Clan Badges

[macwilkin]

Ah, thanks. I was, however, making the point that Moors are something very different from Turks, and European conflicts with the two groups reached their peaks at different historical periods. So I didn't think that his remark touched on this.

Your information about the heart of Robert the Bruce at least gave some link. Btw, what happened to Robert's heart?

Mea Culpa!

The Bruce's heart was returned to Scotland, and buried at Melrose Abbey:

http://www.rampantscotland.com/know/blknow_heart.htm

One of the legends involving Sir James and the heart was that before Douglas was killed by a group of Moors, he flung the casket with the heart into them, crying "Onward, Brave Heart -- Douglas will follow!"

T.

[Jack Daw]

In "The Book of Crests," by Mike McLaren, the crest for Muir is depicted with the profile of the head. In regard to the source, the author writes, "The blazons and mottoes are reprinted here exactly as they were originally put down by the heralds in the Court of the Lord Lyon in Edinburgh, Scotland."

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Ah, thanks. I was, however, making the point that Moors are something very different from Turks, and European conflicts with the two groups reached their peaks at different historical periods. So I didn't think that his remark touched on this.

Your information about the heart of Robert the Bruce at least gave some link. Btw, what happened to Robert's heart?

I have seen very few blazons referring to a "Turk's head"; By and large heralds seem to have favoured the term "Moor's head" or "Saracen's head" (in all probability to lend an air of specious antiquity to a de novo grant of arms!). While we tend to be rather precise in identifying people today, I rather much doubt that was the case even 100 years ago. In all likelihood the two terms were used interchangeably, although Turks heads are inevitably depicted as wearing a turban whereas Saracens and Moors are often depicted without their head-gear.

Perhaps a Lockhart would like the honour of telling us what became of the Bruce's heart?

[Galician]

I have seen very few blazons referring to a "Turk's head"; By and large heralds seem to have favoured the term "Moor's head" or "Saracen's head" (in all probability to lend an air of specious antiquity to a de novo grant of arms!). While we tend to be rather precise in identifying people today, I rather much doubt that was the case even 100 years ago. In all likelihood the two terms were used interchangeably, although Turks heads are inevitably depicted as wearing a turban whereas Saracens and Moors are often depicted without their head-gear. Perhaps a Lockhart would like the honour of telling us what became of the Bruce's heart?

That would seem to depend on the level of contact with one group or another. One hundred years ago, the Turks still had one of the largest empires of the "Old" world, reaching right into Europe. So I think it's reasonable to say Europeans of that period had a clearer idea of who the Turks were than did people later in the century.

I'm still curious, though, what the reason for the head might have been. If the crest was designed in the Victorian era, was it a British bit of bravado directed toward other nationalities, which seems typical of the Victorian era, when they ruled around the world.

[macwilkin]

Perhaps a Lockhart would like the honour of telling us what became of the Bruce's heart?

I'm not a Lockhart, but I mentioned the story above.

T.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I'm still curious, though, what the reason for the head might have been. If the crest was designed in the Victorian era, was it a British bit of bravado directed toward other nationalities, which seems typical of the Victorian era, when they ruled around the world.

"The HUMAN HEAD stands for honour. The heads of "blackamoors" ... generally refer to deeds of prowess in the crusades." [The Symbolisms of Heraldry by W. Cecil Wade, London 1893] I think there is a danger in reading too much into heraldic symbolism, especially when one tires to interpret that symbolism in terms of 21st century manners, morals, and mores (to say nothing of political correctness!). In 1856 Moslem Turkey was the ally of Christian Britain in a war against Christian Russia, quite a change from little more than 150 years before when virtually every Christian country in Europe was involved on some level with assisting the Holy Roman Empire (Austria) in driving the Turks from the very gates of Vienna.

As far as Britain "ruling the world", well, one could, I suppose, take the view that the abolition of slavery, the introduction of un-biased courts, and bringing parliamentary democracy to millions and millions of non-European peoples in the 19th century was typical of Victorian cultural imperialism, and that these things should now be discarded by all of those former "Outposts of Empire" in this post-colonial world in which we now all live. Or maybe not, as the case may be.

Satirical comments aside, there is nothing wrong with an individual wishing to commemorate his deeds (or those of a remote ancestor) by showing the head of an adversary stuck on a sword, or pike, or merely in decapitated form. That the head may represent a specific kind of person (a Moor, a Turk, a Chinese, or a Frenchman for that matter) is merely an historical reference and nothing beyond that "historical notation" should be implied or read in to it.

