That’s pretty interesting. Whose arms are those on the reverse?
arriano wrote:
That’s pretty interesting. Whose arms are those on the reverse?
Those are the Lords Proprietor of Carolina.
Seb—Great find!! Are there anymore Landgrave or Cassique seals? I’m especially interested in one for Sir Nathaniel Johnson, sometime Governor of the Leeward Islands and later Proprietary Governor of Carolina.
Thanks,
Guy
http://www.ricehope.com/history/LordProprietors.htm
Lord Anthony Ashley Cooper, first Earl of Shaftesbury; 1621 - 1683
Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon; 1609 - 1674
George Monck, Duke of Albemarle; 1608 - 1670
William, Earl of Craven; 1608 - 1697
Lord John Berkeley; 1607 - 1678
Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia (1641 - 1676); 1606 - 1677
Sir John Colleton; 1608 - 1666
Sir George Carteret; 1615 - 1680
Charleston has some familiar names: the Ashley River and the Cooper River (with the Cooper River Bridge); Berkeley County, Colleton County, and Craven County (now part of Berkeley). Craven County was just northeast of Charleston, but there is (was?) also a Craven County in what became North Carolina. I’m willing to bet that Albermarle Sound in NC is named for the Duke.
The town of Monck’s Corner, about 40 miles north of Charleston, is still extant and is in the vicinity of the old plantation, Mulberry, that belonged to Thomas Broughton, son-in-law to Sir Nathaniel. Broughton became Lt. Gov under Sir Nathaniel’s son Robert Johnson; he was Acting Gov from 1735-37 years following Robert’s death.
To much trivia!
—Guy
It’s worth mentioning that the cornucopias on the obverse are probably the inspiration for the one that appears today on the North Carolina state seal.
http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/scc/tutorial/plagiarism/graphics/seal_nc.gif
Also, note the similarity of the key features of this seal to the NC Senate arms recently devised by the College of Arms and posted by Seb in the old forum a few months back, especially the arrangement of the shields surrounding the cross of St. George on the reverse of the seal and the field of the new arms.
Wow… What a wonderful example of the evolution of heraldic design. I admit that I had wondered about the design of the NC Arms. Now it all makes sense given the historical context of the seal.
Dave
Just found this paper presented by Guy Stair Sainty:
"Heraldry And Nobility In The American Context"
http://www.newyorkfamilyhistory.org/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=113&page=1
Remarks delivered on Tuesday 25 January 2005 at a meeting sponsored by the College of Arms Foundation and The Committee of Heraldry of the New York Genealogical & Biographical Society
of interest was page 3:
Guy Stair Sainty wrote:
The Province had been granted as a County Palatine held directly from the Crown by Charles II as a reward to several of those who had played the most prominent part in his restoration in 1660, with the title of Lords Proprietors, and of whom the first among them enjoyed the special title of Lord Palatine of Carolina. These were mostly men of new wealth and modest ancestry who rose to great heights, very much the American way, and included:
* General George Monck, also rewarded with the title of Duke of Albemarle, who had brought about the restoration of Charles II but whose only son and successor in the title died in a pub in 1688 (I am not sure who would have inherited his share of the Province in 1705);
* Edward Hyde, the wily lawyer appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer at the age of 33, who had stuck loyally to Charles II in 1649 - Hyde was elevated to Lord High Chancellor by the exiled King in 1658 and at the restoration was created by him Earl of Clarendon. (Clarendon’s daughter married James, Duke of York, future King James II as his first wife and was the mother of Queen Mary II and Queen Anne – in 1705 the 2nd Earl of Clarendon, uncle of the Queen, was one of the then Lords Proprietor.)
* William Craven, whose father had risen from humble tailor to Lord Mayor and whose vast fortune he had inherited, was raised to the peerage as a baron after demonstrating surprising skills as a young officer in the Thirty Years War assisting the King’s sister, the so-called Winter Queen whose grandson became late King George I. Craven not only subsidized the Queen when she lost her throne, but also stayed with Charles II throughout his in exile in the Hague and financing him to the tune of £50,000 – the equivalent today of about $10 million - on the restoration he was elevated as Earl of Craven. His title and fortune passed by the special remainder in the original patent to a first cousin three times removed who died very young in 1711 – while the Albemarle and Clarendon titles have been long extinct, that of Craven is still extant although the fortune has been lost.
* John, 1st Lord Berkeley of Stratton, who actually descended from the ancient gentry family of Berkeley of which a branch still lives at Berkeley Castle, famous as being the place where Edward II was brutally murdered in a fashion too indelicate to describe here, but who had also been a faithful supporter of the King in exile, who had raised him in 1658 even while still a deposed monarch to the peerage – I should say here that such peerages were recognized after the restoration from the dates of their creation, and provide a useful precedent for the claim that titles granted by deposed monarchs, provided they had the authority to do so and maintained the proper forms, could be considered legitimate. Berkeley became Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Ambassador to France but by 1705 had been succeeded in his Carolina properties by the third of his sons to succeed to the peerage – the Berkeley properties were eventually ceded to the Earls of Berkeley.
* Anthony Ashley Cooper had been a leading Cromwellian, but was of the 12 MPs who had presented the formal invitation to Charles II to return and quickly became a loyal supporter of the King, being rewarded with the title first of Lord Ashley and then Earl of Shaftesbury – the present Earl has recently been the subject of an international manhunt after mysteriously disappearing two months ago [in November 2004] and is presumed kidnapped and probably murdered.
* Sir George Carteret, Baronet, was another leading royal loyalist who was created Lord Carteret in 1681 but had been succeeded by his infant son in 1690; as Lord Carteret was only fifteen in 1705 his affairs were handled by his mother, a great heiress in her own right.
* John Colleton, whose father made a City fortune which he had enlarged, had had his estates sequestrated by the Cromwellian regime and gone to Barbados where he further increased his fortune – he was first created a baronet in 1661, and then not only made in 1663 one of the Lord Proprietors of Carolina but also of Georgia and in 1667 was made Sovereign Proprietor of the Bahamas. His son, the second holder of the Colleton baronetcy, in 1694, was inheritor of his properties. The last and final commissioner was a cousin of Lord Berkeley.
The establishment by the Lords Proprietors in 1705 of a heraldic jurisdiction was based on the authority so granted by Charles II to grant:
Titles, Dignities and Honours… to Men well deserving the same Degrees to bear, and with such Titles to be Honoured and adorned, AND WHEREAS by our form of Government It was by our said Predecessor Established and Constituted, and is by us and our Heires and Successors for ever to be observed, That there be a certain Number of Landgraves and Cassiques who may be and are the perpetual and Hereditary Nobles and Peers of our said Province of Carolina, and to the End that above Rule and Order of Honor may be Established and Settled in our Said Province.
The titles they established were deliberately chosen to avoid parallels with the British peerage and were given the unusual names of landgrave (similar to an ancient German and Danish title) and cassique with the appointment of a herald to administer this. In the end nothing much came of this ambitious plan and the whole of the Carolinas were sold back to the Crown by Act of Parliament in 1728. The Carolinas, Georgia and Maryland, which had each been granted as fiefs of the Crown to develop and encourage immigration, were far too redolent of monarchical power to have survived in this form after independence, even if they had not been taken back under direct royal control long before 1776.
I like the author’s first name!
—Guy
DRShorey wrote:
Wow… What a wonderful example of the evolution of heraldic design. I admit that I had wondered about the design of the NC Arms. Now it all makes sense given the historical context of the seal.
Dave
The crown depicted on the College of Arms emblazon alludes to the "Sun in Splendor" upon which the arms of Landgraves & Cassiques were to be placed.
Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina wrote:
...We do hereby Authorise, Impower and direct you the said Laurence Cromp Carolina Herald, to devyse, give, Grant and Assigne to the said Landgraves and Cassiques of our Sd. Province upon the Face of the Sun in its’ Glory Such Arms and Crest as you Shall think most proper, & upon the Escocheon of the said Arms a Landgraves & Cassiques Cap of Honor, which said Badges or Distinctions of Honor they are not to make use till assigned by You
http://www.sc.edu/library/socar/uscs/1993/cromp93.html
Found a footnote explaining that Cassique = Earl and Landgrave = Duke:
Quote:
l. 33. Paper government. Burke possibly had in mind the original settlement of Carolina, with its “model of a constitution framed, and body of fundamental laws compiled by the famous philosopher, Mr. Locke.” (European Settlements in America, vol. ii. p. 237.) This absurd specimen of modern feudalism settled the lands in large and inalienable fiefs, on three classes of nobility: barons, cassiques (earls), and landgraves (dukes), and was tolerated for two generations. Shaftesbury had a hand in it. Burke’s resolutions would in effect have established a new charter for all the Colonies.
http://oll.libertyfund.org/Home3/HTML.php?recordID=0005.01
—Guy
Mr. Sainty, in his article, points out that the English system of herldry predominates in the US and that even though Spain held most of the trans-Mississippi west the Spanish influence on US heraldry is negligible. IMO this observation is correct. As the ol’ saying goes:"The victors write the history."
To make the story of the American Revolution short, the French neither colonized nor made erstwhile agreements with the Native Americans in the trans-Applichian west. In as much as the English government was unable to contain its colonists to the eastern side of the Applichians (though England made colonizing west of the Applichians illegial), the colonists virtually settled the French territory. And with the help of some very valuable land transfers, the territory between the Applichians and the Mississippi became Englsh/American holdings. West of the Mississippi, except for the now southwet US, the Spanish failed to colonize its holdings. With the advent of Lewis and Clarke (two good ol’ St. Louis boys!) the trans-Mississippi west eventally entered the US. For better or worse, whatever the Americans thought of heraldry became part of local thought.
Hi Ed.
I’m not sure what you are saying exactly. While I agree that to the victor goes the spoils, and while I also agree that on the face of it heraldry may well be as you’ve laid out here, I can not as either an observant, or proud, citizen of the West/Southwest say that “English†culture prevails. For, by and large it most certainly does not – no where close.
Now maybe in the realm of heraldry you would be correct, but the idea that because Anglo colonists settled the Midwest and that a couple of their sons ventured into the west does not indicate that the ultimate culture/sub-culture is either solely, or dominantly, English.
In Colorado, where we are both Western and Southwestern the predominant culture – outside of the hodge-podge, eclectic American culture is in fact Hispano-Native American. Everything from our name on up is of the Hispano-Native American culture.
That’s not to say that there is zero or only even a little English cultural influence, for there is that culture intertwined with the hodge-podge, eclectic American culture. However, to surmise that because the Spanish “never†– highly debatable form a historical perspective, which we can get into on another day – colonized this area and that as it is now American it is therefore default English is highly speculative.
But, if we are to stay with heraldry alone you may be right. Although I doubt very much that the Spanish influenced Catholic Church(es) of this area would be inclined to agree with such a notion.
Thank you, Donnchadh, for your reply. I agree with you totally, the predominate culture of Colorado and the southwestern US is Hispano-Native American. However, it seems to me, that the heraldry that has come out of the area has more English influence than Spanish. Considering the vast Spanish influence on the area, I am at a total loss to explain why there is not a greater Spanish influence on heraldry. So what I’m saying is that the heraldry that comes from the area is predominately English. But the same is true for the heraldry that comes from the former French holdings between the Applichians and the Mississippi. Though the former French influence remains in such names as Terre Haute and Detroit, the heraldry that comes from the area is more English than anything else.
Hi Ed. Yeah, that’s why I was saying in regards to heraldry (outside Catholic heraldry of course, which is more Spanish/Native in origin) I’d think you were correct. I’m wondering if this is because most of the American frontier is in fact a place of opportunity and even refuge for the “everyday” man of yester-year? I mean for example my family on my father’s side were Irish Catholic pioneers with homesteads/ranches in Iowa and Nebraska with the family later moving to Colorado. To them and indeed to many pioneers/frontiersmen the animals were their primary focus with the “brand” being extremely important – in a weird way I would argue that American “Brands” are very much like the ancient form of heraldry (outside of the military scope of course) in that they were/are a very practical way of identifying one man’s property from another. As were things like fighting the native peoples of this land and each other and even the law and then the railroads and fences etc. for survival. I’m wondering how many of them really had time for things like heraldry? I suspect the same could be said for the miners, foresters, rail road builders, military men, etc. I think of all the groups of people who made the American frontier what it once was only the “white lace” crowd would even care what heraldry even was. I suspect it may have been seen as anathema to a man in a new republic, or maybe even their old feelings of unworthiness carried over from their experiences in their father/mother lands and so did not ever really think on heraldry much. Of course I’m just speculating, but I think with some merit.
