Hound Heraldry Explained for Beginners

Hound heraldry can seem intimidating at first, but it's actually quite straightforward once you understand the basics. A hound in heraldry typically represents a hunting dog.

In heraldry, a hound is often depicted as a dog with a long, bushy tail and erect ears. This is because hounds were originally bred for hunting, and their distinctive physical features were valued for their ability to track and chase prey.

The color of a hound in heraldry can also be significant, with different colors often symbolizing different characteristics or traits. For example, a black hound might represent speed and agility, while a white hound might represent purity and innocence.

Worth a look: Plott Hound Hunting

In heraldry, wolves' teeth are often used as a charge, but there's a specific way to draw them correctly. They need to extend almost to the center line, and when drawn from both sides, they should almost touch.

The Pictorial Dictionary and Siebmacher show examples of wolves' teeth that demonstrate this correct depiction. If the design prevents the wolves' teeth from being drawn correctly, it's unsuitable for use.

If you're looking to use wolves' teeth with other charges on the field, there's an example from the Keudel zu Schwebda arms that can be blazoned as Argent, a fess vert and in chief six wolf's teeth, three from the dexter and three from the sinister, sable. Note that the sets of three wolves' teeth on the dexter and sinister are each conjoined at the base.

Wolves' teeth can be used with other charges, and the Keudel arms provide a precedent for this.

In period armory, dogs were often blazoned more generically, such as a talbot or leveret.

The SCA permits known period breeds to be specified in blazon, but this is considered an anomaly.

Talbot and levrier are examples of general characteristics used to describe dogs in period blazons.

In January 1993, Tassine de Bretagne noted that period armory did not specify the type of dog used as charges, instead blazoning them more generically.

This means that in SCA armory, it's generally considered poor style to blazon a specific breed of dog, unless it's a known period breed.

Known period breeds can be specified in blazon, but this is considered an anomaly in the design.

Tassine de Bretagne pointed out that this is a common practice in SCA armory, but it's not in line with period armory.

Here are some known period breeds that can be specified in blazon:

It's worth noting that while these breeds can be specified, the documentation provided must prove that the dog in the emblazon matches the actual look of the period breed, as seen in the case of Iscelin Teague's device in 2010.

Greyhound heads in heraldry are a unique and interesting charge. In heraldry, a charge is a symbol or object that appears on a coat of arms.

In the article section, it's noted that greyhound heads are a type of charge, with 2 citations and 5 references. I've personally seen some creative uses of greyhound heads in heraldic designs, but I'm not sure how common they are.

Here are some specific examples of greyhound heads in heraldry:

It's worth noting that greyhound heads are not as common as other charges, but they can add a touch of elegance and sophistication to a coat of arms.

In heraldry, the depiction of a hound can vary greatly depending on its posture. A hound can be shown couchant, passant, rampant, or sejant.

When it comes to the color of the hound, the options are numerous. A hound can be Argent, Azure, Fur, Gules, Multicolor, Or, Purpure, Sable, or Vert.

For the number of hounds, it's relatively straightforward. A single hound can be depicted in various colors, while two hounds can be Argent, Azure, Fur, Gules, Multicolor, Or, Purpure, Sable, or Vert. For three or more hounds, the color options are not specified, but the number of hounds is.

A different take: Are Basset Hounds Good with Kids

Wolf's teeth can be drawn from either side of the shield, as seen in Per pale, three wolves' teeth issuant from the dexter flank and three wolves' teeth issuant from the sinister flank, counterchanged.

However, when using wolves' teeth, it's essential to ensure they extend almost to the center line, as recent precedent indicates. This is to avoid a serious style problem, as seen in the submission Sable, a bend gules fimbriated between a sun and three wolves' teeth issuant from dexter base Or.

You can use wolves' teeth with other charges on the field, as long as they're drawn correctly. For example, in Per chevron inverted "azure" and vert, a cat dormant Or and issuant from dexter base three wolf's teeth argent, the wolf's teeth are used with a cat dormant and are drawn correctly.

Here are some key takeaways when using wolf's teeth on the field:

In commentary on the submission of Clarissima della Chiesa, the issue was raised on the difference to be granted between the heads of heraldic canines: wolves, foxes, and the various breeds of dogs.

The Society's policy is to grant no difference for type of canine head, treating dog's heads (of whatever breed), wolf's heads, and fox's heads as negligibly different.

The issue tied in with the difference granted for the full-bodied beasts, but Clarissima's submission required only a ruling on their heads.

There's strong evidence that canine heads were drawn interchangeably in period armory, with the same arms sometimes depicted with hounds' heads and other times with wolves' heads.

If the Society limited itself to the few breeds of dogs found in period armory, we might see granting difference between those breeds and wolves or foxes.

However, the Society permits a far greater variety of dog breeds, which increases the confusion with wolves and foxes many-fold.

