The Project Gutenberg eBook of Heraldry as art: An account of its development and practice, chiefly in England
    
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: Heraldry as art: An account of its development and practice, chiefly in England

Author: G. W. Eve

Release date: November 6, 2022 [eBook #69298]

Language: English

Original publication: United Kingdom: B. T. Batsford

Credits: deaurider, Amber Black and 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 HERALDRY AS ART: AN ACCOUNT OF ITS DEVELOPMENT AND PRACTICE, CHIEFLY IN ENGLAND ***



HERALDRY AS ART




  HERALDRY
  AS ART

  AN ACCOVNT OF ITS
  DEVELOPMENT AND PRACTICE
  CHIEFLY IN ENGLAND

  BY

  G. W. EVE

  [Illustration]

  B. T. BATSFORD, 94 HIGH HOLBORN
  LONDON 1907




  BUTLER & TANNER,
  THE SELWOOD PRINTING WORKS,
  FROME, AND LONDON.




Preface


The intention of this book is to assist the workers in the many arts
that are concerned with heraldry, in varying degrees, by putting before
them as simply as possible the essential principles of heraldic art.

In this way it is hoped to contribute to the improvement in the
treatment of heraldry that is already evident, as a result of the
renewed recognition of its ornamental and historic importance, but
which still leaves so much to be desired.

It is hoped that not only artists but also those who are, or may
become, interested in this attractive subject in other ways, will find
herein some helpful information and direction. So that the work of the
artist and the judgment and appreciation of the public may alike be
furthered by a knowledge of the factors that go to make up heraldic
design and of the technique of various methods of carrying it into
execution.

To this end the illustrations have been selected from a wide range of
subjects and concise descriptions of the various processes have been
included. And although the scope of the book cannot include all the
methods of applying heraldry, in Bookbinding, Pottery and Tiles for
example, the principles that are set forth will serve all designers
who properly consider the capabilities and limitations of their
materials.

For many facilities in the preparation of the work I here beg to tender
my very sincere thanks. To the Countess of Derby for the gracious
loan of her bookplate; to the Earl of Mar and Kellie for permission
to reproduce the shields at Alloa House; to Mr. W. H. Weldon, Norroy
King of Arms, for the enamel plaque of his crest; to Mr. W. Brindley
for a cast of the Warren shield; to Mr. N. H. J. Westlake for the Arms
of Queen Jane Seymour, from his _History of Stained Glass_; to Messrs.
Hardman of Birmingham for the loan of the Pugin drawings; to Messrs. E.
C. and T. C. Jack for a reproduction of an embroidered shield.

My best thanks are also due to Monsieur Emil Levy for leave to use
illustrations from the Catalogue of the Spitzer Collection; to the
Society of Antiquaries for the Black Prince’s shield; to the Society
of Arts for the loan of sundry blocks; and to the officials of the
Victoria and Albert Museum and the National Art Library for their usual
and invariable helpfulness. Finally I am especially indebted to my
publishers, Messrs. Batsford, who have spared neither time nor trouble
on my behalf.

  G. W. E.

  23, SHEEN GATE MANSIONS,
  EAST SHEEN, S.W.

  _October, 1907._




Contents


                                                 PAGE

  CHAPTER I. =INTRODUCTORY=                         1

 The Origin of Heraldry--Its Uses--Symbolism--Artistic Development--The
 Character of Mediaeval Treatment--The Personal Quality--Fourteenth
 century Examples--The Influence of the Tournaments--Renaissance
 Heraldry--Decadence--Gothic Revival--The Use of Examples--The Aims of
 Heraldic Design.


  CHAPTER II. =THE EVOLUTION OF SHIELD FORMS=      16

 The Achievement--Its Composition and Proportions--Modifications
 of Proportion--The Design of the Heraldic Group--Essential
 Qualities--Variability of Grouping--The Shield--Its Structure
 and Shape as a Fighting Defence--The Norman Shield and its
 Successors--Shields “for Peace”--Pageant Shields--How they were
 Made--The Tournament Shield--Evolution of Decorative Forms--Foliated
 Shields--Fifteenth and Sixteenth Century Examples--Freedom in Shield
 Design--Heraldic Accuracy--What is Essential.


  CHAPTER III. =HERALDIC RULES=                    39

 A Simple Manual of Heraldic Facts--The Shield Surface--The
 Tinctures--Divisions of the Field--Ordinaries--Sketches “in
 Trick”--Charges and their Arrangement.


  CHAPTER IV. =ANIMALS AND MONSTERS=               66

 The Heraldic Lion as a Type--Examples of Various Periods--Heraldic
 Character--Obligatory Poses and Decorative Distribution--Methods of
 Spacing--Characterization--Imaginary Creatures--Unicorns, Dragons and
 Griffins.


  CHAPTER V. =HERALDIC BIRDS AND OTHER FIGURES,
  ANIMATE AND INANIMATE=                           89

 Eagles--Early Types--Plan of Distribution--Other Birds--Bird
 Monsters--Human Figures--Inanimate Charges--Crosses of many
 Forms--Fleurs-de-lis--Examples of Various Periods--The Rose--The Irish
 Harp--Surface Treatment--Diaper, its use in Sculpture, Painting and
 Engraving--Diapers of Badges.


  CHAPTER VI. =HELM, CREST AND MANTLING=          117

 The Helm--Its Structure--Ceremonial Use--Development as
 Armour--Helmets and their Mechanism--Tourney Helms--The Crest--How
 Made and Fixed--Examples of Actual Crests--Influence of Practical
 Conditions on their Pose--Difficulties in Design and How to Deal
 with Them--The Pose of Helmets--The Torse--Mantling--Its Evolution
 from Simple Drapery--Its Treatment in Relation to Shield and Crested
 Helm--Colour--Certain Restrictions.


  CHAPTER VII. =ARMORIAL ACCESSORIES=             139

 Supporters--Derivation from Badges--Special Conditions of their
 Pose--Non-Heraldic Supporters--Amorini--Angels--Symbolic Figures--The
 Eagle of the Holy Roman Empire--And of Prussia--The Imperial
 Crown--Authorized Type for Present Use--The Coronet of the Prince
 of Wales--Coronets of Peers--The Question of the Cap--Baronets’
 Badges--Insignia of Knighthood--The Garter--The Collar and
 George--Other Orders--Relation of Orders to the Shield--Their
 Importance as Indications of Relative Rank--Typical Examples.


  CHAPTER VIII. =METHODS AND MATERIALS=           164

 Illumination--Practical Directions--Methods of the Early
 Illuminators--Colour Treatment--Heraldry in Enamel--Champlevé Enamel,
 Personal and Monumental--The Cloak Clasp of Queen Eleanor--The
 Shield of William de Valence--Stall-plates of the Garter--“Limoges”
 Enamel--Heraldic Enamel by Nardon Penicaud--Bassetaille--Plique-a-jour
 --Heraldry in Metal--Application of Old Examples to Present
 Use--Bronze--Monumental Brasses--Cast Iron Firebacks--Pierced and
 Chiselled Iron Lock-plates--Keys--Repoussé--Engraved Metal--Ceremonial
 Weapons and Implements--Lead-work--Deposited Metal.


  CHAPTER IX. =ARCHITECTURAL DECORATION=          204

 Badges at Blois--And at Hampton Court--Sculpture--Sgraffito--Gesso as
 a Material for Heraldic Relief--Methods of Preparation--A Series of
 Shields in Painted Gesso--Poker Work--Schemes of Decoration--Stained
 Glass--Technical Conditions--Colour Scheme--Working Drawings--Pugin’s
 Designs for the Houses of Parliament--Powell’s Drawings--Armorial
 Windows at Ockwells Manor--Painted Windows in Florence--The Swiss
 Painted Glass--Holbein.


  CHAPTER X. =EMBROIDERED HERALDRY=               246

 Surcoats--Bardings--Embroidered Linen--Banners--Appliqué
 Work--Embroidered Badges--The Toison d’or of Charles the
 Bold--Standards--The Proportions of Banners from Early Times--The
 Direction of their Charges and the Reasons therefor--The Composition
 of the Union Jack--Practical Explanation of its Construction--Painted
 Banners--How Prepared--Trumpet Banners--Heraldic Lace.


  CHAPTER XI. =SOME MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES=        267

 Heraldic Crowns--Chaplets--Roundels--Knots.


  CHAPTER XII. =MARKS OF CADENCY=                 286

 The Origin of the Label--Its Shape and Varieties--Ordinary Marks
 of Cadency--Their Significance--How Displayed--Royal Cadency--The
 Distinguishing Marks of Cadency of Present Personages of the Blood
 Royal.


  INDEX                                           293


  ANALYTICAL INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS               303




HERALDRY AS ART




CHAPTER I

Introductory


In dealing with heraldry from the artist’s point of view, as a
decorative subject which offers interesting scope for technical effort,
it will not be necessary to go overmuch into the question of its
origin, nor to elaborate its history beyond what is needed to give such
knowledge of its methods as may help the doing of present work or the
intelligent appreciation of the old. Nevertheless, the archaeological
aspect of the subject, the conditions and rules of its existence,
must also be carefully studied in order to ensure the correctness of
the statement that heraldry makes and of which heraldic art is the
expression.

As for its origin, we may safely say that heraldry, in its essence,
began when man first used natural forms to symbolize, and ascribe to
himself, those qualities--strength, courage, cunning--which he had full
cause to recognize in the beasts with whom he struggled for existence;
when he reproduced, as well as he could, their ferocious aspect, to
strike terror into his human enemies while satisfying his own warlike
vanity, and so adopted them as badges or even as totems.

In Europe heraldry began to be systematized (as we know it) somewhere
about the eleventh century, and it flourished exceedingly until about
the middle of the sixteenth century, the period thus indicated being
that of its greatest strength and beauty.

The development of defensive armour dictated the placing on it of
the badges that had for long been used in other ways, so that, being
depicted on the shield, they became the arms, and became the crest when
displayed on the head-piece. The device worked on the garment which
covered the body armour made it a veritable _coat of arms_, and this
term, as well as that of coat armour, came in time to be also applied
to the similar armorials of the shield.

The Crusades, in their aggregation of troops of various nationalities,
helped to extend, in showing the necessity for, a regular system of
heraldry as a means of distinguishing one party from another, and the
feudal system itself with its numerous groups, each under its knightly
or noble head in ever-extending subordination, conduced to the same end.

The Tournaments which played so brilliant a part in the splendours of
the Middle Ages also afforded fresh and greatest scope for heraldic
magnificence. Being restricted for the most part to competitors of
noble birth, many of whom were attracted from distant places, they
afforded opportunity for observation and comparison of the various
bearings. They naturally suggested the inclusion of foreign as well
as native armorials in the heraldic MS. of the times, as we find
them depicted in the Rolls of Arms. The necessity for well-ordered
arrangement soon made itself felt, and thence was evolved systematic
heraldry as it now exists. The rules thus originated, being based on
the ever-present difficulties which arose in the actual use of coat
armour, were admirable for their purpose, for they were devised with
a common-sense regard for the conditions under which they were to be
applied, were at first simple and therefore easily understood.

The manner in which the arms were displayed was the most conspicuous
that was possible, every suitable space that offered itself being
employed to bear them in one form or another. Thus in time they
appeared on the shield, helmet and surcoat, and also on the ailettes,
those flat pieces of steel which were used to still further deflect a
blow which had slid from the helmet and might otherwise have injured
the shoulder.

The use of heraldry in battle or tournament by no means exhausted its
possibilities, however, for even in the warlike Middle Ages armorials
were used by priests and women, and by statesmen whose services were
those of the council chamber rather than of the field. In every case
their strong personal and allusive quality was felt to the full,
and intensified the human interest in ordinary things. So that the
enamelled brooch of Queen Eleanor, with its arms of her warrior
husband Edward I linked with her own, becomes something more than a
mere fastening; and the armorial robes of the noble wife who wears her
husband’s armorials on her mantle, covering and protecting her own arms
embroidered on her gown, are made beautiful expressions of a chivalrous
idea.

Heraldry was made especially interesting by the symbolic meanings which
it embodied, thus expressing in its own way a very universal desire for
significance in decorative forms. In the Middle Ages, especially full
as they were of militant fervour and chivalric mysticism, symbolism
entered into everything. Not the heraldry alone but every part of a
knight’s armour had a mystic meaning, the knowledge of which was an
important part of a knightly education. Many of these meanings are
quaintly set forth in one of the books that Caxton printed, _The Order
of Chivalry_. Therein the shield is considered as the especial emblem
of its bearer and of his knightly duty, for “like as the stroke falleth
down upon the shield and saveth the knight right so the knight ought
to apparel him and present his body tofore his lord when he is in
peril hurt or taken.” Even the manner of doing things was underlaid by
beautiful ideas. So he who bore the sword of Justice in a ceremony was
enjoined to bear it truly upright, for Justice should lean neither to
one side nor the other, but be impartial between the two.

Besides the creatures (lions and so forth) which were taken to signify
strength, courage, fidelity and other virtues, there were also those
which symbolized the great mystery of the perpetuation of life, which
has appealed to the imagination of man throughout historic times. The
Peacock, in the periodical renewing of his splendour of plumage; the
Swan, emerging in spotless beauty from the dusky obscurity of its
cygnet state, both expressed this universal idea. To Christian chivalry
the Peacock typified the Resurrection and therefore Immortality,
and the Swan became the emblem of that cult of womanhood which was
so beautiful and characteristic of knightly regard. The symbolism of
the Cross and the emblems of saints and martyrs form a large part of
heraldry, as is natural. Plants and flowers were naturally taken to
express beautiful qualities--constancy, purity, love--as with similar
intention they may still be acceptably employed in the wreaths and
garlands which are, on occasion, associated with armorials.

Symbolism of this kind has been lost to heraldry, not, however, leaving
it without significance; for arms have also allusive meanings that are
no less interesting as records of incidents that are thought worthy of
remembrance.

Many mediaeval bearings originated in this way, the belt and buckles
of Pelham, which commemorate the capture of the French king at
Poitiers, for instance. The more modern kind of heraldic symbolism
occurs in the arms of the great Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovel, who
commemorated his victory over the fleets of Turkey and France at the
end of the seventeenth century by adding two crescents in chief, and a
fleur-de-lis in base to his existing coat, gules a chevron ermine. In
our own time successful generals embody in their armorials the badges
of regiments with which they have been connected, or bear allusions to
places where their successes have been won. In a more peaceful field
the skill and assiduity of a distinguished physician may be rewarded by
the addition to his arms of some part of the Royal insignia, to mark
for all time the services he has rendered to the State. Such arms are
conferred by special grant, and are called Arms of Augmentation or
Augmentations of Honour. In this way the inherent qualities of heraldry
are seen to be very stable and to remain constant through the ages in
spite of changes of manners and of general environment.

Our heraldry, which quickly reached a high degree of decorative
excellence, developed as a system, in a natural way, on the line of its
own necessities; as did its artistic expression in a great measure,
though the latter owed much to transmitted designs and (mainly through
the influence of the textiles and other importations) helped to
perpetuate in Western art the beasts and birds and strange composite
conceptions of the East. These ancient prototypes of familiar heraldic
forms are singularly interesting, as sometimes possessing in a very
marked degree qualities, such as vigorous expression and characteristic
generalization of form, which teach valuable lessons in their
application to modern use.

Although at first the mediaeval draughtsman followed the drawing of
his imported or traditional motives very closely (as in the lions of
some of the thirteenth century MSS. and seals), he soon began to treat
them in his own way, the way that came to be considered peculiarly
heraldic. In thus handling his motives he was entirely himself, and the
outcome was the natural result of the splendid sense of design which
characterized him. The style is rightly considered purely heraldic
because it arose from its own heraldic conditions, and was the result
of the very sane intention that the thing done should be suited to
the use to which it was to be put, viz. to serve as a distinctive
badge which could be seen, and easily read at a distance or when
in motion. Such conditions dictated simple directness of treatment
and resulted in that bold clear definition which combined with good
distribution and the fine balance of colour that results from it, to
produce a very decorative whole. Thus, as so frequently happens in
other ways, the treatment at first suggested by reasons of practical
convenience resulted in an effect of great decorative value. The
method of depicting the pattern-like figures varied, as was natural,
with the materials employed and with other varying circumstances, and,
where opportunity served, a high degree of elaboration was reached;
but whether the treatment was simple or elaborate, breadth of effect
and decorative quality are nearly always conspicuous. The various
methods of working, each satisfactory in its own way, are extremely
interesting, as giving historic sanction to the choice of treatment in
heraldic expression, and in opposition to the narrow view that as a
certain kind of work admirably suits its purpose in its own place that
same treatment should be obligatory in all other cases. The old work
confirms the broader view, so that when a flat treatment, for example,
in harmony or in contrast with surrounding decoration, seems desirable,
the armorials may be done flatly; and when, on the other hand, a more
elaborate treatment seems fit, modelling in relief or any other means
of decorative expression may be properly employed. Nevertheless, the
broad-minded advice to “do as you like” has been sometimes taken too
literally. Order as well as freedom is necessary to the doing of good
work, and that can only be secured by study of the subject from the
systematic or archaeological, as well as from the artistic side.

Heraldic art reached its greatest strength in the fourteenth century,
as appears in what was perhaps the most beautiful example of the work
of the period, the shield of arms in Canterbury Cathedral, said to be
that of Edward the Black Prince (Fig. 1). It is probably one of the
shields that were used for his funeral. Here the lions of the English
coat are admirably distributed and are full of power and spirit. The
fleurs-de-lis of France are beautifully free and graceful, and are
equally well-designed to occupy their spaces and as well proportioned
to them. The whole work, which is so valuable a lesson in the best
qualities of heraldic design, has suffered from the wear of the
centuries; but sufficient remains to show that when uninjured it must
have been superb.

Heraldic art continued finely decorative and expressive for a very
considerable time until the forms which had shown so much spontaneity
became more pattern-like, reverting in a measure to the character
of such of the earlier figures as more nearly reproduced those of
the textiles; for the fourteenth century examples, such as that to
which we have just referred, show a conscious effort to express the
attributes of strength and vitality which were associated with and were
symbolized by the animals that were depicted. In the late mediaeval
work this vivifying force became weakened under the numbing influence
that is inseparable from the reiterated use of forms that have become
stereotyped. In respect to the appeal which visible expression makes
to the ordinary mind as opposed to mere diagrammatic indication, the
best work of the fourteenth century in its effort to depict recognized
attributes links itself in intention with the work of the Renaissance,
although the methods that were employed differed so greatly.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--Shield of the Black Prince in Canterbury
Cathedral. Fourteenth Century.]

At the end of the fifteenth century the personal bearing of heraldry
in war had almost ceased, but it remained an important feature of the
tournaments during the whole period of their existence.

Besides satisfying the martial sense which ever delights in brilliance
and colour, it also gratified the desire for the expression of meaning
in decoration, a mental attitude which heraldry exactly fitted. And
heraldry thenceforward became mainly decorative, while retaining the
allusive and symbolic qualities that are hardly separable from it.

In Tudor times the number of armorials increased in a very marked
degree, no doubt sharing in the impetus given to the arts in England
by the much-needed peace which followed the dynastic wars of York and
Lancaster. As though to link it with that welcome event, beautiful and
simple flowers added their charm to heraldry in notable quantity, and
gillyflowers, columbine, marygold, and many more, appear on shields of
arms and in crests, as well as in the garlands which were so admirably
used as decorative accessories to the armorials.

The Gothic heraldry, in common with the other decorative arts, having
become formalized into a style from which the human interest had to a
great extent gone, a change took place in harmony with the new feeling;
but in the revolt from the formalism of late Gothic art heraldry
frequently went to the opposite extreme, and employed naturalistic
forms in an unsuitable way.

Much of the Renaissance work, however, retained some of the best
qualities of the Gothic, in the pose of the figures and in the
general composition, while in addition it attempted a more detailed
characterization than before.

In many respects it was very admirable and seems, in its suggestion
of individual thought working on the traditions of an older style, to
suggest the lines on which modern heraldic design might develop. German
heraldry has followed these lines to a large extent, and though it has
perhaps become over-florid, is still full of proofs of the advantage
which results from continued touch with the Gothic.

In this country there had been a constant succession of foreign
masons and sculptors, from the time when, in the twelfth century, the
Frenchman William of Sens came to restore Canterbury Cathedral, and
the Renaissance style probably received its most effective impetus in
England from Torregiano and his fellow Florentine artists when they
superseded the native workers in the designing and carrying out of
the tombs of Henry VII and others in the beginning of the sixteenth
century. The king’s tomb was begun in 1503, and is a useful landmark in
the history of the evolution of heraldic style. From this and similar
works the English sculptors and designers learnt the methods of that
revival of art on classic lines which had become developed in Italy for
nearly a century before it made so definite an impression here.

The work that was produced under these influences was marked by great
vitality, variety and grace, until it, in its turn, became weak and
uninteresting, so that by the seventeenth century it had degenerated
into sheer stiff ugliness that it is almost impossible to connect with
the graceful strength of its prototypes.

Holbein, who worked here (except for a short interval) from 1526
until his death, executed, besides his paintings, many designs
for goldsmith’s work and so forth, and has left some few heraldic
drawings, probably designs for the decoration of books, such as
dedicatory plates, or for stained glass; but the Italian influence
was overpowering, and he left little permanent impression on heraldic
style. An example of his heraldry may be referred to in Fig. 221, p.
243.

As time went on, and the practical use of heraldry in the field became
more remote, the sense of proportion became weakened, the decorative
distribution of the early work was no longer sought after, and the
general loss of grip is everywhere perceptible in the design; while in
the execution, especially in later times, minute finish of detail took
the place of the earlier breadth of treatment. The marked inferiority
of the heraldry to the other decorative work of its time (a fault
that is frequently visible in the work of the present day) points to
a general loss of interest in the expression of heraldry, although
its use was tenaciously adhered to, and it is abundantly evident
that in the period which extended from the early seventeenth century
until recent times regard for heraldry (when such regard existed at
all except as a mere desire of display) was mainly directed to its
systematic side and to the ever-increasing detail of its rules and
precedents.

However, the Gothic revival in the early part of last century again
directed attention to heraldry, and the work of Williment, Pugin,
Powell, Burges and others, showed once more how decoratively and
expressively it could be handled when it was seriously studied and
applied.

With reference to the old examples, a study of which is absolutely
necessary in order to understand the principles which underlie all
heraldic design, it will be well to sound a note of warning against
making a fetish of the work of any period, however good; against
mere copying of old examples however excellent, except, of course,
for purposes of study. To merely copy and piece together bits of
precedent is not the way to make an artistic thing at all. A copy can
have no vitality of its own, and cannot even reproduce that of its
original. Even Pugin and Powell cannot be said, in spite of all their
sympathy and power of draughtsmanship, to have altogether succeeded
in suggesting the intense vigour which characterized the work of the
originals that were followed. A broad view must be taken if new work is
to harmonize with new conditions or be anything more than a mere shadow
of a preceding style.

Heraldry in order to be expressive and interesting ought to be
original, or perhaps one should rather say individual, in treatment; an
effort to express itself by means of the artistic qualities that the
old work possesses and teaches us to admire, rather than a copy of its
forms. By original is meant something that the artist thinks out for
himself, his individual expression of what he wishes to convey, with
all the help that he can obtain from his knowledge of previous work,
but without feeling himself bound to imitate it. Points of resemblance
are inevitable. It is hardly possible to avoid showing the influence
of the examples from which the artist has learnt his craft, nor does
it matter; but when the copy is intentional and the intention stops
at that, the work ceases to interest as individual design. All styles
should be studied for the sake of the lessons they may teach in the
application of the ordinary principles of design to correct heraldic
motives, for, after all, that and fitness are what constitute good
heraldry. Composition, the balance of mass and arrangement of line,
with all their various possibilities, may be learned from all forms
and styles of art, pictorial as well as ornamental, that is itself
based on sound principles. The appreciation of such points and their
satisfactory application constitute what we know as the sense and
power of design, and they must be understood before one can pretend to
practise or discuss it.

Heraldry in its setting forth may be regarded in two ways. As the
depicting of an actual shield, crest, helm and so forth, as they
would be shown in a picture of a tournament, for instance; or, as a
presentation of the heraldic facts in the way that is thought most
expressive without having too much regard to preceding renderings. The
former way seems more suitable to the execution of ancient and historic
arms or of such as are to accompany Gothic surroundings, and the latter
to be more likely to harmonize with modern decorative conditions, as
well as to possess more vitality and variety in itself. This harmony
with surrounding decoration, whether on a wall or in a book or in
any other way, is one of the essentials of good design and must be
continually kept in mind. Another, equally important, is that work
should be designed with direct regard to the materials and methods by
which it is to be done. These very obvious points cannot be too often
insisted upon, however wearisome the reiteration, for neglect of them
is at the bottom of most bad work.

Careless treatment of the heraldry, with which it is, nevertheless,
obliged to deal more or less, sooner or later, seems to pervade applied
art and to spoil what is otherwise meritorious work. Doubtless much of
the mischief arises from fear lest improving the drawing or composition
may violate heraldic rules; and this brings us to the necessity of
acquiring so much knowledge of the systematic side of heraldry as will
suffice to show what points are really essential (and therefore to be
carefully preserved and if need be accented), and what, on the other
hand, may be modified or ignored. This may best be done by study of
the system of heraldic description known as blazon, which is described
further on. But before proceeding to do so it will be necessary to deal
first with an heraldic composition as a whole.




CHAPTER II

Evolution of Shield Forms


The armorial group, called an “Achievement” of Arms, principally
consists of the shield and the crest, the latter supported on its
helm, and accompanied by the mantling or lambrequins, and in addition,
mottoes, coronets, supporters and other accessories proper to the
occasion may form part of its composition. The term “achievement”
(sometimes corrupted into hatchment) may be applied to any heraldic
group whether it be a complete presentation of full armorials or
only a selected part of them. In the simple arrangement of shield,
helmet and crest, the proportion of the parts to each other remained
fairly constant from the end of the thirteenth century down to the
Renaissance, that is to say throughout the whole mediaeval period, and
may be taken roughly to be rather more than two-fifths of the whole
height for the shield and rather less than three-fifths for the helmet
and crest.

This, it need hardly be said, must not be taken for actual measurement,
but only as suggesting the relative weight in the design of its
component parts. The result of these proportions is to bring the helm
a little above the actual middle of the composition, and its place
is then found to be a very satisfactory one, in which it serves as
a central point on which the other objects group themselves. There
is also seen to be due scope for the clear definition of the details
of both arms and crest, while there is an appropriate suggestion of
dignity in the whole effect. The principal artists of the Renaissance,
Dürer above all, appear to have fully appreciated this, similar
proportions appearing in the best type of Renaissance work as in that
of the Gothic period.

Such proportions were no doubt suggested by those of the actual things
themselves, but not wholly so; for in other cases the object of the
artist was rather to display the armorials to the best effect than to
copy their appearance when they were being used in another way.

Fig. 2, the reverse of the Great Seal of Henry IV, a splendid example
of the seal engraver’s art, is an interesting illustration of how
armorials were borne by man and horse, as well as of their approximate
proportion. An example of the influence of local considerations in
modifying proportion is the group which occupies the middle of the
canopy of the tomb, in Westminster Abbey, of Louis Robsart, Lord
Bourchier, who was standard-bearer to Henry V. The shield is minimised
as much as possible because its bearings appear large and bold on
the carved banners at the sides; the crest, however, not occurring
elsewhere on the monument, is comparatively enormous. In this case the
shield that is associated with the crest is destitute of charges,
which may, however, have been modelled in gesso on the stone and have
disappeared.

[Illustration: FIG. 2.--Seal of Henry IV. Reverse.]

In a similar way the arms in the group over the point of the arch of
the chantry of Henry V near by are extremely small, a part of the
mantling is even allowed to fall over them, because they are fully
displayed on the shields supported by angels in the spandrils below.

The shape of the space that is available for displaying the achievement
and the character of the bearings also influenced proportion, so that
a crest may be exaggerated, or a shield may be comparatively enlarged,
in the latter case in order to accommodate quarterings perhaps, and
the sense of proportion may still be satisfied because of the evident
reason for the treatment.

The object of an achievement being to display the armorials in the
most distinctive way, it follows that the subordinate parts of it,
especially the helmet and mantling, should all be designed to that
end, that their lines should compose in such a way as to concentrate
the attention on the more important subjects, and that their details,
however intricate, should not detract from a broad effect. In short,
they should be so arranged as to support the central motive and not to
compete with it. Whatever the style of the design it should first of
all express the subject in the most explicit way, and carefully avoid
letting scrolls outshine the crest or mantling distract attention from
the shield which is encompassed by it.

Choice of method should naturally be based on the desire to represent
things in the most direct way and by the simplest means that are
suitable to the purpose in hand, using exactly the right amount of
elaboration, from the perfect simplicity demanded by a figure in
perforated iron, through the varying detail of different forms of
applied art, stained glass, enamel, modelling, carving, painting and
engraving. There is always great charm about simple treatment that
is at the same time expressive, but the right simplicity can only be
reached through knowledge, and is a very different thing from the
emptiness which ignorance hopes to have mistaken for it. Clearness of
statement expressed by vigour of drawing, beauty of line, balance of
mass and harmonious coherence of composition, are obviously essential
qualities; and when to these are added suitability to environment
and material, the result will be that expression of rightness which
constitutes style, whatever the style may be.

Heraldic accuracy is assumed as a matter of course, for heraldry that
is not accurate stultifies itself.

The usual grouping of an achievement was suggested, no doubt, by the
method of displaying armorials in processions and other ceremonials,
when the crested and mantled helmet was placed on a lance staff or some
similar support, and the shield was hung below by its guige. That the
grouping was also a natural one is visible in the seal of Henry IV (p.
18), especially if we imagine the figure to be seen from the opposite
side.

There is nothing heraldically essential in arranging the armorials in
this order, for the crest may be placed in any other relation to the
shield that circumstances may render preferable. When, for instance,
it is undesirable to pile up the design in height the crest is placed
at the side of the shield. The earliest instance of which I am aware
is that of Lord Basset of Drayton, whose arms thus appeared on his
stall-plate as a Knight of the Garter. In such cases it is usually most
convenient to pose the crest on the true right of the shield because
the swing back of the mantling serves admirably to tie up the whole
design, but there is no reason why the positions should not be reversed
if the lines can be made to compose satisfactorily; that is to say, it
is only a matter of ornamental design and not in any way of heraldic
right or wrong.

THE SHIELD.--In the application of badges to the distinctive decoration
of armour, whence arose the term armory for the science of heraldry,
the shield naturally singled itself out to be made of especial
importance as the most suitable space on which to display the device;
for not only was it most conspicuous from its position with regard
to the rest of the armour, but its detachability, and the facility
with which it could be hung by its guige from some suitable support,
rendered it a ready means of representing its master in ceremonials
and pageants. As such a representative it became the principal vehicle
of honourable distinctions, and conversely was also made a means of
punishing misconduct.

The decorative value of shields had been recognized from the earliest
times; on the Greek pottery, for example, they appear bearing the
symbolic representations of birds, lions and other animals, which are
there drawn with all the vigorous beauty and sense of design that we
should naturally expect from such a source.

In the Roman sculptures also shields frequently occur, of whose shapes
some were to reappear at the Renaissance.

[Illustration: FIG. 3.

Back of Fig. 4.]

[Illustration: FIG. 4.

Norman Shield.]

[Illustration: FIG. 5.

Eleventh Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 6.

Back of Fig. 5.]

The Norman shields, as they are represented in the Bayeux tapestry,
in early carvings and in seals, were long and narrow, and the leather
guige by which they could be suspended from the neck was already in
use, as well as the other thongs which served as arm and hand holds
(Figs. 3 and 6), and were so arranged as to permit the grasp to be
applied in a variety of ways as the positions of the shield might
demand. The two sets of grips, called enarmes, that are here shown will
serve to make clear the general arrangement, but their placing varied
considerably, and was naturally adapted to individual requirements
and peculiarities. The shields were strongly curved in a horizontal
direction, partially encircling the body and, in many instances, had in
the centre a projecting boss or umbo. They were rounded at the top, as
in Fig. 5, or the top was straight with rounded comers, as in Fig. 4.
Being pointed at the base they were capable of being thrust into the
ground, so as to be easily held in position by men fighting on foot, to
whom they formed a very efficient defence, being about 4 feet high, in
combination with the hedge of lances that accompanied them. Their width
was about 2 feet or perhaps a little more.

They usually consisted of a foundation of wood covered with strong
thicknesses of leather, additionally strengthened with bands and
bosses of metal, and were often richly painted, and even, it is said,
sometimes adorned with gems.

The round-topped pointed shield appears on the seals for a considerable
length of time, and in Italy has never gone out of decorative use.

Throughout the eleventh and twelfth centuries the Norman shield
remained with very little modification, and was therefore the first
shape to which regular heraldry was applied.

The subjects, besides the armorials which were gradually increasing
in number and in regularity of arrangement, were at first little more
than fanciful decoration, the signs of the zodiac and similar devices,
as well as the badges, which long continued to be used from time to
time in a more ephemeral way than the regular armorials, though nearly
approaching them in character.

Very early in the thirteenth century the height of the shield began to
decrease, and continued to do so until by the middle of the century
an almost equilateral form was arrived at (Figs. 7, 8, 9). This was
probably the effect of the progress in the making of defensive armour,
whose improvement ultimately resulted in the disuse of the shield
altogether. By the end of the thirteenth century heraldry had become
general, and the triangular shields bore coats of arms which showed in
their composition the influence of the shape that contained them. The
fact that a single lion was depicted as rampant rather than in another
pose, was probably due at first to the greater ease with which it could
thus be adapted to the space and so satisfy the decorative sense of
distribution. And the attitude was already in existence in the designs
of the textiles and in other works of Eastern origin.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.]

[Illustration: FIG. 8.]

[Illustration: FIG. 9.]

Until the beginning of the fourteenth century the curves which describe
the sides of the shield commenced quite at the top, but soon afterwards
(the shape becoming rather narrower in proportion to the height) the
side lines began straightly at right angles with the top and, at
about one-fourth of the height, began to develop into the curve which
formed the point (Fig. 11). This is known as the heater shape from its
resemblance to the heater of a smoothing iron. Soon afterwards the
straight part of the sides extended downwards and the shield, thus
becoming wider at the base, more nearly approached the square form, as
in Fig. 12.

The shapes here given are designed to explain the varying forms from
time to time, and not the relative size of actual shields.

[Illustration: FIG. 10.]

[Illustration: FIG. 11.]

[Illustration: FIG. 12.]

The pointed shield was one of the most satisfactory shapes for the
display of a single coat of arms, but it became inconvenient, in most
cases, when two coats were impaled together or when quarterings were
involved, the restricted base rendering it extremely difficult to
deal with objects in that part of the shield. The seals and monuments
naturally represent shields as very flat, but they were not actually
so, but were almost always curved in section to a greater or less
extent, and in one or more directions; for armour was designed to
deflect a blow rather than to directly resist it, this being one of
the ordinary principles on which most kinds of defence are based. As
we have seen in the Norman shields, the curve was at first simply from
side to side, afterwards, in order to prevent a blow from glancing
downwards, the lower part of the shield was made to project, and
finally the top was brought forward so that the shield had a double
curvature, convex from side to side and concave perpendicularly (Fig.
13).

A large shield called a pavoise was used for fighting on foot, a
partial reversion, for definite practical reasons, to the long shield
of the Normans. Like the Norman shields, it in some cases had a pointed
or rounded base, while in others it was roughly rectangular, its most
marked characteristic being the large and projecting rib whose hollow
served on occasion to accommodate a supporting stake (Figs. 14 and
15). It was provided with handgrips and, in most cases, with a guige
by which it could be slung on the shoulders or carried on the back
when not in use. Besides those which were painted with subjects which
extended over the whole surface in the usual way, others were decorated
with small painted shields drawn on the larger one.

[Illustration: FIG. 13.]

[Illustration: FIG. 14.

Pavoise. Afli.

Violet-le-duc.]

[Illustration: FIG. 15.

Back of Fig. 14.]

The term pavoise is sometimes given to the large decorative shields
(of various shapes) which were made in considerable numbers in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, especially in Italy; but there
is no doubt that the term, in strictness, should be confined to this
special defence of the foot-soldier.

A shield with a sharp arris or ridge and a round base is said to
have been the last form to be used in actual war (Fig. 16), and is
interesting as the prototype of the ridged Renaissance shield, which
became of such decorative value, especially when modelled in relief,
because of the play of light and shade which it afforded (Fig. 16A. See
also Figs. 20 and 21).

[Illustration: FIG. 16.--Fifteenth Century.]

It will, of course, be understood that the various shapes of shields,
as they were gradually evolved one from the other, did not in
representation supersede their predecessors altogether, however more
or less completely they may have done so as actual defence, and a
considerable amount of overlapping took place in this as in other
heraldic fashions.

The armorials themselves having been influenced in their composition
by the shield shape that was in vogue when they were devised, the
choice of a form that is equally convenient for all the arms of a
series presents considerable difficulty, and therefore should not be
decided upon until the nature of their whole contents has been properly
considered.

Shields were used in the tournament in a variety of ceremonial ways.
Froissart describes, in his account of the meeting that was held near
Calais in 1390, how they were hung outside the pavilions of the
defenders, so that by touching them the challengers could signify their
intention as to the kind of encounter that was to ensue. For this
purpose two shields were displayed, one “for peace” and another “for
war,” and according as one or the other was touched the encounter took
place with blunt or pointed weapons. Similar shields are referred to by
Edward the Black Prince in his will, dated 1376: “l’un pur la guerre,
de nos armes entiers quartelles” (those represented in Fig. 1 at p. 9),
“et l’autre pur la paix, de nos bages des plumes d’ostruce” (Fig. 17),
both of which decorate his tomb.

[Illustration: FIG. 16A.--Ridged Shield. Fifteenth Century. Martin
Schongauer.]

Together with the banners and pennons of the chief personages, shields
were hung from the windows of the knights’ lodgings in the neighbouring
town to where the lists were set. They also adorned the walls of the
banquet hall, and in every way the actual shields contributed to the
pageantry of the time, and naturally suggested their representation in
tapestries and in other permanently decorative ways.

The treatment of the bearings on the actual shield was, no doubt, by
means of painting in flat colours, the charges being drawn in the
simplest and most direct way; for although there are examples in the
illuminated manuscripts of knights armed with shields whose charges
are in relief, such treatment was probably exceptional owing to its
cost and to the difficulty of repairing damage, or may even have been
due to the elaboration of the illuminator. So that although relief was
employed in cases of unusual magnificence the ordinary treatment was
probably flat.

[Illustration: FIG. 17.--Shield “for Peace” of The Black Prince. After
Stothard.]

Shields for great ceremonial purposes being more purely decorative were
naturally more elaborate, and of these the shield at Canterbury must be
again instanced. Such a shield after serving in the funeral procession
was suspended over the tomb, together with the sword and crested
helmet, as was done for Edward III and Henry V in Westminster Abbey and
for Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, “the Good Duke Humphrey,” in old St.
Paul’s; but of these only the insignia of Henry V remain, and they are
by no means in such interesting preservation as those at Canterbury. A
similar trophy adorned the tomb of Edward IV at Windsor, and is said to
have been embroidered with pearls and gold.

The shields that were intended for ceremonial or decorative purposes
were very carefully made of layers of various materials, such as canvas
and leather, which were stretched over and glued down to the wooden
understructure in order to afford a key to the material that formed
a surface for the subsequent work, in much the same way that panels
were prepared for other kinds of painting at that time. The charges
were then modelled in gesso, afterwards gilt and painted, or else were
fashioned in modelled leather and pinned down to the surface. The
spaces were often diversified with diapered patterns in raised lines of
gesso or by means of punches, and when the gold and colour were added
the whole effect was extremely rich and beautiful. Of such pageant
shields excellent specimens were in the great Bardini collection, now
dispersed.

[Illustration: FIG. 18.--Italian Decoration Shield. Fourteenth Century.]

Fig. 18, a kite-shaped shield of the fourteenth century, bears bendwise
the word Libertas, the motto of the republic of the town of Luroques,
in beautiful letters, whose treatment is perfectly appropriate to the
gesso in which they are executed. The shape of the shield follows
closely one of the early Norman forms, and is somewhat of the same
proportion, being 44 inches high by 21 inches broad. The square
pavoise (Fig. 19) of wood covered with vellum is painted with the arms
of the Buonamici, and over them as crest is the portrait of the head of
that family, Bienheureux Buonamici.

[Illustration: FIG. 19.--Florentine Decoration Shield. Fourteenth
Century.]

At the time that the use of shields in actual combat was becoming less
and less frequent, the invention of engraving on metal plates, the
improvement in wood-engraving, and finally the production of printed
books, opened a fresh field for heraldic art in the making of the
plates of arms which marked the patronage of a literary work, or in the
more familiar bookplate which signified the ownership of the book. Then
began that long series of beautiful little works by Martin Schongauer,
Israel van Meckenen, and by Dürer and their successors. In the large
number of designs thus produced the shields, in many instances, became
much less simple, ceasing to be a representation of the real defence,
though some of them were developments from it. The cusped forms such
as Figs. 20 and 21, which came into use in the latter half of the
fifteenth century, and became still more frequent in the Tudor period,
perhaps have some affinity with the elaborate fluted armour of the
time, but others were frank adaptations of the contemporary decorative
scrolls and were really cartouches more or less in place of a shield.

[Illustration: FIG. 20.--Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 21.--Sixteenth Century.]

The special tournament shield, the shield à bouche, had a marked
influence on subsequent forms. In order that the shield might, during
the joust, fit closely to the shaft of the lance a semi-circular
opening was made, sometimes at the top but more usually at the side,
as in the example (Fig. 22), and from this simple expedient a very
great variety of shape resulted, of which the manner of evolution is
interesting.

In the ornamental forms that were based on the actual ones this
embouchure was sometimes plainly indicated, as in the shield from the
group of Dürer’s coat of arms (Fig. 23) and in the French wood-carving
(Fig. 24); in others the lower point of the opening was merged into
one swinging line, as in the shield of the well-known Death’s Head
coat of arms. The next step was to duplicate the curve suggested by
the bouche, and from the resulting form proceeded an endless variety
of similar shapes, the addition of foliated or scroll ornament
completing the transition from the practical shield to the ornamental
one. An interesting instance of this duplication of form occurs in
the shield from a fifteenth century monument in St. Gatien Cathedral
(Fig. 25). With the recognition of the purely ornamental character
of the shield-form the placing of the spear opening on the naturally
correct side, the dexter, ceased to be thought important, and it was
placed indifferently on one side or the other, and when such shields
occur in pairs, as in those on the Pirckheimer bookplate by Dürer, the
bouche-derived curves are placed symmetrically on opposite sides.

[Illustration: FIG. 22.--Tournament Shield. Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 23.--Dürer’s Arms. Early Sixteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 24.--French Wood-carving. Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 25.--Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 26.--1530.]

Foliated decoration applied to the duplicated tournament form is well
exemplified in the shield from the plate of the arms of Herr Kress, who
was the friend of Dürer, though the plate is not Dürer’s work (Fig. 26).

[Illustration:

  FIG. 27.
  FIG. 28.
  FIG. 29.
  FIG. 30.

Shields by Aldegrever. 1552.]

Among the work of Dürer’s school the beautiful plates of his pupil Hans
Sebald Beham will well repay study for their excellent composition and
for their extreme beauty of draughtsmanship and engraving. Beham’s
shields were often scrolled at the edge, but not extravagantly so, and
he frequently employed plain shields, which, like most others at the
time, however plain in outline, were shown more or less concave in some
or all directions: a well-known device to obtain relief for the light
side of the charges by means of the adjacent shadow that is formed by
the concavity of the shield.

The shields that accompany the figures of the Virtues and Vices,
engraved by Aldegrever in 1552, are most unusual in their curiously
shaped edges, and show very emphatically the complete departure from
the character of the defence shield (Figs. 27-30).

The Italian form derived from the tournament shield took a longer
shape, still retaining the bouche, and often had the base divided into
three parts, and many examples of this shape occur on the walls of the
Palazzo del Podesta, Florence. The surface was generally kept whole and
not fluted, as in the analogous English form. The most characteristic
Italian shield, however, was that derived from the angular Roman ones,
such as those on Trajan’s column, with the outlines curved into cusps.
This is sometimes called the champfrien shape from its resemblance to
the face-plate of horse-armour, but the appearance of the form at the
time of the revived interest in classic art leaves little doubt of the
source from which it was taken. Among others were oval shields, also
of classic origin; and the round-topped Norman shape also occurs very
frequently. Triangular shields with concave outlines were also used.

In the use of more or less elaborate decoration the German artists
participated. Virgil Solis and Jost Amman among others frequently used
the scrolled shield, as Beham also had done. That English heraldry felt
all these influences is evident in the examples from St. Alban’s Abbey
(Figs. 31 and 32), sculptures whose forms are directly derived from the
tournament shield and were carved in the early sixteenth century.

The application of foliated ornament occurs in the Garter Plates early
in the fifteenth century, in that of Henry, Prince of Wales, afterwards
Henry V (Fig. 33), and more completely in the sixteenth century shield,
which bears the arms of the Abbey of St. Alban’s (here omitted), Fig.
32.

In the Elizabethan and Jacobean decoration there is a reversion to
the plain square shield, which usually occurs as a centre for scrolls
and strapwork, the corners becoming slightly pointed, a feature which
developed into the hideous eared shields of later times, when also the
decorated form had become the clumsy “ornamental” shield that was so
long endured.

[Illustration: FIG. 31.--Sixteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 32.--Sixteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 33.]

These various forms point to the useful fact that the shape of a shield
is only limited by the invention and judgment of the designer. The
only, and unfortunate, exception is the lozenge, on which the arms
of ladies are placed in certain cases: an unfortunate shape because
in most instances it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to
accommodate its bearings to it in a satisfactory way. Usage says that
an unmarried lady must bear her father’s arms, and a widow must bear
her father’s and husband’s arms together on a lozenge. This is a point
that cannot be ignored, for an isolated lozenge containing but one
coat is an heraldic statement that the owner is unmarried: except the
statement be modified by the association of other arms, as in the case
of peeresses in their own right. Again the necessity of being clear
about the heraldic facts before attempting to depict them is evident.
In one instance, at least, the arms of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria
were drawn on a lozenge, in spite of the undoubted fact that “the Royal
state is masculine.” It is also for this reason that a Crest is borne
by the Sovereign even when a lady occupies that exalted position.

The immense scope that is afforded by the variety of shield shapes is
extremely valuable in adapting heraldry to general design, in fitting
a shield to its space, in adapting it to its bearings, and in bringing
its lines into proper relation to those of accompanying figures or
ornament. It may also help in the expression of a general idea, as
in the burnt wood panel on p. 218, where there is a suggestion of
rose-leaves in the edges of the shield.

It is obvious that as the statement which heraldry makes is a very
definite one, its accuracy should be the first care, and that this
vital consideration is frequently lost sight of is but too evident from
the fact that even the King’s Arms are as frequently maltreated as the
King’s English.

It will be needless to specify instances--they are not few--of works
of great public as well as artistic interest wherein the arms have
no real connexion with the matter they are supposed to illuminate,
though doubtless the intention was right, and if it had been accurately
carried out would have been appropriate enough. Sometimes the arms that
are ascribed to the family of Fitzjames appear on the shield on which
the artist thought he was depicting the Royal Arms of England.

From the Royal Arms of Scotland the distinctive tressure flory
counterflory which encloses the lion is left out, and this occurs
on the walls of a public library which happens to be the gift of a
Scottish philanthropist.

Errors are also due to faulty intention, for if we have to deal with a
subject which applies to the whole country it is manifestly wrong to
use the lions of England only, to the exclusion of the armorials of the
rest of the United Kingdom, and yet this is constantly done.

Careful observance of customary rules by no means precludes variety
of treatment, however, but, on the contrary, affords ample scope
for excellence of design in stating the heraldic facts with perfect
accuracy. As already said, it is this symbolic statement that gives
heraldry its peculiar value in decoration, for a similar effect of
mass and line could doubtless be got in another way, but not the same
quality of personal allusion.

It will therefore be necessary to ascertain how to distinguish in some
way between the unessential, and therefore available, variation which
is so valuable to design, and such departure from accurate rendering of
the subject as constitutes heraldic mis-statement that may stultify the
whole work. In this important respect guidance may be found, as already
intimated, in the system of description called Blazon, in which should
be expressed all that is essential, and from which everything that is
not essential should be omitted.




CHAPTER III

Heraldic Rules


With the regular establishment of heraldry the need for a technical
method of describing the various bearings at once made itself felt,
and the system of Blazon was the result. Like the heraldry which it
described it was admirably adapted to its purpose, being simple,
perfectly explicit of the character, pose, and position of its subject,
without excessive minuteness in detail. In time, however, it not
only became more complicated, as was natural, but it at last became
a vehicle for the pedantry which, succeeding the artistic feeling of
the Middle Ages, expended itself in the making of unnecessary rules.
By the time the seventeenth century was reached it seemed to be
thought to show the height of heraldic knowledge to insist on every
insignificant detail, and so prevent the artist from deviating into
anything more excellent than was customary at the moment. Indeed
this pedantic affection for exactness in trifles sometimes makes one
wonder that in blazoning a maiden’s face it was not thought necessary
to mention that it included _a nose between two eyes in chief and a
mouth in base_ ppr. As a guide to the degree beyond which freedom of
treatment may not go without destroying the heraldic validity of the
subject, blazoning should be assiduously practised, however irksome and
pedantic it may appear, until a technical note of any armorials can
be written with precision and such a description be translated into a
sketch with equal certainty. After studying the system as explained
herein, I would recommend as practice the endeavouring to properly
describe the armorials in an illustrated work, a Peerage for instance,
with subsequent reference to the authentic blazon for confirmation
or correction. Conversely a sketch should be made from a blazon,
and then compared in a similar way with the illustration. For this
purpose Foster’s _Peerage and Baronetage_, 1881-3, with its beautiful
woodcuts after drawings by Dom Anselm and Forbes Nixon, will be of
admirable service, and at the same time will familiarize the student
with excellent heraldic design. The achievements in that work are
represented with great strength and directness, and have much affinity
with the spirit of the mediaeval work, and are therefore worthy of
careful study. At the same time any tendency to make a style (which
may easily become an eccentricity) into an aim rather than an incident
should be carefully avoided.

Blazon is not intended to enable two persons to depict a coat exactly
alike in petty detail, but rather that each in rendering the subject
in his own fashion may be correct in essentials, so that there can be
no question of what coat is intended. Similarly, when a Patent of Arms
refers to those “in the margin” thereof “more plainly depicted” (i.e.
more legibly than in the technically worded blazon), it is not meant
that the treatment (it may be bad) or the exact quality of tincture
(it may be discoloured) is to be copied, and this is by no means an
unnecessary warning, as experience has shown.

In naming the parts _of the field_ or general surface, it must be
remembered that the shield of arms is regarded as being held in
position in front of its bearer: the side towards the right shoulder
being called _the dexter_, and that towards the left _the sinister_. Of
these the former is “more worthy” than the latter; that is to say, a
charge that is not centrally placed would be to the dexter rather than
to the sinister side of the shield; this, it may be remembered, being
the reverse of the manner of wearing medals and orders on the breast.
The upper part of the shield is _the chief_ and the lower part _the
base_, the former naturally taking precedence over the latter. This is
important in relation to the blazon of parti-coloured fields.

[Illustration: FIG. 34.]

In order to facilitate the accurate placing of objects in their
intended positions on the field its various parts were thus named (Fig.
34):--

  A. Dexter   }
  B. Middle   } Chief.
  C. Sinister }

 D. The honour point, probably so named from its relative position to
 that of the heart in the human body.

 E. The fess point, named after the ordinary which passes through it
 horizontally, as hereafter described.

 F. The nombril or navel point, another fanciful allusion to the human
 body.

  G. Dexter   }
  H. Middle   } Base.
  I. Sinister }

Most of these terms have now become obsolete, but it is still necessary
to know them with regard to their application in old blazon.

In modern blazon when it is necessary to specify the part of the field
that is occupied, the terms _in chief_, or _in base_, _in dexter
chief_, _in sinister chief_, _in dexter base_, or _in sinister base_,
or, if in the sides of the shield, the dexter or sinister side simply,
as the case may be. It will be rarely necessary, however, to use any
other than the first two of these phrases, for the position of charges
is in most instances understood from other circumstances.

Every blazon begins by describing the field, its divisions (if any)
and colour. The partition lines by which it may be divided are named
like the ordinaries, and may therefore be most usefully considered in
connexion with them (_see_ p. 47).

Heraldic tinctures, as they are all called, consist of metals, colours
and furs. The metals and their technical names are: Or = gold, and
Argent = silver. In painting, yellow is equivalent to gold and may be
substituted for it; as white may be, and generally is, substituted for
silver. It may be noted, however, that when an animal is naturally
yellow, and is blazoned _proper_ (ppr.) it must be painted yellow and
not gold.

The colours are: Gules, signifying red; Azure for blue; Vert for
green; Purpure, purple; and Sable, black. Though the terms are more
immediately derived from Norman-French, the early language of chivalry,
some of them at least are believed to have been derived from Eastern,
probably Persian, sources. In practice they are considered to be
completely anglicized and are pronounced accordingly. This also
applies to most heraldic terms, but not to all, the practice in this
respect being somewhat arbitrary.

Tinctures are sometimes indicated by means of lines and other marks,
a system which arose in the beginning of the seventeenth century, and
was derived from the line tints which had long been used in engraving
to distinguish contiguous spaces from each other, and used in this way
they were valuable and unobjectionable because they were under control.
When, however, a colour meaning was given to the lines the designer
was no longer able to restrict their employment to where they were
artistically useful, but must use them throughout or not at all. And
the latter is, on the whole, the more satisfactory way. On flat spaces,
if the lines are sufficiently pronounced to be legible, they may lead
the eye in a direction that is not helpful to the composition, and on
modelled charges or crests they have a flattening and confusing effect
that is very disagreeable. In some instances the tincture lines have
been used only in small patches, such as in shadows, and this is least
objectionable, but is only possible in very simple cases. The signs of
the tinctures are as follows:--

 Argent is shown by a plain surface.

 Or is signified by spots and sometimes by slight pecks which produce
 the appearance of a grain.

 Gules by perpendicular lines.

 Azure by horizontal lines.

 Vert by oblique lines drawn downwards from dexter to sinister.

 Purpure by oblique lines from sinister to dexter, and

 Sable by horizontal and perpendicular lines hatched across each other
 (Fig. 35).

[Illustration:

  Or.    Argent.    Gules.    Azure.    Vert.    Purpure.    Sable.

FIG. 35.--The Tinctures.]

The tinctures are usually contracted into arg., gu., az., vt., purp.,
and sa. for convenience.

It will probably be found that errors of memory are most likely to
occur from confusing the direction of the lines which signify blue and
red respectively; this may be avoided to some extent by connecting the
letters H.B., which distinguish what is perhaps the most used grade of
lead-pencil, with the fact to be remembered: Horizontal = Blue. Also
the fact that objects on the horizon are blue may assist the memory.

[Illustration: FIG. 36.]

The furs are as follows: Ermine, it is hardly necessary to say, is
white with black spots (Fig. 36). Ermines is black with white spots,
and is probably a purely heraldic inversion of ermine. Erminois is
ermine with a gold ground instead of white, and Pean, which is inverted
erminois, has a black ground spotted with gold. The actual ermine
being composed of many small skins sewn together, the black-tipped
tails formed a regular powdering of spots. These, however, have from
the earliest heraldic times been represented by conventional forms of
immense variety, which usually consist of a divided central portion
with the addition of three spots above, the latter being sometimes
embellished with diverging lines. The conventional version of ermine
was even used in costume, being painted on the material which was used
by those to whom the wearing of real ermine was forbidden by sumptuary
law. It will be observed that the body of the spot has become turned
upside down in its transition from the form of the natural tail.

[Illustration: FIG. 37.]

[Illustration: FIG. 38.]

[Illustration: FIG. 39.]

By a similar combination of small skins, in this case grey and white,
_Vair_ was formed (Fig. 37), and this fur also acquired a generally
conventionalized shape, which became, in its late variety, somewhat
like a series of the hideous eared shields of the eighteenth century.
Vair is understood to be argent and azure in alternate spaces, the
blue representing the grey part of the natural fur, and it is only
when other tinctures are employed that they need to be mentioned in
the blazon. In the latter case the term changes to vairy, or vairé, of
such and such tinctures. One of the older forms of vair was made with
undulating lines alternating with straight ones (Fig. 38), and is
obviously better than the modern form. Another early variety carried
the curved lines up to the straight ones, and was drawn somewhat as
though the angles of the modern vair were rounded into curves, the
result being a pleasant form that is shown in Fig. 39. Vair may be of
three tinctures or even more, and instances are mentioned, by Gerard
Leigh for example, but such cases are very rare.

Potent is a fur similarly built up whose skins are in the shape of
crutch-heads, and it is subject to the same colour conditions as vair
(Fig. 40).

[Illustration: FIG. 40.]

[Illustration: FIG. 41.]

[Illustration: FIG. 42.]

Counter-vair and Counter-potent have pieces of the same colour opposed
to each other, as in the example of counter-vair (Fig. 41), and it will
be noticed that these variations of the simpler furs are inferior to
them in that they lose the completeness of the counter-change. In both
vair and potent the colour pieces are more frequently than not placed
point upwards in relation to the metal ones, but there is no definite
rule about this. An ancient form of vair which somewhat resembles
potent is Fig. 42.

[Illustration: FIG. 43.]

[Illustration: FIG. 44.]

[Illustration: FIG. 45.]

[Illustration: FIG. 46.]

[Illustration: FIG. 47.]

[Illustration: FIG. 48.]

[Illustration: FIG. 49.]

[Illustration: FIG. 50.]

Having described the tinctures it will now be convenient to return to
divisions of the field, the simplest possible variation from a plain
shield. A surface is _party per pale_ (Fig. 43) when it is divided by
a perpendicular line into two halves, _party per fess_ (Fig. 44) when
the line which equally divides the shield is a horizontal one, _party
per bend_ (Fig. 45) when it goes diagonally downwards from dexter to
sinister, and _party per bend-sinister_ when the diagonal is reversed.
The word _party_, however, has now fallen into disuse, and the terms
_per fess_, _per pale_ and so forth are considered sufficient. _Per
chevron_, _per saltire_ and _quarterly_ are as represented (Figs. 46,
47, 48). _Gyronny_ (Fig. 49) is a combination of the two last named,
and the number of its pieces being normally eight, any variation from
that number must be expressly mentioned. _Barry_ (Fig. 50) is composed
of repeated horizontal lines, which are odd in number, so that the
spaces begin and end with different tinctures. _Paly_ (Fig. 51) and
_Bendy_ (Fig. 52) are similarly composed of perpendicular and oblique
lines respectively. _Chequey_ (Fig. 53) is, of course, made into
squares by perpendicular and horizontal lines, and _Lozengy_ (Fig. 54)
similarly results from crossing oblique ones. Varieties of the latter
form arise from a combination of perpendicular with oblique lines,
called _paly bendy_, and of horizontal with oblique, which is called
_barry bendy_. Both are of rare occurrence and perhaps resulted from
bad drawing of lozengy.

[Illustration: FIG. 51.]

[Illustration: FIG. 52.]

[Illustration: FIG. 53.]

[Illustration: FIG. 54.]

The field being the first part of a coat of arms to be described, the
character of its division, if any, precedes the mention of its colour.
For example: per pale Or and Gules. Here it may be noted that a field
may be party of two metals or of two colours, for the general rule
against colour being placed upon colour or metal on metal does not
apply in these cases, the spaces being but divisions of one plane and
not parts that are superposed one on the other. Nor does it apply to
objects that are charged on a _party_ field, for in that case it is
inevitable that the tincture of the charge must interfere with one or
other of the tinctures of the field. Nevertheless, when confusion
would be very pronounced counter-change is resorted to, as for example
(Fig. 55): per pale arg. and az. three roses counter-changed.

[Illustration: FIG. 55.]

In blazoning party fields the tinctures count from the dexter side
when the divisions are perpendicular, and from the chief when they are
horizontal. In cases of diagonal division it must be remembered that
the chief has precedence over the dexter side, and therefore in a field
“per bend or and gules,” for instance, the space above the diagonal
counts first and is therefore or. If this point is kept in mind, the
difficulties that are frequently experienced in such blazon disappear.
Thus in _per saltire_ the divisions count from the uppermost space, and
in _gyronny_, this space being again divided by the perpendicular line,
the alternation begins with that part of the chief which is nearest the
dexter, or in other words, the first quarter of the shield is per bend.
In bendy the space next above the middle diagonal may be taken for the
first tincture as the key to the alternation.

Barry, Paly and Bendy are each understood to be composed of six pieces
unless it is otherwise mentioned.

When chequey is applied to ordinaries, at least three rows or _tracks_
are considered essential; so that when there is but one row it is
called Gobony or Compony, and is Counter-compony when there are two.
The two latter varieties occur most frequently in bordures.

The objects that are borne on the shield are divided into two main
groups that are respectively called Ordinaries and Charges.

Ordinaries comprise those simple flat figures which are in most
cases formed by divisions of the shield and generally extend to its
edges. They are the Fess, the Bend, the Chief, the Pale, the Chevron,
the Cross and the Saltire. Some of these have diminutives, similar
figures drawn distinctly smaller and having separate names, and these
will be found under their principals. Other forms, sometimes called
sub-ordinaries are the Pile, Quarter, Canton, Gyron, Bordure, Orle,
Tressure and Flanches.

Other objects, animals, flowers, trees, anything depictable, animate or
inanimate, may be borne as Charges on the field, on ordinaries, or on
each other.

The Fess (Fig. 56) is drawn horizontally across the shield and occupies
the middle of it from side to side, and the blazon might be, for
example, Or, a fess gules, i.e. a red fess on a golden shield. Where
more than one occurs in the same coat they are necessarily smaller and
are called Bars, e.g. Argent three bars sable.

When bars are distinctly arranged in pairs each pair is called a
Bar-gemelle, thus Az. three bars-gemelles Or, means three pairs of bars.

The proportion of the ordinaries to their fields varies very
considerably, and this for many reasons. When the ordinary is alone,
when it is between charges or where it is itself charged, the
proportion will change with the conditions. The character of such
charges and therefore their weight in the composition must also be
taken into account, for the adequate display of all the constituents of
the coat is the object in view.

As an approximate proportion the width of an ordinary may be taken as
somewhat less than one-third of the field when neither, or both, are
charged; as a full third when itself charged and on a plain field; and
as rather more than one-fifth when the field only is charged.

By similar niceties of design the sense of lightness or weight may be
conveyed, so that for decorative purposes the shield may be brought
into due relation with the character of surrounding ornament. Colour
also will affect the apparent proportion, a dark object on a light
ground appearing smaller than it really is, and vice versa, and this
requires careful attention in the counter-change which occur in
heraldry as in other forms of design.

[Illustration: FIG. 56.]

[Illustration: FIG. 57.]

[Illustration: FIG. 58.]

[Illustration: FIG. 59.]

The Bend is drawn from the dexter chief to the sinister base (Fig.
57), and is sometimes accompanied by a smaller bend on either side,
when it is said to be _cotised_ and must so be distinctly described,
as arg. a bend cotised sa.; if, however, the cotises were of another
tincture to the bend the blazon would be, for instance, arg. a bend sa.
cotised gu., that is, a black bend between two smaller red ones on a
white shield. The word cotise is also used for other diminutives that
accompany their ordinaries on either side, and there are instances of
shields being said to be cotised by their supporters. Where two or
more bends of equal width occur they are called bendlets, and when they
are raised above their normal position as in the Arms of Byron and of
Birmingham they are said to be _enhanced_.

The Bend-sinister is a bend reversed; that is to say, descending from
the sinister chief to the opposite base; indeed, it sometimes occurs in
wood-carving merely by reason of the carver having inadvertently turned
his tracing over. The bend-sinister is sometimes used as a mark of
illegitimacy. One of its diminutives, the Baton (a small bend-sinister,
whose ends stop considerably short of the edges of the shield), is
especially used with this intention. A bend-sinister is not necessarily
a mark of illegitimacy. The old heralds indeed do not seem to have
marked a coat in this way in order to hold up its bearer to obloquy,
but simply employed the ordinary as a difference.

A diminutive of the bend called a Ribbon occurs in the Arms of
Abernethy--Or a lion rampant gules, debruised, i.e. passed over by a
ribbon sable.

The Chief occupies the top of the shield from side to side and has no
diminutive (Fig. 58).

The Pale is drawn perpendicularly down the centre of the coat (Fig.
59), and when one of a number is called a Pallet, which again is
sometimes called an Endorse when it accompanies the pale as the cotise
does the bend.

The Chevron (Fig. 60), usually drawn as a right angle, may be varied
to a very large extent as conditions of space require; it becomes
unpleasant, however, when more obtuse than a right angle. In later
French and Italian heraldry it is frequently drawn remarkably acute,
its point often extending to the top of the shield, and this form is
usually found associated with very small and weakly drawn charges. When
more chevrons than one are used together they are called Chevronels.

[Illustration: FIG. 60.]

[Illustration: FIG. 61.]

[Illustration: FIG. 62.]

The Cross (Fig. 61) and its diagonal variety the Saltire (Fig. 62) are
sometimes _voided_, as in Fig. 63, so that the field shows through,
and may also be interlaced, as arg. a cross voided and interlaced sa
(Fig. 64). _Parted and fretty_ is an equivalent term. Its proportion,
even in shields of which it was the only bearing, was much narrower in
mediaeval times than later.

[Illustration: FIG. 63.]

[Illustration: FIG. 64.]

The great variety of its form as a charge is referred to under that
head, and some of its less usual forms as an ordinary are: Fig. 65, a
cross quarter pierced; Fig. 66, a cross quadrate; Fig. 67, a cross
nowy; and Fig. 68, a cross couped.

[Illustration: FIG. 65.]

[Illustration: FIG. 66.]

[Illustration: FIG. 67.]

[Illustration: FIG. 68.]

The Pile is represented in Fig. 69. When more than one occur they point
towards the base, unless their position is otherwise specified, and
their points may either be in a line perpendicular to their widest part
or they may converge towards the centre; in the latter position they
are blazoned “piles in point.” Sometimes three piles are alternated so
that there are “two in chief and one in base,” the latter, of course,
being point upwards between the other two.

[Illustration: FIG. 69.]

With the important exception of the chief all the foregoing ordinaries,
as bearings occupying the principal parts of the shield, are mentioned
in blazon immediately after the field and before the charges, if any,
as: Argent a bend between two fleurs-de-lis Gules, for example. The
chief, on the other hand, is not blazoned until after the rest of the
shield has been fully described.

Ordinaries may themselves be charged, and in that case the sequence in
the blazon is: (1) the field; (2) the objects immediately on it; and
lastly, the charges with which the latter are charged. For example: Az.
_on a_ chevron between three roses Or, as many fleurs-de-lis of the
field. It will be noticed that the fact that the ordinary is charged is
mentioned early in the blazon, though the description of the charges
is left till later in accordance with the sequence already stated.
Also that the chevron and roses being of the same tinctures the word
_Or_ only follows the last of the objects to which it refers. Another
point that is here exemplified is the avoidance of tautology by the use
of the words “as many” instead of the repetition of the number three,
and again in describing the fleurs-de-lis by tincturing them “of the
field” instead of repeating az. This extreme objection to tautology is
very characteristic of heraldic language, and where it is impossible to
otherwise avoid repeating a tincture the ordinary word will be used in
place of the technical one, as Gold in place of Or.

[Illustration: FIG. 70.]

Having proceeded so far with the subject of blazon, two very convenient
methods of noting heraldic facts may now be described. That which is
called a “trick” is a slight sketch, in which simplification is carried
to the ultimate extent by indicating with numbers the charges which
are repeated. As an instance, the coat blazoned above would appear in
trick thus (Fig. 70). In the other method, which is a sort of heraldic
shorthand, the blazon would be written: Az. on a [Shape 1] bet 3 [Shape
2] Or 3 [Shape 3] Az., the niceties of ordinary blazon in avoiding
repetition being ignored.

VARIOUS LINES.--The lines with which simple objects are drawn and
fields divided are, normally, plain ones; but various others are also
employed, and constitute important differences between one coat and
another. Those in ordinary use are as follows (Fig. 71):--

[Illustration: Engrailed

Invected

Wavy

Nebulée

Indented

Dancettée

Embattled

Raguly

Dovetailed

Potenty

Rompu

Fig. 71.]

Engrailed may be drawn with cusps of any suitable size or quality of
curvature. Its points must turn outwards from an ordinary, and when
used as a party line they point to the dexter in per pale and upwards
in per fess and per chevron.

All lines other than plain ones must be mentioned in the blazon in
immediate connexion with the objects to which they refer and before
the tincture, as, Gules a bordure engrailed Or. As the only party line
that appears to face in one direction, engrailed follows the general
heraldic feeling in turning its point to the dexter or to the chief
unless there is special reason to the contrary.

Invected is engrailed reversed, so that the points turn inward. Its use
is comparatively rare and the effect is not very pleasing.

In wavy any form of regular undulation may be employed so long as there
is no possibility of confusion with nebulée.

Nebulée is usually drawn in some modification of the two forms given
above, but there is an old and interesting treatment in which a nearer,
though still conventional, suggestion of clouds covers the ordinary,
as in Fig. 72. This is a bordure nebuly equally with that drawn in the
ordinary way.

[Illustration: FIG. 72.]

Indented is composed of small serrations, while Dancettée usually
consists of not more than three chevrons which, in the case of a fess,
for instance, may be complete, or the series may begin and end with a
half chevron as in the example. In early instances the angles are very
acute, and in the case of party lines extend well across the field. In
such a case the line should begin on one side of the shield and finish
on the other in order to equalize the direction of the points.

Embattled, when applied to fesses and chevrons, is confined to
the upper line unless the ordinary is blazoned “embattled counter
embattled,” in which case both lines are similarly treated. When
applied to a chevron the sides of the crenellations are usually kept
vertical, as though in the wall of a sloping way, rather than at right
angles to the ordinary, though the latter form also occurs.

Raguly, especially when applied to a fess or a pale, is suggestive of
stumps of branches that have been lopped from the parent stem, and this
probably indicates its origin. Thus the projections on both sides of
the ordinary slope the same way, and, in many examples, they alternate.
In the case of a cross they point along the limbs outwards from the
centre.

Many of the heraldic lines are of very ancient usage, and the popular
idea that they are signs of modernity is quite an erroneous one, some
of them occurring as early as the reign of Edward I.

A line is Rompu when it is interrupted as in Fig. 62, and an instance
of this occurs in the Arms of Allen, which is per bend rompu.

SUB-ORDINARIES.--The Canton, Gyron, Inescutcheon, Orle, Tressure,
Bordure and Flanches are classed as Sub-ordinaries. The fusil or
lozenge (_q.v._) and some others are also sometimes included in this
division, but classification of this kind is of little practical
importance.

The Canton (Fig. 73) is frequently a means of displaying an
augmentation, a special distinction added to a previously existing
coat, as in the arms of the family of Lane and others. It is drawn
of any convenient size short of being possibly confused with the
Quarter, the latter occupying the proportion of the shield that its
name implies. The fact that even in modern coats the canton partially
covers, if necessary, a charge near the same part of the shield
suggests that it was in its origin an added mark of honour; and also
because like the chief, it is mentioned in the blazon only after the
main part of the shield has been described.

The Orle (Fig. 69) becomes a Tressure (Fig. 70) by the addition
of fleurs-de-lis, and when doubled and decorated with alternating
fleurs-de-lis on both sides the beautiful “double tressure flory
counterflory” of the Royal arms of Scotland is formed.

[Illustration: FIG. 73.]

[Illustration: FIG. 74.]

[Illustration: FIG. 75.]

[Illustration: FIG. 76.]

Other ordinaries may also be made flory in a similar way, and a
partition line may be flory counterflory, so that each division of the
field interpenetrates the other in a very beautiful counter-change.

The Bordure (Fig. 71) was extensively used in the Middle Ages as an
addition to the arms of a family by which to distinguish its individual
members from each other, as it still is in Scotland, and in its
application to historic personages is a subject of great interest; for
example, the shield of John of Eltham bore the arms of his father,
Edward II, the lions of England, differenced with a bordure charged
with fleurs-de-lis, in allusion to his mother, Isabella of France. The
shield (Fig. 77) appears on the tomb of his nephew, Prince Edmund, at
Kings Langley, but a much finer example is that from Prince John’s own
monument in Westminster Abbey, at p. 77. This part of the subject will
well repay pursuit, though space forbids its further consideration here.

[Illustration: FIG. 77.

Arms of Prince John of Eltham. From the Monument to Prince Edmund of
Langley at Kings Langley.]

It should be noted that when a chief or a canton occurs in the same
arms with a bordure it surmounts the latter, or rather the bordure
stops when it touches the other, for both are usually represented as
in the same plane. Also, when a coat with a bordure is impaled with
another, as in the arms of husband and wife, the bordure stops at the
junction with the other coat. Nevertheless, the charges on the bordure,
if any, and of specified number, remain, with the rest of the arms,
unaffected by its diminution.

The fact that the chief surmounts a bordure lends probability to the
assertion that chiefs like cantons were at first honorific additions to
pre-existing arms.

Flanches are represented in Fig. 78, and their diminutives, Flasques
and Voiders, are sometimes met with in old works.

[Illustration: FIG. 78.]

A shield of arms is said to be _charged_ with the figures upon it, but
the term charge is usually understood to mean some object other than
the ordinaries just described.

Before proceeding further, however, it will be well to consider the
various ways in which charges may be arranged with regard to the
shield, to the ordinary and to each other.

A single charge whose position is not otherwise fixed by the blazon
naturally occupies the whole shield, but when charges are repeated the
arrangement is, of course, more complex.

The most usual number of repeated charges in a coat of arms is three,
two in chief and one in base, an arrangement obviously suggested by
the space available on a pointed shield, and in blazoning they are
said to be _two and one_. As a rule, however, this distribution is
assumed to exist unless another is specified. When the charges are more
than three their disposition must always be mentioned, as: Gules six
horse-shoes, three two a one, Arg. and so on for ten or more, counting
always from the chief or top of the shield.

An indefinite number of charges equally distributed over a surface,
whether of field, ordinary or charge, is said to be Semée, as in the
Arms of France that were assumed by Edward III and his successors, az.
semée-de-lis or. As in this instance, a field semée of anything was
depicted as though cut from a large surface similarly decorated, so
that here and there at the edges a part only of the figures remained.
This early method has been relinquished in favour of what was anciently
called Geratting, by so arranging the powdering of charges that they do
not touch the sides of the shield or any other object with which they
are associated. Considerable management is required to so arrange them
that they shall be equally distributed, and care must be taken that
they do not appear to be _in orle_, as is explained below.

[Illustration: FIG. 79.]

Somewhat similar to semée is what is known as guttée or gouttee (Fig.
79), a means of covering a field or other object by means of a kind
of semée of drops, which have different names according to their
tinctures. Thus when they are gold they are gouttés d’or; when argent,
gouttés d’eau; when gules, gouttés de sang; azure, gouttés de larmes;
sable they are gouttés de poix; and gouttés d’olive are vert.

It is quite permissible to blazon them by their tincture; thus “arg.
gouttée de sang,” would be equally correctly written, arg. guttée gules.

The direction of the ordinaries affords another excellent means of
placing charges; thus, objects in a horizontal line across the middle
of the shield are _in fess_, when at the top they are _in chief_, and
so forth.

Similarly, charges one above the other are blazoned _in pale_. Here
it should be noted that in pale and in fess do not mean occupying the
_space_ of a pale or of a fess, but merely that they are disposed in
the indicated direction. Thus the lions of England are _in pale_, but
should, of course, be drawn right across their field, and in a similar
manner charges in fess extend from chief to base when their character
admits of the extension.

In some instances a number of charges are placed on the field between
others, as: three roses in bend between two roundles; but the result
can rarely be made satisfactory as design, such a coat seeming to need
the steadying effect of the lines of an ordinary.

Charges that are ranged round the field, as in the enamelled shield of
William de Valence at Westminster, p. 176, are _in orle_; if the number
of martlets were specified, the blazon would be so many martlets in
orle; but if the number were indefinite, the term would be an orle of
martlets.

[Illustration: FIG. 80.--Arms of the Grocers Company of London. Cartoon
for mural decoration. Geo. W. Eve.]

When a fess or a chevron is between three charges the latter naturally
fall into the position of two in chief and one in base, and that is
the most usual number and arrangement. Instances of greater numbers
so disposed are rare among ancient examples, for in designing them the
pointed shield seems to have been kept always in view with the notable
exception of Berkeley, Gu. a chevron ermine between ten crosses pattée
Ar; but these adapt themselves perfectly to the shield and chevron,
being balanced by the large number above, as also do the cloves of the
Grocers Company that are similarly arranged. Fig. 80 shows a rendering
of the last-mentioned arms as designed to accompany work of the
eighteenth century.




CHAPTER IV

Animals and Monsters


Among the forms that are characteristically heraldic the Lion, the
symbol of courage, power and magnanimity, is most prominent and typical.

[Illustration: FIG. 81.

Thirteenth Century.]

[Illustration:

  FIG. 82.      FIG. 83.

Device Seals. Thirteenth Century.]

It has already been mentioned that the earliest heraldic lion, followed
the Eastern examples with considerable fidelity, as may be seen by
comparing the lions of the early MSS., such as Fig. 81, with those of
the textiles which were the product of Oriental looms, and of such as
were set up in Sicily with Oriental workmen in the twelfth century.
These early examples were drawn broadly and simply as was fitting
to the material in which they were expressed, and their shape and
proportion approached that of nature. The lion of the early seals, such
as Figs. 82 and 83, present the same characteristics. The former seal
is that of Alexander First in the twelfth century, and the latter that
of Henry, son of Swanus de Denehy, in the thirteenth. The attenuation
which became so characteristic a feature of the animals in later work
arose from the necessity of clear definition of the object which was
to serve as a distinctive badge that would be visible at a distance
and when in motion, as has been already pointed out. The device was
intended to be easily read under the various conditions of use, and
in complying with those conditions the early draughtsman well proved
that splendid sense of design which distinguished him. To this end the
object was drawn as large as the containing space would fairly permit,
and its form was attenuated so as to allow the ground to show through
in due proportion to complete the necessary clearness of definition. A
figure thus treated became a symbol, rather than a representation of
the intended creature, but was, nevertheless, in the best instances,
full of character, vigour and vitality; that is to say, the qualities
that were attributed to the animal, not its mere form, were the object
of expression. The placing of the beasts in the shield and their
proportion to it is always satisfactory at this time, and suggests that
too much care cannot be taken in trying to attain a similar excellence
in present work, but by expressing qualities rather than by copying
forms. Of the examples of lions of various periods, Fig. 84 is taken
from the seal of Henry de Percy, 1300. Figs. 85 and 86, a lion rampant
and passant guardant respectively, are from the enamelled arms on the
tomb of Edward III in Westminster Abbey. Fig. 87 is from a fifteenth
century shield of stained glass that is now in the Victoria and Albert
Museum.

[Illustration: FIG. 84.--End of Twelfth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 85.--Late Fourteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 86.--Later Fourteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 87.--Fifteenth Century.]

The exact proportion which charges should bear to the field cannot,
of course, be stated with accuracy, there being no ready means of
measurement, even if such were desirable, and it must necessarily
remain a matter for artistic perception to find the just mean between
crowding a space and failing to fill it. It is evident also that the
proportion would be modified by circumstances, such as the character of
the charge (whether condensed or dispersed), and also to some extent
by colour, with regard to the respective effects of light on dark or
dark on light as affecting apparent size. It may, however, be suggested
that the charges should be insisted upon to the fullest extent that is
compatible with the general style of the design, the field remaining of
such weight that the Scottish quarter of the Royal Banner, for example,
if seen as a mass at a distance, will tell as gold rather than red. And
after all is said, the actual balance must be left to the decision of
the trained eye.

When strong outline filled in with colour is the method of working, due
allowance must be made for the tendency of the line to become merged in
the darker of the two tinctures; and the object will therefore need to
be drawn slightly larger or smaller accordingly.

There are also illusions of an optical nature that are produced by
certain combinations of lines. If, for instance, three pallets are
charged upon a chevron, it will be found that the middle one must be
appreciably wider than those beside it if the three are to appear
equal. Fig. 88 shows this, though the fact is more clearly appreciable
in a drawing on a larger scale.

[Illustration: FIG. 88.]

The Pose of the Animals must be carefully observed as being of the
utmost heraldic importance, and must in the main be adhered to with
complete fidelity. To neglect in this respect is due much of the bad
heraldry which too often vitiates otherwise good work.

In the early days of the science, when the bearings were few, the
nature of the creature was, no doubt, sufficient for the intended
purpose, for there would be no other near with which to confuse it, and
the pose was probably dictated by the form of the space that the animal
was required to fill, but when it became necessary to distinguish
between different bearers of the same animal, pose assumed a special
significance and therefore became one of the principal means of
heraldic distinction.

Of the two principal poses, rampant and passant, the former is more
suitable to upright spaces and the latter to horizontal ones. When
however a passant lion has to fill an upright space, such as a canton
or a quarter of a shield, or a rampant lion to fill a horizontally
flattened one such as the second quarter of the Royal Standard when it
is constructed in accordance with Admiralty measurements difficulties
occur. One such problem occurs in the arms of Cambridge University,
Gules a cross Ermine between four lions of England, a Bible fesswise of
the field clasped and garnished Or (Fig. 89).

[Illustration: FIG. 89.--Arms of the University of Cambridge. Panel in
copper silvered and oxidized. G. W. Eve.]

It was the rampant position that was considered the typical leonine
one, however, and therefore it was that the lions of England were
called leopards in early times: not that they differed in their
relation to the natural form, but simply that they were not in the
understood leonine posture. It will be seen from the example (Fig.
90) that rampant signifies an upright pose with all the legs separated
in a suggestion of vigorous rage. This arrangement of the limbs is
heraldically essential, for when the hind legs are placed together the
position is called _salient_ or leaping (Fig. 91). With regard to the
heads of animals, it must be understood that in heraldry the normal
position is in profile, and then it requires no special mention in
the blazon. If, however, the blazon is, for example, a lion rampant
guardant, the head is turned until it looks straight out of the shield
at the spectator (Fig. 92). _Regardant_ is when the head is turned
still farther so that it looks backward over the shoulder (Fig. 93).
In some early works the term regardant is used in the same sense as
guardant, full faced, but the position first described is what is now
understood by the term.

[Illustration: FIG. 90.--Rampant.]

[Illustration: FIG. 91.--Salient.]

[Illustration: FIG. 92.--Rampant Guardant.]

[Illustration: FIG. 93.--Rampant Regardant.]

The tail of the rampant lion, which in early examples was elaborated
into a highly ornamental appendage, is usually held in an erect
position, but there is no heraldic reason why it should not occupy any
other position which the shape of the field might render desirable.

It seems to have been always believed that the rage of a lion was
indicated by the agitation of the tail, and Leigh, writing in the
sixteenth century, says: “When the lion is angry, first he beateth the
earth and then his own backe with his taile.” On the other hand, it is
now asserted by wild beast tamers that a lion is most dangerous when
his tail assumes the rigidity of an iron bar and possibly the first
draughtsman to depict the Howard or the Percy lion, in his well-known
and now stereotyped attitude with the tail extended horizontally, was
aware of this.

It is sometimes said that the tail passing between the legs constitutes
a definite heraldic variation, but this is extremely unlikely. The
term ascribed to it of “coward” is much too dangerous to have been
intentionally borne on a shield which symbolically stood for its owner,
except with some other symbol in a position of superiority, such as
the eagle over the dragon in the Guelph arms. Most probably it was one
of the trivial inventions by which the later heraldic writers sought
to fix and give meaning to an accidental and unessential detail.
There are numerous instances of this free treatment of the tail when
there could be no possible heraldic intention, and in every case it
is apparent that some difficulty in arrangement was overcome, as in
both the Great Seals for Scotland of Charles I the lion supporter has
the tail between the legs, and it is not possible to consider this a
Scottish joke, though the animal looks singularly mild and cheerful.
However this may be, the tail may certainly go anywhere outside the
legs. A lion’s tail may be double or forked, and in that case the
blazon says _double queued or queue forchée_. Both terms mean the same
thing, for the double tail issues from but one root. In rare instances
it is twisted into a knot, and is then said to be nowed.

Although the lion has been conventionalized, more or less, into
a pattern, and his positions are always the subject of careful
regulation, he is still susceptible of considerable variation of pose,
within heraldic limits, based on the facts of anatomical structure; so
that while the possibilities of animal movement are observed, it may
be designed to cover its field pattern-wise whatever the shape of the
shield may be, and at the same time retain great vitality and power.
The effort to express vigorous action without suggesting progression
out of the space is not easy perhaps, but the contrary effect is very
ludicrous, as is often apparent in modern mural decorations that are
based on heraldic motives, rampant lions seeming to be walking placidly
up a wall in a procession of their fellows.

The _lion passant_ is depicted with all the limbs separated and the
right forepaw raised (Fig. 94), and when its head is full faced,
affrontée, it is passant guardant, the position of the lions in the
Royal arms of England, viz. Gules three lions passant guardant in pale
Or. The most frequent error in rendering this coat is the turning the
heads in profile, and it cannot therefore be too often insisted upon
that lions so treated are not “lions of England” at all.

[Illustration: FIG. 94.--Passant.]

[Illustration: FIG. 95.--Statant.]

The shield at Canterbury that is ascribed to Edward the Black Prince
has been already described as a most satisfactory example, which is in
brilliant contrast to the modern instances wherein the lions occupy a
central column in a broad field with a wide blank space at either side
of them. This perhaps arose from a mis-reading of the words “in pale”
of the blazon, which were perhaps taken to mean “in place of a pale,”
whereas they mean “in the direction of a pale,” i.e. one over the other
but without lateral limits other than those of the field. Passant
regardant has the head looking backwards as in rampant regardant. The
lion statant (Fig. 95) stands on all four feet, and may be statant
guardant or statant regardant, according to the position of the head as
before mentioned.

Sejant is in the position of Fig. 96 and couchant that of Fig. 97.

[Illustration: FIG 96..--Sejant.]

[Illustration: FIG. 97.--Couchant.]

The expression of vigour is the most important individual quality to
strive after in the treatment of heraldic animals, the line of the back
and loins may be made to express lithe strength, and power be suggested
by the massive shoulder, with the powerful fore-leg tapering to the
wide-stretched and vigorous paw. Dignity and life should be in the pose
of the leonine head and mane, and broad harmonious effect in the whole
treatment. The widely spread toes were sometimes very much exaggerated,
as in the Arms of John of Eltham (Fig. 98), but in character and
drawing were much nearer the natural facts than the foot of a quiescent
lion might lead one to imagine. This may be seen on a small scale in
the domestic cat when she stretches her leg with her claws protruding.

When the lions of the later Gothic type lost the vigorous qualities
of the earlier examples the toes lost their power and became like
radiating leaf-forms.

[Illustration: FIG. 98.--Arms of Prince John of Eltham.

Westminster Abbey.]

The setting-on of the tail may also help the expression of vigorous
life, its junction with the body being well marked instead of being
allowed to flow softly out of the line of the back. This is well
shown in Dürer’s lion at Fig. 99, that splendid example of the best
kind of Renaissance heraldry whose fine drawing, well-balanced design
and beautiful technique have caused its frequent instance as a striking
work of heraldic art. The illustration is reproduced from the very
fine impression in the National Art Library at the Victoria and Albert
Museum.

Both these examples are excellent for their good decorative
distribution, the former shield being probably the best extant instance
of that necessary quality.

In the lions of various periods it will be seen how the type altered
from time to time, from that of the thirteenth century MSS., which
possesses a considerable amount of a natural leonine shape, through the
attenuated beast of the later mediaeval period down to the Renaissance
form in its two somewhat dissimilar styles: that of Germany, from which
modern German heraldry is derived, which shows a strong survival of
Gothic influence; and that of Italy, from which appears to have been
drawn the heraldry of the rest of Europe until the still recent Gothic
revival here.

In modern German heraldry the lions have become so over-elaborated that
in many instances the prevalent effect is one of fluffiness. Too much
is made of the hair, especially in the legs, which are sometimes much
more suggestive of the well-feathered legs of a dorking fowl than of
the clean and powerful, though hairy, limb of a lion; and with the lost
suggestion of vital energy goes any symbolic dignity that it expresses.

[Illustration: FIG. 99.--The Coat of Arms with a Cock. A. Dürer.]

The later Italian heraldry and the style which followed it ultimately
dispensed with attenuation in the animals together with most of
the other decorative qualities of the hated Gothic, and the efforts
at naturalistic representation resulted in forms which at a little
distance became mere undistinguishable blobs, to the complete defeat
of the object of their existence. The rampant lions became tame
and therefore ludicrous in the upright pose which, deprived of any
suggestion of rage and strength becomes meaningless, while in what
may be called the decorative treatment the suggestion of the creature
and of its attributed qualities in a broad and simple way sanctions
an arrangement which makes for decorative distribution as well as for
symbolic expressiveness. Vigour also makes for the dignity that is an
important consideration in serious design, for when once a ludicrous
suggestion is attached to a thing it becomes inseparable from it.
Probably the most frequent accompaniment of such want of vigour is the
production of a feebly human expression which inevitably suggests the
connexion with it of some trivial or ludicrous phrase. Now the grinning
jaws of the early lions are never imbecile.

With regard to the strong characterization that is required valuable
lessons may be learnt from the lions of the Assyrian bas-reliefs,
one of which is represented here (Fig. 100). The accentuation of the
principal muscular forms and masses is very striking, and presents
suggestions of a method that lends itself well to the expression
of heraldic character. It is not, of course, intended to import an
Assyrian lion bodily into the shield, or that the Assyrian style should
be visible in the resulting work, but only that the method should be
studied and applied as a special means to a definite end.

[Illustration: FIG. 100.--Lion from Assyrian Bas-relief.]

The degree of detail and the amount of its elaboration will depend on
the size and general character of the work. Sometimes mere outline will
suffice, though on a larger scale or in other conditions it would look
empty. Thence to complete modelling embraces a wide field of choice
in which to find methods suitable to all purposes. Under ordinary
conditions a simple broad treatment is much to be desired, definition
being obtained by few but accurately placed lines, such as those of
ribs and loins in the body, and of brow, jaw and mane in the head.

The degree of relief of charges should, of course, stop short of any
suggestion of detachment from the field. This might seem too obvious
for remark, but an example to the contrary, a large, and in many
respects beautiful, work in coloured leather was recently to be seen in
which, the arms of the Medici being the principal motive, the charges
appeared to be suspended in front of the shield from which they seemed
to be so distant as to cast full round shadows.

In adjusting a rampant lion or other beast to its field a skeleton
sketch of the main lines of distribution may be usefully employed as a
guide in first blocking out the animal, in the same way that similar
diagrammatic forms are sometimes used in figure composition. On this
the figure will be drawn, the head being thrown well back and the
hindmost leg being brought towards the centre line so as to help the
spacing in the dexter base of the shield.

Care should be taken not to make the higher of the forelegs too short,
or the value is lost of the strong forward reach from the shoulder,
which expresses the action while it helps the distribution.

In posing animals on a shield it must never be forgotten that not only
is a pattern being arranged but that it is made with the body and limbs
of a supposedly living thing.

Fig. 101 is one of the methods that suggest themselves, and passant
lions may be spaced in a similar way (Fig. 102).

[Illustration: FIG. 101.]

[Illustration: FIG. 102.]

A lion’s claws and tongue, of which he is _armed_ and _langued_
respectively, are gules except when he or the field is of that
tincture, and in either of the latter cases he is armed and langued
azure, as in the Royal coat of Scotland. This is taken as of course,
and need not be mentioned in the blazon, though it very often is.

Demi-lions are usually demi-lions rampant, and in this form they were
largely used as crests, which will be discussed later on. They are
depicted as severed low down at the loins, and the tail is retained in
most cases, though not always. When, as a charge, they are in contact
with a line of an ordinary, as though arising from it, they must be
described in the blazon as _issuant_.

Demi-lions passant or passant guardant are of more rare occurrence, the
latter generally in conjunction with another object, as in the arms
ascribed to the Cinque Ports on the seal of Sandwich (Fig. 103), where
the demi-lions are joined to the hulls of ships. This evidently arose
from the joining together by dimidiation or halving of two separate
coats, viz. the Arms of England with one of local allusion: Az. three
hulls of ships Or. By a similar method were evolved the Arms of the
city of Chester, wherein the lions of England are conjoined with the
wheatsheaves of the Earldom.

[Illustration: FIG. 103.--Seal of Sandwich (Mayor’s Seal).]

Among the separate parts of animals used alone or in repetition a
lion’s head is a frequent charge, and it follows the general rule of
being represented in profile unless otherwise described. The lion’s
leg, called a jamb, is also separately used as a charge, the tail being
likewise thus employed. It must be remarked, that whenever a separate
part of an animal is used as a charge the method of its severance must
be carefully distinguished, whether _couped_, cleanly cut off, or
_erased_, roughly torn away. In the latter case the erasure generally
consists of three points or tufts, though not necessarily of that exact
number so long as the erasure is sufficiently marked. It may, however,
be noted here that a demi-lion as a crest is considered to be couped
unless it is otherwise described, the junction with the helm usually
disappearing within the torse that encircles it at that point.

Animals that can neither be described as actual nor purely imaginary
are the so-called “heraldic” tiger and “heraldic” antelope, which have
little apparent relation to their natural namesakes, but were perhaps
evolved in the effort of an early artist to realize the wonderful
description of some marvellous traveller. They have a family likeness,
however, in their armed snouts and in their leonine tails, the latter
being an appendage with which the mediaeval artist was fond of
finishing off his creatures in default of more accurate information.

The poses of the lion are followed in a general way by other animals,
both natural and “heraldic”; but in many instances the attitudes are
called by different names for different creatures, a practice that
was usual in mediaeval times, and also has its present examples, such
as that two partridges are a brace and two hounds a couple, which
need hardly be further specified. The Stag, emblematic of speed and
sport rather than of combative virtues, has a special set of terms,
which were naturally borrowed in part from those used in hunting. Thus
he is “_at gaze_” when standing with his head affrontée, but when
he stands with his head in profile he is _statant_ like any other
beast; _springing_ when in the salient position, _trippant_ when he
is walking, _at speed_ when running, and when couched he is _lodged_,
and so he must be described in the blazon. His antlers, which are
called _attires_, must, if they are of a different colour, be carefully
mentioned and also his hoofs in a similar case, e.g. Azure a stag
trippant Arg. attired and unguled (i.e. hoofed) Or.

A distinction is made between the stag and other horned animals in that
the latter are said to be _armed_ with their horns, as in the crest of
the Duke of Bedford, a goat statant Arg. armed Or.

Horses and other maned animals, real and imaginary, are _crined_ of
their manes. Thus, the supporters of the Goldsmiths Company (Fig.
104) are unicorns or, armed, crined and hoofed arg. (in some examples
purpure). This treatment of the Goldsmiths’ arms was designed,
like those of the Grocers Company at p. 64, to harmonize with early
eighteenth century decorations. The unicorn has a horse’s head and
body with the legs and cloven hoofs of a stag. Its twisted horn issues
from the middle of its forehead, and its tail is that of a lion, the
foregoing examples which have horses’ tails being extremely rare
exceptions to the general rule.

[Illustration: FIG. 104.--The Arms of the Goldsmiths Company of London.
Cartoon for mural decoration. Geo. W. Eve.]

[Illustration: Portion of a Pageant Car, with Heraldic Monsters. By
Albert Dürer.]

[Illustration: Griffin from the Triumphal Arch of the Emperor
Maximilian I. Dürer.]

Of other imaginary animals the Griffin or Gryphon is probably the
best known next to the unicorn, seeing that its name is that which
is popularly applied to most non-natural beasts. Evidently derived
from one of those creatures by which early eastern art expressed the
conjunction of various attributes, it came, like many other monsters,
to be implicitly believed in as an actual beast until a comparatively
late date. Thus Gerard Leigh has something to say of griffins which
“bear great enmity to man and horse, though the man be armed and on
horseback yet they take the one with the other quite from the ground
and carry them clean away. I think they are of great hugeness,” he goes
on, “for I have a claw of one of their paws which should show them to
be as big as two Lyons!” In another place Leigh refuses to believe
something that he had heard because he “had not seen the proof thereof”!

The griffin is half eagle and half lion, the head forepart and wings
being those of an eagle and the rest of the body with the hind legs and
tail are leonine. The head of a griffin has ears, and these serve to
distinguish it from that of an eagle when it is used alone.

A curious variety of griffin, borne by the Marquis of Ormonde, is
wingless, has two horns on its head and groups of rays issuing from
its body, and is termed a male-griffin, for some inscrutable reason. It
should be noted that the term for a griffin in a rampant position is
_segreant_, all other poses being described in the ordinary way.

The treatment of the composite animals naturally followed that of the
creatures which entered into their composition, while the Dragons, more
purely imaginary creatures, have suggestions of a snakelike character
in their scales and annulations.

In continental heraldry the dragon has but one pair of legs and behind
them the body diminishing into a snakelike tail, which sometimes
terminates in a barbed end. This form we term a Wyvern, reserving the
word dragon for the four-legged variety.

The conception of a dragon varied greatly, the prevailing
characteristic in many instances being a hard scaliness somewhat
suggestive of the Chinese and other oriental types. In other examples
greater sinuosity and a more leathery texture is apparent, recalling
to mind the idea of the “loathly worm” of some of the mediaeval dragon
legends. As a symbol of evil, terrible but overcome, it is associated
with St. George and with St. Michael, and also appears, with more
personal allusion, in the well-known device of the Guelphic faction in
their contest with the Ghibellines.

[Illustration: Arms of the City of London. Wallis. 1677.]

[Illustration: Wyvern (so-called “Dragon”)

From Paradin, “Devices Heroiques,” 1557.]

[Illustration: Privy Seal of Henry VIII.]




CHAPTER V

Heraldic Birds and other Figures, Animate and Inanimate


In the same way that the lion asserted its pre-eminence among heraldic
beasts the Eagle, the most powerful of birds of prey, was adopted
as the symbol of victory from a time so early that one hesitates to
set a period to it, for in Chaldea and Assyria, 4000 B.C., the eagle
typified conquest, even as it did in the Middle Ages. The especially
characteristic attitude of the heraldic eagle when it is said to be
_displayed_ is first found in these early picture writings of the East,
and from thence through countless stages comes to adorn the surface of
the shields, to whose decoration its spreading form and radiating lines
so admirably lend themselves. The pose is, of course, a natural one, as
one may see when a gull hovers and backs in the air; but its decorative
power and its adaptability to a shield shape are so striking as to
suggest its invention for the purpose. The same necessity for clear
definition that influenced the drawing of the mediaeval lion caused the
eagle to be treated in a somewhat similar way, and the feathers of the
wings being wide spread with ample clear space between them, while the
body became to some extent attenuated, made the figure as conventional
as the lion, and similarly adaptable to decorative distribution on a
surface.

[Illustration: FIG. 105.--Shield of the Emperor from the Tomb of Prince
Edmund at Kings Langley. Early Fifteenth Century.]

A good example of the heraldic eagle of the Middle Ages is on one
of the shields that decorate the tomb of Edmund Plantagenet at Kings
Langley, Herts (Fig. 105). This, the eagle with two heads of the Holy
Roman Empire, alludes to Richard, Earl of Cornwall, who though he was
never actually Emperor, got so far as to be elected King of the Romans
in 1257, and the arms of the Empire are constantly ascribed to him.

The skeleton sketch that is useful in blocking out an eagle in its
space will take some such form as Fig. 106.

[Illustration: FIG. 106.]

In the mediaeval period eagles were always shown on shields in the
pattern-like displayed position, whether they were single or double
headed, until Renaissance heraldry in its reversion to classic types
introduced the eagle of the Roman Ensigns and Monuments, which
thenceforth has had to be taken into account when eagles are described
in blazon. Thus it is now necessary to state whether the bird is
displayed, is close or is rising. An eagle is close when it stands in
profile with its wings folded, and is rising when it stands in the same
general position but with its wings raised. An eagle in the position
of that of the Roman Ensign is sometimes blazoned “an eagle with
wings displayed,” and must not, of course, be confused with “an eagle
displayed.” When they are flying they, like other birds, are said to be
volant. They are _armed_ and _membered_ as to their beaks and feet when
difference of colour renders it necessary to mention those details.
Other birds are rarely if ever displayed.

Falcons usually have bells strapped to their legs with thongs called
jesses, and then are blazoned as _jessed_ and _belled_. They are
sometimes _hooded_ also. The hood covering the eyes has an opening for
the beak and is usually decorated with a tuft of feathers.

A cock is said to be _armed_ with his beak and spurs, _crested_ as to
his comb, and _jowlopped_ of his wattles.

A peacock when it carries its train raised and fully spread is
blazoned, with great and obvious propriety, “a peacock in his pride,”
but simply as a peacock, without qualification, when the tail is
trailed.

The pelican, the well-known emblem of maternal love, is shown standing
in her nest and feeding her brood with blood from her breast, and
with her wings in a displayed position with the points downward in an
attitude of protection. In this position she is called a pelican in her
piety.

As an imaginary variant of an actual thing it may be convenient to
refer here to the martlet, the very distinctive heraldic bird without
feet, the “martlette of the sunne,” as old armorists call it. It is
shaped like a swallow but without feet, for it was believed to live
entirely in the air. Hence it was assigned as a mark of cadency to the
fourth son, who, being so far from succession to the land, had only his
own powers to sustain him (see Fig. 294).

Martlets form part of the arms that are ascribed to Edward the
Confessor, though in the example at Westminster Abbey the birds
distinctly have feet and may perhaps have been meant for some other
bird altogether, perhaps doves, whose symbolism of peace caused their
early appearance among Royal insignia.

[Illustration: Seal of the Emperor Sigismund, as King of Hungary.]

[Illustration: Seal of Charles IV. as Emperor.]

[Illustration: Seal of Dauphiny, 1494.]

[Illustration: Italian Medal by Pisano, 1441.]

[Illustration: Italian Medal, attributed to Bartolo Talpas, XVth
Century.]

Of imaginary birds the phoenix is most interesting as a symbol of the
perpetuation of life, and early writers never tired of describing in
elaborate detail how the fabled bird, which they, however, accepted and
believed in as a natural fact, effected his rejuvenescence through fire
of his own kindling. Therefore the phoenix is represented in heraldry
as resting upon its pyre. In recent times it has been customary to
depict the bird as shaped like an eagle, but in earlier examples the
head was crested like a peacock. Its proper colour was purely fanciful,
some examples of great beauty being blue and gold, the preponderance of
tincture varying with the fancy of the artist.

The Harpy of classic story appears in heraldry in the shapes of eagles
with the faces and breasts of women, and this appears to have been the
only figure, with one exception, which combines the human form with
that of a bird, for the bird-headed beings of the Assyrian bas-reliefs
and other forms of Eastern art were not among those adopted into
our heraldry, though there are a few instances in German work. The
exceptions are the swans with women’s faces that in the fourteenth
century decorated some of the hallings, of hangings of tapestry or
embroidery, as especially emphasized versions of the chivalric symbol
of womanhood that the swan was considered to be. For this reason it was
adopted as a badge at a time which assiduously fashioned its manners
after the traditionary chivalry of King Arthur and his knights, and
when every kind of poetic and symbolic heraldry reached its fullest
development.

FISH.--Of heraldic fish the Dolphin may perhaps be considered the most
distinguished, mainly from its association in former times with the
heir to the throne of France; but it is occasionally met with in our
heraldry, generally perhaps as typical of fish in general, as in the
arms of the Fishmongers Company of London. It is represented with its
body curved, and is then said to be _embowed_, and it also occurs in
the other position referred to below. When it is blazoned _proper_ its
colour, heraldically, is green with red fins and tail.

Other fish occur as punning allusions to their owners’ names, e.g.
the Lucies (pike) of the family of Lucy, whose arms are one of the
quarterings of the Duke of Northumberland.

A fish when placed horizontally across the shield is blazoned _naiant_,
or swimming, and when perpendicular as though breathing on the surface
it is _hauriant_.

HUMAN FIGURES.--The human figure appears heraldically as representing
religious or symbolic persons, and in combination with other forms it
makes those composite figures which express a conjunction of symbolic
ideas. A woman’s head and breasts joined to the body of a lion made the
well-known Sphinx, a figure closely associated with Egypt, to which
country and to services rendered therein it usually alludes in modern
heraldry. The Greek sphinx is composed of the head and bust of a woman
joined to the body and legs of a dog, and in addition is winged. Its
occurrence is rare in heraldry, a recent instance being the Greek
sphinx sejant, which is the crest of the University of Leeds.

[Illustration: Printer’s Mark of Grimm & Wirsung, Augsburg, 1521. From
a volume by Erasmus. Hans Weidlitz.]

[Illustration: Arms of Schwingshärtein, a Nuremberg family. German,
_ca._ 1580.

 The device is a punning one, the figure waving hair being in allusion
 to the name of the family.]

[Illustration: Bookplate by Albert Dürer. _Circa_ 1520.]

In conjunction with a fish’s tail the body of a woman forms the
Mermaid, the beautiful Syrena of old writers, who never tire of
telling how, like the harpy, she charms the shipmen with her song.
Nevertheless, she was of sinister character, “glad and merry in tempest
and heavy and sad in faire weather.” She is usually represented holding
a looking-glass in which she regards herself while she combs her long
hair. The male of the species is called a Triton, and usually holds a
trident as the symbol of naval dominion. Indeed he is sometimes called
Neptune, and crowned with a spiked crown, the form known as an Eastern
crown that is described and illustrated under that head. Another
semi-human form is the Centaur, the favourite badge of King Stephen,
the classic monster, half man and half horse and armed with a bow, that
is sometimes called a Sagittarius.

Male figures were frequently described as Savage Men, and were
represented rough and shaggy with hair, and with wreaths of oak about
their loins, the blazon being: a savage man ppr. wreathed about the
loins with an oak wreath vert. In some instances they were wreathed
about the temples also.

Heads of both sexes, arms and legs, are used as charges and more
frequently as crests, and are described as couped or erased, at the
shoulder or the neck, as the case may be.

The whole Arm from the shoulder is shown bent and is then blazoned,
an arm _embowed_. It should also be stated in the blazon whether the
arm is dexter or sinister, and whether, if not naked, it is vested
(and if so of what colour), or in armour, when it is described as an
arm _vambraced_. _In armour_ is often substituted for the later term.
Pairs of arms grasping an object, drawing a bow or wielding a hammer,
are also met with. When the arm does not extend beyond the elbow it is
blazoned a cubit arm, and its position, whether erect or otherwise,
must be specified.

Human hands are borne by several families into whose name “Main”
enters, either as Tremaine, Maynard, etc., and among other families by
the O’Neils, and in the well-known badge of Ulster, the distinguishing
badge of a baronet. They are usually depicted erect and couped at the
wrist, and are assumed to be open unless it is otherwise stated.

Anything depictable may be used as a charge, but in this wide field
there are still certain particular objects, that single themselves out
for more detailed treatment than the rest, and of these the cross in
its many varied forms, the rose and the fleur-de-lis are the principal.

CROSSES.--In a system of heraldry which took its rise from a military
Christianity the cross naturally became a much-employed symbol under
the various forms which the necessities of distinction or decoration
suggested. Although it has been dealt with to some extent under the
head of ordinaries, it is as a charge that it reaches its greatest
variety and beauty. The plain cross with limbs of unequal length, which
is called a passion cross, is sometimes placed upon steps or degrees,
as in Fig. 107, when it may be described as a cross calvary.

Of the more decorative varieties those which terminate in a manner
suggested by the fleur-de-lis are among the most usual and beautiful.
Probably many of them were decorative before they became distinctive,
for among the early sculptures are many examples of decorated crosses
with foliated ends which follow none of the familiar forms and are
obviously purely ornamental.

[Illustration: FIG. 107.--Cross Calvary.]

[Illustration: FIG. 108.--Cross Flory.]

[Illustration: FIG. 109.--Cross Fleuretté.]

[Illustration: FIG. 110.--Cross Patonee.]

[Illustration: FIG. 111.--Cross Moline.]

Crosses in general are drawn with limbs of equal length except where
the shape of a shield suggests the lengthening of the lower limb
in order to satisfactorily place the object in its field, but the
intention is that the limbs are to be considered equal and not like
those of the passion cross. The width of crosses may be considerably
varied, for difference consists not in the proportions of parts to
each other but in essential variations of form. The floriated, or
otherwise varied, cross may therefore be made of any proportion that
the arrangement of the shield may suggest; that is to say, the same
adaptability exists in these crosses as in the ordinaries, and their
proportions may and should be varied in relation to the field they
occupy and the charges with which they are associated. Though the
floriated crosses are all derived from one source, their various
shapes have long become fixed and now constitute heraldic difference.
It will be useful therefore to observe that the end of a cross flory
(Fig. 108) may approach very closely the form of a fleur-de-lis so
long as confusion is not caused with the cross fleuretté (Fig. 109),
in which the fleur-de-lis appears joined to the cross, rather than as
though developed from it. The cross patonee (Fig. 110) differs from the
cross flory merely in that the limbs of the former increase in width
outwards, the lines radiating from the centre in a very pleasant way.
In early shields the two latter forms are used indifferently for each
other, as in the arms ascribed to Edward the Confessor, and in such
cases choice may, of course, be made of one or other form; but it is
obvious that when definite distinction between similar forms has been
arrived at it should be observed and followed in later renderings.

[Illustration: FIG. 112.--Seal of Anthony de Bec, Bishop of Durham,
1283-1311.]

The cross moline (Fig. 111) has ends like a fer-de-moline or millrind.
A very beautiful example occurs on the seal of Anthony de Bec, Bishop
of Durham at the end of the thirteenth century (Fig. 112). This form
of cross moline was distinguished by writers of a late time from the
ordinary form with more pointed ends as a cross recercelée, but it was
really the same thing under a different name.

[Illustration: FIG. 113.--Cross Patée.]

The cross patée or formée (Fig. 113) is that which occurs on the
Imperial crown and other Royal insignia. This is a very graceful form
when the limbs are well divided and are drawn with pleasant curves,
as in the crown in Fig. 164. In later examples there has been an
unfortunate widening of the ends until they almost touch each other
at the corners with the result that the figure has the appearance of
a square that is pierced with four radiating vesica-shaped holes and
hardly that of a cross at all.

[Illustration: FIG. 114.--Cross Crosslet.]

[Illustration: FIG. 115.--Cross crosslet Fitchée.]

[Illustration: FIG. 116.--Maltese Cross.]

The cross crosslet (Fig. 114) becomes (in Fig. 115) a cross crosslet
fitchée by its lower limb being pointed, in allusion to the temporary
cross thrust upright into the ground in order, it may be, to serve
as a symbol of hope and consolation to a dying soldier. It must not
be supposed, however, that every coat with a cross crosslet fitchée
originated in the Crusades. Other crosses may be fitchée in a similar
way, the point taking the place of the whole lower limb as in the
example, but in some cases it is made to merely continue the lower
limb, or, in the case of a cross patée fitchée, to issue from the
middle of the lower end, and in such cases the cross is said to be
_fitched at the foot_.

[Illustration: FIG. 117.--Cross Bottonée.]

[Illustration: FIG. 118.--Cross Pommel.]

[Illustration: FIG. 119.--Cross Urdée.]

The eight-pointed or Maltese cross, a development from the cross patée
(Fig. 116), is one of the forms most used in the insignia of Orders
of Knighthood, the Order of the Bath, for example, and of St. John of
Jerusalem among others, and is one of a group of crosses distinguished
from each other by the number of their points. A cross of fourteen
points occurs in the badge of the Order of St. Michael and St. George,
and consists of seven limbs of two points each.

The cross bottonée (Fig. 117) is sometimes thought to be a corruption
of the cross crosslet, whose corners are frequently rounded in early
examples, or it may indeed have been designed to represent buds, as old
armorists say, and if so is a perfectly intelligible and expressive
symbol.

Crosses pomell (Fig. 118), urdée or clichée (Fig. 119), potent (Fig.
120), furchée (Fig. 121), are some of a large number of crosses that
are but rarely used.

The cross tau, derived from the Greek letter of that name, is the cross
of St. Anthony (Fig. 122).

[Illustration: FIG. 120.--Cross Potent.]

[Illustration: FIG. 121.--Cross Furchée.]

[Illustration: FIG. 122.--Cross Tau.]

Crosses may at any time be represented as in relief, which again may
be accented by means of a central arris or ridge which gives lines of
light and shade; and this treatment is especially suitable to metal
work, as is witnessed by many beautiful examples on church bells among
other things.

Care is necessary, however, in black and white drawing that the
indication of an arris does not suggest that the cross is “party” in
any way.

THE FLEUR-DE-LIS is one of the forms derived from a remote antiquity to
become a widespread symbol throughout the whole of mediaeval heraldry.
Probably derived from the iris or some similar flower form, it is found
in the most ancient and the most modern decoration. Even the recent
excavations of the palace of King Minos at Knossos in Crete disclosed
forms of this figure on the wall frescoes. Its ornamental beauty
as well as its spiritual symbolism easily account for its heraldic
prevalence, and even before regular heraldry was formulated the emblem
had a quasi-heraldic existence on the crowns and sceptres of the Royal
seals. Its decorative value needs no pointing out, for its graceful
lines are not only beautiful in themselves but are easily adapted to
harmonize with almost any form with which they may be in ornamental or
heraldic relation.

[Illustration: FIG. 123.--Early Twelfth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 124.--Late Twelfth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 125.--Late Twelfth Century.]

Of the examples that are given here Fig. 123 is taken from the seal
of King Louis VII of France, early in the twelfth century, on which
it appears as the termination of a sceptre. The more distinctively
heraldic form occurs on the oval counter-seal of his successor, Philip
II, on which it appears as a badge without a shield, about the year
1180 (Fig. 124). A very beautiful form of the thirteenth century (Fig.
126) is also of French origin, and that which occurs on the shield of
the Black Prince may be considered typical of the fourteenth century
(Fig. 127). As in all these instances, the fleur-de-lis generally has
but three leaves, but in some early examples the whole five petals of
the iris are suggested by the inclusion of intermediate forms between
the three principal ones (Fig. 125). These were sometimes leaflike, as
in Fig. 128, an example of the fifteenth century, but more usually
are thin stems which terminate in small flowerlike forms. A further
beautiful example is the common seal of Godmanchester, co. Hunts
(Fig. 129). Fleurs-de-lis are then said to be seeded (a term that was
probably made by some late armorist in giving a meaning to a form he
did not understand) or florencée, from the invariable character of the
fleur-de-lis, the “Lily of the City,” in the Arms of Florence (Fig.
130). The elaboration of the simple leaflike forms began as early as
the middle of the fourteenth century at a time when the decorative
sense was untrammelled, and it is in the freely designed illustrations
of the MSS. that the first examples are found. The illustration (Fig.
131) is after one of a number of them that are repeated in various
colours, but of similar form, in a book of the poems of Convenevole
da Prato, Petrarch’s tutor, which was made and painted with miniatures
and other ornaments for Robert of Anjou, King of Naples, about the year
1340, and was probably executed in Florence. It is somewhat surprising
to find at so early a date an example of the highly elaborated form
which became very general in the later Italian decoration.

[Illustration: FIG. 126.--Thirteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 127.--Fourteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 128.--Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 129.--Seal of Godmanchester, Co. Hunts.]

[Illustration: FIG. 130.--Fleur-de-lis from the Pedestal of the Lion,
Florence. Donatello. Fifteenth Century.]

A beautiful example of the decorated fleur-de-lis of the fifteenth
century has already been referred to (Fig. 128).

[Illustration: FIG. 131.--Fourteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 132.--Fifteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 133.--Eighteenth Century.]

About this time also instances occur of fleur-de-lis of the simpler
form but with decorated surfaces, as in that from a fifteenth
century book of the hours that is one of the illustrations to the
Comte de Laborde’s treatise on “Les Fleurs-de-lis Heraldiques et
les Fleurs-de-lis Naturelles,” _Revue Archaelogique_, in which the
conventional fleur-de-lis (Fig. 132) is decorated with natural lilies.

Like other decorative details the fleur-de-lis rapidly deteriorated
in the general artistic decadence that followed the Tudor period, and
during and after the latter half of the sixteenth century the beautiful
and characteristic grace of line was lost, and the form became blobby
and heavy, as in the eighteenth century French example (Fig. 133),
while the coarse and ugly shapes that are commonly seen in ordinary
modern work make it difficult to believe that they could have been
derived, even remotely, from so beautiful a source.

ROSES.--As a Royal badge a golden rose was used by Edward I, and was
depicted with a stalk and leaves similar to the badge of the Malatesta
in Italy in later times. In such cases it must be blazoned “leaved and
slipped,” otherwise it would be rendered as the conventionalized flower
alone, the only leaves shown in the latter being those of the calyx,
which appear between the petals and are heraldically called _barbs_.
These are frequently mentioned on the blazon, e.g. a rose gules barbed
and seeded ppr., the seeds being the centre. Of the conflicting roses
that brought such ruin on the gentry of England the red rose of
Lancaster had been the badge of Henry IV, as the white rose irradiated
was that of Edward IV, the latter badge resulting from a combination
of the rose with the sun, which was another Yorkist emblem. Henry VII
united the red and white rose badges, as he had united the great rival
houses that they symbolized. Sometimes a single rose was made per pale
gu. and ar., or else quarterly of those tinctures (in the former case
the white half retained the rays that usually surrounded the white rose
of York), but the method which has come down in general use is that
of a double rose, the white within the red, or vice versa. In this
form Henry VII made it part of the collar of the Order of the Garter,
and thus it appears sculptured on the walls of St. George’s Chapel at
Windsor. In many instances the York rose retained its rays and the rose
of Lancaster was placed within it, as in Fig. 134, which is sculptured
on the exterior walls of the choir. In many of these the ends of the
petals do not turn over as is most usual, but the modelling indicates a
somewhat similar form. An interesting example of the Tudor rose as used
by Queen Elizabeth is that which was found deeply incised in the wood
of her coffin in Westminster Abbey (Fig. 135). This Queen signified
the union of the Roses in yet another way in the badge that had been
her mother’s, in which the tree-stock which supports the white falcon
sprouts with red and white roses on the same stem.

[Illustration: FIG. 134.]

[Illustration: FIG. 135.]

The Tudor rose has been united by dimidiation to many other badges,
to the pomegranate and to a sheaf of arrows by Queen Mary, and to the
thistle by James I and his successors, of whom Queen Anne used the two
emblems growing from one stem, as in the present Union badge of the
rose, thistle and shamrock. The Tudor rose crowned still remains the
Royal badge for England.

THE HARP.--As the Arms of Ireland as well as for the beauty of form
with which it may be invested, the harp is of the greatest interest
both generally (as the symbol of minstrelsy) and appropriately; for the
fame of the Irish as harpists was widespread even in the early Middle
Ages, when they were among the finest of the world. And although any
symbol, whatever it may be, becomes hallowed by association, it cannot
but be felt that the harp is peculiarly fitted to be the emblem of a
people so full of artistic and romantic enthusiasm.

[Illustration: FIG. 136.]

[Illustration: FIG. 137.]

[Illustration: FIG. 138.]

The heraldic harp was at first very simple and always graceful in form,
following that of the minstrels, the small harp that was played resting
on the knee or held suspended from the neck. Examples of the minstrel’s
harp are Fig. 136 from a thirteenth century French MS. and Fig. 137
from a Tudor MS.

As a device for Ireland, it first appears on the Great Seal in that
of Queen Elizabeth (Fig. 138), when it was used as a badge and was
ensigned with the Imperial crown, as are all Royal badges.

This type of harp is the same as that in the Wappen und Stammbuch by
Jost Amman, 1579, and was evidently the shape that was in heraldic
fashion at that period.

In the next reign it became definitely the Arms of Ireland, as is so
quartered on the Royal Shield by James I, where it has occupied the
third quarter unmoved throughout the changes of its fellow quarterings.

Its form continued to follow more or less that of the minstrel’s harp
until the time of Charles II, when the familiar winged figure was made
its principal characteristic (Fig. 139). This, however, has no special
heraldic significance, but is merely a variety of ornamental treatment.

While it presents opportunities for the highest efforts of art in
the treatment of its figure, as is evidenced by Mr. Alfred Gilbert’s
beautiful harp on the tomb of the Duke of Clarence at Windsor, in the
majority of instances it is altogether without the grace which is
its reason for existence, even when it does not quite descend to the
unlovely lumpiness of Georgian and later times. The possible advantages
of its greater weight in the design as compared with the slighter form,
a weight which tends to effect satisfactory balance with the other
quarters, are counterbalanced by its disadvantages, while the addition
of Celtic tracery to the minstrel’s harp makes it more completely
allusive and helps the composition at the same time. Nevertheless the
figure harp may be very beautiful.

The simpler form is now very generally reverted to, and when artistic
reasons direct the choice, there are no heraldic considerations that
need fetter it. The Arms of Ireland are blazoned: Az. a harp Or
stringed Arg.

[Illustration: FIG. 139.--The Great Seal of Charles II for Ireland.]

Before leaving for a time the further consideration of the shield it
will be convenient to refer to the very beautiful method of relieving
and enriching surfaces which is called Diapering, and is a notable
feature of the more elaborate kinds of heraldry. Numerous and excellent
examples of its use may be found on the sculptured shields of the
monuments and chantries, as well as on incised brasses, in enamels and
in stained glass.

Coming into heraldic use in the thirteenth century, it was soon
extensively applied to the decoration of armorial shields and
especially of their fields and ordinaries. In some instances charges
also were diapered, but only when they were flat in character and when
the general treatment and material lent themselves to the method. In
most cases it was confined to plain surfaces. The patterns were in many
instances derived from those that had been employed from ancient times
in textile decoration.

Whenever diapering is applied to a shield it is purely ornamental in
character, and in many instances is geometrical in plan, having no
forms that could possibly be mistaken for charges, and so be likely to
interfere with the clear statement of the arms. The example is one of
the many beautifully diapered shields that decorate the shrine of the
Percies in Beverley Minster. In sculpture proper, when the design was
cut out of the surface, a pattern such as that of Fig. 140 was found
very suitable to the material and to the method of working it; when,
however, the diaper was modelled up, as in the gesso decoration of
ceremonial shields, or was incised in reverse, as in a seal, the design
frequently took the form of flowing lines as the readiest means of
getting the ornate effect that was required. An example of this latter
method may be referred to in the Great Seal of Henry IV at p. 18, Fig.
2.

[Illustration: FIG. 140.--Diapered Shield from the Percy Shrine in
Beverley Minster. Fourteenth Century.]

In the early examples the diaper, like the semée already referred to,
was treated as though it were a piece of an ornamental fabric stretched
over the shield and passing behind the charges without being affected
or displaced by them. The Renaissance work shows the diaper more
especially adapted to the occasion, as in a Florentine shield from the
Palazzo Guadagni and now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, which is
beautifully decorated in raised lines of gesso which follow the outline
of the figure at a little distance from it, and the rest of the
decoration accommodates itself to the shape of the spaces in a manner
that is especially satisfactory, as conveying the impression of being
carefully designed for its particular purpose, with each part in due
relation to the others.

[Illustration: FIG. 141.--Diapered Shield in Painted Gesso at Alloa
House. The Arms of Henricus de Erskine. 1224. Geo. W. Eve.]

The illuminations of the manuscripts were frequently diapered with
designs drawn in lines of gold on the ground colour, and a lighter or
darker tint of the ground colour was similarly employed, sometimes
also in combination with gold. Indeed, the possibilities of diapering
as surface decoration are almost without limit if it is reasonably
handled. Its effect in enriching and adding interest to simple forms
and spaces is shown in the treatment of the Arms of Henricus de
Erskine (Fig. 141) and the shield of John, fifth Lord Erskine, and his
wife, Lady Margaret Campbell (Fig. 142), two of the series of shields
executed in painted gesso for the hall, Alloa House, Clackmannanshire.
It is very useful in monochrome, as in engraving for instance, as a
means of distinguishing contiguous spaces; in the way that line tints
were employed to do before a colour value was ascribed to them. Being,
of course, completely under control to be employed or omitted at will,
it has none of the objections of the tincture lines.

[Illustration: FIG. 142.--Shield of John, Fifth Lord Erskine. Painted
gesso. Geo. W. Eve.]

The tone effect of diapering must be taken into account, and the
consequent emphasis of the charges, unless their character is very
elaborate and broken up, and in that case there may be a tendency to
confuse their lights and thus obscure and spoil the whole effect.
Discretion is therefore very necessary in applying that which properly
handled is a very useful and decorative device. It has been said that
diaper must have no design of heraldic significance, and this must be
so wherever it is employed on the actual armorials. When, however, it
is used as a background or other extra-armorial decoration the converse
is the case, and badges and charges of an allusive character become
the most suitable motives that can be employed.

Diapers of complete arms occur on a box of champlevé enamel in the
Victoria and Albert Museum, whose decorations consist of lozenge-shaped
spaces filled with the arms of de Valence and others, and in the
similar work on the table of the tomb of William de Valence in
Westminster Abbey. In the portrait medals the background was often
enriched with armorial diapers of distinctive charges, such as the
fleur-de-lis background to the head of Louis XII and the ermine one
of Anne de Bretagne, both of which are excellent examples (Fig. 143).
Similar diapers applied to architectural features are alluded to at p.
205.

[Illustration: FIG. 143.--Medal of Louis XII and Anne of Brittany.
Fifteenth Century.]




CHAPTER VI

Helm, Crest and Mantling


The treatment of the helm and mantling is a matter of especial interest
both as a significant part of an achievement of arms and as that part
of it which affords a great amount of freedom and variety in artistic
arrangement, for the lines of the helm, the character of the mantling,
its direction and flow, and to some extent its colour effect, are like
the shape of the shield, at the disposal of the designer to do as he
will or can with them.

With regard to the shield, which in course of time developed into a
merely ornamented surface on which to bear a device, the sense of
personal allusion was always retained, even when the close association
of armorials with a military idea became to a great extent weakened,
but a more essentially warlike character was always ascribed to the
helmet and crest, as is evidenced by their omission from the arms of
ecclesiastics and, in many instances and with great propriety, from
those of corporations. This feeling may also have influenced the
small size of the helmets of the later sixteenth century onwards.
The intention, however, was not strong enough to dispense with them
altogether as the mediaeval men did, and the result was merely to
weaken the design in including the helmet and crest in a somewhat
shamefaced way.

In the stately ceremonial of the tournament, helm and crest played no
less distinguished a part than the shield, for those military sports
which took so firm a hold on the vigorous tastes of mediaeval chivalry
were accompanied by brilliant ceremonial, in which heraldry found its
widest field of display in all kinds of sumptuous application to the
dress and decoration of the scene.

The lodgings of the knights and nobles were distinguished by paintings
of their armorials, and banners and pennons projected from the windows.
The tribunes of the Ladies and of the Judges of the Tournament were
gay with badges brilliant in colour and of endless variety of form,
while the combatants themselves in surcoats and shields of Arms and
with crested helms and armorial horse trappings, exhausted the heraldic
possibilities of personal adornment.

On a day before that which was fixed for the combats the helms and
crests of the tourneyers were brought together with much ceremony and
were arranged in due order to the satisfaction of the Judges of the
Tournament. Each had its owner’s banner suspended over it and, all
being ready, the Ladies were conducted round the Hall, when if any one
of them, by touching a crest, accused its owner of any fault or crime
against chivalry he was seized, tried and punished, according to the
magnitude of his offence and the custom of the Tournament.

The helm and crest of the Chevalier d’honneur, the knight selected
to attend the Lady of the Tournament and at her bidding to extend
the “Merci des Dames” which forbade further attacks on a combatant
unfortunate in the mêlée, were the objects of especial ceremonial, and
(he being withdrawn by his office from active participation in the
combat) were taken from his head with much courtesy by the Judges and
the Herald and were solemnly given in charge of the Ladies until such
time as his duties should cease at the close of the Tournament. Until
that time an esquire or gentleman bore them aloft upon a lance staff
near to the Lady of the Tournament.

[Illustration: FIG. 144.--Thirteenth Century.]

With regard to the helm, it will not be desirable to discuss its
development as armour through the various forms which preceded those
which were employed to support heraldic crests; and it will suffice to
begin with the early form, which was more or less cylindrical, as in
Fig. 144, and afterwards developed into the more complex curves and
projections of the tournament helm.

At first, comparatively short and resting on the camail which covered
the head, in time it was made longer, until the helm rested on the
shoulders, and being buckled back and front to the body armour became,
as it were, part of it, and besides being a better defence was able
to support the additional pressure of a crest (which though fashioned
of light material was still of considerable weight) with a minimum of
fatigue to its wearer. The crest was attached to the crown plate of the
helm by means of laces, or by small bolts or other fastenings which
passed through holes made for the purpose. It appears improbable that
crests were used to any general extent in actual battle, and for the
best of all practical reasons, that a crest had been found to be a
very dangerous ornament which, at close quarters, served as a handle,
while the laces held, by which to pull down the wearer’s head, and
King Stephen is said to have been among those that suffered in this
way. That they were used in battle to some extent is evident, and
Viollet-le-duc, in referring to the abuse of the Tournament, points out
that the feudal nobility attempted to treat war itself like a grand
tournament and appeared on the field extravagantly arrayed with long
surcoats and lambrequins that encumbered their movements and gave them
an easy prey to simple archers and similar workmanlike troops.

The shape of the helm was naturally susceptible of much variety but
its essential structural character remained the same throughout, and
consisted principally of three parts, the crown plate and two others
for the front and back of the helm respectively. Sight was provided for
in one of two ways, either by leaving an opening between the crown and
front plate or by piercing the latter with horizontal openings which
were strengthened by an additional piece, generally in the form of a
cross, and so splayed as to deflect a point that had struck near the
opening. Both opening and reinforcing piece may be of value in design,
the former from its strong line which must always be reckoned with, and
the latter for the opportunity it affords of introducing decorative
detail where it may be useful. It is interesting to observe that the
back of the helm is of thinner plate than the front, thus dispensing
with weight where it was possible to do so. In the later forms of helm,
which were fastened by straps to the breast and back, the buckle and
the methods of rivetting it to the plates afford other opportunities
for utilizing structural details ornamentally. (Fig. 145.)

[Illustration: FIG. 145.--Fifteenth Century. Tilting Helm.]

The perforations which facilitated breathing were generally on the
right-hand side, and though there were instances of their being on
both sides it was very unusual in view of the fact that the tournament
attack was from the left, and that although the tilting spear had a
coronal instead of a point, care would still be taken to give as little
hold as possible to the weapon.

This refers to breathing holes, spiracula, in the front plate, but
there were also openings, sometimes of considerable size, in the
backplate behind the vertical joint, through which the knight could
hear and perhaps, by turning his head, see and speak to the squire who
attended him.

In the fifteenth century the demand for greater mobility and less
weight in the armour that was used for actual battle had produced
the Helmet or small helm, having a front which opened and a more or
less flexible neck, the Bascinet, the Salade and other forms of head
armour; and thenceforward the great helm was reserved for the uses of
the tournament.

[Illustration: FIG. 146.--Helmet. Fifteenth Century.]

An example of helmet at Fig. 146, after Viollet-le-duc, will serve to
explain its structure. The vizor, in two parts, opens upwards on a
pivot, and the front opens sideways by means of a hinge to permit the
helmet to be put on, and though there was a great variety in shape
and construction they were all modifications of the methods of the
example. The head was capable of movement, the laminated plates of the
gorget giving a certain amount of flexibility from side to side as well
as up and down, provision being also made for some amount of turning
movement. As pieces of defensive mechanism helmets were very excellent,
but were rarely associated with crests in the time of their actual
use--though they were frequently so represented in the later times when
heraldry had become out of touch with the armoured period and did not
trouble to go farther back for its crest support than the most recent
form of closed defence for the head.

In all armour, and much besides helms is used in heraldry, it will be
found useful to acquire a practical knowledge of its structure and
method of working and also the practical reasons for the form of its
various parts. By so doing it will become unnecessary to search for
a model for every need, rather it will be possible in the case of a
figure to draw the man and put the armour on him in the form that seems
most suitable. Forms of greater or less simplicity can thus be designed
as circumstances may dictate, as it may be desirable in the interests
of light and shade to elaborate or minimize the details. Armour
should be so designed that its principal lines help the composition
and express the form in the most forcible, suitable and simple way.
In an arm, for instance, which is of frequent occurrence as a crest,
it should be observed how the gauntlet has its defence added to the
glove, how its wrist fits over the arm piece, the arrangement of the
elbow piece, the cubitiere, on its inner and outer sides with regard
to the hollow of the arm, and so forth. By thus familiarizing oneself
with the essential structure, it becomes possible to handle the subject
with confidence in design, so that perspective, light and shade and the
harmonious relationship of lines may be helped, while the structure
appears convincingly right.

Besides the closed helm which was used in the joust, the mimic duel
with lances, a more open variety was used in the tourney, for in the
latter, which was fought by opposing parties of men armed with blunted
swords and with wooden maces, there was no attack with the point to
be provided against, and it was therefore possible to lighten the
armour by means of perforations and to open the face by substituting
bars for plates. In the helm shown at Fig. 147 it will be noticed
that not only is the face open, but there are numerous holes in the
upper part of the gorget, and the breast-plate and other parts of the
armour were also plentifully perforated. Such armour for tourneying was
frequently modelled in leather instead of metal, the lighter material
being a sufficient defence against sword and mace, though it would have
fared badly against the more concentrated lance shock of the joust,
and therefore when the lance was also permitted in the tourney more
efficient armour was worn.

[Illustration: FIG. 147.--Tourney Helm, after Viollet-le-duc. Fifteenth
Century.]

Fig. 147 shows a form of appliance for fixing the crest by means of
a sort of skull cap, which was laced to the helm through the holes
provided for the purpose.

The earliest decoration of symbolic though still merely general
significance on the helms of the Middle Ages was the reinforcing
piece surrounding the two sight openings, that was made in one of the
many forms of cross; and the coronets and decorative fillets which
denote high rank. These latter were succeeded about the beginning of
the fourteenth century by the actual crests, which were sometimes
repetitions, modified or not, of the device on the shield, sometimes of
a different nature altogether.

[Illustration: FIG. 148.--Panache Crest. French. Fourteenth Century.]

The first attempt to decorate the top of the helm appears to have
been by panaches of feathers, perhaps also of horsehair, for which
representations in gilded leather or other more permanent material were
afterwards substituted. As early as the ninth century movable crests of
coloured leather had decorated the head armour, being fastened back and
front to the bronze or iron cap. These were purely ornamental, except
so far as difference of colour may have made them personal to some
extent. An example of the middle of the fourteenth century appears as
Fig. 148. Some of the panache crests retained their feathery character
and ultimately became crests that were in every way heraldic, while
others were developed into a fan-like form which itself served as a
field for the display of a device or even of the whole arms as in the
case of Sir Geoffrey Louterelle’s crest that is quoted by Boutell.
These ornaments appear to have been purely decorative additions to the
helmet, and could have had no defensive value; on the contrary, the
angle formed by the base with the crown of the helmet would, if rigid,
have provided lodgment and purchase for a blow which might otherwise
have slid off.

Heraldic crests came into definite use about the beginning of the
fourteenth century and soon became of very general application on seals
and in other armorial ways.

The Tournament crests were large and boldly designed and were
constructed of various light materials such as leather, paper and
canvas, worked over a wicker frame; the surface details were modelled
in fine plaster, and the whole was painted and gilt. Few ancient
examples exist in this country, the most notable being that of Edward
the Black Prince which accompanies his shield at Canterbury. Abroad
they are more numerous and Fig. 149 is an excellent example of them.

This spirited dragon’s head, of Florentine work of the fifteenth
century, is modelled in gesso over a wood core, and was painted and
gilt. It is noteworthy that in this instance the torse is modelled with
the crest.

When a device became a crest it was generally modified to some extent
in order to fit it practically for its position. Hence the frequency
of the demi-animals, which, while admitting of more secure adjustment
to the helm, retained all the vigorous and symbolic qualities of the
whole figure. Animals’ heads were also largely used and are equally
satisfactory from the point of view of design, because of the ease with
which their lines may be made to harmonize with those of the supporting
helmet.

When a lion or other animal was used whole it was generally in a
statant position, as it is in the Royal Crest of England, Percy and
others, for that was the most stable posture in which such a modelled
object could be fixed to a helm. In such cases the animal looked
directly in front of it and faced as the helm did.

[Illustration: FIG. 149.--Dragon’s Head Crest from the Bardini
collection. Florentine. Fifteenth Century.]

Flat objects, the sun in splendour for example, were placed edgeways
to the front, so that they were best seen from the sides, but in some
crests, the device, especially when a fleur-de-lis, was formed of
two planes which intersected each other at right angles, so that the
complete form was visible from every point of view.

The mantling, or lambrequins, hung from the top of the helmet, being
fastened to it by laces, and over it the torse, formed of twisted silk
of two or sometimes more tinctures, encircled the crown of the helm
below the crest.

The artistic treatment of the crested and mantled helm was nearly
always satisfactory during the whole period of the tournaments until
they ceased in the sixteenth century, but about the middle of that
century began the unfortunate increase of restrictive rules that were
devised with so little regard to their practical artistic application.
In place of the great helm which had previously been used in the way
that was best suited to the display of the crest, that is to say in
profile or nearly so, the lighter helmet was substituted, and it was
also decreed that it should be varied in shape, twisted about and
opened and shut, according to the rank of its owner, but with total
disregard to the crest. So that we have a lion standing sideways on its
helmet and even looking down the back of it. For in the worst cases a
helmet may be seen turned completely round, while its crest remains
in the original direction. This arose from the stupid application of
the excellent rule that helms when more than one are employed should
be posed with regard to some common centre of interest; an obviously
proper and artistic method, but it should be equally obvious that when
the helm turns the crest must turn too.

Although it will in most instances be possible to ignore these rules,
for the bearer’s rank will usually be sufficiently indicated in some
other way, it is, of course, necessary to know them, and the present
rules for helmets of rank are as follows:--An Esquire or gentleman
has a helmet of steel with gold ornaments and it is posed in profile
with the vizor closed. The position is not interpreted very strictly,
however, and the helmet may be three-quarter face or may make an
even nearer approach, in reason, to the full affrontée position. This
fortunate latitude affords a way by which, when the use of the small
helm is insisted upon, the crest and its support may be brought into
intelligible relationship.

A Knight’s or Baronet’s helmet is similar to that of an Esquire, but is
borne full faced with the vizor open.

It is difficult so see any reason for multiplying indications of rank
which is already marked in other ways, though the difficulty certainly
exists in the case of a Knight (with a Baronet there is of course
none), but it would be easy to devise some distinguishing mark on or
about the shield or on the helmet itself if the authorities would give
a ruling in this sense.

The helmet of a Peer is of steel or silver and gold, the front having
bars or grilles instead of a movable vizor, and its pose is profile
wise, similar to that of the Esquire’s helmet. Its bars are usually
five in number, and attempts to signify exact rank by the number of
bars have not resulted in any rules that are observed.

The Sovereign and Princes of the Blood Royal have barred helmets of
gold which are placed affrontée.

The modern reversion to the tournament helm as a support for the crest
was begun in the illustrations to Foster’s _Peerage_ by Dom Anselm and
Forbes Nixon in 1880 and with what advantage may be seen by inspection
of that admirable work.

There can be no question of the superior value of the great helm from
an artistic point of view. Its strong simplicity makes it especially
suitable as a support for a crest that is treated in a bold and
expansive manner and its bold curves compose well with the lines of
the mantling and shield.

The central position which the helm occupies is necessarily an
important one, and in order to avoid over-accentuation it should be
so designed as to be a link between the shield and the crest, and not
be permitted to concentrate attention on itself. The avoidance of
such undue prominence is helped by the tilting forward of the helm, a
position which tends to make the horizontal lines, of the “sight” for
instance, curve upwards and so help the composition, with respect to
the crest, while the strong line of the front ridge coming down in the
direction of the shield is also valuable.

The forward lean of the helm is always noticeable and probably points
to its being carried on a staff as already mentioned, for its highest
part, which would be the point of support, being usually behind the
centre, would tend to throw it forward and so bring it into some
approach to the degree of inclination that it would have when it was on
the head of a charging knight.

The difficulty of dealing with modern crests usually arises from
their having been designed with regard only to their representation
on flat surfaces, but the problem may be solved to some extent--it is
frequently impossible to do so completely--by carefully adjusting the
crest and helm to each other and by placing them in the aspect that
produces the best effect and at the same time expresses their character
most fully; and for this a sketch model in clay or other plastic
material will be found very helpful.

The leaving out of sight of all methods and materials other than
those employed for the immediate purpose in hand has resulted in most
unfortunate, and in some cases ridiculous, crests which could never
have been used in the ancient way, and now if they have to be carved
in relief or in the round, as mural decoration or as the newel of a
stairway, show themselves wholly inadaptable to reasonable treatment.
On the other hand the early crests are always “possible,” for the
mediaeval herald was naturally familiar with the appearance of an
actual crest modelled in the round, though he may never have modelled
one himself, and so his design is always structurally right. But what
can be said for some modern examples, a dove flying over water for
instance? It seems to have been forgotten until recently that heraldry
ever had a real existence or could possibly be carried out in more
than one way, and the result was that anything that was suitable to a
flat shield was thought equally appropriate for a crest so long as it
was sufficiently differenced from other bearings. A few experiments
with a lump of clay would have shown the fallacy of this idea, and
incidentally might have saved many a family, often in spite of itself,
from being labelled for ever with an absurd bearing.

As, however, we cannot always choose the heraldic motives with which we
have to deal we must make the best of the refractory ones, as well as
of the rest, and the structural side of the subject may be regarded as
the direction in which the solution of difficult problems may be found.
As an example, let us take a rampant lion and pose it on a helm, and it
becomes obvious that if it is taken from a shield without modification
it will look ridiculously insecure on one leg as it is generally
posed, Fig. 150, but that it is much improved if arranged in firmer
relation to its base, the helm, as in Fig. 151.

[Illustration: FIG. 150.]

[Illustration: FIG. 151.]

Another difficult kind of crest is that which is differenced with a
row of objects in front. For instance: In front of a tower between two
wings three fleurs-de-lis; which is usually drawn as Fig. 152, although
wings would never have been modelled fore and aft in that way. If the
solidity of a crest is kept in mind the model would come out something
like Fig. 153, and on similar lines the most unpromising material may
with a little pains be made presentable by the use of sketch models in
the round.

[Illustration: FIG. 152.]

[Illustration: FIG. 153.]

When two helmets and crests occur together they turn towards each other
and so naturally help the unity of design, and when there are three,
the outer ones turn similarly towards that in the centre. If, however,
the crest be of such a nature that it cannot be turned about, it will
of course be preferable for the crest to dictate the position of the
helm rather than to repeat the senseless fault of the helm and crest
facing different ways.

The arrangement about the helmet of the Torse or Wreath is of
considerable importance. It should always be treated as a silken favour
wreathed round the helmet, and not as a support for the crest, to which
it is merely a decorative accessory. An unfortunate phrase which has
been used in blazoning crests, from as early as the sixteenth century,
may be answerable for much ridiculous treatment of the wreath as a
solid object, viz., _On_ a wreath, etc., which suggests a material
connexion between it and the crest, and resulted in the stiff rods
which were balanced on their centres, or, when two crests were used,
were treated as platforms on which the crests stood on either side of,
and away from, the helmet.

That this method of blazoning a crest is not unavoidable is evident
in a draft of the grant of a crest to the Grocers Company of London
in which the formula is “uppon the healme a camell golde bryded sable
berynge two bagges of peper,” etc.

In early times the colours of the torse had no relation to those of the
shield, being adopted in a purely fanciful way, but in the course of
time the present custom was arrived at, namely, that the wreath should
consist of the principal metal and colours of the arms, as shown by
their priority, in the blazon.

[Illustration: FIG. 154.]

As the torse was composed of pieces of silk of different colours
twisted together, the colours appear alternately, six spaces being
generally shown, their alternation beginning on the dexter side with
the metal, as most heraldic alternations do, for the idea was that
metal was more “worthy” than colour, but there is nothing essential in
this. In some instances the torse resembles drapery cut into leaves, as
in Fig. 154, a fifteenth century example from the Palazzo del Podesta,
Florence. Its place is sometimes taken by a decorative circlet called a
crest coronet, which, however, is no indication of rank, though it is
probably derived from the practice at a time before coronets signified
specific degrees of nobility, when it often appears encircling the
helmets of personages of high rank. Later, when coronets were beginning
to take the form that soon became regular, the crest of a Peer was made
to issue from a coronet, as in that of Richard Earl of Warwick, on his
tomb. An excellent practice, and one quite in harmony with heraldic
feeling, that there has been some attempt to revive in modern times.
Other coronets that occur in crests and are also used as charges are
described at p. 271.

The MANTLING or LAMBREQUIN, that depends from the helmet, and is a most
valuable asset to the designer, was derived from some such protection
to the helmet as the surcoat was to the body armour, and like it was
soon made to serve decorative purposes. The surcoats, mantles and other
garments of the fourteenth century, being ornamented with dagged
edges cut into various tongue-shaped patterns, the mantling naturally
followed their example and thence proceeded to other ornamental
development, very simply at first, but continuing with ever-increasing
elaboration until it became, in many instances, similar to the
contemporary architectural tracery. Its early form is shown in Fig.
155, and the beginning of its decorative development in Fig. 156. An
even earlier instance of dagged edges to drapery occurs on Trajan’s
column, in the decoration of a tent.

[Illustration: FIG. 155.]

[Illustration: FIG. 156.]

Though the mantling probably remained comparatively simple in actual
use its treatment in the illuminated MSS. and on monuments shows a very
ready acceptance of its ornamental possibilities, both as a decorative
adjunct to the armorials and also as a link between them and other
decoration. During the Middle Ages it followed the method of the Gothic
tracery in dividing and sub-dividing in groups of three, which curved
and interlaced in infinite variety.

In addition to being laced to the helm it was, in some cases, secured
by two straps which were rivetted to the helm on either side and
buckled at the back. It was also frequently decorated with badges, and
in some cases the coat of arms was wholly repeated on it. It sometimes
took the form of a cap which fitted over the helm, and was continued
behind, and a curious example of a tourney helm with such an ornament
is Fig. 157, after Viollet-le-duc, which is part of the equipment of a
knight about to tourney, whose surcoat is charged with a double-headed
eagle, and, he being about to encounter with swords and therefore
having no shield, the charge is repeated on the helm in the bold and
effective manner here shown. On the stall plate of Gaston de Foix as
a Knight of the Garter, part of whose arms is Or three pallets Gules,
the mantling has one side similarly striped with gold and red. Examples
of mantling charged with badges are also to be found on the Garter
stall-plates.

[Illustration: FIG. 157.]

The practice of decorating the surface of mantling is still carried
out to some extent in that of a Knight of the Garter, as it hangs over
his stall in St. George’s Chapel, the coloured side being sewn with
a twisted ornament in lace and spangles. The edges are jagged with
cuts in accordance with the theory that that was the origin of the
ornamental form. A far-fetched reason for what was after all a purely
ornamental development.

The office of mantling being a purely decorative one suggests that
its treatment, as form, should be such as to support and supplement
the lines of the shield and its contents, and to assist in linking
together the whole composition. It will therefore avail itself of the
well-known power of curves to emphasize what they enclose and will
find endless variety of design in the way its lines may be made to help
each other in direction and force.

[Illustration: Bookplate of John Stabius, Professor of Mathematics.
Dürer.]

[Illustration: Arms of Kress of Kressenstein. School of Dürer.]

[Illustration: Arms of Don Pero Lasso di Castilla. German, 16th
Century.]

[Illustration: Armorials by Dürer.]

The facility of folding over the edges will be found extremely useful
in correcting balance as well in form as in tone and colour, and its
use in this way is practically without limit. Such foldings should of
course be designed in due relation to the general direction of the
mantling, so as to assist its swing and flow, or else be obviously and
intentionally opposed to it. In other words, there should be intention
in every detail.

It will also be noticed how valuable are straight lines, either in the
Arms or as the top of the shield, to play against the curves.

It has been indicated that the treatment as regards form is practically
untrammelled, but as to colour there are certain rules that must be
observed. In the Middle Ages there were no rules other than sumptuary
laws, to which it is probably due that ermine came to be painted on
mantlings and caps of maintenance in the same conventional way that it
appeared on the shield. Otherwise, mantlings were merely governed by
fancy until late in the sixteenth century, except that in the latter
part of that period it had become customary for those of Peers to be
doubled, i.e. lined, with Ermine. With the seventeenth century began
a uniform mantling of Gules; doubled with Ermine for Peers and with
Argent for those below that rank. Perhaps the colours were considered
national as being taken from St. George’s cross on its argent field.
The present rule is for the mantling to be of the colour and metal
first mentioned in the blazon of the arms, as the torse does, and it
dates from the end of the eighteenth century. The exceptions to this
general rule are as follows:--The Sovereign’s and the Heir Apparent’s
arms are mantled Or, and doubled ermine, as also are those of the other
Princes of the Blood Royal. Peers formerly used the first colours of
their blazon also doubled with ermine, as they still do in Scotland,
but otherwise they now follow the general rule. However one may regret
the older custom which produced variety of colour in the surroundings
of the arms themselves and so gave scope for much beautiful
arrangement, the established custom should certainly be observed,
however reluctantly, and colour relief be obtained in other ways; such
as by treatment of the background where such is practicable. Of course
modification of tone still remains available.

It is sometimes held that arms that were granted at the time when red
and white mantlings were usual, and were mentioned in the blazon of the
Grant, should now and henceforth be so accompanied, and this would seem
to be a case when choice of method would be legitimate. The description
in the blazon, usually so binding, is here of little force, for it was
in such cases a mere routine phrase which conveyed no distinction of
one case from another, and the change of official custom may be taken
to have superseded the former rule. Certainly it is not permissible
nowadays to colour the mantling without reference to the arms or
without warrant from properly transmitted custom.




CHAPTER VII

Armorial Accessories


The armorial shield, and, in a rather less degree, the crest, are in
an especial sense essential parts of an heraldic achievement, and have
always been considered fully representative of their bearers. Therefore
they may be used together, or singly, without the supporters or other
accessories to which their owner may be entitled. On the other hand,
supporters, though they may be employed without the arms to support
badges or monograms, have, in that case, little more than the force of
fanciful devices.

[Illustration: FIG. 158.--Seal of John de Segrave (_c._ 1300).]

[Illustration: FIG. 159.--Seal of Anne Countess of Devon.]

[Illustration: FIG. 160.--Seal of Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmoreland.]

Supporters were in their origin badges which had acquired permanence by
custom in the same way that the arms of the shield had acquired it at
an earlier time. Thus, in addition to the regular armorials which so
profusely adorned the Seals, certain badges were freely used which from
association acquired in many cases a permanence by frequent recurrence
equal to that of the arms with which they were associated. In this way
lions appear in many of the Great Seals, notably in those of Edward
III and in the beautiful seal of Henry IV. Such emblems were placed
decoratively in any spaces that were suitable, and in the simpler
seals the intervals between the circumscription and the more or less
triangular shield within it invited their display, as in Fig. 158, the
seal of John de Segrave (c. 1300), which has a garb on either side of
the shield. In Fig. 159, the seal of Anne Countess of Devon, lions
occupy similar spaces, but with their backs to the shields. The seal
of Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmoreland, Fig. 160, shows greyhounds,
which, though of subordinate proportion, have assumed the regular
pose of supporters; while in the splendid seal of Edmond Beaufort,
Duke of Somerset, Fig. 161, the finely designed supporting figures
have complete heraldic force. Another fine example is that of William
Lord Hastings, Fig. 162. The connexion between ancient Badges and the
Supporters in present use is easily traced, and, as one instance of
many, it will suffice to mention the white lion Badge of Mowbray, which
has become one of the supporters of the Duke of Norfolk. The actual
recognized use of these accessories appears to have begun at the end of
the fourteenth century; and to have become firmly established in the
following one.

[Illustration: FIG. 161.--Seal of Edmond Beaufort, Duke of Somerset.]

[Illustration: FIG. 162.--Seal of William Lord Hastings. Fifteenth
Century.]

The idea that supporters originated in fantastically dressed pages at
a tournament seems to have little or no foundation, and though there
may have been some such representation of already established devices,
later statements on the subject have probably been much over-valued.

Viollet-le-duc quotes an instance of a celebrated tournament, which was
held on May Day, 1346, at Chambery, when Amedee VI of Savoy had his
shield hung on a tree and guarded by two lions. The interesting fact is
mentioned that the shields, helms and crests of the knights who figured
at this tournament remained in the Church of St. Francis at Chambery,
until 1660 or thereabouts. Then the church was redecorated, and in the
disregard for antiquity, which we find so difficult to understand, the
relics of chivalry disappeared.

At first and for a considerable time the proportion of supporters to
the arms was very satisfactory, being bold without over emphasis, but
during the sixteenth and following centuries, a tendency to increase
their size was felt, and it is in this respect that modern sculptured
heraldry is lacking in balance, for to over-accentuate the supporters
is necessarily to minimize the arms, and so divert interest from the
central motive.

When the space to be filled by the achievement demands it, the pose of
the supporters may be varied to a considerable extent, but the rampant
position should always be adhered to when it is possible. Where, for
instance, the space is wide, as on a mantelpiece, there is no heraldic
objection to placing the figures in a couchant position on either side
of the shield, an arrangement that has been frequently resorted to in
Friezes.

Sanction is given to this freedom of treatment by the fact that it is
not usual in blazoning supporters to specify the heraldic attitude,
except in so far as it affects the pose of the head. That is to say,
if the head is in the normal position, in profile, the figure is
blazoned, for example, a lion Or. If it were guardant or regardant, the
fact would likewise be mentioned but not the general pose, rampant or
anything else.

In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the supporters were sometimes
employed in pairs, and sometimes singly, to hold up the banners of
arms that were represented in heraldic manuscripts or sculptured on
monuments, and they were then usually placed in a sejant position.
In some instances, more frequent in Italy and Germany than in this
country, supporters bear crested helms on their heads in a very curious
way. An English instance is on the seal of Edmond Mortimer, A.D. 1372,
mentioned by Boutell.

On the seals of the fifteenth century onwards, the supporters were
freely adapted to the available spaces, without much, if any, regard
for actual physical support to any other part of the achievement. It
was heraldically sufficient that they were present, and the rest was
left to the taste and skill of the designer.

The variety of supporters has of course increased with the number of
those entitled to bear them, and creatures are now used which, though
perfectly suitable in an allusive way, are not equally adapted to the
ordinary heraldic treatment, and the result of working in an outworn
groove appears when Troop horses, Camels, Elephants, and so forth are
seen climbing up the side of a shield, instead of standing beside it.
Admit that the rampant attitude in an animal that does not ramp is not
obligatory, and the difficulty is easily overcome with every advantage
to the dignity of the composition.

The idea of moral support would also be much to the advantage of
symbolic human figures that are already burdened in a variety of
ways, for the sight of a figure, with both hands full, trying to obey
a non-existent law as to touching the shield that it “supports” is
pathetically ridiculous. Nevertheless, the hold on the shield is of
value in linking a design together, when it can be effected without
violence to ease and probability.

Too great freedom of natural treatment is not desirable, for it is
out of harmony with the especial decorative quality of heraldry, so
that one objects to the natural animal supporters that characterized
the illustrations of the eighteenth century, prowling from behind the
shields, not as heraldic error, but as wanting in dignity as decorative
design.

As a general rule, with some few special exceptions, the right
to bear supporters is confined to Peers and Peeresses and to the
highest classes, Knights Grand Cross or analogous ranks, of Orders of
Knighthood. Knights of the Garter, of the Thistle, or of S. Patrick are
entitled as such to bear Supporters, but as members of those orders are
now invariably Peers, the question does not arise.

[Illustration: FIG. 163.--Amorini Supporters from Venice.]

Figures of Angels and Amorini that are not considered to have the
technical qualification of heraldic supporters are of constant
occurrence in ornamental art, and symbolical figures holding the
shields of arms are posed in the spandrels of arches with admirable
effect and perfect propriety, and the fact that symbolic figures are
sometimes adopted as actual heraldic supporters can hardly be allowed
to cramp decorative art in so important a particular, nevertheless the
distinction should be recognized.

At Venice there is an admirably designed incised tablet in which
Amorini stand beside the shield, each supporting on a pole one of the
two large crests, Fig. 163; and the demi-angels which support the Royal
Arms on the spandrels of the screen of Henry V. Chantry at Westminster,
and the series of similar figures holding Badges in various parts of
the Abbey should also be noted.

Another admirable work in which Amorini figure is the fine panel of the
Arms of Cardinal Wolsey, which faces the Crown Court at Hampton Court
Palace, Fig. 164, a work that is no less remarkable for the strength
and bold relief of its heraldry than for the grace and beautiful
modelling of the figures.

Under the head of supporters reference may also be made to the eagles,
double or single-headed, on which in certain cases armorials are
borne as a mark of special privilege. The arms of Princes and Peers
of the Holy Roman Empire are borne on the double-headed Imperial
Eagle, like those of the Duke of Marlborough as Prince of Mindelheim,
as a privilege inherent in their rank. The single-headed eagle of
the Kingdom of Prussia supports in a similar way the armorials of
The Countess of Derby, to one of whose ancestors, Lord Carnarvon,
Ambassador at Berlin at the end of the seventeenth century, the
privilege was granted by Frederick William I. It therefore appears on
her book plate, which I am permitted to reproduce here, Fig. 165.

[Illustration: FIG. 164.--Sculptured Arms of Cardinal Wolsey. Hampton
Court Palace.]

Other accessories consist of Crowns, Coronets, Insignia of Order of
Knighthood, Mottoes, Symbols of Office, Medals or any other emblem of
personal dignity or ornament.

The principal of these, the Imperial Crown, was, in its earliest form,
a decorated circlet which was frequently of a most beautiful and
elaborate character, but whose decoration, apart from its general form,
had not acquired specific symbolic force, unless the fleur-de-lis that
sometimes appeared as part of it may be so regarded. If so, it was
probably introduced with the same idea of religious symbolism, as an
emblem of the Resurrection, or of the Virgin Mary, or of the Trinity,
which caused it to be used on sceptres and in other ways. The crowns
of the early seals show traces of arches in some instances, but it was
only in the time of Henry V that the crown, the one that succeeded the
“golden care” of Shakespeare, finally became arched.

The number of the arches, as of the fleurs-de-lis and the crosses
pattée that were added, varied from time to time, but since the
restoration of Charles II the essential details have remained constant,
though the general shape has changed with the contemporary taste in
other ornament. A considerable variety of form is also found in the
same period, the arches in Tudor times having sometimes the Gothic
pointed character, as it appears in Fig. 166, on the reverse of the
beautiful golden Bulla with which Henry VIII sealed the treaty of the
Field of the Cloth of Gold. In this instance it will be observed that
the number of arches is doubled, and the fleurs-de-lis and crosses
pattée proportionately increased. In a similar way the Scottish Royal
Crown is represented with an unusually large number of crosses and
fleurs-de-lis on the rim.

[Illustration: FIG. 165.--The Countess of Derby’s Bookplate.

Geo. W. Eve.]

In other examples, notably those sculptured on St. George’s
Chapel in Windsor Castle, the arch is much flattened and the crosses
and fleurs-de-lis stand high on the rim, thus producing a certain
squareness which is very happily suggestive of strength. It was this
type of crown that influenced the treatment of those on the present
Royal bookplates. In the seventeenth century the arches were depressed
where they cross, and in the Georgian period the extent of the
depression was very considerable, as may be seen in the maces of that
time.

[Illustration: FIG. 166.--Golden Bulla with which the Treaty of the
Field of the Cloth of Gold was Sealed. Sixteenth Century.]

It seems to evidence the want of intention, and that ignoring of
symbolic value that was characteristic of the time, for otherwise the
idea would certainly have suggested itself that the orb, the emblem
of sovereignty, should be held strongly up, and the crown be made to
suggest its adequacy to its pre-eminent dignity.

