Per Pale - or Impaled?

[Martin Goldstraw]

Per Pale or Impaling?
In the Visitations of Chester the arms of John de Orreby, Lord and
Baron of Candesley (vixit 24, E.3) married to Margrett living 24 E. 3.
are recorded as:

Per pale, dexter, Gules, two lion passant in pale Argent; sinister
......... a bend ........., over all a label of five points Or.

Is this one coat of arms as the blazon would lead one to think or
could it in fact be two coats impaled?

1. The only similarity to the arms of his g.g. grandfather from whom
he is a junior cadet [Sr. Phillip de Orreby, Justice of Chester Arms:
Ermine, three chevrons Gules, on a canton of the second a lion passant
Or.] is the lions passant of the dexter side of the arms.

2. Does anyone have any information (or guess) as to the missing
tinctures of the sinister side of the shield. Unfortunately the
pedigree gives no clue as to the maiden name of his wife so I can't do
a simple name check to find a coat of arms "......... a bend
........., over all a label of five points Or."

Any thoughts would be appreciated. (please don't suggest that I
contact the CoA – this route is not an option in this project as it
would be far too expensive!)

Martin

http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

[James Dempster]

Post by Martin Goldstraw
Per Pale or Impaling?
In the Visitations of Chester the arms of John de Orreby, Lord and
Baron of Candesley (vixit 24, E.3) married to Margrett living 24 E. 3.
Per pale, dexter, Gules, two lion passant in pale Argent; sinister
......... a bend ........., over all a label of five points Or.
Is this one coat of arms as the blazon would lead one to think or
could it in fact be two coats impaled?
1. The only similarity to the arms of his g.g. grandfather from whom
Ermine, three chevrons Gules, on a canton of the second a lion passant
Or.] is the lions passant of the dexter side of the arms.
2. Does anyone have any information (or guess) as to the missing
tinctures of the sinister side of the shield. Unfortunately the
pedigree gives no clue as to the maiden name of his wife so I can't do
a simple name check to find a coat of arms "......... a bend
........., over all a label of five points Or."
Any thoughts would be appreciated. (please don't suggest that I
contact the CoA – this route is not an option in this project as it
would be far too expensive!)
Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

There are the following Orreby arms mentioned in the DBA vol 1, pp 267
& 334 and vol 2 pp 505-506

VOL 1

2 lions passant and label

Orreby, John de, of Lincs: Birch 12319 ...LLUM IOH(A)NNIS DE ORBY
1346.

Gu 2 lions passant Arg label Or

Ereby, Cheshire: L2 178, 4
Ereby, Sr Johan: N 955.
Ereby, S Jeh de: GA 106
Orby: XL 47
Orby: L1 483, 2
Orby:SK 736
Orby, Monsire de: AN 64
Orreby: PO 407 ('Erreby' written above in Elizabethan hand)

Gu 2 lions passant Arg label of 5 Or

Orby: L9 89a, 6

Per pale bend

Orreby, John de, Clerk: PRO-sls 1314-5 (on 2 of 4 shields set in
legend on sl of Orreby).

VOL 2

Argent one and a half chevrons and a canton Gules (entire dexter limb
of upper chevron obscured by the canton).

Orby: CVC 569
Orby, Fulke de: CRK 701
Ormby, Sir Fulke de: CVC 594
Mobberley, Sir John de: WLN 309
Moberley, S' John de, of Cheshire: CY 11, 41
Orbeby, John de: WLN 831
Orby, Sir Foulk de WLN 292
Orby, Sir Fowk de: PCL II 45
Orby, Sr Fulco de, of Cheshire: CY 5, 18

Working out the sourcing:

Birch: British Museum Seals, ed. W. de Gray Birch, BM, London
1887-1910 (6 vols).

L2: Coll of Arms MS L2 :c1520

N: Bannerets Roll (aka Great Roll, aka Parliamentary Roll): c1312

GA: Segar's Roll: c1282

XL: Prince Arthur's Book - Wriothesley's Lions (temp Henry VIII?)

L1: Coll of Arms MS L1: c1520

SK: Starkey's Roll: c1460

AN: Antiquaries Roll: c1360

PO: Powell's Roll: c1350

PRO-sls: Public Record Office Seals - card index by Sir W St John
Hope.

