Talk:Lion (heraldry)

Heraldry and vexillology B‑class

Lion (heraldry) is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Cats B‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Just wanted to say that there is no use for this article as we already have a heraldry article, which we could have just added some of this information to. In anycase, I would like to mention that unlike much of the rest of Western Europe, Germany does not associate itself with the lion much. The Tiger (under Nazi Germany) and leopard (before Nazi Germany and now) are/were the choice for some coat of arms in Germany. The eagle is by far the main animal that you will most often find in German heraldry, however. With this said, I took out the black panthers (leopards) that were mistaken for lions from the coat of arms of some German states and districts. I kept the coat of arms of Thuringia because it is a lion and I added other coat of arms from different nations and/or cities, states and districts just to make it a little more diverse. User:TheGoodSon

The only difference between lions and leopards in heraldry is their posture. —Tamfang 00:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True enough. Leopards are often depicted as stalking (as seen here Baden-Württemberg) or in upright positions, while lions are usually just standing or rampant. User: TheGoodSon

What do you mean by "upright"? Statant, sejant, salient ...? —Tamfang 22:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the UK arms because England and Scotland are also displayed separately (and more visibly!). If there are images of the crests only, those might be added.

Thuringia could also be dropped, as it is obviously derived from Hesse.

We probably don't really need so many examples of "a shield with a lion, supported by two lions", particularly at this size. —Tamfang 19:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thegoodson writes:

• Baden Wurttemberg coat of arms is PANTHERS, not lions. ...

How do you tell the difference?

What's the German word for the monster (which cannot be mistaken for a lion) in the arms of Styria? In English it's a panther.

• Remember, leopards are the unofficial animal symbol of germany.

Remember? I've lived 45 years without ever hearing it before. We learn something every day!

• lions have no significance in germany, unlike much of western eur

And leopards have? How do you tell them apart? Anyway, so what? Mullets have (so far as I know) no special significance in Britain or France, where they appear most frequently in arms.

Not that I object to limiting the number of examples. —Tamfang 06:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tamfang, I am German and have known this for quite a long time. The leopard (especially the black panther) has been associated with Germany for a long time. In Nazi Germany, the tiger replaced the leopard (for obvious reasons...tigers are biggers, more powerful and more fierce and thus more suitable for the horrible regime). After 1945, the tiger was replaced back to the leopard, which is, a "softer" version of the tiger. Many coat of arms in Germany that depict leopards sometimes look like lions, but in fact they are not. The eagle is the main animal, followed by the leopard and than the lion (not saying that lions aren't used, but just that they aren't as important as leopards). Tigers have become taboo because of their nazi association. Do you read German? If you do, I can refer you to a book on all this. User:TheGoodSon

I ask again and again: what is the difference between a lion and a leopard (in heraldry) other than the name? (Sadly no, I have never learned to read German.) —Tamfang 22:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tamfang, there is a difference between lions and leopards in heraldry and symbolism. Lions are associated with justice, freedom, family, courage, honor and security. Leopards symbolize military might, ferocity, resistence, and powerful independence. Germany as a nation simply sybolizes themself with the eagle first and foremost by far and than the leopard. Each nation has different national animal and eagle and leopard are Germany's. Don't ask me why they chose it (and formerly the tiger) over the lion...they just did. User:TheGoodSon

(sigh) And is there any way to tell by LOOKING AT IT whether a given heraldic beast represents "justice, freedom, family, courage, honor and security" or "military might, ferocity, resistence, and powerful independence"? In English and French heraldry the only difference is posture. —Tamfang 05:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new article about leopards in heraldry, see Leopard (heraldry). - GilliamJF 00:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It merely repeats what I already know: that a lion passant gardant is sometimes called a leopard. Can't see why it's a separate article. —Tamfang 06:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got out Neubecker's Deutsch und Französisch für Heraldiker, a bilingual glossary. It's the only bilingual wordbook I have that does not separate the two vocabularies, so these entries appear together:

• Leopard – léopard; gelöwter L.: léopard lionné; natürlicher L.: panthère
• léopard – Leopard; hersehender, schreitender Löwe
• — lionné – gelöwter, (aufrechter) Leopard; hersehender (aufrechter) Löwe

Which implies that German blazon optionally follows French in calling a lion passant gardant a "leopard", though the analytic style as in English is also known. —Tamfang 06:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of adding a leopard section into lion article, I propose to rename it into Heraldic beast which would contain both (and more) with proper redirects, of course. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 10:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Disagree because 'heraldic beast' would be far too ambiguous; it could encompass wyverns and gryphons and all sorts. In British heraldry, at least, the lion is more commonly used. Mon Vier 23:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Oppose Heraldic beasts will be far too long a list and the heraldic concepts about the lion and leopard are pretty old. We should keep the two articles. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 13:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reference or source for the statement that the Bohemian two-tailed lion 'originally was an artist's flourish'?

I'm not contesting it - merely fascinated. I found a reference to the Santiago Dotor, 9 Sep 2002 which says:

"The oldest arms of the Kings of Bohemia showed in silver a black eagle, covered with golden tears (still used by the Italian region Trient). The silver double-tailed lion was introduced by King Ottokar_II_of_Bohemia in 1249. Ever since the double-tailed lion remained on the arms of Bohemia."

If it's that old, I'd assume that the only evidence for the Artistic Flourish Hypothesis would be particularly ancient images showing that flourish. Anybody have one?

Purely in the interest of science, you understand... --Cdavis999 (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you mean the appropriate evidence would be examples of the lion of Bohemia not showing the flourish? —Tamfang (talk) 05:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er, I meant showing the flourish as a flourish, rather than as a second fork. I note other heraldic lions with little flufts ((c) 1984 K. Louw) sticking out of the shaft of their tails, and I can see how this might have evolved. I'd just like to see specific examples - if they exist - of the one that supposedly led to the two-tailed Bohemian Beastie. Just curiosity, is all. --Cdavis999 (talk) 08:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldnt it be noted that Passant also means Guardant? Ive seen it both ways.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 06:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "seen it both ways"? Passant means walking; guardant means looking. The lions of England are passant and guardant, but there are examples of lions passant not guardant, and (fewer) of lions rampant guardant. —Tamfang (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see, would not the Welsh arms be passant and guardant as well then? The lions there are also facing the viewer. I have not seen any other entry for a guardant lion yet.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 04:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Welsh lions are likewise passant guardant. —Tamfang (talk) 07:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should we then not make another entry for the guardant and give examples? Because it may confuse, as it did me, the differences. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 08:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just come across this term, which appears to mean a lion depicted without the tail, a change in arms forced upon the bearer when he fell from grace with the crown… am I correct in my interpretation? (my main sources are a 19th-century French dictionary and a popular novel…) Thanks for any help. Physchim62 (talk) 18:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a term of blazon it may be real, but abatements (alterations for disgrace) appear to be mythical. —Tamfang (talk) 09:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Coat of Arms of the Philippines.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:SouthTipperaryCrest.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm moving this discussion here from Talk:Attitude (heraldry) because I feel it has some bearing on this article as well, and may serve to further clarify the distinction of terms such as léopard lionné and lion léopardé. There is some disagreement among sources, so the issue is not as cut-and-dry as this article currently suggests, indeed, some directly contradict this article's unsourced statements on the matter. Of course other sources support them, thus, some discussion is in order. The copied discussion is marked with horizontal lines below. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

Interestingly, French heralds have long held that any lion in a walking position must necessarily be a "leopard", though this practice is controversial.

In Rietstap, at least, a lion rampant guardant is a léopard lionné and a lion passant (not guardant) is a lion léopardé. This says to me that the head position is what counts. —Tamfang (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above quoted passage (except the last phrase) is a close paraphrasing of Fox-Davies, pp. 172-3, as indicated in the footnote. The last bit was a quick summing up to state that there was an argument against this practice without getting into the argument. We can discuss this issue in as much length as the author, but I didn't find it necessary. I just summed up what he had to say about it as succinctly as possible. If you've got something to add to it, find a source and add it. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Léopard lionné. Nom héraldique d'un lion rampant qui a la tête posée de front. ¶ Lion léopardé. Nom héraldique du lion passant qui a la tête posée de profil. Souvent on emploie le seul nom de lion passant. —Rietstap, Armorial Général (1884), p.xxv.

"LÉOPARD-LIONNÉ—A lion rampant-gardant. ¶ LION-LÉOPARDÉ—A lion passant." —Woodward & Burnett, A Treatise on Heraldry (1896/1969), p.735.

"... In French blazon, however, the old distinction is still observed. The French lion is our lion rampant, the French leopard is our lion passant guardant, whilst they term our lion passant a léopard-lionné, and our lion rampant guardant is their lion-léopardé." —Fox-Davies, The Art of Heraldry (1904), p.122.

Woodward and Rietstap agree against Fox-Davies. —Tamfang (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, what I'm getting from the above is that Rietstap and Woodward suggest that while the French "leopard" is passant-guardant, it is the guardant, rather than passant, that is the defining point of the leopard. Thus, a beast which is rampant-guardant is a leopard (guardant) posing as a lion (rampant), while a beast passant in profile is a lion (in profile) posing as a leopard (passant). So they suggest it is the beast guardant, not the beast passant, that defines a leopard. Is that right? Do they say that outright elsewhere? Honestly, all I "know" about it is that the French call the lion passant guardant a leopard, but I don't know why without researching it specifically, so I'm relying on Fox-Davies here because he has more to say on the subject than the other authors in my collection. There does seem to be some disagreement here, do you have any other sources on the subject? Wilhelm_meis (talk) 06:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking again at Woodward: the text itself is contradictory.

"As the necessity for varying the attitude of either animal arose out of the multiplication of coats, the terms came into use of lion léopardé for what we call a lion rampant-gardant, and léopard lionné for a lion passant. Now, when a lion came to be repeated more than once in a coat of arms, and space did not admit of its being placed in the rampant attitude, it was very apt to assume the position of a leopard lionné, or even of a leopard simply. The earliest trace which we have of the arms of any member of the English royal hosue is on the shield of King JOHN as prince, on whose seal are two lions passant, or léopards-lionnés." (pp. 209–210)

"In French blazon the old distinction between the lion and the leopard is still preserved. The lion is our lion rampant. The léopard is the same beast but passant-gardant; while the names lion-léopardé and léopard-lionné are respectively given to our lion passant, and rampant-gardant." (pp.210–211)

Neubecker's bilingual glossary has:

léopard lionné — gelöwter, (aufrechter) Leopard; hersehender (aufrechter) Löwe

which seems (I don't read German) to agree with Rietstap; but no entry for lion léopardé.

I don't think I have any other place to look. —Tamfang (talk) 07:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A trip to the library yielded these further results:

Hugh Clark, An Introduction to Heraldry, 18th ed., (1892) revised by J. R. Planché (pp. 155-6):

"Leopard. This well-known animal is rarely seen entire as a charge in ancient coats, and its name is given to the lion in certain attitudes. See Lion. Plate XXXI, n. 30 [which depicts a natural leopard (spotted, without mane)] presents us with a modern example. Sable, three leopards rampant argent, spotted sable; name, LYNCH. It is, however, probably, from the name, that the Lynx was the animal originally represented in this coat.

"Leopard Lioné. See Lion Leopardé."

"Lion. The true heraldic lion, according to French authors, is always to be represented in profile, or, as the ancient heralds say, showing but one eye and one ear. His attitude, also, should always be rampant or ravaging. When passant and full-faced, they blazoned him a leopard, vide Lion Leopardé: in England, however, the lions in the royal and other achievements have always been blazoned as lions, however depicted since the time of Henry III, in whose reign they were called "Leopards".

Lion of England. This term is used when speaking of a canton, or augmentation of arms. In such case, instead of saying on a canton gules, a lion passant gardant or, as an augmentation, you say, he bears on a canton a lion of England, which hath the same signification.

Lion Leopardé. This is a French term for what the English call a Lion passant gardant. The word leopard is always made use of by the French heralds to express in their language, a lion full-faced, or gardant. Thus, when a lion is placed on an escutcheon in that attitude which we call rampant gardant, the French blazon it a Lion Leopardé. When he is passant only, they call him leopard lioné.

Thus, Clark's position is that the term leopard is essentially French for a lion gardant (and is also generally presumed to be passant), but that a lion passant is a leopard lioné, while a lion rampant gardant is a lion leopardé. While the attachment of the term leopard to the guardant rather than the passant position is at odds with Fox-Davies, the designations of leopard lioné and lion leopardé are in agreement with Fox-Davies and at odds with Woodward. This seems inconsistent and utterly confusing.

As for Neubecker's bilingual glossary entry quoted above (since I do speak German), this would translate as:

léopard lionné — gelöwter, (aufrechter) Leopard; hersehender (aufrechter) Löwe

léopard lionné — as a lion, (upright) Leopard; guardant (upright) lion

So Neubecker is saying a leopard lioné is is a leopard (which apparently is necessarily guardant) that is upright like a lion. This is totally at odds with Fox-Davies, but also lacks Clark's apparent inconsistency. Another source that I came across today, Boutell's Heraldry (revised, 1978 ed.), on p. 65, had the following to say on the matter:

The early heralds considered a lion walking and looking about him to be behaving like a leopard, and they consequently blazoned him as a lion-leopardé, or merely as a leopard, though they always drew him as a stylized lion without spots or other leopard-like characteristics. So it is that the lions of England were sometimes blazoned as leopards. They are now termed lions passant guardant.

This is unfortunately of little use to us, but to suggest that the origin of the term is very much like what I earlier hypothesized. So in summary, it seems there is little known and little agreed upon among authors regarding the exact definition of a leopard etc. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 09:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

The interesting question is why the lion is so stylized as to violate the anatomy of a lion. The disproportionate limbs, the odd tufts of fur, the two tails, mishapen legs, knotted claws, etc. The discussion of lion or leopard is distracting -as odd as the figures are, the main of hair on the head and the tuft of hair on the tail is unique to lions. What we learn is that some places call lions "leopards". Having said that - I see the two-tailed lion displayed a lot in Germany. A shame that someone removed those images and references because they choose to call them leopards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turbine valves (talk • contribs) 19:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why is it included twice?