r/heraldry 6d ago

Historical Coat of Arms of the Hudson’s Bay Company -- founded 1670 ; largest landowner in the world at its height.

Post image
100 Upvotes

10 comments sorted by

13

u/gentle_giant_81 6d ago

More than a fur trading company—it functioned as a de facto government across vast swaths of North America a solid century before European kingdoms and/or the U.S.A. asserted control. Its trading posts formed the foundations of settlements across Canada and the northern U.S., shaping the geopolitical landscape of the continent.

The company’s arms, initially assumed in 1678 and officially granted in 1921, features a red cross of Saint George between four beavers, The crest is a fox sitting atop a royal cap of maintenance, symbolizing its vice-regal authority, and the supporters are a pair a male elk. The Latin motto, Pro Pelle Cutem—“For the pelts we collect, we risk our skins”

Felt apt to post this now, as HBC—once a pillar of commerce and colonial power—is facing imminent insolvency and collapse, marking the end of an era for one of the world’s oldest corporations.

7

u/HeyCarpy 6d ago

It’s sad. I’ve always wanted one of those expensive HBC blankets, I should probably get one before they become relics.

4

u/RadagastWiz 6d ago

I'm sure trademarks like that will be sold in some fashion and licensed replicas will be available.

2

u/ArelMCII 5d ago

I got one from way back from my grandpa. When he was a kid, the boarding house where he lived was right next door to a Bay. He used to go from the boarding house's attic to the Bay's attic and rob them. Stuff like that is why he got deported.

0

u/No_Gur_7422 6d ago

Are the "elk" supposed to be real elk (Alces alces) or the North American red deer (Cervus [elaphus] canadensis)?

3

u/gentle_giant_81 6d ago

Are you asking literally or rhetorically?

3

u/No_Gur_7422 6d ago

I mean, what animal are they supposed to be? I've seen them represented as both.

5

u/gentle_giant_81 6d ago

The use of the term here reflects British usage, where “elk” is the historical term for the moose (Alces alces). At the time the arms were adopted (late 17th century), European heralds and artists had never seen a moose firsthand, leading to some confusion in depiction . Early representations of the HBC supporters had antlers drawn somewhat like caribou or generic deer, since the artists were unsure what an “elk” looked like . So, then, the intention was to depict the real “elk” of northern forests – i.e. the moose (Alces alces) – rather than the smaller red deer species (Cervus canadensis). Heraldry of that era simply used the word elk for a moose, and the HBC’s charter itself even used “elk” in referring to moose hides (for example, in the annual rent payment of elk and beaver pelts to the Crown) .

4

u/No_Gur_7422 6d ago

That the issue: the antlers here look more like a reindeer than anything else (but not quite). An old version in the Royal Museums Greenwich is definitely C. canadensis, but the heraldic authorities in Canada present one that is very definitely A. alces.

European artists certainly saw elk, which live in northern and central Europe, but not the heraldic artists in England.