CVC: Calveleys Book 3 - Cheshire Roll [lost original] 15th cent

CRK: Creswick's Roll c1510 (aka Creswick's Book II), BL Add MS 62541

WLN: Sir William le Neve's Book [lost original] c1500

CY: County Roll temp Ric2 [Soc Antiq MS 664 iv 1-22 Roll 16]

PCL: Portcullis' Book, BL Harley MS 521 c1410

Next stop the Aspilogia to find out where some of these rolls can be
found.

To make a deal of bricks from very little straw, I notice a slightly
earlier Lincolnshire family bearing Gules two lions and a label and a
Cheshire family bearing chevrons and a canton, generally slightly
later.

The visitation records (which I assume were nowhere near contemporary
to 24 E III) suggest to me a possible merger of the two arms and
possibly the eventual "takeover" of the Lincolnshire arms by the
Cheshire family.

It doesn't particularly surprise me as I'm still puzzling over the
arms of the Barleys/Barlows in the quest for clues to the actual
identity of the woman who came north as an attendant to Margarent
Tudor and married 1st the 1st Lord Elphinstone and 2nd the 6th Lord
Forbes.

The inclusion of the arms with the bend on one of the subsidiary
shields on the PRO seal suggests maybe an heiress mother or
ancestress, though into which Orreby branch she was married isn't
clear.

I included the Mobberleys since they're Cheshire and bearing identical
arms together with a similar name.

James
James Dempster (remove nospam to reply by email)

You know you've had a good night
when you wake up
and someone's outlining you in chalk.

[Martin Goldstraw]

James,
As always your answers are most informed and useful but it still
doesn't answer my question - Is this one coat of arms Per Pale or
could it have been recorded wrongly and should it in fact be two coats
of arms impaled?

Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

[James Dempster]

Post by Martin Goldstraw
James,
As always your answers are most informed and useful but it still
doesn't answer my question - Is this one coat of arms Per Pale or
could it have been recorded wrongly and should it in fact be two coats
of arms impaled?

At the risk to my reputation :-) I'll happily admit that I don't know.
As far as I can see there are the following options.

1. Two coats of arms impaled for a man and wife but with the label
crossing them both.

2. Two coats of arms impaled for the eldest son of a man and an
heiress wife

3. Two coats of arms impaled for a man with an heiress ancestress,
given that the arms may date from a period where quartering was a
novel idea which was not the only way of marshalling such.

4. One coat of arms per pale.

The first thing is whether the visitation record is that of real arms
contemporary with the person recorded (i.e. a seal or monument or
decorative piece). If yes, then all 4 options are open. If no and it
is what was used in 1580, then we have to think that option 4 is the
most likely.

Thereafter the seal of John de Orreby, Clerk, at the PRO sounds the
most interesting because it contains very similar arms to those in
question. The rest of the work is likely to be genealogical, seeing if
the two John Orrebys connect up and identifying the arms with the
bend.

James
James Dempster (remove nospam to reply by email)

You know you've had a good night
when you wake up
and someone's outlining you in chalk.

[d***@hotmail.com]

Evening!
I have wrestling with this coat of arms from a different angle as I believe that is found in the Bostock coat of arms quartering (Bostock of Abingdon) see p.76 Visitation of Berkshire. The relevant arms (Gules, two lions passant or, a label of five points azure) are identified as STRANGE, but the pedigree cannot be made to include a Strange descent, even though the arms look right. There is a clear Orreby descent, however, through Agnes de Orreby (grand daughter to Phillip, Justiciar of Chester) and Walkelin Arderne, whose great, great granddaughter Margery Whettenhall married Adam Bostock.

I can't find any obvious confirmation of these particular arms though. Does anyone know which arms Phillip de Orreby, son of Phillip the Justiciar bore? Agnes (or Anne) Arderne was his daughter.


Incidentally, the herald also suggests that one of the Bostock quarterings is HOLLAND?, but really it is the Poole arms.

Cheers Dave


Per Pale or Impaling?
In the Visitations of Chester the arms of John de Orreby, Lord and
Baron of Candesley (vixit 24, E.3) married to Margrett living 24 E. 3.
are recorded as:
Per pale, dexter, Gules, two lion passant in pale Argent; sinister
......... a bend ........., over all a label of five points Or.

Is this one coat of arms as the blazon would lead one to think or
could it in fact be two coats impaled?

