The three skulls are arranged with two on the bottom and one above between them. Petrasancta states that three Turkish heads in turbans are in the coat of arms of the family Below in Marchia, but two are arranged above and one on the bottom. Dalmatia also claims a coat of arms with three heads, but each wears a beard and a crown. The Warsaw Chapter has the head of St. John the Baptist on a dish, because the name of its church is “The Beheading of St. John.”

Vadingus mentions in 1348, that Ferdynandus Garsya de Platea received five Turkish heads from Emperor Charles and King Philip of Spain in recompense for singlehandedly killing the Turkish tyrant, Adryan Barbarossa, and four others.

>Altho I cannot locate the origins of this coat of arms, I know that a member of the family of Weskop moved from Livonia to Poland in 1600 and received honorary citizenship for military service. He married a wealthy heiress, Kozuchowska. His son, Felicyan, was a captain of the royal cavalry for twenty years, and married Anna Laskowska. They had two daughters: Katarzyna, who married Dobrzycki, and Barbara, who married Stefan Misiuna. Four sons died without heirs: Ignacy, Marcin, Jedrzej, and Franciszek. The fifth son, Jan, married Frances Morska, and their children were Stefan and Anna.

Translated by Josephine M. Piegzik and Jonathan Shea; first appeared in the Spring 1985 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


For heroic action in the campaign against Moscow, Bazyli Bialokurowicz was awarded this coat of arms, known as POCISK, by King Stefan Batory.

Bazyli settled in Plock. His grandson, Stefan Latyczowski, king’s butler and marshal of the estate of v. Jan Zamojski of Sandomir, married Zerkowska. His second wife, Kosmider Gruszczynska, bore three sons: Michal, hussar, served under Hetman Hieronim Lubomirski; Jerzy served with the subprefect 01 -sztynski; and, Felicyan became a Jesuit priest.

Translated by Josephine M. Piegzik; first appeared in the Spring 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


Mention had already been made of the Bialowkorski Family which bears the coat of arms, ABDANK. The MS on the Prussian family line contains this description: the horseshoe is the same as in the DABROWA coat of arms but without the hufnals and with only one cross above it. An eagle’s leg is enclosed by the horseshoe. There are three ostrich plumes above the helmet and crown.

Altho there is no record of the manner in which this coat of arms was acquired, it is known that Daniel Bialoskorski of Mazowsze married Lazynska who, being the only daughter of Dominik Jarzebinski of Dabrowa, inherited all of the wealth and the coat of arms. His children were Agnieszka, Michal and Jedrzej. Michal married Jadwiga Nakielska who gave birth to Szczesny, Melchior, and Krzysztof. His second wife was Agnieszka; their estate is at Wabrzezno.

Krasicki notes that a bird’s claw is in the horseshoe and that the plumes were blue, green, and red.

Translated by Josephine M. Piegzik; first appeared in the Spring 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


All agree that this coat of arms was acquired in Poland in 1332 during the reign of Wladyslaw Lokietek. The King led an expedition against the Knights of the Cross. When the army reached the enemy’s camp, a knight of the house Jastrzebiec concealed flaming arrows from the night watch with which he succeeded in torching the enemy’s tents. The fire enabled the King’s army to rout and kill the enemy with dispatch. The Knight’s ingenuity was rewarded with the addition of an arrow to the family’s coat of arms which was then named for the village, BIALYNIA, near which the action took place.

Other families using BIALYNIA are: Mirski, Rzepecki, Wilczek, Zablocki.

Translated by Josephine M. Piegzik; first appeared in the Spring 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


There is a red antler of a deer with four gnarled extensions in a field of gold; a similar antler is above the helmet. Altho Paprocki, Okolski, and Bielski have written about this coat of arms, none of them mentions its beginnings, other than that it was brought to Poland from Silesia.

In 1420, the Biberszteins were so powerful that Prince Henry Glogowski signed a peace treaty with them.

Paprocki reports that Silesian coins were stamped with the Bibersztein coat of arms on one side and with such inscriptions on the other side as: Ulricus Comes in Regenstat, Maria Mater Salvatoris, Caspar Ulricus (1509), and Ernestus in Regenstat Comes.

Paprocki also adds that a Count Bibersztein, Fryderyk, contributed a great deal to the victories of the Polish Prince Herman for which he was rewarded with considerable property.

Others, such as Bielski, claim that it was Count Jan Bibersztein whom King Henryk Glogowski sent out with an army to take over the provinces of Wielkopolska, but who was defeated by Dobrogost Szamotulski (Cromer, lib. 11, 1310). The Count then settled in Poland. Paprocki adds that this Jan was a descendant of the Germans whom King Herman of Poland took prisoner in 1094 having fought off the invading Czechs. Later, he gave them lands to settle, and to the more worthy, more extensive estates.

Krasicki notes that there is to this day an estate named Bibersztein in Switzerland. There are several in Germany and, among others in Silesia, there is the family Marszal Bibersztein. August III appointed one of them the postmaster general in Warsaw. However, the coat of arms of the Marszals is not the antler of a deer but SZACHOWNICA.

Other families claiming the Bibersztein coat of arms:

Bialkowski, Blonski, Boiszewski, Kazimirski, Jazwiecki, Sebienski

Translated by Josephine M. Piegzik; first appeared in the Spring 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


The Bielikoiczes in Brest-Litovsk use these arms: they have three rods or a shell arranged in the-form you see above. Of these Bielikoiczes Dawid, Rzeczycki stolnik [master of the pantry] prospered in the year 1680; his son was Jan, by Zofja z Mielanowa of the Nalecz arms. In the Volhynia metryka [register] for 1528 I read of a local landowner, Bazyly Bielikowicz. Neither Paprocki nor Okolski wrote about them.

Bielikowicz. Krasicki writes that there are Bielikoiczes who later changed their name to Bielikowicz, and they exist to this day in the Brzesc Kujawski area. – Wieladek writes about them; Kuropatnicki places them in his work; I found in a 1764 constitution that Stefan Jan Bielikowicz, town clerk, representative of Braclaw county, and Vehmgericht judge, signed his name to the election of King Stanislaw August for that same county of Braclaw. There also are the signatures of Franciszek, Braclaw cup-bearer, and Wincenty, Braclaw judge from the same county. – Stefan, Braclaw town clerk, and Leon, equerry, circa 1763. – Franciszek, cup-bearer of Braclaw county, signed an act of general confederation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1764. There, too, was Samuel Bielikowicz, and Leonard, Braclaw town clerk, circa 1769, and Adam, Braclaw straznik [guard, custodian].- Ignacy, Kamieniec canon. – Antoni, His Majesty’s chamberlain, was a representative at the 1784 sejm in Grodno. – Jozef, Braclaw builder. – Alexander, Livonian equerry.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


Paprocki and Okolski did not write about them. On a white field an arrow between two lilies, i.e., with a lily on either side, points straight up, and a second such arrow is seen piercing the helm. I have read nowhere about the origins of these arms; I have heard only that they were introduced to Poland from the Czechs long ago. The Blachas use these arms as their seal: among them Mikolaj, Wschowa cup-hearer, had three sons by Boszkowska, Jedrzej Alexander, Jozef and Jan.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


These arms are described in MS. on Prussian families: the arms feature a white crest and an azure field; through the middle of two red stripes separated from each other a golden arrow points upwards, while the helm and crown have three ostrich feathers, two azure, the third one white: but some of this house include only one red stripe in their arms, while others show the arrow pointing downward.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


At one time this house flourished in Livonia: now it does so in Poland. Among its members was Siferdus a Blomberch (that’s how it used to be spelled), Riga archbishop circa 1400. -Mikolaj was Piltyn starosta in 1686, and earlier Jan Blumberk stood for the election of Wladyslaw IV in Livonia. Jerzy was for Jan III. Neither Paprocki nor Okolski wrote about them.

Blumberk, commander of the Zamojski garrison, had two sons and a daughter who married Cybulski – Krasicki’s note.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


In these arms an azure crest is divided into four parts: on the upper right is a golden cross, on the left a red lion without a crown;on the lower right is a lion, and on the left a cross of the same form as above. On the helm is a red lion without crown, between two wings, with his tail erect and curved back to the right, over his head; his right forepaw is raised, and the lions on the shield are symmetrically posed the same way. The people of this house were honorable and ancient in Prussia, and in Germany they served in various imperial and ducal courts. See Ms. de Famil. Pruss.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1986 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


Three white lilies are arranged in a straight line, each under the last, on an azure field. Biel. fol. 190. has five ostrich feathers on the helm; but different authors vary in regard to the lilies: some, such as Paprocki w Gniazdzie i Okol., show three lilies with root and leaves. Others, such as Paprocki o herbach fol. 565 and Janicius, show it in a form as if two of the lilies have been combined into one, as we see in the Gozdawa arms. Nasz Ks. Petrasancta, in Symbol. Heroicis, includes a similar coat of arms in his book, except he has the lilies golden. None of our historians have written about these arms’ origins or about the time when they either were introduced to us or were born. They list among armorials only the first, Marcin, Archibishop of Gniezno; his fame is so great among various authors, and there’s so much confusion from the books published about him, that I must talk about him at greater length.

This Marcin, according to Gerard Jan Wossyusz’s de Historicis Latinis, which quotes Volaterran, was born in Carsula or Castino; Albert. Miraeus de scriptor. Ecclesiast. maintains the same thing; it also gives him there the title of “Konsentynski” [Cosenza] archbishop, Ks. Antoni Possevin S.J. t. 2. appar. sub Litera M. says that he was not a Pole but a Cartulan, or a Scot. The same source one time gives his order as Cistercian, another time as Kaznodziejski [preaching friar, i.e., Dominican]. Siffridus Petrus Leogardiensis from Trythenius proves that a great difference of opinion arose among learned people as to his order, whether he was Benedictine, Cistercian, or Dominican; each was claiming him for his own order. Some in Rajnaud wanted to call him an Italian by birth, and in Bzowiusz some jostle to call his home Konsencya[Cosenza], others Benevento. Kardynal Bellarmin lib. de scriptor. Ecclesiast. attests that he was Polish by birth, a friar by profession, an archbishop by rank, and a penitent of Innocent IV who wrote a chronicle covering up to Honorius IV, but calls him simple and undereducated for including in it the story of Pope John’s being a woman and giving other such items as history. Possevinus concurs with Bellarmin: Jul. Buleng. Francuz Diatriba 14. contra Cassaubonum. Our Father Kwiatkiewicz, in this book to which he gave the title Fajcinus, also lays the blame for the fictitious Pope Joan on him. Damalew. in Archiep. Gnesnen., despite ascribing great skill in ecclesiastic law to him and renown to his name, also blames him for this exposed nursery-tale. In Dialogue 6 of de signis verae Ecclesiae Jakob Ostrowski throws this same charge up to him; and a host of others, one after the other, failed to get to the truth of the matter.

But that Marcin was Polish by birth, a Dominican by profession, and Gniezno archbishop in rank, is proved first of all in Rajnaud tomo 14. Annal. Eccles. in 1277, where the author quotes letters of Popes Nicholas III, C. tom. I. L. 1. Ep. 189, and Martin IV, C tomo I. 1. 3. ep. 50. Rajnaud is supported by Spondanus, same year, num. 18, from a letter of that same pope Martin dated 23 December. This letter is in the registry of the Vatican Library. C. 126 has the same letter, also Vadingus tomo 2. in Annal. Ordin. Min. toward the end of 1281. It was written to Henry of the Bremen Minorite princes; it says that – the Gniezno archdiocese having been orphaned since Martin’s death and since Wlostyborz, Gniezno canon chosen unanimously from the chapter for that capital, had voluntarily handed his resignation to Eilip Eirman, the apostolic nuncio in that place and at that time – he was appointing this Henry Gniezno archbishop; and there we read the words of the Pope: Per mortem Martini Poloni de Ordine Praedicatorum, quem in Archiepiscopus, eidem praefeceramus Ecclesiae [By the death of the Pole Martin of the order of Preachers, whom we made Archbishop and to whom we entrusted the Church … ] – in the face of such decisive evidence, all doubt on this point should disappear. Furthermore, toward the end of 1278 in num. 32 in Annal. Eccles. Bzovius tells of himself that in Bononia [=Bologna], where Marcin died, he saw his body laid out to await the last day and this brief inscription on his tombstone in the Dominican church: Hic jacet Erater Martinus Polonus Ordinis Praedicatorum Archiepiscopus Gnesnensis [Here lies Brother Martin, Pole, of the Order of Preachers, Gniezno Archbishop]; Rajnaudus also writes of this. And if these obvious proofs did not speak for themselves, it would suffice to note that his general fame, widespread among various authors, never describes him other than by his homeland, Martinus Polonus [Martin the Pole]. Some (Sajnaudus says) gave him the title “archbishop of Konsencya” [Consenza]; if he administered this church of Calabria, he must have done so after 1272, when Thomas, that city’s pastor, accepted the patriarchy of Jerusalem. Marcin, seduced by affection for his homeland, left Konsencya with papal permission and took charge of the metropolis of Gniezno; hurrying there on his way from Rome, on the road he took the path to etemity in 1279.

As for his writings: Leo Alanus in Commentations de Joannae Papissae fabula defends our Pole and says that the fictitious story is nowhere to be found in his truthful chronicle. In Urban VIII’s time a very old copy of his chronicle was taken from the Vatican library, and in it there was no sign of this work that has been unfairly attributed to him to this day. From this that writer concludes that this patch was sewn in as an addition either by undereducated or by evil people. Vitae Pontif. Roman. tomo 2. fol. 1981. Joannes Stalenus saw a manuscript of the older chronicle in another place, and he states in his Papissa Monstrosa that there wasn’t a hint of the fictitious Joan in it. Bzovius also testifies to the same for his compatriot. And Sifridus Piotr Leovardiensis in dedicat. Martiniani Chronici says:
Caeterum cum sua tempestate uti fere solus, ita praecipuus rerum Ecclesiasticarum Chronographus fuerit, factum esse, ut opus ab ipso editum, magno cum applausu exciperent, quod, quoniam typis nondum repertis, manu describendum erat, (quod optimis, quibusvis authoribus usuvenit) factum est, ut aliorum imperitia, aliorum negligentia, aliorum malevolentia propositum exemplar, de intregritatis gratia deturbarit. [But since he was almost the only – and thus the chief – Chronographer of Ecclesiastical affairs in his time, it could happen (as it has with many authors, the best among them), since type had not yet been invented and works had to be copied by hand, that a given copy of the work he had published to great applause could be robbed by others’ ignorance, negligence, or malevolence of the virtue of correctness.] See Siffridus.

This author is completely mistaken when he says that Marcin covered up to 1320 in his history and when he ascribes to the pen of Marcin the Pole and considers his work everything the Basel edition adds to the Eulden version, from the beginning of 1277. Three times his chronicle was issued into the light of day from the printer’s press. The first time was the Typis Oporianis in Basel in 1559. The second time was in 1574, Typis Plantinianis in Antwerp. The third time was in Cologne in 1616. Several editions of these added history of four Popes that, according to Vossyusz, were not in the others; and that author doubts that Marcin lived that long. As for me, I am certain that he did not live so long, and my proof is in the papal letters of Nicholas III and Martin IV, inasmuch as the latter wrote in 1282 – already after his death – to appoint another successor to the cathedral orphaned by his death, as we spoke of earlier. How then was Martin supposed to annotate the events of later years when he had long since died? Many scholars of considerable repute are of the same opinion. Bucholcer asserts in his chronology that Marcin covered only up to 1278 in his chronicle, and that the rest, up to 1320, was added by others. Rajnaudus says under 1277 num. 19 from Bernard Gwidon that it only went up to the time of Pope John XXI; Spondanus states the same thing under 1278 num. 18, where he adds that in many old manuscripts his history was not extended farther than to Nicholas III; he himself saw that, but there are some who write that it went only to Clement IV.

Praising his knowledge and skill, Siffridus of Trytemius says: Vir erat in Scripturis Sanctis studiosus et eruditus, ac saecularium Literarum non ignarus [He was a man studious and learned in the Sacred Scriptures, and not ignorant of secular letters]. P. Rajnaudus speaks likewise.
Etsi a Cardinali Bellarmino et Possevino, notetur censura nimiae in vetustorum temporum scribenda historia simplicitatis, et fabulas nonnullas pro veris afferre; caeterum illum in temporum suorum pangenda historia, rerum gestarum veritati consentire experti sumus. [Although Cardinal Bellarmin and Possevin criticized him for excessive simplicity in writing the history of ancient times and for presenting more than one fable as true, still we have found him to be consistent with the facts in recounting the history of our times.]

It is clear from the books he published what kind of man he was. He wrote: 1. Tabula Decretalium [A Table of Decretals]; 2. Chronicon Summorum Pontificum et Imperatorum [A Chronicle of All Pontiffs and Emperors]; 3. Sermones de tempore [Discources on Time]; 4. Sermones de Sanctis [Discources on the Saints] in Argentorato in 1486 and reprinted in 1488, according to Maraeus; 5. De diversis, miraculis [On Various Miracles]; 6. De Schismate Graecorum [On the Greeks’ Schism]; 7. Historia de Guelfis [History of the Guelphs]. Bzovius writes of all these that he saw them in the Vatican library. Vossius adds that Marcin wrote a book which he titled Memorabilia Romae. Speranza in libro Selectae Scripturae puncto 142 cites his Promptuarium. Martinus Baronius says that he also wrote a chronicle of Poland, in the seven leaves of which he says there was something about Boleslaw the Bold. Cardinal Bellarmin deserves reproach for censuring this Pole when he never had a chance to see an authentic original of Marcin’s chronicle: and Possevin, too, (who praises Florymund Remund, one of the heretics Marcin convinced of the lie about Pope Joan, praises him in volumes 1 and 2) – if he had read Remund – would have found there how Remund praises Marcin, and would surely not have taken pen in hand to write the remark by which he changed his garb: to say the same of other authors.

Rajnaudus blames our Polish historians for having kept silent about their archbishop Marcin, whether because he died far from his homeland before assuming his cathedral seat, or because his elevation to that metropolis did not become known to the Poles, or because his promotion had no result and was regarded as invalid. He mentions Kromer, however, on this point: but our historian Dlugosz, much older than Kromer, speaks quite clearly about Marcin. Clemens Janicius in his epigrammata places him among the archbishops of Gniezno, where he wrote about him, Tam cito cur moreris legum jurisque; perite, non potes an Stygias, vincere jure Deas. [Why do you, learned in statutes and law, die so swiftly? Why can you not conquer the Stygian goddesses with law?] After these Bielski fol. 190 Paprocki wrote about him, as did Damalewicz in Vitis Archiepisc, in a very inferior way. Others, too, spread his books and the fame of his name. Pruszcz, Forteca Duchowna fol. 102. Pawel Russel Tryumf fol. 19 et 100 calls him “Strzepski,” and thus suspicion arose among some that they should draw him into the Strzemie arms, as does Severinus in Vita S. Hyacinthi lib. 1 cap. 23, even calling Dlugosz as a witness. Starolski in Hecathe also adds that first among Poles, and probably alone among them, he won very great fame around the world with his writings. In all this I hold with Janicius, Damalewicz, Paprocki, Bielski, and Okolski that he was of the Bodula arms, which the poet applied to his brief life as an archbishop, Breve est ver liliorum [Brief is the lilies’ spring]. This Marcin was the twenty-second in the line of Gniezno archbishops and was elevated to that honor by Nicholas III in Viterbo on 23 May. Paprocki counts among various conferments to others besides Marcin one to Pomscibor Bodula and his brother Nadbor in 1283, and he read the name Dadzibog Bodula on the roster of Sendomierz monastery in 1289.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Spring 1987 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


There are two white arrows, broken, on a blue field, arranged so that one of the arrowheads points up and the other down; on the helm is a peacock with its tail spread; its beak points to the shield’s right, and in the beak it holds an arrow, likewise broken and twisted upward. Bielski. fol. 228. Paprocki w Gniazdzie fol. 305. o herbarch fol. 182. Okolski tom. 1. Ks. Petrasancta has no such arms, but he does say of France that this coat of arms is common there: a gold eagle on a shield on which there are, as in our Bogorya arms, two broken arrows with silver arrow-heads. Petrasancta cap. 63. fol. 528.

All of our writers agree that these arms were bom here in Poland on a particular occasion. Boleslaw the Brave, armed with only 3,000 of his cavalry, attacked a much larger band of Polovtsy near Snowskie and struck down the leader of the foe: in this fray one colonel from among the others, named Bogorya, mowed down Polovtsy with great courage of heart, and, heartening his forces to victory in his battalion, bore several wounds and arrows in his body. Boleslaw, returning from the site, saw Bogorya, and extracted those arrows from his chest with his own royal hands; and Boleslaw conferred them, broken as they were, on him and his descendants as an eternal honor. This first owner of the arms was supposedly Michal Bogorya, whose name I read in a decree granting privileges to Holy Cross monastery near Sendomierz in 1069, and a little before that in the papers of Trzemeszno monastery, when he was given the title of count, from which Paprocki concludes that this house must have had its earliest origins from that point.

In praising the Bogorya family Dlugosz says that they were always Humani, et tractabiles (humane and reasonable), and that was evident in the first ancestors of this house and the way they endeared themselves to their lords’ hearts. Mikolaj Bogorya, voivode of Sendomierz under and highly esteemed by the Polish king Kazimierz the Just, was held in no less regard by the king’s sons: sharing with God his substance, he bequeathed the Miechow convent the villages Jaxyce and Rzeplice; it is unknown by what law the villages later ceased to be part of this foundation. Nakielski, Miechow. fol. 69 et 101. Regarding this Mikolaj there is more in Miechowita swiadczy lib. 3. cap. 6. Paprocki o herb. fol. 182 Starowolski in Vitis Episc. Cracov. I add this from the accounts of years: that he added to Koprzywnica monastery several of his villages as an eternal bequest, and by this his example he encouraged others of his house to similar generosity; and that in 1185 they made God and the Koprzywnica church heirs of their fortune. Mikolaj was Zawichowski (Zawichost?) castellan in 131 1. On this see Kromer lib. 14.

Jaroslaw Bogorya was 28th archbishop of Gniezno. In his youth his parents sent him to study in Bologna, and in several years he advanced in knowledge so much that the whole academy chose him to be rector. He administered the academy with great credit, and with no less generosity of heart; for when the Bologna magistrate sentenced to the sword a certain English student convicted of some illegal excess, Bogorya defended the integrity of the academy’s right by moving it to another place, returning it to Bologna only after he had received satisfaction on the score of the student’s killing, on which see Damalewicz in Vitis Arcbiep. Gnesn. But Paprocki o herb. fol. 182 has more to say on this subject. Jaroslow ordered the English student executed for adultery he’d committed with the husband’s consent; but he regretted it so much that he established a chapel for the dead man’s soul at the behest of Pope John XXII. No more can one prove Damalewicz’s surmise in that same work that his Bogorya, on a pilgrimage from Bologna to Avignon, was named archbishop of Gniezno there by Pope Clement VI: for Dlugosz clearly says that in 1343 the Gniezno chapter, at the instance of King Kazimierz, chose him for that office unanimously on 14 February 1342 – at the time he was only Archdeacon of Krakow and Gniezno canon. This much is certain, that Jaroslow carried out his pastoral functions with extraordinary prudence, for he visited not only his own diocese but also those of other bishops of his metropolis. With King Kazimierz he settled succefully in 1361 the controversies that had been growing greater and greater for several years between Bodzenta, bishop of Krakow, and the landowners of Krakow and Sendomierz provinces concerning tithes, ecclesiastical jurisdiction, exemption of clerics from lay courts, and the funding of new rectories. Lublin and Sieciechow districts has been desolated by the pagans’ continual raids, and so he exempted them from paying tithes for thirty years. Damalewicz, Kromer. Through King Kazimierz he frustrated the designs of the Roman Emperor Charles IV to separate the Wroclaw bishops from the Gniezno metropolis, but later united his granddaughter in matrimony with this Charles in Krakow, and Kazimierz showed his gratitude for this by leaving several bequests to his cathedral in his will. But after Kazimierz’s death, when the coronation approached of the successor to the Polish throne, Louis, the King of Hungary, Jaroslow, by agreement with the viovodes of Great Poland, wanted to crown him nowhere else than in Gniezno: but he finally acceded to the royal will and celebrated the ceremony in Krakow, inasmuch as Louis wished to follow the example of Wladyslaw Lokietek and Kazimierz, who had been inaugurated there. He cut off the Mazovian prince Ziemowit from the community of the faithful with ecclesiastical punishments because the latter had looked the other way – and may even have ordered it – as Piotrasz with his people plundered church properties: Ziemowit repaid the harm he’d done by leaving two villages to Gniezno cathedral in perpetuity. For damage done the church Jaroslaw took from Tomislaw z Przespolewa the village Kowalewo and attached it to the church. In addition he endowed Znin and the hamlet of Kamien, and he managed the kowicz demesne, which at that time he had been so devastated that it produced barely a grzywna of income for the treasury, so that by that time it brought in 800 grzywna annually. In addition, having preceded King Kazimierz the hamlet of Przedecz and Zarow with its lake, he took for them Spicimierz castle and village, Wolszczyce, and Kotamino; and again for Chroszlin he took Krolewce and Tarnkow, he took from the king Cienia and Michalow in Kalisz province. Thus administering his church’s income, he worked for the greater glory of God: for this purpose he tore down ancient, mouldering wooden houses of God and erected ones of his own funding in Gniezno, Kurzelow, Opatow, and Skotniki, his ancestral estates. In Uniejow he invested and endowed canons at the church of the Virgin Mary; he also endowed the parsonage at the church of St. Mikolaj, and in 1370 ceded it to the Benedictine Fathers, adding the village Biedrzykow. Having restored the ruined collegiate-church in Kalisz, he added to it the villages of Tyniec and Dobczyce. He provided for tithes for other churches, e. g., in Budyowsice, in Pabianice, St. Stanislaw in Krakow, at the St. George castle, and did the same for the Krzepice church and thus for the town of Krzepice, which no longer belonged to his archdiocese, but Bodzenta, the Krakow bishop, looked the other way. Here I will not mention how many parishes he provided with ecclesiastical equipment. In Gniezno, Kalisz, Wielun, and Leczyca he established episcopal courts. He introduced regular canons for the Kalisz parish of St. Mikolaj in 1358 at King Kazimierz’s request. He consecrated four Plock bishops – Janislaw Wronski, and the Gulczewskis, Mikolaj, Stanislaw and Dobieslaw – as well as Poznan bishop Jan, and Krystyn, the first archbishop of Halicz, although Miechowita incorrectly credits Jakob Swinka with this. Proceeding to the last years of pastoral labors of his 100 years, when he began to weaken visibly, he intended to resign his archepiscopate to his subordinate, Mikolaj z Koszutowa, Gniezno pastor, and he would have done so; but when Mikolaj, without consent of the chapter and even of the king, sought the appointment in Avignon from Pope Gregory, Jan Paszkowicz, the Gniezno chanter (kantor), was sent to the Pope by the chapter expressly to frustrate his designs, and did so. But shortly thereafter Bogorya resigned his cathedral to Jan z Strzeice, named Suchywilk, his nephew, with the permission of all concerned, and kept only two demesnes for himself. Wanting then to live more peacefully in God, he lived for two years in Lad monastery, then moved to Kalisz, where he died in 1376, after 34 vears as an archbishop. He ordered that after his death he should be buried in Gniezno in a chapel he had erected: but he should be brought not through the doors but through a hole made in the wall; he wanted his body carried to his grave that way because, as he said about himself, he did not enter the office of archbishop by the route prescribed by church canons; which voluntary confession about himself Spondanus particularly praises. A headstone was erected for him in 1562 by Jan Kokalewski, Gniezno chancellor, with the memorial commendation of his virtues: you will find it in Paprocki. I came to see it in MS. Coll. Caliss. S.J. extrakt ex libro Benefic. with the seal of the Gniezno chapter, in which I read that this Jaroslow endowed the Kazimierz church in the archdiocese with new income in 1375, at the behest of Piotr, Lubusz bishop. The following wrote about him: Spondan. Ann. Eccles. anno 1376 num. 8. Bzovius anno 1374 num. 15. Dlugosz 1372. Paprocki o herb. fol. 182. Damale. in Archiep. Gnes. Nakiel. fol. 302. Szczygiel. in Tinec. fol. 118. Cichoc. Alloc. Osec. lib. 8 cap. 13.

