Hello! I just joined this group, my first google group, and am new to this research, though I have read previous posts. I am interested in the Dennis and Stradling families.

You might want to check the accuracy of this info I found on the web, though, given than you're more experienced researchers than I am, it may already be familiar to you:

Coats of arms are hereditary and can be passed down through descendants of the male line. Daughters of men who bear arms are entitled to use them, but their children cannot unless agreed by the monarch.

A woman is a heraldic heiress only if she has no brothers or all her brothers die without sons or daughters. Shen then carries those arms for the benefit of her future male descendants.

Illegitimate women are regarded as heraldic heiresses, even if they have brothers.

If the above is accurate and applies to the place and time we're discussing, and if Katherine indeed had brothers, might the absence of a Stradling heraldic device in connection to Walter suggest that Katherine is, in fact, legitimate? She apparently had brothers.

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:24:57 AM UTC-8, Cindy H. wrote:
> Hello! I just joined this group, my first google group, and am new to this research, though I have read previous posts. I am interested in the Dennis and Stradling families.
>
> You might want to check the accuracy of this info I found on the web, though,
> given than you're more experienced researchers than I am, it may already be
> familiar to you:
>
> Coats of arms are hereditary and can be passed down through descendants of
> the male line. Daughters of men who bear arms are entitled to use them, but
> their children cannot unless agreed by the monarch.

This is slightly oversimplified. Technically only the senior male heir is entitled to the undifferenced arms. A younger son and his descendants must alter it in some manner. Historically this was done organically, but later it came to be codified, sometimes through grants confirming the specific difference.

As to children of daughters:

> A woman is a heraldic heiress only if she has no brothers or all her brothers die
> without sons or daughters. Shen then carries those arms for the benefit of her
> future male descendants.

There is one exception here - if a man had children by two wives, a son by one first and daughters by a second who was herself an heiress, then the children of the daughters would be entitled to the arms of their maternal grandmother, but would also be entitled to the maternal grandfather as the conduit for them acquiring the maternal inheritance - I have even seen it stated by some older descriptions of the rules of heraldry that one could not represent an ancestral inheritance in heraldry without including all of the families through which it passed, even if not heirs to those intermediary families.

Remember that many of the modern rules arose as retrospective codification of what at the time had been non-codified social trends, and such trends were not static over time.

> Illegitimate women are regarded as heraldic heiresses, even if they have brothers.

No, the opposite. At least historically, illegitmate children could never be heirs/heiresses, they were 'children of none'. Technically, they were entitled to no arms whatsoever without a separate grant to them, though in practice they often used their paternal arms differenced in some manner (there developed differences 'typical' of bastardy, like the bend sinister), but with illegitimate daughters, they could never be heiresses and never pass arms.

> If the above is accurate and applies to the place and time we're discussing, and if
> Katherine indeed had brothers, might the absence of a Stradling heraldic device in
> connection to Walter suggest that Katherine is, in fact, legitimate? She apparently
> had brothers.

No. Whether legitimate with brothers or illegitimate, she would not have been an heiress and would not have passed arms. Further, though, bear in mind that not everyone entitled to incorporate the arms of a mother who was an heiress did so in every case - there are examples where in every-day usage someone would simply display the paternal arms or a simplified quartering, while in more formalized commissioned artwork they might display a more elaborate coat with dozens of quarterings representing their entire inheritance. As such, one must be careful in drawing any conclusion from a coat not appearing.

None of this stopped some descendants of an illegitimate daughter from retroactively elevating her status in their heraldry, but this was not exclusive to this specific situation - some of the 17th century heraldic displays included arms for families that weren't even ancestral, simply because they wanted to use the heraldry to 'improve' their claim to land they actually acquired by transfer rather than inheritance.

taf

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 1:38:35 PM UTC-5, taf wrote:
> On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:24:57 AM UTC-8, Cindy H. wrote:
> > Hello! I just joined this group, my first google group, and am new to this research, though I have read previous posts. I am interested in the Dennis and Stradling families.
> >
> > You might want to check the accuracy of this info I found on the web, though,
> > given than you're more experienced researchers than I am, it may already be
> > familiar to you:
> >
> > Coats of arms are hereditary and can be passed down through descendants of
> > the male line. Daughters of men who bear arms are entitled to use them, but
> > their children cannot unless agreed by the monarch.
> This is slightly oversimplified. Technically only the senior male heir is entitled to the undifferenced arms. A younger son and his descendants must alter it in some manner. Historically this was done organically, but later it came to be codified, sometimes through grants confirming the specific difference.
>
> As to children of daughters:
> > A woman is a heraldic heiress only if she has no brothers or all her brothers die
> > without sons or daughters. Shen then carries those arms for the benefit of her
> > future male descendants.
> There is one exception here - if a man had children by two wives, a son by one first and daughters by a second who was herself an heiress, then the children of the daughters would be entitled to the arms of their maternal grandmother, but would also be entitled to the maternal grandfather as the conduit for them acquiring the maternal inheritance - I have even seen it stated by some older descriptions of the rules of heraldry that one could not represent an ancestral inheritance in heraldry without including all of the families through which it passed, even if not heirs to those intermediary families.
>
> Remember that many of the modern rules arose as retrospective codification of what at the time had been non-codified social trends, and such trends were not static over time.
> > Illegitimate women are regarded as heraldic heiresses, even if they have brothers.
> No, the opposite. At least historically, illegitmate children could never be heirs/heiresses, they were 'children of none'. Technically, they were entitled to no arms whatsoever without a separate grant to them, though in practice they often used their paternal arms differenced in some manner (there developed differences 'typical' of bastardy, like the bend sinister), but with illegitimate daughters, they could never be heiresses and never pass arms.
> > If the above is accurate and applies to the place and time we're discussing, and if
> > Katherine indeed had brothers, might the absence of a Stradling heraldic device in
> > connection to Walter suggest that Katherine is, in fact, legitimate? She apparently
> > had brothers.
> No. Whether legitimate with brothers or illegitimate, she would not have been an heiress and would not have passed arms. Further, though, bear in mind that not everyone entitled to incorporate the arms of a mother who was an heiress did so in every case - there are examples where in every-day usage someone would simply display the paternal arms or a simplified quartering, while in more formalized commissioned artwork they might display a more elaborate coat with dozens of quarterings representing their entire inheritance. As such, one must be careful in drawing any conclusion from a coat not appearing.
>
> None of this stopped some descendants of an illegitimate daughter from retroactively elevating her status in their heraldry, but this was not exclusive to this specific situation - some of the 17th century heraldic displays included arms for families that weren't even ancestral, simply because they wanted to use the heraldry to 'improve' their claim to land they actually acquired by transfer rather than inheritance.
>
> taf

Hi Cindy,

You raise an interesting question that I long puzzled over. I can’t add to subject matter expertise provided by taf, but I can share some thoughts on the 1520 Dennis pedigree.

When I first realized that the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter Dennis’ funerary brass seemed to be identical to those of his mother in the Dennis pedigree, I thought that she was likely legitimate and also that if she was a heraldic heiress, then she couldn’t have been Sir Edward Stradling’s daughter (since he had at least one son, Sir Henry Stradling). However, that specific quartering (a chevron between three roses) has not been repeated in any subsequent Dennis arms, including those at Siston Court.

I would also like to note that, as far as I could tell, the Dennis pedigree is accurate in its representation of the spouses’ arms. For example, we can identify Corbet and Russell arms held by Sir Gilbert Dennis’ wives; Fiennes and Danvers for Sir Walter Dennis’ wives; and Twynyho and Berkeley arms for Sir William Dennis’ wives. Keeping that in mind, it strikes me as odd that they would get the Stradling arms wrong both in the pedigree and on the funerary brass. As such, on the basis of this heraldic evidence, I am personally leaning towards Sir Walter’s mother not being a daughter of Sir Edward Stradling. However, to make things more complicated, the Dictionary of British Arms Medieval Ordinary specifically identifies the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter’s funerary brass as Russell, but the caption for the same arms in the Dennis pedigree seems to read Stradlyng.

All the best!

Andrew

PS: I am posting via Google Groups and usually respond using the Reply-all button by typing in the field that appears at the bottom after I click it.

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:08:33 PM UTC-5, Andrew Z wrote:
> Hi Cindy,
>
> You raise an interesting question that I long puzzled over. I can’t add to subject matter expertise provided by taf, but I can share some thoughts on the 1520 Dennis pedigree.
>
> When I first realized that the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter Dennis’ funerary brass seemed to be identical to those of his mother in the Dennis pedigree, I thought that she was likely legitimate and also that if she was a heraldic heiress, then she couldn’t have been Sir Edward Stradling’s daughter (since he had at least one son, Sir Henry Stradling). However, that specific quartering (a chevron between three roses) has not been repeated in any subsequent Dennis arms, including those at Siston Court.
>
> I would also like to note that, as far as I could tell, the Dennis pedigree is accurate in its representation of the spouses’ arms. For example, we can identify Corbet and Russell arms held by Sir Gilbert Dennis’ wives; Fiennes and Danvers for Sir Walter Dennis’ wives; and Twynyho and Berkeley arms for Sir William Dennis’ wives. Keeping that in mind, it strikes me as odd that they would get the Stradling arms wrong both in the pedigree and on the funerary brass. As such, on the basis of this heraldic evidence, I am personally leaning towards Sir Walter’s mother not being a daughter of Sir Edward Stradling. However, to make things more complicated, the Dictionary of British Arms Medieval Ordinary specifically identifies the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter’s funerary brass as Russell, but the caption for the same arms in the Dennis pedigree seems to read Stradlyng.
>
> All the best!
>
> Andrew
>
> PS: I am posting via Google Groups and usually respond using the Reply-all button by typing in the field that appears at the bottom after I click it..
Hi Andrew,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Most interesting information, but it is indeed a puzzlement! Alas, I can't add anything more but will keep my eye on posts in case of a discovery. This is a great group!

Best to you,
Cindy H.

On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 10:51:29 AM UTC-6, Cindy H. wrote:
> On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:08:33 PM UTC-5, Andrew Z wrote:
> > Hi Cindy,
> >
> > You raise an interesting question that I long puzzled over. I can’t add to subject matter expertise provided by taf, but I can share some thoughts on the 1520 Dennis pedigree.
> >
> > When I first realized that the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter Dennis’ funerary brass seemed to be identical to those of his mother in the Dennis pedigree, I thought that she was likely legitimate and also that if she was a heraldic heiress, then she couldn’t have been Sir Edward Stradling’s daughter (since he had at least one son, Sir Henry Stradling). However, that specific quartering (a chevron between three roses) has not been repeated in any subsequent Dennis arms, including those at Siston Court.
> >
> > I would also like to note that, as far as I could tell, the Dennis pedigree is accurate in its representation of the spouses’ arms. For example, we can identify Corbet and Russell arms held by Sir Gilbert Dennis’ wives; Fiennes and Danvers for Sir Walter Dennis’ wives; and Twynyho and Berkeley arms for Sir William Dennis’ wives. Keeping that in mind, it strikes me as odd that they would get the Stradling arms wrong both in the pedigree and on the funerary brass. As such, on the basis of this heraldic evidence, I am personally leaning towards Sir Walter’s mother not being a daughter of Sir Edward Stradling. However, to make things more complicated, the Dictionary of British Arms Medieval Ordinary specifically identifies the arms in the 4th quarter of Sir Walter’s funerary brass as Russell, but the caption for the same arms in the Dennis pedigree seems to read Stradlyng.
> >
> > All the best!
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > PS: I am posting via Google Groups and usually respond using the Reply-all button by typing in the field that appears at the bottom after I click it.
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Most interesting information, but it is indeed a puzzlement! Alas, I can't add anything more but will keep my eye on posts in case of a discovery. This is a great group!
>
> Best to you,
> Cindy H.

Hello, Cindy and Andrew,
Thank you, Andrew, for the information you provided a couple of months ago. I really do appreciate it, but have not been on this site for awhile.

The evidence you wrote about seems to support Sir Walter's funerary brass as having a Russell coat of arms in the 4th quarter, and I'm trying to think "outside the (monumental) box", because this is an interesting topic to me also. The Russell coat of arms (Argent, on a chief gules three bezants) is prominently displayed on Maurice and Walter's monumental brass and is different, as you know, from Walter's 4th quarter. If Maurice's first wife was a Russell from another branch, and was important enough to be on Walter's funerary COA, one would think she would be mentioned elsewhere, and perhaps those records will be found at some point.

