Colour, a cherry blossom metal.An Essay on Mons
Being a brief discussion of the use of medieval Japanese heraldic devices and their incorporation into the SCA by Meradudd Cethin.
Note - The following discussion concerns how to appropriately design a traditional mon as it would be seen in period. The CoA will register mon that are not authentic as long as they adhere to the Rules for Submission.
What exactly IS a Mon and how was it used?
A Mon is the term for the traditional Japanese heraldic emblem. It is depicted in two tinctures, one colour and one metal, with one of the tinctures serving as the field. It is normally constructed of a primary charge group, on occasion surrounded by an annulet or other enclosure. The mon was used as both a badge and a device and represented either a person or (more commonly) a dynastic house. If defined strictly by western heraldic standards, a mon would be considered closer to a badge than a device.
The mon was worn on three places. Traditionally, a samurai or general would not use a shield in a classical 'western' sense, instead using the large yumi (war bow), the two sword style of dai-sho (katana and wakazashi) or occasionally a two-handed dai-katana or polearm. If a shield was used, it was a large tower shield that was stood in front of the samurai and used as a defensive position whilst he fired arrows from behind it. In addition, a large mon was worn upon the back of the warrior, and the design is replicated in miniature upon each breast in front. Some samurai and generals would travel into battle with a flag attached to their backs, emblazoned with the mon. In the event that armor was not worn, the mon would be displayed in the above pattern on a ceremonial daimon, suo or kataginu.
A bit of history about Mons.
The mon traces its roots back to the early 11th century (the late Heian period), when noble families started to adopt particular emblems to decorate their carriages and other personal items. Thus, the mon is, at its very inception, a heraldic badge. These mons were used by the courtiers and other, non-martial, aristocrats. With the ushering in of the Kamakura period, this changed. During the Gempei War (1180-85), the two factions used unadorned red and white banners to denote the opposing sides. By the 13th century, the mon was being utilized as a means of identification in battle. . By the opening of the 14th century, an army would sport over two hundred different mon-emblazoned banners. As time wore on, the Japanese analog to the knight, the Samurai, was transformed from a simple fighter to a gentleman with refined tastes and appreciation of the courtly ways. As part of that, the mon became adopted by the Samurai and their overlords, the Daimyo. It transferred a modicum of respectability and mon became synonymous with the name of the person who it belonged to. A mon was usually passed down through the generations unchanged, each member being able to be identified by their predecessors deeds.
All of this came to an end in the ‘Age of Battles’ (mid 15th century through 1600), for this time was an era of civil war and many families were torn apart by political divisions. Thus, differencing in mons was needed. In addition, mons were awarded to persons for conspicuous heroism and gallantry. This was, as can be imagined, when the most profuse proliferation of new mon designs was seen.
Differences between Eastern and Western Heraldry
The differences between the Japanese method of heraldry and that of the West are numerous and profound. Perhaps the most striking is the tremendous simplicity compared to heraldic devices in the West. Mons are always monochromatic, being a metal or colour on the contrasting background. In addition, as cadency was not used in Japanese heraldry, the emphasis on each mon being distinctly different was not as much an issue as in the west.
How would one register a mon for use in the SCA?
There are several hurdles to being able to properly register and use a mon in the SCA. Please be reminded that the Rules for Submission utilized by the College of Arms were written for western heraldry, and originally for 13th -14th century Anglo-Norman heraldry. Thus, the rules of blazon as defined there are very different than those laid down in the 15th century Japanese mon book, Kenmon Shoka Mon. What’s a gentle to do? Let us address the particular peculiarities of a mon in turn, and provide possible solutions. Please be aware that the design notes are for authentic-style Mon. The CoA will register mon that are not in the period style assuming they follow the CoA guidelines for submissions.
1. Design of the mon -. With few exceptions, the mon design can be considered simple heraldry, normally having only a primary charge and is occasionally surrounded by an annulet as a secondary charge. (RFS, X, 2). If the primary charge group consists of more than one charge, they (with a handful of exceptions) always follow symmetry around the central point of the mon. Thus, two of any charge are arranged close and respectant (assuming a ‘direction’ can be ascertained) and three of any charge are arranged close and express radial symmetry. Further, there are a few examples of ‘pictoral heraldry’, where the charges are arranged such that a picture (most often a river scene) is depicted. Pictoral heraldry is considered obtrusively modern by the CoA and is grounds for return (RFS, VIII, 4, a)
2. Use of tinctures - The mon utilizes only two tinctures, a colour (hereafter referred to as ‘dark’) and a metal (hereafter referred to as ‘light’). Furs of any type were never used in Japanese heraldry and thus, would not be considered appropriate.
3. Charge types - Of the 96 documented charges, 65 are either plants, animals or parts of animals. Of those, only the Dragon Scales and the Phoenix are ‘mythical’ in nature. Other types include tools, boats, certain natural objects and phenomenon (stars, moon, mountains, waves) and abstract geometric designs. Of note, there are no "ordinaries" or use of the human figure in Japanese heraldry. The difficulty comes in using the charges, for any charge "...must be identifiable, in and of itself, without labels or excessive explanation." (RFS VII, 7,a). Further,
"Any element used in Society armory must be describable in standard heraldic terms so that a competent heraldic artist can reproduce the armory solely from the blazon. Elements that cannot be described in such a way that the depiction of the armory will remain consistent may not be used, even if they are identifiable design motifs that were used before 1600." (RFS,VII,7,b)
Despite these restrictions, many mon can still be adequately blazoned, the depiction of the actual charge as a eastern type vis à vis the western heraldic being left up to the artist. In the following section, many of the blazonable charges are listed, along with appropriate blazon. Please note that the reconstruction requirement still applies, however.
OK, enough of this! Show me the Mon, eh!
Shown below are a few examples of historical mon, their blazons as per SCA terminology and a brief commentary. In these examples, I refer to the tinctures as 'metal' and 'colour', as any metal or any colour can be used.
A. Single charge element without enclosure
Colour, a cherry blossom metal.
Colour, a japanese ivy leaf metal.
Colour, a demi-crane rising metal.
These are the simplest of Mon, having only a single charge element and no enclosure.
B. Single charge element with enclosure
Colour, a cross coinjoined with an annulet metal.
Metal, an igita (japanese well frame) within an annulet colour.
The annulet is by far the most common enclosure, but the voided hexagon (called a kikko) is another rather popular enclosure.
C. Multiple charge elements without an enclosure
Colour, three oak leaves, 1 and 2, conjoined at the base metal.
Colour, three japanese ivy leaves, 1 and 2, points to center, metal.
Metal, two feathers in fess colour.
A few things to note here. The primary orientation for multiple charge elements in a group is that of radial symmetry, normally with the elements being conjoined as in the first example. Secondly, when there are an odd number of charge elements, the orientation is almost always ‘point up’. Thus, a group of three elements would read 1 and 2, a group of five elements would read 1, 2 and 2. There appears to be no default for groups of two elements, with in fess, saltire and pale all being common enough.
D. Multiple charge elements with an enclosure
Metal, two bars conjoined with an annulet colour.
Colour, two feathers in saltire within an annulet metal.
Colour, four lozenges pierced, 1,2 and 1, within an annulet metal.
IN CONCLUSION:
Bibliography
Dower, John The Elements of Japanese Design (New York: Weatherhill, 2000)
Hawley, W. M. and Kei Chapplear Mon: The Family Crest (Hollywood: Hawley, 1976)
Matuya Piece-Goods Store Japanese Design Motifs (New York: Dover, 1972)
Society for Creative Anachronism, Rules for Submission http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html
Back to Main