289 Head v Tyllot

289 HEAD V TYLLOT

Richard Head of Garboldisham, co. Norfolk, gent v Thomas Tyllot of the same

1640

Abstract

Head complained that Tyllot had abused him in Garboldisham parish, Norfolk, by calling him Goodman Head and saying 'I care not a turd for Head. What is Head? He is but Head and no gentleman, by God; and by God I will maintain it and will spend ten pounds with him by God'. No further proceedings nor sentence survive.

Initial proceedings

18/4r, Libel [damaged]

1. Head's family had been reputed gentry for up to 60 years.

2. Between March 1639 and January 1640, Tyllot had abused Head in Garboldisham parish, calling him Goodman Head and saying 'I care not a turd for Head. What is Head? He is but Head and no gentleman, by God; and by God I will maintain it and will spend ten pounds with him by God', which words were provocative of a duel.

3. Tyllot had given out that Head was not a gentleman but a plebeian.

4. [Damaged]

5. [Damaged] This was true, public and notorious.

Head pleaded the Earl Marshal for justice to restore the good name of his family, and for his damages and expenses.

Signed by Robert King.

Notes

Neither of the parties appear 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).

Documents

• Initial proceedings
  • Libel: 18/4r (1640)

People mentioned in the case

• Head, Richard, gent
• King, Robert, lawyer
• Tyllot, Thomas

Places mentioned in the case

• Norfolk
  • Garboldisham

Topics of the case

• denial of gentility
• scatological insult