1. The only similarity to the arms of his g.g. grandfather from whom
he is a junior cadet [Sr. Phillip de Orreby, Justice of Chester Arms:
Ermine, three chevrons Gules, on a canton of the second a lion passant
Or.] is the lions passant of the dexter side of the arms.

2. Does anyone have any information (or guess) as to the missing
tinctures of the sinister side of the shield. Unfortunately the
pedigree gives no clue as to the maiden name of his wife so I can't do
a simple name check to find a coat of arms "......... a bend
........., over all a label of five points Or."

Any thoughts would be appreciated. (please don't suggest that I
contact the CoA – this route is not an option in this project as it
would be far too expensive!)

Martin

http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

[Peter Howarth]

Post by d***@hotmail.com
Evening!
I have wrestling with this coat of arms from a different angle as I believe that is found in the Bostock coat of arms quartering (Bostock of Abingdon) see p.76 Visitation of Berkshire. The relevant arms (Gules, two lions passant or, a label of five points azure) are identified as STRANGE, but the pedigree cannot be made to include a Strange descent, even though the arms look right. There is a clear Orreby descent, however, through Agnes de Orreby (grand daughter to Phillip, Justiciar of Chester) and Walkelin Arderne, whose great, great granddaughter Margery Whettenhall married Adam Bostock.
I can't find any obvious confirmation of these particular arms though. Does anyone know which arms Phillip de Orreby, son of Phillip the Justiciar bore? Agnes (or Anne) Arderne was his daughter.
Incidentally, the herald also suggests that one of the Bostock quarterings is HOLLAND?, but really it is the Poole arms.
Cheers Dave
Per Pale or Impaling?
In the Visitations of Chester the arms of John de Orreby, Lord and
Baron of Candesley (vixit 24, E.3) married to Margrett living 24 E. 3.
Per pale, dexter, Gules, two lion passant in pale Argent; sinister
......... a bend ........., over all a label of five points Or.
Is this one coat of arms as the blazon would lead one to think or
could it in fact be two coats impaled?
1. The only similarity to the arms of his g.g. grandfather from whom
Ermine, three chevrons Gules, on a canton of the second a lion passant
Or.] is the lions passant of the dexter side of the arms.
2. Does anyone have any information (or guess) as to the missing
tinctures of the sinister side of the shield. Unfortunately the
pedigree gives no clue as to the maiden name of his wife so I can't do
a simple name check to find a coat of arms "......... a bend
........., over all a label of five points Or."
Any thoughts would be appreciated. (please don't suggest that I
contact the CoA – this route is not an option in this project as it
would be far too expensive!)
Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk

Quarterings should be thought of as simply representing those families from whom descent is claimed, rather than as genuine arms of heiresses. Often, the arms were not actually borne by the ancestor, but were those attributed by later heralds to that person. And sometimes the quarters represent ancestresses who were not even heraldic heiresses -- look at the quarterings that Edward IV gave to his wife, Elizabeth Woodville, to make her look more nobility and less gentry.

Amongst all the different spellings, Orreby, Erreby, Arby, etc. I have chosen the spelling Orby for my work on the family, based on the modern spelling of the village of Orby, Lincs. However, I also record all the different variations that I find for each individual.

There is no evidence of any arms for Philip II de Orby, father of Agnes, who predeceased his father, Philip I of Alvanley, justiciar of Chester (d.c.1230). Even for Philip I the evidence is scanty. All we have is an unannotated drawing [/Visitation of Cheshire 1580/ Plate 1 fig 13] of a shield-shaped seal with arms 'ermine, three chevrons, and on a canton a lion passant' and a legend + SIGILLVM PHILIPPI DE ORBI. We can guess it belonged to Philip the justiciar. We have no date, but it is similar in style to a seal of Henry de Aldithley or Audley [Birch 7017], dated 1233, that is also shield-shaped (fretty) and that also has a canton, but with a cross formy. Henry had connections with Chester, having married in 1217 a daughter of Ralf, seneschal of Chester, and himself becoming constable of Beeston and Chester castles in 1237.

