Category:Domain:Mhoried

[kgauck]

Discussion thread for Category:Domain:Mhoried (http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/Category:Domain:Mhoried). If you would like to add a comment, click the Post Reply button.

[kgauck]

There are three arms in this category right now, and I wonder which would be prefered for the arms of Mhoried (as opposed to the Mhor).

The first is the arms in Ruins of Empire worn by the Mhor.
The second and third are the quarters made whole arms.

If we select 2 or 3, then the other unquartered arms would presumably be the arms of the Mhor's own family.

Thoughts?

[Thelandrin]

I think the idea of the scales and sword is to promote both sides of justice - mercy and retribution - as represented by the famous statue at the Old Bailey.

Since the lord generally has the least complicated arms and lesser relatives add to them, I would suggest that if the first arms are those of the Mhor, the other two would either be ancestors or completely unrelated.

[kgauck]

The statue you refer to is of Dike (sister of Nike) who is a Roman goddess of Justice. Nike is a godess of Victory, so you see how the Romans saw such things.

The question is based on the fact that the arms are quartered in the first place. Generally quartered arms indicate a combination of realms (Castille and Leon) or claims thereto. It would be easy to combine a sword and balance if one message was indicated.

[ryancaveney]

The question is based on the fact that the arms are quartered in the first place.

I would make the sword the arms of the realm, and the balance the arms of the family. The entire purpose of the realm is to act as all Anuire's first line of defense against the Gorgon's vast hordes, so its symbol should be purely military. Daeric Mhoried himself, however, is portrayed as a just ruler, and one who thoroughly understands that in order to be best prepared for war, a realm must also be strong socially and economically; both of these are aspects of the balance. Reasoning from the personality of one man to the personalities of his ancestors seems amply justified given bloodline inheritance; additionally, the Mhor is the most "good guy" ruler in all Anuire, so he should also do the best job of living up to the high ideals of his forebears.


Ryan

[Thelandrin]

Well, it could still be based on two powerful families marrying, one with the sword as their symbol and the other with the scales. A similar thing happened with the families of Ghieste and Dhaliene combining to become Ghoere.

[ryancaveney]

Well, it could still be based on two powerful families marrying, one with the sword as their symbol and the other with the scales. A similar thing happened with the families of Ghieste and Dhaliene combining to become Ghoere.

Indeed it could. In which case, the arms of Mhoried as a realm should be based on a *shield*, since its function is to shield the rest of Anuire from the Gorgon, and its capital city is named Shieldhaven.


Ryan

[kgauck]

Saving the Apperances:

The voting certainly seems to be heavily in favor of the quartered arms we see in the Ruins of Empire. Any they are cool arms.

But, quartered arms mean two realms have been joined. If the current ruling house represented the big realm, he would just absorb the little realm and no adjustment to the arms would take place. So the ruling house must have originated from a smaller realm and inherited or otherwise aquired the big realm. They could also be two equal sized realms.

Does the northern part of the realm have its own arms quartered with the southern part in a new realm composed of what was once two places?

[Thelandrin]

Well, I would think that if Mhoried had merged with another realm, it would be called out, like with Ghoere. Maybe another noble family, distantly related to the Mhors, was called upon to inherit after some historical catastrophe, and they quartered the Mhoried arms with their own as a symbol of their previous heritage.

[Sir Tiamat]

Mhoried is very large, which may have to do with two realms being interlinked through marriage.

I can also immagine that as the power of the Gorgon grew ,the people inhabiting what is now Markazor were driven across the river towards the safe haven that is now "shieldhaven". The former regents of large parts of the Markazor area may have withdrawn to the/their territories behind the river, taking their troops, administration and bloodline. The Mhoried family may well have decided to bundle forces with the other family, especially if they had a decent bloodline and legitimacy to offer.

