Scottish Armiger’s Crest Badge with a Feather
Greg
the armiger’s one feather as standard equipment. As we understand the
rules to date; the feather is yet another addition by Innes of
Learney, and that there is in fact no provision in the Clan practice
respecting the use of one feather prior to Innes. It is also
understood that the Clan Chief wore the crest alone without the strap
and buckle, as that that format was reserved for followers of the
chief. Therefore, how is it that the Armiger is; although granted a
badge, able to display a feather, and intermedidiate a strap and
buckle? The motto is usually dispalyed above the plain crest on a
wreath for a chief... Upon what ancient practice does this derive?
barrassie
Dear Greg,
There are illustrations of chief of Hay wearing a strap and bucle
badge in his hat, he is wearing a tweed suit in the 19th century,
there is also a portratit in oils of Dame Flora McLeod of McLeod
wearing a crest within strap and buckle pinning a tartan cloak at her
neck.
The late Aplegirth late chief of clan Jardine wore a crest badge
within strap and buckle at Border Gathering Games Day with his three
eagle feathers, so did I at one time. However my granfather's cap
badge and plaid broach both had a plain circuit without strap and
buckle,(the hallmark is for Glasgow 1882) but I think like you that
Learney pushed the strap and buckle badge for clansmen, and the plain
one for the chiefs.
Best wishes,
Charles
Greg
wrote:
Hello Charles,
Yes, I am aware that there are some chiefs who have worn the strap and
buckle, but as you also said many (like your grandfather) were plain.
The other issue of the armiger's one feather is an interesting one: An
armiger (as such) does not fit the hierarchy of a clan. Therefore how
is it, outside of Innes, that some armigers boast the right to wear
and eagle feather with the cap badge? And even if we consider Lyon
Court, I'm not sure that Lyon has the authority to delegate feathers
to anyone - does he?
StephenP
>
> Hello Charles,
>
> Yes, I am aware that there are some chiefs who have worn the strap and
> buckle, but as you also said many (like your grandfather) were plain.
> The other issue of the armiger's one feather is an interesting one: An
> armiger (as such) does not fit the hierarchy of a clan. Therefore how
> is it, outside of Innes, that some armigers boast the right to wear
> and eagle feather with the cap badge? And even if we consider Lyon
> Court, I'm not sure that Lyon has the authority to delegate feathers
> to anyone - does he?-
Greg
Unless the new Lyon changes things, the current practice will remain
extant viz;
http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/242.html
I suppose that if a Scottish armiger is not a "clansman" he is the
head (but not chief) of his own heraldic family. So a single feather
is acceptable.
The trouble is that a lot of froth and worry is generated over matters
that are of no real importance.
Yours aye
Stephen
barrassie
Hi Greg and Stephen,
Lord Lyon and Lyon Court can give guidance on the wearing of feathers,
which are not by law but hallowed custom. A previous Lord Lyon had
advised me that though not a legal point, it was by hallowed custom
and should be treated with respect. I personally wear two feathers, my
father inherited his father's two golden eagle feathers, I have a phot
of my father wearing them c 1950.
I recently assisted a Head of long established Territorial House to
matriculate her late father's Arms in her name, although there was an
elder brother she was the nominated heir, I advised her trhat she
should be entitled to two eagle feathers but that I would check with
Lyon Court, Carrick advised me that I would have to approach her chief
Madam Hunter of Hunterston this I did and and that gracious lady
santioned the wearing of two eagle feathers by the Head of the House
Hafton.
Yrs aye,
Charles
Greg
Yes Stephen, I read that. The question however revolves around the
prescient for historical purposes. If this was Innes then that's
important to know. The wearing of feathers by Chief's and Captains is
an old old practice as I understand. You missed my origianl question
and follow-up of (one feather) - no froth, just history...
As Charles said the two feather practice may be quite old do to its
respect. Therefore the question remains; did Innes institute the
practice of "The Armiger's Feather"? And again, I would think that an
armiger would wear a plain crest as strap and buckle implies clanship,
and I would also think it not to be worn in the presense of the chief
as it implies rank.
rha_s...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Greg,
Your concern to be one of implied rank.
Whether Innes of Learney invented the ancient tradition of one feather
for an armiger or whether the tradition was actually ancient I can't
say but I fail to see how the wearing of such an adornment, be it in
the presence of ones chief or not, can cause any offence to anyone
(including a chief) as the only rank (if indeed it can be claimed as
rank) indicated by one feather is that of armiger. Provided that the
wearer is in fact an armiger*, he surely can not be accused of
pretending to any rank to which he is not entitled. One feather does
not have any significance as to rank but the wearing of two feathers,
or even three, is quite a different matter and when an armiger is seen
to sport two or more feathers it is quite right that questions as to
pretensions of rank should be asked.
In my experience, it is so called Clan Officials outwith the knowledge
base of Scotland (i.e. mostly Americans) who seem to be unaware of the
true significance of two or more feathers and we often see those who
are no more than presidents of Highland games calling themselves chief
of the games and proudly, but wrongly, wearing any number of feathers
regardless of their actual and deserved status!
* When I refer to the status of armiger, I could be even more
proscriptive and demand that those who have assumed arms (such as
Americans) and do not have arms granted or matriculated in The Lyon
Register really ought not to wear a crest circlet with any feathers at
all when attending Highland games. I take this stand because although
there is no armorial law in America, we are talking about a Scottish
tradition and these people are attending a celebration of Scottish
heritage and sentimentally at least, during the Highland Games they
are mentally on Scottish soil and ought therefore to abide by the
rules of Scotland. If you have no arms recorded in the register then
at best you are only allowed to wear the crest of your chief in a
strap and buckle and ought to forget all about feathers unless your
chief has given you permission to wear 'em!
Edward
Greg
>
> - Show quoted text -
>Whether Innes of Learney invented the ancient tradition of one feather
>for an armiger or whether the tradition was actually ancient I can't
>say
This is key to the question. Now, when you ask:
>I fail to see how the wearing of such an adornment, be it in
>the presence of ones chief or not, can cause any offence
I don’t conclude any sort of offense as much as I suggest the
implication (a misnomer of sorts) of clan rank. Yet at games here in
California I have seen clan members wearing the ancient tartan and
sporting a clan cap badge with a “custom” crest and one feather
(silver or real is of no matter). This display suggests a sept, which
is a rank in a clan – a new house: not just association incorrectly
labeled as a “sept”. Let’s not forget that the 12th Duke of Argyll
made it very clear that plain Campbell was to be worn save for the
houses of Louden and Cowder. It therefore seems improper for a
clansman to wear the tartan and support his own cause with a display
of arms: (non- traditional) that is; not balanced. I did not say that
one feather (claimed) rank: I said it implied rank.
If we use the US as an example, it has always been my understanding
(and observed practice) that Americans, by attending and participating
at games, are trying to understand and perhaps utilize any cultural
information gained to help them work within the traditions. One
feather does not seem an ancient practice… and (seems) to skirt
tradition: this is why I raise the question of origin.
(Americans) as you say: > “who seem to be unaware of the true
significance of two or more feathers…”: therein lies my point:
feathers (show) rank.
I agree with your proscription on assumed arms: these folks take their
own chances in the arena of Scottish customs. I am becoming more
surprised by what appears to be a conflict of interest with regard to
some Scots customs… So one of my interests has been to try and define
the origins where possible of rules that – bend – reality a little.
The key question of origin however still remains without an answer.
Greg
>
> - Show quoted text -
The first line of my reponse didn't show:
Edward said:
> Whether Innes of Learney invented the ancient tradition of one feather
> for an armiger or whether the tradition was actually ancient I can't
> say
(That) is the key to my question etc...
Greg
>
> - Show quoted text -
The first line of my reponse didn't show:
Edward said:
> Whether Innes of Learney invented the ancient tradition of one feather
> for an armiger or whether the tradition was actually ancient I can't
> say
(That) is the key to my question etc...
barrassie
>
> - Show quoted text -
Last year my wife and I attended the Oban Games, she was representing
the Sltire Society as a member of council, I made the mistake of
wearing real eagle feathers, however I noticed that real feathers were
worn by the President of the Games the Duke of Argyle and one
American, I later quietly took mine off when I had the opportunity.
There were others wearing their silver crest badges which did include
silver feathers. A number of other chiefs also wear festhers but their
armigerous chieftains and gentlemen of the clan do not. In future I
will check before I attend a gathering/games before I wear feathers.
The genlemen of the clans refered to under the gaelic had their place
so I would think it not unlikely that single feathers were worn by
simple armigers in the 19th century and perhaps before. As an archer
in the Royal Bodyguard. Regimental Pipers wear one feather in their
bonnet one feather. There are also extant illustrations of militia
badges with various numbers of eagle feathers displayed.
Yrs aye,
Charles
Tom
>
> - Show quoted text -
I believe Lyon is agnostic on the issue of eagle feathers. It's
custom, not heraldic law, and custom is by its nature maleable (no
matter how irritating that is for some of us).
It seems to me that the single feather is, for armigers, filling a
vacuum in terms of badge adornments into which they naturally fall, as
persons of substance and representatives of their own houses (however
minor or major) within established clans and/or "septs." They're not
chiefs of clans or name, but they do have a certain elevated status
within the clan structure.
Tom
It would seem that if there's any doubt, an armiger should consult his/
her clan chief as to whether it is proper for armigers of that clan to
adorn their crest badges with the single feather.
> In my experience, it is so called Clan Officials outwith the knowledge
> base of Scotland (i.e. mostly Americans) who seem to be unaware of the
> true significance of two or more feathers and we often see those who
> are no more than presidents of Highland games calling themselves chief
> of the games and proudly, but wrongly, wearing any number of feathers
> regardless of their actual and deserved status!
(Sighs). I've seen it, I don't care much for it, but if a "president"
or "chief" of an annual Highland game or gathering chooses to be "king
for a day" and wear feathers, outside of Scotland there's no remedy
for it, except to absent oneself so as not to lend your unspoken
assent or complicity to the infraction. Anything noisier, such as
snickering, heckling, or public mockery would be rudeness to one's
host, which is yet another area outside of Lyon's jurisdiction.
> * When I refer to the status of armiger, I could be even more
> proscriptive and demand that those who have assumed arms (such as
> Americans) and do not have arms granted or matriculated in The Lyon
> Register really ought not to wear a crest circlet with any feathers at
> all when attending Highland games. I take this stand because although
> there is no armorial law in America, we are talking about a Scottish
> tradition and these people are attending a celebration of Scottish
> heritage and sentimentally at least, during the Highland Games they
> are mentally on Scottish soil and ought therefore to abide by the
> rules of Scotland. If you have no arms recorded in the register then
> at best you are only allowed to wear the crest of your chief in a
> strap and buckle and ought to forget all about feathers unless your
> chief has given you permission to wear 'em!
I would concur. Either you're going to "play the game" by "the rules"
or what's the point in the first place? While any armiger can wear
their own crest as a badge, whether within a strap and buckle or a
circlet, according to taste and personal preferenc, the feathers
denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish clan system, so someone
not an armiger _in_Scotland_ should forgo feathers on their crest
badge.
> Edward- Hide quoted text -
Greg
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
>the feathers
>denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish clan system
Right. That's what I'm saying. The second part of the question then
is: what of teose armigers who are not Scot or recognized members of a
clan?
And BTW did Innes encourage this idea?
Greg
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't know why some lines are left out, but:
Tom said: the feathers denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish
clan system
To which I replied:
Right. That's what I'm saying. The second part of the question then
is: what of teose armigers who are not Scot or recognized members of a
clan?
And BTW did Innes encourage this idea?
There (arms crossed - wait for the post)
Tom
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
> > >the feathers
> > >denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish clan system
>
> > Right. That's what I'm saying. The second part of the question then
> > is: what of teose armigers who are not Scot or recognized members of a
> > clan?
>
> > And BTW did Innes encourage this idea?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Take two:
>
> I don't know why some lines are left out, but:
>
> Tom said: the feathers denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish
> clan system
>
> To which I replied:
>
> Right. That's what I'm saying. The second part of the question then
> is: what of teose armigers who are not Scot or recognized members of a
> clan?
>
> And BTW did Innes encourage this idea?
Your second part is itself two parts.
Armigers who are not armigers in Scotland (granted or matriculated
therein) ought not to be adding feathers, silver or otherwise, to
their crest badges. One could make the argument that they ought not
have crest badges at all, but I think that's too parochial a view. I
see the crest badge as yet another instance of Scotland's continuing
and historical series of contributions to the world.
At the risk of sounding like a certain former U.S. president, your
second question depends on just what membership in a clan comprises.
Must each prospective clan member somehow pass muster with that's clan
chief or do they voluntarily associate themselves therewith, based
upon presumed kinship (whether by provable ancestry, name or
geography)? Formal membership in one of the various clan societies
neither suffices to confirm clan membership nor does non-membership
somehow invalidate it.
However "recognized membership" is defined, the single feather
denoting an armiger should be limited to those possessing Scottish
arms.
Having said that, I have no quarrel with an armiger of any nation
(self-assumed or granted under some authority) having a crest badge of
their arms (either strap & buckle or circlet style if appropriate) in
the Scottish manner for correct wear with Scottish-style attire. To
me it speaks well that they so admire Scotland's national dress that
they would imitate it, imitation being the sincerest form of flattery
(after cash, that is).
Were I to have my arms matriculated in Scotland, I should take it upon
myself to introduce myself, by letter, to my clan chief there, simply
as a courtesy. I might then take the opportunity to sound him out on
his views of armigers of Clan Wallace including the single-feather on
their crest badges. I'm sure his response would be courteous, even if
it were in the negative. It would seem to me that since the feathers,
single, double, or triple, denote "rank" within the clan, his opinion
would be dispositive.
Lastly, I don't think Innes of Learney encouraged broader (i.e., by
non-Scottish armigers) use of the eagle feather denoting clan rank.
My reading of Innes has thusfar been limited to his Scots Heraldry
and, as is common in any work on the heraldry of various nations, it
is implicit that the guidance applies to Scottish heraldry and none
other. So my assumption is that the eagle feather adornment and
significance is likewise limited to Scots armigers.
rha_s...@yahoo.com
> > > >the feathers
> > > >denote a social/clan rank within the Scottish clan system
>
> > > Right. That's what I'm saying. The second part of the question then
> > > is: what of teose armigers who are not Scot or recognized members of a
> > > clan?
The important point to grasp is that Innes of Learney was only
referring to those who have arms recorded in his Register. Reading his
work on Scots Heraldry, not only does he confine his comments to those
in right of arms recorded in his Register, he practically refuses to
accept that anyone who is not armigerous is of any worth at all - they
are in his eyes "unknown".
I believe that Innes of Learney would not have been pleased to see
anyone who was not armigerous (i.e. did not have arms recorded in his
Register) wearing one, two and certainly not three feathers in their
bonnet whether they were a clan official or not. He would have
expected any non armigerous person (an unknown) with pretensions to
the wearing of a feather to jolly-well petition for his own arms
before even thinking about wearing one.
There are a couple of points in this conversation which niggle away at
me. The first is that one feather denotes rank either in or out of the
clan. Depending on ones point of view on the status of an armiger (vs.
a non armiger), a feather may denote a certain rank within a clan but
only if it is accepted that armigerous status gives rank. My own view,
for what it is worth, is that one feather simply indicates that the
wearer has armorial bearings recording in the Lyon Court Register i.e.
that he is an armiger. I fully accept that the wearing of two or more
feathers must indicate some form of rank as it goes beyond simply
indicating that the wearer is an armiger.
The other point which niggles away at me is the assertion that in
order to wear one feather an armiger must request the permission of
his chief. This assertion must surely be based upon the erroneous, and
entirely outdated, belief that all armigers must belong to a clan
which is simply not the case. There are many armigers who either by
choice or circumstance do not belong to any clan or lowland (chiefly)
family who by right of the fact that they have armorial bearings
recorded in the Lyon Register wear one feather.
Edward
barrassie
>
> - Show quoted text -
The eagle feath is only for Scottish Arms of Scottish origin not
foreign Arms matriculated in Scotland, that being said a chief can
grant or allow the use of feathers by whom he pleases, in fact he
might have a non armigerous commossioner who would wear two feathers.
Another case would be where a chief allows those holding Arms granted
by say Canada to wear feathers.
Charles McK of Hillhouse
rha_s...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> The eagle feath is only for Scottish Arms of Scottish origin not
> foreign Arms matriculated in Scotland,
You would have us believe that a man of ancient family with a proven
right to English arms who moves to live in Scotland and, being already
armigerous, matriculates those English arms in the Lyon Register (as
indeed he must as he is now somebody who lives in Scotland) has no
right to wear a feather and yet his friend the Englishman of no
ancient family who likewise moves to Scotland and having no existing
armorial bearings of his own therefore successfully, as somebody who
lives in Scotland, petitions for a new grant is entitled to wear a
feather. That is absolute Rubbish!
Who made that rule up?
A great many of the chiefly families are of non Scots origin and bear
their arms which are also of non Scots origin of old simply
matriculated in the Lyon register with no record of a grant to be
seen; they pre-date the register. Given that the use of a feather is
not subject to armorial law but a subject to custom, you have made a
rather bold, and if I may say so, unsupported statement the
implication of which is that there are two different classes of arms
in Scotland, one of a lower status than the other, one a matriculation
of foreign arms and the other Scottish arms. This is not the case and
I would like to see what evidence you have to show that Lyon Court
treats any armiger with arms recorded in the register as first class
or second class.
Lyon Court guidance and even Innes of Learney himself quite clearly
states that "Any Scot who has recorded Arms and Crest in the Public
Register of All Arms and Bearings in Scotland ("Lyon Register" for
short) has the right to wear his Crest as a badge in various
particular forms."
And:
"An armiger is entitled to ONE silver eagle’s feather behind the
circlet"
Lyon Court makes no distinction between Scottish arms and foreign arms
matriculated in the register. The only requirement is that arms are
recorded in the register. For a definition of "Any Scot" I suggest you
read THE SCOTS. WHO ARE THEY? HOW DO THEY SEE THEMSELVES?
By Roddy Martine. Author, broadcaster and Associate Editor, Caledonia
I quote but one small but pertinent extract:
"a Scot is, simply enough, somebody who lives in Scotland."
>that being said a chief can
> grant or allow the use of feathers by whom he pleases, in fact he
> might have a non armigerous commossioner who would wear two feathers.
> Another case would be where a chief allows those holding Arms granted
> by say Canada to wear feathers.
> Charles McK of Hillhouse-
I'm sorry, I don't subscribe to this belief that there are things a
chief can "grant". It seems to me that a great many people wish to
bend the customs and rules to suit themselves. Innes of Learney at
least attempted to provide some guidance as to the use of crest badges
and feather and, as I stated earlier, he would have baulked at a non
armiger wearing any number of feathers. If there are any clan
commissioners out there who are not armigerous, why have they not
taken the time and trouble to petition for a grant? If the clan system
is that important to them, they ought to be armigerous. Following the
line adopted by Innes of Learney, they can not possibly be accepted as
gentlemen of the clan unless and until they have armigerous status and
it follows therefore that they ought not wear any feathers in their
bonnet!
A clan chief does not have the right to allow a non armiger to mislead
the world into thinking that he is armigerous and has a right to wear
one or more feathers. The use of feathers by non armigers is
altogether too "American" for my liking!
Edward