regestrer there cause with hym.’2
Garter’s answer is
‘that all manner of bookes & presidences which were belongyng
generallye to the offyce of armes beyng at anye tyme in the custody of
1 State Papers (i) 73, fols. i88-8b.	2 Ibid., fo. 190.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	95
John Wryothesleye Garter father to Garter that nowe ys, were
delyvered by the handes of me Garter and by my brother Willyam
Wryothesley afte[r] Yorke Heraulte, by the commaundemente of
there father unto Machado Clarencius and to other of the offyce of
armes then beyng present in the chapitre house at the Blake Frears in
London in the yere of our Lorde God MCCCCC and iiij, And the
sayd Garter sayth that he hath non other bookes nor presidences but
such bookes as hys sayd father dyd geve hym of hys owne proper. In
gevyng also to hys brother Wyllyam all suche bookes as were of
petygrees and armes to hym belongyng, as the sayd Garter ys redye to
approve as by the testament of hys father sealed by the seale of the
Archebyshop of Cauntorburye then beyng. Savyng the sayd Garter
sayth that he had restoryd by the said Machadoo Clarencius the custody
of the Roole of Knyghtes of the Raygne of the most noble prynce of
famous memory Kyng Henry the Vllth and also a byll of lyveryes of
the office of armes sygned with the hande of the sayd most noble kyng
redy to be shewed and are redy to be restoryd to the office agayne. And
as for all other suche bookes as were delyvered unto the sayd Machado
to kepe to the use of the whoole offyce: dothe nowe remayne in the
hands & custodye of the sayd Benolte Clarencius. Wherefore the
generall lybrary ys nowe in the kepyng of the sayd Clarencius where-
unto all the office of Arme sholde resorte unto.’1
Probably the real matter of dispute was which had been
the private books of John Writhe and which the office books.
Both accounts throw light on the significance for the heralds
of their incorporation of the 2nd of March 1484? The
granting of such charters to crafts and misteries was a
fashion of the time, and it is possible, though not very
probable, that the heralds hoped by this means to secure
some strengthening of their monopoly. But the main, if not
the sole, purpose of this charter was to qualify them for the
grant simultaneously made them, of the house of Cold-
harbour (on the site of No. 89 Upper Thames Street)3 where
they might meet and confer for the advancement and culti-
vation of their faculty. A principal element in this advance-
ment would of course be their access thus acquired to a
common library.
1	Ibid., fols. 202—202b.
2	The original Letters Patent of Richard III bearing this date are now Brit.
Mus. MS. Cotton, Faustina E.I, fo. 23. For the text see Rymer’s Foedera, old
ed., vol. xii, p. 215.
3	London Topographical Record, vol. x, 1916, pp. 94-100.
96	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
The heralds of France, it may be noted, had achieved a
similar result nearly eighty years earlier by the agreement
dated the 9th of January 1406/7 whereby they acquired for
their library, meetings, and other purposes, the use of the
Chapel of Petit Saint Antoine.1 Since the acts of Richard III
were cancelled by his successor, the heralds’ charter expired
after little more than a year’s operation. Its only legacy, if
Benoit can be trusted, was the transference to Garter of his
colleagues’ books. The popular notion, that the jurisdiction
and records of the College date from this transitory grant,
is entirely baseless.
We may now return to our main subject and examine
Benoit’s story of the events immediately preceding the grant
of his Visitation Commission by Henry VIII. The fact that
Wriothesley’s ‘Replication’ does not directly challenge or
emend it, raises a certain presumption in its favour. Benoit
makes this the first point in his ‘Aunswere ... to the artycles
untruly surmysed by Sir Thomas Writh alias Garter kyng
rof Armes’.
‘Fyrst’, he says, ‘where the sayd Garter kyng of armes saithe that
the sayd Clarcncyus kyng of armes hath obtayned of the kynges grace
letters pattentes by hys untrue surmyse and particler sute, ought not of
ryght to be put in execucyon but to be, etc. And he for hys dyso-
bedyens & untrue surmyse contrary to hys othe to have, etc. To that
artycle the sayd Clarencyeus kyng of armes sayth the suete that was
made to the kynges grace was by a true juste and a plaine waye for to
have againe to hys said offyce of armes of Clarencyus all suche aucto-
rytes privyleges & libertyes as hath ben the aunssyaunt order & custom
in the sayd offyce of armes in tymes past, for yt ys not unknowen that
the kyngs grace had a perffet knowledge of the grete mysgovernance
& also mysorderyng that Garter kyng of armes used & dyd in the sayd
offyce of armes the whych was agaynst the honor of noble men and of
all gentylmen of name & of armes, that ys to say in gevyng of armes to
bound men to vyelde persones not able to uphold the honor of nobles,
wereupon hys grace toke a greate dyspleasure with the sayd Gartier
kyng of armes for hys so wrong usyng in the sayd offyce of armes,
wherfore hys grace dyd commaunde that Gartyer Clarencyeus and
Norrey kynges of armes sholde come before hys grace and there to
1 Coll. Ann., MS. Anstis, Officers of Anns, vol. iii, p. 529; Les Rois, He'rauts et
PoursuLvants d'Armes, by Baron du Roure de Paulin, Paris, 1906, p. 54; cf.
Armorial de Berry, supra cit., pp. 51, 54.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	97
make answere to such thynges as shal be layd to there charges. And
so there yt was approvede before die kynges grace that the offences
above wrytten was done geven and grauntyd by the sayd Garter kyng
cf armes, for the whiche offence the kyngs grace was sore dyspleasyd
with the said Garter. And at the said tyme for the sayd offences usyd
in the offyce of armes as above is wrytten hys grace dyschargyd the
said Gartier with the other kynges of armes of all such auctofytes &
privileges that is to saye in gevyng of armes or conysaunces of armes to
enoble any person. And so toke the said actorytes & privyleges in hys
owne hande, saynge such actorytes belongyth to hys prerogatyve. Also
hys grace sayd that the sayd Gartier nor no other kyng of armes had no
such auctorytye nor privyleges to them geven nor grauntyd by no
prince to enoble to person nor personnes, nor non such grauntes nor
awctorytyes coulde be aprovid grauntyd nor geven to them by there
letters pattentes, wherefore hys grace there chargyng & commaundyng
the sayd Gartier with the other kynges of armes that from thence-
fourthe they sholde never medyll with no suche awctorytes in gevyng
of armes to enoble any persone in the payne of hys hyghe dyspleasor,
for there was no suche worde for there awctoryte expressid or in the
sayd letteres pattentes, and so hys grace there toke away the said
actoryties & prevyleges from the sayd offycers of armes & retayned yt
in hys owne hande, & soo the sayd Gartyer with the other kynges of
armes were cleane demysed & dyscharged of the sayd privyleges and
actorytes in the sayd offyce of armes, whereuppon the said Clarencieux
kyng of armes seyng the offyce of armes fallyng in such rewyne &
decay in thys realme lesyng theyr awnssyaunte actorytes & lybertyes
to the sayd offyce of armes belongyng in olde and aunssyaunte tymes
past, also seyng the great dangers daylye growyng to the said offyce the
sayd Clarencyeus kyng of armes havyng more respect to the aunssyente
offyce and to the generail will of hys company more then he had to hys
owne syngler proffette for to get agayne theyr aunssyent actorites &
lyberties to the said offyce belongynge, the which movid hym to sue to
the kynges grace that he might have renewed agayne to the said offyce
of armes of Clarencieux all such actorytes privyleges & lybertes as hath
ben the aunsheaunt order & custom in the offyce of armes in tymes
past. And for the more strength & actoryte of the sayd offyce of armes
the sayd Clarencyeus kyng of armes suyd to the kynges grace that the
sayd actoryties previleges and lybertes might be graunted & also gevyn
by the high actoryte of hys gracyous letteres pattentes under the great
seale. And so by the greate sute of the sayd Clarencieus kynge of
armes obtayned & gotte forth the kynges letteres Pattentes under the
greate seale in thys sorte & manner foloyng, that ys to say when the
bylle was signed by the kyngs grace the sayd byll past to the signet &
4607	н
98	THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530
so to the privy seale & then to the greate seale. And in thys sort &
manner the sayd Clarencyeus kyng of armes had forth the kynges
noble letteres pattentes accordyng to the order & custome of the great
seale, whereby yt playnly appeareth that the sayd Clarencious made
no untrue surmysyd sute to the kynges grace nor by no craftye wayes
obtaynyd of the kynges grace hys moste noble letteres pattentes as the
sayd Gartier hath untruly surmysyd agaynst him, the whych appearyth
heare to hys greate dishonestye and shame so to report as playnly
apperyth in thys sayd artycle.’1
How much truth there is in this account of the matter we
have no means of knowing. Garter, as has been said, does
not refer to the interview with the king and contents himself
with denying in detail the allegation that he had granted
arms to ‘bound men’ and ‘vyelde persones’.2 Benoit cannot
simply have invented the tale of an interview at which, on
his own showing, both the other Kings of Arms as well as
Henry VIII himself were present. The occasion must have
been a trying one for the heralds. One apparent contra-
diction will be noted. The king, says Benoit, discharged
Garter and the other kings of their privilege of giving arms
or cognizances ‘to enoble any person’, but in the same breath
asserted that they had never had any such privilege or
authority granted them by any prince, nor could such a
privilege be approved by their letters patent. This well
illustrates the uncertainty still surrounding the nature of a
King of Arms’ grant. Six years later the position was some-
what clarified by the inclusion in Thomas Hawley’s patent
of creation as Clarenceux of a new clause—‘Concedentes
eidem Clarencieulx authoritatem potestatem et licentiam
literas patentes armorum clans viris donandi’.3 William
Fellowe’s patent as Norroy two months later4 was still more
specific, giving him ‘authoritatem potestatem et licentiam
tarn aptandi dandi et concedendi insignia arma et cristas
caeteraque nobilitatis monumenta quam visitandi et corri-
gendi insignia vitiosa et alia delicta arma vel nobilitatem
concernentia’. The right to visit ‘virtute officii’ is here, it
may be noted, explicitly conferred. Not, however, till more
1	State Papers (i) 73, fols. 182-3.
2	Supra, p. 90.
3	19 May 1536. Coll. Arm. MS., Officers of Arms, vol. ii, p. 383.
4	28 July 1536. Ibid., p. 261.
THE CONTROVERSY OF 1530	99
than a century later, for some reason, was a like clause first
inserted in Garter’s patent.1
Whether Benoit or Wriothesley was in the right, one fact
is evident. The former was able to persuade the king that
he was so. Whatever the previous practice had been, the
letters patent of the 19th of April 1530 gave the right of
visiting once and for all to the provincial kings and took it
from Garter. Though successive holders of the latter office
struggled intermittently against this decision, down to the
time when Visitations ended and even after, they were never
able to reverse it. We should, I think, be grateful to Benoit,
for if his story is true, it seems probable that but for his
influence with the king the heralds’ armorial authority
would have been cancelled or diminished, as in France, and
Visitations as we know them would never have come into
being at all. The letters patent which his ‘prejudicial! suet’
obtained were unquestionably the source from which the
great collection made in the two succeeding centuries
flowed.
1 That of Sir Henry St. George, April 1644. Ibid., pp. 269, 272.
X
THE VISITATIONS OF 1530
WE have now returned to the point from which we
started, having, I hope, established on the way that
the Visitation of 1530, so far from being a wholly new
departure, was merely the latest stage in a long development.
We must now look back again and consider whether it is
possible to recover any particulars of the ‘Visitations’ which
preceded it, and in. particular whether any surviving manu-
scripts can with probability be identified as their products.
The first step is to consider the nature of Benoit’s own
Visitation. Its surviving records are contained in five
volumes at the College of Arms.1 Three are rough copies
written during the actual progress of the Visitation, two
(with some leaves of the arms of London Companies bound
into one of the rough copies) are fair or office copies made
on his return. The former are somewhat roughly written
and have the shields tricked. In the latter the shields are
handsomely painted and the text is in a fair set hand. The
writing throughout both rough and fair copies (apart from
a few insertions) appears to be by one hand, and that, since
it agrees with his distinctive signature, Benoit’s own. The
letters in the tricked shields of the rough copies seem to be
in the same hand, and thus there is little doubt that the draw-
ings too are his. But the style of these in turn resembles
so closely that of the paintings in the fair copies, that it is
probably safe to credit Benoit himself with the whole.
Where rough and fair copies can be compared, the latter
seem usually to follow the former fairly closely, though with
a certain number of omissions. Of the three rough copies,
the earliest is perhaps the large quarto volume labelled
‘1st H.7’, entitled ‘Visitations of T. Benoit alias Clarenceiux
of Sutherey & the He of Wyght’, and containing also some
arms and descents from the mainland of Hampshire and at
the end the painted arms of London Companies referred to
above. Next probably in date is a quarto volume labelled
‘H.18’, containing arms and descents from Somerset,
1 See Appendix G, No. 30.
THE VISITATIONS OF 1530	101
Dorset, Devon, and Cornwall. An entry on fo. 72 is dated
‘at the visitacion A° Mlio Vco xxxj°’. The third is a quarto
volume labelled ‘H.20’, containing arms and descents from
Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Staf-
fordshire, and Worcestershire. At the beginning is written
‘The booke of Visitation of Thomas Benoit alias Claren-
cieu(x) of the xxiijli yere of king H. the VIIIth, (1531); and
on the opposite page, ‘The fryday xixth day of Juli I partyd
from my howsse at Cheswyke tawards my progresse in
Visitacion’.
Of two painted office copies, ‘D 13’ is a small folio of 183
leaves, covering Kent, Sussex, Surrey, Hampshire, Somerset,
and (sparsely) Dorset; while ‘G 2’, a folio of some 140 leaves,
covers Devon and Cornwall.
Benoit appears to have prepared these Visitation books
in advance by drawing in the upper half of each page either
two (in the office copies and part of H 18) or three blank
shields. In the office copies the first on each page is gener-
ally surmounted by helmet and mantling. That these shields
were drawn in beforehand is shown by the fact that many of
them (especially the second and third shields on each page,
meant for impalements and quarterings) have never been
filled in. Where the entries are complete, a short narrative
genealogy of the family to which the arms belong is written
below the shields. The descent is seldom or never carried
back farther than the great-grandfather of a living repre-
sentative, and often not so far. Particulars of wives and
children are given where known, but no dates. In some
cases only the living bearer of the arms is given, with no
account of his ancestry. The coats of several religious houses
and their heads for the time being are entered. In ‘ist H.7’
there are several entries of sums of money, presumably the
fees paid. The amounts range from ioj. to £6. 6s. 8 <7., this
last being paid by ‘Syr Harry Courteney Lorde Marquese
of Excestre’.1 The main basis of computation appears to be
rank. In the office copy the arms of this nobleman have been
struck through2 in consequence of his beheading in 1539.
The contemporary Visitation of the North made by
Thomas Tonge, Norroy, ‘virtute officii’, begun on the 7th
1 Coll. Arm. MS. ist H 7, fo. 8b.	2 Ibid., D 13, fo. 77.
Ю2	THE VISITATIONS OF 1530
of August 1530, and entered in a folio book in the College
of Arms labelled *D 4’,1 differs mainly in minor particulars;
but its inclusion at the beginning of a considerable collection
of shields with names but no descents is worth remarking.
Three lesser Visitations were made about the same date
for Clarenceux by heralds acting as his deputies. By a deed
dated the 16th of June 1530/ the first of a long series of
documents called Deputations, whereby the Kings of Arms
appointed heralds and pursuivants to visit on their behalf,
Benoit constituted
‘Thomas Halley [Hawley] alias Carolyle [Carlisle] haraulde at
armes of whose fidelite truthe wysedom and discrecyone he dothe
moche truste, his substitute and deputie in the premisses [sc. his com-
mission from the king which is recited in full] and hathe gevyn to
hym power and auctoritie to doo exercise take and receive reforme
deface and gyve all and singuler thinges expressed in the saide letteres
patentes as well within the citie of London as elles where within his
provynce and in his absence oonly during his pleasur and as moche as
rhe may doo or exercise in any maner of wise by vertue of the same
letteres patentes.’
No book of Visitation made by Hawley for Benoit is pre-
served in the College of Arms, but I shall later produce
evidence to show that he did in fact make a Visitation of
London of which a record survives.3
A Visitation was made in Wales by William Fellow,
Lancaster herald, by Benoit’s authority, and the quarto
volume labelled ‘H.8’, still preserved in the College of Arms,
is the record of it. It is entitled ‘A Vysytacon in Walys made
by Willm Fellowe alias Lancaster heraulde in the name and
by the aucthorytie of Thomas Benoit alias Clarencieulx’, and
contains, as well as paintings and tricks of arms followed by
genealogies, many notes of shields on tombs and elsewhere
in churches. Wriothesley, in his Replication, objects
‘that Clarencius hathe presumed withoute auctorite to make vysita-
cions in Wales. For though the provynce of Wales ys Englysshe yet
yt ys not England. And Clarencius pattent ys only of the south parties
1	Edited in Surtees Society, vol. xli, from Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 1499 (sup-
posed by the editor to be the Office Copy) by W. H. D. Longstaffe, 1863; see also
the introduction to Surtees Society, vol. cxxii, by F. W. Dendy.
2	Coll. Arm. Muniment Room, Box 25, no. 17.
3	Infra, p. 118.
THE VISITATIONS OF 1530	103
of the realme of England. And Garter saith that there hath bynne of
late a kyng of armes of the provynce and cuntrey of Walis as may be
approvyd and shewyd under the greate seale of Englande.’
The King of Arms to whom he refers is probably William
Ballard, March.1 The dispute respecting jurisdiction in
Wales had the unhappy consequence that it was not again
visited until on the 3rd of February 1585 a joint deputation
for the purpose was granted to Lewis Dwnn by Robert
Cooke, Clarenceux, and Robert Glover, Somerset herald, on
behalf of William Flower, Norroy.2 Fulk ap Howel, Lan-
caster herald, had indeed been authorized to visit there by
letters patent of Edward VI, dated the 9th of June 1550,
but he never did so.3
The third of the Visitations made by Benoit’s deputies is
as anomalous as it is interesting. The original strayed from
the College and in 1668, when Dugdale copied it, was in the
hands of William Pierpoint at Thoresby in Nottingham-
shire. In 1745, however, it was burnt in the fire which
destroyed the library there.4 It was entitled ‘A Visitacion
made in Lancashire and in a parte of Chestershyre par
Lancaster Heraulde in the xxiiiith yeare of our Soveraigne
Lord Kinge Henry VIIIth by a Speciall Comicion of Thomas
Benoilt, alias Clarencieux, King of the same Province*. The
Lancaster herald in question was the same William Fellow
who visited Wales. The anomaly lies in the fact that Lan-
cashire and Cheshire were and are in the province not of
Clarenceux but of Norroy. Either Benoit must have made
a special agreement with Norroy, or he was acting ultra vires,
or else the title has been wrongly copied. The words
‘Speciall Comicion’ give some support to the first view.
The entries are tricks of arms followed sometimes by a
single name only, but generally by a narrative genealogy.
1	Infra, p. 108.
2	Heraldic Visitations of Wales and part of the Marches ... by Lewis Dwnn,
Deputy Herald at arms . . . edited by Sir Samuel Rush Meyrick . . . mdcccxlvi,
p. xxiii. The copy of the deputation is taken from Coll. Arm. MS. H Pedigrees 16,
pp. 202-3. (See also Appendix G, No. 31.)
3	Ibid., p. xxi, and Archaeologia, vol. xiii, p. 396.
* The present College copy, labelled is Dugdale’s copy of 1668. Brit. Mus.
MS. Harl. 2076, edited by William Langton in Chetham Society, vols. xcviii and
ex, is a sixteen th-century copy, and another (abbreviated) is in the hands of Aubrey
J. Toppin, Esq., York Herald.
Ю4	THE VISITATIONS OF 1530
The special interest arises from certain unexpectedly vivid
asides.
‘Edward Earl of Derbye. My lord was at the Court illo tempore’;1
‘The Abbay of Whaley. The abbott was not at home’ ;2 ‘John Talbott
of Saleberry ... a verrey gentle Esquir & worthy to bee taken payne
for’;3 ‘Sir John Townley of Townley Knight had to his firste wief one
who was doughter to Sir Charles Appillysdon & one of the heyres of
Gatesford; whereby he*beareth the goats. I wote not what her name
is nor I made no greate inquisition, for he would have no noate taken
of hym, saying that ther was no more Gentilmen in Lancashire But
my Lord of Derbye & Mountegle. I soght hym all day Rydinge in
the wyld countrey & his reward was ij s, which the guyde hadd the
most parte and I had as evill a jorney as ever I hadd’ ;* ‘Robert Holt of
Stubbley maried an olde woman by whom he hadd no yssue, & ther-
fore he wold not have her name entered’;5 ‘Sir Richard Houghton
Knight. . . . The said Sir Richard hath putt away his lady and wife,
and kepeth a concobyne in his house, by whom he hath divers children,
and by the lady he hath Ley Hall; which armes he beareth quartered
with his in the first quarter, he says that Mr Garter licensed him so to
doe, and he gave Mr Garter an angle noble, but he gave me nothing
nor made me no good chere, but gave me proude woords’;6 ‘Richard
Asheton of Mydleton . . . M: That the said Mr Asheton at the
Scottishe felde tooke a prysoner whose name was Sir John Forman
Knight Sergeant porter to the Scottishe Kinge; and also he tooke
Alexander Bauret, Sheryffe of Aberdyne, whych two prysoners he
delyvered to my Lord of Norfolke that now ys. How to know how he
shall bear their armes’;7 ‘Syr Alexander Radclyffe Knyght . . . Syr, I
suppose thyse armes do stand out of order, in as myche as he berys
Radclyffe in the second quarter’;8 ‘Syr Thomas Sudworthe Knyght
. . . I spake not with hym’;9 ‘Thomas Tarbocke Knoweth not his
armes for a certenty’;10 ‘James Newport of Leichfeild ... Thys James
abovesayd knoweth not hys armes, but that he say the that yt ys three
fleur de lis silver, and knowethe not the feelde’;11 ‘Holland of Clifton
was not at howme’;12 ‘. . . Massye of Rigiston . . . Richard maried
Anne daughter to Thurston Tillesley and thelder of them passeth not
vij yeare olde’.13
The informality of these entries, as well as the difficulties
met with by Fellow, suggest that neither the Lancashire
1	Chetham	Soc., vol. xcviii, p. i.	2	Ibid.,	p.	30.
3	Ibid.,	p.	35.	*	Ibid.,	p.	43.	s	Ibid.,	p.	47.
6	Ibid.,	p.	48.	7	Ibid.,	p.	59.	8	Ibid.,	p.	64.
9	Ibid.,	p.	73.	10	Ibid.,	vol. ex, p, 131.
11 Ibid., p'. 173.	12 Ibid., p. 214.	13 Ibid., p. 22c.
THE VISITATIONS OF 1530	105
gentry nor the herald himself were much accustomed to
inquisitions of this character. But Sir John Towneley’s
extremely conservative view of gentility suggests that the
far North may have lagged a little behind the times in this
as in other matters. Sir Richard Houghton’s reference to
Garter at least admits heraldic authority, though it may not
have pleased the deputy of Clarenceux.
Taking these early Visitations together, we may now note
the points in which they and their successors differ.1 * If we
compare one of Benoit’s office copies with one of Dugdale’s
made a century and a half later, a striking change is ap-
parent. In the older book the main emphasis is on the arms,
which are handsomely painted, often for the wife as well as
the husband, with at best only a short narrative genealogy
without dates or notes of evidence attached. In the later this
is reversed; the arms are either shown by a serviceable but
unimposing trick, with quarterings sometimes but impale-
ments never, while the pedigree is set out in tabular form,
often with some elaboration of dates, collateral branches and
supporting documents, is carried back as far as possible, and
is attested by the signature of a living member of the family.
