was originally created by him, for it was a question whether the
recipients of the new dignity should be designated by that or
some other name.[1] But there is no doubt that as previously
used it was merely a corrupt synonym for banneret, and not the
name of any separate dignity. On the Continent, however, there
are several recorded examples of bannerets who had an hereditary
claim to that honour and its attendant privileges on the ground
of the nature of their feudal tenure.[2] And generally, at any rate
to commence with, it seems probable that bannerets were in
every country merely the more important class of feudatories,
the “ricos hombres” in contrast to the knights bachelors, who
in France in the time of St Louis were known as “pauvres
hommes.” In England all the barons or greater nobility were
entitled to bear banners, and therefore Du Cange’s observations
would apply to them as well as to the barons or greater nobility
of France and Spain. But it is clear that from a comparatively
early period bannerets whose claims were founded on personal
distinction rather than on feudal tenure gradually came to the
front, and much the same process of substitution appears to
have gone on in their case as that which we have marked in the
case of simple knights. According to the Sallade and the
Division du Monde, as cited by Selden, bannerets were clearly
in the beginning feudal tenants of a certain magnitude and
importance and nothing more, and different forms for their
creation are given in time of peace and in time of war.[3] But
in the French Gesta Romanorum the warlike form alone is given,
and it is quoted by both Selden and Du Cange. From the latter
a more modern version of it is given by Daniel as the only one
generally in force.
The knight bachelor whose services and landed possessions entitled him to promotion would apply formally to the commander in the field for the title of banneret. If this were granted, the heralds were called to cut publicly the tails from his pennon: or the commander, as a special honour, might cut them off with his own hands.[4] The earliest contemporary mention of knights banneret is in France, Daniel says, in the reign of Philip Augustus, and in England, Selden says in the reign of Edward I. But in neither case is reference made to them in such a manner as to suggest that the dignity was then regarded as new or even uncommon, and it seems pretty certain that its existence on one side could not have long preceded its existence on the other side of the Channel. Sir Alan Plokenet, Sir Ralph Daubeney and Sir Philip Daubeney are entered as bannerets on the roll of the garrison of Caermarthen Castle in 1282, and the roll of Carlaverock records the names and arms of eighty-five bannerets who accompanied Edward I. in his expedition into Scotland in 1300.
What the exact contingent was which bannerets were expected to supply to the royal host is doubtful.[5] But, however this may be, in the reign of Edward III. and afterwards bannerets appear as the commanders of a military force raised by themselves and marshalled under their banners: their status and their relations both to the crown and to their followers were mainly the consequences of voluntary contract not of feudal tenure. It is from the reigns of Edward III. and Richard II. also that the two best descriptions we possess of the actual creation of a banneret have been transmitted to us.[6] Sir Thomas Smith, writing towards the end of the 16th century, says, after noticing the conditions to be observed in the creation of bannerets, “but this order is almost grown out of use in England”;[7] and, during the controversy which arose between the new order of baronets and the crown early in the 17th century respecting their precedence, it was alleged without contradiction in an argument on behalf of the baronets before the privy council that “there are not bannerets now in being, peradventure never shall be.”[8] Sir Ralph Fane, Sir Francis Bryan and Sir Ralph Sadler were created bannerets by the Lord Protector Somerset after the battle of Pinkie in 1547, and the better opinion is that this was the last occasion on which the dignity was conferred. It has been stated indeed that Charles I. created Sir John Smith a banneret after the battle of Edgehill in 1642 for having rescued the royal standard from the enemy. But of this there is no sufficient proof. It was also supposed that George III. had created several naval officers bannerets towards the end of the last century, because he knighted them on board ship under the royal standard displayed. This, however, is unquestionably an error.[9]
On the continent of Europe the degree of knight bachelor disappeared with the military system which had given rise to it. It is now therefore peculiar to the British Empire, where, although very frequently conferred by letters patent, it is yet the only dignity which is still even Existing Orders of Knighthood. occasionally created—as every dignity was formerly created—by means of a ceremony in which the sovereign and the subject personally take part. Everywhere else dubbing or the accolade seems to have become obsolete, and no other species of knighthood, if knighthood it can be called, is known except that which is dependent on admission to some particular order. It is a common error to suppose that baronets are hereditary knights. Baronets are not knights unless they are knighted like anybody else; and, so far from being knights because they are baronets, one of the privileges granted to them shortly after the institution of their dignity was that they, not being knights, and their successors and their eldest sons and heirs-apparent should, when they attained their majority, be entitled if they desired to receive knighthood.[10] It is a maxim of the law indeed that, as Coke says, “the knight is by creation and not by descent,” and, although we hear of such designations as the “knight of Kerry” or the “knight of Glin,” they are no more than traditional nicknames, and do not by any means imply that the persons to whom they are applied are knights in a legitimate sense. Notwithstanding, however, that simple knighthood has gone out of use abroad, there are innumerable grand crosses, commanders and companions of a formidable assortment of orders in almost every part of the world.[11] (See the section on “Orders of Knighthood” below.)