Sir Walter Denys lived long enough to inherit a part of his great grandfather, Sir Maurice Russell's, estate when his grandmother (Margaret Russell's) second husband, John Kemys, died in 1477. John Kemys was Sir Edward Stradling's nephew. Kemys outlived Maurice Denys, his stepson, by about 17 years, so he must have been pretty old!

I'm interested in how Margaret Russell and her sister came to inherit their father, Maurice's Russell's estate, minus the dower that Russell's second wife, Joan, formerly Dauntsey, got (she married Sir Edward Stradling's brother, John Stradling as a second husband). Sir Maurice Russell had only daughters by his first wife, and he married the much younger Joan Dauntsey and did have a son and heir by her, Thomas Russell, who died at age 19, along with his infant daughter, while his unnamed wife disappeared from the record. As a result, Margaret Russell, his daughter (and Maurice Denys' mother) inherited half of the remainder of Russell's estate, the other half going to her sister and her spouse. At that time, Margaret was married to second husband, John Kemys. Walter inherited this when Kemys died in 1477.

I wonder if the roses in the coat of arms are somehow linked to the "War of the Roses" going on at that time.

Hi, all, I posted under the other post, thanking Taf. I was looking for coat of arms with chevrons and roses and found this:
https://www.heraldry-wiki.com/heraldrywiki/index.php?title=Winchester_College

At the bottom is William Wykeham's coat of arms, with the Chevron and 3 roses on the sinister side. He was the Bishop of Winchester from 1368- 1404, when Henry Beaufort succeeded him.

Could this be related to the mysterious chevron with coat of arms?

On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 5:43:25 PM UTC-8, HWynn wrote:

> I wonder if the roses in the coat of arms are somehow linked to the "War of the Roses" going on at that time.

I think this would be unlikely. Just about every gentry family participating in the War of the Roses already had arms, including innumerable ones with roses.

taf

On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 5:56:39 PM UTC-8, HWynn wrote:
> Hi, all, I posted under the other post, thanking Taf. I was looking for coat of arms with chevrons and roses and found this:
> https://www.heraldry-wiki.com/heraldrywiki/index.php?title=Winchester_College
>
> At the bottom is William Wykeham's coat of arms, with the Chevron and 3 roses on the sinister side. He was the Bishop of Winchester from 1368- 1404, when Henry Beaufort succeeded him.
>
> Could this be related to the mysterious chevron with coat of arms?

Likely just coincidence. The Dictionary of British Arms (v. 3, beginning p. 342) has almost 2 pages-worth of different arms with a chevron between three roses, and if you aren't sure those flowers are really roses, more like 7 pages.
https://library.oapen.org/viewer/web/viewer.html?file=/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/31215/634734.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

taf

On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 12:14:05 PM UTC-8, taf wrote:
> Likely just coincidence. The Dictionary of British Arms (v. 3, beginning p. 342)

Sorry, that should have been vol. 2 (the page number and link given were correct, I just erred in giving the volume number).

taf

On Friday, February 4, 2022 at 8:43:25 PM UTC-5, HWynn wrote:
> Hello, Cindy and Andrew,
> Thank you, Andrew, for the information you provided a couple of months ago. I really do appreciate it, but have not been on this site for awhile.
>
> The evidence you wrote about seems to support Sir Walter's funerary brass as having a Russell coat of arms in the 4th quarter, and I'm trying to think "outside the (monumental) box", because this is an interesting topic to me also. The Russell coat of arms (Argent, on a chief gules three bezants) is prominently displayed on Maurice and Walter's monumental brass and is different, as you know, from Walter's 4th quarter. If Maurice's first wife was a Russell from another branch, and was important enough to be on Walter's funerary COA, one would think she would be mentioned elsewhere, and perhaps those records will be found at some point.
>
> Sir Walter Denys lived long enough to inherit a part of his great grandfather, Sir Maurice Russell's, estate when his grandmother (Margaret Russell's) second husband, John Kemys, died in 1477. John Kemys was Sir Edward Stradling's nephew. Kemys outlived Maurice Denys, his stepson, by about 17 years, so he must have been pretty old!
>
> I'm interested in how Margaret Russell and her sister came to inherit their father, Maurice's Russell's estate, minus the dower that Russell's second wife, Joan, formerly Dauntsey, got (she married Sir Edward Stradling's brother, John Stradling as a second husband). Sir Maurice Russell had only daughters by his first wife, and he married the much younger Joan Dauntsey and did have a son and heir by her, Thomas Russell, who died at age 19, along with his infant daughter, while his unnamed wife disappeared from the record. As a result, Margaret Russell, his daughter (and Maurice Denys' mother) inherited half of the remainder of Russell's estate, the other half going to her sister and her spouse. At that time, Margaret was married to second husband, John Kemys. Walter inherited this when Kemys died in 1477.
>
> I wonder if the roses in the coat of arms are somehow linked to the "War of the Roses" going on at that time.

