Steven Hand s will is on the Handcousins website. Sent from my iPad Carol Boyd ... Steven Hand s will is on the Handcousins website. Sent from my iPad CarolMessage 1 of 12 , Apr 30, 2012View SourceSteven Hand's will is on the Handcousins website.
Sent from my iPadCarol Boyd
On Apr 30, 2012, at 5:28 PM, "Jim Liptrap" <jim@...> wrote:
Wonderful!Is there an outline somewhere of the English Family before (and after?) John's emigration ?Jim----- Original Message -----From: Carol BoydSent: Monday, April 30, 2012 2:05 PMSubject: Re: [handcousins] Re: A Larger Hand GraphicOur John Hand had an older brother Giles. He is named in Stephen's will.
Sent from my iPadCarol Boyd
On Apr 30, 2012, at 2:21 PM, "Jim Liptrap" <jim@...> wrote:
(clicked too soon)The Title of Baronet would descend by the eldest male heir. The Coat of Arms (shield) descends with the title, and as with ALL coats of arms, there is only one (1) person entitled to bear those arms at a time (!). It is NOT the property of all descendants, and certainly not of everyone having the same surname. Close family members may use the Arms, but only when it has been "differenced" by the addition of a symbol indicating that person's relationship to the rightful bearer of the arms, such as a "label" for the eldest son and heir presumptive, usually in the upper left corner of the shield. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_coat_of_armsThe "Family Crest," which is the ornamentation above and around the shield, including the motto, may be used by anyone who can prove direct, legitimate, male descent.----- Original Message -----From: Poppi27@...Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 12:04 PMSubject: Re: [handcousins] Re: A Larger Hand GraphicWould the purchaser of such a title be able to pass it down to his ancestors?-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Liptrap <jim@...>
To: handcousins <email@example.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 30, 2012 11:34 am
Subject: Re: [handcousins] Re: A Larger Hand Graphic
An excellent question:(A) There may have been an earlier noble family(B) By the time of the Stuarts (1611), anyone (of good birth and £1000 annual income) could purchase for themselves a Baronetage, with arms. The Crown was in such desperate need of money to finance their wars, and Parliament reluctant to raise taxes, and deficit spending not a possibility (!) , this alternate funding method was re-introduced. Most went to prosperous merchants, but it would have been possible for a successful farmer to have purchased one, as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BaronetHOWEVER: No Hand is listed among the Baronets of England http://www.leighrayment.com/baronetage.htmWhich raises the same question. And since we do not have the name of the original recipient of arms, there is no way to prove descent from him - Crozier not withstanding.Not all families had arms.Jim----- Original Message -----From: Daniel StitesSent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:45 AMSubject: RE: [handcousins] Re: A Larger Hand GraphicCan someone explain why the Hands of Kent would have arms at all given the fact they were yeoman not noblemen?Thanks,Dan StitesDaniel Stites, MD
1120 Brockman Lane
Sonoma, CA 95476
Hello,I looked for the Hands in the Visitations of Kent, 1619 and 1663-8. Nothing. What record ties the arms to the Hands of Stanstede, Kent? Just Crozier? The Clayton Library in Houston has its collection divided geographically, so since I was looking for British Arms, Crozier's was not present. After I was home and checked the on-line catalog, I found that it is in the USA Section. So that will be a later trip. But that still does not explain the absence of the family record from the Visitations of the Heralds in Kent in the 1600's. If they had arms by 1668, it was the job of the Heralds to document the family. If they were not issued until after 1668, then John Hand, who left before 1644, would NOT be entitled to use them.Burkes just gives the description. The Dictionary of Suffolk Arms places the arms in Ousden, Suffolk, near the west edge of the county, but gives no names. And the Visitations of Suffolk don't record anything either.Incidentaly, the same arms, all colors and designs - except using left hands, is the arms of the Maynard Family of Hoxne, Essex, granted Sir Henry Maynard in 1612, exinct 1775. (Dictionary of Suffolk Arms)Jim----- Original Message -----From: sirtsclanSent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 5:23 AMSubject: [handcousins] Re: A Larger Hand GraphicThis has to be the largest hand I've ever seen in a graphic.
By the way, there are many coats of arms with a hand featured as part of the full coat of arms. Very interesting subject.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "sirtsclan" <sirtsclan@...> wrote:
> Click on image to see a large hand--too funny for me.