The United Kingdom has eight orders of knighthood—the Garter, the Thistle, St Patrick, the Bath, the Star of India, St Michael and St George, the Indian Empire and the Royal Victorian Order; and, while the first is undoubtedly the oldest as well as the most illustrious anywhere existing, a fictitious antiquity has been claimed and is even still frequently conceded
- ↑ See “Project concerninge the conferinge of the title of vidom,” wherein it is said that “the title of vidom (vicedominus) was an ancient title used in this kingdom of England both before and since the Norman Conquest” (State Papers, James I. Domestic Series, lxiii. 150 B, probable date April 1611).
- ↑ Selden, Titles of Honor, pp. 452 seq.
- ↑ Ibid. pp. 449 seq.
- ↑ Du Cange, Dissertation, ix.; Selden, Titles of Honor, p. 452; Daniel, Milice Françoise, i. 86 (Paris, 1721).
- ↑ Selden, Titles of Honor, p. 656; Grose, Military Antiquities, ii. 206.
- ↑ Froissart, Bk. I. ch. 241 and Bk. II. ch. 53. The recipients were Sir John Chandos and Sir Thos. Trivet.
- ↑ Commonwealth of England (ed. 1640), p. 48.
- ↑ State Papers, Domestic Series, James the First, lxvii. 119.
- ↑ “Thursday, June 24th: His Majesty was pleased to confer the honour of knights banneret on the following flag officers and commanders under the royal standard, who kneeling kissed hands on the occasion: Admirals Pye and Sprye; Captains Knight, Bickerton and Vernon,” Gentleman’s Magazine (1773) xliii. 299. Sir Harris Nicolas remarks on these and the other cases (British Orders of Knighthood, vol. xliii.) and Sir William Fitzherbert published anonymously a pamphlet on the subject, A Short Inquiry into the Nature of the Titles conferred at Portsmouth, &c., which is very scarce, but is to be found under the name of “Fitzherbert” in the catalogue of the British Museum Library.
- ↑ “Sir Henry Ferrers, Baronet, was indicted by the name of Sir Henry Ferrers, Knight, for the murther of one Stone whom one Nightingale feloniously murthered, and that the said Sir Henry was present aiding and abetting, &c. Upon this indictment Sir Henry Ferrers being arraigned said he never was knighted, which being confessed, the indictment was held not to be sufficient, wherefore he was indicted de novo by the name of Sir Henry Ferrers, Baronet.” Brydall, Jus Imaginis apud Anglos, or the Law of England relating to the Nobility and Gentry (London, 1675), p. 20. Cf. Patent Rolls, 10 Jac. I., pt. x. No. 18; Selden, Titles of Honor, p. 687.
- ↑ Louis XIV. introduced the practice of dividing the members of military orders into several degrees when he established the order of St Louis in 1693.
