*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 07:15:10 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1686614
  • Total Topics: 118113
  • Online Today: 777
  • Online Ever: 2235
  • (October 29, 2023, 12:32:45 AM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: Richard de la Pole Heraldry  (Read 2272 times)

Offline Stuart

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 857
    • Army Royal
Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« on: July 20, 2016, 03:48:29 PM »
Calling all heraldry buffs

I've tried in vain to find the heraldry of Richard De la Pole, 5th Duke of Suffolk, the white Rose, d. 1525 so I've attempted to piece it together.

I started with the arms of his older brother and used a ring symbol to indicate that he was the fifth son but don't know if that should be on a bar?

Fully aware that in reality no one is really going to care with the depths of pedantry that this task has befallen me but any thoughts or examples of fifth heirs in heraldry would be appreciated.

Stuart

Offline Stuart

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 857
    • Army Royal
Re: Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2016, 03:49:25 PM »
P.S. My design is for a flag

Offline Arlequín

  • Galactic Brain
  • Posts: 6218
  • Culpame de la Bossa Nova...
Re: Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2016, 10:02:55 AM »
I could very well be wrong, but I seem to recall that he would only need to bear the ring on his arms while his brother was alive. Once he became de jure duke (and only surviving member of the line) he would bear the arms without difference (as there could be no confusion to whom the same arms belonged). In the same way his brother's arms would have been labelled while their father was alive, but not after.

In short his arms would be the same as his brother's at that point.

One of heraldry's 'unofficial' rules, Cadency was something that could result in immense confusion if it was followed rigorously. For example, it could be possible for someone to bear exactly the same arms as his uncle (which would not be permitted), or to need a mass of symbols to display that he was the third son, of a fourth son, of a first son etc. I'm led to believe therefore that it was a convenience (in England at least), to only display marks as required and when confusion might possibly arise.

Somebody with a good knowledge of heraldry should be able to give a more concrete answer though... and I'm not that guy.  :)

Offline TadPortly

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 657
    • http://www.oxfordhousehold.co.uk/
Re: Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2016, 03:31:58 PM »
I agree with Arlequin - he would be using his father's arms if there were no surviving brothers
They were all drawn to the Keep; the soldiers who brought death; the father and daughter fighting for life; the people who have always feared it; and the one man who knows its secret....

Offline Metternich

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2559
Re: Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2016, 11:26:02 PM »
Arlequin and TadPortly are quite correct - he only needed to difference the arms while his father and brother were alive (and died without other heirs taking precedence over him).

Offline Patrice

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1769
  • Breizh / Brittany
    • "Argad!"
Re: Richard de la Pole Heraldry
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2016, 08:52:55 AM »
I agree. :)

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
790 Views
Last post August 25, 2011, 08:18:46 AM
by alligator9
2 Replies
1446 Views
Last post January 23, 2013, 01:14:10 AM
by Arlequín
0 Replies
755 Views
Last post February 11, 2013, 11:43:14 AM
by Emir of Askaristan
2 Replies
1133 Views
Last post May 24, 2014, 04:32:45 PM
by Arlequín
6 Replies
1308 Views
Last post August 13, 2022, 07:55:06 PM
by George1863