Talk:Abatement (heraldry)

	Heraldry portal Abatement (heraldry) is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles
	This was a selected article on the Heraldry and Vexillology Portal for December 2012.

Untitled[edit]

Any information on the abated Scottish adulterer? —Ashley Y 12:47, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

No, he probably didn't exist in the first place. Shinobu (talk) 14:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify me[edit]

Is the displaying of a shield "an abatement proper? or just a dishonourable display of the unaltered shield?"

According to Charles Boutell abatement is any sign of degradation. It seems that if they were displaying the shield upside down to dishonor the traiter that this would be a clear abatement.

Boutell, Charles (1864), Heraldry, historical and popular, With 975 Illustrations (3rd ed.), Richard Bentley, p. 77, Abatement: - any sign of degradation {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help) Kthapelo (talk) 13:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that Leigh (writing in 1562) enumerated the supposed "nine abatements" that Woodcock copied into the Oxford Guide to Heraldry (1988), listing reversal of the entire escutcheon as the ninth (and by far most serious) abatement, prescribed for high treason. Fox-Davies pointed out that not only was this an abatement, but it is the only one reliably and repeatedly attested to have actually been carried out. The others involving stains, all modern authorities seem to agree, existed only in theory. I have updated and expanded the article to reflect this. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 19:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement with Bend page[edit]

After trying to find some information on abatements, it seems that this article directly contradicts that of the Bend article in regards to bend sinister.

In this article it is said that it is a common misconception that bend sinister denotes illegitimacy. In the Bend article it is listed as exactly that and gives reference to an example. Which is correct? - 58.166.89.162 (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the material about bends sinister, which was poorly-sourced, and added better sources to Bend (heraldry) § Bend sinister. See also Talk:Bend (heraldry). —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]