Skip to main content

The Heraldry of Godinton House. Part II The Toke family

Page number
185-208
Author
Philip L.A. Newill
Citation

Philip L.A. Newill.2016.The Heraldry of Godinton House. Part II The Toke family .Archaeologia Cantiana.137:185-208.

View

The Heraldry of Godinton House.

Part II: The Toke Family

philip l.a. newill

The Toke family owned Godinton for over four hundred years and as well as making many additions to the house, they left numerous heraldic items. In around 1903 the heraldry was noted by the then vicar of Hothfield, Rev. Harry Russell and his notes provide an invaluable record. From Russell’s notes and the surviving items, it is largely possible to reconstruct the heraldic display seen over a century ago.

The Great Hall and Corridor

The heraldic display in the Great Hall and adjoining corridor in c.1903 would have been largely unaltered since its installation, probably by Nicholas Roundell Toke (d. 1837).

The East Wall: the main heraldic display began on the east wall of the Great Hall, continuing along the south and west walls, even extending to the adjacent corridor to the south. The east wall was panelled, with a single doorway at the north end and a false door at the south end for symmetry.1 A contemporary photograph shows the confessional (used purely for storage) in the centre between two chairs and heraldic shields can just be seen on the upper left of the picture.2 A photograph of unknown date (although 1896 at the latest),3 shows the north doorway and four shields above it, with one further to the right, arranged in a similar manner to the west wall as it is today. There would have been twelve coats on the east wall, six associated with each doorway (Fig. 1), however Russell only recorded eleven.4 The omitted coat, the northernmost, was for Goldwell (Azure, a chief Or, over all a lion rampant Argent billetty Sable armed and langued Gules) and is present today. When Russell visited, Godinton was owned by George Ashley Dodd,5 and there would have been no reason to create new heraldic items relating to the Toke family. The coats on the walls were those of the male line of the Toke family (Fig. 2), illustrating the marriage(s) of each member. The first three coats were those of Goldwell, Toke (ancient) (per chevron Sable and Argent, three griffins’ heads erased counterchanged langued Gules) and Chichele (Or, a chevron between three cinquefoils Gules), relating to Thomas Toke, and his first and second wives, Joan Goldwell and Cecilia Chichele, respectively.6 Joan Goldwell was her father’s heir at length and through her the Toke family eventually inherited Godinton.7 The next three coats were those of Engham (Argent, a chevron Sable between three pellets, on a chief Gules a lion passant guardant Or), Toke (augmented) (Argent, on a chevron between three greyhounds’ heads erased Sable collared Or as many plates) and Walworth (Gules, a bend raguly Argent between two garbs Or), representing John Toke and his first and second wives, Margaret Walworth and Anne Engham, respectively.8 It would seem from Russell’s notes that the coats of Walworth and Engham were transposed, since logically, the first wife’s arms should have been displayed to the left of her husband’s and those of the second wife to the right. The coat seen here for John Toke is different from that of his father, Thomas Toke due to the granting of an augmentation by Henry VII for services rendered.9 John Toke’s original coat consisted of the ancient arms with a mullet Or for difference, the mullet (five-pointed star) indicating that he was the third son. The augmented coat was seen extensively around the house, particularly in the Great Hall, sometimes quartering the ancient arms. The next six coats, over the false doorway, were effectively in pairs. The coats of Toke (aug.) and Kempe (Gules, three garbs within a bordure engrailed Or) represented the marriage of John Toke and Cecily Kempe, while those of Toke (aug.) and Bennet of Essex (now missing) were for Nicholas Toke and Mary Bennet. The coats of Toke (aug.) and Thomson (now missing) were for John Toke and Agnes Thomson (married 1581), the parents of the celebrated Captain Nicholas Toke (d. 1680).10

Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the coats over the two east wall doorways c.1903.

1 = Goldwell. 2 = Toke (ancient). 3 = Chichele. 4 = Engham. 5 = Toke (augmented).

6 = Walworth. 7 = Toke (aug.). 8 = Kempe. 9 = Toke (aug.). 10 = Bennet of Essex.

11 = Toke (aug.). 12 = Thomson.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Thomas Toke

m.1 Joan Goldwell

m.2 Cecilia Chichele

John Toke

m.1 Margaret Walworth

m.2 Anne Engham

John Toke

m. Cecily Kempe

Nicholas Toke

m. Mary Bennet

John Toke

Married 1581

m. Agnes Thomson

‘Capt.’ Nicholas Toke

Dr Henry Toke

m.1 Anne Robinson

m. Sarah Harlestone

m.2 Margaret Knatchbull

m.3 Jane Dobell

m.4 Mary Browne

Sir Nicholas Toke

m.5 Diana Finch

m.2 Katharine Dyke

(m.1 Joan Toke)

John Toke

Other issue

m. Susannah Mills

(see Fig. 3)

Nicholas Toke

m. Eleanor Cockman

John Toke

m. Margaret Roundell

Nicholas Roundell Toke

Died 1837

m. Anna Maria Wrey

Fig. 2 The Toke family of Godinton as represented in and around the Great Hall.

In 1925 Liberty & Co. created two large Tudor style arches in this wall,11 removing the series of heraldic coats. Only the arms of Goldwell and Toke (anc.) were put back here. Three (Engham and two Toke (aug.)) were added to the south wall; five (Chichele, Walworth, Kempe and two Toke (aug.)) were placed in the adjacent cor-ridors; and of the other two (Bennet of Essex and Thomson), one was placed next to Kempe at the foot of the staircase, where the shield outline remains; the other was lost.

The Confessional: against the centre of the east wall was the confessional bearing the arms of Finch (but with the griffins statant not passant) and the motto ‘AVRES ANIMI FORES’.12 The motto translates as ‘the ears are the door of the mind’,13 appropriate for a confessional, but is unrelated to the Finch family. Today the confessional is in the Parlour, following its removal from the Great Hall by Liberty & Co. in 1925.14

The South Wall: the only coats on the south wall in c.1903 were those seen today on the screens to either side of the main doorway. The easternmost screen featured arms for the five marriages of Captain Nicholas Toke, each represented by a single impaled coat. From left to right the five coats were, Toke (aug.) impaling: firstly, Robinson (Vert, a fret Or, on a chief of the second three escallops ermine), for Anne Robinson; secondly, Knatchbull (Azure, three crosses crosslet between two bendlets Or), for Margaret Knatchbull; thirdly, Dobell (Sable, a hind statant between three bells Argent), for Jane Dobell; fourthly, Browne of Weald Hall (Gules, a chevron between three lions’ gambs erased and erect Argent, on a chief of the second an eagle displayed Sable), for Mary Browne; and finally, Finch (Argent, a chevron between three griffins passant Sable), for Lady Diana Finch.15 The coats displayed on this screen appear to have been painted onto leather, then tacked onto the carved wooden screen and now have a fragile appearance.

The westernmost screen also bears five coats of marriage, effectively relating to Sir Nicholas Toke, nephew of Captain Nicholas. The first of these coats is Toke (aug.) impaling an unidentified and somewhat suspicious coat (Argent, a saltire checky Gules and Sable), which should be that of Harlestone (paly of six Or and Sable),16 since these arms were to represent the marriage of Dr Henry Toke (brother of Capt. Nicholas) and Sarah Harlestone, the parents of Sir Nicholas Toke.17 None of the known coats of Harlestone match that on the screen and the observed coat could not be found in the usual textbooks.18 The next two coats display Sir Nicholas’ two marriages, Toke (aug.) impaling Toke (anc.) for his brief marriage to his cousin Joan Toke; and Toke (aug.) impaling Dyke (Or, three cinquefoils Sable) for his marriage to Katherine Dyke in 1668.19 The final two coats on this screen are for the marriages of two of Sir Nicholas’ daughters (Fig. 3), but in the wrong order. The fourth coat was not identified by Russell,20 but probably represents Payne (quartering Yearworth) impaling Toke (aug.), although the dexter (left) side is not quartered, but is divided per fess, with the Payne arms in chief (per fess Sable and Gules, two lions passant counterchanged) and the Yearworth arms (Gules, three bucks’ heads couped Sable collared of the first) in base. No definite link to the Yearworth family could be found and these arms may be here by mistake (a family by the name of Yerewood appears in the 1662 Sussex Visitation,21 but no arms could be found for this family). This impaled coat represents the marriage of Edward Payne and Elizabeth Toke. Some regions of the sinister appear Gules (possibly the colour of the underlying medium) but should be Argent.22 The final coat on this screen is Henden (Azure, a lion passant between three escallops Or) impaling Toke (aug.), for William Henden (Hendon) and Katharine Toke.23

Sir Nicholas Toke

m.2 Kath. Dyke

John Toke m.

Elizabeth Toke

Bridget Toke m.

Susannah Mills

m. Edward Payne

Thomas Brett

Katharine Toke m.

Sarah Toke m.2

William Henden

Matthias Rutton

Fig. 3 The marriages of selected offspring from Sir Nicholas Toke’s second marriage.

The West Wall: the coats on the panelling to either side of the chimney breast were in c.1903 as they are today and represented the marriages of the final four generations of this genealogical series, with a crest at each end. In contrast to the coats on the screens, these marriages are displayed on pairs of shields, a reflection of the east wall (c.1903). The first two coats represent the 1701 marriage of John Toke and Susannah Mills,24 but the Toke coat is Toke (aug.) quartering Toke (anc.), not because of an earlier marriage to a Toke heiress, but to show both ancient and augmented coats (as they were entitled to do, particularly with the augmentation taking priority). In addition, the use of a quarterly Toke coat is visually pleasing, since it balances with the quarterly coat of Mills. The coat used here is Mills (paly of six Argent and Sable, a fess Gules) quartering Bulteel (Azure, a chevron Or between two swans Argent beaked and legged Gules in chief and a pair of shears of the third in base) (not Lannoy as suggested by Russell),25 as Susannah Mills’ mother was Leah Bulteel, a co-heiress.26 The supposed Mills coat could not be confirmed as such and is identical to the coat of Walsingham.27 A literature coat for a Mills family was found, but with three mullets Or upon the fess.28 The arms of Lannoy differ subtly from those of Bulteel: the former has a chevron Argent (silver),29 whereas the latter has a chevron Or (gold).30 The next two coats represent the marriage of Nicholas Toke to Eleanor Cockman in 1735.31 The Toke coat is the same as in the previous pair and is again matched with a quarterly coat, that of Cockman. This coat shows Cockman (Argent, three game cocks Gules) quartering Wylde (Argent, a chevron Sable, on a chief of the second three martlets Or), since Eleanor Cockman’s mother was a Wylde heiress.32 To the right of the chimney breast is the next pair of coats, for the 1762 marriage of John Toke to Margaret Roundell.33 The quarterly Toke coat is paired with the whole coat of Roundell (Or, a fess Gules between three olive branches proper). Margaret Roundell was an heraldic heiress and the arms are seen quartered elsewhere. The final two coats are for Nicholas Roundell Toke’s marriage to Anna Maria Wrey in 1791.34 The quarterly Toke coat is paired with that of Wrey (Sable, a fess between three pole-axes Argent) quartering Bourchier (Argent, a cross engrailed Gules between four water bougets Sable), Plantagenet (quarterly: 1 & 4: Azure, three fleurs-de-lis Or; 2 & 3: Gules, three lions passant guardant in pale Or; all within a bordure Argent) and Bohun (Azure, a bend Argent cotised Or between six lions rampant of the third armed and langued Gules). The Wrey family was justified in using all quarters of this coat and would have been keen to display their Plantagenet connection. The arms seen in the third quarter are correct for Thomas of Woodstock and his descendants.35 The Plantagenet family inherited the arms of Bohun after Thomas Plantagenet (son of Edward III) married Eleanor de Bohun, a daughter and co-heir of Humphrey de Bohun, seventh Earl of Hereford.36 The Bourchier family inherited the arms of Plantagenet and Bohun after William Bourchier married Anne of Woodstock (Anne Plantagenet), daughter and co-heir of Thomas Plantagenet.37 The final link is the inheritance by the Wrey family of the arms of Bourchier (including Plantagenet and Bohun), which occurred after the marriage of Sir Chichester Wrey, third Baronet, to Anne Bourchier, third daughter and co-heir of Edward Bourchier, fourth Earl of Bath, by 1653.38 Fig. 4 represents the three marriages linking the Wrey family to that of Bohun. In summary: a Bohun heiress married a Plantagenet; a Plantagenet heiress married a Bourchier; and a Bourchier heiress married a Wrey.

Wrey

Bourchier

Plantagenet

Bohun

Fig. 4 Diagram showing links between the Wrey arms and inherited arms. (For further explanatory text, see endnote 75.)

The shields in the far left and right corners were thought by Russell to bear the crest and the badge of Goldwell,39 however each device is on a wreath, suggesting that both are crests. The crest in the left (south-west) corner (a demi-lion rampant Argent billetty Sable langued Gules crowned Or) could not be found in the usual literature, but is reminiscent of the Goldwell arms; the crest in the right (north-west) corner (out of a well Or three columbine branches proper) is similar to that of a different Goldwell family in the literature.40

The Great Hall Corridor: the display in the adjacent corridor will be discussed at this point, since it is a continuation of that in the Great Hall. When Russell visited Godinton he recorded four coats on the south wall of the Corridor but appears to have missed at least five coats displayed on the north wall screens, i.e. on the reverse side of the screens mentioned in the Great Hall.41 In 1903, Godinton was no longer in the ownership of the Toke family, so it is unlikely that these coats were added after Russell’s visit. The Hall side of each screen was discussed earlier, and the arms displayed on the Corridor side are branches from this series. The east screen bears three impaled coats painted onto leather, for marriages of Captain Nicholas’ daughters. From east to west, the three coats are in order, starting with Chute (Gules, three swords in pale barwise pommels in sinister within an orle of mullets Or on a canton per fess of the second and Azure a lion rampant Argent) impaling Toke (aug.) for George Chute and Eleanor Toke. Secondly, Moyle (Gules, a mule within a bordure Argent) impaling Toke (aug.), for Mary Toke’s first marriage, to Robert Moyle. Finally, Godfrey (Sable, a chevron between three pelicans’ heads erased vulning themselves Or) impaling Toke (aug.), for Mary Toke’s second marriage, to Thomas Godfrey of Lydd.42

