On Monday, May 30, 2022 at 9:43:16 AM UTC-7, J. Sardina wrote:
> On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 11:59:17 AM UTC-5, taf wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 6:26:09 AM UTC-8, J. Sardina wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
> > The tinctures for all the illustrated coats are given on p. 257.
> > > 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.
> > Gregson gives the eagle as sable (black).
> > > From what i have read online, black on red is a violation of heraldic standards,
> > > unless the eagles are proper, meaning not technical black.
> > This is correct of the current 'rules'. There are two caveats though. First, in the earliest days of heraldry, these hard-and-fast rules had yet to arise, so it is at least possible that these arms predated the formalization of practices that would have prevented them. Second, there is at least a possibility that at some point previously, these arms were preserved only in a painted display, without independent blazon. The paints used for the metals were subject to oxidation over time, and a painted metal could begin to appear black(ish) and be thus misinterpreted.
> > > 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.
> > Yes. Many of the precise distinctions among swords or flowers or even styles of lions were once simply differences in artistic representation, not formal heraldic differences.
> > > 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" . . . .
> >
> > We have talked about this before.
> > > It seems too many arms for a one family.
> > There are documented instaces of families changing their arms just out of whim (examples: the Earls of Lincoln, Neville [or was it Percy, I don't clearly remember which], Gorges), but in this case I have to wonder if it isn't a case of abandoning historical arms and adopting those of a more prominent family of similar surname, as the Spencers did with the Despenser 'quarterly with a bend' arms. We know, or at least we think we know, that there were multiple unrelated Cuerden gentry families, so it may be that the branch in question originally bore the sword/eagle quarterly arms, but the dubiously took on the griffin arms of a distinct Cuerden family as their primary bearing, relegating their authentic 'ancient' arms to a secondary quarter.
> >
> > I am not saying this is definitely what happened, simply that there is nothing inherently dubious (from a historical perspective, not from a 'modern rules of heraldry' perspective) about a family being seen with different arms over time.
> >
> > taf
> Hello,
>
> After quiet a long time, I finally found something to research on this topic, but it is not what I expected at all.
> I still do not know if the documents proving John Cuerton's pedigree from 1558 have survived at some archive in Vizcaya, but i managed to order a book that does bring copied and summaries from documents located at the Consulado of Bilbao, which handled all matters related commerce and merchants. It does mention him in a few pages, and some incidents involving Englishmen staying at his house in Bilbao.
>
> In the meantime, i finally located the notes from Jonathan Kirton, who unfortunately died a few years ago. He studied the Cuertons or Curetons, but the Kirk(e)tons, and came across a few unconnected ones in Chester and Cheshire in general. Among his notes, he had one about the arms of CUERTON from Cheshire, recorded before 1580 as follows:
>
> There is one entry in the Visitation index (1530-1687) under this name, namely in the
> Visitation of Cheshire in 1580: a drawing of the Arms, named simply as:-
> "Cuerton" from "An old book of Arms of Sir George Calveley" which was recorded at the Visitation.
>
> The Arms of Cuerton may be blazoned: "Sable three pierced Mullets two and one, Or".
>
> There is a College of Arms reference along with it.
>
> I have seen some references about that book, but have not found it online.. It seems to contains some arms for knights but also for esquires.
>
> However, this coat of arms is totally different from the ones in Cuerton's documents and also from the one claimed by Dr. Keurden for the Keurden de Cuerden Hall. It might belong to a different family.
>
> Interestingly, from the published visitations of Cheshire, the second sir George Calveley was a descendant and heir of a Tatnall family whose arms were very similar to the ones given in Cuerton's document for the mystery sir John'is de Mathem?, whose daughter is said to have married into the Querton family, the difference being the bordure. It might be a coincidence, though.
>

Dict of British Arms attributes these arms (sa. 3 pierced mullets or) to Spurstowe, listing several different instances.
taf