Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 14:31:17 GMT -6
Azul, Fellow Talossans - In response to a request by King John, your humble Squirrel King is posting here the (somewhat edited and greatly condensed) discussion that the Fellows of the College have been conducting around the water cooler in the third floor lounge. Some may think that all the Fellow of the Royal Taloosan College of Arms do is wear funny hats and strange capes, and speak pompously about arcane terms and obscure precedents. Well, we do, but that's not the point. The point is that we are discussing an issue that will impact all citizens of Talossa. The King feels (and we agree) that it would be best to hold this debate in public. A QUICK RECAP OF THE PAST 1000 YEARSThe main purpose for a coat of arms was battlefield identification. Since very few women (that Joan d'Arc girl not withstanding) put on armor and mixed it up on the battlefield, women didn't get coats of arms in the old days. Later this was codified into law. Then the men all got in trouble. After sleeping on the couch for a few centuries, the guys gave up and the law changed. But it changed in different ways in different places. Everybody did it differently. Add to it the challenge of what to do for rich girls with no kid brothers, and widows getting married again and again, and it got very confusing. Even today, there's no guarantee that the Fellows of the College could get it right, but none of them want to sleep on the couch. So we're trying. SO WHAT DID THE GARTER KING OF ARMS, THE CLARENCEUX KING OF ARMS AND THE NORROY AND ULSTER KING OF ARMS SAY ABOUT THIS IN 1997?A lot about the use of the lozenge and the cartouche. Go see.OKAY, BUT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR TALOSSA?It means that we aren't bound by any one tradition. It means we can work something out on our own. It means that we look on the female citizens of Talossa as valuable and equal partners in our national enterprise. It also means that, no matter how careful we are, somebody's going to be sleeping on the couch. WHY SHOULD I CARE?If you love your mother, you should care. If you have a daughter, you should care. If you happen to be married or dating, or just hopeful, or your son is married, dating or hopeful, you should care. Every citizen of Talossa, by the fact of his or her citizenship, is a Gentleman or Lady, and is held for all purposes to be "of gentle blood" and thus entitled to arms as a member of the Talossan gentry. ENOUGH WITH THE PREAMBLE. GET ON WITH IT!Oh, okay.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 14:37:22 GMT -6
On 4/21/07, the Columcille Pursuivant wrote: Fellow Collegians --
Knowing that we have a question before us on the proper heraldic rules for arms to be borne by female armigers in the Kingdom of Talossa, I wanted to present some observations and ideas to get the ball rolling:- In other nations, female armigers are awarded the arms of their father, emblazoned on a lozenge rather than an escutcheon. However, it seems that this rule is not followed in all cases, as for example, Elizabeth II holds arms emblazoned on an escutcheon.
- No differencing between armigers who are sisters are considered by these other nations.
- Given the nature of immigration to our Kingdom, and the fact that the ability to obtain a coat of arms from the royal hand is an important benefit of becoming a subject of His Majesty, it would seem to be proper to provide equal right to a coat of arms to all members of the gentry, which is formed by all members of the citizenry. Therefore, it would behoove us to consider allowing female citizens the ability to design arms to bear for their persons, independent of a mandate that their father be a Talossan armiger.
- Unless I have not properly perceived the attitude of the College, no member of the College is enamoured of the idea that female arms be differenced from male arms by the use of a lozenge, preferring to see if we can accomplish our purpose using the usual escutcheon.
Here are some thoughts:
1. Female citizens, either of whose parents are armigers, shall bear the arms of their father (or their mother should their father not be an armiger), differenced. 2. Said differencing might be done according to the same rules of difference followed for sons (that is, label for the eldest daughter, crescent for the second-eldest, etc.). 3. Further, all female armigers shall difference any inherited arms, or, failing this, shall ensure that their own original arms be differenced to indicate their gender by the inclusion of a lozenge overall, which may be rendered in any manner to preserve propriety of the arms.
In other words, I'm thinking that females can create their own arms just like males, and that one requirement of the arms for a female be a big diamond shape over the whole escutcheon. Might be a solid-coloured diamond, might be counterchanged, might be just the outline of it, whatever. What say the College? Shall we discuss and decide this matter?
Columcille After a score of e-mails and over 2000 words, the College did decide to discuss and decide this matter again. Note that this is the fourth time on record that the College has decide to discuss this topic. Somehow, we forgot to decide this topic. We're going to fix that this time.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 14:44:57 GMT -6
In reply to Columcille, the Bartleby Pursuivant wrote: I think lozenges or ovals (instead of escutcheons) for females would be interesting (it's good enough for Maggie Thatcher) but I don't feel strongly about it. It's hard for me to envision the lozenge overall idea.
