Author Topic: Arms of the Wicksteeds of Wicksteed and the Wicksteads of Nantwich  (Read 232 times)

Offline Andrew RM Hayes

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Arms of the Wicksteeds of Wicksteed and the Wicksteads of Nantwich
« on: Tuesday 01 August 17 16:58 BST (UK) »
The exemplification of arms and grant of crest to Thomas Wicksteed of Wicksteed (1607) is illustrated with a diagram showing the same arms as those of the Wicksteads of Nantwich, as described in the 1613 Herald's Visitation of Cheshire. The pedigree of the latter family states that they were descended from a younger (son) of Wickstid of Wickstid. What I don't understand is why the junior line did not use a mark of cadency to distinguish them from the senior branch. John Wicksteed, the grandson of Thomas Wickstead, gentleman usher to James I, was still alive until 1624, when his PCC will was proved, so it is not a case that the senior line had become extinct. Although this mentions no male heir, just sisters, a supposed daughter and a divorced wife!

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Kiltpin

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Stand and be Counted
    • View Profile
Re: Arms of the Wicksteeds of Wicksteed and the Wicksteads of Nantwich
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 01 August 17 18:42 BST (UK) »
The exemplification of arms and grant of crest to Thomas Wicksteed of Wicksteed (1607) is illustrated with a diagram showing the same arms as those of the Wicksteads of Nantwich, as described in the 1613 Herald's Visitation of Cheshire. The pedigree of the latter family states that they were descended from a younger (son) of Wickstid of Wickstid. What I don't understand is why the junior line did not use a mark of cadency to distinguish them from the senior branch. John Wicksteed, the grandson of Thomas Wickstead, gentleman usher to James I, was still alive until 1624, when his PCC will was proved, so it is not a case that the senior line had become extinct. Although this mentions no male heir, just sisters, a supposed daughter and a divorced wife!

Without any other information, I would presume that the senior line, did in fact become extinct. His sisters would have transmitted his father's arms (not his) as an impalement; his "supposed daughter" would have transmitted his arms as a quartering, but only if she was "legally born, of the body"; if not, then nothing; likewise the divorced wife. She would no longer be able to bear his arms. In all these cases the subsequent arms are differenced by either impalement or by quartering.

The cadet line might very well have had a cadency mark but dropped it when they became the de facto senior line. A good example of this (but not the only one), is the Duke of Wellington, who was a second son. He bore a crescent till he was elevated to the peerage and it was quietly dropped - a duke outranking a gentleman.

Although we like to quote "one man, one arms" and cite Scrope versus Grosvenor, what is forgotten is the fact that there was a third contender - Carmelow from the West Country. He could not afford the lavish spending of the other two and packed up and went home. His descendants live to this day and bear "Azure a bend Or", just like the descendants of Scrope do today.

Regards

Chas
Whannell - Eaton - Jackson
India - Scotland - Australia

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Andrew RM Hayes

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Arms of the Wicksteeds of Wicksteed and the Wicksteads of Nantwich
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday 02 August 17 11:16 BST (UK) »
Thank you for your reply.
I didn't realise there had been a third contender in the notorious Grosvenor case.
Ormerod, a 19th century Cheshire antiquarian,  makes reference to Wickstead Hall, ancient residence of the Wicksteads, near Marbury, Cheshire. "A junior branch moved to Nantwich, but the senior continued to live there until the last (ie 18th) century, when Mary, heiress of Richard Wickstead Esq, married Simon Etheridge."
So it seems that the senior line continued, although not through the heirs of John Wickstead's body.
Interestingly 17th century inventories of the Nantwich family include paintings of their arms, so they were obviously important to them. Perhaps they simply ignored the rules?