Some friends ask me advice and I’d like your opinion before I make any comment to them.

They are married; both of them belonged to the non-titled nobility in Southern France, she is an heiress and he is the second son in his family. Their sons should:

1.- Impale paternal and maternal arms

2.- Maternal Arms with inescutcheon of paternal arms

3.- Paternal Arms with inescutcheon of maternal arms

4.- Just their paternal arms with cadency marks

5.- Quartering paternal and maternal arms

Thanks in advance

personally, I think images of both their arms would be very influential in any decision making!

If she is an heiress I think her arms must be shown, well not must, but certainly should be shown. I’d think #3 is best, but I don’t know if that is kosher with a French tradition… wait for Joe or Nicolas to answer that one I think…

Ok. i am posting the CoA.

Disclaimer: I Can’t draw, paint or design even to save my life. I tried two different software to do this. Please note taht this is just for didactic purposes and have no artistic intention whatsoever.

His

http://www.aurelio.valarezo.net/srd1.JPG

Hers

http://www.aurelio.valarezo.net/saint germain 5 (nmg0).jpg

Now I most definitely think #3 is the right call. It places the heiress’ arms in the center point and they will be very attractive in that position I think!

P.S. I do not see anything artistically wrong with these versions; they are good.

I would say to go with just paternal arms… quartering gets very complicated very quickly.  A pretense shield would show the mother’s arms but that, as far as my understanding, is not appropriate for passing down… what about working some part of their mother’s arms into a unique crest?

Assuming there are no set rules in southern French heraldic tradition (if there are, they should be followed; Nicolas may know the right answer to this), I would say that the best approach to marshalling the arms is to quarter them as follows:

1st & 4th:  Sable a fess indented between 3 crosses bottony 1 & 2 Argent.

2nd:  Or a fess raguly Gules.

3rd:  Azure three lions’ heads erased Gules.

English (and, I think Scottish) rules would place her arms on an escutcheon of pretense only if she has no brothers and her father is dead; otherwise the couple would impale his arms with hers, but I think this makes for a very unattractive appearance.

Another approach might be "Per pale, dexter his arms; sinister per fess, her paternal arms and her maternal arms."

Any marshalling of her arms with his would preclude the need for cadency marking on his arms, even under strict English practice.  The quartering would be a sufficient difference.

I’m guessing that untitled nobility are going to want to preserve all three basic coats in these two arms one way or another, meaning that compounding them into a new composition would be out of the question.

i must have missed it, as i thought Aurelio said she was a heraldic heiress and no one else is around to bear the arms. so if that is correct why wouldn’t they be borne on an escutcheon as in #3?

i feel i must be missing something all together now…

Denny

You are right she is a heraldic heiress. Actually it’s about a year her father died and their first son is about to be 18. That’s the reason they are intrested in the proper design for their first son (Alphonse).

I can tell that Guislain use his CoA for his personal matters and Dominique for hers. They never impale their arms, they have alliance arms though.

Similar situation I have with my wife, (I mean never have impaled arms) with the difference that my wife is not a heiress and we don’t have any children.

So she is a heraldic heiress then. If so why wouldn’t the 18 year old son be entitled to both his paternal and maternal arms? Or is it that he is and that is why you’re trying to find out the best way to help them with that, which was my original understanding of the situation.

Is there a French tradition on all of this at all? If not I still think have the heraldic heiress’ arms displayed on an escutcheon would be prudent, as in this way both the paternal and maternal arms are together for the 18 year old son.

Now if it were a matter of marshaling for marriage that’d be different I think. But, as it’s for the 18 year old son I think he should be entitled to display both. But, I am not an expert on these matters… so take my opinion for what it’s worth.

No particular knowledge of French practice, so can only copmment from the usually cited British rules.

England (& probably Ireland?) - the happy couple place the heiress’ arms as an inescutcheon on his arms, & the kids quarter the arms as Joe described.

Scotland - the happy couple simply impale H & W.  The kids petition Lyon & he decides how to do the quartering—either handling each of mama’s quarters separately per Joe, or treating her quartered coat as a "grand quartering"  Of course either or both of the kids could opt to use papa’s arms only, with cadency as needed (supplied by Lyon); or one or both could adopt mama’s surname & use her arms alone (by matriculating that with Lyon).

There are practical & emotional pro’s & con’s for any of these options, for American use.  It would be most interesting tom learn about the French rules or customs…

Donnchadh wrote:

i must have missed it, as i thought Aurelio said she was a heraldic heiress and no one else is around to bear the arms. so if that is correct why wouldn’t they be borne on an escutcheon as in #3?

i feel i must be missing something all together now…

You’re just missing who Joe was talking about. The married couple would display her arms in an escutcheon of pretense. The children would quarter.

I looked at von Volborth’s Heraldry:  Customs, Rules & Styles last night and he says the most common way of displaying marital arms on the Continent is simply to place the two shields next to each other.  In German-speaking & influenced countries, the shields are often tilted toward each other and the charges on the husband’s arms turned to "respect" the wife’s shield, but the examples he gives from France (from old tombstones) simply have the two shields abutting each other side by side, with a single coronet (which would obviously be appropriate if the people in question are untitled nobility) centered over them.

He went a little into quartering by offspring in other countries, but didn’t cover France.  I’ll try to have a look at one of his other books that may cover the matter tonight, if I have time between kids’ soccer practice, basketball practice, and Boy Scouts.

But, Patrick, I thought that quartering in Spanish heraldry showed familial alliances. If not then yes, quarter, but if yes an escutcheon would be better I think.

P.S. welcome back Patrick.

Denny.

If they were Spanish that is what I would recomend but since they are French I have some doubts.

They have alliance arms depicted in varous formats (among them a wonderful porcelain service if I remember correctly) but their concern is about their children.

As a curiosity my parents have alliance arms depicted in the "german" way since they were married. I have to ask why. It has always seem natural for me to see their arms depicted in taht way. I think it’s probably the same way they were depicted in their wedding invitation. I’ll ask :o

To see my parents alliance arms (modern representation) http://www.heraldrysociety.us/forums/showthread.php?t=2457

Joseph McMillan wrote:

I looked at von Volborth’s Heraldry:  Customs, Rules & Styles last night and he says the most common way of displaying marital arms on the Continent is simply to place the two shields next to each other.  In German-speaking & influenced countries, the shields are often tilted toward each other and the charges on the husband’s arms turned to "respect" the wife’s shield, but the examples he gives from France (from old tombstones) simply have the two shields abutting each other side by side, with a single coronet (which would obviously be appropriate if the people in question are untitled nobility) centered over them.

He went a little into quartering by offspring in other countries, but didn’t cover France.  I’ll try to have a look at one of his other books that may cover the matter tonight, if I have time between kids’ soccer practice, basketball practice, and Boy Scouts.

There we go! Von Volbroth has the answer, as usual. :D