{"id":4133,"date":"2025-09-25T03:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-09-25T03:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/materialcultureofwills\/?p=4133"},"modified":"2025-11-07T15:27:46","modified_gmt":"2025-11-07T15:27:46","slug":"will-of-the-month-a-gentleman-of-the-city-of-london","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.exeter.ac.uk\/materialcultureofwills\/2025\/09\/25\/will-of-the-month-a-gentleman-of-the-city-of-london\/","title":{"rendered":"Will of the Month: A Gentleman of the City of London"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Dylan Cox<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dylan is a third year History student at the University of Exeter who has been on a work experience placement with the \u2018Material Wills\u2019 project over the summer. Dylan has transcribed and researched the will of a London gentleman, and in this blog post he reflects on what the will can tell us about seventeenth-century society, on different \u2018styles\u2019 of will-making, and also on the process of this type of archival research more broadly.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This month\u2019s blog post discusses the will of Giles Rawlins, proved on the 10th<\/sup> of June 1678, in which he describes himself as a \u2018London Gentleman\u2019.[1]<\/a> What stood out to me about this will was that it offered a unique approach toward will making, one in which finances dominate as Rawlins\u2019 discussion of his \u2018Temporall Estate\u2019 lacks mention of many of the sentimental objects and funerary arrangements that form the focal point of many other wills. Instead, a concern with distributing money, settling debts, and allocating property form the bulk of the content. This highlights the testator’s pragmatism and concern with settling his estate. Rawlins states that he is \u2018Revoaking all wills by me formerly made\u2019. This suggests that he made several versions of his will, and that the desire to settle his financial affairs was a constant concern in the final years of his life. A potential reason for this style of will-making could be that Giles preferred to give during his life, opting to allocate those possessions most sentimental and valuable outside of his will. If this was the case it highlights the variety of attitudes toward gift-giving and will-making: some saw it as an opportunity to list and divide up their personal effects, while others made alternative and often undocumented arrangements for their possessions.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
A modern photograph of Friday Street in London, the location of Giles Rawlins\u2019 potential residence and inn.
https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/2\/26\/Friday_Street_City_of_London.JPG<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