There are several different versions of these arms. One is on a seal dated 1260 [illustrated, Durham Cathedral, /Catalogue of the Medieval Seals/ 1926] with a shield 'ermine, two chevrons and a canton' and a legend + S' THOME:DE:ORREBI, which C H Hunter Blair attributes to Thomas, the younger son of Herbert de Orby of Gawsworth, Cheshire, and nephew of Philip I. Another is a painted shield, F 327 (c.1285), for Jon de Orbebi, 'argent, two chevrons and on a canton gules two lions passant argent' [Brault, /Rolls of Arms of Edward I/ i. 280 Charles' Roll]. This was probably John I de Orby of Dalby (d.1329), great-grandson of Philip the justiciar through Philip's second son Fulk. There is then a gap of about a century before another painted shield, CY 18 (last quarter 14c.), sub 'Chestreshire', for Sr ffulco de Arby, 'argent, two chevrons and a canton gules' [Clemmensen, /Ordinary of Medieval Armorials/ County Roll]. This may refer back to John's grandfather, Fulk.

Within that century gap we find examples of a different coat of arms for Orby, similar to the one you are interested in, i.e. 'gules, two lions passant argent, a label or'. There is a written blazon at GA 107 (1300) for Sir Jehan de Erreby, 'de gueulles a deux lyons passauntz d'argent a ung label d'or' [Brault, /Rolls of Arms of Edward I/ i. 456 Galloway Roll] and at N 955 (c.1312) (sub Chestreschire) for Sire Johan de Ereby, 'de goules, a ij lions passanz de argent, e un label de or' [Nicolas, /A Roll of Arms of Peers and Knights in the Reign of Edward the Second/ 82 Parliamentary Roll].

This could well be the same John I de Orby of Dalby (d.1329) as for the entry in Charles' Roll. There are a surprising number of cases from the last part of the thirteenth century where men changed their arms to new ones with a lion on them. They include earls, barons and knights. And although some instances can be explained on genealogical grounds, most of them seem to be simply following some kind of fashion. In addition the new arms are those on the canton of his previous arms, with a label to difference it from, for example, the Strange and Pedwardine families. I don't think we need to find some genealogical connection to the Strange family of Knockin in order to explain the change of arms.

The heir of John I de Orby of Dalby (d.1329) was his grandson, John II (d.1354), whose arms, again 'gules, two lions passant argent, a label or', appear on a seal of 1346 [Birch, /Catalogue of Seals/ 12,319], and as painted shields at PO 407 (c.1350) [Greenstreet 'Powell Roll of Arms' /Reliquary/ iii (1889) 235] and AN 64 (c.1360) [Clemmensen, /Ordinary of Medieval Armorials/ Antiquaries' Roll]. John II had an only daughter, Joan, who in turn left an only daughter, Mary, who died without issue in 1394.

It may well be that the quarter you refer to represents a descent from the Orby family through the Ardernes, but that part of the Orby family never in fact used those arms.

Peter Howarth

[Peter Howarth]

Whilst writing my previous post, I also looked at the original post on this thread.

There are in fact two references to a seal in the name of Orreby with a shield bearing a bend. One has already been mentioned: that cited in DBA i. 334 under the heading 'per pale bend' for John de Orreby, Clerk, from PRO-seals dated 1314-15, "on 2 of 4 shields set in legend on sl of Orreby".

But compare that to Birch, /Catalogue of Seals/ 12,318, again dated 1314-15, a plaster cast [therefore a copy of the original wax impression] round, shield of arms: barry, in chief three roundels; shield surrounded by four roundels each with a shield: 1,4 per pale, a bend engrailed; 2,3 cross flory btw 4 martlets; : S' IOH'IS : DE : ORREBI. DBA mentions it at i. 353. These must in fact refer to the same seal, even though one has the bend engrailed and the other plain. And since the principal arms are 'barry, in chief three roundels', they do not refer to the Orby of Dalton family.

According to Complete Peerage x. 174 note (c), Margaret, wife of John II de Orby of Dalton (d.1354) was 'said in the old pedigrees to be da. of (—) de St. Pierre.' And lo and behold, Clemmensen, /Ordinary of Medieval Armorials/, under StPierre2, has references to ten different rolls of arms, dating from 1285 to 1400, all giving the arms of various members of the St. Pierre family as 'argent, a bend sable and label gules'. It looks as if John Paul Rylands, the editor of the Visitation of Cheshire, working from a seal or a monument, guessed at the tinctures involved and got the label wrong.

It also looks as though the original arms represented Orby of Dalton impaling St Pierre (or St Peter) of La Hyde, Staffs and lands in Derbys and Cheshire.

