Here's what Peter Walne said about the Richard Ball he thought might possibly be (Walne did not claim he was) William's father: "In the problem of the Ball ancestry, the approach most likely to lead to a solution is a reconsideration of the heraldic evidence. When William Ball [of London and Berkshire] recorded his pedigree he recorded his arms _Azure on a cross pierced of the field or four galtraps of the first_ with a crest, _A galtrap azure the upward point bloody_. Had there been a close connection between the Balls of Berkshire and Virginia, one would have expected to find these arms or some close approximation to them used in the Virginia branch of the family. Heck [note: _Colonel William Ball of Virginia_, pp. 16 ff. The arms are _Argent a lion passant sable on a chief of the second three mullets of the first_ with a crest _Out of clouds proper a demi lion rampant sable holding a globe or_.] shows clearly that the arms which were known to and claimed by the family in Virginia were identical or very similar to those granted in 1613 to Dr. Richard Ball, son of Lawrence Ball of Northamptonshire. If Heck's statement is correct and Colonel William Ball did indeed bring 'an illuminated parchment' when he emigrated from England, then the origins of the family must be sought in the Northamptonshire line. On the heraldic evidence, there is nothing inherently improbable in the descent he postulates for the Balls of Lancaster County, though admittedly the pedigree which results from this is by no means as tidy as the one at present traditionally favoured. It is impossible, however, heraldically to claim one descent, as is the case in _Burke's Landed Gentry_, from a family entitled to bear arms and to append to the descent the arms of an entirely different family, albeit of the same name. One is wrong, descent or arms. If Colonel William did bring a representation of the Northamptonshire arms with him, then his evidence of descent antedates the Downman pedigree evidence and the lines which it suggests should be followed."

Thanks Kathleen.  I have read the Walne article, and he does not state William Ball of Virginia may be a son of Richard Ball of Northamptonshire.   He only states that William Ball may be connected to the Northamptonshire family.  However, I think Walne's statement to this effect is based on very flimsy evidence (a Parchment that no one has seen) and not sure how this meets the genealogical standards/expectations as set forth by others on this List.   Recently, I quoted a late 1500's will from Suffolk, England which specifically mentioned a Ball and was told it was fantastic and speculative.  Yet, it seems List members are more than willing to accept Walne's statement regarding the Northamptonshire Ball family which is based on a supposed parchment invented by Heck (not Hayden).  I don't get it.  Is it because Walne is published and therefore given more freedom to speculate as he pleases???   -----Original Message----- From: Kathleen Much <much.bookdr@gmail.com> Sender: va-northern-neck-bounces@rootsweb.com Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:30:17 To: va-northern-neck@rootsweb.com<va-northern-neck@rootsweb.com> Reply-To: va-northern-neck@rootsweb.com Subject: [VA-NORTHERN-NECK] Richard Ball,       possible father of Wm the Immigrannt   Here's what Peter Walne said about the Richard Ball he thought might possibly be (Walne did not claim he was) William's father: