Sir John Vanbrugh
The College of Arms went through a period of great difficulty towards the end of the 17th century, reaching a low point in the early eighteenth century. Between December 1704 and December 1706 not a single grant of arms was registered. The College of Arms operates under the Earl Marshal’s authority but Thomas Duke of Norfolk, who had succeeded his uncle as Earl Marshal in 1701, was disqualified as a minor until 1704 and then disqualified for being a catholic. His office was exercised by a succession of deputies. It was one of these deputies, proclaiming the rights of the Earl Marshal, who appointed the renowned architect and dramatist John Vanbrugh to be Clarenceux King of Arms. At this time he was known primarily for his plays and his scandalous wit.
There are three Kings of Arms of the College of Arms: Garter Principal King of Arms, Clarenceux King of Arms, and Norroy and Ulster King of Arms. Clarenceux has jurisdiction over England south of the River Trent and Wales. Norroy and Ulster has jurisdiction over England north of the River Trent and Northern Ireland. Garter Principal King of Arms has overall seniority and supervisory authority within the College but no territorial jurisdiction. To appoint an outsider to one of the senior and most lucrative offices, with no previous experience as a herald in ordinary, was outrageous. Recent Kings of Arms had been in their seventies or eighties, appointed after they had progressed through lesser offices as heralds of arms in ordinary. Vanbrugh was only forty years old. A petition by the heralds was brought before the Privy Council in 1704, in the presence of Queen Anne who declared herself in favour of the appointment.
1704 was also the year in which the Duke of Marlborough secured victory at Blenheim. Queen Anne gave the Duke the choice of architect for her gift of Blenheim Palace. In choosing Vanbrugh, the Duke gave Vanbrugh his principal preoccupation for the next ten years, even as he occupied one of the senior offices of the College of Arms.
Adding to the controversy of Vanbrugh’s appointment was the manner in which he had satirised heraldic practices, and Welsh (Cymru) genealogical traditions in particular, with the character Quaint in his play Æsop, first performed at Drury Lane in 1697. Yet this satire reveals familiarity with Cymru interest in genealogy and the status applied to ancestry. The gentry he would have encountered growing up in Chester could trace their family lines back centuries through the Chronicles, displayed in their quartered arms. Well into the late seventeenth century, it was expected that gentlemen of the old families would know their ancient lineage and could identify kinship to at least their fourth cousins.
Quaint: Why, Sir, I’m a Herald by Nature, my Mother was a Welchwoman.
Esop: A Welchwoman? Pr’ythee of what Country is that?
Quaint: That, Sir, is a Country in the World’s Backside, where every Man is born a Gentleman and a Genealogist. Sir, I cou’d tell my Mother’s Pedigree before I could speak plain; which, to shew you the Depth of my Art, and the Strength of my Memory, I’ll trundle you down in an instant. Noah had three Sons, Shem, Ham, and Japhet; Shem—
Esop: Hold, I conjure thee, in the Name of all thy Ancestors.
Quaint: Sir, I cou’d take it higher, but I begin at Noah for brevity’s sake.
Sir Anthony Richard Wagner, Garter King of Arms in Heralds of England, published 1967 observed that, although the appointment was ‘incongruous’, Vanbrugh was ‘possibly the most distinguished man who has ever worn a herald’s tabard.’
Sir John Vanbrugh (1664-1726) was the fourth of nineteen children. He was the eldest surviving son of Giles Vanbrugh, a London cloth-merchant of Flemish descent, and his wife Elizabeth, daughter and co-heiress of Sir Dudley Carleton, of Imber Court, Thames Ditton, Surrey. John’s uncle, the merchant Gulielmo Van Brugs was an armiger, his shield appearing on the frontispiece of Thomas Fuller’s A Pisgah-sight of Palestine, published 1650, and his mother was co-heiress of her armigerous father. However, from John Vanbrugh’s appointment as Clarenceux King of Arms in 1704 until his knighthood ten years later, he did not have an official grant of arms. In 1714 he was granted the arms of his uncle together with the canting crest, which happens to suit this architect rather well.
Foster & Rylands’ Grantees of Arms Named in Docquets and Patents, published 1916, references Carleton quarters in documents dated 30th April 1714, a few days after the Vanbrugh arms were granted. Contemporary sources show Vanbrugh’s arms unquartered but Sir A. R. Wagner records that Vanbrugh quartered the arms of Sir Dudley Carleton: Argent on a bend Sable three mascles of the first. Following English custom, Sir John Vanbrugh could claim the Carleton arms through his mother but not the striking Carleton crest.
In the early eighteenth century, London was transforming into a global commercial and financial centre. The Royal Navy expanded, securing maritime dominance and protecting growing overseas trade. Merchants accumulated unprecedented wealth through colonial commerce, particularly in the Americas and the Caribbean, while immigration, including Huguenot artisans and other skilled workers, supplied labour and expertise to craft, finance, and trade. The Letters Patent signed by Sir John Vanbrugh during his tenure reflect these developments. They include the following armorial bearings (crests by Vadym Burla, shields by the author).
Olmius was latinised from the Flemish or Dutch ‘Van Olm’ (Elm) and these are canting arms. Like Vanbrugh’s own Flemish arms, the Olmius arms were acknowledged and registered by the College of Arms. They were then quartered with Gerverdine, Reynstein and Cappré arms.
The armoured Moor in the Olmius crest signifies honour proved under exceptional trial, a classical emblem in seventeenth-century Germanic heraldry denoting martial distinction earned through service rather than inherited rank.
Social mobility brought new challenges to the College of Arms. William Defoe wrote in 1726 of ‘the tradesmen of England, as they grow wealthy, coming every day to the Heralds’ Office, to search for the Coats of Arms of their ancestors, in order to paint them upon their coaches, and engrave them upon their plate, embroider them upon their furniture, or carve them upon the pediments of their new houses.’
During Vanbrugh’s tenure the College of Arms began to emerge from its earlier decline, not through conscious reform but through adaptation to changing social conditions. Vanbrugh’s appointment reflected the Whig politics and court patronage of the period and while he took little part in the day-to-day work of the College, his position as a prominent figure helped maintain the office’s visibility and connection to the state, even as the practical work remained largely in the hands of its working heralds and deputies.
In Queen Anne’s final years, Vanbrugh successfully lobbied the Deputy Earl Marshal in a bid to be appointed Garter King of Arms, but John Anstis was appointed just weeks before the Queen’s death, leaving Vanbrugh’s hopes unfulfilled. As Tories began to gain over the Whig party, a letter Vanbrugh had written to the Mayor of Woodstock fell into the hands of his political enemies. Writing to the Duke of Marlborough, he noted that, although the Queen “said she had been under an obligation to me not to consent” to Anstis’ petition, Vanbrugh’s “behaviour had been such in writing that letter to Woodstock, that now she had done with me — That was her expression.” Although heraldic offices were traditionally held for life, with the Hanover succession in 1714 Vanbrugh effectively withdrew from public office while retaining the title. In 1725 he sold this office to Knox Ward (1703-1741) for £3000, telling a friend he had “got leave to dispose in earnest, of a place I got in jest”.
Sir John Vanbrugh was a self-taught visionary who has been dubbed ‘The Rockstar of the English Baroque’. 300 years on, his legacy is celebrated at six of the nation’s finest country houses, where his architectural brilliance survives. Heraldry subtly informed his architectural style. Through his bold designs and dramatic imagination, Vanbrugh embodies the creativity, ambition, and international connections that made early eighteenth century London a cosmopolitan stage.
To find out more about the year-long festival bringing Vanbrugh’s world to life visit vanbrugh300.co.uk
