Including Society of the Cincinnati eagle

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
11 September 2007 09:31
 

WBHenry;49500 wrote:

And yet, what of the martial beginnings of heraldry itself?  The American public at large would be offended or "turned off" to heraldry by noting a Congretional Medal of Honor hanging from the shield of a CMH awardee?  Nothing hereditary there, nothing to do with family, nothing to do with blood lines, but the highest honor this country can bestow, a good faith achievement on the part of that individual.  The original intent of heraldry is that arms would be born by honorable persons.  This would harm American heraldry in what way?


In no way whatsoever. Once again, look at Section 2.2.

 

2.2.3. Orders, Decorations, and Awards

2.2.3.1. Military and civil decorations awarded by the United States government or one of the states may be displayed as part of an armorial achievement as follows:

Decorations worn in the form of a shoulder sash and breast star are indicated by a depiction of the sash encircling the shield, with the badge that fastens the sash at the hip shown surmounting the crossed ends of the sash below the base of the shield and/or by placing the breast star behind the shield with the perimeter of the star sufficiently visible around the shield to identify the decoration represented.

Decorations worn on a neck ribbon are indicated by a depiction of the ribbon emerging from behind the shield with the pendant of the decoration depicted below the base of the shield.

Decorations worn on a breast ribbon are indicated by a depiction of the decoration suspended below the base of the shield by a length of the ribbon emerging from behind the shield.

2.2.3.2. The insignia of orders and decorations conferred by or under the auspices of a foreign head of state recognized by the United States may be displayed either in accordance with the guidelines for U.S. decorations or with the customs governing heraldic display in the country granting the honor. It is recommended that, if the recipient of such a foreign honor is also the bearer of a U.S. decoration, the foreign insignia be displayed only if the highest U.S. decoration held is also depicted.

 

I keep going back to this document primarily because:

 

a) it is Guidelines for Heraldic Practice in the United States Recommended by the American Heraldry Society. N.B.: not just within the walls of our Society, but Guidelines for Heraldic Practice in the United States.

 

b) It’s our policy, developed from consensus of the membership and adoption of the Board of Governors. That, of course, does not mean that the policy cannot or should not be revisited, but how does it look in a public forum when our membership does not seem to know and/or support our policies?

 

The only issue that AHS has, as a matter of policy, with the display of honors or decorations is when they come from private organizations. And then, we merely request that armigers consider their appropriateness in context with the display of them.

 

Friends: PLEASE! Before continuing this discussion, read and understand our guidelines.

 
Joe123
 
Avatar
 
 
Joe123
Total Posts:  82
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 11:25
 

Great discussion.  Patrick, thanks for the rudder guidance in this discussion… obviously, I needed to do some homework before my last post!!:p

I percieve that as AHS tries to further the use of heraldry in America, the real issue here may actually be "inclusion" - to "Include" those in the "use" of arms.  We should seek to include as many people as possible, but, that it should be done within the AHS’s guidelines.  Here’s how I came to that conclusion:

 

No person will ever come to the table with the same type of achievement or history as the last - but - WILL come to the table with SOME TYPE of achievement or history.  Whether it’s as a community leader in the smallest town, in the smallest state, in the smallest country, where they helped one person or accomplished the smallest job as a full-time parent, laborer, or professional,

 

OR,

 

the leader of a great army in the field,

 

the person’s unique history can be displayed through arms just as grandly as the next in the hands of a talented armiger.  That is the true beauty of american heraldry and what I see as the enduring, postive, approach that drew me to AHS in the first place.

 

In my mind I just keep returning to the fact that the spirit of the nation is one of individual achievement.  By "achievement" I would like to heartily emphasize that achievement is relative.  Relative in the sense that we all accomplish things of importance to us individually.  These can all be beautifully celebrated through arms designed within a set of guidelines.

 

And finally, that there is some group of people out there who have been excluded from bearing arms due to economic, social, etc, circumstances from aquiring "things" for inclusion in arms discounts their experiences - if the designer / armiger takes the time to get to know the person involved, you can find some unique feature of their personality or life that is interesting to convey.

 

America succeeds as communities and as the global leader because we bring all comers on-board and incorporate their unique contributions.  "Inclusion" and "Incorporation" are the unique qualities of this country and can be furthered through their visual display in our arms.

 

For what it’s worth,

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 16:18
 

Would someone in a position to do so be kind enough to encapsulate the AHS’s official response to the question below with a simple yes or no?


fwhite;49476 wrote:

But in terms of the Cincinnati eagle specifically, is it or is it not going to be permitted as part of a full achievement of arms for display in the AHS armorial?

 

 
Andrew J Vidal
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew J Vidal
Total Posts:  567
Joined  13-10-2006
 
 
 
11 September 2007 16:54
 

Although I cant speak for the Society (that will be Dave or Pastor Henry) I would venture to say no.  The badge is not awarded by the US Gov’t and it isn’t a civilian award.

 
David Pritchard
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pritchard
Total Posts:  2058
Joined  26-01-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 17:04
 

Andrew J Vidal;49534 wrote:

Although I cant speak for the Society (that will be Dave or Pastor Henry) I would venture to say no.


I want to remind everyone, that I am not a board member of this society. My opinions are my own (and I have many of them) which Is why I do not want to be a board member of this society (as I would have to curb my own opinions).

 
Andrew J Vidal
 
Avatar
 
 
Andrew J Vidal
Total Posts:  567
Joined  13-10-2006
 
 
 
11 September 2007 17:38
 

I was referring to our President, Dave Shorey.  I should have specified that in my previous post.

 
Joe123
 
Avatar
 
 
Joe123
Total Posts:  82
Joined  02-08-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 17:58
 

OK, no more long winded declarations of theoretical patriotic concepts from me!!! :grin: as they seem to have put FWhite over the edge….  wink

 
David Pritchard
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pritchard
Total Posts:  2058
Joined  26-01-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 19:03
 

Andrew J Vidal;49537 wrote:

I was referring to our President, Dave Shorey.  I should have specified that in my previous post.


We should all try to better identify the Davids when we refer to one as there are five or more of them on this message board.

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
11 September 2007 19:09
 

Joe123;49538 wrote:

OK, no more long winded declarations of theoretical patriotic concepts from me!!! :grin: as they seem to have put FWhite over the edge….  wink


Yes, this whole thread has gotten me to the point where I’ve been driving staples into my head to relieve the pressure. :rolleyes:

 

Fred, for my part, I apologize: I seem to have missed your original question altogether. Here is MY answer (not the Official Answer (tm) of the Society):

 

The Order of the Cincinatti is, by its own admission, a private hereditary association. While many of America’s brightest and best have been members and while it is certainly honorable, the eagle is the badge of a member, not an award or honor (in the sense that the CMH is). It is also not awarded or conferred by any Government, State, County or Municipality, etc. and so, the AHS would probably pass on displaying it with a member’s achievement.

 

This does not indicate, nor is it meant to infer, that AHS has anything but the highest regard for the Cincinatti. However, if we open the door to the eagle, we open the door to the Sons of the American Revolution (hey, I could display my star!), the Lions, the Kiwanis, and any other organization that gives and/or sells its members a badge.

 

That, for what it’s worth, is my answer.

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
11 September 2007 22:27
 

A couple of (I hope) practical observations; & apologies if some of this has already been said, I didn’t have the time to carefully read all "x" pages of this thread before dinner:

1) use of the insignia of any private group with no governmental sanction, within the confines of that group, doesn’t strike me as improper.  Pretentious perhaps, depending on the circumstances, but not improper, so long as we (figuratively speaking) drop it at the door on our way out.  Its like bonnet feathers at the Scottish games—no one wears them to the office on Monday.

 

2) For public display, the criteria which I believe we’ve espoused is that use of a medal which the bearer is authorized to wear by the Federal government, is OK.  The underlying rationale (mine anyway) is that we—AHS or other private groups in the US—really, really don’t want to be in the position of sitting as judges based on our own notions of what "orders" are "real" etc.—a desire growing out of the burnt fingers of the MacCarthy Mor fiasco.  If the Feds allow their military, diplomatic &/or civil service personnel to wear a particular foreign decoration, then we defer to their judgement (even if wemight personally disagree) & treat it as OK.  If they don’t, then (again even ifwe might personally disagree) we treat it as not OK.  In either case, we’re not allowing ourselves to be painted into corners by slick willies with personal agendas.

 

The overriding motive is NOT to pass our own judgment on this or that gong, but to limit it to that whichn our own government sanctions.  If that includes the Cincinnatti but not the Sons of Lefthanded Lithuanianss, so be it; it keeps us, as a society, out of the gong-sanctioning business that caused e.g. the ACH so much embarrassment when the excrement hit the fan.

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
11 September 2007 23:06
 

Michael F. McCartney;49543 wrote:

. . . a desire growing out of the burnt fingers of the MacCarthy Mor fiasco.


That sounds deliciously scandalous. Can anyone recapitulate it for me?

 

The arguments being adduced all founder on the inconsistency that arms including the insigne of the SMOM are on display at this site. The SMOM is a perfectly respectable organization, one I’d be honored to belong to, but the Maltese Cross is not bestowed by any government, is of foreign origin, and is arguably just a badge of membership in a club for Catholic philanthropists. Do you really mean to tell me that in the context of this uniquely American set of heraldic practices the AHS is advocating, the SMOM rates as acceptable for display and the Cincinnati eagle doesn’t?

 
PBlanton
 
Avatar
 
 
PBlanton
Total Posts:  808
Joined  06-11-2005
 
 
 
11 September 2007 23:12
 

I have been quietly following this thread since its inception and am amazed at the amount of confusion contained herein. The original post is:


fwhite wrote:

I notice that in the Society’s guidelines for American heraldic usage, the inclusion of lineage society medals in the full achievement of arms is discouraged. I understand and embrace what I take to be the reasoning behind this recommendation. I wonder, however, if at least one finer distinction shouldn’t be made. The Society of the Cincinnati has a bona fide chivalric and nobiliary character (cf. the argument of Guy Stair Sainty), is our only home-grown such order, and is arguably as worthy of inclusion in a full achievement of arms as an order of knighthood (e.g., Malta). Any thoughts on this?


