16 Annotations

First Reading

David Quidnunc  •  Link

Don't know much about Fauntleroy

His first name is unknown. The best that the L&M Companion volume can do is say there was a Thomas Fauntleroy listed in St. Margaret parish records in Westminster starting in 1656 and in records for following years "but not those for 1661" (which is not an exact way of putting it -- did he appear later? L&M doesn't say -- and doesn't say if they don't know). According to the Index volume, Fauntleroy only appears in the diary once, on 16 November 1660.

David Quidnunc  •  Link

Speculating about Fauntleroy

"in discourse he seems to be wise and say little, though I know things are changed against his mind." -- 16 Nov 1660 entry

Pepys's comment sounds to me like Fauntleroy was a Puritan, since, in 1660, that would fit well with the idea of keeping mum when you're opposed to things that have changed.

Government work was likely the biggest profession for men at St. Margaret's parish, so maybe Fauntleroy, like so many of Pepys's friends, was a clerk. It's interesting that he seems to have left the parish by 1661, after the change in government. But if he'd shown up in government records as a clerk, L&M would have found his name and reported that to us. Some records could be lost.

If Fauntleroy was in the service of some Puritan bigwig, I suspect Pepys was likely to point that out in his entry. Maybe he worked for some Puritan littlewig. Maybe he worked in or owned one of the businesses at Westminster Hall. In any event, he would seem to have something to lose by not keeping mum -- customers? a government job? a church job?

I wonder if Pepys's use of the word "discourse" indicates any kind of higher tone to the conversation. Saying Fauntleroy "seems to be wise" is something of a compliment about his discretion, and Pepys writing that he knows Fauntleroy is opposed to "things" indicates he knew Fauntleroy's mind pretty well before, suggesting his "old acquaintance" had spoken quite a lot before.

Roger Arbor  •  Link

Fauntleroy... Mmmm. Any connecting with the king (wrong side of the bed and all that)... Le Roi... Font.. or does my mind work along too predictable a course? Not the 'current' king of course.

vincent  •  Link

Roger! Do you mean baptised a king?

David Quidnunc  •  Link


Clearly, "fountain-the-king." But if his name involved baptism, Fauntleroy would have welcomed the political/religious revolution of 1660. Or maybe it means "sprung from the King" and Fauntleroy is a pretender to the throne, disconsolate that Charles II has now grabbed the crown...

"Discourse" just seems to mean conversation, judging by Pepys's previous use of the term. Maybe long conversation.

Pepys has been in Westminster Hall several times, even since he moved to Seething Lane, according to our handy site search engine -- which seems to eliminate the possibility that Fauntleroy worked there, since Pepys says he hasn't seen him for quite a while.

David Quidnunc  •  Link

"font le roi" means "make the king"
and fountain is "fontaine" in French, according to Babelfish online translator:

So he's a kingmaker . . .

vincent  •  Link

The correct answer lies with La Mere[Mater]. Only she knows the answer.

Peter  •  Link

The most important question has to be ..... "Was he a vertically challenged aristocrat?"

Peter  •  Link

On the issue of the name, I should think it has more to do with "the king's water source" ... possibly a place name? However, "Kingswell" sounds much more prosaic!

Grahamt  •  Link

In modern French a water source would either be Source du Roi or Fontaine du Roi. (du, or de la, is "of the") As David says font-le-Roi means "made the King": font being the past tense of faire, and nothing to do with fonts or fountains

Grahamt  •  Link

Error in my French Grammer:
font is 3rd party plural present tense, so font-le-Roi is "(they) make the King"

vincent  •  Link

In ecclesiastical French "fonts" means baptismal or baptisemaux. Here, we do need a good insight to French Language :[and a genuine French version] which played a heavy part of the [top]upper crust of Society language as they would have buzz words that the Vulgar masses would not understand; There is still an 'in' language and an 'out' language to seperate "thems" from the "usses". Meanings of words and their uses in all languages are always changing, evolving . That is Why Classical Greek and Latin are so useful because they are caste in solid? concrete. The 17C translation of Livi will differ from to-days version and of course that depends on the different school of thought. It would be interesting to see a Translation of Livi into French, German , English from 17C version then Xtranslated into the modern Idom then see if it could be reversed back in to the classical.

dirk  •  Link

The name Fauntleroy

I found the following explanation for this family name:
From Hutchin's History of Dorset,Third Edition, Vol. IV, [pages 179-180, Quote: "Tradition says that this family had their name of L'enfant le Roy,[...] from being the issue of some one of our kings."

You can check that (and some more information) at

A family tree (fairly complete it would seem) can be found at

Jim Fauntleroy  •  Link

I know little of Mr. Pepys, but I know a thing or two about Fauntleroys. The name goes back to the early 1300's with no documented royal connection. There is a standard work tracing the Fauntleroy name (Robert Fauntleroy, 1952). Plenty of research may have been done since then to supplement what I have from that source.

There are two mentions of a Thomas Fauntleroy who would have been living in 1660. Of the first, all we know is that his father, John, was baptized in 1615 and that Thomas himself was buried in 1664. It is unknown how old he was.

The other Thomas was baptized in 1621 and had a will dated 1679. It is stated that he lived at Culvers Grove at Boreham, County Essex. He married and had five known children during the 1660's. It is perhaps interesting to note that his brother, Moore, emigrated to the United States in 1643 and from him all the American Fauntleroys are descended.

D.D. Coffman  •  Link

Anyone interested in Thomas Fauntleroy should check out "Lux in Tenebris, or A Clavis to the Treasury in Broad-Street" (1653). See EEBO or ESTC/Wing (F559).

Third Reading

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Pepys doesn't share Fauntleroy's first name, so we have no way of knowing if this is the right man. But he is a good candidate ...

You can read Thomas Fauntleroy's book, "Lux in Tenebris, or A Clavis to the Treasury in Broad-Street"
at https://llds.ling-phil.ox.ac.uk/l…

The whole title: "By vertue of severall ordinances of the Lords and Commons now assembled in Parliament, directed to us the Commissioners of Excise, for the ordering and receipts of the excise and new-import."
Author: England and Wales. Commissioners of Excise.
Publication info: [London : s.n., 1644]

Everything you want to know about the Excise Taxation and the Origins of Public Debt from 1647 - 1663 -- which covers Thomas Fauntleroy's time there:

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.


Chart showing the number of references in each month of the diary’s entries.