The Duke Family in England: The Early Centuries

Notes by Lynn S. Teague, July 1999
The following is research on the Duke family of various parts of southern England, believed to be the origin of the Duke(s) families of Virginia, Barbados, and South Carolina. Other families named “Duke” exist in England. In some cases, the English name Duke may be a shortening of Marmaduke; this is said to be a source of the name “Duke” in the north.
The Duke(s) family of southern England is of Anglo-Norman origin. Originally, the Normans were Danish Vikings who were raiding throughout France. They were given Normandy, at the mouth of the Seine, to encourage them to settle down. They intermarried with the Franks already resident along the northern French coast.
The Normans rapidly adopted the local language after settling in France. This contrasts with their practice when they moved on to England. There, they continued to speak (and write in) Norman French, or Anglo-Norman, for several hundred years. They also maintained estates in Normandy after the conquest of England.
The Duke family first appears in known English records in the late 1100's. The name “Duke” or “Dukes” was originally le Duc, a term that was used to mean “leader” before the term became associated with a specific rank of the nobility. In southern England, the form Le Duc persists for several centuries.
A Dictionary of British Surnames states that the name is derived from "ME duc, duk(e), douk, doke, OFr duc 'leader of an army, captain'." The term is derived from a title in the administration of the Carolingian Empire, and was equivalent to the term “ealerdom” that was native to the Scandinavian origins of the Normans and the “alderman” of Anglo-Saxon England. The ealerdom, and le duc, was the representative of the royal ruler among local leaders.
There is a parallel with Anglo-Saxon practices in these functions of the “duc”:
During Ethelred’s reign one of the king’s local bailiffs (‘reeves’) in each shire had come to be known as the ‘shire-reeve’ or sheriff. He was the king’s chief executive agent in the shire, and gradually assumed more and more of the alderman’s functions. The sheriff was responsible for collecting royal revenues and the profits of justice, but he also belonged to the growing community of local thegns. In the shire court he could announce the king’s will to the gentry of the shire, take a big part in day-to-day business, and add the weight of royal authority to action against oppressive magnates.

The Earliest Recorded Members of the Duke Family in England

The following individuals are found in The Norman People and their Existing Descendants :
Duke. Osmond le Duc, Alexander and Robert le Duc, Norm., 1180-98; Radulphus Dux of Bucks (1199). Hence the Baronets Duke. Robert D. and his father are mentioned in England.
Duck, or Le Duc. Willelmus Dux was of Normandy, 1198; Ralph Dux of Buckinghamshire 1198.
These establish some connections with Normandy. It is possibly that some of those identified with Normandy were actually born in England, since at this time residence in both locations was common and many who lived in England continued to think of Normandy as their principal residence.
A History of English Surnames  gives the following references to members of the le Duc family in England:
Herbert le Duc 1185 Templars (Shropshire)
Adam Duke 1198 Pipe Rolls  (Bedfordshire)
Henry Dukes 1214 Curia Regis Rolls  (Warwickshire)
Osbert le Duke 1230 Pipe Rolls  (Devonshire)
The Osbert le Duket (as the name appears in the original Pipe Rolls) mentioned in Devonshire probably is an error. Usually, “Duket” is not a variant of “Duc” but a different name altogether.
The reference to Henry Dukes in 1214 is a record of his having been fined one-half mark, with many others, for joining with William de Buckingham in depriving Simon de Barton of his free holding in Barton. Barton was located in Bidford Parish in southwestern Warwickshire, immediately west of Temple Grafton, held by the Knights Templar until their dissolution and subsequently by the Knights Hospitallers. Both the time and the location suggest that Henry and Herbert le Duc, Knight Templar in Shropshire a few years earlier, might have been brothers. There is no evidence of a succeeding generation in this area, however.
The Knights Templar, the order of which Herbert le Duc was a member, were established in 1118 and became one of the two major military orders of the Middle Ages, created to protect travellers on the road of the Holy Land and ultimately among the most prominent of the groups of medieval crusaders. In 1185, the year that Herbert le Duke’s membership is noted, they built Temple Church in London, which was later to become the Temple of the Inns of Court. Herbert le Duc is likely to have served with Richard I (Coeur de Lion) on the Third Crusade, against Saladin, which Richard began in July 1190.
The reference to a member of the Duke family in England in 1185 is the earliest that the present author has found, although it is quickly followed by quite a few others. At this time, there was still considerable movement between Normandy and England. During the 34 years of the reign of Henry II (1154-89), he spent 21 years on the continent, and only 13 in England. It is probable that the Ducs had been living in England for at least three generations by 1185 to produce the number of scattered references that have been found for the late 1100’s and the 1200's. If there were several generations in place by 1185, this would date their appearance in England at or near the time of the conquest in 1066. It is estimated that the conquest involved about 7000 men and the names of most of them are unknown. Early references in the Domesday Book  are often by first name and location only, providing an ample number of early Normans who cannot be associated with their descendants only a few generations later. The history of the family suggests that the area in and surrounding London represented the earliest identifiable English home of the family that we are tracing.
We also find examples of different, and presumably independent, early forms of the Duke surname in other areas at this time. In 1210 Godefridi Duc was mentioned in the vicinity of Sutton, Northamptonshire. Ralph f. Duc is found in Lincolnshire:
Radulfus f. Duc habet j caballum precium iiij s. et ij iuvencos precium v. S. et duos vitulos precium ij s., xxti vj oves precium ix s. et j suillam precium iiij d. et j quarterium frumenti precium xl d. et j summam ordei precium ij s. et dim. summam a[v]ene [preci]um vj d. Summa xve xxij d.
This tells us that Ralph f. [filius, son of] Duc of the Aswardhun Wapentake of Lincolnshire had 1 packhorse, 2 young horses, 2 calves, 26 sheep, a pig, a quantity of corn, and other items. The whole was valued at 15 s 22 d. This record reflects the same Norman impulse toward meticulous administration that produced the Domesday Book.
The name of Reginald le Duc is listed in Yorkshire in 1199, and takes the same form as that of the Normans in southern England, but there is no evidence that he established a family line there.

The Duke Family in eastern England

Three, or perhaps four, major branches of the le Duc family appear to have existed in the late 12th and early 13th century. One consists of Henry in Warwickshire and Herbert, Knight Templar in adjacent Shropshire, and their close relatives. Another consists of Roger le Duc, Sheriff of London in 1990-91 and 1993, and his descendants. The next includes Adam le Duc of Bedfordshire and his descendants. Ralph le Duc of Buckinghamshire may be Adam’s brother, and is included in this branch.

London

 The family of Roger le Duc assumed prominence in the late 12th century in England. We find the following references in a history of Suffolk:
Roger le Duke, Sheriff of London 1190-1191, 1193, under Richard I, Coeur de Leon
Peter Duke, Sheriff of London 1209, under King John, and his son,
Roger Duke, Sheriff of London 1227, Lord Mayor of London 1227-1230, under King Henry III, and his grandson
Walter of Brampton, did homage for land in Shadingfield at Framlingham Castle during the reign of Edward III, 1327-1377

Roger le Duc’s Family

The earliest generations of the family of Roger le Duc consists of Roger, Peter (probably Roger’s son although this relationship isn’t certain), and finally Roger, who was Lord Mayor of London in 1227-30.
In 1209, Peter le Duc was Sheriff of London. In the preceding year, Pope Innocent had laid an interdict on England and Wales; in 1209 King John was excommunicated. There is little evidence that this caused any great concern on the part of the king or the public. Other matters provoked greater concern, and in 1215 John was compelled to sign the Magna Carta, which established the division of authority between crown and parliament that has been the unique strength of English governance and law.
In the Easter Term of 1221, in the fifth year of King Henry III, Roger le Duc served as judge of the itinerant superior court in Norfolk. It is not known which Roger le Duc is meant.
In 1225-6, William Duke, probably a son or brother of Roger, was an alderman of London, involved in the foundation of a convent of the Grey Friars in the parish of "Sancti Nicholai de Macellis," St. Nicholas. Roger Duke and Martin FitzWilliam are listed as "vicecomites" (sheriffs) of London. Roger Duke is listed as Mayor in 1226, with Stephan Bokerell and Henry Cobham, "vicecomites."
By 1227, Roger le Duc was again Sheriff of London, and later Mayor of the city from 1227-30. The amount of time elapsed since the previous tenure as sheriff of a Roger le Duc suggests that this was probably a different individual. At this time Henry III was on the throne. A council ruled in his behalf, since when King John died in 1216 Henry was only nine years old. Henry III did not actually assume his responsibilities as king until 1232.
The approximate location of the London properties of Roger le Duc, Mayor of London in 1227-30, has been identified in English records regarding later transfers of the property. The first transfer was in 1239:
January 20, 1239: Grant to St. Mary and the brethren of the hospital of Ospreng, in frank almoin, of a house in the parish of St. Mary, Colecherch, in the city of London, which Matthew Blund sold to Roger le Duc, who afterwards sold it to Isaac of Norwich, a Jew, from whose heirs the king purchased it.
The parish of St. Mary, Colechurch, in London is located immediately southwest of the Guildhall, north and south of Cheapside.
The second transfer in which Roger le Duc's ownership is mentioned was on February 10, 1280:
The same day was read in full Husting an agreement whereby John de Quoye and Johanna his wife, daughter of John Viel, junior, demised to Roger the Tailor their capital mansion in Bredstrete, formerly belong to Roger le Duc, together with a shop formerly held by Hugh de Lenne, skinner.
“Bredstrete” is Bread Street, between Cheapside and Cannon Street, south of the City of London wall and only a few blocks from the City of London Guildhall.

The Dorset Estates of Roger le Duc

Roger le Duke acquired a number of properties at the end of his term as mayor of London:
Grant to Roger le Duc, citizen of London, of a rent of 30 marks, which the prior of Vast and Rumilly was wont to receive yearly from Thomas de Canvill by way of farm for the town of Fobbing, and of a rent of 10 marks, which the said prior was wont to receive from the monks of Coggeshall, which rents the said Roger has from the said prior for a term of seven years from A.D.1227; grant also to the said Roger of the manors of Winterburne, Bochamton, and Swanewic, and the advowson of Winterburne, which the said prior and convent have demised to the said Roger to hold for life by rendering one besant yearly to them.
The rents to be received by Roger le Duc from Fobbing and Coggeshall refer to Suffolk. However, the estates were in Dorset. All three of these manors were the property of the Priory of Vast (Vaast or Wast) in France. Winterbourne Monkton was immediately southwest of Dorchester; Bochampton was northeast of Dorchester; Swanewic was in the Purbeck area at the location of contemporary Swanage, just south of Poole on the Dorset coast. Interestingly, they are clustered around the two royal castles present in Dorset at that time, at Dorchester and at Castle Corfe, Purbeck.
The next reference to the transfer of the Dorset estates occurs in 1269, when the prior of St. Michael, Winterbourn Monkton (Sancti Michaelis de Vasto) contracted with Adam de Stratton for the lease of these manors and associated lands. Roger le Duc and his heirs might have held this property in the interim, during the years A.D.1228-1269, but it is more likely that the estates reverted to the crown on his death, prior to 1241.
These estates were almost certainly leased as sources of income, but it is possible that members of the family resided at one or all of the manors for some part of the time between 1228 and 1241, or even 1269. However, no evidence of an established family of the Duke name appears in Dorset during the 13th or 14th centuries. They are absent in the Hundred Rolls of 1279-81. It is improbable that establishment of the Duke family in Dorset dates from Roger le Duc’s acquisition of these estates.

Roger in Bucks

In 1230 Roger le Duc leased a manor in Buckinghamshire for a five year period:
Allowance (concessisse) to Roger le Duc, citizen of London, of an agreement made between John son of Robert and the said Roger, whereby the said Roger or his assigns were to hold the manor of Evre, co. Bucks, except the mills and swans, of the said John for a term of five years from the quinzaine of Easter 14 Henry III, pursuant to a chirograph made between the said Roger and John.
Evre is in extreme southeastern Buckinghamshire, on the border with Middlesex. This property would have been within an easy one-day ride by horse of London, a convenient country estate for someone involved in London affairs. It is unclear whether John didn’t want to lease out his swans, or whether Roger was not disposed to take them.

London Again

Roger le Duc was Sheriff of London in 1225-7, and Mayor in 1227-30. A contemporaneous William le Duc was a London Alderman, living in St. Nicholas parish; he might have been Roger's brother, another son of the older Roger. (Although Peter le Duc is given in some sources as son of the first Roger, and father of the second, this does not seem chronologically likely to the present author, particularly since the name Peter does not reappear for some time in the family story.)
There was apparently no time after Roger le Duc’s term as mayor in 1227-30 that the Duke family was not represented in London. In 1283 we find a record of a will by John le Duk, proved in the London Court of Husting, providing as follows:
To Johanna his wife his mansion house for life; remainder to Thomas and Roger his sons in equal portions. No date. [Roll 14 (138)].
This John le Duk is almost certainly a son or grandson of Roger le Duc.
Subsequently, we find additional information about another John Duk, in the 1308 will of Geoffrey de Borham of London. Borham left his tenement in the parish of S. Stephen de Colemanestrete (St. Stephen of Coleman Street) to his wife Cristiana and his daughter Juliana. The remainders were to go to his daughter Juliana, and to William and Adam, sons of his sister Alesia, who had married John Duk. Another sister of the testator, married to Thomas de Bradefeld, was also charged with certain payments to the children of Alesia. No further information is provided regarding John and Alesia Duk and their children; they might not have lived in London.
Borham also bequeathed funding for a chantry in the church of St. Stephen, or failing that St. Dunstan, for the good of his soul and the souls of Matilda, his former wife, and of Osmund and Deonisia, his parents, and others. He also left to Juliana “divers chattels,” including counterpanes, feather beds, sheets, a large brass pot holding seven gallons and a brass pot of one gallon, table-cloths, towels, and, finally, he left twelvepence toward the work of London Bridge.

John Duke of the King's Household: How Many, and Where?

A reference tells us that John Duke of the king's household was on a stipend of 100s. a year from Edward III. This was changed to life maintenance at Thorneye in Cambridgeshire in 1368. This was a provision for retirement, used for those whose rank did not warrant a gift of a manor and whose lack of immediate ties permitted retirement to a religious community. Another reference tells us that John Duke of Essex served at Crécy and Calais, and in 1347 was with many others granted a pardon for his service, provided he continued to provide military service in France, apparently indefinitely. It is likely that this is the same individual who was given retirement at Thorneye, after having continued in the king's service for many years. Medieval war has been described as the king's household in arms.
In 1361, Edward III awarded to another John Duke an annuity of 100 s at the exchequer by Edward III. He was at that time a yeoman of the royal household. The term "yeoman" held a very different meaning in the royal household than it did in other contexts. It has been observed that "A considerable number of king's yeomen, probably all, were of the armigerous class." These individuals sometimes performed services that outside the royal household would have been considered menial, but within it were the province of well-born individuals. Literacy was often required, and the pay was equivalent to that of a knight bachelor.
In 1370 the king’s grant was altered. John Duk was promoted and made an esquire by the king and granted £10 annuity to maintain this estate. Richard II confirmed this grant in 1378, one year after ascending the throne, and again in 1388. Henry IV confirmed this royal grant in 1399.
A John Duke is described as “the king’s servant” in a grant of the king’s income from the felony conviction of John Colshill alias Burton alias Byrton, for a felony at Shoreditch, near London.   Another similar reference involves being given the right to the forfeited goods of John Stodeley of Berkeford, co. Bedford, and Walter Clerk of the same, convicted in the death of Thomas Bailly of Eynesbury at Hakeney [Hackney, London].
On November 11, 1404, a John Duke, described as a "groom of the king’s chamber," was appointed by Henry IV as bailiff itinerant of Wiltshire for life. This appears to be yet a third John Duke in the king's household, probably the same as the individual given the benefit of goods forfeited by criminals. A groom of the chamber was a lower rank in the household than esquire, so this John Duke was not the same as the individual who was made esquire in 1370. He was probably young, to hold a lower office and to be young enough to fulfill the role of bailiff itinerant. It is very possible that this individual already had a residence in Wiltshire, since service in the king’s household was normally accompanied by maintenance of at least one estate outside London. (At this time the royal government was quite mobile, and not nearly so centered on Westminster as was later the case, although the transition to a stable seat of government was underway.)

The Trade in Hides and Wool

There are many references indicating that during the 14th century a portion of the Duke family became very active in trade, to their considerable profit.
In 1315 Edward II issued a safe conduct for John Duke, master of the 'la Godale' of London, for purposes of trade, "provided he does not carry the corn or victuals to the king's Scotch enemies, and that he holds no communion with them." This individual might be connected with the later appearance of a Duke family in Brussels.
In 1339 Thomas Duche and other "merchants of Lombardy conversant in the city of London" were summoned to the Council at the Tower of London to hear certain matters propounded to them in the king's behalf touching the furtherance of the present war." The king was seeking money from these merchants.
In 1339 and again in 1340 Edward III ordered the collectors of customs in the port of London to pay to Katherine daughter of William Duc of Brussels and to Henry Estor, her son, or to their attorney, £50 for the term, noting that the king had granted them £100 yearly for life of land or rent in the realm, and that this served until this commitment could be met. This was 10 times greater than the pay for an esquire of the king’s household. Katherine and her son had offered the king "homage and fealty," something very unusual for women other than those heir to very substantial noble estates. Reminders were issued regarding the 1340 payments, over a period of several months, in a dispute between the king and the collectors of customs for the port of London. Regular repetitions of these orders for biannual payment occur until the last in 1357. In one case, the order is to Walter de Chiriton, "fermor" of customs and subsidies due in all the ports of England, and specifies the name of Katherine's attorney, Henry Picard.
In 1340 the king issued an order to the Exchequer regarding his debts of £21,000 to merchants of Florence and a £900 debt to Clayus Duke, indicating that the money of the subsidy of lambs, fleeces, and sheaves in Wilts, Southampton, Somerset and Dorset and personal taxes in the same counties were to be devoted to repaying these debts and to subsidizing the household expenses of the Duke of Cornwall and the Earl of Chester. In 1341 an even larger debt to "Clayus Duk and other men of Brussels" was recorded, involving about 4000 marks due by the king, in a loan negotiated by Henry de Lancastre.
In all, there seem to have been at least three individuals named "Duc," apparently English, resident in Brussels and in Lombardy, and perhaps in London as well, for purposes of trade. They were doing very well at it. These were William, Clayus, and Thomas. All three appear in surviving records at about A.D.1340. William, in turn, had a daughter, Katherine, apparently resident in England. She was mother of a son, Henry Ester. Her involvement in family financial affairs must have been exceptional for the time.
After 1340, only Katherine and her son, with secondary references to Katherine's father, William, continue to appear in the published government records. This may be due to any number of factors, but the most likely one is unpleasant. In 1349 England experienced its first, very virulent, outbreak of the plague, the Black Death. This struck first and worst in port cities and among those involved with shipping and trade. The absence in the records in following years of the members of the Duke family who were heavily involved in trade could be attributed to this event.

London Again

Thomas Duke, Skinner

There are many references to Thomas Duke of London in the late 14th and early 15th centuries. In 1365, Thomas Duke, with Walter Oxton, Robert Ive, and Richard Olneye (all of London) “mainperned under a pain of £100” (provided bail) for Robert Goderych [Goodrich], ‘skynnere’ of Devon, who was accused by John Pasford, ‘cordewaner’, of trespass. Robert had been outlawed in Devon for failure to appear to answer this charge. Thomas Duke may have known Goderych from common membership in a guild, since Thomas is also described as a ‘skynnere’ in later documents.
In 1374 Thomas Duke, a tenant of a house in the parish of St. Dunstan near Temple Bar, sued regarding obstruction of his right-of-way.
In 1388, Thomas Duke, skinner of London, was order to return to Joan de Salisbury, wife of the late John de Salisbury, knight, the clothing delivered to him by her husband in pledge for a sum of money, as an “order of the king’s kindness.” The clothing in question included “a short cloak of scarlet furred with ‘menever,’ two gowns of ‘baudekyn’ and cloth of gold furred with ‘menever,’ two plain gowns, one of ‘baudekyn’ the other of black velvet, one ‘cote’ of ‘baudkyn’ the other of black velvet, one ‘cot of ‘baudekyn’ furred with ‘pople,’ and one mantle of bluet furred with ‘menever.’”
In 1392 Thomas Duke, ‘skynner,’ provided security, with others, for a writ of supersedeas omnino in favor of John de Middelton of the parish of St. Dunstan in West London. In the same year, John de Middelton, clerk, was sent to the abbot and convent of Thorney, “to take such maintenance in that house as John Duke deceased had at the late king’s command.”
In September 1396 Thomas and his wife, Agnes, citizens of London, were granted papal indulgences, providing that they might choose a confessor, who could grant them absolution and enjoin a penance at the time of death, except in cases reserved to the aspolostic see (the papacy). This was a papal indulgence of the sort that lay at the heart of many of the complaints of the Reformation. However, it was not enough. Thomas and his wife apparently wanted to be very sure of their salvation. In September 1397 they are listed for a different form of indult:
Indults to the underwritten persons to choose their confessor, who may as often as they please, after hearing their confession, grant them absolution and enjoin a salutary penance, except in cases reserved to the apostolic see.
This, a more expensive form of indult, provided for continuing absolution rather than that given only at the time of death.
Thomas Duke and John Twyford of London, esquire, in 1397 provided mainprise (surety) for the commitment to John Michel, king’s serjeant-at-arms, and Thomas Mundevyle,  of a messuage called “Wilbyes” in Edelmeton and Totenham, held in chief by the estate of John, Lord de Beaumond.
In 1402 King Henry IV partially compensated Thomas Duc and John Wodecok for debts that the king was unable to repay at that time:
Grant to John Wodecok, citizen and mercer of London, and Thomas Duc, citizen and skinner of London, who have lent to the king divers sums of money for the wars of Ireland, for which payment cannot at present be made, that in part payment they may collect the sum of 348l. 9s. 6d. from the custom and subsidy of wools, hides, and wool-fells in the port of Chichester by view and testimony of the collectors and controllers.
This Thomas Duke, despite (or perhaps because of) being a “skinner” rather than a “chivaler” was very wealthy. In that year he served as executor for the estate of John Manyngton, late citizen and skinner of London.
A writ issued March 17, 1404, ordered the Sheriff of Wilts, by mainprise of Thomas Duyk 'skynner,' John son of Thomas Duyk, John Hadoun 'draper' and John Trom 'skynner,' all of London, in respect of taking a second time of John Duyk of Chiriton the younger security for keeping peace toward the prior or canons of Lanthony. A similar writ for John Duke of Conok was issued by mainprise of individuals in Suffolk, including Thomas de la Pole, Knight. Conok is an estate within Chirton, a few miles southeast of Devizes, Wiltshire. Conok was held by the Knights Hospitallers until 1324, when it became crown property. Later it was sold to the de la Pole family. Thomas de la Pole was obviously involved as owner of the estate. (It is likely that the dispute involved property lines, since Lanthony owned adjacent lands.) The Dukes of London were probably involved in this affair through kinship with the Wiltshire family.
In 1408 Thomas Duke and his son, John,were again loaning money to the powerful in London, this time £100 to Ralph de Nevylle [Neville], Earl of Westmoreland, and his son, John de Nevylle, knight. Ralph de Neville married Joan Beaufort, daughter of John of Gaunt, and was himself the head of one of England’s most powerful noble families.
English records show that in 1408-09, Thomas Duke and William Norton were sheriffs of London (Middlesex). In 1410 they were involved in efforts to correct proceedings initiated during their tenure in which error had occured.
In 1412, Thomas Duke was a witness to a charter of the lands, rents and services in Somerset and Gloucestershire of Nicholas Morys, granted to Roger Paternoster, chaplain, and William Marchissy, their heirs and assigns.
In the 14th year of Henry IV (1413), Richard Page, esquire, was charged for not appearing to answer Thomas Duke, citizen and skinner of London, touching a debt of £5. 6s. 8d. A similar debt, this time of £40, from William Langbrok was recorded in 1413. In 1413 Thomas Duke also issued with others a writ of mutatis mutandis in favour of William Forster of London.
Thomas Duke witnessed a quitclaim by Rober Thriske, Clerk, to John Deram, esquire, for a manor and lands in Hertfordshire and Middlesex in 1413. Thomas Beaufort, Earl of Dorset, was also a beneficiary. This is, again, a member of John of Gaunt’s extensive family, which he established in very powerful positions before his 1399 death.
On the sixth of May, 1422, Thomas Duke’s will was entered in the London Court of Husting:
Duk (Thomas), skinner.--To be buried in S. Katherine’s Chapel, which he had lately rebuilt, in the church of S. Dunstan West in Fletestret. To Sir John Walshford, perpetual vicar of the said church, and churchwardens of the same, certain rents in the parish of S. Dunstan aforesaid for the maintenance of a chantry for the good of his soul, the souls of Agnes his wife and others, as directed. In default the said rents to go over to the rector and churchwardens of the church of S. Brigid in Fletestret for the maintenance of a chantry in the said church of S. Brigid. To John Duk his son tenements called “le Tabard on the hoop,” “le Crane on the hop,” “le Newe Taverne,” and others in the parishes of S. Brigid and S. Dunstan and elsewhere in tail; remainder in trust for sale for pious and charitable uses. Dated London, 15 April, A.D.1411. [Roll 150(8)].
Despite Thomas’ good intentions, this chantry was not created due to legal ambiguity -- it could not be shown that the vicar of St. Dunstan had been canonically instituted as perpetual vicar. To correct this, William Pepyr, in his will (dated June 8, 1442, and enrolled in the Court of Hustings in 1451) created a chantry in his own name and that of Thomas and Agnes Duke, bequeathing the actual funding of £10/year to the Master of the Mistery of the Craft of Skinners and his successors.
Thomas Duke in 1423 brought a plea with John Wodecok (who had joined Thomas Duke in loaning money to Richard II) and several others, as administrators of the estate of Nicholas Loude of the county of Somerset, against Robert Yevelton, knight, of Wiltshire. Sir Robert was in debt to a long litany of individuals throughout southern England. This is probably a case in which the document was processed after Thomas Duke’s death.

John Duke, Skinner, of Westminster

The preceding records show that Thomas Duke, citizen and skinner of London was assisted in his business affairs by a son, John. This individual appears in the official records as John Duke, 'skinner,' and as John Duke of Westminster.
In 1382 John Duke of Westminster was involved in a writ of supersedeas to the Sheriff of Canterbury. As we shall see in later references, this was a son of Thomas Duke, skinner. William de Skelton, armorer, was among the other witnesses.
John Duke was included in a will of 1391-2 in London. William Power (called “Wodehous”), skinner, provided for aid to the Fraternity of Skinners, in aid of its chaplains. He also left a bequest to Custance, wife of John Duk, and to others. His will gives some insight into the lifestyle of a “skinner” in London at this time, at least those highly placed in the guilds and in the merchant life of the city. He left, besides his real estate and money, silver vessels pertaining to his hall, chamber, pantry, and kitchen.
In 1400, a writ of supersedeas was issued to the sheriffs of London, by mainprise of John Duke 'skynnere,' and others, to free a Robert Norburgh 'skynnere' and Margaret his wife, if taken by the sheriff in connection with a suit by Thomas Tannere of Wells, Somerset, alleging threats.
In 1406, this John Duke again backed a writ of supersedeas, this time to the Sheriff of Northampton on behalf of John Hegge of Hygham at suit of William Hosteler for trespass. In the same year, Richard Duke, 'skynner,' presumably another son of Thomas, backed an order of supersedeas in favour of Walter Parkere, in London. In 1407, it was again John Duke, 'skynner,' who backed a writ of supersedeas for Richard Yve of Sandwich. In 1409 John Duke, 'skynner,' and Robert Austyn, 'coteler,' of London guaranteed 100 marks for the appearance of William Multon, 'coteller,' in chancery to answer charges.

William Duke, Chaplain

In 1389, William Duke, chaplain, with John Welbourne, enfeoffed John de Salisbury, knight, son of John Salesbury, merchant, for the use of 29 acres of land and 6 acres of meadow in Little Merlawe and Cokeham. William was probably a son of Thomas Duke, given the known association at this time between Thomas Duke and the family of John de Salisbury, especially the king's order to Thomas to return the finery of the knight's wife.

William Duk, 'draper'

In 1376 William Duk, 'draper,' was a witness to a quitclaim to Robert de Thame, citizen and mercer of London and Juliana daughter of Thomas de Betoyne sometime citizen of London, by John de Betoyne citizen and painter, regarding the estate of Thomas, father of Julia.

William Duke

In 1391 Thomas Soche was pardoned for the death of William Duke, killed at Brichmanisshaye in Heampton on Sunday before Midsummer, 9 Richard II.

And Other London Residents

In 1334 John Duk was vicar of the church of Great Bursted. Properties previously under his control at Illford (now an eastern suburb of London) were given by Edward III to the convent of Stratford.
In 1338, Stephen Duke appeared as a juror and a witness in murder cases in the Tower District of London.
In 1380 Walter Duke was involved in an attempt to have a debt of £200 repaid by William Brundale, who also owed others, although lesser amounts.
John Ecton, knight, was charged in 1398 with failure to appear to answer charges of Thomas Styward, esquire, and John Duke, citizen and tailor of London, touching a debt of £15 6s. 8d.
In 1453, Agnes Hert of London, widow, listed William Duke, esquire, among beneficiaries of her will.
In 1454, John Duk was a witness of the will of William Chamber, at Ryselp in northwestern Middlesex, at the periphery of London. The beneficiary was William Norton, "of the king's household." Earlier in the century, a William Norton had been sheriff of Middlesex [London] with Thomas Duke. Now, this individual who was probably his son or grandson was a member of the royal household, and still involved with the Duke family.

Bedfordshire

The earliest references to a member of the Duke family in Bedfordshire occur in the Pipe Rolls for 1197 and 1198. The first reference states that "Adam Duke debet dim. m. pro eodem [proprestura]." The second is to the same effect. This apparently refers to Adam Duke's payment of one-half mark tax levied on his men-at-arms to ransom Richard I, who had been captured in France on his return from the Crusades ("de scutagio militum ad redemptionem regis"). It is not clear from the information given in the rolls where in Bedfordshire Adam Duke was located.
There is again no specific location given for the next two generations. In 1252 Ranulphus [Ralph] Duke and his son William were held at the king’s prison at Bedford for the murder of Hunith’ la Walesch’:
De ponendo per Ballium. -- Ricardus Haring’. Ranulphus Duke et Willelmus filius ejus et Ricardus Grim, capti et detenti in prisona regis de Bedeford pro morte Hunith’ la Walesch’, unde rettati sunt, habent litteras vicomiti Bed’ quod ponantur per ballium. Teste ut supra.
In the Hundred Rolls of 1278-9 we find a Thomas Duke:
Thomas le Duke, tenant in Suldrope, Bedfordshire, holding 2 parts of 1 virgate of land (2 virgates?) for 2 shillings a year and works for 12 pence a year.
This is confirmed in the Feudal Aids:
Soldrope.--Willelmus de le Despense, Michael in le Lane, Warinus Duke, Willelmus Bacoun, Willelmus Faber et Robertus Bacoun tenent quartam partem un. f. m. et tenent de priore Hospitales.
Thomas le Duke was a tenant of the Knights Hospitallers of Jerusalem, along with Roger de la Despense and his wife, Joan, who held the advowson of the Suldrope Church. Members of the Despenser family, Hugh the older and younger, were to play an important, if dark, part in English history of this period as favorites of King Edward. It is unclear how the Suldrope branch of the family was related to these.
In 1283, Walter Duke was charged (in company with a variety of others, including Richard, Prior of Bissmede) with the murder of William de Legh, by his mother, Agnes de Legh.
A later individual bearing the Duke name, the heir of Thomas le Duke, has been identified in Bedfordshire in 1302-3:
Warinus Duke [Warren Duke] tenent at Soldrope, Hundredum de Wylie
Suldrope was held by the Prior of Melchbourne, associated with the Knights Hospitallers, by service of one-fourth of a knight’s fee. In 1302 six of the tenants, William de la Despenser, Michael in Le Lane, Warin Duke, William Bacon, William Faber and Robert Bacon, combined to render this service. However, in 1340 no member of the Duke family is among those listed among the parties responsible for accounting for the taxes of the parish. This is not conclusive evidence that no adult male member of the family continued to live there, but it is likely, especially in the absence of any later references to the Duke family at Soldroup.
In 1341 the Calendar of Patent Rolls  reviewed the amercements for the liberties allowed in the Exchequer to the prior and convent of Dunstaple, Bedfordshire, by virtue of royal charters. This noted that in the great roll of the thirteenth year of Edward III:
Idem vicecomes reddit compotum de xs. de Andrea et Willelmo Lestauurs quia non habent. Et dimidia marca de Herberto le Tanour pro eodem. Et dimidia marca pro Martino le Duc pro transgressione. Et de iiijs. de Gregorio de Barton pro falsa mensura. Et de xs. de Galfrido de Isileye pro panno vendito …
Martin le Duc was fined half a mark for a transgression of some sort.

Huntingdonshire

The Duke family was also found in the adjacent county of Huntingdonshire. This is first indicated by an unfortunate reference in 1310:
John Sweyn, of Newenton Blosmevill, and Jul[iana] his wife, and Richard son of John Douce, of Catteworth, in the king’s prison of Huntingdon for the death of an unknown man and woman, have letters to the sheriff of Huntingdon to bail them until the first assize.
Quite a few of the Duke family appear in the 1327 lay subsidy rolls for that county, but not the Richard mentioned above.

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
Leightonstone	Spaldwick	William	20d
Leightonstone	Spaldwick	Adam	15d
Leightonstone	Old Weston	Alan	12d
Leightonstone	Old Weston	Godfrey, sen.	6d
Leightonstone	Old Weston	Godfrey	2s. 0d
Leightonstone	Ellington	Walter	15d
Leightonstone	Ellington	Thomas (ob.)	9d.

Oxfordshire and Warwickshire

Many references suggest close ties between the Oxfordshire and Warwickshire branches of the Duke family. The earliest reference for these counties is in Warwickshire, where in 1200 we find Henricus Dukes paying a half mark fine for having been among those depriving Simon de Barton of his land rights.
In the very fragmentary Hundred Rolls of 1279-81 for Warwickshire (there are only two hundreds extant), we find Henricus Duke in Wynderton, Warwick, holding 1 virgate of land for 12 s., from Roger de Clifford, who was associated with the Earl of Warwick. Jordanus Doke and Petronella Duke each held 1 virgate in Brailes for 27 d. Isabella Duke held a virgate in Kineton Hundred from the Earl of Warwick.
The hundred rolls from which the following references are taken were assembled in the seventh and eighth years of Edward I's reign, 1281-1282:
the wife and son of Hugh le Duk, tenant-in-chief of property in the town of Oxford, under the Priory of Stodleye and the Priory of Goringes, in Oxfordshire;
William le Duke, tenant in the Ewelme Half-Hundred, Oxfordshire, holding “j di’ acam” (half an acre plot?) for “tre p iiij d. p ann”
Ewelme, where William le Duc was located, is southeast of the town of Oxford, a linear hundred that in its eastern portions touches on the Thames.

Robert le Duc, Heir of Roger

In 1237, there is a reference to Roger le Duc, and to Robert le Duc, his “predicted” heir, in Oxfordshire:
Johannes filius Alani tenet iij. partes ville de Kaldemorton … . Et iiijtam partem dedit dictus comes abbati de Sancto Jocio pro x.l. terre quam dictus abbas dedit Rogero le Duc per servicium c.s. per annum, et modo eam tenet Robertus le Duc, heres predicti Rogeri le Duc.
At this time Roger and Robert le Duc each held one quarter of the town of Kaldemorton in Bloxham Hundred in return for knight's service. Bloxham Hundred is in the north-central portion of Oxfordshire, a finger of land between Warwickshire and Northamptonshire.
Slightly later, we find in the Receipt and Issue Rolls for Michaelmas Term, 1241, the following Oxfordshire reference to an heir of Roger le Duc, presumably Robert:
Oxon’   De hered’ Rogeri le Duc j m. de fine pro Judeis
Oxon’   De heredibus Rogeri le Duck’ j m. de debito Ide de Haverhull’
The receipt and issue rolls were listings of payments into the Royal Exchequer by sheriffs, often on behalf of others. The first reference above may refer to payment of one mark by Roger le Duc on behalf of individuals subject to a special tax levied on Jews in England at this time. The second refers to “Haverhull.” The closest equivalent place name found by the author is “Haverhill,” which is in Suffolk about 20 miles southeast of the town of Cambridge, in Cambridgeshire.
In 1268 Robert Duke was one of those commissioned to assess the estate and the heir of Sir John de Baillol for the crown.
These references to the Duke family are followed by later listings in the hundred rolls of Edward I. The hundred rolls from which the following reference is taken were assembled in the seventh and eighth years of Edward I's reign, 1281-1282:
Robert le Duke, tenant in the hundred of Chadlington, Oxfordshire, holding 1/2 virgate for which he pays 4s 3d a year, plus other properties;
Chadlington is immediately south of Bloxham Hundred.

The Duke Family in the Ewelme Hundred

William le Duke (of the 1280 hundred rolls) was clearly not farming in this area; one-half acre would scarcely support a single person. It is more likely that this was a home, without farmland, chosen for its ease of access to London. At this time travel to London was easiest by barge along the Thames.

The Duke Family at Oxford

The “wife and son of Hugh” mentioned in the 1280 hundred rolls were living in the town of Oxford. Soon, others in the same areas can be identified.
In 1294 John le Duk of Goseford, with Walter de Wycthille, John Phelip, John de Crokesford and Henry de la Chaumbre acknowledged that they owed Walter, Abbot of Westminster, 88 marks [a very considerable sum at the time], to be levied, in default of payment, of their lands and chattels in co. Oxford. Goseford is located 4.5 miles from the town of Oxford.

The Duke Family at Wretchwick

The family of Hugh le Duc established a branch in eastern Oxfordshire, as this reference in Index of Names in Oxfordshire Charters  shows:
Duk' (Hugh le), of Wrecchewyk. Tackley grants to (1314), MS. Top. gen. c. 39 (30-31).
Wrecchewyk, or Wretchwick, was in the Ploughly Hundred, in Bicester; it was held by Bichester Priory, itself controlled by the Priory of Tackley, in Essex, as part of the Honor of St. Valery.
In 1323 a commission of oyer and terminer was issued on complaint of William Aylmer, parson of the church at Datyngton, that a very large number of individuals, among them Hugh and Richard le Duk', broke into his houses at Dadynton and Caveresham, co. Oxford, and carried away his goods. A similar charge was made in the same year against these individuals. Richard was probably a son of Hugh. One interesting aspect of these charges was the enforcement of this commission by John le Botiller of Lanultut, with several others. An individual of the same name earlier appeared as leader of a group in which Henry Duke participated in the Forest of Dene, west of the Severn, an incident to be dealt with in the discussion of the family in Gloucestershire.
The Duke family, apparently the Wretchwick branch, continued to be represented in Oxfordshire for several centuries. Richard Duke is among those identified as commissioners for the Inquisition of 1517 in Oxfordshire. Later, a Richard Duke was in residence at Newton Manor in Oxfordshire by 1523. Newton Purcell is six miles north-east of Bicester. Newton was held by Oseney Abbey, and was part of the Honor of St. Valery, which eventually was incorporated into the Honor of Wallingford, held in the 14th century by Richard of Cornwall and his successor, Edmond.
Richard Duke was in residence at Newton by 1523. John Duke, perhaps Richard’s grandson, held the manor in 1552, and Roger Duke in 1559. His successor Paul Duke, with his wife Sabina, sold the manor to John Sill in 1596.
This family also held property at Frankton, Warwickshire, acquired through marriage in the early 16th century. Frankton was held by the Priory of Coventry until the dissolution, but the Botillier family (see above) was a principal tenant at Frankton of the priory. Richard Duke was present in 1529; his interest in the property was subsequently held by his sons, Richard and John (died 1565) and his wife Margaret. In 1652 Roger Duke sold the property, although this was later disputed.

The Duke Family at Sandford

In 1361 there is a reference to the Duke family in north-central Oxfordshire:
Oxon - P’cept Nicho de Someton et Johi Duke consanguin’ et her’ Thome Duke def de uno mesuagio et duab, virgatis tre cum ptin’ in Sandford q’ de R. tenent’ in capite.
This indicates that John Duke, blood relative and heir of Thomas Duke, held an estate that included a residence (or a site for a residence) and three virgates of land in Sandford, Oxfordshire, (apparently the northern Sandford, rather than another located south of the town of Oxford) as tenants-in-chief of the king, in return for military service.
In 1376 a John Duk, probably the same individual identified previously as the heir of Thomas, was charged with having "intruded himself into a messuage and two virgates of land in Sandford [Oxfordshire] after the death of John Carter of Sandford, who held the same of the king in chief, and … the same John Duk immediately after the death of John Carter married Margery late the wife of the said John … without the king's license." He was afterward granted a messuage and 2 virgates of land in Sandford, in accordance with letters patent of pardon in his favour; as the king had taken his homage and fealty.
In 1380, Henry Duke of Spellesbury, near Chadlington, was pardoned, after the intervention of the Earl of Warwickshire, for having stolen 14 sheep, valued at 20s, at Chadlington, from Richard Whytefeld. An Earl seems a rather heavy gun to bring into a charge of ovine theft, but medieval justice could be heavy and perhaps this was warranted. In any case, this reference is interesting in connection with the earlier presence of Henry le Duc in Warwickshire, and later evidence that this family held property simultaneously in both Oxfordshire and Warwickshire.
In 1398, John Duke was appointed a tax commissioner responsible with others for delivery of Oxfordshire taxes to the royal Exchequer.
The Duke family continued to occasionally fall afoul of the king’s rights in Oxfordshire. In 1420 it was recorded that:

 

John Duke son of John Duke of Sandford the younger and Katharine his wife, daughter of Richard Bray of Shutford, lately acquired to themselves and the heirs of their bodies from John Duke of Sandford a messuage and two virgates of land in Sandford and Leedwell, held of the king in chief, and entered thereon without license; the king, for 13s 4d. paid in the hanaper, pardons the trespass in this.
One probable family member is difficult to place within this scheme. John “Doke” was granted a general pardon in 1346 for his participation in the French wars, presumably including the battle of Crécy, on the testimony of the Earl of Warwick.
To continue our picture of this branch of the family in eastern England, we must add Essex to the list of counties to be considered.

Essex

Essex is immediately northeast of London, extending to the English Channel in the east and to Hertfordshire in the west.

Springfield

The Duke family was present in Essex quite early.The Place-Names of Essex records that John le Duk held land at Springfield in 1239, according to unpublished feet of fines in the Public Record Office. However, this John Duke was eventually unfortunate. In 1269, John Quiting was pardoned, at the instance of William de Faukham, for the death of John le Duk "and any consequent outlawry."
John le Duk left heirs, among them a son named John. This is revealed in another tragic record preserved in the Patent Rolls. This listing appeared in 1300:
The like [pardon] to Thomas de Clavering of the county of Hertford, by reason of like services, for the rape and death of Juliana daughter of John le Duc, and of his outlawry for the same.
Hertford is immediately north of London. The pardon was given for service in the king’s war in Scotland; it is unlikely that the family of John le Duc was consulted about whether this represented adequate justice.
Rape is not a crime limited to young victims. However, it is likely that Juliana was young, having been referred to through reference to her father rather than a husband. Therefore, there was a John Duke who succeeded his father at Springfield, and this John Duke married and had at least one child.
A second individual whose age is consistent with his having been a son of the second John Duke at Springfield appears as the heir to that estate. In 1328 Richard Duke testified to the age of Margaret de Bovill, daughter of John de Bovill. He indicated at that time that he was 50 years old, and therefore born in about 1278. Richard Duke was at the time the king’s bailiff at Chelmsford.
In 1361, a younger Richard Duk swore homage and fealty to Edward III [as a tenant in capite] and was granted a fourth part of a manor at Springfield, Essex, (one mile northeast of Chelmsford) in return for service of a fourth part of a knight's fee, as a consequence of the inheritance of this share by his wife, Margaret Wendovere, whose mother, Elizabeth Wendovere, wife of Peter de Wendovere, had been a tenant-in-chief under the crown. This apparently supplemented a much older family holding in the area, according to the report in Place-Names of Essex. Two homes listed in the Springfield area, Springfield Dukes and Duke’s, are associated with the family.
This was probably the same Richard Duke who was a witness in 1369 to a charter for a hall with chambers and a kitchen in the manor of Springfield, to Robert de Bradenham from John, son  and heir of Sir John de Goldyngton, knight.

Widdington

John Duke of Essex served at Crécy and Calais, and in 1347 was with many others granted a pardon for his service, provided he continued to provide military service in France, apparently indefinitely. Edward III issued these pardons from Calais:
Pardon, for good service in the war of France, to John son of William Whyssh of Donecastre, co. York, of the king’s suit against him for any homicides, felonies, robberies and trespasses in England before 4 September last, and of any consequent outlawries; on condition that so long as the king be on this side the seas he do not withdraw from his service without licence. By K. and testimony of William atta Wode.
The like to the following: --
Thomas de Bernadby …
John Duk of the county of Essex. By K. and testimony of William Trussebut.
There is no indication in the published record of what specific offense required pardon. This John Duke seems to have established a home at Widdington, Essex. However, William Trussebut, who testified to his service, was of the retinue of William de Bohun, Earl of Northampton.
In 1367 John Duk the younger [implying the existence of an elder, probably the same individual who served at Crécy] and his heirs were granted free warren of their demesne lands of Wedyton, Essex, by Edward III. Wedyton (Widdington) is in northwestern Essex. Prior’s Hall and Prior’s Wood appear to be the portions of the property held by the Priory of Tackle(y) in Essex, in turn held by the French Prior of St. Valery as a consequence of a donation by William I.
In 1380 and in 1384 John Duke of Essex is mentioned in connection with Tackle(y) grants.   In 1390, John Duke was commissioned with others to convene a jury of Middlesex and Essex touching waste and dilapidation at the alien priory of Takley, in the king’s hand on account of the war with France.
John Duke was a commissioner of array for Essex, responsible for conscripting troops for the king’s military service, in 1384.   His companions in this post were very distinguished, including the earls of both Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire (who do not appear on the lists for their own counties) and a member of the Bouchier family, later earls of Essex.
In 1398, John Duke was among those assigned by Richard II to provide to the Exchequer £2000 from the county of Essex.
In 1399, John Duke and all others present in earlier royal commissions in Essex are absent. This may relate to the radical change in royal government at this time. In 1399 Richard II was deposed, and murdered. Henry IV took his place, establishing the Lancastrian dynasty on the throne of England for many decades.
Richard II exempted John Duke of Wydyton from unwilling appointment to a wide range of positions, apparently in recognition of prior service. In 1400, this was confirmed by Henry IV:
Exemption for life of John Duc of Wydyton from being put on assizes, juries, inquisitions or recognitions and from being made mayor, sheriff, escheator, coroner, justice of the peace or of labourers, collector of tenths, fifteenths or subsidies, taxer, trier, assessor, captain or governor of men at arms, hobelers or archers or other bailiff or minister of the king against his will.
This confirmed an earlier statement to the same effect by Richard II.
In 1399, Guy Duke went on Richard II’s Irish campaign. In 1402, Guy Duke of Essex gave recognisance for 100s. to Robert Ramsey. In 1403 Guy Duke of Essex gave recognisance for 350 marks to Nicholas Wolbergh, citizen and fishmonger of London. This is doubtless the same Guy Duke who served with Bouchier at the Battle of Agincourt in 1415.
John Duke reappears in a 1405 reference:
John Lerlyngton and William Folborne to John Duke of Weditone. Recognisance for 56s. 8 d. payable a month after Easter next, to be levied etc. in the county of [left blank].
The said John and William to John Duke of Weditone. (like) recognisance for 56s. 8d payable a month after Michaelmas next. [county again left blank]
It is unfortunate that this reference omits an intended reference to the county, since there are quite a few locations named “Weditone” in late medieval England. However, the Essex location is the only one of these known to have been the residence of a Duke family, and specifically a John Duke, at this time.
After 1405 there are no more references to the Duke family at Weddington.

Norfolk

In 1320, William Duk was a witness, in Norwich, to a grant to Sibton (Sybeton') convent. There is no information about the home of this individual.
In 1337 William, son of Agatha Duke of Castelacre, was pardoned, with Henry atte Cros, chaplain, for acquiring in fee from William Bony two messuages in Swasham, without license from the king, who had granted them to John, Duke of Brittany and Earl of Richmond. They paid a one-half mark fine. The tenants-in-capite of Castle Acre were the de Warennes, Earls of Surrey.
In 1410, Robert Portyr of Wroxham was charged with not appearing before the justices of the Bench of Richard II to answer Walter Duk of Norfolk touching a debt of 6 marks. This apparently refers to the same Walter Duke found in Suffolk, after his acquisition of Norfolk properties.
Adam Duke of Wabrunne [Weybourne, Norfolk] in 1340 was pardoned by Edward III, by virtue of his military service overseas for the king and a commitment to return if necessary, for the death of Thomas Reynold of Wabrunne, and a trespass against John de Ormesby, knight.
The Norfolk family shares with those of Surrey and that of Dorset (to be discussed below) an association with John de Warenne (John de Garenne), Earl of Surrey, which may be an important clue to their identity. It is quite possible that the same individuals owned land in these various counties, as a consequence of that association.

Cambridgeshire

Southern Cambridgeshire

The history of the Duke family in Cambridgeshire is begins in the early 13th century, but the record is sporadic and some references to the family here do not necessarily represent local individuals.
The earliest record in Cambridgeshire is that of Arnold de Dukes, recorded in 1200. William and Robert were identified as sons of Arnold. This is almost certainly an unrelated family; the “de Dukes” suggests the independent development of a similar surname.
In the Hundred Rolls of 1280, Thomas Duke is listed as holding several cottages in the Fulbourne, Cambridgeshire, area, very near the town of Cambridge. At the same time, John Duke held a messuage and 8 acres of land at Eltisley, in the Hundred of Stowe, west of Cambridge. Eltisley was held by the crown, but the Prioress of Huntingdon appears to have beentenant in capite by 1340.
In 1322 a commission of oyer and terminer was issued stating that a large number of persons representing the town of Cambridge:
… attacked and spoiled divers inns of the masters and scholars of the University, climbed the walls, broke the doors, and windows, mounted by ladders into the solers and assaulted the said masters and scholars, imprisoned some, mutilated others of their members, and killed William de Shelton, parson of the church of Welton, carried away all they could of the books and other goods of all the masters and scholars, so that no person dare go to the University of the said town for study.
Geoffrey Duk' was among those accused of these crimes.
In the same year Geoffrey Duk' was again part of a large number of individuals charged with assaulting and wounding Arnold de Tyle, clerk, at his inn at Cambridge, taking away his goods. He was not a member of our Duke family. “Duk’” is a standard abbreviation in the various Rolls documents for “Duket,” a separate family in this area.
This sort of behavior was apparently regrettably common, even among "good" families, during the 14th century:
Most of the local disorders had no political significance at all: they were due simply to lack of governance or abuse of authority, occasionally to vaulting ambition; more frequently the troubles were incidents in a long-standing feud with neighbors … .
As soon as we dig below the surface in any county it appears to be crawling with miscreants, robbers, renegade clergy, faithless knights, and rascals of every complexion -- king's men gone wrong or Lancastrians without a master.
Later, it is clear that the family attitude towards the University was not so negative. The earliest recorded member of the family to attend college was Richard Duke, who was admitted to King's Hall, Cambridge, on May 10, 1362, where he remained until his death on June 16, 1369. At this time higher education was pursued principally by the clergy. He might have been from this branch of the family.
Edward III, in 1364, granted licence for the alienation in mortmain by William de Horwode of Cambridge to the master and scholars of the house of Corpus Christi and St. Mary, Cambridge, of five messuages and eight cottages in Cambridge, and the reversion of a messuage and two void places there which Mariota Duke held for life, all of these held of the king in burgage for 26s. 8d. yearly.
In 1351 this Mariota Duk and many others were charged with ravishing Pernell le Enveyse of Waledene, abducting her with her husband’s goods.

Northern Cambridgeshire and Thorney

In 1368, John Duke surrendered a 100s. annuity from Edward III in return for life maintenance at the convent at Thorneye. Thorney is in northern Cambridgeshire. He died before 1392, when Edward III ordered that John Middelton, clerk, be given the place at Thorneye previously held by John Duke, and certainly before 1401, when yet another individual, William Storthwot, the king's clerk, was placed at Thorneye in the place formerly held by John Duke. This was a form of retirement, rather than an indication of choosing a monastic life, and would have been especially suitable for those who were injured and unable to continue their chosen profession. During the Hundred Years War, on-the-job injuries were not uncommon for the king’s servants.
In 1405 a notice appeared regarding this same John Duke, apparently resolving issues of his estate:
John Duke late serjeant of King Edward to Thomas now abbot of Thorneye and the convent and to their successors. Surrender of his estate in a yearly rent of 100s. and a gown or 1 mark for it, to  him granted in that monastery for life by brother John late abbot thereof and the convent at request of the said king; and general release of all actions real and personal. Dated Thorneye, 7 November 7 Henry VI. Memorandum of acknowledgment, 19 November.
In 1418 there is a record of the residence of a John Duke in Ely, in a complex record of properties in that city subject to the Bishop of Ely.

Hertford

Hertfordshire is immediately west of Essex, and southwest of Cambridgeshire. The western boundary of the county is therefore very near the home of John Duke of Widdington and of Geoffrey and Mariotta of Cambridge.
In 1320, Stephen le Duk was among those cited for breaking into the house of Jordon Moraunt, king’s clerk and parson of the church of Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, and stealing goods there. Interestingly, another parson also participated in this, along with about 100 others. This individual could be of the Hertfordshire or the Essex families.
The Hertfordshire record casts doubt on some of the other presumed members of the Duke family, along with this one. In 1220, there is a Hertfordshire reference to “Gaufridus filius Mariote” of Hertford. We later find Mariote Duke in the Widdington, Essex, area, and Geoffrey Duke in Cambridge, only a few miles away.

Surrey

In 1321, William Duuk of Dorking, Surrey, (immediately south of London) was pardoned, with many others, for actions against Hugh le Despenser, the senior and the younger, alleged to have been led by Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex. The actions for which he was cited were apparently part of a larger opposition by the barons that had developed against the older and younger Hugh le Despenser, who were hanged after the king was deposed. The Duke of Lancaster had a pivotal role in inciting the barons and their followers to unite against the Despensers. The most significant point regarding this incident is the probable association of William Duuk with the Earl of Surrey, John de Warenne. Much of the property in Dorking was controlled directly by de Warenne.
On July 10, 1380, Walter Brundale was charged with failing to appear regarding a debt of £200 to Walter Duke. In 1381, Walter Duke was a witness to a charter of feoffment for lands in Surrey, in Westminster.
In 1455, John Duke of Southwark, Surrey, was charged with failing to appear regarding a debt of £21 5s. 4d. Southwark is south of the Thames, immediately opposite the City of London.

Suffolk

A substantial branch of the Duke family was established in the county of Suffolk during the 14th century. A lineage of this family has been given by Walter Garland Duke.
The early experience of the Duke family in Suffolk does not appear to have been very fortunate. In 1278, William le Gardener, imprisoned at Ipswich for the death of Robert le Duk, made bail.
In 1374 Ralph de Shelton, knight of Norfolk, was involved in a case against William Assheman, who had been charged with threatening Walter Duke of Suffolk.
In 1377, Walter Duke of Suffolk was appointed a tax commissioner for an assessment of knight's fees. This appears to be the same Walter Duke who did homage for his land in Shadingfield at Framlingham Castle during the reign of Edward III, and was said to have been a grandson of Roger le Duke, Mayor of London in 1230. The time elapsed between Roger and Walter does not encourage this interpretation, however. There is a gap of 147 years between the AD 1230 end of Roger le Duke's tenure as Mayor of London and the 1377 appearance of Walter Duke in Suffolk records.
In 1382, and again in 1383, Robert Duke of Suffolk was appointed a tax commissioner of Suffolk.
In 1384 Simon Duke of St. Edmond [Bury St. Edmonds] was one of hundreds compelled to  a recognisance of £10,000 to make no insurrection against the abbot and convent of St. Edmonds.
In 1413, Robert Duk was a witness in London to a charter of a tenement of 5 acres in Sotirlee [4.5 miles northeast of Beccles, in East Suffolk] and Senstede, and a charter of a great number of properties in the same area.
In 1414 John Duke, master of the hospital of St. Nicholas Bury St. Edmunds, obtained a writ to the sheriff of Suffolk to set free his cattle, taken unlawfully by Nicholas Coners of Berton by Bury, Esquire.
The subsequent history of the Suffolk family (or at least of principal heirs) is relatively well documented. Walter was succeeded by Roger Duke and he was succeeded in turn by his son, Robert Duke. Robert Duke held the lands in Shadingfield, including 4 knights' fees in Shadingfield, Brosyerde, Swyftlynge, and Ryngstede, in the eleventh year of the reign of Henry VI (AD 1433). These were held of the Mowbrays, Dukes of Suffolk at this time. His wife, Alice, died in 1437. His son, John Duke of Brampton, married Joan Park, daughter of William de la Park, gentleman, and was Lord of the Manor of Aslacton, in Norfolk, and of Ilketshall, in Suffolk, in 1445.
This line eventually led to the only branch of the family (other than that of Devon, in the 20th century) known to have actually acquired a title, that of baron, but the line is now extinct.
The Duke family of Suffolk has a long record of involvement in trade and merchant affairs. Hugh atte Fenne of Yarmouth, written in 1476, recorded business dealings with Thomas Duke and his close relatives Thomas Playter and John Russe.
The Duke family of Suffolk does not seem to have been very active in the English Civil War, except for George Duke of Wandsworth, son of George Duke of Suffolk (d. 1551) and Anne Bleverhaysset, and husband of Katharine Braham or Barham, daughter of Richard Barham of Wandsworth. At the time of the restoration of the crown, George Duke made a statement indicating his suffering in support of the monarchy, and consequently his worthiness for the position of Secretary to the Council for Trade, a position which he was granted:
Engaged in the late wars, but was taken prisoner in December, 1646, kept in the New Prison, near Thames Street, on pump water and pottage till April, 1647, and then turned out, half dead and naked, into Lambeth Fields. Made his way back to Windsor where he lived, and engaged in a design, which was long continued, to surprise the castle for the King; had spies at the Council of State and Cromwell’s Council and spent large sums on intelligence and holding correspondence with His Majesty and his friends. Raised 500 men for Sir George Booth’s rising. Has often helped the King’s friends with necessaries and money, and thus spent 20 years and most of his fortune, having also lost £3000 purchase money and £1200 a year, by suppresion of his office in the Starchamber.
Later, George Duke of Wandsworth was again rewarded. On 14 Mar 1664  King Charles II recommended him to the Duke of York, Governor, and the Assistants of the Royal Fishing Company, identifying him as the late secretary of the Committee for Trade, “to be entertained by them in the same post, for which he is particularly fitted.” Two of his sons were graduated from Oxford University: Edward, third son of George Duke of Wandsworth, received a D. Med. from Gloucester Hall 9 Aug 1660 and was made an honorary fellow of the College of Physicians 1664; and William, matriculated Christ Church 3 Jul 1663, aged 18, B.A. 1667, M.A. 23 Mar 1669-70.
George Duke’s marriage to Katharine Braham is of interest. Evelyn Brandenberger believed that a Mary Barham was wife of Thomas Duke, founder of the Virginia Duke family, but has since found that the Mary Barham who was sister of Anthony Barham of Virginia died in England, and too soon to have been the Mary who married Thomas Duke of Virginia. Thomas Duke married Marie Barham in Surrey County, England, on 12 Nov 1633.
The will of “Anthony Barham, Gent. of Mulberry Island in Virginia at present residing in England” was dated September 6, 1641. It was proved in London in 1642 by “friends Edward Maior and William Butler,” both of whom were mentioned as legatees in the will. Others mentioned include Edward Aldey (Awtley), minister of St. Andrews in Canterbury; wife Elizabeth; daughter Elizabeth, “Mother (mother-in-law) Bennet” and “Brother-in-law richard Bennett (son of Thomas Bennett); sister Graves and her son; “my sister Mary Duke” as well as Joane Pierce and Mr. William Pierce (son of Captain William Pierce). He also mentions money due him from Thomas Lyne. Brandenberger found that Anthony Barham came to Virginia on the Abigail in 1621. He was one of the inhabitants of the William Pierce Plantation on the Muster of 1624/25, and the will of Ann Barham, his mother, establishes that he was in Virginia in 1640. The nuncupative will of Ann Barham of the City of Canterberry, Kent, widow (mother of Anthony), dated June 21, 1640, was proved in court on the 13th of July the same year. In it she bequeathed to her daughter Mrs. Graves, “to Anthony Barham now in Virginia” money in the hands of Thomas Lyne (Perogative Court of Canterberry, Coventry 102).
On the other hand, Brandenberger identifies other connections between the Duke family of Kent and the Barhams. Sir Martin Barham, eldest son of Sir Francis Barham lived in County Kent. His first wife was Ursula Rudstone, a relative of Anne Rudstone, daugher of Isaac Rudstone of Boughton Manchensie. Anne maried second William Duke, Esq., of Richmond Surry, son of Thomas Duke of Aylesford Kent.

Other Branches

In some English counties there are branches of the Duke family that appear in the late 12th century, and probably represent groups derived from cousins or even brothers of the Roger le Duc who was sheriff of London under Richard I.

Sussex

In 1343, the king promised Robert le Duk of Angemeryng [Angmering, 3 miles NE of Littlehampton, Sussex] payment of £23 6s. 4 1/2 d. due for five sacks, forty-three cloves, of his wool, at 6 marks the sack, taken by Hugh Boucy and his fellows, lately appointed to take for the king a moiety of the wool in the county of Sussex.
In 1383, a Walter Duke was involved in a suit for trespass in Sussex.

The Family of Ralph Duke in Buckinghamshire

Earlier references noted the presence of Radulphus Dux in Buckinghamshire in 1198.
In 1237 we find another reference to the le Duc family in Buckinghamshire. John le Duc and Alexander le Duc were burgesses of the town of Wycumbe in southwestern Buckinghamshire, near the Oxfordshire border.
In 1272, the sheriff of Bucks was order to hold Raph Bagge and Thomas le Fevre at Saint Albans (immediately north of London) for the murder of John Duke.

Kent

The Duke family in Surrey and Kent could be an off-shoot of the London family; Surrey is immediately south of London. Dorking, where one individual is identified, is now a southern London suburb.
In 1247 Nicholas le Duc is recorded as having held a messuage (with water rights and a mill) near Ospringe, Kent, which was 0.5 miles north of Haversham.
Henry Duk(es) was among the many charged in 1318 with surrounding the dwelling of the Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, at Salmanston, Kent, attempting to burn the manor, and succeeding in felling trees and destroying ploughs, carts, and harnesses. This was followed by besieging Henry de Newenton, a monk, in the abbot's home at Clyvesende, removing the roof and wrecking the houses, imprisoning the monk.

Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, and the far North

Other Duke families, especially in the northern counties, do not appear to have been related to the Norman family that originated in London.
In 1229 Robert Duk was among many individuals listed for military service, from Lincolnshire.
In 1242 an Alan Duc is mentioned in Navenby, Lincolnshire.
In 1274, Richard le Duk of Wissenden, a town that was then in Rutland but now is in Leicestershire, was imprisoned at Ocham for the death of Thomas de Assewell, and made bail.
In the Hundred Rolls we find a number of individuals in Lincolnshire. “Ranulphs sviens Nichi Duke” is listed as bailing out an imprisoned felon, Stepho Schankes, in that county. Walter Duke, in the Hundred of Beltslawe, is listed as having been unjustly imprisoned for military service.
It was noted earlier that a Reginald le Duc, probably a member of the Norman family, was recorded in an early Yorkshire reference. It is nevertheless doubtful that later Yorkshire references are connected to this family. In 1348, Thomas “Duck” was charged with being among those who hunted in the park of Peter de Malo Lacu, assaulting his servants. In 1360, Thomas Duk, ‘sadeler,’ of Richmond, Yorkshire, was found to have acted in self-defense in the death of Richard de Aton of Richmond, also a “sadeler.”

Putting It All Together

By A.D.1300 the Duke family had expanded into many areas in southern England. The Norman family identified with Roger le Duc of London was especially conspicuous in several locations besides Suffolk. In Oxfordshire and Warwickshire we find branches of the family first identified with Robert le Duc, heir of Roger. This family was associated in some way with the Earl of Warwickshire. It persisted until at least the 17th century. Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire were home to yet another branch, with probable ties to the Oxfordshire line.
The remaining family of the Duke name in southeastern England was centered in London. Its specific relationship to the others has not been discovered, but there is evidence that this group continued without significant interruption from the time of Roger le Duc in London. In about 1340 at least three members of the family (William, Thomas, and Clayus or Clays le Duc) resided in Brussels and in Lombardy, and were engaged in the wool trade. This branch of the family was heavily involved in providing financing to Edward III during the years 1339-1340.
Somewhat later the London family included a member of the late medieval guilds of London who also was sufficiently wealthy to provide a significant part of the financing for the crown’s military ventures, in this case Richard II’s war in Ireland. Thomas Duke 'skinner' had ties to Devonshire and other southwestern counties of England, including a John Duke of Chiriton, Wiltshire. Thomas Duke became Sheriff of London in 1408-09, and died in 1422. His son, John, may have moved to Southampton sometime between 1408 and 1412.
The other London-based family members of this time period were associated with the royal household. Both were named John Duke or le Duc. The oldest, apparently a serjeant and yeoman of the king's household, was provided with maintenance for life at the priory of Thorney in 1368; this was probably a form of retirement benefit. The middle individual was a yeoman of the king's household under Edward III in 1361 and in 1370 was promoted to "esquire" of the king's household.
Finally, in 1404 John Duke, groom of the king's chamber, was appointed to another position, bailiff itinerant in Wilts. This might have been a form of retirement as well, but seems an unlikely position for an older man, requiring frequent travel throughout the county. In addition, the position of “groom of the king’s chamber” was lower than that held by the earlier John Duke, who was appointed a king’s esquire. This was yet another, younger John Duke who began to receive royal benefits in the early 15th century and was then appointed to the Wiltshire position.

The Duke Family in Southwestern England

The history of the Duke family in southwestern England does not seem to be earlier than the 13th century. The principal early evidence of the Duke family in this region relates, once more, to Roger le Duc, Lord Mayor of London in 1227-1230. However, the family is absent from the available records during a fairly prolonged period.
Although some still-hidden information may appear, at present it seems that the real settlement of the Duke family in southwestern England dates from the 50-year period after the 1280 hundred rolls, and especially to the period 1280-1300. By the time of the 1332 lay subsidy (moveable property tax) rolls, there are many Duke listings, concentrated heavily in Wiltshire.

The Southwestern Roots of the Duke Family

The Duke family of Devonshire has been described as one whose members were descendants of Norman knights, who were not in the forefront of political events but "who went on century after century to till their land, serve in Parliament, and obediently ride off to die in foreign wars." These country squires obtained university educations, frequently were members of the Inns of Court, and undertook responsible positions of public service, but they were not among the titled nobility.

Wiltshire

The Duke family first appears in Wiltshire in the 14th century; it is not present in the Hundred Rolls of 1279-81. When the 1332 tax rolls were made, the Duke family had expanded to include at least 8 adults holding significant amounts of property, scattered throughout the county.
One of the earliest reference probably does not involve a Wiltshire resident. Nicholas le Duk (see Gloucestershire) was charged with many others for breaking into houses at Sevenhampton and Heyworth, Wilts, and carrying away goods. This could easily be the Nicholas Duke of Gloucestershire found in the tax rolls for that county, since these locations are quite near one another. The Wiltshire tax rolls provide a different cast of characters.

The 1332 Tax Rolls

In 1332 Wiltshire tax roles show that at least five and perhaps as many as 12 individuals with the name Duke (in some cases still in its Norman form) held property in Wiltshire:

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
South
Mere	Zeals (Sceles)	John Duke	22 3/4 d
“	“	William Duke	12d
Frustfield	Whelpley	William Duke	12 d
Dunworth	Tisbury	William Duke	8s 0d
Alderbury	Winterborne Dauntsey	Henry Duke	3s 4d
Central
Dole	Tilshead	Sibyl la Dukes	5s 0d
Swanborough	Wilcot (Wylcote)	William le Douke	12 d
Studfold	[All] Cannings	Geoffrey le Duke	5 s 0 d
West Central
Startley	Christian Malford	William Duke	20 d
Startley	Christian Malford	Roger Douce	18 d
Chippenham	Corsham	John Duyke	3 s 11/4 d
Chippenham	Kington Michael	Richard Doke	12 d
North
Chedglow	Sutton	Peter Ducke	12d
Chedglow	Crudwell	John Duke	16 d

Individuals might appear in the tax lists for multiple hundreds and villages, if they possessed property in multiple areas. It is especially unlikely that each reference to William or John Duke is independent; these are almost certainly indicative of multiple properties in the hands of a lesser number of individuals. It is especially likely that the William Duke properties of southern, and perhaps also those of central, Wilts belonged to one person.
It is also unknown whether all of the individuals listed were in fact resident -- rather than just holders of taxable property -- in Wiltshire.
The lands were held by various primary tenants under the crown; the Duke family was not a tenant in capite for any of the Wilts properties that they occupied. Many of the properties were held by the Duchy of Lancaster in the early part of the 14th century, becoming part of the holdings of the Earl of Salisbury after 1337, and returning at the end of the century (with the beheading of the last de Montague earl) to the crown and the House of Lancaster. The Abbess of Shaftesbury held Tisbury, a tie with Dorset.
Comparison with other taxpayers of Wiltshire suggests that the Duke family there was generally comfortable, especially when it is considered that tradespeople, craftsmen, and the smaller farmers normally fell below minimum levels for taxation, and when it is also recalled that the properties may not have been held by distinct individuals. The taxes listed here represent a 15th of the assessed value of livestock and agricultural produce, or one tenth the value of household goods, merchandise, tools, and other moveable goods. Altogether, 9,700 Wiltshire individuals paid £1490 in taxes. Taxes of 3 shillings were average, and taxes of 8 shillings were within the higher range in the county.

Later Events in Wiltshire

In 1352, John Duk and Richard Duk were charged with many others for having broken into the close, house, and dovecoat of Walter Mareys at Trol, Wilts, looting the house and killing the doves, and burning the timber of the houses.
Another notice does much to clarify the position of the Duke family in Wiltshire. A 1381 notice to the escheator of the county of Wilts identified John Duyk as Bailiff of the liberty of William Earl of Salisbury of the hundred of  Aldewardebury. This was the second de Montagu (or de Montacute) to serve as Earl of Salisbury. The hundred mentioned was a private hundred of the earls, although prior to the appointment of the first earl, also William de Montague, it had belonged to the Duchy of Lancaster. This position would easily account for multiple properties in the ownership of single individuals among the Wilts Duke family. A bailiff, in particular, would be in an excellent position to acquire properties within the holdings of the overlord, and many of the Wilts holdings were indeed held from the king by the Earl of Salisbury.
In 1400, the Earl of Salisbury attempted to overthrow King Henry IV, after his murder of Richard II. He, and others with him, were captured at Circencester in southern Gloucester (near the northern Wilts Duke properties) and beheaded. The line was thereafter attainted.
In 1404 a John Duk received a Wiltshire appointment from Henry IV:
Grant for life to the king’s servant John Duc, one of the grooms of the king’s chamber, of the office of bailiff itinerant  in the county of Wilts with the fees and wages pertaining to it.
This appointment is singularly appropriate for a member of a family that had previously provided the bailiff for the holder of the most extensive holdings in the county, those of the de Montague Earls of Salisbury. It suggests that the members of the king’s household discussed previously were from this part of the extended (at this point, very extended) Duke family.
In 1404 a writ to the sheriff of Wiltshire required the release of John Duyk of Conok, and five others, on mainprise of Thomas de la Pole, knight; William Copdoke, William Rede and John Denham of Suffolk. They were charged with threatening the Prior of Lanthony and had mainperned in chancery that they would "do or procure no hurt or harm to the prior, the canons, their men or servants, nor fire their houses." On the same day another writ to the Sheriff of Wilts was ordered, by mainprise of Thomas Duyk 'skynner,' John son of Thomas Duyk, John Hadoun 'draper' and John Trom 'skynner,' all of London, in respect of taking a second time of John Duyk of Chiriton the younger security for keeping peace toward the prior or canons of Lanthony. Conok was a holding within the Chiriton parish, and was held by the Knights Hospitallers after 1308, until it reverted to the crown in 1324. Later, in the 1340's it was sold to the de la Pole family of Suffolk. This explains the Thomas de la Pole's involvement in the situation of John Duke; the dispute was doubtless about property rights involving Conok and the adjacent Lanthony Priory lands.
In 1405, William Duke was a juror in Salisbury for the inquisition post mortem on Elizabeth Seyntomer. This information is found in the “Hungerford Cartulary”, the records of the powerful Hungerford family, and indicates that William Duke may have been a feofee of the Hungerford family at this time. Hungerford succeeded to many of the estates of the earls of Salisbury.
This may or may not have been the same individual, county unspecified, mentioned in King Henry IV’s records for 1403:
Pardon to Julian the wife of William Duke for all felonies and trespasses committed by her, except treason, murder and rape.
The like to Maud daughter of William Duke and Julian his wife.
This wording appears frequently in the Patent Rolls, and appears to be a conventional pardon that may refer to conventional offenses, like those of trespass against the king’s rights in property  held by the family, or perhaps to political opposition falling short of an actual charge of treason.
In 1413, John Duyk, chaplain, with Robert Ennok and John Frankelayn, received in fee the manor of Beyton and the advowson of the church there, and the manor of Lye in the parish of Westbury, Wilts, with services to the chief lords of the fee. This was recorded in the “Edington Cartulary.” The grant was from John Rous, the elder. In 1414 Duke and his colleagues in turn granted the properties to John Rous, the younger. These transfers illustrate the overlapping quality of feudal relationships. In addition to the oddity of the re-transfer of the property, it is interesting that John Rous and a member of the Lye family are listed among Hungerford’s retinue at Agincourt in 1415.
There are also later references to the family in Salisbury and adjacent areas. In 1428 a Peter Duke was a juror in the Underditch Hundred, where the estate of Lake that was to become the family seat is located.  
In 1455 John Duke brought suit concerning a messuage in Malmesbury, and won.
In 1457 Henry Duke was listed as one of the wardens of St. Nicholas Hospital, Salisbury, just south of the cathedral. He was a priest, and in 1462 was Master of the hospital of St. Nicholas, where he was granted an indult:
To Henry Duke, priest, master of the hospital of St. Nicholas in the city of Salisbury. Indult to have a portable altar, on which he may celebrate or have celebrated by a fit priest mass and other divine offices in presence of himself and his household servants, to choose a fit priest, secular or regular, as his confessor, who may, after hearing his confession, grant him absolution for his crimes etc., in cases not reserved to the apostolic see, as often as opportune, and in reserved cases (except certain cases specified, e.g. violation of interdict, etc.) once only, and enjoin penance, and who, or other confessor of his choice, may grant him, being penitent and having confessed, plenary remission of all his sins, likewise once only, namedly in the hour of death, and may commute his vows of abstinence and pilgrimage, except those of pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Rome and Compostela; with the usual clauses providing for the making of satisfaction to whom it is due, against abuse of the present indult and requiring the usual Friday fasting for a year, etc. Sincere devotionis. (G. de Piccolominibus. xxv. A. de Reate. S. Crusiliati, S. de Spada.)
This indult is far more complex than most that were registered. It is especially interesting that his vows of abstinence could be commuted under this indulgence. He might have been one of the medieval priests, common in earlier times, who married and raised a family.

Dorset

Dorset is a critical county for the history of the Duke family of Otterton, Devon. All sources agree that John Duke of Sherbourne, Dorset, was the founder of the Otterton line.

1332 Lay Subsidy Rolls

After Roger Duke’s original lifetime grant of three manors in Dorset, the 1332 lay subsidy (tax) rolls are the next record of the Duke family in Dorset. They are absent from the hundred rolls of 1279-81.

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
Whitchurch	Symondsbury	John	5 s. 0 d.
Badbury	Bridport	John	18 d.
Bere Regis	Byre	William	5 s. 0 d.
Totcombe	Cerne Abbas	Walter	2 s. 0 d.
Cokdene	Canford	Walter	8 d.

The 1340 Inquistion Nonarum

In 1340 John Duke is listed as mong those responsible for accounting for the taxes of the parish of Canford, where William Duke previously held property. He is almost certainly a son of this William Duke.

The Duke Family of Cerne Abbas

Walter Duke held property in Cerne Abbas in 1332, and later records indicate that his family, or some part of it, lived there in later years. In 1363, Robert, Bishop of Salisbury, complained that John Duk was among those who waylaid his carts carrying six tuns [large barrels] of wine from Melcombe to his castle at Shirborn [Sherbourne], destroying the wine and impounding the horses at Great Mynterne, assaulting his servants. Thomas, Abbot of Cerne [Dorset], was also among those charged.
However, this was not the end of it. On January 30, 1363, the Abbot of Cerne complained that a group broke his close and houses at Great Mynterne, Dorset, and carried away his goods, at the same time recovering the wine and horses in question, which he described as having been impounded by Richard de Elleworth, his bailiff. Richard de Elleworth; Nicholas Honye, tithing-man of the town; and John Duk and Richard Goulde, the abbot's servants, attempted to stop them and were assaulted. Truly, it was an interesting time.
In 1376, Edward le Duk was charged with participating in the looting of a ship that had been driven ashore at Purbeck, on the Dorset coast. The nature of the incident is not so clear as it would be today, however, since rights to salvage from ships driven ashore were common gifts of the crown to religious houses and to towns. Suit was frequently brought when one group infringed on the rights of another in this respect. However, in this case it was shipowner who protested.
There are also 15th century references to the Duke family in Dorset, suggesting that some members of the family stayed in this county. Thomas Duke, of Cerne Abbey, was ordained Deacon on June 5, 1490, by Thomas Langton, Bishop of Salisbury.
It is interesting that in Dorset all early (but much later than this period) references to individuals named Duke in the International Genealogical Index were located in the Swanage area, and could be associated with the Duke family occupation of the Vast Priory property of Swanwic. The county of Dorset has a remarkably small number of persons named Duke listed in that data base.

Southampton

There is an isolated early reference to the Duke family in the area of Southampton, on the Isle of Wight. In about 1230-35, Godfrid Duc held half an acre on Wight, as a tenant of Robert Rabel, who in turn held property from God’s House, Southampton.
In 1412, James Bruyn, 'Ducheman,' was ordered freed by the Sheriff of Kent, on charges of rape and abduction of Margaret Plumpton, on mainprise of John Duke of the county of Southampton [Hampshire], John Gerard of Gloucestershire, esquire, Henry Ponsharde of Berkshire, and John Gosselyn of Hertfordshire. It is possible that this John Duke was the son of Thomas Duke, skinner, of London. Earlier he had been involved with many of his father’s London business affairs, but after 1408 seems to have disappeared from the London scene. This business of providing surety for court cases is one in which he had been especially active while in London.
In 1422, Robert Dooke was appointed to be deputy to the king's chief butler, Thomas Chaucer, in the port of "Jernemut" [Yarmouth, Somerset]. Thomas was the son of Geoffrey Chaucer, author of Canterbury Tales. Geoffrey Chaucer was an esquire in the service of King Edward III, with John Duke, who was given life residency at Thorneye in 1368. Thomas Chaucer’s grandfather, Geoffrey’s father, had held this same position in in 1347-1349.

Worcestershire, Gloucestershire, and Somerset

Worcestershire

Worcestershire is north of Gloucester in western England. A surviving lay subsidy roll from Worcester, made in about 1280 and therefore earlier than those of other counties presented here, includes William, Walter, and John Duke.

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
	Tybryton	Alicia Duck	4s 6d
	Tybryton	John Duck	2s
	Salewarp	Walter Duck	2s
	Severnestok	William Duc	5s
	Trympeleye	William le Duc	2s 6d

There can be little doubt that the Duke family in Worcester was in some way under the control of the Earl of Warwick. Walter Duke’s residence was in a parish in which William de Bello Campo (Beauchamp in Anglo-Norman, or “beautiful fields”), Earl of Warwick since 1268, was the most prominent taxpayer. William le Duke’s residence was in a parish in which Roger de Clifford, knight to Warwick, lived. The Duke family homes were strung out along the eastern bank of the Severn in close proximity to the Beauchamp family seat at Powyck.
In 1327 John de Stonystret of Hyndelegh was pardoned for the death of William, son of Thomas le Duc, of Hyndelegh.
The later lay subsidy rolls of 1332-3 in Worcester are unfortunately quite fragmentary. However, the 1340 Nonarum Inquisitiones roll preserves a record of one family member:

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
	Tyberton	Phillipi le Duk’	?

This Phillip appears to be a descendant of the John Duke previously resident in this town. He served with Joh’ de Eveling, Stephi le Baillj, and John Grys.
Later we find evidence that the Duke family continued in this county, and continued their association with the Beauchamp family. Friar Henry Duke, Prior of the Austin [Augustininian] Friars of Droitwich, in 1388 accepted funding for an anchoret’s cell at the Priory from Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick and “founder of our convent.”

