Add/remove tags to this thread

Topic: The Tabernacle of David

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Status: Offline
Posts: 772

The Tabernacle of David


All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us. In that day will I raise up the Tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old...

And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, listen to me. Simeon has declared how God at the start did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, after this I will return, and will build again the Tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up, that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Therefore my sentence is, that we trouble them not, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God...

Some in the Church (i.e. British-Israelites) do not understand the fact that, during the Church Age, the Tabernacle or House or Throne of David has been in ruins and has continued such until this day. However, the majority of the rest of the Church does not understand that after the Church Age (Rom 11), God will restore the Tabernacle of David as the verses above point out.

You will notice that it is James the brother of our Lord who stated that after the Church Age God will restore this Throne. This is important for one very obvious reason and that is the fact that, with the departure of Y'shua, James is now the Crown Prince of the Davidic Throne, and was recognized as such by the crowd when he was thrown from the Temple by the Priests (Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History).

Many of the early Church, which was predominantly Jewish, were looking for God to restore the Davidic Throne right then (Acts 1). James, remembering our Lords words ("your house is left unto you desolate"), and seeing the Gentiles begin to flood into the Church, realized that this New Work of God was probably going to last for a while, until the message had been preached throughout the World ("the whole earth shall be full of the Glory of the Lord", "Go into all the World" etc), and the Firstfruits of the Gentiles were gathered into the Garner or Barn called the Commonwealth of Israel and then, after these things, God would return and restore the Tabernacle of David.

This tells us several things. The first is that the Monarchy in England is not the Davidic. It also tells us that, assuredly, in order to fullfill the prophecy, there is today, somewhere, a direct descendant of David through the Male Lineage who can, and will, fulfill the promise. To fulfill the Scripture, he must be able to prove this descent through pedigree because DNA would not show this direct descent through the male lineage but would, in fact, over-emphasize the female lineage.

Zuckerman has shown that William the Conqueror was a direct descendant of David through the Male lineage, through his father Robert Duke of Normandy who made William his legal heir and, therefore, any of his descendants, that can prove their lineage back to him, can also claim this birthrite. That is what the remainder of this post will do.

I have previously shown, in my post The White Leopard, that I am a direct descendant on the Male Line from Sir John Hill.

"Hill (Heligan, co. Cornwall; Hill's Court, co. Devon; Hampshire, Lincolnshire, and Somersetshire; the Hills of Heligan descended from Sir John Hill of Kenston, co. Somerset). Gu. a saltire, vaire, betw. four mullets ar. Crest - A demi leopard ar. spotted of all colours, ducally gorged or."

A General Armory of England, Scotland and Ireland John Burke, Esq, Published by Edward Churton, Holles Street, Cavendish Square, London, 1842

Given enough time, if the Lord tarries, I will obtain the detailed pedigree that I used to obtain this information. For now, we can use a little logic and the rules of Heraldry to ascertain the ancestry of Sir John. The symbol of the Leopard used in the crest above is now our starting point.

"The leopard is considered to be borne of an adulterous union between a lioness and a pard...It is suggested as an appropriated charge for someone born in adultery."

The Oxford Guide to Heraldry by Thomas Wood **** - Somerset Herald, Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford, 1988, pg 64

However, it was also used of Richard the Lionheart, after his imprisonment to the Austrian, but in this same connection to his father William the Bastard Conqueror. The importance of this is that it is a fairly rare heraldic symbol with limited use.

"The animal [leopard], however, except as a supporter or crest, is by no means common in English Heraldry."

The Complete Guide to Heraldry by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, Bonanza Books, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1978, pgs 192-3

Not only is the Leopard itself a rare symbol but a Leopard bearing a Crown is extremely rare. And this brings us to the second symbol used in my Crest and that is the Crown itself. In his will, Lionel, Duke of Clarence (1368), bequeaths two Golden Circles, with one of which he was created Duke. Richard, Earl of Drundel, in his will (December 5, 1375), leaves his 'melieure coronne' to his eldest son Richard, his 'second melieure coronne' to his daughter Joan, and his 'tierce coronne' to his daughter Alice. The fact that the earl distributes his coronets amongst his family irrespective of the fact that the earldom (of which one would presume the coronets to be a sign) would pass to his son, would seem to show that the wearing of a coronet even at that date was merely indicative of high nobility of birth."

The Complete Guide to Heraldry by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, Bonanza Books, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1978, pg 362

"The real truth is that the members of the Royal Family do not inherit these coronets as a matter of course. They technically and in fact have no coronets until these have been assigned by Royal Warrant with the arms...the coronets only apply to the children of Princes. The Children of princesses...are not technically members of the Royal Family, nor do they inherit either rank or coronet from their mothers."

Ibid pg 364

"The unique use of actual coronets in England at the occasion of each coronation ceremony has prevented them becoming (as in so many other countries) mere pictured heraldic details...Coronets of rank are used very indiscriminately on the continent, particularly in France and the Low Countries. Their use by no means implies the same as with us, and frequently indicates little if anything beyond merer noble birth."

Ibid pg 365

So we see that the use of a Crown on a Leopard in Sir John's Crest means that his ancestor was a legitimate heir of a person who used a Crowned Leopard as his emblem, which itself indicates that his ancestor was the Son of a Bastard King, or the Leopard would bear no crown. Even if John's ancestor was a bastard himself, he was made the legitimate heir of his sire thus voiding his origins, like William before him. The practice of giving titles of nobility and thus crowns to bastards, apparently, didn't occur until the time of the Tudor's.

"Bastardy, the result of illicit, possibly adulterous union, was frowned on by the Church in the Middle Ages, certainly after the marriage law was clarified by the eleventh century or so. Adultery and the question of the possible succession to estates of someone not the lawful heir was also of importance to civil law. This last was not usually a matter of concern in cases of royal bastardy though. Royal bastards were usually known to be such, and were indeed given such 'titles' as 'Bastard of Burgundy' or even the 'Great Bastard' (son of Phillip II, Duke of Savoy). They were frequently given lands and titles of nobility, although in the case of English kings, not titles, in our period at least. The Tudors resumed giving royal bastards titles; Henry VIII created his illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond and indeed possibly prepared him for the succession to the crown."

"Legally, at birth a bastard child has then no name at all, and no arms...he inherits no arms at all, no name, and no property, save by specific devise or bequest." "The popular idea that he inherits a right to the arms subject to a mark of distinction being quite incorrect. He has none at all."

A Complete Guide to Heraldry by A.C. Fox-Davies, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1969, pgs 396, 395

The Tudor's started with Henry VI in 1485 AD whereas Sir John was born circa 1434 AD. What this indicates is that Sir John is descended from a Prince who was descended from a Bastard King - there is no other explanation. This is a strong indication that he is a direct descendant from William, however, we have another clue to Sir John's ancestry gleaned from another source that will strengthen this view.

In Fairbairn's book of Crests of the families of Great Britain and Ireland (Heraldic Book Company, Baltimore, 1968, Plate 25, Crest 10) you have a picture of "A demi-leopard arg., spotted of all colors, ducally gorged or." And in the Key to the Plates (pg 101) there are found five families that have this Crest:

"10. *Allen, *Bothorpe, *Crooks, Hill, Poynes. "For purposes of comparison, an asterisk is affixed to names in cases where the engraving does not precisely correspond with the blazon as given in the text." (pg 97).

However, Crooks does not bear a Crown ("A General Armory of England, Scotland, and Ireland" John Burke, Esq, Published by Edward Churton, Holles Street, Cavendish Square, London, 1842) and assuredly neither does Allen or Bothorpe, as the asterisk above indicates, and these latter two are not even mentioned in Burke's Peerage so their lineages are probably extinct by now. Only Poynes' Leopard bears a Crown and the difference is that the Leopard is Purple and not White nor is it Spotted of all Colors. This latter may then be a cousin to Sir John or possibly another branch or tree altogether and does not concern the current study. The fact that my Leopard is "spotted of all colors" shows that my ancestor was chosen as the First Born Son of the lineage, which symbolism is also drawn from the Word where Jacob made Joseph a Coat of Many (all) Colors. This then also shows that Sir John was also the continuance of this FirstBorn Lineage, which he then subsequently passed onto my ancestor that crossed the ocean Ralph Hill. which then also discounts any other descendants of William as having the Rights to the Throne other than those descended from Ralph Hill of Billerica. Of those, I am sure I am the only one that has shown any interest in this particular lineage and that would make me the incumbant.

So, here we see the rarity of these two symbols combined. However, there is another Hill mentioned by Fairbairn (pg 277) that has exactly the same Crest as Sir John's.

"Hill-Male, Captain Richard, of Pen-y-coedcae, near Pontypridd, Glamorgan, (1) A Spear erect ppr., therefrom pendent by a riband az., an eschutcheon gu., charged with two battle-axes saltirewise arg. (2) A demi-leopard arg., spotted of all colors, ducally gorged or. Cruci dum spiro spero" (While I breath I hope in the Cross).

Notes : A) Pen - y - coedcae, in the Welsh, would mean, roughly "top of the tree line" and Pontypridd would be "a brick bridge." ("Welsh-English, English-Welsh Dictionary", H. Meurig Evans, M.A., Saphrograph Corp., 194 Elizabeth Street, New York, Ny, 1969, pgs 356, 94, 68, 366, 368), B) Every item in that description is important and shows the connection : 1) Demi as opposed to a full Leopard - which actually yields a 2-1 ratio, 2) Leopard as opposed to a Lion - again 2-1 and it is conservative since there are dozens of crests that could have been used like a Tiger etc, 3) White as opposed to the other six heraldic colors - 7-1 ratio, 4) Spotted of all colors as opposed to two other patterns on Leopards in "Oxford's Guide" for this same time frame and Class of Crests 3-1 ratio, 5) Dukal Crown instead of Royal or another crown but we will be conservative at 2-1, 6) Gorged means around the neck as opposed to on its head or in its paw - 3-1 ratio, 7) Or. or Gold crown as opposed, once again, to the other colors 7-1 ratio, 8) Hill as opposed to every other name in the book but we will be generously concervative at 2-1 ratio. Just using the number of correspondances alone would yield you an error factor of 7 factorial (5020 - 1), but when all the other odds are factored in you would have to multiply this number by about 4000 to get the real odds and this is very strong indication that Sir John is in fact a direct descendant of Captain Richard.

And, since both of these crests predate any "central authority" then they were devised by the Houses of the Princes and would, in fact, be grandfathered as to their authority. See my critique of Burke's Peerage and Baronatage for more proof of this.

It can hardly be coincidence that these two Hill's have exactly the same Crest and one of them is assuredly the ancestor of the other. The key to who came first is in the names themselves, which we will see as we procede. Captain Richard actually had two names, which is not unusual for the time, and both the shield and the crest belong to him. The proof of this latter point is that Fairbairn, where both the Husband and Wife display their crests, distinquishes whose is whose, which he did not do in this instance indicating that both belonged to Hill-Male. Further, if the first were the wife's would be because she was an Heiress and, therefore, her estate would be passed to her children and, therefore, Sir John would have quartered the Shield, which he did not do.

"In the next generation the son and heir would have descent from his mother equally with his father, and the arms of her family would be equally arms of descent to him, and no longer the mere territorial emblem of Lordship. Consequently, they became on the same footing as the father. The son would naturally, therefore, quarter the arms."

