Page images

which Thomas, Lord Dacre, who was of the same family, thought alluded CHARLES I to the distractions of the College, whilst he was an officer of arms.


I have not seen his appointment to this pursuivantship; but I am inclined to think he had the office, and after Lennard's death. The dates of the patents of his going to Windsor's place, and Ryley's as Blue-mantle, do not agree, by the difference of about a month; but it is well known, there was no regularity about passing them for several reigns. Their creation was the principal thing relied upon in those periods.

September 4, 1633.-WILLIAM RYLEY, Gent.-See Lancaster.

1641. ROBERT BROWNE, Gent.

Was the only pursuivant who remained steady in his duty to his royal master when the sword was drawn. The Parliament, some say, dispossessed him of his office; but that probably is not the case, for it is pretty certain he died in the College, being buried at St. Bennet's, Paul's Wharf, October 14, 1646.

(By Intrusion.):

1646. JOHN WATSON, Gent.-See Usurpation.


James 1.-THOMPSON, Gent.-See Lancaster.

WILLIAM CROWNE, Gent.-See Usurpation.

Patent on September 14, 1638.-Created at the Red Lion Inn in Richmond, by the
Earl of Arundel, the 24th following.

It is singular, that during Charles I's reign, there should have been only two pursuivants who had this office. It was owing to Thompson remaining so long without farther promotion, and the civil wars which broke out some time after Crowne obtained it.


James 1.-JOHN HOLLAND, Gent.

He and Brooke, York, were the only officers who, having been in the service of Elizabeth, survived to this reign. It is singular he should never,

[blocks in formation]




CHARLES I. in all the years he was in the College, arrive at any preferment beyond this, Pursuivants, in which he died. He bore Azure, semé of Fleur-de-lis, a Lion rampant regardant Argent, and when he became Rouge-rose, with a Label.


It is very probable, that he was son, or near relation, to Joseph Holland, Esq., a native of Devonshire, an excellent herald, genealogist, and antiquary, who was of the Inner Temple, living in 1617. In the College is a parchment roll of the nobility and gentry of Devon, and also of Cornwall and Somerset, to 1585; there is a folio MS. upon the same subject in some private collection, it is supposed. In 1658, a tract of his, expressive of his opinion about Parliaments, with others, were printed. Hearne, in his collections, has published six papers of his, relative to law terms, cities, dimensions of land, heralds, inns of courts, and the names of Britain. Four or five more remain in MS., amongst the Cottonian Collection, in the British Museum.

Dec. 22, 1625.-THOMAS PRESTON, Gent.

Son of Isaac Preston, eldest son of William Preston, of Preston in Sussex. Jacob, his father's younger brother, was ancestor to a family of this surname, at Beston St. Laurence in Sussex. In 1630, Charles I. sent him to Ireland, to acquaint the Lords Justices of that kingdom of the birth of Prince Charles, his Majesty's son, and afterward his successor. He was received and rewarded, in a manner which bespoke their joy for the occacasion, and of the good opinion they entertained of his own personal merit. September 21, 1633, he had a patent, constituting him Ulster, king at arms, for Ireland..

JOHN BEAUCHAMP, Gent.-See Usurpation.

Patent in 1633.

These are all the pursuivants in ordinary that I have found in this reign, whom I could class in their particular offices. There is one I have mentioned, but no name is given, who unhappily fell a victim, in 1628, to the very disagreeable employment of taking up supposed culprits. This pursuivant was sent to apprehend one Hurst, "a popish recusant," who lived near Preston in Lancashire, whose family resisting, the unfortunate officer at arms was killed upon the spot. There can be little doubt, but that George Mainwaring, Esq., who became Richmond herald, and William Griffith, Esq., who obtained the place of Lançaster herald, were pur


suivants in ordinary; but I do not discover what offices they held in the CHARLES I.. College, previous to their promotion of heralds.







[ocr errors]

July 31, 1630.-WILLIAM RYLEY, Gent.-See Blue-mantle.

HENRY LILLY, Gent.-See Rouge-croix.


James 1.-THOMAS HAMELIN, Gent.

