The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.
This free content was Born digital. CC-NC-BY.
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '42 Bere v Flamock', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640, ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/42-bere-flamock [accessed 3 December 2024].
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '42 Bere v Flamock', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed December 3, 2024, https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/42-bere-flamock.
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "42 Bere v Flamock". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 3 December 2024. https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/42-bere-flamock.
In this section
42 BERE V FLAMOCK
George Bere of St Ervan, co. Cornwall, gent v John Flamock of Padstow, co. Cornwall, gent
December 1637 - November 1638
Abstract
Bere claimed that in Padstow, co. Cornwall, between June and August 1636, Flamock had said that he was a base fellow, repeating the insult after Bere had maintained that he was as well descended as Flamock. Process was granted on 15 December 1637, but the cause had been settled by arbitration by 6 November 1638.
Initial proceedings
3/77, Petition to Arundel
'Your petitioner is a gentleman ancientlie descended and that John Flamock of the towne of Padstowe in the Countie of Cornwall about the moneth of June, Julie, of August in the yeare 1636 in the towne of Padstowe said to your petitioner that he was a base fellowe, whereunto your petitioner answeared he was a gentleman as well descended as Flamock or to that effect. Flamocke replyed and said againe, that your petitioner was a base fellowe, which wordes he repeated diverse times to the contumelie and disgrace of your petitioner, thereby provoking your petitioner to a duell.'
Petitioned that Flamock be brought to answer.
Duck desired Dethick to grant process, 15 December 1637.
Signed by Arthur Duck.
Summary of proceedings
Dr Duck acted as counsel for Bere. On 6 November 1638 the cause appeared before Lord Maltravers, the earl of Huntingdon, the earl of Bath and Sir Henry Marten. An agreement had been made between the parties and Dr Duck agreed to lapse the prosecution.
Notes
The family pedigrees of Bere and Flamock appear in J. L. Vivian and H. H. Drake (eds.), The Visitation of the County of Cornwall in the Year 1620 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 9, 1874), pp. 9, 71.
Documents
- Initial proceedings
- Petition to Arundel: 3/77 (15 Dec 1637)
- Proceedings
- Proceedings before Maltravers: R.19, fos. 454r-468v (6 Nov 1638)
People mentioned in the case
- Bere, George, gent (also Beare)
- Bourchier, Henry, earl of Bath
- Duck, Arthur, lawyer
- Dethick, Gilbert, registrar
- Flamock, John, gent (also Flammock)
- Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
- Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
- Hastings, Henry, earl of Huntingdon
- Marten, Henry, knight
Places mentioned in the case
- Cornwall
- Padstow
- St Ervan
Topics of the case
- arbitration
- comparison
- denial of gentility
- provocative of a duel