Gloucestershire

The Duke family also appears in Gloucestershire records during the 13th century, which is not surprising given the role of the Beauchamps in that county. In 1285 Henry le Duc of Hope Maloysel (Hope Mansell, west of Gloucester) was pardoned for participating in a group led by John de Botillier, associated with the Earls of Warwick. They captured and decapitated Philip de Blakeneye, who had trespassed in the Dene Forest, kept by Grimbald Pauncefot, constable of the castle of St. Briavel. De Blakeneye escaped to commit futher trespasses and robberies. Then, Henry le Duc and others are said to have “pursuing him with hue and cry as one fleeing from justice, decapitated him.” The Dean Forest and St. Briavel are west of the Severn, on the extreme southern border of Gloucestershire and Wales. This was well within the territory of the Earls of Warwick. In 1321, William de Beauchamp was made Gov. of St. Briavel and of the Forest of Dean.
Beween 1301 and 1307, John Duce of Bristol, Gloucestershire, was pardoned by Edward I for crimes committed in company with many others of the area against Maurice de Berkeley while he was in Scotland on the king’s service. The history of the Duke family in Gloucestershire seems to have been a spotted one.
The lay subsidy roll of 1327 shows the following individuals:

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
Tibblestone and Deerhurst	Beckford (Villa de Bekkeforde)	Walter Duk	3s 6d
Longtree	Culkerton (Culkerton)	William le Duk	4s 9.5 p
extra-hundredal	Gloucester (Villa Gloucestr)	Nicholas le Duk	6d

 
Walter Duke was in the southern part of the county (now Avon since the British local government reorganization of the 1970’s), probably along the Avon River. William Duke is in a town on the northwestern boundary of Wiltshire, east of Gloucester. Nicholas le Duke is in the town of Gloucester.

 

In 1345, Thomas le Duk’ of Gloucester is listed as a priest at Tewkesbury Abbey on the Saturday in Embertide after Pentecost. The apostrophe casts some doubt on whether this is the Duc family; the apostrophe is often used in abbreviating “Duket,” a separate surname. However, Worcester records sometimes use this form for “Duke” and in this case the individual is more likely of the Duke family.
In 1403 John Duke was ordered arrested, to be brought before the king and council, with others from the Cirencester, Gloucester, area. No reason was given for the order, but the charge was presumably serious, to justify an appearance before the royal council. This suggests political charges rather than any conventional crime. Since Richard II had been deposed in 1399 and there was still a great deal of activity by his supporters,  it is possible that the charges here were related to the radical change in government of 1399-1400. In particular, this may refer to a member of the Wiltshire Duke family, who as we shall see had connections that particularly predisposed them to oppose Henry IV, the Lancastrian usurper of the throne who deposed, and later killed, Richard II in 1399.
In 1453, John Duke of Cirencestre, Gloucester, 'chapman,' [merchant, trader] was pardoned for outlawries in the counties of Gloucester, Worcester, and in London.
During the 15th century the Gloucestershire family was engaged in trade with France. In 1479, Bartram Duke imported "14 weys of coal" and "5 C onions" on the James  of Rochelle (France). Bartram Duke is listed as master, and the owner of the shipment was the "factor and attorney of Henry Bourchier, Earl of Ewe." On October 28, 1479, Martin Duke was master of the James  of Rochelle, importing 33 tuns wine for John Esterfild' and Henry Vaghan. On January 29, 1480, custom was paid by Nicholas Duke on 7 mantles imported through the Port of Bristol.
Bartram Duke was described as “alien” and may have taken up residence in France. Burke’s General Armory refers to members of the family who moved to France in the late Middle Ages, doubtless to pursue their business interests.

Somerset

The Duke family in Somerset appears to have been derived from the Worcester and Gloucestershire settlers.
In 1315 Philip le Duk was named among the many individuals who were charged with breaking a dyke belonging to the church of St. Andrew in Wells, Somerset. This violence appears to have arisen from a dispute concerning water rights. This Phillip le Duk could easily be the same who was noted in Tibberton, Worc., in 1340. If not, he is presumably a close relative.
In 1402, John Duke of Congesbury, Somerset, (a few miles southeast of Bristol) was pardoned for “all felonies committed by him except treason, murder, and rape.

Devon

Early References in Devon

In 1298, Joel de Duk was identified with the import of 2 tuns of wine on the la cogge Sainte Marie of Teignmouth, which docked at Topsham. In 1299, he is listed for 6 tuns and 1 pipe, on the le Bonan of Exmouth, docked at Topsham. In 1302-1303, John le Duk was listed for “5 tuns, of which W. de Ochamton has 1 tun; 4 tuns customed,” on the Seynt Anne  of Teignmouth.
However, records of the 1332 tax rolls show that no Duke of that period lived in the vicinity of Otterton. Plympton Hundred is in the southwestern part of Devon, and Shirwill is in the extreme northeast. Otterton, the later home of the Duke family, is in the southeast. Like the Somerset family, these individuals may have been connected with the Gloucestershire Duke family.

Hundred	Town	Name	Tax
Plympton	Plympton St. Mary	John Duk	8d
Shirewill	Shirwell	John Duk	18d

Both the Plympton (southern, near Plymouth) and Shirwell (northwestern) areas later held substantial families of the Duke name with unknown connection to the Otterton family; these references may reflect their origins.

The Earliest Dukes of the Otterton Branch

The first reference to a Duke at Poer-Hayes (later home of a major branch of the family), in 1356, is not a pleasant one:
The like [commission of oyer and terminer] to Hugh de Courteneye, earl of Devon, William de Shareshull, John de Stouford, Richard de Birton, John Hundismor and Robert Weye, on complaint by Robert son of John de Hokeworthy, Ralph de Shillynford, John Aleyn of Woneford, Thomas de Shillynford and William Thursteynt, that Thomas Duc, 'taillour,' and others ravished Cecily wife of the said Robert at Poerseys, co. Devon, and abducted her with his goods and chattels.
The identification of Thomas Duke as ‘taillour’ appears to be a mark of membership in the guilds, rather than a simple description of his vocation. This links him to the London Duke family. “Ravished” is here used in an older sense, that of taking someone away against their will, often by violence. It is a reflection on the times that the charge refers to abducting her with “his” goods and chattels, rather than “their” belongings.
On August 14, 1377, Robert Hull, Escheator in Devon, was ordered to deliver to Margaret, widow of Hugh de Courtenay, Earl of Devon, money from various land assessments as her dower right. Among these assessments was one against Thomas Duke, who was to pay one-eighth of one knight’s fee in “Yetemeton and Powers Heghes.” These estates were part of the massive "honor" (group of feudal properties) of Okehampton, the initial basis of the Courtenay family wealth and influence. Powers Heghes is obviously Poer-Hayes. Yetemeton is a variant of Yettington, Yetematon, or Yethemeton, in the hamlet of Bicton, Devon. It is adjacent to Poer-Hayes.
This Thomas Duke, although his connection to the Otterton family is unknown, must have had a reasonably close relationship. The coincidence of the name appearing in such a small area (Poer-Hayes held four households with sufficient resources to be taxed at the time of the 1332 lay subsidy) is not likely.
Another early member of the Duke family in Devon may be related to the Otterton branch. In 1390, Peter Duk, chaplain, was presented to the church of Jacobistowe [immediately north of Okehampton] in the diocese of Exeter. This was relatively far-removed from Poer-Hayes, and this person may be unrelated. In October 1396 this Peter Duke was designated a papal chaplain “with the usual privileges,” by Pope Boniface IX. In the same year, he was Vicar of Saint Mary in Exeter Diocese and was granted (presumably for a fee) an indult (indulgence) for seven years “to take the fruits of his benefices while studying letters at an university, or residing in the Roman court or on any one of his benefices.” Concurrent mandates were sent to the abbots of Glastonbury in the diocese of Bath, and Tavistock, and the chancellor of Exeter.

Poer-Hayes and Otterton

The Duke family at Otterton was long associated with their home at Poer Hayes, later known as Barton Hayes. Otterton existed at the time of the Norman Conquest, and is listed in the Domesday Book, Annotated, as follows:
Otterton  Otritone/tona  Mont St. Michel Church, formerly Countess Gytha. market on Sundays. 3 mills. 60 pigs, 18 cattle, 300 sheep, 22 goats. Nearby is Ladram Bay with rock staves and large caves.
Ottery St. Mary  Otrei/Otri, St. Mary’s Church,  Rouen, before and after 1066. 3 mills, garden. 24 cattle, 130 sheep, 18 wild mares. Town given to Rouen Cathedral by Edward the Confessor and bought back by Bishop Grandisson of Exeter, who rebuilt the church in the 14th century. Restored by William Butterfield in the 19th century, it is now one of the country’s finest churches.
Poer Hayes is not a manor house, but a substantial farmhouse of the traditional Devonshire cob and thatch construction, built in the early 1500’s. It is regarded as an especially lovely example of this local architecture, is identified on contemporary maps of Devon as a location worth visiting, and has been featured in books on the vernacular architecture of England.

Duke at Poer-Hayes

Who was John Duke, said to have founded the Duke family of Otterton and Poer-Hayes? What do we actually know about him, and does this allow us to determine his descent from earlier branches of the Duke family?
John Duke married a Shelston, a member of a family with no identifiable Dorset, or even southwest England, connections. He was certainly from a branch of the Duke family established elsewhere than Dorset. He was an “esquire,” and a member of the gentry. He and his descendants rapidly assumed roles in Devonshire public life appropriate to this social position. They also continued close ties with London, a practice common to the gentry of this and other periods in England.
He and his descendants carried arms that are unique to the Otterton branch of the Duke family and its derivatives, but are clearly derived from the earliest arms of the “le Duc” family. In addition, an early reference, probably derived from the time of Edward II or Edward III (basically the 1300’s), indicates that identical arms, only slightly different from those of the Otterton family, were carried by branches of the Duke family in both Bedfordshire and Devon.

Feudal Relationships of the Duke Family

The relationships of the Duke family members to major landholders may help to sort out its many members during the Middle Ages. The groups of individuals and families associated with powerful feudal lords are known as “affinities.” The Duke family may have been associated with the Beauchamp (in Latin, as it is often given in the English records, Bello Campo)  affinity, led by the sheriffs of Gloucestershire and Earls of Warwick, and the Warenne (Garenne) affinity, led by the Earl of Surrey. Later, the Montacutes became significant.
Up until about 1350 these relationships were of primary importance. Under true feudalism, families of knights and esquires were usually associated with only one feudal overlord, and held their land exclusively from that individual. There was a real expectation of military service to the lord, although scutage fees were often paid to avoid military service. After 1350, the Middle Ages were waning, and land might be held from any number of individuals without any real expectation of military service. Scutage fees were the norm, rather than the exception. The early associations of the Duke family, when these were most meaningful, can be summarized as follows:

Affinity/ Individual or Institution	Nature of Relationship	Year	Duke Family Member
Beauchamp/ William de Beauchamp	land, Salewarp, Worcester	1280	Walter Duke
Beauchamp/ William de Beauchamp	land, Brailes, Warwickshire	1280	Jordan Duke
Beauchamp/ Thomas de Beauchamp	Crécy and Calais campaigns,	1346	John Duke of Oxfordshire
Beauchamp/ Roger de Clifford	land, Hope Mansell, Gloucestershire	1285	Henry Duke
Beauchamp/ Roger de Clifford	war, conquest of Wales, St. Briavals, Gloucestershire	1285	Henry Duke
Beauchamp/ Roger de Clifford	land, Tibberton, Worcestershire	1280	William Duke
Beauchamp/ Roger de Clifford	land, Severnstoke, Worcestershire	1280	William Duke
Beauchamp/ William de Beauchamp	land, Old Weston, Hunts. (Rutland)	1280	Godfrey Duke,  Sr.
Beauchamp/ William de Beauchamp	land, Old Weston, Hunts. (Rutland)	1280	Godfrey Duke
Beauchamp/ William de Beauchamp	land, Old Weston, Hunts. (Rutland)	1280	Alan Duke
Beauchamp/ Thomas de Beauchamp	intercession in case of stolen sheep, Spellesbury, Oxfordshire	1380	Henry Duke
Beauchamp/ Priory of Wygorn	land, Spellesbury, Oxfordshire	1280	Robert le Duc
Beauchamp/ Priory of Wygorn	land, Trympleneye, Worcestershire	1280	John Duke
Beauchamp/ Priory of Wygorn	land, Trympleneye, Worcestershire	1280	Alecia Duke
Beauchamp/ Stodleye Priory	land, Oxford, Oxfordshire	1280	wife and son of Hugh Duke
?/ William de Buckingham	land, Barton, Warwickshire	1214	Henry Duke
?/ Hospitallers, Melchbourne Priory	land, Suldrope, Bedfordshire	1280	Thomas Duke
?/ Hospitallers, Melchbourne Priory	land, Suldrope, Bedfordshire	1302	Warren Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Dorking, Surrey	1321	William Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	barons’ revolt, overthrow of Hugh le Despenser, elder and younger	1321	William Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Castleacre, Norfolk (?)	1320	William Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Castleacre, Norfolk	1337	William Duke, son of Agatha
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Cerne Abbas, Dorset	1332	Walter Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Canford, Dorset	1332	William Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Tilshead, Wilts	1332	Sybil Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, All Cannings, Wilts	1332	Geoffrey Duke
Warenne/ John de Warenne	land, Winterbourne Dauntsey, Wilts	1332	Henry Duke
Warenne, John de Warenne	land, Whepley, Wilts	1332	William Duke
Montacute, William de Montacute	land, Alderbury, Wilts, and office of bailiff to the Earl of Salisbury	1381	William Duke
Courtenay, ? de Courtenay	land, Poer-Hayes, Devon	1353, 1377	Thomas Duke

After 1337, William de Montagu (Montacute) became Earl of Salisbury, and took over many of the lands in Wiltshire and Dorset occupied by members of the Duke family originally under the Beauchamps and Warennes. This is reflected in the identification of William Duke of Alderbury, in 1381, as bailiff to the Earl of Salisbury, and in many landholding associations. It may be significant that John de Warenne held Sherborne Castle and Purbeck Chase in Dorset, as well as Canford from 1317-1337; these were later held by the Montagu’s.

Family Arms and Family History

The arms of the Duke family may cast light upon this early period in the family history. The arms for the Otterton and Poer-Hayes, Devonshire, family are described as “Per fesse ar. and az. three chaplets counterchanged, crest demi-griffin or, holding a chaplet.” [The shield is horizontally divided into blue and silver fields with three leafy wreaths in counterchanged blue and silver, with a gold griffin’s head and wings holding a wreath above.] Supposed meanings are often assigned to the colors and symbols of heraldry, but these interpretations are usually later inventions. Arms do, however, provide evidence of historical associations. Related families developed similar arms and families tied by feudal connections to highly placed nobles sometimes indicated this connection in their arms. Arms also may contain symbols of particular meaning to the individuals who used them. Some are even simple puns on family names. The older the arms, the less likely that an elaborate symbolic scheme underlies them. Finally, and most important, arms identify related families.
The Shield
In the case of the Duke arms, there is a historical progression apparent in Burke's General Armory and other sources. The earliest form is listed for "Due" (obviously a transcription error for Duc), and is blazoned "az. a chef indented ar."   This formed the basic coat from which other later Duke arms were derived. It describes a coat of arms that is blue with the upper third in silver, with an indented boundary separating the two colors. No location is given for the bearer of these arms, suggesting an early roll of arms without such information as the original source of the entry.
A later form introduces the chaplets, and is blazoned "az. three chaplets and a chief indented ar." The three chaplets, or floral wreaths, were added to the previous version. Again, there is no locational information provided.
The next chronological development is listed in Burke's General Armory  as "Duke (cos. Bedford and Devon)." It is blazoned "per fesse indented ar. and az. three chaplets counterchanged." Here the upper, silver or white, portion of the shield has grown from about one-third to about one-half of the shield. The three wreaths are distributed on both the upper part (two wreaths) and the lower part (one wreath), in colors counterchanged from the background color. This is the last variant before that specifically associated with Otterton,  Devon, in the General Armory. Unlike the later forms, it retains the indented boundary between the upper and lower portions of the shield.
This Bedfordshire and Devon variant seems to be earlier than the Otterton version. The indented line of the earliest versions is retained in the Bedforshire and Devon variant. Alternatively, the indented line could represent an effort to differentiate a later coat from an existing Otterton variant. However, no discussion of the Duke family of Otterton refers to a later Bedfordshire offshoot, and such an offshoot should be late enough to be documented and known. Also, the use of only county locations in the identification of the "Bedfordshire and Devon" variant suggests an early source for the entry, in the rolls of arms of the time of Edward II and Edward III, when typically only county locations were provided for the bearers of the arms.
It is interesting that there is a shield very similar to these early Duc arms, that of FitzWilliam of Greystoke. Early members of the Duke family several times encountered this clan. Roger le Duc was co-sheriff of London with a William FitzWilliam and a few decades later the FitzWilliams of Greystoke were neighbors of the Duc family along the Bedforshire-Northamptonshire border. It is possible that the wreaths or chaplets of the Duc and Greystoke arms were added at approximately the same time, during the 13th century.
A later roll of arms of this sort (unfortunately published without the coats themselves) establishes that at least one Duke definitely participated in the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, and there may have been two others. Guy Duke is listed as having been with Sir William Bourchier, in fee to the king.   Bourchier was later Earl of Ewe because of his role in France; his heirs became earls of Essex. Guy was from the Essex County branch of the Duke family.
A John “Doke” served with William de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk. “Doke” does not appear to be legitimate as written, and might be a corruption of Duke. John “Doke” could be a member of the Suffolk branch of the Duke family, but the extensive holdings of medieval nobility were not limited to the counties associated with their titles. This could have been one of the Conock, Wiltshire, Duke family, whose property was held in tenancy from the earls of Suffolk.
Richard “Doo” served with Edmund de la Pole, Knight. "Do" could also be a corruption of Duke, although it does appear as a legitimate surname in its own right in various records, including those for the Norfolk area. There also was a substantial de la Pole family in Devon. The Pole family had resided at Pole, in the parish of Tiverton, since the Norman Conquest, and at Pole, in Cheshire, “from ancient time.” Numerous members of the de la Pole family appear in the accounts of the 1238 pleas of the Devon Eyre.   The Pole family of Suffolk also held lands in Wiltshire, including at least one property occupied by the Duke family.
The herald who conducted the 1620 visitation of Devon carried the genealogy of the Duke family back to William Duke of Exeter, and thus to 1417, when Henry V first ordered county sheriffs to enforce restriction of arms to those who had used them "since time immemorial," (in English heraldic terms, since at least 1189) or to those with a later specific grant of arms. This brings us close to the time of probable divergence of the Duke family of Devonshire from a Bedfordshire line, in the 14th century.
The Duke family does not appear to have been established for any great length of time in Bedfordshire. Thomas Duke, listed in the 1281 hundred rolls, and Warren Duke, his successor who was providing knights service in return for the land in 1302, are the only individuals identified there. Thomas could have been a son of Robert Duke, heir of Roger le Duc in Oxfordshire, or he could have been a son of John le Duc who died in 1283 in London, known to have had a son named Thomas. Either would tie him to the primary Duke family lines.
The Crest
Of crests similar to that of the Duke family, it has been observed that:
Only simple monsters occur in early crests, such as the griffen’s head and wings within a crown of Sir John Montagu (1389), …
The Duke family was associated with the de Montagu’s, the best known family having a similar crest. The Barons de Montagu had their principal residence in the 13th and early 14th century in Dorset. In 1337 William de Montagu was made Earl of Salisbury for service to Edward III and to the House of Lancaster. He captured and imprisoned Mortimer, who had joined with Queen Isabella to imprison and then murder Edward II, keeping Edward III from his rightful accession to the throne. Not surprisingly, once Edward III gained his throne (and he had a very long reign), William de Montagu and his heirs were favorites of the crown.
The Earl of Salisbury was tenant-in-chief of the county of Devon during the 13th century, of Sherborne Castle and adjacent properties in Dorset and Somersetshire in the 14th century (when John Duke lived near Sherborne), and of many of the portions of Wiltshire in which the Duke family was found in 1302 and in the 1330’s, including especially the Hundred of Mere near Sherborne.
Summary
By the 16th century there were only two basic armigerous branches of the Duke family: Suffolk and Otterton, with their derivative branches. While their arms are different, they share common colors (blue and silver or white) and are recognizably the product of the same root, the earlier arms of the "le Duc" family.
Although there is abundant evidence that the Duke family was established in Gloucestershire and adjacent portions of Somerset and Wiltshire by about 1300, these lines do not appear to have been armigerous. It is also interesting that the arms of the Duke family of Tore [Dorset] are of the same colors as those of Suffolk and Devonshire, but are very different, showing a "coney" (beast) in silver on a blue ground. This suggests a very early divergence from the Duc and Duke lines with which we are principally concerned here.
The arms of the Otterton family suggests an origin in the Bedfordshire line of the Duke family, and a derivation directly from that source.

Other Evidence for Otterton Origins

In 1377, the name of Thomas Duke immediately follows that of John Poer in the Book of Fees  as a feofee of the de Courtenay dowager. Poer’s heirs were assessed the fifth part of one knight's fee in Blakeburgh, apparently having retained this as their principal seat, while the Duke family occupied Poer Hayes, and the Bicton property, which was previously held by the Poers.
It is reasonable to conclude that John Duke of Sherborne, Dorset, who normally appears as the first in the Devonshire Duke family line, in about 1400, was the heir (although perhaps not the son) of this Thomas Duke, who held feudal property rights at Poer Hayes in 1377.
John  Duke is said to have been in Sherborne, Dorset, in about 1400. He married a member of the Shelston family, whether there or elsewhere is uncertain. The information appears in a genealogy in which John Duke is the first member of the family mentioned. The genealogy is presented in a Dorset history to document the background of George Duke who much later, in 1527, obtained Dorset properties through the chancery grant dissolution process, which will be discussed in more detail later. The genealogy conflicts in several respects with available records, and the association of John Duke with Sherborne must be taken with caution. There is no evidence that any substantial part of the Duke family, or the Shelston (Sheldton or Shelton) family, resided in Dorset at this time. While John Duke and his wife might well have lived there for a time, his roots must be sought elsewhere. A search for locations where other records indicate that the Duke and Shelston family came into contact is a good place to start looking for the origins of this particular John Duke.

The Shelston (Sheldon) Family

The Shelton was not prominent in early southwestern England. References to the name are concentrated very heavily in Norfolk, London, and to a lesser extent Oxfordshire.
London
The most conspicuous Shelstons of this time period were John de Shelton, of John of Gaunt’s household in the early 1370’s, and Clement de Shelton, porter of John of Gaunt’s castle in London, La Sauvoye (The Savoy) in 1379-80. Clement, for example, appears in the following entry:
Johan, etc., leiutenant, etc, a noz chers et bien amez Piers Thilioll, Rauland Vauz, Clement de Shelton, … et a chescun de eux saluz. Come par noz lettrez patentes eions ordenez, constitut et assignez noz treschers et tresbien amez Roger le sire de Clifford, Hugh le sire de Dacre, et monsire Matheu Redeman gardeins del Westmarche et noz deputez pur tenir un jour et treter ovesque monsire Archebalde Douglas des trespas et attemptatz faites encontre lassurances es dites marches, …
To be “dear and well loved” by John of Gaunt, King of Castile and Duke of Lancaster, son of Edward III and father of Henry IV, would have been no small recognition, but his registers suggest that the Duke had many “dear and well loved” friends, employees, and colleagues. His staff at one time consisted of an earl, three barons, 83 knights and 112 esquires. Reports also indicate that he was not nearly so mild-mannered as his register entries suggest. John of Gaunt has been described as “the mightiest subject England has ever seen.”
Norfolk and Suffolk
The Sheldon family was also found in Norfolk and Suffolk. In the early to mid-13th century, Robertus de Seltun’ (Robert Sheldon) held land as a feofee in the Liberty of St. Edmund’s (“tria feoda”). His property was at Eye, 10 miles west of Framlingham where the overlord of Walter Duke resided during the reign of Edward III, a century later. Later, Henricus de Schelton’ (Henry Sheldon) again held “tria feoda” in this same feudal liberty, for military service to the king.
In 1346, Sir Ralph de Shelton was among the knights with the king at Crécy and Calais. He was in the retinue of Robert de Morle (Morley) in Norfolk and Suffolk, and is also listed for the retinue of Robert de Ufford, Earl of Suffolk. This was not with undue haste, however. He was knighted at Crécy, and was pardoned his fine for not taking knighthood in England according to the King's proclamation that all who held £40 in land (Ralph de Shelton's were in Suffolk) should be knighted.
Thomas de Shelton, of the retinue of John fitz Walter, did service at Crécy and Calais for land in Essex, Norfolk, Beds, and Bucks. However, another reference places Thomas de Shelton in the retinue of the Prince of Wales, Edward the Black Prince. This may represent two individuals, since it is elsewhere noted that Thomas de Shelton served continuously in the retinue of Sir John fitz Wauter [Walter].
A final Crécy references places Robert, son of William de Shelton, of Kirketon, in France, at the testimony of the Prince of Wales.
In 1381 Ralph Shelton, knight, obtained from the king a license to enclose a way in Shelton, Norfolk. The proposed walkway was to be below his manor-house on the north, eighty perches long by three broad, and was licenced for a fee of half a mark.
In 1399 Ralph Shelton, ‘chivaler,’ was a commissioner of array for Norfolk. In the same year, John Shelton was presented ot the church of Little Berkhamsteded, in the Diocese of Lincoln.
In 1384 Ralph de Shelton is listed (with Michael de la Pole, Chancellor) as a justice in Norfolk, and was instructed to inquire into problems at St. Mary Walsingham, a shrine that even today is an object of “high church” veneration in England. He retained this position in 1385.
In 1401, Henry IV granted to Ralph Shelton, knight, and Alesia his wife of two tuns of red wine of Gascony yearly in the port of Lenne [King’s Lynne, Norfolk], paying the king’s price. Also in 1401, a Peter Shelton in adjacent Cambridgeshire, a clerk, granted license in mortmain to the warden and scholars of the  hall called ‘Valence Marie’ at Cambridge to enlarge their manse through use of 3 roods of land held by Shelton and John Cheyne of the king.
In 1402, Ralph Shelton was again a commissioner of array for Norfolk. The specific occasion was the order of the king that the counties “men at arms, archers and other fencible men” be assembled “for the defense of the sea coast against the king’s enemies, who intend invasion.”
Other references to the Sheltons are less revealing. In 1402 Richard Whytkyrtell of Tychemerssh was pardoned for the death of John Lyttestere of Tychemerssh in the house of John Shelton of Tychemerssh. This location is in Northamptonshire, near the Suldrope, Bedfordshire, home of the Duke family.
In the early 15th century, the Sheltons had responsibilities to the king in the maintenance of peace in the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk. In 1408 King Henry IV issued a commission “de walliis et fossatis” to Thomas Skelton, ‘chivaler,’ and others, of Norfolk.
On December 1, 1411, King Henry IV issued a writ of “oyer and terminer” to Ralph Shelton “chivaler” (knight) of Suffolk, and others, in connection with a charge based upon a complaint from “Thomas de Morle, ‘chivaler,’ that Thomas Hemgrave, ‘chivaler’ and other evildoers went armed to Mutford and Carleton Colvyle, co. Suffolk, broke his close at Carleton Colvyle,” and committed while there various crimes including violating his free warren, hunting and fishing without a license, assaulted and threatened his men and tenants there, and obstructed highways.
In May of the same year there was a commission to Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, based upon an inquisition taken before Ralph Shelton, ‘chivaler,’ Edmund Oldhalle and Oliver Groos, sheriff of Norfolk, again charging evildoers. This time, however, the charges involved breaking into a priory tower, hanging three bells there, and walling up and fastening the doors, thus excluding the prior and monks.
There were also Shelston properties in the Birmingham area. In 1382 Thomas de Sheldon, with John Colleshull, John Goldsmyth and William atta Slowe licenced the alienation in mortmain of land in Birmingham and Egebaston to the value of 20 marks yearly to support two chaplains in daily celebration of masses to the honour of God, the Virgin, St. Cross, St. Thomas the Martyr (Thomas á Becket) and St. Katharine, in the church of St. Martin, Birmingham. The names associated with Sheldon in this reference are also commonly found in Suffolk and Norfolk, and the property might not have been in the location of their residence.
In 1382, Thomas de Skelton was named a commissioner of oyer and terminer in Cambridgeshire.
London
In 1385, John de Shelton of London was involved in a writ of supersedeas regarding actions in the city of Lincoln. This is almost certainly the same John de Shelton who was in the household of John of Gaunt at the Savoy.
In 1404 a William Shelton was charged with not appearing to answer William de Waltham, clerk, regarding a debt of 20 marks, in London.
During the time of John and Clement de Shelton’s service to John of Gaunt, Sir Thomas Hungerford was the duke’s seneschal. In 1405, a previous reference demonstrated that a William Duke was listed in the Hungerford family cartulary for Wiltshire, and was probably a feofee of the Hungerford family (as were many others; the family was extremely powerful). In addition, members of the Duke family had been in the household of Edward III, John of Gaunt’s father. There would have been a high potential for contact between Shelston and Duke families, in either London, Norfolk, or Bedfordshire.

There are early, but very questionable, references to the Duke family in southwestern England at a very early period. There is a 1230 reference to Osbert le Duc in Devon, mentioned earlier. In addition, Osbertus Duket (possibly Duke, but also a separate name) held a virgate of land and a croft at Mucheldevr’ from the Abbot of Hyde for service at some time between 1208 and 1213 (and possibly much longer). An Osbertus Duket is also listed in Cambridgeshire (between the Bedfordshire and Norfolk branches of the Duke family) slightly later, in 1230-31.

The Heirs of John Duke

The Duke family prospered in Devon, but not as knights and soldiers. The very early fragments of history available for the family in southwest England point toward a focus on appointed and elected positions in the city and county and the law. There are also records of involvement in the wine trade, but to an extent suggestive of purchase for an extended medieval household rather than commercial trade. They were gentry who lived on country estates, but they also had close ties to the city of Exeter. This sort of life did not tend to catapult people to great wealth fame through association with belligerent kings and lords, but produced opportunities for gaining moderate wealth and respected position, with a great deal of stability from generation to generation. This focus did not exempt one from military service, but did tend to limit the frequency and duration of involvement in England’s conflicts abroad.
Those who were of appropriate family background to have the option of pursuing knighthood but chose not to do so were technically “esquires,” like those in training for knighthood but not yet dubbed knight, although they retained obligations as men-at-arms for feudal lords and the crown. By the 14th century knighthood had become very undesirable for most qualified individuals. It required great expense in armor for one's self and one's mount,  and also for one’s own subordinate men-at-arms, and often led to a significantly shortened life expectancy. Elderly knights were a rare breed. If they survived conflicts with enemies abroad, they were often killed or deprived of their estates in internal wars and conflicts.

 

In the 14th century and later, members of the Duke family conspicuously chose to avoid placing their hopes of advancement in their roles as men-at-arms, pursuing instead administration, law, and the aspects of bureaucracy appropriate to the gentry. This was common at this time:
Naturally, from their beginnings, the two universities [Oxford and Cambridge] had always admitted a good number of young men of aristocratic or gentle birth who were destined for careers in the church. In the fifteenth century, however, we begin to hear of young gentlemen who were not so destined attending the university. In many cases, perhaps most, it seems clear that … they were not going to stay the full course … a spell in them was seen as preparatory to more serious study in what really were becoming, for them, the most significant focuses of tertiary learning, the Inns of Court in London … The principal objects of those who came to study … were of course pragmatic. A landowner … needed … ‘to know how to defend himself in competitive county society’ … To anyone who hoped for office, as a sheriff or coroner or escheator, or to sit on a county commission as a justice of the peace, a solid grounding in the law was invaluable.
It is precisely these sorts of offices, and this sort of education, that members of the Duke family began to pursue during the 1400’s in Devonshire.

The Duke Family: Secular and Sacred Office

John Duke appears in English records in 1428 when he was  appointed by the king as a tax commissioner for the Boddleigh and Wonford hundreds, in Devonshire.
There are references to members of the Duke family in southern Devon during this period, but they might well belong to the non-Otterton Duke line in the county. In 1421, Peter Duke was appointed Vicar of Harberton, Devon, by Edmund Lacy, Bishop of Exeter. He was previously mentioned in connection with his appointment as a papal chaplain and other events in his career.

William Duke, Mayor of Exeter

During the period 1442-61, John Duke’s son, William, was Mayor of Exeter, although he did not hold this office continuously throughout this time. He appears in the letters of John Shillingford, Mayor of Exeter in 1447-50. In April of 1448 Shillingford sent a letter from London to Exeter by William Duke, who was returning to Exeter at that time. He is later mentioned in connection with the Exeter receiver’s accounts, and might have served in that office during Shillingford’s tenure as mayor. William made improvements to the city that were visible centuries later, including rebuilding a stone aquaduct in the city center.
London dwarfed all other urban centers in England, but during the late middle ages Exeter rose from a town of about 2000 persons to become one of the half-dozen largest cities in England, other than London. At a time of stagnant population, Exeter was showing the sort of growth indicative of a thriving economy. The position of Mayor was a powerful one at this time, when elaborate tiers of bureaucracy had not developed to stand between local governments and the Crown.
William Duke of Exeter married Cecily Poer.

Poer Family

Poers Hayes derived its name from the Poer family, with whom the Duke family intermarried several times during the 15th and 16th centuries. It was a family long established in Devon and even more so in the adjacent counties of Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Dorset. Of the various Poer family arms, only those of Wiltshire and Dorset, and of a Cornwall branch derived from Devon, resemble those of the Devon family. The circumstantial evidence for a tie between the Devon line and the Wiltshire and Dorset Poer families is very strong.
The Poer family made a place for themselves among the Anglo-Norman aristocracy and gentry of England quite early. Roger le Poor or le Poer was Chancellor of England under King Stephen, and died in 1139. He appears to be the first of the le Poers to have achieved national importance in England.
Roger, Robert, William, and Simon le Poer took part in the conquest of Ireland, accompanying Strongbow, and it is believed that they were all brothers. Roger, who died in 1186, was the most conspicuous of these. Some of the le Poer family subsequently remained in Ireland, ultimately receiving the title Earl of Tyrone. Burke’s General Armory notes that in 1535 Roger le Poer’s descendant, Richard le Poer (or Power) of Curraghmore, County Waterford, was made Lord le Poer.
However, some descendants of the le Poer brothers returned to England. For example, in the reign of Henry II, William le Poer held lands in Oxfordshire, Herefordshire, and Gloucestershire, and Robert le Poer held property in Oxfordshire.
Herbert le Poor was the last bishop at Sarum, in Wiltshire, and Richard le Poor was the first bishop at the new cathedral at Salisbury, serving from 1217 to 1229. He later served as Bishop of Durham, and died in 1237. Richard and Herbert were sons of Richard of Ilchester, bishop of Winchester, and Chancellor of England. They were necessarily illegitimate, since bishops couldn’t marry. Medieval England was notoriously lax, however, about the chastity of the priesthood.
The Dictionary of National Biography  observes of Herbert le Poor, Bishop of Sarum in the early 13th century, that:
Dr. Stubbs suggests that he was connected with Roger Poor [see Roger] and therefore also with Roger of Salisbury and Richard FitzNeale. Canon Rich Jones conjectured that Poore was in this case the equivalent not of ‘pauper,’ but of ‘puer’ or the Norman ‘poer,’ a knight or cadet of good family (cf. Anglo-Saxon ‘cild’). He has also pointed out that near Tarrant in Dorset, where Herbert’s brother Richard was born, there are places called Poorstock and Poorton.
The names of “Poorstock” and “Poorton” in Dorset are more commonly given as “Powerstock” and “Powerton,” both modernized forms of “Poer.” Canon Jones’ interpretation seems very likely to be correct. “Poore” is the equivalent in this case of “Poer.”
Richard le Poer’s history was quite distinguished overall, but the best known accomplishment of his career was certainly the movement of the see from Sarum to Salisbury and the erection of Salisbury Cathedral. He organized the effort, and found the funds, for the construction of this jewel among the Gothic cathedrals of England, sometimes criticized as “too perfect” and a bit austere, but always regarded as one of the most historically and architecturally important buildings in England, a nearly pure example of Early English Gothic.
He also left less tangible monuments. Richard le Poer is credited with the final form of ‘the use of Sarum,’ the liturgy that became dominant throughout much of England and is one of the primary forerunners of the Book of Common Prayer  of the Anglican Communion. The “Sarum Rite,” spread throughout much of southern England and is regarded as among the most elaborate forms of Christian religious service. “The elaborate splendour of Sarum ceremonial, as carried out in the cathedral church in the centuries immediately preceeding the Reformation, contrasted vividly with the comparative simplicity of the practice of the Roman Church.”
Richard founded a Cistercian house for nuns and their servants at his birthplace, Crawford Tarrant in Dorset. He also has been credited, probably eroneously, with the Ancren Riwle, a treatise on the monastic life that has been described as “one of the most perfect models of simple natural eloquent prose in our language …”
And, finally, as if this were not a sufficiently full life, Richard resided for some time, including minimally the year 1223, at Sherborne Castle in Dorset, “but it would have been as Sheriff of Dorset, and not as Bishop of Salisbury, that he held it.” Gilbert de Staplebridge acted for Richard as undersheriff. Clearly the medieval conception of appropriate episcopal roles differed from later standards.
It may be more than coincidence that Walter le Poer was Sheriff of Devon in 1222, probably overlapping Richard’s tenure as Sheriff of adjacent Dorset. The sheriffs were royal appointments, at this time frequently given to related members of families trusted by the crown. Walter le Poer was also a collector of the lay subsidy in Worcestershire in 1226, a justice itinerant in Worcestershire in the same year, and in 1227 justice itinerant for Oxford, Hereford, Stafford, and Salop (Shropshire). William le Poer (“le Pohier”) was Sheriff of Devon in 1222-1224, and was described as possibly an “outsider,” not native to Devon. The appointment of the Poers in and after 1222 marks the first appearance of the family in Devonshire.
There are references to the Poer family in the pleas of the Devon Eyre, dealing with civil litigation, of 1238. Hugh le Poer was listed as one who pledged for the fine of Walter Losoner and Ralph de Hapse in the case of the abduction of Robert de Sicca Villa de Strachville in Witheridge Hundred. Stephen le Poer was held in default for failing to appear for the first day as a juror in Braunton Hundred. He held land valued at one knight’s fee in Churchill, East Down, Barony of Dartington.
In 1238, Roger le Poer was an Elector for Sancte Marie Otery Hundred, held by the Dean and Chapter of Rouen Cathedral. In 1242-43, he was a juror in the Buddleigh Hundred and a tenant at Yethemeton, at Blakebergh, and at Rapelinghegh, a feofee of John de Courtenay, Earl of Devon. The Blakebergh property was in the honor of Plymton, held of the sheriff of Devon; there is doubtless some connection with William le Poer’s service in this position in 1222-1224. At some date between 1242 and 1254, a Phillip le Poer was a witness to a gift to the priory of the church of Ashbury, Devon.
It seems likely that William le Poer, sheriff of Devon in 1222-1224,  was father of Roger, and perhaps also of Stephen and Hugh le Poer, since there is no evidence of a pre-existing Devonshire le Poer line to provide alternatives. Thus the genealogy of Cecily Poer, who married John Duke’s son William, was from William le Poer or le Pohier, Sheriff of Devon in 1222-1224; to Roger, elector for Ottery Saint Mary in 1238 and juror in 1242; through several generations to John Poer, feofee of the Dowager of the Earl of Devon in 1377; to his son, Roger, father of Cecily.

William and London

William Duke of Exeter may have married more than once, and may have maintained residences in both Exeter and London. (Alternatively there were two prominent men identified as William Dukes of Exeter at this time.) In 1448 he and his wife at that time, Juliana, were granted a papal indult to have a portable altar:
To William Duke, nobeleman, lord of divers places [not named], and Juliana his wife, noblewoman, of the diocese of Exeter.
This was confirmed in 1449-50, providing a bit more locational information:
Item simile altare portatile pro nobiili viro Willelmo Duke, nonnullorum locorum domino Londoniensis diocesis, salutem, etc., sub simili data ut supra, etc. (Pe . . . Martii, as in the preceding.)
These references establish that William Duke and his wife Juliana of Exeter maintained residences in both the Diocese of London and that of Exeter.
In 1450, the master and attorneys of a ship out of Barcelona acknowledged to the master and seamen of the 'Makerell, a barge belonging to Henry [Beaufort], duke of Exeter, receiving various goods including 3 yards of red and 5 yards of woollen cloth from William Duke.
In 1453, William Duke was made a Justice of the Peace for Devon, and was scheduled to appear in Westminster on July 10, 1457. In the same year, a William Duke -- unquestionably a different individual -- was listed as having received stolen goods in Cornwall.

William Duke’s Heirs

On September 20, 1449, Richard Duke was tonsured in a ceremony presided over by Edmund Lacy, entering final vows as a monk; this individual is likely to have been associated with the John Duke of Otterton. His name, “Richard,” is very common in the Otterton line, and apparently unknown in the other early Duke families of southwestern England. This could easily be a younger brother of William Duke, mayor of Exeter.
On July 18, 1461, William's son, Richard Duke, was appointed porter of the king’s castle of Exeter, county Devon. This was the year of the accession of Edward IV, of the House of York, who replaced Henry VI, last of the usurping House of Lancaster. Richard Duke’s appointment might therefore have been a local element in the massive changing of royal appointees associated with this change at the highest level of government.
In 1453, a William Duke appears listed as having imported “18 dol’ vini” into the port of Hull, in Yorkshire, on the Trynyte  of Dartmouth [Devon].
In 1477, William Duke was Collector of Customs and Subsidies for Exeter and Dartmouth and adjacent ports. The royal customs system dates from the reign of Edward I. In 1275 a tax on the export of wool was introduced, payable in every port; wool was the principal economic activity of Devon, indeed of all England, at this time. The collectors of custom, two in each major port, inspected the merchandise, calculated the customs due, received and handled the money, kept detailed accounts, and made annual accountings of all this to the national Exchequer. Collectors were paid £20 a year plus their expenses, and any gifts, annuities, or assignments made by the Crown in anticipation of the revenue. The persons appointed to this office were normally closely associated with the local civic and merchant leaders. This and other positions held by the 15th century Duke family, including John Duke’s appointment as tax commissioner, tend to support the notion that the Duke family is related to the earlier individuals found importing wine through the Port of Exeter.
John and Richard Duke of Exeter entered Oxford in 1501. These individuals appear to have been sons of Roger Duke, a son of William Duke and Cecily Poer Duke. Richard Duke was a Cardinal Morton Scholar in 1501 at Oxford, and was admitted as a fellow of Exeter College in that year. He received his M.A. by 1505, his B.Th. June 19, 1515, his D. Th. November 5, 1516. He entered the Church, and was Junior Proctor of Oxford University 1509-10, and subsequently served in many distinguished positions, including Ord. subden. in Magdalen College Chapel, Rector of Holy Trinity, Exeter; Canon of York and Prebendary of Dunnington; Rector of Whimple, Devon; Archdeacon of Salisbury Cathedral (1526-death); Dean of Cardinal Wolsey's chapel (1528); Canon and Prebendary of Exeter College (1528-death); Canon of Salisbury and Prebendary of Rothefen College (1530-death); Canon of Wells and Prebendary of Buckland Denham (1533); chaplain to Cardinal Wolsey (1518); one of Wolsey's commissioners for the recantation of heretics (1526); and member of the committee on heretical books (1530).
In 1525 William Duke (listed as “Doctar Duke”) served as Dean of the Chapel in the retinue of Cardinal (and Chancellor of  England) Wolsey during his trip to Calais, France, on behalf of the crown. The company must have been more than ordinarily interesting. Wolsey himself was never accused of being boring, and in the retinue we also find Sir Thomas More, knight and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. This is the Thomas More who became Chancellor of England, and was executed for his refusal to agree to Henry VIII’s divorce and separation from the Roman church. He was later canonized. A rigid man, he was also known for his great intelligence and integrity.
Richard Duke died before August 1539. This litany of positions reflects the medieval practice of holding offices in title only, and paying a clerk some fraction of the actual compensation to actually perform the associated duties. It would certainly not have been possible for a single individual to discharge the duties of these offices; many would have been full-time positions in themselves. Cardinal Wolsey was especially notorious for this practice, and Richard Duke appears to have been a protegé of the Cardinal. Nevertheless, this was an interesting assortment of positions in an interesting time, especially with respect to Richard Duke’s functions involving Cardinal Wolsey. In 1527 and 1528 Wolsey was occupied with attempting to obtain the Pope’s permission for Henry VIII to annull his existing marriage and marry Anne Boleyn, an attempt that failed. Although the formation of the independent English church owed much to the impetus of the Reformation, this political situation prompted the separation of the English church from Rome. At his death Richard Duke left to Oxford the MS. collection relating to the cathedral church and the city of Exeter compiled by Jo. Hooker, Ex. Cath. Libr. MS. 3530, confirming his association with the Duke family that had produced several mayors of that city.
Another reference to an association between the Duke family and Hooker exists:
“On the east side of Exeter is a parish called Heavitree, in a healthy situation on a gravelly soil, distinguished by the birth of Arthur Duck, an eminent civilian, in which character he is better known abroad than in his own country; author of the life of archbishop Chichele; and a treatise “De Authoritate Juris Civilis;” and of the primitive, learned, and humble Richard Hooker, who wrote the “Ecclesiastical Polity,’ 1553, and 1560.”
William Duke, Mayor of Exeter in 1442-61, had a son, Richard, who inherited from him, and produced two sons, Richard and Henry. The older son, Richard, became mayor of Exeter in 1523. The younger son, Henry, established a line that for a time was a cadet branch of the family, referred to by their location at Pynne or Pinne, near Otterton. This line included Richard’s son John, and his son, Richard.
Another William Duke was Queen’s footman under Elizabeth I for 31 years, and was given Ford Manor, near the borders of Somerset and Dorset, and other lands in county Middlesex, without fine, in consideration of his service. Ford is also near the Devonshire border, and it is likely that this individual was a member or relative of the Devon family.

The Joy of Real Estate

Richard Duke, Mayor of Exeter in 1523, became Clerk of the Court of Augmentations in London during the 1650’s. This court handled transactions involving the dissolution of monasteries and their supporting chantry grants. Throughout England property had been donated to support priests in performing masses for the dead. Protestant reformers joined with the crown in 1647 to seize this property for the benefit of the crown. This land was then leased for the benefit of the government, and eventually sold.
The central officers of the Court of Augmentations were a Chancellor, a Treasurer, an Attorney, and a Solicitor, with a Clerk, an Usher, and a Messenger. This was apparently modelled on the administrative model of the Duchy of Lancaster.
It has been noted that:
Richard Duke, Clerk of the court from 1536 until its dissolution in 1554, received each year, in legitimate fees for enrolling indentures, writing privy seals and drafting and enrolling patents, many times his basic salary of £40. What he received by way of gifts, which in contemporary eyes formed a hardly less legitimate part of his emoluments, we can only guess."
This addresses the question of where Richard Duke obtained the funds to support his own acquisitions during this period. The grants that Richard Duke was involved in obtaining while Clerk of the Court of Augmentations include the following related to Somerset:
•          North Curry, Somerset: Brotherhood Priest -- Einston Farm
A request to purchase by Sir Thomas Bell and Richard Duke; the property was formally conveyed to Richard Duke by Bell on 10 September 1548.
•          Yeovilton, Somerset: Free Chapel in the Lordship of Speckington
20 August 1549 for Thomas Warde, servant of Richard Duke, Esquire
•          To Thomas Reve, “servant of Richard Duke, esquire,” and George Cotton of London, Gentlemen, 29 November 1552, property formerly belonging to Ilminster Chantry, in Sea and Dunpole. George Cotton was vice-chamberlain to Edward VI. Reve was an assistant clerk to Richard Duke. Reve granted the properties on 29 November 1552 to Humphrey Walrond of Sea, near Ilminster, who worked as an attorney for the sheriffs of the south-west counties in the court of Chancery. This grant included property in 25 counties. Overall, Reve was a party in the purchase of nine grants, valued at over £18,800.
Duke was also active in procuring properties in Gloucestershire, in company with Sir Thomas Bell. They included the following:
•          a tenement in the City of Gloucester bringing in 22s a year, purchased in 1548 and previously supporting a chantry at St. Mary’s parish;
•          a stable and garden in Gloucester and property in Lydney and Ripple (Worcs.), previously supporting a chantry at St. Mary’s parish;
•          two burgages and land in Gloucester, Tredworth, and elswhere, and a rent of 12d. in Pedmarsh field, all previously supporting St. Mary’s chantry at St. Nicholas’ church in Gloucester;
•          part of the endowments of St. Mary’s chantry at St. Owen’s church, all in the City of Gloucester.
Richard Duke’s Somerset purchases associate Richard Duke and Humphrey Walrond during the 1550’s. The connection between the two families was to continue for more than a century, and under interesting conditions, in England and in Barbados.
Other family connections appear in the chantry grants. One of the purchasers of property was Sir George Broke [Brooke], Lord Cobham. Sir George’s second son, George, later married Christiana Duke. Another grant, in Taunton, went to Nicholas Prideaux of Soldon, Devon, Esquire, and Roger Prideaux of London, Gentleman. A later Richard Duke was to marry Catherine Prideaux, daughter of George Prideaux of Nutwell, near Otterton.
George Duke, Richard’s son, purchased a number of Dorset properties through the chancery grant dissolutions. For the substantial sum of £557, 8s., 1d, he bought in 1527 “a tenement called the New Inn, lands, &c., in Castleton, Newland, and Sherborn, Baynard’s lease in Holbrooke in Lidlinch belong to this abbey [Cerne Abbey], and Scotley’s Park in Yateminster belong to Cerne Abbey.” Richard also acquired the very substantial property associated with the Manor of Comberwell in Surrey in 1554 while serving as Clerk of this court; his son George had married Anne Weld of Comberwell and this property might have been for his benefit.
These associations illustrate the operation of the “old boys” network in England in the 1550’s. They are, however, a relatively small portion of the picture. The grants reported are only those associated with the chantrys of Somerset and Gloucestershire and to a lesser extent Dorset. The chantry grants of the remaining counties of England, all administered through the same court, have not been fully published, and doubtless contain other acquisitions by the Duke family and their friends and relatives.

This Richard Duke had two sons, George and John. George married Anne Wilde, daughter of William Wilde of Cumberwell, Surrey, and established his household there in the home acquired by his father when Clerk of the Court of Augmentations. His second marriage was to Phillipa Weldon, daughter of Hugh Weldon. John married Juliana Cosenton, and through her acquired the estate at Aylesford, Kent, where he established his home. John and Juliana had no children, and their estate was inherited by the heirs of George Duke and Anne Wilde. Their story will be continued in the discussion of the Kent line of the Duke family of Lake House.

 

Subsequent Generations

In Devonshire, Richard’s younger son, Henry, married Matilda Whyte (White), daughter of Roger Whyte of Ottery St. Mary, and had two sons, Richard and John. During Elizabeth's reign this Richard Duke served as Sheriff of Devonshire. Richard and John continued the Devonshire line of the Duke family. Richard’s only son died young, and the line devolved to John’s descendants.
George Duke, who inherited Poer Hayes, went on to establish the Lake, Wilts, branch of the family. Poer Hayes was bought from George Duke by Richard Duke, son of Henry Duke and Matilda Whyte Duke, and later High Sheriff of Devonshire under Elizabeth I.
It fell to another Richard, the son of John Duke, who was son of Henry Duke of Pynne (younger brother of Richard Duke of the Court of Augmentations), to head the Devonshire family during the early 17th century. In 1620 a visitation by the royal herald confirmed the family arms, and noted that  Richard was the son of John Duke, who in turn was the second son of Henry Duke. This Henry was the second son of Richard, and was grandson of William Duke, who had been Mayor of Exeter in 1442-61.
Richard Duke married Martha Parker, daughter of John Parker of London, who died on March 1, 1583. This continues the evidence of the London associations of the Devonshire Duke family during this period. He then married Katherine, daughter of George Prideaux of the Manor of Nutwell, on December 9 of the same year.

The Prideaux Family

Nutwell is south of Exeter on the Exe River. The Prideaux were long established in this area. The family was begun in England by Paganus de Prideaux, who held Prideaux Castle in Cornwall under William I, suggesting participation in the Norman Conquest of 1066. Their family crest includes the head of a Saracen, denoting their participation in the crusades.
Herden Prideaux, great-grandson of Paganus de Prideaux and son of Nicholas de Prideaux (died 1169) married the daughter and heiress of Ralph Orcharton, of Orcharton, Devon. This established the Devonshire line of the family, which after the termination of the Cornwall line in 1387 was the senior line.
The Devon family included Sir Jeffrey Prideaux, who died in about 1243; Sir Roger Prideaux, born about 1224; and Sir Ralph Prideaux, born about 1243. In 1346 Thomas Prideaux served in the war in France, presumably at Crécy and Calais, with John Trevaignon of the king's retinue. Other members of the Prideaux family were feoffees of the very powerful Courtenay family, earls of Devonshire.   John Prideaux, Knight (died 1403) was the son of Sir Roger Prideaux of Orcherton and Joan, the heiress of Peter Clifford. Sir John was a commissioner of array in Devon between 1379 and 1392, and was a knight of the shire in the parliaments of October, 1383 (with Sir Robert Cornu) and February, 1388 (with Sir Philip Courtenay). He and his family had close connections with the earl. His sister’s son, Robert Scobhull, was another of the earl’s esquires; his cousin, also John Prideaux, married the daughter of Robert French, one of Earl Edward’s lawyers, in the 1390’s. Sir John himself acted as a feoffee of the earl in 1383, and witnessed with him a charter of Thomas Beauchamp. The Nutwell branch, from which Richard Duke’s wife came, was established by a cadet branch of this line.

The Duke Family in the Early Seventeenth Century

Richard Duke was buried on March 21, 1606, leaving 14 children by his two marriages. On October 24, 1617, his oldest son, also Richard Duke, matriculated at Exeter College, Oxford University. Students from Devonshire very frequently chose Exeter from among the Oxford colleges. Richard's younger brother, Robert Duke, also matriculated that year. At least five members of the Devonshire Duke of Lake family attended Exeter College, Oxford (Richard, b.1599; Robert, b.1600; Humphrey, b.1611; Richard, b.1652; George, b.1654).
Richard's oldest son, Richard, was subsequently disinherited because of “an unsuitable marriage.” We have no information about his unsuitable bride. The younger Robert inherited the Poerhayes estate, after being admitted to the Inner Temple (the Bar) in 1619. An even younger son, Humphrey, emigrated to Barbados in the first years of its colonization, establishing the roots of the Barbados Dukes family.
The story of this branch of the Duke family will continue later, as we move on to the time of the English civil war and to the Duke family in America.

Branches of the Otterton Family

Several major branches of the Duke family trace their origins to the Otterton, Devon, family.

Wiltshire

Michael Duke was the first to lease Lake House near Amesbury, in the 1550’s, as part of the same chantry grants that profited Richard Duke of Devonshire and his friends so well. He was not the only leasee, however. Alice Duke is also listed, having leased “diverse arable lands of the lord’s demesne.” Alice paid £3 13s. Michael paid the sum of “6s 8d p.a. for a good fat swan at the Feast of St. Lucy the Virgin, £3 6s 8d.” Michael Duke is generally said to have come from Devonshire, which is rendered more probable by the chantry grant associations with Richard Duke of Devon.
Amesbury had been described in the Domesday Book (Annotated)  as follows:
Amesbury  Ambles/Ambresberie. King’s land; 3 thanes, the pre-Conquest holders; Osmund from Edward of Salisbury. 8 mills. town on the River Avon; Stonehenge and Woodhenge, both c. 1500 B.C. In A.D.980, Queen Elfrida founded a nunnery there.
As the annotated Domesday  noted, the most famous of English prehistoric archaeological sites, Stonehenge, is located in Amesbury Parish, as is the somewhat smaller Woodhenge. Amesbury itself is known in legend as the place where Queen Guinevere died, and from which her body was carried in state to Glastonbury.
The area around Lake includes several very famous English landmarks. Stonehenge is only a few miles away, and Salisbury Cathedral, a few more miles to the southeast, is historically and architecturally important.
In 1570 Michael’s son John leased a farm in Wilsford from George Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, for the lives of himself and his children John and Agnes. Michael’s grandson, George, married Dorothy Poer and inherited Poer-Hayes in Devon, but sold this to his cousin Richard. He then purchased Lake House in 1578, establishing this as the family seat that was to survive as such until its sale out of the family in 1897. The house is still intact today, on the road through the Woodford Valley from Salisbury to Amesbury.
In 1086 the estate that later became part of Lake Manor was held by Hugh de Avranches. It seems to have come into the hands of Edward, Earl of Salisbury, in the early 12th century, who gave it to his foundation, Bradenstoke Priory. It continued to be held by the Earl of Salisbury, until sold by the Countess of Salisbury in 1325 to Hugh le Despenser, an acquisitive gentleman who profitted conspicuously from very close relationships with the royal family. After his death the lands were forfeit to the Crown, and might have been granted to William de Montagu with the Earldom of Salisbury in 1337, as part of his substantial reward for assistance to Edward III. The Montagu family retained it until at least 1428, with the exception of the years 1400-1409, when it was forfeit to the Crown. John de Montagu had engaged in rebellion, which was always sure to annoy the Crown. In 1475 Lake House was held by a John Cheyne of Pynne, presumably the same Pynne in Devon where a branch of the Otterton Duke family lived a few years later. Henry Duke, who founded the Pynne branch of the Otterton family, was born in 1462.
Lake Manor then went through a variety of owners until the mid-sixteenth century. At that time, Lake House was held by the wardens of the fraternity and guild of St. Anne, Croscombe (Somerset). The crown leased the manor to Michael Duke, as part of the process of realizing income from seized chantry grants. Lake House was then sold by the Crown to Robert Thomas and Andrew Salter, merchant tailors of London, in 1550. They immediately sold it to John Capelyn, who in 1579 sold it to George Duke, grandson of Michael Duke. It remained in the Duke family for nine generations, and was sold in 1897 by Jane, widow of Rev. Edward Duke (1814-1895).
George Duke seems to have re-built the Lake manor house soon after his purchase in 1578. The house has been described as follows:
Lake House is of two stories, basement, and attics, and has stone mullioned and transomed windows, gabled roofs, and diagonally-set chimneys. The external treatment of stone and flint chequerwork is an outstanding example of this technique. The original building was L-shaped, the principal block facing west and the shorter arm running back behind its northern end. It has been suggested that this north wing may incorporate part of an earlier house … The principal west front facing the road is symmetrical and has a projecting porch flanked by semi-octagonal windows, all three features being two-storied and surmounted by embattled parapets. At roof level is a line of five small gables. A shield above the doorway is blazoned with the three annulets of the Duke family … It was said that there had formerly been a drawbridge across the stream behind the house.
In 1623 a visit by the herald St. George confirmed the family arms, identical to those of Otterton, of the Duke family of Lake, Wiltshire. 
George's son John inherited Lake at his death in 1610. John Duke married Maria Young, and became Sheriff of Wiltshire in 1640. The Young family was well-established among the gentry of southwestern England. Of southeastern Devonshire during this period it has been said that:
A high degree of aristocratic landownership was giving way, by the mid-seventeenth century, to dominance by some of the most eminent gentry families: among them the Poles, the Drakes, and the Youngs or Yonges.

The  Duke Family in Hampshire (Southampton)

John Duke’s son, also John Duke, established yet another family residence in the Andover Hundred of Hampshire, near Amport; this is referred to as the Sarson, Hants., branch of the Duke of Lake family. John purchased Cholderton Manor, historically also referred to as Anne Savage, which after his 1670 death was inherited within the Duke family until at least the time of William Duke, of Chichester, in 1873.
In 1595 an additional home, Compton Breamor manor, was sold to George Duke. This manor was in the Downton Hundred of Wiltshire, but today is found within the borders of Hampshire. When he died in 1610 it was inherited by Robert Duke, and it was then sold in 1702 to George Duke, of Sarson, in Amports, Hampshire, whose son John inherited it. George was a descendant of the John Duke who moved from Wiltshire to Hampshire and died in 1670. This is interesting not only in terms of documenting the continuation of the Duke of Lake family in Hampshire, but because it establishes the existence of an otherwise undocumented son of George, named Robert.
Robert’s portion of the family settled at Compton Breamor after George Duke’s purchase of that property in 1595, and inherited the property after George’s death in 1610 until its sale in 1793 by a descendant of George Duke, Robert Duke. Compton Breamor (now known as Breamore House) is on the Avon River, in Hampshire immediately adjacent to the southern boundary with Wiltshire, and survives today.
Lt. Col. Robert Duke, a conspicuous member of the Duke family during the English Civil War, was part of this portion of the Duke family, establishing his family home in Stuckton, Fordingbridge, Hampshire, only a few miles south of Compton Breamor.

Kent and Surrey

In the mid-1550's, another branch of the Duke of Lake family broke off from the Devonshire group, to establish themselves in Kent and Surrey in southeastern England, in Maidstone and in Aylesford, Kent, and subsequently at the manor of Milkwell in Surrey:
The manor of Milkwell was partly in Camberwell and partly in Lambeth … . The manor with Milkwell Wood in Lambeth was granted in 1541 to Sir Thomas Wyatt, who was attainted in 1554. It was afterward acquired by Richard Duke, clerk of the Court of  Augmentations, and remained for some time in the same family. By 1609 it had come to Thomas Duke, whose property consisted of the manor, 6 messuages, 8 cottages, 5 barns, 5 gardens, and 400 acres in Milkwell, Camberwell and Lambeth, besides 30 acres once parcel of the monastery of Bermondsey. Sir Edward Duke, his heir, sold them to Robert Campbell, alderman of London.
Sir Edward Duke was knighted for service to the crown in August 1607.
This portion of the Duke of Lake family came to have many American connections, in part through their long-standing association with the Wyatt family, which produced the first royal governor of Virginia, whose son married a member of the Duke family from Kent. A variety of sources identify members of the Kent branch of the Duke family as among the earliest settlers of Virginia.

