The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while
Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitney branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
On Tuesday, March 5, 2019 at 3:03:15 PM UTC-5, Louis Epstein wrote:
The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitney branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
The quick answer is, Yes, they should be differenced in some way. Changing the motto and/or crest is not enough. there has to a noticeable difference in the shield.
BTW, what happened to alt.talk.royalty ? Who "owns" it and how can the situation be fixed?
On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 4:09:02 AM UTC-5, Scott55 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 5, 2019 at 3:03:15 PM UTC-5, Louis Epstein wrote:
The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while
Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and >> > langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitley branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
The quick answer is, Yes, they should be differenced in some way.
Changing the motto and/or crest is not enough. there has to a
noticeable difference in the shield.
BTW, what happened to alt.talk.royalty ? Who "owns" it and how can the
situation be fixed?
It's a Usenet group. Usenet is a very old system that predates the term "internet." Since owning things on the internet is a mid-90s thing,
nobody owns a Usenet group.
Thus modern features like no anti-spam protection do not exist, which
means it's very difficult to figure out a way to get people to post here
like they did in 1999.
Nick
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while
Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitney branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
BTW, what happened to alt.talk.royalty ? Who "owns" it and how can the
situation be fixed?
It's a Usenet group. Usenet is a very old system that predates the term "internet." Since owning things on the internet is a mid-90s thing,
nobody owns a Usenet group.
Technically "alt" groups are the less regulated alternatives to
"Usenet" proper,within Netnews.
Newsgroups are designed to be shared by the entire Internet
rather than be a particular site to which all must go to find them.
The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while
Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitney branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
On 05/03/2019 8:03 pm, Louis Epstein wrote:
The Viscounts Allendale and their cousin the late life peer
Baron Beaumont of Whitley are given the exact same blazon in
Debrett's and Burke's...same arms
Gules,a lion rampant or,between eight crescents in orle of the second
and crest
A Bull's Head erased quarterly argent and gules charged with a Mullet
sable
but different motto and supporters (and of course coronet).
There is a tiny difference in each Peerage that is not replicated in
the other (Burke's omits the comma after Gules for Allendale while
Debrett's says "eights" instead of "eight" crescents) and is likely
a typo (I have perhaps not replicated every capitalization).
Wikipedia uses the same illustration for them and their
common ancestor Thomas Wentworth Beaumont and for the progenitor
and the viscounts quotes the blazon as "Gules,a lion rampant or armed and
langued azure an orle of eight crescents of the second" but
uses the above text for Beaumont of Whitley.
Does there not need to be some visible difference on the
shield?
The lion rampant or,and the pattern of what surrounds it,
are common with the Beaumont baronets (akin to the ancient Barons
Beaumont now represented by the Duke of Norfolk),
their shield being azure and the surroundings fleurs-de-lis;
but the Allendale/Whitney branches ought to be more distinct
from each other,I would expect.
What authority supervises their heraldry?
If it is Lyon, then you are right and on application, the appropriate
person would discover suitable differences. This duty is in the Act of Parliament setting up the Lyon Court.
But if it is The College of Arms, there is no such duty of including differences in their principal statutes (whatever they might be). Interestingly these days the grants of new arms include a clause about including differences, but that was not the practice 100 years ago.
If it almost any other country, there are no requirements for anything,
not even differences.
My guess is that the College of Arms has some supervisory position for
these peerages and they might not be bothered.
What rules of the game have you found to justify your assertion for the
need for differences?
BTW, what happened to alt.talk.royalty ? Who "owns" it and how can the
situation be fixed?
It's a Usenet group. Usenet is a very old system that predates the term
"internet." Since owning things on the internet is a mid-90s thing,
nobody owns a Usenet group.
Technically "alt" groups are the less regulated alternatives to
"Usenet" proper,within Netnews.
Newsgroups are designed to be shared by the entire Internet
rather than be a particular site to which all must go to find them.
As I remember, the heyday of rec.heraldry was official over when it was
hit with a "sporge flood" that rendered it useless. how did it
eventually recover from this vandalism?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 63:18:03 |
| Calls: | 6,654 |
| Files: | 12,200 |
| Messages: | 5,331,697 |