The west screen would probably have borne three coats, each for a daughter of Sir Nicholas Toke, however one has been lost. Continuing from east to west the coats are those of Brett (Or, a lion rampant within an orle of ten crosses crosslet fitchy Gules) impaling Toke (aug.), for Thomas Brett of Wye and Bridget Toke; the central missing coat; and Rutton (per fess Or and Azure, in chief two unicorns’ heads couped Gules another in base Or) impaling Toke (aug.), for Matthias Rutton and Sarah Toke.43 The unicorns’ heads seen here should be counterchanged,44 but the two in chief are almost Gules, probably the colour of the underlying medium. Sir Nicholas and his second wife Katharine produced many offspring of which the marriages of John (heir), Katharine and Elizabeth are represented in the Great Hall, while those of Sarah and Bridget are represented in the Corridor (Fig. 3).45

The four impaled coats on the south side of the corridor represent descendants of the Toke family of Bere, hence the ancestral Toke coat (without the mullet for difference), not Toke (aug.) (Fig. 5). From east to west, the first coat is that of Toke (anc.) impaling Monins (Gules, three crescents Or), for George Toke and Peyton Monins. The next coat is Toke (anc.) impaling Hales (Gules, three arrows palewise Argent barbed Or heads downwards), for Thomas Toke and Joane Hales.46 These are two later generations of the Toke family of Bere. The next two coats are Toke (anc.) impaling Baker (Azure, a fess Or between three swans’ heads erased Argent) and Toke (anc.) impaling Dacres (Gules, a chevron between three escallops Argent), not Browne of London as given by Russell,47 and appear to be transposed. These are two generations of the Tokes of Hertfordshire, a line descended from Ralph, brother of Thomas Toke (Fig. 5).48

Thomas Toke

Ralph Toke

m.1 Joan Goldwell

Walter Toke

Ralph Toke

Richard Toke

John Toke

Ralph Toke

(1st son)

(o.s.p.)

(3rd son)

William Toke

Ralph Toke

[Godinton line]

(Fig. 2)

Walter Toke

John Toke

Thomas Toke

George Toke m.

Peyton Monins

John Tooke m.

Elizabeth

Thomas Toke

Dacres

m. Joane Hales

Ralph Tooke m.

Elizabeth Baker

Fig. 5 Pedigree excerpt showing the four marriages of the Tokes of Bere represented in the Great Hall Corridor and how they relate to the Tokes of Godinton.

The Great Hall North Wall: the two north wall windows each contained in their uppermost portions three rectangular panels, the centre one featuring an oval design, while the other two each had a smaller, circular design, as they do today. The four circular designs each feature a coat of arms surrounded by a legend and a date. In c.1903 these four designs were in chronological order,49 as seen today, but an account published in 1826 suggests that the Goldwell and Toke - Goldwell panels were originally transposed.50 From this account and one by the artist himself, these four stained glass panels are known to be largely the work of Thomas Willement, the leading stained glass artist of his day, in 1826.51 The two oval designs in enamelled glass are not by Willement, but may have been reused by him in later works at Godinton.

In terms of heraldry, the four coats all supposedly relate to the Toke family. The coat on the left (Argent, a chevron Gules between three horseshoes Sable) is surrounded by the legend ‘Sigillum Willielmi filii philip de Toke 1165’. This coat was identified in a more modern text as that of Marshall or Pochen, Poching or Pochin,52 but with no obvious connection to the Toke family. A similar coat appears on the seal on a grant between William de Touc of Leke and Raph Bugg of Nottingham.53 However, the account does not clearly state which of the parties and witnesses involved possessed the arms on the seal (a chevronel between three horseshoes). It has been suggested that the horseshoe coat at Godinton is that of Toke of Nottinghamshire and that it is derived from a coat of Ferrers.54

The second coat (quarterly: 1 & 4: Azure, a chief Or over all a lion rampant Argent billetty Sable; 2 & 3: Argent, six columbine flowers Azure, on a chief Sable three wells Or) is surrounded by the legend ‘Arma antiqua familia de Goldwell 1440’. Russell recorded the Azure charges on the second and third quarters as escallops,55 but are probably columbine flowers, given the Goldwell crest seen on the west wall. These quarters have been identified as those of a second Goldwell family and the charges referred to as columbine flowers, when formerly seen in Ashford church. The coat referred to featured both Goldwell coats seen here, but impaled, not quartered, i.e. the ‘lion’ coat impaling the ‘wells’ coat,56 suggesting a marriage. The Goldwell glass is thought to be fifteenth-century, but surrounded by relatively modern glass.57 This coat of Goldwell quartering Goldwell (2) appears to be identical to one currently in the Goldwell window in Great Chart church.

The third circular design (per chevron Sable and Argent, three griffins’ heads erased counterchanged; on an escutcheon: Azure, a chief Or, over all a lion rampant Argent billetty Sable), surrounded by the legend ‘Johannes Toke et Johanne Goldwell uxor ejus 1448’ represents the marriage of Thomas Toke (not John Toke, as the legend suggests) and Joan Goldwell.58 The ancient Toke coat is used here correctly, with an escutcheon of pretence for Goldwell. Joan Goldwell was not born an heraldic heiress, as she had a brother, but eventually she became one and through her the Toke family inherited the Godinton estate.59

To the right is the fourth coat (per fess dancetty Azure and Gules, three lions passant Or), surrounded by the legend ‘Arma Concessa Ricardo patri Briani Tuke militis 1476’. These arms are those of Tuke; the arms of Sir Bryan Tuke were identical, but with the lions in pale.60

The two oval designs in enamelled glass date from the seventeenth century,61 and could easily be partly due to Willement, since the brown and yellow border at the edge of these panels is identical to that surrounding each circular design mentioned above. The oval design in the west window contains the augmented Toke arms, helm, crest and mantling, with the painted design divided into square panels separated by metal strips. The oval to the east is identical except for the square containing the arms, which has been divided into nine smaller squares separated by metalwork. The quarterly coat features, in order, the arms of Toke (aug.), Toke (anc., a mullet for difference), Goldwell, Holland (per fess Azure and Gules, three fleurs-de-lis Argent), Malmains (ermine, on a chief Gules three dexter hands couped Argent), Haute (Or, a cross engrailed Gules, a crescent Argent for difference), Shelving (per pale Argent and Gules, a lion rampant of the first), Walworth (Gules, a bend raguly Argent between two garbs Or) and a curious coat thought to be Bennet of Leicestershire (Or, on a bend Gules between six boars’ heads couped Azure three demi-lions rampant of the first).62 The ninth quarter is a mistake (instead of Bennet of Essex) and in addition seems to have been wrongly executed. The literature suggests the bend should be Azure and charged with a demi-lion between two fleurs-de-lis Or.63 The coat for Malmains should feature sinister hands, as seen in all other examples in the house, not dexter hands. The Shelving quarter has deteriorated so that the lion and the Azure half of the field are now colourless. The quarterly coat as a whole has a poor quality appearance, unlike the surrounding enamelled glass.

The Fireplace and Chimney Breast: the area above the fireplace was rich in carved woodwork, as it is today, featuring two intricately carved square panels, each with an oval hole surrounding heraldic intarsia work; and above, a border of carved leaves, containing three coats of arms. The intarsia work (probably Italian) depicts two quarterly coats, each complete with a helm and crest. On the left is a coat for Kempe and on the right one for Fermour (Farmour), together representing the marriage of Sir Thomas Kempe and Joan Mordaunt in 1571. Thomas Kempe was the third husband of Joan Fermour, after John, second Lord Mordaunt.64 The Kempe coat here is quarterly of four, although the family would have been entitled to use a coat of six quarters.65 The Fermour coat also has four quarters, so the two coats are aesthetically balanced. The intarsia here comprises differently coloured woods to represent the heraldic tinctures, but not all colours are accurately represented. For this reason, the tinctures are omitted from the following blazon.

