ANOTHER edition of this little work having been called for, I have
carefully revised and corrected what has been already written; I
have also made some additions, the result of further investigation,
and the information of many friends and correspondents, whose
courtesy and kindness I here beg most gratefully to acknowledge.
Since the book was published in the year 1859, the male lines of
three families, whose names were originally comprehended in it, have
become extinct, viz.: Cotton of Landwade, in the county of
Cambridge, Hornyold of Blackmore Park, and Hanford of Wollashill,
both in Worcestershire. On the other hand, notices of eight "_new
peers?_" will be found in the present volume, four of which also
occurred in the second edition. I allude to Lovett of Liscombe, in
the county of Buckingham, and Basset of Tehidy, in the county of
Cornwall--very ancient families, whose landed property being until
lately in female hands, could not, in accordance with the rules
which I had laid down, be comprehended in the first edition; I have
also added Huyshe of Sand, in Devonshire, Patten of Bank Hall,
in Lincolnshire, Bertie of Uffington, Anderson of Brocklesby, and
Massingberd of Wrangle, all in Lincolnshire, and, lastly, Upton of
Ashton Court, in the county of Somerset. And here I must again beg
to remind the reader, that the intention of this work is not to give
an account of every family whose pedigree may be continued in the
male line beyond the time which I have mentioned (the beginning of
the sixteenth century), but of those only who were established as
_county families_, "inheriting arms from their ancestors," at that
period. It is no doubt in many cases very difficult to distinguish
accurately the pretensions of many families who may possibly have a
fair claim to this distinction, though, from the reasons to which I
have formerly alluded, it is not easy to establish them. I can only
say that as far as my information extends I have endeavoured fairly
and honestly to draw the correct line, but whether I have succeeded
must be left to the judgment of others.
E. P. S.
Lower Eatington, January 22, 1866.
"An ancient estate should always go to males. It is mighty foolish
to let a stranger have it because he marries your daughter and takes
your name. As for an Estate newly acquired by trade, you may give
it, if you will, to the dog _Towser_, and let him keep his _own_
name."--DR. JOHNSON.
+Noble and Gentle Men of England+