[Jock Scot]

"The HUMAN HEAD stands for honour. The heads of "blackamoors" ... generally refer to deeds of prowess in the crusades." [The Symbolisms of Heraldry by W. Cecil Wade, London 1893] I think there is a danger in reading too much into heraldic symbolism, especially when one tires to interpret that symbolism in terms of 21st century manners, morals, and mores (to say nothing of political correctness!). In 1856 Moslem Turkey was the ally of Christian Britain in a war against Christian Russia, quite a change from little more than 150 years before when virtually every Christian country in Europe was involved on some level with assisting the Holy Roman Empire (Austria) in driving the Turks from the very gates of Vienna.

As far as Britain "ruling the world", well, one could, I suppose, take the view that the abolition of slavery, the introduction of un-biased courts, and bringing parliamentary democracy to millions and millions of non-European peoples in the 19th century was typical of Victorian cultural imperialism, and that these things should now be discarded by all of those former "Outposts of Empire" in this post-colonial world in which we now all live. Or maybe not, as the case may be.

Satirical comments aside, there is nothing wrong with an individual wishing to commemorate his deeds (or those of a remote ancestor) by showing the head of an adversary stuck on a sword, or pike, or merely in decapitated form. That the head may represent a specific kind of person (a Moor, a Turk, a Chinese, or a Frenchman for that matter) is merely an historical reference and nothing beyond that "historical notation" should be implied or read in to it.

Very well put M.of R.,I wish I was cleaver enough to say that myself.I thought it though!

[gilmore]

[I...
Satirical comments aside, there is nothing wrong with an individual wishing to commemorate his deeds (or those of a remote ancestor) by showing the head of an adversary stuck on a sword, or pike, or merely in decapitated form. That the head may represent a specific kind of person (a Moor, a Turk, a Chinese, or a Frenchman for that matter) is merely an historical reference and nothing beyond that "historical notation" should be implied or read in to it.

Is there a clan crest with a decapitated head representing a Campbell or a MacDonald? Or an Englishman? If not, why do you think there isn't?

[M. A. C. Newsome]

Is there a clan crest with a decapitated head representing a Campbell or a MacDonald? Or an Englishman? If not, why do you think there isn't?

Actually, I'm pretty sure there are Welsh crests that use an "Anglo-Saxon head" as a charge.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Is there a clan crest with a decapitated head representing a Campbell

Yes there is. Chisholm quite clearly depicts the sacred boar head of the Campbells on a dagger. That's the Highland equivalent of putting the Profit Mohammed's head on a stick. Far more insulting than using the old stand-by "Head of A Savage" which is how warring clans referred to each other, and why that charge appears on the odd Scottish crest.

Or an Englishman?

I suspect you haven't seen the crest of the Adairs? The head of a nice beared Englishman, complete with blood dripping from the neck. You might also look at the arms of Lloyd, as well as several other Welsh families who display Saxon Heads as part of their armorial achievement. Fauntleroy uses the head of an infant, although to be fair this is an example of canting arms, the origin of the name being "l'enfante la roy"

If not, why do you think there isn't?

Well. Let me put it this way. I do not wish to sound vexatious when I suggest that it seems to me you may have an ulterior motive for raising the question about the ethnicity of heads found as heraldic charges, usually in clan badges. Whether this is to cast aspersions upon the British, or to raise issues dealing with some sort of wrongly perceived unfair racial attitudes in heraldry I do not know. Nor do I really care. I have thus far answered your questions, and would prefer that discussions on heraldic matters remain just that-- focussed on heraldry and not wander off into the arena of "social grievance". That said, I'll answer your last question:

Sloane Evans's The Grammar of Heraldry lists no fewer than eight heraldic heads: (1) Wild Man's or Savage's); (2) Moor's; (3) Saracen's; (4) Saxon's; (5) Englishman's; (6) Old Man's; (7) Woman's; (8) Child's.

As I've shown, with the exception of canting arms and crests (Moor punning Muir for example), Saxon's, Savages, and Englishmen seem to outnumber Moors and Saracens in British heraldry by a fair old number.

Fewer than about 5% of crests encountered in British heraldry are representational of the human head. Why is that? Well, I believe it is down to two things:

First, heads, even skewered on a sword, just don't look fierce or ferocious. There is a reason that the most common charge is a lion-- it's ferocious and it looks cool. Even poorly drawn it is still a lion, with all that it conveys.

Second, people in the British Isles regularly intermarry, and nothing is more apt to put the kibosh on a marriage than showing up at the castle to ask for the bride's hand when you have her Uncle Bulgaria's head being used as the crest on your helmet. No matter how much land you may have, the wedding is probably off.

I hope that answers you questions.