Rationale of Heraldic Charges, etc.
(Arms of the See of Chichester)
“The Formes of the pure celestiall bodies mixt with grosse terrestrials; earthly animals with watery; sauage beasts with tame; whole-footed beasts with diuided; reptiles with things gressible; fowles of prey with home-bred; these again with riuer fowles; aery insecta with earthly; also things naturall with artificiall; arts liberall with mechanicall; military with rusticall; and rusticall with ciuil. Which confused mixture hath not a little discouraged many persons—otherwise well affected to the study of Armory—and impaired the estimation of the profession.”Guillim.
“The Formes of the pure celestiall bodies mixt with grosse terrestrials; earthly animals with watery; sauage beasts with tame; whole-footed beasts with diuided; reptiles with things gressible; fowles of prey with home-bred; these again with riuer fowles; aery insecta with earthly; also things naturall with artificiall; arts liberall with mechanicall; military with rusticall; and rusticall with ciuil. Which confused mixture hath not a little discouraged many persons—otherwise well affected to the study of Armory—and impaired the estimation of the profession.”
Guillim.
Dictionariesof the technical terms employed in heraldry are so common, and the elements of the science so well explained in various popular treatises,[83]that it would be impertinent in an essay like the present to go into all the detailsusually comprised in those useful books of reference. Still it may interest the general reader, and will, I trust, give no offence to adepts in the science, if I offer a few observations on this subject, with illustrations from our old writers, adding some etymological conjectures of my own.
The origin of the expression ‘a coat of arms’ we have already seen, as also the cause why heraldric ensigns are borne upon a shield. Shields have been made of every imaginable shape according to the taste of the age or the fancy of the bearer, with these two restrictions, that the shields of knights-bannerets must be square, and those of ladies in the form of a lozenge. The most usual, because the most convenient, shape is that which is technically called theheater-shield—from its resemblance to the heater of an iron—with some slight variations. Our friend Sylvanus Morgan, whose ingenuity all must admire, in defiance of the oft-quoted proverb:
“When Adam digged and Eve span,Who was then the Gentleman?”
deduces this shape for men, and that of the lozenge for women, from thespadeof Adam, and thespindleof Eve!
The ground or field of every coat of arms must be either of metal, colour, or fur. TheMETALSof heraldry are, Or==gold, and argent==silver, and as the shield of war was antiently of metal, either embossed or enamelled, the retention of the two precious metals as the field of an escocheon is easily accounted for. TheCOLOURSare gules, azure, vert, purpure, sable, tenne, and sanguine. While some of these terms are French; others, though coming to us through that medium,are originally from other languages.Gules, according to Ducange, isgoulis,guelle,gulasiveguella, the red colour of the mouth or throat of an animal. Mackenzie derives it from the Hebrewgulude, a piece of red cloth, or from the Arabicgule, a red rose.Ghulin the Persian signifies rose-coloured, andGhulistanis ‘the country of roses.’ It is probably one of those importations from the East which the Crusades introduced, both into the elements of armory and the nomenclature of the science. It was sometimes calledvermeil[84](vermilion) androuget. An antient knight is represented as bearing a plain red banner without any charge:
“Mais Eurmenions de la BretteLa baniere euttoute rougecte.”[85]
The barbarous termblodiuswas likewise occasionally used to express this colour.
Azure==light-blue, is a French corruption of the Arabic wordlazurorlazuli. The lapis lazuli is a copper ore, very compact and hard, which is found in detached lumps, of an elegant blue colour, and to it the artist is indebted for his beautiful ultra-marine. This colour, still one of the dearest of pigments, was antiently in great request, and called ‘beyond-sea azure.’[86]The lapis lazuli is found in Persia, Bucharia, and China.
Vert(French) is light green. This word was applied atan early period “to every thing,” says Cowell, “that grows and bears agreenleaf within the forest that may cover and hide a deer.” Vert and venison, in the vocabulary of woodcraft, were as inseparable as shadow and substance.To vertsignified to enter the forest, as in an old song of the thirteenth century:
“Sumer is i-cumen in,Lhude sing cuccu;Groweth sed and bloweth med,And springeth the wde nu.Sing Cuccu, Cuccu!Awe bleteth after lomb,Lhouth after calvé cu,Bulluc sterteth,BuckeVERTETH,Murie sing Cuccu,” etc.
This colour was antiently calledsynople, and in the Boke of St. Albanssynobylt, a word which Colombiere derives from the Latinsinopis, a dyeing mineral,[87]or from Synople, a town in the Levant, whence a green dye was procured.
OfSablethe derivation is very uncertain. It seems unlikely to have been taken from the colour of the diminutive animal now known by this name, first, because it wouldthen rank under the category offurs; and, secondly, because that animal is far from black. Indeed, the best sable is of a light brown or sand colour. Dallaway quotes a line, however, which might be adduced in support of this derivation:
“Sables, ermines, vair et gris.”
Guillim derives it fromsabulum, gross sand or gravel, but this seems very improbable, although I have nothing better to substitute. It is curious that ‘sable’ and ‘azure’ should have been selected from the ‘jargon’ of heraldry for poetical use, to the exclusion of other similar terms:
“By this the drooping daylight ’gan to fade,And yield his room to sad succeeding night,Who with hersablemantle ’gan to shadeThe face of earth, and ways of living wight.”Faerie Queen.“Thus repliesMinerva, graceful, with herazureeyes.”Pope.
Purpure(purple) is not common in English armory: still less so are thestainantor disgraceful colours,Tenny(orange) andMurrey, which Dr. Johnson defines as “darkly red,” deriving it through the Frenchmorée, and the Italianmorello. The fine cherry designated by this last word is, when ripe, of the exact colour intended by murrey. Bacon says, “Leaves of some trees turn a littlemurrey, or reddish;” and “a waistcoat ofmurrey-coloured satin” occurs in the writings of Arbuthnot.
By these terms were the arms of gentlemen described; but for the arms of nobility they were not sufficiently lofty. These were blazoned by the precious stones, astopazfor yellow,rubyfor red, &c. For the arms of princes it was necessary to go a step higher, namely, to the heavenly bodies,Sol,Luna,Mars, &c. Sir John Ferne enumerates several other sets of terms, in all thirteen, which he classifies thus: 1, planets; 2, precious stones; 3, vertues; 4, celestiall signes; 5, months; 6, days of the week; 7, ages of man; 8, flowers; 9, elements; 10, sesons of the yeer; 11, complexions; 12, numbers; 13, mettailes. What would those who are disgusted with the ‘jargon’ of our science say to such blazon as the following?—
He bearethSunday, a lion rampantTuesday.He bearethFaith, a wolf salientLoyalty.He bearethMarigold, a bear passant,Blue Lily, muzzledWhite Rose.He beareth,Infancy, three grasshoppersVirility.He beareth,Melancholy, three asses’ heads,Flegmatique!
I must confess that, in the course of my heraldric reading, I have never met with blazon of this singular description, but Ferne assures his reader that it may be his fortune “to light upon such phantasticall termes,” and he gives an historical and philosophical account of their origin. So recently as the last century the planets and gems were used in royal and noble armory, but of late good taste has limited blazon to the first-mentioned and most simple set of terms in all cases.
Thefursare ermine, ermines, erminois, erminites, pean,vair, and potent counter-potent. They are all said to be indicative of dignity. In armorial painting their effect is very rich.Ermine, which may be taken as the type of the five first mentioned, is represented by three spots placed triangularly, and three hairs in black upon a white ground. It is intended to represent the black tail of a species of weasel fixed upon the white skin of the animal. Guillim[88]gives a coat, containing sixwhole ermines, as represented in the margin. Sir G. Mackenzie informs us that “the first user of this fur in arms was Brutus, the son of Silvius, who having by accident killed his father, left that unhappie ground, and travelling in Bretaigne in France, fell asleep, and when he awoke he found this little beast upon his shield, and from that time wore a shield ermine!” This fur is said to have been introduced into England by Alan, Earl of Richmond, so created by William the Conqueror. The ermine (mustela erminea) is found in all the northern regions of the old continent, and as far southward as Persia and China. It was originally brought into western Europe from Armenia, then calledErmonie, whence its name. Chaucer employserminfor the adjective Armenian.Vaireis composed of miniature shields of blue and white alternately placed. According to Mackenzie it represents the skin of a small quadruped calledvarus, the back of which is of a bluish grey, and the belly white; and Guillim adds that when the head and feet of the animal are cut off from the skin, the latter resembles the figure of vaire used in heraldry. The costly fur so much spoken of by our old poets under the name ofminiveris derived by Dallaway from the Frenchmenu vair, on account ofits smallness and delicacy. The old Frenchvaironsignifies anything of two colours, and may possibly be the etymon ofvaire.
(Temp Edw. I.)Arms of Sackville.
Potent-counter-potent, literally “crutch-opposite-crutch,” resembles the tops of crutches counter-placed. What the origin of this figure may have been does not appear, although the word potent, in the sense of crutch, was common in the days of Chaucer.
“When luste of youth wasted be and spent,Then in his hand he takyth apotent.”
And again,
“So eld she was that she ne wentA foote, but it were by potent.”Romaunt of the Rose.
(“Gules, a bend argent”)
Having thus taken a glance at the field, or ground of the heraldric shield, let us next briefly notice what are called thehonourable ordinaries, one or other of which occurs in the great majority of arms, viz., theCHIEF,BEND,BEND-SINISTER,FESSE,PALE,CROSS,SALTIRE,CHEVERON, andPILE. Thechiefis a fifth part of the shield nearest the top;unde nomen. In the primitive bearings, which were literally coats, or rather mantles of arms, the chief might be formed by turning the upper part of the garment back in form of a collar, thus exposing the lining, which doubtless was often of a different colour from the mantle itself. A knight who might chance at a tournament to wear a scarlet mantle lined with white, would in this manner acquire as arms, ‘Gules, a chief argent.’ Thebendis a stripe passing diagonally across the shield from the dexter corner; (and thebend-sinister, the contrary way,) and is, etymologically, the same word with the Frenchbandeand Saxon band.[89]This ordinary evidently represents a band or scarf worn over one shoulder, and passingunder the opposite arm, and is well exemplified in the white belt worn by a soldier over his red coat. Of a similar origin is thefesse, a horizontal stripe across the middle of the shield, which represents a sash or military girdle. The term is evidently derived from the Latinfascia, through the Frenchfasce. Thepaleis like the fesse, except that its direction is perpendicular. From its name it has been supposed to represent thepales, or palisades of a camp, and in support of this origin it has been remarked that, in antient warfare, every soldier was obliged to carry a pale, and to fix it as the lines were drawn for the security of the camp. This hypothesis seems to be one of thoseafter-thoughtswith which heraldric theories abound. There is no doubt that most armorialformsexisted long before the invention of blazon, and that when it was found necessary to give every figure its distinctive appellation, the real origin of many bearings had been lost sight of, and the names assigned them were those of objects they wereconjecturedto represent.
It is far more probable that this ordinary originated in the insertion of a perpendicular stripe of a different colour from the mantle itself, an idea which is supported by the fact that the pale occupies in breadth a third of the escocheon. Two breadths of blue cloth divided by one of yellow, would produce a blazonable coat, ‘Azure, a pale or.’ When a shield is divided into several horizontal stripes of alternate colours it is calledbarry; when the stripes run perpendicularly it is said to bepaly; and when they take a diagonal direction it is styledbendy. The love of a striking contrast of colours in costume is characteristic of a semi-barbarous state of society, and the shawls and robes of the orientals of the present day afford a good illustration of the origin ofthese striped bearings.[90]Such vestments were not peculiar to the military, with whom we must always associate the heraldry of the earliest times; for, so lately as the time of Chaucer, they were the favourite fashion of civilians. This author, in his ‘Parson’s Tale,’ makes that worthy ecclesiastic complain of the “sinful costly array of clothing in the embrouding, the disguising, indenting orbarring, ounding,paling, winding orbending, and semblable waste of cloth in vanity.”[91]
Arms divided into two compartments by a horizontal line are said to beparted per fesse; when the line is perpendicular,parted per pale; and so of the others. Ridiculous as it may seem, our ancestors, from the reign of Edward II to that of Richard II, affected this kind of dress. In a contemporary illumination, John of Gaunt is represented in a long robe divided exactly in half, one side being blue, the other white, the colours of the House of Lancaster. Chaucer’s Parson, just now quoted, inveighs against the “wrappings of their hose which are departed of two colours, white and red, white and blue, or black and red,” making the wearers seem as though “the fire of St. Anthony or other such mischance had consumed one half of their bodies.” “These party-coloured hose,” humorously remarks Mr. Planché, “render uncertain the fellowship of the legs, and the common terma pairperfectly inadmissible.” But to return to the honourable ordinaries. Thecross. It would not be difficult tofill a volume with disquisitions upon this bearing, forming, as it does, a prominent feature in the heraldry of all Christendom; but I must content myself with a general view, without entering much into detail. The cross, as the symbol of Christianity, naturally engaged the reverent and affectionate regard of the early Christians, a feeling which lapsed first into superstition, and eventually into idolatry. In those chivalrous but ill-directed efforts of the princes and armies of Christian Europe to gain possession of the Holy Land, the cross was adopted as the sign or mark of the common cause; it floated upon the standard, was embroidered upon the robes, and depicted on the shields of the enthusiastic throng whose campaigns hence took the designation ofCroisades, orCrusades. On subsequent occasions the cross was employed in this general manner, especially when the interests of the church were concerned, as, for instance, at the battle of Lewes in 1264, when the soldiers of the baronial army marked themselves with a white cross for the purpose of distinguishing each other from the king’s forces.[92]The plain cross, or cross of St. George, is the most antient form of this bearing; it differed, however, from the form now in use in having the horizontal bar placed higher than the centre of the upright. The alteration was doubtless a matter of convenience to allow the common charges of the field, when any occurred, a more equal space. But the cross has been so modified by the varying tastes of different ages, that Dame Juliana Berners, at a time when armory was comparatively simple, declares that “crossis innumerabull are borne dayli.” The principal and most usual varieties of this ordinary are described in the ‘Boke of St. Albans.’ One of themost interesting forms is thecross fitchée, or ‘fixibyll,’ because being sharpened at the lower end it could be fixed into the ground, like the little crosses in Catholic cemeteries. It probably originated in the cross antiently carried by pilgrims, which answered the purpose of a walking-staff, and served, when occasion required, for the use of devotion. Next to this may be reckoned thecross patée, thecross-crosslet, thecross patonce, and thecross moline, called in the Boke a “mylneris cros,” “for it is made to the similitude of a certain instrument of yrne in mylnys, the which berith the mylneston.”[93]The plain crosscorded, or entwined with ropes, was borne, according to the same authority, in the “armys of a nobull man, the which was some tyme a crafty man (handicraftsman), aroperas he himself said.” These crosses are fully described in the larger treatises on heraldry, together with numerous others. Berry’s Encyclopædia Heraldica enumerates no less thanTHREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-FIVEvarieties.
Thesaltire, popularly called St. Andrew’s cross, is formed like two bends crossing each other in the centre of the escocheon. A great variety of opinions has existed as to its origin. Some authors take it for an antient piece of harness attached to the saddle of a horse to enable the rider,sauter dessous, to jump down.[94]Others derive it from an instrument usedin saltu, in the forest, for the purpose of taking wild beasts; but neither of these hypotheses seems very probable. Leigh says, “This in the old tyme, was of yeheight of a man, and was borne of such as used to scale the walls [saltare in muros] of towns. For it was driven full of pinnes necessary to that purpose. And walles of townes werethenbut lowe as appeared by the walls of Rome, whiche were suche that Remus easelye leaped over them. Witnesseth also the same the citie of Winchester whose walls were overlooked of Colbrande, chieftaine of the Danes, who were slayne by Guye, Erle of Warwike.” Thecheveron, which resembles a pair of rafters, is likewise of very uncertain origin. It has generally been considered as a kind of architectural emblem. Leigh, speaking of a coat containing three cheveronels, or little cheverons, says, “The ancestour of this cote hath builded iij greate houses in one province,” and this remark applies with some truth to the Lewkenors of Sussex, who bore similar arms, though whether assumed from such a circumstance I cannot ascertain. Thepileis a wedge-like figure based upon the edge of the shield, and having its apex inwards. The following etymons have been suggested: 1,pilum, Lat. the head of an arrow; the Spaniards and Italians call this ordinarycuspis. 2,pile, French, a strong pointed timber driven into boggy ground to make a firm foundation. 3,pied, French, the foot; in French armory it is calledpieu. I cannot admit any of these derivations, though perhaps my own etymon may not be deemed less irrelevant, viz.pellis, the skin of a beast, whence our English terms pell, pelt, peltry, &c. The skin of a wild beast, deprived of the headand fore legs, and fastened round the neck by the hinder ones, would form a rude garment, such as the hunter would consider an honourable trophy of his skill, and such as the soldier of an unpolished age would by no means despise; and it would resemble, with tolerable exactness, the pile of heraldry. TheQUARTERis, as the word implies, a fourth part of the field, differing in tincture from the remainder; and theCANTON, a smaller quadrangular figure in the dexter, or sinister, chief of the escocheon, so called from the Frenchcantoné, cornered.
The following figures rank as sub-ordinaries, viz.Flasques,Flanches, theFret,Border,Orle,Tressure,Gyron, &c.
Flasques, always borne in pairs, are two pieces hollowed out at each side of the shield:FLANCHESandVOIDERSare modifications of this bearing. The last, says Leigh,[95]“is the reward of a gentlewoman for service by her done to the prince or princess.” It is not improbable that it was borrowed from a peculiar fashion in female costume which prevailed temp. Richard II. Chaucer uses the wordvoidedinthe sense of removed, made empty, and this is probably the origin of the term.
When a shield is divided into eight acute-angled triangles, by lines drawn perpendicularly, horizontally, and diagonally through the centre, it is blazoned by the phrase ‘gyronnyof eight,’ and so of any other number of equal partitions of the same form. If one of these triangles occur singly it is termed agyron. For this term the nomenclature of heraldry is indebted to the Spanish language, in which it means a gore, gusset, or triangular piece of cloth. The family of Giron, subsequently ennobled as Dukes of Ossona, bear three such figures in their arms, from the following circumstance. Alphonso VI, king of Spain, in a battle with the Moors, had his horse killed under him, when, being in great personal danger, he was rescued and remounted by Don Roderico de Cissneres, who, as a memorial of the event, cut three triangular pieces from his sovereign’s mantle, which being afterwards exhibited to the king, he bestowed on his valiant follower an adequate reward, and gave him permission to bear three gyrons as his arms. The English family of Gurr, whose surname was probably derived from the village of Gueures, near Dieppe, bear ‘gyronny ... and ...’ as a ‘canting’ or allusive coat. Some derive this species of bearing from a kind of patchwork mantle of various colours. Hence, doubtless, also arose that picturesque species of bearing calledchequy, consisting of alternate squares of different tinctures. Chaucer and Spenser use the wordcheckelatoun; probably in this sense:
“His robe wascheque-latoun.”Knight’s Tale.“But in a jacket, quilted richly rareUponchecklaton, was he richly dight.”Faerie Queen.
The chequered dress of the Celtic nations, still retained in the Highland plaid or tartan, may, in some way, have originated the chequered coat of heraldry. At all events, this is a more probable source than the chess-board, from which some writers derive it.
Most of the ordinaries have their diminutives, as the bendlet, the pallet, the cheveronel, &c. These are usually bounded by straight lines; but the ordinaries themselves admit of a variety of modifications of outline, as follows: 1.Indented, like the teeth of a saw. According to Upton, this line represents the teeth of wild beasts, but Dallaway derives it from a moulding much employed in Saxon architecture. 2.Crenelle, or embattled, like the top of a castle, (Lat.crena, a notch.) The ‘licentia crenellare’ of the middle ages was the sovereign’s permission to his nobles to embattle or fortify their mansions. 3.Nebuly(nebulosus,) from its resemblance to clouds. 4.Wavy, or undulated. 5.Dancette, like indented, but larger, and consisting of only three pieces. 6.Engrailed, a number of little semi-circles connected in a line, the points of junction being turned outward. Johnson derives this word from the French ‘grêle,’ hail, marked or indented as with hailstones. And 7.Invecked, the same as the last, but reversed.
Roundlesare charges, as their name implies, of a circular form. The first idea of bearing them as charges in heraldry may have been suggested by the studs or knobs by which the parts of an actual buckler were strengthened and held together. As soon as blazon was introduced they received distinctive names, according to their tinctures. The bezant (or) was supposed to represent a gold coin, in value about a ducat, struck at Constantinople (Byzantium) in the times of the Crusades. Leigh, however, assigns it a muchgreater value, and calls it a talent weighing 104 lbs. troy, and worth 3750l.“Of these beisaunts you shall rede dyversly in Scripture, as when Salomon had geuen unto Hiram xx cities, he again gave vnto Salomon 120beisauntsof gold, whereof these toke their first name,” (‘obeisance?’) Theplate(argent) was probably some kind of silver coin. Thetorteaux(red) called in the Boke of S. A. “tortellys, or litill cakys,” are said to be emblematical of plenty, and to represent a cake of bread. The modern French ‘torteau’ is applied more exclusively to a kind of oil-cake of an oblong form used as food for cattle. ‘Tortilla,’ in Spanish, is a cake compounded of flour and lard. Dame J. Berners says it should be calledwastel. ‘Wastel-brede’ is defined in the glossary to Chaucer, as bread made of the finest flour, and derived from the French ‘gasteau.’ Chaucer represents his Prioresse as keeping small hounds
“that she feddeWith rosted flesh, and milk andwastel brede.”Prol. Cant. Tales.
Pommes(green), says Dallaway, are berries; but if etymology is worth anything, they must be apples, and such Leigh calls them.Hurts(blue) the same authority considers berries, and most heralds have taken them to be those diminutive things, whortleberries, or as they are called in Sussex, Cornwall, and Devonshire, ‘hurts.’ But I am rather inclined with Leigh to consider them representations of the ‘black andblue’ contusions resulting from the “clumsy thumps” of war.PelletsorOgresses(black) are the ‘piletta’ or leaden knobs forming the heads of blunt arrows for killing deer without injuring the skin.[96]Golpes(purple) are wounds,and when they stand five in a shield may have a religious allusion to the five wounds of Christ.Oranges(tenne) speak for themselves; andGuzes, Leigh says, are eyeballs; but as their colour is sanguine, or dull red, this seems unlikely.
TheAnnuletseems to have been taken from the ring armour, much in use about the period of the Norman Conquest. TheOrle, or false escocheon, is merely a band going round the shield at a short distance from the edge: it was probably borrowed from an antient mode of ornamenting a shield, serving as a kind of frame to the principal charge. Animals or flowers disposed round the escocheon in the same form, are also termed an orle. Thebordure, or border, explains itself. Like the orle, it was primarily designed as an ornament. Thelozenge, derived by Glover from the quarry, or small pane of glass of this shape, Dallaway thinks originated in the diamond-shaped cushions which occur on tombs to support the heads of female effigies, as helmets do those of men. Themascleis taken for the mesh of a net. When many areunited the arms are blazonedmasculy, and then represent a rich network thrown over the armour. At the siege of Carlaverok a certain knight is described as having his armour and vestments ‘masculy or and azure:’
“Son harnois et son attireAvoit masclé de or et de azure.”
