[HPforGrownups] [Fwd: Re: Hogwarts crests (sic)]

[Amanda Lewanski]

No: HPFGUIDX 7192

Rita Winston wrote:

> Is this another complaint against the vile and loathsome artist of
> the wall calendar?

It was more a complaint against anyone who has departed from the attractive
and authentic-looking heraldry of the book, and substituted this modern-look
garbage.

> I'll add my voice to the clamor of those who say that Ravenclaw's
> mascot should be a Raven (possible perching on a pallid bust of
> Pallas) rather than an eagle.

Ahem. The mascot can be anything. Their armorial charge is an eagle.

> Altho' it is possible that Gruffydd Glndwr DID choose to bear a lion as
> his sign, and not change it to match the names the Sais gave him...
> [Gruffydd Glndwr is my theory.]

I'm betting the arms were attributed, at an early date (arms = heraldic
device, coat of arms, usually incorrectly called a "crest"). Attributed
armory is a coat of arms made up long after the fact for a
pre-heraldic-period person. An example: Adam & Eve. They were not around
during the period when people were doing heraldry, but it was inconceiveable
that people of such note would not have had armory (a mark of the upper
classes). Therefore, they *must* have had arms, so people gave them some.
Other examples are a few of the Nine Worthies. They were examples of various
virtues, broken into the Three Good Jews, Three Good Heathens, and Three
Good Christians (I think that's right). They were (thinks hard) King David,
Judas Maccabeus,       , Hector of Troy, ......., King Arthur, Charlemagne.
Sorry for the gaps, my books are in the baby's room. My mind's going, I
actually had to make banners of all these, I used to know all the blazons,
much less the names! The point being that only a couple of these coats of
arms have even a toehold in actuality; the other coats were bestowed upon
the bearer in retrospect.

Did that make sense? Anyway, since Hogwarts was founded before the regular
system of true heraldry really got going, I'm betting the arms are
attributed. And the lion was the A-plus, bestest, butchest animal possible.
The king of beasts. The eagle was his counterpart, the king of birds. So
they were the most honorable choices to make.

> As bronze, despite being an Olympic medal, is not a heraldic metal,
> not even a heraldic color, not even a color which by another name is
> a heraldic color. So wouldn't they HAVE to depict a bronze object
> as or?

If they were paying even an iota of attention, yes. Or, for you who have
lives, is the heraldic term for gold.

More rambling available at the slightest breath of interest. Be careful.

--Amanda