The Glory and Unification of the Phoenix: A Case Study of Arms in Chicago

For nearly 10 years, Chicago presented a major hurdle in my ongoing research focusing on the heraldic work of Pierre de Chaignon la Rose (1872-1941). Why? Due to gaps and limitations in the holdings of several important archives, I could not prove my long standing view that la Rose designed the arms for the Archdiocese of Chicago and the University of Saint Mary of the Lake--I had the supporting evidence of la Rose's work for Mundelein College. The rendering of the phoenix simply haunted me. While feelings can serve as a guiding impulse towards any given notion, having supporting evidence is, by far, superior.

I want to acknowledge and give special thanks to the archivists at the Women and Leadership Archives of Loyola University Chicago.  Through their preservation and kind assistance, we finally have data unlocking the mystery surrounding the "phoenix rising from the flames" in three corporate coats designed by la Rose for Roman Catholic institutions in Chicago.

Two Tasks In One Design

Through la Rose's heraldic designs for these three Roman Catholic institutions, we find clear evidence of his methodology for unification and differencing of arms.  In other words, the "phoenix rising from the flames," was the charge showing unification, while smaller charges placed on the either the breast or wings of the phoenix presented an artistic opportunity to show differencing at the same time.  This distinctly "la Rosian" method--placing charge upon charge--is but one version of how la Rose would accomplish these two critical tasks.  

Seal and arms of the University of St. Mary of the Lake based on la Rose's original design.  Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

Given the shear volume of designs he created, la Rose needed multiple methods for these two tasks in order to maintain consistency and thus allowing each new coat to be unique.  No respected herald would propose undifferenced arms from an established coat for new corporate arms, and la Rose worked diligently to cultivate his highly respected position as a herald in the US at a time when the field was void of such heralds.  To learn about la Rose's first method for both unification and differencing, please click here to read a case study on the arms of the Diocese of Quincy.

As I complete analyses on certain heraldic findings, especially in cases when the institution in question does not know or have any identifying information regarding their coat of arms, I make time to send all information I have in an effort to educate and complete their records.  This important educational step underscores my intention to help share the brilliance of la Rose's work--what good is served by hoarding vital historical information regarding these corporate arms?  Already with several such cases, I have thoroughly enjoyed helping institutions piece together these historical findings, and the responses have been both overwhelmingly positive and appreciated.  A major victory for la Rose!  

La Rose's First Academic Commission 

A close up view of la Rose's University of Chicago
design #1 carved above the entrance portico of
Harper Memorial Library. Image is from
the University of Chicago website.

The story of la Rose's work in Chicago begins in 1910 with his sketches for new arms for the University of Chicago.  To read more about la Rose's work with the University of Chicago, please click here to see how the "phoenix rising from the flames" would take flight.   La Rose's first draft of the arms for the university would be used for heraldic carvings on Harper Memorial Library, and later adopted by the board but revised following a "restudy" (La Rose, 1910).  For the University of Chicago, the final version of arms after the "restudy" was rendered by Sir Henry Farnham Burke (1859-1930), then Somerset Herald of Arms in Ordinary with the College of Arms in London (Office of Counsel and Business Manager, 1912).

The main objection to la Rose's design used for carvings on Harper Memorial Library was raised by the College of Arms in London.  As a reference, la Rose blazoned University of Chicago design #1, "argent on a phoenix gules an open book of the first, edged and bound or" (La Rose, 1910, 2).  

The heralds in London believed the placement of the open book upon the breast of the mythical bird was illogical, that while the phoenix itself is saved from the fires below, any object such as a book on its chest would likely be consumed (University of Chicago, 1912).  At present, I am unable to locate any response from la Rose concerning the heralds' astute observation.  

We learn la Rose's opinion, however, regarding this question of logic in the next instance la Rose used the "phoenix rising from the flames."  

The Phoenix Rises in Atlanta

Arms of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

In 1920, la Rose designed arms for the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta and charged the breast of the bird with a cross bottony to reference the dedication of the see's cathedral to Saint Philip (Diocese of Atlanta, 1921).  If la Rose agreed with the heralds in London concerning the possible consumption by fire for charges placed upon the bird, then he would not have placed the cross bottony for Saint Philip in Atlanta's arms. 

Banner of arms, the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

The blazon for the arms of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta: Argent, on a pheonix rising from the flames gules a cross bottony of the first, on a canton azure a ciborium of the first (Diocese of Atlanta, 1921).  Thus, we know how la Rose likely felt about this matter.        

For Chicago, however, the phoenix would rest peacefully until 1930.  

Chicago Revisited 

His Eminence George Cardinal Mundelein (1872-1939) would be the first Archbishop of Chicago to be elevated to the College of Cardinals in 1924, and in my review of data, it certainly appears that Cardinal Mundelein's ministry was quite fruitful in the archdiocese, as His Eminence founded several institutions of higher learning as an example (Kahover, 2014).

Originally chartered in 1844 under the leadership of the first Bishop of Chicago, William Quarter (1806-1848), the University of Saint Mary of the Lake would serve as the seminary for the archdiocese, but ultimately shuttered her doors to priestly formation by 1866 (Kahover, 2014).  By the time Cardinal Mundelein took over the reigns of the Archdiocese of Chicago, there was a pressing need for more priests, and Cardinal Mundelein reopened the university in 1920 (Kahover, 2014, 9).

Arms of the University of St. Mary of the Lake.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

Tracking down the origins of the university's arms, however, led to many dead ends.  The answer to unlocking the 10-year mystery surrounding the designer of the arms for both the university and the Archdiocese of Chicago was found buried in the Women and Leadership Archives of Loyola University Chicago.

In a letter dated July 19, 1930 from la Rose to the Reverend Sister President of Mundelein College, la Rose explains the design rational for the college's new arms, and references Cardinal Mundelein in the letter:

"Then to show that the College is in Chicago, I have used the phoenix rising from his flames.  I refer you to the classical legend.  This symbol not only typified the history of the city, but is itself the ecclesiastical symbol of the resurrection.  

"I have but a month or so ago submitted to His Eminence a design of arms for the Archdiocese of Chicago embodying this symbol.  He now has it under consideration, but as he has already authorized its use, to indicate the Archdiocese, on the arms I am designing for the seminary (St. Mary of the Lake) I should wish, for the sake of uniformity in arms of the archdiocesan foundations, to use it also on your shield--subject to His Eminence's approval" (Letter from la Rose to the Reverend Sister President of Mundelein College). 

Finally, we have answers regarding all three of these attractive arms bearing the phoenix rising from the flames.  It is important to note, however, that the Archives of the Archdiocese of Chicago does not have any information in their collections regarding la Rose or the designs for the archdiocese's arms.  Yet, based on this data, it is evident and clear that la Rose should be attributed as the designer.  

La Rose added "(St. Mary of the Lake)" as the reference in the letter for the seminary.  While others may (and certainly have) disagreed with me regarding la Rose's attribution as the designer for the arms of the University of Saint Mary of the Lake and the Archdiocese of Chicago, no other herald was employing the phoenix in the early 20th century, much less rendering the mythical bird in the simplest form possible.  Additionally, la Rose enjoyed a prominent national reputation within the US Roman Catholic Church by this time, and likely most bishops were well aware of his work designing diocesan arms.       

Taken together, these three coats of arms illustrate la Rose's clever methods for showing unification and differencing at the same time.  If we follow the order mentioned in la Rose's letter, then, the arms were designed chronologically with the University of Saint Mary of the Lake as the first, the Archdiocese of Chicago next, and finally Mundelein College rounding out the trio of arms.

The Seminary Reborn

The University of Saint Mary of the Lake is located on the shore besides Saint Mary's Lake in Mundelein, Illinois and the barry wavy in base makes this reference clear for identification.  The torteau, or red roundel, is a play upon the Cardinal's red zuchetto worn by the second founder, Cardinal Mundelein.  The demi-phoenix upon the chief carries the two fleurs-de-lis that would eventually appear in the arms of the archdiocese--a reference to the early French settlers in the Chicago area.  In this instance, la Rose uses the chief to show the university's unification, or that the institution is an archdiocesan foundation.

Banner of arms of the University of St. Mary of the Lake.
Rendering by Chad Krouse, 2024.

The blazon for the arms of The University of Saint Mary of the Lake: Azure, issuing from a lake barry wavy in base, three Madonna lilies conjoined argent charged with a torteau, on a chief of the second, a demi phoenix displayed gules between two fleurs-de-lis on the wings of the second.  

The Arms of the Corporate Sole

For the Archdiocese of Chicago's arms, la Rose employed his method of referencing the patronal saint or the dedication of the see's cathedral, by way of a charge or tincture (color).  The see's cathedral is where the cathedra or chair of the prelate in question resides--the seat of authority for the episcopacy.  Presently, I have in my data 27 coats of arms for both Episcopal and Roman Catholic dioceses/archdioceses where la Rose employs this design technique.  The Cathedral of the Holy Name in Chicago houses the cathedra of the Archdiocese, and thus the monogram of the Holy Name is placed upon the breast of the phoenix.    

Arms of the Archdiocese of Chicago.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

The blazon for the arms of the Archdiocese of Chicago:  Or, on the breast of a phoenix rising from the flames gules the monogram of the Holy Name between two fleurs-de-lis on the wings all of the field. 

It must be disclosed that without la Rose's letter from July 19, 1930 to the President of Mundelein College, it may likely be impossible to prove la Rose's hand in designing the arms for the Archdiocese of Chicago.  Likewise, there is no existing data that can be found to disprove la Rose's design for the archdiocese.  

Banner of arms, the Archdiocese of Chicago.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

There is one additional data point to consider, however.  In La Rose (1920), we get a glimpse into la Rose's plan for devising arms for all the archdioceses in the US.  Having just illustrated and explained the newly devised arms for the Archdiocese of Saint Paul in the article, la Rose adds:

"Of the fourteen archdioceses in the United States, we now have eight, a majority, equipped with diocesan heraldry, following the ancient precedent reestablished among us ten years ago by their Eminences Cardinal Gibbons and Cardinal O'Connell.  It is to be hoped that eventually the remaining six will follow suit" (La Rose, 1920, 41).

La Rose had a plan from the beginning to convert all the archdioceses over to sound heraldry for their arms.  While la Rose rendered the arms for the archdiocese in 1930, these arms would not be officially used until the late 1930s when Archbishop Samuel Stritch (1887-1958) succeeded Mundelein.  

My view is that Cardinal Stritch likely used la Rose's design for Chicago because Stritch previously led the Diocese of Toledo and the Archdiocese of Milwaukee prior to his translation to Chicago--both sees bore coats of arms designed by la Rose.  As a reference, the Diocese of Toledo's arms were designed in 1912 and the Archdiocese of Milwaukee's arms in 1933.  

Mundelein College and the University of Chicago 

Arms of Mundelein College.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

Mundelein College, established by the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, officially opened as a Catholic women's college on November 1, 1929--a mere two days following the disastrous crash of the US stock market (DeCock, 2001).  By 1991, Mundelein College would merge with Loyola University Chicago (Harrington & Moylan, 2001).

Banner of arms, Mundelein College.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

Interestingly enough, Ralph Adams Cram (1863-1942) was hired to design the college in 1917, but work stopped as a result of World War I (Tarvardian, 1990, 56).  It is probable, therefore, that la Rose's involvement by 1930 was the result of Cram.  

The flag arranged based on the arms of Mundelein College, designed by Pierre de Chaignon la Rose in 1930.  Image is courtesy of the Women and Leadership Archives of Loyola University Chicago, September 2023.