The challenges of archival research<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The will is a good lesson in the perils of archival research, for if I had been specifically searching for a particular Giles Rawlins, I would have encountered some difficulties. When trying to find out more about this testator, I have found records of two different men named Giles Rawlins, who both had their wills proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury in 1678, and who both had ties to Hereford. This adds an additional layer of difficulty when trying to identify testators and piece together an accurate picture of their lives. Nevertheless, one of the two men named Giles Rawlins was born in Herefordshire and lived from 1601 to 1678, a place familiar to the testator of this will as he left \u2018the Poore of the Parish of Langarron in the County of Hereford the sum[m]e of Ten\u0192n pounds\u2019.[2]<\/a> Moreover, he owned both Birley Court and land in Hereford. This Giles Rawlins attended Oxford University and graduated with a BA in 1622 and a MA in 1625, he was also the Rector of Ganarew in 1624 and Wolferlow in 1625.[3]<\/a> If this Giles Rawlins is the \u2018London Gentleman\u2019 of this will and of this blog, then he would have been educated, wealthy, and an individual who moved to London later in life. However, the educated man involved in the church could very well be identified as the alternative Giles Rawlins, whose will reveals he was the \u2018Clerk of Highley\u2019.[4]<\/a> This is only further confused by the fact we know the \u2018London Gentleman\u2019 made at least one other will prior to the one discussed in this blog post. Such difficulties are the product of historical sources created without concern for the logistics of research centuries later, rather, they were legal documents which served a purpose at the time, a fact exemplified by this will\u2019s pragmatism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A window into Early Modern London<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This Giles Rawlins lived in London and mentioned his \u2018dwelling house in fryday streete\u2019: this may have been his primary residence as the letters of Sir Roger Hill from October 1677 address a Giles Rawlins of Friday Street. However, this property may have also been \u2018knowne by the name of the signe of the Rose and Pomgranett\u2019, likely an inn, which reveals interesting information about London in the late seventeenth century. Using \u2018John Stow\u2019s A Survey of London\u2019 we find that Friday Street was \u201cso called of fishmongers dwelling there, and seruing Frydayes market\u201d and was situated in an area of considerable wealth as \u201c<\/em>tall houses, of three or foure stories in height,\u201d were built. Furthermore, it lay next to \u201cBredstreete\u201d which \u201cis now wholy inhabited by rich Marchants\u201d and \u201cdiuers faire Innes bee there, for good receipt of Carriers, and other trauellers to the city\u201d.[5]<\/a> Here, Stow mentioned the inns which housed travellers and provides an insight into the significant degree of wealth. This is corroborated by the fact that the adjacent parish churches of St. Matthew, St. John the Evangelist, and St. Margaret Moses housed the graves of 12 notable men, including John Mabbe the once Chamberlain of London.[6]<\/a> By considering the property mentioned in Rawlins\u2019 will, we can piece together a clearer view of the structure of London, and the geographic distribution of wealth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Charitable bequests<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be expected from an individual of considerable wealth, Rawlins made multiple charitable bequests, including \u2018to the Hospitall of Bridewell the sum[m]e of ffive pounds’. [7]<\/a> Bridewell Hospital, a charitable institution, was initially established as a royal palace in 1553, but was later used to punish \u2018disorderly poor\u2019 and house homeless children in London.[8]<\/a> Furthermore, Bridewell hospital provided desirable apprenticeships known as \u2018Lock\u2019s Gift\u2019, worth \u00a310, that were used to provide a boy with a basic education and trade. In the late seventeenth century, there were 100 apprenticeships offered by the hospital. However, its dual function as a house of correction meant hard labour and whipping were used as modes of punishment acting as alternatives to incarceration. Bridewell was a large institution which housed a significant, transient, prisoner population which peaked in 1702 at 1474 individuals.[9]<\/a> Therefore, Rawlins\u2019 will reveals<\/a> not only information pertaining to the wealthy of London, the merchants of Friday Street, but also those at the other end of the socio-economic scale.   <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
“The Prospect of Bridewell” from John Strype<\/a>‘s An Accurate Edition of Stow’s “A Survey of London<\/a>“<\/em> (1720) https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Bridewell_Palace#\/media\/File:Prospect_of_Bridewell.jpg<\/a> <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

A rare mention of sentimental possessions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Material possessions dominate many other wills, however, their near absence in Rawlins\u2019 will highlights the diverse approach to will-making in the seventeenth century. Whereas some individuals spent time organising funerary arrangements and allocating precious objects, Giles Rawlins appears to use his will for its more utilitarian purpose, distributing wealth and paying debts. However, two of the few objects detailed are \u2018Gold Ring[s] of Twenty shillings price\u2019 which he \u2018Bequeath[ed] To my Cozen William Gwyllim and his wife\u2019, which were most likely mourning rings.[10]<\/a> From the seventeenth to the nineteenth century, dedicating money in one\u2019s will toward mourning rings was common practice and can provide insight into class dynamics in early modern England.[11]<\/a> Jolene Zigarovich argues such rings were \u201csentimental, intimate, and personalised while also commodified, class-oriented, and public\u201d.[12]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
An Example of a \u2018Enamelled gold mourning ring, The hoop with a skull reserved in black enamel inscribed Non hic Sr. N. S. obt 30 June 86, <\/em>England, date 1686\u2019. \u00a9 Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 2025 https:\/\/collections.vam.ac.uk\/item\/O125929\/mourning-ring-unknown<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n

The 20 shillings Rawlins left for each ring would be worth around \u00a3113.78 as of 2017.[13]<\/a> This figure appears to be an appropriate sum as Samuel Pepys similarly ordered 46 mourning rings at 20 shillings each in his will around the same era.[14]<\/a> However, more extravagant options were available such as the \u201ctwo hundred pounds for a ring\u201d to each executor left by Horace Walpole the 4th<\/sup> Earl of Orford in 1797, which was closer to \u00a315,000 each in 2017.[15]<\/a> This invites questions surrounding the role played by wills to the importance of displays of wealth and class dynamics in Early Modern England. Overall, this will of a \u2018London Gentleman\u2019, and its focus on property and finance, allows a more defined vision of the reality of London life to be constructed beyond generic terms such as \u2018rich Marchants\u2019 and \u2018fishmongers\u2019 found in other sources.<\/p>\n\n\n