One relatively neglected area in the study of ecclesiastic heraldry is the area of the arms and heraldic privileges of the laymen who were ennobled by the Supreme Pontiff, particularly those who were granted hereditary nobility, While the arms assumed by the secular and religious clergymen of the Roman Catholic Church are usually for only one lifetime the arms of the nobility are hereditary (one of the defining characteristics of personal heraldry was that the marks placed on a shield were hereditary). While some writers in the area of ecclesiastic heraldry limit their focus to the arms of ordained ministers and church institutions, I find myself in agreement with Francois Velde’s observations, although I would quibble with some of the bases he quotes for distinguishing whether the titles flow from teh temporal or spiritual powers of the Pope.
Quote:
The "Roman" Nobility
From the late Middle Ages onward, popes have granted titles of nobility. The titles, which became especially common at the end of the 16th c., became known in the early 19th c. as Roman nobility although they have less to do with Rome than with the Pope.
The titles included prince, duke, count, among others. One particular title was that of count palatine. It apparently emerged during the Avignon period, and was defined by the Trento Council as "knight of the Sacred Palace and of the Court of Laterano and palatine count". The title was associated with the Order of the Golden Spur.
During the French occupation in the Napoleonic period, Roman titles were abolished, and they were re-established on July 6, 1816. The Order of the Golden Spur, which had lost a good deal of its value by being awarded too easily, was abolished on Oct. 31, 1841 (replace with the Order of Saint-Sylvester). The title that used to accompany it was shortened to "Roman count palatine", and further simplified to "count" in 1847. The pope continued to grant titles even after 1870 and the loss of the Papal States. By the Lateran Accord of 1929, the Italian government recognized and confirmed the pope’s power to grant titles, and the titles were considered equivalent to Italian titles. With the abolition of nobility in the Italian Republic in 1948, the Roman nobility was once again considered as foreign. Pius XII granted a few more titles, John XXIII confirmed some but none have been granted under Paul VI and John-Paul I.
The titles could be for life or hereditary. Typically, it was fairly easy for the holder of a life title to petition for conversion into a hereditary title. The titles were usually, but not always transmissible by male primogeniture only; there were usually, but not always granted to men.
Are these titles granted by the pope as temporal sovereign or as head of the Church? I personally incline toward the latter. The facts are that the pope granted these titles mainly to foreigners, not to his subjects in the Papal States; moreover, he continued to grant such titles even between 1870 and 1929, when he had no subjects and no sovereignty. The acts by which these titles are created are registered with the Actae Apolosticae Sedis, indicating that they are acts of the Holy See, that is, the governing body of the Catholic Church, not the government of Vatican City. Finally, the text of such acts makes clear that it is the grantor is the pope as spiritual figure; and the conditions imposed for transmission of nobility, in the case of hereditary titles, include a clause that the descendants must be Roman Catholic and must "persevere in their obedience to the apostolic Holy See." Such conditions have nothing to do with the pope’s temporal sovereignty, and everything with his position as head of the Church.
I actually find myself inclined to agree with Francois’s interpretation on the temporal vs. spiritual basis of the titles, but the question is: where’s the heraldry? What are the heraldic privileges of which you speak?
Joseph McMillan;57877 wrote:
I actually find myself inclined to agree with Francois’s interpretation on the temporal vs. spiritual basis of the titles, but the question is: where’s the heraldry? What are the heraldic privileges of which you speak?
Like elsewhere a range of coronets, insignial elements, etc. as well as augmentations or special charges denoting a connection with the Papacy such as tairas, crossed keys and umbrellas.
One of the interesting ones is the Papal chief - not unlike the augmentations of allegiance found in some older Italian arms - the so called Ghibelline or Guelfic chiefs, some of the "Guelphic" chiefs included not the arms of Anjou but that of the Papacy. The ombrellino was also used as an augmentation of allegiance. Umbrellas also appeared in the arms of Gonfalliers, sometimes in the arms of family members of Popes, etc., etc.
There’s lots of heraldry there - just as with the achievements of clerics.
Thanks George! I love this topic myself.
So, is it fair to assume that the appearance of the coronets are much like those found in a lot of Europe as evidenced by the chart in Neubecker and then again in execution by such heraldic artists as Foppoli, Yamashita, etc?
I ask as I seem to recall that in large encyclopedia of heraldry, I think by Fox-Davies, in the research section of my local library there was a very large section on different coronets used. I vaguely recall them and so have no detail of such in my head. I will have to make another appointment to go back into the research section so I can look over the book and perhaps photocopy the pages to share them - if they let me that is.
If the Church did not use similar sets of coronets I wonder what they did use ... anyone have any idea where to see some examples?
As to the Papal Chief, was it of the Gules with crossed keys as in the arms of the Holy See, or, was it in the Napoleonic format we see today of Or and Argent?
