A Complete Guide to Heraldry Part 59

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 702.--Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, d. 1322 (son of preceding): England with a label azure, each point charged with three fleurs-de-lis. (From his seal, 1301.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 703.--Henry of Lancaster, 1295-1324 (brother of preceding, before he succeeded his brother as Earl of Lancaster): England with a bend azure. (From his seal, 1301.) After 1324 he bore England with a label as his brother.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 704.--Henry, Duke of Lancaster, son of preceding. (From his seal, 1358.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 705.--Edward of Carnarvon, Prince of Wales (afterwards Edward II.), bore before 1307: England with a label azure. (From his seal, 1305.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 706.--John of Eltham (second son of Edward II.): England with a bordure of the arms of France. (From his tomb.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 707.--Arms of Edmund of Woodstock, Earl of Kent, 3rd son of Edward I.: England within a bordure argent. The same arms were borne by his descendant, Thomas de Holand, Earl of Kent.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 708.--Arms of John de Holand, Duke of Exeter (d. 1400): England, a bordure of France. (From his seal, 1381.)]

{492} supporters, and shield are all equally differenced, but the difficulty of adding difference mark on difference mark when no marriage or heiress can ever bring in any alteration to the crest is very generally recognised and admitted, even officially, and it is rare indeed to come across a crest carrying more than a single difference mark.

The grant of an augmentation to any cadet obviates the slightest necessity for any further use of difference marks inherited before the grant.

There are no difference marks whatever for daughters, there being in English common law no seniority between the different daughters of one man.

They succeed equally, whether heiresses or not, to the arms of their father for use during their lifetimes, and they must bear them on their own lozenges or impaled on the shields of their husbands, with the difference marks which their father needed to use. It would be permissible, however, to discard these difference marks of their fathers if subsequently to his death his issue succeeded to the position of head of the family. For instance, suppose the daughters of the younger son of an earl are under consideration. They would bear upon lozenges the arms of their father, which would be those of the earl, charged with the mullet or crescent which their father had used as a younger son. If by the extinction of issue the brother of these daughters succeed to the earldom, they would no longer be required to bear their father's difference mark.

There are no marks of difference between illegitimate children. In the eye of the law an illegitimate person has no relatives, and stands alone.

Supposing it be subsequently found that a marriage ceremony had been illegal, the whole issue of that marriage becomes of course illegitimate.

As such, no one of them is ent.i.tled to bear arms. A Royal Licence, and exemplification following thereupon, is necessary for each single one. Of these exemplifications there is one case on record in which I think nine follow each other on successive pages of one of the Grant Books: all differ in some way--usually in the colour of the bordure; but the fact that there are illegitimate brothers of the same parentage does not prevent the descendants of any daughter quartering the differenced coat exemplified to her. As far as heraldic law is concerned, she is the heiress of herself, representing only herself, and consequently her heir quarters her arms.

Marks of difference are never added to an exemplification following upon a Royal Licence _after illegitimacy_. Marks of difference are to indicate cadency, and there is no cadency vested in a person of illegitimate birth--their right to the arms proceeding only from the regrant of them in the exemplification. What is added in lieu is the _mark of distinction_ to indicate the b.a.s.t.a.r.dy. {493}

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 709.--John de Holand, Duke of Exeter, son of preceding.

Arms as preceding. (From his seal.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 710.--Henry de Holand, Duke of Exeter, son of preceding. Arms as preceding. (From his seal, 1455.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 711.--Thomas of Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk, second son of Edward I.: Arms of England, a label of three points argent.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 712.--Thomas de Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1400).

(From a drawing of his seal, MS. Cott., Julius, C. vii., f. 166.) Arms, see page 465.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 713.--John de Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1432): Arms as Fig. 711. (From his Garter plate.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 714.--John de Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1461): Arms as Fig. 711. (From his seal.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 715.--Edward the Black Prince: Quarterly, 1 and 4 France (ancient); 2 and 3 England, and a label of three points argent.

(From his tomb.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 716.--Richard, Prince of Wales (afterwards Richard II.), son of preceding: Arms as preceding. (From his seal, 1377.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 717.--Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, fifth son of King Edward III.: France (ancient) and England quarterly, a label of three points argent, each point charged with three torteaux. (From his seal, 1391.) His son, Edward, Earl of Cambridge, until he succeeded his father, _i.e._ before 1462, bore the same with an additional difference of a bordure of Spain (Fig. 316). Vincent attributes to him, however, a label as Fig. 719, which possibly he bore after his father's death.]

{494}

The method of differencing the English Royal Arms is quite unique, and has no relation to the method ordinarily in use in this country for the arms of subjects. The Royal Arms are not personal. They are the sovereign arms of dominion, indicating the sovereignty enjoyed by the person upon the throne.

Consequently they are in no degree hereditary, and from the earliest times, certainly since the reign of Edward I., the right to bear the undifferenced arms has been confined exclusively to the sovereign upon the throne. In early times there were two methods employed, namely, the use of the bordure and of varieties of the label, the label of the heir-apparent to the English throne being originally of azure. The arms of Thomas of Woodstock, the youngest son of Edward I., were differenced by a bordure argent; his elder brother, Thomas de Brotherton, having had a label of three points argent; whilst the eldest son, Edward II., as Prince of Wales used a label of three points azure. From that period to the end of the Tudor period the use of labels and bordures seems to have continued concurrently, some members of the Royal Family using one, some the other, though there does not appear to have been any precise rules governing a choice between the two. When Edward III. claimed the throne of France and quartered the arms of that country with those of England, of course a portion of the field then became azure, and a blue label upon a blue field was no longer possible. The heir-apparent therefore differenced his shield by the plain label of three points argent, and this has ever since, down to the present day, continued to be the "difference" used by the heir-apparent to the English throne. A label of gules upon the gules quartering of England was equally impossible, and consequently from that period all labels used by any member of the Royal Family have been argent, charged with different objects, these being frequently taken from the arms of some female ancestor. Figs. 700 to 730 are a somewhat extensive collection of variations of the Royal Arms.

