Coat-of-Arms c. 17th century

Editor: Here we have an anonymous engraving titled "Coat-of-Arms." It's quite elaborate, with lots of swirling details around a central shield. It feels very formal and hierarchical. What do you see in this piece, especially considering its historical context? Curator: This coat-of-arms speaks volumes about power and identity in 17th-century society. It's not just decoration; it's a visual assertion of status. The symbols chosen, the architectural details – they all construct a narrative about the family or institution it represents. Who was being excluded as these identities were asserted? Editor: So, you’re saying it's as much about who is *not* represented as who *is*? Curator: Precisely. Coats-of-arms served to legitimize certain lineages while solidifying social hierarchies. By examining these symbols, we can decode the power dynamics at play and question whose stories are being prioritized. Editor: That's a powerful way to look at it. I hadn't considered the exclusionary aspect so explicitly. Curator: Art can be a tool for both inclusion and exclusion. Analyzing these historical markers allows us to better understand and challenge contemporary structures of power.