I remember in Athlone, Ireland back in 1997 that a local told me of this nice house that I was looking at being the home of the Count McCormick - the Irish Tenor of note - family who still resided there. Of course there was no COA or crest or coronet that I could see ... just a lovely house.
I just find this all-together fascinating!! :D
One of the interesting things is there seems to be a variety of coronets used by the Papal nobility and there is more variety of usage in Italian heraldry than in the charts you mentioned. Take a look at Pinches’ book on European Nobility and Heraldry for a broader coverage.
There was also a larger noble estate in the Papal states of a variety of oriigins.
The Papal Chief was red. The crossed keys argent and or and an ombrellino was often added if there was a Pope in the family.
There were also concessions of augmentations of Papal arms used as a quarter to members of some noble confraternities like that of the Holy Apostles.
There are probably others, but unfortunately it is difficult to find information - I would welcome the advice of others. I’m hoping this thread helps stimulate some discussion of this issue - it seems to have bogged down in a catalogue of one after another prelates arms or diocese’s arms ignoring the historical role of the lay Roman nobility in the Church and the heraldry associated with it.
Did the papal-nobles have any military obligations to the Pope in exchange for their titles?
George Lucki;57951 wrote:
[Quoting Fr.Velde:] Are these titles granted by the pope as temporal sovereign or as head of the Church? I personally incline toward the latter. [...] a clause that the descendants must be Roman Catholic and must "persevere in their obedience to the apostolic Holy See." Such conditions have nothing to do with the pope’s temporal sovereignty, and everything with his position as head of the Church.
Dear George,
As far as I understand, it is highly misleading both to consider the temporal sovereignty of the Pope as independent of his ecclesiastical position (as Velde does), and to identify the papal temporal authority with the authority of the headship of a State.
The sovereign power of the Supreme Pontiff was for senturies directly attached to his See rather than to any of his possessions, being an absolutely secular attribute of a spiritual dignity. This medieval principle presumably could become obsolete in modern times if it would not gain a decisive importance because of the loss of the Papal State in the course of the unification of Italy. The Vatican sovereignty is amalgamated to the sovereign status of the Holy See, the latter status being a much more complicated phenomenon.
Therefore, the fact that the papal heraldic, chivalric and nobiliary honours are conferred by the Pope as the head of the Catholic church rather than of the State of the Vatican, does not make that honours ecclesiastic. They are “normal” temporal honours, albeit sometimes attached to an ecclesiastical position (including that of a loyal layman), just like the fons honorum which produced them is attached to the See of Rome.
Greetings, everyone.
I am going to offer some observations and questions, along with the caveat that my ignorance of the Vatican, in both its ecclesiastical and temporal functions, is nearly complete.
Michael,
Why do you feel that the separation of the Pope’s ecclesiastical and temporal powers is misleading? I find it to be a useful way of thinking of the office, to help explain the Vatican’s unique position. We have an similar situation (that of multiple offices fulfilled by one person) in the person of Queen Elizabeth, who is the reigning monarch of multiple sovereign states. Also, isn’t it necessary to make such a distinction due to the powers of a sovereign state, such as issuance of passports, citizenship, etc? Other churches do not possess these powers, and this is not because of less spiritual authority, but because of the lack of sovereignty.
Please feel free to correct me, but I don’t see what is so misleading about holding the two offices separate.
The nature of the papal authority as fons honorum (I almost said fons honorarium—:) was debated widely and at length on the old rec.heraldry forum. If interested, it can likely be searched in Google; but would IMO be of somewhat limited relevance here, & even to briefly summarize the warring camps would likely (and quite properly IMO) be squashed like a bug by our moderators as likely offensive one to the others—some of it went far past "spirited"—and unlikely to produce much useful discussion of heraldry.
What might be more relevant here would be the arms borne by the various papal nobles—origins, any commonly shared attributes, various additaments, rules/customs of inheritance (of the arms & additaments, and only peripherally of the titles themselves). Given that the American Heinz 57 includes a notable Italian element, these matters might be of particular interest to them, and of more general interest to the rest of us.
George, thanks for the info. 
I am inclined to agree with Michael Med. in that the basis for such grants has more to do with being Peter, as was before and is now, than as the head of the Vatican City State. His position as Vicar of Christ, for a Catholic, is far more important than his position as sovereign of the Vatican City State - they don’t even come close in importance IMO. So, if I had to say where such ability came from it would be from the pope being Peter and not sovereign of the Vatican. If Italy were to send in an army and take over the Vatican from an administrative standpoint it would end the pontiff’s role as head of the Vatican City State, but it could not end his vocation as Vicar of Christ. From a practical standpoint this is the ‘proof in the pudding’ for where his authority to grant whatever noble title he wanted to whomever and whenever.
Now, as to images, I did a google search and could not find anything through 5 pages on papal nobility heraldry. I will keep looking, but I can not guarantee that I will come up with anything. If I do I will post the image here. I sincerely hope that others post it here if they find such images.
C’ya.
To bring this thread back to heraldry, does anyone know if there were heraldic addiments of office that were used by the lay members of the Papal Court prior to its reform by Pope Paul VI?
On page No. 171 of Carl von Volborth’s book Heraldry, Customs Rules and Styles there are illustrations of arms of two families, one who provided a pope, with an augmentation to the field and the other for outstanding service to the Church with an addiment behind the shield consisting of the crossed keys and the ombrellino.
David Pritchard;57982 wrote:
To bring this thread back to heraldry, does anyone know if there were heraldic addiments of office that were used by the lay members of the Papal Court prior to its reform by Pope Paul VI?
On page No. 171 of Carl von Volborth’s book Heraldry, Customs Rules and Styles there are illustrations of arms of two families, one who provided a pope, with an augmentation to the field and the other for outstanding service to the Church with an addiment behind the shield consisting of the crossed keys and the ombrellino.
It doesn’t seem so. The examples from Von Volborth that you pointed out are examples of Italian not Papal heraldic practices. The inclusion of the tiara and keys as an augmentation on the shield if your family has a member who is (or was) a Pope is not established by the Holy See. It became a feature of Italian heraldry during the 450 year period when Italians only were being elected Pope. It does not indicate an office or title bestowed by the Pope. The example is of a papal Marquis who was created as such by Pope Pius XI (the one preceding his papal cousin) and the augmentation of the tiara and keys came not with that title but with the subsequent election of his cousin as Pope Pius XII. If my cousin was elected Pope I could augment my arms in the same way without any communication whatsoever between me and the Holy See.
The other example is a bit different in that the augmentation of the ombrellino and keys (the symbol of the Church) was received by the Princes Odescalchi for services to the Church by a specific decision of the Pope. However, that has nothing to do with ennobling them. They were Princes before receiving this and the augmentation could also just as easily been given to any armigerous family without conferring along with it any title.
Von Volborth correctly indicates that this symbol, too, was often borne by families who gave a Pope to the Church. However, as with the one above, in such a case it was assumed, not granted by the Papacy.
Very interesting thread.
If these examples are representative of Italian and not of Papal heraldry, then my question is: has the Pope ever ennobled non-Italians? If so, how have their arms been created/modified?
kimon;57984 wrote:
If these examples are representative of Italian and not of Papal heraldry, then my question is: has the Pope ever ennobled non-Italians? If so, how have their arms been created/modified?
The Pope has definitely ennobled non-Italians (e.g., countesses Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy and Bernardine Murphy Donohue—the latter a major donor to the school where I teach, it so happens. In fact, there’s a portrait of her right outside my office, and the building in which it sits was named for her).
I have no idea how it might have affected their arms, or if either was armigerous at all. JFK received a grant from the Chief Herald of Ireland in right of a Fitzgerald ancestor, so I suppose those arms were usable by his mother, but I can’t be sure.
Fred White;57985 wrote:
JFK received a grant from the Chief Herald of Ireland in right of a Fitzgerald ancestor…
Actually, Kennedy’s grant was to himself and the other descendants of his paternal great-grandfather, Patrick Kennedy, not to a Fitzgerald ancestor (notwithstanding the inclusion of a Fitzgerald-inspired bordure in the arms). So if there had been any armorial consequences of Rose Kennedy’s title, they would not have had any effect on these arms.
A good image of the letters patent, courtesy of Seb Nelson, can be seen at http://www.americanheraldry.org/pages/uploads/President/kenn-grant-lg.png and is linked from our website’s article on JFK’s arms, http://www.americanheraldry.org/pages/index.php?n=President.Kennedy
Quote:
If these examples are representative of Italian and not of Papal heraldry, then my question is: has the Pope ever ennobled non-Italians? If so, how have their arms been created/modified?
Kimon, yes. There are two Irish families that I know of, outside of the American-Irish families Fred mentioned (thanks I did not know that Fred), for certain that were ennobled.
One was the family of that great Irish tenor who was ennobled to the level of a Count (Count McCormick) whose family still resides, or did when I was in Athlone in 1997, in Ireland. I did not recall seeing any armory about the house when I was visiting Athlone that year, so I don’t know of his arms as such. I could contact the CHoI office to see if there is something, but I’m not certain I’d get a reply soon, or at all.
A second was the family of MacSweeney of…I forget where right now, but it is in Co. Cork. They are a cadet of MacSweeney Fanad IIRC, which I may not…it might have been MacSweeney Doe…I’ll check on that too. They were ennobled to the level of marquis. The last male of this line passed and the grandson, maybe great-grandson…I’ll have to ask him, of the last of this line has the arms that were granted to them, or assumed I’m not sure, granted to him by Lord Lyon in his grant of arms from the office in remembrance of that familial connection.
There may be more Irish families, but these are two Irish families I am aware of. I am certain other nations outside of Italy have some as well.
