Wednesday, 9 June 2021

A despicable fake

I came across this (undated) letter, purporting to be from Garter King of Arms while searching for something quite unrelated. It is such a despicable fake that it just has to be exposed. 

It would seem that this individual has a desire to claim the arms (and Lordship of the Manor) of Baguley despite the fact that the (heraldic) family of Baguley (those believed, but not proved, to have been descendants of Hammon de Massey) are extinct. Certainly the Hall came to the Leighs of Booths via an heiress. The arms are also quartered by Fritton. It is likely that most, if not all, of those with this name today have what is known as a location surname i.e. at the time surnames were adopted they lived in or were from the village, rather than being descendants of the extinct manorial lords.

I placed this fake letter on the Facebook forum of The Heraldry Society and participants in the discussion did a wonderful job of dissecting the elements which exposed it as a fraud. 

Quite apart from the different fonts used, we start with the word "apologize" with a "z". Englishmen tend to use apologise with an "s". But what is the apology for? It appears that Garter is apologising on behalf of York Herald for his lack of knowledge of Thomas Woodcock and his research in the Oxford Guide to Heraldry. I simply don't believe that  York would be ignorant of either the man or his works; this is too incredible to be believed. The comment about any case "in heraldic court" (not in the heraldic court or the Court of Chivalry) is also quite ridiculous as Garter would, if he wished to discuss a case to be brought before the Court of Chivalry, have mentioned his own view that any resurrection of the Court would be practically impossible and he would have cited comments made at the Manchester case.
Garter would know full well that in his judgement (Manchester Corporation v Manchester Palace of Varieties [1955] P 133) Lord Goddard suggested that: “if this court is to sit again it should be convened only where there is some really substantial reason for the exercise of its jurisdiction.” Someone wishing to prove a right to arms would do so by having his pedigree examined by The College, not by bringing a case before the Court of Chivalry. 

The reference to the Earl Marshal as "his grace" in lower case does not further convince us that this letter is genuine.

The next part is meaningless waffle but it is clumsy to write "bare" arms when the real Garter would know full well that a person bears arms. When a person is seeking to prove a right to bear arms, no garter would write, without substantial proof, and suggest that the petitioner simply accept his recognition as head of the family and the bit about nobility is meaningless to an English King of Arms. To suggest that there is a need to simply "accept my recognition and leave the matter alone" (implying that it would be too much trouble to do anything else)  is risible. 

Those of us with any smattering of knowledge about these things would know that anyone claiming the right to bear arms and writing to the College of Arms for guidance would be informed of a proper process, involving a proven genealogy, by which that right must be claimed and we know that the College of Arms would offer, for a fee, assistance in either proving or disproving the claim. The Court of Chivalry would not come into the discussion, nor would any herald suggest anything, without proof, which would indicate a sort of "its far too much trouble to go to these lengths so lets just say that you are the head of your American family and you can use the arms with some cadency marks, call yourself Esquire and be a nobleman"! 

Oh, and we don't end a letter with Yours Sincerely with an upper case S. It should be Yours sincerely.

What an utterly despicable, illiterate, effort to pretend to be something that you are not.   

Wednesday, 2 June 2021

John Lloyd, L.L.B., 1608.

Sometimes, I hit a brick wall and this evening was one of those times. I am coming to the end of the letter L in the Funeral Certificates and have a few outstanding arms to complete, one being the arms of Mrs. Elizabeth Leigh, daughter of Thomas Edwards of the Mould, in the County of Flint, gent. I'm saving that one up until I can pluck up the courage to spend time doing a complicated image. However, the one that has really frustrated me is that of John Lloyd, L.L.B., who died in 1608. The only description of the arms is "A trick of arms. On a chevron between three dolphins nowed an annulet." I don't have the luxury of seeing the actual trick and the written description isn't helpful, not only because it doesn't give tinctures but also because the dolphins are described as "nowed". This is an unusual attitude for a dolphin (it means tied in a knot; frequently applied to serpents and the tails of beasts when knotted) and I am wondering if it should actually be naiant which is used to describe fish swimming horizontally across the shield (and yes, I do know that a dolphin isn't a fish!). The default posture for an heraldic dolphin is naiant and they are typically drawn embowed or embowed counter-embowed.  

Sadly, neither Google or Burke's General Armory are helping as I can't find a Lloyd amongst the many in Burke's with a dolphin coat. 


It could be this one. Monument, St. Mary's on the Hill; Ormerod, Volume 1, page 266. : 

Tuesday, 1 June 2021

Sir Urian Legh, Knight, 1627.

 The latest addition to the Funeral Certificates series is that of  Sir Urian Legh, Knight, 1627.

Arms: Quarterly 1, Azure, two bars Argent, over all a bend gobony, Or and Gules [Legh of Adlington]; 2, Argent, a lion rampant Gules [Leigh]; 3, Azure, a chevron between three ducal coronets Or [Corona]; 4, Gules, three cross crosslets fitchee Or, a chief of the second [Arden of Arden]; 5, Azure, a bend Or within a bordure Argent [Grosvenor after first judgement and pre appeal??]; 6, Argent, a cross patonce Sable [Belgrave *].

Crest: An unicorn's head Argent, couped Gules, armed and maned Or.

The 6th quarter is recorded in the Visitations of 1580 (page 151) as Argent, a cross flory Sable [Belgrave].

Sunday, 30 May 2021

Victorian oil painting Twemlow of Hatherton

Sold by Bonhams, Auction House, on the 28th April 2010, from the Sampson and Horne Collection, for £660 including premium.


Within a carved oak frame, the reverse with the carved inscription, 'ARMS OF THE TREMLOW'S of HATHERTON, CHESHIRE, 1686', together with an earlier oil on metal armorial for the same family, 30.5cm high, 22cm wide, (12" high, 8.5" wide) (2 items in the lot)

Sampson & Horne Antiques were a major dealership on the London antiques scene and it closed with the announcement of the auction of the entire trading stock at Bonhams on April 28 2010. 

Saturday, 29 May 2021

Mrs. Anne Leech, Widow, 1601

 Mrs. Anne Leech, Widow, 1601

Wife of Robert Leech, Doctor of Lawe and Chancellor, deceased. Daughter and sole heir of  John Webster of the City, Gent.

Arms (Webster): Argent, a cross patonce between four mullets Sable.    

Friday, 28 May 2021

Roger Hurleston, Gentleman, 1634.

 Roger Hurleston, Gentleman, 1634.

Arms: Quarterly 1 and 4, Argent, four Ermine spots in cross Sable, the heads meeting in the centre point; 2, Argent, two bendlets engrailed Sable, the lower one couped at the upper end; 3, Argent, a chevron between three crossbows Sable.

Crest: A goat's head erased Argent, armed and bearded Or, charged on the neck with four Ermine spots, as in the arms.

Mrs. Elizabeth Hurleston, 1628.

 Newly added to the Funeral Certificates:

Mrs. Elizabeth Hurleston, 1628.
Daughter and coheir to James Mainwaringe of Croxton.
Arms: (in a lozenge) Quarterly of four: 1 and 4, Argent, on two bars Gules, three cinquefoils Or [Mainwaring]; 2, Sable, a lion rampant Argent, debrused by a bendlet gobony Or and Gules [Croxton]; 3, Argent, a chevron engrailed between three garbs Sable [Darby].

A despicable fake

I came across this (undated) letter, purporting to be from Garter King of Arms while searching for something quite unrelated. It is such a d...

Popular Posts