The Heraldic Illustrations

from BARONAGE Magazine

Heraldry is usually much easier to check than are the more complex details of marriage connections in the middle ages, but even here Burke's Peerage may not be considered as an authority. The illustrations of arms at the head of the articles do not always match the blazon given at the foot. Sometimes both the illustration and the blazon are wrong. For example, on the shield of the Edmonstone baronets appear the pronominal arms of Seton, for the Edmonstone's red ring with its blue centre (annulet gules stoned azure ) is missing. (The similarity is probably owed to the 12th century Edmonstones of that Ilk and their cadets, the Edmonstones of Duntreath, being descended of the Setons.)

Naturally, for the Baronage magazine, our principal interest is in the armorial illustrations at the head of each family's entry. Here we must immediately acknowledge that it would be quite impossible for any commercial enterprise to meet the standards heraldic art deserves. If all the armorial achievements were to be printed in colour the production costs would put the price of the books beyond reach, and even if an artistic rendering in black and white were to be printed for every family the final price would still be beyond the reach of most potential buyers.

The chosen solution was to use and sometimes to modify the drawings in the 1970 edition, a decision that has produced a wide range of quality and, regrettably, a few mistakes.

The 1970 edition's portrayal of the arms of the Edmonstone baronets was unchanged from earlier editions, but its printing block was much worn, so that the quality was far worse than it had been in, for example, our 1906 copy. However, the arms shown here, and blazoned accordingly in the text are ~ Or three crescents within a double tressure flory-counterflory Gules. But these are the arms of Seton. The arms of Edmonstone are ~ Or an annulet Gules stoned Azure between three crescents within a double tressure flory-counterflory of the Second.

For the New Burke's Peerage the artist prepared a new presentation seemingly based on that used by Debrett's Peerage ~ not a happy choice. A helm, not included in the earlier version, has now been added, but it faces the front (as used to be the fashion for baronets' helms) and thus makes the swan's head and neck look absurd (for obviously the crest would be aligned with the helm).

The supporters, the two lions rampant, are obviously not rampant as they should be ~ with both their hind legs on the ground they could perhaps be blazoned salient (but then both forelegs should be raised).

Of most interest, however, is the presence at the fess point of a gem-ring stoned Azure instead of the annulet stoned Azure. This suggests a misunderstanding of the nature of annulets and gem-rings

The shield on the far left bears a gem-ring Gules stoned Azure. The nearer shield bears an annulet Gules stoned Azure. The difference is substantial, but the position is easy to confuse if the matriculated blazon is ignored or taken for granted, which the picture above suggests. An illuminated manuscript dated circa 1604 shows Edmonstone of Duntreath then to have borne Or a gem-ring stoned Azure between three crescents Gules (i.e. the gem was blue).

That Edmonston was in Seton territory, that at least one early Edmonston bore the Seton arms undifferenced (sir ioon of eetmonston according to the Armorial de Gelre, mid-14th century), that subsequent Edmonstons (Edmiston, Edmonstones, et al.) bore the Seton arms with an annulet or a gem-ring added for difference, are all strong indications of their origin as a younger son of the Seton family, or of a Seton daughter marrying a man who changed his name to hers. This is an area well worth serious research, for the Seton blood is of huge importance in understanding the politics of the 12th and 13th centuries.