Medal/Ribbon Bars in Cheif

 
David Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pope
Total Posts:  559
Joined  17-09-2010
 
 
 
07 April 2015 18:20
 

Kathy McClurg;103789 wrote:

Hi David,

I did start a separate thread on Headgear..


Thanks!

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
07 April 2015 23:32
 

Joseph McMillan wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse, but this irritates me more every time I think about it.

Is this person ...going to propose to the French a red chief instead of the Legion of Honor below the shield, or to the British a sanguine chief instead of the VC below the shield?


Hey, let’s be fair.  Maybe the Brits and French will see the wisdom of reddish chiefs and post-validate the artwork - heraldic version of subsequent marriage legitimating earlier indiscretions; in the meantime let’s remain sanguine, or at least take two aspirin to keep the blood pressure in check smile

 
Kathy McClurg
 
Avatar
 
 
Kathy McClurg
Total Posts:  1274
Joined  13-03-2009
 
 
 
08 April 2015 05:49
 

Joseph McMillan;103786 wrote:

Not to beat a dead horse, but this irritates me more every time I think about it.

Given that there is an established way, recognized internationally, of displaying orders and decorations with arms, isn’t the suggestion that the US should do it differently an implication that our decorations are somehow different from other countries’ decorations?  And if different, then better?  Or worse?  Is this person—oh, the hell with it, is she—going to propose to the French a red chief instead of the Legion of Honor below the shield, or to the British a sanguine chief instead of the VC below the shield?


Have to admit, the latest offering appears to include some award for firefighting.. and some commentary about how she doesn’t like digital art because heraldry is a medieval art form.. but.. yet.. does one not see the irony since she’s throwing heraldic conventions out the window to produce this new "American" framework.

 

Anyway, I’m really more interested in the.. thoughts.. on the innovation than the individual producing them.

 
mghofer
 
Avatar
 
 
mghofer
Total Posts:  46
Joined  14-09-2014
 
 
 
11 April 2015 00:05
 

I am not keen on the idea for the reasons already stated and for at least one more. As repeating the previous ones is a waste of time, I will confine my post the the new one.

What award would be significant enough to add a complex (most award ribbons are not simple)? Who would get to decide? Multiple of the same award would be even more complicated (Silver Star, one "V" for valor and two oak leaf clusters; easy to blazon, but would dominate the arms even more).

 

The more I scratch at this concept, the less I like it.

 
Kathy McClurg
 
Avatar
 
 
Kathy McClurg
Total Posts:  1274
Joined  13-03-2009
 
 
 
11 April 2015 20:27
 

mghofer;103920 wrote:

Multiple of the same award would be even more complicated (Silver Star, one "V" for valor and two oak leaf clusters; easy to blazon, but would dominate the arms even more).

The more I scratch at this concept, the less I like it.


I’ve already seen one in progress with two oak leaf clusters.. And now we are adding some kind of fireman award to the list of silly chief innovations.

 

If I haven’t been clear already,  I absolutely hate this stupid, disrespectful "innovation" - it is ugly, opens a wide potential for "stolen valor" (purposeful or not), is disrespectful of countries where augmentations of honor are conveyed via canton or chief, is disrespectful of this country which has defined the show of medals, ribbons, etc and does not provide heraldic augmentations.

 

Any person claiming to have any knowledge of heraldry or heraldry in the United States putting designs like this out should refund the money of any of the uneducated clients duped into buying them.

 

As I stated much earlier, any self respecting registry of arms should refuse the registration as they would a registration of supporters, open faced helms, fake titles as not best practice in the United States.  There is no place in anywhere but the deepest corner of the bucket shop world for this "heraldry."  They should be accepted when the person provides the letter from the activity or position awarding the medal which provides the proper authority to use the ribbon bar as an augmentation of honor on their shield as approved by that heraldic authority.

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
11 April 2015 23:14
 

Strongly worded, but the overall negative reception for this innovation appears to represent a consensus with IIRC no dissents (apologies if I missed any.)

How often do we get unanimity?  smile

 
mjsmith
 
Avatar
 
 
mjsmith
Total Posts:  121
Joined  15-08-2012
 
 
 
12 April 2015 17:56
 

I have just returned from spending a week or so at Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri for my son’s graduation from his Military Police training.  It has been a while since I have been around my military brothers and sisters but I was reminded of just how much tradition and honor are revered in such places.

While I think innovation is a good thing as needed, the inclusion of military and police ribbons and medals incorporated into one’s arms cheapens both the honor bestowed upon the individual and the symbolic traditions of heraldry.  Allusions can be made but not outright placement thereof.  There are tasteful displays that can be done incorporating both but the thought of, for instance, a Medal of Honor recipient desiring to have the ribbon in chief on his arms flies in the face of the selflessness he displayed during the actions he performed for which the honor was earned.

 

I would daresay you would find the same sentiment from a fireman or police officer earning a similar honor.  In my opinion suggesting such a thing displays a distinct lack of service and understanding of these honors in the first place.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
12 April 2015 18:26
 

mjsmith;103979 wrote:

I have just returned from spending a week or so at Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri for my son’s graduation from his Military Police training. It has been a while since I have been around my military brothers and sisters but I was reminded of just how much tradition and honor are revered in such places.

While I think innovation is a good thing as needed, the inclusion of military and police ribbons and medals incorporated into one’s arms cheapens both the honor bestowed upon the individual and the symbolic traditions of heraldry. Allusions can be made but not outright placement thereof. There are tasteful displays that can be done incorporating both but the thought of, for instance, a Medal of Honor recipient desiring to have the ribbon in chief on his arms flies in the face of the selflessness he displayed during the actions he performed for which the honor was earned.

 

I would daresay you would find the same sentiment from a fireman or police officer earning a similar honor. In my opinion suggesting such a thing displays a distinct lack of service and understanding of these honors in the first place.


The whole notion of giving honors in a public form that can be worn implies the expectation that they will be displayed.  My problem isn’t with the recipient of a decoration displaying it heraldically.  It just belongs below the shield in accordance with long established custom, not on the shield where it forms part of the heritable elements of the arms.  The grandchildren didn’t win the Medal of Honor (no lectures on the verb please) and have no business displaying it on their arms, in the chief or anywhere else.

 
Guy Power
 
Avatar
 
 
Guy Power
Total Posts:  1576
Joined  05-01-2006
 
 
 
13 April 2015 12:09
 

mghofer;103920 wrote:

...(Silver Star, one "V" for valor and two oak leaf clusters; easy to blazon, but would dominate the arms even more).


Minor pedantic quibble here.  The Silver Star Medal never has a "V" device because the medal is awarded solely for valor, specifically for "gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force."

 

The Bronze Star Medal may be awarded with a "V" device; for the "V" to be worn, the award citation must state "for valor."  Award criteria are "...heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party…."

 

The "V" device may be awarded with the Distinguished Flying Cross and service Commendation medals (e.g., Army Commendation Medal with "V" device).

 

—Guy

 
mghofer
 
Avatar
 
 
mghofer
Total Posts:  46
Joined  14-09-2014
 
 
 
13 April 2015 17:49
 

Guy Power;104003 wrote:

Minor pedantic quibble here.  The Silver Star Medal never has a "V" device because the medal is awarded solely for valor, specifically for "gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force."

The Bronze Star Medal may be awarded with a "V" device; for the "V" to be worn, the award citation must state "for valor."  Award criteria are "...heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party…."

 

The "V" device may be awarded with the Distinguished Flying Cross and service Commendation medals (e.g., Army Commendation Medal with "V" device).

 

—Guy


Good point. A Bronze Star would have been a better example. Original point remains though.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
13 April 2015 20:42
 

If we had a heraldic authority, and if the proportion of Americans who use arms were large enough to make it meaningful, then I think it might be reasonable to allow augmentations for the arms of those formally honored with the Congressional Gold Medal. I suggest that only because the level of achievement typically recognized by the CGM most closely resembles that for which augmentations of honor have been granted by British monarchs.

But it would still have the effect of creating an officially recognized hereditary honor, which is inconsistent with American mores even though not expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

 

Without a heraldic authority, people would be left to create augmentations for themselves, which is like awarding oneself a decoration.