Attached is a chart that I prepared tracing the marshalled arms of my four inter-related families over 4-5 generations. Interestingly, this includes two divorces and subsequent remarriges.
http://i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz250/lls38/th_MarshalledFamilies.jpg?t=1300311427 .
Is there a way you could make it bigger? I can’t see anything.
Is this better? I’m just learnig this graphic stuff.
http:///i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz250/lls38/th_MarshalledFamilies.jpg?t=1300332072
http:///i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz250/lls38/MarshalledFamilies.jpg?t=1300332635
May just be me (computer-dyslexic) but I can’t see any image of your chart after your initial posting—which, while too small to read, looks most interesting!
The reason why the subsequent images are not displaying is because the link to the image is not being recognized as an image (it’s got the ?t=xxxxx after the .jpg)
Here is the link to the image for those interested: http://i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz250/lls38/MarshalledFamilies.jpg?t=1300332635
Can you tell us something about the origin of these arms? Assumed by the people involved, assumed on their behalf by later generations, inherited from the distant past, whatever?
Thanks for the re-direct to the correct PhotoBucket image. I guess I was a little careless in my "copy and paste". The arms are all assumed, having been first registered With the American College of arms in 1994 and 1995. All for were designed by me.
Very cool! Just out of curiousity, why does Lyle Snyder bear his wifes arms in pretense on his shield rather than just a straight marshalling?
JBGarrison;81721 wrote:
Very cool! Just out of curiousity, why does Lyle Snyder bear his wifes arms in pretense on his shield rather than just a straight marshalling?
Because that’s the way it’s done. 
A husband does not "claim" his wife’s arms, but as the man of the family he represents her and acts on her behalf. Therefore he bears her arms in pretense. She, on the other hand, marshals her arms with his and their children will quarter them.
Kenneth Mansfield;81724 wrote:
Because that’s the way it’s done.
A husband does not "claim" his wife’s arms, but as the man of the family he represents her and acts on her behalf. Therefore he bears her arms in pretense. She, on the other hand, marshals her arms with his and their children will quarter them.
But, in this form, only if she has no brothers who will inherit the arms. Otherwise, as Kenneth says.
Note that this is the British Isles (English, Scottish, Irish) custom and not necessarily the same as that followed in other traditions.
Thank you Mr. Mansfield and Mr. McMillan for clearing that up.
I’ve read at least a couple of descriptions on the how and why of marshalling and never quite got it. You have explained it clearly and I have finally had my ahah! moment with this concept.
So, in mostly British tradition then, marshalling is only done by the wife, quartering by the children, and bearing an escutcheon of pretense by the husband. Got it… finally! :banghead: ...and all of this happens when a wife has no brothers to transmit her fathers arms to. :eek:
Not quite. It is all marshalling, just in different forms.
In the ordinary run of things, the husband may display his arms impaled with his wife’s father’s arms, with his own crest. He may also elect to display his arms alone. His children inherit only his arms.
If, however, the wife is a heraldic heiress, i.e., her father is dead and she has no brothers to inherit the father’s arms, then the husband places her arms in pretense over his own, and the children inherit both coats of arms, his quartered with hers.
Joseph McMillan;81735 wrote:
If, however, the wife is a heraldic heiress, i.e., her father is dead and she has no brothers to inherit the father’s arms, then the husband places her arms in pretense over his own, and the children inherit both coats of arms, his quartered with hers.
What helped me was a phrase in Boutell’s heraldry, namely that the husband of an heraldic heiress "pretends to be the head of her family", thus bears her family’s arms in pretense. When she dies, he can no longer pretend to be the head of that family (the eldest child of that marriage becomes the head of his mother’s family), and so loses the arms in pretense.
Thanks for clearing up terminology for me Mr. McMillan… so marshalling is a general term which includes using an escutcheon of pretense AND impalement.
Mr. Gill, that phrase in Boutell’s heraldry is very helpful, since it clears up the "why" aspect of this question for me.
I’m trying to remember what (if anything) relevant we say in our Guidelines re: quartering vs. pretense for spouse’s arms.
My personal opinion FWIW is that the distinction isn’t terribly relevant here in that it doesn’t reflect a distinction with any meaning in American law & social customs generally, which was (I believe wisely) our touchstone in drafting the Guidelines. IMO (& only that) the choice should reflect what fits artistically rather than blindly following some (here obsolete) English custom; or perhaps viewed as a purely optional notion here, like cadency based on primogeniture, which was abolished here at or shortly after the Revolution.
My opinions only, others may of course differ. And if the English practice mirrored practice in most of the rest of the armorial world, there would be a greater reason to follow it, though I probably would still argue against it as a rigid rule here.
