Transcriber's Notes

Changes to the text are limited to correction of typographical errors are listed at[ the end of the book]. Minor corrections to formatting or punctuation are made without comment.

Most figures and plates include a link to a larger image, except for some whose size or quality does not warrant it. Illustrations and plates have been re-positioned to appear as close as possible following the first reference in the text, while retaining their numbered order. Plate XXX and Plate XXXI appeared in reverse order in the original book.

Text in blackletter font is presented as larger, bold and italic.

Footnotes have been numbered sequentially throughout the book and re-positioned at the end of chapters.

Links to [Table of Contents]; [List of Illustrations]; [Index].

THE ARTISTIC CRAFTS SERIES
OF TECHNICAL HANDBOOKS
EDITED BY W. R. LETHABY

HERALDRY

BANNER OF THE ARMS OF KING GEORGE THE FIFTH.

HERALDRY FOR
CRAFTSMEN & DESIGNERS

BY W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE
LITT.D., D.C.L., WITH DIAGRAMS
BY THE AUTHOR AND
NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS
COLOURED LITHOGRAPHS
AND COLLOTYPE REPRODUCTIONS
FROM ANCIENT
EXAMPLES

PUBLISHED BY JOHN HOGG
13 PATERNOSTER ROW
LONDON 1913

Printed by Ballantyne & Company Ltd London

[EDITOR'S PREFACE]

In issuing this volume of a series of Handbooks on the Artistic Crafts, it will be well to state what are our general aims.

In the first place, we wish to provide trustworthy text-books of workshop practice, from the points of view of experts who have critically examined the methods current in the shops, and, putting aside vain survivals, are prepared to say what is good workmanship and to set up a standard of quality in the crafts which are more especially associated with design. Secondly, in doing this, we hope to treat design itself as an essential part of good workmanship. During the last century most of the arts, save painting and sculpture of an academic kind, were little considered, and there was a tendency to look on 'design' as a mere matter of appearance. Such 'ornamentation' as there was was usually obtained by following in a mechanical way a drawing provided by an artist who often knew little of the technical processes involved in production. With the critical attention given to the crafts by Ruskin and Morris, it came to be seen that it was impossible to detach design from craft in this way, and that, in the widest sense, true design is an inseparable element of good quality, involving as it does the selection of good and suitable material, contrivance for special purpose, expert workmanship, proper finish and so on, far more than mere ornament, and, indeed, that ornamentation itself was rather an exuberance of fine workmanship than a matter of merely abstract lines. Workmanship when separated by too wide a gulf from fresh thought—that is, from design—inevitably decays, and, on the other hand, ornamentation, divorced from workmanship, is necessarily unreal, and quickly falls into affectation. Proper ornamentation may be defined as a language addressed to the eye; it is pleasant thought expressed in the speech of the tool.

In the third place, we would have this series put artistic craftsmanship before people as furnishing reasonable occupations for those who would gain a livelihood. Although within the bounds of academic art the competition, of its kind, is so acute that only a very few per cent. can fairly hope to succeed as painters and sculptors, yet as artistic craftsmen there is some probability that nearly every one who would pass through a sufficient period of apprenticeship to workmanship and design would reach a measure of success.

In the blending of handwork and thought in such arts as we propose to deal with, happy careers may be found as far removed from the dreary routine of hack labour as from the terrible uncertainty of academic art. It is desirable in every way that men of good education should be brought back into the productive crafts: there are more than enough of us 'in the City,' and it is probable that more consideration will be given in this century than in the last to Design and Workmanship.

Designers have at times to deal with some matters which are almost common to all the arts, matters which they either know or do not know, and in which the genius they are apt to trust in goes for little apart from knowledge. They must learn lettering for inscriptions much like they once learnt the multiplication table, and they should learn the elements of heraldry in the same way. This it has been difficult to do, as most of the books on heraldry, in seeking to be complete, so effectually muddle up the few important points with the vast number of things unimportant, or worse, that the art student is likely to give it up in despair. Many books on heraldry, which in itself is surely a gay thing, have been made to resemble grammars and dictionaries of a meaningless jargon.

Any student, however, who has become interested in a single shield, or in the look of the thing as seen in a collection of fine examples of heraldry such as are illustrated in this volume, should be able to master the main principles in an hour or two. The curious terms are only old-fashioned; they are used, so far as they are necessary, not of malice, but because it is of the essence of heraldry that everything shall be so strictly defined that a few words may represent a shield of arms as surely as a picture. Hence everything has a name, everything is clear, sharp, and bright, the colours are few, the forms must be large and simple. Even the seemingly arbitrary dictum that 'no colour must be put on colour or metal on metal' may probably have arisen from the fact that when gilding or silvering was used on a shield it would form a perfect foil for colours, but as they reflected light in the same way, they could not be distinguished if used one on the other. Even yellow pigment on white would not tell clearly at any distance; the maxim is merely a rule for the sake of distinctness. Again, the curious vigorous drawing of beasts and birds with the eyes staring and the feet spread out was not the result of a desire to be quaint, but arose naturally from the same need of being clear. A good naturalistic drawing of a lion would be useless on a flag. Granted the special needs of heraldry, it developed in a perfectly understandable way.

On the question of heraldic drawing I should like to caution the student against thinking that it is so easy as it looks. Elementary and exaggerated, it may seem as if any child might do it, but in truth it is terribly difficult. The old shields were designed by experts with great experience; they placed the charge perfectly on the field and so distributed the parts that they were balanced in 'weight'; there were no weak lines and nothing was crowded for lack of room. Much practice made them perfect, and perfection is still difficult.

The present volume seems to me exactly what artists have wanted.

W. R. LETHABY

March 1913

[AUTHOR'S PREFACE]

This book is an attempt to place before designers and craftsmen such an account of the principles of the art of Heraldry as will enable them to work out for themselves the many and various applications of it that are possible to-day.

To that end the different usages which have prevailed from time to time are dealt with in detail, and are illustrated as far as may be from ancient sources.

Should it be thought that undue stress has been laid upon the pre-Tudor heraldry, to the comparative exclusion of that of later times, it may be pointed out that until the principles of the earlier heraldry have been grasped and appreciated, it is impossible to get rid of the cast-iron uniformity and stupid rules that bound the heraldry of to-day, and tend to strangle all attempts to raise it to a higher level.

To what extent these chilling ideas prevail, and how necessary it is to get rid of them, cannot better be illustrated than by two letters written to the author, after most of the following chapters were in type, by a critical friend who has not read any of them.

He points out in his first letter that on the very day of his writing there had been brought to his notice, not for the first time, the great need that exists for a book in which sculptors and painters may find out what they legitimately may and what they may not do as regards heraldry. What, for example, may be left out from an achievement of arms, and how the different elements composing it may be varied, or even rearranged.

He instances the case of a sculptor who had been supplied with a drawing, 'brilliant in emerald green and powder blue,' of the arms that had been granted to a famous Englishman whose memory was about to be honoured by the setting up of a statue with his arms, etc. carved upon the pedestal.

The arms in the drawing did not present any difficulties, but the crest was not shown upon the helm, and the whole was surrounded by a series of trophies which to this unenlightened sculptor were as heraldic as the arms and crest. Out of all this, asked the sculptor, what could lawfully be omitted? If any of the trophies were supporters, must they be shown? And must the crest be used? Ought the crest to be on a helm? And should the helm be shown in profile or full-faced?

The contents of the drawing, if all were sculptured, would, in my friend's opinion, 'either come so small as to be unmonumental, or so large as to dwarf the statue into a doll.'

It will be seen from the principles enunciated in the present work that the answers to the foregoing questions were obviously as follows:

I. That the sculptor might use the arms alone if he thought fit, and he might vary the shape and size of the shield according to his fancy.

II. That he could omit the crest if he wished, but if he elected to use it, the crest ought certainly to be set upon a helm, which should face the same way as the crest; the crested helm might also be flourished about with such mantling as the sculptor thought proper.

III. That in the particular drawing none of the trophies was heraldic. The sculptor accordingly could omit the whole, if he were so minded, or could dispose about the arms and crested helm any such other trophies of like character as would in his judgment look well or be appropriate.

In a further letter my friend enumerates other difficulties that vex poor artists. Must a shield always be surmounted by a crested helm? Should the helm face any special way according to the degree of the bearer thereof? What are the ordinary relative proportions which helm and crest should bear to the shield? May a shield be set aslant as well as upright? Should a torse be drawn with a curved or a straight line? Is it necessary to represent the engraved dots and lines indicative of the tinctures? What are supporters to stand upon? Are they to plant their feet on a ribbon or scroll, or on a flowering mound, or what? May arms entitled to have supporters be represented without them? What are the simplest elements to which a shield of arms may be reduced?—as, for example, in a panel some 60 or 70 feet above the eye, and when but a small space is available.

To a craftsman or designer who has grasped the principles of heraldry these further questions will present no difficulty, and most of them can be answered by that appeal to medieval usage which the nature of the illustrations renders possible.

These illustrations, it will be seen, are largely selected from heraldic seals, and for the particular reason that seals illustrate so admirably and in a small compass such a number of those usages to which appeal may confidently be made. Examples of heraldry in conjunction with buildings, monuments, and architectural features generally, have also been given, and its application to the minor arts has not been overlooked.

In order, too, to enable full advantage to be taken of the long period covered by the illustrations, the most typical of these have been collected into a [chronological series at the end of the book]. It is thus possible to show the gradual rise and decline of heraldic art from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century, beyond which it is hardly necessary to go.

The only modern illustrations that have been tolerated are those showing the formation of the Union Jack, and the degraded condition of the so-called Royal Standard. The coloured frontispiece is an attempt to show a more effective way of displaying with equal heraldic 'correctness' the arms of our Sovereign Lord King George the Fifth.

W. H. ST. JOHN HOPE

My thanks are due to the Society of Antiquaries of London for leave to reproduce the coloured illustrations in pls. I and II, for the loan of blocks or drawings of figs. 7, 13, 33, 64, 65, 101, 129, 153, 186, 187, 190, and 193, and for leave to photograph the numerous casts of seals figured in pls. V-XIV and XVII-XXX and throughout the book; to the Royal Archæological Institute for loan of figs. 20 and 107; to the Sussex Archæological Society for the loan of fig. 142; to the Society of Arts for figs. 6, 15, 17, 28, 30, 41, 45, 46, 48, 51, 55, 73, 74, 86, 92, 114, 126, 127, 150, 154, 155, and 199; to the Royal Institute of British Architects for figs. 8, 93, and 199; to Messrs. Cassell & Co. for figs. 21, 53, 54, 56, 63, 81, 84, 85, 91, 108, 109, 117, 118, 124, 132, 133, 139, 151; to Messrs. Constable & Co. for figs. 9, 14, 43, 67, 68, 72, 75, 76, 77, 78, 83, 136, 137, 138; to Messrs. Parker & Co. for fig. 143; and to Messrs. Longmans & Co. for figs. 177, 183. Also to Mr. T. W. Rutter for lending the drawings reproduced in pls. II and III; to Mr. R. W. Paul for the drawing of fig. 184; to Mr. Mill Stephenson for the loan of the brass rubbings reproduced in figs. 19, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 35-39, 42, 146-148; to the Rev. T. W. Galpin, Mr. E. M. Beloe, and Mr. Aymer Vallance for the photographs of figs. 47, 149, and 191 respectively; and to the Rev. Severne Majendie for leave to photograph the effigies of the Duke and Duchess of Exeter (figs. 167, 168) in St. Katharine's chapel in Regent's Park.

I wish also to thank, among others, Mr. David Weller, head verger of Westminster Abbey, for leave to reproduce the photographs shown in figs. 1, 2, 4, 34, 40, 87, 104, 110, 134, 156, 176, 194, 195; Mr. T. W. Phillips, of Wells, for those forming figs. 23 and 111; Mr. Charles Goulding, of Beverley, for those forming figs. 49, 50; Mr. T. Palmer Clarke, of Cambridge, for those forming figs. 88, 96, 128, 170, 171, and 172; and Mr. Fred Spalding, of Chelmsford, for the photograph of the New Hall panel in fig. 189.

[CONTENTS]

[LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS]

PLATES

ILLUSTRATIONS IN TEXT

[CHAPTER I]
INTRODUCTION

Defects of Modern Heraldic Decoration; Appeal to First Principles; English versus Foreign Sources; Definition of Heraldry; Modes of Display; Colours and Furs; Formation of Arms; Divisions of the Shield; Early Authorities: Seals, Monuments, Buildings, Wills and Inventories, Rolls of Arms.

To those who have given attention to the study of ancient heraldry few things are more surprising than the imperfect understanding of its true principles displayed in their works by so many artists and craftsmen of every degree. Year after year, in paintings and sculpture at the Royal Academy and other exhibitions, in the architecture and decorations of our churches and public buildings, on monuments, on plate, jewellery, and ornaments of all kinds, the attempt to introduce armorial accessories, even by some of our best artists, is almost always a failure.

In so recent a work as the national memorial to Queen Victoria before Buckingham Palace, the shields for Scotland in the frieze of the pedestal bear the rampant lion only, and the distinctive double tressure is again omitted in the Scottish quarter of the royal arms behind the figure of Victory. The sides of the pedestal also bear fanciful shields of arms, in the one case with three lamps, in the other with some allegorical device, charged on bends sinister!

It is only fair to say that the fault appears to be not altogether that of the artist or craftsman, but should rather be ascribed to the disregard of the principles and usages of true armory that pervades so much of the printed literature to which men naturally turn for information.

He, however, who would know something about heraldic art must go behind the books to better sources of information, and rid himself once and for all of the modern cast-iron rules that cramp all attempts to improve matters. He will then soon find himself revelling in the delightful freedom and playful common-sense of medieval armory when it was still a living art, and a science too, utilized for artistic purposes by every class of worker and unencumbered by the ridiculous conceits of Tudor and later times.

The appeal, moreover, should largely be confined, if one would have what is best, to our own land. In the beginning heraldry was much the same in most European countries, but in course of time foreign armory became complicated by needless subdivisions and new methods of expression and combination. It would indeed be foolish to maintain that nothing can be learnt from foreign sources, but in the earlier stages of study English heraldry should come first. Not only is it characterized by a beautiful simplicity which continued practically unchanged until the beginning of the sixteenth century, but no other country outside England possesses such a wealth of examples of its various applications, and they lie immediately to hand for purposes of study and comparison. Moreover, English heraldry so fully illustrates the general principles followed in other countries that it is unnecessary at first to go further afield.

Heraldry, or armory as it was anciently called, is a symbolical and pictorial language of uncertain and disputed origin, which, by the beginning of the thirteenth century, had already been reduced to a science with a system, classification, and nomenclature of its own. The artistic devices known as arms, which may be formed by proper combinations of the colours, ordinaries, and figures that represent the letters of this language, had each their significance, and soon came to be regarded as the hereditary possession of some person, family, dignity, or office.

Fig. 1. Tile with the arms of King Henry III, c. 1255, from the chapter-house of Westminster abbey.

The display of arms was restricted primarily to shields and banners, but occasionally to horse-trappers (pls. [XI] B and [XII] B) and such garments as jupes, gowns, and mantles. Later on heraldry came also to be used ornamentally, either upon shields or without them, in all kinds of ways, in architecture and on monuments, on tiles and in glazing, in woodcarvings and in paintings, in woven stuffs and embroideries, in jewellery and on seals.

Fig. 2. Shield of the arms of St. Edward, c. 1259, in the quire of Westminster abbey church. An early instance of the use of heraldry in architecture.

The colours used in heraldry are red, blue, green, purple, and black, or, to give them their old names, gules, azure, vert, purpure, and sable; combined with the yellow of gold and the whiteness of silver. Orange was never used, probably on account of the difficulty of finding a stable pigment. It was soon found that for brilliancy of effect the use of gold or silver with a colour was preferable to that of colour with colour or metal with metal; two colours are therefore found together or superposed only under certain conditions, and the same applies to the two metals.

Fig. 3. Heraldry on the gatehouse of Kirkham priory, Yorkshire, built between 1289 and 1296.

Imitations of two furs, ermine and vair, were also used: the one of white flecked with little black tails; the other of alternating oblong patches of white and blue, square at the top and rounded at the bottom, to represent grey squirrels' skins. (See figs. [151], [152].) If vair were coloured other than white and blue, the resultant was called vairy. There is also known a black fur with silver ermine-tails.

There were never any exact rules as to the particular tint of the colour employed, that being simply a matter of taste. Thus blue may range from a full indigo almost to Cambridge-blue, and red from a bright scarlet, through vermilion, to a dull brick colour, and so on; and it is surprising to find how well quiet colours blend together.

In the formation of arms the mere combinations of colours and metals produced by vertical, horizontal, or other divisions of the shield were soon exhausted, as were quarters, checkers, etc. There accordingly grew quite naturally the further use of applied strips or bands based upon such divisions.

Party — Party-fessewise — Quarterly

Pale — Fesse — Cross

Party-bendwise — Party-saltirewise — Gyronny

Bend — Saltire — Border

Chief — Quarter — Cheveron

Pile — Orle — Flanches

Paly — Barry — Wavy

Bendy — Checky — Lozengy

Thus the vertical parting of a metal and a colour known as party produced the pale, and a horizontal division the fesse or bar, and these combined to form the cross suggested by the quarterly lines. An oblique or slanting parting gave rise to the bend, and the crossing of two such produced the St. Andrew's cross or saltire. A combination of the lines of a saltire with a quarterly division produced the varied field called gyronny. The border almost suggested itself. A cutting off of the upper half or head of the shield yielded the chief, and of a fourth part the quarter. One other of these applied pieces, or ordinaries as they were called, was the cheveron, formed of two strips issuing from the lower edges of the shield and meeting in a point in the middle, like the cheverons forming the roof timbers of a house. Another ordinary was the pile, which was often threefold with lines converging towards the base as in fig. [72]. Sometimes a shield was charged with one of smaller size called a scutcheon, and the middle of this was occasionally cut out to form a voided scutcheon or orle. Flanches, as they are called, are very rarely found; they are formed by drawing incurving lines within each side of the shield. An even series of pales yielded a vertical striping called paly, and of piles, pily, while an even number of bars became barry. Undulated or waved bars formed wavy, and sometimes paly and pily stripes were also waved (fig. [19]). In early examples the bend was often bended or curved. Bends are so represented in one of the shields in Westminster abbey (fig. [4]), in some of the shields over the nave arcades in York minster, and on a number of monumental effigies. A narrower bend which overlaid everything was known as a baston (see fig. [60]). A number of narrow bends produced bendy, but the lines were then straight. A field divided into squares or checkers formed checky, and when divided into what are now called lozenges it became lozengy. Pales, fesses, crosses, saltires, borders, and cheverons sometimes had their edges engrailed by taking out of them, as it were, a continuous series of bites separated by sharp points, and the lower edge of a chief or the inner margin of a border was often indented like the edge of a saw; but in early heraldry engrailing and indenting were interchangeable terms. An indented fesse was anciently called a daunce. Cheverons, fesses, bars, etc. were occasionally battled, through the upper line being formed into battlements. A fesse was often placed between two cheverons, as in the well-known arms of FitzWalter; or between two very narrow bars called cotises, or pairs of cotises called gemell bars. Cheverons, bends, and pales were also sometimes cotised. Cotises were often of a tincture different from that of the ordinary which they accompanied, and sometimes indented or dancetty as in the arms of Clopton (fig. [5]) and Gonvile. The ground or field could be relieved by the use of vair or ermine, or by the addition of fretting or trellis-work or other simple means. It was also not unfrequently powdered with small crosses, fleurs-de-lis, or billets; often in conjunction with a larger charge like a cinqfoil or a lion.

Fig. 4. Shield with curved bend or baston of Henry de Laci earl of Lincoln, c. 1259, in the quire of Westminster abbey church.

Fig. 5. Arms of Clopton, sable a bend silver and two cotises dancetty gold, from a brass c. 1420 at Long Melford in Suffolk.

Almost from the beginning every kind of device was charged or painted upon shields, either singly or in multiple, and upon or about such ordinaries as crosses, cheverons, and fesses. Birds, beasts, and fishes, and parts of them like heads, or feet, or wings; flowers, fruits, and leaves; suns, moons or crescents, and stars; fleurs-de-lis, crosses, billets, roundels, rings, etc.—all were pressed into the service. The great rule as to colour held good as regards charges, and it was not permissible to paint a red rose upon blue or a gold star upon silver; but a red rose upon gold or a silver star upon blue was quite right.

It has however been lawful at all times to place an ordinary, such as a fesse or a cheveron, and whether charged or not, upon a parti-coloured field like quarterly, checky, paly, or barry, or upon vair or vairy. A quarter, or a chief, or a border, without reference to its colour, can also be added to any such field.

Conversely, a parti-coloured cross, fesse, or charge of any kind is allowable upon a plain field.

In the Great Roll of arms, temp. Edward II, are instances of two shields, in the one case of a red lion, and in the other of a red fer-de-moline, on fields party gold and vert; also of a silver leopard upon a field party gold and gules, and of three red lions upon party gold and azure. Likewise of a shield with three lions ermine upon party azure and gules, and of another with wavy red bars upon a field party gold and silver.

In the arms, too, of Eton College granted by King Henry VI in 1448-9 three silver lilies on a black field are combined with a chief party azure and gules, with a gold leopard on the red half and a gold fleur-de-lis on the blue half. King Henry also granted in 1449 these arms, party cheveronwise gules and sable three gold keys, to Roger Keys, clerk, for his services in connexion with the building of Eton College, and to his brother Thomas Keys and his descendants.

Shields with quarterly fields often had a single charge in the quarter, like the well-known molet of the Veres, or the eagle of Phelip.

Arms were sometimes counter-coloured, by interchanging the tinctures of the whole or parts of an ordinary or charge or charges overlying a parti-coloured field. This often has a very striking effect, as in the arms of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, which are party silver and sable a cheveron counter-coloured, or those of Geoffrey Chaucer, who bore party silver and gules a bend counter-coloured. Sir Robert Farnham bore quarterly silver and azure four crescents counter-coloured, or, as the Great Roll describes them, 'de l'un en l'autre.' The town of Southampton likewise bears for its arms gules a chief silver with three roses counter-coloured.

In drawing parti-coloured fields it is as well to consider what are the old rules with regard to them. In the early rolls a field barry of silver and azure, or of gold and sable, is often described as of six pieces, that is, with three coloured bars alternating with three of the metal, though barry of eight and even ten pieces is found. Paly of six pieces is also a normal number. But the number of pieces must always be even, or the alternate pieces will become bars or pales. The number of squares in each line of a checkered field or ordinary is also another important matter. Six or eight form the usual basis for the division of a field, but the seven on the seal of the earl of Warenne and Surrey attached to the Barons' Letter of 1300-1 is not without its artistic advantages. On an ordinary, such as a fesse or cross, there should be at least two rows of checkers. Here, however, as in other cases, much depends upon the size of the shield, and a large one could obviously carry with advantage either on field or ordinary more squares than a small one without infringing any heraldic law.

Besides the plain cross familiar to most of us in the arms of St. George, and the similar form with engrailed edges, there is a variety known as the ragged cross, derived from two crossed pieces of a tree with lopped branches. This is often used in the so-called arms of Our Lord, showing the instruments of His Passion, or in compositions associated therewith, as in the cross with the three crowned nails forming the arms of the town of Colchester.

Several other forms of cross have also been used. The most popular of these is that with splayed or spreading ends, often split into three divisions, called the cross paty, which appears in the arms of St. Edward (see figs. [2] and [43]). It is practically the same as the cross called patonce, flory, or fleury, these being names applied to mere variations of drawing. The cross with les chefs flurettes of the Great Roll seems to have been one flowered, or with fleurs-de-lis, at the ends.

Another favourite cross was that with forked or split ends, formed of a fer-de-moline or mill-rind, sometimes called a cross fourchée, or, when the split ends were coiled, a cross recercelée. The arms of Antony Bek bishop of Durham (1284-1310) and patriarch of Jerusalem were gules a fer-de-moline ermine, and certain vestments 'woven with a cross of his arms which are called ferrum molendini' passed to his cathedral church at his death. On his seal of dignity the bishop is shown actually wearing such a vestment of his arms.

The tau or St. Anthony's cross also occurs in some late fifteenth century arms.

The small crosses with which the field of a shield was sometimes powdered were usually what are now called crosslets, but with rounded instead of the modern squared angles, as in the Beauchamp arms (fig. [14]), and a field powdered with these was simply called crusily. But the powdering sometimes consisted of crosses paty, or formy as they were also styled, as in the arms of Berkeley, or of the cross with crutched ends called a cross potent, like that in the arms of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. These crosses often had a spiked foot, as if for fixing them in the ground, and were then further described as fitchy or crosses fixable.

Since the elucidation of the artistic rather than the scientific side of heraldry is the object of this present work, it is advisable to show how it may best be studied.

The artistic treatment of heraldry can only be taught imperfectly by means of books, and it is far better that the student should be his own teacher by consulting such good examples of heraldic art as may commonly be found nigh at hand. He may, however, first equip himself to advantage with a proper grasp of the subject by reading carefully the admirable article on Heraldry, by Mr. Oswald Barron, in the new (eleventh) edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica.

The earliest and best of artistic authorities are heraldic seals. These came into common use towards the end of the twelfth century, much at the same time that armory itself became a thing of life, and they were constantly being engraved for men, and even for women, who bore and used arms, and for corporate bodies entitled to have seals.

Moreover, since every seal was produced under the direction of its owner and continually used by him, the heraldry displayed on seals has a personal interest of the greatest value, as showing not only what arms the owner bore, but how they were intended to be seen.

From seals may be learnt the different shapes of shields, and the times of their changes of fashion; the methods of depicting crests; the origin and use of supporters; the treatment of the 'words' and 'reasons' now called mottoes; the various ways of combining arms to indicate alliances, kinships, and official connexions; and the many other effective ways in which heraldry may be treated artistically without breaking the rigid rules of its scientific side.

Seals, unfortunately, owing to their inaccessibility, are not so generally available for purposes of study as some other authorities. They are consequently comparatively little known. Fine series, both of original impressions and casts, are on exhibition in the British and the Victoria and Albert Museums, and in not a few local museums also,[1] but the great collection in the British Museum is practically the only public one that can be utilized to any extent by the heraldic student, and then under the limitation of applying for each seal by a separate ticket.

The many examples of armorial seals illustrated in the present work will give the student a good idea of their importance and high artistic excellence.

Next to the heraldry on seals, that displayed on tombs and monuments, and in combination with architecture, may be studied, and, of course, with greater ease, since such a number of examples is available. Many a village church is comparatively as rich in heraldry as the abbey churches of Westminster and St. Albans, or the minsters of Lincoln and York and Beverley.

It is to the country church, too, that we may often look for lovely examples of old heraldic glass, which has escaped the destruction of other subjects that were deemed more superstitious (pls. I, II, and III).

PLATE I. ARMS OF MILTON ABBEY FROM A WINDOW IN IBBERTON CHURCH DORSET, C. 1475 (FROM ARCHAEOLOGIA, VOL. XLVII.)

PLATE II. SHIELDS IN STAINED GLASS OF THE 14TH CENTURY WITH THE ARMS OF (1) JOHN, EARL OF KENT (2) JOHN OF GAUNT AS KING OF CASTILE, AND (3) SIR WILLIAM ARUNDEL, K.G.: IN THE VICTORIA AND ALBERT MUSEUM.

