sign in sign up
<<
Home , Albany Herald, Armiger, Cadency, Coat of arms, Crown (heraldry), Don Pottinger

IN THE SCA A Menu of Options in and Marshaling

by Galen of Bristol, Eighth von Drachenwald, of the SCA, Master of the , of the Court, of Ansteorra

Presented at the Ansteorran Heraldic & Scribal Symposium, August 2nd, 2014, A.S. XLIX

Heraldry was born with one essential purpose: as a tool for deciding whether not to kill the person you meet on the of battle. Thus the need for simple, distinctive, and brightly-colored images on shields, and crests.

But as heraldry became more common in the 12th and 13th centuries, and on into the High , it also became a coveted privilege of the to inherit coats of arms and to use heraldry to illustrate relationships between bearers of these coats. It is the purpose of this paper to offer information and suggestions that will be useful for illustrating relationships between married couples in the SCA and for their sons and daughters.

In the Middle Ages, people lived in a culture that had included their parents and grandparents before them, and their children and grandchildren after them.

In the SCA, few of us had parents who were in the SCA, from whom we might inherit coats of arms. Likewise, while many of us have children, it is hardly uncommon for grown children of SCA members to opt for other forms of recreation than spending their weekends at tourneys and feasts. Thus, there is an entire area of heraldry that was common in period, which is barely touched upon in the SCA.

In what will quickly become clear (and as I have tried emphasize in the subtitle of this paper with the words “Menu of Options”), there is not a Single Right Way to use heraldry to depict the relationships between husbands and wives, and among sons and daughters. Thus, we will be exploring different options, and discussing the implications of each.

This paper is the result of my own poor research into the this topic, and should be taken as a starting place, not a final authority, for you own investigation into these topics. I’m sure that, as I will learn more about how period used heraldry to illustrate their relationships, I will want to extend and modify this paper.

THE FIRST OPTION In the SCA, any individual has the right to register and display armory unique to himself, without regard to his sex, age, or parentage. Probably the vast majority have this right by virtue of a specific of Arms, granted by the of their Kingdom most often in recognition of some sort of service to the SCA. But in addition, this privilege is extended by courtesy and tradition to every participant in SCA activities. Those not specifically honored by with an Award, Grant, or Patent of Arms can still register their own unique armory. The registration of devices by SCA participants who have not been awarded arms by the Crown has long been cheerfully encouraged by the and by all over the known world.

So, in every case, a wife, a son, or a daughter has the right to register their own unique armory without regard to that carried by any other member of the family. This remains, by far, the most common practice in SCA families.

Arms of Deaton Claymore Arms of Deaton’s son, Duke Morgan of the Oaks

(Image source: Kingdom of Atenveldt of Precedence, http://m.atenveldt.org/FullOP)

HERALDIC HEIRS In the SCA, anyone with registered armory can designate, simply by submitting a letter to the ’s office, someone to inherit their armory when they die. This person is called an “heraldic heir.” For the purposes of this paper, wherever I refer to eldest sons and how to identify them, I believe it would be appropriate for SCA heraldic heirs to avail themselves of those prerogatives.

FIRST SONS and Labels Traditionally, sons may display their father’s arms with some sort of change to it. This is called “differencing”. The best-known method of differencing among SCA members is probably the use of “marks of cadency”, and easily the most-used of these is the well-known “” of an eldest son.

The label of three points is used with a father’s to identify the eldest son of that father, during the father’s lifetime. In choosing this option for SCA use, be sure to select for the label a with sufficient contrast from the original coat of arms.

This method would be appropriate to use for the heraldic heir of any living . If a woman were to designate an heraldic heir, her heir could likewise display her arms in this fashion during her life.

At his death, the son removes the label and inherits the undifferenced coat.

In the SCA, it is not uncommon to see children bearing their parents’ arms differenced in this manner. Less common is to see adults whose parents are in the SCA continue to display their parents’ arms differenced by a label, but there are ready examples:

l to r: Lord Ambergate Zane ap Simonn, and his father, Simonn of Amber Isle, at Gulf Wars in A.S. XLVII. (Photo courtesy of Countess Tessa)

Arms of Duke Paul of Bellatrix Arms of Paul’s eldest son, Duke Stephen of Bellatrix

(image source: The History of the Kingdom of the West website, http://history.westkingdom.org/)

Less well known in the SCA is the label of five traditionally used by a grandson. The eldest son of an eldest son, during the lifetime of his father and grandfather, may display the grandfather’s arms differenced with a label of five points. In exceptionally long lived cases, a great-grandson (eldest son of an eldest son of an eldest son) would display the great-grandfather’s arms with a label of seven points.

Shield of Lord Wilhelm von Bellatrix, son of Duke Stephen of Bellatrix, grandson of Duke Paul of Bellatrix. (photo courtesy of Lord Wilhelm) YOUNGER SONS and Cadency In , a system of standard marks of cadency was adopted by the Tudor period, in which a different mark of cadency would be added to the father’s arms to indicate a second, third, fourth, fifth, etc., son.

I had this system in mind when I created shields for my children for boffer combat:

(Photo by the author.)

The decision of exactly where to place the mark of cadency, and what tincture to make it, are wholly matters of artistic discretion. These marks of cadency are then inherited by the children of these younger sons.

The primary advantage of this system is that it’s easy to see where each child belongs in the of succession. The primary disadvantage is that a second son may end up with the same differenced arms as his elder brother’s second son.

But there are more options.

Prior to the adoption in England of standardized marks of cadency, younger sons would simply make some minor change to their father’s arms. They might change the tincture of the field or of a group of charges, or else add charges. You couldn’t just look at a shield and know where the bearer fell in line with his brothers, but you could generally see a heraldic “resemblance”, just as when you look at faces and see a family resemblance.

In its normal work of discerning whether new heraldic submissions are sufficiently different from existing armory, the SCA’s College of Arms is explicitly looking at differences that are greater than simply cadency differences. Therefore, for your children to be able to submit a cadenced version of your armory, a letter from you granting permission to conflict will generally be needed along with the submission.

My own second son chose to follow this tradition in submitting his own armory to the SCA:

Armory registered to Matthias of Kirkwall, my second son. (Image by the author.)

Duke Paul’s second son, Viscount Brion of Bellatrix employed the traditionally associated with a second son, but his changes go beyond mere cadency, to a distinct coat of arms, while still maintaining visual references to his father’s arms.

Arms of Viscount Brion of Bellatrix, Duke Paul’s second son. (image source: The History of the Kingdom of the West website, http://history.westkingdom.org/)

FATHERS, HUSBANDS, WIVES AND DAUGHTERS Traditional heraldic practice is strongly influenced by medieval European culture. This can sometimes be confusing for 21st century English-speaking westerners who haven’t made a study of the difference between medieval and modern western culture. While an in-depth discussion of this topic is far outside the scope of this paper, a brief quotation might serve to illustrate this point. Benjamin Franklin, writing for an English audience, wrote: “Much less is it adviseable for a Person to go thither [to America], who has no other Quality to recommend him but his Birth. In Europe it has indeed its Value; but it is a Commodity that cannot be carried to a worse Market than that of America, where people do not inquire concerning a Stranger, What is he? but, What can he do?” [BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, "Information to Those Who Would Remove to America"]

In medieval Europe, the first questions asked about a woman were not “what is she” (to use Franklin’s formulation), but “who is her father?” or, “who is her husband?” As irritating as this may sound to modern American ears, let’s spend a moment on this.

In period, most women who bore arms did not inherit them. An undifferenced coat of arms was inherited according to the rule of primogeniture, and so, among females, only an oldest daughter with no brothers would inherit her father’s coat. Marks of cadency were not used for daughters, to delineate which was the elder. An unmarried daughter would simply display her father’s arms, without marks of difference or cadency. In traditional heraldic display, this display was done on a diamond shape called a . (In Ansteorra, where the herald’s office registers achievements of arms, a lozenge is a registerable option for a woman to display her arms as part of her .)

When the woman married, she would display her father’s arms together with her husband’s on a shield shape, her father’s arms on the sinister side of the shield, and her husband’s on the dexter side. Displaying the husband’s and wife’s arms together is known as “marshaling.” This method of marshaling is called “impaling.” This sort of display very quickly identifies a woman by reference to her father and her husband. Also implied is that her children will not inherit any right to her father’s arms through her.

Arms of Viscount Galen of Bristol impaled with those of his wife, Baroness Alessandra Beatrice Desiderio. (Image by the author).

But it did happen in period that some women, lacking any brother or older sister, did inherit their father’s arms. They are referred to as heraldic heiresses. When a heraldic heiress married, she would display her arms marshaled with her husband’s on a shield shape called an “ of pretense”. That is, her husband’s arms would fill the shield, but then a smaller shield displaying her inherited arms would be placed overall. As with impaling, this sort of display very quickly identifies a woman by reference to her father and her husband. But the implication here is that she also probably has some title or land in her own right, and an inheritance that can be passed on to her children.

Arms of Alessandra displayed on an escutcheon of pretense with those of her husband. (Detail from a sketch by the author.)

In the SCA, it is very common for a woman to arms in her own right, most often by a formal Award of Arms from the Crown. It is therefore quite appropriate in virtually all cases for her to display her arms on a shield shape, and if she wishes to marshal her arms with those of her husband, to do so on an escutcheon of pretense.

Alternately, if a married woman preferred to impale her arms with those of her husband, either for persona, aesthetic, or other reasons, and is comfortable with the implications that attend that form of display, I would think that appropriate as well.

Likewise, an unmarried woman who wished to imply that she was displaying her father’s arms as his daughter might opt to display her arms on a lozenge rather than on a shield shape.

In actual SCA practice, I have only very rarely observed married couples marshalling their arms for display. It’s my opinion that it’s a practice that warrants increased use. It would be visually attractive, not to mention being downright romantic.

Please note, I am not talking about registering marshaled coats of arms, but rather taking two coats that are separately registered and displaying them in this manner.

MARSHALING INHERITED ARMS To people unfamiliar with heraldry (for example, most Americans), the mention of a coat of arms conjures up an image of a shield divided into four quarters, with two, three or even four different coats of arms in the different quarters. The royal arms of the sovereign of Great Britain, with England in the first and fourth quarters, in the second quarter, and in the third quarter, is a familiar example.

In the earlier section, we talked about marshaling arms by impaling and by an escutcheon of pretense. These are appropriate for combining the arms of wives and husbands.

Dividing the shield into quarters and placing different coats of arms in those quarters is appropriate for when you have a person who is the heraldic heir of two different armigers.

For example, an earlier illustration of the arms of Lord Ambergate Zane ap Simonn shows Lord Zane displaying his father’s arms differenced by a label of three. But as the sole surviving son of two armigers, Count Simonn and Countess Tessa, Lord Zane could have instead chosen to display the arms of both of his parents, which might look something like this:

Arms of Count Simonn quartered with those of Countess Tessa. Their son Lord Zane could choose this form as an option. (Image by the author.)

Now, purely for reasons of artistic simplicity, it’s easy to see why Zane doesn’t choose to do this. But it would be an option.

With more visually simple coats of arms, such an option might become more appealing. Here is an example of my lady’s and my arms quartered together, which might be appropriate if we both had the same heraldic heir.

Arms of Galen quartered with those of Alessandra, as might be used by their joint heraldic heir. (Image by the author.)

The SCA doesn’t presently register marshaled arms, even when they are rightfully inherited. But, in the future, as more children take up the heraldic legacy of their armigerous forebears, such a need may become more apparent.

In the meantime, it is easy to imagine SCA members adopting such practices in their heraldic display, to the great benefit of our events.

About the author The author of this paper is known in the Society for Creative Anachronism as Viscount Galen of Bristol, Knight of the Society, Master of the Pelican, Baron of the Court of Ansteorra, Lion of Ansteorra, Defender of the Dream. He has previously served as Halberd , Nautilus Pursuivant, Sea Moose Pursuivant, and Golden Staff Herald. He may be reached in care of Paul Mitchell, [email protected].

Sources Simple Heraldry, Cheerfully Illustrated, by Sir of that Ilk, BT., O.S.T.I., Ph.D., F.S.A., Advocate, of Arms and , O.S.T.I., M.A. (Hons). D.A., Pursuivant of Arms, Mayflower Books, New York, 1953, reprinted 1979. Uncaptioned illustrations are from this source.

A Complete Guide to Heraldry, by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, T.C. & E.C. , Edinburgh, 1909.

Armoria Familia, by Mike Oettle http://www.oocities.org/skuinsbalk/arms_family.html

Acknowledgements Baroness Alessandra Beatrice Desiderio Lord Richard Stewart of St. Andrews, Tressure Herald Duke Stephen of Bellatrix Countess Tessa of the Gardens Lord Wilhelm von Bellatrix HL Arabella de Montecute