Scottish Cadence Marking

The science of differencing and combining Arms

Post Reply
J.R.
AR Registered
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:59 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Scottish Cadence Marking

Post by J.R. » Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:24 pm

Hello all,
I have always seen the cadence chart used in Scotland. I was recently told that the Lord Lyon also has other ways of showing cadence. What does he use as a guide? 2. By looking at the chart, how does one decide a cadence if there are a large number of generations? ie: 2nd son of the 10th eldest son.
Cheers,
Major Jameson R. Johnson
Bi Ag Feitheamh

User avatar
Charles E. Drake
AR Reg. & IHS Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:04 pm
Location: Savannah, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Scottish Cadence Marking

Post by Charles E. Drake » Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:39 am

J.R. wrote: I have always seen the cadence chart used in Scotland. I was recently told that the Lord Lyon also has other ways of showing cadence. What does he use as a guide? 2. By looking at the chart, how does one decide a cadence if there are a large number of generations? ie: 2nd son of the 10th eldest son.

I'm not sure what you mean about looking at the chart. What comes to mind is that one just follows it. However, maybe I am missing something. Some of those charts do not show a larger number of sons, so perhaps this is what you mean. Even though the charts are a simplification, there are tables going higher in textbooks, such as Innes, Scots Heraldry (2nd Ed., p. 104).

As I recently posted on another board, I am the eldest child of the eldest child of the ninth son of the sixth son of the only child of the subject of the Crown from whom we traced. Since this ancestor would get the undifferenced arms, I would get a differenced version.

Inasmuch as one of the sons of my great-grandfather had no issue, Lyon called for a bordure rayonee (for eighth son) Sable (for sixth son). Neither the person assisting me at the Lyon office, Slains Pursuivant, or I cared for how this looked. It did not seem to go well with my red wyvern. We asked Lyon if he would break the rules and allow another color or line, such as making the bend engrailed, or the bordure Gules, since it is unlikely very many, if any, of my cousins will choose to matriculate. However, Lyon was unwilling to do that.

He was willing, however, to allow a charged bordure to represent my great-grandfather. GGF's wife was Elizabeth Watson, and Lyon allowed a bordure charge of oak leaves to indicate him since Oaks are used for persons named Watson in Scottish heraldic tradition (thus taking care of the sixth son difference).

He called for a bordure Purpure (for eighth son, again). Since the Purpure was fairly close to the tincture of the Azure field, we were able to get it counter-compony, which looked better to us.

This resulted in my arms within a bordure counter-compony Argent and Purpure charged with three oak leaves Or.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

/Charles
Charles E. F. Drake
Numquam Captat Muscas
wyverngules.com

J.R.
AR Registered
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:59 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by J.R. » Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:52 pm

Dear Charles,
Wow, that must have been a process. You were close to where I am interested in going with the question. In the case I'm talking about, you have 9 eldest sons, then a 2nd son, 3 more eldest or eldest surviving sons, another 2nd son, and then again to the eldest son. So within those 15 generations, there are two second sons. I have trouble with the short charts figuring out what automatic cadence mark the final eldest son would have.
Cheers,
J.R.
Major Jameson R. Johnson
Bi Ag Feitheamh

User avatar
Charles E. Drake
AR Reg. & IHS Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:04 pm
Location: Savannah, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Charles E. Drake » Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:28 am

J.R. wrote: In the case I'm talking about, you have 9 eldest sons, then a 2nd son, 3 more eldest or eldest surviving sons, another 2nd son, and then again to the eldest son. So within those 15 generations, there are two second sons. I have trouble with the short charts figuring out what automatic cadence mark the final eldest son would have.

There are lots of people on this board who have forgotten more Scottish heraldry than I will ever know. However, it is my understanding that the undifferenced arms pass down all those 9 generations of senior heirs with change. The second son then gets a bordure Or. The arms with the gold bordure then pass through the additional 3 generations of eldest sons without change. The next second son would engrail the bordure.

This results in a bordure engrailed Or.

Any eldest son would show a label during the lifetime of his father, but remove it when his father died.

Regards,

/Charles
Charles E. F. Drake
Numquam Captat Muscas
wyverngules.com

User avatar
J Duncan of Sketraw
Site Admin
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Banff, Scotland
Contact:

Post by J Duncan of Sketraw » Sat Apr 08, 2006 4:27 pm

I thought this might help explain the process of cadency in Scotland and England from Don Pontinger & Iain Moncreiff of Easter Moncreiff book of 1953;

Image


Image
Slaintè
John A. Duncan of Sketraw

The Armorial Register - International Register of Arms
http://www.armorial-register.com

Image

User avatar
C Ross of Biggar
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:32 pm
Location: Hesse, Germany

Post by C Ross of Biggar » Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:36 am

Of course, some son or other may petition for a quartering somewhere down the line and this would also act as a difference.
Kind regards
Charles Ross of Biggar

User avatar
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Post by Martin Goldstraw » Sat Oct 21, 2006 10:17 pm

I am conscious that the topic of this thread is Scottish cadency marking but since John has posted illustrations of both Scottish and English cadency markings it might be appropriate to compare differences adopted with the Quartering of arms in both heraldic jurisdictions when responding to Biggar's question.

In the Scottish system, where cadency markings are compulsory and visually more obvious than those of the English, the relevant arms when quartered remain the same - that is to say (for example) if the assigned cadency mark is a bordure Gules then when these arms are quartered they are "added" to the other coat unaltered. Seems obvious doesn't it?

However, by contrast, when an English coat of arms is quartered with another it could be the case that the cadency mark of, for example a crescent (which ought to be used but is more often not used) is dropped altogether. The argument here is that as the quartered coat creates an altogether different achievement to the undifferenced coat there is no need for the (minor) cadency mark any longer.

Of course the fact remains that although in Scotland the quartered coat MUST be matriculated with Lyon Court and it is therefore subject to regulation and as a result it will follow the rules, in England whilst the new quartered coat OUGHT to be regularised through the College of Arms, there is no law which dictates that it must be and therefore although for the sake of purity a coat of arms which ought to bear a cadency mark ought to retain that mark when quartered it is not always the case that it does. Ideally an Englishman ought not to quarter any arms without first obtaining advice from the College of arms but in practice such advise is not always sought ... sadly in my view!
Martin Goldstraw

----------
The Armorial Register
http://www.armorial-register.com

Image

Iain Boyd
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 12:14 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Iain Boyd » Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:09 pm

Dear Major Johnson,

I suspect that Charles Drake's suggestion may not necessarily be the cadency the Lord Lyon would apply in the example you have given - unless you can prove that there are no other more senior lines.

For example, "3 eldest sons, then a 2nd son, 9 more eldest or eldest surviving sons, another 2nd son, and then another eldest son" could be entitled to the same cadency marks as would "5 eldest sons, then a 2nd son, 1 more eldest or eldest surviving sons, another 2nd son, and then 7 more eldest sons".

The problem is that there are more possibilities of variation in descent in 15 generations than in 4 or 5.

Regards,

Iain Boyd
Iain Boyd
New Zealand

Post Reply

Return to “Cadency and Marshalling”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest