Edward IV. replaced this province under a King of Arms, and revived the dormant title of _Norroy_. But in the Statute of Resumptions, {31} made 1st Henry VII., a clause was inserted that the same should not extend to _John Moore_, otherwise _Norroy_, chief Herald King of Arms of the north parts of this realm of England, so appointed by King Edward IV. by his Letters Patent, bearing date 9th July, in the eighteenth year of his reign. It has since continued without interruption. _Falcon King of Arms_ seems the next who had the title of King conferred upon him, and was so named from one of the Royal badges of King Edward III., and it was afterwards given to a herald and pursuivant, under princes who bore the falcon as a badge or cognisance, and it is difficult to ascertain whether this officer was considered a king, herald, or pursuivant. _Froissart_ in 1395 calls _Faucon_ only a herald, and in 1364 mentions this officer as a King of Arms belonging to the King of England; but it is certain that in the 18th Richard II. there was a King of Arms by that appellation, and so continued until the reign of Richard III., if not later; but at what particular period of time the officer was discontinued cannot be correctly ascertained. _Windsor_ has been considered by some writers to have been the title of a King of Arms, from an abbreviation in some old records, which might be otherwise translated. There is, however, amongst the Protections in the Tower of London, one granted in the 49th Edward III. to _Stephen de Windesore, Heraldo Armorum rege dicto_, which seems to favour the conjecture, and other records might be quoted for and against this supposition, which might have arisen through mistake in the entries, as they contradict one another. _Marche_ seems the next in point of antiquity of creation; but although Sir Henry Spelman says that King Edward IV. descended from the _Earls of Marche_, promoted _Marche Herald_ to be a King of Arms, giving him, perhaps, the marches for his province, it is pretty clearly ascertained that it was of a more early date, from the express mention of _March Rex Heraldorum_ and _March Rex Heraldus_ in records of the time of Richard II., though it may be possible that it was then only a nominal title, and did not become a real one till the reign of Edward IV., as mentioned by Spelman.