Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

The science of differencing and combining Arms

Post Reply
User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:48 pm

A couple of immediate reactions -

First, a good start, but you might want to make the boars larger, to better fill the available space.

Second, the crescent does come across as
likely a cadency mark, given it's location and size. There just isn't sufficient space above the point of the chevron for a non-cadency crescent. If you were to move the crescent to the base (below the chevron) and enlarge it to fill the available space, it would look like a normal charge rather than a mark of cadency.

That's about all I can say without some idea as to the reasons for the charges - e.g. who or what they represent...
Mike~~
Fremont, California

User avatar
J Duncan of Sketraw
Site Admin
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Banff, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by J Duncan of Sketraw » Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:41 am

I agree with Michaels reaction......good start though:)
Slaintè
John A. Duncan of Sketraw

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

Image

User avatar
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Martin Goldstraw » Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:55 am

A competent artist could make this better. If the chevron was more acute it would give more room for larger boars but here the crescent can't be mistaken for a mark of cadency.

Please note that no check has been made to see if this design clashes with any existing one.

oleary.jpg
oleary.jpg (85.7 KiB) Viewed 9292 times
Martin Goldstraw

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

Image

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Sat Dec 09, 2017 5:26 pm

My guess (only that) is that while you may find something similar, the chevron countetchanged likely will be different - but I could well be wrong!
Last edited by Michael F. McCartney on Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mike~~
Fremont, California

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:10 pm

Also, could you share a bit of basic info re: your friend? e.g. surname or roots, a bit of his family history, etc.? Not looking to highjack your design process, just maybe make better informed suggestions.
Mike~~
Fremont, California

User avatar
Mark A. Henderson
AR Reg. & IHS Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 7:40 pm

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Mark A. Henderson » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:47 pm

Image

Here is a quick image I devised.
Kindest regards,

Mark Anthony Henderson
Virtus et Victoria

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:55 am

Mark - nice work!
Brian - your anonymous friend now has two similar but not identical designs (versions,) to consider - the only heraldically significant difference being Martin's boars rampant vs Mark's boars statant.

Before he decides on one or the other, you might suggest a "refrigerator test" for a few weeks (if you're not familiar with the term, just ask; I don't remember if it came up when you were designing your own arms).
Mike~~
Fremont, California

User avatar
J Duncan of Sketraw
Site Admin
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:57 am
Location: Banff, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by J Duncan of Sketraw » Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:49 am

Of the two I kind of like Marks boars statant. :)
Slaintè
John A. Duncan of Sketraw

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

Image

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:48 pm

Suggest he do the refrigerator test first! - before pasting bookplates in his favorite books!!!

One nice advantage of Argent and Sable is that a black and white image is already in full color!
Mike~~
Fremont, California

User avatar
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Martin Goldstraw » Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:27 pm

Michael F. McCartney wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:48 pm
Suggest he do the refrigerator test first! - before pasting bookplates in his favorite books!!!

One nice advantage of Argent and Sable is that a black and white image is already in full color!
Ha Ha - nice observation.
Martin Goldstraw

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

Image

User avatar
Michael F. McCartney
IHS Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 am
Location: Fremont, California

Re: Possible confusion between cadency and normal charge

Post by Michael F. McCartney » Sun Dec 24, 2017 5:31 am

:)
Mike~~
Fremont, California

Post Reply

Return to “Cadency and Marshalling”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests