Today, July 11, the Catholic Church keeps the Feast of St. benedict, Patriarch of Western Monasticism. While Benedict lived in the 6th C. and was, therefore, not armigerous the order that bears his name is:
http://www.osb.org/graphics/arms0b.gif
In addition, the titular "head" of the order, The Abbot-Primate, (currently the Most Rev. Notker Wolf, OSB) also uses a coat of arms:
http://imageshack.us/a/img585/2315/ff7b.jpg
although he recently made a slight modification to the shield so it now appears as:
Has he usurped the royal arms of Ireland as his personal arms? Does he impale these with the arms of the order?
David Pope;99825 wrote:
Has he usurped the royal arms of Ireland as his personal arms? Does he impale these with the arms of the order?
wow not even a subtle usurpation.
he’s entitled to 20 tassels - like an archbishop?
David Pope;99825 wrote:
Has he usurped the royal arms of Ireland as his personal arms? Does he impale these with the arms of the order?
The entire shield depicts his personal arms. The harp is a symbol of King David who is commonly spoken of as the composer of the Psalms. Abbot Notker is a musician. Despite all of the best efforts of several people who advised him on the design of his arms who pointed out to him that they are the arms of the Republic of Ireland (no one particularly cared about these arms being used by those illegally occupying the North of Ireland) and. as such, should be suitably differenced he would not relent. He is German, after all.
The coat of arms as used by him is the one shown. He does not impale his personal arms with the arms of the Order.
steven harris;99830 wrote:
he’s entitled to 20 tassels - like an archbishop?
No. He’s entitled to 20 tassels like an Abbot-Primate.
gselvester;99834 wrote:
The entire shield depicts his personal arms. The harp is a symbol of King David who is commonly spoken of as the composer of the Psalms. Abbot Notker is a musician. Despite all of the best efforts of several people who advised him on the design of his arms who pointed out to him that they are the arms of the Republic of Ireland (no one particularly cared about these arms being used by those illegally occupying the North of Ireland) and. as such, should be suitably differenced he would not relent. He is German, after all.
The coat of arms as used by him is the one shown. He does not impale his personal arms with the arms of the Order.
Knowing that, meh…
The partitioning of the field is unnecessarily confusing as it appears that he is impaling arms with that of a diocese, etc.
gselvester;99834 wrote:
He is German, after all.
The coat of arms as used by him is the one shown. He does not impale his personal arms with the arms of the Order.
And, being German, would probably quarter rather than impale if he did marshal them together, ja?
Just as well he only uses his personal arms (leaving aside for the moment quibbles re: possible infringement). Quartering this already semi-quartered design with the arms of some unfortunate diocese would only produce additional unnecessary eyestrain.
gselvester;99834 wrote:
Despite all of the best efforts of several people who advised him on the design of his arms who pointed out to him that they are the arms of the Republic of Ireland (no one particularly cared about these arms being used by those illegally occupying the North of Ireland)
The Republic of Ireland is of course a very recent arrival on the scene. The arms are those of the legitimate sovereigns of Ireland (which lordship given by the then Pope) who have been deprived of three quarters of their realm. Legality depends on laws and the Crown of Ireland Act 1542, (1542 c. 1) is still on the statute books in the UK including Northern Ireland and was only abolished in the Republic of Ireland by the Statute Law Revision Act 2007!
gselvester wrote:
and. as such, should be suitably differenced he would not relent.
They are of course differenced by the quarters.
Would it not be better if the arms were blazoned ‘per pale indented’ or some other line of division down the palar line? At the very least this would show that the arms were to be considered not to be divisable but to be viewed as a whole.
John
The simple answer is "yes". However, that is not what the Abbot-Primate elected to do.