PLATE III. SHIELDS IN STAINED GLASS OF THE 14TH CENTURY WITH THE ARMS OF (1) MOWBRAY (2) BEAUCHAMP, AND (3) AUDLEY: IN THE VICTORIA AND ALBERT MUSEUM.

But the student is not restricted to ecclesiastical buildings in his search for good examples of heraldry.

Inasmuch as there never was such a thing as an ecclesiastical style, it was quite immaterial to the medieval master masons whether they were called in to build a church or a gatehouse, a castle or a mansion, a barn or a bridge. The master carpenter worked in the same way upon a rood loft or a pew end as upon the screen or the coffer in the house of the lord; the glazier filled alike with his coloured transparencies the bay of the hall, the window of the chapel, or that of the minster or the abbey; and the tiler sold his wares to sacrist, churchwarden, or squire alike.

The applications of heraldry to architecture are so numerous that it is not easy to deal with them in any degree of connexion.

Shields of arms, badges, crests, and supporters are freely used in every conceivable way, and on every reasonable place: on gatehouses (figs. [3], [95], [96]) and towers, on porches and doorways, in windows and on walls, on plinths, buttresses, and pinnacles, on cornice, frieze, and parapet, on chimney-pieces (figs. [8], [94]) and spandrels, on vaults and roofs, on woodwork, metalwork (figs. [6], [7]), and furniture of all kinds, on tombs, fonts, pulpits, screens, and coffers, in painting, in glass, and on the tiles of the floor (figs. [1], [9], [14]).

Fig. 6. Heraldic candle-holder, etc. from the latten grate about the tomb of King Henry VII at Westminster.

Fig. 7. Firedog with armorial bearings.

Fig. 8. Chimney-piece in Tattershall castle, Lincolnshire, built by Ralph lord Cromwell between 1433 and 1455, with shields of arms and treasurer's purse and motto'

Fig. 9. Paving tiles with arms and badges of the Beauchamps, from Tewkesbury abbey church.

Though actual examples are now rare, we know from pictures and monuments, and the tantalizing descriptions in inventories, to how large an extent heraldry was used in embroidery and woven work, on carpets and hangings, on copes and frontals, on gowns, mantles, and jupes, on trappers and in banners, and even on the sails of ships (fig. [10]).

Fig. 10. Seal of Richard duke of Gloucester, as admiral of England in Dorset and Somerset (1462), with arms on the mainsail of the ship.

Wills and inventories also tell us that in jewellery and goldsmiths' work (see figs. [11] and [12]) heraldry played a prominent part, and by the aid of enamel it appeared in its proper colours, an advantage not always attainable otherwise (fig. [13]). Beautiful examples of heraldic shields bright with enamel occur in the abbey church of Westminster on the tombs of King Edward III and of William of Valence, and on the tombs at Canterbury and Warwick respectively of Edward prince of Wales and Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick; while in St. George's chapel in Windsor castle there are actually nearly ninety enamelled stall-plates of Knights of the Garter of earlier date than Tudor times, extending from about 1390 to 1485, and forming in themselves a veritable heraldic storehouse of the highest artistic excellence. (See pls. XV, XVI.)

Fig. 11. Heraldic buckle from the effigy of Robert lord Hungerford (ob. 1459) in Salisbury cathedral church.

Fig. 12. Heraldic buckle from the effigy of William lord Bardolf (ob. 1441) in Dennington church, Suffolk.

Fig. 13. Enamelled shield with the arms of Ballard on the print of a mazer (c. 1445) at All Souls college, Oxford.

Another source of coloured heraldry is to be found in the so-called rolls of arms.

While heraldry was a living art, it obviously became necessary to keep some record of the numerous armorial bearings which were already in use, as well as of those that were constantly being invented. This seems to have been done by entering the arms on long rolls of parchment. In the earliest examples these took the form of rows of painted shields, with the owners' names written over (pl. [IV]); but in a few rare cases the blazon or written description of the arms is also given, while other rolls consist wholly of such descriptions, as in the well-known Great and Boroughbridge Rolls. These have a special value in supplying the terminology of the old heraldry, but this belongs to the science or grammar and not the art of it. The pictured rolls, on the other hand, clearly belong to the artistic side, and as they date from the middle of the thirteenth century onwards, they show how the early heralds from time to time drew the arms they wished to record.

Fig. 14. Heraldic paving tiles from Tewkesbury abbey. The three uppermost bear the arms of Despenser, Berkeley, and Beauchamp, and the large one the arms of Robert FitzHamon, the founder, impaled with the singular cross of the abbey.

PLATE IV. PART (REDUCED) OF AN EARLY ROLL OF ARMS BELONGING TO THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF LONDON.

[1] It would surely not be a matter of much difficulty or expense to equip the leading schools of art in this country with sets of casts of these beautiful objects.

[CHAPTER II]
THE SHIELD AND ITS TREATMENT

Early Forms of Shields; Later Forms; Shields of Irregular Outline and Surface; The Filling of a Shield; Apparent versus Absolute Uniformity; Modern Rules as to Proportion; The Use and Abuse of Quartering: its Origin and Growth; Differencing of Arms; The Scutcheon of Ulster; Diapering.

From these preliminary remarks we may pass to the practical consideration of the principles of heraldic art.

And first as to shields and their treatment.

The form of a shield is in itself entirely arbitrary and void of meaning. Although it varied from time to time, this was simply a matter of fashion, like the shape of an arch or the pattern of a window. Such changes must not, however, be overlooked, for it would be absurd in actual practice to use an ornate shield of the style of the fifteenth or sixteenth century for a lion of (say) the thirteenth century type, or to fill a shield of early form with charges characteristic of a later date.

During the twelfth century shields were more or less kite-shaped, like those that were actually used, but in the thirteenth century they began to be shorter and straighter across the top. Good examples of this type may be found on seals. In the aisles behind the quire of Westminster abbey church, the beautiful shields in the spandrels of the wall arcade, of a date not later than 1259, retain their rounded upper corners. (See figs. [2] and [15].) The next form, with the upper corners square (figs. [16], [17]), came into vogue in the second half of the thirteenth century, and has continued always in use. Owing to the elastic way in which its curves can be slightly altered when required, it may safely be adopted in general practice. In the earliest examples the curves begin at the top, or just below, but later on they were so struck as to increase the area of the lower part of the shield in order to make more room for the charges. In some fourteenth century instances the sides continue straight nearly to the bottom, so that the shield is practically an oblong with rounded lower corners, like the shields of the royal arms on our coinage to-day (fig. [18] and pl. [VI] A). A tendency in the same direction is not uncommon throughout the fifteenth century. About the middle of the same century the fashion began to prevail, alongside the other, of representing a man's arms on the same irregularly shaped shield that he was wont to carry in the jousts. This is as wide at the bottom as the top, with its outline worked into curves, and has on the dexter, or right-hand side as borne, a deep notch for the lance to rest in during tilting; the top and bottom of the shield are often subdivided into three or more lobes or shallow curves. Good examples occur on seals and monuments, and some of the Garter stall-plates. (See pls. [V] A and B; [VI] B; [XVII]; and [XXIII] A.) Shields of a more ornate form are occasionally to be met with, like an example (fig. [19]) on a brass at Stoke Poges of the date 1476, with graceful leaf-work curling over at the top and bottom. Shields similarly ornamented occur on the doorway of a citizen's house now built into the Guildhall at Norwich (fig. [20]).

Fig. 15. Shield with rounded corners (c. 1259) of Richard earl of Cornwall in the quire of Westminster abbey church.

Fig. 16. Shields of English work from the tomb of William earl of Pembroke (ob. 1296) in Westminster abbey church.

Fig. 17. Seal of Hugh Bardolf showing shield with square corners. From the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 18. Seal and counterseal of Simon lord of Montagu, with shield of unusual form supported by two bearded men and surmounted by the castle of Corfe, of which Simon became governor in 1298. The quadrangular signet displays a griffin. From the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 19. Shield of ornate form, from a brass at Stoke Poges, Bucks, 1476.

Fig. 20. Head of a doorway, now in Norwich Guildhall, with arms of King Henry VIII, the City of Norwich, and the Goldsmiths' Company.

PLATE V.—Examples of shaped shields.

• A John Tiptoft earl of Worcester, 1449.
• B William Herbert earl of Huntingdon, 1479.

PLATE VI.—Various shapes of shields.

• A John earl of Kent 1351.
• B John Mowbray, duke of Norfolk and earl marshal, 1442.

In the simpler forms the field of a shield in painted representations is invariably shown flat; but in carvings, and occasionally on seals, a slight convexity, or even concavity, is often met with, the artistic advantages of which it is unnecessary to enlarge upon. In some of the later ornate forms, like those described above, the incurved or engrailed edge is accompanied by a field worked with a series of ridges and furrows (figs. [21] and [23]). The effect of this may be good, but there is a danger of carrying it to excess and so injuring the appearance of the charges. If the shield be well covered by the bearings on it, it is generally better to use one of simple form than one with an irregular outline and ridged surface; but there is, of course, no reason why both forms should not be used concurrently in architectural or other works, as they sometimes were of old.

Fig. 21. Shield with engrailed edges (c. 1520), from the chantry chapel of abbot Thomas Ramryge in St. Albans abbey church.

The same principle as the ridging of a shield to relieve the plain surface was also applied to the ordinaries upon it. An early example may be seen upon the tomb of queen Eleanor at Westminster, which has the bends in the shields of Ponthieu ridged along the middle line. The shield borne by Brian FitzAlan (ob. 1302) in his effigy at Bedale has the alternate bars of his arms (barry of eight pieces gold and gules) treated in the same way. Another instance may be seen on the effigy of Sir Richard Whatton (c. 1325) at Whatton, Notts, in which a bend, though charged, is ridged. The shields on the tomb of Guy lord Bryen (ob. 1390) at Tewkesbury (fig. [22]) furnish typical later examples, while during the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries instances are as common as the curved and ridged shields described above, especially as regards crosses and saltires, as at St. Albans, the George Inn at Glastonbury (fig. [23]), and elsewhere.

Fig. 22. Shields with ridged charges, from the monument of Guy lord Bryen (ob. 1390) in Tewkesbury abbey church.

Fig. 23. Armorial panels, the middlemost with the arms, supporters, and badges of King Edward IV, from the George Inn at Glastonbury.

In monumental effigies the shield borne by a knight often has a convex or rounded surface (fig. [24]), and in late fifteenth century and Tudor architecture otherwise flat shields sometimes have the middle swelled out, as on dean Gunthorpe's oriel at Wells, in a manner very popular in Renaissance work. (See figs. [111] and [195].)

Fig. 24. Shield with curved surface, from an effigy of a Pembridge at Clehonger, Herefordshire.

A reference to a number of good ancient examples of heraldic shields or banners will disclose the care that has been taken to occupy the field, as far as possible, with whatever is placed upon it (figs. [25], [26], [27]). A lion or an eagle, for instance, will have the limbs and extremities so spread out as to fill every available space; and the same will be found in every group or combination of objects capable of arrangement or extension.

Fig. 25. Shield from the seal of Henry Percy (from the Barons' Letter) with well-drawn lion.

Fig. 26. Shield with a leaping lion, from a brass (c. 1380) at Felbrigge in Norfolk.

Fig. 27. Shield with an eagle from a brass at Great Tew, Oxon, c. 1410.

Even with most unpromising combinations, or a group that cannot be extended or modified at all, or with a single charge like a fleur-de-lis, or ordinary such as a bend, (fig. [30]), pale, or cheveron (pl. [VIII] A), a judicious adjustment of proportions, or some equally common-sense method, enabled a medieval artist to make his shield look well.

Fig. 28. Seal of Queen's College, Oxford, 1341, with well-filled shields.

Fig. 29. Shield with a griffin, from a brass of 1405 at Boughton-under-Blean, Kent.

Fig. 30. Seal of Peter de Mauley IV (from the Barons' Letter), showing a simple well-balanced shield.

Another point that may be noticed in all old work is that in shields containing several similar objects no two are exactly alike. If the charges be, for example, three roses or three roundels or three lions (fig. [32]), two will be placed in the upper and the third in the lower part of the shield. But the latter will often be somewhat larger than the others, and these, in turn, will differ slightly the one from the other as they do in nature. So, too, in a case like the three leopards of the King of England, whether displayed on shield or in banner, no two are exactly alike, but each differs somewhat from another in pose or in size (fig. [32]). Even when the same charge is repeated many times, like the fleurs-de-lis in the old arms of France, any possible chance of mechanical monotony is avoided by a trifling variation in the shape of each, as in the shield of the King of France in the early series at Westminster (fig. [34]).

Another fact is that in the old work lines and curves are hardly ever quite true, but drawn by hand instead of with pen or compasses. The modern artist, on the contrary, usually draws his lines and curves with mechanical precision; his charges are exact copies one of another; the fact that they do not fill the field (pace the royal arms on the coinage) is to him quite unimportant, and the final result is that under no circumstances will his work look well. Even in old stencilling a pleasing effect never seen in modern work of the kind was produced through a not too rigid adherence to a regularity of application.

Fig. 31. Shield with a bend counter-flowered, from the brass of Sir Thomas Bromfleet (1430) at Wymington, Beds.

Fig. 32. Shield with three lions, from a brass at Stanford Dingley, Berks, 1444.

Fig. 33. Shield of the royal arms done in boiled leather, from the tomb of Edward prince of Wales at Canterbury, 1376.

Fig. 34. Shield of the King of France (c. 1259) in the quire of Westminster abbey church.

