Augmentations in American Arms

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
13 April 2016 12:17
 

David Pope;105874 wrote:

It seems that at some point an augmentation (at least one which is on the shield and does not denote nobility) just becomes part of an American’s "base arms".


Not just at some point, but at the moment it is granted.  The whole notion of augmentations is that they become an integral part of the arms and are inherited by everyone to whom the arms descend.  Even if the honoree got both an augmentation and a peerage, the augmentation was carried on by all descendants (in the male line), the title (and coronet and supporters) only by the eldest son and his eldest son, etc.

 
David Pope
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pope
Total Posts:  559
Joined  17-09-2010
 
 
 
13 April 2016 12:29
 

Joseph McMillan;105877 wrote:

Not just at some point, but at the moment it is granted.  The whole notion of augmentations is that they become an integral part of the arms and are inherited by everyone to whom the arms descend.  Even if the honoree got both an augmentation and a peerage, the augmentation was carried on by all descendants (in the male line), the title (and coronet and supporters) only by the eldest son and his eldest son, etc.


That being the case, then any augmentation to the shield is an acceptable American augmentation?

 
Luis Cid
 
Avatar
 
 
Luis Cid
Total Posts:  163
Joined  03-09-2009
 
 
 
13 April 2016 13:06
 

David Pope;105878 wrote:

That being the case, then any augmentation to the shield is an acceptable American augmentation?


Yes, any augmentation granted to the sheild is within best practice in the U.S., with the exception of the Napoleonic augmentations that Joe had earlier noted that can only be used in conjuction with the title of nobility and the external additaments indicating the noble title held by the bearer of those arms (younger siblings would not be able to use the augmentation in those cases).

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
13 April 2016 15:44
 

Also, I’m not sure that I’d call the Napoleonic quarters, chiefs, etc. "augmentations" properly speaking.  (I have no idea whether Napoleon did.)  They’re more comparable to the cantons and inescutcheons of Ulster or Nova Scotia in the arms of British baronets—which also descend only with the title, not to all heirs, and should likewise be omitted in American usage.

 
Joseph McMillan
 
Avatar
 
 
Joseph McMillan
Total Posts:  7658
Joined  08-06-2004
 
 
 
13 April 2016 15:56
 

To me, the cases we’ve been discussing are fairly cut and dried (which may account for any perceptions of unintentional brusqueness on my part).

A somewhat closer call would be the augmentation granted by Empress Elizabeth of Russia to the soldiers of the imperial Life Guards who carried out the coup that put her on the throne in 1741.  All of them were raised to the nobility.  Those who didn’t already have arms were granted them, and all received an augmentation in the form of a dexter impalement "Sable on a chevron Or between three mullets Argent three grenades fired proper."  They also all were granted identical crests, a grenadier’s cap adorned with red and white ostrich plumes and flanked by a pair of black wings,  each wing charged with three silver mullets.

 

I would say that an American descendant of one of the Leibkampanez (as they were called) is justified in using the arms as long as he or she omits the open-visored helm signifying nobility.  But I suppose one could make an argument that, as the impaled augmentation was granted as part of the ennoblement process, it also has to go.  Not to mention that it was awarded for loyalty to one faction of a foreign government and disloyalty to another faction.

 
Luis Cid
 
Avatar
 
 
Luis Cid
Total Posts:  163
Joined  03-09-2009
 
 
 
13 April 2016 18:43
 

Joseph McMillan;105882 wrote:

To me, the cases we’ve been discussing are fairly cut and dried (which may account for any perceptions of unintentional brusqueness on my part).

A somewhat closer call would be the augmentation granted by Empress Elizabeth of Russia to the soldiers of the imperial Life Guards who carried out the coup that put her on the throne in 1741.  All of them were raised to the nobility.  Those who didn’t already have arms were granted them, and all received an augmentation in the form of a dexter impalement "Sable on a chevron Or between three mullets Argent three grenades fired proper."  They also all were granted identical crests, a grenadier’s cap adorned with red and white ostrich plumes and flanked by a pair of black wings,  each wing charged with three silver mullets.

 

I would say that as long as an American descendant of one of the Leibkampanez (as they were called) is justified in using the arms as long as he or she omits the open-visored helm signifying nobility.  But I suppose one could make an argument that, as the impaled augmentation was granted as part of the ennoblement process, it also has to go.  Not to mention that it was awarded for loyalty to one faction of a foreign government and disloyalty to another faction.


The Leibkampanez are a great case study for us.  I would also put forth all Portuguese personal arms as the commoners and untitled nobility were deprived of their right to arms by royal decree until the end of the monarchy in 1910.  The result was a loss of interest in personal heraldry outside of the titled nobility and that the overwhelming majority of Portuguese arms are now tied to noble titles - wouldn’t they fall afoul of the test if the Leibkampanez do?  Interesting question for the AHS.

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
15 April 2016 23:27
 

At last! - we’re back to augmentations on the field of the arms (shield or banner).  Not that I’m not at least as guilty as any re: the digression into the arguably related but not identical issue of the Canadian Loyalist coronets - mea culpa.

It appears that Joe and Luis are in agreement re: e.g. the specific augmentations for Baronets and Napoleonic nobles - me too.  Neither "the" singular heir to a Baronetage in each generation, clearly entitled to the relevant canton or inescutcheon in a British context; nor any of the descendants of a Napoleonic Duke, baron, etc., clearly entitled to the relevant Canton or chief in a Napoleonic context; nor, I would argue, anyone entitled to a foreign augmentation signifying titled or untitled noblesse in that foreign context, should display that augmentation in daily American useage.  Some of course likely will, there being no American law against it; but it is at best not "best practice" outside the relevant foreign context noted in our Guidelines, and arguably (by me anyway) a visual betrayal of what it means, and what it cannot mean, to be an American.

 

Some here will agree, some won’t, especially re: the last half of my last sentence.  Joe has repeatedly based his objections on the fact that since we have no nobility in this country, nobiliary displays are meaningless and thus shouldn’t be used here, rather than some moral objection. (Apologies if I’m mischaracterizing his position.). I agree with his argument, but also do see a moral argument as well, starting with the accepted definition of arms as symbols of personal or familial identity.  Not only do we have no noblesse, but displaying augmentations or additaments that are, or suggest to the viewer, some sort or level of foreign noblesse, are at best unconsciously, and at worst consciously, a misleading claim to an identity or status that none here can honestly claim to enjoy in the American context.  Harumpf, harumpf…

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
16 April 2016 00:29
 

As to arms originating in a jurisdiction that limited the use of arns by non-nobles - I don’t see these as the same thing as a nobiliary additament or augmentation, at least in the American context, despite a suggestive surface similarity (my MDR of alliteration - well, OK, "nattering nabobs of nobility" wink

 
snelson
 
Avatar
 
 
snelson
Total Posts:  464
Joined  03-06-2005
 
 
 
16 April 2016 13:30
 

Hi Mike.  I agree with much of what you write.  One observation I might add relates to my recent purchase of the new 2016 edition of the Swedish Adels kalender (Swedish Peerage Book) published by the Swedish House of Lords, the Riddarhuset: https://www.riddarhuset.se/verksamhet/genealogi-och-heraldik/adelskalendern-och-legala-notiser/

There are, IMO, a large number of living individuals listed in the genealogical tables (as senior or collateral representatives of some titled and untitled Swedish noble families) that were both born in and currently reside in the United States.  I don’t have exact numbers (the book is over a thousand pages long and my ability to read Swedish is limited), but I would guess it is in the low-hundreds.

 

The book is full of wonderful heraldic illustrations, and from what little I know about Swedish heraldry barons and counts frequently received augmentations of additional quarterings along with their titles.  I think Swedish nobility (and, by extension, any related augmentations/quarterings) also descends to all legitimate descendants in the male line, unlike baronetcies or Napoleonic titles, which usually descend only to the senior male heirs (I may be wrong about this).

 

All of this makes this thread especially relevant in the context of Swedish-Americans.  IMO, since hereditary nobility is incompatible with American values, the deletion of obvious external elements such as coronets is rather straightforward.  While I don’t know the number of American citizens who are heirs to baronetcies or Napoleonic titles, I would guess that the number is very small when compared to the number of Americans of Swedish noble ancestry.

 

The Adels kalender could serve additional purposes within the context of American heraldry.  The genealogical tables could allow researchers to contact these Americans and learn a variety of things such as 1) do they use their ancestral arms and 2) do they use the quarterings that were granted along with their ancestors’ titles or not.

 

The Adels kalender might also allow a researcher to 1) learn whether or not their ancestors renounced their nobility when they became naturalized citizens or 2) if their families acquired citizenship by birth-in-America and were not required to renounce any nobility.

 
Luis Cid
 
Avatar
 
 
Luis Cid
Total Posts:  163
Joined  03-09-2009
 
 
 
16 April 2016 15:15
 

snelson;105894 wrote:

Hi Mike.  I agree with much of what you write.  One observation I might add relates to my recent purchase of the new 2016 edition of the Swedish Adels kalender (Swedish Peerage Book) published by the Swedish House of Lords, the Riddarhuset: https://www.riddarhuset.se/verksamhet/genealogi-och-heraldik/adelskalendern-och-legala-notiser/

There are, IMO, a large number of living individuals listed in the genealogical tables (as senior or collateral representatives of some titled and untitled Swedish noble families) that were both born in and currently reside in the United States.  I don’t have exact numbers (the book is over a thousand pages long and my ability to read Swedish is limited), but I would guess it is in the low-hundreds.

 

The book is full of wonderful heraldic illustrations, and from what little I know about Swedish heraldry barons and counts frequently received augmentations of additional quarterings along with their titles.  I think Swedish nobility (and, by extension, any related augmentations/quarterings) also descends to all legitimate descendants in the male line, unlike baronetcies or Napoleonic titles, which usually descend only to the senior male heirs (I may be wrong about this).

 

All of this makes this thread especially relevant in the context of Swedish-Americans.  IMO, since hereditary nobility is incompatible with American values, the deletion of obvious external elements such as coronets is rather straightforward.  While I don’t know the number of American citizens who are heirs to baronetcies or Napoleonic titles, I would guess that the number is very small when compared to the number of Americans of Swedish noble ancestry.

 

The Adels kalender could serve additional purposes within the context of American heraldry.  The genealogical tables could allow researchers to contact these Americans and learn a variety of things such as 1) do they use their ancestral arms and 2) do they use the quarterings that were granted along with their ancestors’ titles or not.

 

The Adels kalender might also allow a researcher to 1) learn whether or not their ancestors renounced their nobility when they became naturalized citizens or 2) if their families acquired citizenship by birth-in-America and were not required to renounce any nobility.


I very largely agree with Mike on all of his points, and using his filter for what would be best practice here I would say that the extra noble quarterings granted with the Swedish titles would not be a problem since all the heirs inherit them and their use is not restricted to the sole heir to the title (unlike the Napoleonic and Baronet additions to the shield - which Joe pointed out are not even true augmentations of honour but rather a part of the noble title along with external additaments restricted to the primogenitor).  This standard would also apply to the arms of Portuguese nobles’ arms and all others when used here without external additaments exclusive to titled nobility in the arm’s original heraldic jurisdiction.

 
Luis Cid
 
Avatar
 
 
Luis Cid
Total Posts:  163
Joined  03-09-2009
 
 
 
16 April 2016 15:20
 

I would like to point out that in the U.K. a baronet is not very strictly speaking a noble as the officially recognized nobility in the U.K. consists only of the peerage, of which baronets are not.  But since they have an inherited title and are given precedence of honour above that of a gentleman we here may treat them for heraldic purposes as nobles.

 
JamesD
 
Avatar
 
 
JamesD
Total Posts:  90
Joined  29-04-2007
 
 
 
16 April 2016 16:36
 

snelson;105894 wrote:

There are, IMO, a large number of living individuals listed in the genealogical tables (as senior or collateral representatives of some titled and untitled Swedish noble families) that were both born in and currently reside in the United States.

Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal, to name but two.

Edit: I am not aware whether they (or, more likely, their father) appears in Sebastian’s book but the Internet seems convinced that they are of the noble Gyllenhaal family:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyllenhaal_family

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Gyllenhaal.jpg

 
snelson
 
Avatar
 
 
snelson
Total Posts:  464
Joined  03-06-2005
 
 
 
16 April 2016 18:08
 

Quote:

I very largely agree with Mike on all of his points, and using his filter for what would be best practice here I would say that the extra noble quarterings granted with the Swedish titles would not be a problem since all the heirs inherit them and their use is not restricted to the sole heir to the title

Hi Luis.  I’m not sure if this is entirely correct.  If a baronet has five sons at the time of his death, I believe that only the eldest son will become a baronet upon his father’s death (and begin to use the appropriate augmentation/canton).  However, it is my understanding that if a Swedish count has five sons, each son is a count immediately upon birth, and the sons use the augmentations/quarterings of their father (along with the appropriate coronet, supporters, barred helms and crests) simultaneously during their father’s lifetime.  Furthermore, I think that all of first count’s agnatic grandsons are also counts upon birth, and so forth down the generations.  Hopefully some of our Scandinavian friends can clarify this…

 
snelson
 
Avatar
 
 
snelson
Total Posts:  464
Joined  03-06-2005
 
 
 
16 April 2016 18:10
 

Quote:

Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal, to name but two.

Edit: I am not aware whether they (or, more likely, their father) appears in Sebastian’s book but the Internet seems convinced that they are of the noble Gyllenhaal family

Yes both Jake and Maggie are listed in the Adels kalender.

 
Iain Boyd
 
Avatar
 
 
Iain Boyd
Total Posts:  309
Joined  15-10-2005
 
 
 
16 April 2016 18:25
 

There is an interesting article about the Gyllenhaal coats of arms on the following site -

<http://www.gyllenhaal.org/index.html>.

 

Select ‘Articles’ from the list on the left.

 

Regards,

 

Iain Boyd