The left coat comprises Kempe quartering Chiche (three lions rampant within a bordure), Browne (of Betchworth) (two double cotises between in chief a griffin’s head erased and in base a mullet of four points) and Fitzalan (a lion rampant) (quarter-ing Maltravers (a fret)). The arms of Chiche were inherited by Sir William Kempe from his mother Emlyn Chiche and quarter two other coats, not shown. The Browne arms (including those of Fitzalan (Arundel) and Maltravers) were inherited by Sir Thomas Kempe from his mother Eleanor Browne, heiress of Robert Browne (Figs 6 and 7). Robert Browne was the third son of Sir Thomas Browne,66 hence the mullet for difference. The Browne family inherited the arms of Fitzalan (and Maltravers) after one Sir Thomas Browne married Ellyn, the daughter and co-heir of Sir Thomas Fitzalan.67 Finally, the arms of Fitzalan (Arundel) are quartering those of Maltravers probably because Sir John Arundel (a son of Richard Fitzalan II) married Eleanor, one of the granddaughters and heirs of John, first Lord Maltravers (died 1364).68

Kempe

Chiche

Browne

Fitzalan

Maltravers

Fig. 6 Diagram showing the links between the families

represented on the Kempe arms.

Alyn

Chiche

Sir Thomas Browne

Sir Thomas Kempe

m. Emlyn Chiche

Robert Browne

Sir William Kempe

m. Eleanor Browne

Sir Thomas Kempe

Fig. 7 Pedigree excerpt for Sir Thomas Kempe.

The coat for Browne of Betchworth lacks the three lions passant in bend,69 so the coat has just the double cotises, griffin’s head in chief, and a mullet for difference in base. Russell mistakenly attributed this quarter to Toke (anc.),70 probably because of the griffin’s head.

The right coat comprises Fermour (on a fess between three lions’ heads erased and langued as many anchors) quartering Browne (per pale indented, a chevron between three escallops). Joan Fermour inherited the arms of her mother Anne Browne, presumably heiress of Sir William, Lord Mayor of London in 1507,71 although no confirmation could be found (Fig. 8).

Sir William Browne

Sir Richard Fermour m.

Anne Browne

Joan Fermour

Fig. 8 Pedigree excerpt for Joan (Fermour), widow of Lord Mordaunt.

The crests of Kempe (on a garb lying barwise a falcon with wings endorsed) and Fermour (a cock’s head erased combed and wattled holding in the beak a branch of flowers leaved) surmounting each coat respectively are in fair agreement with the literature.72

The two carved wooden panels surrounding the intarsia work are either Flemish or Italian and each bears the number 1574 and a pair of initials. The initials on the left panel are IM, and those on the right are TK. Since the marriage represented here is that of Thomas Kempe and Joan Mordaunt (née Fermour),73 it seems likely that the initials are for them, but the carved surrounds appear to have been transposed during installation.

Between the two pieces of intarsia work is a Toke coat composed of sixteen quarters, above it the helm and augmented crest and below it the motto militia mea multiplex. Russell suggests that the coats are, in order, those of Toke (aug.), Toke (anc.), Goldwell, Holland, Malmains (ermine, on a chief Gules three sinister hands couped Argent), Haute, Peto (Azure, a dolphin haurient Or langued Gules), Shelving (per pale Azure and Gules, a lion rampant ermine langued of the second), Dene (Argent, a fess indented Gules), Gatton (checky Argent and Azure), Surrenden (Argent, a bend Gules between two cotises nebuly Sable), Pluckley (Or, a fleur-de-lis Sable), Malmains (2) (Azure, three sinister hands couped ermine), Toniford (Gules, on a cross Or five fleurs-de-lis Sable), Walworth and Bennet (of Essex) (Argent, a fess Gules between three coneys sejant rampant Sable).74

Fig. 9 is a simplified method of illustrating how each of the quarters was inherited by the Toke family.75 The first two quarters are for the Toke family and require no further discussion. The third, fifteenth and sixteenth quarters are for heiresses that married into the Toke family, namely Joan Goldwell, Margaret Walworth and Mary Bennet, respectively (Fig. 2). The Goldwell family had already inherited various quarterings via marriage to heiresses of the Holland and Haute families and so their arms too are present. The Goldwell family inherited the arms of Holland through the marriage of Thomas Goldwell and Jane, daughter and heir of Henry Holland.76 Jane Holland’s mother, Alice was the daughter and heir of Henry Malmains, so when the Goldwells inherited the arms of Holland they were also entitled to those of Malmains, hence the fourth and fifth quarters. As mentioned previously, the Goldwell family inherited the arms of Haute, which included at least six other coats. William Goldwell married Alice, a daughter and co-heir of John Haute of Surrenden,77 hence the sixth quarter. The seventh quarter, however, is not easily explained. Russell identified this coat as that of Peto,78 but no literature confirmation could be found. The coat is almost identical to that of a family called Walworth (not to be confused with Walworth in the fifteenth quarter).79 From the position of the quarter, the arms must have been inherited by the Haute family prior to the Haute - Shelving marriage, but no Haute - Peto or Haute - Walworth marriage could be found, and consequently this quarter remains unconfirmed. The eighth quarter is that of Shelving and justifies the presence of Dene and Gatton, the ninth and tenth quarters. Edmund de Haute married Benedicta Shelving, daughter and heir of John Shelving.80 One John de Shelving married Benedicta, eldest daughter and co-heir of Thomas de Dene, son of William de Dene,81 and Elizabeth, daughter and co-heir of Hamo de Gatton.82 The aforementioned Alice Haute’s mother was Joan, daughter and heir of John Surrenden, son of John Surrenden, hence her arms in the eleventh quarter. The elder John Surrenden married Agnes, daughter and heir of William de Pluckley,83 justifying the twelfth quarter. The thirteenth quarter represents a second family by the name of Malmains and from its position must have been inherited by the Pluckley family, but no Pluckley - Malmains marriage could be found. The arms of Toniford in the fourteenth quarter are there as William de Pluckley married Isabella, daughter and heir of William de Toniford.84 The fifteenth and sixteenth quarters, Walworth and Bennet of Essex, were mentioned above and in the pedigree (Fig. 2).

Toke (aug.)

Toke (anc.)

Goldwell

Holland

Malmains

Haute

Peto (?)

Shelving

Dene

Gatton

Surrenden

Pluckley

Malmains (2)

Toniford

Walworth

Bennet (of Essex)

Fig. 9 Diagram showing the links between the families represented in the Toke arms.

The border contains three carved and painted coats of arms representing the families of Brenchley (Gules, three crosses engrailed Or), Moore (Azure, on a chief indented Or, three mullets pierced Argent) and De Benenden (Azure, a lobster Or). These three families are believed to be intermarried,85 (see Chinese Room) and are linked to the Toke family via a Toke - Moore marriage.86 A standard text gives the coat of Moore with the mullets pierced Gules (red) and suggests that the De Benenden arms should feature a scorpion, not a lobster.87 The De Benenden arms are fairly obscure but do appear in a more recent collection of coats, featuring a lobster.88 Above the point of the fireplace arch is a representation of the ancient Toke crest (a griffin’s head erased holding in the beak a sword point upwards).

