Bamford Ancient History and Coats of Arms

By David M. Bamford

dmbamford@netzero.com

Clayton, NC, USA

 

           

While surnames were not used in England until after the Norman Invasion in 1066, the name Bamford is of Anglo-Saxon origin. It is one of many Old English habitational names which were derived from place names (farms, villages, and towns). Bamford is Old English for beam, tree + ford , i.e., a ford that could be crossed by means of a tree trunk or plank bridge by those that wanted to keep their feet dry.[1] This means that Bamford was a settlement near a river-crossing.

 

The name Bamford was said to have originated in one or two places in England: Derbyshire and Lancashire. Today in Derbyshire, Bamford is a village of about 1,800 residents in the Hope Valley. Bamford is located southwest of Sheffield on the River Derwent. This may be the ancient Anglo-Saxon village that was documented to be in Derbyshire in 1086 (see paragraph below on the Domesday Book).

 

The other village named Bamford was said to be located in Lancashire. Current maps of England do not show a Bamford in this county. There seems to be some confusion as to where it once was. One source calls the place “Bircle-Cum Bamford,” a township in the Parish of Middleton, near Bury, Lancashire.[2] However, another source states that Bircle-Cum Bamford was established in the Parish of “Ribbleton,” Lancashire.[3] The Parish of Ribbleton is located northeast of Preston, about 30 miles northwest of Middleton.[4] One source states that Bamford was a village in Greater Manchester.[5] Greater Manchester is an urbanized Metropolitan District.

 

So where was it? Several old maps of Lancashire were checked, and Bamford could not be found listed in the vicinity of these parishes. It is not listed on John Speed’s Map of Lancashire, 1610.[6]  One internet site, which seems to be well-documented, has a map showing exactly where Bamford was in Lancashire. Bamford is shown to be in the Hundred of Salford in the Parish of Middleton.[7] Not all areas in Middleton are contiguous, and Bamford is in a detached, satellite portion between the Parishes of Bury and Rochdale. Furthermore, it is located north of the River Roche, just south of a place called Ashworth and west of a place called Kenyon Fold. Apparently, there were two townships in this portion of Middleton in the year 1830, Birtle and Bamford.[8] Perhaps Bircle-Cum Bamford and Birtle and Bamford are the same place. Unlike the ancient place in Derbyshire, this village appears to have taken the Bamford name in the mid 1200s (see paragraph below on Thomas de Bamford). 

 

The Anglo-Saxon era lasted from 449 to 1066.[9] This was a time when three Germanic tribes, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, migrated from Europe and settled in what is now England. The Saxons settled south and southwest, the Angles settled north, and the Jutes settled southeast. Their cultures were very similar so they mingled and eventually formed several competing Anglo-Saxon kingdoms: Mercia, Northumbria, and Wessex. These tribes and mini-kingdoms had to also compete with the Vikings and the Welsh. The native Britons, the Welsh, were displaced and driven into the mountainous areas of western Britain. There were several battles “in the ensuing 200 years, in which the Welsh were generally defeated. Thus, there appears to have been comparatively little peaceful coexistence between the Anglo-Saxons and the Welsh.”[10] Around 945 the dominant Anglo-Saxon kingdom at that time, Wessex, became the Kingdom of England.[11] Believing he had a legitimate claim to the throne of England, Duke William of Normandy (a French province) invaded and conquered Anglo-Saxon England at the Battle of Hastings in October 1066. King Harold of England was killed at the battle.[12] For many years, England would be ruled by the French-speaking Normans.

 

The Domesday Book of 1086, which was a detailed survey of just about everything taxable in England and not destroyed by the Normans, lists Bamford as an existing village or town in the county of Derbyshire. This seems to indicate that the name Bamford pre-dates the Norman Invasion in 1066. It is important to note that Bamford is not listed as a village in Lancashire in the Domesday Book. Duke William gave Ralph FitzHubert several lordships in Derbyshire, including the village of Bamford, as a reward for his assistance and support at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.[13] Duke William set himself up as king and parceled England into estates or lordships and divided them up among his Norman supporters.

 

The surname Bamford appears to be the ancient original spelling. However, there are a number of spelling variants for Bamford. These include Banford, Bamforth, Balmforth, Bamfard, Baumford, Bampforth, and Bampford.[14] The various Bamfords are listed below in chronological order.

 

While Bamford was established as a place-name in Derbyshire before 1066, one of the first individuals to take this surname was Thomas de Bamford (Thomas of Bamford). He was granted the estate of Bamford by Sir Adam de Bury . . . for his services and homage to King Henry III.[15] While no date is given, we can narrow it down to the years 1216 to 1272 in which Henry III ruled England. The estate of Bamford appears to be the township of Bircle-Cum Bamford located in the Parish of Middleton, Lancashire. As mentioned previously, this is near the Parish of Bury. This makes sense as the estate grantor, Sir Adam, was from Bury. Another source states that Thomas de Bamford built Bamford Hall.[16] While Adam de Bury had a knighthood (title of Sir), there is no mention that Thomas was a knight. Depending on when Thomas lived during the reign of Henry III, he may have been a knight. In 1224 Henry III prepared for an expedition to Gascony (French province), and he ordered “every adult freeman who held land equivalent to a knight’s fee to take up arms and be knighted.”[17] This was land yielding an annual income of 20 pounds.

 

Several other Bamfords can be found in various sources. It is unclear if and how they are related. There was a Richard de Bamford residing in Yorkshire in 1273. Perhaps these are the same, but there was an Adam de Baumford and an Adam Bamforth in 1379.[18] No location is given. There was a Christopher Bamford, Esquire, mentioned in some records at the Durham University Library for the years 1471 and 1473. This is listed as Miscellaneous Charters 6137 (Year 1471) and 6146 (Year 1473). It mentions that Christopher leased some lands and manors in or near the city of Durham from a knight, Sir Robert Claxton. The manors are listed as being in Claxton, Bruntoft, and Fishburn.[19] It should be noted that Christopher held the title of Esquire or Squire. This was a rank below a knight.

 

There was reportedly a John Bamford who was born in 1518 in Bamford, Derbyshire, England. In 1576 John settled in Wales in the Parish of Llangurig, Montgomeryshire. Furthermore, it appears he lived in a place call Trefeglwys and later died in 1578.[20]

 

There are other Bamfords of record. In 1602 there was a William Bamford of Bamford, the Parish of Bury, Lancashire.[21] This is likely the same village located in the Parish of Middleton. The Lancashire parishes of Bury and Middleton were contiguous. According to the Wolley Manuscripts, Derbyshire, there was a Robert Bamford listed as being present on July 28, 1611, at court at Wirksworth Church regarding church repairs and casting of the first bell.[22]

 

Next, there was a James Bamford of Hurdsfield, Cheshire, in 1613.[23] Cheshire is just south of Lancashire. There were reportedly two or three John Bamfords that traveled from England to America. However, they may be the same person but it is unclear. A John Bamford settled in Virginia in 1624, and a John Bamford settled in Jamaica (Barbados—The West Indies) in 1685.[24] According to the records for Barbados, there was a John Bamford living there in 1700.[25] To add to the confusion, the passenger list for the ship Bonaventure shows a John Bamford, age 28, sailing from London to Virginia in 1635.[26]

 

There are a few others. There was a Henry Bamford and an Elizabeth Becket living somewhere in the year 1738.[27] There was a William Bamford, Esquire, from Rugeley, Staffordshire, and a William Bamford, Esquire, of Bamford, Lancashire; the latter was Sheriff of Lancashire in 1787.[28]

 

All of the above Bamfords were from England. The only one that will be mentioned not born in England is my 5^th great-grandfather who was John Bamford. He was born in 1764, possibly in Barrington, New Hampshire and died in 1843 at (or buried at) St. David’s Parish, New Brunswick, Canada. He married Mary “Polly” Averill in 1794. She was born after 1767 and died in 1847. She was the daughter of Enoch Moulton Averill and Ruth Hilton.[29] My Bamford line came from England to the New World and then migrated from New England to Canada after the American Revolution and then to Maine in the late 1800s (after 1880). At this time, I am unable to make a documented link to England. I do not know where in England my Bamford ancestors came from. Looking over various sources and pedigrees, there were several John and William Bamfords. These appear to be the most predominant names in old records.

 

There is another important piece of information that has been found. This was not inserted above because it is unclear if these are in fact Bamfords. In Volume II of The Knights of England by William A. Shaw, the name “Bamford” was specifically listed in the back index. This work is a roster of knights by year. In the index, it had this entry: “Bamford (see Bafford).” The surname Bafford is not listed as a recognized variant of Bamford in any of the books on surnames used in this report. Bafford appears to be a separate, unrelated surname according to other sources. Maybe these are Bamfords or perhaps Shaw incorrectly assumes Bafford is a variant of Bamford. There are two Baffords listed in this volume.

 

There was a John Bafford who was made a knight, along with many others, by King Edward III in 1347 during the siege of Calais in France.[30] This was during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453) between England and France. Philip VI of France provoked this conflict in 1337 by invading the English controlled province of Gascony on the west coat of France. Philip took an aggressive stance because Edward had laid claim to the French throne. When the King of France, Charles IV, died in 1328, the crown was passed to his cousin, Philip IV. Edward III of England argued, that as a nephew of Charles IV, he was the nearer relative than Philip as cousin.[31] Edward declared himself as King of France in 1340. The war raged off and on until 1453, long after both Edward and Philip were dead. The English won several victories including Crecy (1346), Poitiers (1356), and Agincourt (1415). But after they failed to take Orleans in 1429 and their subsequent defeat at Patay in the same year, the English lost the momentum. In the end, the English were driven from France and lost most of their conquered French territories with the exception of Calais which remained in English hands until 1558.[32]

 

The second Bafford listed in Shaw’s The Knights of England was “Bartholomew Bafford (Bampford).”[33] He is listed as a Knight Bachelor in the year 1586. In this entry, note how Shaw lists “Bampford” after the name Bafford. As mentioned earlier, Bampford is a recognized variant of Bamford. Shaw does not have “Bampford” after the entry on John Bafford. At this time, there is just not enough data to know one way or the other if these Baffords are Bamfords. The fact that one had the name of John, a common name among Bamfords, might be a clue. More research is needed.

 

The next part of this analysis will focus on the Bamford Coats of Arms. Four (4) coats of arms have been found in the records for persons with the name Bamford. Two appear to have originated during the Middle Ages and the other two appear to be contemporary variations of the older ones. The latter two appear to be no older than 150 years. A very brief overview of heraldry is below. This explains the rules of arms which are often ignored by many stores and companies that sell “your coat of arms.”

 

 Heraldry is the system for identifying individuals by means of distinctive hereditary insignia.[34] Various sources say heraldry appeared in England in the 1100s. It is important to note that this was a hereditary system, and that the insignia was passed down through the male line. Coats of arms were originally insignias painted on shields and embroidered on surcoats or tunics so that one could be identified in battle or in tournaments. By the 1500s, heraldry lost its military role and became obsolete. This was because battles were now being fought with guns, shields were obsolete, armies were becoming larger, and flags were being used to identify armies, not individuals.

 

Identifying crests began to be added in the 1200s.[35] Crests were three-dimensional objects, creatures, or animals that were fastened to the top of the helmet. They were primarily decorative, worn in tournaments and not often in battle. In England the crest "was considered a personal rather than a hereditary device, and was therefore subject to change, different members of the same family normally using different crests."[36]

 

During the 1100s, coats of arms were first used and adopted by the nobility. But by the 1200s, the use of arms by the lesser nobility was widespread. This included men-at-arms, esquires, knights, and others granted the right to bear arms. As more and more armorial bearings were in use, heralds were employed by kings and lords to keep track of who was using what arms. During the Medieval Period, heralds traveled around with the job of identifying individuals at tournaments and battles by the insignia painted on their shields and surcoats.

 

In England during the Renaissance, the Herald Visitations took place between the years 1530 and 1686. The Herald Visitations “were the [county] tours of inspection made by heralds in England to survey and keep a record of the coats of arms and pedigrees of those using arms and to correct irregularities.”[37] They operated under the authority of the Royal Commission. The main purpose of the visitations was to remove all false arms and arms devised without authority.[38] Those using arms had to prove to the heralds that the arms in use were lawful. One had a right to arms either by grant or by ancient usage through a direct male-line ancestor. This is also called the right to arms by inheritance. If one could not provide satisfactory evidence that they had a right to arms, then they would have to cease using the arms or, in some cases, have them properly recorded and registered. It is very important to note that the “medieval arms of families who did not fail in the male line are exhaustively covered by the Visitations.”[39] This will be an important point later.

 

In heraldry, the shield is always described from the position of the bearer (not the viewer). The right and left sides are called the dexter and sinister sides respectively. The face of the shield where the devices are painted is called the field. All devices painted on the field are colored, and their heraldic names are as follows: Or (gold or yellow), Argent (silver or white), Azure (blue), Gules (red), Sable (black), Vert (green), and Purpure (purple). These colors are referred to as tinctures.[40] If a color or tincture is used more than once, it is usually not repeated but it is referred to as “of the first” or “of the second” depending on when it first occurred during the coat of arms description; the description is called blazoning.[41] Blazoning involves describing the coat of arms in a particular order.

 

The devices painted on the shield are called Charges or Ordinaries, and there are several types: Chief, Fess, Pale, Base, Chevron, Bend, Saltire, Cross, Pile, and Quarter or Canton.[42] Each Charge occupies a specific area of the field, approximately one-third of the area. A few will be described. The Chief is the top, the Base is the bottom, the Fess is the middle, the Pale is a vertical bar through the middle, the Saltire is an ‘X’ across the field, the Bend is a bar running from the dexter side down to the sinister side, and the Canton occupies a third of the Chief on the dexter side. In addition to the Ordinaries, there may be animate charges and inanimate charges added to the shield. Animate charges included various animals (birds, lions) while inanimate charges included objects (crosses, swords, stars). It is important to note that the natural coloring of these charges is referred to as “proper.”[43] Some of these heraldic terms will be used later.

 

            Many sources were checked in researching the Bamford Coats of Arms. While this list is tedious, it is important to list them so that others can see if any sources have been overlooked. The sources checked were: Crozier’s General Armory, William A. Crozier; Armorial General de J.B. Rietstap, Johannes Rietstap; Ordinary of British Armorials, John W. Papworth; The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, Sir Bernard Burke; General Armory Two: Alfred Morant’s Additions and Corrections to Burke, Cecil Humphrey-Smith; Fairbairn’s Book of Crests of the Families of Great Britain and Ireland; and last of all, Armorial Families: A Directory of Gentlemen of Coat-Armour, Arthur Charles Fox-Davies.  Out of these sources, only Burke and Fox-Davies listed arms for individuals named Bamford.

 

Contemporary arms are found in Fox-Davies. The arms in this work do not appear to be that old. The arms and crests here are much more complex than medieval arms, and mottos are listed. Medieval arms were very simple. The Fox-Davies volume appears to only list arms for those holding the title of “gentleman.” Furthermore, these “gentlemen” lived during the mid 1800s and early 1900s. The first arms listed was granted to Arthur John Jones Bamford, born 1857, and died 1894. He is listed as being Lord of the Manor of Misterton. His sons were Charles Arthur Bamford, Esquire, born 1880, and Edwin Scott Bamford, born 1886. In heraldic terms, the shield is described as: argent, a fess engrailed between two annulets in chief, and as many mascles in base gules; the crest is described as: on a wreath of the colors, in front of a dexter arm embowed holding a flagstaff proper, therefrom flowing a banner argent, charged with a mascle gules, three annulets interlaced of the last; and the motto is: Perseverantia vincit. The mantle is gules and argent.[44] The motto is Latin for “Perseverance Conquers.”[45]

 

Here is what this coat of arms looks like. The shield is silver (argent), and there is a jagged (engrailed) bar (fess) across the center; There are two annulets (circles) above (chief) the fess, and two mascles (diamonds) below. The fess, mascles, and annulets are red (gules). The crest part of this coat of arms is a wreath with three annulets linked together; there is an arm in armor attached to the wreath with the elbow bent on the dexter side holding a flag with one red mascle on it.

