[ANSTHRLD] Inheriting augmented arms or reserved charges?

[kevinkeary at aol.com]

As has been pointed out, the arms are registered with and without the augmentation. I think that's the right way to look at it. You can only have one set of arms registered. Your unaugmented arms are your arms and are what your heir is entitled to use with a label while you live and to inherit when you don't. He would NOT have the right to bear the augmented arms, with or without a label before or after inheritance. That augmentation is something YOU have the right to bear by Royal Writ. This is MORE than a difference in blazon. Mundane practice may (or may not) be somewhat different, but that's how I see OUR rules.

And that is regardless of whether the augmented arms are technically something someone COULD HAVE registered regardless or rank or award, before they became your augmented arms. The augmented arms carry with them the implication of augmentation.


On the other hand, your heir WOULD inherit legal control of your augmented arms, without the right to bear them. He COULD, assuming they were, like Galen's, bearable as unaugmented arms, REGISTER them as unaugmented arms and release the (original AND augmented) arms he inherited control of at the same time as actions contingent upon each other. I think that would be legal. I also think it would be crass and insulting to your memory, but that's just me.

Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim McDaniel <tmcd at panix.com>
To: Heralds List, Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA,Inc. <heralds at lists.ansteorra.org>
Sent: Tue, Aug 3, 2010 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: [ANSTHRLD] Inheriting augmented arms or reserved charges?


On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Jay Rudin <rudin at peoplepc.com> wrote: 
> The kicker in the deck is that these arms could pass as unaugmented 
> arms. 
 
That's not the "kicker"; that's the whole point. 
 
We register the emblazon, not the blazon. 
 
Fitz Galen (is his name Alexander? I'm afraid I don't recall) can 
perfectly well bear the arms "Gules, on a bend wavy between two 
double-bitted battle axes Or, a mullet of five greater and five lesser 
points sable", and that is indeed what is registered to his father, 
along with "Gules, a bend wavy between two double-bitted battle axes 
Or". 
 
> I suspect that the commentary would focus on the twin issues of 
> complexity and presumptuousness. "It sure looks awfully close to a 
> previously registered augmentation." 
 
That and four dollars &c. I can register a design that contains four 
crescents points outward conjoined in saltire (the usual Caidan 
augmentation) without let or hindrance. I just have to hope Known 
World Heraldic Symposium never goes back to southern California. 
And complexity rule-of-thumb 6. 
 
> And he couldn't just drop the label after the death of his father. 
> On Galen's arms, that is an augmentation. 
 
I don't understand. There is no label on Galen's arms. 
 
> Until then, he can't use it in the SCA 
 
"Under this decision, consorts in kingdoms or principalities without 
consort's arms may use the undifferenced kingdom arms, and kingdoms 
may elect to allow both heirs to the throne to display the kingdom 
arms differenced by a label or other standard mark of cadency." (12/03 
LoAR Cover Letter) Yet the laurel wreath is restricted in registration 
to SCA branches [1], and by heraldic metonymy their ceremonial heads 
may display them freely as their arms of dominion. 
 
Denyel Lincoln 
 
[1] "I returned the original arms of the Crown Prince (Calontir 
differenced by a label) with a certain amount of regret. If there 
were to be any exception to the rule that a laurel wreath may be used 
only in the arms of an SCA branch, that would be it. ... I do not, 
however, consider it inappropriate for a Crown Prince to bear the arms 
of the King differenced by a label. This seems to me a valid form of 
display of the royal arms, and it appears to be consistent with our 
existing policies. ('The heir of an armiger may bear the armiger's 
arms with a label or other such mark of cadency ... These cadenced 
versions of the arms need not be registered to be borne.' Rules 
XIV.D) [BoE, 10 Mar 85, p.4]" 
 
-- Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com 
_______________________________________________ 
Heralds mailing list 
Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org 
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/heralds-ansteorra.org