581 Scarburgh v Bryan

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

This free content was Born digital. CC-NC-BY.

Citation:

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '581 Scarburgh v Bryan', 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/581-scarburgh-bryan [accessed 23 November 2024].

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '581 Scarburgh v Bryan', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed November 23, 2024, https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/581-scarburgh-bryan.

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "581 Scarburgh v Bryan". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 23 November 2024. https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/581-scarburgh-bryan.

In this section

581 SCARBURGH V BRYAN

Samuel Scarburgh of North Walsham, co. Norfolk, gent v Robert Bryan of the city of Norwich, baker

October 1640

Abstract

Scarburgh complained that in the summer of 1640 Bryan, in the presence of several witnesses, called him a 'base fellow and gentleman, and [said he] had plaied the knave with him'. Process was granted on 17 October 1640, but no further proceedings survive.

Initial proceedings

5/156, Plaintiff's bond

2 October 1640

Bound to 'appear in the court in Arundel House in the Strand without Temple Barr, London'.

Signed by Henry Linch acting for Scarburgh.

Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of John Longland.

5/157, Petition

'Your petitioner is a gentleman of armes and, that notwithstanding, within these three months last past, in the presence of divers witnesses, one Robert Briant of the cittie of Norwich, baker, without any cause or provocation given by your petitioner, said that your petitioner was a base fellow and no gentleman, and had plaied the knave with him, your petitioner being without remedy elsewhere, and Briant a rich able person.'

Petitioned that Bryan be brought to answer.

Arundel granted process, 17 October 1640.

Notes

The Scarburghs of North Walsham appeared in the Visitation of 1664, but Samuel was not among those named. Otherwise, neither party appears in the Visitations of Norfolk of 1613 and 1664.

A. W. Hughes Clarke and A. Campling (eds.), The Visitation of Norfolk, anno domini 1664, part II (Publications of the Harleian Society, 86, 1934), p. 194.

Robert Bryant was apprenticed to Richard Keymer, baker, on 18 May 1632. By 31 August 1640, Robert Bryant, had taken an apprentice of his own.

P. Millican (ed.), The Register of the Freemen of Norwich, 1548-1713 (Norwich, 1934), pp. 4, 209.

Documents

  • Initial proceedings
    • Plaintiff's bond: 5/156 (2 Oct 1640)
    • Petition: 5/157 (17 Oct 1640)

People mentioned in the case

  • Bryan, Robert, baker (also Briant, Bryant)
  • Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
  • Keymer, Richard, baker
  • Linch, Henry
  • Longland, John
  • Scarburgh, Samuel, gent (also Scarborough)

Places mentioned in the case

  • London
    • Arundel House
    • Strand
    • Temple Bar
  • Norfolk
    • North Walsham
  • Norwich

Topics of the case

  • denial of gentility
PreviousTable of contentsNext