Doubtless this was in sympathy with the somewhat heavy curves of other
ornament, but its effect is common-place, weak and unfortunate. The
general character of the present day shape is a return to the more
beautiful pointed arch, and Fig. 167 is the form approved by His
Majesty for official use. It is to be understood that this does not
refer to the actual crown, which has remained much as it was in the
time of Charles II, but to its heraldic equivalent.

[Illustration: FIG. 167.--The Royal Crown as sanctioned for official
use.]

The decoration of the arches may take many forms, sometimes consisting
of large pearls, as in the usual way, sometimes of architectural
crockets as in much of the carved decoration, or as jewelled running
ornament composed of national Badges, or of oak-leaves and acorns as in
that which is known as the Imperial State Crown. A fine example of the
Tudor crown occurs in the stained glass roundel of the Arms of Queen
Jane Seymour, in which the arches are crocketted, and the crosses have
the cusped character that was prevalent at this period, Fig. 168.

In the jewels on the rim, no attempt is usually made to copy those of
the actual crown and great variety of jewelled decoration is therefore
possible. The gems are most often represented of antique form, that is
to say, cut _en cabuchon_, instead of in facets, thus presenting a
decorative simplicity that is very suitable to ornamental effect.

[Illustration: FIG. 168.--Arms of Queen Jane Seymour, Stained Glass
Roundel. Sixteenth Century.]

With regard to the cross on the orb the former remarks concerning
crosses pattée are especially applicable, and in addition it should be
observed how much more satisfactory it is for the lines of the lower
limb of the cross to be produced from the circumference of the orb than
for the corners to be projected beyond it. In the latter case the cross
has the unfortunate effect of being balanced on the orb instead of
rising from and being part of it.

The essential form of the crown, then, is a circlet heightened with
crosses and fleurs-de-lis alternately, from which rise two arches that
spring from behind the crosses pattée and uphold the orb, which is
itself surmounted by a cross.

Care is necessary in order that the curves of the arches may be kept
sufficiently flat, for otherwise too much tendency to a half-circle may
result.

The crosses and fleurs-de-lis offer remarkable opportunities for
strong, graceful, and varied treatment, and if they are kept fairly
high, and well defined, the dignity of the design is much enhanced.

The cap which is enclosed in the actual crown is of purple velvet, but
is represented heraldically as of crimson, and is lined with ermine,
which being turned up at the edge, appears round the lower rim.

The Coronets of the sons and daughters of the Sovereign have similar
circlets to that of the crown, but are not enarched, except in the case
of the Prince of Wales, who has one arch supporting an orb. The latter
coronet is usually drawn from a point of view from which the complete
arch is seen spreading from side to side. Fig. 169.

Other Princes and Princesses bear coronets that are varied according
to nearness to the Throne, the grandchildren of the Sovereign having
ducal leaves in place of two of the crosses, while nephews have similar
leaves in place of all the fleurs-de-lis. This must not be taken as
an invariable rule of heraldry but as an indication of the system that
is observed in framing the Royal Warrants by which alone the right
to these coronets, and also to the Royal marks of cadency (q.v.) is
conferred.

[Illustration: FIG. 169.--Coronet of the Prince of Wales.]

Royal coronets, other than that of the Prince of Wales, do not change
automatically as private marks of cadency do, but being arranged under
the same Royal Warrant by which the arms are assigned, they remain as
so designated until they are changed by the same authority.

The Coronets of Peers were definitely assigned to the various ranks
by warrant of Charles II, having by that time become developed into
distinctive forms, as the Crown had been, from the circlets which in
themselves were marks of high rank and were so used ceremonially in
conferring a title.

The coronet of a Duke is composed of eight ornamental leaves of
equal height, wrongly called strawberry leaves, set on a rim which
is ornamented with jewel-like tracery but not with actual gems.
Eight being the full number of leaves, five of which are visible in
representation.

A Marquis’s coronet has four leaves alternately with an equal number
of silver balls, called pearls, which are set on points to the height
of the leaves, and the coronet is always represented as so posed that
three leaves and two balls are visible. It is directed that in all
coronets the balls shall be of silver and not counterfeit pearls.

An Earl’s coronet has eight balls raised on high points and showing
between them leaves which are set low down. Five balls and four
alternate leaves are usually shown. This form is evidently derived
from the beautiful coronet that is sculptured on the tomb of Thomas
Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel, 1445, and in the same way that the coronet
of another Earl of Arundel (A.D. 1487) foreshadowed that of a duke.
The former of these is very fine, having groups of three pearls on
alternate points, and with the leaves also on points to the same height
as the others.

A Viscount’s coronet is a circle with surface decorations which, like
all the preceding, is as in that of a Duke and has sixteen silver balls
set close on the rim, and of them nine are shown.

A Baron’s coronet has six silver balls, also set directly on the rim
and not on points, the circlet in this instance being plain, i.e.,
without indications of jewel forms.

In the warrant of Charles II it is directed that all the coronets shall
be worn over a cap of crimson velvet lined with ermine, and having a
tassel of gold at the top. This cap, however, is not an essential part
of the coronet, although a head covering of considerable distinction in
itself. During the greater part of the Middle Ages the temporal peerage
consisted principally of earls and barons, the former distinguished by
the circlet of gold, which was variously decorated, and the latter by a
cap of crimson lined with fur. For military purposes, the coronet was
fixed to the helmet, and at other times it was placed, for practical
reasons of comfort among others, round the cap which formed part of
contemporary costume, as may be seen in many of the beautiful French
and Italian medals of the fifteenth century, notably in one of Louis
XII at the end of that period. Fig. 143. In another composition of
about the same time, a head of King Herod has a crown which encircles
a cap of the shape usually ascribed, in modern times, to a Cap of
Maintenance. The last-named head covering is one of much interest as
an early subject of privilege, although but little appears to be known
about it. Its shape was obviously not its distinctive quality, and
it must therefore have been the material or colour which constituted
its especial value; and having regard to the sumptuary restrictions
concerning the wearing of ermine, among other things, it seems probable
that its lining of this fur was its distinctive quality, and that being
prohibited to those of inferior rank, it would naturally be the cap
that would be associated with a coronet when it was actually worn. Thus
was formed the prototype of the coronets as described in the warrants
of the end of the seventeenth century, when caps of this character had
ceased to be part of the ordinary costume of people of position. The
cap is therefore a means of wearing the coronet and no indication of
definite rank and may certainly be omitted in heraldic design, since it
adds nothing to what is signified by the coronet itself and is not an
essential part of it.

This view would appear to have been the contemporary official one, for
many of the Garter plates subsequent to the warrant of Charles II have
no caps to the coronets, and that of John, Duke of Argyle, 1700, may be
cited as an example, among others.

By the before-mentioned warrant, the use of the ermine-lined caps was
extended to barons equally with other ranks of the peerage.

The rank of Baronet, also hereditary, is of two classes, one of which
was instituted in 1611 to encourage the plantation of Ulster, and the
other in 1624 for the plantation of Nova Scotia. All new creations of
the rank of baronet are of the former kind, and the Badge consists of
the well-known red hand of Ulster on an argent field. This is borne on
the coat of arms either on a canton or on a small escutcheon, whichever
is most convenient, and if the latter it may be anywhere on the main
shield in the same way that a mark of cadency is placed. The Badge of
a Baronet of Nova Scotia is an actual jewel like that of an order and
usually appears below the shield pendent from its ribbon of orange
tawny silk. It is also worn round the neck like the insignia of an
order, and consists of an oval medallion on which is the Cross of St.
Andrew behind a shield ensigned with the Imperial crown and charged
with the Arms of Scotland, and on the margin of the badge is the motto
“Fax mentis honestæ gloria.”

The Insignia of Orders of Knighthood are also among the most important
and decorative accessories, either surrounding the shield, such as
collars, the Garter, and the motto circle of other orders; or suspended
below it as crosses and jewels.

[Illustration: FIG. 170.--Arms of John second Earl of Mar, K.G., 1634.
Modelled gesso, afterwards painted. Geo. W. Eve.]

Knights of the Garter surround the shields of their arms with
representations of the Garter inscribed with the motto of the order,
“Honi soit qui mal y pense,” in the well-known way. It was formerly
light blue, but since the time of George I has been of the dark rich
colour to which it has given the name of Garter Blue. The buckle,
motto and other embellishments are of gold and it is now edged with
the same. This last, however, is purely decorative, but has become
usual from about the sixteenth century. The motto begins above the
buckle, which is always placed in the dexter side, and may be in any
character of lettering that seems fit. Fig. 170 shows a gartered shield
from the series at Alloa House. The collar consists of twenty-six
small garters (in allusion to the Sovereign and twenty-five Knight
Companions), each enclosing a rose, alternately with an equal number
of knots, the whole being joined together with links of gold. It is
notable that the roses are Tudor ones, the collar having been added
to the insignia of the great Order by Henry VII, and are a red rose
within a white one and a white within a red alternately. Depending from
the collar is the representation of St. George slaying the Dragon, the
jewel which is known as the Great George. Composed of gold and enamel
it was frequently richly jewelled, and otherwise treated as a splendid
subject for artistic elaboration. When the collar is used with the arms
it is placed outside the Garter. These constitute the insignia that are
immediately associated with the shield, but there are in addition the
Star, the Ribbon and the Lesser George. The Star is worn on the left
breast, consists of groups of rays, in silver or diamonds, arranged
in eight points, and bearing in the centre the enamelled Cross of St.
George encircled with the Garter.

The Lesser George, the jewel which is worn pendent at the side from
the ribbon of the order which is worn over the left shoulder, consists
of an oval badge of a similar group to that of the Great George, but
placed within the Garter which forms a frame to the badge. It will be
noticed that the Great George has no containing form.

The Collar when it surrounds the shield is placed outside the Garter,
and either one or both may be used to enclose a crest or other device.
In thus using the collar of an order in a decorative way, it will
not be necessary to represent the actual number of pieces in it, but
only their nature and the proper order in which they occur, and a
considerable latitude may be taken in treating the details so long as
their essential character remains clear.

The custom of encircling arms with the Garter has influenced the whole
British practice with regard to orders of knighthood, other orders
using in a similar way the motto circle which forms part of their badge.

The foreign practice is to use the collar with its badge to surround
the arms, or in other cases to suspend a badge from its riband below
the shield.

A knight of several orders uses principally that which is of superior
rank either alone or in conjunction with others. In the latter case
the emblem of the superior is innermost in surrounding the shield; and
is the dexter of two, or the most central of a greater number, when
dependent from it. When, however, some special allusion is intended the
insignia of an inferior order may be used alone.

Thus in the case of an achievement that was to be used in connexion
with a specific order, the insignia of that order would be properly
used to the exclusion of one of superior rank.

It will be understood that the heraldic bearing of such insignia is a
privilege that need not always be exercised, and when it is, may be
used in a variety of ways. Thus the Garter may closely surround the
shield in the familiar way or may encircle the whole achievement as in
some coins and medals, or even be straightened out as in the design of
some of the Tudor bookbindings.

In view of cases that have actually occurred, it should be noted that
stars of orders must not be suspended below a shield as a badge may
be, though they may be embodied in accessory design in a suitable way.
That is to say, that only those decorations should hang below the
shield which actually have a pendent character and hang from collars,
ribbons, and so forth, while stars may decorate panels, be enclosed
in tracery, or be employed in any other way that is not unsuitable to
their naturally _appliqué_ character.

The Order of the Thistle has a Collar composed of thistles alternating
with a badge made of four sprigs of the ancient rue interlaced, the
whole being enamelled in the proper colours. Depending from the centre
thistle of the collar is the Badge, a star of eight points bearing the
figure of St. Andrew supporting his white cross. His gown is green and
the surcoat purple, and he stands on a mount of green. When not used
with the collar the Jewel hangs from the dark green ribbon that is worn
over the left shoulder. Fig. 171 from the series at Alloa House shows
a method of treating the collar in gesso photographed before painting.
The star of the order consists of a silver St. Andrew’s cross having
rays issuing from its angles and bearing in the centre a thistle within
a circle of green enamel, that is edged with gold and bears in golden
letters the motto, “Nemo me impune lacessit.” It is this circle and
motto that are placed round the shields of the knights of the order and
sometimes with the collar in addition.

[Illustration: FIG. 171.--Shield with Collar of the Order of the
Thistle. Arms of John, sixth Earl of Mar, K.T. Gesso, before painting.
Geo. W. Eve.]

The Knights of the Order of St. Patrick surround their arms with
the sky-blue circle of that order inscribed with the motto, “Quis
separabit,” and the date MDCCLXXXIII. The Collar is composed of roses
and harps alternately, tied together with knots of gold. The roses are
double and are white within red, and red within white alternately,
like those of the Garter collar. In the centre is an imperial crown
ensigning a harp from which hangs the badge of gold, oval in shape,
and surrounded with a wreath of shamrocks which encloses the circle of
light blue enamel on which is the motto and the date MDCCLXXXIII in
golden letters. Within the circle is the cross of St. Patrick, Gules on
a field Argent, surmounted with a trefoil slipped and with each of its
leaves charged with an imperial crown, Or. The star is of eight points,
the perpendicular and horizontal rays being larger than the diagonal
ones, and bears the device within a motto circle exactly similar to
those of the badge, but without the shamrock wreath. These are the
three principal orders which form a group that is somewhat apart from
the rest.

In the foregoing orders consisting, as was customary in earlier times,
of a Grand Master and of Knight Companions ranking equally among
themselves, the amount of insignia associated with their arms is
unimportant as a mark of rank, the simplest being equally efficacious
heraldically with the more elaborate. In the case, however, of orders
which are divided into classes, the different parts of the insignia
have acquired a special importance as indications of rank within the
order which must be very carefully observed.

Taking the Order of the Bath as typical, the lowest rank, that of
Companion (C.B.), is shown by suspending the badge below the shield.
The next grade, Knight Commander (K.C.B.), in addition to the suspended
badge, encircles the shield with the motto of the order. And finally,
a Knight Grand Cross (G.C.B.) adds to the preceding the collar of the
order round his arms, outside the motto circle. It must be noted that
the order has two divisions, civil and military, whose badges differ.
The rest of their insignia is identical, except that a wreath of laurel
accompanies the motto circle of the Military Division.




CHAPTER VIII

Methods and Materials


The methods of painting heraldry have changed very little from those
that were employed in the early MSS. In the unfinished Bible at
Winchester Cathedral, of which the illuminations are in every stage of
progress from the sketch to the finished work, the sequence is clearly
shown. First, the design lightly sketched in with fine charcoal or a
leaden stylus, then carefully gone over with a black line. The gold
masses put in and burnished and then the colour. Shading and correction
of the outline followed, and finally the high lights put a finish to
the work.

Vellum, a fine parchment made of calf skin, is the most suitable
surface for heraldic painting in water-colour, although paper,
which includes various “boards,” is useful for students’ work and
for preliminary drawings. The colours bear up, and gold acquires an
appearance of solidity on vellum which cannot be obtained on paper.
No doubt the surface is somewhat difficult to deal with at first and
painting on it has a technique of its own, but there is nothing that
cannot be overcome if it is approached in a practical way. The colour
of vellum varies from a yellowish white to darkish ivory colour, a
variety that is due to the natural colour of the skin. It can also be
obtained in positive colours, the kind that is used in book-binding. It
is somewhat thickly coated on one side with a chalky preparation, and
if this side, the front, is used it requires delicate handling, for it
is easily injured by the scraping that may be necessary for erasure,
so that a rough spot of skin appears through the preparation and the
surface can only be restored with great difficulty. Unless, therefore,
it is necessary to use both sides as for a leaf of a book, the back of
the skin will be found preferable. It is a little darker in tone and
not quite so smooth, is tolerably hard and bears erasure well, but the
knife requires deft handling, and then small corrections can be made
with it successfully, for colours do not penetrate vellum very far,
though when properly prepared they adhere to the surface with ample
tenacity. It will be found very desirable to keep vellum clean rather
than to trust to subsequent cleaning.

As it is difficult to properly remove pencil marks except with the
knife, the design should first be made as fully as necessary on paper
or other surface, and transferred to the vellum by tracing or rubbing
down or by pouncing. The best way of transferring a design is to go
carefully over the back of a tracing of it with a sharp pencil and
having carefully placed it in position on the vellum to rub it down
with a knife held slanting, a palette knife will do very well, and
in that way the lines are clearly transferred to the vellum without
the depression on the surface that a point is likely to make. Tracing
down the design with a style and coloured transfer paper is less
satisfactory owing to the blurring of the line, unless the point used
is very sharp and then it is likely to cut through. In making the
preliminary design the colour composition with regard to such parts
as are susceptible of free treatment (such as the mantling) should
be carefully noted so that nothing experimental need be tried on the
vellum. Unless both sides of the skin are to be used it is well to
strain the vellum over an ordinary frame by means of glue or with small
tacks at frequent intervals, first well damping it on the reverse side
to that which is to be used. A piece of cardboard should be placed
between the vellum and the frame to give support to the surface and
help to throw up the colour, care being taken, however, that the vellum
though damp is not actually wet or it will stick to the cardboard in
patches with disastrous effect. Having the design traced on the vellum
the next step is to lay in the gold. This is provided in shells or
cakes and is painted on very evenly with a sable brush and when dry is
burnished with an agate burnisher, or a tusk does very well.

Burnishing is facilitated by first gently passing the finger tip over
the gold, and a piece of card or other firm substance should be placed
behind the work during the whole process, or, when a high degree of
polish is desired, a piece of plate glass may take the place of the
card. But it must be remembered that over-burnishing deprives the gold
of its beautiful colour and tends to blackness.

The principal colours are then laid in their places and their quality
will depend of course on the taste and intention of the artist, but
in the absence of necessity for modification, the traditional strong
brilliance will probably be sought after and the colours will be
used in their fullest strength and purity. For red, Vermilion is
unapproachable in its place, has great body and is therefore easy to
use. For blue, Cobalt is very beautiful but is somewhat difficult
to lay from its want of opacity, a quality which is not improved by
the glycerine which is used in “moist” colours. French ultramarine
or French Blue (it is known under various names) forms when mixed
with white a fairly efficient substitute for cobalt and presents no
difficulties in laying.

Green. The most brilliant is of course Emerald Green, but as it is
extremely difficult to lay and easily works up it is much feared and
avoided. It is very useful in combination with greens of lower tone
mixed with white to lighten them. Green oxide of chromium (not chrome
green) is excellent in this way and possesses good body.

The white will be Chinese White, made from oxide of zinc, which does
not change colour as the lead whites do. The latter, however, are
extremely useful for temporary work, such as for design that is to
be carried out in other materials, when the drawing is no longer of
consequence after it has served its purpose.

The difficult colours Cobalt and Emerald Green can nevertheless be
laid satisfactorily by means of patient trial, the result depending
on that skill of manipulation which can only come by much practice
as well as on the exact degree of moisture with which the colours
are used. Indeed, it may be well to point out, especially for the
benefit of those who are familiar with water-colour sketching, how
comparatively dry all the colours are worked in illumination. Tints,
even, are best put on with a sparely filled brush in a manner that
approaches a scumble much more nearly than a wash. This will be found
most troublesome in tints that are painted on the vellum itself, as
in white mantling, for instance, or in objects that are “proper,” and
anything like a wash with a full brush being impossible, a certain
amount of stippling will probably become inevitable. The work is
certainly somewhat difficult, and too much disappointment, therefore,
should not be felt at the failure of first efforts. Shortly, the effort
should be directed to getting the colour on with as little moisture as
will suffice, so that the surface of the vellum may not become wet and
disturbed.

The principal masses of colour being in, such dividing or other strong
lines as occur will be drawn with black. A drawing pen will probably
be used for straight ones and in this also care must be taken that
the black, lamp black or ivory black, is not too diluted, or it will
probably spread, especially when in contact with colours that contain
glycerine or waxy constituents.

This done, the next stage of the work, if it is to have the elaboration
of the real illuminated MSS. rather than of the diagrammatic Rolls of
Arms, will be to model up the forms with shadow colour, using carmine
or crimson lake to shade vermilion with the addition of a little sepia
when stronger colour is required. Blue will be shaded with French blue
to the required tone, and green with darker green.

The lights may then be put in with light tones of their respective
colours. Gold is shaded with a low tone of yellow as a general shadow
colour and with umber, and is sometimes high lighted with Naples yellow
and white. In accessory decoration gold may be shaded with green and
finished with a darker tint of the same colour.

In the colour treatment of mantling the tone may well be kept low in
relation to that of the shield to which it will thus lead up and give
value.

Instead of lighting with tones of their own colour the parts in which
modelling is suggested, a very beautiful and decorative effect is
produced by the mediaeval practice of heightening the whole design with
gold in lines which coalesce into masses on the high lights and trail
off into the shadows where also they help to define the form in a very
effective way. This use of gold throughout the work serves at the same
time to harmonize and pull the whole thing together into unity. It is
a method which requires considerable skill of hand and clearness of
intention, for the lines must be drawn with firm certainty, but when
successful is most effectively beautiful.

In the treatment of the helmet its relative importance in the
composition must not be forgotten, nor its brilliancy in combination
with its central position be allowed to attract undue attention. The
broad shadow which its body takes in its forward tilted position is
very useful in keeping down the general tone, in colour work as well
as in black and white. Also it may be remembered that helmets were
themselves painted and their rivets gilt.

In painting on paper, where yellow is substituted for gold, Cadmium
will be found to be the most useful kind of that colour.

Until the invention of moist colour the pigments were obtained in
powder and mixed with gum water, a great deal of small knowledge being
required in order that the colours should not rub off the surface on
the one hand, or crack or otherwise misbehave on the other. Gold was
mixed in the same way, but if with too little gum it rubbed off and if
with too much it refused to burnish. Nevertheless, the colours when
so mixed have a certain advantage in having more body, and a better
because less waxy surface. However, the greater convenience of moist
colour is undoubted and in some of them the surface is very good.
So-named luminous body colour made by Newman of Soho Square has been
recently tried with very satisfactory results, the cobalt among the
“difficult colours” being particularly good.

The notable revival of Enamelling has restored to heraldry a very
beautiful means of expression, one which has proved from the twelfth
century downwards to be especially suitable to its subject, as well
from its broad simplicity of treatment as from its permanence and
beauty. In this connexion one’s thoughts inevitably turn to the
stall-plates of the Knights of that Most Noble Order of the Garter in
its Chapel in Windsor Castle, and one is led to hope that they may once
again be done in a way not unworthy of their splendid and monumental
predecessors of the old days.

Enamel entered to an enormous extent into the decorative metal work of
the Middle Ages. Altars, Church vessels, and crosiers, caskets, nefs
and other domestic objects, the girdles and clasps for ladies’ use, as
well as the details of military trappings were among the many things
that were adorned in this manner. The massive military belts that were
worn below the hips and were indicative of high rank were especially
rich in goldsmiths’ work and enamels, infinite pains and enormous sums
being spent on their execution.

[Illustration: FIG. 172.--Queen Eleanor’s Cloak Clasp. Champlevé
Enamel. Thirteenth century.]

Of the various methods of enamelling that which is known as Champlevé
is especially associated with Gothic art. Among the most interesting
of the personal ornaments is the cloak clasp of Queen Eleanor, wife of
the warrior King Edward I (Fig. 172). Here the arms of her husband,
England, with those of her own blood, Castile and Leon, unite to make
a unique fastening to the Royal mantle of that Queen “of Good Memory.”
This clasp was probably made at Limoges, where Champlevé enamel was
certainly produced as early as the latter half of the twelfth century
and probably earlier, the art having been imported, it is said, from
Venice, whither it had come from the East.

At this same time heraldry was coming into systematic form, and enamel
was soon employed to display it on the Royal and other monuments,
beginning perhaps with the memorial slab to Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count
of Anjou (father of Henry II), who died in 1151, which is now in the
Museum at Le Mans.

The succeeding centuries are increasingly rich in heraldic enamels,
the shields in the monuments of Edward III and his Queen, Philippa of
Hainault, and on the magnificent tomb of William de Valence, Earl of
Pembroke, in Westminster Abbey, may be taken as examples. The shield
on the latter monument is reproduced by Boutell and others and will
well repay study, especially when it is rendered in the colour which is
necessary to a full appreciation of its beauty (Fig. 174).

Towards the end of the mediaeval period began the Garter stall-plates
already alluded to as still to be seen on the panels of St. George’s
Chapel, which date from the early fifteenth century, though some of
them relate to personages of an earlier time.

These have most fortunately been brought within reach of study in the
valuable facsimile reproductions in the work by Mr. St. John Hope,
which includes in its scope the plates which were executed down to
nearly the end of the fifteenth century. As examples of heraldic
composition they are invaluable, for although the deterioration of the
Gothic was already begun, they possess to a remarkable extent those
decorative qualities that their modern successors so unfortunately
lack.

Enamel itself consists of a rather dense glass coloured with metallic
oxides, and must not be confused with the enamel colours which are
employed in painting on porcelain. The latter are vitrifiable but not
vitrified material; that is to say, in them the metallic colours in
powder are mixed with powdered glass, and the whole becomes fluxed
together when the work is fired in the kiln or muffle, while in true
enamel the glass and its colouring are intimately combined from
the first. By way of definition it may be said that enamel work is
therefore an arrangement of one or more layers of coloured glass on
fused metal.

In Champlevé work the design is first outlined on a metal plate,
usually copper, and then, by means of gravers and chisel-like tools
called scorpers, the space which is to receive the enamel is cut out
to the necessary depth, from ¹⁄₃₂ to ¹⁄₂₀ of an inch, the rather rough
surface that is left by the scorper serving as an additional key to
the enamel (see Fig. 173), which having been ground to a powder and
moistened with water, is then placed in the cavities prepared for it,
and, after being carefully dried, is put into a muffle raised to a
red heat, and thus fired until the enamel is fluxed. The work is then
allowed to cool, is smoothed and polished, and the metal parts may then
be gilt. Champlevé is usually executed in opaque enamel; that is, in
glass made opaque by an admixture of oxide of tin.

In very early specimens two or more colours are found in contact in one
space, but this is extremely difficult to do, and the resulting line
is a somewhat ragged one in European work, though wonderful effects
of opaque colours are produced by the Japanese. Since the thirteenth
century each colour, in Western work, fills its own space.

[Illustration: FIG. 173.--Plate prepared for Champlevé Enamel.]

The design, must, from the nature of the work, be kept very simple
without too much subtlety of line that might be lost in the cutting,
and the laying of the enamel will be facilitated if the angles of small
spaces are not made too pointed. The principal qualities of form will
consist in good distribution and well-balanced masses rather than in
expression of detail. The outlines of charges which are in colour
on metal, or vice versa, are formed by the edges of the sunk spaces
and such further definition that maybe required, such as the marking
of the junction of the further legs with a lion’s body, is effected
with a line of the ground colour laid in a groove cut for the purpose.
This perfectly natural method of drawing with the materials that are
immediately concerned has resulted in some singularly inept modern
examples of heraldry, where the limbs are deliberately represented as
detached from the bodies, as though there were something mysteriously
mediaeval in such an unreasoning travesty of a perfectly simple
expedient.

Where one colour approaches another, as in the de Valence shield
(Fig. 174), it will be necessary to leave a narrow rim of metal as an
outline, and where the work is sufficiently large other details of form
will be shown in a similar way. Diaper also may be thus drawn in lines
of metal among colour, as is shown here in the running ornament, or by
lines of colour in metal, as the case may be.

The gilt outlines of the de Valence Champlevé shield somewhat suggest
the effect of Cloisonné work, the way in which the Byzantine enamels
were executed; but this method has been little, if at all, employed
heraldically. In it the spaces to be filled are made of flat wires that
are bent to the requisite form and soldered into their places on a
metal plate, and the work then proceeds as in Champlevé.

[Illustration: FIG. 174.--Shield on Champlevé Enamel from the Monument
to William de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, in Westminster Abbey.]

In the fifteenth century, when Renaissance art was beginning to look at
things in a new way and was discovering new methods by which to express
itself, a new kind of enamel work took the place of the more formal
Champlevé, just as a freer kind of heraldry was about to supersede the
decadent Gothic. This became known in time as “Limoges Enamel,” though,
as we know, that place had been celebrated for enamel in another form
for hundreds of years. This painted enamel did not, however, take the
place of Champlevé on monuments, rather the use of enamel in that way
died out. Probably the painted plaques were too tender for the purpose,
and in any case the treatment would have had to be much modified to
bring them into harmony with monumental conditions. Although the
method was new the treatment of the subjects was largely that of the
missal paintings, and figure compositions, both sacred and secular,
were accompanied by decorative borders into which heraldry naturally
entered. Fig. 175 is an heraldic example of this method as it was
practised by the celebrated Nardon Penicaud.

[Illustration: FIG. 175.--Arms in Limoges Enamel. Part of a Triptych by
Nardon Penicaud.]

This kind of enamel is done on a smooth plaque of thin copper or other
metal which has been slightly domed for the purpose. It is covered with
a coat of enamel which forms the ground, the back also being enamelled
in order to equalize the contractile strains, and fired. The design is
then painted in white of suitable thicknesses, which on being fired
form tones with the ground colour according to their relative opacity,
and the result is called grisaille. This is a very charming form of
decoration in itself, and is frequently done with that intention.
Usually, however, coloured enamel is painted over it, the work being
carefully fired at each stage, a very anxious process, and finally it
may be heightened with gold after the manner of the illuminations. An
additional method of obtaining decorative effects, in diapers, etc.,
presents itself in the power of scratching the painted gold with a
needle before firing. Fig. 176, executed in this manner, is a plaque
that is the property of W. H. Weldon, Esq.

From the capacity of painted enamel to imitate the effects of the
illuminations it presents few technical difficulties as design. Its
practice, however, is another matter, as may be imagined when the risk
of the numerous firings is taken into account.

A form of enamel that is occasionally used for badges and similar
heraldic subjects is that which is called bassetaille. In this method
the subject, usually in the form of a medallion, is carved in low
relief and the transparent enamel fluxed completely over it, the
surface being afterwards ground and polished. The varying thickness of
the enamel, from the deepest part of the relief to the highest, gives a
quality of gradated colour that is extremely beautiful. In a badge or
jewel of this kind there is, of course, a rim raised to the height
necessary to contain the enamel and extending above the highest point
of the carved subject.

[Illustration: FIG. 176.--Enamelled Plaque. Crest of W. H. Weldon,
Esq., C.V.O., Norroy King of Arms. Geo. W. Eve.]

Still another method is that which came into use in the fifteenth
century for jewels, and is known as plique-a-jour, a kind of
transparent Cloisonné which is said to have been produced by Cellini,
who certainly knew of it. It is an extremely difficult process, but
the effect is remarkably precious and jewel-like, the enamel being
fired into a design which has been built up of bent wire and soldered
together like Cloisonné without the bedplate, so that the work looks
like a miniature piece of stained glass (as indeed it is) and of great
beauty. In a similar way a design may be cut out or saw pierced through
a plate of metal and filled with enamel _à jour_.

In all methods of enamelling, a drawing of the design must of necessity
be first made, and it is of course essential that the designer should
have a practical knowledge of the methods that are concerned, the
design and the finished work being necessarily interdependent, and
though written descriptions are useful to indicate the nature of the
processes nothing can supply the place of actual experiment under
competent instruction. Familiarity with the practical side of art
craftsmanship need not imply an intention to produce the work itself,
but is absolutely necessary to adequately designing for it.

Enamel is increasingly employed in commemorative tablets and in objects
of ceremonial use, and is also used with equally charming effect on
the decoration of cabinets, jewel caskets, and other boxes to which as
wedding gifts or other presentations, heraldry, properly marshalled
and well executed, is peculiarly appropriate. To such purposes the
“Limoges” painted method readily lends itself, especially when the
general design is of somewhat ornate character. With regard to the
mounting of enamels, metal as framework seems especially suitable to
their perfect display, as the setting to the gem, and so when a plaque
is used to decorate a wooden panel it is well to introduce metal as
an intermediary. But, nevertheless, I have found a well-cut ebony
frame very satisfactory in itself, and the matter is clearly one for
experiment.

Champlevé and Cloisonné go well with the more severe styles of design,
both ornamental and heraldic, in fact, enamel goes best with styles
similar to those with which it was associated in the early practice.
The one with the freedom of the Renaissance, the others with the
greater severity and strength of the Gothic.

For salvers, inkstands, lamps and other utensils heraldry in Champlevé
enamel is very suitable and it is somewhat remarkable that it is
not more often employed in place of the engraving which is usually
inappropriate because of its lack of decorative quality.

METAL.--Although heraldry in metal work has so wide a range, from the
massive bronze gate to the badge worked on a buckle, that it can only
be partially dealt with in a general work, it is desirable to touch
upon such parts of so large a subject as may help the student to find
in early work good examples for present application. The value of
the beautiful metal coffret, the jewel case of the Middle Ages, for
instance, to the designing of the modern box, whether it be intended
for a similar use or as the repository of a city’s thanks to a hero,
is obvious. Even the obsolete weapons of early times may be made useful
for their decoration, as admirable models for the making of trowels
and other ceremonial implements whose after character as souvenirs of
interesting occasions renders them suitable to, if indeed it does not
demand, heraldic or symbolic decoration.

Of the large work the stately bronze doors of Henry VII’s Chapel in
Westminster Abbey are among the most distinguished examples in their
perforated design of work whose duty is rather that of a gate than a
door. The panels are filled with badges in pierced work, the Beaufort
Portcullis, Henry’s favourite badge, the Falcon and Fetterlock of York,
the entwined roses of York and Lancaster, and the Royal Monogram, all
telling their story in terms of beautiful metal work. Within is the
monument with the effigies of the King and Queen recumbent on the tomb,
while at the foot amorini support a shield of arms and at the corners
are placed angels who once held crowns. Designed by Torregiano and
executed by him or under his direction, it is without doubt the most
splendid and complete heraldic metal work of its time and style in this
country. Over the gates in the grille which surrounds the tomb are the
Royal Arms, France and England quarterly with the dragon and greyhound
supporters. The latter was the badge of the Nevilles, but the former,
the Dragon of Cadwallader, was of especial value in the King’s eyes.
It denoted his descent from Llewellyn and King Arthur, and perhaps he
liked to feel that his greatness was not wholly dependent upon York
and Lancaster. It had been flown, on a flag of the Tudor colours,
argent and vert, on the field of Bosworth when the “White Boar” was
slain and his crown was plucked from the hawthorn bush into which it
had fallen and placed on the head of the victor. As badges, the dragon
and the greyhound are repeated on the upper part all round the grill
and in its parapet portcullises and roses alternate in the cuspings
of the tracery. One of these dragons is shown in Fig. 173. Even the
great candle sconces are Tudor roses placed horizontally, which support
crowns whose crosses and fleur-de-lis form a decorative rim. As
heraldic design the proportion of the parts, the vigour of the animals
and the excellence of the spacing (and this may be especially seen in
the supporters over the gates) leave nothing to be desired, while the
general arrangement of the repeated heraldic motives in a decorative
and yet reticent way is as admirable an example as can be found.

[Illustration: FIG. 177.--Dragon from the Grills in Henry VII’s Chapel,
Westminster Abbey. Sixteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 178.--Memorial Brass to Sir J. de Brewys, Wiston
Church, Sussex.]

Relief in metal work, cast or wrought, was very fully employed in
the Renaissance monuments in place of the flatter treatment which
preceded it. The mediaeval memorials more frequently employed the
flat decoration done in Champlevé enamel fixed into the spaces of
sculptured stone, or else the incised metal slab, somewhat similar in
its method of production, which is known as a Monumental Brass. These
are so comparatively numerous and of such admirable workmanship as to
form one of the most interesting and instructive means of studying most
that pertains to good heraldry. They were executed with great care,
and afford examples of almost every kind of application of arms and
badges to costume. Their wealth of heraldic lore is ably set forth in
the works of Creeny, Waller, and others, and a single illustration
must suffice here. Fig. 178 is the interesting brass to the memory of
Sir John de Brewys, which is in many respects typical. The figure of
the knight in his armour, his hands in an attitude of prayer, his head
resting on his great helm, which bears his crest, and his feet on a
couchant lion. Around him are shields of his arms six times repeated,
and between them on little scrolls the words “Jesus” and “Mercy” many
times occur.

The method of work is very similar to that of the Champlevé enamels,
allowing for the difference in scale, the lines being boldly incised
in the metal with chisel-like tools and then filled in with black or
colour much after the way of the niello and enamel of the smaller and
more precious work, a hard waxy composition being used as the colouring
material.

Among the smaller metal work of domestic use, the firedogs, firebacks,
hinges, locks and other parts of furniture, there is no lack of
examples. The slabs of cast iron that are known as firebacks were
very generally used as spaces for heraldry, the emphatic central
position which they shared with the chimney-piece making them similarly
appropriate. With the revival of dog-grates the accompanying fireback
has also returned to favour, and a study of old castings therefore
becomes additionally necessary. The Tudor examples are usually very
excellent and bold in design, as in that illustrated here (Fig. 179),
which displays the Royal Arms, probably of Henry VIII. In a form of
work which is to be subjected to the action of fire, and even to be
seen for the most part through lighted fuel, a design is obviously
fitting in proportion to the degree of elimination of unessential
detail that is effected, and in the case in point this has been most
efficiently done. The arms, and the lower part of the centre generally,
are much fireworn, but anything of this nature simpler and finer in
pose and modelling than are the supporters it would be difficult to
find, while the proportion and spacing of the whole composition leave
nothing to be desired. Fig. 180 is another well-designed Tudor example,
the arms being those of Queen Elizabeth, who sometimes used the
greyhound for a supporter as her father had done, instead of the dragon.

[Illustration: FIG. 179.--Armorial Fireback. English. Sixteenth
Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 180.--Armorial Fireback. English. Sixteenth
Century.]

It must be remembered, in designing firebacks, that the work is
to be carried out by casting and should therefore be of suitable
character. Casting is necessary because every time that wrought iron
becomes red-hot and cools again it scales, and so loses a considerable
thickness of material in a comparatively short time, a disadvantage
that does not exist in the cast metal. The design in most cases is
treated panel-wise within a raised border, but in the later backs the
outline of the design, of the mantling and crest, sometimes formed the
edge of the fireback without a containing rim. A space at the bottom,
the part that was most embedded in the fire, is frequently left plain,
or simply fluted.

[Illustration: FIG. 181.--Mortar in Cast Bronze.]

Fig. 181 is also interesting as heraldry in cast metal, which in
this case is bronze; and an Italian example is found in the arms of
the Martelli, cast in bronze by Donatello (Fig. 182), which has much
spirit, but lacks the excellent distribution of the same creature on
the decorative shield for the Palazzo Guadagni now in the Museum at
South Kensington.

[Illustration: FIG. 182.--Arms of the Martelli, by Donatello.]

The elaborate hinges, clasps, and locks of doors and coffers that were
often enriched still further with coats of arms are also of great
interest and appear to have been made subjects of lavish decoration
before the larger domestic belongings were so treated. Of the
decorations of lock-plates the German example of the Imperial Eagle
from the Town Hall, Nuremberg (Fig. 183), is interesting as an instance
of great simplification of form to suit the material in which it is
expressed. Fig. 184 is another but more ornate example of the treatment
of pierced and chased metal.

[Illustration: FIG. 183.--Lock-plate. German. From the Town Hall,
Nuremberg.]

[Illustration: FIG. 184.--Decorated Hinge in Pierced and Chiselled
Metal. German. Seventeenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 185.--Lock-plate. Chiselled Iron. French.
Fifteenth Century.]

The French lock-plate in chiselled iron (Fig. 185) was in the Spitzer
Collection, and is decorated with the crowned Arms of France, and
with Navarre, Aragon, Bearn and Bourbon quarterly and with a coat at
top repeated on either side, consisting of three pommes de pin, or
pine cones. The fleur-de-lis in Gothic tracery on the hasp is also
notable. Fig. 186 bears the crowned Arms of France surrounded by the
beautiful collar of St. Michael. Below is the well-known monogram
which combines the initials of Henry II and of Diana de Poitiers,
and her badge of crescents forms a circular device interlaced within
the guilloche border, and a further allusion to her goddess namesake
occurs in the bows and arrows at the sides. A fellow bolt-plate in the
same collection has the Arms of France dimidiating those of Medici
and Dauphiny on the shield at top, and in place of the crescent badge
below, is a rainbow in clouds and surrounded by laurel; and the
monogram, a double K for Queen Katherine, is several times repeated.

[Illustration: FIG. 186.--Bolt-plate. French. Sixteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 187.--Panel in Chiselled Iron. Sixteenth Century.]

A very beautiful work, also in chiselled iron, is the panel of the
armorial insignia of the Emperor Charles V, the Arms with the Columns
the latter rising from waves of the sea, being the device that
represented the Pillars of Hercules and the motto “plus oultre” (Fig.
187). The arms are encircled with the collar of the Toison d’Or very
boldly treated. The work is Spanish of the early sixteenth century,
and is notable for its exquisite finish as well as for its general
excellence of design and drawing.

[Illustration: FIG. 188.--Key with the Arms of an Archbishop.
Eighteenth Century.]

[Illustration: FIG. 189.--Key. Eighteenth Century.]

Examples of keys, also from the Spitzer Collection, are given in Figs.
188 and 189. The former bears the arms of a Cardinal Archbishop, and
the latter, which is excellently pierced and chiselled, has two lions
supporting a badge, a crowned castle. Each is of good design, its use
and material having been well considered so that it is of a decorative
shape that does not impede its usefulness. The latter is full of minute
and exquisite detail, indistinguishable in the illustration. Besides
the decoration of the barrel with a spiral band, there are eagles’
heads on its wards and the words “vive le roi” are twice inscribed on
it in letters of gold.

[Illustration: FIG. 190.--Repoussé Buckler in the Royal Armoury,
Stockholm.]

The beautiful and elaborate repoussé and engraved work that was very
largely employed in the decoration of metal in the Middle Ages and
the Renaissance, found full scope in the magnificent armour in which
the greatest artists and the most skilful craftsmen combined their
forces to make a gift that should be worthy of a princely hand.
Repoussé decoration consisted for the most part of the allegorical
and mythological subjects that were so fashionable at the period, and
comparatively little heraldry was done in that way. Engraving and
etching, on the other hand, were extensively used to decorate metal
with arms and badges.

In the execution of repoussé work a metal plate is fixed down to a bed
of pitch, a material which affords an efficient support while being
soft enough to yield to the shaping metal as it is hammered and punched
into the designed form. The work is afterwards chased and finished
on the face, but the essential quality is, of course, that of being
modelled into relief from behind. A very beautiful piece of repoussé
work is the quadrangular buckler, of late sixteenth century work, in
the Royal Armoury at Stockholm, which was bought in Holland by Charles
XV of Sweden (Fig. 190). The design is a fine bold treatment of the
Arms of the Visconti, and the workmanship is probably Italian. There is
a backplate with repoussé arms in the same collection.

[Illustration: FIG. 191.--Powder-horn with Armorials. The Royal
Armoury, Dresden. Sixteenth Century.]

The powder horn (Fig. 191) in the Royal Armoury at Dresden is a very
good example of the treatment of heraldry on a small object, and
incidentally shows the practice of placing helms on the heads of
supporters in order to display some of the crests.

[Illustration: FIG. 192.--Bill or Glaive, German (1620).]

Engraving being extensively used to cut decorative bands of ornament
on the armour, was naturally the method adopted for ornamenting
the blades of weapons and other flat surfaces. Indeed, it was from
the engraving for ornament’s sake that engraving for the purpose
of reproduction by printing was evolved by Finiguerra, the famous
Florentine goldsmith, in the middle of the fifteenth century. This
interesting experiment, if it were an experiment and not a practice
whose application had been before unnoticed, is said to have been made
on a piece of plate, a pix, of which the only impression is said to be
in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Engraving was also preliminary
to niello work and to damascening, two somewhat analogous methods of
decoration, that are peculiarly suitable to the ornamentation of
metal. In the former the lines of the engraving are filled with a
sort of black enamel which is fixed in its place by heat, while in
damascening the design, drawn with boldly cut lines on the steel, is
filled in with gold or other metal hammered in with mallets, and the
whole surface is then polished.

The halberds and partisans that were of the nature of ceremonial
weapons, the arms of body guards, for example, were usually decorated
in some such way. The bill or glaive (Fig. 192) is a good example
of German work of its period, and the halberd (Fig. 193) is a very
interesting specimen of French work of a little earlier date.

These examples will be found valuable in their bearing on the
decoration of ceremonial tools such as the trowels with which
foundation-stones are laid.

In engraving a surface for subsequent treatment with another metal or
with enamel the process itself will dictate the use of a strong and
suitable method of cutting. When, however, the engraving is to stand
on its own qualities it is important to bear in mind the difference
between engraving that is employed as decoration and that intended for
printing. This distinction has frequently been lost sight of, with the
result that there is much engraving of the sort that, however well it
might print, and in some cases this is more than doubtful, it certainly
does not decorate; while fine bold cutting that is done in the right
way will realize the value of the play of light on the incised line,
and the consequent ornamental effect. In this connexion it may perhaps
be permitted to define shortly the technical distinction between
etching and engraving. In etched work, then, the design is bitten
into metal with an acid mordant, while engraving is done with a cutting
tool.

[Illustration: FIG. 193.--Halberd, Damascened. French (1596).]

Etching is largely evident in the decoration of metal, frequently
taking the form of lowering the background by biting-in with acid, and
thus leaving the design to appear in masses of polished surface in
contrast with the darkened colour of the bitten metal, and the details
are put in with lines that are etched or engraved, as may be most
convenient.

[Illustration: FIG. 194.--Cistern in Cast Lead.]

An important quality of this kind of treatment is that while the
objects are enriched and very expressively decorated their practical
efficiency for work is in no way impaired, and this may fairly be taken
to be a conclusive test of right decorative treatment.

[Illustration: FIG. 195.--Fountain in Cast Lead. Dutch. Seventeenth
Century.]

Interesting features of Renaissance dwellings were the rainwater heads,
cisterns, fountains, statues and other garden accessories that were
cast in lead; architectural fashions which are again coming into vogue
with the returning regard for the style of the Renaissance. The cistern
(Fig. 194) is an heraldic example in cast lead, and Fig. 195 is a
fountain in the same material. The latter is Dutch work of the early
seventeenth century, and was brought from Bois-le-duc. The motives,
eagles displayed, lions’ heads and the lion rampant of Holland which
holds in its paws a sword and a sheaf of arrows, are thrice repeated
round the central pipe, which is surmounted by a crown.

[Illustration: FIG. 196.--Arms of Oxford University. Panel, Copper,
silvered and oxidized. G. W. Eve.]

Yet another method of metallic production is shown in electro deposited
replicas of modelled designs such as Fig. 196, a panel treatment of the
Arms of Oxford University, which may be considered in connexion with
its fellow of Cambridge, Fig. 89.




CHAPTER IX

Architectural Decoration


In its application to architectural decoration heraldry put forth
some of its finest work as became one of the family of the “mother
of the arts,” and it was in architecture too that the modern revival
of heraldic art began, much in the same way that the Renaissance had
first made its influence felt in the decoration of the monuments of an
earlier time.

The sculptured heraldry of the Middle Ages was confined to the
monuments and chantries, such as those of Westminster Abbey,
Peterborough, Kings Langley, Canterbury, Beverley and many other places
whose sculptured shields are memorials no less of the personages whose
arms they bear than of the vigorous art of their time. Certain it is
that even in the worst periods the heraldic decoration of architectural
objects continued to show a greater degree of excellence than was
generally evident in other forms of heraldic expression.

With the growth of the Renaissance, domestic architecture and its
attendant decoration, in which armorials were displayed, increased
enormously in extent and beauty, and the colleges which were founded or
rebuilt in the early sixteenth century followed in the decoration of
the chapels and halls the excellent examples of their predecessors, but
in the new and adaptable style that had come into fashion.

Henry VIII patronized art with enthusiasm as a part of his general
rivalry with the magnificent Francis I, and his example was followed
by the new families who were taking the place of the old nobility that
civil war and the scaffold had nearly exterminated, in building stately
mansions, many of which stand as present examples of the skill and
thoroughness with which the work was done.

In France the beautiful châteaux which still remain as store-houses of
heraldic and other artistic wealth were built during the same period
under Charles VIII, Louis XII and Francis I, and it is difficult to
describe in adequate language how perfectly they displayed their
characteristic devices with a dignity that was without one touch of
obtrusiveness.

Fontainebleau, Blois, Chambord and many another stately building
testify to the taste and magnificence of their owners as well as to
the skill that was lavished on their making. Fig. 197, the Gateway of
the Château de Blois, is especially interesting for the employment of
badges and heraldic diapers. The porcupine badge of Louis XII appears
over the doorways as it does within, while the main archway is flanked
by columns ornamented with a diaper which encloses in its reticulations
the fleur-de-lis of France and the ermine spot of Brittany. A range
of similar columns is in one of the interior courts. Fig. 202 is an
example of the badge-adorned fireplaces in the château. The whole is
a restoration, very little indeed of the original work having remained.

[Illustration: FIG. 197.--Gateway of the Château de Blois. (Restored.)
Fifteenth Century.]

In Spain extremely bold and vigorous heraldic sculpture was placed over
doorways and under windows, but it was often executed with magnificent
effect in large rectangular panels at the sides of the principal
entrance. Fine examples are at the doorway of the Hospital at Santiago
and at that of the University Library at Salamanca.

Italian examples are found in the Florentine wall decoration in the
Palazzo Vecchio and Palazzo del Podesta, in the composition of which
small shields bearing the symbols of Saints and the arms of cities were
usually associated with the principal device.

Heraldic groups were also employed with excellent effect on angles of
buildings, breaking the straight line in profile in a very satisfactory
way.

In the scheme of heraldry for a house the principal position on the
exterior was over the main entrance, and there the armorials of the
owner were boldly displayed, arms of alliance and genealogical trees
being reserved for the more intimate surroundings of the interior.

Other parts of the exterior were ornamented with less elaborate
insignia such as seemed to fit the spaces that offered themselves,
badges being freely used in this way as well inside as out. Chimney
stacks and other flat spaces were relieved with panels, and ridges
and pinnacles were adorned with figures of heraldic significance in
relation to the family of the house.

In arms in relief, whether in large mural decorations or in the minute
workmanship of a seal, contiguous spaces, which in flat painting would
be considered divisions of the same plane, are distinguished from each
other by sinking the surface in parts or by means of diapering. The
quarterly shield of Henry IV on his great seal (Fig. 2, p. 18) has
the field of the English quarter sunk so that the edge of the French
quarter being higher takes light or throws a shadow which defines the
space. Additional emphasis is given to ordinaries by strongly bevelling
their edges which then reflect light in the same way. And diapering,
which has been already referred to, may have the effect of raising or
lowering the tone of the decorated surface, according to the amount of
light it reflects or of shadow that it includes.

The mantling that occurs in sculpture, especially when done in wood,
does not hesitate to go to the fullest extent in the direction of
free ornamental treatment, and in thus seizing upon the decorative
possibilities of its so lightly fettered character it may form a
connecting decoration between the constituents of an heraldic scheme
which might otherwise have a certain effect of spottiness.

The pose of the heraldic elements of the design may also be made to
help materially the general unity of effect. Thus the helmets of a
series of armorials may be faced towards a central point, such as the
altar in a church, or the hearth or the daïs of a secular apartment.
Shields may be inclined in a common direction with similar intention
and all the heraldry have definite relation to its surroundings. It
should be remembered, however, that in thus posing the elements of a
series, a shield must be treated as a whole, and the contents must not
be altered in sympathy with the direction of its regard.

[Illustration: FIG. 198.--Frieze in Sgraffito.]

A form of external decoration which has been but little used for
heraldry, though it is one which is readily adapted to the purpose, is
that kind of cement work in layers that is known as Sgraffito. Examples
of this method of work are shown in the friezes, Figs. 198 and 199, in
which the heraldry adds interest to very graceful design, and in the
panel of the Armorials of Pope Paul III (Fig. 200).

[Illustration: FIG. 199.--Frieze in Sgraffito.]

In Sgraffito work the design is drawn through a coat of moist plaster
on to a lower one of another colour, much as etching is drawn through
the ground on to the copper, and like it is, in its simplest form, a
line art.

[Illustration: FIG. 200.--Arms of Pope Paul III (Farnese). Panel in
Sgraffito.]

Heraldry in interior decoration found its first application in the
actual shields, which were hung on the walls of the great Halls of
mediaeval strongholds, was closely followed by the similar use of
the more ornate ceremonial ones and continued in the tapestries and
embroidered hallings which were the wall coverings of the halls and
chambers. Some of these are still extant, and many others are mentioned
in the wills of great personages and in the household accounts of the
time.

[Illustration: FIG. 201.--Armorial carving in the Gallery of the Vyne,
Hampshire.]

At the end of the fifteenth century panelling was superseding the
decorative draperies and sculpture was taking the place in domestic
buildings that it had long held in ecclesiastical ones, the heraldry
which had been displayed in beautiful needlework being executed in
carving that was no less beautiful in another way. Plaster work also
came largely into use for interior decoration.

Many instances of beautifully applied heraldry are given in Mr. Gotch’s
admirable work[1] and notably the doorway and panelling of the Gallery
of the Vyne, Hampshire, Fig. 201, which I am permitted to reproduce
here. The doorway is adorned by arms supported by amorini and the
panelling is full of shields and badges; the appropriateness of the
work is immediately felt, and there is nothing obtrusive, everything
“occurs” with an inevitableness that is delightful.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Early Renaissance Architecture in England._

In the decoration of a room the fireplace is naturally the central
feature, to which in some cases the heraldry is confined; in others,
and the larger number, it covers the panel above, the decoration
varying in amount from a carving in the centre of the frieze of the
chimney-piece, or on comparatively small centres of panelling, to the
whole armorials fully displayed. Fig. 202 is an example of badges
employed in this way, and is another of the many representations of the
devices of Louis XII and his Queen, Anne of Brittany.

These large chimney-piece achievements are produced in a variety of
ways, being sometimes sculptured in stone or wood, but they are also
cast in plaster or modelled _in situ_ in the same material.

[Illustration: FIG. 202.--Fireplace in the Salon Louis XII Château de
Blois. (Restoration in the style of the Fifteenth Century.)]

In the decoration of ceilings complete armorials and even shields of
arms are by no means so much used as are badges and other fanciful
devices, the intersections of ribs and the centres of panels being
naturally selected for the purpose. Two examples of ceiling bosses
consisting of wreaths enclosing a shield of the Royal Arms and a
fleur-de-lis badge respectively are from ceilings at Hampton Court
(Fig. 203), for which also I am indebted to Mr. Gotch’s work.

[Illustration: FIG. 203.--Ceiling Bosses from Hampton Court Palace.
Sixteenth Century.]

The upper divisions of wall panelling are especially suitable for a
series of shields and badges when they are at a sufficient height to
bring the heraldry above the line of the eye. This will probably be in
carved work, the most direct and natural way of decorating wood, but
shields in colour, flat or in relief, may occupy the panels with very
satisfactory effect. A frieze is also an obviously suitable space for
such a purpose, whether the decoration be modelled or painted, or both.

Among the materials suitable for interior decoration gesso is an
excellent means of obtaining relief in work that is to be painted,
and it is more readily handled than modelled plaster, from the ease
with which it can be kept moist. In early work the smaller details
of monuments were frequently modelled in this material, as were the
arms on some of the stone shields in Westminster Abbey; and on the
decorative panelling, on which jewels and enamels were also modelled
and painted.

Gesso is simply the Italian name for Plaster of Paris, burnt gypsum,
but is technically understood to mean a preparation of plaster or other
material which depends for its hardening on the solidifying of some
cohesive medium, usually a form of glue, and not on chemical action in
the material.

Methods of making gesso are described by Cennino Cennini in the MS.,
written in 1437, in which he describes minutely the technical practices
of his time. First the plaster is to be “well washed and kept moist
in a tub for at least a month” and is to be stirred up well every day
until “it almost rots and is completely slaked and it will become soft
as silk.” It was then made into cakes, dried and kept for use. By this
process it became what was called gesso sottile, though the term is
also applied to the similar preparation of whiting, to be mentioned
presently. As to its use, it is directed to “Put some cakes of gesso
sottile into a pipkin of water and let them absorb as much as they
will. Grind it fine, mix it with fine glue in a pipkin, put the pipkin
in water so that it becomes hot but does not boil, for if it did it
would be spoiled.”

A very important point is the thorough slaking and tempering of the
plaster, which continues to improve the longer it is kept. The glue
that was used was made from hides, size being made from the fine kinds
of skin, vellum and parchment, as the finest kind is made now. Fish
glue was also used from very early times.

Very useful gesso is made with whiting (calcined chalk) instead of the
plaster. The latter is said to be tougher, but whiting is certainly
easier in working. The whiting should be soaked in water for at least
twenty-four hours (like the preceding preparation this kind of gesso
is all the better the more thoroughly it is prepared), and mixed in a
vessel, with the fine thin glue, the whole being placed in a saucepan
of water and kept hot. By keeping the pot of gesso in the water while
it is being used it will be kept liquid for some time (though the top
will skin over rather soon) and it may be remelted by again heating it
from time to time. I find ordinary gelatine a good adhesive and melt it
into the consistency of a not too strong size before adding it to the
whiting, together with a few drops of oil or glycerine as a preventive
from cracking. The gesso is best used with a long-haired brush, such
as those called riggers, from which it is allowed to flow in a blobby
way, the lights being first loaded on and afterwards joined down by
subsequent painting. It may at this stage be modelled to some extent,
and for this a stiffish brush moistened with warm water is an efficient
tool. When it is dry the gesso may be carved and shaped with knives and
riffles with the same facility as plaster. It may then have a coat of
gelatine (which should be very thin, as otherwise it will form a skin
that is likely to blur detail), and the work is ready for painting or
other treatment.

In the treatment of wooden shields in this way care should be taken
that they are well seasoned, and unless they are sufficiently thick
they should have transverse pieces at the back to prevent warping;
a coat of gesso on the back is also useful for the same purpose. If
the wood is well stopped by being sized several times and is slightly
roughened the layers of linen or other keying material may be dispensed
with.

Gesso work is well adapted for treatment in colour, and of this the
quality may be much improved by the use of underlying metal, gold under
red, and silver under blue. These metals are applied by the ordinary
gilders’ methods and are then painted over. Very beautiful effects may
also be obtained in monochrome on modelled gesso, when the gradations
of tone may be made to help the relief and vary the colour.

Pyrography, or burnt word etching, is also employed in heraldic
decoration, a notable instance being the series of shields on the
fireplace of Lord Leven and Melville at Glenferness. An example of this
method of work is shown in Fig. 204, a fanciful composition designed
for the door of a cabinet.

In arranging a scheme of heraldic decoration, the field of choice is
a very large and varied one, from the simplest shield or badge on the
frieze of a mantelpiece to the carefully planned series decoration of a
whole building.

[Illustration: FIG. 204.--Burnt Wood Panel, “Love’s Armorials,”
executed by Mrs. Geo. W. Eve after design by Geo. W. Eve.]

[Illustration: FIG. 205.--Arms of the Earl and Countess of Mar and
Kellie. Painted Gesso. Geo. W. Eve.]

As an example of one form of genealogical scheme maybe instanced the
series of arms and devices in painted gesso now in the hall of Alloa
House, Alloa, which were done to fill a range of panels in a dado,
and beginning with the simplest shield of Henricus de Erskine in 1224
(Fig. 141), extend round the apartment and end, on the opposite side
of the fireplace, with the quartered and impaled arms of the present
Earl and Countess of Mar and Kellie (Fig. 205). Alternating with the
arms of each generation are repetitions of three devices, designed
for the purpose and consisting of the crest and motto of the Earldom
of Mar, those of Kellie (Fig. 206) and the monogram and motto with
the supporters (Fig. 207) respectively. These devices were of course
capable of any necessary amount of repetition, and when a knighthood of
an order necessitated a group of two or more shields the devices serve
to mark the grouping, and as it were to punctuate the whole scheme. The
gesso was made of whiting and gelatine as already described, and the
surface was varied by the use of different textures. The colour was
applied over metal which was allowed to show through on the ridges of
the diaper that was also introduced to give variety and interest to the
simpler forms. Others of this series are illustrated in Figs. 141 and
142.

[Illustration: FIG. 206.--Device. Crest of the Earldom of Kellie.
Gesso, before painting. Geo. W. Eve.]

[Illustration: FIG. 207.--Device. Monogram and Supporters of the Earl
of Mar and Kellie. Gesso, before painting. Geo. W. Eve.]

Another method of arranging a scheme of decoration is that which traces
the advent of quarterings into the shield of a family, by picking
from the pedigree the matches by which the various coats of arms came
in, and making them the motives of the work, to the exclusion of
intermediate matches, proceeding in regular order from the simple arms
to the final shield of complete quarterings.

Many other schemes will readily suggest themselves. The visits of
guests of distinction may be marked by panels of their arms in the
chambers they occupied, perhaps by an enamel plaque in the centre of a
panel.

The arms of Schools, Colleges and Universities, and of other
corporations and institutions, motives that are allusive rather than
personal, are yet of the keenest interest to those concerned, an
interest that is too often tempered by the unworthiness of the heraldic
treatment. The practice of hanging on the wall shields of arms of the
stationers’ shop type may be necessary for commercial reasons, but is
much to be deplored. It seems impossible to get them improved, the
feeling that they are “good enough” (and perhaps they are!) appears
to be sufficient recommendation. Even when the arms are well treated,
as is rarely the case, and I am not now referring only to the kind
which satisfies the aesthetic perception of the casual schoolboy, the
effect of the hanging shield in an ordinary room suggests at best a
kind of Strawberry Hill Gothic that is out of keeping with any probable
surroundings. When heraldry that can be treated as a movable picture is
needed, and something of this kind is made necessary by the want of
permanence in our dwelling-places, a framed panel of arms is probably
the most suitable form that modern heraldic wall decoration can take.
It may be in wood or metal, in colour or monochrome, of any quality and
interest that may be found most pleasing, and being framed, it will
take its place in the adornment of an ordinary room in the same way
that a picture does.

STAINED GLASS.--Of all methods of heraldic expression stained glass
is perhaps the most appropriate as purely decorative treatment of the
subject, for not only is the splendour of colour peculiarly fitting,
but even the commemorative quality of heraldry assimilates in feeling
with the memorial character which is rarely absent from a stained
window.

The temptation which it naturally offered to partisan fury has left
comparatively little of the early work, but sufficient has remained to
show how perfectly it could be made to serve its purpose.

In a form of design which is carried out with pieces of coloured glass
cut to the necessary shapes and held together by strips of grooved
lead, which is soldered into position, this structural lead-work
presents considerable difficulty. It follows the lines of the
composition wherever possible, but when the shape of the glass makes
another course desirable, it does not hesitate to go across a space,
and in that case, being frankly used for structural reasons, it must
not clash with those lines that help to define form. In short, design
in this, perhaps more than in other arts, must conform to the dictation
of the material. Thus it is important that the pieces of glass should
be designed of cutable shape without too small re-entering angles,
and the limits of bending in the lead must also be recognized. Its
passing across objects is vindicated by structural necessity, and by
that alone, and narrow places are leaded across, not only because of
any difficulty that there may be in the cutting, but because the glass
would probably break there when being fired in a kiln, or when under
the strains that are set up in a window by wind pressure.

The tendency of outline to lose itself in the darker of the colours
that it divides has already been referred to, and is very notable in
this connexion. When therefore the objects are light on dark, the
lead-work will sink into the background, and although it may leave
small space for the glass, it is sometimes surprising how efficiently
that little lights up and expresses the colour. If the charges are
inconveniently small for the leading, resort is had to what is
called flash glass, which consists of two layers, of which one only
is coloured, and is made by dipping a piece of molten white into a
coloured glass, when the mass is about to be blown into the bulb which,
shaped and expanded, ultimately becomes a sheet of glass. The desired
shapes are pierced through the coloured layer of the composite sheet by
means of grinding, or by etching with hydrofluoric acid, and are left
white, or stained yellow with a solution of silver, as the case may be.

In addition to the lead-work, which defines the general forms with
more or less accuracy, details are depicted by means of a brown enamel
colour, which serves also as a general shadow tint, being painted on
the glass, and then fired. The brown enamel is also used for the
diapering which is so especially valuable in glass decoration, and for
this purpose it may express the design in lines drawn with the colour
or, being applied as a broad wash; the diaper pattern may be scratched
out of it with a point. As a general rule over-painting should be used
as sparingly as possible for the purpose of defining or emphasizing
form.

The silver stain can be similarly put on, either in lines or in washes,
these materials, either alone or in combination, serving to express
surface decorations of all degrees of elaboration.

In addition to the accurate and expressive drawing which goes to make
good heraldry, the principal feature of glass design is obviously its
colour effect, the grouping of the colour masses in such a way as will
best express the subject in beautiful coloured light. In view of the
obligatory nature of heraldic tinctures, though not of their exact
quality, the harmony of colour may be helped by suitable treatment of
the background (which is susceptible of variation that is only limited
by the nature of the materials) in combination with the prescribed
colours of the heraldry. And here occurs that temptation to alter the
tinctures of mantlings which has proved too much for the correctness of
some heraldic compositions.

The design is usually made on a small scale, showing the colour scheme
and the general composition, and a full-size drawing in black and white
is then prepared, in which the arrangement of the leading and the
character of other details are carefully indicated. On this the various
coloured glass is laid and cut into the required shapes, which are
then arranged in due order with the lead, and the whole is securely
soldered together. The lead having a double groove is in section like
the letter H, the inside surfaces being milled, to afford a better key
for the glass and for the cement which is added for additional security.

Pugin, whose influence on architecture was so impressive, had no less
strong an effect on the heraldry which accompanies it so appropriately,
and the beautiful armorial decoration of the Houses of Parliament, for
which he is answerable, is a wonderful mass of fine work in glass and
stone and other materials. No less remarkable in that it succeeded
a long period of such extreme weakness, and was itself but the
firstfruits of the revived interest in the subject.

In this work Pugin was fortunate in the efficient assistance that was
at his command, and the drawings by his son-in-law and pupil, John
Powell, by Burgess and others, show how admirably the master mind was
served. The drawings reproduced here were probably designed by Pugin,
but the actual work is that of John Powell.

However imbued with the mediaeval spirit Pugin was, the Renaissance
feeling unmistakably asserts itself in these designs, and in spite of
the Gothic detail of the tracery they seem to associate themselves
naturally with the Tudor heraldry rather than with that of an earlier
time. Indeed, it is possible that Pugin was not unmindful of this, for
there is little doubt that he had studied the Renaissance work that is
to be found, as well as that of the Middle Ages, in the neighbouring
Abbey.

[Illustration: FIG. 208.--Cartoon for Stained Glass. (Upper Part) Royal
Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

Tudor heraldry marked the close of the Middle Ages. In character it was
a combination of the mediaeval style with that of the Renaissance;
that is to say, it was the expression of what remained of mediaeval
regard for its subject, in a form that was strongly influenced by the
new feeling in Art.

Besides the technical knowledge and the power of draughtsmanship
there is ample evidence of individual design working through various
influences, handling and assimilating them, a further proof that no
one possessing real artistic power, in whatever degree, is content
merely to reproduce the dry bones of any period. However that may
be, they are very beautiful drawings, serving admirably as models of
working drawings, in which is set forth all that is necessary to the
carrying out of the work, and I am much indebted to Messrs. Hardman for
permission to reproduce them.

The disposition of the lead is very carefully shown throughout, and the
smaller details are drawn just so far as is necessary for the direction
of the painter. Repetitions of figures being similarly finished only
when they differ in some important respect from the initial shape, as
in the case of the lion in the base of the shield of the Royal Arms
(Fig. 208), when the pose is sufficiently varied from the upper ones,
by the field space, as to warrant its separate treatment. These arms
occupy the upper part of the light in the Royal Gallery, Fig. 209
being the lower part of the same window. Perhaps the most remarkable
for vigour is the little white horse which so admirably occupies its
space, a quatrefoil opening (Fig. 210). All the animals are full of
vitality, but none have quite so much as this. In this respect it may
well be contrasted with the much inferior Dragon of Cadwallader in
Fig. 209. The character of the unicorn (Fig. 211) is altogether unusual
in English heraldry, and follows the foreign type which derives its
form from that of a goat with one horn, instead of that which is the
combination of a horse’s body with the legs of a stag and the tail
of a lion, a form with which other examples have made us familiar. The
wild boar of Richard III (Fig. 212), for all his enormous tusks, seems
not unworthy of the irreverent way in which he is referred to, in a
working note pencilled on the cartoon, as “the pig.”

[Illustration: FIG. 209.--Cartoon for Stained Glass. (Lower Part) Royal
Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

[Illustration: FIG. 210.--Design for Stained Glass in the Houses of
Parliament. Drawn by John Powell.]

[Illustration: FIG. 211.--Unicorn. Cartoon for Stained Glass, Royal
Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

[Illustration: FIG. 212.--The White Boar of Richard III. Cartoon for
Stained Glass. Royal Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

[Illustration: FIG. 213.--The Royal Crest. Cartoon for Stained Glass.
Royal Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

The comparative smallness of the Royal Crest in Fig. 213 is due to the
designer’s intention to bring the head into the central line of the
composition with a view to upstanding effect, and in this respect is of
course a reasonable problem to have solved. Whether, however, it was
worth while so to sacrifice the larger proportion which the lion would
have had to the crown in mediaeval design is another matter.

Nevertheless, the whole series of work is finely designed and
beautifully drawn with clearly thought-out intentions as a whole, and
with much delightful fancy in the variation of the decorated detail,
and to conclude this very interesting series Fig. 214 is from a
coloured drawing of the white swan of the de Bohuns that was one of the
badges of Henry IV.

[Illustration: FIG. 214.--Cartoon for Stained Glass. Coloured. Royal
Gallery, Houses of Parliament.]

In domestic stained glass conditions that were different from those
that were involved in church windows had to be considered, and
especially excessive obscuration of the light was to be avoided, this
being effected by the use of plain, or slightly decorated, quarries,
the stronger colour being confined to a centre roundel or medallion, a
very suitable space for heraldic treatment, and to decorated borders.
In addition, from the time of the Middle Ages such stained windows
had been made movable by being enclosed in frames which could be
temporarily fastened into window spaces, as is still done, and for a
similar reason armorial roundels may remain detached from the window
and be suspended by wires (see Fig. 168).

Of such roundels there are many excellent examples, that were
originally in Netley Abbey, in the Hartley Museum at Southampton.

[Illustration: FIG. 215.--Arms of Henry VI, Ockwells Manor, Berks.]

[Illustration: FIG. 216.--Arms of the Earl of Warwick, K.G. Ockwells
Manor.]

From the second half of the fifteenth century onwards armorial stained
glass increased greatly in extent and freedom. The shields became
square and in many instances have the form (derived from the tournament
shield à bouche) which became associated later with the name of the
Tudors. Probably the finest examples of domestic stained glass that
we have are the splendid heraldic windows at Ockwells Manor, Berks.
In these the shields are much curved, the helmets and mantlings are
very elaborate, and the figures are drawn with great vitality and
beauty. Each light has an achievement, consisting of arms with mantled
helm and crest, in the middle, upon a background of quarries placed
diamondwise and bearing the Norreys Badge, three distaffs, in yellow
stain. In diagonal lines, the motto in text letters, “Feyth = fully
serve,” is several times repeated in all but two of the lights, the
exceptions being the Royal ones, where “Dieu et mon droit” accompanies
the Arms of Henry VI (Fig. 215) and “Humble et Loiall,” the motto of
his Queen, Margaret of Anjou, is with her armorials. In both these
lights the Norreys Badge appears as in the others. Below the King’s
Arms are his two supporters, heraldic antelopes Argent, which are
spotted, as well as armed, crined and unguled (i.e. horned, haired
and hoofed) Or. The series, which included twelve lights that are now
vacant, was erected by Sir John Norreys, the builder of Ockwells
Manor House, and consists of his arms and those, to quote Mr. Everard
Green, “of his sovereign, patrons and kinsfolk. In short a liber
amicorum in glass, a not unpleasant way for light to come to us.” The
arms here illustrated are those of Sir Edmund Beaumont, K.G., and Sir
James Butler, K.G. (Figs. 217 and 218), of Sir Henry Beauchamp, Earl of
Warwick (Fig. 216), and the Royal Arms, to which reference has already
been made. The heraldic particulars of those and others that remain
will be found amply set forth in _Archaeologia_, vol. lvi., 1899. It
will be observed that the arms of such as were K.G. are not encircled
with the Garter, that practice not having as yet come into full general
use. Some attention should be given to the badges on these windows as
being good examples of the practice in domestic glass of decorating
transparent quarries with devices, badges and monograms, floral and
other running patterns, in stain and grisaille, as admirably serving
its purpose without too much sacrifice of light, and therefore as
affording suggestions for modern work which has to comply with similar
conditions. The lights herein illustrated are from the excellent
drawings by Mr. W. T. Cleobury, in the Victoria and Albert Museum.

[Illustration: FIG. 217.--Arms of Sir Edmund Beaumont, K.G., Ockwells
Manor.]

[Illustration: FIG. 218.--Arms of Sir James Butler, K.G., Ockwells
Manor.]

The glass that has been hitherto mentioned is that which, like the true
enamels, is coloured in the making with metallic oxides, the painting
on it being confined to the use of the brown shadow colour, and the
yellow silver stain. Windows made wholly in that way can be described
as painted glass because though the silver is a true stain, it is used
as paint and fired, instead of being incorporated with the glass
in the pot. About the middle of the sixteenth century, the practice
came into vogue of using panes of transparent glass as surfaces for
decorative design in painted colours or in grisaille, and large windows
of square panes of white glass with elaborate designs of arabesque
ornament were done in verifiable enamel colours and with a minimum of
leading, such as those in the Laurentian Library, Florence (Fig. 219).
The medallion in the centre contains the arms of the Medici, the family
of Pope Clement VII, whose tiara and keys accompany the arms in another
of the same series of windows that has been reproduced in Mr. Lewis
Day’s admirable book, _Windows_.

A very remarkable school of enamelled glass painting that largely
concerned itself with heraldry existed in Switzerland, encouraged by
the custom which had grown up of persons and guilds presenting painted
windows to each other. These largely consisted of portrait subjects
accompanied by armorial bearings.

Into this work the use of the point entered to a surprising extent, the
washes of colour being frequently covered with the scratched lines with
which details were drawn or textures indicated with the minuteness of
fine engraving. Indeed the process of obtaining effects by drawing with
a needle in lines of light through a dark medium inevitably suggests
the art of etching on metal.

[Illustration: FIG. 219.--Painted Window in the Laurentian Library,
Florence. Sixteenth Century.]

Marvellous as were the effects produced by the needle in the hands of a
master the method was a dangerous one under less capable control, and
in any case the effect is altogether different and less glass-like than
that of the earlier method, being characterized by a sharp glittering
brilliancy in place of the deep effulgence of pot metal.

[Illustration: FIG. 220.--Drawing for Stained Glass, Victoria and
Albert Museum.]

This painted glass of the sixteenth century contains much fine vigorous
heraldic drawing, as may be seen in the working drawings that are
extant, as well as in the windows themselves, Burgmair and many others,
whose power in heraldic art is well-known in other directions, having
also made designs for the glass painters.

Fig. 215 is a characteristic sketch of lions supporting banners and
shields, a favourite method of grouping in compositions of this kind.
The vigour and “go” of these animals is very remarkable, and it is
unfortunate that the artist’s name is not on the drawing.

[Illustration: FIG. 221.--Drawing by Holbein, Victoria and Albert
Museum.]

[Illustration: FIG. 222.--Drawing for Stained Glass, Victoria and
Albert Museum. A. Renten. Sixteenth Century.]

The drawing by Holbein, Fig. 221, is very characteristic of his work,
and of the style of continental heraldry in the sixteenth century when
the early simplicity was giving way to great elaboration of design.

The helmets in the glass work of this period are useful indications
of how structural facts, reinforcing pieces for example, and surface
ornament may be made available as decorative detail, and Fig. 222, by
A. Renten, is one of many good examples that are found among drawings
of this kind. The mantlings by this artist are particularly well drawn,
as is evident in the illustration.




CHAPTER X

Embroidered Heraldry


The romantic associations that embroidered heraldry call to mind,
of fair fingers working the devices on battle flags and on knightly
surcoats, render it a subject of the utmost fascination, and although
its adequate treatment would demand more space than can be devoted to
it here, it will still be possible to refer in some measure to an art
that, like the heraldry it embodied, touched in one way or another all
the life of the Middle Ages and has transmitted no little of its beauty
and charm to the work of our own time.

Long before heraldry was formulated noble ladies practised the art
and found in it a delightful occupation. Embroidered heraldry is even
alluded to in that dim time where myth and history meet, as when the
Raven banner of the Vikings, the dread Landeyda, desolation of the
land, was woven and embroidered in one noontide by the daughters of
Reyner Lodbrock, son of Sigurd.

In England in the sixth century Aldelswitha, a noble Saxon lady,
taught the art to some young girls and so formed the first school
of art needlework of which we have any record. The four daughters
of Edward the Elder were celebrated embroiderers, and there was a
constant succession of skilled needleworkers whose names and even many
of their notable works were handed down as worthy of remembrance;
the altar cloths and vestments, covered with golden eagles, that had
been worked by Queen Aelgitha the wife of Canute among many others.
And the reputation was not merely a local one, but throughout Europe
the praises are recorded of the Opus Anglicum, whose name, from being
at first a general one, afterwards acquired a particular technical
meaning. The excellence that called forth such universal appreciation
continued throughout the mediaeval period, as when in the thirteenth
century Pope Innocent III was enthusiastic in its praise. In the
development of heraldry embroidery found a congenial subject, and
ladies busied themselves in depicting with the needle their husbands’
armorials, as their predecessors had pictured the incidents of their
own times, on hallings and banners and emblazoned garments, such
employment being a frequent subject of the beautiful illuminations of
the painted MSS. which had so much affinity with fine needlework, from
which it copied and was itself copied in return.

Ecclesiastical vestments and altar frontals contain much heraldry, and
the Syon Cope, that most interesting work of the thirteenth century,
contains on its orphreys and borders some sixty coats of arms on round
or diamond shaped shields. One of those on the orphreys is shown at
Fig. 223, although it is perhaps more curious than beautiful.

[Illustration: FIG. 223.--Arms of Geneville from the Syon Cope.]

Among the earliest examples of heraldic embroidery that survive is the
surcoat of Edward the Black Prince, no less admirable in its way than
the already mentioned shield, and on account of its unique character it
is necessarily reproduced again and again. It consists of the arms of
the shield translated into terms of embroidery, and if it were but in
better preservation a finer model for heraldic work it would be hardly
possible to conceive. This is but one of the many splendid heraldic
garments of which so little remains, but which are depicted on the
monumental effigies with absolute fidelity. Of the latter fact this
surcoat is one of the proofs, for its copy on the effigies was made
with such accuracy that even the faults of the needlework are there.[2]
The embroidery of badges on garments instead of the regular arms was
also common, as witness the effigies of Richard II and his Queen, Anne
of Bohemia, in Westminster Abbey.

FOOTNOTES:

[2] _Needlework as Art_, Lady Marion Alford.

[Illustration: FIG. 224.--Embroidered Cap with badges, Victoria and
Albert Museum. Sixteenth Century.]

A sixteenth century example of embroidered badges, a cap of fine linen
beautifully worked with fleurs-de-lis and roses as the principal
motives, is in the Victoria and Albert Museum, and is reproduced in
Fig. 224.

[Illustration: FIG. 225.--Altar Frontal in Embroidered Linen, Victoria
and Albert Museum.]

Another example of embroidered linen (Fig. 225) in the Victoria and
Albert Museum, is an altar frontal which is decorated with heraldic
motives in appliqué work.

[Illustration: FIG. 226.--Embroidered Badge. Part of the Insignia of
Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy. Fifteenth Century.]

Some interesting and instructive fragments of embroidery exist in the
Museum at Berne, part of the spoil taken from the tent of Charles
the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, after the disastrous Battle of Grandson
in 1476. Fig. 226 is the badge, the flint and steel, of the Great
Burgundian Order of the Golden Fleece, whose insignia are conspicuous
in the decoration of the next century in association with the Emperors
Maximilian and Charles V. In this instance the steel striker serves as
a space for the quartered arms of Burgundy, Limbourg and Flanders. Fig.
227 shows the same arms on what was perhaps part of the bardings, the
tournament or other ceremonial drapery of a charger.

[Illustration: FIG. 227.--Heraldic Embroidery. Part of the Insignia of
Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy. Fifteenth Century.]

Both show admirably how heraldic embroidery should be done, namely, in
flat applique strongly designed and simply executed. The sable lions of
Flanders are conclusive proofs of how heraldic vigour and decorative
distribution may be attained in embroidery.

Towards the end of the sixteenth century embroidery began to be padded
into relief, a practice which afterwards developed to a remarkable
extent in spite of its inartistic unsuitability to the material
and work. It was naturally least offensive in its beginnings, and
the shield of Eric XIV, King of Sweden (Fig. 228), is a somewhat
exceptionally good example of the heraldry of its time (about 1560).
The arms are well-designed, the lions of the fourth quarter, Denmark,
being particularly spirited, while the execution is very excellent of
its kind.

[Illustration: FIG. 228.--Arms of Eric XIV, King of Sweden. Berne
Museum. About 1560.]

An instance of domestic embroidery occurs in Fig. 229, where the arms
of James I are used as a centre to a design that is, in the main,
floral.

[Illustration: FIG. 229.--Arms of James I. Victoria and Albert Museum.
Early Seventeenth Century.]

Work of the highest heraldic importance must always have been that
of the banners, as the very concentration of battle heraldry, but of
these, alas! there are no very early examples.

The banners of the Knights of the Garter in St. George’s Chapel were
doubtless all embroidered formerly, as that of the Sovereign still
is, but they have for long been done in an inferior way, even as the
painted stall plates superseded their enamelled predecessors.

Of the various forms of flag that were in use in the day of
the tournament and even survived, at funeral ceremonies, until
comparatively modern times, the principal were the Banner, the Pennon
and the Standard. The Banner, sometimes called the Great Banner, was
square in shape and bore the arms of its lord exactly as they were
borne on his shield, i.e., occupying the whole surface. Its use was
confined to such knights as were especially privileged, and who were
therefore called Knights Bannerets, and to nobles of higher rank.
Although the banner as such bore the whole arms of the shield, other
large and square flags, even when charged with badges, were sometimes
called by the same name when employed for a special purpose, as, for
instance, the banner of the Red Dragon of Cadwallader that was borne at
Bosworth Field.

The Pennon was a long pointed flag, which was borne by a knight and
was charged with his arms or device. The cutting off of the tail of
the pennon, leaving the flag square, conferred on its owner the right
to have a banner thenceforward, which ceremony of creating a Banneret
always took place on the field of battle and under the royal banner
displayed. The Standard, properly so-called, was also a pointed flag,
though banners were sometimes called standards when they were flown
from a mast that was either fixed in the ground or was supported on
a solid platform or wagon. From this comes the inaccurate custom of
describing the Royal Banner as the Royal Standard. The Standard always,
in England, had the national emblem, the Cross of St. George, next the
staff, and the remainder of the flag was of the owner’s colours, and
was charged with his badges and motto (Fig. 230).

[Illustration: FIG. 230.--A Standard. Sixteenth Century.]

The early form of the banner was higher than it was long, that is
to say, the hoist, that part of a flag that is next the staff, was
greater than the fly or the length from the staff to the further edge
of the flag, and that shape continued throughout the Tudor period;
later, however, the form became more square and finally extended in
the other direction until at the present time the Admiralty pattern
is greater in length than in height in the proportion of two to one.
This has, no doubt, been arranged as the best suited to naval use, and
for the Union Flag and for the Ensigns it appears satisfactory, but
when a more armorial sort of flag is in question the naval proportion
becomes more or less objectionable according to the nature of the
bearings. In the Royal Banner, as so proportioned, the difficulty of
designing the rampant lion of the Scottish quarter, so that it may be
well distributed in its space and still vigorous, or of the Irish harp
so that it may properly balance with the other quarterings, is nearly
insuperable.

When we remember that the whole plan on which armorial bearings are
devised is based on filling an upright space, the shield shape, it is
not difficult to understand how it is that the attempt to adapt such
emblems to a horizontal space so frequently suggests the ludicrous
effect of a distorting mirror. There is of course no reason why the
proportion of flags should be the same whether they are flown on land
or sea, and this is very properly recognized in regimental colours and
in the banners of the Knights of the Garter at Windsor, all of which
are more nearly square.

Animals on flags, and also on the bardings of horses, always faced
towards the staff in the one case and towards the head of the horse
in the other, and this for a very natural reason. The flag flowing
backward would cause the figure that turned towards its staff to face
in the direction of advance and the figures on the bardings would, of
course, have the same direction under the similar circumstances, while
it is evident that if they faced in the opposite direction they would
inevitably have given rise to the offensive gibe that they were running
away.

The banner that concerns us more especially, the Union Jack, may have
its essential construction explained by reference to the diagrams in
Fig. 231. First we have two of the three national emblems (1) and (2),
the cross of St. George and the saltire of St. Andrew, as they had long
been used by England and Scotland respectively. Soon after King James
succeeded to the English Crown a banner was made (3) which combined
the two by placing the red cross of St. George (with a narrow line,
taken from its white field, left round it) over that of St. Andrew, and
thence was formed the first Union Jack, under which the great naval
actions of the eighteenth century were fought.

At the Union with Ireland, in 1801, a fresh element, a red saltire on
a white field for St. Patrick (4), was introduced, and the red of St.
Patrick and the white of St. Andrew were united in equal proportions in
this manner--(5), the red being made to retain a little of its white
field as St. George had done formerly, and the result so far appears
in--(6). The cross of St. George, with its white edge, was then placed
over all, to complete the Union Jack as we know it. This will be found
quite easy to follow if care is taken to remember the construction,
and that the lines from corner to corner of the flag divide equally
the broad white and the red of the saltires. Also that in the upper
quarter, next the staff, the broad white must be uppermost, and for
this reason: it is heraldically usual to begin a counter-change of two
tinctures, a metal (silver or white) and a colour (red), by naming the
metal first. Further, the tincture that is mentioned first is always
placed next above the line of diagonal division. Therefore, as the
blazon in the warrant is a “saltire per saltire quarterly argent and
gules,” the white must be where it is. And so any possible question of
precedence was automatically avoided.

[Illustration: FIG. 231.]

The form of the flag as shown on the Royal Warrant of 1801 is seen in
(7), and is that which has been followed in regimental colours. In this
it will be observed that in consequence of the narrow white of the
saltire being a fimbriation that is added to the red the outline of the
saltire does not register across. The Admiralty pattern, however, in
what one cannot but feel was an unnecessary effort to avoid this, seems
to place narrow red strips on top of the white saltire, so that the
outside diagonal lines manage to register, but the result is to reduce
St. Patrick’s half of the joint saltire by the width of the narrow
white.

Now, the evident intention in devising the flag was to effect equal
representation of Scotland and Ireland in order to lessen the
probability of quarrels such as had occurred between the Scotch and
English seamen before the first Union Jack was made in the early
seventeenth century; and this is perfectly effected by the pattern of
the Royal Warrant.

The intention of equality is also evidenced in the warrant by similar
care in designing the Union badge of Rose, Thistle, and Shamrock, for
after the badge has been described as a rose with a thistle on one side
and a trefoil on the other, the description is carefully repeated, but
with the positions of the shamrock and thistle reversed, the obvious
intention being to remove any ground for a claim to priority that might
have arisen by assigning the dexter side to one emblem in preference
to the other. Indeed I have known exception to be taken to a perfectly
correct rendering of this Union Badge, under the impression that such
precedence did in fact exist.

Another form of banner which survives is that which was, from a very
early period, used to decorate trumpets and is still so employed by
the trumpeters of the Household Cavalry and by those of the Sheriffs
of counties for use on occasions of ceremony. Such decorations usually
contain the arms alone, as a great banner does, but there are also
instances of badges being borne on them and also complete armorial
insignia. They are tied to the instruments by ribbons or laces, and
hang squarely down. The bearings, whether simple or complex, are made
to read upright, when the trumpet is held horizontally, as though they
were on a hanging shield. This is, of course, the natural way, though
there are instances to the contrary.

As we have seen, flags were generally embroidered and with more or
less elaboration according to the circumstances which influenced other
heraldic treatment. Frequently they were done in cutwork, sewn down and
done over with beautiful needlework and even adorned with gems. The
greatest artists were employed to design them, Sandro Botticelli among
many others.

The methods of the missal painter in his use of gold lines for lights
and other definitions and decorations were employed in the needlework,
indeed all the arts of illuminated decoration, taking the term in its
widest sense, copied from each other, but each adapted the method to
its own needs and materials; and that is the gist of the whole matter.
At the beginning, in the seventeenth century, of the period that was
so fatal to all decorative art, when embroidery took what was probably
thought to be a wonderful new departure, its subjects were raised to
an increasing height from the ground where before it had been flatly
treated. Thenceforward the embroidery became lumpy as the heraldry
became weak, and both were alike inartistic until comparatively
recently, until in fact it began to be again recognized that the
mediaeval artists were right, that the right way to use a material was
the natural way and not in attempting to make it resemble something
else. At the time referred to it seems to have been thought that the
more embroidery was made to look like a coloured relief and the less
like embroidery the better embroidery it was, and therefore the lions,
for example, were stuffed up and raised as high as possible and the
whole effect became coarse and clumsy, an effect that was largely
contributed to by the inferior design.

The costliness of embroidery helped the introduction of painted
banners, which in time, assisted by the decay of embroidered as
of other decorative arts, superseded the needlework. However, the
inferiority of the painted banner was always recognized, and although
even the banners of the Knights of the Garter had come to be done in
the cheaper method, that which hung over the stall of the Sovereign
continued to be embroidered, as it is to this day. The present banner
is beautifully worked, and is on the correct lines of flat design.

In painted banners, usually of silk, the material is strained in a
frame, by means of laces passed through tapes sewn to the edges, and
the design being drawn or pounced on it, is carefully gone over with
size, which fills the interstices of the silk, and when dry forms an
excellent surface for the subsequent gilding and painting in oils.

There can be no doubt, however, that embroidery, now that it has so
brilliantly revived, is the method of all others in which modern
banners should be executed, and if this were recognized there need
be no lack of opportunity. Among others the trumpet banners of the
Sheriffs who every year are appointed to the respective counties, are
used to display their arms during the year of office, and afterwards,
their official life being ended, are frequently made into screens for
domestic use. It is in this connexion that their method of production
becomes of especial importance. Their somewhat tawdry and incongruous
appearance is quickly felt, and they soon disappear into the retirement
that they merit.

The banners of the City Companies would better decorate their venerable
halls if fashioned in beautiful needlework, and when they were carried
in the procession on Lord Mayor’s Day would impart a gleam of real
splendour into that properties-in-daylight pageant. The painted banners
could still serve for bad weather flags.

[Illustration: FIG. 232.--Bed Cover, Flemish Work. Victoria and Albert
Museum.]

In modern heraldic embroidery the design is the weak point, but
improvement would certainly follow the study of good early work
and also of good examples of other decorative methods if they were
intelligently adapted to the materials employed. The purpose and
character of the object must influence the work, and considerations of
weight and substance affect the making of a banner, which is to wave
and flow, at least to some extent that would not need to be insisted on
in a framed panel. Not that the treatment need be wholly flat, like
the diagrammatic shield of an early roll of arms, for it may well
have such definition of the charges as are seen on the Black Prince’s
surcoat; also the complete form of an object may be sufficiently
suggested without the employment of methods more suitable to another
material. Thus, it is not particularly difficult to indicate that a
thing is round without making it as round as possible.

[Illustration: FIG. 233.--Design for Lace. Arms of Frederick II, King
of Denmark. From the pattern-book of the Duchess of Brunswick.]

LACE.--Although heraldry does not appear to have been so extensively
practised in lace as in other forms of needlework, it is still used to
a considerable extent, and generally as a device that is introduced as
a personal detail in a large pattern.

Among the few examples of heraldic lace at South Kensington are a piece
of English needlepoint and the bedcover of Flemish work in which the
double-headed eagle is well done (Fig. 232), which will repay study,
and serve to explain the method of this kind of work.

The method of making the preliminary designs for lace is set forth in
the pattern-books which began to be produced in the sixteenth century,
and of which very interesting examples are extant. The lace design,
Fig. 233, is from a book of patterns which belonged to the Duchess
of Brunswick and is now in the National Art Library of the Victoria
and Albert Museum, and represents the arms of Frederick II, King of
Denmark. It has the usual characteristics of the German heraldry of its
time.




CHAPTER XI

Some Miscellaneous Charges


 ANNULET.--A simple ring, as in the mark of cadency of a fifth son,
 Fig. 295, p. 288. A ring in which a precious stone is mounted is
 called a gem-ring, and an interesting example occurs in one of
 the badges of the Medici, Fig 234; another Medici badge has three
 gem-rings interlaced.

[Illustration: FIG. 234.--Badge of Medici from Dialogo dell’ imprese,
1559.]

 BARNACLES OR BREYS.--An instrument that was used to control a restive
 horse by exerting pressure on his nostrils. They are represented as in
 Fig. 235, or open as in Fig. 236. (_See also_ Geneville, Fig. 223, p.
 248.)

[Illustration: FIG. 235.]

[Illustration: FIG. 236.]

 BATTERING-RAM.--A siege weapon consisting of a heavy beam headed like
 a ram and having hooks or other means of fastening the chains by which
 it was supported and swung. Figs. 237 to 239 are some of its forms.
 When difference of tincture requires it is said to be headed, or
 armed, and garnished of these appliances. Sometimes the term purfled
 is used for garnished. One of the best known examples is the coat of
 Bertie: _Az._ three battering rams barways in pale ppr. headed and
 garnished, az.

[Illustration: FIG. 237.]

[Illustration: FIG. 238.]

[Illustration: FIG. 239.]

 BUCKLES.--Being important part of military equipment were frequently
 employed as charges or as badges in allusion to battle occurrences
 or other notable events. Thus the Badge of the Pelhams commemorates
 the capture of King John of France at the Battle of Poictiers. Buckles
 afford some scope for decoration, as in Fig. 240, a fifteenth century
 example from Westminster Abbey.

[Illustration: FIG. 240.]

[Illustration: FIG. 241.]

 BUGLE HORN.--This, the most frequent of the charges derived from the
 Chase, forms an interesting subject for decorative treatment, in its
 possible grace of line and in the ornamental character of its details.
 It is usually shown as if suspended from a knotted or twisted cord, of
 which it is _stringed_, though it is occasionally hung from a flatter
 form of baldric. Its garnishings, mouth-piece, rim rings, etc., are
 usually gold (Fig. 241).

[Illustration: FIG. 242.]

[Illustration: FIG. 243.]

[Illustration: FIG. 244.]

 CHAPLET.--A wreath of leaves or of flowers and leaves. In the
 latter the flowers are usually four in number (Fig. 242). When a
 “chaplet” without further qualification is mentioned, a severely
 conventionalized form is sometimes employed, consisting of a ring
 with four flower bosses, as Fig. 243. _See_ Garland. A chaplet of oak
 is called a civic crown (Fig. 244), and one of laurel a triumphal
 crown.

 CHESS-ROOK (Fig. 245).--This is probably the result of a mis-reading
 of roc, the coronal of a tilting spear. It is always represented with
 the cleft shape of the latter and never as a castle, the usual form of
 chess-rook.

 CINQUE-FOIL (Fig. 246).--A five membered leaf, or conventional flower
 of five petals.

[Illustration: FIG. 245.]

[Illustration: FIG. 246.]

[Illustration: FIG. 247.]

 CLARION.--A combination of musical pipes in a hand case, the Syrinx
 or Pan-pipe. It is of frequent occurrence in the heraldry of the
 Middle Ages and in a large variety of more or less elaborate forms,
 one of which is here represented (Fig. 247). It is sometimes called
 a rest, with the suggestion that it represents the piece fixed on a
 breast-plate as a support for the tilting spear, but this appears to
 be extremely improbable.

 CLOUDS occur as bordures and other ordinaries in various interesting
 conventional forms and also as points from which emerge arms and other
 objects. Ordinaries composed of clouds in this way are blazoned
 nebuly equally with the more simplified nebuly line. There are many
 examples of this treatment of which Fig. 72, p. 57, will give an idea
 of a bordure nebuly, as it appears in one of the representations at
 the Heralds College of the arms of the Mercers Company.

[Illustration: FIG. 248.]

 COCKATRICE.--A wyvern-like monster with a cock’s head, as in the many
 sixteenth century drawings of the arms of the City of Basle, to which
 it was a supporter under its other name of Basilisk, as in Fig. 248,
 part of a drawing by Holbein.

 CORONETS.--Crown and coronets other than those of rank, already
 described, may be considered as of two kinds, and are of purely
 symbolic import.

[Illustration: FIG. 249.]

 Crowns (including coronets) used as charges, are generally those that
 are more accurately described as heraldic crowns, that is, those which
 have no allusion to specific rank, but are emblematic in various other
 ways. The coronet of decorative leaves set on a rim and sometimes
 called a crest coronet (Fig. 249) is thus borne as a charge in the
 arms of some of the Companies of London in allusion to events in which
 kings have been concerned. When, however, a specifically Royal Crown
 appears it is usually as an Augmentation by special grant from the
 Sovereign. A fine example of crowns and their distribution as charges
 on a shield is Fig. 250, from the tomb of Prince Edmund of Langley, at
 Kings Langley, Herts. The arms are those ascribed to St. Edmund.

[Illustration: FIG. 250.--Shield from the tomb of Prince Edmund of
Langley. Early Fifteenth Century.]

 Other heraldic crowns are the mural crown, representing a fortified
 wall (Fig. 251), and the naval crown, composed of sails and sterns of
 ships (Fig. 252), and both are at the present time restricted with
 care, in the cases of new grants or augmentations, to circumstances in
 which their obvious symbolism applies.

[Illustration: FIG. 251.]

[Illustration: FIG. 252.]

[Illustration: FIG. 253.]

 The mural crown is usually composed in our heraldry of the simple
 crenellations shown in the example. Abroad, however, a more elaborate
 and picturesque form occurs in the form of a castellated wall showing
 three towers at intervals.

[Illustration: FIG. 254.]

[Illustration: FIG. 255.]

 The crown vallery is intended to represent palisades, as in Fig. 253,
 and when the palisades are more definite and are fastened to the rim
 instead of rising out of it, the crown is palisado instead of vallery
 (Fig. 254).

 The Eastern crown, sometimes called an antique crown, is formed of
 five straight rays (Fig. 255), and when in addition there is a star
 on each point it becomes a celestial crown.

 CRESCENT.--This charge, beautiful as it appears in the badges
 connected with Henry II of France and Diana of Poitiers, has come
 to be drawn clumsily as to look more like a biscuit with a bite out
 of it than a graceful shape derived from the crescent moon. When it
 is simply described as a crescent it always has its points upwards,
 and it becomes a decrescent if they point to the sinister, and an
 increscent when they are pointed to the dexter. Still rarer as a
 charge than these latter is the full moon, and when she thus occurs
 she is blazoned a Moon in her Plenitude. It is understood that the
 proportionate thickness of a crescent may be any that is felt to be in
 harmony with the general character of the design that accompanies it.

 ESCALLOP SHELL.--This beautiful charge, with its radiating lines
 within its outline, appears to have been specially connected with the
 Crusades as the pilgrim’s badge, as such being sewn on to the cloak
 or hat. Later the shells so worn were sometimes elaborately painted
 in the manner of the illuminators, in memory of the pilgrimage. The
 escallop is especially associated with St. James, and so frequently
 occurs in Spanish decoration such as that of the House of the Shells,
 Saragossa, the whole front of which is semée of escallops in high
 relief.

 Also, an old writer says: “The shell thereof is the fairest instrument
 that can be, being of nature’s making, which for the beauties sake is
 put in the collars of Saint Michael’s Order.”

 ESTOILE.--A star of six wavy points.

[Illustration: FIG. 256.]

 ESCARBUNCLE (Fig. 256).--Is derived from the strengthening bands of
 the shield which the mediaeval metal worker’s decorative instinct
 made into beautiful ornament even as it did the hinges of a door. The
 metal plates radiating from the central boss of the shield terminated
 in foliated forms of great beauty, the fleurs-de-lis of the present
 charge, while the hollow ring in the centre enabled it to fit over the
 boss. Many beautiful examples exist of this piece of armour become the
 Badge of Anjou, worn by Henry II.

[Illustration: FIG. 257.]

 FOUNTAIN (Fig. 257).--The symbol of a spring of water, is a roundle
 barry, wavy argent and azure, wavy lines having been emblematic
 of water from time immemorial. Its occurrence in the arms of Lord
 Stourton (Sable a bend or between six fountains) is very interesting
 as an example of heraldry of which the meaning is well understood. In
 the admirable account given by Mr. Fox Davies in _The Art of Heraldry_
 he points out that the manor of Stourton on the borders of Wilts and
 Somerset obtained its name from the river Stour which rises within
 the manor. The sources of that river are six wells which exist in a
 tiny valley in Stourton Park, which is still called Six Wells Bottom.
 When Leland wrote in 1540 to 1542 the whole six were in existence
 (some have since disappeared), for he wrote: “The ryver of Stoure
 risith ther of six fountaynes or springes, whereof 3 be on the northe
 side of the Parke, harde withyn the Pale, and other 3 be northe also
 but withoute the Parke. The Lorde Stourton giveth these 6 fountaynes
 yn his Armes.” In addition, not only were three springs inside the
 park and three outside, but also three were in Wiltshire and three in
 Somerset. The appropriateness of three fountains on either side of the
 ordinary is therefore manifest. Would that all heraldic origins were
 equally clear!

[Illustration: FIG. 258.]

 FYLFOT (Fig. 258).--A symbolic figure which appears to have been used
 from the remotest antiquity and round which much literature has been
 written in common with its Indian form, the Swastica. Its presence in
 heraldry is probably to be ascribed to mere copying from some eastern
 example, though even thus a symbolic meaning may have been ascribed to
 its cross-like form, or perhaps some one of the transmitted meanings
 may even have been known.

 It occurs in the arms of Sir Wm. Kellaway in a “Copy of an antient
 roll of Arms,” in the Heralds’ College.

 In Japan it is well-known as the Mon or badge of the Matsudaira family.

 HAMMER.--In heraldry both the workman’s hammer, emblematic of
 industry, if it have no more definite symbolism, occurs as well as the
 military _martel-de-fer_. Examples of both are given in Figs. 259 and
 260. Another instance of the first is in the Arms of the Blacksmiths
 Company of London, Sa a chev. Or between three hammers Arg. handled
 and ensigned with crowns gold; and with this is their swinging motto,
 “By hammer and hand all arts do stand.”

[Illustration: FIG. 259.]

[Illustration: FIG. 260.]

 HAWK’S BELLS AND JESSES.--The bells are of the globular kind (Fig.
 261), and jesses are the leather straps by which they were secured to
 the falcons’ legs. Also attached to the jesses were pieces of metal,
 called vervels, that were stamped with the owner’s monogram or badge.

 HAWK’S LURE.--A bird’s wing that was attached to a cord by means of
 which it was thrown in the air in order to attract the falcons to
 hand. Its usual shape as a charge is as in Fig. 262.

[Illustration: FIG. 261.]

[Illustration: FIG. 262.]

[Illustration: FIG. 263.]

 HEMP-BRAKE OR HACKLE.--An instrument for bruising hemp. Its best known
 heraldic example is as the badge of Sir Reginald Bray (Fig. 263), the
 architect to Henry VII, for whom he built the magnificent Chapel in
 Westminster Abbey and completed St. George’s Chapel at Windsor. The
 badge is now used by Lord Bray, who is descended from Sir Reginald’s
 brother.

[Illustration: FIG. 264.]

[Illustration: FIG. 265.]

[Illustration: FIG. 266.]

[Illustration: FIG. 267.]

 KNOTS.--A form of badge that is composed of one or more cords or
 straps twisted into open knots and used to symbolize the bond of a
 vow. The best known, perhaps, is the Stafford knot (Fig. 264), which
 from being the badge of the Earls of Stafford has been appropriated by
 many institutions connected with that county. The Heneage knot, also
 on a single line, is Fig. 265, and is sometimes accompanied by the
 motto, “Fast though untied,” and Fig. 266 is the Bowen knot of four
 bows. Fig. 267 is from among the devices on the robe of the effigy
 of Anne of Bohemia on her tomb at Westminster Abbey, and is thought
 by Boutell to convey the idea of a monogram. He also sees in the Wake
 and Ormond knot (Fig. 268) the initials W and O entwined. A modern
 attempt was made to form a monogram of the silken tags represented as
 depending from the seal shape of the bookplate (by C. W. Sherborn,
 R.E.) of the celebrated J. Robinson Planché, Dramatist and Somerset
 Herald.

[Illustration: FIG. 268.]

[Illustration: FIG. 269.]

[Illustration: FIG. 270.]

[Illustration: FIG. 271.]

 The Bouchier knot is Fig. 269, and Boutell mentions a Bouchier badge
 formed of the knot tied to a coudiere or elbow piece, as from a
 monument in Westminster Abbey.

 The Dacre knot is less a knot than a badge, consisting of an escallop
 shell linked by a cord with a ragged staff or a billet (Fig. 270). In
 the same way a sickle and a garb are tied together in the badge of
 Lord Hastings, and are suggestive of the way in which initial letters
 of names were linked with each other and with badges in the splendid
 pageants of the sixteenth century.

 The Lacey knot is shown at Fig. 271.

 LOZENGE.--Fig. 272.

[Illustration: FIG. 272.]

[Illustration: FIG. 273.]

[Illustration: FIG. 274.]

 MANCHE OR MAUNCHE.--A severely conventionalized form of a sleeve,
 derived from the actual sleeve which was worn at a tournament, as a
 ladies’ favour, floating from the shoulder of a favoured knight. The
 illustrations are from the fifteenth century seal of Lord Hastings
 (Fig. 273), and from a MS. of the following century relating to the
 same family (Fig. 274).

 MULLET.--A five-pointed star-like figure whose name is derived from
 Mollette, the rowel of a spur (Fig. 293).

 PALL.--An heraldic figure which occurs in the arms of certain
 Archbishoprics, being indeed a representation of the Pallium, which is
 an especial vestment of an Archbishop. Mr. Everard Green, Rouge Dragon
 Pursuivant, has fully dealt with this in an admirable monograph which
 is among the Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries, from which it
 appears certain that the pall is not the arms of a particular see, but
 is an ensign of the ecclesiastical rank of an archbishop.

 PHEON.--The head of a dart, the so-called broad arrow of Government
 stores. It usually has its inner edges engrailed, but this is not
 essential any more than are the rigidly straight lines with which
 it is generally drawn. There are many other forms in early use that
 are much more satisfactory, such as Fig. 275, which is from an early
 sixteenth century MS. The pheon is understood to be point downwards as
 in the example, unless it is otherwise described.

[Illustration: FIG. 275.]

 ROUNDELS.--Circular charges whose names differ according to their
 tincture. Thus a roundel or is supposed to be a flat piece of gold
 and is called a Bezant after Byzantium. A roundel arg. is a Plate; a
 roundel gules is a Torteau; the Hurt is azure; the Pellet or Ogress is
 sable; the Pomme is vert. Ancient armorists also mention Golpes, which
 are purpure; Guzes, sanguine; and Oranges, tenné; but these are not
 actually used in English heraldry. Another roundel, called a Fountain,
 is barry-wavey arg. and az., and is further alluded to under its name
 (Fig. 250). The use of the heraldic names of the various roundels
 is not obligatory, however, their description by tinctures, like
 other charges, being equally correct. They are frequently themselves
 charged and may be of ermine or other fur, and be treated in every
 way as other flat spaces. Their treatment in relief or otherwise is
 largely a matter of taste, and whether a roundel be treated as flat
 or globular must depend on the character of the surrounding work. The
 frequently made suggestion that bezants and plates, being derived
 from flat objects, should always be flat, while others should always
 be globular, would often be awkward if carried out in practice,
 especially in sculpture; and even if the derivations be correct, a
 roundel as a circular object without other qualification is just as
 conceivable as a roundel derived from a coin. Suitability to the
 general design seems to be the governing factor here as elsewhere.

[Illustration: FIG. 276.]

[Illustration: FIG. 277.]

 PORTCULLIS.--A strong grille for the protection of a fortified
 gateway. It was made of heavy beams securely clamped together and shod
 with iron, and is represented with the chains on either side by which
 it was suspended. The example (Fig. 276) is from the Chartulary of
 Westminster Abbey, where it forms part of the painted decoration of
 the MS. as one of the favourite badges of Henry VII. It has given a
 name to one of the pursuivants of arms, and as part of the armorials
 of the city of Westminster is one of the most familiar charges.

 QUATREFOIL (Fig. 277).--A four-leaved charge, derived from clover or
 from a four-petalled flower.

 SHAKEFORK (Fig. 278).--An unusual charge which occurs in the Arms of
 Cunningham.

[Illustration: FIG. 278.]

[Illustration: FIG. 279.]

[Illustration: FIG. 280.]

 SPADE.--Emblematic of agriculture and industry. It is of great variety
 of form. Figs. 279 and 280 are fifteenth and sixteenth century forms
 of these implements, which were usually of wood shod with iron, as in
 the examples.

[Illustration: FIG. 281.]

[Illustration: FIG. 282.]

 SPEAR.--Is usually described as a tilting spear, and when its shaft is
 without swell as a javelin. It is regarded as the emblem of manhood,
 as the distaff is the symbol of womanhood. As usually depicted,
 without the vamplate, it appears as in Fig. 281; but there is no
 reason against representing the plate in addition if it is thought
 desirable. Although the tilting spear was most frequently used with
 the blunted head, the coronel or roc, it is almost always represented
 heraldically with a sharp spear point. The shaft is sometimes
 parti-coloured, or else grooved into flutings as it was in actual use.
 In some cases these grooves were so large and deep as to result in
 a form of the girder principle by which great lightness and strength
 were obtained. The Arms of Shakespeare, granted in 1546, are: Or on a
 bend Sable a spear Gold.

 SPURS.--As the peculiar symbol of knighthood are naturally of frequent
 occurrence as charges. They are given star-shaped rowels unless the
 more ancient form with a single point is intended, and it is then
 blazoned a Prick Spur.

 “The Spurs ben given to a knight to signify diligence and swiftness.”

 SRUTTLE.--Another name for winnowing fan (Fig. 282).

[Illustration: FIG. 283.]

[Illustration: FIG. 284.]

[Illustration: FIG. 285.]

 SWORD.--Is sometimes borne in allusion to St. Paul, as it is in the
 Arms of the City of London. Unless otherwise described, a straight
 sword with a cross hilt, an arming sword as it was sometimes called,
 is understood. Its position--that is to say, the direction of the
 blade--whether pale, wise or fesswise, and where there are more swords
 than one, their relative positions and the direction of their points
 are duly stated.

 TREFOIL (Fig. 283).--Is always represented with a stalk, as in the
 example, but the term slipped is always included in the blazon
 nevertheless. The form of the charge is usually as given, but in rare
 instances it appears as in Fig. 284, which is from a fifteenth century
 MS. in the Heralds’ College.

 WATER BOUGET.--This, like the maunche, is an instance of the
 conventionalization of an actual thing into a shape that bears but
 remote likeness to the original form. Although there are instances
 in which its derivation from water carriers, its undoubted origin,
 is more nearly suggested, its heraldic form was clearly established
 in the fourteenth century, chiefly in connexion with the family of
 Bourchier, which furnished so many persons of note to mediaeval
 history.




CHAPTER XII

Marks of Cadency


[Illustration: FIG. 286.]

[Illustration: FIG. 287.]

In order to distinguish the various members of a family among
themselves certain additions to the shield called marks of cadency are
employed; and in the earliest days of the heraldic system a son charged
the arms that he derived from his father with such a mark of difference
as he thought fit and effectual, but by the middle of the fourteenth
century some amount of regularity was arrived at, and by the end of the
sixteenth century the present method had become usual. In this system
the eldest son is distinguished by a file or label of three points,
which consists of a horizontal part from which depend the lambeaux
(Fig. 286 _et seq._). Its origin is extremely obscure, and whether it
represents the points of garments, or tongues or labels threaded on
a cord, no one can say with certainty. It seems probable that it may
have originally been a favour or distinction whose history and original
significance have been lost. The effigy at Artois of Charles Count
d’Eu has a label which passes round the shoulders, exactly as other
collars did, and consists of large labels charged with castles and
suspended from what appears to be a narrow cord (Fig. 288).

[Illustration: FIG. 288.]

[Illustration: FIG. 289.]

[Illustration: FIG. 290.]

On a shield the label is borne in chief and passes over any charges
that may be in that part of the arms. In early examples the pendant
parts are wider than the rest, in some cases much wider, as in the
Garter Plate of Gaston de Foix, Comte de Longueville and Captal de
Buch, whose label is charged with a complete coat of arms repeated
on each point, a cross charged with five escallop shells, which are
the arms of John de Grielly, a previous Captal de Buch who married
Blanche de Foix. In later times the points of labels were widened at
the ends as in Fig. 289, a form which in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries had become as squat and ugly as the still common type (Fig.
290). In ordinary cadency the label which extends from side to side
of the shield is no longer used, being reserved for members of the
Blood Royal, and a shortened form takes its place in ordinary coats
of arms. Distinctions of cadency are provided to the number of nine,
and no regular provision is made beyond the ninth son; not because
others are to go undifferenced, but because in old heraldic treatises
great importance is ascribed to that mystic figure 9. There were
nine tinctures (including the rare colours tenné and sanguine), nine
ordinaries, nine partitions, or methods of displaying charges with
ordinaries, and so forth. The differences are as follows:--

  The eldest son      a label.
      second  ”       a crescent.
      third   ”       a mullet.
      fourth  ”       a martlet.
      fifth   ”       an amulet.
      sixth   ”       a fleur-de-lis.
      seventh ”       a rose.
      eighth  ”       a cross moline.
      ninth   ”       a double quatrefoil.

[Illustration: FIGS. 291-299.]

A mark of cadency is borne on any part of a coat that may be found
most suitable for its conspicuous display, but always in such a manner
that it may not be mistaken for a charge. It is generally placed
somewhere in chief or sometimes in the centre of the shield, and its
colour may be any that is well seen. Bossewell says (1572): “Every
difference ought to be placed in the moste evidente part of the coat
armour, videlicit, in the place where the same maie soonest be scene or
perceived.” And another early writer indicates the distance at which
a difference should be easily perceived on a banner or other flag as
eighteen yards.

The sons of the eldest son bear each his own difference charged upon
the label of his father, and in similar manner the sons of the second
son of the head of the family charge their differences on their
father’s crescent, and so forth. As marking the degree of nearness to
the headship of the family such distinctions are disused or changed
as circumstances dictate, but in some cases a second or other junior
son continues to use his difference after his father’s death in order
to prevent confusion with his elder brother who has in due course
succeeded to the undifferenced coat, and in spite of the inevitable
clashing with the second son of that elder brother, who would also
bear a crescent for difference. Such a method of distinguishing
“Houses” as well as sons would, of course, become impossible in a very
few generations, and this points to the superiority of the mediaeval
method of differencing as well as to what is the principal weakness of
modern heraldry in England as a system, namely, the want of distinction
between the branches of a family. That, however, is more a matter for
the scientific herald. The mark of cadency may be placed on the crest
as well as on the arms, but it is not commonly done, except when the
crest is used alone.

It should be noted here that though daughters (other than Princesses
of the Blood) do not difference their arms personally, for they rank
equally among themselves, they do bear their father’s difference so
long as he bears it.

When by impalement or other means the individuality of the bearer is
sufficiently pointed out, marks of cadency are frequently considered
to be redundant, and are therefore omitted; but their inclusion is
preferable.

Royal cadency follows a method apart, and when arms are assigned by
the Sovereign to the various members of the Royal Family, as is done
by warrant on their arrival at full age, the proper individual mark
of cadency is assigned at the same time. At the present day it always
takes the form of a label; which is plain for the Prince of Wales, and
charged in some distinctive manner for other members of the Blood Royal.

The labels of the other living Princes and Princesses to whom arms have
been assigned are as follows: and it should be noted that all these
various labels are Argent. The Princess Royal (Duchess of Fife) bears
over the Royal Arms a label of five points charged with three crosses
gules alternating with two thistles ppr.

The Princess Victoria differences her arms with a label of five points
charged with three roses alternately with two crosses gules.

The Princess Maud (Queen of Norway) bears a label of five points
charged with three hearts and two crosses gules.

The Duke of Connaught has a label of three points, charged on the
centre point with St. George’s Cross and on each of the others with a
fleur-de-lis Azure.

The Princess Christian, of Schleswig-Holstein, bears a label of three
points, the centre of which is charged with St. George’s Cross and each
of the others with a rose gules.

The Princess Louise (Duchess of Argyll) bears a label of three points,
the centre point charged with a rose, each of the others with a canton
gules.

The Princess Beatrice (Princess Henry of Battenberg) bears a label
of three points, the centre one charged with a heart and each of the
others with a rose.

In Royal Achievements the labels are charged on the crest and
supporters as well as the arms, and in these positions are usually
couped at the ends, though there is no reason why they should be so;
on the contrary, remembering that these figures are “in the round” it
would be preferable to follow the ancient usage.

A further distinction from the arms of the Sovereign is made by
substituting for the Imperial Crown, which is borne on the heads of the
lion crest and supporter and also encircles the throat of the unicorn,
the coronet which is proper to the personage concerned.




INDEX


              PAGE

  ACCESSORIES, 139

  ACHIEVEMENTS, 16, 19

  ALDEGREVER, 34

  ALEXANDER FIRST, SEAL OF, 66

  ALLOA HOUSE, SHIELDS AT, 113, 114, 115, 157, 161, 217, 219

  ALTAR FRONTAL, 250

  AMMAN, JOST, 35, 108

  AMORINI, 144

  ANGELS, 144

  ANIMALS as crests, 127;
    and monsters, 66;
    on flags, 257;
    on the bardings of horses, 257

  ANNE OF BOHEMIA, DEVICE KNOT OF, 278

  ” OF BRITTANY, 116, 212

  ” COUNTESS OF DEVON, SEAL OF, 140

  ” QUEEN, 108

  ANNULET, 267, 288

  ANSELM, DOM, 40

  ANTHONY DE BEC, SEAL OF, 98

  ARCHITECTURAL HERALDRY, 204

  ARGENT, 44

  ARGYLL, DUKE OF, 155

  ARMORIAL ACCESSORIES, 139

  ” GARMENTS, 3

  ARMOUR, 123

  ARUNDEL, CORONET OF THE EARL OF, 154

  ASSYRIAN LION, 80

  ATTENUATION, 67

  AUGMENTATIONS, 6

  AZURE, 44


  BADGES, 141

  BANNERS, 28, 69;
    of the Garter, 255;
    painted, 262

  BAR, 50

  BARNACLES, 268

  BARONET, 156;
    of Nova Scotia, 156

  BARONET’S HELMET, 129

  BARON’S cap, 154;
    coronet, 154

  BARRY, 47

  BARS-GEMELLE, 50

  BASLE, ARMS OF, 271

  BASSET, LORD, OF DRAYTON, 20

  BASSETAILLE ENAMEL, 178

  BATH, the Order of the, 16;
    insignia of various ranks, 163

  BATON, 52

  BATTERING-RAM, 268

  BEAUMONT, SIR EDMUND, ARMS OF, 238

  BEDCOVER, LACE, 264

  BEDFORD, DUKE OF, 85

  BEHAM, HANS SEBALD, 34, 35

  BELLS, 277

  BEND, 51

  BENDLET, 52

  BEND-SINISTER, 52

  BENDY, 48

  BERKELEY, ARMS OF, 64

  BERTIE, ARMS OF, 268

  BEZANT, 281

  BIBLE, 70

  ” WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL, 164

  BILL, 197

  BIRDS, 89

  BIRMINGHAM, CITY OF, 52

  BLACK PRINCE, THE, 8, 75;
    surcoat, 102, 248

  BLACKSMITHS’ COMPANY, ARMS OF, 277

  BLAZON, 15, 38, 54, 75

  BLOIS, BADGES AT, 205

  BOAR, 232

  BOLT-PLATE, 192

  BORDURE, 59

  BOTTICELLI, SANDRO, 261

  BOURCHIER, LOUIS ROBSART, LORD, 17

  ” KNOT, 279

  BOWEN KNOT, 278

  BRASS, MONUMENTAL, 184

  BRAY, SIR REGINALD, BADGE OF, 277

  BREWYS, SIR JOHN DE, BRASS OF, 184

  BRITTANY, BADGE OF, 205

  BRONZE MORTAR, 188

  BRUNSWICK, DUCHESS OF, 265

  BUCKLES, 268

  BUGLE HORN, 269

  BULLA OF GOLD OF HENRY VIII., 149

  BUONAMICI, 31

  BURGES, 13, 226

  BURGUNDY, CHARLES, DUKE OF, 251

  BUTLER, SIR JAMES, ARMS OF, 238

  BYRON, ARMS OF, 52


  CADENCY, 286

  CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY, ARMS OF, 70

  CANTON, 58

  CAP OF MAINTENANCE, 155

  CARNARVON, LORD, 146

  CAST IRON, 185

  CAXTON, 4

  CEILINGS, 213

  CELLINI, 180

  CENTAUR, 95

  CEREMONIAL SHIELDS, 9, 29;
    structure of, 30

  CHAMPLEVÉ ENAMEL, 171

  CHAPLET, 269

  CHARGES, 50;
    flat and in relief, 29;
    their arrangement, 61

  CHARLES I., GREAT SEAL OF, 74

  ” II., GREAT SEAL OF, 110

  ” V., EMPEROR, ARMS OF, 192

  ” COUNT D’EU, EFFIGY WITH LABEL, 287

  ” THE BOLD, 251

  CHEQUEY, 48

  CHESS-ROOK, 270

  CHESTER, CITY OF, 83

  CHEVRON, 52

  CHIEF, 52

  CHIMNEY PIECES, 212

  CHIVALRY, THE ORDER OF, 4

  CHOICE OF TREATMENT, 7, 19

  CINQUE PORTS, 83, 84

  CINQUEFOIL, 270

  CISTERN, LEAD, 200

  CIVIC CROWN, 270

  CLARENCE, DUKE OF, 109

  CLARION, 270

  CLEMENT VII, POPE, 240

  CLEOBURY, W. T., 238

  CLOISONNÉ ENAMEL, 181

  CLOUDS, 270

  COCK, 79, 92

  COCKATRICE, 271

  COLLAR, of the Order of the Garter, 158;
    of St. Patrick, 162;
    of the Thistle, 160;
    of the Bath, 162;
    of Toison d’Or, 193

  COLOURS OF MANTLING, 137

  COMPONY, 49

  CORONETS, 271;
    crest coronet, 271;
    mural crown, 273;
    naval crown, 273;
    crown vallery, 273;
    crown palisado, 273;
    eastern crown, 273;
    celestial crown, 274

  CORONETS, ROYAL, 152

  ” OF PEERS, 153

  COTISE, 51

  COUNTERCHANGE, 49

  COUNTER-COMPONY, 49

  COUNTER-POTENT, 46

  COUNTER-VAIR, 46

  COUPED, 54, 84

  CROSSES, 96

  CROSS, 5, 53;
    bottonée, 100;
    couped, 54;
    calvary, 97;
    crosslet, 99;
    crosslet-fitchy, 99;
    fleuretté, 97;
    flory, 97;
    furchée, 101;
    interlaced, 53;
    moline, 97;
    nowy, 54;
    parted and fretty, 53;
    patonee, 97;
    patée, 99;
    pomell, 100;
    potent, 101;
    quadrate, 54;
    quarter pierced, 54;
    recercelée, 99;
    tau, 101;
    urdée, 100;
    voided, 53

  CREST, 37, 118;
    ceremonial use, 118;
    difficulties in treatment, 130;
    dragon’s head, 127;
    of the Black Prince, 126;
    panache, 125;
    tourney crest, 136

  CRESTS OF QUEENS REGNANT, 37

  CRESCENT, 192, 274, 288

  CROWN, Imperial, 148;
    of Henry V., of Henry VIII., of Charles II., 148;
    Georgian, 149

  CRUSADES, 2

  CUTWORK, 261


  DACRE KNOT, 279

  DAMASCENING, 198

  DANCETTÉE, 56

  DAY, LEWIS F., 240

  DEMI-LIONS, 83

  DERBY, COUNTESS OF, 146

  DEVICES AT ALLOA HOUSE, 220, 221

  DIANA DE POITIERS, BADGE OF, 192

  DIAPERING, 110

  DIMIDIATION, 83

  DISTRIBUTION, PLANS FOR, 82, 91

  DIVISION OF THE FIELD, 47

  DOLPHIN, 93

  DONATELLO, 189

  DOVETAILED, 56

  DRAGON OF CADWALLADER, 182, 183

  DRAGON’S HEAD CREST, 127

  DUKE’S CORONET, 153

  DÜRER, 31, 32, 34, 79


  EAGLES, 89;
    plan for distribution, 91

  EAGLE of the Emperor, 90;
    of the Holy Roman Empire, 146;
    of Prussia, 146;
    on lock-plate, 190

  EARL’S CORONET, 154

  EASTERN INFLUENCE ON HERALDRY, 6

  EDMOND BEAUFORT, DUKE OF SOMERSET, SEAL OF, 141

  EDMUND, PRINCE, OF LANGLEY, 60, 90, 272

  EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE, 8, 75

  ” THE CONFESSOR, 92

  ” I, 3

  ” II, 59

  ” III, 29, 62, 68, 140

  ” IV, 29

  ELEANOR, QUEEN, 3

  ELECTROTYPE, 202

  ELIZABETH, QUEEN, 107, 109

  ELIZABETHAN DECORATION, 36

  EMBATTLED, 56

  EMBROIDERY, 246

  EMBROIDERED ARMS, 252

  ” BADGES, 250

  ENAMEL, 170;
    Bassetaille, 178;
    Champlevé, 171;
    Cloisonné, 181;
    designs and drawings, 180;
    “Limoges enamel,” 177;
    plique-a-jour, 180

  ENGLAND, ARMS OF, 8, 69, 75, 83

  ENGRAILED, 56

  ENGRAVING, DECORATIVE, 196

  ENHANCED, 52

  ERASED, 84

  ERIC, KING OF SWEDEN, ARMS OF, 253

  ERMINES, 44

  ERMINOIS, 44

  ERSKINE, HENRICUS DE, 113

  ESCALLOP SHELL, 274

  ESCARBUNCLE, 275

  ESTOILE, 275

  ESQUIRE’S HELMET, 129

  ETCHED DECORATION, 200


  FALCON, 91

  FESS, 50

  FIELD, THE, 41

  ” OF THE CLOTH OF GOLD, GOLD SEAL OF TREATY, 149

  FIREBACKS, 185

  FISH, 93

  FISHMONGERS’ COMPANY, 94

  FITZALAN, EARL OF ARUNDEL, 154

  FITZJAMES, 37

  FLANCHES, 61

  FLANDERS, ARMS OF, 252

  FLASQUES, 61

  FLEURS-DE-LIS, 101

  FLORENCE, ARMS OF, 103

  FLORENTINE HERALDRY, 35

  ” SHIELD, 112

  FLOWERS, 5

  FOREIGN INFLUENCE, 11

  FOSTER’S PEERAGE, 40

  FOUNTAIN, 275;
    lead, 201

  FRANCE, ARMS OF, 8, 62

  FREDERICK II, ARMS OF, 265

  FRENCH CHÂTEAUX, 205

  FRIEZES, 209

  FROISSART, 27

  FUSIL, 58

  FYLFOT, 276


  GALLERY OF THE VYNE, 212

  GARBS, 84

  GARLANDS, 5

  GARTER, the, 156, 158;
    collar of the, 107;
    Knight of the, 20;
    order of the, 136, 158

  GARTER PLATES, 35

  GASTON DE FOIX, 136, 287

  GENEVILLE, ARMS OF, 248

  GEORGE THE LESSER, ORDER OF THE, 158

  GERATTING, 62

  GERMAN HERALDRY, 78;
    Gothic influence in, 78

  GESSO, 18, 214;
    its preparations, 215;
    use, 116;
    Cennino Cennini, 215

  GILBERT, ALFRED, 109

  GLAIVE, 197

  GLOUCESTER, DUKE OF, 29

  GOAT, 85

  GOBONY, 49

  GODMANCHESTER, SEAL OF, 103

  GOLDEN FLEECE, 193, 251

  GOLDSMITHS’ COMPANY, ARMS OF, 85

  GOLPES, 281

  GOTHIC LIONS, 76

  ” REVIVAL, 12

  ” WORK, 17

  GOUTTÉ D’OR, ETC., 62

  GREAT GEORGE, THE, 158

  ” SEALS, 17, 110, 140

  GREEK SYMBOLIC FIGURES, 21

  GREEN, EVERARD, 238, 280

  GREYHOUNDS, 140

  GRIELLY, ARMS OF, 287

  GRIFFIN OR GRYPHON, 87

  GROCERS’ COMPANY, 133;
    arms of, 64

  GULES, 44

  GUTTÉE, 62

  GUZES, 281

  GYRON, 58

  GYRONNY, 47


  HALBERD, 198

  HAMMER, 276

  HAMPTON COURT, 147, 214

  HARPS, 108

  HARPY, 93

  HAWK’S bells and jesses, 277;
    lure, 277

  HELM, 117;
    ceremonial use, 118;
    development of form, 119;
    its structure, 120

  HELMET, 122;
    as a sign of rank, 128

  HEMP-BRAKE, 277

  HENEAGE KNOT, 278

  HENRY V, 106, 140;
    Great Seal of, 17, 18, 20

  ” V, 17, 18, 29, 35;
    chantry, 146

  ” VI, ARMS OF, 236

  ” VII, 11, 106, 158;
    badge of, 282;
    tomb, 182

  ” II OF FRANCE, ARMS OF, 192

  ” PRINCE OF WALES, 35

  ” SON OF SWANUS, SEAL OF, 66

  HERALDRY, origin of, 1;
    eastern influence, 6;
    foreign influence on, 11;
    Gothic influence, 10, 11;
    Italian influence, 12

  HERALDIC QUALITIES, 20

  ” SHORTHAND, 55

  ” ANTELOPE, 84

  ” TIGER, 84

  HINGE WITH LIONS, 191

  HOLBEIN, 12, 243

  HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, EAGLE OF, 146

  HORSE, 85, 230

  HUMAN FIGURES, 94;
    arms, 95;
    hands, 95;
    heads, 95

  HURT, 281


  ILLUMINATIONS, 164;
    methods, materials, 164

  IMPALING, 61

  IN FESS, ETC., 63

  IN ORLE, 62

  INDENTED, 56

  INESCUTCHEON, 58

  INSIGNIA OF ORDERS, 156

  INTERIOR DECORATION, 210

  INVECTED, 56

  IRELAND, arms of, 110;
    Great Seal for, 110

  IRISH HARP, 108

  ISABELLA OF FRANCE, 59

  ITALIAN GLASS PAINTING, 240

  ” INFLUENCE, 78

  ” SHIELDS, 30, 31, 35


  JACOBEAN DECORATION, 36

  JAMB, 84

  JAMES I, 107, 109;
    arms of, 254

  JANE SEYMOUR, QUEEN, 150

  JAVELIN, 283

  JESSES, 277

  JOHN, DUKE OF ARGYLL, 155

  ” EARL OF MAR, K.T., 161

  ” KING OF FRANCE, 268

  ” LORD ERSKINE, 114

  ” PRINCE, OF ELTHAM, 50, 176


  KATHERINE, QUEEN OF FRANCE, 192

  KELLIE, DEVICE FOR EARLDOM OF, 220

  KEYS, 194

  KNIGHTS helmet, 129;
    of orders, 144;
    supporters of, 144;
    other insignia, 156

  KNOTS, 278

  KRESS, 34


  LABEL, 286

  LABORDE, COMTE DE, 105

  LACE, 265

  LACEY KNOT, 279

  LADIES, ARMS OF, 36

  LAMBREQUINS, 127

  LANCASTER ROSE, 106

  LEEDS UNIVERSITY, CREST OF, 94

  LEIGH, GERARD, 87

  LELAND, 275

  LEVEN AND MELVILLE, LORD, 217

  “LIMOGES” ENAMEL, 177

  LINES, VARIOUS, 56

  LIONS, 66;
    Assyrian 80;
    head, 84;
    leg, 84;
    Renaissance, 78

  LOCK-PLATES, 189

  LOUIS VII, 102

  ” XII, 155, 205;
    badge of, 212;
    medal of, 116

  LOZENGE, 58

  ” SHIELD, 36

  LOZENGY, 48

  LUROQUES, ARMS OF, 30


  MALATESTA, 106

  MALE-GRIFFIN, 88

  MANTLING, 127, 134, 208;
    colour treatment of, 137;
    rules for various ranks, 137

  MAR AND KELLIE, EARL OF, 219

  MARGARET CAMPBELL, LADY, 114

  ” OF ANJOU, 236

  MARKS OF CADENCY, 288

  MARQUIS’S CORONET, 153

  MARTEL-DE-FER, 276

  MARTELLI, ARMS OF, 189

  MARTLET, 92

  MARY, QUEEN, 107

  MAUNCHE, 280

  MECKENEN, ISRAEL VAN, 31

  MEDAL WITH DIAPERING, 116

  MEDIAEVAL TREATMENT, 6

  MEDICI, BADGE OF, 267

  MERMAID, 94

  METAL WORK, 181

  MODELLED ARMS, 157

  MON OF MATSUDAIRA FAMILY, 276

  MONSTERS, 66

  MONUMENTAL BRASSES, 184

  MOON, 274

  MORTAR, BRONZE, 188

  MOTTO SHIELD, 30

  MOWBRAY, 141

  MULLET, 280


  NEBULÉE, 56

  NEPTUNE, 95

  NIELLO, 198

  NIXON, FORBES, 40

  NORFOLK, DUKE OF, 141

  NORREYS, BADGE OF SIR JOHN, 236


  OCKWELLS MANOR, STAINED GLASS AT, 236

  OGRESS, 281

  OR, 44

  ORANGES, 28

  ORDINARIES, 51;
    proportion of, 51

  ORIGIN OF HERALDRY, 1

  ORIGINALITY, 13

  ORLE, 59

  ORMONDE, MARQUIS OF, 87

  OXFORD UNIVERSITY, ARMS OF, 202


  PAINTED BANNERS, 262

  PALE, 52

  PALL, 280

  PALY, 48

  PANACHE CREST, 125

  PAN-PIPE, 270

  PARTY LINES, 47

  ” PER PALE, ETC., 47

  PAVOISE, 26

  PEACOCK, 4, 92

  PEAN, 44

  PEER’S HELMET, 129

  PELHAM, 5

  ” BADGE, 268

  PELICAN, 92

  PELLET, 281

  PENICAUD, NARDON, ENAMEL BY, 177

  PENNON, 255

  PER PALE, ETC., 47

  PERCY, HENRY DE, 68

  ” SHRINE, 111

  PHEON, 280

  PHILIP II, 102

  PHŒNIX, 73

  PILE, 54

  PIRCKHEIMER, 34

  PLANCHÉ, J. ROBINSON, 279

  PLANTS, 5

  PLATE, 281

  PLIQUE-A-JOUR ENAMEL, 180

  POINTS OF THE FIELD, 41

  POITIERS, BATTLE OF, 5

  POKER WORK, 37, 217

  POMME, 281

  PORTCULLIS, 282

  POSE OF ANIMALS, 70

  POTENT, 46

  POTENTY, 56

  POWDER-HORN, 196

  POWELL, JOHN, 13, 226

  PRICK SPUR, 284

  PROPORTION, 16, 19;
    of ordinaries, 51

  PUGIN, 13, 226

  PURPURE, 44

  PYROGRAPHY, 37, 217


  RAGULY, 56

  RALPH NEVILLE, EARL OF WESTMORELAND, SEAL OF, 140

  RENAISSANCE HERALDRY, 9, 10

  ” SHIELDS, 27

  ” WORK, 17

  REPOUSSÉ BUCKLER, 195

  RIBBON, 52

  RICHARD, EARL OF CONNAUGHT, 91

  ROBERT, KING OF NAPLES, 105

  ROBSART, 17

  ROLLS OF ARMS, 2

  ROMAN SCULPTURE, 21

  ROMAN SHIELDS, 35

  ROMPU, 56

  ROSES, 106

  ROUNDEL, STAINED GLASS, 151;
    from Netley Abbey, 236

  ROUNDELS, 281

  ROYAL ARMS, 37, 38, 146, 227, 236

  ” BANNER, 69

  ” CADENCY, 153, 290

  ” CORONETS, 152

  ” CREST, 233

  ” CROWNS, 148, 149, 150;
    official type, 150

  ROYAL HELMETS, 129

  ” MANTLING, 138


  SABLE, 44

  SAGITTARIUS, 95

  ST. ALBAN’S ABBEY, SHIELDS FROM, 35

  ST. EDMUND, ARMS ASCRIBED TO, 272

  ST. GATIEN CATHEDRAL, SHIELD IN, 33

  ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, CROWNS ON, 148

  ST. JAMES, 274

  ST. PATRICK, THE ORDER OF, 162

  SALTIRE, 53

  SANDWICH, SEAL OF, 84

  SAVAGE MEN, 95

  SCHEMES OF DECORATION, 217

  SCHONGAUER, MARTIN, 28, 31

  SCOTLAND, ROYAL ARMS OF, 38

  SCOTTISH ROYAL CROWN, 148

  SCULPTURE, 147, 208

  SEAL, 84, 98, 103, 109, 139, 149

  SEALS, 67, 140, 141

  SEGRAVE, JOHN DE, SEAL OF, 139

  SEMÉE, 62

  SGRAFFITO, 209

  SHAKESPEARE, ARMS OF, 284

  SHERBORN, C. W., 279

  SHIELD BEARING MOTTO, 30;
    construction, 23;
    foliated, 33, 36;
    shapes, 32, 33, 34, 36

  SHIELDS, 21, 28;
    ceremonial use of, 28;
    “for Peace,” 28, 29;
    Norman, 22, 23, 25, 26;
    ridged, 27, 28;
    square, 25;
    triangular, 24, 25, 35

  SHIPS, 83

  SHOVEL, ADM. SIR CLOUDESLEY, 5

  SOLIS, VIRGIL, 35

  SOMERSET, SEAL OF THE DUKE OF, 141

  SPADE, 282

  SPEAR, 283

  SPHINX, 94

  SPURS, 284

  SRUTTLE, 284

  STAFFORD KNOT, 278

  STAG, 85

  STAINED GLASS, 151, 223

  ” DESIGNS AND DRAWINGS, 225

  STANDARD, 255

  STARS OF ORDERS, 160

  STEPHEN, KING, 95, 120

  STOURTON, LORD, 275

  SUB-ORDINARIES, 58

  SUPPORTERS, 139

  SWAN, 4

  SWISS PAINTED GLASS, 240

  SWORD, 284

  SYMBOLISM, 4

  SYON COPE, 247

  SYRENA, 94

  SYRINX, 270


  THISTLE, THE ORDER OF THE, 160

  TILTING SPEAR, 283

  TINCTURES, 42

  TOISON D’OR, BADGE OF, 251

  TORREGIANO, 11, 182

  TORSE, 127

  TORTEAU, 281

  TOURNAMENTS, 2, 27, 118

  TOURNEY HELM, 123

  TREASURE, 59

  TREFOIL, 284

  TRICK, SKETCHES IN, 55

  TRITON, 95

  TRUMPET BANNERS, 261

  TUDOR HERALDRY, 10, 226

  ” ROSE, 107


  ULSTER BADGE, 96

  UNICORN, 230

  UNION BADGE, 260

  ” JACK, 258


  VAIR, 45

  VALENCE, WILLIAM DE, 63, 126

  VELLUM, 164

  VERT, 44

  VERVELS, 277

  VICTORIA, QUEEN, 37

  VISCONTI, ARMS OF, 195

  VISCOUNT’S CORONET, 154

  VOIDERS, 61


  WAKE AND ORMOND KNOT, 279

  WALES, CORONET OF THE PRINCE OF, 153

  WARWICK, EARL OF, ARMS OF, 237

  WATER BOUGET, 285

  WAVY, 56

  WELDON, W. H., ESQ., C.V.O., 178

  WESTMORELAND, EARL OF, SEAL, 140

  WHEATSHEAVES, 84

  WIDOWS, ARMS OF, 36

  WILLIAM DE VALENCE, 63, 126

  ” LORD HASTINGS, SEAL OF, 141

  ” OF SENS, 11

  WILLIMENT, J., 12

  WINCHESTER CATHEDRAL, BIBLE, 164

  WINNOWING FAN, 284

  WOLSEY, ARMS OF CARDINAL, 147

  WOOD-CARVING, 211

  WREATH, 269

  WYVERN, 88


  YORK ROSE, 106




INDEX TO ILLUSTRATIONS


  PAGE

  ALTAR FRONTAL, 250

  AMORINI, 145, 147, 209, 211, 218

  ANGEL, 140

  ANNE OF BOHEMIA, KNOT, 278

  ” OF BRITTANY, MEDAL, 116

  ANNULET, 267, 288

  ANTELOPES, “HERALDIC”, 237

  ARCHBISHOP’S HAT, 194

  ARMOUR, 184

  ARMS, imaginary, 218;
    in trick, 55

  ” of Cambridge University, 71;
    of City of London, 88;
    of Edward the Confessor, 229;
    of Erskine, 113, 115, 157;
    of Goldsmiths’ Company, 86;
    of Grocers’ Company, 64;
    of Prince John of Eltham, 60, 77;
    of Kress (German), 136;
    of Oxford University, 202;
    of Pope Paul III, 210

  ASSYRIAN BAS-RELIEF, 81


  BADGE, EMBROIDERED, 251

  ” of Diane de Poitiers, 192;
    of Louis XII, 206;
    of Medici, 267;
    of Toison d’Or, 86, 87;

  BADGES, 29, 136, 213

  BALANCES, 86

  BANNERS, 242

  BARDINGS, 18

  BARNACLES, 268

  BARRY, 47

  BASILISK, 271

  BASLE, ARMS OF, 271

  BATTERING-RAM, 268

  BEAUMONT, ARMS OF SIR E., 239

  BEND, 51, 137

  BENDY, 48

  BILL, ENGRAVED, 197

  BILLET, 278

  BOAR, 232

  BOOK, 71, 202

  BOOKPLATE, by Dürer, 95, 136;
    German, 94

  BORDURE, 57, 59, 60

  BOUCHIER KNOT, 279

  BOWEN KNOT, 278

  BOWS, 192

  BREYS, 268

  BRONZE MORTAR, 188

  ” SHIELD, 189

  BUCKLE, 269

  BUCKLES, 86, 174

  BUGLE HORN, 95, 269

  BULLS, 219

  ” HEAD, 140

  BURGUNDY, ARMS OF, 251, 252

  BURNT WOOD PANEL, 218

  BUTLER, ARMS OF SIR JAMES, 239


  CADENCY MARKS, 288

  CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY, ARMS OF, 71

  CANTING COAT OF ARMS, 94

  CANTON, 59

  CAP, EMBROIDERED, 249

  CAR, PAGEANT, 86

  CARDINAL’S HAT, 147

  CASTLE, 137

  CASTLES, 171

  CEILING BOSSES, HAMPTON COURT, 214

  CHAMPLEVÉ ENAMEL, 171, 174, 176

  CHAPLET, 269

  CHARLES, COUNT D’EU, EFFIGY, 287

  CHARLES II, GREAT SEAL, 110

  ” IV, SEAL AS EMPEROR, 92

  CHEQUEY, 48

  CHESS-ROOK, 270

  CHEVRON, 53

  CHIEF, 51

  CINQUEFOIL, 270

  CISTERN, 200

  CITY OF LONDON, ARMS OF, 88

  CIVIC CROWN, 269

  CLARION, 270

  CLEMENT VII, ARMS OF POPE, 241

  COCK, 79

  COCKATRICE, 271

  COLLAR of the Garter, 149;
    of the Thistle, 161;
    of the Toison d’Or, 193

  COLUMBINE, 237

  COLUMNS, 193

  COPPER PANEL, SILVERED, 202

  CORNISH CHOUGH, 147

  CORONET, 195;
    crest, 271;
    of an earl, 219;
    of the Prince of Wales, 153

  CORONETS, 202

  COUNTER-VAIR, 46

  CRESCENT, 288

  CRESCENTS, 192

  CREST, 88, 94, 95, 136, 184, 220, 237, 239, 244;
    enamelled, of W. H. Weldon, Esq., 179;
    panache, 125, 135;
    various treatments, 132

  CRESTS, 145, 196

  CROSS, 53, 88, 265

  ” calvary, 97;
    couped, 54;
    crosslet, 99;
    crosslet fitchée, 99, 115, 157, 161, 219;
    engrailed, 147;
    fleuretté 97;
    flory, 97, 229;
    formée, 99;
    Maltese, 99;
    moline, 97, 98, 288;
    nowy, 54;
    patée, 99;
    patonee, 97;
    quadrate, 54;
    quarter pierced, 54;
    voided, 53;
    voided and interlaced, 53

  CROWN, 89, 136, 137, 186, 187, 192, 193, 194, 201, 211, 218, 227,
    233, 242;
    official type, 151;
    of a King of Arms, 179;
    palisado, 273;
    Tudor, 149, 151;
    vallery, 273

  CROWNS, 272, 273;
    embroidered, 253, 254

  CUPID, 218

  CUPS, 86


  DACRE KNOT, 279

  DAUPHINY, SEAL OF, 93

  DECORATION SHIELD, ITALIAN, 30, 31

  DEVICE SHIELDS, 220, 221

  DIANE DE POITIERS, BADGE, 192

  DIAPER, 115, 157, 161, 218, 206

  DIAPERED medal, 116;
    shield, 112, 113, 115

  DOGS, 95

  DOLPHIN, 200

  DOLPHINS, 93

  DONATELLO, SHIELD BY, 189

  DOUBLE quatrefoil, 288;
    badge, 229

  DRAGON, 86, 89, 183, 186, 187, 229

  DRAGONS, 88

  DÜRER, ALBRECHT, 79, 86, 87, 95, 136, 137

  ” pageant car by, 86;
    school of, 136


  EAGLE, 86, 136, 141, 239

  ” double-headed, 90, 190, 193, 197;
    lace, 264;
    of the Emperor, 90;
    plan for distribution on shield, 91

  EAGLES, 92, 201

  EARL’S CORONET, 219, 220, 221

  EASTERN CROWN, 273

  EDWARD THE CONFESSOR, ARMS OF, 229

  ELEANOR, QUEEN, CLOAK CLASP, 171

  EMBROIDERED BADGE, 251

  ” LINEN, 250

  EMBROIDERY, 248, 254

  ENAMEL BY NARDON PENICAUD, 177

  ” CHAMPLEVÉ, 171, 174, 176

  ” LIMOGES, 177, 179;
    plate for, 174

  ENAMELLED CLOAK CLASP, 171

  ” SHIELD, 176

  ENGLAND, ARMS OF, 9

  ENGRAVED DECORATION, 8, 197, 199

  EQUESTRIAN FIGURE, 206

  ” SEAL, 18

  ERIC XIV, KING OF SWEDEN, ARMS OF, 253

  ERMINE, 44

  ” BADGE, 213

  ERSKINE, ARMS OF, 113, 115, 157, 161

  ESCALLOP, 278

  ESCARBUNCLE, 275


  FEATHERS, 29, 267;
    peacocks’, 136

  FESS, 51, 137

  FIREBACK, 186, 187

  FIREPLACE, CHÂTEAU DE BLOIS, 213

  FLAGS, 259

  FLANCHES, 61

  FLEURS-DE-LIS, 9, 60, 77, 89, 93, 102-5, 141, 151, 191, 192, 200,
    201, 214, 237, 239, 288;
    embroidered, 249, 251, 252

  FLORENTINE GLASS DECORATION, 241

  FOUNTAIN, 275

  FRANCE, ARMS OF, 9

  FREDERICK II OF DENMARK, ARMS OF, 265

  FRIEZE IN SGRAFFITO, 209

  FYLFOT, 276


  GARBS, 139

  GARTER, 227

  ” COLLAR, 149

  GARTERED SHIELD, 157

  GATEWAY, CHÂTEAU DE BLOIS, 206

  GESSO, 220, 221

  ” SHIELDS, 161, 219

  GLAIVE, 197

  GODMANCHESTER, SEAL OF, 103

  GOUTTEE, 62

  GREAT SEAL OF CHARLES II, 110

  GREYHOUND, 187

  GREYHOUNDS, 140

  GRIFFIN, 189, 221;
    seated, 87

  GRIFFINS, 86

  GRILLE OF HENRY VII’S CHAPEL, WESTMINSTER, 183

  GRIMM, ARMS OF, 94

  GROCERS’ COMPANY, ARMS OF, 64

  GYRONNY, 47, 115


  HALBERD, ENGRAVED, 199

  HAMMER, 277

  HARP, 108, 109, 227

  HAWK’S BELLS AND JESSES, 278;
    lure, 278

  HEART, ENFLAMED, 218

  HELM, 119;
    tilting, 121;
    tourney, 124;
    crest for tourney, 136

  HELMET, 18, 31, 79, 86, 88, 94, 119, 121-5, 135, 136, 137, 140, 141,
    145, 179, 184, 196, 218, 220, 237, 239, 244

  HEMP-BRAKE, 278

  HENEAGE KNOT, 278

  HENRY VI, ARMS OF, 237

  ” VII BADGE, 183

  ” VIII PRIVY SEAL OF, 89

  HERALDIC ANTELOPES, 237

  ” SLAB, 145

  ” TIGER, 141

  HINGE WITH LIONS, 191

  HOLBEIN, 271

  HOLY GHOST, 242

  HORNS, 95

  HORSE, 229

  HOUNDS, 95

  HUMAN FIGURE, 94, 95, 184, 189, 195, 196, 244

  HUMAN FIGURES, 86, 145, 209, 211, 218


  IMAGINARY ARMS, 218

  IRON WORK, 190, 191, 192, 193


  JAMES I, ARMS OF, EMBROIDERED, 254


  KEYS, 194;
    papal, 210

  KNOTS, 278, 279


  LABEL, 286, 287, 288

  LACE, 264, 265

  LACEY KNOT, 279

  LASSO DE CASTILLA, ARMS OF DON PERO, 137

  LEAD CISTERN, 200

  ” FOUNTAIN, 201

  LEOPARD’S FACE, 147

  ” FACES, 86

  LETTERING, 220, 221

  LETTERS, 256

  “LIMOGES” ENAMEL, 177, 179

  LINES, VARIOUS, 56

  LION, 89, 137, 186, 188, 220, 233

  ” Assyrian, 81;
    passant, 67, 75, 147;
    passant guardant, 9, 18, 60, 68, 71, 77, 141;
    rampant, 66, 67, 68, 72, 79, 137, 139, 140;
    rampant guardant, 72;
    rampant regardant, 72, 89;
    salient, 72;
    sejant, 76

  LIONS, 9, 18, 60, 89, 151, 184, 227, 237, 239, 242, 243;
    conjoined with ships, 84;
    embroidered, 248-54;
    faces of, 137;
    heads of, 137;
    in enamel, 171, 174;
    lace, 265;
    on hinge, 191;
    plans for distribution on shields, 83, 89, 137

  LOCK-PLATE, 191;
    with eagle, 190

  LONDON, CITY OF, ARMS, 88

  LOUIS XII MEDAL, 116

  LOZENGE, 279

  LOZENGES, 48

  LYMPHAD, 115


  MAN, SAVAGE, 94, 95

  MANTLING, 79, 88, 94, 95, 135, 136, 137, 179, 220, 237, 244

  MAR AND KELLIE, ARMS OF THE EARL AND COUNTESS OF, 219

  MARTLET, 229, 288

  MAUNCHE, 141, 280

  MAXIMILIAN I, EMPEROR, 86, 87

  MEDAL WITH DIAPER, 116

  MEDALS, ITALIAN, 93

  MEDICI BADGE, 267

  MEMORIAL BRASS, 184

  MITRE, 243

  MONOGRAM, 221

  MORTAR, BRONZE, 188

  MOTTOES, 30, 64, 86, 88, 184, 202, 218, 220, 221, 233, 237, 239,
    256, 267

  MULLET, 288

  MURAL CROWN, 273;
    decoration, 64, 86


  NAVAL CROWN, 273

  NEBULÉE, 57


  OCKWELLS GLASS, 237, 239

  ORLE, 59

  OSTRICH FEATHERS, 267


  PAGEANT CAR, part of, 86

  PALE, 51, 115, 157, 161, 219

  PALE, DIAPERED, 113

  PALLETS ON A CHEVRON, 69

  PALY, 48

  PANACHE CREST, 125, 135

  PANEL BY DONATELLO, 104

  ” IN CHISELLED IRON, 193

  ” IN COPPER, 71

  PAN-PIPE, 270

  PAPAL keys, 210;
    tiara, 210

  PARTED AND FRETTY, 53

  PAUL III, ARMS OF POPE, 210

  PAVOISE, 26

  PELICAN, 93

  PER BEND, 47

  ” CHEVRON, 47

  ” FESS, 47;
    indented, 239

  ” PALE, 47, 49

  ” SALTIRE, 47

  PHEON, 281

  PHŒNIX, 93

  PILE, 54

  PISANO, MEDAL BY, 93

  PLATE PREPARED FOR ENAMEL, 174

  POINTS OF THE SHIELD, 41

  POKER WORK, 218

  PORCUPINE, 206, 213

  PORTCULLIS, 282

  POTENT, 46

  POWDER-HORN, 196

  PRINCE OF WALES’ CORONET, 153

  PRINTER’S MARK, HERALDIC, 94

  PYROGRAPHY, 218


  QUARTERLY, 47

  QUATREFOIL, 282


  REPOUSSÉ SHIELD, 195

  ROSE, 107, 147, 288;
    irradiated, 107

  ROSES, 49

  ROUNDLES, 241

  ROYAL ARMS, 9, 18, 60, 77, 89, 149, 186, 187, 211, 214, 227, 237

  ” CREST, 233


  ST. EDMUND, ARMS OF, 272

  SALTIRE, 53, 140

  SAVAGE MAN, 94, 95

  SCALES, 86

  SCULPTURED ARMS, 147

  SEAL, Gold Bulla of Henry VIII, 149;
    of Anne, Countess of Devon, 140;
    of Anthony de Bec, Bishop of Durham, 98;
    of Charles IV, 92;
    of Dauphin, 93;
    of Edmond Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, 141;
    of Henry IV, 18;
    of John de Segrave, 139;
    Privy, of Henry VIII, 89;
    of Ralph Neville, Earl of Westmoreland, 140;
    of Sandwich, 84;
    of Sigismund, 92;
    of William Lord Hastings, 141;
    Segrave Seal, 149

  SERPENT, 89, 195;
    nowed, 256

  SGRAFFITO FRIEZE, 209

  ” PANEL, 210

  SHIELD, 88, 89, 94, 95, 136, 137, 237, 239, 244;
    bronze, by Donatello, 189;
    cusped, fifteenth and sixteenth century, 32;
    decoration, 30, 31;
    diapered, 112, 113, 115;
    embroidered, 253;
    from the tomb of Prince Edmund of Langley, 90;
    in enamel, 176;
    in gesso, 161, 219;
    Italian, 145, 210;
    of the Black Prince, 9;
    points of, 41

  SHIELDS AT ALLOA HOUSE, 113, 115, 157;
    decorated, 33, 34, 36;
    derived from the tournament form, 33;
    fourteenth century, 24;
    heater shape, 24, 25;
    in gesso, 113, 115, 157, 220, 221;
    Norman, 22;
    ridged, 27, 28;
    square, 25;
    tournament, 26, 33

  SHIP, 115

  SHIPS, CONJOINED WITH LIONS, 84

  SNAKE, 89, 195

  SPADE, 283

  SPEAR, TILTING, 283

  SRUTTLE, 283

  STABIUS, ARMS OF, 136

  STAFFORD KNOT, 278

  STAINED GLASS, 227, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 235, 237, 239, 241, 242,
    243, 244

  STANDARD, 256

  SUPPORTERS, 86, 88, 89, 140, 141, 145, 186, 187, 196, 211, 209, 211;
    royal, 237

  SWAN, 234

  SWORD, 88, 136

  SYON COPE, ARMS FROM, 248

  SYRINX, 270


  TALPAS, MEDAL BY, 93

  THISTLE COLLAR, 161

  TIARA, PAPAL, 210

  TIGER, HERALDIC, 141

  TILTING HELM, 121;
    spear, 283

  TINCTURES, 44

  TOISON D’OR BADGE, 86, 87, 251;
    collar, 193

  TORSE, FLORENTINE, 134

  TOURNAMENT COLLAR, 287

  TOURNEY HELM, 124

  ” HELM AND CREST, 136

  TREFOIL, 256, 284

  TRESSURE, 59, 219

  TRICKED ARMS, 55

  TSCHERTTS, ARMS OF, 95

  TUDOR CROWN, 140


  UNICORN, 86, 231

  UNION JACK, 259


  VAIR, 45, 151;
    ancient form of, 46

  VARIOUS LINES, 56


  WAKE AND ORMOND KNOT, 279

  WARWICK, ARMS OF THE EARL OF, 236

  WATER BOUGET, 284

  WEIDLITZ, HANS, 94

  WELDON, W. H., CREST OF, 179

  WILLIAM DE VALENCE SHIELD, 176

  WINGS, 94;
    dragons’, 88

  WINGS CONJOINED IN LURE, 151

  WINNOWING FAN, 283

  WIRSUNG, ARMS OF, 94

  WOLSEY, CARDINAL, ARMS OF, 147

  WOOD-CARVING, 211

  WYVERN, 94




Transcriber’s Note:

Minor errors and omissions in punctuation, hyphenation, and
capitalization have been fixed.

Some words with potential alternative spellings were left as in the
text, including jowlopped, marygold, spandrils, Poictiers, applique,
and gouttee.

Page 55: Three instances of non-Unicode shapes have been designated
by [Shape]. [Shape 1] is similar to an Greek lambda (Λ), but obtuse.
[Shape 2] is a circle with a dot in the middle and five lines radiating
from it. [Shape 3] is a cross with three arcs on the top.

Page 58: “displaying an augumentation” changed to “displaying an
augmentation”.

Page 62: “known as guttee or goutee” changed to “known as guttée or
gouttee”.

Page 99: “patée or formee” changed to “patée or formée”.

Page 100: “Cross Pomell” changed to “Cross Pommel” in the Fig. 118
caption.

Page 106: “Maltesta in Italy” changed to “Malatesta in Italy”.

Page 111: “like the semé” changed to “like the semée”.

Page 119: “more or less cylindical” changed to “more or less
cylindrical”.

Page 173: “Champlévé is usually” changed to “Champlevé is usually”.

Page 216: “in this way car” changed to “in this way care”.

Page 279: “J. Robinson Planche” changed to “J. Robinson Planché”.

Index entry spellings were changed to match the spelling in the text:

Page 295: “furchee” in the index changed to “furchée”.

Page 295: “botonée” in the index changed to “bottonée”.

Page 295: “Durer” in the index changed to “Dürer”.

Page 296: “French chateaux” in the index changed to “French châteaux”.

Page 298: “Lambriquins” in the index changed to “Lambrequins”.

Page 298: “Nebulee” in the index changed to “Nebulée”.

Page 298: “Ogresse” in the index changed to “Ogress”.

Pages 299, 307: “Earl of Westmorland” in the index changed to “Earl of
Westmoreland”.

Page 304: “crosslet fitché” in the index changed to “crosslet
fitchée”.

Page 304: “patonce” in the index changed to “patonee”.

Page 305: “Chateau de Blois” in the index changed to “Château de Blois”
in two places.

Page 297, 305: “Gyrony” in the index changed to “Gyronny”.

Page 306: “saliant” in the index changed to “salient”.



*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HERALDRY AS ART: AN ACCOUNT OF ITS DEVELOPMENT AND PRACTICE, CHIEFLY IN ENGLAND ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    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.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.