Bearers of these Arms:

____ Buczkowski, ____ Gniazdowski, Gorski, ____ Kolanowski, ____ Maciejowicz, Magnuski, Mokranowski, ____ Podleski, Porebny, ____ Skotnicki, Staszkowski, ____ Tarnowski, Tur, ____ Wolowicz, ____ Zakrzewski

But not all use the Bogorya arms in the form described earlier. In the first place, the house of Porebny places a cross formed as a written letter X between the two broken arrows. The Gorski and Tur families bear both arrows joined as if one; on the helm there are three ostrich feathers, two on the sides red, the third white. Others in Lithuania add a cross across the middle of the two arrows joined as one, as I saw in Krzysztof Bialozor’s panegyric Upomniki.

Bogorski of arms Suchekomnaty. The MS on Prussian families says regarding Bogorski that the Suchekomnaty arms flourish particularly in Prussia and adds that they were formerly called the Buckhorns.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1987 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


Neither Paprocki or Okolski wrote of them: their coat of arms as such is a private one. The shield is divided into two parts, on one of which a lion rears up, two paws raised, and on the other five roses are arranged in a row on a stripe. I have been unable to find anywhere on what occassion these arms were conferred: they currently are flourishing in Sandomierz province. There was a Stanislaw in 1697. One of them married Jerzy Brant. – These arms which I have placed here are from their domestic seal, but MS. o familiach Pruskich asserts that they use the Ramult arms.

(Wieladek writes that he read in the 1764 constitution between suffragan bishops that Jozef Bombek signed his name to the election of King Stanislaw August.)

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Spring 1988 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


In this coat of arms there is a lily of the field joined with another so that one points straight up and the other down, both roofed so that they arise from each other, forcing, as it were, a single lily: so that half of this combined lily is white in a red field, on the left side of the shield; on the right the other half is black on a white field. On the helm is half a man in armor and with an old fashioned helmet on his head, and he holds two two standards in his hands; in his right hand, which is white (for he himself is half black), he holds a black one, and in his left, which is black, he holds a white one. On the helmet he has a lily like that on the shield. Paproc. w Gniazdzie fol. 1213. o herb. fol. 578. Okolski. t. 1.fol. 59. Bielski fol. 507. A rather similar coat of arms is placed in Petrasancta cap. 60. among foreign emblems, from which it is easy to see that it did not originate among us here in Poland but was brought here from elsewhere. Indeed, these arms were acquired in France on this occasion: between King Philip of France and the English a war had been raging, one unfavorable to the French not only because of the loss of many people and cavalry but also because John the Blind, the Czech king who was reinforcing his relative, the king of France, perished. That had happened in 1346 [i.e., the battle of Crecy, near the start of the Hundred Years’ War; what follows must refer to a time nearer the end of the war, a century later – Trans.]. Jan Boner of Wissemberg, whose estates were on the Landa river and who came from the Netherlands, was at that time arranging pay for the French forces; on many occasions he pressed the English, a fortunate Mars, and was first made rotmistrz [captain of the horse] and later also hetman, and he managed his forces in such a way that he soon stood the English on their heads and brought two standards, black and white, as the spoils of his victory and threw them at the King’s feet. For this King Philip bestowed those same banners on him and his descendants, in addition to many significant keepsakes worthy of a knightly hear, and added to them the lily of France in the manner described above.

Whether he came to Poland soon or not, I can not determine. Decius in his history written about Zygmunt I – an author the more reliable because he lived in those days and was a patriot of the Boners – listed under the year 1515 others who had come from Wissemburg to our realm over the last 80 years, especially those who had settled in Krakow, and he says: Evocatus est item a Vissemburgensibus in hoc Regnum vir insignis Joannes Bonerus Landanus, qui primis initiis ex mercatura opibus auctus, et apud Casimirum, Joannem Albertum, et Alexandrum Poloniae Reges in pretio habitus est [Also summoned by the Vissemburgians to this Realm was an eminent man, Jan Boner of Landa, who was originally hired for trade in provisions and was held in high regard by Poland’s kings Kazimierz, Jan Albert, and Aleksander]. The same thing was written, following Decyusz (although theycalled him “Miechowita”), by Bielski and Paprocki. But the latter, in Paprocki o herb. fol. 699, listing several of the more prominent people thriving in the city of Krakow from 1378, includes Mikolaj Bochnar, who presided over the city in 1383 and again in 1396, when he was also inspector of the Krakow salt-works. There is also Lukasz Bochnar in 1403. Then Dryacki, and other writers on the life of Blessed Izajasz Boner, maintain that that holy man was born in 1380; so long before Jan Boner, indeed, even before King Kazimierz Jagiellonowicz, the family of the Boners must have come to us. Perhaps some will say that these men, Mikolaj, Lukasz, and Blessed Izajasz were not of the house of Boner but were Bochnars of Starykon arms; but after all, Dryacki expressly states that he had long since seen on Izajasz’s grave this Boner coat of arms serving as a reminder to his countrymen of his relations: and for that purpose I, too, will give a summary of his life.

The Blessed Izajasz Boner, whose father was Floryan Boner and whose mother was Bronislawa z Brzezia Lanckoronska, Zadora arms, Hieronim’s daughter, was born in Krakow on Grodzka street in 1380, and was christened Amborzy; when he’d grown up he was handed over for education, in 1395, to the academy that at that time was still in Kazimierz near Krakow, founded by the Polish king Kazimierz the Great. There he soon progressed so that after the academy was moved from Kazimierz to Krakow, he received the baccalaureate and master’s degrees, as is shown by the register Artisticae facultatis of 1406, see Dryacki. What is incomprehensible is that he was supposed to have been declared a doctor of theology at the Krakow academy in that year, but according to our historians it was long after that year that the teaching of theology was first permitted at that academy; on this score Clusius says that that degree was conferred not at the academy but at the Augustinian monastery near Krakow, in which all those higher studies were flourishing at the time. He conversed intimately with those fathers and frequented their sermons and conversations; once at St. Katarzyna’s Church he listened to a preacher preach earnestly and condemn the world and its vanity, and he took his words to heart and took the habit of the order of Hermits of St. Augustine at the hands of the pious Jan, Swietokrzyski abbot, and chose the name of that monastery’s prior, Izajasz, for his new life. He immediately began to train himself in the various virtues and soon became the image of excellence and an example to others. He liked nothing more than to think and talk about the blessed eternity and heavenly praise, and that he found this very much to his taste while still here on earth is attested by what his fellow monks heard, when during prayer they saw Izajasz elevated above the earth and enraptured, accompanied by some extraordinary melody (evidently angelic) of astonishing joy and harmony, singing particularly the hymn “Ave Regina Caelorum, Mater Regis Angelorum” (“Hail, Queen of Heaven, Mother of King of Angels”), and the holy man sang along with it: for he had a special regard for the Blessed Mother, so that most often he was in prayer before her image; which, copied at his expense, God later made famous with many graces, so that many a time during his services there running late into the night, when sleep overcame him he would throw himself to the ground, and it was more a matter of sleep’s deceiving him than of his actually going to sleep, because soon he would return once more to his delights with God. His humility was singular: because of it, when his elders reprimanded him for some small and rather innocent defect, he would fall to their feet, kiss them, and beg forgiveness. For this reason while he was still in the Novitiate he considered himself so base that he judged himself unworthy of the order’s habit and worthless to the order; and later, when he was already well on in years and highly regarded by all, he gratefully accepted the lowest services and duties with his extraordinary contentment, lovingly serving his fellow monks in their illnesses, visiting the hospital and huts of the poor, comforting the needy, confirming them in better hope in God, and encouraging them to have patience; and since he found he did not have enough time for prayer and reading books, he would give only four hours for sleep, from eight to twelve. He afflicted his body not only with lack of sleep, but also drew blood from cuts with harsh discipline, pressed his body with iron bars, tormented himself with a hair-shirt, and weakened himself with fasts, eating practically nothing on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays, sharing his portion with the needy at the monastery’s fort. In heavy frosts he walked to church with bare feet; that he might keep the mortification of his body secret before human eyes, he did wear shoes, but with the bottoms cut out. Dressed this way, he visited the graves of St. Stanislaw the Bishop and Blessed Salomea and other Polish patron saints on foot, and his feet, whether cut by stones, by frost, or by other sharp objects, would be splattered with blood. He repaid his enemies’ hatred for him with love, failing before them and begging forgiveness for his offenses. He withstood all unpleasantness with an unconquered heart: the tongues of those attacking his teaching and holy actions, the stinging mockeries of his deeds, the criticisms of the envious, the calumnies of the malicious, none of this could shake him from his pious undertakings connected with God. Having ceaselessly exercized himself in these virtues, he was stricken by a fatal disease, during which the Most Blessed Virgin appeared to him with the baby Jesus in her arms, surrounded by St. Stanislaw the Bishop and Jacek and Kazimierz (thus all those who wrote of his life say, although it wasn’t until twenty years later that St. Kazimierz passed over to heavenly praise, that is, in 1483, whereas this happened in 1471 or 1461, according to Dryacki – when St. Kazimierz had barely been born), Jadwiga, Salomea, and Kinga, and she summoned him to heaven, saying (I include here the words from Rev. Nadasy), Serve mi dilecte paratus jam esto, possidere regnum Dei, ab initio mundi a Deo omnibus Sanctis praeparatum [My dear servant, be now ready to possess the kingdom of God prepared by God from the beginning of the world for all Saints]; and rejoicing at this, Blessed Izajasz ended his life joyfully and in sanctity in 147 1, at the age of 90, on 8 February; whatever others may have written, I am following the inscription that was copied from his gravestone, in short, Obiit Venerabilis Pater Isajas Sacrae Theologiae Professor anno 1471 [The Venerable Father Izajasz, professor of holy Theology, died in the year 1471]. An image was placed on his grave, and it holds in its hands the sentence: Tempus breve, judicium difficile [Time is short, judgement difficult]. Joined with his life’s great sanctity was knowledge in no way inferior: it was evident at the Council of Konstanz, when with ten other doctors of the same order he thoroughly disproved the erros of the Hussites; he did the same thing in Prague. It is also evident to this day in some of his writings: for he wrote four books in Magistrum Sententiarum, in which both the turn of his humor and an uncommon skill stand out. But his Commentaria was destroyed by fire after his death, on Holy Trinity Sunday, 1556, when the Krakow monastery of the Augustine Fathers burned unexpectedly; so was his biography, which one of those who knew him and lived with him had written at length shortly after his death: there are only those that I have cited here, who later wrote about him to praise this blessed man, i.e., Martinus Baronius Clericus anno 1610. Nakielski in Miechovia fol. 265. Fridericus Szembek Soc. J. Philippus Alegambe Soc. J. Bollandus in Actis SS. tomo 2. and 8. Febr. Bzovius in Annal. tomo 18. num. 34. Pruszcz Forteca Duchowna fol. 144. Augustinus Clusius anno 1610, and finally, Fulgentius Dryacki Ord. S. August. God made famous the piety of his life with great wonders, for while he was yet alive he raised two from the dead, of whom the authors cited mention one: that one time when Blessed Izajasz was praying before the image of the Blessed Mother, the body of one Stanislaw by name, a citizen of Kazimierz, was being brought into that church, accompanied by the great sorrow of his relatives, who bewailed the loss of the deceased; the holy man cried out to the Blessed Mother, Monstra te esse Matrem [ Show that you are the Mother], and he took the corpse’s hand and raised him and handed him over, alive. You will find the other one in the life of Blessed Stanislaw Kazimirczyk. I read of as many raised by his merit after his death. In addition some to this day still regain their sight, others their health after malignant fevers, and yet others different graces at this man’s grave, as is attested by the votive Masses in thanks for these blessings, to which I refer writers on his life. His body was raised from the earth with the consent of Pope Urban VIII in 1633 by commissioners appointed for the task by the bishop of Krakow and awaits further honors and respects from the apostolic See, and more than a few have beheld in wonder an extraordinary brightness at his grave.

