Staffordshire's Punning Heraldry - Bagnall

 Bagnall

Arms: Per saltire Or and Ermine, a lion rampant Azure.

Crest: An antelope sejant Argent ducally gorged Or.

There is a clever heraldic pun (known as canting arms) to be found in the crest of this achievement. The pun relies on a very rare, mythical heraldic beast known as the bagwyn. 

The blazon describes the crest as an antelope sejant. In traditional British heraldry, a bagwyn is an imaginary monster that looks almost exactly like a heraldic antelope. The primary distinction between the two is minimal, mostly involving the specific shape of the horns and the horse-like tail. Because they are so visually identical, armourists frequently substituted or conflated the two creatures. Bagwyn, is a direct phonetic pun on the surname Bagnall ("Bag-wyn" / "Bag-nall"). By placing an antelope in the crest, the designer created a visual nod to the bagwyn, cementing a classic medieval wordplay on the bearer's family name. 

Staffordshire's Punning Heraldry - Cunliffe

 Cunliffe

Arms:  Sable three conies courant Argent.

Crest: A greyhound sejant Argent collared Sable.

There is an excellent heraldic pun (known in heraldry as canting arms) to be found in this achievement. The pun operates on two clever levels, playing with both the sounds of the words and the interactions of the animals depicted. The core of the pun relies on the historical pronunciation of the word "Conies". The word Conies (the old English word for rabbits) was traditionally pronounced to rhyme with "honeys" or "monies" (with a short 'u' sound: /ˈkʌni/). 

"Cunliffe" (originally derived from the Lancashire location Cundeclif or Cumbecliue) starts with the exact same phonetic sound ("Cun-").  By placing three conies on the shield, the armiger was using visual wordplay to sound out the first syllable of the surname Cunliffe. 

The combination of the shield and the crest creates a lively, theatrical joke: On the shield, the conies are described as courant (running). Perched directly above them on the crest is a greyhound, a dog famously bred for coursing and hunting rabbits. The layout creates a perpetual visual gag: the greyhound sits atop the helmet eternally watching or waiting to chase the three rabbits running across the shield right below it.

The last commercial parchment and vellum maker

A notice from The Heraldry Society concerning William Cowley the UK's last commercial parchment and vellum maker.

Oops - they've done it again!

As an ex-Leekensian, I have a passing interest in matters Civic, especially so when it involves heraldry. 

The Government has just confirmed that two new councils will provide services for Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent in the future. Two new unitary councils will replace the ten existing ones and cover:

• North Staffordshire - taking in Staffordshire Moorlands, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke-on-Trent

• Southern and Mid Staffordshire - taking in Stafford, East Staffordshire, South Staffordshire, Cannock Chase, Lichfield, Tamworth

Under the Government’s timetable, the new councils are expected to be established in April 2028, with elections to shadow councils held in May 2027. 

How does this affect heraldry? 

Well, quite a lot because ten councils are affected; Staffordshire County Council, Staffordshire Moorlands, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, East Staffordshire, South Staffordshire, Cannock Chase, Lichfield, and Tamworth, are all armigerous Councils. All ten of them are about to be abolished and replaced by two new unitary authorities. 

Ten armorial achievements consigned to the bin of history.

You can see all of the arms on the excellent Civic Heraldry of England & Wales site.

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Book Update

 I'm almost there.

The content is ready and the book cover has been designed. On Monday I shall be contacting the printers for a quote. 

Here's a sneak preview of the cover.

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry.

The "tincture rule" - what good is it?

With my other hat on,  I have recently had the pleasure of assisting a new armiger by enblazoning for him his own design to bring it to life. The field is of three colours and it is charged with a three Argent horses. A coloured field, all be it of three colours, charged with charges of metal. In my opinion, not really a breach of any tincture rules but in order to be doubly sure, I used "en cousu" in the blazon.

The reaction was excellent (on FaceBook) but two contributors felt that it having three colours on the field wasn't the done thing saying that it "would not fit in with European rules" as it was a breach of the tincture rules with one of the contributors quoting Michel Pastoureau in his Traité de l'Héraldique who expanded upon the rule.

My response to the "criticism" was that, "yes, it would fit with European rules (not that it needs to as it belongs to a citizen if the USA). If you have read the blazon you would have noted that the field is "en cousu" which is a term used by the French heralds. There are many examples where a colour is "placed" next to another colour, shields that are tierced per pale being an example of a field where, simply because it is divided into three parts, unless a fur is used, it almost always has either one colour against another colour, or one metal against another metal. The point being that whilst placing a charge of a colour onto a field of another colour is, quite sensibly, an unfortunate breach because it can't easily be seen, here we have charges of a metal placed upon a multi coloured field and all is clearly visible. A field of one colour adjacent to another is not at all unusual or unknown in heraldry."

I recieved further quotes from Michel Pastoureau and his Traité de l'Héraldique. Now, I have never read the works of M. Pastoureau but I am prepared to believe that his champion is very well informed about  his work; in which case, it seems that M. Pastoureau is, or was, simply of a closed mind.  

I further suggested "that the rather unflexible approach of Michel Pastoureau is not only staid but is today totally unacceptable. The whole purpose of the so called "tincture rule" is to aid clarity, not to prevent the design of arms that have an inherent clarity already. Even modern heralds are content to find ways around the tincture rule, the most abused being the use of the term "Proper" ; witness the use of the term in the recent grant by the Lord Lyon to George Vernon Dent MBE ("Or on a bend Azure three lozenges Ermine in chief two swords in saltire points upwards Proper and in base a jackdaw Proper. ) with silver swords on a gold field. Not one I would condone but clearly a greater breach of the "rule" than the widely accepted "en cousu" where in reality, the shield and its charges are as clear as day. We must look at "old writings" as guidance, and where we find them to be "misguided" we should use our common sense. To blazon a field as en cousu is nothing new and a sensible way to treat a multi-coloured field charged with metal charges. When flown as a flag from the battlements of a tower this "en cousu" achievement will be clear, far clearer than two swords in saltire "proper" on a gold field. Whilst I respect the fact that you have researched your opinion, it is not one I share."

These are of course my views but I am willing to expand upon them.

I work on the basis that the "tincture rule" is very sensibly there to guide, but it is not there to dictate. Witness the quoted example (which I personally would try to avoid) of the granted arms of Mr. Dent MBE. 

There are many workarounds which are quite legitimately accepted in the heraldry world.

There are "geometric workarounds" (divisions of the field). The tincture rule only applies when a charge is placed on top of a field. It does not apply to divisions where two fields sit next to each other.

Then there is "juxtaposition": A shield split down the middle (per pale) can safely be half-red and half-blue because the colours are touching side-by-side, not layered. There is absolutely nothing wrong with placing a metal charge on a shield per pale Azure and Gules. 

Neutral Fields: If a shield is evenly divided into an equal number of colour and metal pieces (such as barry stripes, bendy diagonal lines, or chequy checkers), the entire field is considered "neutral". You can place any charge, metal or colour, on top of it because it will inevitably cross over contrasting sections.

Using "amphibious" tinctures. Certain materials bypass the metal/colour divide entirely. For example heraldic furs like Ermine (black tails on white) or Vair (blue and white squirrel patterns) are considered neutral. They can legitimately, and without fear of repecussions, be placed on a metal or a colour, and vice versa.

The dreaded "Proper": When a charge is blazoned Proper (meaning depicted in its natural colours, like a brown bear or a green tree), it is generally exempt from the rule. I have to say that this is not always a good workaround as we have seen with silver swords on a gold field but perhaps more acceptable when a hawk Proper is placed upon a green field but care should be taken to ensure that the charge can actually be seen otherwise (as in the swords coat) Proper is a cheeky waste of time and the artist is often required to heavily outline the charge in order for it to clearly seen; much better to use "fimbriated" if one has to. On the whole, using the hawk as an example, when a hawk is placed upon a shield it would be better defined in one of the true heraldic colours or metals (nothing wrong with a red hawk on a silver field) and confine the beauty of a hawk Proper to the crest where it is not competing with a background. 

Then, rather rarer, we have Sable as a "hybrid": In certain regional traditions (particularly German and Eastern European heraldry), Sable (black) is treated as a hybrid tincture that can occasionally be treated as either a colour or a metal to maintain visibility.

And now we arrive at our example of flaunches "en cousu" which come under the heading of  Fringes, Bordures, and Overlapping Charges. 

1) The "Cousu" (Sewn) Loophole: Popular in French heraldry, if an influential noble or city wanted to add a charge that violated the rule, heralds would blazon it as cousu. This linguistically implied that the new piece was "sewn" alongside the shield rather than painted on top of it, bypassing the restriction.

2) Debruised Charges: If a charge is placed over a field and another element (like a bend or diagonal stripe) passes over both the field and the charge, it is acceptable because it is technically passing over multiple contrasting layers.

3) Composed Charges: Small accents on an animal, such as a lion's claws or tongue (armed and langued), can bypass the rule if they are too small to impact the shield's overall contrast from a distance.

4) Overlining or Fimbriation (referred to previously). If an armiger absolutely insists on putting a dark charge on a dark field (e.g., a blue cross on a red field), a herald can add a fimbriation. This adds a narrow border of metal (gold or silver) around the charge. The metal serves as a separation strip, meaning the colour technically touches metal rather than another colour.

There are of course, historically, deliberate violations (Armes à enquerre). Sometimes, the rule was broken entirely on purpose to force an exception. These are known as armes à enquerre (arms to inquire about). The deliberate mistake was meant to look so shocking that viewers would immediately stop and ask about the history of the shield. The Kingdom of Jerusalem, being the most famous example, features five gold crosses directly on a silver shield (Or on Argent). This was intentionally allowed to signify the unique, holy status of the kingdom, placing it above the standard laws of mortal heraldry.

So, to sum up, the so called tincture rule is there to guide only, and as a guide, it has its merits, but there are legitimate workarounds which can, and should be used (with the proviso that the ultimate aim is to maintain visibilty and clarity).

And remember, there is a lot of outdated information out there that was, once upon a time, perfectly valid; like the oft quoted "fact" that the helms of gentlemen and esquires have to face to dexter and only those abouve a certain rank can have forward facing helms. Rules that have long since been abandoned to common sense. But above all, remember that heraldry should be fun. 

The wonderful flag of Wales. 

A breach of the tincture rules? Maybe but no one could say that this flag couldn't be seen if it was flown from the battlements of a castle - it often is and the so called tincture rules don't for one moment matter. 

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - 185 images

Today I have completed all of the illustrations for the Shropshire's Punning Heraldry series - all 185 of them. Now begins the work of putting everything together into a full colour illustrated book along with every explanation of each individual pun.  

Zouche

Arms: Gules, 10 bezants 4, 3, 2, & 1 a file of three points throughout Azure.

(Visitations) (Corbet Pedigree).

It is said that there is an intentional heraldic pun in the historic coat of arms borne by the Zouche family. However, the pun does not rest on the word "bezant" itself, but rather on the ancient French word for a tree stump. The Anglo-Norman surname Zouche (originally de la Zouche) derives from the Old French and Norman word chouche or çouche (modern French: souche), which means "a tree stump." In early medieval heraldry, fields that were scattered entirely with small round charges (known as semé) were often meant to represent the texture, leaves, or parts of a plant related to the family name. A red field scattered with gold coins (Gules, bezantée) was, in this coat, visually used by the family to look like a blazing or glowing tree stump. 

Stretching a point? Probably but this is in fact a well known and accepted cant. 

This exact wordplay was openly recognized by medieval contemporaries. In the famous Caerlaverock Poem (a 1300 roll of arms written in Old French verse), the poet explicitly describes the arms of Alan la Zouche:"...sa rouge baniere o besans... ke fust brisans". This translates to: "...his red banner with bezants... which signified a burning branch/stump". The word brisans or buisson played directly on the visual illusion of a burning log or root system created by the gold dots on a bright red background. While early records from the 13th and 14th centuries simply describe the shield as Gules, bezantée (an unquantified scattering of gold coins), it later became standardized by heralds to a fixed number for easier rendering. This settled into the neat triangular layout of 10 bezants arranged 4, 3, 2, 1.

The surname Zouche (historically written as de la Souche) comes from the Old French word souche, which means a tree stump or stock. While many branches of the family later used an actual tree stump as a crest or badge, the famous shield featuring gold coins (bezants) on a red field (Gules, ten bezants 4, 3, 2, 1) relied on a clever linguistic connection to spending money. The specific punning nature of these arms is famously documented in the Caerlaverock Poem, a heraldic roll from the siege of Caerlaverock Castle in 1300. The poet mocks Alan de la Zouche's arms: "Aleyn de la Souche tresor signfiout ke fust brisans, sa rouge baniere o besans. Car biens cai ki a dependu tresor plus ke en burce pendu." Translation: "Alan de la Zouche meant to show that his treasure was being broken up [spent/scattered], his red banner with bezants. For I well know that he has spent more treasure than could ever be suspended in a purse."

The file, or label, of three points is a mark of cadency to denote the heir (the first son) and it is removed once the arms have been inherited.