 

The second arms listed in Fox-Davies was granted to Henry Bamford of Uttoxeter, born 1818, and died 1896. He had several sons including Samuel Bamford, Esquire, born 1845; John Bamford, Esquire, born 1854; and Joseph Bamford, Esquire, born 1862. In heraldic terms, the shield is described as: gules, a sword erect proper, pommel and hilt or, surmounted by a fess wavy erminois, in chief two crosses crosslet fitchee of the third; the crest is described as: on a wreath of the colors, in front of a lion’s head couped sable, between two olive branches fructed proper, two cross crosslets fitchee in saltire or; and the motto is "Dum rectus securus." The mantle is gules and or.[46]

 

Here is what this coat of arms looks like. The shield is red (gules) with a sword extending up the middle of the shield with the handle of the sword in the base and the tip of the blade in the chief. The sword is colored naturally (proper). The shield is tilted to the dexter side. There is a yellow (or) wavy bar (fess) across the middle of the shield with an erminois design on the fess. In addition, there are 2 yellow (of the third) fitchee crosses above the fess in the chief, one on each side of the sword blade. There are a wide variety of crosses used in heraldry, and the fitchee cross is one of them. The bottom of the fitchee cross is pointed so that if it were inverted, it would almost look like a sword. The crest part of this coat of arms is a wreath with a black (sable) lion’s head in between two olive branches. In the middle of the wreath, there are two cross crosslets fitchee crossed in the shape of an ‘X.’

 

The Bamford medieval arms are found in Burke’s The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. None of the Bamford arms listed in Fox-Davies’ volume are listed by Burke. This is because Burke’s work was published in the 1840s while Fox-Davies’ was published in 1970. Fox-Davies’ focus appears to be on new arms granted during the years 1890 to 1929, not older medieval arms. The important thing about Burke’s work is that he relies heavily on the written records of the Herald Visitations 1530 - 1686. And as mentioned earlier, these visitations during the Renaissance recorded many medieval arms still in use at that time which had been passed down from father to son(s) over the years. As long as there was a direct male-line connection to an original grantee of arms, the male descendants (sons and grandsons) had a legal claim to the arms by right of inheritance.

 

The first arms listed in Burke was granted to William Bamford, Esquire, of Rugeley, Staffordshire. No date is given but Burke lists the location as Colton, Staffordshire for the arms.[47] It appears that William was the user of these arms at the time of the visitations in Staffordshire, and that he was not the original grantee. It also appears that these arms were first recorded in Staffordshire. This is just a guess based on how Burke enters his information. After the surname, Burke states the location (county in most cases) of the arms followed by any other information such as names. Looking at other surname entries, Burke does not list the original grantee but he seems to list the last recorded user. In many cases, the last recorded user is using arms that are hundreds of years old. A digital picture of these arms is shown below as “Attachment A.” In heraldic terms, the shield is: argent, a fess wavy between three cross crosslets fitchee gules. The crest is described as: a lion’s head erased proper.[48] This translates into a silver shield with a red wavy bar across the center with two crosses fitchee in the chief and one in the base. The crest is a lion’s head colored naturally. When I ordered this coat of arms from an internet company, they sent it to me with the lion’s head colored sable or black. I believe this to be an error so, using a graphics program, I manually colored the lion’s head brown or proper.

 

The age of these arms is unknown. That information is not readily available. However, looking at other arms in various books, this style dates easily to the year 1300.[49] This is a safe, conservative guess but these arms may date to the 1200s. One source states that these arms were granted in the year 1228.[50] Certainly arms of this character were in use during the mid to late 1200s.[51]

 

The second arms listed in Burke was granted to William Bamford, Esquire, of Bamford, Lancaster (Lancashire). Burke also states that William was sheriff in 1787. Burke also includes 1613 as the year for the visitation of this county.[52] This entry confirms that Burke listed the last recorded holder or user of the arms and not the original grantee. It is also not known if the two William Bamfords listed for both arms are the same person. One important observation is that Burke lists these exact same arms for the surname Bamforth, a recognized variant of Bamford, located in The High House, Derbyshire, and also for the surnames Banford and Baumford, other variants of Bamford, located in Donyngton, Lincolnshire.[53] The fact that Burke found these same arms in three different counties seems to indicate that these arms may be older and had been passed down several generations. A digital picture of these arms is shown below as “Attachment B.” In heraldic terms, the shield is: argent, a fess engrailed gules.[54] This translates into a silver shield with a red jagged bar across the center.