Another cause of the bad effect of much modern heraldry is the unnecessary adherence to the rules laid down in some of the textbooks and manuals as to the relative widths of ordinaries and subordinaries. The old heralds certainly did not fetter themselves with such shackles. A cheveron, a bend, a fesse, or a cross was drawn of the best proportion to look well (figs. [35], [36]). If charged it would be wider than when plain. If placed between charges it was drawn narrower, if itself uncharged, and thus took its proper relative position with regard to the size and arrangement or the charges. So, too, with a border; if uncharged or merely gobony (i.e. formed of short lengths of alternate colours) or engrailed, it was drawn very narrow, and even if charged it was not allowed much greater width (figs. [38], [39]). It thus never unduly encroached upon the field or other contents of the shield, and yet remained an artistic addition in itself. The curious bordering known as the tressure, which is almost peculiar to Scotland, and familiar to us through its occurrence in the shield of our Sovereign, is drawn sufficiently narrow in all good examples to leave ample room for the ramping lion it fences in, and its frieze of fleurs-de-lis is formed of a good number of flowers, instead of the eight considered sufficient in the royal arms of to-day. Even a chief, if necessary, was enlarged from the 'less than one-third of the shield' of to-day to the one-half of it, or even more, as may be seen in some of the examples of the arms of the monastery in the abbey church of Westminster, or in those of the town of Southampton.

From the brass of bishop Robert Wyvil in the cathedral church of Salisbury, 1375.

From the brass of William Holyngbroke at New Romney in Kent, 1375.

Figs. 35 and 36. Shields with uncharged ordinaries.

Fig. 37. Shield with a charged bend, from a brass at Kidderminster, 1415.

From the brass of William Grevel (1401) at Chipping Campden in Gloucestershire.

From the brass of Thomas Walysel (c. 1420) at Whitchurch, Oxon.

Figs. 38 and 39. Shields with engrailed borders, plain and charged.

Another feature of early heraldry which it is well to bear in mind is the sparing use of what is known as quartering, or the method of combining in one shield the arms of two or more persons or families. One of our oldest instances of this occurs on the tomb of Queen Eleanor, the first wife of King Edward I, at Westminster, and shows her paternal arms of Castile and Leon so arranged (fig. [40]). Another early example occurs in the Great Roll, temp. Edward II, where the arms of Sir Simon Montagu (ob. c. 1316), silver a fesse indented gules of three indentures, are quartered with azure a gold griffin. So long as the shield contained only four quarters, with the first and fourth, and the second and third, respectively alike, the effect was often good, as in the cases just noted, or in the beautiful arms of France and England combined used after 1340 by King Edward III (fig. [41]). There are also many examples, as in the well-known bearings of the Veres and of the Despensers, where a quarterly disposition of the shield forms the basis of the arms. But when, as became common in the fifteenth century, quarters were multiplied or subdivided, the artistic effect of the old simple shield was lost or destroyed. As the principle was further extended, especially in Tudor and Stewart times, the result became more and more confused in appearance, until the field resembled rather a piece of coloured patchwork than a combination of various arms all more or less beautiful in themselves.

Fig. 40. Quartered shield of Queen Eleanor of Castile, from her tomb at Westminster, 1291.

Fig. 41. Arms of King Edward III, from his tomb at Westminster.

The origin and growth of these combinations, which actually are perfectly lawful and proper, and yet often quite accidental, can easily be illustrated by a few typical examples.

In 1382 King Richard II, who used the same arms as his grandfather, a quarterly shield of Old France and England, married Anne of Bohemia, daughter of the Emperor Charles IV. As her shield was also a quartered one, the combined arms of the king and his queen, as shown upon her seal, formed a shield of eight quarters (pl. [VII] A). This was further complicated through the later assumption by King Richard of the arms assigned to St. Edward (fig. [43]), a cross between five birds; and the eight-quartered shield with this clumsy addition at one side may be seen on the Felbrigge brass.

PLATE VII.—Examples of Quartering.

• A Queen Anne of Bohemia, 1382.
• B John of Gaunt's privy seal as King of Castile, 1372.

Fig. 42. Shield with impaled quarters, from the brass of Peter Halle (c. 1420) at Herne in Kent.

Fig. 43. Arms of St. Edward, from the tomb of Edmund duke of York (ob. 1402) at King's Langley.

These arms of St. Edward were used for a time duly 'differenced' in conjunction with his own quarterly arms by Henry of Lancaster, afterwards King Henry IV, and are impaled with those of his wife, Mary de Bohun, on his seal (1399) as duke of Hereford. Artistically the lop-sided effect so produced is quite unhappy.

Many fifteenth century shields show forth, by the simple quartering of a man's arms with those of his wife or his mother, his succession or summons as a lord of parliament, or his inheritance of great estates.

But this simplicity was gradually destroyed when the added quartering was itself quartered, as in the arms of Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury (see pls. [XVII] A and [XXII] B), or the quarterings were all different, as in the case of Humphrey Stafford duke of Buckingham. When but a year old he succeeded his father as earl of Stafford, and on his mother's death he became earl of Buckingham, Hereford, Northampton, Essex, and Perche! These dignities are duly displayed in the quarterings of his arms on his seal, as follows: 1. The quartered arms of his mother, for the earldom of Buckingham. 2. Bohun of Hereford. 3. Bohun of Northampton. 4. Stafford (fig. [44]).

Fig. 44. Seal of Humphrey Stafford earl of Buckingham, Hereford, Stafford, Northampton, and Perche, as captain of Calais and lieutenant of the Marches, 1442.

When Henry duke of Buckingham succeeded in 1460 to all the dignities of duke Humphrey his grandfather, he wisely elected, by the advice of the kings-of-arms, to drop the above quarterings, and to use only the arms of his great-grandmother, who as sister and heir of Humphrey duke of Gloucester and earl of Buckingham bore France and England quarterly within a border silver.

About 1433 Margaret, daughter of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, was married to John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury, and she thereupon had a beautiful seal engraved, with two large shields or arms hung side by side by their straps from a ragged staff, the badge of her father's house (pl. [XXVII] B). This charming composition is, however, quite spoilt through the complicated treatment of the shields. One of these bears the arms of husband and wife conjoined, the other those of the lady's father. The earl of Warwick's shield is a quartered one of Beauchamp and Newburgh, with a small superimposed scutcheon. The earl of Shrewsbury's arms also consisted of four quarters, to which his wife added her four (omitting the scutcheon), and thus made a patchwork of eight.

A more remarkable and equally accidental case may be illustrated by the brass of Sir Humphrey Bourchier (1471) in the abbey church of Westminster.

This displays four shields: one has the arms of Bourchier quartering Lovain and impaling the quarterly arms of Berners; and another, the six quarterings of Sir Humphrey's wife, Elizabeth Tylney. In a third shield these are quite properly impaled, with a resultant of fourteen quarters. In the fourth shield these are quartered together, and so produce a dreadful confusion of twenty-eight quarters! It is not necessary here to show how these shields might have been simplified in themselves, but from the artistic standpoint there cannot be any doubt that the two first should at least have been kept separate. The many other examples to be found in the illustrations of this book will serve as useful reminders of the greater advantage artistically of simpler treatment.

It is moreover well to remember that in the majority of cases there is not the least need in actual work to produce a great many quarterings in a shield. In numerous examples, especially in the sixteenth century and later, they were assumed merely for display, and to reduce them to a reasonable few is often a most desirable thing.

It is difficult without knowledge of individual cases to lay down any definite rules for dealing with quarterings, but there can be no question that in general a shield looks best without any at all. In the case of a man with a compound name or title, who represents more than one family or dignity, it would be legitimate to add a quartering on that account, but only of the actual arms of the family or dignity represented. It is however so hard to draw a line or to restrain the wishes of clients that the fifteenth century example of Henry duke of Buckingham should ever be borne in mind.

As soon as the principle of hereditary descent of armorial bearings became established, the necessity arose of making some slight difference between the arms of a father and those borne by his sons. This was usually done by adding to the paternal arms such more or less unobtrusive device as a label, or narrow border, or a small charge like a crescent or a molet.

The lord John of Eltham, son of King Edward II, bears upon his tomb at Westminster a beautifully carved shield of the arms of England differenced by a border of France; and one of the sons of King Edward III, Thomas of Woodstock, differenced his father's arms by a silver border, as at an earlier period did Edmund earl of Kent, the youngest son of King Edward I.

The label is a narrow band with long pendent strips or pieces, usually three, but sometimes four or five in number, placed upon and across the upper part of a shield (fig. [45]). It is now used to distinguish the arms of an eldest son from those of his father, but this was not always the rule, and younger sons of King Henry III and King Edward I, and at least three of the sons of King Edward III, besides the Prince of Wales, bore distinctive labels for difference. Anciently, the label was very narrow, and the pendent pieces of equal or nearly equal width throughout, even when charged with devices, as they sometimes were. The colour was also a matter of choice. The first three Edwards, during their fathers' lifetime, successively bore blue labels, sometimes of three, sometimes of five pieces, while the younger brother of King Edward I, Edmund earl of Lancaster, used a label of France (blue with gold fleurs-de-lis) of four pieces, and Thomas of Brotherton, second son of King Edward I, a silver label of three pieces.

Fig. 45. Shield of Sir Hugh Hastings, from the Elsing brass (1347), with diapered maunch and a label of three pieces.

In the case of the sons of King Edward III, the Prince of Wales bore at first a silver label of five and later of three pieces; Lionel duke of Clarence seems to have borne at one time a gold label with a red cross on each piece for Ulster, and at another a silver label charged on each piece with a red quarter for Clare; John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster bore an ermine label for his earldom of Richmond (pl. [II]); and Edmund duke of York a silver label with three red roundels on each piece (pl. [XXI] B). The rolls of arms furnish instances of labels of all colours, and with pieces charged with various devices, such as leopards, eagles, castles, martlets, etc.

Differencing with labels was likewise extended to crests, and a good example may be seen on the monument of Edward prince of Wales (ob. 1376) at Canterbury (fig. [46]), as well as in fig. [139].

Fig. 46. Part of the gilt-latten effigy of Edward prince of Wales at Canterbury, showing labels over both the arms and the crest.

In modern heraldry the label is often drawn unduly wide, with short and ugly wedge-shaped pieces hanging from or sticking on to it, and sometimes it does not even extend to the sides of the shield. The result is that instead of its being a comparatively unobtrusive addition to the arms the label becomes unduly conspicuous and void of all artistic effect.

The old way of differencing by the addition of a crescent, molet, or similar device was generally carried out in quite an artistic fashion on account of the care taken to place the device agreeably, a favourite position being on the principal ordinary or charge of the arms.

Many cadets of the great family of Nevill, for example, differenced the arms of their house, gules a saltire silver, by placing the device on the middle of the saltire, and some of the Beauchamps placed the differencing mark on the fesse of their arms. In other cases the device was placed in the upper part of the shield, or in some other such point where it would least interfere with or be confounded with the charges.

One of the most difficult differences an artist has to contend with to-day is the silver scutcheon with a red hand which is placed upon the arms of baronets. Its position of course varies, and may often be altered with advantage, and it looks all the better if drawn not unduly large and with a simple heater-shaped shield. But some artists wisely leave it out altogether.

In the case of all devices introduced as differences it will generally be found advisable to draw them to a somewhat smaller scale than the charges already in the arms.

In many ancient heraldic shields, especially in painted glass, and to a lesser extent in carved work and on seals, the plain uncharged surfaces of the field or ordinaries are relieved by covering them with the purely ornamental decoration called diapering (figs. [45], [48]). An early instance in relief occurs on the shield of the effigy in the Templars' church in London usually ascribed to Geoffrey de Magnavilla; and another delicately sculptured example of later date is to be seen on the Vere effigy in Hatfield Broadoak church in Essex (fig. [47]). Several fine instances of painted diapering will be found in Stothard's Monumental Effigies. This beautiful treatment has, happily, been largely revived of late years by the glass painters, who use it quite successfully, probably from the ease with which in their case it can be applied. Modern carvers use it very sparingly, and this perhaps is as it should be, for diapering needs to be done with great skill in sculpture to look well. A careful study therefore of old examples is advisable, in order thoroughly to understand the principles of its application.

Fig. 47. Diapered shield of the arms of Vere, from an effigy in Hatfield Broadoak church, Essex.

Fig. 48. Diapered shield from the seal of Robert Waldby archbishop of York, 1390, for the regality of Hexham.

Some of the finest diapered shields in carved work occur in the spandrels of the splendid monument of the lady Eleanor Percy in Beverley minster (figs. [49], [50]). Good instances are to be found on seals, and a number of these are here illustrated in order to show the proper treatment of diapering. (See pls. [VIII], [XII], and [XXVII] A.)

Fig. 49. Diapered shield of the arms of Clun, from the monument of the lady Eleanor Percy (ob. 1337) in Beverley minster.

Fig. 50. Diapered shield of the arms of Percy, from the monument of the lady Eleanor Percy (ob. 1337) in Beverley minster.

PLATE VIII.—Examples of diapered shields.

• A Humphrey earl of Stafford, in 1429.
• B John Tiptoft.
• C Elizabeth, wife of John la Warre, in 1393.

It is of course to be borne in mind that diapering is merely a surface decoration, and it must not on any account be emphasized by any difference of colour from that of the field or ordinary it relieves, nor must it be treated with such prominence as to render it liable to be mistaken for a charge or charges.

Diapering can be represented effectively in embroidered work by the use of flowered or patterned damasks, as may be seen in the banners in St. Paul's cathedral church in the chapel of the Order of St. Michael and St. George.

[CHAPTER III]
THE SHIELD AND ITS TREATMENT
(continued)

Armorial Bearings of Ladies; Use of Lozenges and Roundels as variant forms of Shields; Arms of Men on Lozenges; Combinations of Shields with Lozenges and Roundels of Arms on Seals and in Embroideries.

Before leaving the subject of the shield a few words must be written about the armorial bearings of ladies.

It has always been the practice for the daughters of a house to bear, without difference or alteration, the arms of their father. This practice has been departed from only in quite modern times, by the addition of distinctive labels to the arms borne by our princesses. To the manner in which married ladies have arranged or 'marshalled' their arms reference will be made later, but it is necessary here to call attention to the fact that it has been customary for a long time to place the arms of widows and single ladies upon shields that are lozenge-shaped. A good early example is that from the monument in Westminster abbey church of Frances Brandon duchess of Suffolk (ob. 1559), shown in fig. [51].

Fig. 51. Lozenge of arms from the monument at Westminster of Frances Brandon duchess of Suffolk (ob. 1559).

This singularly inconvenient form of shield, upon which it is often impossible to draw the arms properly, began to be used early in the fourteenth century.

It was not, however, used for or restricted to the arms of ladies, since the evidence of seals shows that it was at first used to contain the armorial bearings of men. There can likewise be little doubt that it and the roundel, which was also charged with arms, were contemporaneously invented by the seal engravers as variants from the ordinary form of shield; and it is interesting to note that the majority of the examples occur on seals which have a background or setting of elaborate tracery.

The roundel seems to have originated in the covering of the entire field of a circular seal with the arms of its owner, such as the leopards of England which are so disposed in a counterseal of Edward of Carnarvon as prince of Wales. Two seals of John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, engraved probably in 1372, show a similar treatment: the one bearing his arms impaling, and the other his arms impaled with, those of Castile and Leon (pl. [VII] B). The former commemorates his marriage with Constance of Castile, and the latter the duke's claim in right of his wife to the kingdom of Castile itself.

A large enamelled roundel, party gules and azure with a gold charbocle, accompanies the shield and crested helm which, with it, form the stall-plate of Ralph lord Bassett (c. 1390) at Windsor.

One of the lesser seals appended to the Barons' Letter, that of Robert FitzPain, is an oval filled with the owner's arms (fig. [52]).

Fig. 52. Seal of Robert FitzPain, with arms in an oval.

One of the earliest examples of arms on a lozenge is on a seal of Thomas Furnival, who died in 1279, and another but little later is furnished by the seal of William de Braose, appended to a deed of either 1282 or 1314 at Magdalen College, Oxford (pl. [IX] B).

PLATE IX.—Use of lozenges and roundels of arms.

• A William Paynel, in 1301.
• B William Braose, ? 1282.
• C Parnell Bensted, in 1359.
• D E Elizabeth of Clare.

That of William Paynel, appended to the Barons' Letter, also has his arms on a lozenge (pl. [IX] A).

The first seal of a lady in which lozenges of arms occur is probably that of Joan, daughter of Henry count of Barre and Eleanor daughter of King Edward I, who married, in 1306, John de Warenne earl of Surrey (fig. [53]). This has five lozenges arranged in cross: that in the middle has her husband's checkers, those on each side her father's barbels, etc. and those above and below the three leopards of England. The lady's descent from King Edward is further shown by the castles and lions of his consort Eleanor of Castile.

Fig. 53. Seal of Joan de Barre, wife of John de Warenne earl of Surrey, 1306.

Another interesting example, of a date about 1320, is the seal of Parnel, daughter of H. de Grapenell, and widow (1) of John FitzJohn and (2) of Sir John Bensted (ob. 1323). This has in the middle a shield of the arms of Bensted, gules three gold gemell-bars, between four lozenges, apparently for Grapenell and FitzJohn (pl. [IX] C).

Contemporary with Parnel Bensted's seal are two others in which roundels are used instead of lozenges. Both are traceried seals of Elizabeth daughter of Gilbert of Clare earl of Gloucester, and Joan daughter of King Edward I and Queen Eleanor of Castile. She was thrice married: first, about 1306 to John of Burgh, son of Richard earl of Ulster; secondly to Theobald lord Verdon; and thirdly to Roger lord d'Amory, who died in 1322.

One of these seals has in the middle, in a shield, Elizabeth's own arms of Clare impaling Burgh within a black border bedewed with tears. Above and below are roundels of Clare, and on either side other roundels of Verdon and d'Amory. In the interspaces are the castles and lions of Castile and Leon (pl. [IX] D).

The other seal is similarly arranged, but has in the middle a large shield of d'Amory, between roundels of arms of the lady's other husbands above and below, and of Clare for her father or herself on either side. The interspaces again contain castles and lions (pl. [IX] E).

Four other early seals of great artistic merit displaying roundels may also be described, especially since they are apparently the work of the same engraver. They are filled with tracery, consisting of a triangle enclosing a circle, which contains a large shield, with cusped circles on its sides containing roundels or devices.

The first is for Mary de Seynt-Pol, who married in 1322 Aymer of Valence earl of Pembroke (fig. [54]). The shield bears the dimidiated arms of husband and wife; on a roundel in base are the arms of her mother; and higher up are roundels of England and France, out of compliment to King Edward II and Queen Isabel.

Fig. 54. Seal of Mary de Seynt-Pol, wife of Aymer of Valence earl of Pembroke, 1322.

The second is for John de Bohun earl of Hereford, and has a large shield of Bohun with roundels also of Bohun. It was probably engraved in 1322, and before the earl's marriage in 1325 (pl. [X] A).

PLATE X.—Use of lozenges and roundels of arms.

• A John de Bohun earl of Hereford, 1322.
• B Hugh Courtenay earl of Devon, 1334.
• C Henry Sturmy, lord of Savernake Forest, 1355.
• D Elizabeth, wife of Walter Bermyngham, in 1341.
• E Sibyl, wife of Sir Edmund Arundel, 1350.

The third is for Richard FitzAlan earl of Arundel (1330-1), who succeeded to the vast Warenne estates in 1347. It has in the middle a shield of FitzAlan, and about it three roundels with the checkers of Warenne.

The fourth is for Hugh Courtenay earl of Devon (1334-5-40)or his son Hugh (1340-77). The shield displays the arms of Courtenay and in each of the outer circles is a sexfoil (pl. [X] B).

To these examples may be added a fifth of about the same date, for Henry Sturmy or Esturmy, lord of the forest of Savernake. This has the Sturmy shield in the middle, between two roundels of the Hussey arms, and a third roundel above with the tenure horn of Savernake Forest (pl. [X] C).

Other seals that may be quoted in illustration of the indiscriminate use of shields, roundels, and lozenges during the fourteenth century are those of: (1) Juliana, daughter of Thomas Leybourne, and wife of John lord Hastings (ob. 1325), with a shield of Hastings impaling Leybourne, encircled by six lozenges of arms indicative of other alliances and descents, derived from the fact of the lady having been married thrice; (2) Elizabeth de Multon, wife of Walter Bermyngham, with the shield of Bermyngham surrounded by six roundels of other arms; (3) Maud, daughter of Bartholomew Badlesmere, and wife in 1336 of John de Vere earl of Oxford (fig. [55]), with a shield of Vere between lozenges of Clare, Badlesmere (her father and herself), Clare with label (mother), and FitzPayn (first husband); (4) Maud, daughter of Henry earl of Lancaster, married first to William of Burgh earl of Ulster, and secondly (in 1343-4) to Sir Ralph Ufford (fig. [56]), with lozenges of Lancaster (father and herself) above and Chaworth (mother) below, and shields of Burgh and Ufford (husbands); (5) Sybil, daughter of William Montagu earl of Salisbury and Katharine Graunson, with shield of FitzAlan with a label, for her husband Sir Edmund of Arundel, second son of Edmund FitzAlan earl of Arundel, between lozenges of Montagu and Graunson (pl. [X] E);[2] and (6) Elizabeth, widow of Sir Gilbert Elsefield, with a lozenge of Elsefield between four roundels of other arms (impression 1382-3).

Fig. 55. Seal of Maud Badlesmere, wife of John de Vere earl of Oxford, 1336.

Fig. 56. Seal of Maud of Lancaster, wife (1) of William of Burgh earl of Ulster, and (2) of Sir Ralph Ufford, 1343-4.

Alice, wife of Thomas of Heslerton, has on her seal (impression 1374) a large lozenge of the arms of Heslerton (gules six silver lions with gold crowns) within a quatrefoil, outside of which are four small banners of arms with martlets between.

Lastly may be noted a seal of Roger Foljambe, attached to a deed of 1396-7, having a lozenge of his arms (a bend and six scallop shells) surrounded by his word or motto.

But seals are not the only authorities for the indiscriminate use of roundels and lozenges as well as shields of arms. In the Victoria and Albert Museum at South Kensington is an enamelled coffer of late thirteenth century work decorated with lozenges of arms of England, Valence, Dreux, Angoulême, Brabant, and Lacy. The famous Syon cope de opere Anglicano, also in the Victoria and Albert Museum, has the existing orphrey filled with large armorial roundels and lozenges, and its border is composed of a stole and fanon embroidered throughout with lozenges of arms. (See fig. [57].) Christchurch, Canterbury, in 1315 possessed an albe 'sewn with lozenges with the arms of the king of England and of Leybourne,'[3] and another 'sewn with the arms of Northwode and Ponyngg in squares';[4] also an albe 'sewn with divers arms in lozenges with purple frets with a stole and fanon of the same work,'[5] evidently not unlike those on the Syon cope.

Fig. 57. The Syon Cope, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum.

It may also be noted that the pillows beneath the head of the effigy at Westminster of Aveline countess of Lancaster (c. 1275) are both covered with heraldic lozenges: on the upper one with the arms of her husband alternating with the lion of Redvers; on the lower with the vair cross on red of her father, William of Forz earl of Albemarle. The gilt metal bed plate under the effigy of William of Valence earl of Pembroke (ob. 1296), likewise at Westminster, is also covered with a lozengy diaper of England and Valence, still bright with the original enamel; the workmanship of this, however, is probably French.

The restriction of the lozenge to the arms of ladies has clearly therefore no medieval precedent, and there is not any reason why the modern custom should not be set aside when for artistic reasons a shield or roundel is preferable.

[2] Impression attached to a deed in the British Museum, 1350-1.

[3] 'consuta de losenges cum armis regis Anglie et de Leyburn.'

[4] 'consuta de armis de Northwode et Ponyngg in quadrangulis.'

[5] 'consuta de diversis armis in lozengis cum frectis purpureis cum stola et manipulo ejusdem operis.'

[CHAPTER IV]
THE TREATMENT OF CRESTS

Origin of Crests; Earliest examples of Crests; Ways of wearing Crests; The Helm and its treatment; Modern use of Helms; Absurd Crests; Use of Crests other than by individuals; The comparative sizes of Helms and Crests.

A crest was originally, as its name reminds us, a tuft or plume on the head of a bird. Such a plume or tuft, or bush as it was often called, was fixed in early times as an ornament on the top of a helm, of which it thus formed the crest. Other devices, such as could conveniently be so worn, were soon used for the same purpose, and like armorial bearings became associated with particular individuals. In later days when the helm enveloped the whole head, the crest played a useful part in revealing the wearer's identity, though his face was hidden.

One of the earliest suggestions of a crest in English armory appears on the second great seal (of 1198) of King Richard I, whose cylindrical helm has a leopard upon the cap with two wing-shaped fans above turned in opposite directions. On many seals of the second half of the thirteenth century, as, for instance, on those of Robert de Vere earl of Oxford (1263) and Henry de Laci earl of Lincoln (1272), the knight is represented as riding in full armour, with the helm surmounted with a fan-shaped plume, which is also repeated upon the horse's head. (See also fig. [58] and [pl. XI B].)

Fig. 58. Seal of Thomas de Moulton, with fan-shaped crest on helm and horse's head. From the Barons' Letter.

PLATE XI.—Early examples of crests.

• A Roger of Leybourne, ob. 1284.
• B Henry de Perci, in 1301.

An early use of a crest proper is furnished by the seal of Roger of Leybourne (ob. 1284). This shows his shield of arms (bearing six lions) hung upon a tree, with his banner (charged with one lion only) behind, and at one side a helm with lion crest ([pl. XI A]). Thomas of Berkeley in 1295 has upon his seal a shield flanked by two mermaids and surmounted by a helm carrying a mitre for a crest. Thomas earl of Lancaster (1296) on two separate seals has a wiver, or two-legged dragon, upon his helm, and this again is repeated upon his horse's head (fig. [59]). The seal of his brother Henry of Lancaster, appended to the Barons' Letter, also shows his helm crested with a wiver (fig. [60]). Two other early examples of crests on seals from the Barons' Letter are shown in figs. [61] and [62]. Sir John Peche, on a seal appended to a deed of 1323-4, has his shield flanked by wivers and surmounted by a helm with squirrel crest. William Montagu earl of Salisbury (1336-7), in the mounted figure of himself on his fine seal, has a demi-griffin fixed upon his crowned helm ([pl. XII B]), and King Edward III shows for the first time, on his seal of 1340, his crest of a crowned leopard standing upon the cap of estate which surmounts his helm.

Fig. 59. Seal of Thomas earl of Lancaster, Leicester, and Ferrers, showing wiver crest on his helm and horse's head. From the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 60. Seal of Henry of Lancaster, lord of Monmouth, with wiver crest and quasi-supporters.

PLATE XII.—Early uses of crests, on seals of William Montagu earl of Salisbury, 1337-44.

During the first half of the fourteenth century there is an interesting diversity in the manner of representing crests, when not being worn by their owners.

William Montagu earl of Salisbury shows on his counterseal ([pl. XII A]) his shield supported by two griffins, and ensigned by the demi-griffin issuing from an open crown which in his seal he carries upon his helm. John Engayn, in 1349, has upon the upper edge of his shield a wolf or fox walking under a tree. Henry duke of Lancaster (1341) ensigns the shield of his arms with a cap of estate surmounted by a leopard (pl. [XIII] C); and Peter de Mauley, the sixth of that name, in 1379-80 has a seal with his simple arms (a bend) supported by two ramping leopards, and surmounted by a fierce dragon breathing defiance (pl. [XX] B). In none of these cases does a helm appear.

