The latest newsletter of the College of Arms in London is available at:
Thanks for posting this, Fr. Guy.
I wish that they would include pictures of the new Letters Patent or at least just the emblazonments. As a digital publication, the cost would be minimal.
Jonathan R. Baker;47018 wrote:
Thanks for posting this, Fr. Guy.
I wish that they would include pictures of the new Letters Patent or at least just the emblazonments. As a digital publication, the cost would be minimal.
I agree Jonathan, what is the point in producing a list of newly granted arms whitout any description.
Of course a very limited sample, but they seem to show (blazon & emblazon) the arms of corporate bodies, but not of individuals. Perhaops they see a privacy concern of some sort?
so…....why in the case of the ASSOCIATION OF BRITISH NEUROLOGISTS supporters did they have to blazon their Latin name? why wouldn’t everyone understand what a seahorse was? or is there another beast i am unaware of in heraldry that is a seahorse? it just seems that Hippocampus is a rather large and unnecessary name to give in a blazon. am i wrong?
Perhaps to avoid confusion with hybrid creatures, à la sea-lions and the dog-fish?
Marcus K;47022 wrote:
I agree Jonathan, what is the point in producing a list of newly granted arms whitout any description.
I’ve complained about this before in this forum. A bunch of names listed doesn’t tell anyone much of anything unless you’re somehow associated with the person receiving the grant. But Michael may be correct in that there’s some kind of privacy issue. Although it didn’t stop them from showing off the arms of Sirs George Martin and Paul McCartney. Maybe if you’re a celebrity the privacy exemption doesn’t apply.
Quote:
it just seems that Hippocampus is a rather large and unnecessary name to give in a blazon. am i wrong?
Yes, because the hippocampus is a name given to a part of the brain.
To my eye, the pile and chevronels look like the spinal nerves radiating out from the cauda equina. The rooks look a bit like the two lobes of the brain, though this might be reaching.
/Charles
Donnchadh;47030 wrote:
so…....why in the case of the ASSOCIATION OF BRITISH NEUROLOGISTS supporters did they have to blazon their Latin name? why wouldn’t everyone understand what a seahorse was? or is there another beast i am unaware of in heraldry that is a seahorse? it just seems that Hippocampus is a rather large and unnecessary name to give in a blazon. am i wrong?
I believe that Dr. Drake has already provided the answer to your question. There is however always one good reason to keep blazons in mysterious tongues, that is exclusivity of the heraldic club. As you may have noticed, over the past twenty years the heraldic field has been penetrated by the most pedestrian of sorts, with no knowledge of Latin, Middle French and heraldic principles. I strongly believe that we should not use common names or adjectives for blazons as it opens the field up our area of study to those with inadequate educations and no understanding or respect for the traditions of heraldry. While we as Americans have collectively repudiated the class system with which heraldry was once associated, there is no reason for us to wallow with swine to prove this commitment.
Donnchadh;47030 wrote:
so…....why in the case of the ASSOCIATION OF BRITISH NEUROLOGISTS supporters did they have to blazon their Latin name? why wouldn’t everyone understand what a seahorse was? or is there another beast i am unaware of in heraldry that is a seahorse? it just seems that Hippocampus is a rather large and unnecessary name to give in a blazon. am i wrong?
The heraldic Seahorse have nothing to do with the natural animal hence the Hippocampus wording. The heraldic Seahorse btw has the upperbody of a Horse and the lower a fish’s tail.
http://www.canterbury.nsw.gov.au/resources/images/crest.jpg
Heraldic Seahorses as supporters in the arms of the City of Canterbury, in New South Wales (Australia). Picture from http://www.canterbury.nsw.gov.au/
Michael F. McCartney;47024 wrote:
Of course a very limited sample, but they seem to show (blazon & emblazon) the arms of corporate bodies, but not of individuals. Perhaops they see a privacy concern of some sort?
Perhaps, but arms are granted by letters patent, and the whole point of letters patent is that they are open to public scrutiny (that’s what patent means). Besides, if the grant is not made public, doesn’t that defeat the notion arms as cognizances?
When a British subject receives an honor like a decoration, order, or title, the details are published in an official gazette . It’s hard to see how that would be any less of a privacy concern than a grant of arms—unless grantees of arms are embarrassed by having paid that much for a vanity item.
Quote:
Yes, because the hippocampus is a name given to a part of the brain.
Quote:
Perhaps to avoid confusion with hybrid creatures, à la sea-lions and the dog-fish?
You are both correct. In herladry a sea-horse is a mythical creature with the head of a horse and a tail of a fish. However it seems that the Association of British Neurologists is using a bit of word-play in the supporters. To pull this off they need to show the image of the creature scientists know as "Hippocampus"
ok. cool. i didnt know that. i luv learning new things. thanks.