The primary purpose of Visitation is still to test titles to
arms, but a secondary one has crept in of registering de-
scents for their own sake and not merely as proof of armorial
right. It is my contention that, as the later Visitations grew
out of the earlier, so had the earlier grown from rolls and
books of arms in which shields were entered with only the
living owner’s name and without genealogical particulars.
If this view is correct, we ought not, in searching for sur-
viving entry books of the Visitations made before 1530, to
look only for books of the later type. Some of this type can
indeed be found; but I shall hope to show that certain others,
hitherto classified vaguely as rolls or books of arms, have an
equal claim to be called Visitations.
1 See further A. R. Wagner, Records and Collections of the College of Arms, 1952,
PP- 55'65-
XI
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
IN 1930 Mr. С. H. Hunter Blair edited for the Surtees
Society1 parts of two manuscripts in the Bodleian2 under
the title, A Visitation of the North of England circa 1480-1500.
One of these manuscripts is in the hand of Robert Glover,
Somerset (d. 1588). The other is by Roger Dodsworth, and
one of the entries is stated to be—‘Out of my antient rolle
of pedigrees wch are very autenticall and cited by Mr. Cam-
den’. The collection consists of pedigrees in Latin (set out
in these copies in the old pedigree form—that is, with the
names in circles joined by radiating lines), with tricks and
blazons of arms. The blazons are remarkable for being in
terms of gems—as Topaz for Or, Pearl for Argent, Ruby
for Gules. This fantastic system, which was invented by
Sicily herald before 14583 and is described in the Boke of
St. Albans and elsewhere, has sometimes been thought a
mere text-book writer’s fancy, never in fact used. It is,
however, found applied in more than one manuscript of the
later fifteenth century.
The pedigrees are of the Royal House and of gentry in
the North, and many of them have been closely dated by the
editor from internal evidence. Most, if not all, belong to
the reign of Henry VII; that of Fitzwilliam,4 for example,
cannot be earlier than May 1491. There were in this reign
three holders only of the office of Norroy—John More from
1478 to 1491, Roger Machado from 1491 or earlier to
1493, and Christopher Carlisle from 1493 to 15x0. The
last would, on grounds of date alone, be the most likely
author. There is, however, other evidence which points to
him. In 1935 I found that a manuscript in the College of
Arms5 contained a third copy of this same collection, with-
1 Vol. 144. See also A. R. Wagner, Records and Collections of the College of Arms,
1952, P’ 77-	2 MS. Ashmole 831, fols. ib-8yb (in the hand of Robert
Glover), and MS. Dodsworth 81.
3 Le Blason des couleurs en armes, litres et devises par Sicille herault d' Alphonse Г,
Roi d'Aragon, publie et annote par Hippolyte Cocheris, Paris, i860, pp. 52-7.
* Surtees'Society, vol. 144, pp. 74-6.
5 M 4, fols. 99-135 (bound up with L 18 and 1st M 17).
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	107
out tricks. This volume was the property, and seems to be
in the hand, of Christopher Barker, Richmond herald from
1522 to 1536, Norroy 1536, and Garter from 1536 to his
death in 15501—and Barker was apparently nephew to
Christopher Carlisle.2
Daliaway,3 and writers who have copied from him, state
that ‘The most ancient visitation of which any account is
recorded is “Visitatio facta per Marischallum de Norroy ult.
ann. R. Henrici 4ti. 1412. 66.C.23, f. 75, Bibl. Harleian”.’
The reference is to a page4 5 containing two pedigrees, one of
Allsop of Allsop in the Dale, Derbyshire, the other of
Robinson. Each pedigree is supported by a list of mainly
fictitious Visitations beginning with ‘Visitatio facta per me
Bewe James principalem regem armorum, in anno Domini
1334, annoque regni regis Edwardi 3’. There are not even
citations from this and the others in the list, only their bare
titles. Their unreality is sufficiently established in an article
in the sixth volume of The Herald and Genealogist'* to need
no further proof, which could yet if needful be produced.
The writer of the article attributes the concoction to
Richard Lee, Clarenceux.
In the same manuscript volume is a letter dated the 1st of
March 1623, written to Sir Richard St. George, Clarenceux,
by John Wodenothe of Shavington, Cheshire, son-in-law of
Robert Cooke, Clarenceux from 1567 to 1592. In it the
writer refers to ‘the Visitation of March Kinge of Armes,
taken in the reigne of K. Ed. 4.’, formerly the property of
Cooke. On this Humphrey Wanley, in his Catalogue of the
Harley Manuscripts,6 observes, ‘I having consulted some of
the Officers of Arms about the above-mentioned Book; am
told, it still remains in their Office; being not a Visita-
tion-book, but a book of Pedegrees of the Nobility & Gentry
of the Province of William Ballard, Marche, King of Arms’.
1 On fo. 1 is written ‘richemont Caduciator’. On fo. 34 is Barker’s genealogy
written by himself.
2 Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 376; Coll. Arm. MS. L 14,
fo. 265b.
3 James Daliaway, Enquiries into the Origin and Progress of the Science of Heraldry
in England, 1793, p. 163.
4 Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 1196, fo. 116.
5 1871, pp. 436-40.	6 1808, vol. i, p. 593.
io8	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
This book is ‘M 3’,1 a vellum folio of a hundred leaves,
inscribed at the beginning, ‘This boke was bought of the
Wydow of Marche king of armes by gartier Roy d’armes
dez anglois’. This March was William Ballard, who in
1460 was herald to Henry, Duke of Exeter. A patent of the
18th of January 1485 shows that he was then still living.
‘Gartier’ was in 1490 John Writhe.
An account of Ballard’s lineage on the second leaf calls
him ‘Marche kyng of armys of the West of England Walis
and Corn ewale whyche testyfyethe thees thyngis ensuing’.
The original portions seem to be wholly or mainly by
Ballard’s own hand, but there are large additions by later
owners, most of them by Thomas Wriothesley but some
apparently by John Writhe and some by William Hervey,
Clarenceux (1557—67). Entries which appear to be Ballard’s
comprise a Latin epitaph on King Arthur and a French one
on Richard, Duke of York,2 his own lineage, the King of
Arms’ oath, notes of Cheshire fees from the Red Book of the
f Exchequer, names of Cheshire gentry with English blazons
of their arms and crests and other information respecting
them to which reference must be made, accounts of the
coronation of Queen Elizabeth Wydville in 1465, of the
marriage celebrations (including jousts) of Richard, Duke
of York, and Anne, Countess of Norfolk, in 1477, painted
shields of members of the Stanley family with crests and
quarterings, painted shields, crests and badges of Lancashire
and Cheshire gentry3 and of Yorkshire gentry.
Of about the same date but in a different and coarser
style are a series of names and blazoned arms of the nobility
and gentry of South Wales and the adjoining Marches and
1 Heralds' Commemorative Exhib. 1484-1934., Ulus. Cat. no. 67 and Pls. XXVII,
XXVIII. See A. R. Wagner, Cat. of Eng. Med. Rolls of Arms, 1950, pp. 111-16.
2 The same epitaph signed ‘Chester le HC’, i.e. Chester the Herald, is printed in
Political Poems and Songs relating to English History, ed. Thomas Wright, Rolls
Series, 1861, vol. ii, pp. 256-7, from Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 48, fo. 81b. Much if not
all of Harl. 48 seems to be the work of this Chester Herald, who is probably the
‘Richard Chester otherwise called March King of Arms’ mentioned 1 July 1480 in
the Close Roll (20 Edward IV, m.20). If so, he would be Ballard’s predecessor as
March.' The possibility that his, not Ballard’s, is the first hand in M 3 is discounted
by its difference from that of Harl. 48.
3 M 3, fols. 35b-42bj edited as ‘Ballard’s Roll’, from a copy by Robert Glover
in Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 2076 collated with this original, by Ralph Griffin, F.S.A.,
in Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, vol. viii, 1932-3.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	109
another of painted shields of gentry of Devon and Cornwall.
Since, however, both these relate to Ballard’s province of
March, they are probably compiled, if not written, by him.
A copy of the greater part of the Devon and Cornwall
section, in a book which in 1584 belonged to Joseph Hol-
land the antiquary and is now Egmont manuscript 197,1
has this note: ‘A trew coppy of this booke remayneth in the
office: but they are all paynted on horsbacke, as Mr Garter
did shewe them unto me the 27 of September 1589.’ No
such copy as this is now known in the College, but its exis-
tence is a notable link between Ballard’s book and the group
next to be mentioned.
The only sections containing anything approaching pedi-
grees are those occupying folios 1—5b and giving the names
and blazons of arms and crests of Cheshire gentry about
1480, and the similar entry for South Wales occupying
folios 15b—24b. Most of the entries give no more than this,
but some few add particulars of the tenure by which the
then head of the family held his lands, and of the number
and names of his sons. For example:
‘Sir Wylliam Brereton berythe sylver ij barres sabylle and his helm
a bores hed sabylle moselet of goulis also he berythe in his ijde quarter
sylver two fanons sabylle. And he hathe viij sonnes as here ensuithe
Wylliam. Andrew. Robert. Mathew. Harry. John. Hugo. Rodger.
And he holdis by knyght service Stapulforde and he pays a cheffe to
the kyng other a sparhauke or ellis ij si.’2
These particulars of tenure are clearly connected with the
clause in the King of Arms’ oath requiring him ‘to have
knowledge of all the noble gentlemen within your Marches
. . . and to inquire if any of them hold by any service as by
knight’s fee or otherwise’. Indeed, this entire section is the
most literal possible fulfilment of the clauses in that oath
enjoining Visitation, and, -pace the heralds of 1808, it cannot,
I think, be doubted that this section at least of Ballard’s Book
is entitled to be called by that name. Moreover, Wode-
nothe’s so calling it probably means that Clarenceux Cooke
did so, and thus indicates the survival in the College at that
date of the traditional nomenclature.
1	On deposit in the Public Record Office. CEMRA, p. 115.
2	Coll. Arm. MS. M 3, fo. 3b.
110	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
The next piece of evidence is still more positive. Thomas
Benoit, by his Will dated the 24th of April and proved in
the Prerogative Court of Canterbury on the 16th of May
1534,1 bequeathed
‘unto my lovinge & trusty frend Thomas Hawley otherwise called
Carlisle Harold at Armys all my bookes of Registers old and new, all
my Roules of Armys, all my bookes of Interments, All my Bookes of
all my New Visitacions, all my foure Volumes of Frosard, My Booke
of ancient Presidents Concerninge the Rights and Dutyes perteyning
to the hole Office of Armys which booke is written in Parchment and
Covered with Bordes & over that with leather, with all other my
bookes of Cronicles, Gestes of Honour & Generally all my bookes that
be in any wyte Concerninge the Office of Armys, and he to use occupy
and Enjoy them as his owne duringe his lyfe, and after his deceas, I
will and bequeth all and singuler these bookes, as I have expressed in
this my Will that they shall from tyme to tyme as longe as they may
Endure remayn & be in the hands Custody & kepyng of the Kyng of
Armys by the name of Clarenceaux and soe from Kinge of Armys to
Kinge at Armys called Clarenceaux every one in his owne tyme to use
F occupy and Enjoye as his owne during his Naturall Life. Provided in
any wise, and I will that there be a Tabull well written to Expresse
the Number and what they be of my said bookes. And that the said
Tabull may be delivered alwayes.with the said bookes from Man to
Man that shall occupy the Office of Clarenceaux aforesaid, and to
none other. And that it will please them of the office of Armes to put
in Writinge my Name & Surname & the Name of my Office of
Clarenceux.’2
The inventory3 was duly made for the executors by
Thomas Wall, Windsor herald and afterwards Garter, being
completed on Monday the 30th of June 1534. Several
copies of it survive in the College of Arms4 and elsewhere.
It comprises 54 manuscript books or sheets, 17 Rolls of
Pedigree, 7 Rolls of Arms, 13 narrative or record Rolls,
and 23 printed books. A considerable number of the items
can be identified as still remaining in the College of Arms
and there is no doubt that this collection, together with such
portions of Wriothesley’s as were ultimately added to it,
formed the foundation of the College Library. Unhappily
1	P.C.C. 14 Hogen.
2	Coll. Arm. MS., Anstis, Officersof Arms, vol. ii, p. 371.	3 App. F, p. 150.
4	(д) Coll. Arm. MS. Heralds, vol. i, fols. 139—81. Contemporary and perhaps
the original, (b) Ibid., fols. 182-55. (cj Officers of Arms, vol. ii, pp. 373-9.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	in
it must also be said that some of the most interesting items
cannot now be found there.
Of these last none are more striking than the third and
fourth items.
Item a booke of visitation of many\ .	, • ,
, . -it 1	1	1 I painted with men
shires with London and other г c l j*
+	, TTT-1V lorarmysbowndin
noble recordes made by William L	,
TT , .	,.	’	.	1 boordes couvered
.T 1 Hawkeslow alias	Llarencieux I ^ith leder
’4- ’ King of armes.
Item a booke of visitation of many A
shires with London and princes I bound in boordes
painted with men of armes made /couvered with
by Roger Ligh alias Clarencieux I leder.
king of armes.
Now William Hawkslowe, Clarenceux, ‘was drounede in
the Spanish sea’ in 1476 and his obsequies were held at
St. Mary Somerset, 7 May 1476.1 He had been an Officer of
arms eighteen years,2 and was Clarenceux at least as early
as 1465.3 Roger Leigh was probably created Clarenceux at
St. George’s Feast held at Windsor on the 8th of May
143 5,4 and had lately ‘dyed in grete penurye’ on the 30th
of November 1460.5 Benoit was an Officer of Arms before
the death of John Writhe, Garter. But Writhe was almost
certainly Falcon herald before the death of Hawkeslowe,6
while Smert, his predecessor as Garter, was so created as
early as 1450. Benoit’s attribution of these books to Legh
and Hawkeslowe, therefore, would probably rest on
knowledge.
The most striking point in the two descriptions is one
which they share. Both the books are said to be ‘painted
with men of armes’. We might be somewhat at a loss to
construe this phrase were it not for the survival of two books
to which, when we have once considered the matter, we
must allow that it applies exactly. Each of sixty-two pages7
1	Coll. Arm. MS. D 4, fo. 1.
2	Ibid., Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. ii, p. 321, citing a Pell Roll.
3	Grant of Arms to the Upholders* Company of London dated n Dec. 1465,
Sylvanus Morgan, Sphere of Gentry 1661, Lib. 2, p. 94.
* Coll. Arm MS., Anstis, Officers of Arms, vol. ii, pp. 311,313, citing a Pell Roll.
5 Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. ii, p. 139.
6 Ibid., vol. i, p. 357.	7 Fols. 9-22 and 24~4ob. See CEMRA, pp. 92-7.
112	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
of Harleian manuscript 4205 is painted with two pairs of
figures of knights on horseback. Each pair is of knights
tilting against each other with sword or lance; and each
knight has his name written over him and his arms painted
on his tabard and the trapper of his horse. The collection is
in fact a roll of arms in pictorial form. It was edited by
Greenstreet in 1883 as The Military Roll of Arms.1 Sections
are headed ‘Soffolk’, ‘Essex’, and ‘Kent’. Before describing
the rest of the volume we must note the presence of another
portion of this collection, comprising Seventy-two more
figures, in Additional manuscript 45133 (formerly Clumber
manuscript 18 9)? Their original conjunction is proved by
both identity of style and continuity of pagination. It was
first observed in 1935 by Mr. S. M. Collins. The inclusion
of Sir Richard Wydville who became Earl Rivers in 1485
seems to date the compilation before that year.
The latter part of Harleian manuscript 42053 contains a
series of 133 painted figures of armed knights standing with
f visor raised, one to a page. Each knight wears a coat and
supports a banner of his own arms. On examination this
collection proves to be no more than a pictorial copy, made
towards the end of the fifteenth century, of that part of the
Parliamentary Roll4 of Edward H’s reign which comprises
the Bannerets.
At the beginning of the book is an incomplete series of
drawings of the Kings of England from William I to
Henry VI wearing coats of their arms, with short English
verse histories of their reigns. On the first leaf is a painting
in what seems a different hand from the rest, of the arms5 of
Sir Thomas Holme, Clarenceux from 1476 to 1494, the
immediate successor of William Hawkeslowe.
The other contents of Additional manuscript 45133
(Clumber manuscript 189) are more varied and of several
dates. It begins6 with three full-page painted civilian figures
without names or arms. Next comes a series7 of tricked
1	Walford’s Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer, vol. iv, pp. 29-34, 140-5,
254-9.	2 Fols. 24—32b.	3 Fols. 41-112.	4 Supra, p. 52.
5	The shield is surrounded by a Garter, probably from Holme’s admission to be
a Military Knight of Windsor in 1482. Cf. Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica,
5th series, vol. 10, pp. 80-1, Why the Garter? by H. Stanford London, F.S.A.
6	Fols. 6-7.	7 Fols. 8-23.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	113
shields in an early sixteenth-century hand that may be
Thomas Wriothesley’s. This is of much interest, for it ap-
pears to be a transcript of the heraldic contents of what we
may call the ‘Military’ collection, as it was when complete.
That is to say, the first shields are those of the Bannerets
from the Parliamentary Roll, while the rest are those of the
mounted knights 'now divided between this book and
Harleian manuscript 4205. Next come these equestrian
figures themselves;1 then a collection of painted shields with
crests, helmets, and mantling,2 comprising arms of lords of
the late fifteenth century, arms of London citizens and
others probably granted by Clarenceux Machado, and a
mixed collection probably added by John Writhe and
Thomas Wriothesley. After this come pedigrees of foreign
Sovereigns;3 the oldest known Scottish roll of arms, com-
piled soon after 1490;4 sketches of the ‘ij standartz taken by
Sir William Molyneux at the Batayll of Brampston More’
(i.e. Flodden) in 1513; a list of ‘The genealogies in the boke
of the north’, which to judge from it must have had much in
common with a collection of pedigrees in Thomas Wriothes-
ley’s hand now in the British Museum.5 On the next two
leaves are painted nine figures—that is, four pairs and one
with its pair missing—of noble husbands and wives wearing
their arms, and linked together by chains. They probably
date from about 1500. A book containing similar paintings
and associated with the name of Thomas Wriothesley now
belongs to the Duke of Buccleuch.6
The next eleven leaves7 (now detached and in the Guild-
hall Library) are in some ways the most remarkable in this
remarkable book. They are painted with twenty full-page
figures of the mayor and aidermen of London in the year
1446-7, each with his shield and crest beside him (though
a few are blank), and each supporting a frame of blank
shields intended to be painted with the arms of the succeed-
ing aidermen for the several wards. Some of these shields
have been painted in subsequently. Three detached leaves,
1 Fols. 24-396, vide supra.
2 Fols. 33-4.	3 Fols. 446-516.	4 Fols. 53-66.
5 MS. Add. 5530.
6 City of Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery Heraldic Exhibition, November-
December, 1936, Catalogue no. 541. CEMRA, p. 103.	7 Fols. 616-71.
4607	I
114	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
containing six figures, from the same series, were presented
to the Guildhall Library by Mr. Alexander J. Sefi in 1932.
The rest of the book is filled by two large alphabetical
indices in the hand of Thomas Wriothesley, Garter, inter-
spersed with a number of membranes from rolls of arms of
the type associated with him, with the exception of two,
which are in a hand closely resembling that of the famous
armorial of Toison d’Or.1 The first index2 comprises letters
В to S only, and has references to two books (neither of them
this volume), one having 204 leaves, the other apparently
the ‘Boke of the North’ mentioned above. The second
index3 is complete and is headed ‘Registrum armorum Th.
Wr. alias gartier Regis armorum anglicorum’. Its references
are ‘Rotulus Edwardi primi’, ‘Rotulus Edwardi tertii et
Ricardi secundi’, ‘Rotulus Henrici sexti et Edwardi quarti’,
‘In rotulo militum Henrici septimi’, ‘In libro simili’, ‘In
rotulo picto’, ‘London Essex Norff Suff’, ‘Saint George’.
These were all no doubt books in Wriothesley’s possession,
and it may prove possible to identify some of them from the
entries here given.
Were it not for the association of the book with Wriothes-
ley, one would be tempted to suggest the identification of
the series of aidermen as Roger Leigh’s Visitation of London
and of the equestrian figures as Hawkeslowe’s ‘Visitation of
many shires . . . painted with men of armys’. The dates of
both would fit perfectly. But if these collections belonged to
Wriothesley it is a little difficult to suppose that they passed
to Benoit in time to be included in the inventory of 1534.
Since, however, it is clear that both collections have been at
some time dismembered and bound up with matter of differ-
ent origin, and since there is in fact no evidence of ownership
by Wriothesley in these actual leaves but only in others now
associated with them, it is possible to- suppose that the asso-
ciation is of later date.
The argument that these, being Clarenceux’s books,4
ought to have come to Benoit and not Wriothesley, is
weakened by Benoit’s own statement that Wriothesley had
1 Ancien Armorial Equestre de la Toison d'Or et de Г Europe au quinzieme siecle,
ed. Loreclan Larchey, Paris, 1890.	2 Fols. 74-116b.
3 Fols. 117-57!).	4 Cf. the arms of Thomas Holme in MS. Harl. 4205, fo. 1.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	115
embezzled the office books, and by the fact that the leaves of
the Clumber manuscript which I have attributed to Mach-
ado Clarenceux certainly contain additions in Wriothesley’s
own hand. The question whether or not these are parts of
the books referred to in Benoit’s inventory must therefore
for the present remain open. What is much less doubtful is
that these books must probably have been of just this type.
Indeed, I should myself have no hesitation in calling the
London collection at least a ‘Visitation’.
One more British Museum manuscript of the same date
and kind remains to be mentioned. This is Stowe manu-
script 594, a large folio volume containing paintings of
King Edward III, the twenty-five founder knights of the
Order of the Garter, and of Garter King of Arms kneeling
before St. George.1 The king and the knights have their
right hands resting on rectangular frames (like those of the
London aidermen above-mentioned) containing paintings of
the arms, with names over, of their successors in their
several stalls. The great majority of these names and shields
are by one hand, probably that of the painter of the figures;
and of these none belongs to a knight created later than
1445. This indicates as the author Sir William Bruges, the
first Garter King of Arms, who held office, as we have seen,
from 1417 to his death in 1450. The cramped insertion of
some of the latest shields shows that they were added after
the original compilation. In one of the longest series of
shields, that on folio 15b, the last uncrowded name and coat
are those of Sir John Blount, who held his stall only from
1417 to 1418. This suggests that Bruges may have begun
the compilation of this book immediately upon appointment.
Again, it may be connected with the great setting up of the
Knights’ Stall Plates at Windsor under Henry V, in-
geniously inferred by St. John Hope and by him dated in
1421 and linked with the revision in that year of the Statutes
of the Order.2 In any case it seems probable that the book
was planned by Bruges as his official record or ‘Visitation’
1 These drawings are the basis of Hollar’s engraving in Ashmole’s Institution of
the Order of the Garter, 1672, p. 642; and vide Bodleian MS. Ashmole 1131,
fols. i59b-62. CEMRA) pp. 83—6.
2 The Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter, 1348-1485a series
n6	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
of the arms of the Knights of the Order whose name he bore
and upon which his duties centred. This book is, I submit,
the earliest English armorial that can be attributed to a
known herald, and the prototype of the whole class of
‘Visitations with men of arms’. Among its progeny may
perhaps be numbered not only the pictorial Visitations of
Legh and Hawkeslowe, but also the splendid and famous
equestrian armorial of Toison d’Or.1
A note in this book in a middle sixteenth-century hand,
‘These yt followen ben sett owt at Stanfford in the Churche
at the costs of Sr William Bruggys Garter’, has produced in
Anstis and later writers a mistaken idea that these drawings
were the original sketches for the stained glass windows
representing the Founder Knights set up by Bruges in the
chancel windows of St. George’s Church, Stamford.2 Most
of the glass seems already to have perished by Anstis’ day,
and he presumably had not access to the notable series of
facsimile drawings made from it by Dugdale in 1641, now
in the possession of Lord Winchilsea. The present Rector
of St. George’s, Stamford, the Rev. W. A. Rees-Jones, who
has had access to this collection, states that the two sets of
figures are quite distinct.3 The subject alone is common to
both series.