 

The Duke family prospered in early 17th century England. In 1639-40, John Duke was Sheriff of Wiltshire. At the same time the distantly related Suffolk Duke family had similar success; Edward Duke was Sheriff of Suffolk. However, a time had come when parts of the family would begin to disperse to the New World. Political turmoil was a major cause of departures during the 1600’s, but personal choice, family disputes, and economics also shaped decisions to emigrate.

 

The Devonshire Family and its Branches

Among the connections of the Duke family of Devon was Sir Walter Raleigh, who founded the colony of Roanoke in 1586 and praised the New World to his friends and relatives. Raleigh was born at Poer Hayes, and in 1584 wrote to Richard Duke that he wished to purchase the estate: “but for the natural disposition I have to that place, being born in the house, I had rather seat myself there than anywhere else.”  Raleigh failed to acquire Poerhayes, and also failed to establish any permanent colony in America. It was not until 1607 that the London Company succeeded in placing the first permanent English settlement in the Americas.
The specific connection between the Raleigh family and the Duke family has not been identified. Walter Raleigh was born at Barton Hayes (Poer Hayes) in 1539 to Walter Raleigh and Katherine Champernowne (Champernon) Raleigh. The Raleighs were descended from an earlier Walter Raleigh, born about 1220 at Raleigh, Devon. The parents of Katherine Champernon are unknown, but the Champernon line in Devon descends from a very distinguished Anglo-Norman family that originally settled in Cornwall, with a branch moving on to Devonshire by the 13th century.
Fortunately, despite this connection the early immigrants to the New World from the Duke family did not choose to go to Roanoke. It has sometimes been suggested that the first of the Duke family to leave England was the disinherited Richard Duke of Otterton. In 1633 it has been thought that he could have become one of the famous “Ark and Dove colonists” (named for the ships in which they traveled) to the new colony of Maryland; a Richard Duke was among them. Although this individual was apparently absent from the colony during the years 1642-1648 (suggestive dates to anyone familiar with the history of the English civil wars), and died in England in 1653, his descendants were among the distinguished early settlers of the Maryland colony. However, it is very uncertain that these are the same individuals. There are records suggesting that the Richard Duke of Maryland was born in 1613, long after the disinherited Richard Duke of Otterton.

The English Civil War

As the English civil war began, Robert Duke of Otterton was the head of the Devonshire branch of the family. He later became known as a "trimmer," one who trims his sails to fit the political climate of the times.
Robert’s grandmother (step-grandmother actually, but the only paternal grandmother that he knew) was Catharine Prideaux Duke, daughter of George Prideaux of Nutwell. The Prideaux family were leading Parliamentarians in Devon. Peter Prideaux was a conspicuous leader of the pro-Parliament faction in the county, and Edmund Prideaux was Cromwell’s Attorney General. However, Robert’s mother, Margaret Bassett Duke, was the daughter of Sir Arthur Bassett of Heanton, who was one of the three or four most prominent royalist leaders in Devon. In addition, Robert’s aunt Elizabeth Duke had married Humphrey Walrond, a royalist and father of another strongly committed royalist, who later lived in Barbados. An aunt, Martha Duke, married Hugh Chichester. The Chichester family was perhaps the most conservative of all; many of the Chichesters were recusants.
Robert’s wife, Sarah Reynall Duke, was the daughter of Richard Reynall of Creedy Wild. Her brother Thomas Reynall was identified as the epitome of a trimmer J.P. and M.P., and the family as a whole was active in local government during the Interregnum but could not be said to be actively pro-Parliament, although Thomas was called “an ardent Presbyterian.”
It seems unlikely that there were many friendly Duke family reunions in Devonshire between 1642 and 1660.
Other members of the family were not so cautious as Robert Duke of Otterton. It has been said that in 1642 a Robert Duke, while a student at Magdalen College, Oxford University, “threw off his gown and bought him a sword.” The parentage of this “Robert” is not identified in this source, but it is noted that he was of the Duke of Lake family of Wiltshire.
In 1648 John Duke of Lake House in Wiltshire was implicated in an uprising against the parliamentary government, and ordered arrested.
In  contrast, in the 1650’s Robert Duke of Otterton was among the Assessment Commissioners for Devonshire. At Easter in 1654 he examined a Newton Poppleford couple in his position of Justice of the Peace. This was apparently a sexual misconduct charge. However, it has been noted that Robert Duke was “not a specialist in the unmarried sexually active,” apparently a popular specialty in the days of the Puritan Cromwell.
The rebellious Robert reappeared in 1655. Lt. Col. Robert Duke “took up arms” and was second in command in the defense of Portland Castle, under Col. Gallop, during Penruddock’s Revolt. This was probably the most conspicuous of the attempts to overthrow the government of the Protector, but lacked organization and widespread support. The royalists surrendered Portland to the beseigers representing Cromwell. Robert was convicted of treason on April 18, 1655, and with them was condemned to be beheaded. However, this was commuted to life in Exeter Gaol for Robert.
Robert is almost certainly the son of Robert Duke who inherited Compton Breamor from George Duke, although parish records have not survived to preserve the names of his children. Lt. Col. Robert Duke is known to have been a member of the Duke of Lake family from Wiltshire; his wife, Anne’s, later petition to the government makes reference to this. He attended Magdalen College at Oxford, which is consistent with this information. (He does not, however, appear in the published Oxford lists, presumably because he never completed his degree.) Magdalen was favored by the Wiltshire branch of the family; others who attended Magdalen were George, who was involved in the Salisbury Uprising, and John, son of Edward Duke of Winterbourne Stoke. He established his household in Stuckton, Hampshire, near the Compton Breamore estate of the older Robert Duke. In addition, it is the Wiltshire rather than the Devonshire or Kent branch that was heavily involved in attempts to overthrow Cromwell's government.
In Salisbury Penruddock's Revolt  involved about 200-400 people who took the Sheriff of Wiltshire prisoner in his nightshirt, along with other county officials. They proceeded into Devonshire, but were overcome and captured. Among the royalists were John and George Duke of Lake. Penruddock and his second-in-command, Grove, had been given assurances of pardon for themselves and their troops if they surrendered, but Penruddock and Grove were ultimately beheaded, after a rather rudimentary trial. The others were imprisoned at Exeter.
Robert subsequently petitioned Cromwell for parole or exile, and was exiled to Barbados. His successful petitions can probably be attributed to the influence of his family, and to an abjectly penitent (even groveling) petition:
Petition of Fras. [Francis] Jones and Rob. [Robert] Duke prisoners in Exeter Castle, to the Protector. We owe the very air we breathe to your clemency, and would rather be torn in pieces than stir a little finger against you. We beg you to add liberty to life, on our plighting faith and religion, and giving security for good deportment in our native country; or else to banish us, that our familes may not perish by the expense of our tedious, though deserved imprisonment. With reference to Council, 2 Nov. 1655.
This petition was granted in an order of November 30:
Order thereon in Council that Gen. Desborow give a warrant to the keeper of the prison to deliver them, and others in prison at Exeter on the late insurrection, to merchants or others, who will give security to transport them prisoners to the East Indies, not to return without special license.
There is inconsistency here in the supposed location of the exile of Robert Duke, with virtually all other sources giving Barbados as the place of exile. Oliver Cromwell had a preference for shipping political dissidents to Barbados, and this is what happened to the Penruddock Rebellion prisoners:
This practice was continued after the Penruddock rising at Salisbury in 1655. On suspicion of complicity, about seventy royalist gentlemen were arrested and brought for trial. Owing to lack of evidence, the jury could not convict them [ed. note: Robert Duke and several others were exceptions; there was abundant evidence and they were convicted]; ‘yet your petitioners and others’, in the words of their graphic appeal, ‘were all kept prisoners for the space of one whole year, and then on a sudden (without the least preparation) snatcht out of their prisons, … and driven through the streets of the City of Exon [Exeter] … none being suffered to take leave of them, and so hurried to Plymouth aboard the ship John of London.’ The petition goes on to describe the terrible conditions of the voyage out to Barbados, and their sufferings as servants on the plantations, ‘grinding at the Mills, attending the furnaces, or digging in this scorching land, having nothing to feed on (notwithstanding their hard labour) but Potatoe Roots, … being bought and sold still from one Planter to another, or attached as horses and beasts for the debts of their masters, being whipt at the whipping posts, as Rogues, for their masters pleasure, and sleep in styes worse than hogs in England.’
In 1656 a George Duke petitioned, in company with Edward Penruddock (brother of John), to be sent from the prison at Exeter to Virginia rather than Barbados. This introduces the possibility that the wrong George Duke has been identified with the Penruddock Rebellion by English family historians. Sources usually indicate that the John and George Duke in question were those who resided at Lake House at this time.
However, this does not appear to be true. John Duke of Lake House did participate in the Rebellion, but he lived undisturbed at Lake until his death at the age of 94 in 1671. He pled ill-health and advanced age and was exempted from exile. His son George died at home on October 13, 1655. Exile of the Penruddock prisoners was not even ordered until November 30, 1655, after Robert Duke’s petition, and a month after George Duke of Lake House, son of John, was dead. Thus, a delay in presenting the petition to Council could scarcely account for the discrepancy in dates. George Duke, son of John, was not the George of the 1655 Rebellion.
Who was the George Duke who petitioned for a change in the location of his exile in 1656? The Committee for Compounding with Delinquents, which sequestered the estates of royalists and recusants, on September 17, 1652, claimed a share of the Wiltshire estates of a George Duke, of Salterton, at the same time that they took a share of that of John Duke, of Lake. Earlier, George Duke of Bulford had been identified as a recusant on January 13, 1648. This George is probably a son of Andrew or John Duke of Bulford, moving from his father's home at Bulford to another Wiltshire town, Salterton, between 1648 and 1652.
Lt. Col. Robert Duke was not shipped to Barbados on the John  of London in 1656 with the other prisoners; a deposition in the Public Record Office dated 1659 has established the list of prisoners transported on that ship in 1656, and he is not on it. Presumably he was shipped on some other transport, perhaps with the Francis Jones who joined him in his petition. George Duke also fails to appear on the list of the John’s passengers. However, George Duke is known to have gone from England to Virginia in 1656, this was the George Duke of the Penruddock Rebellion.
A number of references during this period reflect the political association of some Devon and Kent Duke family members with the Commonwealth. In 1658-9 Robert Duke of Otterton was High Sheriff of Devonshire. This is an office that Robert Duke would not have held had he not maintained cordial relationships with Parliament. Similarly, in 1658 there was a request by George Duke and other justices of peace at Maidstone [Kent] assizes, to the Commissioners of the Great Seal; for "customary relief to the distressed petitioners." The Duke family in Kent seems also not to have foregone their customary offices and political functions.
However, the Wiltshire family continued its opposition. On July 9, 1659, Sec. Nicholas wrote from Brussels to Mr. Mompesson:
I am glad that you and your lieutenant-colonel are so ready to go for England; the time seems now seasonable, there being so great distractions among the rebels, and if we hear truth, the greatest part of the nation, being very weary of the rebellious government, wish and incline to appear for the King’s restoration … when landed, contrive to get to your friends, and raise your regiment. By the time you get a number of horse, I hope you may hear of some of the King’s friends gotten together in a body, whom you should join as soon as you can safely. Edw. Penruddock and Mr. Duke are in England, and will join you.
This presumably refers to Edward Penruddock, brother of John, and to the George Duke with whom he petitioned the Council in 1656. John Duke of Lake House was at this time about 82 years old, and unlikely to have been travelling the world. Both Lt. Col. Robert Duke and George Duke of Lake House were dead. The George Duke of the Rebellion seems to have been exiled to Virginia in 1656, and it was certainly this exile from which he was returning. There are no indications that he later returned to Virginia.

Restoration

In 1660 Charles II assumed the British throne, restoring the monarchy. In that year Anne Duke, widow of Lt. Col. Robert Duke, and his five children petitioned Parliament in October for estates in Hants. (Hampshire) to replace those lost. Anne reported that Robert died in exile prior to that time:
Anne, widow of Robert Duke. For a lease for 99 years of Ellingham Manor, and of the Abbey Lands, Christ Church, co. Hants [Hampshire], forfeited by attainder of John Lisle. Her husband suffered much in the late wars, was engaged in Col. Penruddock’s rising in the west, and sentenced to death, but reprieved and banished to the East Indies, where he has lately died.
The five children of Robert Duke, to the same effect.
It is scarcely surprising that Robert died in exile, given the conditions of the transport and servitude in Barbados. However, Anne’s request was not granted, or if any lease was granted it was for a very short time:
This John Lisle the regicide, created Viscount Lisle by Cromwell, was attainted at the Restoration, but escaped to the Continent, where he was assassinated in 1664. Subsequently Ellingham was restored to his son John, who died in 1709….
Evidence that Anne and her children remained in Stockton, Hampshire, where they lived when Robert was arrested, is found in the lists of Oxford graduates. In 1671 John Duke, listed as son of Robert Duke of Stuckton, gentleman, matriculated at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and received his B.A. in 1674, his M.A. in 1677, and a B.D. in 1687. In 1696 he was Rector of Bishops Waltham, Hants. This is certainly one of Robert's children, probably the oldest son. There was no other Duke family in Stuckton. John was 17 when he matriculated, and would have been born in 1654, the year before Robert's arrest.
It clearly was not possible for Robert, or any others exiled after the Penruddock affair, to take their families with them to Barbados, and it would have been years -- probably until the Restoration in 1660 -- before those who survived could have sent for their families had they chosen to remain in Barbados.
The Duke family in Devon continued to prosper through the Stuart Restoration. This was noted in 1664:
Bishop Ward compiled a list of 14 presbyterians and ‘Oliverians’ who had survived the 1650’s [as J.P.’s and members of Parliament]; to their number could be added Robert Duke of Otterton, Sir John Northcote, who was prominent in debates in Parliament on religion and who thought of deans and chapters as mere parasites, and probably Sir Francis Drake and John Maynard.
In 1661 Robert Duke of Otterton was pardoned by Charles II for taking up arms against the king. He was buried at Otterton 1665, and succeeded by his son Richard. In the 1660’s Richard Duke was described as having been among gentry purchasing land to consolidate ancestral estates. Later, he was the focus of an interesting disagreement between Magdalen College and the king. On March 16, 1681, King Charles II wrote to the President of Magdalen College, requiring him to admit Richard Duke into the place of steward of that college. On March 28, 1681, President Clarke of Magdalen, March 18, wrote to the King that his letter arrived too late, that he had made another appointment and could not appoint Richard Duke steward of Magdalen College. Then, on April 8,1681, Charles II wrote to President Clarke of Magdalen, that this was unacceptable, and that he was to appoint Richard Duke. This ended the exchange; presumably the king won.

The Duke Family and the Duke of Monmouth

Histories associate the Duke family of Devonshire with James Duke of Monmouth, a son (probably illegitimate) of James II who attempted to overthrow his half-brother Charles. In in the early 1680’s he frequently visited Mr. Duke of Ottery, near Colyton, in Exeter, Devon :
It was soon noticed that the manor doors opened to Monmouth were those either of the traditionally Parliament squires, such as Strode, Prideaux, or Duke, or of those few, who from deep conviction, had supported the Whigs. With the exception of Sir Edmund Prideaux and Sir Thomas Thynne of Longleat, not one of these could be classed as a ‘great’ squire. They were men of moderate estates with gross incomes in the neighborhood of £3,000 or £4,000 a year, and none of them had ever played a part or cut a figure in the world of politics and power.
Monmouth was killed at Sedgemoor in 1685 and his followers were either hanged, drawn and quartered, or, again, sold into indentured service in Barbados. Only one member of the Duke family, a John Duke of Colyton, is listed among those who were intended for arrest after Sedgemoor. There is no evidence that he was tried and convicted.

The English Duke Family in Later Times

The Duke family continued to live at Lake and to play significant parts in local and county affairs for several centuries after the English civil war.
In 1779 Edward Duke was born. He was the second son of Edward Duke of Lake House and Fanny, daughter of John Field of Islington. Edward attended Magdalen College, Oxford, was ordained as an Anglican priest, and inherited Lake House in 1805. He was known principally as an antiquarian and archaeologist who explored tumuli and excavated at Stonehenge. He published, with Hoare, Druidical Temples of the County of Wilts  as well as other archaeological studies. He was an active Wiltshire magistrate and a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and of the Linnean Society, a prestigious scholarly organization. After his death in 1852 he was succeeded by his eldest son, Edward.
In the 19th century another Duke, associated with the Duke family of Lake House, became Lord Mayor of London. This was Sir James Duke, Bart, whose arms upon being awarded his peerage incorporate the three wreaths of the Duke family of Lake House.
The Duke family is still resident in Devonshire and Wiltshire, and continues to play a part in county, and sometimes national, affairs. Perhaps the most distinguished member of the family in this century, Sir Henry Duke, was a Member of Parliament for Exeter, and in 1923 chaired a committee to establish a Department of Law at the University of Exeter. He was the Chief Secretary for Ireland after the Easter Rebellion of 1916-18 and was made first Baron Merrivale in 1925. He was presented with an exceedingly difficult situation in Ireland, and has been described as follows:
…. his methods in an impossible task [have been] criticized as too conciliatory … [he was a] serious, imperturbable counsel, formidable in cross-examination; [he was a] dignified and urbane judge.

A number of individuals named Duke or Dukes arrived in the British colonies over a period of more than a century. The following is a listing derived from a variety of sources:
1633    Richard immigrated to Maryland  (an Ark and Dove passenger).
1634    Richard to Maryland
1635    Jo. to New England
1648    George to Va.
1650    Samuel Duke to Va.
1650    Robert Duke to America (this is a will mention in English probate; not a true immigration)
1653    Richard to Maryland, with wife and two children
1654    Thomas Duke to Va. (indentured)
1655    Robert Duke to Barbados, in exile for treason
1656    Duke to Virginia.
1657    Jane (or Jone) Duke to Maryland
1660    Francis Duke to Maryland
1662    William Duke to Nevis from Bristol, England.
1662    William Duke to Virginia from London, England.
1662    James Duke to Virginia
1666    Robert Duke to Maryland
1667    Thomas Duke to Maryland
1672    Robert Duke to Maryland or Virginia
1677    Henry to Maryland or Virginia
1678    Hannah Duke to Virginia
1678    William Dukes bought ticket in Barbados, on the Barq. Adventure, for Carolina; Daniel Ridley, Comandr.
The William Duke listed above in 1662 was a reference to an indenture; William Duke was indentured to Robert Perry  of Nevis, for 3 years, at Bristol in March 1662. Another William Duke is listed in the same year, to Virginia. In early September, 1662, William Duke was among the passengers on the Recovery, captained by Mr. John Wood, bound from London to Virginia. Since there is no record of actual transport of a William Duke from Bristol to Nevis in 1662, this might be the same individual, having had his indenture sold to a Virginia merchant or somehow having changed his plans.
The 1662 Nevis reference is frequently taken to be the same William Duke who later sailed to Charles Towne, South Carolina. This is unlikely to be true. There is no record of this individual moving on from Nevis to Barbados, and no certainty that he in fact went to Nevis. More to the point, a far more likely candidate is available, from a part of the Duke family already established in Barbados.
Henry Duke was listed on the 1679 census of Barbados with the ages of his household members. He had a wife and three sons living at home, ages 24, 20, and 12, as well as two daughters, ages 25 and 17. The Index of Immigrant Lists  has another Henry Duke immigrating to Barbados in 1680, but the citation refers to Hotten’s Persons of Quality …, where the presence of Henry Duke and his family is noted in Christ Church Parish. There is no evidence of a new immigrant at that time. In 1679, William Dukes arrived in Charleston on the Adventure,  commanded by Daniel Ridley, from Barbados. He left on April 7, 1679. This William Duke was probably the son of Henry Duke of Barbados.
The Index also reports a Richard Duke in South Carolina during the late 1600's. This is erroneous. Richard Duke on May 1, 1690, wrote that in 1681 he bought, from Arnold White and Solomon Plae, 300 acres on the Little River, South Carolina, on the north side of Mr. Godfrey and on the south side of Holloway. He placed the land in the keeping of his attorney, Charles Prous, who died 4 years before his writing. Noting a recent decision to resell lands not occupied in the colony, he wrote requesting that his land not be sold off. An individual signing himself only Freblick responded with an order than his lands be retained, and if they had already been resold that they be replaced with other suitable land in an equal amount. There is no specific evidence that this Richard Duke ever entered South Carolina, since the purchase seems to have been made in England and he was unaware of the status of his investment. A search of the 1988 IGI files yielded only one Charles Prowse (Prous is a variant spelling) of an appropriate age at the time. This was Charles Prowse of Exmouth, Devonshire, who was also father of William Prowse, born in 1670 in Devon. The association indicates that the Richard Duke in question was the oldest son of Robert Duke of Otterton, only a few miles from Exmouth.