HRH Princess Beatrice of York has been granted arms by the College of Arms in London:

http://s2.excoboard.com/forums/3205/user/85362/363754.jpg

gselvester wrote:

HRH Princess Beatrice of York has been granted arms by the College of Arms in London:

So that’s a bee on the label as a canting for Beatrice?

Nice Arms!

—Guy

Guy Power wrote:

So that’s a bee on the label as a canting for Beatrice?

No, it’s three bees, or a bee thrice.  Now that’s clever!

Hate to burst your bubble guys but the bees aren’t canting. They’re taken from the arms of her mother, the Duchess of York. This is similar to the use of the scallop shells on the labels of Princes William and Harry. This was taken from the arms of their mother, Diana.

Does anyone have a copy of the Duchess’ Arms?

Dear Guy,

The bee is taken from the arms of Princess Beatrice’s mother, the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson as was.

Yours aye,

John

Fr. Guy et alia,

Thanks for explaining about the bee.

I like Darren’s observation of it being "bee thrice"—although now it appears to be mere serendipity.

—Guy

[the other one]

LOL! How providential that the bee from the arms of the Duchess of York would end up as Beatrice’s "Bee thrice".

Take care,

LOL.

good humor aside i’d like to talk about the art - go figure.

almost all of the recent renditions of these arms i’ve seen are simply wonderful. the British artists are very, very good.

in this case, i would note, the non-use of a traditional lozenge, or even oval, is quite nice! i love this appearance as it gives more room to display the charges than a typical lozenge. so, the design of the shield is wonderful.

obviously the artwork is masterful. however, i really, really like how the labels are bending around the necks/chest of the supporters. to me this helps to give depth to an art form that is usually dominated by flat surfaces (which ironically is my favorite style, but…) and it is great!

my only issue from an artistic standpoint - i know as though i’m qualified to judge… some people’s kids - is that the harp is twisted. it is twisted because the base do the harp shows the plate to which the strings are attached, which is the norm, but the top of the harp does not show the same tilt as they usually do. look closely at the end of the top part of the harp and you will notice you are only seeing the side of it, whereas you are seeing the front of the plate in the base. not a big deal, but it makes the harp look twisted on itself. again not a big deal and certainly it does not ruin the achievement. just my observations.

Donnchadh wrote:

...the harp is twisted. it is twisted because the base do the harp shows the plate to which the strings are attached, which is the norm, but the top of the harp does not show the same tilt as they usually do. look closely at the end of the top part of the harp and you will notice you are only seeing the side of it, whereas you are seeing the front of the plate in the base. not a big deal, but it makes the harp look twisted on itself. again not a big deal and certainly it does not ruin the achievement. just my observations.

Denny, as far as I can tell the Celtic clarsach is accurately depicted.  The strings are attached at the center of the soundbox and are threaded through the tuning pins on the left side of the neck.

Parts diagram: http://www.cynthiacathcart.net/Pathway/page4.jpg

http://www.siol-nan-gaidheal-usa.com/dealbh/clarsach.jpg

Cheers,

—Bold Phelim Brady, the Bard of Armagh

(aka Guy Power)

At a fair or a wake I would twist my shillelah

Call me their bold Phelim Brady, the Bard of Armagh.

http://www.contemplator.com/tunebook/ireland/armagh.htm

[Americans will recognize this tune as "The Streets of Laredo"]

Hi Guy.

You are right on the placement of the strings and where they end on the plate. I have a lovely harp here at home I bought some time ago including the Celtic knot-work that was both painted and engraved.

However, at the top of the harp in the front in the pic you provide even there is a quasi-rounded termination that is seen when the harp is show this way. You can see it in the Irish national arms as well as many British Royal arms. However, in this one that is missing in the design. So, while the base is accurate and the strings are accurate, the front piece of the top bar is missing and it gives the impression that the top is twisting away from you as you move from the connection point out towards the left where the bar terminates whereas the base and side of the top bar are dead on. This is what I am referring to and what is missing in the depiction of the harp in this one.

Don’t get me wrong it is not bad, but it is enough to catch my eye. I suspect it was an oversight on the part of the artist.

Unless of course this depiction is too small to show the front piece of the top bar clearly and can only be seen when it is in person or larger, which is possibly the case.

Donnchadh wrote:

in this case, i would note, the non-use of a traditional lozenge, or even oval, is quite nice! i love this appearance as it gives more room to display the charges than a typical lozenge. so, the design of the shield is wonderful.

Actually, these arms are depicted on a lozenge. There is more than one form of lozenge. The official blazon from the College of Arms is:

Within a Lozenge ensigned by a Coronet composed of four Crosses formy and four Strawberry Leaves Our Royal Arms differenced by a Label of five points Argent the centre and the exterior points each charged with a Bee volant proper.

The Supporters are to be Our Royal Supporters charged with the like Coronet and Label.

gselvester wrote:

HRH Princess Beatrice of York has been granted arms by the College of Arms in London:

A pedantic streak impels me to quibble:  not by the College of Arms, but by the Queen herself, by royal warrant.  This is reflected in the wording of the blazon, "Our Royal Arms…Our Royal Supporters."

This is the standard procedure for grants to members of the royal family.

See http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Newsletter/011.htm