Thread View: rec.heraldry
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Jennifer Geard
Thu, 07 Jan 1993 02:10
Reforming "false armorye"
Author: Jennifer Geard
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 02:10
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 02:10
37 lines
2517 bytes
2517 bytes
Cast thy heraldry books about the house, and flatmates will point out useful
passages:
The official canon of Visitations, however, begins with the issue
of a Royal Commission by Henry VIII on 19 April 1530 for Thomas
Benolt, Clarenceux King of Arms. It was addressed to the
Sheriffs and other local authorities and directed them that
whereas Clarenceux intended "by waie of noblenes to visite amonge
other your armes and conysaunces and to reform the same yf yt be
necessarye and requisite and to reforme all false armorye and
armes devysed without auctoritie", they were to give him all
assistance in their power.
(Anthony R. Wagner _Historic Heraldry of Britain_ London: Oxford
University Press, 1948, p. 22.)
The term "false arms" had a specific meaning: "Armes that are called false
or falsefied, be either of colours alone, or of mettals alone" (John Ferne
_The Blazon of Gentrie_ London, 1586, p. 163.). I'm inclined to believe
that this usage is intended, since the sense of "improperly assumed armory"
is covered by "armes devysed without auctoritie".
I have a vision of Clarenceux (and buddies) on Visitation "correcting" all
examples of colour-on-colour or metal-on-metal armory that he could find
(along with all the other divers irregularities which HeraldryMan had a duty
to put right). The rules of Tudor heraldry were enforced retrospectively on
existing arms, and shaped all armory which followed.
Question: I live an awfully long way from the old English chapels with
heraldic escutcheons and such -- can anyone offer advice on how to find out
what (unreformed) medieval heraldry was actually like? I'm especially
interested in the "irregular" armory which (if it existed) was likely to have
been suppressed in "heraldic" sources. I haven't yet started looking at
early Rolls of Arms (they're hard to get here -- any good facsimiles
around?).
________________________________________________________________________
Jennifer Geard bloodthorn@sloth.equinox.gen.nz
Christchurch, New Zealand
Re: Reforming "false armorye"
Author: Mark Schuldenfrei
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 14:23
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 14:23
26 lines
1698 bytes
1698 bytes
Jennifer Geard writes: [ A nice quotation about an heraldic visitation deleted -- schuldy ] The term "false arms" had a specific meaning: "Armes that are called false or falsefied, be either of colours alone, or of mettals alone" (John Ferne _The Blazon of Gentrie_ London, 1586, p. 163.). I'm inclined to believe that this usage is intended, since the sense of "improperly assumed armory" is covered by "armes devysed without auctoritie". I don't normally have my heraldry books at work, but I do, and had just looked at the entry under "false heraldry". According to Franklyn's _Shield_and_Crest_, in the glossary, he defined false heraldry as follows: False Heraldry: metal on metal, tincture on tincture. There is a widely entertained belief that the term refers to arms of assumption. This arises thrm the misreading of a work, _Blason_de_Couleurs_ by 'Sicily Herald' (Jean de Courtais - ob. 1435), who employs the term in relation to assumed arms, not because they are unofficial, but because home-made arms frequently err in the inclusion of 'false heraldry'. (page 458) schuldy (Tibor in the SCA) -- Mark Schuldenfrei (schuldy@progress.com) [I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift]
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads