Editing Augmentation of Arms

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
'''WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wiki to make the content "searchable" and easier to find. If you find the information you seek here, go to the original sources as linked below to verify the information and use them for your documentation.'''
'''WARNING: Do not cite this page as a reference. This page is on this wikispace only to make the content "searchable" and easier to find. If you find the information you seek here, go to the original sources as linked below to verify the information and use them for your documentation.'''


See also [[Branch Arms Display]] with "Chiefs of Allegiance" and other possibilities for displaying Augmentations.
See also [[Branch Arms Display]] with "Chiefs of Allegiance" and other possibilities for displaying Augmentations.
Line 7: Line 7:
{| class=wikitable
{| class=wikitable
| [[File:RektoratsmatrikelderUniversitätBaselVol1f232(1460-1567).jpg|250px]]  
| [[File:RektoratsmatrikelderUniversitätBaselVol1f232(1460-1567).jpg|250px]]  
| [[File:BSB270InsigniaUrbiumf178EagleAllegianceTower.PNG|200px]]
|-
|-
| Rektoratsmatrikel der Universität Basel, Vol 1 AN II 3 Basel/Schweiz nach 1460 Folio 232 Matriculation Register of the Rectorate of the University of Basel. Image c1509-10? A pale of the Holy Roman Empire as a possible Augmentation (vs mark of allegiance).
| Rektoratsmatrikel der Universität Basel, Vol 1 AN II 3 Basel/Schweiz nach 1460 Folio 232 Matriculation Register of the Rectorate of the University of Basel. Image c1509-10? A pale of the Holy Roman Empire as a possible Augmentation (vs mark of allegiance).
| Insignia Urbium, BSB 270 f178, 1550-55, double tower
|   
|   
|}
|}


See also [[Branch Arms Display]]
See also [[Branch Arms Display]]


=Sources:=  
=Sources:=  
Line 43: Line 43:
3. Augmentation - An addition to a device given as an honor; both the augmented armory and the unaugmented armory are protected. While the right to an augmentation is given by a kingdom, the form of the augmentation and its suitability for use and registration with a specific device must be approved by the College of Arms. Individuals must demonstrate appropriate proof of entitlement to the augmentation as well as the right to use any restricted charges in the augmentation. The augmented and the unaugmented arms together count as only a single item for purposes of the registration limit; the augmentation is not registered independent of the arms to which it is added. Only the Personal Device can be augmented; badges may not be.
3. Augmentation - An addition to a device given as an honor; both the augmented armory and the unaugmented armory are protected. While the right to an augmentation is given by a kingdom, the form of the augmentation and its suitability for use and registration with a specific device must be approved by the College of Arms. Individuals must demonstrate appropriate proof of entitlement to the augmentation as well as the right to use any restricted charges in the augmentation. The augmented and the unaugmented arms together count as only a single item for purposes of the registration limit; the augmentation is not registered independent of the arms to which it is added. Only the Personal Device can be augmented; badges may not be.
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/admin.html#II.A
http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/admin.html#II.A
 
----
=Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory (SENA):=  
=Standards for Evaluation of Names and Armory (SENA):=  
http://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#A3A3
'''A.Armory'''
'''A.Armory'''
Armorial submissions fit into four categories: primary armory, fielded badges, fieldless badges, and augmentations of honor... Augmentations of honor are additions to existing pieces of primary armory to reflect an honor bestowed by the Crown of an individual kingdom. See A.3 for discussion of the rules which apply specifically to augmentations of arms...
Armorial submissions fit into four categories: primary armory, fielded badges, fieldless badges, and augmentations of honor. The first two follow identical rules and are just administrative categories. Primary armory refers to the single main armorial device for an individual or branch. Fielded badges are similar secondary items; they may function as badges or as devices for alternate personas. Fieldless badges, which can be displayed on any background, are more typical of period badges. They have some special rules for style and conflict, discussed in the relevant sections. Augmentations of honor are additions to existing pieces of primary armory to reflect an honor bestowed by the Crown of an individual kingdom. See A.3 for discussion of the rules which apply specifically to augmentations of arms. There is no separation between personal armory and non-personal armory for style, conflict or presumption. The Ordinary and Armorial contains some other types of items, such as flags of important non-SCA entities; these are also considered armory for the purposes of conflict and presumption.


'''A.3.''' '''A.3.  Types of Designs''': '''Augmentations of Honor''':
'''A.3. Armory Style'''
'''A. Types of Designs''': There are three types of designs (one with sub-types) that have slightly different style rules.


''[revised per August 2022 Cover Letter'' https://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2022/08/22-08cl.html#6 ''The updates are shown below in a standard insert/delete fashion with additions underlined and deletions struck through.]''
'''3. Augmentations of Honor''': An augmentation is a mark of honor bestowed by the Crown that is added to an existing device. An augmentation may not be added to a badge. An augmentation may take many forms, including but not limited to a charged canton, a charged chief, charges in canton or chief, a charge associated with the Crown, or a charge associated with the individual receiving the honor.
* While the right to an augmentation is bestowed by the Crown, its specific form must be determined through the normal registration process. Both the augmentation itself and the augmented device must follow the style rules and restrictions on charges. Because an augmentation adds complexity, augmented devices are often allowed to violate certain style rules, such as allowing charges on tertiary charges or a complexity count of greater than eight, as long as the identifiability of the design is maintained. However, they may not violate the rules on contrast.
* For example, the arms of a branch may not be granted as an augmentation, because they contain a laurel wreath, which cannot be registered to an individual.
* An augmentation that appears to be a display of independent armory, such as a charged canton or a single charged escutcheon, must also be evaluated as if the augmentation itself were a submission of independent armory for purposes of style, conflict, offense, and presumption. Kingdoms may designate a badge as a standard augmentation for its subjects who receive augmentations. Such a badge is considered to be grandfathered to the submitter and does not need to be further checked for style, conflict, offense, or presumption. However, it must maintain good contrast with the field or charge that it is on.
'''A.5. Armory Conflict'''
'''C. Comparisons of Armory''': When considering armory for purposes of possible conflict, there are a number of factors which should be considered.


An augmentation is a mark of honor bestowed by the Crown that is added to an existing device. An augmentation may not be added to a badge. An augmentation may take many forms, including but not limited to a charged canton, a charged chief, charges in canton or chief, a charge associated with the Crown, or a charge associated with the individual receiving the honor.
'''4. Augmentations''': As discussed in [[http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/sena.html#A3A3 A.3.A.3]], in a submission of augmented arms where the augmentation appears to be a display of independent armory, such as a charged canton or a single charged escutcheon, the augmentation must be checked for conflict as if it were a submission of independent armory.


<ins>a. </ins>While the right to an augmentation is bestowed by the Crown, its specific form must be determined through the normal registration process. Both the augmentation itself and the augmented device must follow the style rules and restrictions on charges. Because an augmentation adds complexity, augmented devices are often allowed to violate certain style rules, such as allowing charges on tertiary charges or a complexity count of greater than eight, as long as the identifiability of the design is maintained. Charged cantons, <ins>charged </ins>inescutcheons, and charged chiefs (when they are an augmentation) may have poor contrast with whatever they happen to overlay, whether the field or another charge, provided identifiability is maintained. Other augmentations may not violate the rules on contrast.<blockquote>For example, the arms of a branch may not be granted as an augmentation, because they contain a laurel wreath, which cannot be registered to an individual.
'''A.6. Armory Presumption'''
 
'''C. Claims through Arms of Pretense and Unearned Augmentations''': In period and modern heraldry, an individual may assert a claim to land or property by placing the armory associated with that property on an escutcheon in the middle of their existing armory. An augmentation of honor often takes the form of a charged canton; occasionally it takes the form of a charged escutcheon. Therefore, either a canton or a single escutcheon may be used in an armorial submission only if it is uncharged and of a single tincture. Multiple escutcheons do not have to follow this limitation.
For example, ''Gules, a sea-dog rampant and a chief Or, for augmentation on a canton vert a mullet argent'' may be registered despite the poor contrast of the vert canton which lies partially on the gules field.</blockquote><ins>b. </ins>An augmentation that appears to be a display of independent armory, such as <ins>that described in SENA A6C</ins> must also be evaluated as if the augmentation itself were a submission of independent armory for purposes of style, conflict, offense, and presumption.<blockquote>For example, the chief in ''Gules, a lion rampant and on a chief argent a rose between two mullets gules'' does not need to be conflict checked as it is not an augmentation and thus not considered a display of independent armory. The same chief in an augmentation, ''Gules, a lion rampant argent, for augmentation on a chief argent a rose between two mullets gules'', does not need to be conflict checked as it has neither a peripheral ordinary nor an ordinary terminating at the edge and therefore is not considered to be a display of independent armory. However, the chief in ''Gules, a lion rampant argent, for augmentation on a chief argent a cross between four roses gules'' does need to be conflict checked as independent armory as it is an augmentation that has an ordinary (the cross) that terminates at the edge.</blockquote><ins>c. An augmentation may be created through quartering the augmentation (in the first and fourth quarters) with the base device (in the second and third quarters). The first and fourth quarters are considered to be a display of independent armory and must be evaluated as such. The quarters in quartered armory that is not part of an augmentation but is registerable under A6F are not considered independent displays of armory.</ins><blockquote><ins>For example, in ''Quarterly sable and argent, two squirrels sable'' the quarters do not need to be conflict checked as it is not an augmentation. However, in ''Argent, a squirrel sable, and for augmentation quartered second and third with first and fourth sable, an acorn Or'' the quarter ''Sable, an acorn Or'' must be conflict checked as independent armory.</ins></blockquote><ins>d. Kingdoms may designate a badge (or badges) as a standard augmentation for its subjects who receive augmentations. Such a badge is considered to be subject to the existing registration allowance and does not need to be further checked for style, conflict, offense, or presumption.</ins>
For example, ''Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an escutcheon sable charged with a roundel argent// is not allowed, because it appears to be arms of pretense. //Or, in saltire five escutcheons sable each charged with three roundels argent'' is registerable, because multiple identical escutcheons were not used for arms of pretense or augmentations.
 
The rules governing earned Augmentations are discussed in [[http://heraldry.sca.org/laurel/sena.html#A3A3 A.3.A.3]].
 
https://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#A5C4
 
As revised, section A5C4 reads:<blockquote>'''4. Augmentations''': As discussed in A3A3, in a submission of augmented arms where the augmentation appears to be a display of independent armory, such as <ins>that described in SENA A6C</ins>, the augmentation must be checked for conflict as if it were a submission of independent armory.</blockquote>https://heraldry.sca.org/sena.html#A6C
 
As revised, section A6C reads:<blockquote>'''C. Claims through Arms of Pretense and Unearned Augmentations''': In period and modern heraldry, an individual may assert a claim to land or property by placing the armory associated with that property on an escutcheon in the middle of their existing armory. An augmentation of honor often takes the form of a charged canton; occasionally it takes the form of a charged escutcheon. Therefore, either a canton or a single escutcheon may be used in an armorial submission only if it is uncharged and of a single tincture. Multiple escutcheons do not have to follow this limitation. The use of a charged lozenge as arms of pretense or an augmentation is vanishingly rare. We will not consider a single uncharged lozenge, a single lozenge with a single, non-ordinary, tertiary charge, or multiple lozenges to be <ins> a display of independent armory nor its use to be presumptuous</ins>.<blockquote>For example, ''Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an escutcheon sable charged with a roundel argent'' is not allowed, because it appears to be arms of pretense. ''Or, in saltire five escutcheons sable each charged with three roundels argent'' is registerable, because multiple identical escutcheons were not used for arms of pretense or augmentations.
 
For example, ''Argent, a fess gules surmounted by a lozenge sable charged with a roundel argent'' is registerable as we do not consider a lozenge with a single tertiary charge to be <ins> a display of independent armory</ins>. However, ''Argent, a fess gules surmounted by an lozenge sable charged with two roundels argent'' is not allowed because it has more than one tertiary charge and thus is considered <ins> a display of independent armory and presumptuous</ins>. ''Argent, on a lozenge sable a cross Or'' and ''Argent, on a lozenge sable a fess Or'' are not allowed as the lozenges are charged with ordinaries and are therefore considered <ins>independent displays of armory and presumptuous</ins>.</blockquote><ins>In period and modern heraldry, quartered arms are often a claim to a marital or inheritance relationship or about an office that the person holds. An augmentation of honor may also appear to be marshalled arms with the augmentation appearing in the first and fourth quarters and the original arms appearing in the second and third quarters. While, as discussed in section A6F, we do not usually allow the registration of armory appearing to be marshalled arms, an exception is made for an augmentation so long as all of the charges of the base (unaugmented) device remain identifiable.</ins>
 
Chiefs are a valid period form of augmentation; however, chiefs (whether charged or uncharged) are much more commonly not augmentations. As such, unless it is part of an augmentation and contains either a peripheral ordinary or an ordinary terminating at the edge, we do not consider a chief to be a display of independent armory nor its use to be presumptuous.
 
The rules governing earned Augmentations are discussed in A3A3.</blockquote>As revised, section A6F reads:<blockquote>'''F. Claims through Marshalling''': Marshalling is the combination of two or more arms into a single design. By doing so, it makes a claim about the person that we do not allow in registered arms. This claim can be to a marital or inheritance relationship<ins>,</ins> about an office that the person holds<ins>, or an unearned augmentation</ins>. In some cases, such designs may be displayed, even though they cannot be registered.
 
Arms combined using the per pale field division generally combined either marital arms or the arms of an individual and an office. They are often called impaled arms and were not inherited. The display of registered arms impaled to show a marital relationship is encouraged, even though it is not registerable.
 
Arms combined using the quarterly field division generally combined inherited arms from armigerous parents. They are often called marshalled arms or quartered arms. Once inherited, they were sometimes further cadenced as a whole. While the Spanish occasionally used per saltire divisions for marshalled designs, they more commonly used quarterly divisions for this, so we do not consider fields divided per saltire as potentially marshalled designs.
 
Marshalling in these rules refers to both impaling and quartering collectively. Arms that appear to be marshalled cannot be registered<ins> unless they are augmentations as discussed in A3A3 and A6C</ins>.
 
Both quarterly and per pale divisions were used in single armorial designs and also in marshalled designs. Therefore, quarterly and per pale divisions of the field may be registered only when there is no unmistakable appearance of marshalling. Most designs are either clearly not marshalled or clearly marshalled, but some require more careful examination:</blockquote>There are no changes to A6F1 through A6F3.
 
https://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2022/08/22-08cl.html#6


=Precedents:=  
=Precedents:=  
Line 87: Line 70:


Morsulus Heralds Website - http://www.morsulus.org/ (to search the LoARs and Precedents)
Morsulus Heralds Website - http://www.morsulus.org/ (to search the LoARs and Precedents)
Restatement Wiki - [[http://yehudaheraldry.com/restatement/index.php?title=Main_Page]] (restatements of Precedents)


'' '''Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.''' ''
'' '''Use the above links to be sure any precedents listed below haven't been superseded by newer precedents.''' ''
Line 95: Line 80:
==Registerability:==  
==Registerability:==  
(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)
(Restricted, Reserved, SFPP, OOP)
===October 2021 Cover Letter - Chiefs of Allegiance as Augmentations===
There has been an increase lately in the number of submissions using the equivalent of chiefs of allegiance for augmentations of arms. This has led to questions about the authenticity of such a practice since chiefs of allegiance are typically considered a form of display rather than an indication of any honor.
Research into the augmentations (German "wappenbesserung") found in the Austrian State Archives at https://www.archivinformationssystem.at/feldsuche.aspx shows that a "chief of the Empire" (an Or chief with a sable eagle) was a very common augmentation, particularly among augmenatations granted to Italians. There are many examples of this pattern, which are demonstrated in the following:
The arms of Landus (Lando), which can be seen unaugmented in Insignia Venetorum nobilium III (https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb00001420?page=13) as Quarterly argent and sable, were augmented in 1559 (https://www.archivinformationssystem.at/detail.aspx?ID=2532505) by adding a chief Or charged with a double-headed eagle sable.
The arms of Capelli, which can be seen unaugmented in Doges and families of Venice (https://collections.library.yale.edu/catalog/10613747) f. 26v as Per fess argent and azure, a cap counterchanged were similarly augmented in 1558 (https://www.archivinformationssystem.at/detail.aspx?ID=1533058) by adding a chief Or charged with a double-headed eagle sable.
The arms of Benevenuto, Azure, in fess a tree proper sustained by two lions combattant Or all atop a base grady argent, were augmented in 1574 by adding a chief Or charged with an eagle sable (both the unaugmented and augmented arms can be seen at https://www.archivinformationssystem.at/detail.aspx?ID=1917172).
We are satisfied that chiefs resembling chiefs of allegiance are a valid period form of augmentation. We shall treat them to the same standard as augmenting cantons and instruct Palimpsest to amend SENA appropriately.
We thank Iago Boar for providing this discussion of the matter and we encourage further research into the different ways arms were augmented in period.
https://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2021/10/21-10cl.html#4


==Conflict:==  
==Conflict:==  
Line 117: Line 85:


==Identifiability:==  
==Identifiability:==  
===December 2020 CL - On the Contrast Requirements of Augmentations of Arms===
We recently asked for discussion about contrast requirements for augmentations.
The item in question presented an overall canton which had poor contrast with the field. Nevertheless, the majority of the canton's perimeter had good contrast, since it was over a wide, good-contrast bordure. However, if the canton had good contrast with the field, it would be forced to have poor contrast with the bordure, hindering overall visibility. There was, ultimately, no winning situation: either it was SENA-legal and poor contrast overall (undermining the tincture requirements of Core Style), or it was contrary to SENA, yet visibly good contrast (supporting those same tincture requirements).
Commenters were asked to consider whether we should relax SENA's contrast requirements for augmentations and, if so, what limits if any should be imposed. Period evidence illustrating contrast in cases like this was sought, and a number of examples were identified by Iago Coquille.
A late 16th century English armorial manuscript, University of Victoria Library Ms.Brown.Eng.2, offered several examples of cantons (presumably augmentations) and one escutcheon of pretense, with low contrast. In its sole example of a canton surmounting a bordure, the canton has good contrast with the field but generally overlays low contrast elements.
* Argent, a cross sable and a canton ermine
* Or, two bars gules and on a canton argent an escallop sable
* Or, a bend gules, and on a canton argent two bars and issuant from the chiefmost bar a demi-wolf sable
* Or, a chevron gules and a canton ermine
* Argent, fretty gules and overall a canton ermine
* Or, fretty gules and overall on a canton per pale ermine and Or a ship sable
* Or, three (four?) roundels azure and a canton ermine
* Argent, fretty gules a bordure engrailed sable, overall on a canton gules a lion passant Or
* Argent, a cross flory sable, in canton an inescutcheon Or chevronelly gules
From a Belgian armorial dating to the 1st half of the 15th century (Brussels, Koninklijke Bibliotheek van België, ms. II 6570).
* Azure, two (three?) fleurs-de-lys argent, overall on a canton gules a lion argent
* Azure, three fleurs-de-lys argent, overall on an inescutcheon gules three fleurs-de-lys argent
* Argent, in cross five escallops gules, overall on a canton Or an inescutcheon [...] the canton surmounted by a bend component argent and gules
* Or, on a saltire gules an inescutcheon gules charged with two (three?) lion's sable
... as well as several others.
In addition, Þorfinn Hund also provided the example of the arms of Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk, augmented for his services at the Battle of Flodden, 1513: Gules, on a bend between six crosses-crosslet fitchy argent an escutcheon Or charged with a demi-lion pierced through the mouth by an arrow within a double tressure flory counterflory gules.


Given this support, we are relaxing the contrast requirements for augmentations of arms, permitting charged cantons and inescutcheons of pretense to have poor contrast with whatever they happen to overlay, whether the field or another charge, provided identifiability is maintained. Despite the example provided of an entirely no-contrast case, we choose at this time not to relax the contrast requirements to that extent.
https://heraldry.sca.org/loar/2020/12/20-12cl.html


==='''April 2009 LoAR - rule of contrast:'''===  
==='''April 2009 LoAR - rule of contrast:'''===  
Please note that all contributions to SCA Heraldry Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see SCA Heraldry Wiki:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)