On Sunday, September 5, 2021 at 1:05:03 PM UTC-4, J. Sardina wrote:
> On Sunday, September 5, 2021 at 9:50:06 AM UTC-4, taf wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 4, 2021 at 11:05:51 AM UTC-7, J. Sardina wrote:
> > > Following up on the research, the arms of double-headed eagle quartered with Sarracen
> > > swords, these same arms are given as those of John Cuerden of Cuerden, who married
> > > Elizabeth Farrington.
> > >
> > > This marriage and arms are shown by
> > > GREGSON'S PORTFOLIO OF FRAGMENTS, Third Edition, with Additions and Improvements,
> > > Containing a Copious General Ender, and a Special Index to the Coats of arms. EDITED BY
> > > JOHN HARLAND,
> > > on page 255, at the bottom. The source for these arms is unknown, but it may be a
> > > manuscript mentioned in the entry for Farrington.
> > >
> > > Elizabeth is shown as one of the five co-heiresses of Peter Farington of Little Farington,
> > > shown to have married Alice Hudleston.
> > > The other sisters being Isabella, who married Richard Banister, of Banister Hall, Alice who
> > > is shown married twice, the first time to a Skelton, Cecily, married Thomas Charnock, and
> > > Ann married John Farrington.
> > A good find, but with odd implications. These are clearly the same arms, here attributed to Cuerden of Cuerden, while in the pedigree we have been discussing they are portrayed as if they entered its Cuerden line via marriage in the first generation shown, via the wife of William Cuerden (who is given the Cuerden griffin arms). We have struggled reading the surname of William's wife, but Cuerden it was not.
> >
> > That the family would end up with two different 'Cuerden' arms might suggest something we have seen hints of elsewhere in this discussion, that not all Cuerdens represent the same family, but rather that there were multiple distinct local lineages that adopted the toponymic (as seen with Dr. Keurden). I also have to wonder if the first generation of the pedigree isn't in error in showing how the two Cuerden coats came to be united, that there was some sort of misunderstanding or obfuscation.
> >
> > taf
> Yes. This case seems to be very confusing and I don't see a way to resolve unless there is a very unlikely find of manuscripts referring back to the late 13th century and first half of the next one.
>
> I would not be surprised if even by the time of John Cuerton in 1558 and of John Cuerden, apparently in the same years, there were at least two lines of Cuerden/Keurden, possibly related through younger sons of the original Cuerden family or possibly with different origins or related only through female lines.
>
> As far as I know the original line died out with Simon, who seems to have lived until at least 1292, but it is possible he had cousins or nephews, or that descendants of possible sisters took the surname.
>
> The Kuerdens of the visitations start towards the end of the 15th century, and in between, it is said that several other individuals used that surname, but it is not possible to determine if they were related. At least that is mentioned in the pages on Cuerden at https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lancs/vol6/pp23-29
>
> Unfortunately, the editors of the Fragments...do not specify where they found the coat of arms attached to each chart, and in particular the ones assigned to John Cuerden of Cuerden.
>
> In the case of the Farringtons, there is a footnote about a privately-owned manuscript that appears to mention the five co-heiresses.
>
> Apparently the Cuertons claimed to be descendants of the Cuerden of Lancashire that bore the griffin, but perhaps both lines inherited the other arms from the unidentified sir John de Mathem.
>
> I am going to check further on the John Cuerden, but he seems to be shown in the Lancashire visitations as belonging to the Kuerden de Keurden line.
>
> Dr. Cureton researched the Cuertons and Curetons of Shropshire extensively in the 20th century, but apparently he did not publish the findings in an organized manner, and part of his notes ended up in Southern Families, in rough draft form,. He also seems to have come across the two different coats of arms for Cuerton/Cuerden and did not find a good explanation for it.
>
> In some of the notes he seems to have suggested that some of the Cuertons and Curetons may have been descendants of a Gascon family that had possessions near Grande Sauve Abbey that may have emigrated to England at the end of the 100 years war, but I don't know if he found any proof.
>
> J. Sardina

Following up on this thread, does anybody know if there is a copy of Fragments showing the various arms with their tinctures? The arms show for the Cuerden of Cuerden in this book do not show any indication of color. Interestingly, Fragments shows the arms as quartered with the eagle and what appears to be swords.

John Cuerton's painted heraldic pedigree shows the background to be gules for the eagles and the eagles seems to be verfy dark, apparently black. It does not seem to be blue or gray. From what i have read online, black on red is a violation of heraldic standards, unless the eagles are proper, meaning not technical black. I still have not found any English families with bicephalous eagles on gules between the 14th and 16th centuries.

As for the other half of the arms, they are shown with a wider blade in Cuerton's pedigree, but I guess that was just the way they were drawn.

I still wonder how the eagles and the swords became the arms of the Kuerden of Preston, apparently also as the other known of Quarterly or and azure, a Griffin segreant countercharged, as described in "An Index of Lancashire Heraldy" , available at https://www.hslc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/92-7-France.pdf, which takes information from various visitations, local histories, Burke and other sources.

It seems too many arms for a one family.

J. Sardina