Part 1

Produced by R.G.P.M. van Giesen. For "Slankie".

THE NOBLE AND GENTLE MEN OF ENGLAND.

THE NOBLE AND GENTLE MEN OF ENGLAND; OR, NOTES TOUCHING THE ARMS AND DESCENTS OF THE ANCIENT KNIGHTLY AND GENTLE HOUSES OF ENGLAND, ARRANGED IN THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNTIES. ATTEMPTED BY EVELYN PHILIP SHIRLEY, ESQ. M.A. F.S.A. LATE ONE OF THE KNIGHTS OF THE SHIRE FOR THE COUNTY OF WARWICK.

WESTMINSTER: JOHN BOWER NICHOLS AND SONS. Third Edition, Corrected 1866.

PREFACE.

"That noble families are continued in a long succession of wealth, honour, and reputation, is justly esteemed as one of the most valuable of worldly blessings, as being the certain tokens of God Almighty's providential favour, and the prudent conduct of such ancestors,"--Nath. Johnston's _Account of the Family of Bruce Earl of Aylesbury_, 1691, Harl. MS, 3879.

THE following imperfect attempt to bring together a few notes relating to the ancient aristocracy of England, is confined in the first place to the families _now existing_, and regularly established either as _knightly_ or _gentle_ houses before the commencement of the sixteenth century; secondly, no notice is taken of those families who may have assumed the name and arms of their ancestors in the _female line_: for the truth is, as it has been well observed,* "that, unless we take the _male line_ as the general standard of genealogical rank, we shall find ourselves in a hopeless state of confusion;" thirdly, illegitimate descent is of course excluded; and, fourthly, where families have sold their original estates, they will be noticed in those counties where they are at present seated; if however they still possess the ancient estate of their family, though they may _reside_ in another county, they will be mentioned for the most part under that county from whence they originally sprung.

In those cases where the whole landed estate of the family has been dissipated, although the male line still remains, all notice is omitted, such families having no longer any claim to be classed in any county. For, "ancient dignity was territorial rather than personal, the whole system was rooted in the land, and, even in the present day, though the land may have changed hands often, it has carried along with it some of that sentiment of regard attached to the lordship of it, as surely as its earth has the fresh smell which it gives when upturned by the husbandman."**

This list also, it must be remembered, does not profess to give an account of all those families whose descent may possibly be traced beyond the year 1500, but merely of those who were in the position of what we now call _county families_ before that period. The line of demarcation indeed between the families who rose upon the ruins of the monastic system, and the more ancient aristocracy of England, is often very difficult to be traced, depending as it does on documentary evidence often inaccessible, and obscured by the fanciful and too favourable deductions of the heralds of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

With regard to the sources from whence the following memoranda have been taken, I have endeavoured as much as possible to rely upon the best county histories and MS. collections of authority, and carefully to eschew those modern accounts of family history, which, by ascribing the most absurd pretensions of ancient lineage to families who bore no _real_ claim to that distinction, have done much to bring genealogy itself into contempt among that numerous class of readers who are but slightly acquainted with the subject.

I cannot conclude without recording my obligations to several gentlemen who have in the most liberal manner placed their genealogical collections at my service, and by so doing rendered less imperfect these notices of the noble and gentle houses of England: among that number I wish particularly to mention the names of the late Mr. Joseph Morris of Shrewsbury and Mr. Joseph Hunter, one of the Assistant Keepers of the Records, the learned and accurate historian of South Yorkshire. E.P.S.

Lower Eatington, July 1, 1860.

* Quarterly Review, Jan. 1858, p. 37. ** Quarterly Review, Jan. 1858, p. 31.

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.

ANOTHER edition of this little work having been called for, I have carefully revised and corrected what has been already written; I have also made some additions, the result of further investigation, and the information of many friends and correspondents, whose courtesy and kindness I here beg most gratefully to acknowledge.

Since the book was published in the year 1859, the male lines of three families, whose names were originally comprehended in it, have become extinct, viz.: Cotton of Landwade, in the county of Cambridge, Hornyold of Blackmore Park, and Hanford of Wollashill, both in Worcestershire. On the other hand, notices of eight "_new peers?_" will be found in the present volume, four of which also occurred in the second edition. I allude to Lovett of Liscombe, in the county of Buckingham, and Basset of Tehidy, in the county of Cornwall--very ancient families, whose landed property being until lately in female hands, could not, in accordance with the rules which I had laid down, be comprehended in the first edition; I have also added Huyshe of Sand, in Devonshire, Patten of Bank Hall, in Lincolnshire, Bertie of Uffington, Anderson of Brocklesby, and Massingberd of Wrangle, all in Lincolnshire, and, lastly, Upton of Ashton Court, in the county of Somerset. And here I must again beg to remind the reader, that the intention of this work is not to give an account of every family whose pedigree may be continued in the male line beyond the time which I have mentioned (the beginning of the sixteenth century), but of those only who were established as _county families_, "inheriting arms from their ancestors," at that period. It is no doubt in many cases very difficult to distinguish accurately the pretensions of many families who may possibly have a fair claim to this distinction, though, from the reasons to which I have formerly alluded, it is not easy to establish them. I can only say that as far as my information extends I have endeavoured fairly and honestly to draw the correct line, but whether I have succeeded must be left to the judgment of others. E. P. S.

Lower Eatington, January 22, 1866.

"An ancient estate should always go to males. It is mighty foolish to let a stranger have it because he marries your daughter and takes your name. As for an Estate newly acquired by trade, you may give it, if you will, to the dog _Towser_, and let him keep his _own_ name."--DR. JOHNSON.

+Noble and Gentle Men of England+

BEDFORDSHIRE.

+Knightly.+

ST.JOHN OF MELCHBOURNE, LORD ST.JOHN OF BLETSHOE 1558-9.