Hi Hwynn,

Thank you for revisiting the issue and keeping the conversation going. I think that you provided a great summary of the Russell inheritance state of affairs , it would also certainly be interesting to know if, in addition to the Russell manors, Sir Walter received any through his mother. I agree that if we'd be able to break through the "brick wall" of identifying these arms, we might be able to find other documents relating to that family, which might yield new clues.

I think a possible line of inquiry would be to identify any bearers of these arms (three roses between a chevron) that would be connected to the Stradling, Dennis or Russell families. Although the Dictionary of British Arms specifically identifies the arms in Sir Walter's 4th quarter as Russell, it is also possible they could be in error.

Russell bearers of these arms as per pg. 343:

Or chev Az betw 3 roses Gu

ROOSSEL. L1 554, 5. [Source: Coll.Arm.MS, c1520 (HDB)]

ROSSEL, Sire Geffrey. N 781.[ Source: Parliamentary Roll, c1312]

RUSSELL, Thomas. TJ 695. [Source: Thomas Jenyns's Book, 1410, transcr. O.Barron, [incorporates Jenyns's Ordinary & Jenyns's Roll, collated with BL Add MS 40851]

This aligns with this source (although it adds a "Hugh" to Thomas) :
https://books.google.ca/books?id=Nzw6AQAAMAAJ&lpg=PA169&ots=Nl1ZjbJnK7&pg=PA169#v=onepage&q&f=false

In regard to Sir Geffrey, his manor of Newton in Yorkshire "came into the Boynton family through the marriage of Geoffrey's daughter and coheir Katherine, (fn. 27) on whom, with her husband Thomas Boynton, a moiety was settled in 1340."
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/yorks/north/vol2/pp273-276

"The Boyntons, on the strength of this alliance, quartered the arms of Russell, (Argent), a chevron azure between three roses gules"
Some further details in the footnote:
https://www.google.ca/books/edition/The_Publications_of_the_Surtees_Society/xqgwAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA177&printsec=frontcover

However, the timeframe wouldn't work for Sir Geffrey's heiress to marry Maurice Dennis in ~1430s.

I haven't been able to identify Hugh and Thomas Russell yet.

Another possible line of inquiry would be to contact the College of Arms in regard to the 1520 Dennis pedigree and find out what the tinctures for these arms are, whose arms are these, what they think the caption for Maurice's 1st wife says, who was the author of the pedigree and which herald (if any) verified it.

I think taf has made some good points in regard to your questions. I noticed that Bishop John Russell had similar arms, but apparently he imitated Wykeham's arms as opposed to any Russell arms. https://www.google.ca/books/edition/The_University_in_Society_Volume_I/7ViYDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA147&printsec=frontcover

All the best!

Andrew

Here is the original source (Jenyns' Book) for Thomas and Hugh Russell's arms:

Image 92
https://collections.library.yale.edu/catalog/16161080

Also, here is another photo of the caption for Sir Walter's mother that is found in the 1520 Dennis pedigree:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13sGDTV5AA5aSWECCMACHLckNsY1idF5T/view

Previous one:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YM8HHPwcaoHBcAxSyc9PvN8zGd7AxRlu/view

If someone could confirm what Jenyns' Book says about Thomas Russell and what Dennis pedigree says about Sir Walter's mother, that would be much appreciated.

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 8:59:13 AM UTC-8, Andrew Z wrote:
> Here is the original source (Jenyns' Book) for Thomas and Hugh Russell's arms:
>
> Image 92
> https://collections.library.yale.edu/catalog/16161080
>
> Also, here is another photo of the caption for Sir Walter's mother that is found in the 1520 Dennis pedigree:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/13sGDTV5AA5aSWECCMACHLckNsY1idF5T/view
>
> Previous one:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YM8HHPwcaoHBcAxSyc9PvN8zGd7AxRlu/view
>
> If someone could confirm what Jenyns' Book says about Thomas Russell and what Dennis pedigree says about Sir Walter's mother, that would be much appreciated.

1. my best bet would be (minus the first word for which I have no clue):
"Thomas Russell port dor chevron dazure & iii roses de goules as canteles" - Thomas Russell bore or, a chevron azure & 3 roses gules ?'to the corners' - i.e. what we now call 'a chevron between 3 roses'
"Hugh Russell port dor chevron dazure & iii roses de goules labell dargent" (. . . label argent)

Note: 'chevron' does not look like c-h-e-v-r-o-n, specifically at the c-r-o transition, so it may be using an archaic Norman-French spelling I am unaware of, or an odd v-r ligature that renders the 'r' obscure.

2. much harder to read
"Joh'nna Stradlyng ?? ???? Maur^ Denys" (which I am guessing is just 'Joan Stradling, wife of Maurice Denys' using some way of referring to the marriage that I am not recognizing as anything coming to mind)

taf

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 3:51:08 PM UTC-5, taf wrote:
> On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 8:59:13 AM UTC-8, Andrew Z wrote:
> > Here is the original source (Jenyns' Book) for Thomas and Hugh Russell's arms:
> >
> > Image 92
> > https://collections.library.yale.edu/catalog/16161080
> >
> > Also, here is another photo of the caption for Sir Walter's mother that is found in the 1520 Dennis pedigree:
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/13sGDTV5AA5aSWECCMACHLckNsY1idF5T/view
> >
> > Previous one:
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YM8HHPwcaoHBcAxSyc9PvN8zGd7AxRlu/view
> >
> > If someone could confirm what Jenyns' Book says about Thomas Russell and what Dennis pedigree says about Sir Walter's mother, that would be much appreciated.
> 1. my best bet would be (minus the first word for which I have no clue):
> "Thomas Russell port dor chevron dazure & iii roses de goules as canteles" - Thomas Russell bore or, a chevron azure & 3 roses gules ?'to the corners' - i.e. what we now call 'a chevron between 3 roses'
> "Hugh Russell port dor chevron dazure & iii roses de goules labell dargent" (. . . label argent)
>
> Note: 'chevron' does not look like c-h-e-v-r-o-n, specifically at the c-r-o transition, so it may be using an archaic Norman-French spelling I am unaware of, or an odd v-r ligature that renders the 'r' obscure.
>
> 2. much harder to read
> "Joh'nna Stradlyng ?? ???? Maur^ Denys" (which I am guessing is just 'Joan Stradling, wife of Maurice Denys' using some way of referring to the marriage that I am not recognizing as anything coming to mind)
>
> taf

Thank you so much, taf, this is great! Apologies for not being able to get a better photo of the Stradlyng caption, I tried using a magnifying app, but ultimately the writing is very small and print dots don't help. An acquaintance of mine took a look as well and he believes that it says "Jehanna Stradlyng ux[or] pri[ma] Maur. Denys". Either way, the pedigree caption definitely appears to say Stradlyng, which is at odds with the painted arms for it (unless it's a variant of Stradling arms).

I haven't been able to find any more information about Thomas Russell, it certainly would be helpful to identify him, even if only to rule him out.

It was also interesting to learn about the changes in heraldic terminology.

Thanks again!

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 3:00:22 PM UTC-8, Andrew Z wrote:

> An acquaintance of mine took a look as well and he believes that it says "Jehanna Stradlyng ux[or] pri[ma] Maur. Denys".

I agree with ux[or] - I was going to suggest that but particularly with it being abbreviated, I wasn't comfortable saying so without knowng the context better, and I couldn't come up with what the next word would be - not familiar with the family so I was unaware Maurice married multiply.

I disagree with the reading of the following word, . . . . well, sort of. There is no 'r' (they are distinctive in this script, looking almost like an 'l' that goes down rather than up, or a 'p' without the 'o' part, extending well below the line of text as in 'Stradlyng' or 'Maur' in the same document) and there are five(ish) strokes after the 'p' rather than three. However, your acquaintence is barking up the right tree. Now that I know the correct context, the 'signal' jumps out from the 'noise'. It is not 'pri[ma]', but ṕma, i.e. [pri]ma, using the medieval abbreviation 'ṕ' for 'pre/pri'. (If this character doesn't come through properly, it is a p with a stroke above it, sometimes written like an acute accent, an inverted apostrophy, or even a little swirl.)

A couple of pages that cover abbreviations used in the script of the time:
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manuscriptsandspecialcollections/researchguidance/medievaldocuments/letterformsandabbreviations.aspx
https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/how-read-medieval-handwriting-paleography

Additional note: I say these are medieval abbreviations, but I have seen a signature in colonial America where the name Shepard is spelled Sheᵱd, using the 'ᵱ' abbreviation for 'per'/'par' - where the stem of the 'p' is crossed like a 't', so not just medieval.

taf

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 3:00:22 PM UTC-8, Andrew Z wrote:

> It was also interesting to learn about the changes in heraldic terminology.

Actually surprisingly similar. 'dor', 'dazure' and 'dargent' are just d'or, d'azure and d'argent - of gold, of blue, of silver. 'goules' is a little different, than the modern English 'gules' but triangulates well between that and the modern French 'gueules'. The only one I had to look up was 'canteles', which is the plural of 'cantel', an uncommon early alternative form of 'canton' ('corner' originally), hence my suggested reading. Particularly curious is that the other arms with a similar arrangement, 'a chevron between 3 ____', on the same page don't specify this, including Hugh's. And I think the 'chevron' issue is likely one of script rather than terminology..

taf

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 6:53:09 PM UTC-5, taf wrote:
> On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 3:00:22 PM UTC-8, Andrew Z wrote:
>
> > An acquaintance of mine took a look as well and he believes that it says "Jehanna Stradlyng ux[or] pri[ma] Maur. Denys".
> I agree with ux[or] - I was going to suggest that but particularly with it being abbreviated, I wasn't comfortable saying so without knowng the context better, and I couldn't come up with what the next word would be - not familiar with the family so I was unaware Maurice married multiply.
>
> I disagree with the reading of the following word, . . . . well, sort of. There is no 'r' (they are distinctive in this script, looking almost like an 'l' that goes down rather than up, or a 'p' without the 'o' part, extending well below the line of text as in 'Stradlyng' or 'Maur' in the same document) and there are five(ish) strokes after the 'p' rather than three. However, your acquaintence is barking up the right tree. Now that I know the correct context, the 'signal' jumps out from the 'noise'. It is not 'pri[ma]', but ṕma, i.e. [pri]ma, using the medieval abbreviation 'ṕ' for 'pre/pri'. (If this character doesn't come through properly, it is a p with a stroke above it, sometimes written like an acute accent, an inverted apostrophy, or even a little swirl.)
>
> A couple of pages that cover abbreviations used in the script of the time:
> https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manuscriptsandspecialcollections/researchguidance/medievaldocuments/letterformsandabbreviations.aspx
> https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/how-read-medieval-handwriting-paleography
>
> Additional note: I say these are medieval abbreviations, but I have seen a signature in colonial America where the name Shepard is spelled Sheᵱd, using the 'ᵱ' abbreviation for 'per'/'par' - where the stem of the 'p' is crossed like a 't', so not just medieval.
>
> taf

Hi taf,

Very interesting! Thank you for elaborating and sharing these great resources. Your knowledge in this field is impressive, I had no idea about the subtleties of medieval abbreviations, such as ṕma. In case it is of interest to you, here is a more legible example of the pedigree script referring to Sir Walter's wives:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cswpa0x1YJQTNXnwcrH-qNSsDNGe-2ec/view?usp

Even with my limited understanding of the script in Jenyns' Book, I thought I recognized some of the terms describing the arms. It's remarkable how this medieval terminology system that the heralds developed can still be used today to, among other things, re-create arms digitally on the basis of a single phrase.

All the best!

Andrew