For la Rose's third coat relating to the archdiocese, he recycled the first design he used for the University of Chicago in 1910.  This time, however, la Rose inscribed the open book for the proposal and further differenced the arms with the two roundels on the wings of the phoenix.

La Rose provides details regarding the book and charges placed on the wings of the phoenix to the Reverend Sister:

"On the 'Mundelein' book, I have provisionally placed Our Lord's own definition of himself, which also sums up the aims of all Catholic education.  But on this point you will naturally have your own choice to make... 

"These two symbols--the star and your badge--are very disparate in design, and it becomes necessary to make a tolerable heraldic composition, to bring them into some sort of uniformity at least of general outline.  I have therefore placed the silver star on a blue silver edged 'roundel' (silver and blue being Our Lady's heraldic colors) and done the same with your B.V.M., cross, and Passion nails... 

"The shield as it now stands reveals its ownership declaring it as clearly as the conventions of heraldry and the data at our disposal permit" (Letter from la Rose to the Reverend Sister President of Mundelein College, 1930 July 19).   

The inscription of Mundelein College's open book, via veritas vita, comes from the Vulgate version of the Gospel of John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life."  Indeed, a fitting motto for any Roman Catholic educational institution.

The arms of Mundelein College which was located in Chicago, IL and designed by Pierre de Chaignon la Rose in 1930. Image is courtesy of the Women and Leadership Archives of Loyola University Chicago, September 2023.

The arms for Mundelein College is blazoned:  Argent, on a phoenix rising from the flames gules, an open book edged or thereon inscribed VIA VERITAS VITA, on dexter wing a roundel azure edged of the field charged with a star of the first and on sinister wing a roundel of the fourth edged of the field charged with the symbol of the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary of the first.  

The banner of arms of Mundelein College, designed by Pierre de Chaignon la Rose in 1930.  Image is courtesy of the Women and Leadership Archives of Loyola University Chicago, September 2023.

The year 1930 would prove quite a busy year for la Rose, a year of redemption for him in the Windy City.  If the "phoenix rising from the flames" serves as the Christian symbol for resurrection, it might also be an apt symbol for la Rose himself in relation to his work in Chicago.  That two of the three coats of arms discussed here are still in use 93-years later, attests to both the carrying power of the arms and the brilliance of the designer behind them.   

In recent years, both the University of Saint Mary of the Lake and the Archdiocese of Chicago decidedly removed the two fleurs-de-lis that were incorporated on the wings of the phoenix in both coats of arms.  Why?  I cannot find a logical explanation for the removal, and logic combined with the phoenix can get any herald into trouble. 

Works Cited  

DeCock, M. (2001).  Creating a college: The foundation of Mundelein, 1929-1931.  In A.M. Harrington & P. Moylan (Eds.), Mundelein voices: The women's college experience 1930-1991 (pp 3-29). Loyola Press.

Diocese of Atlanta (1921).  Journal of the 14th annual meeting of the council.  The Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta, 4.

Harrington, A.M. & Moylan, P. (Eds.). Mundelein voices: The women's college experience 1930-1991. Loyola Press.

Kahover, G. (2014).  Mundelein Seminary.  Arcadia Publishing.

La Rose, Pierre de C. (1930 July 19).  Letter from Pierre de Chaignon la Rose to the Reverend Sister President of Mundelein College.  Unpublished letter. 

La Rose, Pierre de C. (1920).  Recent episcopal coat of arms.  In H.J. Heuser (Ed.), The Ecclesiastical Review, vol. 62(July), 41.

La Rose, Pierre de. C. (1910 July 29).  Arms for the University of Chicago.  Unpublished document.  

Office of Counsel and Business Manager (1912 February 8).  Letter from the Office of Counsel and Business Manager of the University of Chicago to Horace S. Fiske.  Unpublished letter.

Tarvardian, P.M.A. (1990).  An uncompromising commitment to mission:  Mundelein College and the advancement of women's higher education 1930-1950 (2732) [Doctoral dissertation, Loyola University of Chicago].  Loyola eCommons.    

University of Chicago (1912).  The phoenix and book.  The University of Chicago Magazine, vol 4(7), 243-248.

Heraldic Artist Spotlight: Dr. Antonio Salmeron

 

Dr. Antonio Salmeron of Madrid, Spain. 
Image is from Dr. Salmeron's website.

For the second installment highlighting heraldic artists, I'm pleased to present Dr. Antonio Salmeron from Madrid, Spain.  Perhaps one of the most prolific heraldic artists these days, Dr. Salmeron is quite busy producing high-quality work found across the globe.  

A scholar by training, Dr. Salmeron's methodology supporting his heraldic work is best explained in his own words.  

"My style as a heraldic artist could be drawn with three terms: clear, symbolic and methodic.

"It is clear because my work searches pieces which transmit energy and vital force to the owner and its relatives. I think that a coat of arms should be a source of light and joy and an expression of freedom. That's why in my heraldic creative process I do prefer to get inspiration in early stages of the heraldic history and portray that freshness to the present.

"It is symbolic because coats of arms must be a representation of its bearer, his/her ideals, goals, motivations, history and anything he/she might want to display. Thus, the creation of a coat of arms should encompass all the signifieds brought by the future owner together with its signifiers, the blazon heraldic rules and the art contributed by the heraldic artist.

"It is methodical because heraldic art is founded on a science, the so called science of heraldry. This systematic knowledge has its principles, its composition rules and its own formal language all of those the true foundations of my artistic methodology. The method must not be considered disincentive to creativity, but a fair support and a guarantee of the professional work" (Blason, 2023 September 11). 

From International Society of Commoners Heraldry: Roll of Arms,
page 18, as an example of Dr. Salmeron's work.

