Sherd Coat of Arms

[behindthefrogs]

Could someone please help me interpret the following blazon.

Argent (silver) on a bend Sable (black) a rose of the field, in the sinister canton a buglehorn strung of the second.

I think this means when viewed from the front a silver shield with a diagonal black stripe top left to bottom right with a rose of the field on the stripe.  In the top right corner is a black square, one third the width of the shield, containing a silver bugle horn.

Does "strung of the second" mean suspended from the quarter point of the top of the shield which would tilt the horn?

I may also be wrong about the rose in my interpretation of “of the field”.  This could refer to the field of the shield rather than the type of rose.  Alternatively does it mean that the rose is not the standard heraldic rose but a more pictorial representation?

David

[Little Nell]

Hi David,

Digging deep into the memory banks here - "rose of the field" - I think field means the colour argent i.e. the colour of the field.  And the "strung of the second" would mean the strings were the second colour mentioned i.e. sable.

I'll go get my book 

Nell

[Little Nell]

What colour for the canton - if black, my suggestion would not work!

Nell

[Little Nell]

Doh, you told me it was black.

Does it say what colour the bugle-horn is?  The strings will be the same tincture unless blazoned otherwise.

Nell

[behindthefrogs]

I like your explanation Nell as the crest is a buglehorn argent strung and garnished sable.  As you say this means the canton could not be sable and according to the rules it can't be argent.  Does this mean a colour is missing or just that the sinister canton is mentioned to position the buglehorn?

Does anyone have access to the Dugdale visitation to Derbyshire 1663/4 which should contain the original of this blazon?

David

[Little Nell]

I think you are right - there is a colour missing.  Will investigate, but cannot promise to find anything.

Nell

[behindthefrogs]

The more I look at it the more likely I feel it is that the reference to THE sinister canton is purely positioning.  This would mean both the buglehorn and its strings would be sable.  If the canton was of a different colour the reference would be to A canton.

Thank you for your help Nell

David

[Little Nell]

I'm not sure about that.  Is the canton not usually put in the top left corner to begin with?  By specifying the position, it implies (to me, at least) that there is a dexter canton.       I think I'll pass on that, or I'll have to read the whole book again.

However, I have found this in the book I have with regards to the blazon:

Repetition of numbers or tinctures came to be thought of as inelegant and so was avoided.

If a tincture or number occurs more than once in the same sentence of a blazon, it is indicated by reference to the words already used, and not by repeating them.  Thus, should a charge be of the same tincture as the field, it is said to be “of the field” or (as the field is always first specified) “of the first.”     

Any charge is said to be “of the second” or “of the third” or “of the last” if its tincture is the same as the second, third or last-mentioned tincture in the blazon. 

Still can't find a picture of the coat of arms though.   

Nell

[behindthefrogs]

I think it looks as follows:

When viewed from the front a silver shield with a diagonal black stripe top left to bottom right with a silver rose on the stripe.  In the top right corner is a black buglehorn with strings, positioned where a sinister canton would be placed.

In fact nothing very complicated

David