Part 26 (2/2)

In treating of this subject, some writers have maintained that the _bordure componee_ is, in its heraldic nature, the most decided and unquestionable Difference for Illegitimacy: and this opinion these writers have derived from the singularly contradictory fact, that the BEAUFORTS differenced with a bordure componee when they became legally _legitimate_. A bordure componee _may_, indeed, be used with such an intention, as it is used by the Duke of RICHMOND, who bears the arms of CHARLES II. within a _bordure componee arg. and gu., charged with eight roses of the last_; but by the BEAUFORTS it was used with an intention exactly the reverse of this. The bordure, however, whatever its aspect or modification of treatment, remains still, as it was of old, an honourable Difference, until some abatement of honour has been a.s.sociated with its presence under special circ.u.mstances. But the stereotyped use of the _bordure wavy_ in England with a set meaning, gives to the wavy variety a lack of desirability. Marks of illegitimacy are intended to remain upon a s.h.i.+eld for all time, although in a few historic cases their use has been discarded. And precisely the same words may be applied to any other charge that has been employed, or may be required to mark Cadency.

Marks of Cadency, as they are borne on s.h.i.+elds of Arms, may also be charged on Badges, Crests, and Supporters. As a matter of course, they appear on Armorial Banners and Standards under the same conditions that they are blazoned upon s.h.i.+elds and Surcoats. Such examples as may be necessary to ill.u.s.trate heraldic usage in these cases, I propose to describe in the following Chapters.

It cannot be necessary for me to adduce any arguments in order to impress upon Students of Heraldry the importance of investigating early Cadency, or to a.s.sure them that a special interest is inseparable from this inquiry: I may suggest, however, that it is most desirable that Students should arrange groups of allied s.h.i.+elds, and should carefully blazon them with their various ”Marks of Cadency,” being careful also to record their authorities for every example.

MODERN CADENCY is marked by the Label and by single small Charges, which take precedence in the following order:--

1. The _Label_, No. 271.

2. The _Crescent_, No. 166, A.

3. The _Mullet_, No. 278.

4. The _Martlet_, No. 161.

5. The _Annulet_, No. 154.

6. The _Fleur de lys_, No. 246.

7. The _Rose_, No. 298.

8. The _Cross Moline_, No. 99.

9. The _Octofoil_, or _Double Quatrefoil_.

When they are adopted, Marks of Cadency now are generally placed upon the Honour Point of the s.h.i.+eld, or in some other conspicuous position: one of these Marks also may be charged upon another, if desired,--as a Martlet may be charged upon a Crescent to denote the fourth son of a second son; and so in other cases.

[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 365.--Seal of William Fraser: appended to Homage Deed, A.D. 1295, preserved in H.M. Record Office.]

The Seal of WILLIAM FRASER, No. 365, from Mr. Laing's Collection, exemplifies in a singular and interesting manner the early use of a differenced Label. Here the Label appears, without any s.h.i.+eld, borne as if it were a Badge: and it is charged, on each of its three points, with two devices that have the appearance of mullets of six points, but which really may be _fraises_--strawberry-leaves, the rebus-device of Fraser.

(See pp. 182-185.)

CHAPTER XIII

DIFFERENCING

_Differencing to denote Feudal Alliance or Dependency: Differencing without any Alliance-- Augmentation-- Abatement._

”Differencing, which comprises in truth the growth and ramification of Coat-Armour, and the whole system of its early development, has been strangely lost sight of in the numerous treatises on Armory that have satisfied recent generations of Englishmen.”

--HERALD AND GENEALOGIST, II. 32.

DIFFERENCING, using the term here as distinct from, or perhaps as not identical with, the subject of CADENCY, includes not only the treatment of Coats of Arms and other armorial insignia, that denote and are based upon _Feudal Alliance_ or _Dependency_, but without blood-relations.h.i.+p; but also implies a comprehensive system of distinguis.h.i.+ng similar Arms, when they are borne by individuals or families between whom no kind of alliance is known to have existed. It is evident, on the one hand, that a feudal influence would naturally lead to some degree of a.s.similation to the Coat-Armour of the feudal Chief, in the Arms of all allies and dependants: and, on the other hand, it will readily be understood that, even in the early days of its career, Heraldry would see the necessity for providing for the constantly increasing demands upon its resources; and, consequently, that it would organise a system which would enable the same Ordinaries and the same princ.i.p.al Charges to appear in distinct s.h.i.+elds, without either confusion or misapprehension.

It is highly probable, and indeed it may be a.s.sumed to be certain, that what I have called a ”feudal influence,” in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in no slight degree affected the general composition of Coats of Arms. In very many instances the working of this influence is still palpable; and it is always interesting to the student of Heraldry, as it must always be eminently useful to the student of History, to detect its presence and to explore its method of action.

Like Cadency, feudal Differencing is expressed by various means, all of them indicating, in a greater or a less degree, the motive which suggested their adoption. I proceed at once to examples, which ill.u.s.trate and explain the system so clearly and so fully, that prolonged introductory remarks are altogether superfluous.

Upon his Seal, RANULPH DE BLONDEVILLE, Earl of CHESTER (died in 1232) bears three garbs or wheat-sheaves; and Rolls of Arms of the time of HENRY III. blazon the s.h.i.+eld of the Earl of CHESTER as--_Az., three garbs or_, No. 366. This s.h.i.+eld has been a.s.signed to the Earls of CHESTER to this day: and, in token of feudal alliance, from the middle of the thirteenth century, ”one or more garbs,” in the words of Mr.

PLANCHe, ”are seen in the majority of Coats belonging to the n.o.bility and gentry of the County Palatine of Chester.” Thus, since the year 1390, the arms of GROSVENOR have been--_Az., a garb or_.

<script>