It remains to consider the light thrown by Benoit’s
inventory on his own Visitations. Seventh in the list is:
‘Item a booke of visitations made by Thomas Benoit alias
Clarencieux of the shires of Kent Sussex Sutherey and
Hampshire in paper painted and written’, which must be
D 13,4 though this includes Somerset and Dorset too. Next
come
‘Item a booke of visitations made by Thomas Benoit alias
Clarencieux of Hampshire and Somersetshire’, and
‘Item a booke of visitations made by T. Benoit alias
of ninety full-sized coloured facsimiles with descriptive notes and historical intro-
ductions by W. H. St. John Hope, 19015 pp. 12-18.
1	Supra, p. 56, note 4.
2	Anstis, Register of the Order of the Garter, vol. i, p. 3455 Catalogue of the Stowe
Manuscripts, vol. i, p. 473.
3	Saint George, the Order of St. George, and The Church of Saint George in Stam-
ford, by the Rev. William Arthur Rees-Jones, Rector of St. George’s, Stamford,
1937, pp. xi-xiii, and Pl. VIII. The author’s suggestion that the drawings in Stowe
MS. 594 are late forgeries is, however, baseless. 4 Supra, p. 101. RCCA, pp. 67-8.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	117
Clarencieux of Devonshire & Cornewail’, which are pre-
sumably the component parts of H 18,1 despite the substitu-
tion of Hampshire for Dorset. The next,
‘Item a booke of visitations made by Tho. Benoit alias
Clarencieux in the xxiiith yere of King H VIII (lancastre)’,
may be Fellow’s Visitation of Lancashire.2 But in this case
we shall have to suppose that H 20,3 the rough copy of the
Visitation in Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, Gloucester-
shire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire, is not included in
the inventory. It seems more probable that Fellow’s book
was still in his own possession and that the later gloss
‘(lancastre)’ is a mistake.
The next, being
‘The booke of visitations made by T. Benoit alias Claren-
cieux of Sutherey and the yle of Wyght’, is ist H 7Л The
twelfth title, ‘Item the booke of visitations made by T. Benoit
alias Clarencieux Kente 8c Sussex’, must be the lost rough
copy of these portions of D 13. H 8s appears fourteenth as
‘Item a booke of visitations of Walis made by William
Fellowe alias Lancastre in the name and by the auctorite of
T. Benoit’; while G 2 is nineteenth as ‘Item a booke of
visitations made by T. B. alias Clarencieux of Cornewail 8c
Devonshire painted’.
There remain two more books described as Visitations,
but not now found in the series at the College. The first of
these comes fifth in order, immediately after the Visitation
of Roger Leigh—‘Item a book made by Thomas Benoit
alias Clarencieux of divers knyghts arms and standards with
all the visitations of burialls in the churches of London
painted and writtyn in paper bound in bourde’. This I
confidently identify as a book in the College now marked
‘A 17’.6 The handwriting is, I believe, Benoit’s, the painting
resembles that of D 13, and the contents, as will be seen,
correspond exactly with this description. The first pages are
painted with arms of noblemen of the time of Henry VII.
Next come painted standards and shields of Henry VIH’s
reign. After these are twenty drawings of the same repeated
J Supra, p. 100. RCCA, pp. 67-8.	2 Supra, p. 103. JRCCA, pp. 67-8.
’ Supra, p.uoi. RCCA, pp. 67-8.	4 Supra, p. 100. RCCA, pp. 67-8.
5 Supra, p. 102. RCCA, pp. 67-8.
6 Heralds' Commemorative Exhibition 1484-1934, Catalogue no. 84, Plate XXIX.
n8	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
figure of a civilian, with blank shields of arms and scrolls
for names above, but only the first two figures coloured.
Presumably a series like that of the Aidermen of London in
1446 was projected. The rest of the book is taken up with
lists of the burials and monuments in forty-one London
churches. These are what the inventory calls ‘visitations of
burialls.’
The same use of the word is found in the thirteenth ‘Item
a booke of visitations made by T. Hawley alias Carlill
Herauld marshall to T. Benoit in divers churches in and
about London in the xxii yere of К. H. VIIIth’. We have
referred to Benoit’s deputation to Hawley1 authorizing him
to visit in London and elsewhere in his absence. Here we
have evidence that such a visitation was actually madfe.
C. L. Kingsford in his edition of Stow’s Survey of London2
refers to an imperfect and crabbed copy by Stow3 of a
Visitation made in London by Clarenceux on the 27th of
March 1532/3, but it was not until 1936 that I had the
good fortune to find among the collection of Dugdale’s
manuscripts preserved at Merevale Hall, the seat of his
descendant Sir William Dugdale, Baronet, a full copy, made
by him in 1661, of both, this and Hawley’s Visitation, of
which it now proves to be the completion. This both as our
oldest narrative of the actual making of a Visitation, and for
its many curious and vivid details, deserves inclusion, and
through the kindness of the present owner I am able to
print it as an appendix.4
It falls into two parts. The first records the Visitation
made by Thomas Hawley, Carlisle Herald, as Marshal and
Deputy to Clarenceux, of Saint Paul’s and twelve other
churches in the City of London, between the 28th of July
and the 3rd of September 1530; and the second, a Visita-
tion of six churches on the eastern side of the City made
by Clarenceux himself, on the 27th of March 1532/3.
Carlisle was accompanied, at Saint Paul’s at least, by Port-
cullis Pursuivant—‘on Purculyus Pursyvant, watyng on the
Herauld’.
The drastic purpose and method of such ‘Visitations of
1 Supra, p. Г02.	2 Vol. i, p. xxxvii.
3 Brit. Mus. Harl. 244, fols. 111-15.	4 Appendix D.
VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530	119
churches’ is made clear at once. It was no less than to cor-
rect, deface, and take away all manner of arms wrongfully
borne, or being false armory; or any marks or devices (such
as Merchants’ marks or Rebuses) put in escutcheons,
squares, or lozenges, or used on banners, pennons, or stand-
ards, against the laws of honour; and to confiscate all such,
for the behoof of Clarenceux.
Carlisle began the proceedings at Saint Paul’s by showing
the King’s Commission to one Doctor Smythe, the Bishop’s
deputy, the Bishop himself being on the King’s business
beyond the seas. Doctor Smythe received it right reverendly
and commanded a verger to wait on the herald and show
him anything that he desired to see. They began in the body
of the church, where the herald defaced and took away
divers escutcheons of arms unlawfully borne, and went on to
the choir where he treated divers others in like manner,
among them one set up on the tomb of Doctor Stillington,
Archdeacon of Norfolk, lately buried there.
‘Correction’, however, was not the herald’s only concern,
for he made more or less detailed notes of several ancient
tombs and the heraldry displayed on them; for example, that
on the left side of the choir lay John, Duke of Lancaster,
and Dame Blanche his wife, in effigy of white alabaster, his
hand holding her hand, with their coronets on their heads,
honourably as pertains to the state of a Duke, he being in his
coat of arms, graven out of the said alabaster, bearing the
arms of England with a label of three points silver (sic, but
it should be ermine) for himself, and for Dame Blanche the
Duchess his wife (sic, but really for his second wife, Con-
stance of Castile), castles and lions, that is England impaling
Castile and Leon.
Carlisle’s entries for other churches follow the same plan,
noting first ‘defacements’, then burials. Clarenceux’s, how-
ever, consist wholly of the latter. The special interest of this
manuscript lies in its evidence of the extent of the powers
actually exercised by Clarenceux after the issue of the Com-
mission of 1530, from which our inquiry began. Heraldic
authority had come to its full growth.
We have followed our heralds down the stream of time from
their obscure beginnings to the moment when, while their
120	VISITATIONS BEFORE 1530
brethren beyond seas were fading, those ‘of the obeisance
of England’ came at last to the enjoyment of unprecedented
powers. The parts which Hawley doubled in 1530, of
chartered antiquary and licensed inquisitor, were to remain
with heralds till the Revolution, when the brightness of the
inquisitorial function became at length somewhat dulled.
Much of the development remains obscure, but we may
hope to have established at least this, that the Visitations
of 1530 were no fresh beginning, but the latest page only
in a long, varied, and not uninforming chapter of medieval
history.
APPENDIX A
PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE EARLY HISTORY OF
HERALDRY
(i)	See p. 13, note 1. Maistre Wace’s Roman de Rou, ed. Dr. Hugo
Andresen, Heilbronn, 1879, IL 7699-706.
Chevaliers ont haubers e branz,
Chauces de fer, helmes luisanz,
Escuz as cols, es meins lor lances,
Etuit ore^nt fait conoissances,
Que Normant altre coneust,
Qu’entrepresure n’i eust,
Que Normant Normant n’oceist,
Ne Normant altre ne ferist.
(2)	See p. 13, note 2. Ibid., 11. 3939-44. (I owe this reference to
Professor J. Orr.)
N’i a riche home ne baron
Qui n’ait lez lui son gonfanon,
Ou gonfanon ou altre enseigne,
Ou sa maisnie se restreigne,
Conoissances e entresainz,
De plusors guises escuz painz.
(3)	See p. 13, note 3. Le Roman de Brut de Wace, ed. Ivor Arnold,
Soc. des Anc. Textes franfais, 1938, tome i, 11. 4963-4.
L’armeure et la conuissance
A pris del rei, sans demurance.
(4)	See p. 13, note 4. Le Roman de Thebes, ed. Leopold Constans;
Soc. des Anc. Textes fran^ais, Paris, 1890,11. 5286-90.
Sor son hauberc ot conoissance
De colors de dous pailes chiers
Et entailliez par eschequiers
D’irriere ot escu deme blanc
Et deme roge come sane.
(5)	See p. 13, note 5. Le Roman de Brut, ed. Le Roux de Lincy, 1838,
II. 9528-31.
De 1’escu fu, par grant maistrie,
De ma dame sainte Marie
Portraite et faite li semblance
Por honor, et por ramembrance.
122
PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
(6)	See p. 13, note 6. Le Roman de Brut, 11. 9518-23.
Helme avoit en son cief luisant
Et fu (for nasaus devant,
Et d’or li chercles environ,
En som ot portrait un dragon,
En Гекле ot mainte piere clere;
Il ot este-Uter son pere.
(7)	See p. 19, notei. The Roll of Caerlaverock (1300}, edited and trans-
lated by Thomas Wright, 1864, pp. 15, 16, IL 353-60; The
Siege of Ca er lav erock, ed. Nicholas Harris Nicolas, 1828, p. 36.
Le beau Brian le filz Aleyn,
De courtoisie e de honnor pleyn,
I vi о banniere barree	»
De or e de goules bien paree:
Dont de chalenge estoit li poinz
Par entre lui e Hue Poinz
Ki portoit tel ne plus ne meins.
Dont merveille avoit meinte e meins.
(8)	See p. 21, note 2. L. W. Vernon Harcourt, His Grace the Steward
and Trial of Peers, 1907, p. 364. Statute 13 Richard II, Cap. 2.
Statutes of the Realm, vol. ii, p. 61.
Al Conestable appertient davoir conissance des contractz tochantz
faitz darmes & de guerre hors du roialme, & auxint des choses qui
touchent armes ou guerre deinz le roialme queux ne poent estre
terminez ne discus par la commune ley ove autres usages & cus-
tumes a ycelles matires appertenantz.
(9)	See p. 65, note 2. G. A. Seyler, Geschichte der Heraldik, Nurn-
berg, 1888, p. 814, citing Estor, Auserl. kleine Schriften L
Quod ipsi in aciebus bellorum, torneamentorum et ubique locorum,
quando et quouscunque voluerint, aut alias fuerit oportunum, tarn in
banderiis, clypeis, quam vestibus caeterisque ornatibus super caput
armorum Leonem crocei coloris, quern ipsi (ut asserunt) deferient et
prius detulerunt ex cessione paterna, coronam de armis nostri Ducatus
Bauariae prout est inserta praesentibus et depicta, valeant ducere et
portare libere et quiete de nostrae plenitudine potestatis, contradictione
cuius libet non obstante; sic quod nullus dicta eorum arma ipsis per nos
tradita et donata quovis modo secum deferat sive portet, nisi ad id
acceserit eorundem consensus pariter et voluntas sicut nostrae maies-
tatis ultionem cupiunt euitare.
(10)	See p. 66, note 1. Ibid., p. 342.
Volentes etiam de solita nostre benignitatis dementia et auctoritate
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDRY 123
Caesarea prefata possessorum intuitu te et heredes tuos ut premittitur
specialibus prerogative muneribus infigere, et quecunque clenodia et
nobilitatis insignia ad vestrum beneplacitum possitis eligere et ea gestare
et ipsis uti in clipeo et galea dummodo aliorum nobilium insigniis qui
ea ab antiquo habuisse et exercuisse noscuntur non preiudicetis indul-
gemus. Quoque eisdem in preliis, tornamentis hastiludiis et in omni
exercitio militari uti et frui sicut ceteri nobiles libere valeatis.
(11)	See p. 66, note 3. Ibid., p. 343.
A claro lumine throni Caesarei velut a sole radii nobilitates alie
legitimo iure precedunt et omnia nobilitatum insignia ab Imperatoria
maiestate dependent, ut non sit datum alicuius generositatis insigne,
quod a gremio non pervenit Cesare claritatis.
(12)	See p. 66, note 5. Rymer’s Foedera^ tome vii, p. 630; Patent
Roll 13 Richard II, p. i, m. 37.
Come un chivaler Fraunceys, a ceo que Nous sumus enfourmez,
ad Chalange, un nostre Liege, Johan de Kyngeston, a faire certeins
Faitz et Pointz d’Armes ovesque le dit Chivaler, Nous, a fyn que le
dit nostre Liege soit le moulz honurablement resceuz, et faire puisse
et parfournir les ditz Faitz et Pointz d’Armes, Luy avons Resceuz en
1’estat de Gentile Homme, et luy fait Esquier, et volons qu’il soit
conuz par Armes, et Porte desore en avant cestassavoir d’Argent, oue
une Chapewe d’azure, ovesque une Plume d’Ostrich, de Geules.
(13)	See p. 68, note 2. Johannis de Bado Aureo, Tractatus de armis
cum Francisco de Foveis^ ed. Bysshe, London, 1654, p. 44.
Praeterea quero, qui potest dare Arma? Et dic(o) quod Rex,
Princeps, rex Armorum, vel haraldus, ut dicit Bartholus.
(14)	See p. 68, note 5. Bysshe, In Nicholaum Uptonum notae^ 1654,
p. 6.
Arma autem quidam et insignia sibi assumunt propria authoritate,
et istis an liceat videndum est: et puto quod licet, sicut enim nomina
inventa sunt ad cognoscendum homines. . . . Ita etiam ista insignia ad
hoc inventa sunt . . . sed talia nomina cuilibet licet imponere sibi ad
placitum ... ita ista insignia cuilibet portare et impingere in suo, tamen
non alieno.
(15)	See p. 69, note 4. L'Jrbre des Batailles d*Honor i Bonet^ publie
par Ernest Nys, Juge au tribunal de premiere instance d’Anvers,
associ£ et secretaire adjoint de 1’institut de droit international, 1883,
p. 237; Royal MS. 20, С. VIII, fols. 151b—2.
Car il у nya qui sont faites et ordenees pour lestat dez dignitez. Si
comme est le seignal de 1’aigle le quel est deputes pour la dignite
124 PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
impeiral, la fleur de lis pour 1’ostel de France, le leopart pour Angle-
terre et aussi de tous les aultres Roys. Et tout ainsi est des aultres
dignitez plus petites. Si comme 1’ermine pour le Due de Bretaine, la
crois. d’argent pour le Conte de Savoie et aussi de tous les aultres qui
sont en dignites samblables soient princes, marquis , ou viscontes, les
quelz ont enciennement chascun ses armes especiales. Et telles armes
purement homme du monde ne doit porter ne mettre en son hostel ne
en sa ville, se non cellui qui est en celle dignite seigneur principal. Et
se auscuns faisoit le contraire il en seroit punis.
(16)	See p. 70, note 1. Royal MS. 20, С. VIII, fo. 152: Nys, p. 238.
Et si nous faut bien entendre ceste question car je ne puis par nos
maistres trouver ceste matiere bien declairee a mon voulpir. Toute
fois il у a aulcuns barons et aulcuns gentilz hommes qui ancienement
leur ancestres eurent les armes qui portent par donacion de 1’Empereur,
ou par donacion ou par privilege des Seigneur Roys. Et disoit ung de
nos maistres que celles armes aultres ne doit pourter, se non qu’il soit
de cellui sane. Et je croy bien qu’il disoit verite se il entendeit en le
propre pais qui est subget a cellui qui les a donnees. Mes ce le Roy de
France avoit donne a mon linaige pour armes ung lion dargent quel tort
feroit en Alemaigne ung Alemant s’il pourtoit les armes samblables.
(17)	See p. 70, note 2. Ibid., fo. 152b; Nys, pp. 238-9.
Mes peires pour son plaisir a pris les armes d’une vaiche de Gueullez
a trois estoilles par dessus et ung aultre de nostre lieu qui de riens n’est
tenus a mon pere vuet prandre cellez propres armes quar moult li sont
plaissanz. Mon pere li vuet contredire. Je vous demande s’il le puet faire.
(18) See p. 70, note 3. Ibid., fo. 153; Nys, p. 239.
Car telles armes sont trouves pour congnoistre des gens la difference
et ce ne seroit point difference a congnoistre entre aultre gens mes
feroit confusion. Item le prince doit garder que 1’ung des ses subges a
ung aultre ne face honte ne injure ne nouvellete. Mes il samble que
cellui qui les prant nouvellement le face pour despit et pour mes-
pressance du premier et pour an commencer dissension contencion et
debat dont le souverain у doit mettre remede.
(19)	See p. 71, note 2. Parties inedites de I*oeuvre de Sidle heraut
d'Alphonse V roi d'Aragon, Marechai d"armes du pays de Hainault,
auteur du blason des couleurs. Precedees d'une lettre en forme de
Preface, et d'une Introduction, par feu le P. Roland, de la compagnie
de fesus, Mons, 1867, Soc. des Bibliophiles Beiges, Publication
No. 22, p. 98.
Item, quant ce vient en ung tournoy tournoyant qu’on dist tournoy
jure, tous les roix d’armes et heraulx avant qu’ilz fenestrent les
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDRY 125
bannieres, pennons ou heaulmes, ne cloent les blasons dessoubz lesdites
bannieres, prendent le serrement les ungz des aultres, et jurent sur le
serrement qu’ilz doibvent a noblesse que tous ceulx qui tournoyent
soubz la banniere dont ils ont le gouvernement, chascun en droit soy,
sont gentilzhommes et nobles de quatre costes; car aultrement ilz ne
у porroient estre receus, et pour ce convient-il qu’ilz congnoissent
et sachent qiielz ilz sont avant qu’ilz les mettent au nombre pour
tournoyer.
(20)	See p. 72, note 1. Ibid., p. 199.
Car il n’est si petit gentil homme qui en tel tournoy ne puist bien
passer et estre receu; et poevent bien porter leur timbre ceulx qui
timbre ont, si bon leur semble, ou quelque aultre enseigne & leur
plaisance sur leurs heaulmes et leurs chevaulx hachies & volente comme
es jouxtes.
(21)	See p. 72, note 2. Ibid., p. 99.
Et se le dit bon voloir et don est souffisant et raisonnable iceulx
officiers d’armes sont tenus de mettre en leurs livres et registres les
noms et armes de iceulx nouveaulx anoblis, soit que leurs armes
prinses & volente auparavant le dit anoblissement leur demeurent ou
que ilz ayent nouvelles armes a eulx donn£es par 1’empereur ou roy
qui les anoblist, affin qu’il en soit memoire pour leurs successeurs en
temps advenir, en faisant mention en quel an et oil ce a este fait; et
aussi que les dittes armes soient mises en leur degre et ordre. Car de
tant comme la noblesse est plus ancienne, de tent doibt-elle preceder
celle qui est de mendre antiquite, sans en ce avoir regard aux person-
nages ne & le richesse.
(22)	See p. 73, note 2. Nicolai Uptoni de Studio Militari Lihri
Quatuor^ ed. Edward Bysshe (Clarenceux), London, 1654, pp.
257-8.
Habemus ilia arma que portamus assumpta ex propria auctoritate,
ut hiis diebus aperte videmus quomodo multi pauperes in guerris
Francie laborantes facti sunt nobiles, quidam per suam prudentiam,
quidam per strenuitatem, quidam per fortitudinem, quidam per alias
suas virtutes, que, ut supradixi, homines nobilitant quorum multi ex
sua propria auctoritate Arma portanda sibi et suis heredibus assump-
serunt.
(23)	See p. 77, note 6. British Museum, MS. Cotton. Faustina E.I.,
fo. 12.
A tous presens et advenir qui cez presentez lettres verront ou orront
Jehan Smert autrement dis Gartier Roy d’armez du Royaume
d’Angleterre salut et toute humble recommandacion. Equite veult et
126 THE EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDRY
raison ordonne que lez hommez vertueulx et de noble couraige soint
pour leurs meritez par renommee remunerez et non pas seullment
leurs personnes en cest vie mortelle tant briefve et transitorie mais
apres eulx ceux qui de leurs corps istront et seront procrees soient en
toutes places de graunt honneur perpetuelment devant autres reluisans
par certaines ensaignes et demonstrances de honneur et gentillesse,
c’est assavoir de blason heaulme et tymbre, afyn que a leur exemple
autres plus se afforcent perseveremment user leur jours en fais d’armez
et autres vertueulx euvres pur acquirer la renommee d’ancienne
gentillesse en leur legnee et posterite. Ce pur je Gartier Roy d’armes
dessusdit qui non pas seullement par commune renommee mez aussi
par le rapport et tesmoignage d’autres nobles hommes dignes de foy
suy pur verite advertyse et enforme que Edmond Mylle a longuement
pursuy le fait de armes et tant en ce que en autres cez affaires s’est
porte vaillientment et Honnourablement gouverne tellement qu’il a
ben deservy, et est ben dygne que doresenavant perpetuelment et a
tousjours lui et sa posterite soient en toutz placez honnourablez admiz,
renommez, comptez, nomb res et receux [a]ou nombre et en la com-
paigne dez autres anciens gentils et noblez hommez. Et pur la re-
membrance de celle sa gentillesse j’ay devise, ordonne et assigne audit
Edmond Mille pur luy et cez heyrez le blason heaulme et tymbre en
le maniere qui s’ensuit. C’est assavoir Ung escu de six pointz de sable
et d’argent a trois ours rampans de mesmes enviselez et enchaynnez
d’or lez chaynnez jettez autour d’eux. Et le tymbre sur le heaulme
ung demy ours de sable pareillment enviselle et enchayne d’or comme
dit est assiz sur ung torce d’or et de gulez enmantelle de mesmes double
d’ermynez. Sicomme la picture est en la marge cy devant la demonstre
a avoir, tenir, user et possesser pour lui et sez diz heires et eulx en
revestir a tousjours mais en tesmoing de ce Je Gartyer Roy d’armes
dessusnome ay signe de ma mayne et sealie de mon selle ces presentes
fait et done le douziesme jour d’aoust 1’an de grace mlcccc cinquante.
