The Curiosities of Heraldry
by Mark Antony Lower · English · Gutenberg #38951 · 548,475 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Curiosities of Heraldry
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Curiosities of Heraldry
Author: Mark Antony Lower
Release date: February 22, 2012 [eBook #38951]
Most recently updated: January 8, 2021
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38951
Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE CURIOSITIES OF HERALDRY ***
Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive.)
THE
CURIOSITIES OF HERALDRY.
WITH
Illustrations from Old English Writers.
BY
MARK ANTONY LOWER,
AUTHOR OF "ENGLISH SURNAMES," ETC.
WITH NUMEROUS WOOD ENGRAVINGS,
From Designs by the Author.
LONDON:
JOHN RUSSELL SMITH,
4, OLD COMPTON STREET, SOHO.
MDCCCXLV.
C. AND J. ADLARD, PRINTERS, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE.
PREFACE.
[Illustration]
Little need be said to the lover of antiquity in commendation of the
subject of this volume; and I take it for granted that every one who reads
the history of the Middle Ages in a right spirit will readily acknowledge
that Heraldry, as a system, is by no means so contemptible a thing as the
mere utilitarian considers it to be. Yet, notwithstanding, how few are
there who have even a partial acquaintance with its principles. To how
many, even of those who find pleasure in archaeological pursuits, does the
charge apply:
"--_neque enim clypei caelamina norit_."
Two hundred years ago, when the study of armory was much more cultivated
than at present, this general ignorance of our 'noble science' called
forth the censure of its admirers. Master Ri. Brathwait, lamenting it,
says of some of his contemporaries:
"They weare theire grandsire's signet on their thumb,
Yet aske them whence their crest is, they are _mum_;"
and adds:
"Who weare gay _coats_, but can no _coat_ deblaze,
Display'd for _gulls_, may bear _gules_ in their face!"[1]
This invective is perhaps a little too severe, yet it is mildness itself
when compared with that of Ranulphus Holme, son of the author of the
'Academy of Armory,' who declares that unless the reader assents to what
is contained in his father's book he is
"neither Art's nor Learning's friend,
But an ignorant, empty, brainless sot,
Whose chiefest study is the _can_ and _pot_!"
Now, though I would by no means place the objector to Heraldry upon the
same bench with the devotee of Bacchus, nor even upon the stool of the
dunce, yet I hope to make it appear that the study is worthy of more
attention than is generally conceded to it.[2] At the same time I wish it
to be distinctly understood that I do not over-rate its importance. "The
benefit arising from different pursuits will differ, of course, in
degree, but nothing that exercises the intellect can be useless, and in
this spirit it may be possible to study even conchology without
degradation."
Many persons regard arms as nothing more than a set of uncouth and
unintelligible emblems by which families are distinguished from one
another; the language by which they are described as an antiquated
"jargon;" and both as little worthy of an hour's examination as astrology,
alchemy or palmistry. This is a mistake; and such individuals are guilty,
however unintentionally, of a great injustice to a lordly, poetical, and
useful science.
That Heraldry is a _lordly_ science none will deny; that it is also a
_poetical_ science I shall shortly attempt to prove; but there are some
sour spirits who know not how to dissever the idea of lordliness from that
of tyranny, and who "thank the gods for not having made them poetical."
These, therefore, will be no recommendations of our subject to _such_
readers; but should I be able to show that it is a _useful_ science, what
objections can those cavillers then raise?
I purpose to give a short dissertation on the utility of Heraldry, but
first let me say a few words on the _poetry_ of the subject. Do not the
'Lion of England,' the 'Red-Cross Banner,' the 'White and Red Roses,' the
'Shamrock of Ireland,' and 'Scotia's barbed Thistle' occupy a place in the
breast of every patriot? and what are they but highly poetical
expressions? Do not the poetry of Chaucer and Spenser and Shakspeare, not
to mention our old heroic ballads and the pleasant legends of a Scott,
abound with heraldrical allusions? Tasso is minute, though inaccurate, in
the description of the banners of his Christian heroes; he was far from
despising blazon as a poetical accessory. And, lastly, see how nobly the
stately Drayton makes the 'jargon' of Heraldry chime in with his glorious
numbers:
"Upon his surcoat valiant _Neville_ bore
A SILVER SALTIRE upon martial red;
A LADIE'S SLEEVE high-spirited _Hastings_ wore;
_Ferrers_ his tabard with rich VAIRY spred,
Well known in many a warlike match before;
A RAVEN sate on _Corbet's_ armed head;
And _Culpeper_ in SILVER ARMS enrailed
Bore thereupon a BLOODIE BEND ENGRAILED;
The noble _Percie_ in that dreadful day
With a BRIGHT CRESCENT in his guidhomme came;
In his WHITE CORNET _Verdon_ doth display
A FRET OF GULES," &c.
_Barons' War_, B. 1, 22, 23.
I now proceed to show that Heraldry is a _useful_ science. It has already
been said that nothing which calls into exercise the intellectual powers
can be useless. But it may be said that there is an abundance of studies
calculated more profitably to exercise them. Granted: but it should be
remembered that, as there is a great diversity of tastes, so there is a
great disparity in the mental capacities of mankind. Heraldry may
therefore be recommended as a study to those who are not qualified to
grasp more profound subjects, and as a source of amusement to those who
wish to relieve their minds in the intervals of graver and more important
pursuits. To either class a very brief study will give an insight into the
theory of heraldry, and a competent knowledge of the terms it employs.
The nomenclature of Heraldry is somewhat repulsive to those who casually
look into a treatise on the subject, and often deters even the
unprejudiced from entering upon the study; but what science is there that
is not in a greater or less degree liable to the same objection?
A recent writer observes: "The language of Heraldry is occasionally
barbarous in sound and appearance, but it is always peculiarly expressive;
and a practice which involves habitual conciseness and precision in their
utmost attainable degree, and in which tautology is viewed as fatally
detrimental, may insensibly benefit the student on other more important
occasions."[3]
But Heraldry is useful on higher grounds than these, and particularly as
an aid to the right understanding of that important period of the history
of Christendom, the reign of feudalism. An eminent French writer, Victor
Hugo, declares that "for him who can decipher it, Heraldry is an
_algebra_, _a language_. The whole history of the second half of the
middle ages is written in blazon, as that of the preceding period is in
the symbolism of the Roman church." To the student of history, then,
Heraldry is far from useless.
The sculptured stone or the emblazoned shield often speaks when the
written records of history are silent. A grotesque carving of coat or
badge in the spandrel of some old church-door, or over the portal of a
decayed mansion, often points out the stock of the otherwise forgotten
patron or lord. "A dim-looking pane in an oriel window, or a discoloured
coat in the dexter corner of an old Holbein may give not only the name of
the benefactor or the portrait, but also identify him personally by
showing his relation to the head of the house, his connexions and
alliances."[4] The antiquary and the local historian, then, possess in
Heraldry a valuable key to many a secret of other times.
To the genealogist a knowledge of Heraldry is indispensable. Coats of arms
in church windows, on the walls, upon tombs, and especially on seals, are
documents of great value. Many persons of the same name can now only be
classed with their proper families by an inspection of the arms they bore.
In Wales, where the number of surnames is very limited, families are much
better recognized by their arms than by their names.[5]
The painter, in representing the gaudy scenes of the courts and camps of
other days, can by no means dispense with a knowledge of our science; and
the architect who should attempt to raise some stately Gothic fane,
omitting the well-carved shield, the heraldric corbel, and the blazoned
grandeur of
"rich windows that exclude the light,"
would inevitably fail to impart to his work one of the greatest charms
possessed by that noblest of all styles of building, and produce a meagre,
soulless, abortion! Heraldry is, then, in the eyes of every man of any
pretensions to taste, a useful, because an indispensable, science.
Now for an argument far stronger than all: Heraldry has been known to
further the ends of _justice_. "I know three families," says Garter
Bigland, "who have acquired estates by virtue of preserving the arms and
escutcheons of their ancestors." I repeat, therefore, without the fear of
contradiction, that Heraldry is a _useful_ science. Q. E. D.
* * * * *
With respect to the sheets now submitted to the reader a few observations
may be necessary. In the first place, I wish it to be understood that I
have avoided, as much as possible, the technicalities of blazon: it was
not my wish to supersede (even had I been competent to do so) the various
excellent treatises on the subject already extant. The sole motive I
entertained in writing this volume was a desire to render the science of
Heraldry more intelligible to the general reader, and to present it in
aspects more interesting and attractive than those writers can possibly
do who treat of blazon merely as an art, and to make him acquainted with
its origin and progress by means of brief historical and biographical
sketches, and by inquiries into the derivation and meaning of armorial
figures. In such an antient and well-explored field there has been but
little scope for original discovery; but if I have succeeded in
concentrating, and placing in a somewhat new light, old and well-known
truths, my labour has not been lost, and my wish to render popular a
too-much neglected study has been in some measure realized.
The references at the foot of nearly every page render acknowledgments to
the authors whose works I have consulted almost unnecessary. It is,
however, but justice to confess my obligations to Dallaway and Montagu for
the general subject, to Noble for the notices of the heralds, and to Moule
for the bibliography. For the illustrations and extracts I am principally
indebted to the Boke of St. Albans, Leigh, Bossewell, Ferne, Guillim,
Morgan, Randle Holme, and nearly all the writers of the antient school;
whose works are rarely met with in an ordinary course of reading. From all
these, both antient and modern, it has been my aim to select such points
as appeared likely to interest both those who have some acquaintance with
the subject and those who are confessedly ignorant of it.
Besides the authors of acknowledged reputation named above, I have
consulted many others of comparatively little importance and value,
convinced with Pliny, "nullum esse librum tam malum ut non aliqua parte
posset prodesse." Should a small proportion only of the reading public
peruse my 'Curiosities of Heraldry' on the same principle, I shall not
want readers!
My thanks are due to William Courthope, Esq. Rouge-Croix pursuivant of
arms, for several obliging communications from the records of the Heralds'
Office, as well as for the great courtesy and promptitude with which he
has invariably attended to every request I have had occasion to make
during the progress of the work.
For the notice of the interesting relic discovered at Lewes (Appendix E),
I am indebted to the kindness of W. H. Blaauw, Esq., M.A., author of the
'Barons' War,' some remarks from whom on the subject were read at the late
meeting of the Archaeological Association at Canterbury, where the relic
itself was exhibited.
The reader is requested to view the simple designs which illustrate these
pages with all the candour with which an amateur draughtsman is usually
indulged. Every fault they exhibit belongs only to myself, not to Mr.
Vasey, the engraver, who, unlike Sir John Ferne's artist,[6] must be
acknowledged to have "done _his_ duety" in a very creditable manner.
It is not unlikely that I may be called upon to justify the orthography of
several words of frequent occurrence in this work. I will therefore
anticipate criticism by a remark or two, premising that I am too
thoroughly imbued with the spirit of antiquarianism to make innovations
without good and sufficient reason. The words to which I allude are
_antient_, _lyon_, _escocheon_, and, particularly, _heraldric_. The first
three cannot be regarded as innovations, as they were in use centuries
ago. For 'an_t_ient,' apology is scarcely necessary, as many standard
writers have used it; and it must be admitted to be quite as much like the
low Latin _antianus_ as _ancient_ is. 'Lyon' looks _picturesque_, and
seems to be in better keeping with the form in which the monarch of the
forest is pourtrayed in heraldry than the modern spelling: an antiquarian
predilection is all that I can urge in its defence. I would never employ
it except in heraldry. 'Escocheon' is used by many modern writers on
heraldry in preference to _escutcheon_, not only as a more elegant
orthography, but as a closer approximation to the French _ecusson_, from
which it is derived.
For 'HERALDRIC' more lengthened arguments may be deemed necessary, as I am
not aware that it occurs in any English dictionary. This adjective is
_almost_ invariably spelt without the R--heraldic; and that orthography,
though sometimes correct, is still oftener false. I contend that two
spellings are necessary, because _two totally different words_ are
required in different senses,--to wit,
I. Heraldic, belonging to a herald; and
II. Heraldric, belonging to heraldry.
I will illustrate the distinction by an example or two.
(I) "The office of Garter is the 'ne plus ultra' of _heraldic_ ambition,"
i. e., it is the height of the herald's ambition ultimately to arrive at
that honour. The word here has no relation whatever to proficiency in the
science of coat-armour or heraldry, since it is possible that a herald or
pursuivant may entertain the desire of gaining the post, _causa honoris_,
without any particular predilection for the study. Again,
"Queen Elizabeth was a staunch defender of _heraldic_ prerogatives;" in
other words, she defended the rights and privileges of her _officers_ of
arms; not the prerogatives of _coats_ of arms, for to what prerogatives
can painted ensigns lay claim?
(II) "A. B. is engaged in _heraldric_ pursuits;" that is, in the study of
armorial bearings; not in the pursuits of a herald, which consist in the
proclamation of peace or war, the attendance on state ceremonials, the
_granting_ of arms, &c. To say that A. B., who has no official connexion
with the College of Arms, is a herald, would be an obvious misnomer,
although he may be quite equal in _heraldrical_ skill to any gentleman of
the tabard.
"The so-called arms of the town of Guildford have nothing _heraldric_
about them," that is, they are not framed in accordance with the laws of
blazon. To say that they are not _heraldic_, would be to say that they do
not declare war, attend coronations, wear a tabard, or perform any of the
functions of a herald--a gross absurdity.
A literary friend, who objects to my reasoning, thinks that the _one
word_, _heraldic_, answers every purpose for both applications. That it
has done so, heretofore, is not certainly a reason why it should after the
distinction has been pointed out. Besides, my doctrine is not unsupported
by analogy. We have a case precisely parallel in the words _monarchal_ and
_monarchical_; and he who would charge me with innovation must, to be
consistent with himself, expunge _monarchical_ from his dictionary as a
useless word.
LEWES; DEC. 1844.
Contents.
CHAP. PAGE
I. THE FABULOUS HISTORY OF HERALDRY 1
II. THE AUTHENTIC HISTORY OF HERALDRY 15
III. RATIONALE OF THE FIGURES EMPLOYED IN HERALDRY 49
IV. THE CHIMERICAL FIGURES OF HERALDRY 89
V. THE LANGUAGE OF ARMS 105
VI. ALLUSIVE ARMS--ARMES PARLANTES 119
VII. CRESTS, SUPPORTERS, BADGES, etc. 133
VIII. HERALDRIC MOTTOES 151
IX. HISTORICAL ARMS--AUGMENTATIONS 161
X. DISTINCTIONS OF RANK AND HONOUR 197
XI. HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE COLLEGE OF ARMS 219
XII. BRIEF NOTICES OF DISTINGUISHED HERALDS AND HERALDRIC
WRITERS, WITH QUOTATIONS FROM THEIR WORKS 245
XIII. GENEALOGY 281
Appendix.
A. ON DIFFERENCES IN ARMS, NOW FIRST PRINTED FROM A MS. BY
SIR EDWARD DERING, BART. 297
B. THE ANTIENT PRACTICE OF BORROWING ARMORIAL ENSIGNS
ILLUSTRATED FROM THE ARMS OF CORNISH FAMILIES 309
C. ABATEMENTS 313
D. GRANT OF ARMS TEMP. EDW. III. 315
E. NOTICE OF AN ANTIENT STEELYARD WEIGHT DISCOVERED AT LEWES 317
ERRATA.
Page 15, line 6, _for_ pays? _read_ pays!
20, -- 15, for _preterea_ read _praeterea_.
The distinction between the _supports_ and _tenans_ of French heraldry
made at page 144 is erroneous. The true distinction is that human figures
and angels, when employed to support the shield, are called _tenans_,
while quadrupeds, fishes, or birds engaged in the same duty are styled
_supports_.
THE CURIOSITIES OF HERALDRY.
CHAPTER I.
Fabulous History of Heraldry.
[Illustration]
"You had a maister that hath fetched the beginning of Gentry from
Adam, and of Knighthood from Olybion."
_Ferne's Blazon of Gentrie._
"Gardons nous de meler le douteux an certain, et le chimerique avec le
vrai."
_Voltaire, Essai sur les Moeurs._
Antiquity has, in a greater or less degree, charms for all; and it is
supposed to stamp such a value on things as nothing else can confer. This
feeling, unexceptionable in itself, is liable to great abuse; especially
in relation to historical matters. In States and in Families, Antiquity
implies greatness, strength, and those other attributes which command
veneration and respect. Hence the first historians of nations have
uniformly endeavoured to carry up their annals to periods far beyond the
limits of probability, thus rendering the earlier portions of their works
a tissue of absurdity deduced from the misty regions of tradition,
conjecture, and song.[7]
This reverence for antiquity has extended itself to genealogists, and to
those who have recorded the history of sciences and inventions. Thus has
it been with the earliest writers on =Heraldry=, a system totally unknown
till within the last thousand years; but which in the fancies of its
zealous admirers has been presumed to have existed, not merely in the
first ages of the world, but at a period
"Ere Nature was, or Adam's dust
Was fashioned to a man!"
We are gravely assured by a writer of the fifteenth century that heraldric
ensigns were primarily borne by the 'hierarchy of the skies,' "_At
hevyn_," says the author of the Boke of St. Albans, "_I will begin_; where
were V orderis of aungelis, and now stand but IV, in _cote armoris_ of
knawlege, encrowned ful hye with precious stones, where Lucifer with
mylionys of aungelis, owt of hevyn fell into hell and odyr places, and
ben holdyn ther in bondage; and all [the remaining angels] were erected in
hevyn of gentill nature!"
Thus, in one short sentence, the origin both of nobility and of its
external symbols is summarily disposed of. When _proofs_ are not to be
adduced, how can we regret that it is no longer?
But to descend a little lower, let us quote again the poetical language of
this indisputable authority: "Adam, the begynnyng of mankind, was as a
stocke unsprayed and unfloreshed,"--having neither boughs nor leaves--"and
in the braunches is knowledge wich is rotun and wich is grene;" that is,
if I rightly understand it, (for poetry is not always quite intelligible,)
both the gentle and the ungentle, the earl and the churl, are descended
from one progenitor; _omnes communem parentem habent_; a truth which, it
is presumed, will not be called in question.
The _gentility_ of the great ancestor of our race is stoutly contended
for, and, that his claim to that distinction might not want support,
Morgan, an enthusiastic armorist of the seventeenth century, has assigned
him _two coats of arms_; one as borne in Eden--when he neither used nor
needed either _coat_ for covering or _arms_ for defence--and another
suited to his condition after the fall. The first was a plain red shield,
described in the language of modern heraldry as 'gules,' while the arms of
Eve, a shield of white, or 'argent,' were borne upon it as an 'escocheon
of pretence,' she being _an heiress_! The arms of Abel were, as a matter
of course, those of his father and mother borne 'quarterly,' and ensigned
with a crosier, like that of a bishop, to show that he was a
'shepheard'[8]
Sir John Ferne, a man of real erudition, was so far carried away by
extravagant notions of the great antiquity of heraldric insignia, as
seriously to deduce the use of furs in heraldry from the 'coats of skins'
which the Creator made for Adam and Eve after their transgression. This,
independently of its absurdity, is an unfortunate idea; for coats of arms
are as certainly marks of honour as these were badges of disgrace; and as
Morgan says, 'innocens was Adam's best gentility.'[9] The second coat of
Adam, says this writer, was '_paly tranche_, divided every way and
tinctured of every colour.' Cain, also, after _his_ fall, changed his
armorials "by ingrailing and _indented_ lines--to show, as the preacher
saith, There is a generation whose _teeth_ are as swords, and their
jaw-_teeth_ as knives to devour the poor from the earth." He was the
first, it is added, who desired to have his arms changed--'So God set a
mark upon him!'[10]
This ante-diluvian heraldry is expatiated upon by our author in a manner
far too prolix for us to follow him through all his grave statements and
learned proofs. I shall therefore only observe, _en passant_, that arms
are assigned to the following personages, viz.: Jabal, the inventor of
tents, _Vert, a tent argent_, (a white tent in a green field!) Jubal, the
primeval musician, _Azure, a harp, or, on a chief argent three rests
gules_;[11] Tubal-Cain, _Sable, a hammer argent, crowned or_, and Naamah,
his sister, the inventress of weaving, _In a lozenge gules, a carding-comb
argent_.
Noah, according to the Boke of St. Albans, "came a _gentilman_ by kynde
... and had iij sonnys begetyn by kinde ... yet in theys iij sonnys
gentilness and ungentilnes was fownde." The sin of Ham degraded him to the
condition of a churl; and upon the partition of the world between the
three brethren Noah pronounced a malediction against him. "Wycked
kaytiff," says he, "I give to thee the north parte of the worlde to draw
thyne habitacion, for ther schall it be, where sorow and care, cold and
myschef, as a churle thou shalt live in the thirde parte of the worlde
wich shall be calde Europe, that is to say, _the contre of churlys_!"
"Japeth," he continues, "cum heder my sonne, thou shalt have my blessing
dere.... I make the a gentilman of the west parte of the world and of
Asia, that is to say, _the contre of gentilmen_." He then in like manner
creates Sem a gentleman, and gives him Africa, or "_the contre of
tempurnes_."[12]
"Of the offspryng of the gentleman Japheth come Habraham, Moyses, Aron,
and the profettys, and also the kyng of the right lyne of Mary, of whom
that gentilman Jhesus ... kyng of the londe of Jude and of Jues, gentilman
by his modre Mary prynce[ss] of cote-armure!"... "Jafet made the first
target and therin he made a ball in token of all the worlde."
Morgan's researches do not seem to have furnished him with the arms of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but those of the twelve patriarchs are given by
him and others. Joseph's "coat of many colours," Morgan, by a strange
oversight, makes to consist of two tinctures only, viz. black, chequered
with white--in the language of heraldry, _chequy sable and argent_,--to
denote the lights and shadows of his history.
The pathetic predictions and benedictions pronounced by the dying
patriarch Jacob to his sons, furnished our old writers with one of their
best pretences for giving coat-armour to persons in those remote ages. The
standards ordered to be set up around the Israelitish camp in the
desert[13] are likewise adduced in support of the notion that regular
heraldry was then known. The arms of the twelve tribes are given by Morgan
in the following hobbling verses:[14]
"Judah bare Gules, a lion[15] couchant or;
Zebulon's black Ship's[16] like to a man of war;
Issachar's asse[17] between two burthens girt;
As Dan's[18] sly snake lies in a field of vert;
Asher with _Azure_ a Cup[19] of gold sustains;
And Nephtali's Hind[20] trips o'er the flow'ry plains;
Ephraim's strong Ox lyes with the couchant Hart;
Manasseh's Tree its branches doth impart;
Benjamin's Wolfe in the field gules resides;
Reuben's field argent and blew bars wav'd glides;
Simeon doth beare his Sword; and in that manner
Gad, having pitched his Tent, sets up his Banner."
The same authority gives as the arms of Moses a _cross_, because he
preferred "taking up the cross," and suffering the lot of his brethren to
a life of pleasure and dignity in the court of Pharaoh. The 'parfight
armory of Duke Joshua,' given by Leigh, is _Partie bendy sinister, or and
gules, a backe displayed sable_. The arms of Gideon were _Sable, a fleece
argent, a chief azure gutte d'eau_,[21] evidently a 'composition' from the
miracle recorded in the Book of Judges. To Samson is ascribed, _Gules, a
lion couchant or, within an orle argent, semee of bees sable_, an equally
evident allusion to a passage in the bearer's history. David, as a matter
of course, bore _a golden harp in a field azure_.[22]
But it is not alone to the worthies of sacred history that these
honourable insignia are ascribed--the heroes of classical story, too, had
their 'atchievements,' Hector of Troy, for example, bore, _Sable, ij lyons
combatand or_.[23] Here again our great authority, Dame Julyan
Berners,[24] may be cited. "Two thousand yere and xxiiij," says she,
"before thyncarnation of Christe, =Cote-Armure= was made and figurid at
the sege of Troye, where in gestis troianorum it tellith that the first
begynnyng of the lawe of armys was; the which was effygured and begunne
before any lawe in the world bot the lawe of nature, and before the X
commaundementis of God."
I have been favoured with the following curious extract from a MS. at the
College of Arms,[25] which also refers the origin of arms to the siege of
Troy. I believe it has never been printed.
"=What Armes be, and where they were firste invented.= As kinges of Armes
record, the begynynge of armes was fyrste founded at the great sege of
Troye w{th}in the Cytie and w{th}out, for the doughtines of deades don on
bothe partyes and for so mouche as thier were soo many valliaunt knights
on bothe sydes w{ch} did soo great acts of Armes, and none of them myght
be knowen from other, the great Lords on both p'ties by thier dyscreate
advice assembled together and accorded that every man that did a great
acte of armes shoulde bere upon him a marke in token of his doutye deades,
that the pepoell myght have the bet{r} knowledge of him, and if it were
soo that suche a man had any chylderen, it was ordeyned that they should
also bere the same marke that their father did w{th} dyvers differences,
that ys to saye, Theldeste as his father did w{th} a labell, the secounde
w{th} a cressente, the third w{th} a molett, the fourth a marlet, the
v{th} an annellet, the vj{th} a flewer delisse. And if there be anye more
than sixe the rest to bere suche differences as lyketh the herauld to geve
them. And when the said seige was ended y{e} lordes went fourth into
dyvers landes to seke there adventures, and into England came Brute and
[his] knights w{th} there markes and inhabited the land; and after,
because the name of MERKES was rewde, they terned the same into ARMES, for
as mouche _as that name was far fayerer_, and becausse that markes were
gotten through myght of armes of men."
The humour of Alexander the Great must have been somewhat of the
quaintest when he assumed the arms ascribed to him by Master Gerard Leigh,
to wit, _Gules a_ GOLDEN LYON SITTING IN A CHAYER and holding _a
battayle-axe of silver_.[26] The 'atchievement' of Caesar was, if we may
trust the same learned armorist, _Or, an eagle displayed with two heads
sable_.[27]
Arms are also assigned to King Arthur, Charlemagne, Sir Guy of Warwick,
and other heroes, who, though belonging to much more recent periods, still
flourished long before the existence of the heraldric system, and never
dreamed of such honours.
That these pretended armorials were the mere figments of the writers who
record them, no one doubts. In these ingenious falsehoods we recognize a
principle similar to that which produced the 'pious frauds' of
enthusiastic churchmen, and to that which led self-duped alchemists to
deceive others. In their zeal for the antiquity of arms--a zeal of so
glowing a character that no one who has not read their works can estimate
it--they imagined that they must have existed from the beginning of the
world. Then, throwing the reins upon the neck of their fancy, they
ascribed to almost every celebrated personage of the earliest ages, the
ensigns they deemed the most appropriate to his character and pursuits.
The feeling inducing such a procedure originated in a mistake as to the
antiquity of chivalry, of which heraldry was part and parcel. Feelings
unknown before the existence of this institution are attributed to the
heroes of antiquity. '_Duke_ Joshua' is presumed to have been only another
Duke William of Normandy, influenced in war by similar motives and
surrounded by the same social circumstances in time of peace. Chaucer
talks of classical heroes as if they were knights of some modern order;
and Lydgate, in his =Troy Boke= invests the heroes of the Iliad with the
costume of his own times, carrying emblazoned shields and fighting under
feudal banners:
"=And to behold in the knights shields
The fell beastes.
"Where that he saw,
In the shields hanging on the hookes,
The beasts rage.
"The which beastes as the storie leres
Were wrought and bete upon their banners
Displaied brode, when they schould fight.="[28]
The fabulous history of the science might be fairly deduced to the
eleventh century, as the Saxon monarchs up to that date are all
represented to have borne arms. Yet as there are not wanting, even in our
day, those who admit the authenticity of those bearings, their claims will
be briefly referred to in the next chapter.
In justice to the credulous and inventive armorists of the 'olden tyme,'
the reader should be reminded that warriors did, in very antient times,
bear various figures upon their shields. These seem in general to have
been engraved in, rather than painted upon, the metal of which the shield
was composed. The French word _escu_ and _escussion_, the Italian _scudo_,
and the English _escocheon_, are evident derivations from the Latin
_scutum_, and the equivalent word _clypeus_ is derived from the Greek verb
[Greek: gluphein], TO ENGRAVE. But those sculptured devices were regarded
as the peculiar ensigns of one individual, who could change them at
pleasure, and did not descend hereditarily like the modern coat of arms.
A few references to the shields here alluded to may not be unacceptable.
Homer describes the shield of Agamemnon as being ornamented with the
Gorgon, his peculiar badge; and Virgil says of Aventinus,[29] the son of
Hercules--
"Post hos insignem palma per gramina currum,
Victoresque ostentat equos, satus Hercule pulchro
Pulcher Aventinus: clypeoque, _insigne paternum_,
Centum angues, cinctamq: gerit serpentibus _hydram_."
_AEneid._ vii, 655.
"Next Aventinus drives his chariot round
The Latian plains, with palms and laurels crowned;
Proud of his steeds he smokes along the field,
His father's _hydra_ fills his ample shield."
_Dryden_, vii, 908.
The Greek dramatists describe the symbols and war-cries placed upon their
shields by the seven chiefs, in their expedition against the city of
Thebes. As an example, Capaneus is represented as bearing the figure of a
giant with a blazing torch, and the motto, "_I will fire the city_!" Such
ensigns seem to have been the peculiar property of the valiant and
well-born, and so far they certainly resembled modern heraldry. Virgil,
speaking of Helenus, whose mother had been a slave, says,
"Slight were his arms--a sword and silver shield;
No _marks of honour_ charged its empty field."[30]
Several of our more recent writers, while they disclaim all belief of the
existence of armorial bearings in earlier times, still think they find
traces of these distinctions in the days of the Roman commonwealth. The
family of the Corvini are particularly cited as having hereditarily borne
a raven as their crest; but this device was, as Nisbet has shown,[31]
merely an ornament bearing allusion to the apocryphal story of an early
ancestor of that race having been assisted in combat by a bird of this
species. The _jus imaginum_ of the Romans is also adduced. In every
condition of civilized society distinctions of rank and honour are
recognized. Thus the Romans had their three classes distinguished as
_nobiles_, _novi_, and _ignobiles_. Those whose ancestors had held high
offices in the state, as Censor, Praetor, or Consul, were accounted
nobiles, and were entitled to have statues of their progenitors executed
in wood, metal, stone, or wax, and adorned with the insignia of their
several offices, and the trophies they had earned in war. These they
usually kept in presses or cabinets, and on occasions of ceremony and
solemnity exhibited before the entrances of their houses. He who had a
right to exhibit his own effigy only, was styled _novus_, and occupied the
same position with regard to the many-imaged line as the upstart of our
own times, who bedecks his newly-started equipage with an equally new coat
of arms, does to the head of an antient house with a shield of forty
quarterings. The ignobiles were not permitted to use any image, and
therefore stood upon an equality with modern plebeians, who bear no arms
but the two assigned them by the heraldry of nature.
The patricians of our day to a certain extent carry out the _jus imaginum_
of antiquity, only substituting painted canvas for sculptured marble or
modelled wax; and there is no sight better calculated to inspire respect
for dignity of station than the gallery of some antient hall hung with a
long series of family portraits; in which, as in a kind of physiognomical
pedigree, the speculative mind may also find matter of agreeable
contemplation. The _jus imaginum_ doubtless originated in the same class
of feelings that gave birth to heraldry, but there is no further connexion
or analogy between the two. It is to hereditary shields and hereditary
banners we must limit the true meaning of heraldry, and all attempts to
find these in the classical era will end in a disappointment as inevitable
as that which accompanies the endeavour to gather "grapes of thorns or
figs of thistles."
[Illustration]
CHAPTER II.
Authentic History of Heraldry.
[Illustration: (John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, temp. Hen. VI, in his
surcoat or coat of arms.)[32]]
"Vetera quae nunc sunt fuerunt olim _nova_."
"L'histoire du blazon! mais c'est l'histoire tout entiere de notre
pays!"
_Jouffroy d'Eschavannes._
Having given some illustrations of the desire of referring the heraldric
system to times of the most remote antiquity, and shown something of the
misapplication of learning to prove what was incapable of proof, let us
now leave the obscure byways of those mystifiers of truth and fabricators
of error, and emerge into the more beaten path presented to us in what may
be called the historical period, which is confined within the last eight
centuries. The history of the sciences, like that of nations, generally
has its fabulous as well as its historical periods, and this is eminently
the case with heraldry; yet in neither instance is there any exact line of
demarcation by which the former are separable from the latter. This
renders it the duty of a discriminating historian to act with the utmost
caution, lest, on the one hand, truths of a remote date should be
sacrificed because surrounded by the circumstances of fiction, and lest,
on the other, error should be too readily admitted as fact, because it
comes to us in a less questionable shape; and I trust I shall not be
deemed guilty of misappropriation if I apply to investigations like the
present, that counsel which primarily refers to things of much greater
import, namely, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."
The _germ_ of that flourishing tree which eventually ramified into all the
kingdoms of Christendom, and became one of the most striking and
picturesque features of the feudal ages, and the most gorgeous ornament of
chivalry, and which interweaves its branches into the entire framework of
mediaeval history, is doubtless to be found in the banners and ornamented
shields of the warriors of antiquity. Standards, as the necessary
distinctions of contending parties on the battle-field, must be nearly or
quite as antient as war itself; and every such mark of distinction would
readily become a national cognizance both in war and peace.[33] But it was
reserved for later ages to apply similar marks and symbols to the purpose
of distinguishing different commanders on the same side, and even after
this became general it was some time ere the hereditary transmission of
such ensigns was resorted to as a means of distinguishing families, which
in the lapse of ages--the warlike idea in which they had their origin
having vanished--has become almost the only purpose to which they are now
applied.
The standards used by the German princes in the centuries immediately
preceding the Norman Conquest, are conjectured to have given rise to
Heraldry, properly so called. Henry l'Oiseleur (the Fowler), who was
raised to the throne of the West in 920, advanced it to its next stage
when, in regulating the tournaments--which from mismanagement had too
often become scenes of blood--he ordered that all combatants should be
distinguished by a kind of mantles or livery composed of lists or narrow
pieces of stuff of opposite colours, whence originated the pale, bend,
&c.--the marks now denominated 'honourable ordinaries.'[34]
If the honour of inventing heraldry be ascribed to the Germans, that of
reducing it to a system must be assigned to France. To the French belong
"the arrangement and combination of tinctures and metals, the variety of
figures effected by the geometrical positions of lines, the attitudes of
animals, and the grotesque delineation of monsters."[35] The art of
describing an heraldric bearing in proper terms is called blasonry, from
the French verb _blasonner_, whence also we derive our word _blaze_ in the
sense of to proclaim or make known.
"The heavens themselves _blaze_ forth the death of princes." _Shak._
"But he went out and began to publish it much, and to _blaze_ abroad
the matter." _St. Mark._
"'Tis still our greatest pride,
To _blaze_ those virtues which the good would hide." _Pope._
The verb seems to have come originally from the German =blasen=, to blow a
horn. At the antient tournaments the attendant heralds proclaimed with
sound of trumpet the dignity of the combatants, and the armorial
distinctions assumed by them; and hence the application of the word to the
scientific description of coat armour.[36] The arrangement of the
tinctures and charges of heraldry into a system may be regarded as the
third stage in the history of the science. This, as we have just seen, was
achieved by the French: and hence the large admixture of old French terms
with words of native growth in our heraldric nomenclature.
Speed and other historians give the arms of a long line of the Anglo-Saxon
and Danish monarchs of England up to the period of the Norman Conquest;
but we search in vain for contemporary evidence that armorial distinctions
were then known. The MSS. of those early times which have descended to us
are rich in illustrations of costume, but no representation of these
'ensigns of honour' occurs in any one of them. It seems probable that
Speed was misled by the early chroniclers, who in their illuminated tomes
often represented events of a much earlier date in the costume of their
own times. Thus, in a work by Matthew Paris, who flourished in the
thirteenth century, Offa, a Danish king of the tenth, is represented in
the habits worn at the first-mentioned date, and bearing an armorial
shield according to the then existing fashion.
At what period the colours and charges of the banner began to be copied
upon the shield is uncertain. A proof that regular heraldry was unknown at
the era of the Conquest, is furnished by that valuable monument, the
Bayeux Tapestry, a pictorial representation of the event, ascribed to the
wife of the Conqueror. In these embroidered scenes neither the banner nor
the shield is furnished with proper arms. Some of the shields bear the
rude effigies of a dragon, griffin, serpent or lion, others crosses,
rings, and various fantastic devices;[37] but these, in the opinion of the
most learned antiquaries, are mere ornaments, or, at best, symbols, more
akin to those of classical antiquity than to modern heraldry. Nothing but
disappointment awaits the curious armorist, who seeks in this venerable
memorial the pale, the bend, and other early elements of arms. As these
would have been much more easily imitated with the needle than the
grotesque figures before alluded to, we may safely conclude that personal
arms had not yet been introduced.[38]
Dallaway asserts that, after the Conquest, William "encouraged, but under
great restrictions, the individual bearing of arms;" but, strangely, does
not cite the most slender authority for the assertion. Camden and Spelman
agree that arms were not introduced until towards the close of the
eleventh century, which must have been within a very short time of the
Conqueror's death. Others again, with more probability, speak of the
second Crusade (A.D. 1147) as the date of their introduction into this
country. But even at this period the proofs of family bearings are very
scanty. Traditions, indeed, are preserved in many families, of arms having
been acquired during this campaign, and in a future chapter several
examples will be quoted, rather as a matter of curiosity than as
historical proof; for all tradition, and especially that which tends to
flatter a family by ascribing to it an exaggerated antiquity, will
generally be found to be _vox et praeterea nihil_. The arms said to occur
on _seals_ in the seventh and eighth centuries may be dismissed as merely
fanciful devices, having no connexion whatever with the heraldry of the
twelfth and thirteenth.
Towards the close of the twelfth century, and at the beginning of the
thirteenth, A.D. 1189-1230, it was usual for warriors to carry a miniature
escocheon suspended from a belt, and decorated with the arms of the
wearer.[39]
[Illustration: (Rich. I. from his second Great Seal.)]
It was in the time of Richard I that heraldry assumed more of the fixed
character it now bears. That monarch appears on his great seal of the date
of 1189, with a shield containing two lions combatant; but in his second
great seal (1195) three lions passant occur, as they have ever since been
used by his successors. Before coming to the throne, as Earl of Poitou, he
had borne lions in some attitude; for, in an antient poem, cited by
Dallaway, William de Barr, a French knight, utters an exclamation to this
effect: "Behold the Count of Poitou challenges us to the field; see he
calls us to the combat; I know the grinning lions in his shield;" and in
the romance of 'Cuer de Lyon,' we read the following couplet:
"=Upon his shoulders a Schelde of stele,
With the 'lybbardes'[40] painted wele.="
The earliest representation of arms upon a seal is of the date of
1187.[41] The embellishment of seals was one of the first as well as one
of the most interesting and useful applications of Heraldry. Seals, at
first rude and devoid of ornament, became, in course of time, beautiful
pieces of workmanship, elaborately decorated with arms, equestrian
figures, and tabernacle work of gothic architecture.
The Crusades are admitted by all modern writers to have given shape to
heraldry. And although we cannot give credit to many of the traditions
relating to the acquisition of armorial bearings by valorous knights on
the plains of Palestine, yet there is no doubt that many of our commonest
charges, such as the crescent, the escallop-shell, the water-bowget, &c.,
are derived from those chivalric scenes. Salverte observes that "the
ensigns which adorned the banner of a knight had not, in earlier times,
been adopted by his son, jealous of honouring, in its turn, the emblem
which he himself had chosen. But this glorious portion of the heritage of
a father or a brother who had died fighting for the cross was seized with
avidity by his successor on the fields of Palestine; for, in changing the
paternal banner, he would have feared that he should not be recognized by
his own vassals and his rivals in glory. History expressly tells us that,
at this epoch, many of the chiefs of the crusaders rendered the symbols
which they bore peculiar to their own house."[42] Dallaway, with his
accustomed elegance, remarks, "Those chiefs who, during the holy war,
returned to their own country, were industrious to call forth the highest
admiration of their martial exploits in the middle ranks. Ambitious of
displaying the banners they had borne in the sacred field, they procured
every external embellishment that could render them either more beautiful
as to the execution of the armorial designs, or more venerable as objects
of such perilous attainment. The bannerols of this era were usually of
silk stuffs, upon which was embroidered the device; and the shields of
metal, enamelled in colours, and diapered or diversified with flourishes
of gold and silver. Both the arts of encaustic painting and embroidery
were then well known and practised, yet of so great cost as to be procured
only by the most noble and wealthy. Amongst other pageantries was the
dedication of these trophies to some propitiatory Saint, over whose shrine
they were suspended, and which introduced armorial bearings in the
decoration of churches, frequently carved in stone, painted in fresco upon
the walls, or stained in glass in the windows. The avarice of the
ecclesiastics in thus adding to their treasures conduced almost as much as
the military genius of the age to the more general introduction of arms.
So sanctioned, the use of them became indispensable."[43]
By the time of Edward the First we find that all great commanders had
adopted arms, which were at that date really _coats_; the tinctures and
charges of the banner and shield being applied to the surcoat, or mantle,
which was worn over the armour, while the trappings of horses were
decorated in a similar manner.
In the ages immediately subsequent to the Crusades, heraldric ensigns
began to be generally applied as architectural decorations. The shields
upon which they were first represented were in the form of an isosceles
triangle, slightly curved on its two equal sides; but soon afterwards they
began to assume that of the gothic arch reversed, a shape probably adopted
with a view to such decoration, as harmonising better with the great
characteristics of the pointed style. Painted glass, too, in its earliest
application, was employed to represent military portraits, and arms with
scrolls containing short sentences, from which family mottoes may have
originated. Warton[44] places this gorgeous ornament at an era earlier
than the reign of Edward II.
Encaustic tiles, also, which were introduced in the early days of
heraldry, afforded another means of displaying the insignia of warriors.
They are still found in the pavements of many of our cathedrals and old
parish churches.
Rolls of Arms, which afford, after seals, the best possible evidence of
the ancient tinctures and charges, occur so early as the time of Henry
III. A document of this description, belonging to that reign, is preserved
in the College of Arms, and contains upwards of 200 coats emblazoned or
described in terms of heraldry differing very little from the modern
nomenclature. In a subsequent chapter I shall have occasion to refer for
some facts to this curious and valuable manuscript.
In the succeeding reigns the science rapidly increased in importance and
utility. The king and his chief nobility began to have heralds attached to
their establishments. These officials, at a later date, took their names
from some badge or cognizance of the family whom they served, such as
Falcon, Rouge Dragon, or from their master's title, as Hereford,
Huntingdon, &c. They were, in many instances, old servants or retainers,
who had borne the brunt of war,[45] and who, in their official capacity,
attending tournaments and battle-fields, had great opportunities of making
collections of arms, and gathering genealogical particulars. It is to
them, as men devoid of general literature and historical knowledge, Mr.
Montagu ascribes the fabulous and romantic stories connected with antient
heraldry; and certainly they had great temptations to falsify facts, and
give scope to invention when a championship for the dignity and antiquity
of the families upon whom they attended was at once a labour of love and
an essential duty of their office.
The =Roll of Karlaverok=, the name of which must be familiar to every
reader who has paid any attention to heraldry, is a poem in
Norman-French, describing the valorous deeds of Edward I and his knights
at the siege of the castle of Karlaverok, in Dumfriesshire, in the year
1300. This roll, which is curious on historical grounds, and by no means
contemptible as a poem, possesses especial charms for the heraldric
student. It describes with remarkable accuracy the banners of the barons
and knights who served in the expedition against Scotland, and "affords
evidence of the perfect state of the science of heraldry at that early
period." It is believed to have been written by Walter of Exeter, a
Franciscan friar, further known as the author of the romantic history of
Guy, Earl of Warwick. A contemporary copy of this valuable relic exists in
the British Museum, and another copy, transcribed from the original, is in
the Library of the College of Arms. The latter was published in 1828 by
Sir Harris Nicolas, with a translation and memoirs of the personages
commemorated by the poet.
The poem commences by stating that, in the year of Grace one thousand
three hundred, the king held a great court at Carlisle, and commanded his
men to prepare to go together with him against his enemies the Scots. On
the appointed day the whole host was ready. "There were," says the
chivalrous friar, "many rich caparisons embroidered on silks and satins;
many a beautiful penon fixed to a lance, and many a banner displayed.
"And afar off was the noise heard of the neighing of horses; mountains and
valleys were everywhere covered with sumpter horses and waggons with
provisions, and sacks of tents and pavilions.
"And the days were long and fine [it was Midsummer]. They proceeded by
easy journeys arranged in four squadrons; the which I will so describe to
you that not one shall be passed over. But first I will tell you of the
names and arms of the companions, especially of the banners, if you will
listen how."
In truth, by far the greater portion of the composition consists of
descriptions of the heraldric insignia borne upon the banners of the
commanders, upwards of one hundred in number. The following are quoted as
examples:
[Illustration:
"=Henri le bon Conte de Nichole
De prowesse enbrasse & a cole
E en son coer le a souveraine
Menans le eschiele primeraine
Baniere ot de un cendall saffrin
O un lion rampant porprin.="]
'Henry the good Earl of Lincoln, burning with valour, which is the chief
feeling of his heart, leading the first squadron, had a banner of yellow
silk with a purple lion rampant.'[46]
[Illustration:
"=Prowesse ke avoit fait ami
De Guilleme de Latimier
Ke la crois patee de or mier
Portoit en rouge bien portraite
Sa baniere ot cele parte traite.="]
'Prowess had made a friend of William le Latimer, who bore on this
occasion a well-proportioned banner, with a gold cross patee, pourtrayed
on red.'[47]
"=Johans de Beauchamp proprement
Portoit le baniere de vair
Au douz tens et au sovest aier.="
'John de Beauchamp
Handsomely bore his banner of vair,
To the gentle weather and south-west air.'[48]
The best authorities are agreed that coat-armour did not become hereditary
until the reign of Henry III and his successor. Before that period
families "kept no constant coat, but gave now this, anon that, sometimes
their paternal, sometimes their maternal or adopted coats, a variation
causing much obfuscation in history."[49] Many of the nobility who had
heretofore borne ensigns consisting of the honorable ordinaries, the
simplest figures of heraldry, now began to charge them with other figures.
Some few families, however, never adopted what are called common charges,
but retained the oldest and simplest forms of bearing, such as bends,
cheverons, fesses, barry, paly, chequy, &c.; and, as a general rule, such
coats may be regarded as the most antient in existence. With respect to
Welsh heraldry, Dallaway thinks that the families of that province did not
adopt the symbols made use of by other nations, until its annexation to
the English Crown by Edward I. Certain it is that many of the oldest
families bear what may be termed legendary pictures, having little or no
analogy to the more systematic armory of England; such, for example, as a
wolf issuing from a cave; a cradle under a tree with a child guarded by a
goat, &c.
The reigns of Edward III and Richard II were the "palmy days" of heraldry.
Then were the banners and escocheons of war refulgent with blazon; the
light of every chancel and hall was stained with the tinctures of
heraldry; the tiled pavement vied with the fretted roof; every corbel,
every vane, spoke proudly of the achievements of the battle-field, and
filled every breast with a lofty emulation of the deeds which earned such
stately rewards. We, the men of this calculating and prosaic nineteenth
century, have, it is probable, but a faint idea of the influence which
heraldry exerted on the minds of our rude forefathers of that chivalrous
age: but we can hardly refuse to admit that, by diffusing more widely the
enthusiasm of martial prowess, it lent a powerful aid to the formation of
our national character, and strongly tended to give to England that proud
military ascendancy she has long enjoyed among the nations of the
earth.[50]
[Illustration: (Ordeal Combat.)]
At this period that peculiar species of ordeal, TRIAL BY COMBAT, the
prototype of the modern duel, was licensed by the supreme magistrate. When
a person was accused by another without any further evidence than the mere
_ipse dixit_ of the accuser, the defendant making good his own cause by
strongly denying the fact, the matter was referred to the decision of the
sword,[51] and although the old proverb that "might overcomes right" was
frequently verified in these encounters, the vanquished party was adjudged
guilty of the crime alleged against him, and dealt with according to law.
The charge usually preferred was that of treason, though the dispute
generally originated in private pique between the parties. These combats
brought together immense numbers of people. That between Sir John Annesley
and Katrington, in the reign of Richard II, was fought before the palace
at Westminster, and attracted more spectators than the king's coronation
had done.[52] All such encounters were regulated by laws which it was the
province of the heralds to enforce.[53]
The TOURNAMENT, though proscribed by churchmen (jealous, as Dallaway
observes, of _shows_ in which they could play no part), had nothing in it
of the objectionable character attaching to the judicial combat. Nor will
it suffer, in the judgment of Gibbon, on a comparison with the Olympic
games, "which, however recommended by the idea of classic antiquity, must
yield to a Gothic tournament, as being, in every point of view, to be
preferred by impartial taste."[54] Descriptions of tournaments occur in so
many popular works that it is not here necessary to do more than to refer
to them. The vivid picture of one by Sir Walter Scott in 'Ivanhoe' is
probably fresh in the reader's memory.
As early heraldry consisted of very simple elements, it cannot excite
surprise that the same bearings were frequently adopted by different
families unknown to each other; hence arose very violent disputes and
controversies, as to whom the prior right belonged. The celebrated case of
Scrope against Grosvenor in the reign of Richard II, may be cited as an
example. The arms _Azure, a bend or_, were claimed by no less than three
families, namely, Carminow of Cornwall, Lord Scrope, and Sir Robert
Grosvenor. On the part of Scrope, it was asserted that these arms had been
borne by his family from the Norman conquest. Carminow pleaded a higher
antiquity, and declared they had been used by _his_ ancestors ever since
the days of king Arthur! The trial by combat had been resorted to by these
two claimants without a satisfactory decision, wherefore it was decreed
that both should continue to bear the coat as heretofore. The dispute
between Scrope and Grosvenor was not so summarily disposed of; a trial,
not by the sword, but by legal process, took place before the high
Constables and the Earl Marshal, and lasted five years. The proceedings,
which were printed in 1831 from the records in the Tower, occupy two large
volumes! The depositions of many gentlemen bearing arms, touching this
controversy, are given at full length, and present us with some curious
and characteristic features of the times. Among many others who gave
evidence in support of the claims of Lord Scrope was the famous Chaucer.
His deposition, taken from the above records, and printed in Sir Harris
Nicolas's elegant life of the poet, recently published, is interesting, no
less from its connexion with the witness than for its curiosity in
relation to our subject:
"Geoffrey Chaucer, Esquire, of the age of forty and upwards, armed for
twenty-seven years, produced on behalf of Sir Richard Scrope, sworn
and examined. Asked, whether the arms _Azure, a bend or_, belonged, or
ought to belong, to the said Sir Richard? Said, Yes, for he saw him so
armed in France, before the town of Retters,[55] and Sir Henry Scrope
armed in the same arms with a white label, and with a banner; and the
said Richard, armed in the entire arms, 'Azure, with a bend or;' and
so he had seen him armed during the whole expedition, until the said
Geoffrey was taken [prisoner.] Asked, how he knew that the said arms
appertained to the said Sir Richard? Said, that he had heard say from
Old Knights and Esquires, that they had been reputed to be their arms,
as common fame and the public voice proved; and he also said that they
had continued their possession of the said arms; and that all his time
he had seen the said arms _in banners, glass, paintings, and
vestments_, and commonly called the arms of Scrope. Asked, if he had
heard any one say who was the first ancestor of the said Sir Richard,
who first bore the said arms? Said, No, nor had he ever heard
otherwise than that they were come of antient ancestry and old gentry,
and used the said arms. Asked, if he had heard any one say how long a
time the ancestors of the said Sir Richard had used the said arms?
Said, No, but he had heard say that it passed the memory of man.
Asked, whether he had ever heard of any interruption or challenge made
by Sir Robert Grosvenor, or by his ancestors, or by any one in his
name, to the said Sir Richard, or to any of his ancestors? Said, No,
but he said that he was once in Friday-street in London, and as he was
walking in the street he saw hanging a new sign made of the said arms,
and he asked what Inn that was that had hung out these arms of
_Scrope_? and one answered him and said, No, Sir, they are not hung
out for the arms of Scrope, nor painted there for those arms, but they
are painted and put there by a knight of the county of Chester, whom
men call Sir Robert Grosvenor; and that was the first time he ever
heard speak of Sir Robert Grosvenor or of his ancestors, or of any
other bearing the name of Grosvenor."[56]
At this date the nobility claimed, and to a considerable extent exercised,
the right of conferring arms upon their followers for faithful services in
war. A memorable instance is related by Froissart, in which the Lord
Audley, a famous general at the battle of Poictiers, rewarded four of his
esquires in this manner. When the battle was over, Edward the Black
Prince, calling for this nobleman, embraced him and said, "Sir James, both
I myself and all others acknowledge you, in the business of the day, to
have been the best doer in arms; wherefore, with intent to furnish you the
better to pursue the wars, I retain you for ever my knight, with 500 marks
yearly revenue, which I shall assign you out of my inheritance in
England." This was, at the period, a great estate, and the Lord Audley
duly appreciated the generosity of the donation; yet, calling to mind his
obligations in the conflict to his four squires, Delves, Mackworth,
Hawkeston, and Foulthurst, he immediately divided the Prince's gift among
them, giving them, at the same time, permission to bear his own arms,
altered in detail, for the sake of distinction. When the prince heard of
this noble deed he was determined not to be outdone in generosity, but
insisted upon Audley's accepting a further grant of 600 marks per annum,
arising out of his duchy of Cornwall.
The arms of Lord Audley were GULES, FRETTY OR, and those of the four
valiant esquires, as borne for many generations by their respective
descendants, in the counties of Chester and Rutland, as follows:
DELVES. Argent, a cheveron _gules, fretty or_, between three delves or
billets sable.
MACKWORTH. Party per pale indented, ermine and sable, a cheveron
_gules, fretty or_.
HAWKESTONE. Ermine, a fesse, _gules, fretty or_, between three hawks.
The hawks were in later times omitted.
FOULTHURST. _Gules, fretty or_, a chief ermine.[57]
Another interesting instance of the granting of arms to faithful
retainers, occurs in a deed from William, Baron of Graystock, to Adam de
Blencowe, of Blencowe, in Cumberland, who had fought under his banners at
Cressy and Poictiers: "To ALL to whom these presents shall come to be seen
or heard, William, Baron of Graystock, Lord of Morpeth, wisheth health in
the Lord. Know ye that I have given and granted to Adam de Blencowe, an
escocheon sable, with a bend closetted, argent and azure, with three
chaplets, gules; and with a crest closetted argent and azure of my arms;
_to have and to hold_ to the said Adam and his heirs for ever; and I, the
said William and my heirs will warrant to the said Adam the arms
aforesaid. In witness whereof, I have to these letters patent set my seal.
Written at the castle of Morpeth, the 26th day of February, in the 30th
year of the reign of King Edward III, after the Conquest."[58]
The practice of devising armorial bearings by will is as antient as the
time of Richard II. In some cases they were also transferred _by deed of
gift_. In the 15th year of the same reign Thomas Grendall, of Fenton,
makes over to Sir William Moigne, to have and to hold to himself, his
heirs and assigns for ever, the arms which had escheated to him (Grendall)
at the death of his cousin, John Beaumeys, of Sawtrey.[59]
Notwithstanding the numerous traditions relative to the granting of arms
by monarchs in very early times, it seems to have been the _general_
practice before the reigns of Richard II and Henry IV for persons of rank
to assume what ensigns they chose.[60] But these monarchs, regarding
themselves as the true "fountains of honour," granted or took them away by
royal edict. The exclusive right of the king to this privilege was long
called in question, and Dame Julyan Berners, so late as 1486, declares
that "armys bi a mannys auctorite taken (if an other man have not borne
theym afore) be of strength enogh." The same gallant lady boldly
challenges the right of heralds: "And it is the opynyon of moni men that
an herod of armis may gyve armys. Bot I say if any sych armys be borne ...
thoos armys be of no more auctorite then thoos armys the wich be taken by
a mannys awne auctorite."
So strictly was the use of coat-armour limited to the military profession,
that a witness in a certain cause in the year 1408, alleged that, although
descended from noble blood, he had no armorial bearings, because neither
himself nor his ancestors had ever been engaged in war.[61]
[Illustration]
It was in the reign of the luxurious Richard II that heraldric devices
began to be displayed upon the civil as well as the military costume of
the great; "upon the mantle, the surcoat and the just-au-corps or boddice,
the charge and cognizance of the wearer were profusely scattered, and
shone resplendent in tissue and beaten gold."[62] Hitherto the escocheon
had been charged with the hereditary (paternal) bearing only, but now the
practice of impaling the wife's arms, and quartering those of the mother,
when an heiress, became the fashion. Impalement was sometimes performed by
placing the dexter half of the lord's shield in juxta-position with the
sinister moiety of his consort's;[63] but this mode of marshalling
occasioned great confusion, entirely destroying the character of both
coats,[64] and was soon abandoned in favour of the present mode of placing
the full arms of both parties side by side in the escocheon. Occasionally
the shield was divided horizontally, the husband's coat occupying the
chief or upper compartment, and the wife's the base or lower half; but
this was never a favourite practice, as the side-by-side arrangement was
deemed better fitted to express the equality of the parties in the
marriage relation.
The practice of impaling official with personal arms, for instance, those
of a bishopric with those of the bishop, does not appear to be of great
antiquity. Provosts, mayors, the kings of arms, heads of houses, and
certain professors in the universities, among others, possess this right;
and it is the general practice to cede the dexter, or more honourable half
of the shield to the coat of office.
Nisbet mentions a fashion formerly prevalent in Spain, which certainly
ranks under the category of 'Curiosities,' and therefore demands a place
here. Single women frequently divided their shield per pale, placing their
paternal arms on the sinister side, and leaving the dexter _blank_, for
those of their husbands, as soon as they should be so fortunate as to
obtain them. This, says mine author, "was the custom _for young ladies
that were resolved to marry_!"[65] These were called "Arms of
Expectation."[66]
[Illustration]
The gorgeous decoration of the male costume with the ensigns of heraldry
soon attracted the attention and excited the emulation of that sex which
is generally foremost in the adoption of personal ornaments. Yes,
incongruous as the idea appears to modern dames, the ladies too assumed
the embroidered _coat of arms_! On the vest or close-fitting garment they
represented the paternal arms, repeating the same ornament, if _femmes
soles_, or single women, on the more voluminous upper robe; but if married
women, this last was occupied by the arms of the husband, an arrangement
not unaptly expressing their condition as _femmes-covertes_. This mode of
wearing the arms was afterwards laid aside, and the ensigns of husband and
wife were impaled on the outer garment, a fashion which existed up to the
time of Henry VIII, as appears from the annexed engraving of Elizabeth,
wife of John Shelley, Esq.[67] copied from a brass in the parish church
of Clapham, co. Sussex. The arms represented are those of Shelley and
Michelgrove, otherwise Fauconer; both belonging, it will be seen, to the
class called canting or allusive arms; those of Shelley being
welk-_shells_, and those of Fauconer, a _falcon_.
Quartering is a division of the shield into four or more equal parts, by
means of which the arms of other families, whose heiresses the ancestors
of the bearer have married, are combined with his paternal arms; and a
shield thus quartered exhibits at one view the ensigns of all the houses
of which he is the representative. In modern times this _cumulatio
armorum_ is occasionally carried to such an extent that upwards of a
hundred coats centre in one individual, and may be represented upon his
shield.[68] The arms of England and France upon the great seal of Edward
III, and those of Castile and Leon in the royal arms of Spain, are early
examples of quartering. The first English subject who quartered arms was
John Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, in the fourteenth century.
In this century originated the practice of placing the shield between two
animals as supporters, for which see a future chapter.
The application of heraldric ornaments to household furniture and
implements of war is of great antiquity. I have now before me the brass
pommel of a sword on which are three triangular shields, two of them
charged with a lion rampant, the other with an eagle displayed. This
relic, which was dug up near Lewes castle, is conjectured to be of the
reign of Henry III.[69] Arms first occur on coins in one of Edmund, King
of Sicily, in the thirteenth century; but the first English monarch who so
used them was Edward III. The first supporters on coins occur in the reign
of Henry VIII, whose 'sovereign' is thus decorated. Arms upon tombs are
found so early as 1144.[70]
Among the 'curiosities' of heraldry belonging to these early times may be
mentioned _adumbrated_ charges; that is, figures represented in outline
with the colour of the field showing through; because the bearers, having
lost their patrimonies, retained only the _shadow_ of their former state
and dignity.[71]
Monasteries and other religious foundations generally bore arms, which
were almost uniformly those of the founders, or a slight modification of
them.[72] Dallaway traces this usage to the knights-templars and
hospitallers who were both soldiers and ecclesiastics. The arms assigned
to most cities and antient boroughs are borrowed from those of early
feudal lords: thus the arms of the borough of Lewes are the chequers of
the Earls of Warren, to whom the barony long appertained, with a canton of
the lion and cross-crosslets of the Mowbrays, lords of the town in the
fourteenth century. Some of the quaint devices which pass for the arms of
particular towns have nothing heraldric about them, and seem to have
originated in the caprice of the artists who engraved their seals. Such
for example is the design which the good townsmen of Guildford are
pleased to call their arms. This consists of a green mount rising out of
the water, and supporting an odd-looking castle, whose two towers are
ornamented with high steeples, surmounted with balls; from the centre of
the castle springs a lofty tower, with three turrets, and ornamented with
the arms of England and France. Over the door are two roses, and in the
door a key, the said door being guarded by a lion-couchant, while high on
each side the castle is a pack of wool gallantly floating through the air!
What this assemblage of objects may signify I do not pretend to guess.
Persons of the middle class, not entitled to coat-armour, invented certain
arbitrary signs called =Merchants' Marks=, and these often occur in the
stonework and windows of old buildings, and upon tombs. Piers Plowman, who
wrote in the reign of Edward III, speaks of "merchauntes' markes ymedeled"
in glass. Sometimes these marks were impaled with the paternal arms of
aristocratic merchants, as in the case of John Halle, a wealthy
woolstapler of Salisbury, rendered immortal by the Rev. Edward Duke in his
'Prolusiones Historicae.' The early printers and painters likewise adopted
similar marks, which are to be seen on their respective works.[73] A rude
monogram seems to have been attempted, and it was generally accompanied
with a cross, and, occasionally, a hint at the inventor's peculiar
pursuit, as in the cut here given, where the staple at the bottom refers
to the worthy John Halle's having been a merchant of the staple. The
heralds objected to such marks being placed upon a shield, for, says the
writer of Harl. MS. 2252 (fol. 10), "=Theys be none Armys=, for every man
may take hym a marke, but not armys without a herawde or purcyvaunte;" and
in "The duty and office of an herald," by F. Thynne, Lancaster Herald,
1605, the officer is directed "to prohibit merchants and others to put
their names, marks, or devices, in escutcheons or shields, which belong to
gentlemen bearing arms and none others."
[Illustration]
At the commencement of the fifteenth century considerable confusion seems
to have arisen from upstarts having assumed the arms of antient
families--a fact which shows that armorial bearings began to be considered
the indispensable accompaniment of wealth. So great had this abuse become
that, in the year 1419, it was deemed necessary to issue a royal mandate
to the sheriff of every county "to summon all persons bearing arms to
prove their right to them," a task of no small difficulty, it may be
presumed, in many cases. Many of the claims then made were referred to the
heralds as commissioners, "but the first regular chapter held by them in a
collective capacity was at the siege of Rouen, in 1420."[74]
The first _King of Arms_ was William Bruges, created by Henry V. Several
grants of arms made by him from 1439 to 1459 are recorded in the College
of Arms.
During the sanguinary struggle between the Houses of Lancaster and York
"arms were universally used, and most religiously and pertinaciously
maintained." Sometimes, however, when the different branches of a family
espoused opposing interests they varied their arms either in the charges
or colours, or both. The antient family of Lower of Cornwall originally
bore "... a cheveron between three _red_ roses," but espousing, it is
supposed, the Yorkist, or white-rose side of the question, they changed
the tincture of their arms to "sable, a cheveron between three _white_
roses,"[75] the coat borne by their descendants to this day. The interest
taken by the Cornish gentry in these civil dissensions may account for the
frequency of the rose in the arms of Cornwall families. The _red rose_ in
the centre of the arms of Lord Abergavenny was placed there by his
ancestor, Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, "better known as the
king-maker," "to show himself the faithful homager and soldier of the
House of Lancaster."[76]
The non-heraldric reader will require a definition of what, in the
technical phrase of blazon, are called =differences=. These are certain
marks, smaller than ordinary charges, placed upon a conspicuous part of
the shield for the purpose of distinguishing the sons of a common parent
from each other. Thus, the eldest son bears a label; the second a
crescent; the third a mullet; the fourth a martlet; the fifth an annulet;
and the sixth a fleur-de-lis. The arms of the six sons of Thomas
Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, who died 30{o} Edward III, were, in the window
of St. Mary's Church, Warwick, _differenced_ in this manner.[77] These
distinctions are carried still further, for the sons of a second son bear
the label, crescent, mullet, &c. upon a crescent; those of a third son the
same upon a mullet, respectively. In the third generation the mark of
cadency is again superimposed upon the two preceding differences,
producing, at length, unutterable confusion. Dugdale published a work, in
1682, on the differences of arms, in which he condemns this system, and
suggests a return to the antient mode, which consisted in varying the
colours and charges of the field, though preserving the general
characteristics of the hereditary bearing. For example, Beauchamp of
Elmley branched out into four lines; the eldest line bore the paternal
arms, _Gules a fess, or_; the other three superadded to this bearing a
charge _or_, six times repeated, namely,
II, Beauchamp of Abergavenny, 6 cross-crosslets
III, Beauchamp of Holt, 6 billets, and
IV, Beauchamp of Bletshoe, 6 martlets,
[Illustration]
and among the further ramifications of the family we find
V, Beauchamp of Essex 6 trefoils slipped
VI, Beauchamp of ---- 6 mullets
VII, Beauchamp of ---- 6 pears,
and upwards of ten other coats, all preserving the field gules and the
fess or. The Bassets, according to the Ashmolean MSS.[78] varied their
coat 7 times, the Lisles 4, the Nevilles 11, and the Braoses 5.
An interesting example of early differencing is cited by Sir Harris
Nicolas, in his 'Roll of Carlaverok.'[79] In the early part of the
fourteenth century--
Leicestershire.
{Alan le Zouche bore Gules, besante Or
Barons. {William le Zouche, of Haryngworth a quarter ermine
the same with
{Sir William Zouche a label azure
Knights. {Sir Oliver Zouche a cheveron erm.
{Sir Amory Zouche a bend argent
{Sir Thomas Zouche on a quarter
argent, a mullet
sable.
Surnames in these early times were in a very unsettled state, for the
younger branches of a family, acquiring new settlements by marriage and
otherwise, abandoned their patronymics, and adopted new ones derived from
the seignories so acquired.[80] Hence it often happens that arms are
identical or similar, when the relationship is not recognized by identity
of appellation.
Illegitimate children generally bore the paternal ensigns differenced by
certain _brizures_. Thus John de Beaufort, eldest natural son of John of
Gaunt, bore _Per pale argent and azure_ [blue and white being the
_colours_ of the House of Lancaster] _on a bend gules, three lions
passant-guardant or_ [the royal arms of England] _in the upper part of
the bend a label azure, charged with nine fleur-de-lis or_.[81] The arms
borne in the usual manner were often surrounded with a bordure to indicate
bastardy; of this mode of differencing several examples are furnished in
the arms of existing peers descended from royalty. Some of the descendants
of Henry Beaufort, third duke of Somerset, placed the Beaufort arms upon a
fesse, and numerous similar instances might be adduced.
The mode of differencing by alterations, or the addition of new charges,
however commended by Dugdale and other great names, is certainly exposed
to the same objection as the use of the label, crescent, mullet, &c., as
tending equally to confusion; for, with the addition of cross-crosslets,
billets, &c., to the primary charge of the Beauchamps, no herald will dare
assert that the original arms are preserved. It is a canon of heraldry
that "Omnia arma arithmeticis figuris sunt simillima, quibus si quid addas
vel subtrahas non remanet eadem species." Every alteration, however
slight, produces a new coat, and thus the principal advantage of coat
armour--its hereditary character--is sacrificed. In fact, a coat of arms
is the symbol of a generic, or family, name, and it is not within the
compass of the heraldric art to particularize individual branches and
members of a family by any additions or changes whatever, at least to any
great extent.[82]
"The numerous class of men who were termed =Armigeri=, or gentry of
coat-armour," observes Dallaway, "very generally took, with a small
variation, the escocheon of that feudal lord whose property and influence
extended over that province which they inhabited," and Camden, in his
'Remaines,' says, "Whereas the earles of Chester bare garbes or
wheat-sheafes, many gentlemen of that countrey took wheatsheafes. Whereas
the old earles of Warwicke bare chequy or and azure, a cheueron ermin,
many thereabout tooke ermine and chequy. In Leicestershire and the
countrey confining diuers bare cinquefoyles, for that the ancient earles
of Leicester bare geules, a cinquefoyle ermine, &c." This was a fertile
source of new bearings.
Sometimes, in the absence of other evidence of one family's having been
feudally dependent upon another, presumptive proof is furnished by a
similarity between the arms. I subjoin an instance. The coat of the
baronial family of Echingham of Echingham, co. Sussex, was 'AZURE A FRET
ARGENT,' and the crest, 'A DEMI-LION RAMPANT ARGENT.'
[Illustration]
The arms of Jefferay, of Chiddingly, in the same county, were '_Azure
fretty or_' (with the addition of a lion passant-guardant, gules, on a
chief argent), and the crest, _A lion's head_ erased _argent_, ducally
crowned azure. The first settlement of the Jefferays was at Betchington,
co. Sussex, an estate which had previously belonged to the lords
Echingham, but there is no proof of the feudal connexion except that which
is furnished by a comparison of the arms.
Richard III greatly promoted the cause of Heraldry in England by the
erection of the heralds into the corporate body which still exists under
the designation of the =College of Arms=. This epoch may be considered the
noonday of the history of armory in England; and as two subsequent
chapters of this volume, devoted respectively to the history of that
institution, and to notices of celebrated writers on heraldry, will bring
down the annals of the science to our own times, "I here make an end" of a
chapter which I trust may not have been found totally devoid of interest
to any reader who loves to trace the records of the past.
[Illustration]
CHAPTER III.
Rationale of Heraldic Charges, etc.
[Illustration: (Arms of the See of Chichester)]
"The Formes of the pure celestiall bodies mixt with grosse
terrestrials; earthly animals with watery; sauage beasts with tame;
whole-footed beasts with diuided; reptiles with things gressible;
fowles of prey with home-bred; these again with riuer fowles; aery
insecta with earthly; also things naturall with artificiall; arts
liberall with mechanicall; military with rusticall; and rusticall with
ciuil. Which confused mixture hath not a little discouraged many
persons--otherwise well affected to the study of Armory--and impaired
the estimation of the profession."
_Guillim._
Dictionaries of the technical terms employed in heraldry are so common,
and the elements of the science so well explained in various popular
treatises,[83] that it would be impertinent in an essay like the present
to go into all the details usually comprised in those useful books of
reference. Still it may interest the general reader, and will, I trust,
give no offence to adepts in the science, if I offer a few observations on
this subject, with illustrations from our old writers, adding some
etymological conjectures of my own.
The origin of the expression 'a coat of arms' we have already seen, as
also the cause why heraldric ensigns are borne upon a shield. Shields have
been made of every imaginable shape according to the taste of the age or
the fancy of the bearer, with these two restrictions, that the shields of
knights-bannerets must be square, and those of ladies in the form of a
lozenge. The most usual, because the most convenient, shape is that which
is technically called the _heater_-shield--from its resemblance to the
heater of an iron--with some slight variations. Our friend Sylvanus
Morgan, whose ingenuity all must admire, in defiance of the oft-quoted
proverb:
"=When Adam digged and Eve span,
Who was then the Gentleman?="
deduces this shape for men, and that of the lozenge for women, from the
_spade_ of Adam, and the _spindle_ of Eve!
[Illustration]
The ground or field of every coat of arms must be either of metal, colour,
or fur. The METALS of heraldry are, Or==gold, and argent==silver, and as
the shield of war was antiently of metal, either embossed or enamelled,
the retention of the two precious metals as the field of an escocheon is
easily accounted for. The COLOURS are gules, azure, vert, purpure, sable,
tenne, and sanguine. While some of these terms are French; others, though
coming to us through that medium, are originally from other languages.
GULES, according to Ducange, is _goulis_, _guelle_, _gula_ sive _guella_,
the red colour of the mouth or throat of an animal. Mackenzie derives it
from the Hebrew _gulude_, a piece of red cloth, or from the Arabic _gule_,
a red rose. _Ghul_ in the Persian signifies rose-coloured, and _Ghulistan_
is 'the country of roses.' It is probably one of those importations from
the East which the Crusades introduced, both into the elements of armory
and the nomenclature of the science. It was sometimes called _vermeil_[84]
(vermilion) and _rouget_. An antient knight is represented as bearing a
plain red banner without any charge:
"Mais Eurmenions de la Brette
La baniere eut _toute rougecte_."[85]
The barbarous term _blodius_ was likewise occasionally used to express
this colour.
AZURE==light-blue, is a French corruption of the Arabic word _lazur_ or
_lazuli_. The lapis lazuli is a copper ore, very compact and hard, which
is found in detached lumps, of an elegant blue colour, and to it the
artist is indebted for his beautiful ultra-marine. This colour, still one
of the dearest of pigments, was antiently in great request, and called
'beyond-sea azure.'[86] The lapis lazuli is found in Persia, Bucharia, and
China.
VERT (French) is light green. This word was applied at an early period
"to every thing," says Cowell, "that grows and bears a _green_ leaf within
the forest that may cover and hide a deer." Vert and venison, in the
vocabulary of woodcraft, were as inseparable as shadow and substance. _To
vert_ signified to enter the forest, as in an old song of the thirteenth
century:
"Sumer is i-cumen in,
Lhude sing cuccu;
Groweth sed and bloweth med,
And springeth the wde nu.
=Sing Cuccu, Cuccu!=
Awe bleteth after lomb,
Lhouth after calve cu,
Bulluc sterteth,
Bucke VERTETH,
=Murie sing Cuccu=," etc.
This colour was antiently called _synople_, and in the Boke of St. Albans
_synobylt_, a word which Colombiere derives from the Latin _sinopis_, a
dyeing mineral,[87] or from Synople, a town in the Levant, whence a green
dye was procured.
Of SABLE the derivation is very uncertain. It seems unlikely to have been
taken from the colour of the diminutive animal now known by this name,
first, because it would then rank under the category of _furs_; and,
secondly, because that animal is far from black. Indeed, the best sable is
of a light brown or sand colour. Dallaway quotes a line, however, which
might be adduced in support of this derivation:
"Sables, ermines, vair et gris."
Guillim derives it from _sabulum_, gross sand or gravel, but this seems
very improbable, although I have nothing better to substitute. It is
curious that 'sable' and 'azure' should have been selected from the
'jargon' of heraldry for poetical use, to the exclusion of other similar
terms:
"By this the drooping daylight 'gan to fade,
And yield his room to sad succeeding night,
Who with her _sable_ mantle 'gan to shade
The face of earth, and ways of living wight."
_Faerie Queen._
"Thus replies
Minerva, graceful, with her _azure_ eyes."
_Pope._
PURPURE (purple) is not common in English armory: still less so are the
_stainant_ or disgraceful colours, TENNY (orange) and MURREY, which Dr.
Johnson defines as "darkly red," deriving it through the French _moree_,
and the Italian _morello_. The fine cherry designated by this last word
is, when ripe, of the exact colour intended by murrey. Bacon says, "Leaves
of some trees turn a little _murrey_, or reddish;" and "a waistcoat of
_murrey_-coloured satin" occurs in the writings of Arbuthnot.
By these terms were the arms of gentlemen described; but for the arms of
nobility they were not sufficiently lofty. These were blazoned by the
precious stones, as _topaz_ for yellow, _ruby_ for red, &c. For the arms
of princes it was necessary to go a step higher, namely, to the heavenly
bodies, _Sol_, _Luna_, _Mars_, &c. Sir John Ferne enumerates several other
sets of terms, in all thirteen, which he classifies thus: 1, planets; 2,
precious stones; 3, vertues; 4, celestiall signes; 5, months; 6, days of
the week; 7, ages of man; 8, flowers; 9, elements; 10, sesons of the yeer;
11, complexions; 12, numbers; 13, mettailes. What would those who are
disgusted with the 'jargon' of our science say to such blazon as the
following?--
He beareth _Sunday_, a lion rampant _Tuesday_.
He beareth _Faith_, a wolf salient _Loyalty_.
He beareth _Marigold_, a bear passant, _Blue Lily_, muzzled _White Rose_.
He beareth, _Infancy_, three grasshoppers _Virility_.
He beareth, _Melancholy_, three asses' heads, _Flegmatique_!
I must confess that, in the course of my heraldric reading, I have never
met with blazon of this singular description, but Ferne assures his reader
that it may be his fortune "to light upon such phantasticall termes," and
he gives an historical and philosophical account of their origin. So
recently as the last century the planets and gems were used in royal and
noble armory, but of late good taste has limited blazon to the
first-mentioned and most simple set of terms in all cases.
[Illustration]
The _furs_ are ermine, ermines, erminois, erminites, pean, vair, and
potent counter-potent. They are all said to be indicative of dignity. In
armorial painting their effect is very rich. ERMINE, which may be taken as
the type of the five first mentioned, is represented by three spots placed
triangularly, and three hairs in black upon a white ground. It is intended
to represent the black tail of a species of weasel fixed upon the white
skin of the animal. Guillim[88] gives a coat, containing six _whole
ermines_, as represented in the margin. Sir G. Mackenzie informs us that
"the first user of this fur in arms was Brutus, the son of Silvius, who
having by accident killed his father, left that unhappie ground, and
travelling in Bretaigne in France, fell asleep, and when he awoke he found
this little beast upon his shield, and from that time wore a shield
ermine!" This fur is said to have been introduced into England by Alan,
Earl of Richmond, so created by William the Conqueror. The ermine
(_mustela erminea_) is found in all the northern regions of the old
continent, and as far southward as Persia and China. It was originally
brought into western Europe from Armenia, then called _Ermonie_, whence
its name. Chaucer employs _ermin_ for the adjective Armenian. VAIRE is
composed of miniature shields of blue and white alternately placed.
According to Mackenzie it represents the skin of a small quadruped called
_varus_, the back of which is of a bluish grey, and the belly white; and
Guillim adds that when the head and feet of the animal are cut off from
the skin, the latter resembles the figure of vaire used in heraldry. The
costly fur so much spoken of by our old poets under the name of _miniver_
is derived by Dallaway from the French _menu vair_, on account of its
smallness and delicacy. The old French _vairon_ signifies anything of two
colours, and may possibly be the etymon of _vaire_.
[Illustration: (Temp Edw. I.) Arms of Sackville.]
POTENT-COUNTER-POTENT, literally "crutch-opposite-crutch," resembles the
tops of crutches counter-placed. What the origin of this figure may have
been does not appear, although the word potent, in the sense of crutch,
was common in the days of Chaucer.
"When luste of youth wasted be and spent,
Then in his hand he takyth a _potent_."
And again,
"So eld she was that she ne went
A foote, but it were by potent."
_Romaunt of the Rose._
[Illustration: ("Gules, a bend argent")]
Having thus taken a glance at the field, or ground of the heraldric
shield, let us next briefly notice what are called the honourable
ordinaries, one or other of which occurs in the great majority of arms,
viz., the CHIEF, BEND, BEND-SINISTER, FESSE, PALE, CROSS, SALTIRE,
CHEVERON, and PILE. The =chief= is a fifth part of the shield nearest the
top; _unde nomen_. In the primitive bearings, which were literally coats,
or rather mantles of arms, the chief might be formed by turning the upper
part of the garment back in form of a collar, thus exposing the lining,
which doubtless was often of a different colour from the mantle itself. A
knight who might chance at a tournament to wear a scarlet mantle lined
with white, would in this manner acquire as arms, 'Gules, a chief argent.'
The =bend= is a stripe passing diagonally across the shield from the
dexter corner; (and the =bend-sinister=, the contrary way,) and is,
etymologically, the same word with the French _bande_ and Saxon band.[89]
This ordinary evidently represents a band or scarf worn over one shoulder,
and passing under the opposite arm, and is well exemplified in the white
belt worn by a soldier over his red coat. Of a similar origin is the
=fesse=, a horizontal stripe across the middle of the shield, which
represents a sash or military girdle. The term is evidently derived from
the Latin _fascia_, through the French _fasce_. The =pale= is like the
fesse, except that its direction is perpendicular. From its name it has
been supposed to represent the _pales_, or palisades of a camp, and in
support of this origin it has been remarked that, in antient warfare,
every soldier was obliged to carry a pale, and to fix it as the lines were
drawn for the security of the camp. This hypothesis seems to be one of
those _after-thoughts_ with which heraldric theories abound. There is no
doubt that most armorial _forms_ existed long before the invention of
blazon, and that when it was found necessary to give every figure its
distinctive appellation, the real origin of many bearings had been lost
sight of, and the names assigned them were those of objects they were
_conjectured_ to represent.
It is far more probable that this ordinary originated in the insertion of
a perpendicular stripe of a different colour from the mantle itself, an
idea which is supported by the fact that the pale occupies in breadth a
third of the escocheon. Two breadths of blue cloth divided by one of
yellow, would produce a blazonable coat, '_Azure, a pale or_.' When a
shield is divided into several horizontal stripes of alternate colours it
is called _barry_; when the stripes run perpendicularly it is said to be
_paly_; and when they take a diagonal direction it is styled _bendy_. The
love of a striking contrast of colours in costume is characteristic of a
semi-barbarous state of society, and the shawls and robes of the orientals
of the present day afford a good illustration of the origin of these
striped bearings.[90] Such vestments were not peculiar to the military,
with whom we must always associate the heraldry of the earliest times;
for, so lately as the time of Chaucer, they were the favourite fashion of
civilians. This author, in his 'Parson's Tale,' makes that worthy
ecclesiastic complain of the "sinful costly array of clothing in the
embrouding, the disguising, indenting or _barring_, ounding, _paling_,
winding or _bending_, and semblable waste of cloth in vanity."[91]
Arms divided into two compartments by a horizontal line are said to be
_parted per fesse_; when the line is perpendicular, _parted per pale_; and
so of the others. Ridiculous as it may seem, our ancestors, from the reign
of Edward II to that of Richard II, affected this kind of dress. In a
contemporary illumination, John of Gaunt is represented in a long robe
divided exactly in half, one side being blue, the other white, the colours
of the House of Lancaster. Chaucer's Parson, just now quoted, inveighs
against the "wrappings of their hose which are departed of two colours,
white and red, white and blue, or black and red," making the wearers seem
as though "the fire of St. Anthony or other such mischance had consumed
one half of their bodies." "These party-coloured hose," humorously remarks
Mr. Planche, "render uncertain the fellowship of the legs, and the common
term _a pair_ perfectly inadmissible." But to return to the honourable
ordinaries. The =cross=. It would not be difficult to fill a volume with
disquisitions upon this bearing, forming, as it does, a prominent feature
in the heraldry of all Christendom; but I must content myself with a
general view, without entering much into detail. The cross, as the symbol
of Christianity, naturally engaged the reverent and affectionate regard of
the early Christians, a feeling which lapsed first into superstition, and
eventually into idolatry. In those chivalrous but ill-directed efforts of
the princes and armies of Christian Europe to gain possession of the Holy
Land, the cross was adopted as the sign or mark of the common cause; it
floated upon the standard, was embroidered upon the robes, and depicted on
the shields of the enthusiastic throng whose campaigns hence took the
designation of _Croisades_, or _Crusades_. On subsequent occasions the
cross was employed in this general manner, especially when the interests
of the church were concerned, as, for instance, at the battle of Lewes in
1264, when the soldiers of the baronial army marked themselves with a
white cross for the purpose of distinguishing each other from the king's
forces.[92] The plain cross, or cross of St. George, is the most antient
form of this bearing; it differed, however, from the form now in use in
having the horizontal bar placed higher than the centre of the upright.
The alteration was doubtless a matter of convenience to allow the common
charges of the field, when any occurred, a more equal space. But the cross
has been so modified by the varying tastes of different ages, that Dame
Juliana Berners, at a time when armory was comparatively simple, declares
that "crossis innumerabull are borne dayli." The principal and most usual
varieties of this ordinary are described in the 'Boke of St. Albans.' One
of the most interesting forms is the _cross fitchee_, or 'fixibyll,'
because being sharpened at the lower end it could be fixed into the
ground, like the little crosses in Catholic cemeteries. It probably
originated in the cross antiently carried by pilgrims, which answered the
purpose of a walking-staff, and served, when occasion required, for the
use of devotion. Next to this may be reckoned the _cross patee_, the
_cross-crosslet_, the _cross patonce_, and the _cross moline_, called in
the Boke a "mylneris cros," "for it is made to the similitude of a certain
instrument of yrne in mylnys, the which berith the mylneston."[93] The
plain cross _corded_, or entwined with ropes, was borne, according to the
same authority, in the "armys of a nobull man, the which was some tyme a
crafty man (handicraftsman), a _roper_ as he himself said." These crosses
are fully described in the larger treatises on heraldry, together with
numerous others. Berry's Encyclopaedia Heraldica enumerates no less than
THREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-FIVE varieties.
[Illustration: Crosslet fitchee patee patonce moline Calvary.]
The =saltire=, popularly called St. Andrew's cross, is formed like two
bends crossing each other in the centre of the escocheon. A great variety
of opinions has existed as to its origin. Some authors take it for an
antient piece of harness attached to the saddle of a horse to enable the
rider, _sauter dessous_, to jump down.[94] Others derive it from an
instrument used _in saltu_, in the forest, for the purpose of taking wild
beasts; but neither of these hypotheses seems very probable. Leigh says,
"This in the old tyme, was of y{e} height of a man, and was borne of such
as used to scale the walls [_saltare in muros_] of towns. For it was
driven full of pinnes necessary to that purpose. And walles of townes were
_then_ but lowe as appeared by the walls of Rome, whiche were suche that
Remus easelye leaped over them. Witnesseth also the same the citie of
Winchester whose walls were overlooked of Colbrande, chieftaine of the
Danes, who were slayne by Guye, Erle of Warwike." The =cheveron=, which
resembles a pair of rafters, is likewise of very uncertain origin. It has
generally been considered as a kind of architectural emblem. Leigh,
speaking of a coat containing three cheveronels, or little cheverons,
says, "The ancestour of this cote hath builded iij greate houses in one
province," and this remark applies with some truth to the Lewkenors of
Sussex, who bore similar arms, though whether assumed from such a
circumstance I cannot ascertain. The =pile= is a wedge-like figure based
upon the edge of the shield, and having its apex inwards. The following
etymons have been suggested: 1, _pilum_, Lat. the head of an arrow; the
Spaniards and Italians call this ordinary _cuspis_. 2, _pile_, French, a
strong pointed timber driven into boggy ground to make a firm foundation.
3, _pied_, French, the foot; in French armory it is called _pieu_. I
cannot admit any of these derivations, though perhaps my own etymon may
not be deemed less irrelevant, viz. _pellis_, the skin of a beast, whence
our English terms pell, pelt, peltry, &c. The skin of a wild beast,
deprived of the head and fore legs, and fastened round the neck by the
hinder ones, would form a rude garment, such as the hunter would consider
an honourable trophy of his skill, and such as the soldier of an
unpolished age would by no means despise; and it would resemble, with
tolerable exactness, the pile of heraldry. The QUARTER is, as the word
implies, a fourth part of the field, differing in tincture from the
remainder; and the CANTON, a smaller quadrangular figure in the dexter, or
sinister, chief of the escocheon, so called from the French _cantone_,
cornered.
The following figures rank as sub-ordinaries, viz. _Flasques_, _Flanches_,
the _Fret_, _Border_, _Orle_, _Tressure_, _Gyron_, &c.
FLASQUES, always borne in pairs, are two pieces hollowed out at each side
of the shield: FLANCHES and VOIDERS are modifications of this bearing. The
last, says Leigh,[95] "is the reward of a gentlewoman for service by her
done to the prince or princess." It is not improbable that it was borrowed
from a peculiar fashion in female costume which prevailed temp. Richard
II. Chaucer uses the word _voided_ in the sense of removed, made empty,
and this is probably the origin of the term.
[Illustration]
When a shield is divided into eight acute-angled triangles, by lines drawn
perpendicularly, horizontally, and diagonally through the centre, it is
blazoned by the phrase '_gyronny_ of eight,' and so of any other number of
equal partitions of the same form. If one of these triangles occur singly
it is termed a _gyron_. For this term the nomenclature of heraldry is
indebted to the Spanish language, in which it means a gore, gusset, or
triangular piece of cloth. The family of Giron, subsequently ennobled as
Dukes of Ossona, bear three such figures in their arms, from the following
circumstance. Alphonso VI, king of Spain, in a battle with the Moors, had
his horse killed under him, when, being in great personal danger, he was
rescued and remounted by Don Roderico de Cissneres, who, as a memorial of
the event, cut three triangular pieces from his sovereign's mantle, which
being afterwards exhibited to the king, he bestowed on his valiant
follower an adequate reward, and gave him permission to bear three gyrons
as his arms. The English family of Gurr, whose surname was probably
derived from the village of Gueures, near Dieppe, bear 'gyronny ... and
...' as a 'canting' or allusive coat. Some derive this species of bearing
from a kind of patchwork mantle of various colours. Hence, doubtless, also
arose that picturesque species of bearing called _chequy_, consisting of
alternate squares of different tinctures. Chaucer and Spenser use the word
_checkelatoun_; probably in this sense:
"His robe was _cheque-latoun_."
_Knight's Tale._
"But in a jacket, quilted richly rare
Upon _checklaton_, was he richly dight."
_Faerie Queen._
The chequered dress of the Celtic nations, still retained in the Highland
plaid or tartan, may, in some way, have originated the chequered coat of
heraldry. At all events, this is a more probable source than the
chess-board, from which some writers derive it.
Most of the ordinaries have their diminutives, as the bendlet, the pallet,
the cheveronel, &c. These are usually bounded by straight lines; but the
ordinaries themselves admit of a variety of modifications of outline, as
follows: 1. _Indented_, like the teeth of a saw. According to Upton, this
line represents the teeth of wild beasts, but Dallaway derives it from a
moulding much employed in Saxon architecture. 2. _Crenelle_, or embattled,
like the top of a castle, (Lat. _crena_, a notch.) The 'licentia
crenellare' of the middle ages was the sovereign's permission to his
nobles to embattle or fortify their mansions. 3. _Nebuly_ (nebulosus,)
from its resemblance to clouds. 4. _Wavy_, or undulated. 5. _Dancette_,
like indented, but larger, and consisting of only three pieces. 6.
_Engrailed_, a number of little semi-circles connected in a line, the
points of junction being turned outward. Johnson derives this word from
the French 'grele,' hail, marked or indented as with hailstones. And 7.
_Invecked_, the same as the last, but reversed.
ROUNDLES are charges, as their name implies, of a circular form. The first
idea of bearing them as charges in heraldry may have been suggested by the
studs or knobs by which the parts of an actual buckler were strengthened
and held together. As soon as blazon was introduced they received
distinctive names, according to their tinctures. The bezant (or) was
supposed to represent a gold coin, in value about a ducat, struck at
Constantinople (Byzantium) in the times of the Crusades. Leigh, however,
assigns it a much greater value, and calls it a talent weighing 104 lbs.
troy, and worth 3750_l._ "Of these beisaunts you shall rede dyversly in
Scripture, as when Salomon had geuen unto Hiram xx cities, he again gave
vnto Salomon 120 _beisaunts_ of gold, whereof these toke their first
name," ('obeisance?') The _plate_ (argent) was probably some kind of
silver coin. The _torteaux_ (red) called in the Boke of S. A. "tortellys,
or litill cakys," are said to be emblematical of plenty, and to represent
a cake of bread. The modern French 'torteau' is applied more exclusively
to a kind of oil-cake of an oblong form used as food for cattle.
'Tortilla,' in Spanish, is a cake compounded of flour and lard. Dame J.
Berners says it should be called _wastel_. 'Wastel-brede' is defined in
the glossary to Chaucer, as bread made of the finest flour, and derived
from the French 'gasteau.' Chaucer represents his Prioresse as keeping
small hounds
"that she fedde
With rosted flesh, and milk and _wastel brede_."
_Prol. Cant. Tales._
_Pommes_ (green), says Dallaway, are berries; but if etymology is worth
anything, they must be apples, and such Leigh calls them. _Hurts_ (blue)
the same authority considers berries, and most heralds have taken them to
be those diminutive things, whortleberries, or as they are called in
Sussex, Cornwall, and Devonshire, 'hurts.' But I am rather inclined with
Leigh to consider them representations of the 'black and _blue_'
contusions resulting from the "clumsy thumps" of war. _Pellets_ or
_Ogresses_ (black) are the 'piletta' or leaden knobs forming the heads of
blunt arrows for killing deer without injuring the skin.[96] _Golpes_
(purple) are wounds, and when they stand five in a shield may have a
religious allusion to the five wounds of Christ. _Oranges_ (tenne) speak
for themselves; and _Guzes_, Leigh says, are eyeballs; but as their colour
is sanguine, or dull red, this seems unlikely.
The _Annulet_ seems to have been taken from the ring armour, much in use
about the period of the Norman Conquest. The _Orle_, or false escocheon,
is merely a band going round the shield at a short distance from the edge:
it was probably borrowed from an antient mode of ornamenting a shield,
serving as a kind of frame to the principal charge. Animals or flowers
disposed round the escocheon in the same form, are also termed an orle.
The _bordure_, or border, explains itself. Like the orle, it was primarily
designed as an ornament. The _lozenge_, derived by Glover from the quarry,
or small pane of glass of this shape, Dallaway thinks originated in the
diamond-shaped cushions which occur on tombs to support the heads of
female effigies, as helmets do those of men. The _mascle_ is taken for the
mesh of a net. When many are united the arms are blazoned _masculy_, and
then represent a rich network thrown over the armour. At the siege of
Carlaverok a certain knight is described as having his armour and
vestments 'masculy or and azure:'
"Son harnois et son attire
Avoit mascle de or et de azure."
_Billets_ have been conjectured to be representations of oblong camps, but
from the name they would seem to be _letters_. They may have been
originally assigned to bearers of important despatches. _Guttee_ is the
term applied to a field or charge sprinkled over with drops of gold,
silver, blood, tears, &c. according to the tincture. This kind of bearing
is said to have originated with the Duke of Anjou, King of Sicily, who,
after the loss of that island, appeared at a tournament with a black
shield sprinkled with drops of water, to represent tears, thus indicating
both his grief and his loss.[97] A warrior returning victorious from
battle, with his buckler sprinkled with blood, would, in the early days of
heraldry, readily have adopted the bearing afterwards called 'guttee de
sang.' In those times the besiegers of a fortress were often assailed with
boiling pitch, poured by the besieged through the machicolations of the
wall constructed for such purposes. Splashes of this pitch falling upon
some besieger's shield, in all probability gave the first idea of 'guttee
de poix.' The _fusil_ is like the lozenge, but narrower. Whatever the
charge may mean, the name is evidently a corruption of the Fr. _fuseau_, a
spindle. The _fret_ may have been borrowed from the architectural
ornaments of the interior of a roof, or more probably, from a knotted
cord. It is sometimes called =Harington's Knot=, though it is not
peculiar to the arms of that family, for it was also borne by the baronial
races of Echingham, Audley, and Verdon, and by many other families.[98]
My purpose being not to describe all the charges or figures occurring in
heraldry, but merely to assign a reasonable origin for those which appear
to the uninitiated to have neither propriety nor meaning, I pass by many
others, and come to those to which a symbolical sense is more readily
attachable, as the heavenly bodies, animals, vegetables, weapons of war,
implements of labour, &c. &c. Here I shall merely offer some general
remarks, for it is less my object to gratify curiosity on this subject
than to excite that attention to it which it really deserves, and
therefore I must say, with gentle Dame Julyan, "Bot for to reherce all the
signys that be borne in armys it were too long a tarying, nor I can not do
hit: _ther be so mony_!"
The heavenly bodies occur frequently in heraldry, and include the Sun, 'in
his glory,' or 'eclipsed;' the Moon, 'incressant,' 'in her complement,'
'decressant,' and 'in her detriment,' or eclipse; stars and comets. The
_crescent_ was the standard of the Saracens during the crusades, as it is
of their successors, the Turks, at this day. As one of the antient laws of
chivalry enacted that the vanquisher of a Saracen gentleman should assume
his arms, it is not remarkable that the crescent was, in the latter
Crusades, often transferred to the Christian shield; although we must
reject the notion that the infidels bore regular heraldric devices. It is
probable, however, that their bucklers were ornamented in various ways
with their national symbol. Several authentic instances of arms with
crescents borne by English families from that early date, are to be found.
Most of the families of Ellis, of this country, bear a cross with four or
more crescents, derived from Sir Archibald Ellis, of Yorkshire, who went
to the Holy Land. From a miraculous event said to have happened during the
Crusade under Rich. I. to Sir Robert Sackville, the noble descendants of
that personage still bear an _estoile_, or star, as their crest.
The ELEMENTS also furnish armorial charges, as flames of fire, rocks,
stones, _islands_, thunderbolts, clouds, rainbows, water, and fountains.
These last are represented by azure roundles charged with three bars wavy
argent. In the arms of Sykes, of Yorkshire, they are called _sykes_--that
being a provincialism for little pools or springs. The antient family of
Gorges bore a _gurges_, or whirlpool, an unique instance, I believe, of
that bearing.
If we derive heraldry from the standards of antient nations, then,
undoubtedly, ANIMALS are the very oldest of armorial charges, since those
standards almost invariably exhibited some animal as their device.
Familiar examples present themselves in the Roman _eagle_ and the Saxon
_horse_. Of QUADRUPEDS the lion occupies the first place, and is far more
usual than any other animal whatever. The king of beasts is found in the
heraldric field in almost every variety of posture, and tinctured with
every hue recognized by the laws of blazon. It may be remarked here, that
in the early days of heraldry animals were probably borne of their
'proper' or natural colour, but as, in process of time, the use of arms
became more common, and the generous qualities of the lion rendered him
the object of general regard as an armorial ensign, it became absolutely
necessary to vary his attitudes and colours, for the purposes of
distinction. The same remark applies, in a greater or less degree, to
other animals and objects. As the emblem of courage the lion has been
represented and misrepresented in a thousand forms. A well-drawn heraldric
lion is a complete caricature of the animal; and hence the ire displayed
by the country herald-painter when shown the lions in the Tower is very
excusable: "What!" said the honest man, "tell me that's a lion; why I've
painted lions rampant and lions passant, and all sorts of lions these five
and twenty years, and for sure I ought to know what a lion's like better
than all that!"
The circumstance of the royal arms of England containing three lions and
those of Scotland one, has rendered this animal a special favourite with
British armorists. Leigh and Guillim, particularly, are very minute in
their remarks upon him. The French heralds object to the representation of
the lion _guardant_, that is, with his face turned full upon the
spectator, and declare that this posture is proper to the leopard,
"wherein," says Guillim, "they offer great indignity to that _roiall
beast_, in that they will not admit him, as saith Upton, to show his full
face, the sight whereof doth terrifie and astonish all the beasts of the
field, and wherein consisteth his chiefest majesty, '=quia omnia animalia
debent depingi et designari in suo ferociore actu=.'" The French still
allude derisively to our national charge as only a leopard. That one of
these dissimilar animals could be mistaken for the other affords singular
evidence of the rudeness with which arms in the middle ages were
delineated.
[Illustration: (Lyon rampant. Guillim.)]
The _leopard_, as an heraldric charge, has been treated with more obloquy
than he deserves, from the erroneous notion that he was a bigenerous
animal, bred between the lion and the female panther. The _bear_ is
generally borne muzzled and 'salient,' leaping, or rather jumping, the
posture of the animal most familiar to our ancestors, who greatly
delighted in his uncouth dancing. The _elephant_, the _wolf_, one of the
most elegant of heraldric devices, the _fox_, the _rabbit_, the
_squirrel_, the _monkey_, the _beaver_, the _porcupine_, the
_cat-a-mountain_, and many other wild animals borne in arms, need no
comment.
The _heraldric tiger_ furnishes another proof of the ignorance of our
ancestors in the natural history of foreign animals. It is represented
thus:
[Illustration]
Among the domestic animals borne in arms are the _horse_, the _ass_, the
_camel_, the _bull_, the _ox_, the _greyhound_, the _talbot_ or mastiff,
the _ram_, the _lamb_, the _hog_, &c.
The horse, from his associations with chivalry and war, has ever been a
favourite charge. The lamb, as commonly represented, with the nimbus round
its head and the banner of the cross, is termed a _holy lamb_. The _alant_
or wolf-dog, an extinct species, is of rare occurrence in arms.
"Abouten his char ther wenten white _alauns_,
Twenty and mo as gret as any stere,
To hunten at the leon or the dere."
_Chaucer._
The _alant_ was the supporter of Fynes, Lord Dacre.
Most of the above were probably borne emblematically, but the _stag_,
_deer_, _boar_, &c., seem to be trophies of the chase, especially when
their heads only occur. The heads and other parts of animals are
represented either as _couped_, cut off smoothly, or _erased_, torn off as
it were with violence, leaving the place of separation jagged and uneven.
The boar's head may have been derived from the old custom of serving up a
boar's head at the tables of feudal nobles. This practice is still
observed in the hall of Queen's College, Oxford, on Christmas-day, when an
antient song or carol, appropriate enough to the ceremony, though not very
well befitting the time and the place, is sung. It begins thus:
"The boar's head in hand bear I,
Bedeck'd with bays and rosemary,
And I pray you, my masters, be merry,
Quot estis in convivio.
=Caput apri defero
Reddens laudes Domino.="
The presentation of a boar's head forms the condition of several feudal
tenures in various parts of the country. As an heraldric bearing, and as a
sign for inns, it is of very antient date. Of its latter application the
far-famed hostelry in Eastcheap affords one among many examples; while its
use in armory was familiar to the father of English poesy, who, describing
the equipments of Sir Thopas, says,
"His sheld was all of gold so red
And therin was a _bore's hed_,
A charboncle beside."
The annexed singular bearing, 'a cup with a boar's head erect,' evidently
alludes to some obsolete custom or tenure.
[Illustration]
It may be remarked here that many of the terms of heraldry, when applied
to the parts and attitudes of 'beastes of venerie and huntyng,' are
identical with the expressions used by learned _chasseurs_ of the 'olden
tyme,' and which are fully elucidated by Dame Julyan, Manwood,
Blundeville, and other writers on woodcraft and the chase; a _science_, by
the way, as systematic in the employment of terms as heraldry itself. This
remark applies equally to the technical words in falconry used in
describing falcons, hawks, &c., when they occur in armory.
When antient armorists had so far departed from the propriety of nature as
to paint swans red and tigers green, it was not difficult to admit still
greater monstrosities. Double-headed and double-tailed lions and eagles
occur at an early date; but these are nothing when compared with the
double and triple-_bodied_ lions figured by Leigh.[99] It would be a mere
waste of time to speculate upon the origin of such bearings, which owe
their birth to "the rich exuberance of a Gothick fancy"--the fertile
source of the chimerical figures noticed in the next chapter.
Among BIRDS, the _eagle_ holds the highest rank. The lyon was the royal
beast--this the imperial bird. He is almost uniformly exhibited in front,
with expanded wings, and blazoned by the term 'displayed.' The _falcon_,
_hawk_, _moor-cock_, _swan_, _cock_, _owl_, _stork_, _raven_, _turkey_,
_peacock_, _swallow_, and many others of the winged nation are well known
to the most careless observer of armorial ensigns. The _Cornish chough_, a
favourite charge, is curiously described by Clarke as "a _fine blue or
purple black-bird_, with red beak and legs," and said to be "a noble
bearing of antiquity, being accounted the _king of crows_!"
The _pelican_ was believed to feed her young with her own blood, and
therefore represented "vulning herself," that is, pecking her breast for a
supply of the vital fluid.[100] The wings are usually indorsed or thrown
upwards; "but this," says Berry, "is unnecessary in the blazon, as that is
the only position in which the pelican is represented in coat-armour."
This may be true of modern heraldry, but antiently this bird was borne
'close,' that is, with the wings down. The pelicans in the arms of the
family of Pelham, resident at Laughton, co. Sussex, temp. Henry IV, were
represented in this manner, as appears from a shield in one of the
spandrels of the western door of Laughton church, and from some painted
glass in the churches of Waldron and Warbleton. In a carving of the
fifteenth century, among the ruins of Robertsbridge Abbey, the pelicans
have their wings slightly raised, and in the modern arms of Pelham they
are indorsed, as shown below.
[Illustration: Laughton Church.]
[Illustration: Robertsbridge Abbey.]
[Illustration: Modern Arms.]
Fishes, as borne in arms, have recently been made the subject of an able,
most interesting, and beautifully illustrated volume.[101] In my _en
passant_ survey of the ensigns of armory it will suffice to remark that
the _dolphin_ takes the same rank among heraldric fishes as the lion
occupies among quadrupeds, and the eagle among birds; after him the
_pike_, _salmon_, _barbel_, and _trout_ hold an honourable place, and even
the _herring_ and _sprat_ are not deemed too mean for armory. Neither have
shell-fish been overlooked: the _escallop_ in particular, from its
religious associations, has always been a special favourite.
AMPHIBIA, REPTILES, and INSECTS sometimes occur, particularly _toads_,
_serpents_, _adders_, _tortoises_, _scorpions_, _snails_, _grasshoppers_,
_spiders_, _ants_, _bees_, and _gad-flies_. It is singular that such
despised and noxious creatures as the scorpion and the toad should have
been adopted as marks of honour; yet such, in former times, was the taste
for _allusive_ arms that the Botreuxes, of Cornwall, relinquished a simple
antient coat in favour of one containing three toads, because the word
'botru' in the Cornish language signified a toad!
The HUMAN FIGURE and its parts are employed in many arms. The arms
pertaining to the bishopric of Salisbury contain a representation of "our
blessed Lady, with her son in her right hand and a sceptre in her left."
The arms of the see of Chichester are the most singular to be found in the
whole circle of church heraldry. They are blazoned thus: 'Azure,
_Prester-John_ hooded, sitting on a tomb-stone; in his sinister hand an
open book; his dexter hand extended, with the two fore-fingers erect, all
or; _in his mouth_ a sword, fessewise, gules, hilt and pommel or, the
point to the sinister.'[102] Prester or Presbyter-John, the person here
represented, was a fabulous person of the middle ages, who was imagined to
sway the sceptre of a powerful empire _somewhere_ in the East, and who
must have been a very long-lived personage, unless he was _reproduced_
from time to time like the phoenix of antiquity. Many writers, during
the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, make mention of him.
Sir John Maundevile describes his territory, which, however, he did not
visit. That country, according to his statement, contained rocks of
adamant,[103] which attracted all the ships that happened to come near
them, until the congeries appeared like a forest, and became a kind of
floating island. It also abounded in popinjays or parrots as "plentee as
gees," and precious stones large enough to make "plateres, dissches, and
cuppes." "Many other marveylles been there," he adds, "so that it were to
cumbrous and to long to putten it in scripture of bokes." He describes the
Emperor himself as "cristene," and believing "wel in the Fadre, in the
Sone, and in the Holy Gost," yet, in some minor points, not quite sound in
the faith. As to his imperial state, he possessed 72 provinces, over each
of which presided a king; and he had so great an army that he could devote
330,000 men to guard his standards, which were "3 crosses of gold, fyn,
grete and hye, fulle of precious stones." It is related of Columbus that
he saw on one of the islands of the West Indies, which he then apprehended
to be a part of the continent of Asia, a grave and sacred personage whom
he at first believed to be Prester-John. This incident serves to show that
the existence of this chimerical being was credited even so lately as the
close of the fifteenth century, although Roger Bacon, in the thirteenth,
doubted many of the tales related of him--"de quo tanta fama solebat esse,
et multa falsa dicta sunt et scripta."[104] The best account of him is to
be found in the work of Matthew Paris, the monk of St. Albans, who wrote
before the year 1250. Marco Polo also mentions him in his travels.[105]
Porny places him in Abyssinia under the title of _Preter cham_, or 'prince
of the worshippers,' while Heckford[106] considers him a priest and one of
the followers of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople in the fifth
century.
_Kings_ and _bishops_ occur as charges; but rarely. The heads of Moors and
Saracens are more common, and belong to the category of trophies, having
originated, for the most part, during the Crusades. The arms of the Welsh
family of Vaughan are 'a cheveron between three children's heads ...
enwrapped about the necks with as many snakes proper.' "It hath beene
reported," saith old Guillim, "that some one of the ancestors of this
family was borne with a snake about his necke: _a matter not impossible_,
but yet very unprobable!" Besides heads, the armorial shield is sometimes
charged with arms and legs, naked, vested, or covered with armour, hands,
feet, eyes, hearts, winged and unwinged, &c. The coat of Tremaine exhibits
three arms (et tres manus!) and that of the Isle of Man, three legs, as
here represented. Of the former, Guillim remarks, "these armes and hands
conjoyned and clenched after this manner may signify a treble offer of
revenge for some notable injurie." If we might be jocular upon so grave a
subject as armory, we should consider the second coat a happy allusion to
the geographical position of the island between the three kingdoms of
England, Ireland, and Scotland, as if it had run away from all three, and
were kicking up its heels in derision of the whole empire![107]
[Illustration]
The VEGETABLE KINGDOM has furnished its full quota of charges. We have
whole trees, as the _oak_, _pine_, _pear-tree_, &c.; parts of trees, as
_oak-branches_, and _starved_ (_i.e._ dead) _branches_, trunks of trees,
generally raguly or knobbed; leaves, as _laurel_, _fig_, _elm_,
_woodbine_, _nettle_, and _holly_; fruit, as _pomegranates_, _apples_,
_pears_, _pine-apples_, _grapes_, _acorns_, and _nuts_; flowers, as the
_rose_, _lily_, _columbine_, _gilliflower_, &c.; corn, as stalks of wheat
and rye, and particularly _garbs_ (Fr. gerbes) or wheatsheaves; to which
some add _trefoils_, _quatrefoils_, and _cinquefoils_, and the bearing
familiar to all in the arms of France, and called the _Fleur-de-lis_.
Respecting the _trefoil_, there can be little doubt, as Mr. Dallaway
observes, that it was borrowed from the foliated ornaments of antient
coronets, which again were imitations of the natural wreath. The shamrock,
which is identical with the trefoil, is the national badge of Ireland. Of
the quatre and cinquefoils "almost any conjecture would be weakly
supported. Amongst the very early embellishments of Gothic architecture
are quatrefoils, at first inserted simply in the heads of windows, between
or over the incurvated or elliptical points of the mullions, and
afterwards diversified into various ramifications, which were the florid
additions to that style."[108] These terms are common to both architecture
and heraldry, but from which of the two the other adopted them must remain
in doubt.
The non-heraldric reader will be surprised to learn that the identity of
the _fleur-de-lis_ with the iris or 'royal lily' has ever been called in
question; yet it has been doubted, with much reason, whether an ornamented
spear-head or sceptre be not the thing intended. The Boke of S. A. informs
us that the arms of the king of France were "certainli sende by an awngell
from heuyn, that is to say iij flowris in maner of swerdis in a felde of
asure, the wich certan armys ware geuyn to the forsayd kyng of fraunce in
sygne of euerlasting trowbull, and that he and his successaries all way
with bataill and swereddys (swords) shulde be punyshid!" Those who imagine
the bearing to be a play upon the royal name of Loys or Louis decide in
favour of the flower. Upton calls it '=flos gladioli=.'[109] Perhaps it
was made a flower for the purpose of assimilating it to the English rose;
certainly all our associations, historical and poetical, would tell in
favour of its being such; and such it was undoubtedly understood to be in
the time of Chaucer, who says of Sire Thopas,
"Upon his crest he bare a tour (tower),
And therein stiked a _lily flour_."
Leigh seems to entertain no doubt of its belonging to the vegetable
kingdom; for in his notice of this charge he particularly describes the
flower and the root of the iris. Mr. Montagu, in his recent 'Guide to the
Study of Heraldry,' thinks the arguments of M. de Menestrier "in favour of
the iris so strong as _almost_ to set the question at rest."[110]
[Illustration]
Those who advocate the spear-head view of the question, bring forward the
common heraldric bearing, _a leopard's head jessant de lis_, i. e. thrust
through the mouth with a fleur-de-lis, which passes through the skull as
represented in the above cut. "There cannot," as Dallaway says, "be a more
absurd combination than that of a leopard's head producing a lily, while
the idea that it was typical of the triumph after the chase, when the
head of the animal was thrust through with a spear and so carried in
procession," seems perfectly consistent. Still the query may arise 'how is
it that the head of no other animal, the wolf or boar for instance, is
found represented in a similar manner?'
The little band surrounding the _pieces_ of which the fleur-de-lis of
heraldry is composed is analogous to nothing whatever in the flower, while
it does strongly resemble the forril of metal which surrounds the
insertion of a spear-head into its staff or pole. After an attentive
consideration of both hypotheses, I have no hesitation in affirming that
the fleur-de-lis is _not_ the lily. This is shown, not from the occurrence
of lilies in their proper shape in some coats, and that of the heraldric
_lis_ in others, (for such a variation might have been accidentally made
by the incorrect representations of unskilful painters,) but from the fact
that both lilies and lis are found in one and the same coat--that of Eton
College.[111]
[Illustration]
The Tressure surrounding the lion in the royal arms of Scotland is
blazoned 'fleury and counter-fleury,' that is, having fleurs-de-lis
springing from it, both on the outer and inner sides. The fabulous account
of the tressure is that it was given by Charlemagne to Achaius, king of
Scotland in the year 792, in token of alliance and friendship. Nisbet
says, "The Tressure Flowerie encompasses the Lyon of Scotland, to show
that he should defend the Flower-de-lisses, and _these to continue a
defence to the Lion_."[112]
Now, although we must discard this early existence of the Scottish
ensigns, it is by no means improbable that the addition of the tressure
was made in commemoration of some alliance between the two crowns at a
later date. But the _defence_ which a bulwark of lilies could afford the
king of beasts would be feeble indeed! Yet, upon the supposition that the
fleur-de-lis is intended for a spear-head, such an addition would be
exceedingly appropriate, as forming a kind of chevaux-de-frise[113] around
the animal.
This doubtful charge may serve as a turning point between 'things
naturall' and 'things artificiall.' Among the latter, crowns, sceptres,
orbs, caps of maintenance, mantles of state, and such-like insignia may be
first named. According to Dame Julyan Berners, _crowns_ formed part of the
arms of King Arthur--"iij dragonys and over that an other sheelde of iij
crownys." Mitres, crosiers, &c. occur principally, though not exclusively,
in church heraldry. From attention in the first instance to the 'arts
liberall' came such charges as books, pens, ink-horns, text-letters, as
=A='s, =T='s and =S='s, organ-pipes, hautboys, harps, viols, bells, &c.
The 'arts mechanicall' furnish us with implements of agriculture, as
ploughs, harrows, scythes, wheels, &c. The _Catherine Wheel_ Dallaway
takes for a cogged, or denticulated mill-wheel, with reference to some
feudal tenure, but it seems rather ungallant to rob the female saint of
the instrument of her passion, while St. Andrew and St. George are allowed
to retain theirs in undisturbed possession. Manufactures afford the
wool-comb, the spindle, the shuttle, the comb, the hemp-break, &c. Among
mechanical implements are included pick-axes, mallets, hammers, plummets,
squares, axes, nails, &c. Architecture furnishes towers, walls, bridges,
pillars, &c. From the marine we have antient ships, boats, rudders, masts,
anchors, and sails. From field-sports come bugle (that is bullock) horns,
bows, arrows, pheons or fish-spears, falcons' bells, and lures,
fish-hooks, eel-spears, nets of various kinds, and bird-bolts. The
bird-bolt was a small blunt arrow, with one, two, or three heads, used
with the crossbow for shooting at birds. Hence the adage of '=The fool's
Bolt is soon shot=,' applied to the hasty expression or retort of an
ignorant babbler. John Heywood versifies the proverb thus:
"A foole's bolte is soone shot, and fleeth oftymes fer;
But the foole's bolte and the mark cum few times ner."[114]
From sedentary games are borrowed playing-tables, dice, chess-rooks, &c.
[Illustration]
War has naturally supplied heraldry with a numerous list of charges, as
banners, spears, beacons, drums, trumpets, cannons, or chamber-pieces,
'murthering chain-shot,' burning matches (of rope), portcullises,
battering-rams, crossbows, swords, sabres, lances, battle-axes, and
scaling-ladders; also shields, generally borne in threes, helmets,
morions, gauntlets, greaves (leg armour), horse-trappings, bridles,
saddles, spurs, horse-shoes, shackles, _cum multis aliis_. Many of these,
though disused in modern warfare, will require no explanation, but a few
others whose use is less obvious may be added, as _swepes_, _caltraps_,
and _water-bowgets_.
The _swepe_, sometimes called a _mangonel_, and as such borne in the
canting arms of Magnall, was a war-engine, used for the purpose of hurling
stones into a besieged town or fortress; a species of balista.
[Illustration: Murthering chain-shot.]
[Illustration: Caltrap.]
[Illustration: Beacon.]
[Illustration: Swepe.]
In the celebrated lampoon upon Richard, king of the Romans, who was
obliged, at the battle of Lewes, to take refuge in a windmill, the
following lines occur:
"The Kynge of Alemaigne wende to do full wel,
He saisede the mulne for a castel;
With hare sharpe swerdes he ground the stel,
He wende that the sayles were _mangonel_!"[115]
The _caltrap_ was a cruel contrivance for galling the feet of horses. It
was made of iron, and so constructed that, however it might fall, one of
its four sharp points should be erect. Numbers of them strewed in the
enemy's path served to retard the advance of cavalry, and a retreat was
sometimes secured by dropping them in the flight, and thus cutting off the
pursuit. Its etymology is uncertain, cheval-trap and _gall_-trap have been
suggested with nearly equal claims to probability.
Water-bowgets, or budgets, date from the Crusades, when water had often to
be conveyed across the sandy deserts from a great distance. They are
represented in various grotesque forms as--
[Illustration]
so that it is a matter of curiosity to know in what manner they were
carried. Leigh and others call them _gorges_; but the charge properly
known by that name is a whirlpool, as borne in the armes parlantes of the
family of Gorges.
The _mullet_, a star-like figure, has been taken to represent the rowel of
a spur; but a doubt of this derivation of the charge may be suggested, as
the spur of the middle ages had no rowel, but consisted of one sharp
spike. Some of the old heralds considered mullets as representations of
falling stars--"exhalations inflamed in the aire and stricken back with a
cloud"--which, according to Guillim, are sometimes found on the earth like
a certain jelly, and assuming the form of the charge. The substance
alluded to bears the name of star-jelly. In the Gentleman's Magazine for
1797, are several communications on this subject, in which there is a
great contrariety of opinion, some of the writers contending that it is an
animal substance, while others consider it a vegetable. As it is usually
found in boggy grounds, Dr. Darwin deemed it a mucilage voided by herons
after they have eaten frogs, and Pennant attributed it to gulls. The
antient alchemists called it the flower of heaven, and imagined that from
it they could procure the universal menstruum; but all their researches
ended in discovering that by distillation it yielded some phlegm, volatile
salt, and empyreumatic oil.[116]
Personal costume, although mixed up with the very earliest of heraldric
devices, furnishes scarcely any regular charges. Excepting shoes, caps,
and body-armour, the _maunch_ is almost the only one derived from this
source. This charge, a familiar example of which occurs in the arms of the
noble family of Hastings, represents an antient fashion of sleeve worn
soon after the Conquest, but of such an extravagant form that Leigh
blazons it a _maunch-maltale_, a badly-cut sleeve; and certainly the
example given by him fully justifies the use of that epithet. The taste
for a long pendulous addition to the cuff of the sleeve forms one of the
most curious features of the female costume of the twelfth century.
According to Brydson, the maunch was a distinguished "favour" bestowed on
some knights, being part of the dress of the lady or princess who
presented it.
The woodcut (no inappropriate _tail-piece_ for the present chapter)
delineates several antient forms of this article. Well may Master Leigh
remark, "Of thinges of antiquitee growen out of fashion this is one."
[Illustration: No. 1, Leigh; 3, 4, from Planche's Hist. Brit. Cost.; 2,
Arms of Hastings, from the tomb of W. de Valence, Earl of Pembroke,
Westminster Abbey.
=Mangys be called in armys a sleue.=
_Boke S. A._]
CHAPTER IV.
Chimerical Figures of Heraldry.
[Illustration]
"Manye merveylles there ben in that regioun."
_Sir John Maundevile._
The days of the Crusaders were the days of romance. "From climes so
fertile in monsters as those through which these adventurers passed,"
observes Dallaway, "we cannot wonder that any fiction was readily received
by superstitious admirers, whose credulity nothing could exhaust." The
narrations of those warriors who had the good fortune to revisit their
native lands were eagerly seized upon by that new class of literary
aspirants, the Romance writers, by means of whose wonder-exciting
productions, giants, griffins, dragons, and monsters of every name, became
familiarized to all. For ages the existence of these products of a
"gothick fancy" was never called in question. The early travellers, such
as Marco Polo and our own renowned Sir John Maundevile, pandered to the
popular taste, and what those chroniclers of 'grete merveyles' reported in
the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was religiously believed in the
sixteenth, and hardly questioned even in the seventeenth. In the early
part of this period, indeed, it can scarcely be expected that the
multitude at least should have been disabused of the delusion, when the
existence of witchcraft was considered an essential part of the common
creed,--when a learned herald, like Guillim, could write a tirade against
"divellish witches that doe worke the destruction of silly infants, and
also of cattel,"--and when the supreme magistrate of these realms could
instigate the burning of deformed old women, and write treatises upon
"Daemonology," which, among other matters, taught his loyal and undoubting
subjects that these maleficae were wont to perform their infernal pranks by
means of circles, some of which were _square_, and others _triangular_! It
was reserved for the advancing light of the eighteenth century to break
the spell, and scatter these monsters to the winds. This, however, was not
to be done at once; for our grandfathers, and even our fathers, gathered
their knowledge of popular _natural_ history from a book which contained
minute descriptions of the _dragon_, 'adorned with cuts' of that
remarkable hexapede, for the edification of its admiring readers!
Under the category of Heraldric Monsters the following deserve especial
notice:--
The Allerion
Chimera
Cockatrice
Dragon
Griffin
Harpy
Lyon-Dragon
Lyon-Poisson
Mermaid
Montygre
Martlet
Opinicus
Pegasus
Sphinx
Sagittary
Satyr
Unicorn
Wyvern
Winged Lyon
Winged Bull.[117]
The _allerion_ is a fabulous bird without either beak or legs, described
by some writers as very small, like a martlet, while others give him the
size of an eagle. The name is derived from the circumstance of his being
destitute of all his extremities except the wings (ailles). Three such
birds, according to the chroniclers of the middle ages, were shot with an
arrow from a tower, by Godfrey of Boulogne, duke of Lorraine, at the siege
of Jerusalem, during the first crusade; and three allerions upon a bend,
in honour of that event, are borne as the arms of the duchy of Lorraine to
this day.[118]
The _chimera_ is, to use the words of Bossewell, "a beaste or monstre
hauing thre heades, one like a Lyon, an other like a Goate, the third like
a Dragon."[119]
The _cockatrice_[120] is a cock, with the wings and tail of a dragon. The
best account of him is given by Leigh: "Thys though he be but at ye most a
foote of length yet is he kyng of all serpentes[121] of whome they are
most afrayde and flee from. For with his breath and sight he sleath all
thynges that comme within a speare's length of him. He infecteth the water
that he commeth neare. His enemy is the wesell, who when he goeth to fight
with y{e} cockatrice eateth the herbe commonlye called Rewe, and so in
fight byting him he dyeth and the wesell therewith dyeth also. And though
the cockatrice be veneme withoute remedye whilest he liueth, yet when he
is dead and burnt to ashes, he loseth all his malice, and the ashes of him
are good for alkumistes, and namely, in turnyng and chaungeyng of
mettall." To this latter remark he adds, "I have not seene the proofe
thereof, and yet I have been one of Jeber's cokes."
The _dragon_ is usually depicted with a serpentine body, sharp ears, a
barbed tongue and tail, strong leathern wings armed with sharp points, and
four eagles' feet, strongly webbed; but there are many modifications of
this form. "Of fancy monsters, the winged, scaly, fiery dragon is by far
the most poetical fabrication of antiquity. To no word, perhaps, are
attached ideas more extraordinary, and of greater antiquity, than to that
of dragon. We find it consecrated by the religion of the earliest people,
and become the object of their mythology. It got mixed up with fable, and
poetry, and history, till it was universally believed, and was to be found
everywhere but in nature.[122] In our days nothing of the kind is to be
seen, excepting a harmless animal hunting its insects. The light of these
days has driven the fiery dragon to take refuge among nations not yet
visited by the light of civilization. The _draco volans_ is a small
lizard, and the only reptile possessing the capacity of flight. For this
purpose it is provided on each side with a membrane between the feet,
which unfolds like a fan at the will of the animal, enabling it to spring
from one tree to another while pursuing its food. It is a provision
similar to that of the flying squirrel, enabling it to take a longer
leap."[123] The annexed cut represents a _dragon volant_, as borne in the
arms of Raynon of Kent, and the _draco volans_ of the zoologists. A
fossil flying lizard has been found in the lias of Dorsetshire, which, to
employ the words of Professor Buckland, is "a monster resembling nothing
that has ever been seen or heard of upon earth, excepting the dragons of
romance and heraldry."
[Illustration]
Considering the hideous form and character of the dragon, it is somewhat
surprising to find him pourtrayed upon the banner and the shield as an
honourable distinction; unless he was employed by way of trophy of a
victory gained over some enemy, who might be symbolically represented in
this manner. The dragon often occurring at the feet of antient monumental
effigies is understood to typify _sin_, over which the deceased has now
triumphed; and the celebrated monster of this tribe slain by our patron
saint, St. George, was doubtless a figurative allusion to a certain
pestilent heresy which he vehemently resisted and rooted out. Favine, on
the Order of Hungary, remarks that the French historians speak of Philip
Augustus 'conquering the dragon' when he overcame Otho IV, who bore a
dragon as the standard of his empire.[124] It has been suggested that the
design of commanders in depicting monsters and wild beasts upon their
standards was to inspire the enemy with terror.[125]
[Illustration]
The dragon forms a part of the fictitious arms of King Arthur; and another
early British king bore the surname of =Pen-Dragon=, or the 'dragon's
head.' The standard of the West Saxon monarchs was a golden dragon in a
red banner. In the Bayeux tapestry a dragon on a pole repeatedly occurs
near the person of King Harold; and in the instance which is copied in the
margin, the words 'HIC HAROLD' are placed over it.[126] It was an early
badge of the Princes of Wales, and was also assumed at various periods by
our English monarchs. Henry III used it at the battle of Lewes in 1264.
"Symoun com to the feld,
And put up his banere;
The Kyng schewed forth his scheld,
His _Dragon_ fulle austere.
The Kyng said 'On hie,
Symon jeo vous defie!'"
_Robert Brunne._
"The order for the creation of this 'austere' beast," says Mr. Blaauw, "is
still extant. Edward Fitz-Odo, the king's goldsmith, was commanded, in
1244, to make it 'in the manner of a standard or ensign, of red samit,' to
be embroidered with gold, and his tongue to appear as though continually
moving, and his eyes of sapphire, or other stones agreeable to him."[127]
"Then was ther a Dragon grete and grimme,
Full of fyre and also venymme,
With a wide throte and tuskes grete."[128]
The dragon-standard must have been in high favour with commanders, for in
the same war we find it unfurled in the opposite cause by the leader of
the baronial party:
"When Sir Simoun wist the dome ageyn them gone,
His felonie forth thrist, somned his men ilkon,
Displaied his banere, lift up his Dragoun!"
_Robt. Brunne._
"When Sir Simon knew the judgment given against them, his wickedness burst
forth, he gathered all his men, displayed his banner, and lifted up his
Dragon."[129] The expression '_his_ dragon' must not be understood to
imply any peculiar right to the device, for the arms of De Montfort were
widely different, viz. 'Gules, a lion rampant, double queue, argent.' From
the indiscriminate use of the monster by different, and even by contending
parties, I should consider him merely as the emblem of defiance. The
Dragon must not be confounded with the usual pennon, or standard of an
army, as it was employed in addition to it. Matthew of Westminster,
speaking of the early battles of this country, says, "The king's place was
_between_ the Dragon and the standard."[130] Among the ensigns borne at
Cressy was a burning dragon, to show that the French were to receive
little mercy.[131] This dragon was of red silk, adorned and beaten with
very broad and fair lilies of gold, and bordered about with gold and
vermilion. The French frequently carried a red pennon, embroidered with a
dragon of gold. Our Henry VI caused a particular coin to be struck, the
reverse of which exhibited a banner charged with a demi-dragon, and a
black dragon was one of the badges of Edward IV. A red dragon was one of
the supporters of Henry VII, Henry VIII, and Elizabeth, whence the title,
Rouge-dragon, of one of the existing pursuivants in the College of Arms.
The _griffin_, or griphon, scarcely less famous than the dragon, was a
compound animal, having the head, wings, and feet of an eagle, with the
hinder part of a lion. He is thus described by Sir John Maundevile in the
26th chapter of his 'ryght merveylous' Travels:
"In that contree [Bacharie] ben many Griffounes, more plentee than in ony
other contree. Sum men seyn that thei han the body upward as an egle, and
benethe as a lyoun; and treuly thei seyn sothe that thei ben of that
schapp. But 0 Griffoun hathe the body more gret and more strong thane 8
lyouns, of such lyouns as ben o' this half (hemisphere); and more gret and
strongere than an 100 egles, suche as we han amonges us. For 0 Griffoun
there wil bere fleynge to his nest a gret hors, or 2 oxen yoked to gidere
as thei gon at the plowghe. For he hathe his talouns so longe and so large
and grete upon his feet, as thowghe thei weren hornes of grete oxen, or of
bugles or of kygn, so that men maken cuppes of hem to drynke of, and of
hire ribbes and of the pennes of hire wenges men maken bowes fulle stronge
to schote with arwes, and quarell."
Casley says that in the Cottonian Library there was a cup of the
description just referred to, four feet in length, and inscribed--
"=Griphi unguis divo Cuthberto Dunelmensi sacer=,"
a dedication which, I must confess, puzzles me sorely. A griffin's claw
and the 'saint-bishop' of Durham seem as absurd a combination of ideas as
that presented in the old proverbial phrase of 'Great A and a Bull's
Foot,' or by the tavern sign of 'The Goat and Compasses.' If wisdom,
according to classical authority, lies in a well, so does the wit of this
association. Another griffin's claw, curiously mounted on an eagle's leg
of silver, which came at the Revolution from the Treasury at St. Denis, is
preserved in the cabinet of antiquities in the King's Library at Paris.
Three such talons were formerly kept at Bayeux, and were fastened on high
days to the altar as precious relics! A 'corne de griffoun' is mentioned
in the Kalend. of Excheq. iii, 176. Another, about an ell in length, is
mentioned by Dr. Grew in his 'History of the Rarities of the Royal
Society,' p. 26. The Doctor thinks it the horn of a roebuck, or of the
_Ibex mas_. Leigh says that griffyns "are of a great hugenes, for I have a
clawe of one of their pawes, which should show them to be as bygge as
_two_ lyons." The egg was likewise preserved as a valuable curiosity, and
used as a goblet. "Item, j oef de griffon, garnis d'argent, od pie et
covercle." The griffin was assumed by the family of Le Dispenser, and the
upper part appears as the crest on the helm of Hugh le Dispenser, who was
buried at Tewkesbury in 1349. Another strikingly designed representation
of this curious animal is seen at Warwick, at the feet of Richard
Beauchamp, who died in 1439.[132]
The _harpy_, unusual in English armory, has the head and breasts of a
woman, with the body, legs, and wings of a vulture. This was a classical
monster. Guillim, imitating Virgil,[133] says:
"Of monsters all, most monstrous this; no greater wrath
God sends 'mongst men; it comes from depths of pitchy hell;
And virgin's face, but wombe like gulfe insatiate hath;
Her hands are griping clawes, her colour pale and fell."
The coat 'Azure, a harpy or,' was 'in Huntingdon church' in Guillim's
time.
The _lyon-dragon_ and the _lyon-poisson_ are compound monsters; the former
of a lion and a dragon, and the latter of a lion and a fish. These are of
very rare occurrence, as is also the _monk-fish_, or Sea Friar, which
Randle Holme tells us 'is a fish in form of a frier.' 'Such a monstrous
and wonderful fish,' he adds, 'was taken in Norway.'
The identity of the popular idea of the _mermaid_ with the classical
notion of the syren is shown in the following passage from Shakspeare:
"Thou rememberest
Since once I sat upon a promontory,
And heard a Mermaid on a dolphin's back
Uttering such dulcet and harmonious breath,
That the rude sea grew civil at her song."
And Brown, in his 'Vulgar Errours,' observes, "few eyes have escaped
[that] the picture of a Mermaid, with woman's head above, and fishy
extremity below, answers the shape of the antient syrens that attempted
upon Ulysses." The heraldric mermaid usually holds a mirror in her right
hand and a comb in her left. The existence of mermaids was religiously
believed not many ages since, and many accounts of their being captured
on the English coast occur in the writings of our old chroniclers, and
other retailers of marvels. The specimens exhibited of late years have
been pronounced ingenious combinations of the upper half of the ape with
the tail of a fish.
The montegre, manticora, or _man-tyger_, had the body of a lion (q.
tiger?), the head of an old man, and the horns of an ox. Some heralds, by
way of finish, give him dragon's feet.
Butler's well-known line,
"The herald's _martlet_ hath no legs,"
has rendered most readers aware of the singular defect of this otherwise
beautiful charge. Heraldric authors differ as to the identity of this
bird. Its being called in Latin blazon 'merula,' and in French 'merlotte,'
the diminutive of 'merle,' has induced some to consider it a blackbird;
while others, with greater plausibility, decide in favour of the common
house martin, the legs of which are so short and the wings so long that
when it alights upon the ground it cannot rise without great difficulty.
Hence originated the mistake of pourtraying it without legs, "and for this
cause," sagely observes Guillim, "it is also given for a _difference_ of
younger brethren to put them in minde to trust to their wings of vertue
and merit to raise themselves, and not to their legges, having but little
land to put their foot on."
The _opinicus_ differs slightly from the griffin, having four lion's legs
instead of two, and the tail is short like that of a camel. It is used as
the crest of the Barber-Chirurgeons Company. The _pegasus_ or winged-horse
ranks among the chimerical figures of heraldry borrowed from classical
fable, and is more frequently employed as a crest or supporter than as a
charge. The _sphinx_ occurs very rarely. The _satyr_ or satyral exhibits a
human face attached to the body of a lion, and has the horns and tail of
an antelope.
The _sagittary_ is the centaur of antiquity--half man, half horse, and is
said to have been assumed as the arms of king Stephen on account of the
great assistance he had received from the archers, and also because he had
entered the kingdom while the sun was in the sign Sagittarius. Sir John
Maundevile tells us that in Bacharie "ben many Ipotaynes, that dwellen
somtyme in the watre and somtyme on the lond; and thei ben half man and
half hors: and thei eten men _when they may take hem_"--an excellent
_gloss_ upon Mrs. _Glass_, 'First _catch_ your hare,' &c.[134]
The _unicorn_ is the most elegant of all these fanciful figures, and is
too well known as the sinister supporter of the royal arms to need any
description. Mr. Dallaway derives the heraldric unicorn from the spike
antiently fixed to the headpiece of a war-horse, and resembling a horn;
but as this does not account for the cloven hoofs and slender, tufted
tail, I should reverse the inference, and derive that appendage from the
popular notion of the unicorn.
The unicorn of antiquity was regarded as the emblem of strength; and as
the dragon was the guardian of wealth, so was the unicorn of chastity. His
horn was a test of poison, and in virtue of this peculiarity the other
beasts of the forest invested him with the office of water-'conner,' never
daring to taste the contents of any pool or fountain until the unicorn
had stirred the waters with his horn to ascertain if any wily serpent or
dragon had deposited his venom therein. Upton and Leigh detail the
'wonderful art' by which the unicorn is captured. "A mayde is set where he
haunteth, and she openeth her lappe, to whome the Vnicorne, as seeking
rescue from the force of the hunter, yeldeth his head and leaueth all his
fierceness, and resting himself vnder her protection, sleapeth vntyll he
is taken and slayne!"
The Hebrew _reem_ being rendered in our version of the Bible unicorn, has
confirmed the vulgar notion that the animal intended was the cloven-hoofed
and single-horned figure of heraldry; but there is nothing in the word
sanctioning the idea that the animal was single-horned; and on referring
to the passages in which the term is introduced, the only one which is
quite distinct on this point seems clearly to intimate that the animal had
_two_ horns. That passage is Deut. xxxiii, 17. 'His horns are like the
_horns_ of the reem;' the word here is singular, not plural, and should
have been 'unicorn,' not 'unicorns,' in our version.[135] It has lately
been attempted to prove that the reem of Scripture was the animal now
known as the nhyl-gau.[136] Reem is translated in the Septuagint by
'[Greek: monokeros],' which is exactly equivalent to our unicorn. If a
one-horned animal be contended for, the rhinoceros is the only one now
known that is entitled to the attribute of _unicornity_. Leigh declares
the unicorn of our science to be a mortal foe to elephants, and such,
according to zoologists, is the character of the rhinoceros. These two
are, however, the only points of resemblance; for while the unicorn of
heraldry is of light and elegant symmetry, the rhinoceros of the African
deserts is an animal so clumsy and ponderous that it has been known to
require eight men to lift the head of one into a cart.[137]
The _wyvern_ is one of the most usual of this description of charges. It
is represented as a kind of flying serpent, the upper part resembling a
dragon with two fore legs, and the lower part a snake or adder. The name
is derived from the Anglo-Saxon 'wivere,' a serpent.
The bull and the lion with the wings of an eagle occasionally occur in
continental armory, but I do not recollect an instance of either in
English heraldry. The winged lion is the achievement of the city of
Venice.
The foregoing enumeration of heraldric monsters includes all that are
generally borne, and even some that scarcely ever occur; but Randle Holme,
in his 'Academy of Armory,' figures and describes a multitude of others,
some of which I strongly suspect to have been the offspring of his own
prolific fancy. The triple-headed Cerberus was borne, this writer tells
us, by the name of _Goaler_, while another family bore 'the scarlet beast
of the bottomless pit:' ensigns of _honour_, truly!
What shall we say of
The _Nependis_, or ape-hog, half ape, half swine;
The _Minocane_, or _Homocane_, half child, half spaniel dog;
The _Lamya_, a compound of a woman, a dragon, a lyon, a goat, a dog, and
a horse;
The Dragon-tyger, and Dragon-wolf;
The Lyon-wyvern;
The Winged Satyr-fish;
The Cat-fish and Devil-fish;
The Ass-bittern (the arms of Mr. Asbitter!)
The Ram-eagle;
The Falcon-fish with a hound's ear;
and
The 'Wonderfull Pig of the Ocean?'
_From Holme's Academy of Armory._
[Illustration: Ram-eagle.]
[Illustration: Cat-fish.]
[Illustration: Ass-bittern.]
CHAPTER V.
The Language of Arms.
"Armes do speak."
_Sylvanus Morgan._
The very earliest of armorial devices are of two classes: the first
comprising those which consist of simple lines and tinctures, so disposed
as to form an agreeable harmony or contrast; and the second embracing
those which convey some sentiment. The first resulted from a study of what
was pleasing to the eye; the other expressed the moral attributes of the
original bearer, by natural or artificial figures employed as symbols. To
illustrate my meaning, let us suppose that two knights, A and B, assume
each a coat of arms. A, regarding nothing more than an agreeable effect,
embroiders his banner with chequers of red and yellow. B, esteeming
himself a valiant soldier, expresses that sentiment by representing upon
his silver buckler a lion in the attitude of combat, which, for the
purpose of inspiring terror, he paints of a colour resembling that of
blood. In the course of a few generations the principles upon which these
devices have been framed are reduced to a science, with a regular
nomenclature and fixed laws. Then A's banner begins to be spoken of as
'Chequy, gules, and or,' while B's escocheon is described as 'Argent, a
lion rampant, gules.' Again, two followers of A, whom we will call C and
D, imitating their chief's example, assume similar devices for their
shields and pennons. C gives the red and yellow chequers of his patron,
adding, for distinction's sake, a white bordure, while D surmounts the
same device with a diagonal stripe of blue. In like manner, two adherents
of B, whom we will style E and F, copy the lion from his shield, but give
him a different colour, E's lion being black and F's blue. Carrying the
principle a stage further, G, a supporter of D, adopts his blue bend, but
omits the chequers of A; and H, a follower of F, retains the colours of
his device, but gives three lions instead of one; while I, also retaining
those colours, gives his lion or lions walking or passant; and so on to
infinity. This I believe will be found the true theory of the
multiplication of armorial bearings.[138]
Thus it will be seen that only a portion of such devices were ever
symbolical, and that those which were, in process of time ceased to be so
in relation to the successors or dependents of the original assumers. When
surnames were first generally adopted, a personage to whom nature had
given a pale visage took the name of White. His sons might be all ruddy
and his grandsons all brown, yet every one of them bore the family name of
White. Again, the original Mr. Wise might have had the misfortune to
become the progenitor of a long line of blockheads, and Mr. Smith's
descendants have all been tailors; yet, regardless of these
circumstances, their posterity are all, respectively, Wises and Smiths
until this day. So it has necessarily occurred with heraldric devices; and
many a gentleman who bears crescents or other celestial insignia, is
chiefly intent upon mundane affairs; while many another, whose shield
displays the rampant lion possesses the peaceful disposition of a lamb.
Strangely at variance with experience is ofttimes found the sentiment of
Horace:
"Fortes creantur fortibus et bonis,
---- nec imbellem feroces
Progenerant aquilae columbam."
The early treatises on heraldry contain little beyond the technicalities
of the science; but in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries a race of
authors arose who bestowed infinite labour upon researches into the origin
of heraldric figures and their symbolical meaning. According to these
writers, every tincture and bearing adumbrated the natural dispositions of
the bearer. The treatises of Leigh and the succeeding heraldrists down to
the time of Morgan abound with speculations, often ingenious but still
oftener absurd, as to the import of armorial ensigns; and a new system
arose sustaining the same relation to heraldry that astrology bears to
astronomy. This was called ARMILOGIA, or the Language of Arms; and the
length to which it was carried tended perhaps more than any other
circumstance to bring the study of legitimate armory into disrepute. In
the present Chapter it is my intention to give a few specimens of these
theories selected here and there, without any attempt at collation; for
their originators are often widely at variance with each other, and, as
in most other matters that are purely speculative, we find "quot homines
tot sententiae."
One of the foremost absurdities of this system is the respect paid to the
mystic number nine. In whatever point of view we examine the armory of
those days, nine prominent features are made to present themselves; thus
there are 9 tinctures, 9 sorts of shields, 9 furs, 9 honourable
ordinaries, 9 roundles, 9 differences of brethren, 9 worthy partitions, 9
mesles, 9 abatements of honour, 9 virtues of chivalry, 9 worthies, 9
female ditto, 9 sorts of gentry, 9 duties of heralds, ix artycles of
gentilnes, ix vices contrary to gentilmen, ix precious stonys, ix vertues
of precious stonys, 9 especial rejoicings, &c. &c. &c.
"Wherefore," asks old Leigh, "have you used the number of nyne in all your
demonstracions more than any other?" to which Gerard replies, "Not onely
because it is aptest for this science, for that the rules incident thereto
chiefly fall out to that number, but that for that of all simple numbers
it is most of content. The figure whereof holdeth all other vnder it, as
by the Arte of Arithmetique ye may sonest perceve, where ye shall fynde,
that all articles and compoundes, be they never so hudge,[139] are made of
nyne figures. The golden number also of itselfe, is the last, the whiche
ye may equally devyde into three odde partes, which have bin resembled to
the blisse of the iii Ierarchies of holines. In the which every one hath a
likenes of the Trinitie," with much more equally to the purpose.[140]
Nothing can be more tedious than to follow a zealous _armilogist_ through
all the windings and turnings into which his fancy leads him. I quote, by
way of example, Leigh's remarks on the tincture gules or red:
"The first of these seven coloures is called Geules. And is in colour
neither red nor sanguine, but is the verye vermilion itself. For that is
right Geule. It is a royal colour, and hath that proper qualitie in it
selfe that it may not be gased on any while. For then the eye is wekened
therby. The author wherof is profe it selfe. _L._ I thincke you may be to
seke for comendacion of this colour, for I have not harde muche either
spoken or written in prayse of it. Can ye saye any thyng? _G._ Although it
shewe itself to be commendable, yet shall it not wante my prayse. I were
nere dryven to the wall, if I had no more to commende this coloure by but
that where-with the Frenshe herehaughts[141] did sett forthe their
Auriflamb, whiche came frome heaven, as by vaine miracle they fayne. But
they that make suche shifte shulde rather have taken occasion to praise
the same, for that the red rammes skinnes covered the arke. And that is no
fable. Yet for my promise of comendacion, I say to you, it is and longe
hath ben used of emperours and kyngs for an apparell of majestie and of
judges in their judgement seates. Also God the Father, promysinge
redemption to the people, by the passion of Christ, saieth, 'What is he
that cometh from Edom, with redd-coloured clothes of Bosra?' which is so
costly clothe. Besides this, it is often spoken of in the scripture which
I leve of for lengthnynge of time. Nowe wyll I speake of the planett Mars,
which is the planett that this colour appertayneth to and is of all other
the hotest, and most fyrye. Martianus telleth, he is the armipotent god of
battell whose hardy desire is to be avenged with spedy boldenes.
Ptolomeus sayeth, this planett maketh a man apte to all firye workes.
_L._ If this be all the prayse you can gyve him, you will no more offend
me with tediousnes. _G._ What nedeth more than enoughe, can ye not
understand hereby what the nature of Mars is? _L._ Yes, very well. _G._
Why then I will shewe you of the precious stone appertainyng to that
colour and planett, which is called a Rubye. It is a stone of dignitie,
and as Isidore writeth, is of the kynde of carbuncles. This precious stone
neither fier wasteth or changeth his colour. This was one of the precious
stones that was sett in the brest lapp of Aron. Of diuerse authors this is
diversely and wonderfully commended for hys singuler vertues. As who list
to rede may finde plentifully inoughe written thereof. Now to the colour
simple and compounde. Of itselfe
1, It betokeneth strength, bouldenes with hardenes.
2, with Or, a desire to conquere.
3, with Argent, envie revenged.
4, with Azure, to wynne heaven by good dedes.
5, with Sable, hateth the worlde, with werynes thereof.
6, with Verte, bould of corage in youth.
7, with Purpure, strong in dede, juste in worde, &c."
In like manner our author labours through the remaining colours, ascribing
to each some wonderful virtue. The irrelevant nature of the observations
introduced is occasionally highly diverting. Nature, art, metaphysics,
religion, history, are all in turn made to contribute something towards
the illustration of the armilogist's theories. In his disquisition on
Argent or silver, he remarks, "Being fine it is medicinable." His
imaginary friend says, "You digresse now, and meddell with that that
apperteineth not to this arte." At this Master Gerard waxes wroth and
says, "I marvayle what science arte or misterye it were that an herhaught
sholde have none intelligence thereof? were it never so secret or
profunde. For, if he have not of all thynges some vnderstanding, as well
as of severall languages he is not worthye to be an herhaught. Therefore
necessary it is for him to have an universal knowledge in eche
thinge."[142]
I can scarcely hope to interest my reader by a display of the symbolical
meaning of the colours of heraldry, yet as perchance some one may feel
gratified in being able to judge of his or her own character and
dispositions by examining the family achievement, I will here, as briefly
as possible, set down the result of Master Leigh's philosophy, divested of
its verbiage.
GOLD, then, betokens wisdom, justice, riches, and elevation of mind.
Compounded with silver, it signifies victory over all infidels, Turks and
Saracens; with gules, a disposition to shed one's blood to acquire riches;
and with azure, a disposition to keep what one gets. Combined with sable
it typifies constancy in all things, particularly in love; with vert, a
joyful possession of riches; and with purpure a friendly feeling even
towards enemies.
SILVER alone signifies chastity, charity, and a clear conscience; but in
company with
gold--the will 'to reuenge Christ's bluddshed.'
gules--honest boldness.
azure--courtesy and discretion.
sable--abstinence.
vert--virtue (!)
purpure--the favour of the people.
GULES has already been described. AZURE, simple, shows a godly
disposition, and joined with
gold--the joyful possession of wealth.
silver--vigilance in service.
gules--aptitude to reprove villany.
sable--sympathy for suffering.
vert--success in enterprise.
purpure--wisdom in counsel.
SABLE betokens constancy, divine doctrine, and sorrow for loss of friends.
With
gold, it means long life.
silver--fame.
gules, it excites the fear of enemies.
azure, it shows a desire to appease strife.
vert--joy after sorrow.
purpure--a religious disposition till death.
VERT, _per se_, means joy, love, and gladness. In poetry it is usually
associated with these feelings. He who bears it with
gold, is 'all in pleasure and joy.'
silver--a sure lieutenant.
gules--a determined fellow.
azure--has excess of mirth.
sable--moderation of ditto.
purpure--bad luck after good fortune.
PURPURE, alone, betokeneth jurisdiction, and combined with
or--wisdom and riches.
silver--a peaceable disposition.
gules--policy in war.
azure--just, but unfortunate, service.
sable--'lamentable as the lapwing.'
vert--'scorpion-like.'
&c. &c. &c.
The ordinaries, the lines of partition, &c., according to this system, are
all significant: thus the bordure signifies a siege; the fesse, command;
the cheveron, great note and estimation; per bend, justice; bendy-undy,
some notable enterprise achieved by water; the pile, immortal virtue;
nebuly, labour and travail. Morgan speaks of the "direct line of
self-love; the flecked and wavy line of pride; the clouded line of
self-conceit; the indented line of envie; the crenelle line of ambition,
&c."[143]
Among common charges the rose means mercy and justice; the pomegranate, a
true soldier; the billet, justice; the garb, plenty, &c.
The following queer passage occurs in Morgan:[144]
"Some of the ancients were of opinion that the forbidden fruit was an aple
of green colour, which we term a pomace: but it might aswel been blew,
since we term it a _hurt_: for of that colour is Becanus his Indian
fig-tree, which he affirms to be the tree of the forbidden fruit: if it
had been red it had been a _tortiaux_, which hath tortered her posterity
ever since; if it had been an orange it was the symbole of dissimulation,
by which the woman might easily be deceived: if it had been the golden
aples of the sun, the pomegranates, it had purple berries within it that
left a stain, being a _besant_ of a waighty _guilt_: or it might have been
silver, for it was fair to the eye, and was a _plate_ that served the
worst fruit to mankind."
Almost every heraldric animal is emblematical of the qualities of the
bearer; but as, upon this principle, little honour would redound to the
bearers of some species, Guillim tells us that "all sortes of animals
borne in armes or ensigns must in blazoning be interpreted in the best
sense, that is, according to their most generous and noble qualities, and
so to the greatest honour of their bearers. For example, the fox is full
of wit, and withall given wholly to filching for his prey. If then this be
the charge of an escocheon we must conceive the qualities represented to
be his wit and cunning, but not his pilfering and stealing."
The following list of emblematical animals and their parts may amuse some:
those whose taste does not lie this way can easily pass it over.
The Ass--patience.
Bull's head--rage.
Goat--policy.
Hart--skill in music.
Horns of stags, &c.--fortitude.
Unicorn--strength.
Lion rampant--courage and generosity.
Lion passant--majesty, clemency, circumspection.
Bear--affection for offspring.
Dog--fidelity, intelligence.
Hedgehog--provident care.
Grasshopper--wisdom.
Serpent--subtlety.
Snail--much deliberation (!)
Stork--filial piety, gratitude.
Eagle--a lofty spirit.
Wings--celerity, protection.
Owl--vigilance.
Pelican--love of offspring.
Swallow--industry.
Cock--courage.
Dolphin--charity.
Crane--civility.
The _wolf_, according to Upton, signifies a _wrangler in parliament_ or
assembly!
It does not seem to have occurred to these allegorizing worthies that the
tincture of a charge may be diametrically opposed to the signification
assigned to the charge itself. For example, the coat, 'Vert, a bull's head
or,' by the armilogical rules cited above, would signify, as to the
tinctures, pleasure and joy, while as to the charge it would mean rage and
fury. Again, 'Purpure, a wolf argent' would mean "a wrangler with a
peaceable disposition!!"
It was my intention to have examined this Language of Arms with more
minuteness, but after a little research I find the labour ill-bestowed. He
who can relish such far-fetched notions may gratify himself by a perusal
of the somewhat rare folio often before quoted, Sylvanus Morgan's 'Sphere
of Gentry,' London, 1661; and still further by that of his supplementary
'Armilogia,' a small quarto published in 1666. These works, with many
others of this and the preceding centuries, contain much useful scientific
information on Heraldry, and generally evince some scholarship, but they
are most unnecessarily blended with what Mr. Moule justly designates "a
cabalistic jargon,"[145] that renders it a matter of utter impossibility
for any person of ordinary patience to read them through. Guillim, whose
work is on the whole the most readable of the number, is not altogether
free from this laboured absurdity.
One feature in many of the early works on Heraldry occasionally renders
them exceedingly amusing, and may partly countervail the prosy dulness of
armilogy--namely, the fancied attributes of visible objects generally, but
of animals in particular. Absurdities in Natural History at which a child
would now laugh are gravely advanced, and often supported by quotations
from Pliny and other classical authors. A few specimens from Leigh and
Guillim are subjoined.
The =Hart=, saith Avicene, "is never troubled with fevers, because he hath
no gall. He hath a bone in his hert, as precious as yvery. He feareth
muche the voyce of the foxe, and hateth the serpent. He is long lived. For
Aristotle writeth, that Diomedes did consecrate a hart to Diana, with a
coller of golde about his necke, which had these wordes, DIOMEDES DIANAE.
After whose tyme, almost a thousand yeres, Agathocles the kynge of Sicile
did kill the same harte, and offered him up with his coller to Jupiter, in
hys temple, which was in Calabria."[146]
"The =Bore= is the ryght Esquier, for he beareth both armor and shielde,
and fighteth sternelye. When he determineth to fight, he will frot his
left shield the space of halfe a day, against an oke. Because that when he
is streking thereon with the tuskes of his enemy, he shal feele no griefe
thereof, and when they have fought one day together then they wil depart
of themselves, keping good appointment, to meete in the same place, the
next day after, yea, and the third day, till one of them be victor."[147]
Of the =Wolf= he says. "It is sayde, if a man be seene of hym first, the
man leseth his voyce. But if the wolfe be scene of manne first, then the
wolfe leseth his boldenesse and hardines. Plinie wryteth, he loueth to
playe with a chylde, and that he will not hurt it, tyll he be extreame
houngry, what time he will not spare to devowre it.... Avicene telleth
that he desyreth greatly to eate fishe. And Phisiologus writeth that he
may not bend his necke backewarde, in no moneth of the yere but in May....
He enfecteth the wolle of shepe that he byteth, and is adversarye to them
and theyr lambes.... There is nothynge that he hateth so much as the
knockynge together of two flint stones, the whiche he feareth more then
the hunters. Aristotle sayeth that all kinde of wolves are contrary to all
kynde of sheepe. For profe wherof Cornelius Agrippa also affirmed that if
a man make a string of the wolves guts and put it on the harpe with
stringes made of shepes guttes, it will never bee brought with any consent
of harmony to agree with the other."[148]
Of the =Raven= Guillim says: "It hath bene an ancient received opinion,
and the same also grounded upon the warrant of the sacred scriptures (if I
mistake not) that such is the propertie of the Raven, that from the time
his young ones are hatched or disclosed, untill he seeth what colour they
will be of, he never taketh care of them nor ministreth any food unto
them, therefore it is thought that they are in the meane space nourished
with the heavenly dew. And so much also doth the kingly prophet, David,
affirme, Which giveth fodder unto the cattell, and feedeth the young
Ravens that call upon him. Psal. 147, 9. The Raven is of colour blacke,
and is called in Latine, Corvus, or Corax, and (according to Alexander)
hath but one kind of cry or sound which is _Cras, Cras_. When he
perceiveth his young ones to be pennefeathered and black like himself,
then doth he labour by all meanes to foster and cherish them from thence
forward."[149]
"Some report that those who rob the =Tiger= of her yong, use a policy to
detaine their damme from following them by casting sundry looking-glasses
in the way, whereat shee useth long to gaze, whether it be to behold her
owne beauty or because when shee seeth her shape in the glasse, she
thinketh she seeth one of her yong ones, and so they escape the swiftnesse
of her pursuit. And thus," moralizes our author, "are many deceived of the
substance, whiles they are much busied about the shadowes."[150]
The following, however, shows that Master Guillim was growing sceptical of
some of the 'vulgar errours' of his day:
"Pierius, in his Hieroglyphicks saith, that if a man stricken of a
=Scorpion= sit upon an asse, with his face towards the taile of the asse,
his paine shall passe out of him into the asse, which shall be tormented
for him. In my opinion he that will beleeve this, is the creature that
must be ridden in this case!"[151]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER VI.
Allusive Arms--Armes Parlantes.
[Illustration: (Arms of the Family of Dobell.)]
"Non verbis sed _rebus_ loquimur."
Allusive Arms are of two kinds: first, those which contain charges that
relate to the character, office, or history of the original bearer; and,
secondly, those which convey a direct pun upon his name. Of the former
description are the covered cups in the arms of Butler, and the
bugle-horns in those of Forester.[152] Several examples of this species
of bearings are given in the ninth chapter of this volume under the title
of 'Historical Arms.' At present, I shall confine myself to the second
class, which are called, in Latin blazon, Arma Cantantia, in French, Armes
Parlantes, and in English, =Canting Arms=. Of this kind we have examples
in the arms of Camel, a camel; Colt, 3 colts; Blackmore, 3 Moor's heads,
&c.
Dallaway, Porny, and other modern writers condemn this species of
bearings, as of recent origin, and unworthy of a place amongst the
classical devices of antient heraldry. Porny places them in the category
of Assumptive Arms--"such as are taken up by the caprice or fancy of
upstarts, though of never so mean extraction." This notion, with
whomsoever it originated, is decidedly erroneous, for such charges are
found not only in the arms of distinguished nobles and knights in the very
earliest days of hereditary armory, but occur also in those of several of
the sovereign states of Europe. According to some authors the LIS in the
royal arms of France are a play upon the name of Louis, antiently spelt
_Loys_. The arms of Spain exhibit, quarterly, a castle and a lion--a pun
upon the names of the united provinces of Castile and Leon; and after the
conquest of Granada by Ferdinand and Isabella, a _pomegranate_ was added
in the base of the escocheon. As to canting charges in the arms of
subjects, we may observe that, in the earliest Roll of Arms extant, that
of the time of Henry III,[153] at least nine such occur. To prove this
assertion, as well as to give the reader a sample of antient blazon, I
shall quote them:
Reinold de Moun--de goules ov ung _manche_ d'argent.
Nicholas de Moeles--d'argent a deux barres de goules, a trois _molets_
en le cheif goules.
Geoffrey de Lucy--de goules a trois _lucies_ d'or.
Roger de Merley--barree d'argent et de goulz, a la bordur d'azure, et
_merlots_ d'or en le bordur.
Hugh de Ferrers--_Vairre_, de argent et d'azur.
Robert Quency--de Goules ung _quintefueil_ de hermyne.
Thomas Corbett--d'or deux _corbeaux_ noir.
Adam de Swyneburne--de goules a trois testes de _Senglier_ d'argent.
Odinel Heron--d'azur a trois _herons_ d'argent.
In another Roll, made temp. Edw. II., armes parlantes are still more
abundant.
Sire Peres Corbeht--de or, a ij _corbils_ de sable.
Sire Robert de Eschales--de goules, a vj _eschalops_ de argent.
_Suthsex and Suthreye_:
Sire Johan Heringaud--de azure, crusule de or a vj _harengs_
(herrings) de or.
_Kent_:
Sire Robert de Sevens, de azure, a iij _vans_ de or.
Sire Aumori de Lucy, de azure, crusule de or, a iij _lucys_ de or.
_Barkschire_:
Sire Adam Martel, de sable, a iij _martels_ de argent.
Sire William Videlou, de argent, a iij testes de _lou_, de goules.
_Bokinghamschire_:
Sire Rauf de Cheyndut, de azure, a un _cheyne_ de or, a un label de
goules.
Sire Johan LE LOU, de argent a ij barres de goules, en le chef iij
testes de _lou_ de goules.
_Estsex_:
Sire Johan Passeleu, bende de or e de azure, a un quarter de argent, e
un _lu_pard _pass_-aunt de goules.
Sire Johan Heroun, de azure a iij _herouns_ de argent.
_Suthfolk_:
Sire Guy Ferre, de goules, a un _fer_-de-molin de argent, e un bastoun
de azure.
Sire Richarde de Cokfeld, de azure, a une croix e iij _coks_ de or.
Sire Huge de Morieus, de azure, a iij foiles de _moures_ de or.
_Northfolk_:
Sire ---- Mounpynzon, de argent, a un lion de sable, a un
_pinzon_[154] de or en le espandle.
_Cauntebrugescire_:
Sire Giles de Trompintoun, de azure, crusule de or, a ij _trompes_ de
or.
_Derby et Notingham_:
Sire Johan le Fauconer, de argent a iij _faucouns_ de goules.
Sire Johan Bordoun, de goules a iij _bordons_ de argent.
_Huntingdonschire_:
Sire Johan de Swyneford, d'argent a iij testes de _cenglers_ de
goulys.
_Norehaunton et Rotelonde_:
Sire Geffrey Rossel, de or, a un cheveron azure, e iij roses de
goules.
_Leycestreschire_:
Sire William Bernak, de argent, a une fesse and iij _bernaks_ de
sable.
_Herefordeschire_:
Sire Peres Corbet, de or a un _corbyn_ de sable.
Sire Thomas Corbet, de or a iij _corbyns_ de sable.
_Schropschire_:
Sire Walter Hakelut, de goules, a iij _hackes_ daneys de or, et un
daunce de argent.
_Northumberland and Comberland_:
Sire Odynel Heron, de argent a iij herons de azure.
Sire Johan Malebis, de argent, a iij testes de _bis_ de goules.
In addition to these, I may adduce the following very antient families,
whose arms are not traceable to any grant, but have been borne
immemorially as antient arms. The Pelhams bear three _pel_icans, and their
crest is a _pe_acock. The puns in both instances, it must be confessed,
are very poor; still, few will doubt that puns were intended. The Arundels
bear six swallows, in French _hirondelles_. The Barons D'Aquila, temp.
Henry III, bore _eagles_; the Bourgchiers, water-_bowgets_; the
Heringauds, _herrings_; Lupus, Earl of Chester, a _wolf's_ head;
Shouldham, Abbot of St. Saviour's, _shov_ellers; the Bacons, a _boar_; the
Wingfelds, _wings_; the Rokewoods, chess-_rooks_; the Pigots, _pick_-axes;
the Boleynes, _bulls'_ heads; the Shelleys, _shells_; and an infinity of
others.
Dame Julyan Berners was no stranger to such arms, for she distinctly
mentions the coat of Peter de Roches, bishop of Winchester, who "baar iij
rochys (roaches) after his awne naam." The cross-_corded_, borne by the
_roper_ who became a "nobull man," spoken of by that lady, belongs to the
other class of allusive arms, as conveying a hint at his former menial
occupation.
That this kind of charges became too common in the early part of the
seventeenth century, Dallaway is, perhaps, correct in affirming; but those
were punning days, and quaint conceits often took the place of true wit.
Camden, the correctness of whose heraldric taste none will presume to
question, did not hold _arma cantantia_ in so contemptible a light as some
of his successors in office have done; for among the arms granted by him,
a list of which is given by Morgan,[155] the following, among others,
occur:
DOBELL of Falmer, co. Sussex, Sable, a _doe_ passant between three
_bells_ argent.[156]
BULLOCK of London. Bulls' heads.
FOSTER of London. Bugle-horns.
HAMPSON of Kent. Hemp-breaks.
FISHER of Staffordshire. A Kingfisher.
CONIE of Huntingdonshire. Coneys.
CROWCH.[157] Crosses formee.
LANGHORN. Bugle-horns.
CANNON of Pembrokeshire. Crest. A cannon.
TREHERNE. Three herns.
CROSS of Lincolnshire. A cross-crosslet.
KNIGHTLEY. A lance.[158]
There was a kind of Rebus much in vogue in the fourteenth and following
centuries, which, although not regulated by the laws of blazon, possessed
somewhat of the heraldric character. Many persons, even those of antient
family, who bore regular coats of arms, adopted various figures for the
purpose of expressing their names pictorially; for instance, one John
Eagleshead gave as his seal an _eagle's head_, surrounded by the motto,
"HOC AQUILAE CAPUT EST, SIGNUMQUE FIGURA JOHANNIS."
The Abbot of Ramsay bore, in the same way, _a ram in the sea_, with an
appropriate legend. One Harebottle expressed his name by a _hare_ upon a
_bottle_; while Islip, abbot of Westminster, represented his by a man
slipping out of a tree, and supposed to exclaim, "I slip!" These "painted
poesies," as Camden styles them, occur chiefly in painted glass windows,
in decorated Gothic architecture, and in the title-pages of early printed
books.[159]
One of the most singular rebuses I have seen occurs in a window in the
chapel at Lullingstone, co. Kent, the seat of Sir P. H. Dyke, Bart. It is
that of Sir John Peche. In this instance the arms of the personage are
surrounded by a wreath, composed of two branches of a peach tree bearing
fruit, every peach being marked with an Old English =e=; Peach-e. It is
curious that this device proves the true pronunciation of the name, which
was formerly supposed to be Peche.
The common rebus, although it did not come into general use until after
the introduction of regular heraldry, may boast of a much higher
antiquity, for such devices occur as the representatives of names of no
less eminence than those of Cicero and Caesar; not to mention those of
celebrated sculptors and mint-masters, who, in the palmiest days of Rome,
frequently marked the productions of their genius with a rebus. Taking
into consideration the great antiquity of these "name-devices," and their
early introduction into the armorial shield, I cannot see any good reason
for the strong prejudices which have existed against them in modern times.
To me, indeed, they appear not only 'allowable' but 'commendable' armory;
for arms, like names, are signs of personality, and therefore those which
'speak to the eye' most intelligibly are preferable to those charges which
have in themselves no meaning.[160]
There can be no doubt but that, from the mutations our language has
experienced within the last six centuries, many of the allusions contained
in coats of arms are greatly obscured, while others are totally lost. The
arms of the family of Eschales, now written Scales, exhibit eschalops
(escallops), and those of Sykes, fountains--a _syke_, in the northern
dialects, signifying a spring, or rather that kind of well, which was
formerly sunk within the precincts of a camp.
* * * * *
In order to show how numerous allusive arms are in English armory, I will
here give a list of those occurring in the Baronetage as it stood in
1836,[161] omitting, for the sake of brevity, the details of the blazon.
BACON. (Crest.) A boar.
SHELLEY. Three whelk-_shells_.
BURDETT of Bramcote. Six birds (martlets).
FOULIS. Three leaves (feuilles, Fr.)
PALMER. (Crest.) A demi panther, holding a palm-branch. Motto: "Palma
virtuti."
RIVERS. Two bars dancette. Query: if these were not originally _wavy_,
to represent _rivers_?
MANSELL. Three maunches.
HAZLERIGG. Three hazel-leaves.
GORING. Three annulets (rings!)
WOLSELEY. (Crest.) A wolf's head.
BURGOYNE. Three _birds_ (martlets), and three talbots (_canes_).
HAMPSON. Three hemp-breaks.
SWINBURNE. (Crest.) A demi boar.
ASHBURNHAM. (Crest.) An ash tree.
BROOKE. (Crest.) A _Brock_ (O. E. for badger).
BURDETT of Burthwaite. Three birds (martlets).
HEAD. Three unicorns' heads.
OXENDEN. Three oxen.
PARKER of London. A stag's head.
RAMSDEN. Three ram's heads.
COLT. Three colts.
WARRENDER. (Crest.) A rabbit.
FEATHERSTONHAUGH. Three feathers.
SHEFFIELD. Three garbs (sheaves).
CUNLIFFE. Three conies.
WOLFF. (Crest.) A wolf.
BERNARD-MORLAND. Quarters a bear.
COOTE. Three cootes.
HERON. Three herons.
SYKES. Three fountains (sykes, vide p. 126).
FLETCHER. Four arrow-heads.
BEEVOR. (Crest.) A beaver.
HUNTER-BLAIR. Three hunting horns.
MILLER. A cross moline.
CALL. Three trumpets.
GOULD. _Or_, a griffin segreant.
BARING. A bear's head.
LAMB. Three lambs.
BOUGHEY-FLETCHER. Four arrows.
TROWBRIDGE. An antient bridge.
MILNES. Three windmill-sails.
BALL. A hand-grenade.
BAYNES. Cross bones.
METCALFE. Three calves.
KAY. (Crest.) A griffin's head holding a key.
LETHBRIDGE. A bridge.
HARTWELL. A hart.
SHELLEY. Three whelk shells, as before.
LOCKHART. A heart within a fetter-lock.
FRASER. Three cinquefoils, or rather strawberry-leaves (Fr.
_fraises_).
CORBET. A corby or raven.
WOOD of Gatton. A tree.
BAIRD. A boar.
COCKERELL. Two cocks.
FLETCHER of Carrow. Four arrow-heads.
SHEAFFE. Three garbs (sheaves).
ANDERSON. A saltier or St. Andrew's cross.
BROKE. (Crest.) A brock or badger.
WYLIE. A [_wily_] fox.
GRIFFIES-WILLIAMS. Four griffins.
WALLER. Three walnut leaves. (Crest.) A walnut tree.
OAKES. Three oak branches.
TROTTER. (Crest.) A horse!
BROOKE of Colebrook. A brock again.
DALRYMPLE-HORN (Elphinstone). Three bugle-horns.
KEY. Three keys.
FOSTER (Antiently written Forester). Three bugle-horns.
HOLYOAKE-GOODRICKE. (Crest.) An oak tree with a scroll containing the
words "Sacra Quercus."
PAULETT. Three swords. The sword was the distinctive mark of St. Paul.
ROE. (Crest.) A roebuck.
A more thorough acquaintance with English archaisms and provincialisms
would probably enable one to detect numerous other bearings corresponding
with the surnames of the bearers; but these seventy examples, cited from
one branch of our lesser nobility only, are fully sufficient to prove that
there is nothing mean or disgraceful in canting or allusive arms.
It would be a matter of little difficulty to fill fifty pages with arms of
this description, but a few more, and those of the most remarkable, may be
given. The family of _Still_ bear guttee d'eau, drops of water; STILLA,
Lat. a drop; _Drope_, Lord Mayor of London, also bore guttee; and
_Harbottle_ bore three drops or. _Vere_, Earl of Oxford, gave a boar, in
Latin VERRES.
_Clear_, _Bright_, _Day_, and _St. Clere_ bear a 'sun in splendour;' the
same luminary is also given by Dy_son_ and Pear_son_; while Dela_luna_
bears a crescent, and _Ster_ling stars.
The crest of _Holden-Rose_, as given in Baker's Northamptonshire, may be
briefly described as a hand HOLDING A ROSE!
Harrison bears a hedgehog, in French _herisson_; Pascall, a paschal-lamb;
and Keats three cats!
_And_ bears gules a Roman =&= argent!
Brand, Lord Dacre, bears two _brands_, or antient swords, in saltire;
Hose, three _legs_ couped at the thigh; and Pickering, a _pike_ between
three _annulets_.
* * * * *
"Le meme usage (says Salverte) a ete alternativement cause et effet." We
have already seen that multitudes of armorial ensigns have been borrowed
from the bearers' names--it is asserted by several authors that, in many
cases, _surnames were borrowed from arms_. Salverte[162] thinks that many
of the chiefs who were engaged in the Crusades assumed and handed down to
their posterity names allusive to the charges of their banners. He also
notices, from the history of Poland, the fact that there were in that
country, in the twelfth century, two families called respectively _Rose_
and _Griffon_, and he thinks "we may with probability suppose, that both
took from their arms those names, which no longer subsist, because
hereditary surnames were not yet establis
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/38951