Other Rooms in the House

The Porch: the glass in the porch windows remains unchanged since its creation by Willement in 1826,89 later noted by Russell.90 In the west window are the crests of Haute (Hawte) (a demi-dragon Or langued Gules) and Goldwell (out of a well Or three columbine branches proper) with the family name under each. Similarly in the east window are the other Goldwell crest (a demi-lion rampant Argent billetty Sable langued Gules crowned Or) and a supposed crest of Malmains (out of a ducal coronet Or a demi-griffin per pale Argent and Gules langued of the third), again with the family name under each. The crest of Malmains seen here bears no relation to any of the literature Malmains coats or crests.91

Over the external double doors is a semicircular window containing the Goldwell well crest on the left and the Goldwell demi-lion crest (reversed in error) on the right. Between these is a quarterly coat with two crests, namely Toke (aug.) quartering Toke (anc.), Goldwell and Roundell. The coat is surmounted by one closed helm, and above that, the crests of Toke (aug.) (dexter) and Toke (anc.) (sinister), with the Toke motto below the arms. The coat is heraldically accurate, with the augmented Toke coat taking priority over the ancient coat; and two quarterings, Goldwell and Roundell, both of which Nicholas Roundell Toke was entitled to use (his mother was a Roundell heiress). The border of each window panel contains the badges of Toke (a dagger (or tuck) erect Argent hilted and pommelled Gules), Goldwell (a well Or), Wrey (a pole-axe erect Argent helved Gules) and Bourchier (a water bouget Sable).

The least noticeable heraldry in the Porch is the stone over the doors into the Great Hall, featuring the augmented Toke coat between the letters NT and MT, relating to Captain Nicholas Toke and his fourth wife Mary. If this interpretation is correct, then it potentially dates the stone to around 1630. This stone was not noted by Russell.92

The Parlour: five coats were present in the Parlour (known then as the ‘Smoking Room’) in c.1903, but little is known of their exact location. Russell listed the coats as Toke (aug.) impaling Kempe; Toke (aug.) impaling Malmains; Toke (aug.) impaling Bourchier-Wrey; Bourchier-Wrey impaling Toke (aug.); and Goldwell impaling Haute.93 The two coats featuring ‘Bourchier-Wrey’ arms were incorrect in their display. Firstly there was no ‘Bourchier-Wrey’ family, merely Wrey; and secondly if there had been such a family, the arms would probably have been quartered (e.g. Wrey quartering Bourchier). The intention of the first of these coats was probably to display Toke (aug.) impaling Wrey (or Wrey quartering Bourchier, Plantagenet and Bohun), representing the marriage of Nicholas Roundell Toke and Anna Maria Wrey.94 The second coat should have shown Wrey (or Wrey quartering Bourchier, Plantagenet and Bohun) impaling Toke (aug.), representing the marriage of Rev. Sir Henry Bourchier Wrey, ninth Baronet and Ellen Maria Toke, only child of N.R. Toke.95

The existence of some of these coats is curious, since Toke (aug.) impaling Kempe and Toke (aug.) impaling ‘Bourchier-Wrey’ were effectively reiterating heraldry in the Great Hall. The coat of Goldwell impaling Haute (a crescent for difference) represented a marriage that occurred before that of Thomas Toke and Joan Goldwell and consequently seems incongruous. The coat Russell recorded as Toke (aug.) impaling Malmains,96 is now missing. A photograph published in 1903 shows a coat displayed over the doorway in the Parlour leading to the annex (now the stairwell).97 The coat appears to be impaled, with Toke (anc.) on the dexter and a coat with a dark chief bearing three charges on the sinister. One coat of Malmains is ermine, on a chief Gules three sinister hands couped Argent,98 so the observed coat was probably this impaled by Toke (anc.). A coat of Toke (anc.) impaling Malmains would have been appropriate, representing John Toke and Elizabeth Malmains, grandparents of Thomas Toke.99

A final point of interest is the appearance of a Toke (aug.) coat in a photograph dating from 1896 at the latest (although probably pre-1875).100 The coat is seen within the central arch of the Parlour overmantel, but is absent from both Russell’s notes and a photograph published in 1903.101

Today none of the five coats seen by Russell are in the Parlour. Four, on substantial wooden shields, were moved to the east end of the Great Hall, probably in 1925 during the work by Liberty & Co.; and the coat featuring Malmains is lost.

The Great Chamber: two coats of Toke (aug.) adorned the fireplace in the Great Chamber, as they do today. The lower of the two is carved into stone and is the only achievement shown. The upper coat, complete with helm, wreath, mantling and motto is lacking the fox crest, as it was in 1903.102

The Bathroom: Russell noted one coat in glass in the bathroom, that of Goldwell.103 The coat is no longer in this room, but a Goldwell coat has since appeared above the Garden door in the Chinese Room.

The Grand Staircase: in c.1903 the Grand Staircase windows contained numerous coats and crests, much as they do today, albeit in an apparently unorganised display (Fig. 10). Some coats have crests and mantling while others are larger and devoid of such items. It is possible to make sense of the coats by dividing them into groups and analysing the contents of each. Group A is made up of the small coats with crests and mantling; group B1 features the larger single coats without crests and mantling; and group B2 consists of the large impaled coats, also without crests and mantling.

24

(B2)

25

(A)

26

(B2)

ii à

10

13

11

27

(A)

28

(B1)

29

(A)

12

(B1)

14

(B1)

30

(B2)

31

(A)

32

(B2)

i

iv

1

(A)

2

(A)

3

(A)

15

(B1)

17

(B1)

4

(B1)

5

(A)

6

(B1)

18

(A)

19

(B1)

20

(A)

ß iii

7

(B1)

9

(B1)

21

(B2)

22

(B1)

23

(B1)

Fig. 10 Schematic representation of the four grand staircase windows showing the groups into which the three types of coats may be divided.

Group A contains the ancient and augmented coats of Toke and some coats of marriage, suggesting that others probably existed and are now lost (Table 1). The marriages, in order, are those to Goldwell, Thomson, Knatchbull, Dobell and Browne, and suggest that these are the only surviving coats from a series representing the descent from Thomas Toke and Joan Goldwell to Captain Nicholas and the first four of his five wives. The heraldic accuracy of this group is suspect in a few cases, most obviously for Toke (anc.) impaling Goldwell (31) in which the tinctures for Toke (anc.) are the wrong way around (per chevron Argent and Sable three griffins’ heads erased counterchanged langued Gules). The Knatchbull coat (27) is charged with three crosses crosslet, when contemporary literature suggests that these should be crosses crosslet fitchy. The crest accompanying these arms also appears to disagree with the literature. The crest in the glass is a leopard statant Sable spotted Argent langued Gules and collared Or, but the literature suggests a leopard statant Argent, spotted Sable.104 The arms of Browne of Weald Hall, Essex, appear twice in this group (2 & 20) and both are surmounted by a crest (a lion’s gamb erased and erect Argent holding a wing Sable). The Browne crest is in agreement with contemporary literature,105 although the arms differ slightly. This source suggests that the Browne arms in these windows should also feature a bordure Argent, i.e. Gules, a chevron between three lions’ gambs erased and erect within a bordure Argent on a chief of the second an eagle displayed Sable crowned Or.

Table 1: The coats of groups A, B1, and B2

Achievement

Status

No.

Group A (Probable)

Toke (aug.)