Lionel of Antwerp, Duke of Clarence, third son of Edward III., bore: France (ancient) and England quarterly, a label of three points argent, and on each point a canton gules.

The use of the bordure as a legitimate difference upon the Royal Arms ceased about the Tudor period, and differencing between members of the Royal Family is now exclusively done by means of these labels. A few cases of bordures to denote illegitimacy can, however, be found. The method of deciding these labels is for separate warrants under the hand and seal of the sovereign to be issued to the different members of the Royal Family, a.s.signing to each a certain coronet, and the label to be borne over the Royal Arms, crest, and supporters. These warrants are personal to those for whom they are {495}

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 718.--Richard, Duke of York (son of Edward, Earl of Cambridge and Duke of York): Arms as preceding. (From his seal, 1436.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 719.--Referred to under Fig. 717.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 720.--Thomas of Woodstock, Earl of Buckingham, seventh son of Edward III.: France (ancient) and England quarterly, a bordure argent. (From a drawing of his seal, 1391, MS. Cott., Julius, C. vii.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 721.--Henry of Monmouth, afterwards Henry V.: France (modern) and England quarterly, a label of three points argent. (From his seal.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 722.--Richard, Duke of Gloucester (afterwards Richard III.): A label of three points ermine, on each point a canton gules.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 723.--Humphrey of Lancaster, Duke of Gloucester, fourth son of Henry IV.: France (modern) and England quarterly, a bordure argent.

(From his seal.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 724.--John de Beaufort, Earl and Marquis of Somerset, son of John of Gaunt. Arms subsequent to his legitimation: France and England quarterly, within a bordure gobony azure and argent. Prior to his legitimation he bore: Per pale argent and azure (the livery colours of Lancaster), a bend of England (_i.e._ a bend gules charged with three lions pa.s.sant guardant or) with a label of France.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 725.--Thomas, Duke of Clarence, second son of Henry IV.

France and England quarterly, a label of three points ermine. (From his seal, 1413.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 726.--George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward IV.: France and England quarterly, a label of three points argent, each charged with a canton gules. (From MS. Harl. 521.)]

{496} issued, and are not hereditary. Of late their use, or perhaps may be their issue, has not been quite so particularly conformed to as is desirable, and at the present time the official records show the arms of their Royal Highnesses the d.u.c.h.ess of Fife, the Princess Victoria, and the Queen of Norway, still bearing the label of five points indicative of their position as grandchildren of the sovereign, which of course they were when the warrants were issued in the lifetime of the late Queen Victoria. In spite of the fact that the warrants have no hereditary limitation, I am only aware of two modern instances in which a warrant has been issued to the son of a cadet of the Royal House who had previously received a warrant. One of these was the late Duke of Cambridge. The warrant was issued to him in his father's lifetime, and to the label previously a.s.signed to his father a second label of three points gules, to be borne directly below the other, was added. The other case was that of his cousin, afterwards Duke of c.u.mberland and King of Hanover. In his case the second label, also gules, was charged with the white horse of Hanover.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 727.--John, Duke of Bedford, third son of Henry IV.: France and England quarterly, a label of five points, the two dexter ermine, the three sinister azure, charged with three fleurs-de-lis or.

(From MS. Add. 18,850.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 728.--Jasper Tudor, Duke of Bedford: France and England quarterly, a bordure azure, charged with martlets or. (From his seal.) Although uncle of Henry VII., Jasper Tudor had no blood descent whatever which would ent.i.tle him to bear these arms. His use of them is very remarkable.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 729.--Thomas de Beaufort, Earl of Dorset, brother of John, Earl of Somerset (Fig. 724): France and England quarterly, a bordure compony ermine and azure. (From his Garter plate.)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 730.--John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, bore: France (ancient) and England quarterly, a label of three points _ermine_ (_i.e._ each point charged with three ermine spots).]

The label of the eldest son of the heir-apparent to the English throne is not, as might be imagined, a plain label of five points, but the plain label of three points, the centre point only being charged. The late Duke of Clarence charged the centre point of his label of {497} three points with a cross couped gules. After his death the Duke of York relinquished the label of five points which he had previously borne, receiving one of three, the centre point charged with an anchor. In every other case all of the points are charged. The following examples of the labels in use at the moment will show how the system now exists:--

_Prince of Wales._--A label of three points argent.

_Princess Royal_ (Louise, d.u.c.h.ess of Fife).--A label of five points argent, charged on the centre and outer points with a cross of St. George gules, and on the two others with a thistle proper.

_Princess Victoria._--A label of five points argent, charged with three roses and two crosses gules.

_Princess Maud_ (H.M. The Queen of Norway).--A label of five points argent, charged with three hearts and two crosses gules.

_The Duke of Edinburgh_ (Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha).--A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a cross gules, and on each of the others an anchor azure. His son, the hereditary Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, who predeceased his father, bore a label of five points, the first, third, and fifth each charged with a cross gules, and the second and fourth each with an anchor azure (Fig. 731).