Billetshave been conjectured to be representations of oblong camps, but from the name they would seem to beletters. They may have been originally assigned to bearers of important despatches.Guttéeis the term applied to a field or charge sprinkled over with drops of gold, silver, blood, tears, &c. according to the tincture. This kind of bearing is said to have originated with the Duke of Anjou, King of Sicily, who, after the loss of that island, appeared at a tournament with a black shield sprinkled with drops of water, to represent tears, thus indicating both his grief and his loss.[97]A warrior returning victorious from battle, with his buckler sprinkled with blood, would, in the early days of heraldry, readily have adopted the bearing afterwards called ‘guttée de sang.’ In those times the besiegers of a fortress were often assailed with boiling pitch, poured by the besieged through the machicolations of the wall constructed for such purposes. Splashes of this pitch falling upon some besieger’s shield, in all probability gave the first idea of ‘guttée de poix.’ Thefusilis like the lozenge, but narrower. Whatever the charge may mean, the name is evidently a corruption of the Fr.fuseau, a spindle. Thefretmay have been borrowed from the architectural ornaments of the interior of a roof, or more probably, from a knotted cord. It is sometimes calledHarington’s Knot, though it is not peculiar to the arms of that family, for it was also borne by the baronial races of Echingham, Audley, and Verdon, and by many other families.[98]
My purpose being not to describe all the charges or figures occurring in heraldry, but merely to assign a reasonable origin for those which appear to the uninitiated to have neither propriety nor meaning, I pass by many others, and come to those to which a symbolical sense is more readily attachable, as the heavenly bodies, animals, vegetables, weapons of war, implements of labour, &c. &c. Here I shall merely offer some general remarks, for it is less my object to gratify curiosity on this subject than to excite that attention to it which it really deserves, and therefore I must say, with gentle Dame Julyan, “Bot for to reherce all the signys that be borne in armys it were too long a tarying, nor I can not do hit:ther be so mony!”
The heavenly bodies occur frequently in heraldry, and include the Sun, ‘in his glory,’ or ‘eclipsed;’ the Moon, ‘incressant,’ ‘in her complement,’ ‘decressant,’ and ‘in her detriment,’ or eclipse; stars and comets. Thecrescentwas the standard of the Saracens during the crusades, as it is of their successors, the Turks, at this day. As one of the antient laws of chivalry enacted that the vanquisher of a Saracen gentleman should assume his arms, it is not remarkable that the crescent was, in the latter Crusades, often transferred to the Christian shield; although we must reject the notion that the infidels bore regular heraldric devices. It is probable, however, that their bucklers were ornamented in various ways with their national symbol. Several authenticinstances of arms with crescents borne by English families from that early date, are to be found. Most of the families of Ellis, of this country, bear a cross with four or more crescents, derived from Sir Archibald Ellis, of Yorkshire, who went to the Holy Land. From a miraculous event said to have happened during the Crusade under Rich. I. to Sir Robert Sackville, the noble descendants of that personage still bear anestoile, or star, as their crest.
TheELEMENTSalso furnish armorial charges, as flames of fire, rocks, stones,islands, thunderbolts, clouds, rainbows, water, and fountains. These last are represented by azure roundles charged with three bars wavy argent. In the arms of Sykes, of Yorkshire, they are calledsykes—that being a provincialism for little pools or springs. The antient family of Gorges bore agurges, or whirlpool, an unique instance, I believe, of that bearing.
If we derive heraldry from the standards of antient nations, then, undoubtedly,ANIMALSare the very oldest of armorial charges, since those standards almost invariably exhibited some animal as their device. Familiar examples present themselves in the Romaneagleand the Saxonhorse. OfQUADRUPEDSthe lion occupies the first place, and is far more usual than any other animal whatever. The king of beasts is found in the heraldric field in almost every variety of posture, and tinctured with every hue recognized by the laws of blazon. It may be remarked here, that in the early days of heraldry animals were probably borne of their ‘proper’ or natural colour, but as, in process of time, the use of arms became more common, and the generous qualities of the lion rendered him the object of general regard as an armorial ensign, it became absolutely necessary to vary his attitudes and colours, for the purposes of distinction. The same remarkapplies, in a greater or less degree, to other animals and objects. As the emblem of courage the lion has been represented and misrepresented in a thousand forms. A well-drawn heraldric lion is a complete caricature of the animal; and hence the ire displayed by the country herald-painter when shown the lions in the Tower is very excusable: “What!” said the honest man, “tell me that’s a lion; why I’ve painted lions rampant and lions passant, and all sorts of lions these five and twenty years, and for sure I ought to know what a lion’s like better than all that!”
(Lyon rampant.Guillim.)
The circumstance of the royal arms of England containing three lions and those of Scotland one, has rendered this animal a special favourite with British armorists. Leigh and Guillim, particularly, are very minute in their remarks upon him. The French heralds object to the representation of the lionguardant, that is, with his face turned full upon the spectator, and declare that this posture is proper to the leopard, “wherein,” says Guillim, “they offer great indignity to thatroiall beast, in that they will not admit him, as saith Upton, to show his full face, the sight whereof doth terrifie and astonish all the beasts of the field, and wherein consisteth his chiefest majesty, ‘quia omnia animalia debent depingi et designari in suo ferociore actu.’” The French still allude derisively to our national charge as only a leopard. That one of these dissimilar animals could be mistaken for the other affords singular evidence of the rudeness with which arms in the middle ages were delineated.
Theleopard, as an heraldric charge, has been treated with more obloquy than he deserves, from the erroneous notion that he was a bigenerousanimal, bred between the lion and the female panther. Thebearis generally borne muzzled and ‘salient,’ leaping, or rather jumping, the posture of the animal most familiar to our ancestors, who greatly delighted in his uncouth dancing. Theelephant, thewolf, one of the most elegant of heraldric devices, thefox, therabbit, thesquirrel, themonkey, thebeaver, theporcupine, thecat-a-mountain, and many other wild animals borne in arms, need no comment.
Theheraldric tigerfurnishes another proof of the ignorance of our ancestors in the natural history of foreign animals. It is represented thus:
Among the domestic animals borne in arms are thehorse, theass, thecamel, thebull, theox, thegreyhound, thetalbotor mastiff, theram, thelamb, thehog, &c.
The horse, from his associations with chivalry and war, has ever been a favourite charge. The lamb, as commonly represented, with the nimbus round its head and the banner of the cross, is termed aholy lamb. Thealantor wolf-dog, an extinct species, is of rare occurrence in arms.
“Abouten his char ther wenten whitealauns,Twenty and mo as gret as any stere,To hunten at the leon or the dere.”Chaucer.
Thealantwas the supporter of Fynes, Lord Dacre.
Most of the above were probably borne emblematically, but thestag,deer,boar, &c., seem to be trophies of the chase, especially when their heads only occur. The heads and other parts of animals are represented either ascouped, cut off smoothly, orerased, torn off as it were with violence, leaving the place of separation jagged and uneven. The boar’s head may have been derived from the old custom of serving up a boar’s head at the tables of feudal nobles. This practice is still observed in the hall of Queen’s College, Oxford, on Christmas-day, when an antient song or carol, appropriate enough to the ceremony, though not very well befitting the time and the place, is sung. It begins thus:
“The boar’s head in hand bear I,Bedeck’d with bays and rosemary,And I pray you, my masters, be merry,Quot estis in convivio.Caput apri deferoReddens laudes Domino.”
The presentation of a boar’s head forms the condition of several feudal tenures in various parts of the country. As an heraldric bearing, and as a sign for inns, it is of very antient date. Of its latter application the far-famed hostelry in Eastcheap affords one among many examples; while its use in armory was familiar to the father of English poesy, who, describing the equipments of Sir Thopas, says,
“His sheld was all of gold so redAnd therin was abore’s hed,A charboncle beside.”
The annexed singular bearing, ‘a cup with a boar’s head erect,’ evidently alludes to some obsolete custom or tenure.
It may be remarked here that many of the terms of heraldry, when applied to the parts and attitudes of ‘beastes of venerie and huntyng,’ are identical with the expressions used by learnedchasseursof the ‘olden tyme,’ and which are fully elucidated by Dame Julyan, Manwood, Blundeville, and other writers on woodcraft and the chase; ascience, by the way, as systematic in the employment of terms as heraldry itself. This remark applies equally to the technical words in falconry used in describing falcons, hawks, &c., when they occur in armory.
When antient armorists had so far departed from the propriety of nature as to paint swans red and tigers green, it was not difficult to admit still greater monstrosities. Double-headed and double-tailed lions and eagles occur at an early date; but these are nothing when compared with the double and triple-bodiedlions figured by Leigh.[99]It would be a mere waste of time to speculate upon the origin of such bearings, which owe their birth to “the rich exuberance of a Gothick fancy”—the fertile source of the chimerical figures noticed in the next chapter.
AmongBIRDS, theeagleholds the highest rank. The lyon was the royal beast—this the imperial bird. He is almost uniformly exhibited in front, with expanded wings, and blazoned by the term ‘displayed.’ Thefalcon,hawk,moor-cock,swan,cock,owl,stork,raven,turkey,peacock,swallow, and many others of the winged nation are well known to the most careless observer of armorial ensigns. TheCornish chough, a favourite charge, is curiously described by Clarke as “afine blue or purple black-bird, with red beak and legs,” and said to be “a noble bearing of antiquity, being accounted theking of crows!”
Thepelicanwas believed to feed her young with her own blood, and therefore represented “vulning herself,” that is, pecking her breast for a supply of the vital fluid.[100]The wings are usually indorsed or thrown upwards; “but this,” says Berry, “is unnecessary in the blazon, as that is the only position in which the pelican is represented in coat-armour.” This may be true of modern heraldry, but antiently this bird was borne ‘close,’ that is, with the wings down. The pelicans in the arms of the family of Pelham, resident at Laughton, co. Sussex, temp. Henry IV, were represented in this manner, as appears from a shield in one of the spandrels of the western door of Laughton church, and from some painted glass in the churches of Waldron and Warbleton. In a carving of the fifteenth century, among the ruins of Robertsbridge Abbey, the pelicans have their wings slightly raised,and in the modern arms of Pelham they are indorsed, as shown below.
Fishes, as borne in arms, have recently been made the subject of an able, most interesting, and beautifully illustrated volume.[101]In myen passantsurvey of the ensigns of armory it will suffice to remark that thedolphintakes the same rank among heraldric fishes as the lion occupies among quadrupeds, and the eagle among birds; after him thepike,salmon,barbel, andtrouthold an honourable place, and even theherringandspratare not deemed too mean for armory. Neither have shell-fish been overlooked: theescallopin particular, from its religious associations, has always been a special favourite.
Amphibia,REPTILES, andINSECTSsometimes occur, particularlytoads,serpents,adders,tortoises,scorpions,snails,grasshoppers,spiders,ants,bees, andgad-flies. It is singular that such despised and noxious creatures as the scorpion and the toad should have been adopted as marks of honour; yet such, in former times, was the taste forallusivearms that the Botreuxes, of Cornwall, relinquished a simple antient coat in favour of one containing three toads, because the word ‘botru’ in the Cornish language signified a toad!
TheHUMAN FIGUREand its parts are employed in manyarms. The arms pertaining to the bishopric of Salisbury contain a representation of “our blessed Lady, with her son in her right hand and a sceptre in her left.” The arms of the see of Chichester are the most singular to be found in the whole circle of church heraldry. They are blazoned thus: ‘Azure,Prester-Johnhooded, sitting on a tomb-stone; in his sinister hand an open book; his dexter hand extended, with the two fore-fingers erect, all or;in his moutha sword, fessewise, gules, hilt and pommel or, the point to the sinister.’[102]Prester or Presbyter-John, the person here represented, was a fabulous person of the middle ages, who was imagined to sway the sceptre of a powerful empiresomewherein the East, and who must have been a very long-lived personage, unless he wasreproducedfrom time to time like the phœnix of antiquity. Many writers, during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, make mention of him. Sir John Maundevile describes his territory, which, however, he did not visit. That country, according to his statement, contained rocks of adamant,[103]which attracted all the ships that happened to come near them, until the congeries appeared like a forest, and became a kind of floating island. It also abounded in popinjays or parrots as “plentee as gees,” and precious stones large enough to make “plateres, dissches, and cuppes.” “Many other marveylles been there,” he adds, “so that it were to cumbrous and to long to putten it in scripture of bokes.” He describes the Emperor himself as “cristene,” and believing “wel in the Fadre, in the Sone, and in the Holy Gost,” yet, in some minor points, not quite sound in the faith. As to his imperial state, he possessed72 provinces, over each of which presided a king; and he had so great an army that he could devote 330,000 men to guard his standards, which were “3 crosses of gold, fyn, grete and hye, fulle of precious stones.” It is related of Columbus that he saw on one of the islands of the West Indies, which he then apprehended to be a part of the continent of Asia, a grave and sacred personage whom he at first believed to be Prester-John. This incident serves to show that the existence of this chimerical being was credited even so lately as the close of the fifteenth century, although Roger Bacon, in the thirteenth, doubted many of the tales related of him—“de quo tanta fama solebat esse, et multa falsa dicta sunt et scripta.”[104]The best account of him is to be found in the work of Matthew Paris, the monk of St. Albans, who wrote before the year 1250. Marco Polo also mentions him in his travels.[105]Porny places him in Abyssinia under the title ofPreter cham, or ‘prince of the worshippers,’ while Heckford[106]considers him a priest and one of the followers of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople in the fifth century.
Kingsandbishopsoccur as charges; but rarely. The heads of Moors and Saracens are more common, and belong to the category of trophies, having originated, for the most part, during the Crusades. The arms of the Welsh family of Vaughan are ‘a cheveron between three children’s heads ... enwrapped about the necks with as many snakes proper.’ “It hath beene reported,” saith old Guillim, “that some one of the ancestors of this family was borne with a snake about his necke:a matter not impossible, but yet very unprobable!” Besides heads, the armorial shield is sometimes charged witharms and legs, naked, vested, or covered with armour, hands, feet, eyes, hearts, winged and unwinged, &c. The coat of Tremaine exhibits three arms (et tres manus!) and that of the Isle of Man, three legs, as here represented. Of the former, Guillim remarks, “these armes and hands conjoyned and clenched after this manner may signify a treble offer of revenge for some notable injurie.” If we might be jocular upon so grave a subject as armory, we should consider the second coat a happy allusion to the geographical position of the island between the three kingdoms of England, Ireland, and Scotland, as if it had run away from all three, and were kicking up its heels in derision of the whole empire![107]