APPENDIX В
PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE EARLY HISTORY OF
HERALDS
(i)	See p. 25, note 3. Jacques Bretel. Le Toumoi de Chauvency^
Edition complete par Maurice Delbouille, 1932, Bibliotheque de la
Faculte de philosophic et lettres de I’universite de Liege, fascicule
XLIX, 11. 2664-80, 2701-6.
A cest mot lievent, si s’en vont,
Que li tornois fu accordes.
Si ont les rois hiraut mandez,
Grehei, Fildor, Maigniem, Huvelle;
Cil porchacierent la querelle.
Louys de Los a pris a dire;
Maigniens, fait il, sans escondire
Aler t’estuet a Monmaidi;
Ainsi diras, con je te di
Que li compaignon de caiens
Mandent salus ceus de laiens,
Et le tornoi a ous ensaignes.
Jusqu’a meidi va et revaignes,
Que demain parlerons a iaus,
N’i.covient lectres ne seaus.
Maigniens s’en est tornez atant,
A Monmaidi en vient batant.
Maigniens est el chastel montez,
Ses mesaiges fu tost contez.
Signor, fait il, nos vos disons
A tous, de par les compaignons
De la feste, qu’apres demain
Avrez le tornoi a la main.
(2)	See p. 25, note 4. Ibid., 11. 2763-87.
Maigniens de Monmaidi se part,
A Chauvenci vien, si depart
Ses novelles au bachelerz.
‘Signor, fait il, ne vaut celers;
Dou tornoi vos aport novelles.
Si m’ait Diex, elle sont belles?
Et respondi Girars de Los: „
‘Et mout me plait, et si de los
128 PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
Que en face crier de main
Que nuns ne traie au chans demain.’
‘—Sire, mais qu’il ne vos anuit,
Il vauroit miex encore ennuit,
S’iert la chose miex establie.’
Lors font desus une establie
Un hiraut monter maintenant,
Si li ont dit le covenant;
Et li hiraus en haut s’ezcrie:
‘Oiez que la bachelerie
De la feste vos fait savoir,
Que ja demain ni puet avoir
Joustes, et qui au chans trairoit
Ne qui pour jouster s’armeroit,
Il avroit perdu le cheval.
Atant est descendus aval,
Et tuit escrient: Il dit voir.
(3)	See p. 25, note 5. Le Roman de Rose ou de Guillaume de Dole^
publie d’apres le manuscrit du Vatican par G. Servois, Societe des
anciens textes fran^ais, Paris, 1893; 11. 2621-30. Delbouille (le
Romain du Castelain de Couci, 1936, infra cit.y p. 52) dates the
composition of this poem not earlier than 1210.
Lors s’en est issuz demanois;
Si fiert cheval des esperons:
О tot lx compegnons
Toz armez, les heaumes laciez,
Les penons au vent desploiez,
S’en vet vers les tornoiement,
Et hyraut apres lui tex c.
Quil font a merveille esgarder;
Et duit dient: ‘Car lai aler.
Cest Guillaumes de Dole, queles!
(4)	See p. 26, note I. Le Romain du Castelain de Couci et de la dame de
Fay el par Jakemes, edition etablie & 1’aide des notes de John E. Matzke
par Maurice Delbouille, Societ£ des anciens textes fran^ais, Paris,
1936; 11. 1301—6. The editor dates the composition of this poem
late in the thirteenth or early in the fourteenth century.
Hiraut crioient noblement:
Couchi, Couchi au vaillant homme
De cui de France jusqu’a Romme
Doit li renons de lui aler!
Couchi, au vaillant baceler,
Couchi au castelain, Couchi!
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDS 129
(5)	See p. 26, note 2. Le Tournoi de Chamency^ 11. 1922-5.
Jamais ne verrez avenir
Plus cruel jouste sanz abatre.
Li Hiraus crient trois et quatre,
Li uns ‘Lambour’, li autre ‘Amance’.
(6)	See p. 26, note 3. Ibid., 11. 283—4, 301-12.
Si tost com en la vile entrai,
Bruiant le hiraut encontrai:
Assis me sui et il lez moi.
Pour ce qu’il suet parler a moi
D’armes et de chevalerie,
Li ai commencie a enquerre
Qui fu chascunz et de quel terre.
Lors me respondit Bruiandiaus:
‘Je congnois grant partie d’iaus.
Cest la li cuens de Lucembourc,
Chevaliers preus et plain d’onor;
Apres, son frere Walerant,
Chevalier preu et compaignant,
Gent et curtois et large assdz.
(7} See p. 26, note 4. Ibid., 11. 798-9, 812-17.
Hyraut parmi les renz parolent
D’armes li uns encontre 1’autre.
Hyraus resont entalente
A parler d’armes, et disoit
Chascuns, qui son ami prisoit:
‘Cil doit bien faire par nature!’
‘Cis rent et paie sa droiture!’
‘Cis est biaus et bons assez!’
(8)	See p. 26, note 5. Ibid., 11. 1014—20, 1023.
Et la dame, quant elle pot
L’apelle et dist: ‘Rois, 9a venez,
De ma demande m’asenez’.
Li rois Maigniens avant sailli
Et la dame demande a li:
‘Rois, qui sont cil qui ont jouste,
A cui la jouste a tant coute’.
‘Dame, ce est Henri de Briei’.
i3o PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
(9)	See p. 26, note 6. Le Romain du Castelain de Couci, supra cit.,
IL 1010-16, 1050-4.
al jour,
Que li hiraut dirent: ‘Singnour,
Ales courier car di matin
Vous ferons nous lever matin
Car veilliet aves vous asses.
Atant est cescuns dessevres.
Et vont seoir et ca et la.
Sacies celle nuit peu dormirent,
Car hiraut par tout estourmirent
Par ces hosteus maint cevalier,
Criant qu’il voisent al moustier.
Il si firent hasteement.
(10)	See p. 26, note 7. L'Histoire de Guillaume le Marechai, Comte de
Striguil et de Pembroke, Regent d'Angleterre de 1216 d 1219,
роете fran^ais, publie pour la societe de Phistoire de France, par Paul
Meyer, Paris, 3 tomes, i, 1891; ii, 1894; iii, 1901. Tome i, p. 36,
11. 977-81.
Hirauz de armes releveor,
Menesterel avanceor
Qui les beaus cops voient et dient,
Apres lui s’arotent et crient:
‘Or $a! tuit a(l) bon chevalier’.
(11)	See p. 26, note 8. Statutes of the Realm, vol. i, p. 231; Anstis,
Register of the Garter, vol. i, p. 294.
E qe nul Roy des haraunz ne menestralz portent privez armez, ne
autres forz lur espees sanz poynte. E qe le Roys des harraunz eyent lur
houces des armes saunz plus.
(12)	See p. 27, note 5. Tournoy de Chawvency, 11. 2270—1.
Bien parolent de vous entr’iaus
Chevaliers, hiraus, menetrel.
(13)	See p. 27, note 6. L'Histoire de Guillaume le Marechai, tome i,
11. 5222-9.
Ve(i)rs est que Henri le Norreis,
Des que li reis s’esmuet e point,
Que lors se crie a icel point,
Qui que point amont ou aval:
‘Qa, Dex aTe al Mareschall’
Fait Henris, e chascun s’empresse
Si qu’il a entor lui tel presse
U nuls ne puet le main estendre.
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDS 131
(14) See p. 28, note 4. Ibid., 11. 3485-520.
Lors commensa un(s) chantereals
Qui ert hirauz d’armes nov(e)als,
E chanta novele chanson:
Ne sai qui louot ne que non,
Mais el refreit out: ‘Marechai,
Kar rrie donez un boen chevall’
Quant li Mareschals 1’entendi,
Unques puis de iloec n’atendi,
Einz se parti de la karole
Sanz faire en a nului parole:
Uns escuiers li amena
Son cheval, e il acena
Le hiraucel: eil s’aper^ut,
Apres lui son poeir corrut.
Ja veneient li josteor,
Cil qui se font avanceor
De comen^ailles comencier.
Cil qui n’out talent de teneier,
Le Mareschal, vers un s’adrece;
Tant s’afia en sa proece,
E en sa lance redde et forte,
Que de son cheval jus le porte,
Sanz nul autre conte cunter;
Puis fist le hiraucel monter;
E cil sans plus dire parole,
Se fiert о tot en la karole
E dist a toz: ‘Vez quel cheval!
Cest me dona le Mareschal.’
Estrangement s’en merveloent
Plusor qui uncore cuidoent
Qu’il fust uncore en la corole,
E molt en firent grant parole.
Le chevalier e les puceles.
Les dames e les damiseles
Distrent qu’il n’i aveit mes fait
El tornei(e)ment si beal fait.
(15) See p. 29, note 8. Le Tournoi de Chauvency^ 11. 675—88.
Et uns hyraus a un pie tort,
Qui a oci maint home a tort
Et blasme, pour le sien avoir,
Mist en braire tout son pooir:
32 PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
‘Curques! Curques au bon Ferci!
Halcions, Halcions ja le feri
De cinq lanses parmi sa teste!’
Ausiment crie come beste
Li hiraus en sori faus patois.
Sotins li a dist en sotois:
‘Tais tois, ribaus, tun’ies pas dignes
A parler d’armes, mais de pignes
Pour escurer ton hannepier,
Qui resamble tes en charnier.’
16)	See p. 29, note 9. Le Tournoi de Chauvency^ 11. 1126—31.
Hiraus braient come corbel,
Pour les plonmcs, non pour la charz
Oncques Hanris, qui fist 1’eschars,
N’ot de cent pars tel couvoitise
Comme uns hiraus quant il s’atise
A panre que il puet avoir.
17)	See p. 29, note 10. Ibid., 11. 1057-68.
Lez une estaiche m’ancoutai,
Si entendi et escoutai
Un gentil menetrel parler.
Henriet 1’oi apeler;
De Loon est, ce disoit on,
Si ne parloit mie breton
Mais un fran^ois bel et joli,
Et si mot furent si poll
Si bien taillie et si a point
Qu’il ni avoit ne pore ne point
De vens qui i fust mal apert,
Car il disoit tout en apert:
18)	See p. 30, note 2. Le Dit des Hyraus^ ed. Arthur Langfors,
Romania, tome 43, 1914, pp. 216-23, И- 48-5i-
Car tournoi ne furent pas fait
Premiers pour gainier chevaus,
Mais pour savoir qui ert vasaus
Du cors pour un grant fais souffrir.
19)	See p. 30, note 3. Ibid., II. 29, 39—42.
Tournoi resemblant parlement.
S(e)’il tienent longuement ce cas,
Il leur convenra avocas
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDS 133
Pour le solail, pour les bastons
Parti r ausi c’as champions.
(20)	See p. 30, note 4. Ibid., 11. 1-13.
Cuis qui n’ose riens entreprendre
Puet peu savoir et peu aprendre,
Mais cil qui par raison emprent
Il pue(t emjpenre et si aprent.
Pour 90U ne me puis plus tenir,
1(1) m’estuet hyraus devenir,
Car paresce avec couvoitise
Me semont souvant et atise
Et me dist que j’ai grant mestier
D’ entreprendre un legier mestier
Ou il ait pou painne et travail;
(Et) je ne truis en mon conseil
Nul milleur que d’estre hiraus.
(21)	See p. 31, note 1. Dits et Contes de Baudouin de Conde et de son
fils fie an de Conde, publie . . . par Aug. Scheier, Bruxelles, 1866,
tome i, p. 168, Li contes des hiraus, II. 459—80, 513-21.
De mon tans (9’ai bien en memoire),
Je vi qui d’une cote armoire
Et di uns dras lignes, sans mentir,
si peu me fuissent entir,
Et d’uns mais sollers feretes,
C’uns chivaliers ot jus jetes,
Estoit bien pares uns hiraus.
En tel abit, 9’os bien dire, iaus
Les vi aler de marce en marce.
S’on tourniast en Danemarche
Ou en Escoche ou en Yslande,
S’alaissent hiraut de Hollande
Ou de Flandres ou de Braibant
Ou d’ailleurs, li un escaibant
Ou clochant, к grant desonor,
Et a grant bonte querre onor;
S’avoient bailees et noires
Les chars en ces cotes armoires
Tous les estes, et les yviers
Estoient encor plus diviers
Car il avoient mout souvent
L’asaut de le plueve et dou vent
i34 PASSAGES ILLUSTRATING THE
Or ont cangiet tout cel abit
Li mal glout, qui tempres labit!
Il ont mis jus les hiraudies
Et viestent les cotes hardies
Et les robes as chevaliers.
Trop les ont en haus escaliers
Montes et d’orguel enaigris
Li chevalier, qui vair et gris
Lordounent par lor negligence.
(22)	See p. 31, note 2. Dits et Contes de Baudouin de Conde et de son
fils Jean de Conde\ p. 170, Li conies des hiraus, 11. 541-3.
Je li demandai: ‘Quels hom ieste?’
‘Quels hom je sui?’ respont cil beste.
‘K’en tient £ toi? Je sui hiraus’.
(23)	See p. 46, note 2. Le Romain du Castelain de fcouci, supra cii.,
11. 1119-24.
Un escu avoit a cine pieces,
Faissiet et de vair et de gueules,
Dont oissies hiraus de gueules
Crier: ‘Saint Jorge! ves le chi
Le boin Enguerran de Couchi
Celui qui biaus cos set donner!’
(24)	See p. 47, note 1. Der Karrenritter von Christian von Troyes^
ed. Wendelin Forster, Halle,. 1899, 11. 5553-65.
Lanceloz trestoz desarmez
S’estoit sor le lit acotez.
La ou il jut si povremant.
A tant ez vos un garnemant,
Un hiraut d’armes an chemise,
Qui an la taverne avoit mise
Sa cote avuec sa chauceure,
Et vint nuz piez grant aleure
Desafublez contre le vant.
L’escu trova a 1’uis devant,
Si 1’esgarda, mes ne pot estre
Qu’il coneust lui ne son mestre;
Ne set qui porter le devoit.
(25л) See p. 47, note ia, Fouke FitzWarin, ed Louis Brandin, Paris,
193°, P- 85,1- i9-
Il porta l’escu endentee,
Come les disours ont devisee:
En l’escu sunt douze dentz
De goules e de argentz.
EARLY HISTORY OF HERALDS 135
(25b) Ibid., p. ii, 1. 10.
E si se repeira a la foreste e se arma de ces armes vermails e vint ou
ces compaignons en le champ e si venqui le tornoy e purprint le champ
pur totes les gentz qe la vyndrent, dount jugement se prist entre tous
les grantz seignours e herrautz e disours.
(26) See p«. 47, note 2. Tournoi de Chauvency^ 11. 470-81.
Li chevaliers qui s’aprestoit
Contre lui, fu de vers Hainnaut.
Adont escrient cis hiraut.
Chascunz huia en son latin,
Et je crioie ‘Bazentin’
Que je ciuda que ce fust cil.
—‘Diable vos fait si soutil’,
Dist uns hiraus, ‘en hiraudie’.
—‘Tais toi, mesias, Dex te maudie,
C’est Bazentins.’—4Vos i mentez!’
De feris fu entalentez
Pour ce que jil clamai mesel.
APPENDIX С
ORDINANCES OF THOMAS, DUKE OF CLARENCE, FOR THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE OFFICE OF ARMS
Discussed on pp. 59-63; here quoted from ,two early sixteenth-
century copies formerly belonging to and perhaps written by Sir Thomas
Wriothesley, British Museum MSS. Lansdowne 285, fols. 207—9,
and Additional 4101, fols. 62—4, and from an early seventeenth-
century copy in the hand of Augustine Vincent, Windsor herald,
College of Arms MS. Vincent 151, ‘Presidents’, pp. 64-8. The text
of these three is practically identical.
‘Les ordonnances et estatutz que furent faictes de par le treshault et
puissant Prince Thomas de Lancastre filz et frere au tresnobles Roys
d’Angleterre et de France, Due de Clarence, Counte d’Aumarle
grant Seneschal d’Angleterre et Connestable etc: pour reformation
et bonne gouvernement en 1’office d’armes.
Premierement nous voulons et ordonnons que Jarretiere Roy
d’armes des Anglois ait et jouysse toutes ses libertees et franchises
comme Souverain en 1’office d’Armes, et que tous aultres Roys
d’armes herauldzet poursuyvantz 1’honneurent et reverencent comme
chief et principal dudit office selon la teneur de sa creacion.
Item que tous les aultres Roys d’armes honnoreront et reveren-
ceront Fung 1’autre selon 1’ancienete et creacion de chacun comme son
compaignon et frere d’armes en toutes manieres tant en parolle que en
faict entre toutes manieres de gens pryveement et apertement aussi
bien estrangers eulx meismes comme aultres en tout temps et lieu et
que nul d’eulx reprouve 1’autre sur paine.
Item nous voulons que chacun herault en semble maniere se porta
en vers son compaignon et herault comme devant, et que chacun d’eulx
courtoisement et reverentement soy comporte envers tous Roys
d’armes ainsi qu’il appartient et les honnourent en faict et en dit, et
semblablement nous voulons que chacun poursuyvant soy maintiengne
humblement et benignement portant due reverence a tous les Roys et
heraultz d’armes ainsi que dit est sur paine.
Item nous voulons et estroictement chargeons et commandons que
Jarretiere generalement et tous aultres Roys d’armes en leur propre
prouince d’oresenavant facent leur debvoir diligentement d’avoir
congnoissance de tous les estatz nobles et gentilz habitantz & demou-
rantz en icelle, les noms des ditz estatz et nobles et principallement de
ceulx qui doibvent porter cotes au service nostre Souverain seigneur,
son lieutenant ou Commissaires de cestuy Royaume, et que tous leurs
ORDINANCES OF THOMAS, DUKE OF CLARENCE 137
noms et armes soient registrez et les noms de leur yssue avecques leur
vraye difference pour record et perpetuelle memoire sur paine.
Item nous voulons que nul des quatre Roys d’armes dedens la
province et marches d’aucun aultre donne armes a aucune maniere de
personne s’elles ne sont vrayement registrees au registre du1 premier
Roy d’armes ou1 du Roy d’Armes de la marche ou les ditz Armes sont
donnees et que se soit aux coustz et labeur de celluy qui les donne ou
de celluy qui prent icelles, et que ce soit dedens six sepmaines apres
que les ditz armes sont donnees sur peine de Cent Solz Sterlings de
celluy qui donne les ditz armes et s’ainsi ne le fait a son grant peril sur
peine.
Item nous Voulons que aucun herault ne presume entreprendre a
donner aucune maniere d’armes de sa propre auctorite a aucune
personne sans le consentement licence et seel du premier Roy d’armes
ou du Roy d’armes de la marche & province ou la requeste est faicte
et que armes ne soient pas donnees a aucune vile ou deshonneste per-
sonne mais a ceulx qui sont vertueux honnestes et de bonne substance
et que ce soit fait par bonne deliberation sur peine de parjure.
Item nous voulons que aucune ne presume sur luy entreprendre
pour faire serche ou avoir congnoissance d’aucunes armes d’aucun
estat ou gentilhomme sans la licence du premier Roy d’armes ou du
Roy d’armes de la marche dont est ledit gentilhomme sur paine.2
Item affin que plus grant honneur meilleure regie et gouvernement
puissent etre pourveuz entre tous les officiers d’armes a leur comfort et
consolation, et aussi pour augmentacion de plus grande science estre
journellement entre eulx obtenue a 1’honneur et bon plaisir du Roy
aussi pour faire corrections et pugnissementz des offences et pour avoir
due reformacion nous voulons que le premier Roy d’armes gcnerale-
ment et chacun Roy d’armes en sa marche duement tiennent leurs
chapitres ainsi que necessite le requiert, Et que nul Roy d’armes refuse
a monstrer et enseigner aucun herault ou poursuyvant qui de aucunes
doubtes les vouldront courtoisement mouvoir. Et se touchant ce ne
leur povoient aider adoncqucs il monstrera la ditc doubte au Con-
nestablc pour avoir la declaration d’icelle. Nous voulons aussi que
s’aucun poursuyvant demande aucune doubte a aucun Roy d’armes
que. le dit Roy d’armes luy demonstrera ou aultrement le limittcra a
ung herault qui touchant ce 1’enseignera s’ainsi le scait faire, Et si non
adoncqucs le dit Roy d’armes 1’enseignera s’il le scait, ou aultrement il
provocquera ung chapitre auquel la dite doubte sera la solve par tout
le chapitre.
Item nous voulons quo cn chacun chapitre certaines doubtes soient
1 Struck out of Lansd. 285.
2 Add. 4101 explains in the margin ‘payne d’estre repute pour parjure, etc.’
138 ORDINANCES OF THOMAS, DUKE OF CLARENCE
moeuz pour 1’augmentacion de la science, et les dictes doubtes resolvees
par bonne deliberacion et determinees veritablement, pour perpetuelle
memoire soient registrees sur paine.
Item que chacun officier d’armes use et hante honestes places et
bonne compaignie et qu’il evite toutes places et personnes qui mani-
festement et apertement sont scandalisees et qu’il soit de bon et hon-
neste comportement et maniere, qu’il se garde de honte et de vicieux
langaige, et sur tout riens de parler apertement aucune villanye en
presence du peuple, et en temps convenyent qu’il s’applicque a lire
livres de bonnes moeurs eloquence, cronicques actes et gestes d’hon-
neur faictz d’armes, et la propriete des couleurs, herbes et pierres,
affin que par ce ilz puissent plus proprement et convenientement
assigner armes a chacune personne ainsi qu’il appertient si que par
icelie grace il puissent estre plus acceptables et commendables et dignes
d’avoir preferrement et approucher et venir a honneur sur paine.
Item nous voulons que nul herault presume de deviser aucuns
enterrementz pour aucun estat gentil ou noble homme ne de mettre
sur leur costes d’armes avecques leurs appertenaunces sans la licence
du premier Roy d’armes ou du Roy d’armes de la marche. Et que nul
des aultres Roys d’armes soy presume mesler en aultres marches sans
licence comme dessus est relate sur paine.
Item que nulle manniere d’officier d’armes d’icy en avant soy com-
plaigne a aucun estat ou gentilhomme encontre aucun officier d’armes
fors seulement a la compaignie des Roys et officiers d’armes premiere-
merit., lesquelz redreceront ladite complainte entre eulx meismes ou
aultrement en leur chapitre indifferentement et egalement sans aucune
faveur ou parcialite. Et s’aucune redresse ne peult estre la obtenue
adoncques se peult complayndre au Connestable pour avoir sur ce
reformacion s’il est possible.
Item nous voulons et chargeons que toutes manieres de solemnitees,
actes solemnelz et faitz des nobles aussi bien touchant les faitz d’armes
comme aultrement soient veritablement et indifferentement registrez,
sans faveur, aucune parcialitee ou plaisir, par le premier Roy d’armes
s’il est present et par le Roy d’armes de la province, et avecques
1’advis et assent des aultres Roys d’armes, et que les ditz officiers
d’armes devant aucune solemnite ou solempne acte d’armes tiennent
ung chapitre et communicquent entre eulx mesmes la matiere.
APPENDIX D
THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530
Discussed on pp. 118—19; quoted by the courtesy of Sir William Dug-
dale, Baronet, from the manuscript at Merevale Hall, Dugdale MS. 8,
' fols. 73—-7 b.
Ex veteri MS. penes Guibbonem Goddard de hospicio Lincolniensi
Arm: 30 Martii A° 1661.
Visitations in London.
A° 1530 Md, the yere of ouer Lord a° M.VcXXXto A°q. xxii° R3
22. H 8. Henrici viii that Thomas Hawlay alias Carliell Herauld
of Armes to the right highe and mighte Prince the King ouer
Soveran above-wretyn, as Debite and Marschall of Armes to the
ryghte onerabyll Thomas Benold alias Clarencieux King of Armes
of the Sowthe partes of thes Realme of Yngland, made Visita-
tions thorow London, for to corecte, deface and take away all
maner of Armes wrongfully borne, or being falce Armory; ore any
markes or devyces put in Scochyns, Squares or Losenges; in Baners,
Penons or Standers used agen the Lawes of oner; them to take as ys
afore wrytyne to the behougthe of ye said Clarencieux King of Armes,
in thys maner and order as hereafter followthe.