 

Burke does not list a crest for these arms. This probably means one of two things. One possibility is that this was an oversight by Burke. Another possibility is that these arms are very old because crests, three-dimensional helmet decorations, did not come into general use until the beginning of the 1300s.[55] These arms can easily date to the 1100s. Looking through Burke’s roster, many arms are described without a crest. To see if a crest was used with these arms, the book Fairbairn’s Book of Crests of the Families of Great Britain and Ireland was consulted. Three crests were found for the following: Bamford of Bamford, Derbyshire; Bamford of Staffordshire; and Arthur John Jones Bamford of Misterton, Lancashire.[56]

 

Since the latter two crests are associated with other arms, the only choice left was the first one since these arms were found by Burke in Derbyshire. The crest found in Derbyshire is described as: on a chapeau, a serpent nowed.[57] See “Attachment B.” It is probably historically correct to display these arms without a crest. At the same time, it is certainly possible that this serpent crest was used with these arms in Derbyshire but not in the other counties where these arms were found. Some internet companies are selling this Bamford coat of arms with the lion’s head erased proper crest. The problem is that this crest was used for the other arms found in Staffordshire. The sources cited in this report show that the lion crest is not associated with these arms. The only one that remotely fits is the serpent on a chapeau.

 

In conclusion, this is all the information I can find. There are a lot of bits and pieces out there; the hard part is connecting the dots. This report is incomplete. More sources need to be checked. The Herald Visitation surveys for Derbyshire, Lancashire, Staffordshire, and Lincolnshire should be checked. These are the counties where Burke found the various Bamford coats of arms. This information will not only provide a picture or description of the coats of arms, but it will show a pedigree for the male descendents of the original ancestor who was granted the arms. The pedigrees are short and only go for 3 or 4 generations but it is important for anyone researching to see if they have a right to arms by inheritance. The College of Arms in London, England, is the official repository for these records. Access to these records is limited. However, heralds are on duty at the College to conduct searches and queries for substantial fees. They are paid professionals. The fee quoted to me for a lookup was 250 pounds or $470. Some of the Visitations are available on CD ROM, but not all. The counties needed here do not appear to be available yet on CD ROM. The Harleian Society is also a repository for this information in addition to some libraries in the United Kingdom. These outlets are not readily accessible to those of us in the United States.

 

Before anyone goes digging through the Herald Visitations, this book should be checked first: Cecil R. Humphrey-Smith’s Armigerous Ancestors: A catalog of sources for the study of the Visitations of the Herald in the 16^th and 17^th Centuries with referenced lists of names (1997). This book lists every name found in the Visitations and indicates which published volume each name is in. I have not been able to check this yet.

 

If old Bamford pedigrees are what you want, then there are three sources to check in addition to the Visitations. They are Geoffrey Battiscombe Barrow’s The Genealogist’s Guide (1977), John Beach Whitmore’s A Genealogist’s Guide: an index to British pedigrees (1953), and George William Marshall’s The Genealogist’s Guide (1893). All of these are said to have pedigrees or pedigree references. I have not been able to check these yet.

 

Hopefully this report will generate interest in further research. This is a work in progress and will be updated when new information becomes available.

 

 

ATTACHMENT A

Bamford of Staffordshire

 

 

SHIELD: Argent, a fess wavy between three cross crosslets fitchee gules

CREST: A lion’s head erased proper

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT B

Bamford of Derbyshire

 

 

SHIELD: Argent, a fess engrailed gules

CREST: On a chapeau, a serpent nowed

 

NOTES