My Historical Disclaimer
"I make no claims to be an expert in heraldry. This article is based primarily
on emails from Dr. Hugh Macartney and readings from the book listed at the end
of the article."
George McCartney
Introduction to Heraldry
Many people researching their family history will come across a Coat of Arms issued to someone with the same surname and mistakenly assume that it is their own Arms. This could not be farther from the truth. Most of us come from peasant or working class ancestry and are not direct decendants of the person to whom the Arms were issued.
The bearing of arms is an inherited right. Even so, there are rigid rules which apply. To legitimately claim the right to a particular coat of arms one must have documented proof of direct descendancy from the person to whom the arms were originally granted.
There may be many representations of arms for a particular family name. There would be an original granting with many variations granted to relatives of the original recipient. Arms granted to relatives were usually similar to the original but with differences to indicate the relationship.
Dr. Hugh Macartney of Canada has done extensive research in the origin of the Macartney/McCartney name. In his studies, he has encountered only two coats of arms that were issued to McCartneys. One was issued to George McCartney (no relation that I know of, honest) who was Lord Mayour of Belfast in the early eighteenth century. Hugh sent me some excellant literature in a series of emails. I have put the data together in what I hope is a logical and readable format.
Before delving into the details of heraldry, a brief quote from Dr. Hugh Macartney:
"First, let's set a distinction between a Crest and a Coat of Arms: a Crest is the sort of thing you have on your blazer pocket, much like a golf association has; a Coat of Arms is the complicated picture which once adorned a shield and later was embellished by artists working for the various Colleges of Arms in different countries.
Top of Page
Heraldry's History
by: Dr. Hugh Macartney ©November 2005
Coats of arms had their origin about the first half of the 12th century when knights in continental Europe began using distinctive markings on their shields to identify themselves in battles and tournaments. When whole body armour replaced chain and link mail the entire body was covered so a person could not be recognised under the helmet.
It was then that distinctive symbols were painted onto shields and, for quick recognition in battle, the pictures were drawn in separate compartments. Later symbolic animals became popular since they could be identified at a glance. Often the drawing of the animals was rather stylised and bore little resemblance to the real thing.
During the crusades shields usually had some Christian symbols with crosses and fleur-de-lis.
Heraldry would have died out when no longer needed for military purposes if it were not for the fact that these pictures began to be used for social reasons and denoted the position, rank and family of the individual. Soon everybody who was anybody had a coat of arms drawn up to the point where the whole business had to be regulated and the description of the arms came to be written in a highly stylized form using a mixture of French, Latin and English.
Before the Normans came, heraldry, in the true sense, did not exist in Ireland. The Normans used simple devices which were easy to recognize in military situations and these are referred to as "ordinaries". Many old Anglo-Irish (the Normans who stayed on in Ireland and founded well known families) still use these.
A separate heraldic tradition, found in the arms of the Anglo-Irish, began in the mid 16th century when the Tudor kings thought seriously of taking possession of Ireland. Then the individual shields became extremely elaborate reflecting the preoccupation of Anglo-Irish with family relationships and status.
The Office of the Ulster King of Arms was set up in 1552 with authority over all arms in Ireland and was part of the household of the Vice-Regal Court. Whereas the arms of the Normans are clearly military, those of the Anglo-Irish reflected their preoccupation with status and family relationships. The native Gaelic people copied the idea of arms and crests but theirs were based more on ancient myths and very complicated family genealogy in which fact and fiction are difficult to sort out.
The third tradition of heraldry relates to the Gaelic Irish whose important families now wanted the same sort of recognition. Their shields were different in that they tended to be related to mythical origins of families and myths themselves. These were usually related to pre-Christian myths as opposed to those of the Anglo-Irish. The stag, bear and red hand are obvious examples.
Another source was the pseudo-mythical assertion that various clans and families were descended from a particular (but mythical) person. Although these myths were widely believed, they originated long before there was written language and we should not take them literally.
You will read a lot of rubbish about the coats of arms of Gaelic families so discount much of what is written.
Top of Page
McCartney Migration
by: Dr. Hugh Macartney ©November 2005
The Macartneys/McCartneys who came back to Ulster from Galloway, Scotland, starting about 1610 represent most of our ancestors. They were poor tenant farmers for the most part - peasants, in fact, and if you had asked them about their family crest they would have laughed because only noblemen had such things. I am afraid those who peddle so called Coats of Arms to people seeking their roots are rather unscrupulous and are mostly making the designs up or are taking the personal Arms of noblemen with whom few of us have any direct connection. These noblemen were themselves once farmers but managed to rise in the financial and social scale receiving knighthoods for service to the crown or a promise of allegiance.
The important McCartneys in Ulster are mostly descended from three well-to-do Scottish Ayrshire landowners who became famous and wealthy in early Belfast. A few were knighted and naturally wanted a coat of arms to go with their position. Thus there are several versions of arms associated with these families. However most McCartneys/Macartneys who settled in Ulster in the early 1600's had the same name as the landowners but were dirt poor farmers and their relationship with the important families was extremely remote.
Top of Page
Concepts of Heraldry
by: George McCartney ©December 2005
As Dr. Hugh Macartney pointed out in one of his articles, there were very few Arms issued to McCartneys. There is a commercial version of a McCartney coat of arms (shown below) which is available at any establishment that sells thing Irish. This device is not legitimate. It is a combination of a variety of Arms developed solely as a souvenir to be sold to unsuspecting tourists. This "tourist" version will be used as a means to explain some of the heraldic concepts.
In the terms of heraldry, this Coat would be described as "or a stag gules passant a bordure gules crested cubit arm palewise a rose gules". In English this would be translated as follows:
or - a gold or yellow field
a stag gules - the symbolic animal in red
passant - with right fore-leg raised as in walking
a bordure gules - surrounded by a red border
crested - having a crest above the shield
cubit arm palewise - a forearm and hand in a verticle position
a rose gules - a red rose
The final description would read as "a red stag walking on a gold field with a red border, under a raised arm holding a red rose".
The Motto
Many families added mottos to their Arms. In this commercial version we see a latin motto "stimulat sed ornat". Thanks to Regis High School in New York City, my son, Michael, had a well rounded education which included Latin studies. He has translated the motto as follows:
stimulat, verb (stimulare): to goad, prick, vex; also, to annoy, incite, stir up (we get the English stimulate from this) - I'm quite sure it's 3rd person singular, making it "he stirs up".
sed, preposition: but, however; also used to confirm, as in "and indeed" or "and what's more".
ornat, verb (ornare): to equip, furnish, fit out; also, to adorn, decorate, embellish; to honor, distinguish (we get the English ornate from this) - this, too, is 3rd person singular, making it "he equips" or "he furnishes".
So, this makes the motto (loosely): "He stirs up trouble, and what's more he supplies the means to carry it out!". Or more simply and accurately (but less colorfully): "He incites, and indeed, he equips".
The Stag
In the Oxford Guide to Heraldry the authors, Thomas Woodcock (Somerset Herald) and John Martin Robinson (Maltravers Herald Extraordinary), make reference to one of the earliest catalogings of heraldric symbols written in 1394, Tractatus de Armis by Johannes de Bado Aureo. de Bado Aureo stated the heraldric meaning of the stag as "poverty in youth and wisdom in war".
In Celtic legend, which predates heraldry, the stag is a very powerful symbol. In early history, the stag in Ireland and Scotland was a very large and powerful animal. One of the rituals relating to leadership was to have the candidate hunt and kill a stag using only a knife made from a stag's horn. The person would then take on the persona of the stag, gaining its strength and wisdom.
Top of Page
Legitimate Arms
by: Dr. Hugh Macartney ©November 2005
There are two prominent Macartney Coats of Arms. The first is, or rather was that of Lord George Macartney (1737-1806). He was knighted in 1764 before going to Russia as Envoy Extraordinary. Likely this is when he commissioned his Arms. Macartney used a stag surmounted by a helmet from the top of which projected a hand holding a single rose. The motto was "Mes conscia recti" or "A mind dedicated to the right things". He and his descendants were entitled to use the Arms but as he died without issue the Arms died with him. Other family members (or anyone else) would not have had the right to use his Arms.
Another Coat of Arms was devised for Sir John Barrington Macartney, 6th Baronet of Nish (possibly Lish), Co. Armagh. This is somewhat similar, though less elaborate, than George's and the hand holds a spray of three roses. Other Macartneys who did not have a personal Coat of Arms simply used a crest consisting of a hand holding one or more roses in various configurations.
What has happened in recent years is that people interested in family history have been conned by commercial interests who sell crests of various families. People with the same name imagine the crests are their rightful crests just because of the name.
While it is not illegal, it must be recognised that family coats of arms were drawn up for an individual noble (i.e. wealthy or important) family and just because you have the same name does not mean that it is also your coat of arms. Many coats of arms were Victorian creations to please families who have risen to wealth and power and are often as contrived as the tartans which also, were often designed in Victorian times when Queen Victoria had a passion for all things Scottish. Some Irish arms and Scottish tartans may be authentic but most, more often than not, are merely Victorian nonsense.
In point of fact the right to have a coat of arms is given to a particular person and may be inherited by the family. However persons with the same name who are unrelated cannot rightfully use it, although many do. So unless your family were given a coat of arms by the Irish College of Heralds it is improper to claim someone else's as your own. In the tourist shops you can buy a crest of any family but everyone with the same name is really not entitled to display it as that of your family. Unless one is a direct descendant of the original owner of the Arms it is not proper to use them as one's own. It is perfectly all right to use any form of a hand holding one or more roses as a crest I think but it should not be miss-labeled as a Coat of Arms.
Suggested Reading
Woodcock, Thomas, and John Martin Robinson; The Oxford Guide to Heraldry; Oxford University Press; 1988
