On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 18:13:37 UTC+1, Douglas Richardson wrote: > My comments are interspersed below. DR > > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 1:27:27 AM UTC-6, Peter Howarth wrote: > > < I am not convinced that the harness pendant with the arms 'quarterly plain and < fretty, over all on a bend sable, three mullets', as described, "probably > < shows the arms of Alan Elsfield". > > > < Firstly, we have no exact date for the pendant beyond an estimated period of > < seventy years (1250-1320) when such things were in high fashion. Alan de > < Elsfield is unknown except for mention in three rolls of arms dated by Gerald < Brault to approximately 1285-1296.[1] > > This is not a correct statement. See further below. > > > I would also stress the point made by Mrs Szymanski that Alan de Elsfield's use of a variation of the Despenser arms does not, of itself, indicate any kinship with that family. > > Alan de Elsfield was in fact related to Hugh le Despenser, presumably the elder: > > Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Deeds 4 (1902): 48 (Sir Alan de Elsefeld [Elsfield] styled “kinsman” by Hugh le Despenser in undated grant). > > See the following weblink: > > https://books.google.com/books?id=H1I4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48 > > Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah Thank you very much for the additional reference to Alan de Elsfield. It's unfortunate that it doesn't help any with the dating either of the pendant or of Alan himself. It does however give a tantalising genealogical connection between Alan and a Hugh le Despenser, something which the arms on their own don't necessarily give. So I'm happy to leave it to genealogists to discover the connection. Peter Howarth