[N2785] Ralph Brook was an Officer at Arms, in the College of Arms, for forty-five years.

He was a member of a Cheshire family and for some reason changed his name from Brooksmouth to Brooke. He was born in 1553 and went to Merchant Taylors School in 1564 being appointed first a Rouge Croix Pursuivant and later York Herald in 1593.

Ralph Brooke lived at Reculver and was buried there. 0n the South Wall of old Reculver Church was hung his portrait showing him with a short trimmed beard in full Herald's ceremonials and under was inscribed:

"Here under, quiet from worldly miseries,
Ralph Brook Esquire, late York Herald lies,
Fifteenth of October he was last alive,
One thousand six hundred and twenty five,
Seventy three years bore he fortunes harms,
and forty five an officer of arms.
He married Thomasin, daughter of Michael Cobb of Kent,
Sargent at Arms, by who two daughters God him lent,
Surviving, Mary, William Dicken's wife,
Thomasine, John Eaton's, Happy be their life."

Ralph Brook seem to have brought the records of the Cobbe family to date during the Heralds Visitation in 1619 and it may be that he added a ducal coronet to the family crest, with, no doubt, the consent of the family.

Brook's reputation has been used by some American researchers to discredit the pedigree of this Cobb family line. It is their argument that Ralph Brook fabricated a totally false pedigree for the descendants of John Cobb (1482).

Let us take a moment to determine whether Brooke's reputation is deserved. Quoting and paraphrasing selected passages from "Dictionary of National Biography" edited by Leslie Stephen; Vol. VI; Smith, Elder and Co; London; 1886: " ... the entry of his admission into Merchant Tailors' School, on 3 July 1564, simply records the fact that his father was Geoffrey, and a shoemaker. In 1576 he was made free of the Painter Stainers' Company, and four years afterwards was appointed Rouge Croix persuivant in the College of Arms. In March 1593 he became York Herald, but attained no higher rank. That he was an accurate and painstaking genealogist there can be no doubt; it seems equally clear that he was of a grasping and jealous nature, and much disliked by his fellow-officers in the Herald's College."

In 1597, a man named Camden who was not a professional herald was made Clarenceux King-at-Arms. Brook took great offense by this; and published "A Discoverie of certaine Errours published in print in the much commended Brittania 1594, very prejudiciall to the Discentes and Successions of the auncient Nobilitie of this Realme."

A long and acrimonious controversy followed ... "the only good result being that, through the researches of Brooke, Camden, and Vincent, the genealogies of the nobility were closely investigated, and the first attempt at a printed peerage was made."

It should be noted that three separate individuals ... including Brooke ... were charged with the task of doing this research. If there was any question of Brooke's genealogical skill and credibility, he certainly would not have been included as a member of this investigation.

Brooke also wrote "A Second Discovery of Errors", which was published in 1723, as part of the manuscript of Anstis. He also authored two editions in 1619 and 1622, which bore the lengthy title "A Catalogue and Succession of the Kings, Princes, Dukes, Marquisses, Earles, and Viscounts of the Realme of England since the Norman Conquest to this present yeare 1619. Together with their Armes, Wives and Children, the times of their deaths and burials, with any other memorable actions, collected by Ralph Brooke, Esquire, Yorke Herauld, Discovering and Reforming many errors committed by men of other Professions and lately published in Print to the great wronging of the nobility and prejudice of his Majestie's Officers and Armes, who are onely appointed and sworne to deale faithfully in these causes."

My conclusions are first, Brooke may or may not have been a product of nobility; and second, there seems to be ample evidence that he had a difficult personality. But there can be no doubt that he was a competent and skilled genealogist ... and utterly dedicated to insure nobody got away with a title they did not deserve ... so much so that he was willing to make himself unpopular and controversial by "blowing the whistle" (as we Americans call it) on his peers, by publicly exposing their own false claims.