Forward facing helm - College of Arms Newsletter
Martin Goldstraw
obliged to bring to your attention an excellent example of a new
illustration of a forward facing helm included in a new grant of arms
and published in the latest newsletter of the College of Arms (see
earlier thread relating to such helms). It is very welcome that the
College has included details of this grant instead of just informing
us of the name of the grantee however it is a pity that the practice
has not yet extended to a blazon for all new armigers reported in its
pages.
Nevertheless, the newsletter is most welcome. Thank you College.
Greg
That's very good. Is the graphic available for those who do not get
the newsletter? and how does the helm square with the crest?
Martin Goldstraw
Greg,
You can download this and all the back copies of the College
Newsletter from their web site.
http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk
More specifically the image I refer to can be seen here:
http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Newsletter/018.pdf
Peter Constantine
> More specifically the image I refer to can be seen here:
> http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Newsletter/018.pdf
Or:
http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Newsletter/018-03.jpg
Crest: Upon a Helm with a Wreath Or Gules and Sable Two Dragons
respectant Gules holding between them a representation of the Celtic
cross of Nevern sans pedestal Sable fimbriated Vert.
I note that the direction of the helm is not specified in the blazon.
x
Martin Goldstraw
Constantine) wrote:
>
> I note that the direction of the helm is not specified in the blazon.
>
> x
It is pleasing that it is not. You will have also noted that the type
of helm is not mentioned either (i.e. an esquires helm) which means
that in the event that any gentleman achieves a knighthood or even a
peerage the blazon will not need to be altered regardless of where his
crest faces. I commend this policy of allowing the artist the freedom
to avoid a silly dexter facing helm when it does not suit a forward
facing crest. It is a return to the common sense acceptance that in
the main a three dimensional crest will (or would have in real life)
naturally face to the front of the helm. If an armiger when deciding
on his crest design wishes to see his lion face forward it can be
placed on a front facing helm; if he wants to see his lion sideways on
it can be shown on a helm facing to the dexter - because it will be
still facing to the front of the wearer if not to the front of the
achievement!
Turenne
wrote:
You're right; though below it states:
"Badge (not illustrated): A Norman Helm affronty Or quadrinimbed Sable
and charged with two Gouttes in fess Azure".
Strange...
Richard Lichten
Martin Goldstraw
Not strange at all Richard. A Badge, unlike a crest, is not a three
dimensional object. The charges which go to make up a badge are
treated in the same way as those which make up a shield - We are able
to walk around a crest and see all of its sides. We can not "walk
around" a badge or a painted shield; their charges are therefore
painted two dimensionally and we need to be specific when describing
their orientation. See for example the shield of Cholmeley of Chomley:
Gules, in chief two esquires helmets Argent and in base a garb Or.
An esquires helmet when painted onto a shield would face to the dexter
otherwise if it was intended that it faced to the front or even to the
sinister, it would have to have an added description. Clearly this two
dimensional badge needs to be described as facing to the front
otherwise we would have no idea how to depict it when painting it.
When a helm is depicted as a helm holding a crest, it makes sense to
leave it to the artist to follow the line dictated by the orientation
of the crest.
Regards,
Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
Turenne
direction a helm is facing need not be blazoned when describing the
crest?
Richard
Martin Goldstraw
Quite. Helmets and their orientation are now left to the discretion of
the artist and he can illustrate the helm according to the way the
crest is facing.
Regards,
Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
Peter Constantine
> It is a return to the common sense acceptance that in
> the main a three dimensional crest will (or would have in real life)
> naturally face to the front of the helm. If an armiger when deciding
> on his crest design wishes to see his lion face forward it can be
> placed on a front facing helm; if he wants to see his lion sideways on
> it can be shown on a helm facing to the dexter - because it will be
> still facing to the front of the wearer if not to the front of the
> achievement!
I think we're still a little way from that level of common sense. As far
as I know, in English heraldry an animal's head (for example) in profile
is still considered to be an entirely different crest to the same
animal's head face on. I don't think this is right but that is how it
seems to be be.
In the example shown in the newsletter I don't think it would ever be
right to show the crest from the side even if a more traditional dexter
facing helm was being depicted - 'two Dragons respectant gules' would
become 'one red Dragon's backside'!
x
Turenne
'two Dragons respectant gules' would become 'one red Dragon's
backside'!
Ha Ha! I take your point, but I imagine that the dragons would shimmy
sideways round the helm if it was depicted in profile (for no other
reason but to save their modesty!)
Richard
Greg
> On Sep 30, 3:47 pm, Greg <scoti...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 30 Sep, 02:11, Martin Goldstraw <heraldryad...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I tremble to divert the forum away from its Irish troubles but feel
> > > obliged to bring to your attention an excellent example of a new
> > > illustration of a forward facing helm included in a new grant of arms
> > > and published in the latest newsletter of the College of Arms (see
> > > earlier thread relating to such helms). It is very welcome that the
> > > College has included details of this grant instead of just informing
> > > us of the name of the grantee however it is a pity that the practice
> > > has not yet extended to a blazon for all new armigers reported in its
> > > pages.
>
> > > Nevertheless, the newsletter is most welcome. Thank you College.
>
> > > Martinhttp://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
>
> > That's very good. Is the graphic available for those who do not get
> > the newsletter? and how does the helm square with the crest?
>
> Greg,
> You can download this and all the back copies of the College
>
> More specifically the image I refer to can be seen here:http://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/Newsletter/018.pdf
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks for the link Martin. The artists is the same one who did
Stephen Plowman's Achievement. I think it's so unusual that the helm
custom would be abandoned... Lord Lyon hasn't taken up this practice
has he?
Martin Goldstraw
>
>Lord Lyon hasn't taken up this practice
> has he?
Sigh.
Oh Greg. I really thought that you had read the last discussion we had
on this topic.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.heraldry/browse_thread/thread/df810e23827691ce#
Yes, Lyon Court has taken up this practice and in the previous thread
you came (eventually) to acknowledge that I had made my case well. I
had thought that you had taken note of the many examples I gave to you
including the link to a copy of an actual grant from Lyon I posted.
The example I gave of a grant to a person of no greater rank than
gentleman clearly shows a forward facing helm and I pointed you to
numerous examples illustrated in the HSS (Scottish) member's gallery.
Oh well, what was it someone said about horses and water?
Martin Goldstraw
Constantine) wrote:
> Martin wrote:
> > It is a return to the common sense acceptance that in
> > the main a three dimensional crest will (or would have in real life)
> > naturally face to the front of the helm. If an armiger when deciding
> > on his crest design wishes to see his lion face forward it can be
> > placed on a front facing helm; if he wants to see his lion sideways on
> > it can be shown on a helm facing to the dexter - because it will be
> > still facing to the front of the wearer if not to the front of the
> > achievement!
>
> I think we're still a little way from that level of common sense. As far
> as I know, in English heraldry an animal's head (for example) in profile
> is still considered to be an entirely different crest to the same
> animal's head face on. I don't think this is right but that is how it
> seems to be be.
>
I agree.
We are however a long way down the road to the acceptance that a crest
is a three dimensional object. In the real world (as opposed to the
paper world of letters patent) a lion's head in profile on a dexter
facing helm is exactly the same as a lion's head face on on a helm
affronte. See my note on same made in my weblog September last year:
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog/?p=43
Greg
> On Oct 1, 2:18 am, Greg <scoti...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Lord Lyon hasn't taken up this practice
> > has he?
>
> Sigh.
>
> Oh Greg. I really thought that you had read the last discussion we had
> on this topic.
>
>
> Yes, Lyon Court has taken up this practice and in the previous thread
> you came (eventually) to acknowledge that I had made my case well. I
> had thought that you had taken note of the many examples I gave to you
> including the link to a copy of an actual grant from Lyon I posted.
> The example I gave of a grant to a person of no greater rank than
> gentleman clearly shows a forward facing helm and I pointed you to
> numerous examples illustrated in the HSS (Scottish) member's gallery.
>
> Oh well, what was it someone said about horses and water?
>
> Martinhttp://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
Just because I forgot a detail is no cause for acting the part of the
"mule": all he does is sit... Please try not to take yourself so
seriously Martin.
I remember the conversation well. Sometimes horses don't take to the
suggestion of those doing the leading; it is where we derive the
phrase
"Horse Sense"...
So, I'd like for you to tell us about the history of this practice,
and how did rankning armigers deal with it?
Martin Goldstraw
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
> So, I'd like for you to tell us about the history of this practice,
> and how did rankning armigers deal with it?
All the information you need is on the previous thread. As I stated in
that thread, from my observations the practice is at least as old as
1993 but could well be older ..... it is not a new practice.
I have no idea how "ranking" armigers "dealt" with it though I would
imagine that "they" didn't blink and eye. We have the example cited on
the earlier thread of Sir Paul McCartney - he being a knight bachelor
would I imagine fit into your category of a "ranking armiger". He
seems not to have been perturbed by the fact that his helm, by
convenience, faces to the dexter. It remains clearly the helm of a
knight.
As I said in the earlier thread, I am actually very surprised that the
fact that the helm can now face whichever way is convenient has
escaped the attention of others. I had thought that everyone knew it!
It is simply a matter of observing what practices have taken place
over the last 30 or so years. It's just a matter of seeing what you
are looking at.
Greg
I'm surprised at it as well. It's sort of the "hidden picture" in a
sense: you can look at it in the overall and not notice the obvious
right off. Works these days change so often that it's hard to see... I
always thought that Stephen Plowman's arms were antoher rendering, I
didn't know, and you pointed out that it was indeed from his LP.
I have to tell you that I think that it's a very good catch. Is there
perhaps someone who may know who the first "new helm" patent went to,
and what the process was that paved the way? That's the sort of
change that has to have a paper trail.
Joseph McMillan
>
> As I said in the earlier thread, I am actually very surprised that the
> fact that the helm can now face whichever way is convenient has
> escaped the attention of others. I had thought that everyone knew it!
> It is simply a matter of observing what practices have taken place
> over the last 30 or so years.
Martin, you're forgetting that an appallingly large portion of the
heraldic world stopped reading when Arthur Fox-Davies laid his pen
down for the last time. Why else would we still (in another forum in
which you and I both participate) see people solemnly holding forth
that English blazoning rules forbid the repetition of the names of
tinctures?
Martin Goldstraw
Ah yes of course Joseph, I am grateful for the timely reminder. It is
remiss of me to forget.
AR
examples from the College of Arms that I've come across are:
1978 - tilting helm almost affronté (LPs for arms of Geoffrey Pearce
on Martin's Cheshire Heraldry website)
1982- tilting helm fully affronté (LPs for arms of Police Federation -
see Friar's 'New Dictionary of Heraldry' p 273)
1985- knight's helm turned to dexter (LPs for arms of Cathedral Church
of the New Advent - see Friar p 126)
Friar also has a photo of Lord Lyon LPs for the arms of the Gunmakers
of the City of London (1982) with a sallet affronté.
The SA Bureau of Heraldry adopted the practice of aligning the
direction of the helmet with the direction of the crest in 1982.
Presumably the Canadian Heraldry Authority adopted it at its inception
in 1988.
Greg
Thank you AR. I knew somebody had some pertinent information on this
subject. It only seems reasonable that there were some heraldic
puritans of some rank who must have balked at the idea; is there any
information on that?
Martin Goldstraw
> This practice appears to be at least thirty years old. The earliest
> examples from the College of Arms that I've come across are:
>
> 1978 - tilting helm almost affronté (LPs for arms of Geoffrey Pearce
> on Martin's Cheshire Heraldry website)
This is an interesting exemplification and one which I resisted using
as a definitive example of a helmet facing to the front however it is,
in my view, perhaps a good example of a "transitional" helm. It has
often been noted that artists "tweaked" the orientation of a dexter
facing helm to better suit a forward facing crest while staying (just)
within the rules and this is quite an old practice. What this example
illustrates is that this "transitional" practice was undertaken by a
College of Arms artist as recently (or if you are in your 30's as long
ago) as 1978. I do however feel that whilst it is attempting to face
the front, it is also straining to comply with the old "rule". By
contrast, when you compare the Pearce illustration of 1978 with the
Plowman example of 1993 or the earlier police example of 1982 (which
might be an exception as it is "corporate" heraldry) it is obvious
that by (possibly) 1982 and definitely by 1993 for personal heraldry
the artist no longer feels constrained by the old "rule" and is quite
free to illustrate the helm blatantly facing to the front.
Regards,
Martin
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk/weblog
georg...@gmail.com
The full recognition that the crest is three dimensional and could
plausibly br placed on a helm would necessarily signal a new classical
age of heraldic practice and the twilight of what has been a lengthy
era of decandent heraldic practice.
Lind regards,
George Lucki