Now I bet if one looks into it one would find it, but it would be with the “white lace” crowd of the day (I should visit the Mullen museums and the Molly Brown House, etc. to see what is there…). I wonder how many of them were keen on heraldry and of those that were how many of them subscribed to an Anglo style/school. Indeed the many houses, and interiors of said houses of this class, were modeled on many different styles including Franco and Novo-Franco, which is most assuredly not Anglo and IMHO rather gaudy (not a bad thing for those out there who would think it is…just a style and an expression for it). Now of course this is more of my field as that’s what I’m in school for now and what I have a total passion for. I will speak to my professors and see what they think about what sort of dominant culture, if there was one, we could see in the homes and interiors of homes of the “white lace” class of the American frontier/pioneer. Because if there is a dominant cultural element in homes and the decoration of said homes one may well find that proof either for or against the idea of heraldry being a decidedly Anglo school/style. I suspect that it may well be Anglo, but I don’t know for sure.
Now this would make for fun, excellent homework…I will see what I can dig up with my own look see into it here in God’s own great state of Colorado.
I would say, however, that very few people who care to celebrate their Hispano-Native culture and are equally interested in heraldry would willingly sublet their beloved Hispano-Native culture for an imported one from back east (Anglo); we get sort of personal about those things out here, well, except for recent transplants I suppose. But even they will convert over time, as the way of things here is, well, what it is. In other words I think that say a man who’s newly into heraldry and is a racial beneficiary of the Hispano-Native culture, or even someone like me who is Irish, but totally a fan of this culture and considers it his own as a Coloradoan, may well want to import the long-lost Hispanic influence into his heraldic expression. I could be wrong I guess…
Sorry so long winded…much time to reflect on things these days…sorry…
Bonjour Donnchadh!
Your reply is certainly food for thought. I will have to consider your comments before I make any reply. In the meantime, I’ll post the blazon for
Meriwether Lewis’ CoA.
Arms: Argent, a dragon’s head and neck erased vert, holding in the mouth a bloody hand proper.
Crest: a dragon’s head and neck erased vert.
It seems to me that on the old message board there was a discussion about Spanish Arms in California, but I don’t recall what it was all about. But I suppose the Spanish Dons had some influence on California heraldry, but I wouldn’t know too much about that. Perhaps, our California members can through some light on that.
Absent a greater effort at an empirical study of the heraldry used by non-English groups in areas originally settled by Spain and France, it seems to me that any thesis such as that presented by Guy Stair Sainty is necessarily unproven. If you start with sources like Vermont, Zieber, Crozier, etc., that focus on early armorial usage on the east coast, then you’re bound to find that the predominant heraldic influence is English. But as far as I know, no one has yet to study systematically the use of arms in French Louisiana or Spanish California, Texas, and New Mexico.
It’s almost certainly true that the predominant influence on American personal heraldry will turn out to be English, just as the predominant influence on American language, law, manners, and political structures was English. But it seems to me that there’s a strong possibility of other strains existing alongside the English one, and it is quite clear that even if French and Spanish (and German and Dutch) influences are not responsible, we have in fact departed measurably from English practices in how we use arms in this country, just as we’ve departed from English practices in language, law, manners, and politics.
But any firm conclusions should await empirical research.
I can’t speak about heraldry in French-settled-areas of the United States, but I have looked into the use of Spanish heraldry in colonial California. There are quite a few helpful secondary sources in this area. Vicente de Cadenas y Vicent published a series of books giving the arms and blazons of various recipients of different Spanish Orders of Chivalry during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, which includes many military men who settled in what is today the American southwest. Vicente de Cadenas y Vicent obtained these blazons directly from the records of these Orders in Spain. Somewhere in my notes I also have some information about different Spanish military regulations by which soldiers and officers could excuse themselves from certain ‘menial’ duties by providing certain genealogical proofs, including their right to arms. I believe the records of these armorial proofs are in some archive in Mexico or Spain, and I am sure these primary sources would shed more light on the use of personal heraldry in the colonial southwest. I have always felt that any predominance of English heraldry here in the West had more to do with the massive influx of English-speaking settlers during the second half of the 19th century and the disestablishment of Spanish-speaking landowners, rather than any lack of Spanish heraldry.
Although I’ve never conducted any research there—or even thought about it except in fantasies—I believe the most likely place for this information in Spain would be the General Archive of the Indies in Seville.
Another approach would be to track down living members of the old Californio families and see what heirlooms of armorial interest have survived—porcelain, silver, seals, tapestries, etc. The fashion of armorial tombstones had largely died out (so to speak) in the East by the time California was settled, but if that wasn’t the case in the Spanish areas it may also be possible to find arms in old cemeteries, if they have survived. Also perhaps carved on ranch houses or in mission churches, etc.
