Cadency: Difference between revisions
Paul Matisz (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Paul Matisz (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
* for the eighth son, a [[cross moline]] |
* for the eighth son, a [[cross moline]] |
||
* for the ninth son, a double [[quatrefoil]] |
* for the ninth son, a double [[quatrefoil]] |
||
Typically brisures were displayed as smaller than other [[charge]]s. |
|||
⚫ | |||
[[Scotland|Scottish]] heraldry used a very different system, often changing [[bordure]]s and [[tincture]] to accomodate changes. |
[[Scotland|Scottish]] heraldry used a very different system, often changing [[bordure]]s and [[tincture]] to accomodate changes. |
||
⚫ | |||
Interestingly, when the holder of the plain arms perished, a general reshuffling of cadency marks was supposed to occur, i.e. the first son inheriting the uncadenced arms, his eldest son inheriting the [[label of three points]], and so on. |
Interestingly, when the holder of the plain arms perished, a general reshuffling of cadency marks was supposed to occur, i.e. the first son inheriting the uncadenced arms, his eldest son inheriting the [[label of three points]], and so on. |
||
Line 20: | Line 22: | ||
Despite the influence of English heraldry in the SCA, cadency marks are simply not recognized by the [[college of arms]], and any attempt to register a [[device]] with a cadency mark will likely be rejected as having an insufficient number of [[Point_of_difference|points of difference]]. |
Despite the influence of English heraldry in the SCA, cadency marks are simply not recognized by the [[college of arms]], and any attempt to register a [[device]] with a cadency mark will likely be rejected as having an insufficient number of [[Point_of_difference|points of difference]]. |
||
The only exception to this |
The only exception to this is the use of a [[label of three points]] on the arms of a Kingdom to denote the [[Crown Prince]] and [[Crown Princess|Princess]]. |
||
Revision as of 03:12, 5 May 2007
Cadency marks (sometimes called brisures,) were used on family arms throughout the late medieval period as a method of distinguishing the arms of a man from those of his sons, who were also entitiled to carry the family's arms.
Each regional heraldry had it's own method for determining cadency. In English heraldry the system (although not mandatory) was often displayed as follows:
- for the first son, a label of three points (a horizontal strip with three tags hanging down)
- for the second son, a crescent (the points upward, as is conventional in heraldry)
- for the third son, a mullet (a five-pointed star)
- for the fourth son, a martlet (a kind of bird)
- for the fifth son, an annulet (a ring)
- for the sixth son, a fleur-de-lys
- for the seventh son, a rose
- for the eighth son, a cross moline
- for the ninth son, a double quatrefoil
Typically brisures were displayed as smaller than other charges.
Scottish heraldry used a very different system, often changing bordures and tincture to accomodate changes.
More elaborate systems of cadency were in place for the various sons of sons, all the way down to the ninth son of a ninth son.
Interestingly, when the holder of the plain arms perished, a general reshuffling of cadency marks was supposed to occur, i.e. the first son inheriting the uncadenced arms, his eldest son inheriting the label of three points, and so on.
Cadency in the SCA
Despite the influence of English heraldry in the SCA, cadency marks are simply not recognized by the college of arms, and any attempt to register a device with a cadency mark will likely be rejected as having an insufficient number of points of difference.
The only exception to this is the use of a label of three points on the arms of a Kingdom to denote the Crown Prince and Princess.