Coat Of Arms Question?

[Domehead]

I didn't state my thought very well. You are correct re: the inheritance of, or transfer of, a crest as "entity" in Scottish Heraldry being as precise as matriculation. In fact, originally escutcheon, crests and estates were all inherited separately. The distinction in Scotland's historic approach to the nature of the crests I was speaking to rests in the character of the crest, itself. A peer may inherit more than one escutcheon through heiress or co-heir-general. Then move to marshal the ordinaries upon a single escutcheon with appropriate cadency. However, in Scotland, it is observed that you have one head, therefore one Helmet, therefore one spot for a single crest.

As opposed to German Heraldry, which has specific requirements for cadency of crests that involve horns. Cadency of crests is not observed in Scotland. England has instances, however rare, of two crests included in full armorial. Where Scotland becomes "less" stringent is the character with which the crest is animated. Branch families, Cadets or Septs (I recognize the dubious nature of this term) of original peerage or prominent Houses have often changed the crest while retaining the escutcheon. The Stewart / Stuart family is a fine example.

Excluding the Royal house, the family Stewart / Stuart has multitude crests blazoned in the General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, Bernard Burke, 1884. Each may be transferred to clansmen respectful of the branch they claim fealty. Each may be inherited from an heiress in the most traditional form. But the premise escutcheon for 95% of the name, beginning with the C12th High Stewards of Scotland Stewart, Steuart or Stuart, is "Or, a fess chequy argent and azure..." then cadenced accordingly, or marshaled & rematriculated and approved by the Lord Lyon. Scotland believes Arms belong to the individual, not the "family". Hence the strict specificity required for inheritance, transmittal, cadency, matriculation and rematriculation of the escutcheon. This same exacting standard is not applied to Scotland's crests.

"In Scotland crests have always had a very much less important position than in England. There has been little if any continuity with regard to them, and instances of changes for which caprice would appear to be the only reason are met with in the cases of a large proportion of the chief families in that kingdom. To such a widespread extent has the permissive character been allowed to the crest, that many cases will be found in which each successive matriculation for the head of the house, or for a cadet, has produced a change in the crest, and instances are to be found where the different crests are the only existing differences in the achievements of a number of cadets of the same family. At the present time, little if any objection is ever made to an entire and radical change in the crest--if this is wished at the time of a rematriculation--and as far as I can gather such changes appear to have always been permitted." Ch.21, A Complete Guide to Heraldry, Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, 1909

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

"In Scotland crests have always had a very much less important position than in England. There has been little if any continuity with regard to them, and instances of changes for which caprice would appear to be the only reason are met with in the cases of a large proportion of the chief families in that kingdom. To such a widespread extent has the permissive character been allowed to the crest, that many cases will be found in which each successive matriculation for the head of the house, or for a cadet, has produced a change in the crest, and instances are to be found where the different crests are the only existing differences in the achievements of a number of cadets of the same family. At the present time, little if any objection is ever made to an entire and radical change in the crest--if this is wished at the time of a rematriculation--and as far as I can gather such changes appear to have always been permitted." Ch.21, A Complete Guide to Heraldry, Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, 1909

When quoting Fox-Davies it should be remembered that, despite all of his writings on the subject, he was never a herald.

In Scotland crests assume the status of transmissible badges (hence their use within a strap and buckle by retainers and followers) which explains why various branches of the same family will have dissimilar crests.

[Domehead]

Yes, Sir. That is why I used the word "transferred". Perhaps I meant transmitted.

JSFMACLJR's follow up query re'd: how crests do not follow the exacting standards of Scottish Heraldry required for matriculation / rematriculation, marshaling & cadency.
I was showing objective sources on the subject, of considerable age (inc: Burke 1884 & Parker 1894) which explain and display the answer you describe.

Slainte,
Domehead

[Mike_Oettle]

To clarify a bit with regard to crests: while the head of a new branch of a family or clan will usually adopt a new crest, and a matriculant may request a new crest when Lord Lyon acknowledges his differenced arms, many armigers do not take up a new crest, and continue to bear the same crest as their father or grandfather.
Consequently several armigers in the same family will often have the same crest.
This is not to be confused with the concept of a clan badge, where a member wears a metal representation of his chief’s crest on his bonnet. The wearer of such a badge may or may not be an armiger. But an armiger will usually have a badge made of his own crest.
In a badge of this kind, the crest appears on a circular device that is clearly not a strap and buckle. The strap and buckle invariably appear where the crest of a chief or chieftain is worn by a follower.
It has often happened that the College of Arms has required that a crest bear a cadency mark or some other mark of difference, but this is not usual in Scotland.
Regards,
Mike

[SlackerDrummer]

When quoting Fox-Davies it should be remembered that,...

...he was English.