Art of describing heraldic arms in proper terms
This article is about heraldry. For the term used in Romantic poetry, see
Blason
.
In
heraldry
and heraldic
vexillology
, a
blazon
is a formal description of a
coat of arms
,
flag
or similar
emblem
, from which the reader can reconstruct the appropriate image. The verb
to blazon
means to create such a description. The visual depiction of a coat of arms or flag has traditionally had considerable latitude in design, but a verbal blazon specifies the essentially distinctive elements. A coat of arms or flag is therefore primarily defined not by a picture but rather by the wording of its blazon (though in modern usage flags are often additionally and more precisely defined using geometrical specifications).
Blazon
is also the specialized language in which a blazon is written, and, as a verb, the act of writing such a description.
Blazonry
is the art, craft or practice of creating a blazon. The language employed in
blazonry
has its own
vocabulary
,
grammar
and
syntax
, which becomes essential for comprehension when blazoning a complex coat of arms.
Other armorial objects and devices ? such as
badges
,
banners
, and
seals
? may also be described in blazon.
The noun and verb
blazon
(referring to a verbal description) are not to be confused with the noun
emblazonment
, or the verb
to emblazon
, both of which relate to the graphic representation of a coat of arms or heraldic device.
Etymology
[
edit
]
The word
blazon
is derived from French
blason
,
'
shield
'
. It is found in English by the end of the 14th century.
[1]
Formerly, heraldic authorities believed that the word was related to the German verb
blasen
'
to blow (a horn)
'
.
[2]
[3]
Present-day lexicographers reject this theory as conjectural and disproved.
[1]
Grammar
[
edit
]
Blazon is generally designed to eliminate ambiguity of interpretation, to be as concise as possible, and to avoid repetition and extraneous punctuation. English
antiquarian
Charles Boutell
stated in 1864:
Heraldic language
is most concise, and it is always minutely exact, definite, and explicit; all unnecessary words are omitted, and all repetitions are carefully avoided; and, at the same time, every detail is specified with absolute precision. The nomenclature is equally significant, and its aim is to combine definitive exactness with a brevity that is indeed
laconic
.
[4]
However,
John Brooke-Little
,
Norroy and Ulster King of Arms
, wrote in 1985: "Although there are certain conventions as to how arms shall be blazoned ... many of the supposedly hard and fast rules laid down in heraldic manuals [including those by heralds] are often ignored."
[5]
A given coat of arms may be drawn in many different ways, all considered equivalent and faithful to the blazon, just as the letter "A" may be printed in many different
fonts
while still being the same letter. For example, the shape of the
escutcheon
is almost always immaterial, with very limited exceptions (e.g., the
coat of arms of Nunavut
, for which a round shield is specified).
The main conventions of blazon are as follows:
- Every blazon of a coat of arms begins by describing the
field
(background), with the first letter capitalised, followed by a
comma
",". In a majority of cases this is a single
tincture
; e.g.
Azure
(blue).
- If the field is complex, the
variation
is described, followed by the tinctures used; e.g.
Chequy gules and argent
(checkered red and white).
- If the shield is
divided
, the division is described, followed by the tinctures of the subfields, beginning with the
dexter
side (shield bearer's right, but viewer's left) of the
chief
(upper) edge; e.g.
Party per pale argent and vert
(dexter half silver,
sinister
half green), or
Quarterly
argent and gules
(clockwise from viewer's top left, i.e.
dexter chief
: white, red, white, red). In the case of a divided shield, it is common for the word "party" or "parted" to be omitted (e.g.,
Per pale argent and vert, a tree eradicated counterchanged
).
- Some authorities prefer to capitalise the names of tinctures and charges, but this convention is far from universal. Where tinctures are not capitalised, an exception may be made for the metal
Or
, in order to avoid confusion with the English word "or". Where space is at a premium, tincture names may be abbreviated: e.g.,
ar.
for
argent
,
gu.
for
gules
,
az.
for
azure
,
sa.
for
sable
, and
purp.
for
purpure
.
- Following the description of the field, the principal
ordinary
or ordinaries and
charge
(s) are named, with their tincture(s); e.g.,
a
bend
or.
- The principal ordinary or charge is followed by any other charges placed on or around it. If a charge is a bird or a beast, its
attitude
is defined, followed by the creature's tincture, followed by anything that may be differently coloured; e.g.
