Re: First quarter of achievement of arms was The 3 Walter Griffiths of Burton...

Heraldry did not even start until around 1150!

And this practice was evident in official documents (visitations) by
1530

Tim Powys-Lybbe...

The next sentence was written by WJ

Tim, each post you've said "can't we stop" and yet you post. Isn't that a
little peculiar behaviour?

Tim Powys-Lybbe...

Because you have not agreed to stop and continue to say I have said
things I have not said.

The next sentence was written by WJ:

As far as the above quote. From 1150 to 1530 is quite a long period of time
to just "gloss over" by saying something like "if it was that way in 1530 it
must have been that way for the whole time period!". Don't you think?

Tim Powys-Lybbe...

I did not say that. Please read what I wrote.

You have even cut out where I denied saying that there were iron-clad
rules. And restating your assertion that I had said there were
iron-clad rules gives the impression that I had not contradicted it and
therefore I accepted it as true. Please be fair.

Remember that the statement you originally picked on was to the effect
that I had not seen any achievements of arms with other than the
personal arms in the first quarter. As of that moment in time that was
true and it remains that it was (then) a true statement. It was a
carefully made statement because I knew, and have regularly repeated,
that there were no universally followed rules in heraldry. The only
thing we have achieved, thanks to Nat Taylor's clear discovery of the
Blount achievement a copy of which I have found here, is that I can now
say only that the overwhelming majority of acheivements that I have seen
have the personal arms in the first quarter; this is true and will
remain true. There is nothing more that can be said. Do you not agree?

Do you not think it is time to stop? This is getting very boring.

(And if you do agree to stop, I can even give some information that
should make you laugh.)