He died in this office, probably a very young man. His arms were Gules, a Lion rampant Ermine, crowned Or. Mr. Hamelin married Mary, only daughter of Sir William Forster, of Aldermarston, Bucks, Knight of the Bath, relict of Sir Edward Stafford, of Bradfield, Berks, Knight. By this lady he had issue two sons, John Hamelin and Thomas Hamelin, who both died without issue. His relict married a third time, to Sir Thomas Manwaring, of the Inner Temple, Knight, steward of Reading: surviving him, she married a fourth time to Elias Ashmole, Esq., Windsor herald, to whom she became a very troublesome "yoke-fellow," as we learn by his diary. EDWARD WALKER, Gent.-See Rouge-croix.

Rouge Rose.





We have seen, that when the unhappy Sovereign Charles I., became ruined by the civil war, the Parliament, usurping the royal prerogative, made members of the College at Arms, even superseding such who had eminently distinguished themselves by their fidelity to his Majesty. There can be little doubt, however, but that the Parliament did this so early, in consequence of their resolution to give a public funeral to their general, the Earl of Essex, who died September 14, 1646, which was appointed to be solemnized, October 22; for it was in the interim between these days, that they chose several, to succeed those whom they had deposed from their offices. It was wonderful that they did not fill up all the vacancies, for there were, as has been observed, the three kings at arms, three heralds, and one pursuivant, who were loyalists; and at that time Philipot, Somerset, who was one of those who retained his duty in this worst of seasons, was dead, consequently his place was then, in their opinions, doubly void; yet they only named persons to fill the offices of kings at arms, and that of Blue-mantle pursuivant, reasoning, perhaps, that it was impossible, without the former, to support the semblance of an heraldic body. Instead of being happy, in having such an opportunity of promoting some of the heralds and pursuivants, who during the war had been uniformly in their interest, in opposition to that of their Sovereign, they acted the direct contrary, passing over those who had been thus forward to serve them at the expense of their allegiance.

This conduct of the parliament was very extraordinary; for they conferred the office of Garter upon Byshe, one of the members of the House of Commons for the Borough of Blechingley, and Squibb had the place of Clarenceux from the interest of Serjeant Glynne, one of the members for Westminster, neither of whom had been in any office in the College, previous to the time of their appointment to their posts; and they nominated Ryley, Lancaster-Herald, a servant of theirs in another department, to be Norroy. Upon Squibb's death, Byshe became both Garter and Clarenceux.


Whether the other vacancies in the College were filled up during the life of the unhappy captive Monarch or not, I cannot determine. These of the College, only, attended the Earl of Essex's funeral: Byshe, Garter; Squibb, Clarenceux; Ryley, Norroy; Owen, York; Beauchamp, Portcullis; Crowne, Rouge-dragon; and Watson, Blue-mantle. It is difficult to account for the absence of the other parliament members of the College, who had always been such from the commencement of the civil war, unless at that time otherwise employed in the public service.

It might have been thought, that after the dreadful catastrophe of the King's death, the College of Arms would have fallen into the utmost confusion; and indeed such was the sour levelling principles of the republicans, that it might seem to have had a civil death, especially as it, in a great measure, depended upon the majesty of the Sovereign. So little notice was taken of it, until monarchy, under another name, was restored, that I have never seen this institution noticed, from the death of Charles I. to the commencement of Oliver's government.

The very epithets, or titles of kings at arms, would sound disgusting, or even dangerous, in the ears of furious fanatical republicans. It was very extraordinary, that these men, who thought so much danger lay in words of royal import, should permit the heads of the College to be called kings, when they altered other such names, as changing the King's Bench into the Upper Bench: even the word kingdom was obnoxious to them. The title, too, of Garter was strange, when the order of St. George, whence the name was derived, was never to be revived. Other names, significant of something relative to our ancient Monarchs, must also have been distasteful to them: that of Rouge-croix peculiarly so, because of their vehement antipathy to the representation of the cross.

I have never seen any particular order for the change of the tabards of the heraldic bodies, and yet, as they had been accustomed to have the royal arms depicted upon them, we must suppose that it was changed for those of the common-wealth, because, in February 1650-1, observing that the royal arms were still retained in many places, an order was issued, that "the king's arms be removed, and those of the state be placed in their, "room" the expense of which was to be defrayed by parish rates. Justices. of the peace, churchwardens, and other officers, were ordered to see it executed.



« PreviousContinue »