Conway Family and Coat of Arms

[marlow...@frontier.com]

Since Matt posted the links to the Stoughton coat of arms reminds me of my Edwin Conway, Sr and Martha Eltonhead's grandson and the coat of arms he used. Edwin Conway, SR is said to be the son of Edward Conway and Dorothy Tracy which is untrue but we believe he does descend from someone in that family someway.

The grandson of Edwin Conway, Sr. and Martha Eltonhead:


Col. Edwin Conway according to the Virginia Archives was given a paper and the seal displayed the following arms: "Someone has written of this coat of armor, it indicates a branch of Lord Conway family replanted and grown to another tree, and requiring arms of it for legal purposes." Anne Conway daughter of Col. Edwin Conway married Robert Edmonds in 1729 in Lancaster County, Virginia which the coat of arms was on a piece of paper.

The coat- of- arms of the family of Col. Edwin Conway in Virginia, is :
It is blazoned:
Sable, on a bend, argent, cotised ermine, a rose, gules, between two annulets of the last."
Crest: " A Moors head, side-faced, proper, banded around the temples, argent and azure."
Motto: Fide et amore "By fidelity and love."

The Conway arms of Edward Conway that married Dorothy Tracy
Source: A Selection of Arms Authorized by the Laws of Heraldry by S. Burke 1814-1892;

" Edward Conway, created a Viscount by his Majesty the King of the Belgians, on the 17th August 1853y.

"pi. ATKxxx.. Authorized Arms. 173
"The titles of Baron Conway of Ragley, in the co. of Warwick, of \'is count Conway of Aber Conway, in the co. of Carnarvon, of Viscount Conway of Killultagh and Earl of Co. \v(raY."

A description of the arms:

"3irm5.--- Sa., on a bend, cottised, arg., a rose, gu., between two annulets of the field; in the sinister cjief point, a cresent, or.
Crc^t.--- The bust of a Moor in profile, couped at the shoulders, ppr wreathed about the temples, arg. and az., and charged on the breast with a cresent, arg.
Motto: --- Fide er amore.'

Marianne Dillow

[Matt A]

In the "Virginia Archives" [Library of Virginia?] there was a "piece of paper"? According to which source? This seems like hearsay, and I am reminded of a series of 3 researchers who claimed to have personally seen the allegedly 3-pear arms of Richard Parrott of Old Rappahanock, VA, on an apocryphal deed, despite the discovery of his actual arms (a different coat) about 10 years ago.

I would appreciate clarification of this statement.

-Matt Ahlgren

[marlow...@frontier.com]

That was handed down in the family. That is why there is a problem with researchers saying that Edward Conway, Sr is the son of Edward Conway and Dorothy Tracy when is not and was never mentioned in Edward Conway's will.

Marianne Dillow

[marlow...@frontier.com]

Please excuse my typos.. That was supposed to be......

That was handed down in the family. That is why there is a problem with researchers saying that Edwin Conway, Sr is the son of Edward Conway and Dorothy Tracy when he is not and was never mentioned in Edward Conway's will.

Marianne Dillow

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GEN-MEDIEV...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

[Derek Howard]

On Saturday, June 22, 2013 5:48:12 AM UTC+2, marlow...@frontier.com wrote:
> Since Matt posted the links to the Stoughton coat of arms reminds me of my
> Edwin Conway, Sr and Martha Eltonhead's grandson and the coat of arms he
> used. Edwin Conway, SR is said to be the son of Edward Conway and Dorothy
> Tracy which is untrue but we believe he does descend from someone in that
> family someway.
>
> The grandson of Edwin Conway, Sr. and Martha Eltonhead:
>
> Col. Edwin Conway according to the Virginia Archives was given a paper and
> the seal displayed the following arms: "Someone has written of this coat of
> armor, it indicates a branch of Lord Conway family replanted and grown to
> another tree, and requiring arms of it for legal purposes." Anne Conway
> daughter of Col. Edwin Conway married Robert Edmonds in 1729 in Lancaster
> County, Virginia which the coat of arms was on a piece of paper.
>

> The coat-of-arms of the family of Col. Edwin Conway in Virginia, is :

> It is blazoned:
> Sable, on a bend, argent, cotised ermine, a rose, gules, between two annulets
> of the last."
> Crest: " A Moors head, side-faced, proper, banded around the temples, argent
> and azure."
> Motto: Fide et amore "By fidelity and love."
>
> The Conway arms of Edward Conway that married Dorothy Tracy
> Source: A Selection of Arms Authorized by the Laws of Heraldry by S. Burke
> 1814-1892;
>
> " Edward Conway, created a Viscount by his Majesty the King of the Belgians,
> on the 17th August 1853y.
>
> "pi. ATKxxx.. Authorized Arms. 173
>

> "The titles of Baron Conway of Ragley, in the co. of Warwick, of Viscount

> Conway of Aber Conway, in the co. of Carnarvon, of Viscount Conway of

> Killultagh and Earl of Conway."

>
> A description of the arms:

> "Arms.--- Sa., on a bend, cottised, arg., a rose, gu., between two annulets
> of the field; in the sinister chief point, a cresent, or.
> Crest.--- The bust of a Moor in profile, couped at the shoulders, ppr

> wreathed about the temples, arg. and az., and charged on the breast with a
> cresent, arg.
> Motto: --- Fide er amore.'
>
> Marianne Dillow

The important point to note is that the arms of the 19th century chap are distinctly different from, albeit similar to, the 17th century colonist. The annulets are sable for the peer, rather than gules for the colonist and the peer has a crescent which may be a mark of difference - I have not yet looked further into the family. Someone had thought it was inappropriate for the two families to bear identical arms as if they were in fact related but they nevertheless wished to show a common surname and perhaps imply to those with less knowledge and more impressionable that they could be.

There were 2 Belgian grants or recognitions of nobility including arms, one in 1855 and one in 1856, the former carrying a coronet so presumably for the viscomte and the other without, perhaps for his heir, under the names "de Conway" - I have not checked the details (Janssens and Duerloo: "Armorial de la noblesse belge", 1992, v 4, nos 896, 897).

For an emblazonment of the arms of Edwin Conway (d. 1675) of Lancaster Co, Va. and references to the sources see the American Heraldry Society page at:
http://www.americanheraldry.org/pages/index.php?n=Roll.C

Derek Howard

[marlow...@frontier.com]

Thanks a lot Derek. I don't understand coats of arms that much but thought a branch from the family could do slight changes on a coat of arms.

Marianne Dillow


----- Original Message -----

[Derek Howard]

On Saturday, June 22, 2013 6:28:27 PM UTC+2, marlow...@frontier.com wrote:
> Thanks a lot Derek. I don't understand coats of arms that much but thought a
> branch from the family could do slight changes on a coat of arms.
>
> Marianne Dillow

This is certainly true, especially in the medieval period, but cannot be relied upon as an indicator that there was indeed a relationship. (Though the limited number of accepted marks of difference for sibling brothers were formalised in the 16th century and were not usually used without justification). These days the heralds in England usually insist on three differences between new arms and old established ones. This has not always been the case and I know of many with only one minor difference but where a relationship was never established.

Having said that, according to "Dictionary of British Arms, Medieval Ordinary", ed Woodcock and Grant, vol 2 (1996), p 97, "Sable on a bend Argent cotised Ermine a rose Gules between two annulets Sable" is recorded for Conway in College of Arms, ms L2 (c 1520); while the same with the annulets Gules are recorded for the name in College of Arms, ms L1 (c 1520) and College of Arms, ms L10 (also c 1520).

A versions with the annulets Or also existed a lot earlier - in Williments roll (c 1395) - assigned to one Henry Conway. (I assume this later is the Henry Conway, Esquire - who I read on the web was the earliest known member of the Conway family of Raglan, knighted by the Earl of March early in the reign of Richard II, and indentured 1382 to serve as a Knight). However, Leo's Genealogics does not show Henry as ancestral to the peerage family which is said to derive from Jenkin Conway, see
http://www.genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00236715&tree=LEO
Could it be that the Conways of Raglan had already differenced from Henry Conway for lack of evidence of a relationship? Does anyone know if there is a link from Henry to Jenkin?