The Complete Guide to Heraldry by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, Bonanza Books, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1978, pg 540

This also tells us that the Escutcheon (a smaller shield on the face of the Shield that bears the Arms which itself may bear arms) that is included in the Captain's Charge is not refering to his heiress wife or, again, the subsequent shield would be quartered, which it is not and further, Fairbairn's would have differentiated whose crest was whose, which he did not. It is then, an Inescutcheon of Augmentation, which was added, probably by Robert's Grandson, to show the participation of his father and grandfather in the Crusades, which would also then explain the smaller shield hanging from the Spear that Robert became famous for.

"The Inescutcheon. This is seldom found borne as an Ordinary, being generally a Coat of Arms borne as an escutcheon of Pretense, superimposed upon a shield of arms in testimony of the claim of a Prince to the Sovereignty of the country so represented, or if by a privated personage, then as the sign that he had married an heiress of the family indicated, and that their joint descendants might subsequently claim to quarter these arms with their own. In the annexed arms of William III. the escutcheon gives the arms of Holland."

The Symbolism of Heraldry by W. Cecil Wade, George Redway, London, 1898, pg 53)

"Augmentations. Are particular marks of honour. Granted by the Sovereign as additions to the paternal arms; and for the most part are borne upon a Canton, or Inescutcheon, sometimes up a Chief, and Fesse; and may be derived from acts of valour, or loyalty; from profession; or from any memorable circumstances and events."

A Dictionary of Heraldry by C.N Elvin, 1889, reprinted Heraldry Today, marlborough, 1969)

Further, that Richard was the descendant of a Prince is obvious from the Crown on his Crest and, as we will see, his name actually bears this out as well.

"The Prince was talkative and prodigal, very bold and valiant, and a strong and sure archer; his voice was loud and clear; his tongue fluent; his feature dull and heavy; his body stout; and his stature short; whence he commonly received the surname of Gambaron or Court-heuse."

The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, edited and translated by Marjorie Chibnall, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1978, Vol 2, pg 108

Now the name Curthose simply means Short Boots and would be translated as Shorty today however, the term Gambaron is of somewhat questionable defintion. But, one can easily see that Baron means exactly what it implies and that would be a Lord or Prince or Ruler, or Captain, as one French English Dictionary Stated (Heath's Standard French and English Dictionary edited by J.E. Mansion, D.C. Heath and Company, Ny, 1939).

Thus, the term 'gam' must be understood and it is found in the prefix of several words like a vine (scion?) , and to play (thus to gamble) as well as, "Gamin...boy, youngster..." (ibid pg 393). Thus, taken together it is not too much of an exaggeration at all to see that this nickname actually means the Young Prince or possibly the etymology of the French (1100 AD) may very well yield, the Son of the Prince refering to his being sired by William the Conqueror before he became King of England. We will be seeing this refered to again, as we procede.

Now, you will notice that Captain Richard was from a little known town in Wales (that's where they speak Welsh) called Glamorgan. What is significant is that there just happens to have been one Royal Person who spent alot of time in that same town. Robert Curthose the eldest son to William the Conqueror, was captured by his brother Henry and interned in Somerset (which is where Sir John is from), but then was transferred across the Channel to Glamorgan where he spent the rest of his days. This was on the frontier and his brother did this to get him as far away from civilization, and his sphere of influence, as possible.

"In 1126, upon his return from Normandy, Henry I transferred the duke from the custody of Bishop Roger of Salisbury to that of Earl Robert of Gloucester, who placed him in confinement at first in his great stronghold at Bristol. But Later he moved him to Cardiff castle in his Welsh lordship of Glamorgan."

Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy Charles Wendell David, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A., 1920, pg 186

We know that his father William used two Passant Guardant Lions on his shield as did Rufus and Henry in turn after him (A Catalogue of the Kings of England by Thomas Milles, Polyanthos Inc., Cottonport, Louisiana, 1972, originally published in The Catalogue of Honor by William Jaggard, London, 1610, the various crests are pictured starting on page 53), but Robert Shortboots never specifically made King of England, so we don't know for sure that he ever used the Lion as his emblem. We do know that in a poem about his exploits on the First Crusade, that was written in his generation, that he is described as a Leopard and, assuredly, for a reason - probably because he bore it as his standard.

"Wace seems to mention the incident, but without any indication that Kerboga was killed by Robert; and in this he is in agreement with the earliest extant version of the Godfrey cycle, the so-called Chanson d'Antioche, which narrates the exploit in truly epic form: "The count of Normandy was of right haughty mien; Full armed he sat upon his steed of dappled gray. He dashed into the melee like a leopard; And his doughty vassals followed him; There was wrought great slaughter of accursed Saracens."

Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy Charles Wendell David, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A., 1920, pg 195

The Leopard was used to symbolize Robert while still a young man and with his imprisonment at the hand of his brother this symbol became permanent showing his direct lineage back to William. This also, apparently, showed his position as Duke of Normandy, for his personal Crest as well as the Crest of the Duke of Normandy, are presented in The Oxford Guide to Heraldry (plate 1, row 1, shield 6 and again plate 11, row 3, shield 1 - plates between pages 48-49), which shows three Passant Guardant Leopards. Further, in the same book (pg 174) there is a drawing of the effigy at Gloucester Cathedral made to the Duke (Robert Cooke, Clarenceus, c. 1569) which shows two Passant Guardant Leopards on his Chest Shirt. So, that Robert was symbolized by the Leopard there is no doubt, and the fact that he kept his Dukal Crown, even in captivity is reported by David Crouch which he would have, obviously, passed on to an heir.