Powles Church in London.
Item, the yere above wretyn, and on the xxviiith day of July the said
Carliel Herauld of Armes fyrst begane at Powles the said Visitacions;
bycauce hyt ys the head and Cathedral Chyrche of Londonn; whereas
the said Carliell Herauld of Armes first schowd the Kings he com-
mandment unto a ryghte onerable man, on Doctor Smythe that tyme
being Debyti for the Beschopp, whos name was Doctor Stookyslay,
that tyme beyng on the Kyng’s besines beyensay: the said Doctor
Smythe resavyd the said comandement ryght reverendly; cofnanding
a Verger to wayte of the said Herauld of Armes; wthyn in the said
Cherche of Polles and to schow to hyme any thynge that he dyssired
to se.
Soe the said Carliell Herauld of Armes, and the Verger, and on
Purculyus Pursyvant, watyng on the Herauld, passing in to the said
Powlys, and soe begane in the body of the said Chirche, wheras the
said Herauld defaced and tooke away dyverse Scochyns of Armes un-
lawfully borne; and dyverse Scochynse wth markes and tokinse in
them agen the Lauce of oner; And so passing in to the Quere, wheras
he defaced and towk away divers Scochyns unlawfully used in lyke
I4O THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530
maner; amonge whom was takyn away the Armes that on Doctor
Styllyngton Archidiacon of Norff; satte on his Ston, wher as he lythe
latly bered, for his wrong eusing, wth dyvers other: wheras lythe in the
syd of the said Quere on the lefte hand John Duke of Langcastre and
Dame Blange his wyffe, lying in pykter of whyte Alyblaster; holdyng
hys hand in here hand, with ther cronals on ther hedys, onerably as
partenyth to the state of a Duke. Also the sade Duke lythe in his Cote
of Armes graven forthe of the sade Alyblaster, wheron he berythe the
Armes of Yngland wth a Labell of iij pontes silver, for hymeselve:
and for Dame Blanche the Duchys his wyffe, castell and lyons; and soe
he beryth on his said Cotte of Armes, England, Castell, and Lyon per
paill. Also the said Duke gaffe the said Cherge of Paulies all the
Landes that they have within a lytell.
Also with owt the Qwer at the upper ynd of the Cherge, a lytill
frome the scryne of Saincte Earcnolde, lythe a Knyght of tlje Order of
the Garter, with the Garter abutte his Leke; and on hyme a fayre long
Slatte-Stone wherin he lyghe pykter in brasse; and on the said Ston in
dyvers places, the Garter sett and grave in the said metell of brasse;
whos name ys ther ingraven. And calld Monsr Aleyn Burschate: but
ther ys maid ther no memory what tyme nor what Dayte, he was ther
beryd; but hyt semyth by the old and anschant lying, hyt schuld be the
days of Henry the Vth of whos sooll Jhesu have merce.
Also they tak King Ethelbert for ther founder of the said Cherge
of Poulles.
The Chapell in the Church-Yoerd of Powles.
Item, the same day vissited the letyll Chapell, and the Schords within
the saide Cherge of Polles; and ther defaced and took away all seche
Skochines, Squares, and Losenges wrongfully eusid, agen the Lause of
Armes, and the onerse of Noble men: Also the same day visited Sfc
Michaelles in the Querne, beside Powles: and ther defaced and took
away divers skochynes wrong and unlawfully eused.
The Gray Friers.
Item, the yer of ye King ouer Soveran Lorde above wretyn the said
Carliel Herauld of Armes viseited the Gray Frerys, and ther defaced
and touk away divers Scochyns and Markes wrongly eused: the wich
visitacion was on the viii day of Auguste, & soe frome the body of the
Cherge to the Qwere, wher as lythe bered on the lefte hand, by syde
the Auter, onerable, the Hart of Quenne Elynor Quenne of Yngland,
wyffe to Kyng Henry the iii.
Alsoe in the mydyst of the Qwere ryght sumtuisly lythe Margaret
Quenne of Yngland, ij wyff unto Edward the fyrste. Alsoe in the
said Qwere lythe Isabella Quenne to Edward Carnarvon. And
bysyde her lythe Jane Quenne of Scotts: and John Duke of Burbun,
THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530	141
and Dame Isabel! hys wyffe, wth dyvers others ryght noble personages
in the said Quere, & in the yles of the said Cherge. And the sayde
Freres holdyth the Cete of Loundon for their funders.
St. Pulchres withowt New-gate.
Item, the yere of ouer Soveran Lord above wretyn, the xii daye of
.Auguste the said Heraulde of Armes vysadyd Sainct Pulcurse withe
owt Nugate: and ther defaced and touk away dyvers Scochens wrong-
ysly eused, & also Markys of Marchands and other put into Scochyns
as tokyns of oner. And frome thence the same day the said Herauld
whent to the whytte Freres in Fiet stret, wheras he defaced and towk
away dyvers skochens unlawfully eused; whereas lythe beryd Sr
Robert Knolys ryght worschiply in the body of the Cherge, wheras
he beryth upon hyme in his Cotte-Armour hys Armes: that ys to say,
gulys on a Cheveron sylver three [roses on] Roses on the Feyld: And
apone hys helme on a Wrethe gulys and sylver, a Ramse Head cupe,
on the laste. And by syde hyme lythe the Lade hys wyffe, bothe lying
in Pykter of Alyblaster on a Towme of Marbyll ryght onerable.
The said Knolles whas the joly mane of Ware in France. And to the
said Freres the Kyng is ther Funder. And also in the Qwere of the
said Freres, lythe dyvers great Astates.
Saint Dunstans in Fletstreet.
Item, the xiij day of the same monthe the said Herauld of Armes
visedid Saincte Dounstance in Fletstret be syde Tempul-Bar, the wich
is caled Sainct Dounstance in the West; and ther defaced & touk away
dyvers Scochons wrongysly eusyd. And the same daye to St Bryd’s in
Fletstret, & also ther defaced & touk away dyvers scochens wrongysly
eusyd agen the Lause of Armes; wheras lyese beryd in the Qwere of
the ryght hand Sr Water Grefyth ryghte onerably; & over hyme hys
Cotte'of Armes, Penon & Hachments.
Sainct Martyns within Lud-gate.
Item, the xx daye of the same monthe, the said Herauld of Armes
visadyd Sainct Martyn’s within Ludgate, and ther defaced & touk
away dyvers Skochyns unlaufully eusyd; wheras lythe beryd Margaret
Lady Aburgany, wyose departed the yere of our Lord a M iiijcLXXX
xviij daye of September, wth dyvers other worschippfull parsonages in
the Cherge, of whos soollys Jcsu have of hys grace merce.
Sainct Grygory within Ludgate.
Item, the same daye, the sayd Herauld vissidyd St Gregores besyde
Powlles, also ther defaced and towk away dyvers Scochyns wrongisly
eused agen the Lause of Armes.
142 THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530
The Blake Freres.
Item, the xvi day of the same monthe, the said Herauld of Armes
vissydyd the blak Freres, and ther defaced & touk away dyvers
Scogins of Armes wronysly eused, and Markes borne insted of tokyns
of oner; wheras lythe beryd in the said Qwere Lord William Cortnay
Erie of Devon: on the ryght hand on the side on the said Qwere. And
also ther lythe the second sone of George Earle of Schroisbery, with
dyvers other noble parsonages. Also in the body of the said Cherge on
the Northe syde lythe Sr Thomas Brandonne Baneret, and Knyght
on the Garter, and over hyme hys Cote of Armes, Baneral & Hach-
ments.
Also on the same syd lyese Sr John Wyngfild Knyght, & over hyme
hys Cote of Armes & Hachments The wyche Sr Thomas Brandonne
desesyd the yere of ouer Lord MVCXI [яс], the fyrste yere of the
Kyng and Soverane Lord Kyng Henry the viij. And on the west syde
of the said Cherge, lythe Sr Thomas Par and Sr Robert Grene ryght
onerably.
A Chappell besyde Powles.
Item, the same day visedyd a lytyll Chapell bysyd Powles the wych ys
caled	and ther defaced and touk
away dyvers Scogins wrongisly borne, and dyvers Markes in Scochyns
as tokens of oner.
Austyn Freers.
Md the xvij daye of the same monthe, the said Herauld of Armes
vissidyd the Freres Augustins, wheras he defaced and touk away
dyvers Scogins of Armes, the wyche wher borne & eused agane the
Lause of Armes, wheras lythe beryd in mydys of the Qwere of the
said Freres, Lucia Doghter of Lorde Barnaberon Duke of Mellayn
& cosen.to the Emperour Sighemound, the yere of ouer Lorde a
Miiijcxxiiij. the wyche Lady was Countys of Кente. Also lyese beryd
in the said Qwere Richerd Erlle of Arondell & of Surray, and Lorde
Waren, wyche departed the yere of ouer Lorde Miijcxcvij. Also ther
lyese in the said Qwere John Lorde Vere Erlle of Oxenforthe; the
wyche departed the yere of ouer Lorde a MiijcLXI.
Item, the upper ynd of the Body of the said Cherge, on the Northe
syde, lythe Lorde Williame Markis Barkley and Erie of Nottingham;
the wyche departed ye yere of ouer Lorde MiiijcLxxx. xi of Jenuary.
And a lytell besyde the saide Markis, lythe Lord Moris Barkley, the
wyche departed the yere of ouer Lord a Miiijcvi. Also in the said
Qwere lythe the Lorde Wyliam Bowser Lord Fevaren; the wyche
.departed the yere of ouer Lorde Miiijc LX. IX. on Sainct Katrene’s
daye.
THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530	143
Sainct Mary Hyll.
Item, the xviij day of ye same monthe, the said Herauld visedyd the
Cherge on Sainct Mary Hyll, & ther defaced and touk away dyvers
Scogens not laufully eused, & Markes set as tokyns of oner agen the
Lausse of Armes; wheras lythe beryd dyvers Marchans of good
repytaschons. And ye same day, from thence the said Herauld went
to Barking Cherge, and ther defaced and touk away dyvers Scogens of
Armes, and Markes in Schogyns wrongysly eused agen the Lausse
of Armes.
Sainct Dunstance in the Este.
Item, the yere of ouer Soveran Lorde ye Kyng above wretyn ye fyrstc
day of Sept: the said Herauld vesydyd Sencte Dunstance in the Este,
& ther defaced & took away divers Schochens wornfully borne & eused
agen the Laues of Armes; wheras lythe beryd dyvers worschipfull
Marchands.
Toure Hyll.
Item, the iij day of Sept: the said Herauld vesydyd St Mary Abbay on
Toure Hyll: and ther defaced & touk away dyvers schogens wronysly
eused; wheras lythe beryd in ye Chapell of the Northesyde of the
Chyrge Sr Thomas Mongombrey, Dame Lore Countesse of Or-
monde his wyffe, and over hys Cote of Armes; that is to say, gulys a
Cheveron, Armes [яс] between iij flore de Lysys gold, upon hys
Helme on a Wrethe sylver & gulys a Flur de lys gold, manteled gulys,
dobled Armes [яс].
Visitatio Civitaus A vysytacione made the xxvijth day of Marche,
London per Thoma the xxjifjth yere of ouer Soverayn Lorde Kynge
Rx Armor. z4° H. 8. НепгУ Уе vlIJth ЬУ Mr Clarencieux King of
Armes of the Sowthe parties of England.
Furste in Saint Mary Abbey at the Towre Hyll, in the Chapell of
ouer Ladie lies beryed, as ys wryttyn on the other syde, Sr Thomas
Mongomery, & hys two wyvys; and in the same Chapell lyes William
Belknape Esquyer somtyme Lorde of Knoll; and one of the heyers of
Raffe Butler Lord Sudley & Tresorer of Englande.
Also ther lye’s in a Tombe one of the dowghttyrs of the sayd Mon-
gomery, whyche was maryed to one of ye Mortymers. Also ther lye’s
besyde the Tombe of Sr Thomas aforesayde, Alice Spice Suster &
Eire to the said Sr Thomas; whyche hade two husbandys, furste to
Clement Spice of blake Notley in Essex.
In the Sowthe syde of the Qwere of the Churche aforesayde, lyes Sr
Niclas Loveyne sometyme Lorde of Este Smythefyld, And besyde
hyme in the flore lye’s hys wyffe, whych was dowghtter to Sr Wylliam
Powlteney; whyche Sr Wylliam was furste Lorde of Este Smythefylde
144 THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530
aforesayde: And the sayde wommane was furste maryed to Sr John
Pekebryge Knyghte. In the sayde Quere before the hyge Awter lyes
buryed Dame Elsabethe, Wyffe to Lord Robart Ratclyffe, Lorde
Fytz-Wauter, Earle of Sussex; whyche Elsabethe was one of the
Dowghttyrs to Edward late Duke of Bokyngham. And besydys the
same Dame Elsabethe, lye’s George Ratclyffe seconde sone to the said
Lorde and Lady, whyche dyed withowt Issue.
And on the other syde of the sayde Dame Elsabethe lyes ryghte
before the hyge awter, undyr a Stone, Dame Jane Stafford Dowghtter
to Homphrey Duke of Bokynghame, and wyffe to Sr Wylliam
Knyvet Knyghte.
Also ther lye’s in the sayd Qwere on the Northe syde in a Tombe,
Lewis John Esquyer, and his wyffe, dowghtter to the Erie of Oxforde.
And besyde hys Tombe lyes Ellyanor dowghter to the said Lewis
John, whyche had iiij husbandes: that is to say, John Whyte, Sr
William Tyrell Knyghte, & Sr Harry Fyttz lewse and Thomas
Gaithe Esquyer, Trcsorer to Edward late Duke of Bokynghame.
Also in a Chappell withowt the Qwere dore, on theSowthesyde, lye’s
Sr Thomas Charles sometyme Lyeffe tennant of the Towre of Londone.
Also at the Qwer dore, lye’s Water Haward, sometime Secretary to
the Lord Treasorer of England.
And also ther lye’s Elsabethe Rowley Gentyll womane.
Also ther lye’s in a Tombe in Saint Annys, Chapell on ye Sowthe-
Syde of ye Church Sr John Mongomery, eldyr brother to Sr Thomas.
In the same Chapell lye’s Sr Andrew Cavendysse & Dame Rose hys
wyffe.
Also on the Northe syde lye’s John Walden Esquyer, & Elsabethe hys
wyffe. They take for ther furste founder ther, King Edward the iijd.
Saint Katryns besyde the Towre.
Ther lye’s in a Tombe on the Northe-Syde of the Qwer, Duke John
of Excester, and Dame Anne Countes of Hontyngdone hys furste
wyffe, & Anne Countes of Dowghtter to ye Erie of Stafford.
Item, in a Chapell of ouer Lady in a Tombe of Marbell lye’s Dame
Anne	wyffe of John Duke of Excester & Dowghter to
John Erie of Salysbery.
In the Sowthe-Side of ye Qwer, lye’s in a Tombe of Marbull,
Thomas Stydolfe and Elysabeth hys wyffe.
In the Qwere lye’s Sr Stephen Scrowpe Knyght: & besyde hyme undyr
another Stone, lyes hys wyffe, & Sr John Scrowpe. Ther lye’s also in
the said Quere undyr dyverce Stones, Thomas & Edward Sydney,
Wylliam Rollyssley, Gydo Ellys, Thomas Walsyngham, Robarde
Wylde, & Thomas Ballard. They take Mawde the Emperes for theys
Founders.
THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530	145
Ouer Lady of Barkinge Chapell in Lond:
At the Northe Ende of the hyge Awter in the sayde Chappell, lye’s in
a Tombe Sr Robard Tate Knyghte, somtyme Mayer of London, &
merchant of the Staple of Callays, & Margery hys wyffe Dowghtter to
. And at the Sowthe end of the said Awter, lye’s in the Wall,
John Cadell, somtyme Merchant of the Staple of Callays. And in ye
Qwere of the same, lye’s Wylliam Spay, Thomas Mowbray of Yorke-
shire Esquyer, John Crosse, Wylliam Bryltone. And without the
Quere dore of the said Chappell within a trylys barryd wth irone, lies
Sr John Rysley Knyght. And ryght agaynste hyme on the other syde
in a Tombe made in the Wall, lies William Beaufise Esquyer; and
by hyme under a slate Stone, lye’s Thomas Frowyke Esquyer, And
beneath theyme in the Wall, in the Northe syde, lye’s Robart Ynge
& Agnes hys wyffe.
The crossed Frers in London.
Ther lye’s beryed before the Hyghe Awter Sr John Skevyngtone
Knyghte, late Sheryphe of Londone, in a Tombe.
In the Northe syde of the Churche lyes John Rofte late Mayor of the
Citte of Londone, in a Tombe of Marbull. Also undyr a Stone lye’s
Marget late the wyffe of John Sakevyle of Sussex; wyche Marget was
one of the Dowghtters to Sr William Bullayne Knyght. Also ther
lye’s Robard Plomer somtyme Sheryffe of Essex, Sr Thomas Bawde,
Edward. Wroth, Sr Franceys Maisen stranger; Nyclas Kyryell Es-
quyer, Olyver Tomer somtyme Porter of the Toure of Londone, and
Fremanne of the Company of the Vynteners of the sayd Cytte; Elysa-
bethe somtyme the wyffe of Nyclas Condorow Gentyllman, Thomas
Olyver Esquyer.
Saint Bottolphe wth owt Algate.
In ouer Lady Chappell on the Northe-Syde of the Qwere undyr a
Stone lye’s Dame Elysabethe Tyrell wyddow. Before the hyge Awter
undyr a Stone lye’s Sr Watter Mancell Knyghte. And bynethe in the
Walkynge-Place of the sayd Churche lye’s Reynold Basset Gentyll-
man.
Saint Olophe besyde the crossyd Frerys.
One the Sowthe ende of the hyge Awter, in a Tombe, lye’s beryed
William Sely and Agnes hys wyffe. And at the Northe ende of the
sayd Awter, lye’s in a Tombe, Sr Richard Haddone Knyghte, som-
tyme Mayer of London.
In the Sowthe Chappell lyes undyr dyvers stones, Thomas Bekyng-
hamGentyllman; Wylliam Bellys gentyllman; and Margery hys wyffe.
4607	r
i46 THE VISITATION OF LONDON, 1530
In the Northe Chappell lye’s Richard Wod gentyllman, sometyme
Mayer of the Stapyll of Callys; & Alice hys wyffe dowghtter to
Tate. Cysten Rawson Gentyllman, Sr John Brerton Knyght, late
of Chessher.
Before the hyge Awter, lye’s Mr Thomas Waggan Gentyllman.
And before the Qwyer dore, lye’s one John, sometime Clarencieux
Kynge of Armes; and Harry Moorton Gentyllman.
APPENDIX E
FROM COLLEGE OF ARMS MS. ST. GEORGE, VOL. VI,
PP- 72-3
Instructions to be observed in the Visitation of Northamptonshire
and Rutland-by Francis Burghill, Esqr. Somerset Herald and Gregory
King Rouge dragon Officers of Armes, Marshals and Deputies to Sir
Henry St. George Knt. Clarenceux King of Armes for those two
Counties Ano. Dni. 1681.
1	st. In the taking of Descents, you shall begin with the Grand-
father and Grandmother of the person entring, or higher if the Case
require, and the Entrer be able to give you a Certain Account, and
bring down the Descent to the Father and Mother, Uncles and Aunts,
Brothers and Sisters of the person So Entring, with his and their
respective Marriages and Issue, and the times of decease of the parents,
Ancestors and other Relations of the person Entring with the places
of Burial, and the Severall Ages of the Enterer and his Issue, and such
other of his Relations mentioned in the Descent as are living at the
time of the Entry made with the Severall Offices, Commands or
Employments of Honour or Trust, Enjoyed by them, or any of them,
now or in their Life time, or as much of this as the Entrer can inform
you of.
2	. In the Allowance of Titles, You shall Enter the person, whose
descents You take with no other Titles, but such as they may justly
and lawfully bear according to the Law of Armes: And you shall In-
form the Severall Knts. of his Majesties proclamation for Registring
the Times of their respective Knighthoods, and the Danger of neglect-
ing the same.
And you shall allow the Title of Esqr. to these and no other.
I.	The heir Male of the Younger Son of a Nobleman.
2.	The heir Male of a Knight.
3.	Officiary Esqrs. Vizt. Such who are made so by the King by
putting on a Collar of S.S. or such who are so Virtute Officii
without that Ceremony as the high-Sheriff of a County, and a
Justice of Peace, during their being in Office or Commission,
with this Caution that you always Enter the said Office or
Qualification in Special terms. As for Serjeants at Law, Doctors
in Divinity, and dignified prebends you shall Register them by
those Titles or Qualifications only, but you shall accept them in
Quality of Esqrs. Barristers at Law, you shall Enter by that
Title, but you shall accept them as Gentlemen only, unless
otherwise qualified to bear the Title of Esqr.
3.	In the Entring of Armes, you shall Enter no Armes to any pedi-
148 COLLEGE OF ARMS MS. ST. GEORGE
gree without the same be clearly and fully proved unto you, either by
the former Books or such authorities, as shall be produced unto you,
and in either case you shall particularly enter the said Proof. And in all
doubtfull Cases, You shall give them Respite till the first or Second
Term, then next Ensuing at your discretion for making out a due
proof unto Clarenceux King of Armes of the Armes or Crest by them
pretended unto, which you shall however in the Mean time take
Notice of with a Memorial of the time so by you allowed for proving
the same: And where You shall Enter any Quarterings with Armes,
You shall as near as you Can Express therewith the Names to whom
Such Quartered Coats belong.
4.	As to Sr Edward Byssh’s Grants, You shall Inform all those who
shall produce unto you any Grants of Arms from Sr Edward Bysshe
Clarenceux King of Arms the Copies, Minutes or Dockets whereof
were not brought into the College of Armes by him in his lifetime,
that the same cannot be allowed till the Earl Marshals Pleasure be
known therein, taking in the meantime an Abstract or Copy of the said
Grant.
5.	As to the Differences of younger Branches, You shall Insert the
known filial distinctions for the imediate Younger sons of the Eldest
House but for more remote Descendants, and for the younger Sons of
younger Sons You shall respite the Assigning such Differences to the
King of Arms of the Province.
6.	As to Signing the Escocheons you Shall keep a Note or Catalogue
of Such Escocheons as you shall deliver out in your Visitation under
your hands and deliver in a Copy thereof with your Notes and Gather-
ings of Descents.
7.	As to Church Notes, You shall as you have opportunity take
Notice of the severall Armes and Monuments in Churches or else-
where, and bring in your Collection thereof with the other Gatherings
of your Visitation.
8.	As to Fees, You shall receive and take for your Severall Entries
the fee formerly received and taken in like Cases, vizt.
1.	From ye Nobility Such Reward or Gratuity as their Lo₽s shall
freely present you with, without Claiming any Certain Summe.
2.	From Corporations and Bodies Politique five Marks for the
more Eminent, and Considerable, and for others from 50s. to
30s. according to the ability of Such Corporation Company or
Society as your Discretion shall direct you.
3.	From Every Baronet, and Knt. fourty Seven Shillings Six pence
4. From Every Esqr. by Birth or Office, a Serjeant at Law, Dr. in
Divinity and Dignified Prebend, Thirty seven Shilling Six pence
5. From Every Gentleman of Coat Armour, Twenty Seven Shil-
lings Six pence.
COLLEGE OF ARMS MS. ST. GEORGE 149
Provided that if any of the Degrees aforesaid being Gentleman of
Coat Armour be in poverty or Distress, and you be well assured
thereof, that in Such Case you Register the Same Gratis.