Any relationship may possibly have existed but at a much earlier date and these differences of tincture may be indicative of a lack of known relationship.

Derek Howard

[marlow...@frontier.com]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Derek Howard" <dho...@skynet.be>
To: gen-me...@rootsweb.com

Yes , these are earlier ones that are associated with the family of Edward Conway that married Dorothy Tracy from other researchers.

Marianne Dillow

[Chris Dickinson]

Marianne Dillow wrote in reply to Derek Howard:
 
 
<snip>

 
>> Any relationship may possibly have existed but at a much earlier date and these differences of tincture may be indicative of a lack of known relationship.

>> Derek Howard

> Yes , these are earlier ones that are associated with the family of Edward Conway that married Dorothy Tracy from other researchers.

 
 
I vaguely remember that this thread spawned from a seal query. I didn't write this earlier, as the below doesn't seem to apply here - but maybe best to get this recorded.
 
A seal on an early modern document (don't know about medieval) doesn't necessarily imply any relationship to the signature. The seal most probably belonged to the attorney representing the client, or the notary. Even if the client has a surname that is the same as that of the attorney, the seal proves nothing - especially in areas in which the surname is clustering.
 
 
 
Chris

[marlow...@frontier.com]

I have other grandparents that had a problem with their coat of arms also. My line goes from Agnes Grosvenor and William Stanley to Sir Robert Grosvenor and Joan Pulford.

SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR (d. 1396), knight, was a defendant in the case of SCROPE and GROSVENOR, in 1369 was with SIR JAMES AUDLEY at the capture of La Roche-sur-Yon. Next year he was in the service of the BLACK PRINCE at the siege of Limoges. During all these campaigns GROSVENOR is stated to have used as his coat of arms, 'azure, a bend or,' and while he was yet a minor his guardian challenged JOHN CAMIROW, a Cornish squire, who had had a like dispute with SIR RICHARD SCROPE for bearing them.

In 1385, SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR was engaged in the expedition against Scotland, and was there challenged by SCROPE as to his right to bear his arms. On 17 Aug. a proclamation was made for the trial to be held at Newcastle on 20 Aug., whence it was almost at once adjourned to meet at Whitehall on 20 Oct. Meetings were held at intervals till 16 May 1386, when THOMAS , DUKE of GLOUCSTER, who presided as constable of England, ordered both parties to appear with their proofs on 21 Jan. 1387, and appointed commissioners to collect evidence. later in the the year was occupied with this business, and on the appointed day the court met again, the constable being present in person, and SIR JOHN de MULTON being lieutenant for the marshal. A host of witnesses were summoned on either side; for SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR, nearly all the knights and gentlemen of Lancashire and Cheshire, together with some abbots, who testified to the use of the bend or by SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR and by his ancestors. On 12 May 1389 that the constable gave judgment against SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR, who was condemned with costs; but in consideration of the strong evidence which he had adduced had assigned to him as his arms 'azure, a bend or, with a plain bordure, argent, for difference.' Against this decision SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR at once appealed, especially against the assignment of arms for which he had never petitioned. The summons to the parties in the suit to appear before the king was issued on 15 May (Fœdera, vii. 620), commissioners were appointed to hear the case, and the trial commenced May 1389; the royal decision was given on 27 May 1390, when the judgment of the constable was confirmed, but the award of distinctive arms was annulled (ib. vii. 676)

SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR and his descendants, adopted in its place 'azure, a garbe or,' which is still retained in the family coat of arms. On 28 Nov. 1390 letters patent were issued directing that SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR was to be held liable for the costs, which amounted to 466l. On 3 Oct. 1391 a further fine of fifty marks was inflicted for his contumacy. But this latter was forgiven on the intercession of SIR RICHARD SCROPE. SIR ROBERT GROSVENOR was appointed sheriff of Cheshire, 'quam diu nobis placuerit,' on 1 Jan. 1389, and was again sheriff in 1394. He died on 12 Sept. 1396. By his wife, JOAN, daughter of SIR ROBERT PULFORD, he had a son, SIR THOMAS GROSVENOR of Hulme, from whom the DUKE of WESTMINISTER is descended.

Marianne Dillow