GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1998-08 > 0902078592


From: Tim Powys-Lybbe <>
Subject: Re: College of Arms:proof enough?
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 18:23:12 +0100


In message <>
(Reedpcgen) wrote:

> (Increatus)
> wrote:
> If a family is registered with the college of arms(england) and the records
> were found in the tower of london as well as a family geneology registered
> would that be considered proof enough of ancestery?
>
>
>
> Answer: No, only the evidence presented (i. e., citations of the records that
> were at the Tower of Londond) can demonstrate the proof. All it would be proof
> of is that someone payed their fees. ; ) Not to denegrate the College of
> Arms, but I've seen several things they did recently which are wrong. What
> they ARE good for is providing copies of records they (and no one else) has,
> such as pedigrees and the original visitations. Other than that, they are only
> as accurate as the knowledge and sources used by the herald who put it together
> for the family. There is at least one herald alive today I do have high
> respect for.
>
> Many of the rolls abd public records used to be housed at the Tower of London
> and are now available at the PRO at Kew, so if you have the information you can
> retrace their steps and perhaps add to it. After all, if the work was done
> some years ago they would not have had the benefit of modern indexes and
> calendars.
>
> pcr
>

Agreed. And I can confirm that the CoA can get things wrong, though
more usually records of people that are far earlier than any herald.
There is a strong suspicion in our family that a herald was open to
persuasion if not also bribery in some of the things he recorded ...
this is in addition to other errors about very early genealogies.

The sad thing is that the CoA will not share their records and engage in
debate about which were correct and which were wrong or dodgy.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe
South Farm:
A logical entity with a real counterpart but no address bar this.

This thread: