Norman’s Annett History

This summary was prepared by Norman Annett of Devon

At the present day the name ‘Annett’, or any of the slight variations formed by the addition of a final letter ‘s’ or ‘e’ and the possible omission of either an ‘n’ or ‘t’, is held by relatively few people and it is highly probable that the incidence of these various forms has not altered significantly with the passage of time. The registrations of births and deaths within the period 1839 to 1880 reveal the following forms of the name:

Annet Annett Annette Annoot Annot

Annott Anett Annatt Annitt Anetts

Annits Annitts Annets Annetts Annetti

The form most commonly recorded is ‘Annetts’ and its 767 appearances account for 54.98% of total entries; the second most common form is ‘Annett’ and its 518 entries amount to 37.1% of the total.   The next most common form is ‘Annets’ and its mere 49 entries account for only 3.5% of entries. All the other forms of the name thus only amount to the remaining 4.42% of the 1,395 entries. The fourth most frequent form, ‘Annet’, was recorded 24 times whilst there were only 19 instances of ‘Annette’. ‘Annoot’ appears just six times whilst other forms have but one or two mentions each.

Telephone directories are another useful source of information on both forms of the name and its broad geographical distribution.   Thus at the present day the name ‘Annett’ is most commonly found within the Greater London area whilst in the provinces there is a large concentration in N. Ireland; otherwise there is a random spread with pockets in several parts of the country.  The communities in N.lreland are the present day representatives of a clan found almost exclusively within the parish of Kilkeen in the barony of Mourne a century and more ago. In that coastal area in the shadow of the mountains no less than one fifteenth of all the voters bore the name ‘Annett’.  Today its descendants are numerous in America and the Antipodes whilst there must also be a certain number on mainland Britain. On the other hand the name ‘Annetts’ is most usually found in southern England with a high concentration in Hampshire, Wiltshire and Berkshire.   The directories also suggest that other versions of the name are currently held by very few indeed.

Some versions of the name recorded in the registers of The Office of Population may certainly be attributed to error and uncertainty- as well as personal idiosyncrasy- rather than to separate and distinct forms. Thus the registration of George Frederick Annett in 1891 was made as ‘Annette’ simply because the information was given by a hospital nurse and not the parent.   There are several cases of births being registered in two versions whilst a single family would sometimes register births in different forms.   This is to be expected from a period when spelling was not quite so widely standardised with ordinary people as it is now. What is noteworthy is that despite the variations encountered in the 19th century, anomalies in registration and a variety of origins there are now virtually two forms only, ‘Annett’ and ‘Annetts’.

The standard references on the emergence of surnames in England suggest that in early medieval times, ‘Annott’, ‘Annotson’, ‘Annett’, ‘Annette’, came into use as diminutives for ‘the son of Anne’.   Furthermore they point to this as being a name popular on the north-east coast of England, an area, too, where the common gull was also called ‘Annet’. One cannot think the latter at all relevant;  however, it is in northern England that early references to the name appear most frequently; as far that is, as research at the present day shows.   Thus a manorial court roll of Wakefield, Yorks, listed a Robert Anot in 1275.   In 1327 a subsidy roll of Cambridge named a John Anot.   One Thomas Annot was named in a manorial record of Sheffield in 1357 whilst a Yorkshire poll tax for 1379 listed Johannes Anot and an Annotson.   A Thomas Annotson was named in a Pardons Roll of 1393.   It is possible that a thorough search of other like contemporary material might yield more examples.

In southern England the records of the Corporation of Rye show a John Anite as a witness to a grant of land in the parish of Pesemersch in 1366. But other records of medieval times have yet to be thoroughly searched: however there was not a single mention of the name in the Lay Subsidy Roll for Devon in the year 1332. Neither was there within the Wiltshire manor of Collingbourne  Ducis, which place later supported a thriving family named ‘Annetts’.   It must be remembered though that to appear on such a subsidy roll people had to possess enough wealth or goods to be liable for assessment. Many folk lived out their lives without ever amassing enough or earning wages enough to be bothered by the tax collectors and so went unrecorded. Thus in Collingbourne Ducis the roll of 1332 named only nineteen people, each paying between 18d. and  the 13s.4d. paid  by Henry, Duke of Lancaster. Thus there must have been many passed over.

As far as the emergence of the name in southern England is concerned it is very noticeable that when parish records become available they point to a concentration of the name in the area surrounding the Hampshire River Ann and that the ‘Annetts’ version eclipsed all others.   An examination of printed poll tax lists for the 14th and 15th centuries, the lay subsidy of 1524/25, the ecclesiastical census of 1563 and muster rolls of around the same period for all areas where the names have an early appearance, would be a worthy and probably fruitful task.  It is in the 16th century with its proliferation of written records that the name, like any other, may be found more frequently and thus family groups provisionally constructed.  Mainly this is due to the injunction issued by Thomas Cromwell in 1538 for all parishes to keep a written record of the burials, baptisms and marriages that occurred within them. At first notes were made on loose sheets copied up in bulk from rough notes.  Later methods, including binding the old leaves, improved accuracy and completeness so that the parish registers came to record the major events in the lives of the vast majority of the population with no distinction as to wealth or class.

After the vicissitudes of time not all parishes possess a complete record dating from 1538, but most have registers that go back to that century. Even foreign nationals who entered the country and who were allowed to set up their own churches kept records, although the life span of the congregation limited these and put their eventual safety at risk.   Some of the owners of the name who appear in the early years of parish records were obviously descendants of natives not previously recorded and some of their lineal descendants must be alive today.   Several modern ‘Annett’ families, however, many of whom have had no discernible point of contact, retain a strong legend of having received their name from foreign immigrants who once sought shelter in this country.

Some of these legends point to Huguenot families who fled from France at the time of the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, an edict which had for a period guaranteed a limited freedom of worship to Protestants in that country. One particular family recalled their forbears having landed in Kent and then having farmed. for a period at Seal, near Sevenoaks in Kent. The Massacre of St. Bartholomew in 1572 was also held to be a reason for families to have fled to this country. The details may differ from family to family, and may indeed be correct, but what is certain is that several present day ‘Annett’ families do derive their name from a continental source. However, immigration from the continent took place in several well marked waves at various times and for various reasons; religious persecution, favourable economic opportunities in this country and even direct recruitment for specific craft skills.  Large-scale immigration of foreign Protestants through religious wars and repression on the continent began in the reign of Edward VI (1541-15~3) and would seem to have been chiefly to London.   On 24th July 1550, by Royal Charter, the king allowed the formation of a church by the refugees in Austin Friars, Broad Street, “to have their service in and for avoiding all sects of Anabaptists and the like”.

The year 1555 saw the arrival at Druridge Bay, Northumberland, of Rolphe Annot, one of three brothers, the others being Rowland and Peter.  Rolphe became the progenitor of a family that has come through to modern times with representatives in many parts of the world. Rowland was recorded as being domiciled in Ratcliffe in the, London parish of Stepney on 14th May 1559.   This part of the city was then a teeming and congested area without the walls where many foreign nationals lived. Rowland was named as a ‘Subject of the King of Spain’, an allegiance owed through birth in a Spanish dominion or conquered country: this he changed when on 4th March 1562 and on payment of a fine of 16s -to the Keeper of the Great Seal, he became naturalised. This in itself proves residence in the country since 1555 for in order to obtain papers of naturalisation proof had to be given of seven years continuous stay in this country.    One last mention in the records of the day sheds a tiny ray of light upon this Rowland; on June 22nd 1563, he was recorded as being a regular member of the German church in London, a weaver by trade and having no children. Thus he was a Lutheran, probably one of those refugees from the Low Countries who were to make such a great contribution to the prosperity of the English cloth industry throughout the reign of Elizabeth.

The third brother, Peter, was not so fortunate. His flight to England was ended at Dunkirk where he was arrested in possession of proscribed printed material; “many books concerning the new reformed religion (of Calvin,”heretic”), like bibles and forbidden catechisms”.   In April 1561 he was put in the jailhouse, judged, held up to public indignation in front of the Town Hall, burnt alive then hanged to a post as a warning to others.  It is interesting that the Annett coat of arms (described in Burke but for which there is no specific grant in this country) has three hearts emblazoned upon it.

It is interesting that the arrival in this country of two Annot (for such is the contemporary spelling -typical of that used by Low Country immigrants) brothers in: 1555 only just pre-dates records of one other with the same surname. In 1556 a Thomas Annot married Agnes Jetter in the town of Norwich: significantly this was an area where a considerable number, of refugees from “the Low Countries had gathered, established themselves in trade and business and revitalised the local, economy, bringing wealth to newcomer and native alike. A second influx of Dutch, Walloon and Flemish people into the eastern parts of England very early in the reign of Elizabeth I (1558-1603) was the result of Spanish religious persecution in the Netherlands and thus the direct cause of the old established cloth trade entering upon a period of great prosperity. The foreign refugees, many of them very skilled workers in types of cloth new to this country, formed strong communities in the townships of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex and Kent.   The records of these counties are full of references to the newcomers and how their arrival brought problems as well as trade to their adopted homes.

Quite large contingents of immigrants landed in Kent and settled in Canterbury, Maidstone and Sandwich; at this latter place a Royal Warrant of 1561 empowered the commonalty to permit foreign craftsmen, who were (wrote the Queen) ‘very skilful’, to carry on their manufacture of bays and says in the town.    In Essex eleven families found their way to Colchester in 1568; within three years this number had increased to 51 Dutch families numbering 185 people.   By 1573 this total had risen to 534 persons whilst by 1586 it was no less than 1,293.   At the same time and from the year 1572 a few French Huguenots had found their way to the same county, though mostly to Maldon and Thorpe-le-Soken.  At the latter place there existed a separate church  congregation until 1732.

Among the Dutch families of Colchester there were several who bore a form of the name ‘Annett’.   In 1590 there a general muster of men who might bear arms was held and recorded in the lists was, ‘Dutchmen in North Ward mainly Baymakers and Gardeners’, Jacob Annotte,  James Annote,” weaver;  Phelype Annote, a glasser and John Anoote.   A Jaoob Anoote of Saint Giles parish had to pay 8d towards the Lay Subsidy taken in the same town in 1591/98, whilst in 1599 a Jacques Annoot was named as being an elder of the Dutch church. At the Lay Subsidy of 1581 Jeames Hannott of St. Mary’s parish in Norwich was also assessed to pay 8d.   These records show the arrival in this country of immigrants from the Low Countries who bore a. form of the name close to one of those of the present.

The spelling of the name with letter ‘0’ as the second typical of references from this period of the l6th century and the refugees in this eastern part of the country.. These were referred to in local records as either ‘Dutch’, ‘Walloons’ or ‘Flemings’ , although at times they were all embraced within the term, ‘Strangers’. Once in this country the immigrants tended to keep together for mutual support and advancement; welcomed by some for their industry and talents, their residence in previously struggling communities was not always appreciated by native competitors or under-employed craftsmen. Generally the newcomers, through the virtues of hard work, business acumen and adaptability as much as a desire not to outwear their welcome, did well, both financially and in other ways, principally in the cloth industry with the new types of cloth they introduced but also in such other ways such as market gardening.   At times their success excited the jealousy of established business men and workers and their activities were subjected to trade and tax restraints levied discriminatorily by local burgesses.

But not all the newcomers could be described in laudatory terms; there must have been amongst them some of fewer scruples if not positive criminal tendencies. Times were then such that on the eastern seaboard of England trade of another sort was rife and engaged in at the same time as legitimate business. This trade was piracy. Seamen of all nationalities suffered considerably during the l6th century from pirates and privateers operating in the Channel and seas off the coasts of the Low Countries, France and Spain.   Spanish merchants were particularly vocal in their condemnation of English seamen who switched roles from legitimate traders to barefaced robbers as opportunity afforded. The nature of the cargo mattered little and however mixed it would be transferred at sea then run into ports where there were enough merchants who asked no questions, or who were in fact the prime movers.    Thomas Annet of Lowestoft was one such receiver of stolen goods whose dealings on one occasion were brought to the attention of the authorities. From the evidence given in 1561 Thomas was a man of some means although there was no indication of his nationality.

However he did live in an area which supported many immigrants so it is possible that he was once numbered amongst them.  Is it possible that he was that same Thomas who had married Agnes Jetter in Norwich in 1556 ?   But whoever Annet’s forebears it was as a result of certain Span1sh merchants compla1nlng to the Privy Counci1 in 1561 of the piracy of divers cargoes from several of their ships that one Thomas Burman, a servant of Annet’s, was taken and questioned about the affair.  Apparently hides and wine, red alum and linen, haberdashery and various kinds of’ sail canvas had been removed from the holds of several vessels sailing through the Channel and carried off into English ports. One deposition named some of those responsible and charged Thomas Annet with receiving the stolen goods.

This piracy. whilst frequently condoned by the authorities in private, brought about periodic attempts to clean up the situation both at sea and on shore. Despite the replacement of’ corrupt officials in the ports and the appointment of special commissioners and the like, little impression was ever made on the practitioners, either English or Continental.  This case would seem to have failed to bring anyone to justice in spite of the fact that Thomas Burman told all.  He gave a long and convincingly detailed story of events at Lowestoft, in the process incriminating his master Thomas Annet beyond any doubt at all. Burman spoke of the goods being landed, of their collection at dead of night, of their delivery to a house of his master, of how the latter paid, of the involvement of his master’s son-in-law and also how his master tried to ensure his, Burman’s, silence by bribery and by proposing to send him out of the country.

The Spanish merchants described Thomas as ‘a very substantial rich man’ and it seems likely from the absence of further records in the State Papers that he escaped any great penalty for his crimes.   An investigation into the records of Lowestoft might yield more information about him, his house, family and business.    Whilst the parish registers are extant from 1561 there might also be other types of borough and parish records wherein Thomas might figure.

Just a few years after the exploits of Thomas, England received its third and greatest wave of immigrants into its eastern and southern ports and havens. They came as a result of an even greater outbreak of religious persecution instituted by the Duke of Alva shortly after his arrival in the Spanish Netherlands in 1567.   Many Protestants fled the Low Countries despite attempts by the Spaniards to close the continental channel ports.   Once in England these people helped swell communities established some years before in such towns as Canterbury, Norwich, Sandwich, Colchester, Maidstone and Southampton.  If they brought little immediate wealth yet they brought their skills and their skills and expertise in all manner of trades and business; manufacturers of woollen goods, linen and silk, weavers, dyers, cloth-pressers, silk-throwsters and many others filled and began a revival of previously decaying English towns.  It is from this period of immigration that holders of the family name begin to figure more frequently in parish registers. This is most noticeable in the main immigration areas nearest the continent, whilst the name is most commonly rendered as ‘Annott’.

These families, no matter where their point of arrival, soon became assimilated into English society and records demonstrate the existence of family groups in different places.    Boyd’s Marriage Records point to a group of marriages at Saint 01ave’s, Southwark, London:-

1587 Joan Annett married John Cowper

1620 Judy Annet married Nicholas Fowe

1633 Frances Annott married Richard .Right

1637 Sarah Annott married William Teyler

and in Faversham, Kent:-

1588 Peter Annot married Susan Keable

1593 Edward Annot married Elizabeth Webb

whilst in Canterbury:-

1588 Thomas Annot married Joan Dod

1593 Jacoba Annett married James Thurston

1614 Thomas Annot married Dorothy Sims

1619 Christopher Annot married Elizabeth Yerrall

1620 Ann Annet married Thomas Askew

1620 Margaret Annet married George Sweeting

1622 Priscilla Annet married Thomas ,Wipp

1623 Eleanor Annet married William Fox

1636 Mary Annott married Christopher Leggat

1639 Thomas Annett married Mary Luck

1642 Catherine Annott married John Gray

1643 Mary Annott married Robert Lovel1

1681 Christopher Annett married Ann Kidder

1689 Susan Annot married Edward Kidder

In addition to the English registers for some of these towns there are also the records of the churches for the foreigners; those of the Walloon Church at Canterbury name Jacobe Annote in 1590 and Charles Annot in 1603. This may mean that one of the families was a French speaking one from Flanders for there were no fewer than 900 such immigrants in the city by 1645 and 500 at Sandwich.

Certainly there must have been several families of the name in Canterbury at the turn of the century, for the registers of the English churches of St. George, St. Andrew and St. Mary Bredin record family events which strongly suggest certain groupings, or tables of descent.   The registers of the two latter parishes have yet to be searched systematically whilst those of the other thirteen have also yet to be seen.   At least the families found in the registers of St. George were of some small consequence in the city and one, at least, seems to have had an interesting career. This was Charles Annott, a surgeon: admitted as a freeman of the city through purchase in 1599, a status then conferred on his two sons-in-law who were of the same profession, his life is commemorated by a monument on the walls of the church of St. Andrew. All that is left is a partial inscription, “Caroli Annott 1632 Englishe Fleete …88 Spanish Fleete”, set above a pictorial representation of two battle fleets. One is left to conjecture at the part that the Spanish Armada played in Charles’ life; obviously it was a major event that it should be so shown on his monument.

Whether it was the same Charles who put his signature ‘Charles Annoott’ in the records of the parish of St. George, where he appears. to have been a churchwarden, is another point for elucidation.   But the immigrants of the south and east are not the only name-holders whose appearance and antecedents are difficult to determine after the passage of centuries for there are other instances in areas far from the coasts.

By the year 1559, for instance, the name had become attached to a small piece of land in Surrey: in that year Elizabeth Copley of Carshalton died. .Her lands and holdings were listed in an inquisition port mortem and amongst ten acres of meadow in Carshalton and Wallington, a small parcel, a meadow, was known as ‘Annot Lande’.    It is more than likely that the land received its name from that of a man with whom it was once particularly associated, but was he of a native family or an early immigrant as the typical Dutch spelling might suggest? .

In 1594, John Charge of Wavenden, Bucks, died and left a bequest of 10s. to be used in the repair of ‘Annot Lane’.  Thus it is very probable that there was a family connected with the county well before these marriage registrations, the only records so far examined:- .

1633  Wiilliam Annot married Joan Right at Hughenden

1662  William Annot married Margaret Partridge at Beaconsfield

1679  Elizabeth Annutt married Joseph Murrin at Hughenden

1688  William Annutt married Mary Weatherhead at Little Miissenden.

The earlier connection is further suggested by the fact that in the parish of Langley Marish the name ‘Annette’ was in use as a place name by the middle of the 17th century. At the same time the name was being used in a similar capacity in an area even further from the south and east coasts; in Feckenham, Worcestershire, ‘Annett’s Place was named in some Chancery proceedings.   It is, however, when one moves on to the heart-lands of old Wessex that the name-holders are found in even greater numbers, albeit with the vast majority of cases showing the form ‘Annetts’, the final ‘s’ not being found in the immigrant areas.

In 1545, some years earlier than the first wave of immigrants and far from any port or haven, William Annettes paid 10s. tax at Burton and Eston in the Hundred of Potterne and Cannynges, Wiltshire.   In 1562,  John Annattes, of Bysshoppes Cannynges, Wilts, paid a fine of 3d. to the Guild Steward of the  Borough of Calne; twelve years later a John Annattes married Maria Kite at Weyhill in Hampshire.  Thus appeared in Wessex versions of that form of the name destined to be most .common in modern times.   Just fourteen miles away from the homes of William and John another William Annates died at Collingbourne Ducis, Wilts, in1631, whilst a John Annets died at Marten, five miles away, in 1631/32.   The earlier dates would seem to indicate that here were no immigrants but native families with roots going back to earlier times. An investigation of the registers of Collingbourne Ducis and its close neighbour, Collingbourne Kingston, both of which are extant from1653, revealed the members of successive generations of William’s family and linked them firmly with their descendants of today.    Most still spell their name as ‘Annetts’ but just a few have unaccountably dropped that final ‘s’ in the last two or three generations only.

Both William and John were described as ‘husbandman’ in the inventories of their belongings made in consequence of their each making a will.  William’s belongings totalled £36; one of the appraisors of his goods being an Edward Annats, undoubtedly a  close relative.   John was in rather better circumstances for his inventory, which listed goods, chattels, crops and animals valued all at £60. others of the name were in different trades and callings;  John Anniott was an alehouse keeper at Odestoke, Wilts in 1620, in which year he subscribed to the’ Wilts Lenten Recognisances’; at Hook, Hampshire, in 1636, Thomas Annotts, a brickmaker, and his wife Ann had their daughter Mary baptised.   A few years before, in 1621, William and Elizabeth Annits were living within the parish of Odiham, Hants.

But there were also some within this part of Wessex who also spelt their name without the final ‘Ss’; at Salisbury, in 1619, Robert Annott of Wilton married Edith Mortimore.  This is the earliest mention yet found in registers of the area, but it was.not the last, for later in the century there came :-

1663    Edith Annat married Thomas Banks,

1664    Edward Annett married Joan Wotton,

1674 , Mary Annat married, William Wite,

1679    Mary Annats married Robert Horn, both of Ludgershall,

I680    Thomas Annits married Sarah Wheeler,

all of whom were married in Salisbury.   Again the registers of the town need to be completely checked in order to reconstruct some of the families who then lived there. Further south, on the way to Southampton, an Amy Annett died at Wellow in 1640; she left a son, Robert and daughter, Amy.   Robert and his wife, Avis, continued to live in Wellow and for many years before his death in 1675 he was a churchwarden.   Further north in the same county, Mary Annetts died in Kimpton in the year 1680; she left five sons and a daughter as well as two grandchildren.   At Burghclere, nearer Newbury, a Mary Annett died in 1673.

Throughout the first three-quarters of the 17th. century the family name was being spread and carried on, both by native English lines as well as by continental immigrants who entered the country at various times after 1550.   By the early years of the reign of James I,  immigration slowed to a trickle for conditions on the continent had changed: in France a degree of toleration had been won by the Protestants through the terms of the Edict of Nantes in 1598.  The Dutch began to reap the rewards of independence from Spain after 1609, when a twelve years truce was signed at Antwerp.   These happier times lasted until Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685, thus bringing to an end the freedom from religious persecution which the Protestants had then enjoyed for nearly ninety years.   But up to that time the first immigrants took root in their new homeland, either striking out and quickly becoming absorbed into English society, or entrenching themselves for a while into well knit refugee communities which endeavoured to retain the habits and practices of past days.

Some of these immigrant families are recorded in the records of the congregations of the foreign churches; thus before 1685 French churches existed in quite a number of English towns; Canterbury, Canvey Island, Colchester, Dover, Faversham, Glastonbury, Ipswich, Maidstone, Norwich, Rye, Sandtoft, Sandwich, Sou.thampton, Stamford, Thetford, Thorne Abbey, Whittlesea, Winchester and Yarmouth.    The registers of the ‘Walloon’ or ‘Strangers’ Church, Canterbury  (previously noted for early references to ‘Annot’s’) record several versions of the name.   In 1638 they note a Nicholas Hannet and Pieronne, his wife; then in 1691, the then late Samuel Hannot is referred to as a native of Guienne, in the pays Conquis of France.  Other references show that Jeanne Hannot, daughter of Samuel, was looked on as a native of Canterbury; however, she married another Frenchman, Jean Delmaire, a native of Picardy.    In Colchester, the registers of the Dutch church refer to a family named Annoot, for there on September 20th. I660, Maria, daughter of Jacob and Maeyken Annoot, was baptised.   Some years later, in I694, John and Susan Annett registered the baptism of their son, John, in the Quaker Church of that same town.

In 1673 two different members of the Clockmakers Company in London took an apprentice each; one of these was a Nicholas Annat, the other a Charles Annott.   In the far Westcountry Richard Annett was contracted by the Navy in I693 to build ropehouses, store-houses and thirteen officers’ residences at the royal dockyard lately constructed at Point Froward, Plymouth.   But by that year there had been another wave of immigrants from France, occasioned by renewed religious persecution of the adherents of the Reformed Church. Many of these French people, Huguenots, left for England; a great number far outdistanced their Catholic fellow citizens in commerce, marine adventure, industry and technical skills and this knowledge, this energy, they  brought to the more congenial soil of England or even the New World.   With these refugees came more bearing versions of the family name, frequently now with an initial aspirate; however, as this was not sounded in French the result was close to versions already in vogue.

In the provinces further French churches came into being in such places as Barnstaple, Bideford, Bristol, Chelsea, Dartmouth, Exeter, Greenwich, Hammersmith, Plymouth, Stoneham and Thorpe.   In London, the most popular settling place, there were no fewer than sixteen Huguenot churches in and around the area of Spitalfields and a seventeenth in Wapping.   This is not a surprising number when one remembers that the church was central to their existence and the very reason for their arrival. Estimates as to how many Huguenots came to England vary from between forty to one hundred thousand: they  entered the country in three main waves, the first in.I68I-82, the second, and largest, between 1686-88 and the third between 1698-1700. They met with a great deal of warmth and sympathy, both royal and public, and were soon prospering as cutlers, watchmakers, instrument makers, jewellers, opticians, locksmiths, hatters, glovers, goldsmiths, silversmiths, surgeons, tailors, all kinds of luxury trades but -above all -in every branch of the silk industry.

The main settlement area for the refugees was Spitalfields, London, for there the silk industry had been established for fifty years.   The more prosperous built elegant homes in Spital Square but the working class crowded into long rows of houses in cramped narrow streets which were quickly run up to house them, thus covering the fields and gardens the area that had been there before.   It is probable that there were over fifteen thousand in this neighbourhood; certainly they soon spread into nearby Bethnal Green,   However, this very act, though it helped many to continue to live in a fairly compact colony, made it difficult for them to remain distinct from their English neighbours and thus their way of life soon began to change.  Even in Spitalfields there was a great variety of occupation amongst the newcomers.  Church entries from 1689 to 1716 enumerate 59 trades within 679 persons: no less than 53 were connected with the sea; this is not surprising when many of the immigrants came from the coasts of Normandy, the shores of Brittany and the Bay of Biscay.

Still others gravitated to the west- end of London and they were those in the more skilled luxury trades and professions.   Many were shopkeepers selling the very goods they made; others attended to the needs of the residential population, some engaged in ‘personal service’, a number held military rank; very few were connected in any way with textiles. One group settled in Wandsworth where they established many important industries that brought much prosperity to the town.   It was in gratitude that a memorial to the exiles was erected in the small burial ground of Mount Nod.   A small Huguenot settlement developed in the village of Sunbury by 1703 and by 1709 twenty- four of the parishioners assessed to pay poor relief were French. Their names recur in local records at least until 1748, though possibly some remain until the19th. century.   French Street, Sunbury, remains to remind one of the colony’s existence.

Examples of the French form of the family name may be found in several of the registers of the London Huguenot churches: in the registers of Crispin Street, for example, are recorded the baptisms of the four children of M. Pierre and Marie Hannat, of Grey  Eagles Street,  Stepney, all between the years 1700 and 1709.  The baptisms of the eight children of Paul Hanet, or Annet, and his wife,  Marie Francoise, were recorded at the French Church, West Street.   Pierre Hanet was a witness to the marriage of Paul Hanet of Paris and Francoise Hyard at the French Church of the Tabernacle in 1699.   .In the years that followed their children were baptised at the French Church of the Savoy and the spelling of the surname varied each time between ‘Anet’, ‘Annet’, ‘Hanet”and ‘Hanette’. This Paul was almost certainly the son of Catherine Hanet a refugee widow from Paris who was accepted in to the Church of the Savoy in 1686; at that date she was 48 years of age and Paul, then aged nine, was the youngest of her three children.

The children of Etienne Hanet and his wife Elizabeth were baptised at the French Church of Hungerford Market; Etienne in 1720 and Gabriel in 1722. In the Church of Threadneedle Street other ‘Anet’s’ of Paris were married, whilst Magdeleine Hanet who married a Guillaume Benoist had her children baptised at the French Church in Rider Court.   A David Hanot was a witness to a baptism at the church of ‘La Patente’, Spitalfields, while several other families, ‘Hanote’ or ‘Hanotte’ are recorded at the French Church in Thorney, Cambridgeshire, between 1682 and 1727.  A record of interest in view of the later distribution of the name in Ireland is in the register of the church of St. Patrick and St. Mary, Dublin, where Marguerite Hannat was godmother to Ester Pineau at her baptism in 1711.

At least two of the Huguenot refugees went to the trouble and expense of being naturalised by Royal Letters Patent; they were Peter Annaut in 1682 and John Hanet in 1686.   Like the latter, the great majority of those recorded in the various Huguenot registers bore the name with an initial aspirate.   As this was not sounded it would have been pronounced little differently from other versions;  French records show that it was frequently written without the initial ‘h’ and a few years in England at a period when spelling was  still inconsistent would no doubt have accelerated the change in form.   The aspirated form did appear at least once in England well before the Huguenot immigration, however; this was in Plymouth in 1606 when a John Hannet was regularly employed by the borough as a mason on the rebuilding of the Guildhall and Shambles.

All kinds of records, public and private, chronicle the advent of the Huguenots and chart their path towards integration into English society; a society that at the time of their arrival was in many ways well behind that which they had renounced in France.

Their coming and stay did much to reverse this situation for they had a great deal to offer the social, professional and business life of the country.   Catherine’Hanet, the Parisian refugee of 1686, was the widow of a clockmaker and in this country the firm of Hanet became famous in this field.   John and George Hanet registered as clockmakers in Westminster in 1765 and in Newport Street in 1770 and 1775.    In 1765  Jean Hanet was Director of the French Hospital, La Providenoe, in London.  In the very early years of the century, 1705, Paul Hanet was in business as a goldsmith; his marks were entered with the Goldsmith’s Company in 1715, 1717 and 1721.  From Spitalfields,  weavers, both masters and men, spread into Bethnal Green;  Soho became a stronghold of the immigrants who made large. contribution to that foreign flavour the area retains to the present day; Wandsworth also owed them much as did many other areas of the capital.

It was .in the 18th. century that the famous deistical writer, Pieter Annet, lived; born, supposedly in Liverpool, in 1693, he was a challenging and provocative personality who was eventually to be imprisoned for his writings.  Despite his fame, or notoriety, his origins are unknown and even his new system of shorthand rates only a note as a step on the way to the now almost universal  ‘Pitman’s’.  Throughout his lifetime the rate of intermarriage between the Huguenots and their English hosts and neighbours accelerated and absorption into English life completed.  English names were adopted; Abraham de la Neuve Maison became Abraham Newhouse; Pellegrins became Pilgrims and Dubois became Wood; Hanet most probably became Annett.  And thus this last wave of continentals provided a fresh source for the name in this country whilst their other versions remained in the civil and church records of their original homes.

One such centre for followers of the ‘Religion Pretendue Reformee’ was Guisnes in north eastern France.  Once the scene of the  ‘Field of the Cloth of Gold’, there freedom of worship had been permitted, a Temple established and registers kept. These are now held in the Griffe Civil at Boulogne-sur-mer.   Between the years 1668 and 1685 the names Hanotte, Hannot, Hannotte, etc., are recorded and several of the families may be traced to England.   Some examples that may be Reconstituted with some confidence follow are demonstrated in an appendix.

As northern France and the Low Countries were the areas of origin of so many continental holders of the family name between 1550 and 1685 it might be assumed that here indeed were the homelands that bred them all.   After all, in Normandy, just 40 miles west of Paris, lies Anet with its chateau built by Philibert de L’Orme between 1547 and 1552 for Diane de Poitiers, mistress of Henry II.    The building, largely destroyed during the French Revolution, is recognised as that most influential architect’s masterpiece and a source of  inspiration for many later builders and buildings. Its frontispiece was removed to Paris to grace the ‘Ecole des Beaux-Arts’ whilst the ‘Diana of Anet’ went to the Louvre.   The present owners of the chateau, M. et Mme. de Yturbe, aver that the town and chateau took their name from the Latin ‘alnetum’; ie. the place where  trees known as ‘aulne’ grow.   Some of these trees still do grow in the park to this day.  From ‘alnetum’ the name changed to ‘Ennet’, then in the 16th century to ‘Annet’ and then ‘Anet’. Then to the east  of Paris there is Annette-sur-Marne, whilst south-east of Digne, in Provence, there is Annot.

The late Stephen Frederick Annett conducted a particular investigation into these possibilities as his correspondence shows, but concluded that none of them bestowed their name upon the family.   Members of the family descended from Rolphe of Northumberland returned in the 19th century to the Montelimar region of France to live and work; some are still resident in Aix-en-Provence to this day.  This family was quite sure that there were none others of the name in Provence.  This same branch of the family did, however, retain and firmly believe in the tradition that they once belonged  to Lombardy, where they were silk weavers, of leaving that area for Lyons, another silk centre and remaining there before once again moving on to the journeys that were to take them to England.   Furthermore they believed that in Italy the name had been ‘Annetti’, and this could quite possibly be true.

When the Duchy of Milan, which included the plain of Lombardy, was overrun by Spain in the early l6th century, its inhabitants were at once subjected to the harsh offices of the Inquisition.    Many of the numerous resident Protestant families then fled Lombardy for France in order to escape the persecutions and confiscation’s ordered by Cardinal Caraffa, who was determined to root out and destroy all heretics regardless of their skills or standing.   France, until later events were to fill this country too with the discord of religious strife, was a haven for these Italian families. Naturally they went not only to places where they would be free to worship but also to where they would best be able to practise their trade, business or profession.   Silk weavers went to Lyons and helped the industry attain .the high standards for which it became famous. Unfortunately many of that city’s records and archive materials were lost during the revolution: this prevented the modern family from finding any trace of its earlier antecedents.

This explanation of the origin of his own ‘Annett’ family fully satisfied Stephen Frederick Annett although it was one of his great disappointments that cost, then the war of 1939-1945, prevented him from obtaining from ‘Araldica’ of Rome a genealogical reconstruction of the ‘Annetti’ which might prove his theses.   However, a study of the correspondence leads this member of the Annett’s to believe that the Italians were offering an heraldic device rather than a family tree. This correspondence also makes clear the extent of Stephen’s investigations and the number of clues he tried to follow up.   One such led him to write to several authorities of the day regarding Anet Island in the Scillies.  Upon being told of this small isle he perforce followed it up only to find that there seemed to be no family connection with it. That the name was fixed at quite an early date is shown from the fact that in 1301 the lord of the isle of Anet was fined for taking a wreck belonging to the crown.

Stephen also wrote to holders of the name in Scotland, Ireland and several families in America, both Canada and the U.S.A.   One of these families, the Annett’s of Gaspé, were particularly anxious to discover more of their ancestor William Edward Annett who settled in Gaspé in the l8th century and whom tradition had as emanating from Wessex.   Research by Kenneth H. Annett established a very full family tree from William Edward right down to the present day.   However,  a firm link with the Annett family descended from Rolphe of Northumberland was not to be made until after Kenneth’s early work had been published in an interesting family chronicle.   Stephen Annett’s work has been continued, not only on the family of Rolphe where he concentrated but on other families both Annett and Annetts.   Much credit for work on the latter families is due to A.T.Neal and R.Annett, for their combined work has done much to bring together details on the major family groups descended from those Annetts of Wessex noted earlier.   In the new millennium new workers in all parts of the world are continuing the work of these pioneers in the study of the Annett and Annetts families.

The collection of all available data from the Office of Population when collated with such 19th century records as Census Returns, Wills and parish registers has enabled some family groups. to be reconstituted, particularly when the first named records give more details with regards to ages and names of marriage partners.   Nevertheless, at this distance in time from the emergence of surnames and the wish of most immigrants to adopt the customs and names of. their new land as soon as possible one can only say that the families of today must descend from a variety of sources but persistence and determination, together with a measure of luck, will in most cases allow a family to trace its descent at least back to the beginning of the 19th century and with good fortune much earlier   It is to be hoped that the success of Stephen Frederick Annett with his own line might spur others to attempt the same for when he began work in the early 1930’s all he had to start with was the knowledge of a comparatively small collection of people bearing his name.  Many of these he came to link in a tree which illuminates the lives of individual members down through the years and helps the family members of today appreciate the world from whence they have come

Appendix A.

A Translation of the Trial and Sentence of Pieter Annoot, Transcribed

By E De Coussemayer in ‘Troubles Religieux Du 16me Siècle

Dans La Flandre Maritime.

[Four Volumes, Bruges, 1876; Vol.IV, pp. 354-355]

You, Pieter Annoot, born in Belle (1), and you, Daniel Gallant, born in Steenwerk (2), both subjects of the king, our formidable and sovereign lord (3), having in mind to sail to England from this town (4) last November, and having been stopped and spoken to by the king’s bailiff, were found to have. in your possession notorious forbidden reformed books and writings, which are prohibited by his Majesty’s placards (or proclamations) to be carried on you because of their heretic contents, namely you, Pieter Annoot, the new testament entitled  ‘The new testament translated from Greek into French’ , without his Majesty’s permission, with letters and annotations by John Calvin, notorious heretic; furthermore a certain catechism and other documents were found with. it, all full of bad teachings; furthermore, an evil and detestable written document entitled ‘Brief Confession of Faith to demonstrate the accord and unity  concerning the doctrine of the churches dispersed in the kingdom of France’, which is full of heretic and reformed teachings.   And you, Daniel Gallant, were found to be carrying on you a new testament printed by Steven Mirmans printed in the year XIV (5), clearly forbidden by the placards, and another book entitled  ‘The little catechism of the Dutch community in London’, written by Martin Micron (6), and which is now spread here and over there.  And inside the little book was bound a short enquiry about, those who joined -or who have travelled to the Dutch community in London, also without permission.   But what is much worse, both having been questioned and examined, first by the legal authorities and thereafter by the inquisitor of our holy christian faith, assisted by certain learned persons, and since then by other clerical persons very knowledgeable in theology, you both have been found and remained true heretics fallen from our old catholic faith and our mother the holy church; notwithstanding the feigned simulated and false external conversion by you, Pieter Annoot, showing penance for a long time, going to confession and receiving the dignified holy sacrament at the altar, thus deceiving the justices and His Majesty, as you both now well demonstrate by sustaining and pertinently persisting that  there are only two sacraments, which for you both is a gross error, and furthermore, you are rejecting the goood institutions and traditions of our mother the holy: apostolic and Roman  catholic church, by both parties conspiring to cut yourselves away (or to detach) from the church and also perturbing our holy religion and common welfare.

Appendix B.

Facsimile of part of the Original Document Reporting

The Trial and Sentencing of Pieter Annoot.

Appendix C.

From ‘The Gentleman’s Magazine’,   Volume 54 (1784)  Page 250

Peter Annett.

As a Satirist, Annett is, to my thinking, far greater than Pope or even Byron. He was greater as a Man and his purpose, the greatest imaginable -to enlighten and free humanity from false faiths and fears. He did not waste his talents and energies in sneering and mud-slinging at insignificant individuals who annoyed  him; he never indulged in spiteful petty animosities.  He aimed his arrows with unerring accuracy of vision and aim at Superstition -the creeds of the Christian Churches -made up of myths, “magic and mysteries. He never missed his mark.  Sometimes his attacks are scathingly vitriolic -so were Voltaire’s –  and so, too, were the winged shafts of Lucian, the greatest satirist the world has ever known.  Like Lucian, Annet devoted his genius to attacking the tyranny of superstition – the matured form of a parasitic growth that was in its infancy while Lucian was annihilating the old Greek gods. Like Lucian, Annet gave of his best to free humanity from fear and illusions and to promote human happiness.

Two intimate personal letters written by Peter Annet to an unnamed friend in Wiltshire, were published fifteen years after his death, in the Gentleman’s Magazine. They were prefaced by a short letter, unfortunately- like the other contributions to that Journal – only initialled.  I am indebted to Mr. H. Cutner, author of ‘Pagan Elements in Christianitv’  (Pioneer Press), a well-known contributor to the ‘Freethinker’, for having made complete copies of them for me in the British Museum.

It is evident from these letters that Annet either had resided at Salisbury, held some position or stayed there for some considerable time at an earlier date; that he made a circle of good friends in that town, who remained loyal to him throughout his long life and who really helped to relieve his sufferings and want when in prison.

With regard to the Poem on the “Fall of Man”, we have endeavoured in vain to trace it or to discover anything about it  – whether it was ever published, or what became of the manuscript.

Peter Annet’s earlier poem, “Necessarian” (I739), proved that he was a true poet, and doubtless he displayed a virile treatment of his theme and a magnificent mastery of logic as well as language in his blank verse.

Two Original Letters from Peter Annet.

“Mr. Urban.   Salisbury.  Mar.24.

In answer to the enquiries of our correspondent F.X. after Peter Annet (Of whom see Gent.Mag. Vol.32 p.560)  I send you copies of two original letters to a gentleman of this city. At the time of his persecution he was thought to be so hardly dealt by, that a subscription  and sent him in Newgate, from some liberal minds in this neighbourhood.  Peter told the gentleman who delivered the benefaction, that Lord B-e had been applied to for a ‘noli proseqi’; but his answer was, that “the Bishop came foaming at the mouth against this man, and what could he do ?” -Archbishop Secker afterwards so far repented him of the evil, that he relieved Peter Annet of his distress, to the day of his death.  If his head had not been bruised, he would not have wanted a plaister.

Yours, etc. A.B.

Spring Gardens. Aug. 7 1756

Dear Sir,

You will I hope pardon the trouble I give you by this letter. I am much obliged to you for the favour of yours, and take the contents kindly, particularly that I have not outlived the remembrance of my friends.  The pamphlet I ordered those at Salisbury I know to be not worthy of their acceptance, respecting the value or matter contained in it.  It was intended as pap for babes, not meat for strong men   I was willing to make the best I could of a bad cause, to induce men to embrace a good one. It is the most christian piece that ever I wrote, or shall write.  That, and another like it, which lies by me in manuscript, have cost me the most study of any, and I like them the least. .I must own they are rather legal than legitimate offspring, the production of art than nature; and this last has told the least of any, so that I intend to print no more; but yet I have such affection to the children of my spirit, which are many, that I would fain bequeth them to some that will have mercy on them, and shew them such oompassion as that they may be known to the world, though I would not have their friend to be a sufferer.  But I must leave all that to fate or chance.  I care not which it is or what it is called.  I am now writing on the fall of man, in blank verse.  But it is far different from Milton in sense.   I wish it was equal to his poetic genius; but of that you must expect it to fall abundantly short.  Besides, it is much a question of whether truth can shine away the lustre of falsehood; for this is all glorious within, and that without.  As it wants no scenes or gaudy embellishments to the lovers of it, its intrinsic value and glory being sufficient to those that know it, so it never courts popular applause, the praise of fools and knaves, who make up the mob, the vulgar, the crowd of mankind.  I believe it is the last work I shall attempt, and if my zeal and  cogitation. can be conquered, as I would have them, it will be so.   I was born with the seeds of strong passions, which growing up with me, could not prevent my displaying them in time.   But these have been of the softer kind, and nothing yet abated by age; and, therefore, religion having been early implanted in my nature, which works up the passions, and love and resentment too, I have felt to make keen impressions in my disposition ; and, therefore, perhaps, I am more stung with jealousy when my friends seem to desert me, than men in common are.  I unbosom to you my breast;  I impart to you the weakness of my soul; I melt while I express it. I cannot read any love affairs, where that passion is strongly expressed, but I am as strongly affected, so as it gives tears to my eyes, and pain in my heart, even to the taking away my stomach for food, and for some time giving me the headache, and this weakness is insurmountable;  and it may be too, that I prefer the friendship of friends, and an honest reputation, beyond wealth.  The love of money is nothing to me, but the love of friends is much;  yet the hatred of enemies I despise. I will therefore put you and my friends in the way, since you desire it, of returning what you are pleased to call my civilities; that is, that some or other of them would let me hear from them now and then.  Let me not be dead to them before I die.  And if I could serve you or them, in anything here in town, I should be glad to do it, for I have now abundance of time and liberty, Mr. Kilby being gone with Lord Loudon to America, to supply the army there (which is to consist of 20,000 men) with provisions.  In the mean time he has thought fit to continue me in my post; so that I have, as I said, all things, and abound; that is, all that I want.  It is not that I am lifted up above my station as a servant, or abound in worldly goods or wealth, but to let you understand that I am contented in my place; which, if I had lost by his going abroad, a worthy gentleman, in my way of thinking too, would have repaired, by making me the steward of his estate, and then I must have lived  wholly in the country. This was agreed to, on condition Mr. Kilby was willing to part with me, concerning which he and that gentleman had a conference. But he not caring to part with me, I remain where I was.

I thank you greatly for the offer you make of enriching my small library with some piece that I may count valuable, which when I have well considered, I shall let you know (or Mr. Easton), that you may not conceive that I esteem lightly of your favours, which are offered as a token of your friendship for me, though now and then a letter that I am not forgotten, but remaineth in it, would be a sufficient gratification to me, for my love to my friends is really disinterested; but in cases of want it is good to have them, and I am very desirous of keeping those few I have. I am very glad that nobody has lessened the affection of my friends to me, and hope to preserve such a moral character till I die, or at least to deserve it, that nothing but malice, or  ignorance, and orthodoxy, may vainly endeavour to blast it; my  letter is so long, that I must desire you to take it as it is, with all its faults, without the polish of a second writing. Let me sometimes hear from my friends in Salisbury, and always be pleased to esteem me their, and Sir, your most obliged and faithful humble servant.


Nov. 30. 1762.


I make bold to inform you how my cause has terminated respecting my sentence. Thursday before last I had an order to appear at the Court of King’s Bench, where the first information annexed to the third number of the Free Enquirer was read, and the quotations from that paper, and apart of that which descants upon these words, “Why judge ye not in yourselves that which is.right,” and some blackening of the whole by the King’s Counsel – I was committed to the King’s Bench prison till the last day of the term, when, being brought again, after two Judges had laid their heads together some time, and the subject of the Free Enquirer was highly aggravated by the Attorney General, who gave them to understand that.he had received directions from his M–y to oblige the offender to suffer exemplary punishment, I was sentenced to Newgate for a month, to stand in the pillory, once at the Royal Exchange, and once at Charing Cross; to be committed, after that, to the house of correction for a twelve month, to pay a fine of 6s.8d. and give security for my good behaviour during life.   So that I am now among ironed felons in Newgate,      hough in what they call theMaster’s Side.  I hope GOD and my friends will support me through all. My respects to your brothers and friends.

I am Sir,

your obliged humble servant,


These letters have never been reprinted; they certainly afford a vivid and realistic presentation of Annet’s attractive personality, especially as they were confidential communications – written without any idea of future publication.

Mr. Robert Bennet, Editor of T’he Salisbury and Winchester Journal’  (founded I729), has favoured the writer with an extract from that paper, dated January 30th. , 1769, which reads:

“The late Mr. Peter Annet, who died a few days ago at Lambeth enjoyed the friendship of the late Archbishop of Canterbury for several years before His Grace’s death, insomuch that he left him an handsome annuity in his last will, and assured him that he took no part in the prosecution which was carried on against him, some years ago, for his Deistical writings, in consequence of which he had stood in the pillory.

We have great pleasure in recording this. It is one of those very, very rare occasions when humanity triumphed over religious animosity and succoured the victim of priestly persecution”

‘Annet benefited for a very short time by Secker’s generosity, since the latter died towards the end of I768 and Peter died in January, I769 ‘.

Ella Twynam.

Appendix D

From the Elizabethan State Papers Domestic

{P.R.O. Ref. S.P. I2/I7- X/J 8845.}

Tbe wronges done to certeine merchantes subjects to the king of Spaine by english pirattes –

To Anthonie Le Boot Antonie de Maralier and consorts:

The one and twentith daie of February last past was robbed Bytwene  Dover and the Coste of Normandy the ship named the Bonadventure, by John Marychuroh and William Toker  englishmen, the whiche did Robb out of the same shipp 74 great ballatts and 30 lb  peces of vitry canvas of all sortes, which was worth £900 sterling: And after the spoile was done the same piratte went to Laistof Road,  And there did sell to Thomas .Annet of the same towne certeine quantitie of it:   By all such meanes and crafte as shall appere by the confession of Thomas Burman his servante annexed hereunto:  And after that the same was knowen were faine the merchantes at their great coste and charges to finde it,  And there was founde 900 peces of vitry canvas cut and hole, and 80 peces of poldaves cut and hole   As it doth appere by thindenture exhibited in the admirall Courte,   And out of the same Canvas and Poldaves was cut a great deale to the value of above 140 pounds, for every pece: ought to conteine 75ells: The whiche the whole peces sholde be ….. ells, and there was delivered nomore than 4800 pounds   As it doth also appeire by the above said indenture,  And considering the premisses and who craftelie the said Annet (being a very substanciall Riche man) bought the  said goodds,   The merchantes requeste is that it wold please the Quenes majesties commissioners for these dauses to get the  Quenes highenis ..  …imediatlie uppon the sight thereof for to bring up the same Thomas Annet Thomas Burman and one Jagges which was consenting to the said piracie,    And the matter to be examined afore them according to Justice, and to comand them to paie the same.

(Marginal note: Thomas Annet Thomas Burman and one Jagges of Lowstoff to’ be sent for. )

The demande of Nicholas da Qastre

Aboute twoo monethes past a shipp of Feckam coming out of Spain was robbed about the Cape by certeine Englishe piratts of these. parcells, 200 great hides of the Indeanes marked with read okar of this marke, N. D.  foure butts of Spanish wyne marked with this mark . . 47 baggs of Read Allome marked with this mark C G.. All the said gooddes perteyning to the foresaide merchants amounting to £300.

The demande of Jeronimo de Curiell and Andres Ruyes and companie

The 25th daie of May last past the shipp named the  Noblet sayling from Nauntes to Bylbao in Spaine was taken by English piatts and carried awaie with all her lading; whiche was 316 fardells of lynnen cloth and habberdashery ware marked with divers markes amounting to above to the great undoing’of the poor merchantes,   And the request of the same merchants doth desire that the Quenes majestie would write unto the Lordes of Skotland,  that in case the same piratts and the same goodds may be stayed. That then it be done accordinglie, and not kept and mainteined there as they heretofore have done,  And in like wise that worde may be sent to the Lorde deputie of Irelande for the apprehension staying, and making serches for the saide piratts and gooddes,  And that the said Lord deputtie may send like worde throughe all the countrie and sea costes in Ireland:   And in like wise that her majestie may give comandement to the lord of Darbie that he may send word to the Isle of man that in case there do arrive anie of the foresaid piratts that they may be stayed accordinglie:   And in likewise the merchants do most humblie desire her majestie that they may have her graces comission thorow all the Realme, charging and comannding to assist the Bearers thereof in the makinge serche of the foresaid gooddes,   And to staye them in whose landes soever it may be found, or that they maie understande that hath bought anie,   That they maie appeire Before her graces counsaill to make answere according to Justice.


Appendix E

Elizabethan State Papers Domestic

P .R.O. Ref. S.P .I2/I7   X/J 8845.

The examinatian of Thomas Burman servant to Thomas Annot of Leistoft taken by Sir Thomas Woodhouse knight the 28th. daie of Maye anno I56I.

Upon this examination itt is required that Burman and Annot may be sent for.

The saide Thomas Burman sayethe he being at London aboute his masters business came from thence to Leistofte to his masters house in the first weeke of lent last past and within 2 or three daies after what daie he doth not well remember he went downe to the seaside to loke to a bote of his masters aboute  II or I2 of the clock in the daie, And uppon the dewnes as he went to the seaside he met with 3 maryners cominge  up to the town with swordes under their armes and the said Burman demandinge of them from whence they came, what they had for their lodinge and whether they were bond, They answered they came from burdeaux loden with wynes and were towarde Scotland,   And at this saide examinate thinketh they went to the house of Thomas Jaggs /

And the saide deponent sayeth that the same daye at night after he had supped his master commanded that they horses shoulbe well meated, and that he shoulde not go to bed and aboute I0 of the clock in the night his master comanded him to yoke 6 horses and put them in the carte, which carte stoode beneth the clyff at a house of his masters,  And that he should cary the horses on the Backside of the strete that no man shoulde see them,  And so the saide examinte dyd,   And when he had yoked the horses to the carte, his master beinge there present, delivered to him a roape and so comanded him to go downe with the horses and carte to the seaside in the south Roade, his master still remayning in the said house /

And the same deponent sayeth that as he went to the water side with the carte he met with these 3 maryners cominge from the sea that he dyd mete with the same daye before and they willed him to make hast, and so retourned they back with him to a bote wherein was certaine canvas and pouledavys which they lode’ uppon the carte, and they 3  went with him back againe with the carte to the said house beneth the cliff where they unloded the same canvas and pouledavys which the said Thomas Annot being there present did receive /

And after the carte was unloden they went back againe to the same south roade where they met with the same bote whiche came from aborde of a ship ridinge in the roade with another lode of canyas and poldavys which was likewise laied in to the carte and caried to the said house and was there received by his said master Thomas Annot  And so brought they after that 3 lodes more of canvas and pouledavys which was delivered at the saide house to the saide Thomas Annot  And was also one hoggeshead of wyne whiche was afterwarde carried to the house of Thomas Jaggs /

Item this saide examinate sayeth that he can no tell howe much canvas nor how many boultes of poldavys were delivered /   But all the canvas was in fardells fast packed with sarplers and all the poldavys were whole and not broken up, and so delivere’d into the house /

Item the saide examinate sayeth that they had made an ende of the cariage of all the said canvas it was aboute 3 or 4 of the clock in the morninge /

Item the said examinate sayeth further that as he went with the carte he did tourne one of the packes of canvas from the carte uppon the dewnes meaninge to have kept the same to his owne use whiche afterwarde his master understoode,  and enforced this said examinate to deliver it unto him,   And charged him that he should saie that he bought the same canvas of a kynsman of his at london, and charged him further .that he shoulde in no wise confesse the receipte of any of this canvas or of anythinge that might betraye the same neither to Syr Thomas Woodhouse upon any examination nor to any other man,   And he wolde be good to him and that he wolde warrant him to save him harmeles / .

Item the said examinate sayeth the Thomas Jaggs beinge aborde of the shipp came ashore in the bote with the thirde of the 4th lode of canvas, and went from thence to the house where the canvas was laied whence this examinate dyd then see present with his saide master /

Item the said examinate confesseth furthermore that one William Frenche sonne in law to Thomas Annot was aborde of the same ship all the tyme that the canvas was delivered, and there remayned untill the next daye /

Item the said examinate sayeth that the next daye  aboute 8 of the clock the said Thomas Jaggs came to his said master and said he must have more money to paie for the same canvas, And so the said Jaggs received of the saide Thomas Annot certeine money howe much this examinate knoweth not /

Item this said examinate further sayeth after he was suspected of these things and thereof first examined by Sir Thomas Woodhouse for the tryall thereof which he denied his master required him to seke shippinge into Spain or other places so as he might be absent /    And thereby should not be further examined. /

Item the said examinate saieth that when Syr Thomas Woodhouse dyd sende for him to be examined his saide master required John Goddyrd to go with him to the intent that if he shoulbe kepte still by Syr Thomas Woodhouse for that he wolde not confesse the matter,  That then the same Goddyrd shoulde be bound for him for his fourthe cominge..whensoever he shoulde be called for, And that he wolde. save the same Goddyrd harmeles for the same /

Appendix F.

A Facsimile of the Original Document

‘The Examination of Thomas Burman Servant to Thomas Annot’