Present

1, 25

Toke (anc., mullet for diff.)

Present

3

Toke (anc.) imp. Goldwell

Present

31

Toke (aug.) imp. Walworth

Missing

-

Toke (aug.) imp. Kempe

Missing

-

Toke (aug.) imp. Bennet

Missing

-

Toke (aug.) imp. Thomson

Present

29

Toke (aug.) imp. Robinson

Missing

-

Toke (aug.) imp. Knatchbull

Present

27

Toke (aug.) imp. Dobell

Present

5, 18

Toke (aug.) imp. Browne

Present

2, 20

Group B1(Probable)

Toke (aug.)

Present

6, 14, 15

Toke (anc., mullet for diff.)

Present

4, 12, 17

Goldwell

Missing

-

Holland

Present

7

Malmains

Present

22

Haute (crescent for diff.)

Missing

-

Shelving

Missing

-

Walworth

Present

9

Bennet (of Essex)

Present

23

Quarterly of nine

Present

19, 28

Group B2

Toke (aug.) imp. Robinson

Present

30

Toke (aug.) imp. Knatchbull

Present

26

Toke (aug.) imp. Dobell

Present

32

Toke (aug.) imp. Browne

Present

24

Toke (aug.) imp. [blank]

Present

21

Group B1 consists of large single coats without crests and mantling, including the quarterly of nine coat (19 & 28) (Toke (aug.) quartering Toke (anc., a mullet for difference), Goldwell, Holland, Malmains, Haute (a crescent for difference), Shelving, Walworth and Bennet (of Essex)). All of the simple coats in this group feature in the quarterly of nine coat and therefore it would seem likely that the missing arms (Goldwell, Haute and Shelving) also once existed and are now lost (Table 1). All coats in this group are in agreement with the literature.106

The third group, B2, contains the large impaled coats, of which there are only five. These coats represent the first four marriages of Captain Nicholas Toke and intriguingly there is a fifth coat (21) with a blank sinister side (Table 1). It would be tempting to suggest that the blank should contain the Finch arms, but there is no evidence to support this. Three of the coats in this group are not in complete agreement with the literature, namely those of Robinson (30), Knatchbull (26) and Browne (24). The Robinson coat has the correct charges, but some of the tinctures differ from those in the literature. In particular, the chief seen here is Argent, charged with three escallops ermines (a fur; black with white markings), whereas the literature sources suggest a chief Or, charged with three escallops ermine.107 No contemporary literature confirmation for Robinson could be found. According to a contemporary source, the coat of Knatchbull should feature three crosses crosslet fitchy,108 as opposed to the three crosses crosslet observed. The Browne coat features the bordure Argent, but differs from the literature in that it is lacking both the eagle displayed and the chief Argent.109

Dating this glass relies upon the method of production and the heraldry depicted. In terms of production, the coats are not made of pieces of coloured glass held together with lead strips in the medieval way, but are painted onto single pieces of colourless glass. This technique is typical of the period between the medieval method and its reintroduction by Willement in the early nineteenth century. In terms of the heraldry, the latest marriage represented is that of Captain Nicholas Toke and Mary Browne (seen in groups A and B2). The quarterly of nine coat would have been appropriate for Captain Nicholas since the last quarter on the coat is for Mary Bennet (seen in group B1), the last heraldic heiress before Captain Nicholas’ time. It is probable that this glass is seventeenth-century, from a time after the burial of Mary Browne in March 1640/1 and before the marriage to Lady Diana Finch in November 1641.110 It should also be noted that Captain Nicholas built his east wing in the early 1630s and it is highly likely that some of this glass was later produced for installation in the windows, particularly those in the Great Chamber. Hasted, writing in 1798, had seen armorial glass in the Grand Staircase windows and believed that it had been collected up from around the house.111 The glass in the windows seen today is probably an arrangement by Willement using the early seventeenth century armorial glass surrounded by early nineteenth century stained glass. Willement probably removed, repaired and reset the armorial glass seen by Hasted, although there is no record of exactly which coats were present, so it is possible that some coats were removed and not replaced. If Hasted is correct, it would agree with the notion that the armorial glass is early seventeenth century and commissioned by Captain Nicholas Toke.

Despite the lack of order with respect to the heraldry, within each window the coats have been arranged in a symmetrical manner with respect to the type of coat (i.e. from group A, B1 or B2). The only exception to this is seen in the bottom row of window iii, where coats 21 and 22 have been transposed (Fig. 10).

The coat of Goldwell (13) in the second window is made of stained glass pieces and lead strip, i.e. in the medieval style, and this may be fifteenth-century. This window also contains two examples of the augmented Toke crest (10 & 11) in enamelled glass.112

Carved heraldic coats without tinctures are seen on the posts at the foot and the top of the staircase. The three posts on the landing bear (left to right): the ancient Toke coat (with a mullet for difference) and the ancient crest; Toke (augmented) quartering Toke (ancient, a mullet for difference); and Toke (augmented) with the fox crest. On the posts at the foot of the stairs are (when viewed from the Great Hall doorway), on the left, Toke (anc., a mullet for difference) with crest; and on the right, Toke (aug.) with crest. These coats were not noted by Russell.113

At the base of the staircase is a shelf area above which are two complex coats representing certain male members of the Toke family and their wives. The coat on the north facing wall is for Captain Nicholas Toke and his five wives, while that on the east facing wall represents Thomas Toke and his two wives. The coat representing Captain Nicholas is unusual inasmuch that it is composed of six coats and that the Toke (aug.) coat is in pale, not in the dexter as in the impaled coats seen in the Great Hall. The wives’ coats are in dexter (Robinson (in chief); Knatchbull (in fess); Dobell (in base)) and sinister (Browne (in chief); and Finch (in base). This method of displaying several wives’ arms on one coat is probably that seen in the fifth edition of Display of Heraldry (1679) by John Guillim (Rouge Croix Pursuivant).114 In contrast to this is the coat for Thomas Toke, which displays the male (Toke (anc.)) arms on the dexter, while the sinister is divided per fess, with the arms of the first wife (Joan Goldwell (but with the lion rampant ermine)) in chief and those of the second wife (Cecilia Chichele) in base. This is the method proposed by Gerard Leigh in the sixteenth century.115 Neither coat was noted by Russell.

The five heraldic beasts and monsters carved from the posts associated with the staircase each support a shield and are notable. At the foot of the stairs are, to the left (when viewed from the Great Hall) a greyhound and to the right, a griffin (now missing one wing), probably in reference to the Toke augmented and ancient coats respectively. To the right of these is a lion as part of a pillar supporting the landing. Halfway up the stairs are a unicorn (but now without the horn and with equine appearance) and secondly a dragon. None of these shields bear any heraldic design.