The English cadency system is well-established in theory, but little used in practice, it seems. The home page of the English College of Arms says that a man's arms "pass equally to all his legitimate children, irrespective of their order of birth," and that cadency marks " *may* be used to identify the arms of brothers." In the long term, we need to decide whether we want Talossan heraldry to be more like that of Scotland, where each individual has a unique coat of arms, or Continental heraldry, which tends to link arms with families more than specific individuals. I think we should avoid clinging to closely to any one ( i.e. English) tradition.
The Canadian system of cadency has a separate set of brisures for daughters - heart, ermine spot, snowflake, fir twig, chess rook, escallop inverted, harp, buckle, claricord.
The Bartleby Pursuivant Then followed several messages about lozenges, and a wryly amusing trio of e-mails about the difference between ovals and ellipses. This drifted somewhat into a heated discussion over the merits of Ptolemaic verses Copernican geometry, and an argument over whether Newton invented calculus on his own or had help. In an effort to get the discussion back on track, the senior herald then waded into the fray.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 14:48:45 GMT -6
In reply to the message from Bartleby, The Squirrel King at Arms wrote: This is indeed a good topic to discuss, and to decide. We've kicked this idea around, but never come to a final decision.
Your Squirrel King has several thought that he asks you to consider: 1. Viva la difference! 2. Talossa never signed on to the Salic Law. 3. It is good to be the first born (unless you are in Egypt and a bunch of Hebrews are killing their sheep because they want to leave.)
Given #1, a lozenge, oval or cartouche might be the best way to go. I agree with His Majesty that a lozenge is a pain to use as differenced arms from a father.
In addition, our Kingdom has several peculiar circumstances that other nations do not have: 1. There's no guarantee that the oldest child will be the first to apply for citizenship. 2. There's no guarantee that the oldest child will be the first to petition for arms. 3. There's no guarantee that a father will be a citizen and will petition for arms before his children.
Given these last points, Bartleby's suggestion that each individual has a unique coat of arms makes sense. We can allow for differenced arms, and for marks of cadency like those borne by our favorite powder monkey, Iác'hdon Ronált Siervicül. These we can take on a case by case basis.
- Jaune Sabre Herald, Squirrel King at Arms That's when His Majesty jumped in, and in an attempt to keep the College heading in the right direction (a task not unlike herding cats), asked to have the debate publicized on Witt. And now it is.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 14:57:48 GMT -6
The Columcille Pursuivant replied to the Squirrel King thus: The cartouche is, to my eye, more manageable and attractive than the lozenge, and it probably provides a similar amount of working area (square inches, well, okay, square pixels) to the escutcheon. I would much prefer to see female arms developed on a cartouche than a lozenge. As to inheritance of arms, and the points that the Squirrel King made about our unique situation, I think we have already, unknowingly, created precedent. The Casalmac'hs present us with the first case of such an issue, but consider if Eugene Oh's older brother Spaghetti became a citizen. Would this mandate that armiger Eugene's arms be borne by Spaghetti, and that Eugene must difference the arms he has borne? And what if Eugene's sister Ravioli came aboard? Yes, it seems to this humble pursuivant that each new citizen coming into the nation probably creates for his or her own self a new, uninherited place in the gentry, despite the condition of any siblings. As such, they would be eligible each to create distinct and unique arms to be borne by their selves and their descendants. Female armigers, by this rule, would pass their arms to their offspring (recast onto an escutcheon in the case of males), providing the father was not a Talosan armiger. In the same way, female citizens whose father bears Talossan arms would cast the arms onto a cartouche. Wiser minds than mine in our college have a much better grasp of differencing for position of birth than I do. My two bence,
Columcille P.S. If we decide this way, I will be happy to create for the use of the College a blank "cartouche.gif" that we each can work from in our projects for female petitioners.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 15:15:40 GMT -6
Your humble Squirrel King inserts a note here to hopefully increase the understanding of his fellow citizens, with the realization that he is likely to cause more confusion: | This is an escutcheon. | | This is a lozenge. | | This is a cartouche. |
Comments welcome.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 15:36:34 GMT -6
Fellow citizens - Some fine examples of the use of the Cartouche in feminine heraldry can be seen on the Gallery of The Heraldry Society of Scotland. One example is below: Miss Kerry Rachael Donachie of Brockloch
Arms: Per Chevron grady Argent and Gules, in chief three roses of the second barbed Vert seeded Or and in base a Wolf's head erased of the first langued Azure.