9. You shall make a fair Transcript or Duplicate of the Descents
by You thus Collected, with the Arms fairly tricked, and bring in the
same together with the Originals within three Months after your
Survey is perfected, but you shall by no means make any private Trans-
script or Duplicate of the said Pedigrees or Armes.
10. And Lastly Whosoever shall appear before you and publickly
disown his right to Arms, or to the Titles of Esqr. or Gentleman, You
Shall Require him to Signify the Same by the Subscription of his hand;
provided that the person so disclaiming be not a known Gentleman of
Bloud and Coat Armour.
APPENDIX F
BENOLT’S INVENTORY
(See pp. iio—11)
fo. 189 The bookes of late apparteynyng unto Thomas Benoit
alias Clarencieux king of armes. And by hym yeven in his late
wyll and testament unto Thomas Hawley then Carleil & nowe
Norrey king of armes and after the decesse of the sayd Norrey
ever after to remaine unto who so ever shalbe Clarencieux.
[I]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]

Furst a booke of the holeA bownd in
Crosserowe of gentilmensl boorde &
armes both paintyd and the covered wb
blasons writt	, J ledr.
fp. Item a booke named the! painted
Erles Marshalles booke for bownd in
to regester all the armes parche-
yeven by Clarencieux J ment.
.0. Item a booke of Visitation^ paintedw4
of many shires with London men of
and other noble recordes armes
made by Willm. Hawkes- >bownd in
low alias Clarencieux king boordes
of armes.	covered
/ w4 ledr.
Item a booke of Visitation ofy
many shires wt. Lond. and bownd in
princes painted wt. men of I boordes
armes made by Roger Legh- covered
als. Clarencieux king of wt. leder
armes.	;
Item a booke made by Tho-1
mas Benoit als. Clarenc. of
divers knyghtes armes and
standartes wt* all the Visita-
tions of burialles in the
churches of London painted
and writtyn papr. bownd in
bourde.	j
[2] L.6.	[3] p. 114 supra; RCCA, 66.
[4] pp. 111-15 supra; CEMRA, 96; RCCA, 66; Brit. Mus. MSS. Harl. 42505
and Add. 45133-	[5] A.17.
BENOLT’S INVENTORY
151
ф__ф
Item a booke wryttyn by'
Willm. Whityng alias Hun-
tingdon herauld & after
bownde in
Chester of Cronicles in
frenche of popes emperours
& kinges of Englond wt. the
armes of divers gentilmen
painted.	j
white
parche-
ment.
Item a booke of Visitations''
made by Thomas Benoit als.
Clarencieux of the shires of
Kent Sussex Sutherey and >
Hampshire &c. in paper
painted & written.
Item a booke of Visitations made by
Thomas Benoit als Clarencieux of
Hamshire and Somersetshire.
Item a booke of Visitations made by T.
Benoit afc Clarencieux of Devonshire &
Cornewail.
Item a booke of Visitations made by
Thos. Benoit ats Clarencieux in the
xxiij* yere of king H. viij.
>^0 Lancaster.
[I3J
The booke of Visitations made by T.
Benoit als Clare, of Sutherey and the
Yle ofWyght.
Item the booke of Visitations made by
T. Benoit als. Clare. Kente & Sussex.
M D. 13. -
[10] See p. 117: ? H. 20.
[13] See 139-46; RCCA, 62, 68.
Item a Booke of Visitations made by T.
Hawley alias Carlille herauld marshall
to T. Benoit in divers churches in and
about London in the xxij yere of К. H.
viijth.
Item a Booke of Visitations of Wales
made by Willm. fellowe als. Lancastre
in the name and by the auctorite of T.
Benoit.
[9] H. 18.
[11] 1st H. 7 (RCCA, 67).
[14] H. 8 (RCCA, 68).
f
152	BENOLT’S INVENTORY
[15] In place of that
boke a boke of
knyghtes in E.3tyme
[16] Ф
M 4------
[l8j ф—
EX9J — jZ
[20]
[23]
Item a Booke of the knyghtes armes in
the tyme of K.H. viij made by T.
Benoit.
Item a Booke of the fourme of Corona-
tions of Kinges and burialles of divers
estates made to be writtyn by T. Benoit
in paper royal bound in forel.
Item a booke written in paper royall of
petigrewes of many gentilmen of the
North pties bownd in forel.
Item a Booke of the gyftes of armes of
Garter and Clar. Benoit w4 divers
knyghtes & also all the gyftes yeven by
Clarencieux Benoit [both] painted in
smal paper bond in forell.
Item a Booke of Visitations made by
T. B. als. Claren. of Cornewail &
Devonshire painted.
Item a frenche booke concernyng many
notes necessary for officers of armes
writyn in frenche with divers noble mens
armes of the reaulme of Fraunce bound
in paper boordes couveryd wt. ledder
Black & of smal paper.
Item a Booke of Jehan de B[a]udo aureo
& Franciscus de Fossis writin in frenche
in smal paper covered wt. paper boordes-
and rede ledder.
Item a litell Booke writtyn in basterd
hande & wel illuminyd concernyng the
droites and custumes of the office of
armes wt. many other goodly maters
couvered with boordes and tawny leder.
Item a great Booke writtin in paper
royall of the. arbre de Batailles with
divers other thinges notable which
Booke of anncient tyme hath longyd
unto the
[18] 2nd G. 4.
[19] G. 2.
BENOLT’S INVENTORY
153
fo. 190		
[24]	0.	Le quatre volumes de Froissart de la [pre]miere impression lies en des aiz et
		cuyr.
[25]	0.	Le Jardin de sante imprime.
[26] .		Le propriete de bestes Imprime.
[27]	0.	Le Livre du Tresor escript et i[llu]mine en parchemyn
[28]		Augustino de Anchona iij l[ibri] printed.
[29]	0.	Le livre de Johan Bocasse j M[e—]sme | Tulles Cicero | et aultres tous liez en- samble imprime[s]
[30]		Le gouvernement des p[rinces] im- primes
[3i]	0.	Boecius de consolation [impr]ime
[32]		Le livre de ix preux [impr]ime
[33]		Le livre des fais d’armes et de chevalerie
[34]	0.	Valere le grant impr[ime]
[35]		Le livre des meurs [et] gouvernement des princes escript
[36]	0.	Le cueur de philozop[hie] imprime
[37]		Valentin et Orson [im]prime.
[38]		Le recueil des histoi[res] de Troye im- prime
[39]		Le deuxiesme vol[ume] de listoir de Troye imprime.
[40]		Le chemyn d’Italye [et] la some des esvesches imprime
[4i]		Traictie sur le f[aic]t de la guerre im- prime
[42]		Le chevalier del [be]re imprime
[43]		Chroniques de [Loys] ximc imprime.
[44]		Des proffitz ch[am]pestres et ruraulx imprime
[45]	0.	Croniques de [FJrance imprimes 1478
154
[46]
[47]
[48]
[49]
[50]
[5i]
[52]
fo. i90b
[53]
[54]
[55]
[56]
[57]
[58]
[59]
[6о]
[6i]
[62]
[63]
BENOLT’S INVENTORY
Caton avec le comment imprime ‘ en
francois
Le livre du viel testament escript en rime
en francois
o. Le quart livre de Galahault imprime
Le faulette d’amours imprime
. o. Vegesius de re militari.
'-^4—л A booke of armes of Hyghalmen
\J	painted.
* A litel booke of armes of sondrey con-
treys paynted.
A booke of the propertie of beestes writ-
tin in Latin
A litell pamphlet of fetes of armes lack-
yng the begynnyg wrtn.
—	© A booke of armes of divers gentilmen of
e	Scotlond. painted.
o. Recueil de certaines choses de Richemont
Clarencieux.
Q________о A booke of all the armes of High AL
Q	main painted.
A booke of actes of parlement of Edward
the third. wrtyn in Frenche.
A booke of armes of divers gentilmen of
(5	beyonde see writtin
Le livre de Geoffreye de Charny chlr
escript.
Des blasons darmes
A booke of lawe of Inglond writtin in
Frenche
A litel booke of the declaration of
St. Augustin of the 31 psal writtin in
Frenche.
[Ь4]
[51] ist М. 5.
A boke of Tailes or miracles writtin in
ryme in Frenche
[56] (?) Arundel MS. 51.
BENOLT’S INVENTORY	155		
[65] [66] [67] [68]	0. [70]	Ф Г T11	A.		Larbre des Batailles writtin in Frenche The booke of Visitation in Lancashire. The abreviate of the cronicles of Inglond writtin in English. The booke of Visitations of burialles in bond. wrtin in prial Divers and many thinge assembled and tied together con- cernyng the office of armes resting in T. H. handes to be know? Item vj rowles of parment full of armes of x & xij yardes apece all well painted in some rowle viijc schochins & some vijc and odde. It. oone rowle veri narrow of the armes of France painted. It. a greate rowle of parchement writtin in France in bastard hande conteynyng the dessentes and cronicles of popes em- perours kinges of France and Englond. It. a long rowle of paper writtin in F renche of the petigre of divers noble men of Englong w4 the howse of France. It. a rowle of parchement of the dessent of the lorde Beaumont wL Inglond and France. It. a rowle of petigrewe in parchment of Copleys It. a litell rowle of parchement in rime of the lord mortemr. writtin in texte in Inglisehe. A litel rowle of parchement from the conquest writtin in ryme. A rowle of the petigrewe of the lord Mortemer in parchement. Ita long rowle ofparchement in Frenche of the cronicles of Englond with petigeres from before the conqueste and unto Edward the furst. 17: RCCA, 78. •w in the possession of A. R. Wagner.
[72] [73] [74] [75] [76]	fo. 191. [77] [78] [66] See pp. [73] Vellum	103» i roll no	
156 [79]	BENOLT’S INVENTORY It. a rowle of parchement concernyng the consanguinite betwe. Henry the vth & the Frenche king.
[8о]	It. a rowle of parchement wl a couvering of ledder of the cronicle of Inglond writ- tin in Frenche wl petigrees.
[8х]	4J1 It. a rowle of the Justes of Smythfeld writtin in paper.
[82]	It. a petigree of the Erie of Rutlond writtin in parchement
[83]	It. the othes of kinges of armes writtin in parchement
[84]	It. two litel rowles writtin in parche- ment of the lord Barkeleys petigree.
[85]	It. remenbrances of the enterrementes of the erics of Salisbury. Oxinford and Devonshire paper.
' [86]	It. a rowle of paper how the king of Scottes made homaige to Englond in
[87]	It. the dessentes of the erle of Ormond in paper.
[88]	It. a petigrewe of the lord Sandes in paper.
[89]	It. a petigrewe of the lord Stourton in paper.
[90]	It. Instructions of K.H. vijth unto Rychemond.
[91]	It. a remembrance of the Enterrementes of great estates.
[92] [93]	It. a petigre of M. Wode of Devonshire. It. the othe of a king of armes at his coronation.
[94]	It. certain articles of Justes writtin in paper.
[95]	It. the armes of certain gentilmen of Callays
[96]
[97]
[98]
BENOLT’S INVENTORY	157
It. certain notes of armes w4 divers other
thinges bound togedr.
It. xj. rowles in paper bounde in oone
bondell wherof ys mynutes and greves
of all the office of armes against Garter.
It. a petigre of the kinges of Englond
writtin in Latin from Lucius unto
Henry the vjth in a rowle of smal paper.
By me wyndesore T. Wall.
APPENDIX G
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS
I.	Page 5:
Cf. the Visitation Instructions given to his deputies in 1681 by Sir
Henry St. George, Clarenceux, in Appendix E, p. 147. See also The
Records and Collections of the College of Arms, by A. R. Wagner,
Richmond Herald, 1952, pp. 55-65.
2.	Page 6, note 1.
Add: For the Visitation manuscripts see A. R. Wagner, The Records
and Collections of the College of Arms, 1952, pp. 66—84.
3.	Page 7, continuation of note 2 from page 6:
Add: Thomas Moule, Bibliotheca Heraldica, 1822, pp. 609—10, in his
account of the Records of the Office of Arms at Dublin, after mention-
ing the four existing Visitation books, says, ‘It appears that Visitations
were made in other counties, from the references in various books now
in the Office of Arms to such as were formerly there, and which were
(it is supposed) detained as private property by the heirs or executors
of the former officers, but at what particular period is unknown.’
4.	Page 13, note a.
H. Ellis Tomlinson in an unpublished thesis on ‘the historical develop-
ment of heraldic terms with especial consideration of armes parlantes’,
1942, shows by a series of quotations that enseigne and conoissance
originally meant lance flag and much the same as gunfainun and
fenuncel:
(1)	Ipomedon, ed. Kolbing and Koschwitz, Breslau, 1889, 11.
5542-3.
E sa lance, ke neire fu,
Fet porter od 1’enseigne neire.
(2)	Prothesilaus, ed. Kluckow, Gdttingen, 1924, 11. 8422—3.
Al poing prent une bone lance,
N’i ot penun ne conisance.
(З)	Ipomedon, 11. 3580-2.
Despluie ad sun gunfanun,
El feutre tent sa blanche lance
Dunt ventile la cunisance.
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS 159
(4) ProthesilauS) 11. 4635-7.
Tut arme sur un blanc destrer.
Blanc escu ot et blanche lance.
Blanche resteit sa conuisance.
5-	P*g‘ Ч> 3-
Add'. Herodotus i. 171, says that the Carians were the first to fasten
crests on helmets and to put devices on shields. J. H. Harvey notes,
Boswell.) Life of Dr. Johnson^ ed. G. Birkbeck Hill and L. F. Powell,
1934, vol. ii, p. 179, ‘On Friday, April 10 [1772], I dined with him
at General Oglethorpe’s where we found Dr. Goldsmith. Armorial
bearings having been mentioned, Johnson said they were as ancient
as the siege of Thebes, which he proved by a passage in one of the
tragedies of Euripides’, probably the Phoenissae., 11. i 104—9.
6.	Page 16, note 2.
Add\ and A. R. Wagner, Heraldry in England^ 2nd ed., 1956,
Pl. 1.
7.	Page 16, note 4.
Add: and Complete Peerage^ vol. xi, App. G.
8.	Page 26, note 8.
Add'. Mr. N. Denholm-Young,‘The Tournament in Thirteenth cen-
tury England’, in Studies in Medieval History presented to Frederick
Maurice Powicke^ Oxford, 1948, pp. 240—68, gives good reason for
dating the Statutum Armorum in its original form back to 1267.
9.	Page 27, note 2.
Add'. Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 46350 records a payment of 50 marks on
19 June 1334: ‘Magistro Andreae Clarence!! Regi heraldo Armorum
sociis suis menestrallis facientibus menestralciam suam coram Rege die
dominica quo die Rex Scocie facit homagium suum domino regi’.
I owe this reference to Professor Francis Wormaid.
10.	Page 31, note 8.
Add'. Montfaucon, Monumens de la Monarchic fran^oise^ Paris, I73°>
vol. ii, pl. xxix, engraves the incised slab in the abbey of Mont St.
Quentin depicting Fauviaus de Suzane ‘Rois d’armes’ (d. 1260), in
mail with ailettes and surcoat. Whether the date of the slab is not
nearer 1300 and whether ‘Rois d’armes’ means King of Arms must
be discussed elsewhere.
160 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS
li.	Page note J.
Add\ The seal is engraved in D. L. Galbreath, Manuel du Blason^
1942, fig. 105. Its legend ‘La Royne . . . eline’ is cryptic.
12.	Page 32, note
Add'. Egon Freiherr von Berchem, Die Herolde und ihre Beziehungen
zum Wappenwesen^ eine vorlaufige Materialsammlung %ur Geschichte
des Heroldswesens^ Berlin, 1939, gives a full account of heralds and
their activities in medieval Germany. He agrees (p. 213) with Seyler
that though ‘herolde’ are not named before the middle fourteenth
century, the earlier ‘knappen von den wappen’ can be identified with
them, and quotes (pp. 122, 124, 126-7) passages which make it clear
that the latter were specially concerned with armory as early as the
late thirteenth century.
*3- Page y^note г.
The two following references in Wardrobe Accounts were sent me by
Professor Hilda Johnstone.
Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 7966 A, fo. 66.
‘Waltero le Marchis Regi Haraldorum facienti quandam pro-
clamacionem per preceptum Regis in presencia eiusdem Regis in
aula sua infra castrum Norht’ die Natalis domini anno present!
videlicet XXV die Dec’ de prohibicione Torneamentorum facta in
Anglia per ipsum Regem de dono Regis per manus proprias apud
Northampton’ xxv die Dec’—xl.s’ 25 Dec. 1300.
Add. 8335, fo. 42.
[Donum] ‘Willelmo Treachant heraldo facienti menestralciam
suam coram Rege de dono ipsius Regis per manus proprias ibidem
eodem die [primo Jan’]—XX.s’. 1 Jan. 1304.
Mr. J. G. Noppen and Mr. H. S. London drew my attention to the
record of payments to John Teysaunt, variously called ‘heraldo domini
Regis Anglic’, one of 14 ‘scutiferi et menestralli’ and ‘menestrallo
Regis’, when he accompanied Eleanor, sister of Edward III, on her
journey to marry Reynold Count of Gueldres at Nijmegen in April
and May 1332, Archaeologia^ vol. Ixxvii (1927), pp. 111—40 (pp. 127,
134, 139) from Accounts, &c. (Exchequer K.R.) Bundle 386, no. 7.
14.	Page 37, note 3.
H. S. London points out that William Bruges, the first Garter king of
arms, in article 4 of his petition to Henry V (Anstis, Register of the
Garter^ vol. ii, p. 439) asks for the primacy in the office ‘atribue en
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS x6i
France a Monjoie Roy d’armes des Francois’. Montjoye, therefore,
already had that position, pace Vallet de Viriville.
15.	Page 47, line 11.
The gesteof Fulk FitzWarin, the hero of the Shropshire marches, of
which the existing prose version of about 1310 seems to be based on an
original in verse of about 1260, refers to his shield of arms as assigned
him by the disours or judges of the tournament, who are associated in
another passage with the heralds.1
16.	Page 48, note 4.
In 1950 this want was in a measure met when the Society of Anti-
quaries published A Catalogue of English Mediaeval Rolls of Arms
(hereafter referred to as CEMRA) by the present writer. The intro-
duction to this partly supersedes the account of the Rolls which
follows.
17.	Page 51, note 3.
Add\ The text should probably read ‘deux dessus le kieviron et ung
dessoubs’.
18.	Page 58, note 1.
Add\ In the opinion of H. Stanford London and Paul Adam-Even it
was probably compiled during the English occupation of Normandy by
a Norman employed as herald or pursuivant by one of the English
officials. Other French ‘Recherches’ or ‘Visitations’ known to Adam-
Even are that of Auvergne by the herald Revel of the end of the
fifteenth century and one of c. 1590 by Richer, herald of the Duke of
Lorraine. •
19.	Page 58, note 3.
Add\ An early sixteenth-century version of the heralds’ creation oath
is printed from a manuscript at Syon House in the Archaeological
fournal, vol. xiii, 1856, pp. 166—7. Others are in Weever, Funeral
Monuments, p. 666; Ashmole MSS. 846, p. 106, 857, pp. 1, 7; 1113,
p. 31: Nicholas Dethick’s account of his creation as Windsor in 1583,
Ashmole MS. 1116, p. 1; Antiquarian Repertory, vol. i, p. 159;
vol. iii, p. 375.
20.	Page 60, note 5.
Add'. And cf. p. 27, n. 2, quoting a payment of 1334, ‘Andreae
Clarence!! Regi heraldo Armorum’, though the Dukedom of Clarence
was not created till 1362.*'
1 Арр. B. 24a, 25b.
4607
M
i62 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS
21.	Page 62, note I.
Add\ Benoit (p. 89) accused Wriothesley of making interpolations in
his copies of these Orders, and D. L. Galbreath suspected the pre-
cision of the clauses requiring the registration of gifts of arms as
anachronistic.
22-	Page 64, note 2.
H. S. London refers to a statement in Strangways’ Book, Harl. MS.
2259, fo. 34, c. 1450, that some make a distinction between marks
(signa} in which there is no metal and arms which have metal. Later
(fo. 7Ob) he says that, if a non-armiger goes to the wars, he can paint his
shield and tunic with a mark, a bar, or a bend, or whatever he pleases,
provided there is no metal. Then, if he distinguishes himself, the
heralds change either the field or the charge to a metal, thus turning
the mark into arms. Any man may take a mark at his own discretion,
but arms need the intervention of a herald.
23.	Page 69, note 2.
Add\ The Tree of Battles of Honore Bonet, an English version with
introduction by G. W. Coopland, Liverpool, 1949. Thomas Holme,
Clarenceux, by his will of 1493 (P-C.C. 9 Vox; Anstis, Register of the
Garter^ vol. i, p. 369, note 0) bequeathed to his godson Thomas
Gartier (i.e. Wriothesley) ‘my booke called Arbor bellorum’.
24.	Page 71, note 2.
Add\ The use of arms by bourgeois and others not noble began in
northern France, the Low Countries, and certain other regions in the
thirteenth century and was there accepted as permissible (subject to
certain qualifications) by the fifteenth. Cf. Remi Mathieu, Le Systeme
heraldique frangais^ 1946. The divergence of the English from the
continental law of arms is discussed by G. D. Squibb, in an article on
‘The Law of Arms in England’ in the Coat of Arms^ vol. ii, I953>
PP- 243“8-
25.	Page 73, note I.
Add'. The relationships of these treatises need a careful re-examination
based upon collation of the further texts now known, cf. H. Stanford
London, ‘Some Medieval Treatises on English Heraldry’, Antiquaries*
fournal, vol. xxxiii, 1953, pp. 169—83.
26.	Page 73, note 4.
For the present note read: In Brit. Mus. MS. Lansdowne 860, fo.
243% is a sixteenth-century copy of letters patent dated 20 March
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS 163
1391 whereby Bardolf Herald authorizes Robert Baynard of Essex to
drop the difference of a label from his arms. Anstis (Coll. Arm. MS.
Bishop’s ‘Heraldic Tracts’, fo. 61), quotes Vincent as referring to the
original of this as existing ‘among the bills in the White Tower’, and
Professor V. H. Galbraith is disposed to believe in its authenticity, as
also in that of a certificate dated 1386 of the arms and pedigree of West
of Sudbury, Co. Suffolk, by ‘Rogier Durroit autrement dit Lancastre
Roy de North d’Angleterre herault a John Duke de Lancaster’, recited
in a patent of 1446 (Brit. Mus. MS. Cotton Faustina E.I. fo. 6: Coll.
Arm. MS. G. 7, fo. 4).
27.	Page 74, note 4.
Add*. In the same way Thomas Barrow, clerk, who was granted arms
by Bellengier in 1477, had a fresh grant from John Wrythe, Garter,
in 1495 {Proc. Soc. Ant.) 2nd ser., xvi, 344, 347).
28.	Page 80, note 2.
J. A. Goodall in the Coat of ArmS) vol. iii, no. 19, p. 106, quotes
another copy of this from Harl. MS. 4900, fo. 17Ч
29.	Page 91, note I.
The book called Barker’s Grants, Coll. Arm. MS. E.D.N. 56, has a
trick of the arms granted to Herafinus de Isturissaga, which is No. 288
in this Roll. Coll. Arm. MS. R. 36, fo. 83b, gives the text of this grant
and shows that it was in fact made by Sir Thomas Wriothesley on
25 March 1516. H. S. London points out that five coats in this Roll
were granted early in 1529, sc. no. 54 in February, nos. 157 and 412
in March, no. 353 in April and no. 156 between 1 Jan. and 21 April.
No. 425, ‘Lord Thomas Cranmer Archbysshop of Canterbury’ be-
came so only in 1533, but this is the last item in the Roll and is known
only from the copies in Roll 25 and MS. 664. Nos. 113, 370, and 371
seem to be grants of 1533, 1538, and 1539 respectively, but may be of
crests to previously existing arms.
30.	Page TOO, note 1.
See also A. R. Wagner, Records and Collections of the College of Arms,
1952, pp. 67-8 and 77-8.
31.	Page 103, note 2.
See also A. R. Wagner, Records and Collections of the College of Armsb
1952, p. 71, Herald and Genealogist) vol. ii, p. 438; Genealogist) n.s.
xix. 145 and 233-4, and Major Francis Jones in the Cymmrodorion
Society Transactions) 1948, p. 376.
INDEX
Abergavenny, Margaret Lady, her
tomb, 141.
Acton, Edward de, 23.
Adam-Even, Paul, 53, 56, 161.
Additional MSS.:
4101: 64, 136.
5530: 113.
34861: 60.
45133: 112.
Adenet le Roi, 18, 29.
Admiral, the, his jurisdiction over
heralds, 42.
Admiralty, Black Book of the, 20, 24,
58.
Agincourt, use of arms at, 64.
Alexander the Great, creation of heralds
by, 43-
Aleyn, Thomas, grant of arms to, 76»
Ancona, Augustino di, 153.
Andrew Clarencell’, 159, 161.
Andrew Norreys or Roy Norreys, 27,
Anjou and Touraine, King of Arms of,
41-5.
Anne of Bohemia, Queen, 67.
Anstis, John, Garter, v, 22, 62, 83, 86,
116, 163; his MS. ‘Officers of Arms*,
7» 23, 27, 33, 35-7, 4b 60, 83, 87, 96,
98, no—11; Sale of his MSS., 1768:
23-
Antiquaries, Society of:
MS. 443: 90.
MS. 664: 52, 90.
Ap Howel, Fulk, Lancaster, 103.
Aquitaine, King of Arms, 22-3, 51.
Arbre des Batailles, 69, 124, 152, 155,
162.
Archives Nationales, Paris, O1. 976: 47.
Arms, alienation of, 22-3, 74.
Arms and nobility, 11, 65-7, 71-3,
76-81, 88-90,96-8; see also Gentility,
qualification for.
Arms, coat of, 31, 44, 64.
Arms, concessions of, 19, 20, 67.
Arms, devised without authority, 9, 10.
Arms, early evidence of property in,
19, 20.
Arms, Foreign, Book of, 154.
Arms, grants of, x 1, 65-82.
by the Emperor, 65-8.
by the King of England, 66-7.
by the King of France, 70.
by heralds, 72-3.
by English Kings of Arms, 73-82,
98, 126, 137.
Thomas Wriothesley’s Roll of, 90-1.
Arms, pleas of, 19, 21-4, 50-1, 68-71.
Arms, right to by prescription, 3.
Arms, rolls of, 18-19, 48-55, 71, 105,
112, 155.
General, 50-1.
Illustrative, 49.
Local, 51-5.
Occasional, 49-50, 72.
French, 53-4.
Scottish, X13.
owned by heralds, 51, 82, no, 114.
the work of heralds, 52-5.
transmitted by heralds, 49.
Arragon, herald of the king of, 34; of
Alfonso V king of, 125.
Arragon, Ramon Berengar IV of, 15.
Arsenal, Bibliothfcque de Г, MS. 4655:
56.
Arthur, Prince of Wales, 83.
Artois, King of Arms of, 36, 43-4.
Arundel, Richard Earl of, tomb of,
:42-
Ashmole, Elias, Windsor, 14, 23, 145.
Assheton, Richard, of Midleton, 104.
Assigns of grantee, grant of arms
covering, 74.
Athens, heraldry in ancient, 14.
Augustine, St., 154.
Auray, battle of, 36.
Austin Friars visited, 142.
Auvergne, Visitation of, 161.
Bado Aureo, Johannes de, 67-8, 123,
X52.
Balfour Paul, Sir James, Lyon, 7.
Ballard, Thomas, tomb of, 144.
Ballard, William, March King of
Arms, 58, 103, 107-9; h*s ап^
Book, угг. College of Arms MS. М3.
Bannerets, 60.
Bannerets’ roll of arms, 52, 60, 1x2-13.
Bardolf herald, 73, 163.
Barker, Christopher, Richmond, Nor-
roy and Garter, 91, 107.
Barker’s Grants, 163.
166
INDEX
Barking, chapel of Our Lady of, in
London, visited, 145.
Barre, Hildebrand, 23.
Barron, Oswald, Maltravers, v, 13,51,52.
Barrow, Thomas, 163.
Bartolo di Sassoferrato, 66, 68, 72, 123.
Basset, Reynold, tomb of, 145.
Bauret, Alexander, 104.
Bavaria, crown of arms of the Duchy
of, 65, 123.
Bavaria, herald of the Duke of, 34.
Bawde, Sir Thomas, tomb of, 145.
Bayeux tapestry, 12, 46.
Baynarde, Robert, 73, 163.
Beasts, book of the properties of, 153,
154.
Beauchamp of Bedford, arms of, 17.
Beaufise, William, his tomb, 145.
Beaumont pedigree, 155.
Behault de Dornon, Armand, 55.
Bekyngham, Thomas, tomb of, 145.
Bele, Thomas, Bishop of Lydda, 91.
Belknap, William, his tomb, 143.
Bellinger, Walter, Ireland King of
Arms, 62, 74, 163.
Bellys, William and Margery, tomb of,
z45-
Benoit, Thomas, Clarenceux, 9, 38, 59,
62, 79-80, 85-6, in, 139, 151, 152,
162; his book of standards, 117; his
dispute with Sir Thomas Wriothesley,
Garter, 78-9, 83-99; his visitations,
100-1, 105, 117-19, 143-6; his will
and inventory of books, 110-11, 114-
18, 150-7.
Berchem, Egon Freiherr von, 160.
Berkeley, Lord Maurice, his tomb, 142.
Berkeley, pedigree of Lord, 156.
Berkeley, William Marquess of, his
tomb, 142.
Berkshire, Visitation in, 101, 117.
Berry, Armorial de, 54, 57.
Berry, Jean due de, 69.
Berry, King of Arms, Gilles le Bouvier,
37, 38, 54.
Berwick roll of arms, 49.
Bethune, Baudouin de, 27.
Beyeren King of Arms, 55.
Biblioth£que Nationale, Paris:
Fonds de Colbert, MS. 9385, 3, 3: 57.
Fonds fran^ais, MS. 4366: 57.
Fonds fran^ais, MS. 14356: 53.
MS. 23998: 56.
Birmingham heraldic exhibition, 113.
Black Friars visited, 142.
Black Prince, Chandos’ life of the, 29.
Blackwall, Richard, grant of arms to,
82.
Blancart, 15.
Blazon by gems, 106.
Blazon, order of, 18.
Blount, Sir John, K.G., 115.
Boccaccio, Giovanni, 153.
Bodleian Library, Oxford:
MS. Ashmole 764: 60.
MS. Ashmole 831: 106.
MS. Ashmole 1131: 115.
MS. Ashmole 1137: 23.
MS. Dodsworth 81: 106.
MS. Douce 308: 48.
MS. Rawlinson C. 399: 41.
Boethius, 153.
Bois Robert, 32.
Boleyn, Sir William, 145.
Bonet, Honore, 69-70, 72, 124, 162.
Borough, Sir John, Garter, 62.
Borough bridge roll of arms, 49.
Boswell, James, 159.
Bourbon, John Duke of, his tomb,
140-1.
Bourbon the herald, 44.
Bourgeois, use of arms by, 162.
Bouton, Victor, 52-3.
Bouvier, Gilles le, Berry, 37, 54.
Brandon, Charles, Duke of Suffolk,
79-
Brandon, Sir Thomas, K.G., tomb of,
142.
Brereton, Sir John, tomb of, 146.
Brereton, Sir William, 109.
Bretel, Jacques, 29, 48, 127.
British Museum MSS., see Additional,
Cotton, Harleian, Lansdowne, Royal,
Stowe.
Brixen, Bruno, Bishop of, 19.
Brooke, Ralph, York, 8.
Broys, John, 22.
Bruce, Robert, 20.
Bruges, Sir William, Garter, 38, 75, 77,
160; his book of arms of Knights of
the Garter, 115-16; window at Stam-
ford given by, 116.
Brugges, Lewis de, de la Gruthuse, 67.
Bruiant, King of Heralds, 26, 29, 47-8,
129.
Brunswick, herald of the Duke of, 34.
INDEX
Brussels, Biblioth&que Roy ale, MS.
15652-6: 53.
Brut, Roman de, 13, 121-2.
Bryan, Sir Guy de, 23.
Bryltone, William, his tomb, 145.
Buccleuch, Duke of, MS. in possession
of the, 113.
Buckingham, Edward Stafford, Duke
of, 144.
Buckingham, Humphrey Stafford,
Duke of, 144.
Buironfosse, battle of, 37.
Burbidge, Sir Richard, Bt., 80.
Burghill, Francis, Somerset Herald, 147.
Burgundy, Hugh II, Duke of, 16.
Burnell, Nicholas, Lord, 22.
Burtchaell, George Dames, Deputy
Ulster, 7.
Butler, Ralph, Lord Sudeley, 143.
Buxhull, Sir Alan, K.G., tomb of, 140.
Bysshe, Sir Edward, Clarenceux, 6, 66,
68, 73, 123, 125; grants of arms by,
148.
Cadell, John, his tomb, 145.
Cadency marks, 148.
Caerlaverock roll of arms and poem,
49, 122.
Caesar, Julius, creation of heralds by,
43-
Calabre herald, 41.
Calais, Arms of gentlemen of, 156.
Calais, church of St. Peter outside, 22.
Calais, siege of, 21.
Camden, William, Clarenceux, 20, 57,
106.
Captains of fortresses, pursuivants of,
42> 45’
Carbonnel, Martin, Navarre King of
Arms, 53.
Cardoeil, see Carlisle herald.
Carians, use of crests by the 159.
Carlisle, Christopher, Norroy, . 87,
106-7.
Carlisle herald, 34, 37.
Carney, Sir Richard, Ulster, 2.
Cato, 154.
Caux, Armorial du Pays de, 57-8.
Cavendish, Sir Andrew, and Rose, his
wife, tomb of, 144.
Champagne, King of Heralds of, 32.
Champions, hired, at judicial combats,
30, 43-
167
Chandos herald, 29, *roy d’armes
d’Engleterre’, 36.
Chapters of the heralds, 59, 60, 64, 82,
89.
Charles IV, Emperor, 65, 66.
Charles V of France, 36, 43, 57.
Charles VII of France, 38, 54.
Charles, Sir Thomas, Lieutenant of the
Tower, his tomb, 144.	. ~
Chariot, King of Arms of Cyprus,
Artois, and France, 36, 43.
Charny, Geoffrey de, 154.
Chauvency, Tournoi de, 25, 26, 29, 31,
47-8, 127-32, 134-5.
Cheshire, Visitation in, 103.
Cheshire, Visitation of, c. 1480: 108-9.
Chester herald, Richard, alias March,
108.
Chevalier de la Charette, Le, 47.
Chifflet, Pierre Francois, 16.
Chiny, Louis de Looz, Count of, 25,127.
Chivalry, Court of, 21-4, 50.
Chivalry, decay of, 42; heralds’ pro-
fessorship of, 45.
Chretien de Troyes, 25, 46, 134.
Chronicles of England, Abbreviate of,
45-
Chronicles, Rolls of, 155.
Church notes, 148.
Cicero, Marcus Tullius, 153.
Clairambault MSS., 32, 36.
Clare, Gilbert de, Earl of Pembroke, 15.
Clare, Gilbert de, Earl of Hertford, 15.
Clarence, Thomas of Lancaster, Duke
of, his heraldic ordinances, 59-64,
73, 76, 81, 88-9, 93-4, 136-8.
Clarencellus, Andreas, 159, 161.
Clarenceux King of Arms, 159, 161;
institution of, 60; books bequeathed
by Benoit to the office of, no.
Clarenceux King of Arms, John, tomb
of, 146.
Clavering, arms of, 17.
Clifford, Sir Robert, 38.
Clinton, William de, Earl pf Hunting-
don, 23.
Clumber MS. 189: 112-15.
Coats of arms, see Arms, coats of.
Cobham, Reynold, 23.
Cocherel, battle of, 37.
Coldharbour, 89, 94-5.
College of Arms MSS., 94-5, 110.
A17: 117, 150.
168
INDEX
College of Arms MSS. (cont.)
Anstis, Officers of Arms, see Anstis,
John.
Arundel 40: 83, 93.
— 51: 38, 154.
— 63(26): 60
Ceremonies III: 60, 64.
D4: 102, in.
D13: 101, 116-17, 151.
E.D.N. 56: 163.
G2: 101, 117, 152.
2nd G4: 152.
G7: 163.
1st H7: 100, 101, 117, 151.
H8: 102, 117, 151.
H18: 100, 101, 117, 151.
H20: 101, 117, 151.
H Pedigrees 16: 103.
Hare I (R36): 79, 81.
Heralds I: 110.
Heralds III: 84.
I25:3.
Li: 82.
L6: 60, 64, 150.
L14: 18, 64, 107.
М3 (Ballard’s Book): 58, 108-9.
M4: 106.
1st M5: 154.
M14: 60.
M19: 58.
Philpot, P.b.14: 39.
Philpot 77.
Processus in Curia Marescalli, 21-4.
R36: 163.
Register of Nobility and Gentry II:
74, 82.
St. George VI: 147.
Vincent 86: 20.
Vincent 151 (Presidents): 60, 64, 82,
136.
4:103.
College of Arms, Muniment Room:
Box 15, Roll 25: 91.
Box 25, No. 17: 9, 102.
Collins, S. M., v, 112.
‘Comptegne* roll of arms, 55.
Cond6, Baudouin de, 30, 31, 133-4.
Condorow, Elizabeth wife of Nicholas,
tomb of, 145.
Confirmations of arms, 74-5.
Canoisances, 12, 13, 121, 158.
Conrod, King of Heralds of Germany,
27-
Constable, the, 20-4, 42, 122, 138.
Contes des Hiraus, Li, 30, 133-4.
Cooke, Robert, Clarenceux, 6, 79, 107.
Cook’s Company, grants of arms to, 77.
Coopland, G. W., 162.
Copley pedigree, 155.
Corby, Robert de, 20.
Cornwall, arms of gentry of, c. 1480:
109.
Cornwall, Visitation of, 101, 117, 151,
152.
Coronations, Book of the form of, 152.
Cosington, Stephen de, 23.
Cotton MSS.:
Faustina E.I: 60, 88, 95, 126, 163.
Nero D.VI: 20.
Tiberius E.VIII: 60.
Couci, Romain du Castelain de, 26, 29,
46, 128, 130, 135.’ '
Coulon, Auguste, 16.
County roll of arms, 52.
Courtenay, Henry, Marquess of Exeter,
101.
Courtenay, William, Earl of Devon,
tomb of, 142.
Cranmer, Thomas, 163.
Crest, grant of, 67.
Crests, in rolls of arms, 53, 57.
Cris de guerre, to be recorded by
Kings of Arms, 57.
Crogiere, 32.
Crosse, John, his tomb, 145.
Crowns, Kings of Arms’, 32, 43, 44.
Crutched Friars, visited, 145.
Curia Militaris, 21-4
Cyprus, King of Arms of, 36, 43.
Dalia way, James, 2, 107.
D’Arcq, Douet, 14, 15, 53.
Deincourt, Edmund, Lord, 20.
Delbouille, Maurice, 25, 48, 127-8.
Demay, H. G., 13, 14, 15.
Denholm-Young, N., 159.
Denmark, herald of the king of, 34.
De Prato, Jacobus, Fenzius, and Al-
bertus, 65.
Deputation, from King of Arms to
herald, 9, 102-3, 118.
Derby, Edward Earl of, 104.
Dering, Sir Edward, his MS. L6: 62.
Dering roll of arms, 50.
Dethick, Nicholas, Windsor herald^
161.
INDEX
Dethick, William, Garter, 93, 109.
Devon, arms of gentry of, c. 1480: 109.
Devon, Visitation of, 101,117,151,152.
D’Hozier, Louis-Pierre, 47.
Dijon, charter at, 17.
Disclaimer, 3.
Dit des Hyraus, 30, 132-3.
Dodsworth, Roger, 106.
Dorset, Visitation of, 101.
Dragon standard of Britain, 12, 13.
Drapers* Company, grant of arms to,
. 75-
Droits of the Office of Arms, Books of,
152.
Dublin, Office of Arms, 6, 158.
Dublin, Trinity College, MS. F.i. 21:2.
Ducange, 56.
Duchies d’Armes, 54.
Duchy of Lancaster records, 15.
Dugdale, Sir William, Bt., 118, 139.
Dugdale, Sir William, Garter, 103, 105,
116, 118, 1385 his acount of Visita-
tion procedure, 2-5, 6.
Dundee herald, 35, 37.
Dunstable rolls of arms, 49.
Du Roure de Paulin, Baron, 36.
Durroit, Roger, Lancaster King of arms,
163.
Dwnn, Lewis, 103.
Eagle, imperial, early use of, 13.
Earl Marshal (see also Marshal), 3, 4.
Earl Marshal’s book, 10, 150.
Edmondson, Joseph, Mowbray, 2.
Edward I, reign of, and rolls of arms, 50.
Edward III, 12, 33-7, 75.
Edward IV, 67.
Edward VI, 103.
Egmont MS. 197: 109.
Eleanor of Provence, heart of, 140.
Ellis, Guy, tomb of, 144.
Ellis, William Smith, 14, 15, 19.
Emperor, King of Arms of the, 44.
England, King of Arms of: Chandos,
36$ Garter, 36, 37; March, 37.
England, Pedigree of the kings of, 157.
Ens eigne, 158.
Erkenwald, St., shrine of, 140.
Esquire, right to title of, 5, 147.
Ethelbert, King, founder of St. Paul’s,
140.
Eton College, 67.
Euripides, 159.
169
Evesham, battle of, 48.
Exeter, Anne Duchess of, her tomb,
144.
Exeter, Henry Duke of, 108.
Exeter, John Holland Duke of, and his
wives, tomb of, 144.
Falcon King of Arms, 35-7.
Falkirk roll of arms, 49.
Faral, Edmond, 25, 29.
Fees, for Visitation entries, 5.
Fees to heralds on ennoblement, 72.
Fellowe,’William, Lancaster and Nor-
roy, 98,-102-5, 117, 151.
Fildor, King of Heralds, 127.
‘First Calais’ roll of arms, 49.
Fitzalan, Brian, 19, 21, 122.
FitzLewes, Sir Henry, 144.
Fitz Warin, Fouke, 134-5.
Fitz Warin, Fulk, 161.
Fitzwaryn, William Bourchier, Lord,
tomb of, 112.
Fitzwilliam roll of arms, 50.
Fleur de lis, 13.
Flodden, standards taken at, 113.
Flower, William, Norroy, 103.
Forman, Sir John, 104.
Forster, Wendelin, 47.
France, Armorial General de la, 47.
France, Chronicles of (1478), 153.
France, heralds in, see Heralds in France.
France, juge d’armes de, 7, 81.
France, King of Heralds of, 32.
Roi d’armes de, 36, 41, 43-4, 54.
French arms, book of, 152.
Froissart, 28, 33-7, 51, 153; copy of,
owned by Benoit, no.
Frowyke, Thomas, his tomb, 145.
Funerals, Kings of Arms’ right to
conduct, 61, 138.
Funerals of great estates, Records of,
156.
Funerals of the Earls of Salisbury,
Oxford, and Devonshire, 156.
Gai the, Eleanor, tomb of, 144.
Gaithe, Thomas, 144.
Galahad, Book of, 154.
Galbraith, V. H., v, 163.
Galbreath, D. L., 15, 17, 53, 160,
162.
Galloway roll of arms, 49.
Garter house, 86.
INDEX
170
Garter King of Arms, office of, 60;
institution of, 63, 81; his claim to be
sovereign in the office of arms, 62,
89, 136; his jurisdiction disputed, 765
his right to grant arms confirmed, 81;
his dispute with Clarenceux, see
Benoit, Thomas.
Garter, Knights of the, Arms of, at
Stamford, 116.
Garter stall plates, 115.
Garter statutes of 1522: 81; of 1421:115.
Garter, ‘Visitation* or book of arms of
Knights of the, 115.
Garzune, 32.
Gautier, Leon, 12.
Gaythforth, arms of, 104.
Gelderland, Heynen, called Gelre,
herald of the Duke of, 52.
Gelderland, William, herald of the
Duke of, 37.
Gelre, Armorial de, 52.
Gelre King of Arms, 52, 55.
Gentility, qualification for, 78-80.
Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou,
15, 16.
Germany, heralds in, vii, 27, 32-3, 160.
Geylnhusen, Johann von, 65.
Gloucester, Earl cf, 27.
Gloucestershire, Visitation in, 101, 117.
Glover, Robert, Somerset, 6, 18, 93,
103, 106, 108.
Glover’s roll of arms, 18, 19, 50.
Gobert de Gondebegon, King of
Heralds of France, 36.
Goddard, Gibbon, 139.
Gonfanon, 121, 158.
Goodall, J. A., 163.
Gorges alias Russel, Tibaud, 23.
Grandmaison, Millin de, 14.
Grant of arms, see Arms, grant of.
Grants of Arms, by Wriothesley and
Benoit, Book of, 152.
Grazebrook, George, 2.
Greene, Sir Robert, tomb of, 142.
Greenstreet, James, 48-9, 1125 his
‘Reference list of the Rolls of Arms’,
4». .
Grehei, King of Heralds, 127.
Grey Friars, visited, 140.
Grey Hastings, 23-4.
Grey Hunel, King of Heralds in
France, 36.
Griffin, Ralph, 91, 108.
Griffith, Sir Walter, tomb of, 141.
Gueldres, Reynold Count of, 160.
Guienne King of Arms, see Smert,
John.
Guienne King of Arms, see Wrex-
worth, John.
‘Guildford’, John of, 67.
Guildhall Library, MS. in the, 113.
Guillaume de Dole, Roman de, 25, 128.
Guillim, John, 60.
Guiot, 32.
Haddon, Sir Richard, tomb of, 145.
Hadstatt, arms of, 19.
Ham, Roman de, 29.
Hamarz, Raoul de, 27, 28..
Hampshire, Visitation of, 101, 116-17,
Hanekin, son of Lybekin the piper, 27.
Harcourt, L. W. Vernon, 21, 122.
Harleian charters: 45. i. 30: 14; 54. g.
44- 39-
Harleian MSS:
48: 108.
69: 60.
244: 118.
1196: 107.
2076: 103, 108.
2259: 162.
4205: 112-14.
4900: 163.
Harleian roll of arms, 49.
Harvey, J. H., 159.
Hawkslowe, William, Clarenceux, 77,
111-12, 114, 150.
Hawley, Thomas, Carlisle and Claren-
ceux, 9, 98, 102, no, 1555 his Visita-
tion of London burials, 118-20, 139-
43-
Hawley, Thomas, Carlisle Herald and
Norroy King of Arms, 150, 151.
Haye, Sir Gilbert of the, 69, 71.
Hearne, Thomas, 20, 73.
Heming burgh, Walter of, 48.
Henry I, 16.
Henry I of France, 13.
Henry V, 63-4, 73, 160.
Henry VI, 38.
Henry VII, 38, 88, 93.
Henry VIII, 9, 77, 81, 88, 93, 96-8.
Henry the Lion, 15.
Henry the young king, 27.
Heraldry, origin of, 12-17.
INDEX
Heralds and heraldry, 46—7.
Heralds as authors of rolls of arms,
5^-5-
Heralds as journalists’, 28.
Heralds as messengers, 33-8, 44, 85-6.
Heralds as messengers for lovers, 42.
Heralds as professors of chivalry, 45.
Heralds as vagrants, 30-1, 34.
Heralds* Commemorative Exhibition
1484-1934: 16, 58, 74.
Heralds, creation of, 31, 43; by Julius
Caesar or Alexander, 43.
Heralds, crimes of, 42.
Heralds, fees paid to, on ennoblement,
see Fees.
Heralds, incorporation of, 95.
Heralds in France, 32, 36, 41, 56-8, 81,
96» 99;
Heralds in Germany, vii, 27, 58.
Heralds’ names of office, 35.
Heralds, oath taken by, on creation, 43,
56, 161.
Heralds owning rolls of arms, 51.
Heralds* visitations see Visitations.
Herodotus, 159.
Hertelin, King of Heralds of Germany,
*7-
Henry, William, Clarenceux, 88, 108.
Heynen, Claes, Gelre and Beyeren King
of Arms, 55.
Heynen, Gelre herald, 52.
High Almaine, Book of Arms of, 154.
Hiraudie, 31, 47, 134, Ч5-
Holland, Joseph, 109.
Holland pf Clifton, 104.
Holme, Sir Thomas, Clarenceux, 74-5,
112, 114, 162.
Holt, Robert, of Stubley, 104.
Hope, Sir William St. John, 115.
Horbury, Sir John de, 39.
Horbury, Sir Ralph de, 39.
Horseley, William, Clarenceux, 60.
Houghton, Sir Richard, 104—5.
Howard, Walter, Secretary to the Lord
Treasurer, his tomb, 144.
Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, 72.
Hunter Blair, С. H., 106.
Huntingdon, Anne Countess of, 144.
Huvelle, King of Heralds, 127.
Inge, Robert and Agnes, tomb of, 145.
Ipomedon, 158.
Ireland, heralds’ visitations in, 6-7.
171
Isabella of France, tomb of, 140.
Isturissaga, Herafinus de, 163.
Jakemes, 25, 29, 128.
James, Bewe, 107.
Jardin de Sante, Le, 153.
Jerusalem, King of, 50.
John Clarenceux, tomb of, 146.
John of Gaunt, 163 and see Lancaster.
John, Lewis, tomb of, 144.
John of Marmoutier, 15.
Johnson, Samuel, 159.
Johnstone, Hilda, 160.
Joigny, tournament at, 28.
Joiner, John, Norroy, 87.
Jones, Evan J., 67-8, 73.
Jones, Francis, 163.
Jousts, Articles of, 156.
Julius Caesar, 38.
Juyll, John, grant of arms to, 81.
Keith, Sir Robert, 20.
Kent, Lucia, countess of, tomb of, 142.
Kent, Visitation of, 101, 116-17, 151.
King, Gregory, Rouge Dragon, 147.
King of Arms’ oath on creation, it,
43, 56-9, 108, 156; in France, 56-7;
in England, 58-9.
King’s College, Cambridge, 67.
Kings of Arms, provincial authority of,
see Provincial authority of Kings of
Arms.
Kings of Heralds, 31-2.
Kingsford, C. L., 118.
Kirchberg, Count Conrad von, 19.
Knappen von den Wappen, 32.
Knights, Benoit’s book of arms of,
temp. Henry VIII, 152.
Knights, book of, temp. Edward III,
152.
Knollys, Sir Robert, tomb of, 141.
Knyvet, Lady (Jane), tomb of, 144.
Knyvet, Sir William, 144.
Kyngeston, Johan de, 66, 123.
Kyriel, Nicholas, tomb of, 145.
Lancashire gentry, arms of, c. 1480:108.
Lancashire gentry, manners of,. in
1530: 104.
Lancashire, Visitation of, 103, 117, 151,
45-
Lancaster, Henry Earl of, Steward, 23.
Lancaster herald, 22, 34, 35.
INDEX
172
Lancaster, John of Gaunt, Duke of,
his tomb, 119, 140.
Lancaster King of arms, 163.
Langlois, Ch. V, 29.
Lansdowne MSS.
203: 14, 15.
285: 60, 136.
860: 162.
Lant, Thomas, Portcullis and Windsor,
83.
Laon, Henri, de, 29, 132.
Larchey, Loredan, 56.
Lart, Charles E., 7.
Laton, Sir Robert de, 50.
Law of Arms, 162.
Lee, Richard, Clarenceux, 6, 79, 107.
Leftvre, Jean, Toison d’Or, 56.
Legh, Roger, Clarenceux, 150.
Leicester King of Arms, 60.
Leigh, Roger, Clarenceux, 74, in, 114.
Le Mans, enamel at, 16.
Le Neve, Peter, Norroy, 23.
Le Neve, Sir William, Norroy and
Clarenceux, 52, 84.
Lesdain, L. Bouly de, 17.
Leutold von Stadeck, 32.
Lewis, Emperor, 65.
Liechtenberg, Ekkho von, 20.
Littledale, Willoughby A., 77.
Lodge, Eleanor C., 29.
London companies, arms of, 100.
London, H. Stanford, v, 112, 160-3.
London, ‘Visitation’ of arms of Mayor
and Aidermen of, in 1446-7: 113-14.
London, Visitation of Burials in, 117-
/З9-46, Ч0-1, 45-
Lorraine, herald of Duke of, 161.
Louis VII of France, Seal of, 13.
Louis XI, Chronicle of, 153.
Lovel, John Lord, 21.
Level «у. Morley, 21-3, 74.
Loveyne, Sir Nicholas, tomb of, 143.
Lybekin the piper, 27.
Lyon King of Arms, Register of, 7.
Machado, Roger, Richmond, Norroy,
and Clarenceux, 38, 83-6, 90, 92-3,
95, 106, 113, 115, 154; his indenture
with Wriothesley, 84-5; instructions
of Henry VII to, 156.
Maigniens, King of Heralds, 25, 47,
127, 129.
Maisen, Sir Francis, tomb of, 145.
Mandeville, Geoffrey de, 17, 18, 19.
Manners, Sir Baldwin de, 20.
March King of Arms:
John Othelake, 33, 35, 36, 37, 51.
William Ballard, 58, 103, 107-9.
Richard Chester, 108.
Marchis, Walter le, king of Heralds,
160.
Margaret of France, tomb of, 140.
Marshal, the, 20-45 see William the
Marshal.
Marshal of France, 42.
Marshal of the Archers, 42.
Marshals of Kings of Arms, 33, 39,
43, 107, 118, 139.
Marsy, Comte de, 17, 18, 46.
Massy, Richard, of Rixton, 104.
Mathieu, Remi, 162.
Matthew Paris marginal shields, 49.
Maud, the Empress, 15.
Maundell, Otes and Peter de, 66.
Maunsell, Sir Walter, tomb of, 145.
Mauny, Walter Lord, 23. .
May, Thomas, of Kent, grant of arms
to, 74.
Meissen, Frederick Margrave of, 58.
Menestrier, C. F., 47.
Men of arms, books painted with, 109,
111-16.
Merchants* Marks, used as arms, 119,
139, 141.
Meulan, Waleran, Count of, 14, 15.
Meyer, Paul. 25-8, 130.
Milan, Bernabo, Duke of, 142.
Military roll of arms, 112.
Mille, Edmond, see Mylle.
Minstrels, 27-31, 130-1, 160.
Missenland herald, 58.
Molyneux, Daniel, Ulster, 6, 7.
Molyneux, Sir William, 113.
Monteagle, Lord, 104.
Montgomery, Sir John, his tomb, 144.
Montgomery, Sir Thomas, his tomb,
143.
Montjoye, Roi d’armes de France, 36,
37, 43-4* 54, 56> 16
More, John, Norroy, 106.
Morell, Nicholas, King of Heralds, 33.
Mores, Edward Rowe, 52.
Morgan, Sylvan us, in.
Morley, Robert Lord, 20, 22.
Morley, Thomas Lord, 21.
Mortayn, Esmond de, 20.
INDEX
Mortimer, Edmund, Earl of March, 36.
Mortimer pedigree, 155.
Morton, Harry, tomb of, 146.
Moule, Thomas, 158.
Mowbray, Thomas, Earl Marshal, 67.
Mowbray, Thomas, of Yorkshire, his
tomb, 145.
Murach, Jordan von, 20.
Mylle, Edmond, grant of arms to,
77-8, 80, 126.
Narbon, Nicholas, Ulster, 6.
Navarre, Armorial de, 53.
Navarre, Charles the Bad, king of, 53.
Navarre, herald of the king of, 34.
Nennius, 13.
Newport, James, 173.
Nicolas, Earl Simon’s barber, 48.
Nicolas, Sir N. Harris, 18, 51, 122.
Nobilitas moralis, 66.
Nobility and arms, see Arms and
nobility, and Gentility, qualification
for.
Noppen, J. G., 160.
Norreys, Andrew Roy, 27, 35.
Norrois, Henry le, 27, 28, 130.
Norroy King of Arms, 27, 32, 35, 37,
38, 39, 60.
North, Boke of the, 113-14.
North, Visitation of the, c, 1500: 106.
Northampton, Earl of, Constable, 22.
Northamptonshire, Visitation of, 147.
Nys, Ernest, 69, 124.
Office, arms of, 32.
Office of arms, institutions of the, 38;
law of the, 42; status and duties of,
c. 1400: 44-5.
Oliver, Thomas, tomb of, 145.
Ormonde, Lora Countess of, her tomb,
*43-
Ormonde, Pedigree of the Earl of, 156.
Orr, J., 121.
Othelake, John, March, 3 3,3 5,36,3 7,51.
Otto I, Emperor, seal of, 13.
Ougreffort the herald, 44.
Oxford, John Earl of, his tomb, 142.
Oxfordshire, Visitation in, 101, 1x7.
Palgrave, Sir Francis, 52.
Parish Clerks* Company, grant of
arms to, 74-5.
Parker, Sir James, 79-80, 88.
173
Parliament, Book of Acts of, temp.
Edward III, 154.
Parliamentary roll of arms, 52, 60,
112-13.
Parr, Sir Thomas, tomb of, 142.
Pedigree, registration of, at Visitations,
4; form of entry of, 6j value of, 6.
Pedigree rolls, 155-7.
Pedigrees of the North, Book of, 152.
Peiresc, Nicolas Claude Fabre de, 57.
Pembridge, Sir John, 144.
Pembroke, Earl of, 23, 24.
РепипсеЦ 158.
Peter, King of Heralds North of Trent,
32, 39, 40.
Philpot, John, Somerset, 39.
Pierce the Ploughman’s Crede, 51.
Pierpoint, William, 103.
Pilkington, Sir Charles, 104.
Placards, see Visitation Placards.
Planche, James Robinson, Somerset, 16.
Plomer, Robert, sheriff of Essex, tomb
of, 145.
Poland, book of heraldry in, 44.
Pope, Mildred K., 29.
Portcullis Pursuivant, 118, 139.
Posse, Otto, 13.
Poulteney, Sir William, 143.
Poynings, Michael Lord, 20.
Poyntz, Hugh, 19, 21, 122.
Prester John, 50.
Prinet, Max, 53.
Prisoner, how to bear the arms of a,
X04.
Proclamation, 160.
Prothesilaus, 158, 159.
Provence, Ramon Berengar of, 165.
Province^ of Kings of Arms, 52, 54.
Provincial authority of Kings of Arms,
з»:
Provincial Kings of Arms, 39, 136.
Public Record Office, Chancery Mis-
cellanea, 6/1: 21; State Papers 9/10:
215 State Papers (1) 73: 76, 79, 80,
84-8, 90, 94-7.
Pursuivants, 32, 42, 44-5 j their crea-
tion, 42.
Radcliffe, Sir Alexander, 104.
Ratcliffe, George, his tomb, 144.
Rawson, Christopher, tomb of, 146.
Rebuses, used as arms, 119.
Rees-Jones, Rev. W. A., 116.
INDEX
174
Religious houses, arms of, in visitations,
101.
Rend of Anjou, 71.
Reppeley, John, 24.
Rest, John, Mayor of London, tomb of,
x45-
Revel the herald, 161.
Revolution, the, its effect on heralds,
- 120.
Richard II, 36, 66-7.
Richard III, 95-6.
Richer, herald of Lorraine, 161.
Rieux, Monsieur de, 38.
Robert, little, King of Heralds, 33.
Roland, Chanson de, 12.
Roland, рёге, 125.
Roll of Knights temp. Henry VII, 95.
Rollesley, William, tomb of, 144.
Rolls of arms, 161; see also Arms, rolls
of.
Roman de Brut, 121-2.
Roman de Rou, 121.
Round, J. Horace, 15.
Rowley, Elizabeth, her tomb, 144.
Rowse, A. L., 8.
Royal MS. 20 С. VIII: 69, 124.
Royaultes d’Armes, 54.
Russel alias Gorges, Tibaud, 23.
Russell, Charles, 48.
Rutland, Pedigree of the Earl of, 156.
Rutland, Visitations of, 147.
Ryseley, Sir John, his tomb, 145.
Sackville, Margaret, tomb of, 145.
Sadleir, T. O., Deputy Ulster, 7.
Sagarra, Ferran de, 15.
St. Albans, Boke of, 106.
St. Antoine, chapel of, Paris, 41, 96.
St. Botolph without Aidgate, visited,
I45:
St. Bride’s, visited, 141.
St. Dunstan in the East, visited, 143.
St. Dunstan’s, Fleet Street, visited, 141.
St. George, Sir Henry, Clarenceux, 147,
158.
St. George, Sir Henry, Richmond and
Garter, 84, 99.
St. George, Richard, Ulster, 2.
St. George, Sir Richard, Clarenceux,
39> xo7-
St. Gregory’s by St. Paul’s, visited, 141.
St. Katherine’s by the Tower, visited,
144.
St. Martin’s, Ludgate, visited, 141.
St. Mary Abbey on Tower Hill,
visited, 143.
St. Mary at Hill, visited, 143.
St. Michael le Querne, visited, 140.
St. Olave, Hart Street, visited, 145.
St. Paul’s Cathedral, visited, 118-19,
139-40-
St. Paul’s, little chapel in the church-
yard of, visited, 140, 142.
Saint-Remy, Jean Lefevre, Seigneur de,
Toison d’Or, 56.
St. Sepulchre’s, visited, 141.
Sandford, Francis, Lancaster, 16, 82.
Sandys, Pedigree of Lord, 156.
Sarrazin, 29.
Sassoferrato, Bartolo di, see Bartolo.
Savoy, Amadeus 1Ц of, 15.
Saxony, Frederick Count Palatine of,
58.
Say, arms of, 17, 18.
Scheier, Aug., 29, 30.
Scotland, Book of Arms of, 154.
Scotland, herald of, 35.
Scotland, Joan Beaufort, Queen of, her
tomb, 140.
Scots, Homage of the King of, in
England, 156.
Scots Parliament, Acts of, 7, 20.
Scottish roll of arms, 113.
Scrope, Sir John, tomb of, 144.
Scrope, Sir Richard, 50.
Scrope, Sir Stephen, and his wife,
tombs of, 144.
Scrope Grosvenor, 23, 50.
Seals, early heraldic, 13—16.
Sefi, Alexander J., 114.
Seltman, С. T., 14.
Sely, William and Agnes, tomb of, 145.
Seton, George, 7.
Seyler, Gustav A., 19, 20, 32, 58, 122-3.
Shrewsbury, George, Earl of, his second
son’s tomb, 142.
Sicily herald, 38, 41-2, 56, 57, 71-2,
106, 125.
Sicily, Louis, King of, 43.
Sigismund, Emperor, 142.
Simon de Montfort’s barber, 48.
SitweU, Sir George, 67, 77.
Skevyngton, Sir John, sheriff, tomb of,
x45-	, ~
Smert, John, Guienne and Garter, 38,
77-8, 126.
INDEX
Smithfield, Roll of the Jousts of, 156.
Smythe, Dr., the Bishop of London's
deputy, 119, 139.
Somerset, Visitation of, 100, 101, 116,
x5i.
South worth, Sir Thomas, 104:
Spay, William, his tomb, 145.
Spelman, Sir Henry, 40.
Spice, Alice, tomb of, 143.
Spice, Clement, 143.
Squibb, G. D., 162.
Stafford, Jane, tomb of, 144.
Stafford, Lord, 23.
Stafford, Ralph Baron of, 20.
Staffordshire, Visitation in, 101, 117;
Stamford, arms of Knights of the Garter
at, 115.
Standards, Benoit's book of, 117.
Stanley arms, 108.
Statutum armorum, 26, 31, 159.
Stenton, F. M., 16.
Stephen, King of England, 17.
Stephenson, Mill, 91.
Stevenson, J. H., 69, 71.
Stillington, Dr., Archdeacon of Nor-
folk, 119, 140.
Stirling roll of arms, 49.
Stokesley, Dr., Bishop of London, 139.
Stothard, C. A., 16.
Stourton, Pedigree of Lord, 156.
Stow, John, 118.
Stowe MS. 594: 115-16.
Strangways' Book, 162.
Stydolfe, Thomas and Elizabeth, tomb
of, 144.
Suchenwirt, Peter, 32.
Surrey, Visitation of, 100, 101, 116-17,
15П
Sussex, Elizabeth (Ratcliffe), Countess
of, her tomb, 144.
Sussex, Visitation of, 101, 116-17, 151.
Suzane, Fauviaus de, 159.
Swayne, William, grant of arms to, 76.
Sydney, Edward, tomb of, 144.
Sydney, Thomas,- tomb of, 144.
Syon House, MS. at, 161.
Talbot, John, of Salesbury, 104.
Tallow Chandlers’ Company, grant of
arms to, 77.
Tancarville the herald, 44;
Tarbock, Thomas, 104.
Tarentum, Prince of, 43.
175
Tate, Sir Robert and Margery, tomb
of, 145.
Tenure, particulars of, in Visitations,
57, 59, 109.
Teysaunt, John, 160.
Thebes, Roman de, 13, 121.
Thebes, siege of, 159.
Thomas of Woodstock, 21, 24.
TKynne, Francis, Lancaster herald, 73.
Titles, Allowance of, at Visitations,
47-
Toison d’Or, Armorial de, 114.
Toison d’Or King of Arms, 56, 63.
Tomlinson, H. Ellis, 158.
Tonge, Thomas, Norroy, 87, 92, 101.
Toppin, Aubrey J., York, 103.
Tournaments and heralds, 25, 26, 30,
39, 46, 71-2, 159, 160.
Townley, Sir John, 104-5.
Treachant, William, 160.
Treatises, Mediaeval heraldic, 162.
Trevor, Bishop Si6n, 67-8, 73.
Turner, Oliver, porter of the Tower,
tomb of, 145.
Tyldesley, Thurstan, 104.
Tyrell, Elizabeth, tomb of, 145.
Tyrell, Sir William, 144.
Uniqueness of arms, certificate of, 75—7.
Upholders* Company, grant of arms to,
in.
Upton, Nicholas, 15, 72-3, 123, 125.
Vaillant King of Arms, 22-3, 51.
Valentine and Orson, 153.
Valerius Magnus, 153.
Vallet de Viriville, 37, 54, 161.
Valoynes, Sir Stephen de, 20.
Vaughan, Hugh, 79-80, 88.
Vegetius, 154.
Vere, arms of, 17.
Vermandois herald, 57.
Vermandois, Ralph, Count of, 14, 15.
Vertue, George, 23.
Vienna, Imperial Library, MS. I,
No. 3297: 55.
Villart, Nicolas, Calabre herald, Anjou
King of Arms, 41.
Vincent, Augustine, 163.
Visitation Commission of 1530: 2, 3,
9-11, 59, 77-8, 82, 87, 90, 96-9.
Visitation, Instructions for, 147-9.
Visitation Placards, 88, 90, 92-4.
INDEX
176
Visitations, heralds*, 2-8, 57, 120:
Dugdale’s account of the manner of
making, 3—5; made by Provincial
Kings of Arms ex officio, 3, 11,
92, 98, 101; in Ireland, 6, 158; in
Scotland, 7; political purpose of, 8;
local rolls of arms forerunners of,
51; enjoined by Thomas Duke of
Clarence, 59, 81, 136—7; made by
Garter, 87, 93, 98; in Wales, 92,
102-3; rough and fair copies,
100-1; of churches and burials,
117-19-
Made by Ballard, 107-9; Benoit,
100-1, no, 116-18, 143-6; ‘Bewe
James’, 107; Bruges, 115—16; Chris-
topher Carlisle, 106; Lewis Dwnn,
103; Fellow, 102-5; Hawkeslowe,
in, 114; Hawley, 102, 118-19,
139-43; Roger Leigh, in, 114;
‘per marischallum de Norroy*, 107;
Tonge, 101-2.
Vivian-Neal, A. W., 8.
Volant, William, King of Heralds, 35.
Vulson, Marc de, 7.
Wace, 13, 121-2.
Waggan, Thomas, tomb of, 146.
Wagner, Anthony R., Richmond, 2,
15, 90, 106, 155, 158, 159, 163.
Walden, John, and Elizabeth his wife,
tomb of, 144.
Waleran, Count of Meulan, 14, 15.
Wales, heralds’ visitations in, 92, 102-
3> xx7-
Wales, South, Visitation of, c. 1480:
108-9, X5X-
Walford’s roll of arms, 50.
Wall, Thomas, Lancaster and Norroy,
87.
Wall, Thomas, Windsor and Garter,
no, 157.
Walsingham, Sir Francis, 93-4.
Walsingham, Thomas, tomb of, 144.
Wanley, Humphrey, 107.
Wappenbrief, 67.
Wappenknaben, 32.
Warbeltone, Johan de, 23.
Warenne, arms of, 15.
Warwick, arms^of old Earls of, 15.
Warwick, Earl of, Marshal, 22.
Welf VI, Marquess of Tuscany, 15.
West of Sudbury, 163.
Whalley, Abbey of, 104.
White flag, 44.
White Friars visited, 141.
White, Geoffrey, 14, 16.
Whiting, William, Huntingdon and
Chester Herald, 151.
Wight, Isle of, Visitation of, 100, 117,
X5X-
William fitz Empress, 16.
William fitz Patrick, Earl of Salisbury,
16.
William Longespee, Earl of Salisbury
16.
William the Marshal, 26-9, 31, 130-1.
Wiltshire, Visitation in, 101, 117.
Winchilsea, Lord, n6.
Windsor herald, 36.
Wingfield, Sir John, tomb of, 142.
Wode of Devonshire, Pedigree of, 156.
Wodenothe, John, 107, 109.
Wood, Richard and Alice, tomb of, 146.
Worcestershire, Visitation in, 101, 117.
Wormaid, Francis, 159.
Wrexworth, John, Guienne King of
Arms, 74-7.
Wriothesley, Thomas, Earl of South-
ampton, 86.
Wriothesley, Sir Thomas, Garter, 62,
83-4, 86-7, 102, 104, 108, n 3-15,
136, 162; comphints of the Office of
Arms against, 157; his dispute with
Clarenceux, see Benoit, Thomas; his
indenture with Machado, 84-5; his
roll of grants of arms, 90-1; his books,
94-5,110; rolls of arms owned by, 114.
Wriothesley, William, York, 86, 95.
Writhe, John, Falcon and Garter, 83,
89, 93-5, 108, in, 113.
Writhe, Thomas, Garter, see Wriothes-
ley.
Wrythe, John, Garter, 163.
Wydville, Elizabeth, Coronation of, 108.
Wydville, Sir Richard, Earl Rivers, 112.
Wylde, Robert, tomb of, 144.
York, Richard Duke of, epitaph on, by
Chester Herald, 108.
York, Richard Duke of, marriage of,
to Anne Countess of Norfolk, 108.
Yorkshire gentry, arms of, c. 1480: 108.
Young, John, Somerset and Norroy, 87.
Zurich, die Wappenrolle von, 53.