LINES USED IN PARTING THE FIELD.
Escutcheons that have more than one tincture are
divided by lines; the straight lines are either perpendicular
|, horizontal —, diagonal line dexter \, and
diagonal line sinister /.
Curved and angular lines are numerous, and each
has an Heraldic name expressive of its form. The
names and figures of those most commonly used by
English armorists are as follow:—
Engrailed
Invected
Wavy, or undé
Embattled, or crenelle
Nebule
Indented
Dancette
Angled
Bevilled
Escartelle
Nowy, or franché
Dove-tailed
Embattled grady:
sometimes called
battled embattled
Potent
Double arched
Arched or enarched
Urdée
Radient
If a shield is divided into four equal parts, it is said
to be quartered: this may be done two ways, viz.—
QUARTERED PER CROSS—The shield
is divided into four parts, called
quarters, by an horizontal and perpendicular
line, crossing each other
in the center of the field, each of
which is numbered.
QUARTERED PER SALTIER,
which is made by two diagonal lines,
dexter and sinister, crossing each
other in the center of the field.
The Escutcheon is sometimes divided
into a great number of parts, in order
to place in it the arms of several
families to which one is allied; this
is called a genealogical achievement.
The compartments are called QUARTERINGS.
DIFFERENCES.
All members of the same family claim the same bearings in their coats of arms;
and to distinguish the principal bearer from his descendants or relatives, it was
necessary to invent some sign so that the degree of consanguinity might be known.
These signs are called DIFFERENCES. During the Crusades, the only difference
consisted in the bordure or border, which, as the name implies, was a border or edging
running round the edge of the shield. The color and form of this border served to
distinguish the leaders of the different bands that served under one duke or chieftain.
The same difference might be used to denote a diversity between particular persons descended
from one family. At the present time they are not used to denote a difference, but as
one of the ordinaries to a coat of arms.
The annexed example exhibits the arms of the Monastery
of Bermondsey.
Party per pale, azure and gules; a bordure, argent.
This bordure is plain; but they may be formed by any of the foregoing lines.
The annexed example is or, a bordure engrailed, gules.
The differences used by armorists at the present time are nine in number.
They not only distinguish the sons of one family, but also denote the
subordinate degrees in each house.
| The Heir, or first son, the LABEL |
|
Second Son, the CRESCENT |
|
| Third Son, the MULLET |
|
| Fourth Son, the MARTLET |
|
| Fifth Son, the ANNULET |
|
| Sixth Son, the FLEUR-DE-LIS |
|
| Seventh Son, the ROSE |
|
| Eighth Son, the CROSS MOLINE |
|
| Ninth Son, the DOUBLE QUATREFOIL |
|
Should either of the nine brothers have male children, the eldest child
would place the label on the difference that distinguished his father;
the second son would place the crescent upon it; the third the mullet;
continuing the same order for as many sons as he may have.
The label only, is used in the arms of the royal family as a difference;
but the points of the label are charged with different figures to
distinguish the second and succeeding sons. The arms of the
sons of King George III. were thus distinguished: the shield of the arms
of the Prince of Wales by a label; the Duke of York's by
the label, the center point of which was charged with a red cross;
that of the Duke of Clarence by a label, the dexter and sinister
points of which were charged with an anchor, the center point with
the red cross; each of the succeeding sons were differenced by
charges on the points of the labels.
All the figures denoting differences are also used as perfect charges on the shield;
but their size and situation will sufficiently determine whether the figure is used as a
perfect coat of arms, or is introduced as a difference or dimunition.
Sisters have no differences in their coats of arms. They are permitted to bear the arms
of their father, as the eldest son does after his father's decease.
Guillim, Leigh, and other ancient armorists mention divers figures, which, they assert, were formerly added to coats of arms as marks of degradation for slander, cowardice,
murder, and other crimes, and to them they give the name of abatements of honor; others have called them blots in the escutcheon: but as no instance can be produced
of such dishonorable marks having been borne in a coat of arms, they may justly be considered as chimerical, or at any rate obsolete, and unworthy of consideration
at the present time. Porney pithily observes, "that arms being marks of honor, they cannot admit of any note of infamy, nor would any one bear them if they were so branded.
It is true, a man may be degraded for divers crimes, particularly high treason; but in such cases the escutcheon is reversed, trod upon, and torn in pieces, to denote a total extinction
and suppression of the honor and dignity of the person to whom it belonged."
The only abatement used in heraldry is the baton: this denotes illegitimacy. It is borne in the
escutcheons of the dukes that assume the royal arms as the illegitimate descendants of King
Charles the Second.