Marks of Cadency in the British Royal Family

Introduction

In the case of royal families, arms are also arms of dominion, and it is therefore important to distinguish junior members of the family. Richard Lionheart was the first to use the arms of England. His brother John perhaps differenced by bearing two lions instead of three. Henry III and his brother the earl of Cornwall bore altogether different arms (the latter adopting the arms of the county of Poitou which he claimed and briefly held in the 1240s). Differencing seems to take root with the children of Henry III, at first a label or bordure charged with devices inspired by the mother's or the wife's arms.

For the next three generations, the heir apparent differences with a label azure, while other sons use a label or a bordure of a different tincture, or bearing charges. Bordures continued to be used as mark of cadency into the 15th century, however, with the children of Edward III the use of a label argent contrasting with both quarters of France and England, bearing various charges, becomes a norm (in Scotland, the label azure remained the rule for the heir apparent down to Henry, son of James VI of Scotland). The number of points is still not meaningful.

The Tudors and Stuarts had few junior sons; marks used by the Plantagenets (label ermine or label of York) were used. An innovation arises with the children of James, duke of York (who bears a label of three points ermine): they are given a label of five points ermine, first instance of the use of 5 points to denote grandchildren of a sovereign. The duke of Kendal was given a label of 3 points, but it was becoming clear by then that Charles II would have no legitimate heirs, and in fact the duke of York's arms were sometimes shown with a label of three points argent.

The modern system really takes shape around 1750-60. Marks of cadency are determined and granted for life to the individual by Royal Warrant (from the 19th century, members of the Royal family do not have arms until assigned to them, and these arms are not necessarily inheritable). The heir apparent bears a label of three points argent, and his eldest son the same with a cross gules on the center label (but note that the current Prince of Wales's eldest son bears an escallop gules). Other children of the sovereign (male and female, whereas females did not use to bear marks of cadency) bear labels of three points argent with various charges, while grandchildren of the sovereign receive labels of five points. In the 18th century, it seems that the eldest sons of younger sons, heirs to dukedoms, differenced with a second label (e.g., Cumberland, Cambridge, Gloucester) which was later removed by a second warrant once they succeeded. This changed under Victoria: all grandsons of the sovereign in male line are given five-point labels, which explains why the 1st duke of Kent had a label of 3 points and the 2d duke presently has a label of 5 points.

Given the typical life-span, a sovereign has to assign marks at most to two generations. George II granted 3-point and 5-point labels. George III granted 3-point labels to his children. Victoria granted a batch of 3-point and 5-point labels; she had the possibility of issuing warrants for her great-grandchildren, but never did. Later, George V in 1921 granted labels of 3 points to his sons. Elizabeth has granted labels of 3 points to her children and labels of 5 points to her cousins (grandchildren of George V) and three of her grandchildren.

How far does the sovereign's choice of marks of cadency extend? Members of the royal family were:

  • until 1864, the children of the sovereign (Royal Highnesses) and the descendants in male line (Highnesses)
  • from 1864 to 1917, the children and grandchildren of the sovereign (Royal Highnesses)
  • since 1917, the children of the sovereign, children of the sovereign's sons, eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.

    • By Royal Warrant dated 24 Feb. 1975, the labels assigned to a grandchild of a sovereign, except the eldest son of a Prince of Wales, became hereditary and are borne as part of the arms together with ordinary marks of difference when appropriate (however, it appears that younger sons of the Prince of Wales can expect to have their label of 5 points changed to a label of 3 points if and when they become sons or brothers of a sovereign). The children of the sovereign's daughters and granddaughters in male line used to quarter their mother's arms in Victoria and Edward VII's time. But this practice has ceased in this reign (the earl of Harewood bears his father's arms only).

    See the page of the College of Arms on the armorial bearings of the children of the Prince of Wales.


    Banner of the Prince of Wales, showing his label argent as eldest son, and the arms of Wales en-surtout (from Lycos Image Gallery).

    Genealogical Charts

    What follows are simplified genealogical charts indicating the marks of cadency born by various members in male descent. They do not include every possible infant, and daughters are excluded until George I because they did not bear marks of cadency.

    References

    The sources are sometimes contradictory, as noted.

    House of Plantagenet (1154-1485)

    Henry II (1133-89):

    House of Tudor (1485-1603)

    House of Stuart (1603-1714)

    From here, all marks of cadency consist of a label argent with various charges on the points. A point uncharged is represented as ---; otherwise, the charge and its tincture is indicated ("fleur" stands for fleur-de-lys).

    James I (1566-1625):

    House of Hannover (1714-1837)

    I have not reported lines of descent through void marriages (due to the Royal Marriages Act of 1772); I have also skipped the Hannover, ex-Cumberland line after the Royal Titles Deprivation Act of 1917 and the subsequent Order in Council of 1919.

    The sovereign placed an inescutcheon gules with the Crown of Charlemagne or en-surtout of the Hanover quarter in the Royal Arms to indicate his dignity as Elector and Arch-Treasurer. His heir placed an inescutcheon gules to indicate his position as heir to the Elector. Others, in principle, did not place that inescutcheon (Fox-Davies), though it is often seen in actual depictions (for example, the future George III used it before 1751; Lee 1992).

    In 1801 the Royal arms were changed, and George III's sons all changed their arms accordingly.

    Houses of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha/Windsor/Windsor-Mountbatten (since 1837)

    In 1837 the Hanover quarter was removed from the royal arms. The royal arms, since then, have been a quartering of England, Scotland and Ireland. However, until 1917, the descendants of Victoria and Albert bore an inescutcheon of Saxony over all, including the princes of Wales, Edward and George. (Initially, Victoria and Albert wanted the prince of Wales to quarter the arms of the UK with those of Saxony, as the Prince Consort had done; see The Greville Memoirs, 1938, vol. 4, p. 432). But by declaration in Council of Mar 4, 1911, the next prince of Wales (future Edward VIII), was given an inescutcheon of Wales ensigned with the coronet of heir apparent, in place of the Saxony esctucheon, when he was first granted arms (interestingly, Fox-Davies had "deplored" in 1909 that the previous Prince's arms did not allude to Wales; Complete Guide, p. 486). By warrant of Sep. 12, 1917 George V removed the inescutcheon of Saxony from the arms of all descendants of the Prince Consort (see Philip Thomas in Burke's Peerage, 1963). Descendants of the Hannover kings (Cumberland, Cambridge) continued to use the Hanoverian inescutcheon (without royal crown).

    Victoria (1819-1901)
    no arms assigned to her before 1837; married Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Prince Consort, who quartered the Royal arms differenced by a label of 3 points argent with a cross gules on the center point, 1 and 4, with Saxony, 2 and 3