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. 

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Wingfield

 Wingfield

Wingfield, of Shrewsbury, Preston-Brockhurst, & Onslow.

Arms: Argent, on a bend Gules cotticed Sable three pairs of wings in lure points downward of the first, a fleur-di-lis for difference.

Crest of Wingfield, temp. Hen. VIII. two wings displayed Argent united by a cord in fret Or.

The arms of Wingfield, of Shrewsbury, Preston-Brockhurst, & Onslow.

The coat of arms for the surname Wingfield features a classic example of canting heraldry (also known as canting arms or an heraldic pun). The use of wings on the shield is a visual pun that audibly and conceptually alludes to the first syllable of the surname "Wing-field". The "wings in lure" (a term depicting two wings joined together as if in a falconer's lure) are a direct, playful reference to Wing. In heraldry, when blazoning, or describing, a coat of arms, the basic shield is referred to as the "field". Whilst strictly speaking the wings in lure are on the bend, not the field, the heralds would have been quite content to use the fact that on the whole, there are wings (on the) field to make a perfect play on the surname Wingfield. 

The shield is described as: Argent, on a bend Gules cotticed Sable three pairs of wings in lure points downward of the first, a fleur-di-lis for difference. The mention of "a fleur-de-lis for difference" is not part of the primary surname pun. In the historical rules of cadency, this signifies that these specific arms belong to the sixth son of the family (or a cadet branch descending from a sixth son), using the fleur-de-lis to distinguish his line from the main branch.

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Willaston

Willaston

Arms: Or, three mullets* two and one Sable (visitations).

Crest: Crest: A demi-lion issuing out of a ducal coronet holding in his paw a mullet (Sable) (Seal 1663)

* Burke's has the mullets pierced.

The arms of Willaston.

There is a traditional heraldic pun (known as a canting coat or armes parlantes) in this coat of arms, but it relies on an archaic spelling and meaning of the surname. While the "mullet" (a star-like charge representing a spur-rowel) might initially seem to have no relationship to the name Willaston, the pun operates on two clever linguistic levels. 

The first is the complex cant upon  "Well-A-Star". In early English and Anglo-Norman heraldry, puns on names were frequently phonetic rather than literal. Surnames ending in "-aston" or "-iston" were often treated by period heralds as a play on "a star" or "east star". The name Willaston (or its variants like Wollaston) was phonetically parsed in heraldic wit as "Well-A-Star" or "Will-A-Star". Because a mullet is the heraldic term for a five, or six-pointed star, placing three prominent stars on the shield directly answered to this verbal joke. 

The second is the aquatic Double-Pun: The "Mullet" Fish. There is a second, overlapping historical joke that applies to this specific family name. Early heraldic lexicographers, most notably Randle Holme III, in his 1688 masterpiece The Academy of Armory, explicitly recorded that the mullet was uniquely used by families like Willaston as a multi-layered pun. In the aquatic world, a mullet is a well-known type of fish. The surname Willaston shares strong historical roots and a nearly identical phonetic origin with the surname Williamson. In the playful, "cheap-shot" logic of medieval heraldry, the family name Williamson/Willaston sounds like "Will's son" or "Will's town". The mullet (fish) was used as a rebus because a young or small mullet fish was historically referred to in various regional English dialects as a "will" or a "willy-fish". Because drawing fish on a shield was sometimes seen as aesthetically less prestigious than geometric shapes, the heraldic designers swapped the literal fish for the geometric star while retaining the exact same phonetic name: a mullet.

By having the lion actively look at and hold a fourth mullet in its paw above the helmet, the heralds were quite literally doubling down on the pun, pointing the viewer's eye directly to the visual clue of the bearer's surname.

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Watson

Watson

Watson, William.

Arms: Azure, a hare courant Proper between three suns 2 & 1 Or.

The arms of William Watson, co. Salop.

There is a distinct heraldic pun (known as canting arms or armes parlantes) in this blazon, which was historically borne by John Watson, Bishop of Winchester (1580–1584). This specific coat of arms breaks down into a two-part phonetic and semantic joke on the surname Watson. The Hare (Wat); from the Middle Ages through to early modern English, "Wat" was a standard, affectionate colloquial nickname for a hare (much like "Tom" for a male cat or "Robin" for a redbreast). Therefore, the hare courant (running hare) directly represents "Wat". The Suns (Son): The three suns flanking the hare serve as a literal, visual play on the word "son". When you read the symbols together on the shield, the heraldic elements visually announce "Wat-Sun" (Watson). 

