My research into the origins of these arms lead me to a document which, to me, did not seem to be all it purported to be:

"To all Men loving Nobleness, Virtue and Chivalry: and to all Ladies, and Maidens of honor, of honest deportment and Gentilesse, and to each of them: "I, James Hedingley, called Guyen King of Arms: Greeting in Peace and Good Speed. Above all, that which appertains to the honorable office of a Herald is first; to record the good fame and renown of all honest and virtuous persons. SO, likewise it is suitable and fit, to Give and set in order to such persons, Ensigns and Arms of honor; so, that their noble an valiant deeds of arms, may be preserved in perpetual remembrance. And therefore having regard to the loyal and valiant service of Peter Dodge, a native of the town of Stopworth, in the County of Chester, Gentlemen: which he has done and performed to my most dear and Sovereign Lord, by the Grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Guyen, as well in several battles against his great enemy and rebel, Baliol, King of Scotland and Vassal of England: as likewise at the sieges of Berwick and Dunbar: there, where, in his duty and valiant courage, he was conspicuous for the advancement of his renown and the good content of my said Sovereign Lord, who, in recompense of his said service and by his Special Grace, Gave to Him, and to his Heirs forever, the Lordship of Podenhughe, with the Barony of Coldingham in the Kingdom of Scotland. "I have thought it therefore convenient in the performance of my office, to Grant him arms accordingly, and specially for two reasons: the one for having valiantly served toward the King's peace and the public good, the other, that his heirs and successors, by the remembrance of his honor and valor, may be encouraged to follow him, always in like virtue and noble conduct. And for which cause: Know Ye: That I, the aforesaid Guyen, have Given and Granted to the said Peter Dodge, that from henceforth he may carry his shield: 'Barry of Six: Or and Sable: on a Pale'gules, a Woman's Breast Gouttant: which arms appear, here in view depicted. I, Guyen King of arms, have Given and Confirmed to the said Peter Dodge and to his heirs forever, to have enjoy and use the same: and in them to be adorned and clothed, for the advancement of their honor, as well in all Triumphs, Jousts, Tournaments, and deeds of Arms, as also in Martial matters and enterprises, that may be requisite in peace or in war, in all places and at all times, according to their pleasure, without the impeachment of any person or persons." "In testimony of which I have here Subjoined my seal. Given the 8th day of April, the Thirty Forth year of the reign of our said Sovereign Lord, Edward, Son of King Henry; after the Conquest, the First of that name." (Translated from the Norman French, in which language the original patent was written.)

Coldingham did not become a barony until 1638 and I had not before come across a Guyen King of Arms so I asked the participants of the Heraldry Society of Scotland forum for their view.

---

James Dempster:

 "Sir Payne Roet, father in law of Geoffrey Chaucer (and of course also father of Katherine Swynford) was Guienne King of Arms so the post existed in the late 14th century. According to Fox Davies (Art of Heraldry p 16) the post varied between that of herald and King of Arms and was extant (though probably not continually) possibly from the time of Edward I to Edward IV.

The arms seem to be the standard (in)famous canting arms of the Dodges details of which also appear in Fox Davies (Art of Heraldry pp 120, 145).

Fox Davies also notes (Art of Heraldry p 394) :

"There was a certain augmentation borne by the Dodge family, which, if it be correct, dates from the 34th year of Edward I, but whether this be authentic it is impossible to say. Most people consider the alleged deed of grant a forgery, and if this be so, the arms only exist by right of subsequent record and the question of augmentation rests upon tradition. The curious charge of a woman's breast distilling drops of milk to typify the nourishment afforded to the king's army is at any rate most interesting."

Further on in The Art of Heraldry (p 460) concerning ancient grants.

"Dallaway in his "Heraldic Enquiries," certainly mentions a grant long before the incorporation of the College. It is alleged to be by James Heddingley, Guyen King of Arms, to Peter Dodge, Gentleman, and to be dated the 8th day of April in the 34th year of "Edward le premier;" but although this is in a collection made by Glover, it is unlikely to be genuine. Documents written in the name of a sovereign who has had no predecessor of the same name do not usually describe him as "the first". Not only so, but it is stated by Austen that Guyen King of Arms was not created till the time of Henry VI."

Given that the Art of Heraldry was a multi-authored work there are some minor differences there. The article on heralds (p 16) was written by Fox Davies himself, those on the human figure (p 120) and beasts (p 145) are not directly signed but were probably his work also. The chapter on Augmentations (p 394) is Fox Davies work whilst that on early grants (p 460) is part of the article on early Scottish sources by Lord Lyon Balfour Paul.

It would appear that the allegedly fake "grant" has been around since the time of Glover (late 1500s)"

---

Charles Ross:

 "I don't feel that the point about kings not usually being named "the first" is a strong one: Edward is not actually described as "Edward I" but rather in the translation from the Norman French (which at that period is likely to be very literal) as "after the conquest the first of that name ". The Normans had swept away the Anglo-Saxons including of course Edward the Confessor; an Edward following after him for obvious reasons was not going to call himself Edward II !! Forgers were usually smart enough to copy the form of genuine documents and then slip in the little forged bits...... One could compare other documents of the same period, but I wouldn't mind betting that that bit is genuine!
What usually gives away forgers are the results of forensic examination revealing quality of paper or type & composition of ink for example."

---

Alex Maxwell Findlater:

 "Just to confirm a couple of points, yes Edward I was always called “Edward the First since the Conquest” in charters etc. Otherwise there might have been confusion with earlier Edwards. Remember that the Normans claimed to be the heirs of Edward the Confessor, who being childless was said to have sent Harold over to convey the promise of the inheritance. Harold certainly went on an embassy to Duke William, whether to offer the kingdom it is impossible to say as there is no record. It is however perhaps given the lie by the summoning back from exile of the Atheling and his sister Margaret, later Queen of Canmore, in 1065.

Coldingham was a very rich priory, a daughter house of Durham and also dedicated to St Cuthbert. It is unlikely therefore that it was granted away by Edward I. At all events, it is not in the list at the back of GWS Barrow’s Robert Bruce, which has the Scottish lands petitioned for by the conquering English knights etc.

Guienne was synonymous with Aquitaine, and Aquitaine came to England with Eleanor, the wife of Henry II. She was the daughter and coheiress of William Duke of Aquitaine. So that the King was Duke of Guienne is quite right.

According to Burke’s General Armory, the Dodge family comes from Slopworth, Co Chester as well as Kent and Suffolk. There the arms have on the pale an eye argent weeping and dropping or. I had looked to see if there was a reference to a visitation, but I found instead a curious adjustment of an immodest mediaeval charge to better please Victorian morality.

It is certainly a charming fake, if fake it is."

---

James Dempster:

Charles Ross wrote:

I don't feel that the point about kings not usually being named "the first" is a strong one: Edward is not actually described as "Edward I" but rather in the translation from the Norman French (which at that period is likely to be very literal) as "after the conquest the first of that name "....... One could compare other documents of the same period, but I wouldn't mind betting that that bit is genuine! What usually gives away forgers are the results of forensic examination revealing quality of paper or type & composition of ink for example.

I world agree with the above - Balfour Paul's point about "le premier" is slight evidence on which to cast aside the document. However, we can only speculate as we don't have the original or absent it a diplomatic copy. There are however, other ways to determine where the document is on the line from bad forgery through good forgery to genuine without analysis of the document.

England had the advantage or disadvantage of being ruled in a quite centralised and legalistic manner from an early age and Edward I was one of the most legalistic of kings. From other sources we should be able to find out whether James Heddingley was in royal service and maybe if he was Guyen King of Arms. If he cannot be traced that is a negative point, if he can a positive. Can Peter Dodge be traced, either in Cheshire or the borders? Can any Dodges be traced with an interest in the Scots borders (perhaps as followers of Edward Balliol)? If they are missing in the records then that is again a point against the validity of the document.

Whitecairns wrote:

I had thought, having read your comments, that perhaps the grant was forged (if it is a forgery) for the purposes of presenting proof of arms at the Visitations but haven't come across them in the Visitations of Cheshire

I'm not sure of Robert Glover's role in all this. I know that he made collections of early heraldic documents e.g. the eponymous "Glover's Roll" and was a long time herald being Portcullis Pursuivant (1568-1571) Somerset Herald (1570-1588). He was also responsible for various visitations including those of Cheshire in 1566 and 1580 (Harleian Soc Vol 18 ).

Absent (so far) anything to suggest otherwise (I have yet to look) I'd also incline to the view that the document was likely to have been hatched up for one of his visitations.

---

Me:
Ormerod in his History of the County Palatine of Chester has this to say of Dodge:

Quote:

A family named Dodge (one of whom occurs in the annexed pegigree*), held a small property in Offerton in the reign of Elizabeth, and were of Holiday Hill, in the same township, in the middle of the last century. Dodge Fold is the name of a hamlet in Offerton, having acquired its name from some yeomen of the family. They are mentioned here chiefly on account of a very early and uncommon grant of a coat, which Guillim in his heraldry gives as “Barry of six pieces Or and Sable, over all a pale Gules charged with a woman’s dug distilling drops of milk proper, “granted to Peter Dogge, or Dodge, for his services in divers battles and sieges, Ap. 8 Edw. I. Guillim’s authority is very doubtfull, or the date should rather be 34 Edw. III. The family is frequently met with in Stockport documents, and they held respectable positions originally in that town, ubder the name of Dogge and Doggeson.

* [my asterisk] the pedigree referred to is that of Winnington of Offerton. A daughter of Winnington of Offerton married Oliver Dodge, of Stockport (living 1553).

I now find – Contra to my earlier post that the arms are indeed recorded in the Visitations of 1613:

Dodge of Stockport:
ARMS (in trick).—Barry of six Or and Sable, on a pale Gules a woman’s
dugg or breast distilling drops of milk Argent.
CREST.—A demi sea-dog rampant guardant Sable, tufted and collared Or.

So, was the document forged to be used as proof at the Visitations?
James, I am with you on this one, I also think it was “hatched up” for the Visitation of 1613.

---

James Dempster:

Whitecairns wrote:

So, was the document forged to be used as proof at the Visitations? James, I am with you on this one, I also think it was “hatched up” for the Visitation of 1613.

I'd put the document earlier than 1613. If I read Balfour Paul's piece in Fox Davies correctly, a record of the "grant" was in the collection of Robert Glover, Somerset Herald. That fits given his underaking the Cheshire Visitations of 1566 and 1580. However, I have found on the web the following account of him, taken from "Glover Memorials & Genealogies" by Anna Glover 1867

Quote:

According to a survey made in the following Counties, the name Glover is recorded as follows: County of Berkshire: Johannies Glover, Sheriff, in the 12th year of Henry VI, AD 1433. Buckinghamshire: John Glover of Kimball; Bedfordshire: Robert Glover of Monceter, Gentleman, martyred at Coventry, September 5th, 1555 Middlesex: William Glover, Sheriff in the time of Queen Elizabeth, London, Middlesex-Kent, about l558. Kent: Robert Glover, Somerset Herald, son of Thomas and Mildred, was born at Ashford, Kent, according to the epitaph on his monument. He died, not forty-six years of age, Anno 1588 and was buried without Cripplegate, London, St. Giles, on the south wall of the Choir...... Cripplegate Ward. “To Robert Glover, alias the Somerset Herald, celebrated as a powerful defender of the are of Heraldry and Antiquarian Truth. From a thorough examination of his old writings, a man of great honor an benignity, of a noble nature and indefatigable labor; of easy manners, living honestly and uprightly before his successors. This sad monument was erected by a loving Nephew, Thomas Milles, to his most beloved maternal uncle." “This Robert was born in Asford, in Kent, a market town, of free parents, was liberally educated and became eminently learned in many things, but was particularly well versed and skilful in Heraldry. He had only one brother, William, from Thomas and Mildred, and also five sisters. He left five surviving children by his wife Elizabeth Flowers, viz., three sons and two daughters. Robert Glover dying as he had lived, lived as if he was about to die. His life closed with death, and he departed piously and calmly united in Christ.”

The whole of this can be found at
http://members.aol.com/diannegl33/GloverPages/Glover4.html

Interestingly, given the identity of Robert Glover's wife, William Flower is listed as Chester Herald 1545-1562 and as Norroy 1562-1588 in a list of Elizabethan heralds at http://renaissance.dm.net/heraldry/officers.html

---

David Hunter of Montlaw:
Since one of the issues raised in this thread is the authenticity of this Guyen King of Arms, I reviewed Walter H. Godfrey, Sir Anthony Wagner and H. Stanford London's "The College of Arms, Queen Victoria Street, Being the Sixteenth and Final Mongraph of the London Survey Committee...with a complete list of the Officers of Arms (1963). This volume discusses Guyenne and Aquitaine King of Arms on page 261, and has this to say about Jaques Hedingley:

Quote:

1. Jaques Hedingley ? Guyenne, King, c. 1306 16 December 1546, Hawley, Clarenceux, confirmed a pat. of arms alleged to have been made 8 April, 34 Ed. I (1306) to Peter Dodge, of Stopford, co. Chester, by 'Jaques Hedingley dict Guyen Roy darmes'. Hedingley is otherwise unknown and the authenticity of the grant is suspect. ([Heraldry and Genealogist], I, 514. Arms: Per bend . . . & . . . with 2 pales . . . in chief.

Based on this, it seems unlikely that the 1613 visitation entry was created from whole cloth. Now, 1546 may be a different matter.

---

The arms as recorded in Burke's General Armoury - an "adjustment of an immodest medieval charge to better please Victorian morality?" Dodge (co. Kent, Slopworth, co. Chester, co. Suffolk, and Mannington, co. Norfolk). Barry of six Or and Sable, over all on a pale Gules an eye Argent weeping and dropping Or. Crest: A demi seadog  Azure, collared, finned, and purfled Or.

I was ably assisted in the research for this page by James Dempster, Derek Howard, Charles Ross, Alex Maxwell Findlater and the late David Hunter of Montlaw, all members of the Heraldry Society of Scotland. To them my thanks are extended.