An eagle
displayed
gules
armed
and wings charged with trefoils or
(see the
coat of arms of Brandenburg
below). If the charge is a tree then it may be described by its shape or its leaves;
eradicated
means its roots are shown.
- Counterchanged
means that a charge which straddles a line of division is given the same tinctures as the divided field, but reversed (see the arms of Behnsdorf below).
- A
quartered
(composite) shield is blazoned one quarter (panel) at a time, proceeding by rows from chief (top) to base, and within each row from dexter (the right side of the bearer holding the shield) to sinister; in other words, from the viewer's left to right.
- Following the description of the shield, any additional components of the
achievement
? such as
crown
/
coronet
,
helmet
,
torse
,
mantling
,
crest
,
motto
,
supporters
and
compartment
? are described in turn, using the same terminology and syntax.
- A convention often followed historically was to name a tincture explicitly only once within a given blazon. If the same tincture was found in different places within the arms, this was addressed either by ordering all elements of like tincture together prior to the tincture name (e.g.,
Argent, two chevrons and a canton gules
); or by naming the tincture only at its first occurrence, and referring to it at subsequent occurrences obliquely, for example by use of the phrase "of the field" (e.g.,
Argent, two chevrons and on a canton gules a lion passant of the field
); or by reference to its numerical place in the sequence of named tinctures (e.g.,
Argent, two chevrons and on a canton gules a lion passant of the first
: in both these examples, the lion is
argent
). However, these conventions are now avoided by the
College of Arms
in London, England, and by most other formal granting bodies, as they may introduce ambiguity to complex blazons.
[6]
- It is common to print all heraldic blazons in
italic
.
[6]
[7]
Heraldry has its own vocabulary, word-order and punctuation, and presenting it in italics indicates to the reader the use of a quasi-foreign language.
-
Azure
, a
bend
or
.
A coat made famous by the medieval court case
Scrope v. Grosvenor
.
-
Party per pale argent and vert, a tree eradicated counterchanged.
Arms of
Behnsdorf
.
-
Argent, an eagle displayed gules armed and wings charged with trefoils Or.
Arms of
Brandenburg
.
-
Quarterly 1st and 4th Sable a lion rampant on a canton Argent a cross Gules; 2nd and 3rd quarterly Argent and Gules in the 2nd and 3rd quarters a fret Or overall on a bend Sable three escallops of the first and as an augmentation in chief an inescutcheon, Argent a cross Gules and thereon an inescutcheon Azure, three fleurs-de-lis Or.
Arms of
Churchill
.
[8]
French vocabulary and grammar
[
edit
]
Because heraldry developed at a time when English clerks wrote in
Anglo-Norman French
, many terms in English heraldry are of French origin. Some of the details of the syntax of blazon also follow French practice: thus,
adjectives
are normally placed after
nouns
rather than before.
A number of heraldic adjectives may be given in either a French or an anglicised form: for example, a
cross pattee
or a
cross patty
; a
cross fitchee
or a
cross fitchy
. In modern English blazons, the anglicised form tends to be preferred.
[6]
Where the French form is used, a problem may arise as to the appropriate adjectival ending, determined in normal French usage by gender and number.
"To describe two hands as
appaumees
, because the word
main
is feminine in French, savours somewhat of pedantry. A person may be a good armorist, and a tolerable French scholar, and still be uncertain whether an escallop-shell covered with
bezants
should be blazoned as bezante or bezantee".
The usual convention in English heraldry is to adhere to the feminine singular form, for example:
a chief undee
and
a saltire undee
, even though the French nouns
chef
and
sautoir
are in fact masculine. Efforts have been made to ignore grammatical correctness, for example by
J. E. Cussans
, who suggested that all French adjectives should be expressed in the masculine singular, without regard to the gender and number of the nouns they qualify, thus
a chief unde
and
a saltire unde
.
[9]
Complexity
[
edit
]
Full descriptions of shields range in complexity, from a single word to a convoluted series describing compound shields:
Quarterly I. Azure three Lions' Heads affronte Crowned Or (for
Dalmatia
); II.
chequy
Argent and
Gules
(for
Croatia
); III. Azure a River in Fess Gules bordered
Argent
thereon a Marten proper beneath a
six-pointed star
Or (for
Slavonia
); IV. per Fess Azure and Or over all a Bar Gules in the Chief a demi-Eagle Sable displayed addextre of the Sun-in-splendour and senestre of a Crescent Argent in the Base seven Towers three and four Gules (for
Transylvania
); ente en point Gules a double-headed Eagle proper on a Peninsula Vert holding a Vase pouring Water into the Sea Argent beneath a Crown proper with bands Azure (for
Fiume
); over all an
escutcheon
Barry of eight Gules and Argent impaling Gules on a Mount Vert a Crown Or issuant therefrom a double-Cross Argent (for
Hungary
)
.
[10]
Points
[
edit
]
Inescutcheon
[
edit
]
Divisions of the field
[
edit
]
The
field
of a
shield
in heraldry can be divided into more than one
tincture
, as can the various
heraldic charges
. Many coats of arms consist simply of a division of the field into two contrasting tinctures. These are considered divisions of a shield, so the rule of tincture can be ignored. For example, a shield divided azure and gules would be perfectly acceptable. A line of partition may be straight or it may be varied. The variations of partition lines can be wavy, indented, embattled, engrailed,
nebuly
, or made into myriad other forms; see
Line (heraldry)
.
[11]
Ordinaries
[
edit
]
In the early days of heraldry, very simple bold rectilinear shapes were painted on shields. These could be easily recognized at a long distance and could be easily remembered. They therefore served the main purpose of heraldry: identification.
[12]
As more complicated shields came into use, these bold shapes were set apart in a separate class as the "honorable ordinaries". They act as charges and are always written first in blazon. Unless otherwise specified they extend to the edges of the field. Though ordinaries are not easily defined, they are generally described as including the
cross
, the
fess
, the
pale
, the
bend
, the
chevron
, the
saltire
, and the
pall
.
[13]
There is a separate class of charges called sub-ordinaries which are of a geometrical shape subordinate to the ordinary. According to Friar, they are distinguished by their order in blazon. The sub-ordinaries include the
inescutcheon
, the
orle
, the tressure, the double tressure, the
bordure
, the
chief
, the
canton
, the
label
, and
flaunches
.
[14]
Ordinaries may appear in parallel series, in which case blazons in English give them different names such as pallets, bars, bendlets, and chevronels. French blazon makes no such distinction between these diminutives and the ordinaries when borne singly. Unless otherwise specified an ordinary is drawn with straight lines, but each may be indented, embattled, wavy, engrailed, or otherwise have their lines varied.
[15]
Charges
[
edit
]
A charge is any object or figure placed on a heraldic shield or on any other object of an armorial composition.
[16]
Any object found in nature or technology may appear as a heraldic charge in armory. Charges can be animals, objects, or geometric shapes. Apart from the ordinaries, the most frequent charges are the
cross
– with its hundreds of variations – and the
lion
and
eagle
. Other common animals are
stags
,
wild boars
,
martlets
, and
fish
.
Dragons
,
bats
,
unicorns
,
griffins
, and more exotic monsters appear as charges and as
supporters
.
Animals are found in various stereotyped positions or
attitudes
.
Quadrupeds
can often be found rampant (standing on the left hind foot). Another frequent position is
passant
, or walking, like the lions of the
coat of arms of England
. Eagles are almost always shown with their wings spread, or displayed. A pair of wings conjoined is called a
vol
.
In
English heraldry
the
crescent
,
mullet
,
martlet
,
annulet
,
fleur-de-lis
, and
rose
may be added to a shield to distinguish
cadet
branches of a family from the senior line. These cadency marks are usually shown smaller than normal charges, but it still does not follow that a shield containing such a charge belongs to a cadet branch. All of these charges occur frequently in basic undifferenced coats of arms.
[17]
Marshalling
[
edit
]
To
marshal
two or more coats of arms is to combine them in one shield. This can be done in a number of ways, of which the simplest is
impalement
:
dividing the field
per pale
and putting one whole coat in each half. Impalement replaced the earlier
dimidiation
– combining the dexter half of one coat with the sinister half of another – because dimidiation can create ambiguity.
A more versatile method is
quartering
, division of the field by both vertical and horizontal lines. As the name implies, the usual number of divisions is four, but the principle has been extended to very large numbers of "quarters".
The third common mode of marshalling is with an
inescutcheon
, a small shield placed in front of the main shield.
Variations of the field
[
edit
]
The
field
of a shield, or less often a charge or crest, is sometimes made up of a pattern of colours, or
variation
. A pattern of horizontal (barwise) stripes, for example, is called
barry
, while a pattern of vertical (palewise) stripes is called
paly
. A pattern of diagonal stripes may be called
bendy
or
bendy sinister
, depending on the direction of the stripes. Other variations include
chevrony
,
gyronny
and
chequy
. Wave shaped stripes are termed
undy
. For further variations, these are sometimes combined to produce patterns of
barry-bendy
,
paly-bendy
,
lozengy
and
fusilly
. Semes, or patterns of repeated charges, are also considered variations of the field.
[18]
The
Rule of tincture
applies to all semes and variations of the field.
Differencing and cadency
[
edit
]
Cadency is any systematic way to distinguish
arms
displayed by
descendants
of the holder of a
coat of arms
when those family members have not been granted arms in their own right. Cadency is necessary in heraldic systems in which a given design may be owned by only one person at any time, generally the head of the senior line of a particular family. As an
armiger
's arms may be used "by courtesy", either by children or spouses, while they are still living, some form of differencing may be required so as not to confuse them with the original
undifferenced
or "plain coat" arms. Historically, arms were only heritable by males and therefore cadency marks had no relevance to daughters; in the modern era, Canadian and Irish heraldry include daughters in cadency. These differences are formed by adding to the arms small and inconspicuous marks called
brisures
, similar to
charges
but smaller. They are placed on the
fess-point
, or
in-chief
in the case of the label.
[19]
Brisures are generally exempt from the
rule of tincture
. One of the best examples of usage from the medieval period is shown on the seven Beauchamp cadets in the stained-glass windows of
St Mary's Church
, Warwick.
[19]
See also
[
edit
]
References
[
edit
]
- ^
a
b
"blazon, n."
.
Oxford English Dictionary
(Online ed.).
Oxford University Press
.
(Subscription or
participating institution membership
required.)
- ^
Encyclopædia Britannica, 9th. ed., vol.11, p.683, "Heraldry"
- ^
Chisholm, Hugh
, ed. (1911).
"Blazon"
.
Encyclopædia Britannica
(11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
- ^
Boutell, Charles
,
Heraldry, Historical and Popular
, 3rd edition, London, 1864, pp. 8?9.
- ^
J. P. Brooke-Little:
An Heraldic Alphabet
; new and revised edition, p. 52. London: Robson Books, 1985.
- ^
a
b
c
"Blazon in CoA"
.
CoA: The Coat of Arms
. Archived from
the original
on 27 December 2017
. Retrieved
26 December
2017
.
- ^
Boutell 1864, p. 11.
- ^
Courtenay, P.
The Armorial Bearings of Sir Winston Churchill
Archived
2013-07-18 at the
Wayback Machine
. The Churchill Centre.
- ^
a
b
Cussans, John E.
(1874).
The Handbook of Heraldry
(2nd ed.). London: Chatto & Windus. p. 47.
- ^
Velde, Francois (August 1998).
"Hungary"
.
Heraldry by Countries
. Retrieved
13 December
2007
.
- ^
Stephen Friar and John Ferguson.
Basic Heraldry
. (W.W. Norton & Company, New York: 1993), 148.
- ^
von Volborth (1981)
, p. 18
- ^
Friar (1987)
, p. 259
- ^
Friar (1987)
, p. 330
- ^
Woodcock & Robinson (1988)
, p. 60
- ^
Boutell (1890)
, p. 311
- ^
Moncreiffe & Pottinger (1953)
, p. 20
- ^
Fox-Davies (1909)
, pp. 101
- ^
a
b
Encyclopædia Britannica, 9th edition (1884), vol. 11, p. 704
- General
- Brault, Gerard J. (1997).
Early Blazon: Heraldic Terminology in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries
, (2nd ed.). Woodbridge, UK: The Boydell Press.
ISBN
0-85115-711-4
.
- Elvin, Charles Norton. (1969).
A Dictionary of Heraldry
. London: Heraldry Today.
ISBN
0-900455-00-4
.
- Parker, James.
A Glossary of Terms Used in Heraldry
, (2nd ed.). Rutland, VT: Charles E. Tuttle Co.
ISBN
0-8048-0715-9
.
- Books
- Boutell, Charles
(1890). Aveling, S. T. (ed.).
Heraldry, Ancient and Modern: Including Boutell's Heraldry
. London: Frederick Warne.
OCLC
6102523
– via Internet Archive.
- Burke, Bernard
(1967).
The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales; Comprising a Registry of Armorial Bearings from the Earliest to the Present Time
. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing.
- Dennys, Rodney
(1975).
The Heraldic Imagination
. New York: Clarkson N. Potter.
- Elvins, Mark Turnham
(1988).
Cardinals and Heraldry
. London: Buckland Publications.
- Fairbairn, James (1986).
Fairbairn's Crests of the Families of Great Britain & Ireland
. New York: Bonanza Books.
- Fox-Davies, Arthur Charles
(1904).
The Art of Heraldry: An Encyclopedia of Armory
. London: T.C. & E.C. Jack – via Internet Archive.
- Fox-Davies, Arthur Charles (1909).
A Complete Guide to Heraldry
. London: T.C. & E.C. Jack.
LCCN
09023803
– via Internet Archive.
- Franklyn, Julian (1968).
Heraldry
. Cranbury, NJ: A.S. Barnes and Company.
ISBN
9780498066832
.
- Friar, Stephen, ed. (1987).
A Dictionary of Heraldry
. New York: Harmony Books.
ISBN
9780517566657
.
- Gwynn-Jones, Peter (1998).
The Art of Heraldry: Origins, Symbols, and Designs
. London: Parkgate Books.
ISBN
9780760710821
.
- Humphery-Smith, Cecil
(1973).
General Armory Two
. London: Tabard Press.
ISBN
9780806305837
.
- Innes of Learney, Thomas (1978). Innes of Edingight, Malcolm (ed.).
Scots Heraldry
(3rd ed.). London: Johnston & Bacon.
ISBN
9780717942282
.
- Le Fevre, Jean (1971). Pinches, Rosemary; Wood, Anthony (eds.).
A European Armorial: An Armorial of Knights of the Golden Fleece and 15th Century Europe
. London: Heraldry Today.
ISBN
9780900455131
.
- Louda, Ji?i;
Maclagan, Michael
(1981).
Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe
. New York: Clarkson Potter.
- Mackenzie of Rosehaugh, George (1680).
Scotland's Herauldrie: the Science of Herauldrie treated as a part of the Civil law and Law of Nations
. Edinburgh: Heir of Andrew Anderson.
- Moncreiffe, Iain
; Pottinger, Don (1953).
Simple Heraldry ? Cheerfully Illustrated
. London and Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons.
- Neubecker, Ottfried
(1976).
Heraldry: Sources, Symbols and Meaning
. Maidenhead, England: McGraw-Hill.
- Nisbet, Alexander (1984).
A system of Heraldry
. Edinburgh: T & A Constable.
- Parker, James (1970).
A Glossary of Terms Used in Heraldry
. Newton Abbot: David & Charles.
- Pastoureau, Michel
(1997).
Heraldry: An Introduction to a Noble Tradition
.
Abrams Discoveries
. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
- Paul, James Balfour
(1903).
An Ordinary of Arms Contained in the Public Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland
. Edinburgh: W. Green & Sons – via Internet Archive.
- Pinches, J. H. (1994).
European Nobility and Heraldry
. Heraldry Today.
ISBN
0-900455-45-4
.
- Reid of Robertland, David; Wilson, Vivien (1977).
An Ordinary of Arms
. Vol. Second. Edinburgh: Lyon Office.
- Rietstap, Johannes B.
(1967).
Armorial General
. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing.
- Siebmacher, Johann. J. (1890?1901).
Siebmacher's Grosses und Allgemeines Wappenbuch Vermehrten Auglage
. Nurnberg: Von Bauer & Raspe.
- Slater, Stephen (2003).
The Complete Book of Heraldry
. New York: Hermes House.
ISBN
9781844772247
.
- von Volborth, Carl-Alexander
(1981).
Heraldry ? Customs, Rules and Styles
. Ware, Hertfordshire: Omega Books.
ISBN
0-907853-47-1
.
- Wagner, Anthony (1946).
Heraldry in England
. Penguin.
OCLC
878505764
.
- Wagner, Anthony R (1967).
Heralds of England: A History of the Office and College of Arms
. London:
Her Majesty's Stationery Office
.
- von Warnstedt, Christopher (October 1970). "The Heraldic Provinces of Europe".
The Coat of Arms
.
XI
(84).
- Woodcock, Thomas
;
Robinson, John Martin
(1988).
The Oxford Guide to Heraldry
. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Woodward, John; Burnett, George (1892) [1884].
Woodward's a treatise on heraldry, British and foreign: with English and French glossaries
. Edinburgh: W. & A. B. Johnson.
ISBN
0-7153-4464-1
.
LCCN
02020303
– via Internet Archive.
External links
[
edit
]