Jan Boner came from Helvetia and stayed in Krakow for a time, then brought his brothers Jakob, Fryderyk, and Jedrzej after him; having soon acquired hereditary estates in Krakow district, especially at Ogrodzieniec and elsewhere, from Wlodek, Bochnia cupbearer, (Dryacki) he gained even more favor with his services to Zygmunt I and was made by him burgrave and inspector of the Krakow salt-works. His lord’s regard brought much envy upon him, but Boner’s intelligence remained wholly unaffected by this and he paid off all the royal estates, loaded as they were with large debts, out of his own pocket. Thus he redeemed bronze [spiz; or could this mean Spisz?] for 12,000 red zlotys from Jordan z Zakliczyna; Oswiecim and Ruskie salt-works for 14,000 red zlotys from Pawel czarny, a citizen of Krakow; and Nieszawa for 10,000 from Stanislaw Koscielecki. He released the stroz rybitwa, mills and butchers’ stalls and other incomes settled on Krakow’s governor for 12,000; the Olkusz olbora, i.e., the ore tithe, for 5,000 from Seweryn Betman; and he released from various hands. Sieradz for 5,000; Gostynin for 2,300 zlotys; Radom for 3,000; Sochaczow for 7,000; Piotrkow for 1,200; Drohobycz for 5,000; Rabsztyn for 1,500; Rytter castle for 1,000; the Lublin customs-duty for 1,400; Czluchow for 4,000; Tuchola for 11,000; Sadecz for 4,000; Inowroclaw for 5,000; and Torun bridge-tolls and customs-duty for 10,000. He paid all services for the entire royal court, unpaid for many years, for which he spent some 200,000 zlotys. In addition he redid at great cost Krakow castle, which was almost in ruins, especially the west side, and later all the walls. Bielski fol. 507. Pastor. in Floro Polon. Cromer.

The works of these Boners are remembered to this day, for they restored the Bochnia and Wieliczka salt mines to good condition, at no small expense to themselves, and from their name to this day comes the name szyba Bonerowska. They also undertook the adornment of a number of churches; thus the altar of St. Stanisl~aw na Skalce stands wholly gilded at their expense, as is evident from the arms placed on it in commemoration. But later, as the descendants of this house rose to greater and greater honors and wealth, they abandoned the true faith and were infected by the Lutheran heresy, in which they died, and so the whole family declined. The information given by Blessed Izajasz Boner’s biographer, that the Nowina or Zlotogolenczyk arms were granted to Mikolaj Boner at the Hrodelski sejm (Dryacki in Vita B. Boner), should not be ascribed to these Boners in any case, for the reason mentioned above.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Spring& Fall 1988 issues of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


On a blue field is a white Unicorn, like a horse, its forelegs raised as if it has been driven toward the right side of the shield, and on its head is a tapering horn: on the helm and the crown is half of a unicorn like the one on the shield. Okolski gives the field of the Boncza arms as red, and others portray the Unicorn with its head directed to the left of the shield. Paprocki w Gniazdzie fol. 79 o herb. fol. 476. Bielski fol. 77. Okolski tom. 1. fol. 62. Liber Klejn. There are a number of houses in Italy, France, Germany, Britain, and Silesia that feature a Unicorn thus in their coats of arms; for them refer to Petrasancta cap. 54.

The question of whether Unicorns exist in this world is a common one among authorities. Plinius, Aelianus, Solinus, Pol~yhist. cap. 5. S. Izydor, among others, say they do. They describe them in the following fashion: a beast like a horse, not only in form but also in size, but with a neck conforming more to that of a deer; on his forehead a single horn grows, two or three cubits long; he has a tail like a boar’s, legs like an elephant’s, but he runs faster than an elephant. From this description of Unicorns grew the following aenigma: Cervum fronte refert, Elephantum sed pede, cauda aprum, voce bovem, corpore prodit equum [riddle: his front recalls the deer, but his feet the elephant, his tail the boar, his voice the cow, and his body reveals the horse]. These authors also add that no one can catch a mature one alive, but it is possible to catch its young offspring, and so they use the following ruse to entrap one. They place a finely dressed girl before him, and having seen her, he forgets his natural wildness, becomes gentle as a lamb, and will play with her until sleep overcomes him; and only then do the lurking hunters fall on him and cut off his horn: from which the symbolist wrote of him: Virgineo mansuescit amore [He is tamed by a maiden’s love]. And this horn of his is a proven medicine for all poisons, for when it is put into water contaminated with poisonous reptiles’ venom, it makes the water whole at once: because of which property you will find no lord’s storehouse where unicorns’ horns are not either displayed as an extraordinary gift or richly framed in gold, in accordance with the irrefutable opinion that they are true unicorn’s booty.

On the other hand Gregory the Great lib. 31. Moral. c. 13. Tertullian. lib. 2. contra Idol. cap. 10. Origenes, Andreas Marinus, Kircher in mundo subterraneo lib. 8. fol. 66. Szentivani in Curios. Miscell. part. 1. dissert. 10 all consider the animal described above to be a complete fabrication. These authors do not in the least deny that there are found in the world Rinocerotes or Nosoroqzce (although St. Jerome translates Rem from the Hebrew as “one,” so that Jednoroqziec or Monocerotes [unicorn] is the same as Nosoroqziec [nose-horn]), such as the ones displayed as spectacles in Roman amphitheaters, that is, an animal like the bull in size but a little longer, in shape like a boar, with one horn not over-long and growing not out of its forehead but on its nostrils. They also admit that there are single-horned Indian asses on which a horn grows from the forehead, a horn broader at the root and somewhat twisted in a cirle. They also admit concerning wild goats in India that they have a single horn growing on their head, but more than four spans long. No one has ever seen the Unicorn described above, and so they rightly regard it as a fabrication.

But inasmuch as unicorn horns are displayed and presented as genuine in many places — e. g., one five cubits long in Paris in the church of St. Dionysius; in Argentorato, one about as large as the size of a fair-sized man; in St. Mark’s in Venice, and elsewhere — our Rev. Kircher concludes with considerable reason that they are not true unicorn horns but the horns of fish, with which nature armed them against the Whales found in icy seas, with this property, that once such a horn has been put into spring water, when someone drinks of it, it not only disposes of poison but also heals other paroxysms. There are other horns similar in kind that often grow in this world (Kircher and Szentywani tell of them) through the unfathomable workings of nature. I refer the reader to those authors, but for me it suffices to mention them.

No one has written on the origins of these arms, they only agree that they were brought here to our country from Italy immediately after the origins of the Christian faith in Poland. According to some the arms arrived with Klemens, bishop of Kruswica or Kujawy. He came to that capital in 994 (after Lucydus, the place’s first bishop), confirmed by Pope Benedykt VII, and his body lies buried in Smogorzewo: thus writes Paprocki, citing Dlugosz, but erroneously. For Dlugosz says that in 1005 this Klemens replaced the late Urban at the see of Wroclaw in Silesia, not Kruswica, and died in 1027; and Damalewicz, who traced the thread of all Kruswica or Kujawy bishops from their beginnings to his own times, made no mention of Klemens. In addition, inasmuch as Paprocki says he was buried in Smogorzewo, that means that he was bishop of Smogorzewo, or, as they now call it, of Wroclaw in Silesia (since the first bishops of that place were buried there), not of Wloclawek or Kruswica. According to Dlugosz, he occupied that see for twelve years, but Glinka in his “Unicorn” asserts that this Klemens was sent by Pope Benedict VII to the Polish prince Mieczyslaw to draw him away from idolatry and polygamy and incline him toward the Christian faith. That same Mieczyslaw used him in the delegation to the Czech prince to request marriage to Dabrowka: he occupied the see for 34 years (he says) and allegedly lived 115 years; what’s more, at that age there wasn’t a gray hair on him; he fed twelve of the needy at his own table. But Glinka describes all these events of so long ago without citing a single author, and in fact differs from other historians, so his tale seems suspect.

Others allege that in 998 there came from Italy with Prokulf, bishop of Krakow, an estimable man named Mierzb who bore these arms (but Mierzb is hardly an Italian word, and that makes this story suspicious), who was gratefully received by Mieczyslaw, monarch of Poland, and provided with estates; and when his brother Klemens assumed the episcopate of Kruswica, he founded a village near Kozlowski estate in Mazovia, not far from Czerwieqnsk, and called it Boncza: who to this day, as Paprocki says, are heirs of those estates. There is a Boncza village in Chelm region, but it seems to me that it was later entitled from the Sienickis to these arms and to the owners of these estates. As for the name Boncza, Okolski and Rev. Rutka conjecture that by rights the name of this “Mierzb” was Boniface, which in the Polish of the day meant the same as Boncza, and so arms, estates, and he were all named Boncza. MS. Rozrazew. says this family was called Bontempo in Italian, i. e., “good time,” and from this the name was turned into Boncza in Polish. Paprocki mentions two sons of Mierzb under the year 1061. Lambert Zula, bishop of Krakow, elevated both Mikolaj and Bogusz, who signed their names as z Wscieklic, to the Krakow canon, along with St. Stanislaw the Martyr. One author adds that both these brothers were born on the same day and died on the same day. As for this Mikolaj z Wscieklic of arms Boncza, Starowolski in Vitis Episcop. Cracovien. mentions, after Dlugosz, that he was made a canon by Lambert. Bogusz z Ziemblic belongs to the Polkozices. Paprocki later dates Boguslaw z Wscieklic in the year 1100 from a grant of privilege. Jan Schedeland — or, as others write his name, Szotlant — bishop of Chelmno, used the Boncza arms, as I discussed under the bishops of Chelmno.

Bearers of these Arms

____ Bartoszewski, Bial~obrzeski, Boniecki, Braciejowski, Brzeski, Brzostowski, Bukowski, Bystrzycki, ____ Charle~ski, Chmielecki, Chome~towski, Chros~ciejowski, ____ Fredro, ____ Gasparski, Gozimirski, Gulin~ski, Iz~ycki, ____ Kargowski, Klonowski, Krakowiecki, Krzewski, Kulwin~ski, Kunicki, ____ Lissowski, ____ Moraniecki, ____ Niedabylski, ____ Osmolski, ____ Pioro, Pokrzywnicki, Postruski, ____ Radawiecki, Romanowski, Rutkowski, Rybczewski, ____ Sienicki, Skoczewski, Skorowski, Socha, Solikowski, Srzebiecki, Strzeszkowski, Szerzen~ski, ____ Tomaszowski, Turoboski, ____ Uzdowski, ____ Was~niewski, Wilga, ____ Z|ol~kiewski

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1988 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


A true Lubicz, i. e., it should have a white Horseshoe, its ends turned downward, with two crosses, one above the horseshoe, the other inside it, but below this is added a yellow half-moon encompassing the horseshoe, edges pointed upward, on a blue field, with three ostrich feathers on the helm. Bielski, fol. 134. Paprocki o herbach, fol. 345. In Stromat. Okolski tomo 1. fol. 67. From the similarity of these arms to those of Lubicz, all conclude that one of the Lubicz clan earned them on the following occasion. When spies warned him in the dead of night of nearby enemies, he attacked them so safely that the passing night held no threat of danger. He fell upon the foe, soundly asleep, and mowed them down; and the rising moon helped him to this victory, so a Mazovian prince added it to his ancestral arms and named him “Bozawola.” Rev. Rutka derives from a certain manuscript the occasion of these arms’ bestowment in the days of the Polish prince Krakus, when the Commander fortunately led all his people across the frozen Danube to Moguncya [Mainz], for which he was awarded these arms.

Bearers of these Arms:

____ Gasecki, Gosciminski, ____ Jemielicki, ____ Komorowski, ____ Ostrowice, ____ Reymunt, Rzeczkowski

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1989 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.

Top of Page


A white cross, on the ends of which are four black lilies, i. e., one positioned on each arm: on the helm are peacock feathers, and on them is a cross like that on the shield. These arms were awarded in 1442 by Wladyslaw, King of Poland and Hungary, to Jerzy Szwarc or Czarny, Councilman and Townsman of Krakow, but other Szwarces admitted to Nowina arms flourish in Poland to this day as Czernys.

Translated by William F. Hoffman; first appeared in the Fall 1989 issue of “Polish Genealogical Society Newsletter”.