By the late Rev. Edward Wilton, M.A. 61 
Tanner assumed (I believe I use that word fitly) when he became 
Chancellor of Norwich. To this I shall allude hereafter. 
As regards the Cornish and Devonshire Family of the name, there 
are five descents given in the last Visitation of the West of England. 
The enrolled Pedigree records Marriages with thefamilies of Whiting, 
Tregarthen, Tilley and Roscannock; at that date 1620 Richard, eldest 
Son, was aged 26; Lawes was 2nd. Son; Arthur 38rd Son; John 4th 
Son; all duly registered as the then existing generation. There is 
no mention throughout the entire Pedigree of any member who had 
_ migrated into Wiltshire; and the name of Bryan Tanner certainly 
does not appear, a Person we know then to have been living; and 
therefore we may venture to say that he was unconnected with the 
Cornish Tanners, by descent from a common ancestor. 
The only printed Pedigree of Bishop Tanner’s ancestors with 
which I am acquainted is that found in Blomefield’s Norfolk. He 
was intimate with the Bishop, who speaks of him as a véty able and 
accurate County Historian: Blomefield therefore must have had the 
opportunity of carrying up the Bishop’s Pedigree, had he been en- 
abled so to do; but he commences it with his Father, the Vicar of 
Market Lavington. I can account for this; and can rise one step 
higher in the Bishop’s genealogy, through the kindness of the Rev. 
John Griffiths, keeper of the Archives at Oxford. There can be no 
doubt that his Grandfather, was Bryan Tanner of Erchfont; and 
that he was a man in a humble condition of life. Certain it is that 
such a Person was then residing at Erchfont; for I find in the Bap- 
tismal Register of that Parish, under the year 1635, “Elizabeth 
Daughter of Bryan Tanner.” I expected to find under 1640, (the 
known date of the Bishop’s Father’s birth) the entry of a Son of 
Bryan Tanner, baptized Thomas: but I sought in vain. At, and 
about that date, the ink has faded from the surface of the coarse and 
greasy parchment; and it would require some chemical application, 
to make most of the entries of that period legible. When in 1635, 
Bryan Tanner’s name is mentioned, there is no addition, as in some 
other cases, of the words “Mr.” “Gent.” or “Esq.”; nothing lead- 
ing us to suppose that he was any thing more than an ordinary 
| Parishioner; the evidence of this fact, will presently appear from 
