Below is an emblazonment of the arms of The Baron Abbot of Colchester – created 1817 by George III, extinct 1919 with the 3rd baron.
In this emblazonment, is the single supporter (holding the banner of arms at dexter) considered to be a “proper” supporter – that is, only an entitlement of hereditary peers and knights grand cross – or is it simply an embellishment of the artist without such restriction?
Hi Steven,
Burke’s gives Colchester’s supporters as unicorns, erm, armed, crined and tufted, or, gorged with a collar, az., within another gemelle, flory-counterflory, gu., therefrom a chain reflexed over the back, gold, and charged on the shoulder with a cross raguly, of the third:
https://archive.org/stream/genealogicalhera00inburk#page/248/mode/1up
I think I’ve seen supporters used in English heraldry before to "support" a banner of the armigers arms, such as:
http://www.archive.org/stream/bannersstandards00howauoft#page/34/mode/2up
snelson;103031 wrote:
I think I’ve seen supporters used in English heraldry before to "support" a banner of the armigers arms
I have seen these as well. In all of the examples that I have run across, the armiger is entitled to supporters (being either a peer or a knight grand cross, for example) and it is one of these supporters that is drawn as holding the banner of arms.
I am wondering if a "gentleman" (one who is not a peer or a knight grand cross, and thus not entitled to the usual shield supporters) be able to have his arms emblazoned with a figure of some sort supporting his banner of arms?
Single supporters have been a topic of discussion before. Some view them as only an artistic element to hold a banner others view them to be only used by grant. I personally think you should be allowed to use them in this way for a little artistic expression.
I’m no fan of supporters in American arms (no surprise!). Perhaps some artfully drawn flagbearer standing behind the shield might be OK, if it doesn’t look like a supporter. (Probably easier said than done 
Why not just the banner on a staff at or near the viewer’s left of the shield? See e.g. the arms of the Army’s Institute of Heraldry, or several pages in our Members Armorial e.g. David Shorey’s page.
And when a crest becomes a supporter? (Mine done by Danilo Martins) This form of display is not governed by any authority that I’m aware of. Personally, I think it’s a fairly weak argument re: "proper supporters" given the most prevalent displays of this type were specifically done by Dan Escott’s Royal Beasts.. Wait! Those pesky raccoon are helping.. perhaps I’m claiming 3 supporters, what does THAT mean? I’m aghast at myself! LOL
http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1367&stc=1&d=1415185647
Or, perhaps we’d like to think a raccoon (by Carlos Navarro)holding my shield shouldn’t be done because.. OH My!... (by the way, Carlos will be doing a Raven Holding the Becker arms at the turn of the year which I intend to frame with this)... Are we implying that I’m implying status I do not have with this? Because that’s the real reason to avoid supporters.. implication of status you don’t have… (sorry about the size)
http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1368&stc=1&d=1415186134
Kathy McClurg;103046 wrote:
...a raccoon (by Carlos Navarro)holding my shield….
Now .... THAT is downright cute!
—Guy
As cute as it is, it does really remind me of Royal Beasts statues at Hampton Court in which the royal arms are held almost exactly as your racoon is by one either the English lion or the Tutor dragon. I realize there isn’t a clear line, but I do think that the depiction is ambiguous enough to allow some possibility of being interpreted that way. It seems to me that using the crest to support the arms as illustrated above is better than introducing extraneous creatures, which leave one wondering where exactly those come from.
love the raccoon!!
To me, the raccoon rendition doesn’t so closely resemble or suggest traditional supporters as to offend reasonable republican scruples, or even my OCD armorial puritanism. Borderline maybe, but too whimsical and cute to make a fuss.
The raccoons around here would be gnawing on the edge of the shield. Not because they’re hungry, just because.
Dcgb7f;103056 wrote:
As cute as it is, it does really remind me of Royal Beasts statues at Hampton Court in which the royal arms are held almost exactly as your racoon is by one either the English lion or the Tutor dragon. I realize there isn’t a clear line, but I do think that the depiction is ambiguous enough to allow some possibility of being interpreted that way. It seems to me that using the crest to support the arms as illustrated above is better than introducing extraneous creatures, which leave one wondering where exactly those come from.
This from the guy who drew the Becker crest with a drunk raccoon? :p
As has been discussed in other threads… supporters are only supporters when they occur in what is clearly an achievement of arms (for all that entails).
And in answer to Steven’s original question, that is not a standard achievement of arms per se… so yes, artistic embellishment.
A non-noble example (from Germany, I think):