His captivity was not by any means onerous and if John of Salisbury is to be believed he went about in public andmany even have received visitors; at least when he was being kept at Wiltshire. Certainly there are records in the 1130 pipe roll of large payments being made for suitable clothing and furnishings for his use. Robert's ducal status in captivity was not queried by his brother: in 1130 the government records themselves call him count of Normandy. King Henry did not himself attempt to lay claim to the title of duke of Normandy, but appears to have pretended to rule Normandy almost as his brother's vicegerent, in the manner of the terms discussed before his capture.

The Normans Hambledon and London, 102 Gloucester Ave., London, 2002, pgs 228-9

But the symbolism doesn't end here for Robert is also lauded, in another poem of that day, for killing a King of the Saracens with a Spear.

The later compilation of the Godfrey matter, edited by Reiffenberg, contains no mention of Robert's combat either with Kerboga or with Red Lion; but it relates a very similar exploit in which he overcame a Saracen king of Tabarie. With his lance at the thrust, and raising the triumphant war cry, Normand!, he bore down upon the Saracen with such force that he pierced his shield a full palm's breadth and a half, and wounded him deeply between lungs and liver.

Robert Curthose Duke of Normandy, pg 196-7

We know that anciently a shied and crest of a specific individual was derived from their ancestry and/or from some heroic deed in battle, and Robert the Crowned Leopard had songs sung in his name showing the Leopard charging into battle and overcoming a King of the Saracens with a Spear. A Spear which, according to Gough ("A Glossary of Terms used in Heraldry" by Henry Gough & James Parker, republished by Gale Research Company, 1966, originally by James Parker and Company, Oxford and London, 1894, pg 544) was not a common Heraldic device in the times in question. The Battle Axes themselves must also be accounted for and one web site connects the Battle Axe to the Crusades themselves and thus you would have another tie in from Captain Hill to Robert Curthose.

The battle-axe symbolizes authority and the execution of military duty. It also signifies a warlike quality of its bearer. The battle-axe first began to be used as a symbol as a result of the crusades. Though other axes are used in heraldry, the battle-axe is distinct because of the design of its blade that is mounted on the shaft and penetrates through it to the other side.

The Battle Axe was not instituted into the Crests of the Kings of Norway until 1280 (International Heraldry by L.G. Pine, Charles E. Tuttle Company, Publishers, Rutland, Vermont, 1970, pg 218) and thus, though Robert is descended from Rollo of Norway, the Battle Axe would not have been passed on to him in this way. The significance is that there are two battle axes in saltire which implies two crusaders and it just so happens that Robert's illegitimate son William of Flanders Lord of Tortosa (per several websites) also went on the Crusade with his rather Robert Curthose, in which he distinquished himself and subsequently perished.

Thus, his son (if he was old enough to go on a Crusade, he was old enough to have left an heir) would have been Robert's grandson and only heir and he would have used both of these Axes in Saltire as assumptions on his Arms and Crests to precisely show his lineage from two Crusaders in one Crusade - one of which who was famed for using a Spear. There can only be one such lineage in this particular history - Robert Curthose and his Bastard Son William of Tortosa. Now we can try and tie all this together. Robert Curthose's legal heir, William Clito died childless while Robert was in the slammer, as had another one of his natural (illegitimate) sons previously, whom he had named Richard.

He was invested with the county of Maine in 1069, but his father refused to give him actual possession of the country. This led him into a state of rebellion for several years, but he finally submitted to his father and was recognized as heir to Normandy...He concluded a treaty with his brother Henry I and ceded the county of Everus to him in 1104. His mismanagement of Normandy led to an invasion by Henry in 1105 and Robert was defeated and taken prisoner at the battle of Tinchebrai on Sept. 28, 1106. The rest of his life was spent in captivity in England. The story that he was blinded is almost certainly untrue and his existence was probably an agreeable one, since he lived to be well over 80, a very great age for those days...He died at Cardiff Castle on 10 February 1134 and was buried in Gloucester Cathedral, where he is commemorated by a monument of much later date. His wife Sibylla had died at Roven in February or March 1103 and was buried at Caen. They had two sons, William 'Clito,' Count of Flanders and Henry, who was killed while hunting in the New Forest. Robert also had two natural sons, Richard and William, and a natural daughter who married Elie de St. Saen.

Brewer's British Royalty David Williamson, Cassell Wellington House, 125 Strand, London, 1996 pg 307-8

Keep in mind that Robert would have given that Crown to one of his heirs especially after the death of his son William Clito. And notice the significance that one of his natural sons was named Richard, which is the first name of Captain Hill-Male indicating a probable connection that was continued in the family history. And, after the death of these two sons, the last one, William, decided that he also wanted to go on the Crusade with his father, and apparently perished in the same.

The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis edited and translated by Marjorie Chibnall,Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1978, Vol 3, pgs 259-260

It seems that in his carefree days, Curthose shacked up with a French woman ("probably in the French Vixin" - ibid) and sired these three children from him. She then presented these sons to Robert when they had grown up. The woman did this to ensure that one of her children would be Robert's heir. Then, however, both of her sons died and her daughter was married off. However, Robert's Bastard Son William of Tartosa had a son who, upon his father's death in the Crusade, would have been able to approach Robert, his grandfather, in jail in Glamorgan, and ask to be his heir - as his only surviving male direct descendant.

This, assuredly, Robert did, not wanting to see his lineage die out and this can be ascertained by those Two Battle Axes (this bastard's son would have been proud to display not one but two battle axes from his father and grandfather) as well as the Spear that Robert used to kill the Saracean King (showing his descent from Robert). And, notice the significance that William the Bastard Conqueror was sired by Robert Duke of Normandy and history repeated itself for William the Bastard's son Robert Curthose, Duke of Normandy then sired a Bastard son that he also named William. Thus, William of Tartosa's son used the two Battle Axes in Saltire to represent this lineage. This is actually proven by the Blue Ribbon that serves to connect the Spear to the small Shield on which appear the Two Battle Axes. If this were a shield of pretense belonging to his wife, Richard would have simply placed the shield in the middle of his own with no strings attached. Thus, the Ribbon connects the Shield of Accomplishment to the Spear, and there is only one person who is famous for using a Spear in any of the Crusades - Duke Robert Curthose. The Ribbon was also used anciently to show the order of birth between sons which indicates that William might have actually sired more than one son before he went on the Crusade.

Riband or Ribbon. A subordinary containing the eighth part of the bend. The Ribbon applied as a difference of the younger sons is of very high antiquity.

A Dictionary of Heraldry by C.N Elvin, 1889, reprinted Heraldry Today, marlborough, 1969

This unnamed son of William of Tartosa assuredly was in Glamorgan at the time of Robert's death and, if so, would have escorted the body back to Gloucester where he was buried and where someone spent a small fortune to built Robert an effigy - assuredly this man or one of his descendants. While in Gloucester, he would have met up with Robert, Earl of Gloucester (Robert's Curthose's Nephew) and would have sealed the right to the Ducal Crown and very possibly was given the 'earldom' of Glamorgan by his Uncle, which was the frontier of England at the time. With the death of his grandfather Robert, there would have been no future for him in Normandy or the French Vexin. This heir then was motivated to set up shop in Glamorgan and one of his descendants was Captain Richard Hill-Male.

Then, when his descendant Sir John moved out of Glamorgan and changed his profession, he dropped the Spear and the Battle Axe's (not recognizing their significance) from the Inescutcheon, and replaced them with a Saltire but he kept the Leopard with the Crown. However, in both his and Captain Richard's shield the Leopard is a Demi leopard and this is significant for a reason, and that is because Robert's grandson, and heir, because he was the son of a bastard like King William before him, had to signify this by a change in the Crest somehow, hence, the Demi-Leopard.

But if under a will or deed of settlement an illegitimate child is required to assume the name and arms of its father or of its mother, a Royal License to assume such name and arms is considered to be necessary...such petition is always granted, on proper proof of the facts, if made in due form to the proper channels. The Royal License to that effect is then issued. But the document contains two conditions, the first being that the arms shall be exemplified according to the laws of arms with due and proper marks of distinction. The ancient practice certainly appears to have been to make some slight change in the crest...or very much altered crests have been granted without any recognisable marks of distinction.

A Complete Guide to Heraldry by A.C. Fox-Davies, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1969, pg 397, 398

Now, all of this is further emphasized by Richard's last name because in the ancient Welsh Language (which Robert actually learned while in jail) the word Male means the Prince.

*mael, eg. 1. arfogaeth. Armour. 2. tywysog, pennaeth. Prince, Lord.

Welsh - English, English - Welsh Dictionary H. Meurig Evans, M.A., Saphrograph Corp., 194 Elizabeth Street, New York, Ny, 1969, pg 321

The asterisk at the front of the word means, hen eiriau neu hen ystyr - obsolete words or meanings from the Byrfoddau - abbreviations page.

Obviously, the only people who could afford Mael or Mail Armour at the time were Princes, of which there was only one at the time in Glamorgan - and only one in all of England that bore a Crowned Leopard as his Crest. Male is made out of Steel Circlets and a Prince wears a Gold Circlet (as I am sure the etymology will bear out).

Also of interest is the fact that the word Hill in Welsh means Son including several combinations thereof.

Hil, eb. ach, llinach, tylwyth, hiliogaeth, perthynas, tras. Lineage, Offspring, Race.

Ibid pg 285

Thus, taken together, at the time that surnames were being handed out, we see that Captain Richard was the son of the Prince which is born out by that Crowned Leopard as his Crest and the escutcheon of accomplishment, as well as the nickname Gambaron, mentioned earlier which means exactly the same thing. His descendants, sometime subsequent to this, dropped the title, but kept the last name Hill and the White Leopard with the Duke's Crown to show their lineage. The reason they dropped the title 'mael' is, obviously, because in the English it means bad or evil (from the French, i.e. Malefactor etc), which is why you find very few, if any, English of the period with the last name of Male. And, for the same reason, they kept the last name Hill, which was a pretty common name, and added the last letter l.

So here we see, using these very rare symbols (Leopard, Crown, Spear, Red Shield, Battle Axe, Glamorgan, Names etc - odds are seven factorial or 5020 to one) gathered together into one Heraldic Crest and with the laws of the Heraldry of the times, combine together to show that my direct ancestor, Sir John Hill, is a direct descendant, through Captain Richard Son of the Prince, from Crown Prince Robert Curthose Son of the Prince, the eldest Son of William the Bastard Conqueror King of England and Normandy, who is himself a direct descendant, through Robert Duke of Normandy, via Rolo and Halfdan and Machir via the Monarchy established in Normandy after the Babylonian dispersion, from the loins of Jehoachin, descended from King David - all of which pass through the Direct Male lineage with not one change of house in the entire lineage.

I am so sure of this information that I am planning on sending it out to various sources (Glamorgan Records Office and Burke's Peerage) for confirmation and will continue to update this post as further information becomes available. You don't want to miss the last letter in the series between myself and Burke's, let me tell you.

Keep in mind one other thing and that is that the person who fulfills the prophecy not only must be descended from King David, but he must also have been given the name David at birth, in accordance with the Prophet Jeremiah (30:9), Ezekial (34:24, 37:24) and Hosea (3:5).

Summary :

When we look at the Names of the people involved and the Location that they came from and the Crest that they all shared in common, and using the Heraldic Laws of the day, then we have here as strong a proof as needed to show that God has kept his promise and that there is a direct male descendant who He will raise up to restore the Davidic Throne. These three witnesses, when combined with the witness of the Word of God; that this descendant must be able to merge the House of Ephraim with that of Judah (which I have already proven concerning my own ancestry) and that he would be given the birth name of David as I was; provides us Solid Heraldic Evidence, admissable in a Court of Law, that proves beyond a Shadow of a Doubt, that I am, in fact, a direct descendant from King David through the Male Lineage with absolutely no change of House in the entire lineage.

And I can assure you, come that Day, that there will be no doubt left in anyone's mind that Y'shua ben Y'hava Himself has restored the Davidic Throne, Tabernacle and Kingdom.

I completed this research in August of 2004 when I walked up to Boulder from Denver and, at the time, I did not know that this was my adoptive lineage. The URL from Wayback Machine is included below to show that I finished the research at that time and is dated September 23, 2004.

So, that sound you hear, if you listen very carefully, is that of (Is 22:23) :

A Stake being driven into a sure place...'


Status: Offline
Posts: 772

While I am waiting for a specific book in my research, I might as well fill in some other information. 

Depending upon the boy's age at the death of his father William in the Crusade, he was probably 'adopted' by his aunt, Robert's sole remaining child, who had married Elie de St. Saen ("Brewer's British Royalty," David Williamson, pgs 307-8). 

Further, that he would move to Glamorgan at the time is not hard to believe for this frontier was being built up by the Normans. They would build a Castle in an area of agricultural fruitfullness and then start moving people in, from the common people who would be the farmers to Soldiers (The Marcher Lords and Gallowglass Warriors) as well as administarial people. It would have provided ample opportunity for him, regardless of which carreer he chose. 

"Despite these repeated failures, large parts of Wales were gradually brought back under Norman control in the next few years. This success was accomplished by Norman pursuit of a new strategy, one based upon a vastly expanded program of castle building. In the light of this fact it seems possible that the major purpose of the royal expedition of 1097 was not to defeat the Welsh in open combat, but to provide a screen for the construction of additional castles in rebellious regions.8 Rufus' failure in 1095 seems to have led the Normans to develop a castle-building strategy which was to make of Wales a land dominated by fortresses.9...The remainder of Henry's reign saw the slow, but steady, consolidation of Norman power in South Wales. The overall pattern of settlement in the region was relatively uniform, and seems almost consciously based upon the organization of Glamorgan, the only lordship to endure the rebellions of the close of the eleventh century with any degree of stability. It seems strange that such advances could have been made under the direction of an authority which was as we have said, more interested in stability than in conquest The reason for this peculiarity lies partly in the character of the settlement, and partly in the political situation of the times. The Normans took, held, and settled only those areas which were capable of supporting the agrarian society necessary to maintain a feudal structure. Everywhere the pattern was similar to that observable in Glamorgan; the Normans were content to exercise only a vague suzerainty over such lands as were not capable of sustaining intensive agriculture. Since it was exactly these relatively barren regions which the Welsh valued most highly, the friction between Welsh natives and Norman settlers was minimized."

Further, had he relocated to Glamorgan, it is highly likely that he married one of the locals and settled down there in Glamorgan, which is why Captain Richard came from that town.

"The new nobility knew no English and probably did little to learn it (in contrast to the situation on the borders of Wales where many Norman lords freely fraternized and married local inhabitants and learned the Welsh language)."

All of this is further supported by the fact that Robert Curthose would have had his own 'household' of servants that would have administered his estate. ("The Norman Empire" John Le Patourel, Oxford University Press, Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1976, pgs 131-7, 141)

"The King, however, was human. He could not work all the time and he certainly did not try to do so...He was accompanied even on such [hunting] occasions by bishops and barons and household officers, and the affairs of his dominions would not always respect office hours...Regents of a kind he had to have; but they were no more than supplementary to his itineration...The very flexibility of this manner of ruling was its strength; and it was the more effective because, at this stage in the growth of governmental institutions in the West, most of what we now classify as 'central government' of the Norman Kings itinerated with them. The first and by far the most important component of their 'central government' was the King himself, and his personal character counted for more than any other single political fact in all his dominions. The relative effectiveness of a Henry Beauclerc and a Robert Curthose shows this at once. But he could not govern alone and did not travel alone. A part of the company that moved round with him was formed by a body known as his Household. [Author's sources are Constitutio Domus Regis from Dialogus - pgs 128-135 and White's "Household of the Norman Kings"]

"It is very difficult to define as an institution. Clearly, the King, like any important person, had to have an elaborate domestic service, a number of cooks, butlers, larderers, chamberlains, and, since he was so often on the move, constables to look after the horses, a bearer of the Kings' bed, a tent-keeper, carters, sumpter-men, bakers to go ahead and prepare for the King's coming, marshals to find lodgings and so on. Some at least of the men so described must have been always and continually with the King, itinerating with him and ministering to his personal needs; but among them there were already groups which, though domestic in origin and still essentially domestic in character, were developing into embryonic departments of state with important governmental functions. The King had a seal and a chancellor to look after it. This seal must always have been kept near him for it authenticated his mandates and grants wherever he might be when they were issued and whichever of his lands they might concern. There was no question for a seal for England and for Normandy. The chancellor had a keeper of the seal (or master of the writing office) under him and a body of clerks, the whole forming the beginnings of a chancery, the King's secretariat, but still a part of his domestic household."

"Likewise, since such money and valuables as the King carried about with him were looked after by his chamberlains in his chamber, this formed another embryonic department with more than a purely domestic significance; for money was often paid directly to the King and constantly had to be spent by him and his household, and such transactions could have considerable administrative and even political importance. [Author's sources are Regesta vol 1 pgs 16-21, Richardson and Sayles' "Governance of Medieval England, pg 228 and chap 12 etc]. The constables and marshals were primarily concerned with the King's horses and his hunting and in keeping some order among the vast concourse of people that formed the court. It would seem natural to look to them for commanders of the armies that were raised from time to time; but their part in the military organization during the twelfth century is hard to define".

"The household, therefore, both in its domestic and in this larger sense, formed a considerable part of the King's administration in itself. The position in the early twelfth century seems to have been the result of two complementary processes, one by which domestic members of a ruler's household were sent out to do his work elsewhwere and one by which men who were of importance in the country at large were drawn into the household is likely that their membership of the household, however nominal it might be, was looked upon by them as a source of honour and a means of advancement and by the King as one useful method of holding his admistration together. For the household was still his household, personal to him...After 1087 William Rufus and Robert Curthose each had his own household, formed, as to its nucleus at least, while they were still princes; but each, when they became King and Duke respectively, took over some members of his father's household. It is clear that Robert had a following, and failed to persuade his father to give him the means to strengthen it; and this and Orderic's narrative imply that he had a household, however elementary, separated from that of the King."

"No doubt it is simply because so much of the work of the King's government was done by men who were members of his household or his court, either accompanying him on his travels or out doing his work in one country or the other, that no clearly defined institution of regency evolved in the early twelfth century, even though the ruler's absences from England or Normandy might last for three or four years at a time." 

If there is one thing we can count on, it is job security, for motivation for these devoted servants to ensure the family lineage of Robert Curthose. It is these people who, assuredly, struck a deal for Robert's Legitimate son William Clito, to marry into another Royal House in Normandy. They are, assuredly, also the ones that set up his illegitimate daughter to marry Eli, as previously mentioned (which shows that they did not consider illegitimate birth to be a problem in cases of Royal Lineage). So, it is not too hard to imagine that, with the death of Robert's legitimate heir, and his two remaining illegitimate sons, that these people would have grabbed hold of his sole remaining heir and grandson through William, and presented him to Robert for the inheritance. Thus, they would have, assuredly, sent a group or delegation with the boy to Glamorgan for just this very purpose.

Depending upon how long they tarried there, waiting, perhaps, for Robert to pass away, they ended up staying in Wales, and assuredly, married the heir apparent off to another Royal person, whether from England, or more likely, one of the Chieftain's daughters from Wales, which is why his descendants settled in Glamorgan, and also explains why Glamorgan was not overrun by these same Chieftains, like the rest of Wales, when King Henry (Robert's brother) passed away.

And, in fact, it is these Stewards of Robert's House that assuredly crafted the Crest that ended up in the hands of Captain Richard Hill-Male mentioned at the start of this post and that Blue Ribbon that ties the Shield of Accomplishment to Robert's Spear was their way of saying that Robert's Lineage was "hanging by a thread." And by the way, for those of you who think that David has thousands of descendants - this current study shows perfectly that "the sword shall not depart from the House of David" because of his part in the murder of Urriah. Both Henry and William lost their heirs when their sons died 'mysteriously' without issue because of this curse and its resultant effects among the descendants of David, leading them to slaughter each other in order to gain this House of David. This, actually, necessitated the Stewards to relocate the boy away from the intrigues of England and London and Normandy, and so they planted him in the frontier of Wales where he, and his descendants, could survive in hiding and thus ensure the lineage.

And, so it is that a Family by the name of Umfreville, who were Kin of Robert Curthose and his grandson, was assuredly these very stewards.

"Robert 'with-the-beard' De Umfreville, Lord of Tours and Vian c 1030-1090 

Tradition has it that Robert De Umfreville was a kinsman of William the Conqueror and sailed with him to England in 1066 and indeed a Robert d'Amfreville does appear amongst the Battle Abbey list of the Conquerors companions. Tours may be Tourville near Amphreville-la-campagne in Normandy. There are seven other Amphrevilles in Normandy but it is most likely that the family name hails from Amphreville-sur-Iton in Orne (G.E.C. Complete peerage (1910) Vol I, p146). The second son of Robert with the beard, Gilbert went with Robert Fitz Hamon (also known as Fitz Haimo) to the conquest of Glamorgan in 1091. In 1095 he was created Lord of Penmark. William II Rufus continued the conquest of Wales started by his father and his vassals established a string of castles along the south wales coast in order to secure the Bristol channel. Welsh land was given out piecemeal to Knights. Gilbert would almost certainly have benefitted, he seems to have been given lands there as a vassal of Robert Fitz Hamon as we know that Umfrevilles held land in Glamorgan throughout the 11th and 12th century. It was Fitz Hamon who established the first castle at Cardiff and was given Glamorgan as his fief and it seems very likely that Gilbert would have held lands there as a vassal of Fitz Hamon. After his death, sometime after 1110, and after a transitionary period Glamorgan passed through his daughter Sibyl (or Mabel) to Robert of Gloucester and thence to his son William of Gloucester.

The Redesdale Umfrevilles 

The Umfrevilles Charter states that the Liberty of Redesdale was granted to Robert 'with-the-beard' Umfreville in 1076. What is certain is that William I paid particular attention to the northern border for exploitation and settlement. William wanted a strong defensive system of castles and loyal vassals as Scotland had proved to be an ideal base for raids by exiled Anglo-Saxon nobles who could rely upon support in Northumbria and Mercia. In 1069 William, tired of uprisings in the former Earldoms, ravaged the North with fire and sword.

A royal castle was built near the mouth of the Tyne in 1080 by William's eldest son Robert Curthose and gave it's name to the small town there, 'New Castle'. If indeed The Umfrevilles built Elsdon Castle at Mote Hills in 1080 then it would have been as part of the settlement of Norman and Flemish families and the fortification of the border region by Robert Curthose. Not only would a castle sited here hold down the Rede valley but would also protect a main trade route into Scotland. There may have been a custodian of the castle in 1080 appointed by Robert Curthose who MAY have been called Umfreville. What is certain is that by 1130 Elsdon, Harbottle and Prudhoe were all owned by the Umfrevilles.

The Glamorgan Umfrevilles acquired property in Devon through marriage in the 13th century (circa 1212) when Sibyl De Torrington of Devon married a Richard De Umfreville. His descendants still held land there in the 14th century (there are two towns in Devon called Charleton Umfreville and Downe Umfreville, Down St Leonards?)." ("A History of the Umfrevilles,", 

In fact, this is actually borne out by the name in the archaic French for the 'um' or 'am' would be refering to 'ami' or 'friend' and the 'fre' is where we get 'fervent' from and of course a 'ville' is a village that is made up of homes or originally a 'house' and thus, with this title that became their surname you have "The House of a Good Friend" to the King, a branch of which became The House of Robert Curthose.

This is the same basic meaning of the "House" of Windsor (and the "House" of Tudor etc) and is exactly the Scriptural meaning of The House of David which, originally, was called The Tabernacle of David. 

So, in my further studies up in Boulder, I came across the information below, where an individual named Master Ralph Mailoc is mentioned as a prominent individual in Glamorgan by the early 1200's. The word Master, in the Welsh of the time, was the previously mentioned Male and this is very possibly the son of the person in question. The 'oc' ending would be "of, from, out of, you" ("Welsh-English English-Welsh Dictionary" H. Meurig Evans, M.A., Saphrograph Corp., New York, NY, 1969, pgs 347, 28), and is connected to "gweler" which, apparently, can mean (pg262) "FAMILY" which is of course, similar to the Scottish "O" as in O'Conner, etc. And, thus we see that Master Ralph was OF the Family of Mail or Male. This is actually indisputable, and is assuredly where Captain Richard Hill-Male derived his name from. 

Unfortunately, for some reason, three of the books at the Library that may have had more information on this individual (History of Medieval Wales) were mysteriously missing, though not checked out.

While there I also found Zuckerman's book and as I was looking through it I noticed that he did not have a detailed pedigree of the house of David, so this is as far as I am able to take this geneology. However, there is more information backing up my theory, then there is for Zuckerman's and if one accepts his theory, then the Hill Family Crest with the White Leopard is all the proof I need in support for my position and thus I am Crown Prince of the Davidic Throne David Thomas-Roberts Hill.

However, I have it on good authority that Abba Himself is going to finish the research into this pedigree and let everyone know for sure that this is true.

You see, he has to because, he has exalted his Word above his very name and he has sworn to restore the Tabernacle of David in these end days and that is exactly what he will do.

Not a doubt in my mind...

"The Scriptorium of Margam Abby" translated by Robert B. Patterson, The Boydell Press, WoodBridge, Suffolk, Uk 2002

"To supply the Lord's of Glamorgan with knights, within the Shire fee a system of honorial tenants were enfeoffed subject to quotas of knight-services. Families holding single or fractional knight's fees in the Shire fee in 1166 Cardiff (Llantrithyd). These servita debita ranged from William de Londres's mesne lordship of Ogmore owing a quota of four knights to Richard of Cardiff's Llantrithyd burdened with one-quarter of the service of a knight." (pg3)

"Richard de Cardiff, Earl William's Seneschal." (pg 31)

"The terminus ad quem is established by the attestation of Master Ralph Mailoc...his [scribe 36] service career began before 2 June 1231, based upon the appearance of Ralph Mailoc in witness lists (nos. 253-54)." (pgs 94-97)

"Acta 253...June 1231 : attestation of Ralph Mailoc : 'Annaled de Tewkesburia'." (pg 121)


According to "The Vale of Glamorgan" by Henry John Randall, R.H. John's Ltd., Neport, G. Britain, 1961, Map 1 AND "Glamorgan County History" Ed. by T.B. Pugh, William Lewis Ltd., Cardiff, 1971, Map 4, Pencoed (Pennycoedcae) and Ponty Pridd are located in Llantrisant (with Tewksbury just west of this).


When we look at the Names of the people involved and the Location that they came from and the Crest that they all shared in common, and using the Heraldic Laws of the day, then we have here as strong a proof as needed to show that God has kept his promise and that there is a direct male descendant who He will raise up to restore the Davidic Throne. These three witnesses, when combined with the witness of the Word of God; that this descendant must be able to merge the House of Ephraim with that of Judah (which I have already proven concerning my own ancestry) and that he would be given the birth name of David as I was; provides us Solid Heraldic Evidence, admissable in a Court of Law, that proves beyond a Shadow of a Doubt, that I am, in fact, a direct descendant from King David through the Male Lineage with absolutely no change of House in the entire lineage. And when, in fact, the Earth itself responds to this Claim (as it did for George Washington and the founding of this country), then it is only the prejudiced mind that can ignore this information. And further, when all of this is accomplished while being harassed and threatened by those antagonistic to this Work (the worlds greatest terrorists - we all know the CIA trained the Taliban and like organizations around the world but nobody ever asks why?), it then becomes an earnest (downpayment) from Shalmah that this Work will be completed in Y'hova's Timing.

And I can assure you, come that Day, that there will be no doubt left in anyone's mind that Y'shua bar Y'hova himself has restored the Davidic Throne, Tabernacle and Kingdom...


Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Members Login

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard