How to Interpret the Heraldry
Women & Arms
The arms of a
woman, except one who is in her own right a sovereign,
are not shown on
a shield, but on a lozenge (a diamond shaped frame). When arms had a
utilitarian purpose, the shield was part of the armor of a warrior and
it was obviously improper for the feminine sex to use armor.
A woman would not use in her armorial insignia either a helmet, a crest
or the mantling. The reason for this is the crest was to aid in
identifying a man in battle when his helmet concealed his face. A woman
did not go into battle; she did not wear a helmet; therefore she needed
no such identification.
The mantling,
which represented another portion of a knight's
equipment, was also considered inappropriate for the use of women.
The motto, being a war cry, was not to be used by women.
The arms, however, were different. An unmarried woman might with propriety use her father's arms. If she was a widow she could use her late husband's arms
to
show the family to which she belonged. However, to make it clear that
the articles so marked were those of a woman and not of a warrior, the
arms were shown in a lozenge. This form was in common use as early as
1400 and was a definite requirement by 1561.
The lozenge form is used by both unmarried women and by widows. If it
bears a single coat of arms it is either that of an unmarried woman or
of a widow whose father used no arms and who therefore bears her late
husband's arms alone.
The unmarried lady bears her father's arms upon a lozenge. She also
uses her father's marks of cadency and often surmounts the shield with
a true lover's knot of light blue ribbon, however, has no
official sanction.
Before considering the arms used by widows one should remember that a
woman did not have a coat of arms of her own. She used her father's
until she married, then she used her husband's after his death, but on
a
lozenge. If a woman's father did not have arms but married a man who
bore arms, on her husband's death she would use the arms he had used
when living, (i.e., the arms of his family) but on a lozenge.
If a woman who had brothers and whose father bore arms, married a man
who also bore arms, the arms of both families were used by the husband
and therefore by his wife or widow. At an early date this was
represented by placing the two shields side by side, but by the end of
the 15th century the present rule, using only one shield, was being
followed. The arms of the husband are placed on the dexter or right
side and the arms of the wife's father on the sinister, or left side.
This placing side by side of the arms is called "impailing," - the
recognized manner for a man to show that his wife came from an
arms-bearing family. A husband, however, is not required to impale his
wife's father's arms with his own. In the majority of cases it would
appear that, on marrying, a man did not alter his own arms, but
continued to use the
same coat of arms he had borne when unmarried, even though he had the
right to impale the arms of his wife's family. In such a case the widow
usually used the arms of the husband's family alone.
In the case of a man who had a coat of arms and no sons, and therefore
no male descendants, it is obvious that his coat of arms could not be
perpetuated unless his daughters carried it to their descendants. In
such cases, the following was done: when the wife was an heiress or
co-heiress ( the word heiress used in the heraldic sense means a
daughter who is an only child, and co-heiress means one of several
sisters having no brothers) the husband did not impale her arms.
Instead, he placed them in the center of his own arms. This is called
an escutcheon of pretense - a small shield over all on which were
displayed the arms of the wife's father. It indicated that the husband
was, through his wife, the representative of her father's family and
was, therefore, carrying his arms for the benefit of his grandchildren.
On the death of the husband, the wife bore her husband's escutcheon and
all, but in lozenge form. Their children inherited both arms, which
were then quartered. This, by the way, is of great value to the
genealogist, indicating as it does, the origin of the wife, her
particular family and even whether she had brothers.
The arms of a peeress in her own right appear complicated but can be
narrowed down to the following rules. If unmarried, her arms are placed
upon a lozenge, with her supporters on each side and her coronet of
rank placed above the lozenge. If she is married, her arms are placed
in an escutcheon of pretense in the center of those of her husband, and
this escutcheon of pretense is ensigned with her coronet
of rank. The
complete arms will be surmounted by her husband's helmet and crest. If
he himself is a peer, then his supporters are shown, together with his
coronet of rank. By the side of the husbands arms, (to the sinister)
the peeress' arms are placed in the same form that she bore them before
marriage.
The wife's coronet and supporters are personal to herself and cannot be
used by her husband. If she is a widow, a similar arrangement is
necessary: on the dexter side, in a lozenge, will appear her late
husband's arms, bearing thereon her own
arms in an escutcheon of pretense surmounted by her coronet; while on
the sinister side will be placed her own arms, as before.
According to Wheeler Holohan's revised edition of Boutell's "Manual of
Heraldry,",
Some authorities consider that a divorcee (that is, one who has been
divorced), should revert to her paternal arms upon a lozenge, and
should not make use of a lover's knot. The absence of the knot and the
fact that the arms on the lozenge are not impaled, indicate that she is
neither unmarried nor a widow. Since, however, the use of this is by no
means universal among unmarried ladies, this proposed device would not
always be an intelligible index to the lady's condition.
Learn
about the Coat of Arms Components -
Achievement