Crest: A Demi Brock
Motto: Vi Virtute Et Honore
So - does this suggest that the Herald needs to add the phrase " En cartouche..." to the blazon?
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Apr 25, 2007 15:40:35 GMT -6
OK, here are some suggestion-ideas for rules we could follow — and please, y’all, take these simply as thoughts, as part of an ongoing discussion, and *not* as royal commands!
1. Any non-armigerous Talossan is eligible for, and should be able to receive a grant of arms.
2. Gentlemen always display their arms on a heater; armigerous ladies may use any shape they like, but are (mildly) encouraged to use a cartouche or lozenge.
3. Heraldic display by non-armigerous ladies
3a. An unmarried lady who is not armigerous, or a married lady whose husband is not armigerous, but whose father or mother is armigerous, may (“by courtesy”) display her father’s or mother’s arms undifferenced on a cartouche or lozenge. If both her father and her mother are armigerous, she should marshall their arms on a cartouche or lozenge, father to dexter.
3b. A non-armigerous married lady whose husband is armigerous may display his arms on a cartouche or lozenge. If her father is also armigerous, she may display her father’s and husband’s arms marshalled on a cartouche or lozenge. (Which way? Father to dexter?)
4. An armigerous gentleman whose wife is also armigerous may display either his own arms, or his arms marshalled with his wife’s (his own to dexter). If his wife is non-armigerous, but her father bears arms, he may, with his father-in-law’s permission, marshall his own arms with his father-in-law’s.
5. The sons of an armigerous gentleman may display their father’s arms suitably differenced, or (if their mother or their mother’s father is armigerous) may marshall their father’s arms with their mother’s or mother’s father. A son who is not his father’s heir may be granted those differenced arms in his own right.
6. The heir (gentleman or lady) of an armigerous gentleman bears his inherited arms by personal right, just as if they had been originally granted to him.
7. A daughter who is not the heir of her armigerous father, if she is granted arms in her own right, may be granted her father’s arms differenced, or may receive an entirely new award.
Not at all a complete solution, but steps in the right direction maybe?
— Blanc Wolf Herald as was
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Apr 25, 2007 15:44:41 GMT -6
The Squirrel King asks: So - does this suggest that the Herald needs to add the phrase "En cartouche..." to the blazon? I think not. I've never seen the shape of the shield blazoned. I would read "en cartouche" in a blazon as referring to a cartouche as a charge, as you might say "Argent upon a cartouche sable two mullets or" or something like that.
|
|
Trotxâ
Talossan since 10-17-2005; Knight since 11-5-2006
Deo duce, ferro comitante
Posts: 1,574
|
Post by Trotxâ on Apr 25, 2007 15:48:56 GMT -6
Blanc Wolf Emeritus -
Good to see you here again.
In Talossa, what is the legal and traditional definition of "heir"? * Oldest Child? * Oldest Son? * Defaults to one of the above, but can be changed by a will? * Or does it default to the State unless specifically outlined in a will?
Could one of the legal minds of the Kingdom enlighten us?
-- Jaune Sabre Herald, Squirrel King at Arms
|
|
Cjara B
Citizen since 5-3-2007
Citizen of Talossa, and now Florencia
Posts: 368
|
Post by Cjara B on Apr 30, 2007 23:24:40 GMT -6
Just a thought, as this is probably the first country to in all ways have equality between the sexes, Then maybe we could use a new shape? I don’t know if that would be a little over board or not, also I don’t really like the cartouche, I’m not sure what would be better, but it’s just a thought.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Apr 30, 2007 23:37:32 GMT -6
How do you feel about an Oval?
oh, wait...
That would also be a Cartouche.
My bad. I'm new here.
|
|
Cjara B
Citizen since 5-3-2007
Citizen of Talossa, and now Florencia
Posts: 368
|
Post by Cjara B on May 2, 2007 19:46:49 GMT -6
How about like an Emerald?
|
|
Cjara B
Citizen since 5-3-2007
Citizen of Talossa, and now Florencia
Posts: 368
|
Post by Cjara B on May 2, 2007 19:50:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on May 2, 2007 20:30:54 GMT -6
I am not a Peer of the College, so I hesitate to stick in my nose (a statement I am sure absolutely no one believes, and rightly so) but wouldn't the implementation of an alternative shape be contrary to the sought equality for women? Especially if it is an emerald, the shape of a jewel of decoration, as contrasted with the warrior-profile of the shield.
|
|