[kgauck]

Maybe another noble family, distantly related to the Mhors, was called upon to inherit after some historical catastrophe, and they quartered the Mhoried arms with their own as a symbol of their previous heritage.
That would not be the arms of Mhoried, though. That would be the arms of the Mhor. Queen Victoria's arms could be depecieted with 164 charges, but England's arms are always three leopards, and Great Britain is England in quarters 1 and 4, Scotland in 2, and Ireland in 3, except in Scotland where the arms are otherwise (Scotland in 1 and 4, England in 2, Ireland in 3).

I can see why the Mhor would wear his own arms. But the quartering of the personal arms of the Mhor would not effect the arms of Mhoried. The arms of Mhoried would only be quartered if it joined another realm, as Leon joined Castille, or England joined Scotland and Ireland.

[ArchScarlettie]

The "Realm" Mhoried could have "joined" with, could be anything. It could have been one independent count, for instance. It could have even been a powerful noble family worthy of note, without a domain. Or, even, they could both be historic Mhor crests. For instance, one of the family before deismaar, and one afterwards (as a Duchy?).

John the Fearless, count of Flanders, marshalled his arms in 1409 as a quartered shield of the new and old coats of Burgundy.

There are many instances, for many reasons, why a shield would be quartered, from anything to an ancestor, a historic event, or personal preference.

[Thelandrin]

Technically speaking of course, England conquered Ireland and joined with Scotland. :)

[kgauck]

Not so. The Act of Union of 1801 was the thing that put the Irish harp on the monarch's arms. Ireland had been in and out of, but mostly in English domination since Henry II, but was not included on the monarch's arms. During the early part of this hegemony, Ireland was a "lordship" and the titles adopted by English monarchs were something like King of England and Lord of Ireland. When England claimed France, they were King of France and England and Lord or Ireland. It was Henry VIII who made Ireland a kingdomm and himself King. This is a personal union. The king would bear one set of arms in Ireland as King of Ireland, and a seperate set of arms elsewhere as King of England. The Act of Union of 1707 made England and Scotland one realm, and so merged the arms of England (quartered England and France) with Scotland. The Act of Union of 1801, which abolished all the seperate institutions of Irish government (like the seperate Irish parliament and Irish peerage) and united them with England and Scotland, put the Irish harp on the arms of the soveriegn. It was also about this time, 1803 with the treaty of Amiens, that the crown of England abandon its claims to the throne of France, so that quarter on the arms was suddenly available.

So conquest of Ireland is no factor in the arms, and civil union everything.

[Thelandrin]

Fair enough I guess :) I was referring to the fact that whilst Wales was simply walked over and Scotland was never conquered before union, Ireland got to enjoy both.

[kgauck]

Welcome to history, where people are either conquered or are conquerors.

[cccpxepoj]

Not so. The Act of Union of 1801 was the thing that put the Irish harp on the monarch's arms. Ireland had been in and out of, but mostly in English domination since Henry II, but was not included on the monarch's arms. During the early part of this hegemony, Ireland was a "lordship" and the titles adopted by English monarchs were something like King of England and Lord of Ireland. When England claimed France, they were King of France and England and Lord or Ireland. It was Henry VIII who made Ireland a kingdomm and himself King. This is a personal union. The king would bear one set of arms in Ireland as King of Ireland, and a seperate set of arms elsewhere as King of England. The Act of Union of 1707 made England and Scotland one realm, and so merged the arms of England (quartered England and France) with Scotland. The Act of Union of 1801, which abolished all the seperate institutions of Irish government (like the seperate Irish parliament and Irish peerage) and united them with England and Scotland, put the Irish harp on the arms of the soveriegn. It was also about this time, 1803 with the treaty of Amiens, that the crown of England abandon its claims to the throne of France, so that quarter on the arms was suddenly available.

So conquest of Ireland is no factor in the arms, and civil union everything.

kgauck are you historian or you just like reading/learning history a lot

[kgauck]

I have a masters in history, taught for several years, but now I run a hotel.

[cccpxepoj]

I have a masters in history, taught for several years, but now I run a hotel.

i can recognize a fellow historian when he speaks ( 3rd year history student )