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Wall

 Wall, of Faintree Hall, Shropshire. 

Arms: Per fesse Or and Azure, a fesse battely counter battely between three fleurs-di-lis all counterchanged. Crest: Out of a mural coronet Or a wolf's head Argent charged on the neck with a fesse embattled and counter embattled Gules.

(Granted July 9th 1594)

The arms of Wall, of Faintree Hall, Shropshire. 

The coat of arms and crest for the surname Wall is a textbook example of a canting arm (a heraldic pun or visual rebus). The central fesse is blazoned as "battelly counter-battelly" (also known as embattled, counter-embattled). In classical architecture and fortification, an embattled parapet or wall features alternating indentations and raised sections (crenelations). Visually and etymologically, this represents the stone wall of a castle, punning directly on the surname Wall. 

The crest sits atop a mural crown. As the name implies, a mural crown is styled to look like the top of a stone wall or a fortress. In stories, and probably also in fact, wolves were notorious for trying to breach the walls of sheepfolds, and were known as relentless jumpers of barriers. A wolf leaping over, attacking, or surmounting a wall is a classic heraldic play on the name.

Shropshire's Punning Heraldry - Vickers

 Vickers

Vickers, Rev. J. 

Arms: Ermine a cross double fourchy Argent charged with 5 mullets Gules.

The arms of the Reverend J. Vickers.

Is this a pun, of just descriptive arms? There may be a tenuous heraldic pun in this blazon, centring entirely on the unique style of the cross representing the first letter of the surname and of the whole achievement being based upon Christian symbolism representing the occupation of the bearer. 

We know that a standard cross fourchy (from the French fourché, meaning "forked") has limbs that split into two points like a tuning fork. A cross double fourchy means it is double-forked, resulting in four prongs at the end of each of the four limbs. In Latin and old legal documents, the number four is "Quattuor", but the Roman numeral is written as "IV". Visually, the four-pronged ends resemble a series of "V"s. Historically, the phonetic and written interplay between "V", the Roman numeral "IV" (Four/Fourchy). The cross is charged with 5 mullets (five-pointed stars). In Roman numerals, the number five is represented by the letter "V". Placing exactly 5 of these charges acts as a blatant literal anchor for the initial letter of the Vickers name. While the primary objective of these specific design choices is the phonetic "cant," the choice of tinctures and furs grounds it in traditional medieval symbolism. 

But the shield has more to offer than simply a representation of the first letter of the bearers surname. The deigner of this achievement put a lot of thought into the occupation of the bearer. The usual coat of arms for the surname Vickers has a a straight forward cross fourchy, with the ends split into two, however, here we encounter a cross double fourchy, where the ends are split into four; the number four is clearly important to the armiger's Christianity.

Each arm of the cross is split into four; in biblical numerology, the number four universally symbolises earthly completeness, creation, and universality. While the number three often represents the divine (e.g., the Trinity), four relates to God's total sovereignty and order over the physical, material world He established. On the fourth day of creation, God completed the material universe by bringing the sun, moon, and stars into existence to govern time, seasons, and days. Four is associated with the four points of the compass (North, South, East, West) and the four winds, representing the geographic totality of the globe and God's reach across all nations. In the Scripture, the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) provide a complete earthly witness of Jesus Christ’s life.The Garden of Eden was watered by four rivers. The four Living Creatures seen around the throne in Revelation (often associated with a lion, ox, man, and eagle) represent all of creation worshiping God.

The five red mullets not only represent the V of Roman numerals, but more importantly, are representations of the wounds received during the crucifixion where Jesus suffered five primary wounds: on each of his hands, each of his feet, and his side.

This coat of arms gives us yet more. The ermine (the winter coat of the stoat, a small weasel) holds deep historical and spiritual significance in Christianity, primarily symbolising purity, incorruptibility, and the preservation of faith. This significance stems from two main traditional beliefs about the animal; the "Purity unto Death" Legend where Medieval bestiaries and folklore claimed that an ermine would rather surrender and die at the hands of hunters than soil its pure white coat by hiding in a dirty den. In Christian teaching, this became a powerful metaphor for martyrdom and the believer’s calling to die to sin rather than compromise their soul or faith.  Because of its flawless white winter coat, the fur became a natural symbol for the absolute purity of Jesus and the sinlessness of the Virgin Mary.

All in all, a worthy coat of arms.