On Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 3:01:35 AM UTC-6, Derek Howard wrote:
> If I might just add a few thoughts for consideration to this thread,
> though they do not lead to any firm conclusions :
> The coat of arms of the Roelx family ("Die He. V. Rues") was Argent
> three lions rampant Gules. [Gelre roll of arms, no 1062, in "Gelre BR
> Ms 15652-56", ed. van Helmont, Leuven 1992, p 340, illustrated page
> 197]. This is _not_ the same as the arms recorded for Katherine de
> Roet in England, which were canting arms. This suggests she was not
> entitled to the Roelx arms and, if she was descended from them or
> another knightly or noble family, she or possibly her father may have
> been illegitimate.

Or that they were English arms granted her father by Edward III. The Roeulx family patrimony had been decimated by then with the family forced to sell back all its holdings to the Count of Hainaut, and their title held in abeyance until significantly later when it was granted to the Croy family.

<snip>

> The term Paon is almost certainly the word for peacock. There is a
> possible rationale for this. The crest of the Counts of Hainault
> consisted of peacock feathers as did de Melun lord of Antoing and the
> marshal of Hainault also used peacock feathers, so did the Drossard or
> Seneschal of Hainault (de Werchin). A representative such as a king of
> arms, or indeed a junior or illegitimate relative may well have been
> referred to as such in the diminutive. It was commonplace for heralds
> to take their title from an heraldic emblem of their masters, as an
> alternative to from their titles or territory, and to be widely known
> by their title. It was also not uncommon for kings of arms in the low
> counties to be distantly related to the ruling families. If there is
> any truth at all in the allegations of a connection to the position of
> Guyenne king of arms, this may have been preceded by a period as
> herald of Hainault.

Giles dit Paon was probably a household attendant of some sort upon the count.

> The chapter of the abbey of St Wadru at Mons was restricted to members
> of the nobility. To have a position in the chapter would have required
> proof of the appropriate noble quarters. At a much later date this was
> legislated for in some detail but in essence had been the same since
> its foundation.

Yes, hence why it is informative that one Elizabeth, specifically called the daughter of Giles of Roeulx *called* Paon was named a secular canoness to St. Waudru so significant.

> The Roelx family were a junior branch of the Counts of Hainault and
> were extinct in 1336.

This is absolutely false. A passing glance at the family indicates that there were all kinds of descendants running around.

However, there were members by the name of
> Gilles before that. "Gilles dis Rigaus dou Rues" was a party, at Mons,
> to a declaration in 1277-78 and sealed with his arms. "Gilles dis
> Rigaux sires dou Roes" "amortit" the land on which the chapel of
> Bellecourt was built 1 April 1297. "Mes sires Giles dis Rigaus sires
> dou Roelz chevalier" sealed an act of the baillie of Hainault in 1297.
> His seal included the Roelx arms and the legend "Sr Egidii dicti
> Rigavt militis dni de Rodio". [de Raadt: Sceaux armoriés des Pays-Bas
> et des pays avoisinants, tome III, reprint 1999, page 232]. Note it is
> not unusual to have a nickname as well as first name even on a seal.
> I am not convinced that the record of the tomb inscription in St Pauls
> referred to elsewhere on the thread represents a real transcription
> from sight of the tomb. The wording surrounding the inscription
> suggests it was speculation and the alleged wording of the tomb was no
> more than was well known from other sources, the damage too
> conveniently obscuring a lack of detail that would be expected on the
> real thing.

Well, no. The evidence indicates it was put there/the brass that is sometime after 1396.

Judy