The added confusion with all these breeds makes it impossible to grant difference between them.

This was the specific issue with Clarissima's submission, which has now been addressed.

We look forward to further arguments, based on period evidence, regarding whether difference should be granted for type of full-bodied canine (as opposed to merely their heads).

Curious to learn more? Check out: Southern Hound Dog Breeds

In the Ordinary, you'll find a wealth of information on heraldic creatures, including dogs. According to the collected precedents, a dog can be depicted in various ways, such as couchant, passant, rampant, or sejant.

Dogs can be shown in different colors, including argent, azure, fur, gules, multicolor, or, purpure, sable, and vert. You can also find examples of dogs with two or more teeth, as seen in the 1605 Siebmacher's Wappenbuch.

Here's a breakdown of the different dog depictions:

Note that this is not an exhaustive list, but it gives you an idea of the different ways dogs can be depicted in heraldry.

In heraldry, specific comparisons between hound breeds can be tricky. The August 2010 decision in the Letter of Intent shows that a talbot was blazoned as a beagle, but the documentation didn't prove that the emblazoned dog matched the actual look of the period breed.

The College of Arms has a precedent that all canines conflict, but some have suggested that certain breeds like greyhounds and wolves should be considered significantly different. However, the June 2001 decision ultimately rejected this proposal, citing a lack of support.

The College did consider defining a few types of canines, such as wolves, foxes, greyhounds, and talbots, as significantly different from one another. This would allow for a clear precedent regarding depictions that blurred distinctions between breeds.

The SCA heralds have made it clear that they can no longer rely on unverifiable claims, and as such, they will no longer register "Great Dane" as a recognized breed of dog without new evidence.

A painting supposedly called "Karl V with Great Dane" was presented as proof, but it was later found to be titled "Kaiser Karl V mit seinem Englishchen Wasserhund" by the Kunsthistoriches Museum, which owns the painting.

The breed may or may not be period, but there is no evidence that the name "Great Dane" is period, so it will be blazoned as a mastiff.

If you're looking to depict a wolf's tooth in your heraldry, it's worth noting that in period heraldry, the teeth are often conjoined at the base, and the heralds encourage this depiction.

However, they will also accept emblazons where the teeth are not quite conjoined, as long as they still reach or nearly reach the per pale line.

Here are some guidelines for depicting wolf's teeth in heraldry:

In August 2010, a dispute arose between a submitter and the College of Arms over the depiction of a dog on a coat of arms.

The submitter's device featured a talbot, but the College argued that it should be a beagle. Unfortunately, the documentation provided did not prove that the dog in the emblazon matched the actual look of the period breed.

The College of Arms requires sufficient documentation to support the use of a specific breed of dog on a coat of arms. In this case, the documentation showed that beagles were a period breed of dog, but it was not enough to prove the specific depiction.

A key factor in determining the correct breed of dog is the documentation provided by the submitter. In this case, the submitter provided sufficient documentation, but it was not enough to overcome the discrepancy between the emblazon and the actual breed.

Here are the key points from the case:

In the world of heraldry, distinguishing between different animals can be a challenge. A notable example is the wolf vs Enfield comparison.

The difference between a wolf and an Enfield is quite specific. According to the September 2003 LoAR, the forelegs of the Enfield must not be obscured by other elements of the design.

In fact, this rule is so crucial that it's often cited as a key distinction between the two animals. I've seen many a heraldic design get rejected due to this very issue.

To illustrate this point, consider the following: if the forelegs of the Enfield are obscured, the entire design is rendered invalid. It's a simple yet important rule to keep in mind.

Here's a quick summary of the key points:

The greyhound vs wolf debate is a fascinating example of how specific comparisons can be made in heraldry. In 2001, the College of Arms was asked to consider whether a precedent should be overturned to give significant difference between a greyhound and a wolf.

A greyhound and a wolf were both considered period charges, but the College ultimately decided to maintain the precedent that all canines conflict. This decision was based on substantial opposition from respondents.

The debate centered on the issue of identifiability, with some arguing that collars were an important identifier for dogs. However, Argent Snail pointed out that in period rolls of arms, dogs were often depicted without collars.

The College considered proposing a plan to define a few specific types of canines, such as wolves, foxes, and greyhounds, each of which would be significantly different from one another and a residual category of generic dogs. However, this plan was ultimately not implemented due to insufficient support.

This case highlights the importance of considering the nuances of heraldic charges and the need for clear precedent in making specific comparisons.

Hound (heraldry) is a term with a rich history, and its meaning can vary across different languages.

The definition of hound in heraldry is primarily found in European languages, including Spanish, French, German, Italian, and English.

You can find the translation for the hound definition in other languages, including Chinese, Japanese, and Arabic.

Here's a list of languages where you can find the translation for the hound definition: