Martin Goldstraw wrote:The original blazon for the crest is/was:
A cubit arms erect, habited, grasping a broken tilting spear in fesse all proper.
This blazon can obviously be exemplified (emblazoned) using a certain amount of artistic license however, at the Visitations of 1580, the visiting herald was quite clearly shown an image of the arms where there was certain embellishments (which still fitted the original blazon) and wrote down in blazon precisely (and possibly over zealously) what he saw:
A cubit arm erect, habited paly of five pieces Or and Sable, cuffed Argent, hand proper, grasping the upper and lower portion of a broken tilting spear of the first, point downwards.
So, taking the image as the blueprint (Gaylorite principle) we are now compelled to forever illustrate the sleeves as "habited paly of five pieces Or and Sable, cuffed Argent" instead of any interpretation we wish of the more flexible (and simple) habited.
I am not a disciple of the Gaylor principle.
If that were the Gaylor principle, neither would I be a disciple of it. But the orthodox approach would be that the blazon written down by the herald and placed in the records of the College of Arms must thereafter prevail, even though it was over-precise, because once the words have been written we must conform all future emblazonments to the words. I believe words can be erased, or struck through, and John Gaylor is, if nothing, an advocate of artistic freedom of interpretation.