Peter Howarth

[Peter Howarth]

Post by Peter Howarth
Whilst writing my previous post, I also looked at the original post on this thread.
There are in fact two references to a seal in the name of Orreby with a shield bearing a bend. One has already been mentioned: that cited in DBA i. 334 under the heading 'per pale bend' for John de Orreby, Clerk, from PRO-seals dated 1314-15, "on 2 of 4 shields set in legend on sl of Orreby".
But compare that to Birch, /Catalogue of Seals/ 12,318, again dated 1314-15, a plaster cast [therefore a copy of the original wax impression] round, shield of arms: barry, in chief three roundels; shield surrounded by four roundels each with a shield: 1,4 per pale, a bend engrailed; 2,3 cross flory btw 4 martlets; : S' IOH'IS : DE : ORREBI. DBA mentions it at i. 353. These must in fact refer to the same seal, even though one has the bend engrailed and the other plain. And since the principal arms are 'barry, in chief three roundels', they do not refer to the Orby of Dalton family.
According to Complete Peerage x. 174 note (c), Margaret, wife of John II de Orby of Dalton (d.1354) was 'said in the old pedigrees to be da. of (—) de St. Pierre.' And lo and behold, Clemmensen, /Ordinary of Medieval Armorials/, under StPierre2, has references to ten different rolls of arms, dating from 1285 to 1400, all giving the arms of various members of the St. Pierre family as 'argent, a bend sable and label gules'. It looks as if John Paul Rylands, the editor of the Visitation of Cheshire, working from a seal or a monument, guessed at the tinctures involved and got the label wrong.
It also looks as though the original arms represented Orby of Dalton impaling St Pierre (or St Peter) of La Hyde, Staffs and lands in Derbys and Cheshire.
Peter Howarth

My apologies. In the previous post, 'Orby of Dalton' should read 'Orby of Dalby'

[d***@hotmail.com]

Thank you for your illuminating and thorough reply Peter, it has given me plenty of food for thought and a handful of references to follow up. I have come across the idea before that heralds did not always strictly abide by their own rules regarding the inclusion of the arms of heraldic heiresses only in the subsequent quarterings. From a genealogical perspective this can be a great boon - for instance the Bostock arms from Abingdon read like a visual pedigree - but also poses questions around who made the decisions regarding inclusion or exclusion of arms inthe quarterings. Why, for instance, would the Del Heath or Poole arms be included while Audley was not? If the purpose of the inclusions was to display prestige then why omit arms with the strongest claim to royal descent? Was it due to political alliances?

I'd be very interested in your thoughts, thanks again for your time,
Cheers Dave

[Peter Howarth]

Post by d***@hotmail.com
Thank you for your illuminating and thorough reply Peter, it has given me plenty of food for thought and a handful of references to follow up. I have come across the idea before that heralds did not always strictly abide by their own rules regarding the inclusion of the arms of heraldic heiresses only in the subsequent quarterings. From a genealogical perspective this can be a great boon - for instance the Bostock arms from Abingdon read like a visual pedigree - but also poses questions around who made the decisions regarding inclusion or exclusion of arms inthe quarterings. Why, for instance, would the Del Heath or Poole arms be included while Audley was not? If the purpose of the inclusions was to display prestige then why omit arms with the strongest claim to royal descent? Was it due to political alliances?
I'd be very interested in your thoughts, thanks again for your time,
Cheers Dave

You don't give the date of the Bostock arms with these multiple quarterings, but one possible explanation for the omission of a quarter for Audley is that the family was not aware of the connection. Quartered arms started to become popular during the fifteenth century as a way of representing the various lands which the armiger held. The notion of 'heraldic heiresses' without any land came much later. If the Audley line came into the next family either before quartering came into fashion, or without any substantial land holdings, that family would not have added the Audley quarter to their arms at the time. Several generations later, her existence may have been forgotten. The pedigrees given to the heralds on their visitations contained plenty of omissions as well as mistakes. And whilst many US genealogists nowadays consider royal descent as the Holy Grail, I'm not sure that English gentry were always quite so enthusiastic.

According to the Dictionary of British Arms i. 267, 'gules, two lions passant or, a label of five points azure' only occurs, in mediaeval times, as the arms of members of the Pedwardine family. The arms for the main branch from Sir Walter de Pedwardine of Pedwardine, Salop (now in Herefs) were usually just 'gules, two lions passant or', which suggests that the quarter with a label might represent a cadet line (rather than a temporary heir apparent).

Peter Howarth