582 Scarburgh v Grix

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

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

Citation:

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '582 Scarburgh v Grix', 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/582-scarburgh-grix [accessed 23 November 2024].

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '582 Scarburgh v Grix', 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/582-scarburgh-grix.

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "582 Scarburgh v Grix". 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/582-scarburgh-grix.

In this section

582 SCARBURGH V GRIX

Samuel Scarburgh of North Walsham, co. Norfolk, gent v Robert Grix of Sutton, co. Norfolk

April 1640

Abstract

Scarburgh complained that on about 31 January 1640, Grix called him 'a base knave a base rascall and a cheateninge fellow', thereby provoking him to duel. Scarburgh claimed that his family coat of arms was 'Or a Chevron between three Castles Gules '. Scarburgh entered bond on 20 April 1640, but no further proceedings survive.

Initial proceedings

5/22, Petition

'Your petitioner is a gent descended of an ancient family and hath armes belonging to him and his family, vizt. Or a Chevron between three Castles Gules . That notwithstanding, one Robert Grix of Sutton in the county of Norfolk, on or about the last day of Januarie anno 1639, at North Walsham aforesaid, did very much abuse your petitioner and amongst other provoking speeches told your petitioner that he was a Base knave a base rascall, and a cheateninge fellow, thereby very much provoking your petitoner to duell.'

Petitioned that Grix be brought to answer.

Maltravers granted process, no date.

5/25, Plaintiff's bond

20 April 1640

Bound to 'appear in the court in the painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster'.

Henry Lynch of St Gregory's parish, London, gent, acting for Scarburgh.

Signed by Henry Linch.

Sealed signed and delivered in the presence of John Watson.

Notes

For another account of this case, see G. D. Squibb, Reports of Heraldic Cases in the Court of Chivalry, 1623-1732 (London, 1956), p. 46.

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

W. Rye (ed.), The Visitation of Norfolk of 1563, 1589 and 1613 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 33, 1891); A. W. Hughes Clarke and A. Campling (eds.), The Visitation of Norfolk, anno domini 1664, part I (Publications of the Harleian Society, 85, 1933); 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.

Documents

  • Initial proceedings
    • Petition: 5/22 (no date)
    • Plaintiff's bond: 5/25 (20 Apr 1640)

People mentioned in the case

  • Grix, Robert
  • Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
  • Linch, Henry, gent (also Lynch)
  • Scarburgh, Samuel, gent (also Sacrborough)
  • Watson, John

Places mentioned in the case

  • Middlesex
    • Westminster
  • Norfolk
    • North Walsham
    • Sutton

Topics of the case

  • allegation of cheating
  • coat of arms
  • denial of gentility
  • provocative of a duel
PreviousTable of contentsNext