I see, in the above post, three distinct questions. First, are lineage society medals discouraged in armorial achievements? Second, are lineage society medals discouraged in armorial achievements displayed on the AHS roll of arms? Third, is the Society of the Cincinnati an American Order of Chivalry?

 

Regarding the first question, I would like to reference our own Guidelines for Heraldic Practice in the United States:


Quote:

2.2.3.7. Awards and insignia of membership conferred by private organizations, including lineage societies, professional associations of a military character, and Scouting or similar groups, are not customarily depicted as part of armorial achievements in the United States, unless the rules of the organization concerned expressly provide for such display. In that case, they are normally used only in the context of the organization’s activities.

(Emphasis mine.)

As I read the above guideline, if the Society of the Cincinnati allows (in by-laws, policies, etc.) their medal to be included in heraldic displays and describes how it is to be displayed, then the medal can and should be displayed if the armiger so wishes. Proper display would be pursuant to the regulations of the Society of the Cincinnati. Some societies do not allow their regalia to be used/displayed outside of their societal functions. It might be prudent for an armiger wishing to display the Cincinnati Eagle with their arms to check with the policies of the Society of the Cincinnati prior to doing so.

 

Regarding the second question, I would like to reference Chapter 5 of our Governor’s Policy Manual:


Quote:

5.1.2 Emblazonments Adhering to Guidelines for Heraldic Practice

5.1.2.1 All arms displayed in the Members’ Armorial as thumbnails and as the primary image will be in keeping with the Society’s Guidelines for Heraldic Practice. Additional emblazonments that follow the Guidelines may also be displayed.


As I read the above policy, as long as the Society of the Cincinnati allows it, then the AHS will also allow it. I believe that the AHS, while not wanting to be "gong-sanctioning", should also not be exclusionary. This, of course, relies upon the keen discretion of the armiger.

 

Regarding the third question, Fred points to an article by Guy Stair Sainty to imply that the Society of the Cincinnati is chivalric and noble American order of knighthood. Mr. Sainty’s article specifically states that the Society of the Cincinnati is “neither a "noble" association nor an Order of Chivalry” although he recognizes it as having characteristics of both. Mr. Sainty further points out that in 1925, when the French Society was restored that the statutes had been marginally altered, but not enough for it to be considered an Order. “If the statutes had been altered, so that the structure (at least in respect of certain of the qualifications for membership) more closely approximated that of the Order of Malta, i.e. that candidates could not become members purely by right, it might have been recognized as an Order, but instead it enjoys the character of a private society dedicated to good works.” For these reasons, I have to agree with Mr. Sainty and say no, the Society of the Cincinnati is not an American Order of Chivalry but a private lineage society.

 

Just my 2¢.

 

Take care,

 
 
gselvester
 
Avatar
 
 
gselvester
Total Posts:  2683
Joined  11-05-2004
 
 
 
11 September 2007 23:21
 

Since the policies of the AHS apply to members and are not in any way supposed to be adhered to by our guests it seems this discussion would be best continued in the Members’ Area. Please do so.

Moderator

 
DRShorey
 
Avatar
 
 
DRShorey
Total Posts:  528
Joined  11-12-2005
 
 
 
12 September 2007 00:01
 

Howdy,

Sorry for my delay in returning to the conversation…my access during work time is limited and I was helping a friend move this past weekend.

 

I am not going to be able to address all the points raised in this thread, but let me offer some further thoughts.

 

I guess my main belief in the display of awards, orders, etc. is that if you received it because of WHO you are…then NO…But if you received it because of what you did…YES.

 

So…if you happen to be someone who happens to be the great great grandson of someone who was an officer in the revolutionary war….thats nice…but I am not impressed.

 

If you happened to have saved a life or performed some act other act of heroism, been a patron of civic minded institutions, or did something that a national or state government entity or quasi-governmental (i.e. U.N., OAS, NATO, etc.) organization identifies as meritorious then it might be appropriate to display. In this area there are gray areas. But it is truly dependent on the situation of the display of the emblazonment.

 

As to AHS policy - An emblazonment bearing the The Society of the Cincinnati Insignia, or Eagle would not be in alignment with our Guidelines and would not be appropriate to display on the main page of the AHS member’s armorial.

 

IF, however, there were an external page bearing the emblazonment, it would be appropriate to have a link to that page on the AHS member’s armorial page.

 

Mr. White, I hope this discussion and the energy and care our members have show to it has inspired you to join the Society.

 

Now on to other posts I need to follow up on…

 

Best wishes,

 

Dave Shorey

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
12 September 2007 00:51
 

P.S.—I guess the system is taking awhile to update, but I’ve paid my membership dues.