The First Library: there were eight carved coats on the north wall of this room in c.1903,116 still present today. The ornately carved overmantel features two single coats: to the left, Toke (aug.) and to the right, Toke (anc., a mullet for difference), both with crest and mantling. Between these is Toke (aug.) impaling Browne, but the sinister appears to be missing the chief charged with an eagle displayed and the bordure,117 possibly for artistic reasons, since both dexter and sinister arms feature a chevron between three charges, thus making the whole appear symmetrical, although heraldically inaccurate. The sinister arms are certain to be those of Browne, since the overmantel is carved with the letters NT (for Nicholas Toke) and MT (for Mary Toke, née Browne) and the number 1631. To either side of the chimney breast is an arch over bookshelves, adorned with a pair of carved wooden impaled coats. On the left arch are Toke (aug.) impaling Robinson and Toke (aug.) impaling Finch, while the right arch bears Toke (aug.) impaling Knatchbull and Toke (aug.) impaling Dobell. Clearly these coats are in the wrong order, but since Mary Browne was Captain Nicholas’ fourth wife and their coat is in the centre, it would have been impossible to display all five coats in the correct order. Russell mistakenly noted ten coats in this room. Toke (aug.) impaling Browne and Toke (anc., a mullet for difference) were also recorded as being over the bookshelves, but from a contemporary photograph it is clear that the right arch only bore two coats, not three.118 The only apparent mistake in the four coats over the bookshelves is in that of Knatchbull which appears to show a bend charged with three crosses crosslet, not three crosses crosslet fitchy between two bendlets, as suggested by the literature.119 The remaining coat is that of Toke (aug.) carved into the stone mantelpiece.

The Second Library: in c.1903 there were four coats of arms in the second library,120 as there are currently. The four coats are carved from pieces of wood inserted into recesses in the mantelpiece, but are of poorer quality than the coats on the First Library overmantel. The coats are, from left to right, those of Toke (anc.), Goldwell, Kempe and Toke (aug.). The reason for displaying these particular coats is not clear, although they probably represent the Toke - Goldwell and Toke - Kempe marriages.

Chinese Room: the only heraldic items seen by Russell were two coats in the glass over the garden door: Moore impaling De Benenden and a separate coat for Brenchley. Three numbers were recorded in the same window: 1440, 1481 and 1448. Today there are three coats of arms, each with a number underneath. To the left is Moore (with mullets pierced Argent) impaling De Benenden over the number 1440; in the centre, Goldwell (with a crescent Or for difference) over the number 1481; and to the right the coat of Brenchley over the number 1448. The information contained within this window should not be taken at face value as the coats are unrelated to the numbers.

The central Goldwell coat is probably the one formerly in the Bathroom.121 The glass currently surrounding the coats and numbers is similar to that in the bay window facing the courtyard, installed in 1919,122 suggesting that around this date the window seen by Russell was broken up and the decorative glass reused in its present setting with the Goldwell coat.

The numbers beneath the coats are significant since they are on pieces of curved orange coloured glass, resembling the date sections of Willement’s four smaller panels in the Great Hall windows. The numbers themselves are significant since two are identical to those in the Great Hall windows (1440 and 1448) and the third, 1481, is close to 1476 also seen there. The style of the number four used in each of these three numbers over the Garden door is peculiar, probably influenced by the style of the flat-topped number eight, which appears on the central post of the Grand Staircase landing and the Great Hall windows. The pieces of glass bearing numbers were probably in Willement’s original (1826) Great Hall windows, later replaced by the pieces seen there today. The reason for making the replacement was probably to remove the peculiar number four and to correct the 1481 to 1476. Given that only three of the Great Hall panels contained the number four, it follows that three pieces were replaced and it is these that are seen over the Garden door. In addition, the number 1165 seen in the Great Hall is between two small cross-like symbols, also seen with the numbers over the Garden door. In contrast these symbols do not appear on the other three numbers in the Great Hall. This is further evidence to suggest that the numbers seen in the Chinese Room were once in the Great Hall windows.

The arms of Moore, De Benenden and Brenchley also appear together in the Great Hall over the fireplace. To see these families represented together is not surprising, since they were linked through marriage. One Thomas de la More was supposedly married to a daughter and heir of Benenden,123 a possible explanation for the coat of Moore impaling De Benenden. Another marriage, that of Sir William Brenchley to Joane de Benenden, another heiress, provides a link to the Brenchley family and may explain the presence of their coat. The common factor in these coats is the De Benenden family and this glass is thought to have been ‘brought from Benenden’.124

Outside

A number of carved stones exist today outside the main house, all but one of which were omitted by Russell, but were almost certainly present in c.1903. Above the porch on the North Lodge is a carved stone bearing a coat of Toke (aug.) quartering Toke (anc.). The stone is painted white and does not indicate any tinctures.

To the west of the Billiard Room is a large brick archway flanked by two doorways leading into a courtyard. Above the main arch is a carved stone bearing a coat of arms with 1448 as the motto. The stone has been painted incorrectly, but closer inspection reveals that the surface is scored and pitted, an indication of tincture according to the Petra Sancta system.125 The arms are those of Toke (anc.) impaling Chichele, with an escutcheon of pretence for Goldwell on the fess point. This stone represents Thomas Toke and his marriages to Joan Goldwell (an heiress, hence the escutcheon of pretence) and later, Cecilia Chichele.126 The motto of 1448 under the coat could be the year in which Thomas Toke married Joan Goldwell. A photograph published in 1907 shows the stone was not painted in the heraldic colours.127

Beyond the arch is a cottage with a carved stone over the porch. This stone features the ancestral and augmented Toke crests beneath the Toke motto. This stone is similar, if not identical, to stones above cottage doorways in Great Chart, but this example is painted white, not in the heraldic colours. A photograph published in 1907 shows this stone with the crests and motto in a dark colour.128

In the wall above the door of the porch adjoining the Great Hall is an ornately carved stone, noted by Russell, bearing a coat of arms complete with helm, crest and mantling.129 The dexter half of the coat comprises Toke (aug.) quartering Toke (anc.), Goldwell and Roundell. The sinister shows Wrey quartering Bourchier, Plantagenet and Bohun. Overall the coat represents the marriage of Nicholas Roundell Toke to Anna Maria Wrey in 1791.130 Some tinctures are indicated by hatching, but currently the stone is not painted. The crest is that of Toke (anc.). This stone has been investigated by the College of Arms,131 and the identification and interpretation are in agreement with that given here.

The porch on the east side of the house bears the Toke (aug.) arms, with helm, crest and mantling, but appears to have been more weathered than the stone over the north porch.

Conclusion

From Russell’s notes and the surviving heraldry it is clear that the Great Hall and Corridor contained a logically designed display of some forty coats illustrating Nicholas Roundell Toke’s descent from Thomas Toke, whose marriage to an eventual Goldwell heiress brought Godinton into the Toke family. The display also shows affiliation to distant Toke relatives of Bere, Kent, and of Hertfordshire. This display was disrupted by the Liberty & Co. work in 1925. The glass in the Grand Staircase windows suggests that a similarly illustrated descent, composed of impaled coats, was created for Captain Nicholas Toke. Two other series in glass represent the heiresses married into the Toke family and four of Captain Nicholas’ five marriages.

acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the Godinton House Preservation Trust for access to the heraldry and the archive; Dr V.J. Newill for information regarding the Toke family and for reading and commenting upon the draft text; Prof. Nigel Morgan for providing a copy of C.R. Councer’s notes; and Mr Jonathan Toke for access to the Toke family pedigree.

endnotes

1 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98; Blomfield, R., plan of the ground floor of Godinton House, 1897, Godinton House archive.

2 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98.

3 Photograph F15/36, undated, Godinton House archive.

4 Godinton - Coats of Arms, notes made from a list by Rev. H.W. Russell, late vicar of Hothfield, typed list, undated; and a facsimile of the original handwritten list, also undated; both Godinton House archive. (Hereafter ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.)

5 Private communication from Rev. Russell to Mr Dodd, 22 April 1903, CKS U967/F3.

6 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book of a Kentish Estate 1616-1704, OUP, London, 1927, pedigree (with additions and corrections by Newill, V.J. from various sources).

7 Hasted, E., The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent, second edition, vol. VII, 1798, p. 506.

8 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

9 Burke, B., The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, facsimile edition fourth impression, Heraldry Today, 1996.

10 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

11 Liberty & Co., London, refurbishment plans, 1924-1925, Godinton House archive.

12 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98; ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

13 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

14 Liberty & Co., London, refurbishment plans, 1924 - 1925.

15 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

16 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume XLII, for the year MDCCCXCVIII, Hovenden, R. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1898.

17 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

18 Papworth, J. W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms belonging to families in Great Britain and Ireland forming an extensive ordinary of British armorials, T. Richards, London, 1874; Burke, B., The General Armory.

19 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

20 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

21 The Visitation of Sussex 1662, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume LXXXIX, for the year MDCCCCXXXVII, Clarke, A.W.H. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1937.

22 Burke, B., The General Armory.

23 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

24 Ibid.

25 The Visitation of London 1633, 1634 and 1635, Volume I, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume XV, for the year MDCCCLXXX, Howard, J.J. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1880; ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

26 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. III, 1797, pp. 349 - 350.

27 Papworth, J. W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms.

28 Burke, B., The General Armory.

29 Papworth, J.W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms.

30 The Visitation of London 1633, 1634 and 1635, vol. I.

31 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

32-34 Ibid.

35 Burke, B., The General Armory.

36 The Complete Peerage, Doubleday, H.A., Warrand, D. and De Walden, H. (eds), The St Catherine Press, London, vol. VI, 1926, p. 474.

37 ODNB, Matthew, H.C.G. and Harrison, B. (eds), OUP, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 227-228.

38 Burke’s Peerage Baronetage & Knightage, 107th edn, Burke’s Peerage & Gentry LLC, Wilmington, Delaware, USA, 2003, vol. III, p. 4248.

39 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

40 Burke, B., The General Armory.

41 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

42 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

43 Ibid.

44 Berry, W., County genealogies. Pedigrees of the families in the county of Kent, Sherwood, Gilbert and Piper, London, 1830.

45 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

46 Ibid.

47 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’; Burke, B., The General Armory.

48 An heraldic pedigree of the Toke family, undated, now in the possession of Mr Jonathan Toke.

49 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

50 Neale, J.P., Views of the Seats of Noblemen and Gentlemen in England, Wales and Scotland, Sherwood & Co., London, 1826.

51 Ibid.; Willement, T., A Concise Account of the Principal Works in Stained Glass that have been Executed by Thomas Willement of London, Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, 1840.

52 Papworth, J.W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms.

53 Thoroton’s History of Nottinghamshire: vol. 1: Republished with large additions by John Throsby, 1790.

54 Neale, J.P., Views of the Seats.

55 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

56 Councer, C.R., Lost Glass from Kent Churches, Kent Records, XXII, 1980.

57 Councer, C.R., list of heraldic glass at Godinton, undated, Godinton House archive.

58 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

59 Hasted, E., op. cit., second edn, vol. VII, 1798, p. 506.

60 Papworth, J.W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms.

61 Councer, C.R., list of heraldic glass at Godinton, undated.

62 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

63 Burke, B., The General Armory.

64 Burke’s Peerage Baronetage & Knightage, vol. II, p. 1894.

65 The Visitations of Kent, 1574 and 1592, part 2, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume LXXV, for the year MDCCCCXXIV, Bannerman, W.B. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1924.

66 Ibid.

67 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume XLII, for the year MDCCCXCVIII, Hovenden, R. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1898.

68 Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 2004, vol. 36, p. 373.

69 Burke, B., The General Armory.

70 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

71 Burke, B., The General Armory; Burke’s Peerage Baronetage & Knightage, vol. II, p. 1894.

72 Burke, B., The General Armory.

73 Burke’s Peerage Baronetage & Knightage, vol. II, p. 1894.

74 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

75 This type of diagram summarises the relationship between the various heiresses from whom the bearer of the arms was descended. The quarters are listed in order from the top downwards, with the name of the principal family in the first column. The second column contains the surnames of what are best described as primary heiresses, those that married into the principal family, in this case Goldwell, Walworth, and Bennet. The third column contains the surnames of the secondary heiresses, those that married into the families represented by the primary heiresses, in this case Holland and Haute. The fourth column contains the surnames of the tertiary heiresses (e.g. Malmains), the fifth the quaternary heiresses (e.g. Dene) and so on. The author is not aware of this type of diagram or associated terminology having been published elsewhere or by another author.

76 Burke, J. and Burke, J.B., A Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Landed Gentry of Great Britain and Ireland, Henry Colburn, London, 1847.

77 Ibid.

78 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

79 Burke, B., The General Armory.

80 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621.

81 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. VI, 1798, p. 450.

82 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. VII, 1798, pp. 175-176.

83 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621.

84 Ibid.

85 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. VII, 1798, pp. 175-176.

86 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

87 Burke, B., The General Armory.

88 Griffin, R. (compiler), Some Kentish Arms and Crests, 1919.

89 Willement, T., A Concise Account.

90 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

91 Burke, B., The General Armory.

92 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

93 Ibid.

94 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

95 Burke’s Peerage Baronetage and Knightage, vol. III, p. 4249.

96 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

97 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98.

98 Burke, B., The General Armory.

99 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

100 Photograph F15/33, undated, Godinton House archive.

101 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’; Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98.

102 Ibid.

103 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

104 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621.

105 The Visitation of Essex 1612 in The Visitations of Essex 1552, 1558, 1570, 1612 and 1634, part I, The Publications of the Harleian Society Volume XIII, for the year MDCCCLXXVIII, Metcalfe, W.C. (ed.), Harleian Society, London, 1878.

106 Burke, B., The General Armory; The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621; Councer, C.R., Lost Glass from Kent Churches.

107 Papworth, J.W., An alphabetical dictionary of coats of arms; Burke, B., The General Armory.

108 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621.

109 The Visitation of Essex 1612.

110 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

111 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. VII, 1798, p. 498.

112 Councer, C.R., list of heraldic glass at Godinton.

113 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

114 Woodcock, T. and Robinson, J.M., The Oxford Guide to Heraldry, OUP, 1988, pp. 121 - 122.

115 Ibid.

116 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98; ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

117 The Visitation of Essex 1612.

118 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98.

119 The Visitation of Kent 1619-1621.

120 Country Life, 18 July 1903, pp. 90-98; ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

121 ‘Rev. Russell’s Notes’.

122 W. Turner Lord & Co., invoice, December 1919, Godinton House archive.

123 Hasted, E., op. cit., vol. VII, 1798, pp. 175-176.

124 Councer, C. R., list of heraldic glass at Godinton.

125 Woodcock, T. and Robinson, J.M., The Oxford Guide to Heraldry, pp. 53-54.

126 Lodge, E.C. (ed.), The Account Book.

127 Country Life, 11 May 1907, pp. 666-673.

128 Ibid.

129 Houfe, S., Godinton, 2002, photograph, p. 17.

130 Burke’s Peerage Baronetage and Knightage, vol. III, p. 4249.

131 Private communication from Hunt, W.G. (Portcullis Pursuivant of Arms, College of Arms) to Sandford, N.G. (Godinton House Preservation Trust), 27 July 1998, Godinton House archive.