Arms of Tarn-et-Garonne, France


In use since at least 2007 (through 2014?)

Blazon: Per quarterly I gules a lion rampant guardant or (Rouergue), II per quarterly i and iv azure a lion rampant argent, ii and iii gules a garb or banded azure (Gascony), III gules a cross of Toulouse or (Languedoc), IV gules a lion passant guardant or armed and langued azure (Aquitaine or Guyenne)

It seems that these arms were previously borne by the General Council of Tarn-et-Garonne as recently as 2010. The department was formed by taking some territory from each of the former provinces that appear in the arms, which I quite like. The “General Council” was renamed to the “Departmental Council” in 2014, which apparently came with a branding update. They don’t seem to actively use these arms anymore. If you’re wondering if Robert Louis proposed an alternative, he absolutely did! His version cut out Rouergue and Gascony in favor of placing the lion of Aquitaine in chief and the cross of Toulouse in base – on a field gules, of course.

Arms of the Earl and Countess of Lincoln

Arms of John de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln 1232-1240 (c. 1192-1240) and Margaret de Quincy, Countess of Lincoln 1232-1266, suo jure 1240-1266 (c. 1206-1266)

From p114 of Lacies Nobilitie by Sir John Ferne (1586)

Blazon: Per pale baron and femme I per quarterly i and iv per quarterly or and gules a bend sable and a label of three points argent (Lacy), ii and iii or a lion rampant purpre (Nigold/Neale), II per quarterly i gules seven mascles conjoined or 3, 3, and 1 (Quincy), ii per pale azure three garbs or (Chester) and azure a wolf’s head erased argent (d’Avranches), iii gules a cinquefoil ermine (Beaumont), iv gules a pale or (Grandmesnil)

You may recognize the baron’s arms as those of Roger de Lacy, Baron of Halton and Pontefract; John was his eldest son. They were jointly created Countess and Earl of Lincoln in 1232. The grant was mostly due to Margaret, as the title had previously been held by her mother Hawise of Chester. Thus, John was only Earl of Lincoln by right of his wife, and when he died in 1240, she retained her title in her own right.

Arms of Comyn and de Quincy

Comyn and de Quincy

Arms of Alexander Comyn, Earl of Buchan (?-1289) and Elizabeth de Quincy

Blazon: Per pale baron and femme azure three garbs or and gules seven mascles conjoined 3, 3, and 1

Ferne gives Comyn’s wife’s name as Alice, but it was actually Elizabeth. The couple had at least nine children together.

The arms given here for Comyn are identical to the arms usually used for the Earls of Chester. Some sources have the Comyns as the first Earls of Chester before the title passed to John of Scotland, but I believe this is incorrect. I cannot find any reliable evidence that the Comyns and the Earls of Chester were related. This may be an error, or it may be a case of two families genuinely bearing the same arms. They were, after all, in two different kingdoms (the Comyns were Scottish), and the famous Scrope v. Grosvenor case would not be decided for another hundred years after Alexander Comyn’s death.

Arms of John of Scotland

John of Scotland

Earl of Huntingdon 1232-1237 (1207-1237)

From p43 of Lacies Nobilitie by Sir John Ferne (1586)

Blazon: Argent three garbs within a tresseure fleury counter-fleury gules

“For that he was created Earl of Chester by H[enry] III… he assumed these three Garbes: and so in the substance of the charge of his coate, he did imitate the
ensignes of his mother: but in the cullors, and also in the double trassure, he represented the coat of Galloway, being the Armes of his father, and all this in one Sheeld.” (65-66)

(I cannot confirm via other sources that these arms were used by John of Scotland, but honestly, they should’ve been. They’re a nice visual combination of his title and heritage, and garbs gules aren’t very common.)

Arms of Quincy and Chester

Quincy and Chester

Arms of Robert de Quincy (?-1217) and Hawise of Chester, Countess of Lincoln 1232-1241? (1180-1241?)

From p43 of Lacies Nobilitie by Sir John Ferne (1586)

Blazon: Per pale baron and femme; the first gules six mascles 3, 3, and 1 or, the second azure three garbs or

Ferne seems to be conflating Robert de Quincy with his brother Roger; he lists Robert as Earl of Winchester, when it was Roger who succeeded their father in 1235, well after Robert’s death.

These are two very, very old English families, so it’s kind of neat to see the union of the two arms. I mean, I’d be much more surprised if they hadn’t intermarried at some point, but the two arms in one coat is still cool, at least in my nerdy opinion.

Arms of Ferrers and Chester

Ferrers and Chester

Arms of William de Ferrers, Earl of Derby 1199-1247 (c. 1168-1247) and Agnes of Chester (?-1247)

From p43 of Lacies Nobilitie by Sir John Ferne (1586)

Blazon: Per pale baron and femme; the first argent six horseshoes sable, the second azure three garbs or

There are several competing opinions on the “true” arms of the Ferrers family. The horseshoes shown here (or some variation thereof) are usually considered to be canting arms (for “farrier”), and different authorities will argue accordingly; if the source in question takes a dim view of canting arms, the blazon given is usually “vairy or and gules.” Ferne falls into the pro-horseshoe camp, arguing that the vairy was adopted by “Henry Earle Ferrers… for the affection which he bare to his wife and her family,” which makes the horseshoe coat “their most auntient Coate, and the signe and representation of theyr service done to their Soveraigne.” (67) He also touches on the canting arms debate, saying that “those families which beare Armes alluding to their names… are both honorable and auntient.” (68)

Arms of Huntingdon and de Blondeville

Huntingdon and de Blondeville

Arms of David of Scotland, Earl of Huntingdon 1214?-1219 (1144-1219) and Matilda de Blondeville (1171-1233)

From p43 of Lacies Nobilitie by Sir John Ferne (1586)

Blazon: Per pale baron and femme; the first argent an escutcheon within a tresseure fleury counter-fleury gules, the second azure three garbs or

As grandson of David I of Scotland and younger brother of William I of Scotland, David was entitled to bear the royal arms with a difference. Judging from Ferne’s depiction, he used two methods of differencing that are more typical of
Scottish heraldry than English: changing the tinctures and using a different charge. The tresseure and use of gules still clearly connects him to the royal family of Scotland. According to Ferne, the nontraditional differencing is due to
his royal blood, since “for the difference being little & in the feeld far off, not easely to be perceaved, should bring a confusion to the people, so that is should be difficult to them, to discerne which is their King.” (63)  He
attributes the specific choice of argent and an escutcheon to “the defense of verity, and sincere truth, signified by the cullor of white.” (65)