part thereof. This happens with the bordure when it is a part of the original coat of arms. If, however, the chief were in existence at an earlier period and the bordure is added later as a mark of difference, the bordure surrounds the chief. On the other hand, if a bordure exists, even as a mark of difference, and a chief of augmentation is subsequently added, or a canton for distinction, the chief or the canton in these cases would surmount the bordure.
Similarly a bend when added later as a mark of difference surmounts the chief. Such a case is very unusual, as the use of the bend for differencing has long been obsolete.
 Fig. 203.—Chief dovetailed. |
 Fig. 204.—Arms of Peter de Dreux, Earl of Richmond (c. 1230): Chequy or and azure, a quarter ermine. (From his seal.) |
 Fig. 205.—Arms of De Vere, Earls of Oxford: Quarterly gules and or, in the first quarter a mullet argent. |
A chief is never couped or cottised, and it has no diminutive in British armory.
THE QUARTER
The quarter is not often met with in English armory, the best-known instance being the well-known coat of Shirley, Earl Ferrers, viz: Paly of six or and azure, a quarter ermine. The arms of the Earls of Richmond (Fig. 204) supply another instance. Of course as a division of the field under the blazon of "quarterly" (e.g. or and azure) it is constantly to be met with, but a single quarter is rare.
Originally a single quarter was drawn to contain the full fourth part of the shield, but with the more modern tendency to reduce the size of all charges, its area has been somewhat diminished. Whilst a quarter will only be found within a plain partition line, a field divided quarterly (occasionally, but I think hardly so correctly, termed "per cross") is not so limited. Examples of quarterly fields will be found in the historic shield of De Vere (Fig. 205) and De Mandeville. An irregular partition line is often introduced in a new grant to conjoin quarterings