I admire how Dr. Salmeron adopted his own methods to maintain consistency with all his work.  You can definitely tell that this heraldic artist is very much a scholar.

I connected with Dr. Salmeron in 2020 during pandemic through a growing and vibrant Facebook group, "The International Society of Commoners Heraldry."  

Now with more than 2,300 Facebook members, the Society purports to provide, "a place for those who choose to embrace heraldry in the contemporary world as a means of representing themselves using the traditional symbolism of Heraldry."

As an example of just one project, Dr. Salmeron created an armorial for the group, cataloging arms for each member as they join--the Roll of Arms grows by the week and Dr. Salmeron keeps quite busy here.  In addition to his ongoing projects with the International Society of Commoners Heraldry, Dr. Salmeron receives commissions from all of the world to either create new arms or emblazonments of existing arms rendered in his own style. 

Ever the scholar, Dr. Salmeron provides insight into how he applies his methods for arms to achieve harmony between the art and science of heraldry.  The image below is taken from the "Friends of Dr. Antonio Salermon Cabanas" Facebook group as an illustration of Dr. Salmeron's methodology in action. 

Finding balance between the art and science of heraldry in the work of Dr. Salmeron.  Image is from "Friends of Dr. Antonio Salmeron Cabanas" Facebook group, September 2023.

Finally, I'm pleased to share my arms rendered by Dr. Salmeron, in which I requested his Spanish style to give my arms that Salmeron touch.

The arms of Chad M. Krouse, rendered in the Spanish style by Dr. Salmeron, May 2020.

I highly recommend Dr. Salmeron to anyone looking to either design their own arms or simply create a new and unique emblazonment of existing arms.  Please click here to view Dr. Salmeron's website for contact information.  You simply won't be disappointed!  Dr. Salmeron is a scholar and a gentleman.  

Heraldic Artist Spotlight: Brian Abshier

 

The arms of Brian Abshier rendered in his style. 
Image source:  Art by Brian Abshier website.

I'm starting a new series to celebrate various heraldic artists around the world, as a means to showcase the modern relevancy heraldry enjoys well into the 21st century.  Suffice it to say, the shear volume of these expert heraldic artists working today could easily keep any arminger busy submitting commissions for quite a long time--a great problem to have in our field.

Brian Abshier is a heraldic artist residing in the United States, and is one whom I've had the pleasure of working with for a few years.  Abshier was my first commission during the COVID-19 pandemic--he was slammed busy with requests for heraldic art at that time.    

Abshier gives us the following autobiography from his website:

"Artwork has always been a hobby and passion of mine, but it had always been done in traditional medium for most of my life. I first began seriously working with digital art in the late 2000's by creating textures and assets for various computer games. Through this, I became familiar with the techniques, tools, and software involved in the digital artwork. 

Around 2016 I found the artwork of artists like Andrew Stewart Jamieson, Quentin Peacock, and others and found it very captivating. Like many others, heraldry created a natural bridge between the interests of medieval history and art" (Art by Brian Abshier, 11 September 2023).

Arms and Crest of Chad M. Krouse rendered by
Brian Abshier in the "Bellenville style," March 2020.

Furthermore, as his style and knowledge in heraldry progressed, Abshier's work would be featured in a number of publications.  By 2018, Abshier took the plunge and began accepting commissions.  

Initially, I commissioned Abshier in 2020 to have my arms and crest emblazoned in the "Bellenville" style.  Abshier's rendering of the cardinal in this style is just pure genius--I love it!

According to Hofman (2017), the Bellenville Armorial was one of the most famous and admired works of heraldry developed between 1355-1380 and consisting of 75 folios.  Abshier's interpretation of the style made famous by the armorial, illustrates the artist's depth of knowledge in medieval history along with his talent for creativity.  Moreover, I just loved how unusual and historical my arms appear in the Bellenville style.  

Not long after that commission, I asked Abshier for a full set to include a banner, badge, etc.  I was not disappointed in the results.  Abshier's style provides absolute identification of the individual bearing arms--as draftsmanship and blazoning are vital elements for good heraldry.  As Pierre de Chaignon la Rose (1872-1941) once wrote concerning several designs for new arms,

"In determining the merits of these designs, they should be studied at a distance, and their relative effectiveness thus determined.  The shield which is at a distance is the simplest and perspicuous--has the most 'carrying power'--is always the best heraldry" (la Rose, 1910, 4).

From any distance, I believe, Abshier's heraldic work provides that critical "carrying power" necessary for heraldry.    

Who would want to attack the dashing knight bearing this shield? 
The arms of Chad M. Krouse rendered by Brian Abshier, March 2020.

No other artist, that I have worked with so far, has rendered the flowering dogwood (cornus florida) quite like Abshier--my absolute favorite version.  I admire the detail and shading techniques Abshier employs to render the cornus florida as an acceptable heraldic charge.  

The flowering dogwood (cornus florida)
rendered by Brian Abshier, March 2020.

I hope the reader will consider Abshier for a commission--you simply cannot go wrong with an emblazonment in his Bellenville style.  For more information, please click here to visit Abshier's website, which contains a full gallery of work, contact information for commissions, etc.  

Works Cited

Abshier, B. (2023 September 11).  Background.  Art by Brian Abshier.  http://www.abshier.us/about.html 

Hofman, E. (2017 July 7).  Bellenville's two armorials.  Heraldica Nova.  https://heraldica.hypotheses.org/5785

La Rose, Pierre de. C. (1910 July 29).  Arms for the University of Chicago.  Unpublished document.  

From Ashes to Ashes: Mistaken Identity and the Arms of the University of Chicago

The coat of arms of the University of Chicago
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2025

For years, history has inaccurately attributed the design of the coat of arms for the University of Chicago to Pierre de Chaignon la Rose (1872-1941).  Most readily accept the abundance of references available as to the designer through the internet, even I will admit to falling victim to this ruse until recently.  As I continue to mine through my data on la Rose's heraldic work, I have been digging deeper into the multitude of archives across the country in order to see correspondence and original images for accurate references.  This additional step, I assure the reader, has proven vital. 

The First Clue

Several weeks ago, I came across an old reference in my files from Robertson (1916), in which the author notes:

"In the first form of the coat-of-arms the book was placed upon the breast of the phoenix. It is so carved in many places in Harper Memorial Library. Further study of the design resulted in the decision to separate the book and the phoenix. 

"The coat-of-arms of the University of Chicago is, therefore : argent, a phoenix displayed gules, langued azure, in flame proper. On a chief gules, a book expanded proper, edged and bound or.  On dexter page of book the words, Crescat Scientia, inscribed, 3 lines in pesse sable. On sinister page the words, Vita Excolatur, inscribed, 3 lines in pesse sable" (124).

Immediately, alarm bells went off.  How on earth did I miss this reference to another version of the arms years ago?  I'm reminded of the proverb used by US President Ronald W. Reagan (1911-2004), "trust but verify."  A research request to the university's archives ensued and I was intrigued by the data supplied to me by the university.  

According to the webpage concerning such matters from the Office of the Secretary at the University of Chicago, we find the following description:

"The University Coat of Arms, a shield displaying the phoenix below and the book and motto above, was adopted by the Board of Trustees on August 16, 1910. The University motto Crescat scientia; vita excolatur was adopted by the Board on January 17, 1911 and added to the Coat of Arms on the pages of the open book.

"The Coat of Arms was designed by Pierre de Chaignon la Rose, a heraldic specialist in Boston working under contract to the Board of Trustees. No surviving documents make clear precisely why the phoenix was adopted as the central element on the Coat of Arms, but the most probable assumption is that the phoenix can be seen as a symbol of the city of Chicago, which was seriously damaged by the great Chicago Fire of 1871 and then was successfully rebuilt, or reborn, within just a few years" (Office of the Secretary, 2023 September 9).

 La Rose Submits Three Designs 

Rendered by Chad Krouse based on archival documents. Click to enlarge.

Here is the story of the University of Chicago's arms based on my review of data from their archives.  I've attempted to recreate la Rose's three proposals based on the blazons he provided.  Since designs #1 and #3 were not available to me from the archives, these renderings are my best guess (though we do have a clear reference for design #1 from the stone carving).   

The story begins, as most do involving la Rose, with an architect and a need for heraldic decoration.  Charles A. Coolidge (1858-1936) was selected as the architect to build Harper Memorial Library in the collegiate-gothic style and would request from la Rose designs for heraldic decoration (La Rose, 1912). 

On July 29, 1910, la Rose would submit a total of three designs to the university for consideration as a decoration for the new library.  

"In devising a seal for the University of Chicago, I am informed that it shall be heraldic, in accordance with ancient English, Continental, and American precedent. It will be necessary, then, before considering a seal as such, to establish heraldic bearings for the University, which will later be incorporated in the seal" (La Rose, 1910, 1).  

La Rose was led to believe that his design would be officially adopted and used as the basis for the legal corporate seal.  The instruction given to la Rose was to incorporate a depiction of the Founder's Tower at the University somehow into the arms.  Clearly, la Rose was not terribly thrilled about the desires of the university's board.

"It should be clearly understood that the purpose of heraldry has never been to depict, by its charges, a specific object, but merely to typify in the most conventional manner possible, a class of objects.  

"If it is desired to indicate the Founder’s Tower, the most scholarly way would be by means of the usual heraldic abstract convention—the chess form of tower.  If, however, the authorities cannot bring themselves to this level of detachment, a kind of precedent for the Founder’s Tower can be found in the seals of several English municipal corporations (see the Book of Public Arms, by A.C. Fox-Davies), where in some cases are shown representations of presumably actual medieval structures" (La Rose, 1910, 1). 

A close up view of la Rose's University of Chicago design #1 carved above the entrance portico of Harper Memorial Library, The University of Chicago.  Image is from the University of Chicago website.  

The Phoenix Rises 

La Rose (1910) offers this rationale for his preference to use the phoenix as the main charge in the university's arms.  Contrary to the lack of any information concerning the rationale for using the phoenix, as published on the website of the Office of the Secretary, la Rose clearly outlines his rationale:

"The heraldic charge, however, which in my opinion, will most clearly identify the arms of the University of Chicago, is the 'phoenix'--an eagle shaped bird rising from flames.  And as the fundamental purpose of a coat of arms is simply to identify its owner ('Arma sunt distinguendi Causa'), and not, as is vulgary supposed, to symbolize his origin, history, achievements, aspirations, etc., any charge that can be regarded as peculiarly appropriate from this point of view, has the highest value" (2). 

With the phoenix firmly established in la Rose's mind, for the University of Chicago design #1, la Rose provides this blazon:

"In my first sketch (argent on a phoenix gules an open book of the first, edged and bound or), I have represented the University of Chicago in the simplest form, and therefore--to the herald--the best" (La Rose, 1910, 2).

La Rose clearly states his preference for this version of the arms, but note the open book is left blank.

Design #1, data-informed emblazonment based on archival documents.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

At that time, the university had not settled on a motto, and the archives contains several letters from faculty and others proposing various mottos.  In Goodspeed (1916), we learn the origins of the final motto:

"The University owed the motto of the coat-of-arms and the seal to Professor Paul Shorey. Mr. Shorey was thinking one day of that phrase in Tennyson's In Memoriam: 'Let knowledge grow from more to more,' and it impressed him as expressing one purpose of a university. He thereupon put it into Latin-Scientia crescat. 

"Casting about for some phrase that would express the University's ideal of service, as Mr. Robertson of the Department of English wrote in the University of Chicago Magazine for June, 1912 , he was minded of the passage in the sixth book of the Aeneid, in which Vergil tells of seeing in the happy fields those who on earth enriched or adorned human life. [Inventas aut qui vitam excoluere per artes.] And so he got his second verb and subject. In putting the two parts together he related them in English by 'and so.' 

"Hence Dr. Shorey offered as a motto for the University: Crescat scientia; vita excolatur.  'Let knowledge grow from more to more; And so be human life enriched.'  The motto was welcomed and adopted" (467-468).  

Dr. Shorey's motto that would be inscribed on the open book is truly unique for the university's identification, for these arms would avoid the abundance of vertas in all its variations scattered about on other US scholastic arms.  

Of Towers and Shields

Design #2, data-informed emblazonment based on archival documents.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

For the University of Chicago design #2, la Rose bowed to the desires of the university's board to incorporate the Founder's Tower.  For this sketch, la Rose provides the following blazon:  "argent on phoenix gules as [sic] ineschuteon of the field, thereon the Founder's Tower of the University of Chicago" (La Rose, 1910, 3).  Thankfully, we do have an image of this design.

University of Chicago design #2 by la Rose in 1910.  Image is courtesy of the Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections, the University of Chicago Library, September 2023.

La Rose (1910) writes about University of Chicago design #2:  "the design sufficiently explains itself:  it is simple and perspicuous heraldry, and has the merit of reducing the somewhat unheraldic feature of the Founder's Tower to a minimum" (3).    

Design #3, data-informed emblazonment based on archival documents.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

For la Rose's third and final sketch, he reverses the composition.  For the University of Chicago design #3, la Rose offers the following blazon:  "argent the Founder's Tower of the U. of C.; an ineschuteon or a phoenix gules an open book argent, the edges and bindings of the field" (La Rose, 1910, 3).  

La Rose (1910) offers the following directive to the board concerning his three proposed designs:

"In determining the merits of these designs, they should be studied at a distance, and their relative effectiveness thus determined.  The shield which is at a distance is the simplest and perspicuous--has the most 'carrying power'--is always the best heraldry.  My own judgment places them in the order named" (4).    

Here is where the story of the University of Chicago's arms becomes rather interesting.  It is evident that la Rose's University of Chicago design #1 was used for carvings on Harper Memorial Library (Robertson, 1916, 124-125).  On August 16, 1910, the board of trustees of the university would officially adopt their coat of arms.  But which one?  I believe la Rose's University of Chicago design #1 was adopted and most likely caused the ensuing "restudy."  

Finding Mister Burke

The opposite page of the final version of arms, as seen above in the introduction.  Image is courtesy of the Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections, The University of Chicago Library, September 2023.

Enter Sir Henry Farnham Burke (1859-1930) .  In 1910, Sir Henry was an officer of the College of Arms in London, serving as Somerset Herald of Arms in Ordinary, and in 1919 would be promoted to Garter Principal King of Arms.  To track down this "Mr. Burke," a close inspection of documents from the archives yielded the final source.

Letter from Office of Counsel and Business Manager to Mr. Horace S. Fiske, dated February 8, 1912 (I am unable to make out the signature) where in the post-script we learn of Sir Henry's origin.  Click on the image to enlarge.  Image is courtesy of the Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections, The University of Chicago Library, September 2023.  Click image to enlarge.

In University of Chicago (1912), we learn more about Burke's involvement.

"A further study of this design [University of Chicago design #1] brought forth the objection of English heralds that the position of the book [la Rose positioned the open book on the breast of the phoenix] was illogical, that although the phoenix could not be consumed by flames the book might be.  

"Mr. Burke [Sir Henry] of London suggested the division of the field and the placing of the book in chief...Mr. Burke's modification has resulted in the form as published, and as carved in the staircase of the west tower of Harper" (244-245). 

The arms were finally settled sometime between the fall of 1910 to the spring of 1912.  A chief was called forth as a logical solution to bear the university's open and inscribed book now containing two clasps--an altogether different design from those proposed by la Rose.  

La Rose Inquires 

For nearly two years following the board's adoption of la Rose's first design, all went silent.  On May 18, 1912, la Rose wrote to the Secretary of the University of Chicago with the following inquiry:

"A year or more ago, at the request of Mr. Charles Coolidge, the Architect, I designed a heraldic seal for the University of Chicago [likely University of Chicago design #1].  As I am preparing a column on corporate heraldry in America, I am curious to know whether or not the university ever adopted officially these arms.  If so I should be very grateful if you could send me a print of the seal" (Letter from Pierre de Chaignon la Rose to the Secretary of the University of Chicago).    

Clearly, la Rose was kept in the dark on such matters.  The Secretary of the University sent the following reply on May 31, 1912:

"My dear Mr. LaRose, the University of Chicago seal has at last been adopted.  The charges are those which you know, the Phoenix and book.  A restudy of the design [likey University of Chicago design #1] resulted in the shifting of the book to the position in chief.  The seal will be published the 10th of June.  At that time you will receive a copy of the magazine containing the final form.  Your own share in proposing the design is mentioned in the article which accompanies the seal" (Letter from D.A. Robertson to Pierre de Chaignon la Rose).   

The University of Chicago Magazine would be published the following month in June, and based on my reading of the article, this is the magazine Robertson refers to in his letter to la Rose.  I shudder to think of la Rose's reaction to the heralds' critique of his design--that an open book charged on the breast of the phoenix might well burn (University of Chicago, 1912).  Moreover, how chuffed would la Rose be knowing that he was being credited for a design he did not render?  

And that's where the story concludes--from la Rose's phoenix rising up from the ashes to its eventual defeat by an English herald's chief.  Yet, somehow, history has glossed over the facts and continues to credit la Rose for the final version of arms.  The heralds in London do not typically work for free, and there would likely have been payment sent from the university or one of its benefactors to cover the costs involved for the restudy.  Thus, there remains an important gap in the data:  we simply do not know who from the university contacted the College of Arms, much less the rationale behind such a request for a restudy.          

La Rose Versus Burke  

The final version, or "restudy" of the arms for the University of Chicago designed by Sir Henry Farnham Burke (1859-1930) of the College of Arms between 1910-1912.  Image is courtesy of the Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections, The Library of the University of Chicago, September 2023.

A few data points to consider.  First, Goodspeed (1916) provides the blazon of the "restudied" arms which provide more details of how to render the phoenix.  La Rose chose to render both the mythical bird and the open book in their simplest forms, and thus a shorter blazon.  

"Mr. Burke [Sir Henry], of London, made a further study of the design [presumably la Rose's University of Chicago design #1], suggested a re-arrangement of the field.  

"The resultant coat-of-arms is as follows:  'Argent, a phoenix displayed gules, langued azure, in flame proper. On a chief gules, a book expanded proper, edged and bound or. On dexter page of book the words Crescat scientia inscribed , three lines in pesse sable. On sinister page the words Vita excolatur inscribed, three lines in pesse sable'"(467).

We know from la Rose that simplicity of the form is primary, and I should have been tipped off by the thoroughly detailed blazon of the final arms which does not match la Rose's style.  Based on la Rose's design of the flames found in University of Chicago design #2, we see the herald's phoenix and flames evolving over time, as future renderings would dramatically simplify the flames as well as the beast's feathers.  Ten years after his design work for the University, la Rose uses a phoenix and flames for the arms of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta, showing a completely different rendering.  The herald replicated the simpler phoenix and flames in the arms of Mundelein College designed in 1930.  Historically, both Chicago and Atlanta experienced catastrophic fires, and the phoenix serves as a logical heraldic charge.

Arms of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.

La Rose notoriously recycled rejected sketches, likely because he felt they represented those simplest forms of heraldry--good heraldry.  Burke's phoenix looks nothing like la Rose's version, and Burke goes further to blazon the color of the phoenix's tongue as well as having the flames proper--where la Rose keeps the bird and flames all red.  Furthermore, Burke's open book in chief contains two clasps, whereas la Rose blazoned the book without clasps--the final blazon published by the university ignores this critical feature.     

Concluding Thoughts

So now what?  The real question remains how to convince the University of Chicago, a storied research university in America, that their attribution of la Rose is incorrect.  I will kindly share my analysis with the university in hopes of clearing things up--there is no blame here.  As for me, I thoroughly enjoyed digging into this rich data; for only a heraldic researcher would likely recognize the innocence of this error.    

While the sole intention with my research on la Rose, from the very beginning, was to give him credit for the work he did, I endeavor to provide evidence-based analyses.  In other words, you go where data tells you to go. Yes, la Rose provided the basis for the design scheme, and yes, the university did use la Rose's first sketch for architectural carvings.  The final adopted version of the university's arms, however, is simply not a design or rendering by la Rose.    

For the University of Chicago, their adopted arms--an equally lovely design--came from the hands of an English herald, and this is a most peculiar fact in US scholastic heraldry.  From my review, the university did not receive any official grant of sorts from London, but rather a "suggestion" from Mr. Burke.  

Ultimately, in my opinion, the incorrect attribution was likely caused by only naming, "Mr. Burke of London," a quaint style to achieve simplicity in writing.  Save those brief descriptions of Mr. Burke in University of Chicago (1912) and in Goodspeed (1916), nothing would clearly identify Burke as an officer of the College of Arms.  Quaint writing muddied the waters for just about everyone, myself included.  I am grateful for the wisdom of the university to archive an otherwise internal, innocuous letter regarding its arms.  The letter from the Office of Counsel and Business Manager to Mr. Horace S. Fiske was the key to unlocking the identity of our Mr. Burke (Office of Counsel and Business Manager, 1912).  

A modern emblazonment of the arms of the University of Chicago
after Sir Henry's 1910-1912 "restudy."  
Image is from the University of Chicago website.

Now in 2023, the University of Chicago's coat of arms designed by Sir Henry between 1910-1912, has celebrated a very respectable 113th birthday.  The university's arms are most assuredly a highly treasured symbol of pride for countless alumni around the world.  Regardless of the attribution of its designer, the University of Chicago's coat of arms bears the weight of all those human experiences who have lived out Dr. Shorey's motto: "let knowledge grow from more to more; and so be human life enriched."  

The endurance of the university's arms, furthermore, proves the "carrying power" of good--or to use la Rose, perspicuous-- heraldry to function as a true and lasting expression of the institution's storied brand.  I have often wondered la Rose's view on this matter, heraldry as an expression of corporate identity, if he had the benefit of seeing his work surviving 100 years or better.  I hope he would agree with me.      

Based on my data for US schools bearing arms, the College of William & Mary was the first and only academic institution to receive a formal grant of arms from London on May 16, 1694 (Godson, et. al, 1993, 23).  I have nothing further concerning the involvement of the College of Arms for any other US-based academic institution until the 1960s, when honorary devisals were permitted for US-based organizations.  

That the University of Chicago proudly displays these attractive arms tied so closely to the heralds of London, and for this reason alone, the story of the university's coat of arms needs be shared widely and thus attributed correctly.

_________________

Epilogue

After writing this article, I found something interesting which simply puzzles me and continues to muddy the waters regarding the attribution of the designer for the arms for the University of Chicago.  On April 1, 1929, the University of Chicago formally received copyright protection for both the coat of arms and university seal.  For the coat of arms, the entry reads:

Chicago.  Chicago, University, 4800, 4801.  

La Rose (Pierre DeChignon) designs:  

Crescat Scientia, vita excolatur.  [Coat of arms: shield with open book in band across top: spread-winged eagle below with flower] copyright 1 c.  April 1, 1929:  G538" (Library of Congress Copyright Office, 1929, 4809).

What does this mean?  Based on my very limited knowledge of copyright laws, the image of the coat of arms as seen above in the introduction was formally copyrighted and attributed to la Rose--even though his middle name is misspelled and the flames are cited as a flower.  Given the gap in the archive's holding regarding any response from la Rose to the Office of Secretary of the University, I wonder if any legal action was taken by la Rose or a mediated agreement reached between the two parties.  Needless to say, those documents would not be released to the public--private universities are not subject to requests under the Freedom of Information Act unlike their public counterparts.  

In a letter I came upon previously in the archives, but disregarded simply because it felt innocuous, dated July 11, 1911 from Office of Counsel and Business Manager to David A. Robertson, the Secretary of the University, we find:

"In regard to the publication of the Coat of Arms and Seal of the University in the July magazine, I want to call your attention to the fact that it has been our wish to have this copyrighted before it goes out.  That action has been postponed pending approval of both by Mr. Ryerson.  I will speak to Mr. Ryerson in regard to the matter and ascertain if it is still his wish to take that course" (Letter from Office of Counsel and Business Manager to David A. Robertson).  

Now, however, this letter appears much more interesting and relevant.  It seems the university had plans to copyright the arms as early as 1911--why wait until 1929 to formally submit materials for legal protection?  Moreover, it would appear based on this letter, the magazine article announcing the new coat of arms would be delayed by one year, possibly caused by the restudy.  We simply do not know the reason for these delays.  I also begin to wonder why la Rose changed up his version of the phoenix and flames in 1920 for the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta, was this change to avoid infringement or his growing appreciation of simple heraldry?

La Rose was proud of the work he did as a herald.  I have several examples in my data of letters he penned to various editors in order to defend errant statements made regarding his work.  Below is one timely example published in The Living Church, a month following the University of Chicago's magazine article announcing the new coat of arms:

To the Editor of The Living Church:  A recent lecture of mine at St. John's Theological School, Cambridge, on Ecclesiastical Heraldry, has been variously reported in Church papers.  Amateur reporting of so technical a subject is, of course, bound to be inaccurate.  I find now that I am being credited with an attack on the coat of arms of the Diocese of Kansas City.  As a matter of fact, I did not mention these arms in my discourse, for the reason that I myself designed them for the diocese!  Obviously, then, I would be unwilling to attack them as unsound heraldry, and equally obviously am I prepared to defend them." 

[The error referred to does not appear in the report of Mr. la Rose's address printed in The Living Church, in which Kansas City is not mentioned--Editor L.C.] (La Rose, 1912 July 13, 385).  

La Rose is writing in reference to an article which appeared in the May 25, 1912 edition of The Living Church, and the editor's note is correct--I checked (The Living Church, 1912 May 25, 139).  Was la Rose so incensed by how he was treated in Chicago that he fired off a letter to the editor but aimed at the wrong target?  Again, we do not know.  

From this example by la Rose, the reader will adduce the sharpness of his pen.  My guess is that la Rose was still fuming from the university's magazine article that he would have received in June.  La Rose would not relent on matters of heraldry, likely because had the utmost confidence in his sound methods for devising new corporate arms.  There seems little doubt that la Rose would not have responded to the university's final version of arms as printed in University of Chicago (1912).

As of now, there is no data to fill in this rather interesting gap.  Perhaps the reader can render a guess.

Works Cited

Diocese of Atlanta (1921).  Journal of the 14th annual meeting of the council.  The Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta.  

Godson, S.H, Johnson, L.H., Sherman, R.B., Tate, T.W., & Walker, H.C. (1993).  The College of William & Mary: A history (vol. 1).  King and Queen Press. 

Goodspeed, T.W. (1916).  A history of the University of Chicago: The first quarter century.  University of Chicago Press.

La Rose, Pierre de C. (1912 July 13).  Mr. La Rose on heraldry [Letter to the editor].  The Living Church, vol 47(10), 385.  

La Rose, Pierre de C. (1912 May 8).  Letter from Pierre de Chaignon la Rose to the Secretary of the University of Chicago.  Unpublished letter.  

La Rose, Pierre de C. (1910 July 29).  Arms for the University of Chicago.  Unpublished document.  

Library of Congress Copyright Office (1929).  Catalogue of copyright entries: Part 4 works of art (volume 24, number 2).  United States Government Printing Office, 4809.

Office of Counsel and Business Manager (1912 February 8).  Letter from the Office of Counsel and Business Manager of the University of Chicago to Horace S. Fiske.  Unpublished letter.

Office of Counsel and Business Manager (1911 July 11).  Letter from the Office of Counsel and Business Manager of the University of Chicago to David A. Robertson.  Unpublished letter.

Office of the Secretary (2023 September 9).  University emblems.  Office of the Secretary, the University of Chicago.  https://secretary.uchicago.edu/university-emblems/

Robertson, D.A. (1916).  The University of Chicago:  An official guide.  University of Chicago Press, 124-125.

Robertson, D.A. (1912 May 31).  Letter from D.A. Robertson to Pierre de Chaignon la Rose.  Unpublished letter.

The Living Church (1912 May 25).  American ecclesiastical heraldry.  The Living Church, vol 47(4), 139.

University of Chicago (1912).  The phoenix and book.  The University of Chicago Magazine, vol 4(7), 243-248.

Scholastic Heraldry Nearing 1.6K

 

The updated masthead for the FB Group.

The Scholastic Heraldry Group on Facebook has reached a new milestone, and nearly has 1,600 members from across the globe.  Huzzah!  

Click here to join the Scholastic Heraldry Facebook Group

I even learned today of a recent honorary devisal of arms to a US college through our group.  Ralston College, located in Savannah, Georgia, received such a devisal in 2022.  So, just when you think all your data is current, you learn something new.

Letters patent assigned to Ralston College Inc.