THE FAMILY OF THE TRADESCANTS.
In Chambers's Edinburgh Journal, No. 359., New Series, may be found an account of this family, written by myself; I hope to be excused when I say that it is the most accurate hitherto published. It gave me great pleasure to find that so distinguished an antiquary as Dr. Rimbault mainly corroborates the article alluded to; but I regret that I feel bound to notice a serious error into which that gentleman has fallen. Dr. R. states that "Old John Tradescant died in the year 1652;" and in another place he states that—
"It was not the youngest John Tradescant that died in 1652, but the oldest, the grandfather, the first of that name that settled in England."
The conflicting accounts and confusion in the history of the Tradescants, have no doubt arisen from the three, "grandsire, father, and son," having been all named John; consequently, for the sake of perspicuity, I shall adopt the plan of our worthy editor, and designate the Tradescant who first settled in England, No. 1.; his son, who published the Musæum Tradescantianum, No. 2.; and the son of the latter, who "died in his spring," No. 3. Now, to prove that it was the youngest of the Tradescants, No. 3., who died in 1652, we have only to refer to the preface of the Musæum Tradescantianum, which was published in 1656. There we find that Tradescant No. 2. says that—
"About three years agoe (by the perswasion of some friends) I was resolved to take a catalogue of those rarities and curiosities, which my father had sedulously collected, and myself with continued diligence have augmented and hitherto preserved together."
He then proceeds to account for the delay in the publication of the work in these words:
"Presently thereupon my onely son died, one of my friends fell sick," &c.
Again, in Ashmole's Diary we find the following entry:
"Sept. 11th, 1652. Young John Tredescant died."
And, further on, Ashmole states that
"He was buried by his grandfather, in Lambeth Churchyard."
The word by, in the quotation, meaning, by the side of, close by his grandfather. The burial register of Lambeth parish gives the date of the interment, Sept. 16, 1652. Ashmole's Diary, as quoted by Dr. Rimbault, and the burial register also, give the date of the death of Tradescant No. 2., who survived his son ten years: the family then became extinct.
Ashmole, who became acquainted with the Tradescants in 1650, never mentions the grandfather (No. 1.), nor is his name to be found in the burial registry; and consequently the date of his death, as far as I have read, has always been set down as uncertain. There are other parish records, however, than burial registers; and I was well repaid for my search by finding, in the Churchwardens' Accounts of St. Mary's, Lambeth, the following entries:
"1634. June 1. Received for burial of Jane, wife of John Tradeskin, 12s."
"1637-8. Item. John Tradeskin; ye gret bell and black cloth, 5s. 4d."
This last entry, in all probability, marks the date of the death of the first Tradescant. Assuming that it does, and as the engraving by Hollar represents him as far advanced in years, his age did not exclude him from having been in the service of Queen Elizabeth, so much so as it would if he had died in 1652. I read the line on the tombstone,—
"Both gardeners to the Rose and Lily Queen"—
as signifying that one of the Tradescants had been gardener to Elizabeth, the Rose Queen, and the other to Henrietta, the Lily Queen. However, as that is little more than a matter of opinion, not of historical fact, it need not be further alluded to at present.
I am happy to say, that I have every reason to believe that I am on the trace of new, curious, and indisputably authentic information respecting the Tradescants. If successful, and if the editor will spare me a corner, I shall be proud to communicate it to the readers of "Notes and Queries."
Tradescant's house, and the house adjoining, where Ashmole lived, previous to his taking possession of Tradescant's house, after Mrs. Tradescant's death (see Ashmole's Diary), are still standing, though they have undergone many alterations. Even there, the name of Tradescant seems forgotten: the venerable building is only known by a nick-name, derived most probably from its antique chimneys. I had many weary pilgrimages before I discovered the identical edifice. I have not seen the interior, but am aware that there are some traces of Ashmole in the house, but none whatever of Tradescant in either house or garden. I had a conversation with the gardener of the gentleman who now occupies it: he appeared to have an indistinct idea that an adept in his own profession had once lived there, for he observed that, "If old What's-his-name were alive now, the potato disease could soon be cured." Oh! what we antiquaries meet with! He further gave me to understand that "furriners sometimes came there wishing to see the place, but that I was the only Englishman, that he recollected, who expressed any curiosity about it."
The restorers of the tomb of the Tradescants merely took away the old leger stone, on which were cut the words quoted by A. W. H. (Vol. iii., p. 207.), and replaced it by a new stone bearing the lines quoted by Dr. Rimbault, which were not on the original stone (see Aubrey's Surrey), and the words—
"Erected 1662.
Repaired by Subscription, 1773."
But although the name of the childless, persecuted widow, Hester Tradescant, is not now on the tomb which she piously erected to the memories of her husband and son; still, on the west end of it, can be traced the form of a hydra tearing a human skull—fit emblem of the foul and vulture-like rapacity of Elias Ashmole.
William Pinkerton.
Dalmeny Cottage, Ham, Surrey.