Greetings. I’m new to the AHS and to this site, but have been considering matriculating/ assuming arms for some time. I’ve taken time to let my ideas gel and have done the “refrigerator test” for about three months with several different designs, concluding with the design below which I like quite well. At this point I ask for your critique, in the hopes that you may pick up on some things that I’ve missed.
My surname is Pope. I am not able to document descent from an armiger or a particular known immigrant. That being said, my best working hypothesis is that my Pope ancestors emigrated from Bristol, England to Virginia in the mid 17th century. From there they seem to have moved south into Sampson County, North Carolina and ultimately west to Union County, NC, just east of Charlotte in the early 1800s.
I like the idea of canting arms and considering trying to cant on my surname (a pall argent bearing three crosses gules for the pallium?, a mitre?, crossed keys?) before abandoning that route, since all my ideas seemed easily confused with ecclesiastical heraldry or just plain tacky.
My next thought was to use historical grants of arms to those bearing the Pope surname as the basis for my design. My searches for arms recorded for persons bearing the surname Pope lead me to this page:
http://www.heraldry-online.org.uk/pope/pope-arms.htm
A perusal of these arms shows a common theme of “argent two chevrons/chevronels gules”; frequently with a canton, usually gules; and escallops and griffin heads as charges in one fashion or another.
While visiting the College of Arms website I noticed what I think is a coat of arms in a photo from the Fenwick Roll granted to someone surnamed Pope in the 15th century in England, but it’s hard to be sure that the name above the arms is “Pope”. I can’t seem to locate any better photos of this particular roll of arms. Does anyone know a source? I’ve circled the arms in red here:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5089/5375661786_5420044b05_m.jpg
How similar may my arms be to these without inviting rebuke since I am not able to show descent from any of these individuals?
Here’s the prototype design that won the refrigerator test:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5088/5375661732_2402651b71.jpg
Due to my family’s background in VA and NC, I chose to use an Eastern Dogwood flower (the state flower for both states), which seems to me quite like a traditional heraldic rose, used in place of the escallop on the canton. I’d like it to be rendered “argent, seeded or” instead of “proper” but think this violates the metal on metal rule. Is there an exception for seeding?
I tried to keep the overall design simple and bold, but am uncertain whether it is proper to use two true chevrons or whether one should switch to chevronels when using more than one chevron at a time. Here are two different iterations:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5126/5375061789_5ca2c680e5.jpg
The arms from the Fenwick Roll, posted above, actually have half of the top chevron completely obscured by the canton, so I guess that’s also an option.
For a crest I’ve used a griffin rampant supporting a staff bearing a banner of the canton. I like the griffin, particularly in or, and it is another tie to previous Pope surname grants. The staff/banner may be a little repetitive, but the canton/dogwood seemed to be asking for it…
I’ve considered using "Amor Patriae Delectatur" as a motto- "Love of Native Land Delights", which is again tied to the use of the dogwood flower charge.
I welcome any constructive criticism you might have. The illustrations are cobbled together in MSPaint, so please forgive the artistic “cut and paste”, but hopefully it gives you an idea of what I’m envisioning. Thanks.
David
David,
Welcome from a fellow Tar Heel (not sure of your collegiate leanings, so in the historical sense). I’ve been wondering when you’d make an introduction.
It looks like you’ve done your homework. Based on the Pope entries in Burke’s I’d say Argent two Chevrons Gules on a Canton [Gules or Azure] a [charge] [Argent or Or] is a great place to start. There are other arms, of course, but this does seem to be a major theme (about half those listed). There are also a couple with a red chief rather than a canton. Given that you don’t know of any relation to any of these, I might recommend sticking with the two differences rule for "strangers in blood" (if I’ve got that right).
I do like what you’ve got. I like the dogwood flower (of course I do). I prefer the chevrons to the chevronnels - much bolder. You might consider making them engrailed (or something similar) to add the extra difference. Though then you’d need to check to make sure that Argent two chevrons engrailed Gules isn’t the primary charge of some other name. Come to think of it, since there are both red and blue cantons in the Pope arms listed in Burke’s; and given that the dogwood is almost assuredly unique; you might consider changing the color of the canton to green or black. I realize that spoils the bold two-color design you have going, but it would give the additional change with as little variation as possible.
Kenneth,
Thanks for your input. I’ll have to do a couple mock-ups with the canton a different color. Perhaps "on a canton bleu celeste an Eastern Dogwood flower argent seeded or" (ok, you’ve got me, I’m a UNC guy…);)
I’ll also think a bit more about the "two difference" rule and see what I can come up with. Engrailing the chevrons could work…
David
Have you considered putting the dogwood on the chevrons (3 and 3)? Such a theme is less likely to be "taken" than chevrons with fancy edges.
This would then free up the canton for some other charge that is relevant. Differently charged cantons could then be a form of differencing between family branches, should you wish to go down that route.
James
James Dempster;81257 wrote:
Have you considered putting the dogwood on the chevrons (3 and 3)? Such a theme is less likely to be "taken" than chevrons with fancy edges.
This would then free up the canton for some other charge that is relevant. Differently charged cantons could then be a form of differencing between family branches, should you wish to go down that route.
James
James, that’s an interesting idea as well. I will have to play around wth that idea and see what I can come up with. I’ll make the chevrons full so that the dogwood flowers can be larger.
Thanks,
David
Hello, Cousin David!*
A point to keep in mind as you head down this road is that English heraldic design typically does not follow the Scottish approach of deriving all arms of a given name with the stem arms of that name. The English don’t assume the kind of fictive kinship among all Popes that the Scots would assume among all MacMillans.
In fact, the early 20th century English heraldic scholar Horace Round was blisteringly critical of the kings of arms for their past practice of sometimes granting arms that falsely implied a relationship with some eminent person of the same name, and modern English heralds have occasionally criticized the Scottish principle of "indeterminate cadency."
Just something to think about.
Joe
________
*David and I met at a St. Andrews Society lecture by Lord Lyon here in Alexandria a few months ago, initially brought together by by spotting his MacMillan kilt. We soon discovered that we had a common ancestor in William Pope, who was in Isle of Wight County, Va, by the early 1660s.
I agree that the bold chevrons are better than the chevronels; but I think it would be a shame to introduce another color, if one can find some other way to difference your arms from those of other Popes. More unusual (and therefore less likely to run into the arms of another family) than engrailing the chevrons might be to use some such partition for the canton.
Another, bolder difference might be: Per pale Argent and Gules two chevrons counterchanged on a canton Gules an Eastern dogwood flower Argent seeded Or.
Another thought:
Canting arms don’t have to be too precise. To get to "Pope", one need not refer to the ecclesiastical dignitary who uses that title. Instead one might use a poppy (flower). E.g. Argent two chevrons between three poppies Gules (with or without the canton with dogwood flower).
David Pope;81254 wrote:
My surname is Pope. I am not able to document descent from an armiger or a particular known immigrant. That being said, my best working hypothesis is that my Pope ancestors emigrated from Bristol, England to Virginia in the mid 17th century. From there they seem to have moved south into Sampson County, North Carolina and ultimately west to Union County, NC, just east of Charlotte in the early 1800s.
My G-G-G-G-Grandfather George W. Fowler resided in Union County in the mid-1800s. Any Fowlers in that tree?
David Pope;81254 wrote:
Due to my family’s background in VA and NC, I chose to use an Eastern Dogwood flower (the state flower for both states), which seems to me quite like a traditional heraldic rose, used in place of the escallop on the canton. I’d like it to be rendered “argent, seeded or” instead of “proper” but think this violates the metal on metal rule. Is there an exception for seeding?
Minor elements like seeding (and tongues and claws of animals, etc.) aren’t affected by the tincture rule. The English royal badge of a Tudor rose has gold seeds on the white rose, for example.
How about…
Argent a chevron Gules and on a base Gules a dogwood flower argent?
JBGarrison;81265 wrote:
How about…
Argent a chevron Gules and on a base Gules a dogwood flower argent?
If you were to go that route, you’d be better IMO to go with per Chevron Argent and Gules a Chevron counterchanged and in base an Eastern Dogwood flower Argent seeded Or.
But I’m not crazy about either.
Joseph McMillan;81260 wrote:
Hello, Cousin David!* ... *David and I met at a St. Andrews Society lecture by Lord Lyon here in Alexandria a few months ago, initially brought together by by spotting his MacMillan kilt. We soon discovered that we had a common ancestor in William Pope, who was in Isle of Wight County, Va, by the early 1660s.
cool
8)
Kenneth Mansfield;81266 wrote:
If you were to go that route, you’d be better IMO to go with per Chevron Argent and Gules a Chevron counterchanged and in base an Eastern Dogwood flower Argent seeded Or.
But I’m not crazy about either.
I see your point Mr. Mansfield. My blazon would make for almost no separation of argent field (if any at all) between the base and the chevron gules.
Also, now that I think about it, even with your blazon, it would almost look like a base cotised "extra thick" rather than an actual chevron, thus drawing away from the whole point of having two chevron charges.
I agree, Mr. Mansfield’s blazon is better, and additionally, I agree with him that this direction isn’t as ideal as I’d previously thought.
David is likely to be a cousin of mine also, as my Drakes were from Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties, Virginia. There were a number of Drake and Pope intermarriages there, although I don’t have a Pope in my ancestry AFAIK.
I like the first design the best, but I think the preference is that there should be at least two "line differences," meaning not just tincture changes. How about three chevronels, instead of two, and keep the red canton with the dogwood?