Fig. 61. Seal of Robert de la Warde, with fan crest.

Fig. 62. Seal of Walter de Mounci, with the helm surmounted by a fox as a crest.

After the middle of the fourteenth century the crest is invariably shown as part of the helm.

The helm, it is hardly necessary to say, was such an one as formed part of the war harness of the time, and in the numerous armorial representations that may be found on seals or on monuments or buildings it is almost invariably shown in profile. This was, however, merely on account of its being the most convenient way of displaying the crest, and, in accordance with the usual medieval common-sense, examples are to be found which show the helm and crest facing the observer.

Thus Thomas de Holand (1353) has on his seal a shield of his arms hung from a tree and flanked by two fronting helms, each encircled by a crown and surmounted by a huge bush of feathers; Sir Robert de Marni (1366) flanks his shield, which is also hung from a tree, with two fronting helms, each crested with a tall pair of wings rising from the sides of a cap of estate (fig. [63]); Sir Stephen Hales (1392-3) on his seal has a couched shield of his arms surmounted by a fronting helm, with a crown about it from which issue two fine wings; Robert Deynelay (1394-5) in like manner shows his helm crested with two ears of a bat or hare; and Walter lord FitzWalter (1415-31) has on his seal a couched shield, and on a fronting helm above a cap of estate surmounted by a star between two large wings (pl. [XIII] A). Another example of a fronting helm is shown in pl. [V] B.

Fig. 63. Seal of Sir Robert de Marni, 1366, with crested helms flanking the shield.

The present custom of using various types of helm facing different ways to denote grades of rank is comparatively recent as well as often inconvenient, and utterly subversive of the proper method of displaying a crest, which should invariably face the same way as its wearer. This fact is amply illustrated by the early stall-plates at Windsor, but the modern crested helms surmounting the stalls there were for a long time the scoff of students of heraldry owing to the absurd manner in which the crests were set athwart the fronting helms. It is pleasant to be able to add that the crests have lately been replaced almost throughout by a new and larger series, worthy of their surroundings, and set upon the helms in the proper way. Under the same enlightened administration the most recent stall-plates are enamelled creations of real artistic and heraldic excellence.

Fig. 64. Crest, etc. of Sir John Astley, from a MS. c. 1420.

The crest was, of old time, almost always something that could actually be set upon a helm, and such objects as naturally were too large or too heavy were modelled in boiled leather, wood, or other light material: like the fine crest borne at the funeral of Edward prince of Wales, now over his tomb at Canterbury, which is a leopard standing upon a cap of estate and modelled in leather covered with stamped gesso (fig. [65]); or the soldan's head of carved wood that surmounts the funeral helm of George lord Cobham, in Cobham church, Kent (fig. [66]).

Fig. 65. Crest of Edward prince of Wales, 1376, of leather and stamped gesso, from his tomb at Canterbury.

Fig. 66. Funeral helm and wooden crest of George Brooke lord Cobham (ob. 1558) in Cobham church, Kent.

Such impossible crests as the pictorial scenes and other absurdities granted by the kings-of-arms during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and even back to Elizabethan days, would not have been thought of at an earlier period, when heraldry was a living art.

The degradation of the proper use of a crest, other than by those entitled to wear one, began as soon as the kings-of-arms presumed to grant armorial bearings by their bestowing crests upon impersonal corporate bodies like the London livery companies, such as the Tallow Chandlers (1456), Masons (1472), and Wax Chandlers (1485-6).

Arms were borne by the mayor and commonalty of a city or town at least as early as 1283 in the case of Chester, and of 1305 in the case of Dover (or the Cinque Ports), but none presumed to use a crest until London did so on the making of a new seal in 1539, and no crest was granted to a town before 1561.

Before leaving crests a word must be said as to their comparative sizes.

Throughout the best period of heraldic art the crested helm and the shield in pictorial representations practically balance one another, but there is occasionally a tendency to diminish the shield, and so apparently to enlarge the crest. This may be seen, for example, in several of the early stall-plates at Windsor (figs. [67], [68]), which otherwise are admirable models as to the treatment of crests in general. They also show very clearly how easily and comfortably the crests surmount the helms.

Fig. 67. Stall-plate of Humphrey duke of Buckingham as earl of Stafford, c. 1429.

Fig. 68. Stall-plate of Sir Thomas Burgh, c. 1483.

A remarkable early English example of the use of two crests is furnished by a seal of Richard Nevill (1449-71), the 'Kingmaker,' who was earl of Salisbury, and, in right of his wife, also earl of Warwick (fig. [69]). This exhibits two helms above the multi-quartered shield, the one carrying the Beauchamp swan for the earldom of Warwick, the other the Montagu griffin for the earldom of Salisbury.

Fig. 69. Seal of Richard Nevill with separate crests and supporters for his earldoms of Salisbury and Warwick.

[CHAPTER V]
MANTLINGS

Origin of Mantlings; Simple early forms; Colours of Mantlings; Medieval usage as to colours of Mantlings.

In actual use the helm seems often to have been covered behind by a hanging scarf or cloth of some kind, perhaps to temper the heat of the sun, like a modern puggaree. Heraldically this is represented by what is now called the mantling.

At first this was a simple affair, worn puggaree-wise, but by degrees it was enlarged in representations until it extended on either side beyond the helm, and was disposed in graceful twists and folds with dagged edges, which have been supposed to represent the cuts it was liable to receive during fighting (figs. [70], [71]).

Fig. 70. Seal of William lord Hastings, c. 1461.

Fig. 71. Seal of William de la Pole earl of Suffolk, 1415.

The usual colour for the mantling, for a long time, has been red, and its lining of ermine or white fur, but there is ample precedence for a difference of treatment, as may be seen in that rich collection of ancient heraldic art, the stall-plates at Windsor.

The earliest surviving plate, that of Ralph lord Bassett (K.G. 1368-90), has a short black mantling, to match the boar's head that forms his crest (fig. [72]). A large group of plates set up in 1421 exhibits a considerable variety. Thus the plate of Sir Sanchet Dabrichecourt has a red mantling powdered with gold lozenges, a treatment suggested by two bands of red similarly decorated which encircle the bush of feathers forming his crest (fig. [73]). The mantling of William lord Latimer is of red and silver stripes, and that of John lord Beaumont, like the field of his shield, is, together with the cap of estate, of blue powdered with gold fleurs-de-lis. Sir Walter Pavely has also a blue mantling.

Fig. 72. Stall-plate of Ralph lord Basset, showing simple form of mantling.

Fig. 73. Stall-plate of Sir Sanchet Dabrichecourt, c. 1421.

Sir William FitzWaryn's mantling is quarterly per fesse indented of red and ermine, like his shield of arms. The Captal de Buch, Raynald lord Cobham, Hugh lord Burnell (fig. [77]), Hugh lord Bourchier (pl. [XVI]), and Sir Thomas Banastre have black mantlings, and John lord Bourchier and William lord Willoughby d'Eresby (pl. [XV]) white mantlings lined with red. Sir Miles Stapleton and the Soudan de la Trau have black mantlings lined with red. Several early mantlings, too, are formed entirely of silver feathers, with red, black, or other linings. These usually accompany a feathered crest, like Sir William Arundel's griffin (fig. [74]), or the earl of Warwick's swan (fig. [75]), or Sir Thomas Erpingham's bush of feathers. Another curious variation, which is found on four early plates, has the colour of the mantling different on the two sides of the helm, such as red on one side, and blue or black on the other. In about a dozen plates between 1450 and 1470 the red, and in one case the blue, ground of a mantling is relieved by a trailing pattern in gold, sometimes in lines only, but more usually as leafwork or flowers. In the plate of Walter lord Hungerford (el. 1421) the mantling on his banner-like plate is barred with red and ermine (see fig. [136]), in allusion to the arms of his lordship of Hussey. Lastly, in the plate of Richard lord Rivers (el. 1450) the mantling is red, sown with gold trefoils, and lined with white, with gold tassels at the ends (fig. [76]). This is derived from the crest, which is the upper part of a man brandishing a scimitar, and clad in a red tunic with standing collar and large hanging sleeves, also sown with trefoils. The sleeves are cleverly arranged in the plate, as if forming part of the mantling, and are similarly dagged and lined and tasselled. On the stall-plate (c. 1483) of Francis viscount Lovel the mantling is of purple sown with gold hanging locks.

Fig. 74. Stall-plate of Sir William Arundel, c. 1421.

Fig. 75. Stall-plate of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, after 1423.

Fig. 76. Stall-plate of Richard Wydville lord Rivers, c. 1450.

[CHAPTER VI]
CRESTS AND CROWNS, CAPS OF ESTATE, AND WREATHS

Crests within Crowns; Nature and treatment of Crowns; Caps of Estate: Their possible origin and introduction into Heraldry; The colour of Caps; The placing of Crests upon Caps; Wreaths or Torses; Their Colour; Crests and Mottoes; Use of Crests by Bishops; The ensigning of Arms with Mitres, Cardinals' and Doctors' Hats, and Caps of Estate.

The treatment of the crest varies. In the earliest examples it is set directly upon the mantled helm (fig. [77] and pls. [XIV] A and [XVII] B), to which it was actually attached by wires through holes on top. But from the first large numbers of crests were fixed, or rose as it were, from within a crown or coronet encircling the helm, or stood upon a cap or hat of estate that surmounted it. (See figs. [65], [67], [72], [73], [74], [75], and pls. [XIII] E and F, [XVII] A, [XXI], [XXII], [XXVII] A, etc.)

PLATE XIII.—Various treatments of crests.

• A & B, Walter lord FitzWalter, 1415-31.
• C, Henry duke of Lancaster, 1341.
• D, Robert Shottesbroke, 1458-9.
• E, Thomas lord Dacre of Gilsland, 1412.
• F, Sir John Cheyny, 1395.

Fig. 77. Stall-plate of Hugh lord Burnell, c. 1421.

PLATE XIV.—Examples of crests and mantlings.

• A, Edmund Grey earl of Kent, 1442.
• B, Thomas Ballard, Esq.
• C, Sir Henry Ingelose, of Loddon, 1451.

The crown was merely ornamental, and had no reference to the dignity of the wearer, but was used alike heraldically by prince and peer, knight and esquire, and the same may be said of the cap of estate.

Crowns were anciently formed of a number of leaves or fleurons set upright upon the band, sometimes with lesser leaves or jewels between them; the bands too were often jewelled. But in practice only three (fig. [78]), or sometimes five, principal leaves are shown when the crown is drawn in profile (fig. [83]).

Fig. 78. Arms of St. Edmund, from the tomb of Edmund duke of York (ob. 1402) at King's Langley.

PLATE XV. STALL-PLATE (REDUCED) OF HUGH STAFFORD LORD BOURCHIER, C. 1421.

Beyond the fact that the thing was a crown, there was no strict rule as to the design, which varied according to the taste of the artist. Two examples among the early stall-plates at Windsor, those of Hugh Stafford lord Bourchier (fig. [79] and pl. [XVI]) and Richard lord Grey of Codnor (both c. 1421), illustrate this in a pretty way (fig. [80]). In both cases the plate after being finished has been cut up, partly reversed, and in part re-engraved; not because anything was wrong with the heraldry, but to make the crested helms face the other way. These have accordingly been turned over, but in cutting them afresh the engraver has slightly varied the designs of the crests and of the crowns with which each is encircled, without however in any way altering their heraldic character. In the earliest existing plates the crested helms are all drawn turned towards the high altar, consequently those on the north side of the quire face heraldically towards the sinister. The two plates just noted, and at least one other, have been transferred from one side of the quire to the other.

Fig. 79. Crest from the reverse of the stall-plate of Hugh Stafford lord Bourchier.

ig. 80. Two forms of the same crest, from the stall-plate of Richard lord Grey of Codnor.

PLATE XVI. STALL-PLATE OF WILLIAM LORD WILLOUGHBY, C. 1421.

One of the first instances of a crown about a crest is on the seal of William Montagu earl of Salisbury, 1337 (pl. [XII]).

Crowns were not by any means always of gold or silver, and quite a number of pre-Tudor stall-plates have them enamelled red, and in two cases blue.

These heraldic crowns must not be confounded with the coronets, as they are now called, worn of different patterns by peers and peeresses according to their degree; some reference to these will be made later.

The cap of estate is generally depicted in English heraldic art as a high crowned conical hat or cap with flattened top, and a broad brim lined with ermine. The brim is usually turned up high in front, but gradually lessens along the sides towards the back, where the brim extends horizontally to its full width.

The cap of estate first appears, surmounted by his leopard crest, on the head of King Edward III in the great seal made for him in February 1339-40 on his assumption of the title of King of France. Whether the cap has any connexion with the assumption of the king's new title it is difficult to say, but its more common name of 'cap of maintenance' would acquire a significant meaning could such connexion be proved. It is however more probable that the cap was worn by the king for his dignity of duke of Normandy and of Aquitaine, and it was long the custom for representatives of those duchies to take part in coronation processions wearing robes and caps of estate. According to the Little Device for the coronation of Henry VII, there were to ride before the king in the procession from the Tower 'ij Squiers for the kinges bodie bearing in baudrick wise twoo mantells furred w^t Ermyns, wearing twoo hattes of Estate of Crymsen clothe of golde beked on, beks turnyd upp behinde, and furred also w^t Ermyns in reprecentacion of the kinges twoo duchesses of Gyen and Normandie.'[6]

Although the cap may at first have been restricted to the king, it was certainly used by the sons of Edward III, and may be seen of like form and fashion upon the seals of Edward as prince of Wales (1343), of John of Gaunt as duke of Lancaster (1362) and of Edmund of Langley as duke of York (pl. [XXI]), and of Thomas of Woodstock as duke of Gloucester in 1385. It was no doubt in each case given by personal investiture by the Sovereign, but only to those who were made dukes.

In heraldry, however, the cap of estate was used after 1350 by many who were not only dukes who had been invested with it, but by earls and barons who had not been so invested, and even by mere knights (pl. [XIII] F).

It would be as rash to argue from this that such persons were all entitled to wear for dignity the cap of estate as it would be to insist that the equally common use of a crown round the base of a crest entitled every knight or baron on whose seal it occurs to wear a coronet.

The colour of the cap of estate was almost invariably red, with a lining of ermine, but in two of the early stall-plates it is blue. The crest is generally placed directly upon it, but representations of two-legged or four-legged creatures often stand upon the brim with their feet on either side of the flat-topped cap (figs. [112], [138]). It is hardly necessary to say that the crested cap is always placed upon the helm, with the mantling issuing from under it.

It is a common practice nowadays, quite wrongly, to represent crests apart from the helm, and as standing upon a twisted bar, or wreath as it is called. A little research will show that this bar represents the twisting together of two or three differently coloured stuffs, and fixing the wreath so formed round the base of the crest to mask its junction with the top of a helm. Once invented it came into common use, and crests of all kinds were fixed within it.

When seen sideways the rounded top of the helm causes the crest to appear as if standing upon the wreath, and this has no doubt given rise to the present malpractice.

The Rev. C. Boutell in his smaller English Heraldry quotes the Hastings brass at Elsing, of the year 1347, as the earliest instance of a wreath about a crest (fig. [81]). But this brass is probably French, and in English work the wreath does not come into being much before the close of the fourteenth century, and was not regularly used until about 1450.

Fig. 81. Helm with crest and wreath, from the Hastings brass at Elsing, 1347.

The wreath or torse, as it was also called, from being a twist, was usually of two colours, derived from the principal metal and colour of the arms; but the fifteenth century stall-plates show many variations from this rule. Thus Lewis lord Bourchier (c. 1421) has a torse of blue, gold, and black, and John earl of Tankerville (c. 1421) one of green, red, and white. John lord Bourchier (c. 1421) and Henry lord Bourchier (c. 1452) both have black and green torses. Richard Wydville lord Rivers (c. 1450) has the crest issuing from a green torse, crested with a crown of holly leaves. Thomas lord Stanley (c. 1459) has a torse of gold and blue with red spots or jewels between, and Sir William Chamberlayne (c. 1461) a red and blue torse.

The modern practice is that the twists of a torse shall be only six in number; but in old heraldry there was no such rule, and any number from four may be found, whatever would look best. In the Harsick brass (fig. [82]) there are eleven twists.

Fig. 82. Helm with crest and torse and simple form of mantling, from the Harsick brass at Southacre, 1384.

Crests occasionally had mottoes or 'words' associated with them, quite apart from the ordinary 'word' or 'reason' of the family or individual. Thus the ermine bush of feathers that formed the crest of Sir Simon Felbrigge is accompanied on his stall-plate (c. 1421) by a scroll lettered Sanz muer (fig. [83]), and on that of John lord Scrope (el. 1461) the crest, which is likewise a bush of feathers, has above it the 'reason' autre qz-elle. Two of the fine seals of Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury (1428-60) have behind his demi-griffin crest a scroll lettered apparently ma [or do] pleſier (pls. [XVII] A and [XXII] B), and the seal of John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury, as marshal of France (1445), has a scroll with his 'word' issuing from the mouth of his lion crest (pl. [XVII] B).

Fig. 83. Stall-plate of Sir Simon Felbrigge, c. 1421.

PLATE XVII.—Crests with mottoes.

• A, Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury, 1428-60.
• B, John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury, 1445.

From what has been said above as to the ancient association of helm and crest, it follows that the present fashion of representing the crest by itself, apart from the helm to which it was always attached, is entirely wrong. It at once renders the crest meaningless: in appearance it forthwith becomes insignificant; and attempts to treat it artistically generally end in failure.

Let crests be shown as crests, properly set upon practicable helms, and with competent mantlings treated with all the freedom that they are capable of.

It may here be noted that it has not been customary, nor is it logically correct, for ladies and other non-combatant persons, such as the ministers of the Church, to use crests; arms they have ever been allowed to bear. Examples, however, of the breach of the rule as to crests even by bishops are afforded by several of their privy seals. Thus Henry le Despenser bishop of Norwich (1370-1406) has his differenced shield of arms surmounted by a mantled helm upon which a mitre, with a griffin's head and wings issuing therefrom, is placed as a crest (fig. [84]); and Alexander Nevill archbishop of York (1374) shows his shield hanging below a crowned helm surmounted by the bull's head crest of his house and supported by two griffins.

Fig. 84. Privy seal of Henry le Despenser bishop of Norwich, 1370-1406.

William Courtenay, as archbishop of Canterbury (1381-96), similarly displays a shield of his arms, ensigned by a helm surmounted by a cap of estate with a dolphin on top. A helm crested with a lovely bunch of columbines is also carved with his arms above the tomb of James Goldwell bishop of Norwich (ob. 1498-9) in his cathedral church.

Robert Nevill on his privy seal as bishop of Durham (1438-57) surmounts his shield with a beautiful labelled mitre, from which issues a bull's head with a scroll lettered en grace affie.

Many of the bishops of Durham, on their great seals in chancery, in virtue of their secular palatinate jurisdiction, are represented as riding in complete armour with helms on their heads. The first to be so represented was Thomas Hatfield (1345), who wears a large crowned helm surmounted by a mitre, from which issues a bush of feathers. John Fordham (1381) also surmounts his crowned helm with a mitre, on which is perched a bird. Walter Skirlaw (1388) and Thomas Langley (1406) set within the crowns crests without mitres; in one case the bust of an angel, in the other a bush of feathers. Robert Nevill (1438) surmounts his crowned helm with a mitre, from which issues a bull's head, as on his privy seal above noted. Cuthbert Tunstall (1530) has a mitre alone upon his helm.

The usual practice in displaying a bishop's arms has been, for a long time, to ensign them simply with his own official headgear in the shape of a mitre, and the same custom prevailed with regard to the arms of mitred abbots and priors. Robert Nevill's privy seal is an early example.

Cardinals ensigned their shields with the tasselled hat of their order, as may be seen on the seal-of-arms of Henry Beaufort bishop of Winchester (1405), and in a carving of his arms in Southwark cathedral church. A cardinal's hat is displayed, with his rebus and sundry royal badges, on the arch about the cenotaph of John Morton archbishop of Canterbury and cardinal in the undercroft of his cathedral church.

Doctors also sometimes surmounted their arms with the round cap pertaining to their dignity.

On the monument at St. Albans of Humphrey duke of Gloucester (ob. 1446) his arms are ensigned alternately by his mantled and crested helm, and by a large cap of estate encircled by a crown or coronet. Jasper duke of Bedford (1485) on his seal likewise surmounts his arms with a cap of estate encircled by a delicate crown.

There is not any necessity at the present day to represent any crown or coronet with the cap of estate within it.

[6] L. G. Wickham Legg, English Coronation Records (Westminster, 1901), 223.

[CHAPTER VII]
THE USE OF BADGES, KNOTS, AND THE REBUS

Definition of a Badge; Difference between Crests and Badges; Examples of Badges; The Ostrich-Feather Badge; The White Hart, etc.; Introduction of Badges into Heraldry; Their Prevalence; Allusive Badges; Badges of obscure Origin; Knots and Badges; The Rebus.

Closely allied with crests, but borne and used in an entirely different way, are the devices called badges.

The whole history of these is in itself of great interest, and the facility with which they lend themselves to artistic heraldic decoration renders badges of peculiar value.

A badge is, properly speaking, any distinctive device, emblem, or figure assumed as the mark or cognisance of an individual or family; and it should be borne alone, without any shield, torse, or other accessory. But a badge may be and often was, like a crest, accompanied by a word, reason, or motto. There is however this important difference between a crest and a badge, that the crest was pre-eminently the personal device of its owner, while his badge might also be used by his servants and retainers. Such a use of the badge still survives in the 'crest' on the buttons of liveried servants.

The most famous and best known badge is that of the three ostrich feathers encircled by a crown or coronet borne by the Prince of Wales. It was probably introduced by Queen Philippa, who is known to have possessed plate ornamented with 'a black scocheon of ostrich feathers,' perhaps allusive of the Comté of Ostrevant, the appanage of the eldest sons of the house of Hainault. A single ostrich feather, alone or stuck in a scroll, occurs after 1343 in several seals of Edward prince of Wales, and on his tomb at Canterbury the shield of his own arms alternates with his mother's black shield with three silver ostrich feathers, each transfixing a scroll with the word ich diene; over the shield is likewise a scroll inscribed with the same words ([fig. 85]). John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster is said to have borne an ostrich feather powdered with ermine tails, and Thomas of Woodstock duke of Gloucester, the youngest of Queen Philippa's sons, bore the feathers with a strap (which some have regarded as a Garter) extended along the quill ([fig. 86]). The Queen's great-grandson, Richard duke of York and earl of March (1436), bore the feather with a chain similarly placed; perhaps Edmund of Langley, his grandfather, had done the same. Henry of Lancaster, the son of John of Gaunt, on his seal as earl of Derby in 1385 (pl. [XXIV] C) and on that as duke of Hereford in 1399, has an ostrich feather stuck in the end of a scroll which is entwined about the feather and inscribed with the significant word souvereyne, and the same word is repeated many times on his tomb as King Henry IV at Canterbury.

Fig. 85. Shield with ostrich-feather badge from the tomb of Edward prince of Wales (ob. 1376) at Canterbury.

Fig. 86. Seal of Thomas of Woodstock duke of Gloucester with ostrich-feather and Bohun swan badges.

Another notable badge is the couched white hart of King Richard II, with which may be named the white hind borne by his kinsman, Thomas Holand earl of Kent (pl. [XVIII] B).

PLATE XVIII.—Examples of supporters.

• A Joan Arundel wife of William lord Beauchamp, 1416.
• B Thomas Holand earl of Kent, 1398.
• C Robert Corbet
• D Joan Stafford countess of Kent and lady of Wake, 1437.

The fetterlock-and-falcon (fig. [87]) and the white rose of the house of York, the white lion of the earls of March, the rayed rose of Edward IV, and the silver boar of Richard III are of course well-known badges; as well as the red and the red and white roses, the crowned fleur-de-lis, and the Beaufort portcullis, used by the Tudor kings (fig. [88]).

Fig. 87. Fetterlock-and-falcon badge of the house of York, from Henry VII's chapel at Westminster.

Fig. 88. Crowned rose and portcullis from King's college chapel at Cambridge.

When badges first came into use in this country is uncertain, but after the middle of the fourteenth century they abound. They are foreshadowed by the free treatment of earlier decorative heraldry, such as the little leopards on the footgear and pillows of King Henry III's gilt-latten effigy at Westminster, and the plate with its lozengy diaper of leopards on which it lies; also the lozengy diaper of castles and lions which covers the metal plate whereon lies the effigy of Queen Eleanor of Castile.

Many badges, too, originated in devices borrowed from various sources and arranged about the shield on seals, as in figs. [89] and [90], which are only two out of a number of such appended to the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 89. Seal of Robert de Clifford, with arms surrounded by rings in allusion to his mother Isabel Vipont.

Fig. 90. Seal of Robert de Toni as CHEVALER AU CING with the arms encircled by swans and talbots.

The famous white swan badge of the Bohuns (fig. [91]) is found perched upon the shield in the seal of Humphrey Bohun earl of Hereford and Essex, 1298 (pl. [XIX] B). Later on its neck was encircled by a crown for a collar, with a chain attached, and in this form it appears on the seals of Thomas of Woodstock, who married Eleanor Bohun (fig. [86]), and on that lady's brass at Westminster. It was also borne by the sons and descendants of King Henry IV by his wife Mary Bohun.

Fig. 91. Seal of Oliver Bohun with swans about the shield.

PLATE XIX.—Origin of supporters.

• A Stephen Longespee, ob. 1260.
• B Humphrey de Bohun earl of Hereford and Essex, constable of England, 1298.

The gilt-latten effigies of Richard II (fig. [92]) and Anne of Bohemia have their dresses pounced all over with badges, such as the white hart, the sun-burst, and the broom sprigs on that of the king, and the ostrich and a peculiar knot on that of the queen. In 1380 Edmund Mortimer earl of March left a bequest of 'our large bed of black satin embroidered with white lions and gold roses, with scocheons of the arms of Mortimer and Ulster,' and in 1385 Joan princess of Wales bequeathed to her son the King (Richard II) 'my new bed of red velvet embroidered with ostrich feathers of silver and leopards' heads of gold with boughs and leaves issuing from their mouths.' In 1397, Sir Ralph Hastings, whose arms were a red maunch or sleeve on a gold ground, and his crest a bull's head, left bequests of a silver bason and laver 'stamped with a bull's head (cum capite tauri), a vestment of red cloth of gold with orfreys before and behind worked with maunches (cum maunches) and with the colours of mine arms,' and six salts stamped with maunches. In 1388 John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster mentions in his will 'my great bed of cloth of gold, the field powdered with roses of gold set upon pipes of gold, and in each pipe two white ostrich feathers,' also 'my new vestment of cloth of gold the field red worked with gold falcons.' Two falcons holding hanging locks in their beaks are also shown on one of the duke's seals (pl. [XXI] A). In 1400 Thomas Beauchamp earl of Warwick left a bed of silk embroidered with 'bears of mine arms'; and in 1415 John lord le Scrope mentions in his will documents sealed cum signato meo de Crabb, and in a codicil made in 1453 he bequeaths 'j fayre pile of coppis conteyning xij coppis of gilt, with crabbis in ye myddes, and two coveryngis to thame with crabb.' In the north of England a crab is often called a scrap, whence its assumption by the Scropes.

Fig. 92. Gilt-latten effigy at Westminster of King Richard II, pounced with badges, etc.

Such examples as the foregoing could be multiplied indefinitely, but they will suffice to show the prevalence of badges and the many ways in which they were used. They of course abounded on seals as well as on monuments of all kinds, and in conjunction with architecture. Under this last head may be quoted such examples as the arches in Wingfield church, Suffolk (fig. [93]), studded with leopards' heads, wings, and Stafford knots, commemorative of Michael de la Pole earl of Suffolk (ob. 1415) and his wife Katharine Stafford; the porch and other parts of Lavenham church, displaying the boars and molets of John de Vere earl of Oxford; bishop Courtenay's chimney-piece in the bishop's palace at Exeter (fig. [94]); and the great displays of Tudor badges on the deanery gateway at Peterborough (fig. [95]), the gatehouses at Christ's (fig. [96]) and St. John's Colleges (fig. [172]) at Cambridge, and the noble chapel of King's College. Special mention must also be made of the magnificent bronze doors of Henry VII's chapel at Westminster, than which no more beautiful example of the use of badges for decorative purposes could possibly be found (fig. [97]).

Fig. 93. Piers and arches in Wingfield church, Suffolk, with badges of Michael de la Pole earl of Suffolk (ob. 1415) and his wife Katharine Stafford.

Fig. 94. Chimney-piece in the Bishop's Palace at Exeter with the arms and badges of bishop Peter Courtenay, 1478-87.

Fig. 95. Gateway to the Deanery at Peterborough. Built by Robert Kirkton abbot 1497-1526.

Fig. 96. The gatehouse of Christ's College, Cambridge.

Fig. 97. Bronze door with badges of York and Beaufort, from the Lady chapel of Westminster abbey church.

The sources of badges were various. As a matter of fact a man's badge was often the same device as his crest, like the Courtenay dolphin, or the boar of the Veres, or the sickle of the Hungerfords. Sometimes the badge was derived from a part of the arms, such as the leopards' heads and the wings of the de la Poles, the water-bougets of the Bourchiers (fig. [98]), the silver molet of the Veres (fig. [99]), and the Phelip eagle (fig. [100]). If by chance a badge could have any punning or allusive meaning it was the more popular, and it then often served as a rebus. The boar (verre) of the Veres (fig. [99]), the crab or scrap of the Scropes, the pike or luce of the Lucys, the long swords of Longespee (pl. [XIX] A), the gray or badger of Richard lord Grey of Codnor (fig. [102]), and the wood-stock or tree stump of Thomas duke of Gloucester, who was born at Woodstock, are all good examples of a practice that should be followed whenever possible, even in these degenerate days.

Fig. 98. Signet with badge and crested helm of Lewis lord Bourchier, 1420.

Fig. 99. Seal of Hugh de Vere with boar badge and two wivers as supporters. From the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 100. Signet of William Phelip lord Bardolf (c. 1410) with eagle badge derived from his arms.

Fig. 101. Signet with flote badge and word of Sir William Oldhalle in 1457.

Fig. 102. Seal with badge (a gray or badger) of Richard lord Grey of Codnor, 1392.

Fig. 103. Seal of Thomas lord Stanley as earl of Derby and seneschal of Macclesfield, 1485, with the eagle's claw badge of Stanley and the legs of the Isle of Man.

But in a large number of cases the badge has a different and often quite obscure origin, like the Bohun swan, the Percy crescent and swivel, the Beauchamp bear and ragged staff, the Lovel hanging-lock, the Zouch eagle and crooked billet, and the Berkeley mermaid.

Fig. 104. Daisy plant (marguerite) badge of the Lady Margaret Beaufort, from Henry VII's chapel at Westminster.

A few families, e.g. the Staffords (fig. [105]), the Bourchiers, and the Wakes, used as a badge some special form of knot, and attention has already been called to the peculiar knots pounced upon the effigy of Queen Anne of Bohemia. Interesting examples of the Bourchier knot may be seen on the tomb of archbishop Thomas Bourchier at Canterbury, and on the brass of Sir Humphrey Bourchier at Westminster (fig. [106]), and a good instance of the application of the knot is afforded by the seal of Joan Stafford countess of Kent and lady of Wake, who encircles her impaled shield with a cordon of Stafford knots (pl. [XVIII] D). On the tomb at Lowick (Northants) of Edward Stafford earl of Wiltshire (ob. 1498) the shields are encircled with cordons of Stafford knots with another Stafford badge, the nave of a wheel, alternating with the knots (fig. [107]). On the canopy of the tomb at Little Easton in Essex of Henry Bourchier earl of Essex (ob. 1483) and his wife Isabel, sister of Richard duke of York, is a badge formed by placing a Bourchier knot within a fetterlock of York.

Fig. 105. Part of the brass at Exeter of canon William Langeton, kinsman of Edward Stafford bishop of Exeter, 1413, in cope with an orphrey of [X]'s and Stafford knots.

Fig. 106. Elbow-piece and Bourchier knot, from the brass of Sir Humphrey Bourchier (ob. 1471) in Westminster abbey church.

Fig. 107. Alabaster tomb and effigy of Edward Stafford earl of Wiltshire (ob. 1498) in Lowick church, Northamptonshire.

Mention has been made above of the rebus. This was invariably a badge or device forming a pun upon a man's surname, and at one time was exceedingly popular. It no doubt originated in the canting or allusive heraldry of earlier days, like the boars' heads of the Swynburnes, the trumpets of the Trumpingtons, the hammers (Fr. martel) of the Martels, or the scallop shells of the Scales. The ox crossing a ford in the arms of Oxford, and the Cam and its great bridge in the arms of Cambridge are also kindred examples. A large number of rebuses on names ending in 'ton' are based upon a tun or barrel, like the lup on a ton of Robert Lupton provost of Eton 1503-4, or the large church (kirk) and ton of abbot Kirkton on the deanery gate at Peterborough (fig. [108]), or the beacon rising from a ton of bishop Thomas Beckington at Wells (fig. [109]). The gold wells of bishop Goldwell and the harts lying in water of bishop Walter Lyhart in their cathedral church at Norwich are well known, as are probably the eye and the slip of a tree which form, together with a man falling from a tree (I slip!), the rebuses of abbot Islip at Westminster (fig. [110]). An ox, the letter N, and a bridge make the rebus of canon John Oxenbridge in his chantry chapel at Windsor, while an eagle and an ox with ne on his side gives the name of prior John Oxney at Christchurch, Canterbury. Two large hares with a spring or well rising between them crouch at the feet of bishop Harewell's effigy at Wells; and dean Gunthorpe's oriel window in the deanery there is decorated with guns (fig. [111]). Sir John Pechey's arms (azure a lion ermine with a forked tail and a gold crown), in a window in Lullingstone church, Kent, are encircled by a wreath of peach-branches, with peaches charged with the letter e for the final syllable of his name (fig. [112]).

Fig. 108. Rebus of abbot Robert Kirkton, from the Deanery Gate at Peterborough.

Fig. 109. Rebus of Thomas Beckington bishop of Bath and Wells, 1477.

Fig. 110. Rebus of John Islip abbot of Westminster, from his chantry chapel.

Fig. 111. Oriel window in the Deanery at Wells with badge of King Edward IV, and rebus of Dean Gunthorpe.

Fig. 112. Arms and rebus of Sir John Pechey (ob. 1522), from painted glass in Lullingstone church, Kent.

Here again it is needless to multiply examples of rebuses, but the fun to be got out of them is ample justification for urging their adoption and use in connexion with decorative heraldry.[7]

[7] The Rev. E. E. Dorling has taken for his rebus a little door (doorling!) with the hinges ending in E's, and the author of this book might fitly content himself with the anchor of Hope!

[CHAPTER VIII]
SUPPORTERS

The probable Origin of Supporters; Quasi-Supporters; True Supporters: their Introduction; Supporters of Crested Helms; Pairs of Supporters; Dissimilar Supporters; The use of Supporters by Ladies; Other ways of supporting Shields.

The misuse of crests to which reference has been made unfortunately does not stand alone, for modern artists are quite as much at fault with regard to the proper treatment of supporters.

There can be little doubt that these charming adjuncts to heraldic compositions originated with the seal engravers, in their desire to fill up the vacant space in a round seal between the shield and its surrounding margin. In the oldest examples this was done by adding scrollwork or leafage, but in the seal of Humphrey Bohun earl of Hereford, 1220, the large shield of his arms is flanked by two smaller shields of his other earldom of Essex. The same treatment occurs in the seal of his grandson, another Humphrey Bohun earl of Hereford and Essex, 1298-1322 (pl. [XIX] B). Henry de Laci (1257) has the side spaces filled by two small wivers, and in the seal of Stephen Longespee (ob. 1260) the shield is flanked by two long swords (pl. [XIX] A). Gilbert of Clare earl of Gloucester (1262) has his shield hung on a peg and accompanied by two lions back to back, while in the seal of Edmund earl of Cornwall (1272) and son of Richard king of the Romans the shield is held up in the beak of an imperial eagle splayed or spread out behind it. Thomas earl of Lancaster (1296) on both his larger and his lesser seals has the shield flanked by two wivers, as has also his brother Henry of Lancaster (1298) (fig. [60]).

Sometimes the shield is hung about the neck of a bird (fig. [113]), or about a beast, as in the seal of Alan la Souche, which likewise has the shield surrounded by a number of lions (fig. [114]).

Fig. 113. Seal of John de Moun with the shield slung from an eagle and flanked by two leopards. From the Barons' Letter.

Fig. 114. Seal of Alan la Souche in 1301.

During the first half of the fourteenth century little definite progress was made towards true supporters. Shields, whether hung from pegs or upon trees, or surmounted by crested helms, still continued to be flanked by quasi-supporters, which of course varied much in character. Pairs of wivers, dragons, and lions, usually back to back, the better to fit the space, and sometimes with entwined tails, were common early in the century, and shields with splayed eagles behind may not infrequently be found (figs. [115], [116]). What may be regarded as true supporters appear on the lesser seal (pl. [XII] A) of William Montagu earl of Salisbury (circa 1337), wherein two griffins seem to be holding up the shield, but it is not until well on in the second half of the fourteenth century that further definite instances become fairly common.

Fig. 115. Seal of John Beauchamp of Hacche with shield on breast of an eagle.

Fig. 116. Seal of William de Ferrers with shield upon an eagle with two heads.

Interesting transitional usages may also be found. Thus on a seal (c. 1350) of Margaret Graunson two wivers uphold by their beaks the upper corners of a shield of her husband's arms, while a third wiver similarly grips the point. Guy de Bryen (c. 1350) has his shield hung upon a tree and supported at the corners by two wivers holding it by their beaks. Another lady, Joan FitzAlan, who married in 1362 Humphrey Bohun earl of Hereford, has an impaled shield of their arms held up in their beaks by two Bohun swans; and another pair of swans perform the same office in a FitzWarin seal used in 1398-9 (pl. [XX] A).

PLATE XX.—Shields with supporters.

• A Ivo FitzWarin, in 1398-9.
• B Peter de Mauley, in 1379-80.
• C Sir Bartholomew Burghersh, 1397-8.
• D John la Warre, in 1390.

A curious variant from the ordinary flanking pair of beasts occurs on the seal of Edmund Mortimer earl of March (1360-81), where the arms are accompanied by a pair of lions with their heads covered by large helms with the earl's crest, a bush of feathers rising from a crown. A similar treatment is to be seen on a seal of John la Warre, as used in 1390 (pl. [XX] D).

Analogous cases will be noted on the seal of Sir Robert de Marni (1366) (fig. [64]), whose shield hangs from a tree and is flanked by two fronting helms with tall pairs of wings rising from caps of estate as crests; also in a seal of Sir Bartholomew Burghersh (1397-8), which has the shield flanked by two helms crested with tall soldans' heads, and surmounted by what is probably his badge, a swan with a lady's head (pl. [XX] C). A seal of Sir Roger Scales (1369-86) has his seal flanked by two long-necked wivers, and hung by a strap from another wiver which has twisted itself into the shape of the letter S, and perched itself on the upper edge of the shield.

Another case of true supporters is afforded by a seal of Peter de Mauley in 1379-80, where a shield surmounted by a fierce dragon (perhaps a badge) is upheld by small lions (pl. [XX] B). Other supporters of shields only may be seen on seals of Thomas Beauchamp earl of Warwick (1369), where they are bears; and of Roger Mortimer earl of March and Ulster (1381), where they are lions, as is also the case in a seal of John Batour used in 1418-9. In each of these cases the shield is hung upon a tree.

In heraldic representations where the shield of arms is surmounted by a helm and crest, there is the same hesitation in arriving at true supporters; the space at the sides being filled at first by a badge or such device. Thus John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster (in 1362) introduced a pair of eagles with hanging locks in their beaks, and his brother Edmund of Langley duke of York (in 1385) followed suit with a couple of falcons having in their beaks scrolls with scriptures (pl. [XXI]). John Nevill lord of Raby and seneschal of Bordeaux (1378) flanked his arms, etc. with two letters b, while his kinsman, Sir William Nevill, used in 1390 a seal with his arms and crested helm accompanied by two large stars.

PLATE XXI.—Shields accompanied by Badges.

• A John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, 1362.
• B Edmund of Langley duke of York, 1385.

The fine seal of Thomas lord Despenser (before 1397) has on either side of his shield and crested helm a tree from which hangs a lozenge of arms: the one bearing the three cheverons of Clare, for his lordship of Glamorgan; the other the forked-tailed lion of the barony of Burghersh, which came to him through his mother (pl. [XXII] A). Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury in 1429 similarly places two angels bearing shields: one with the arms of Nevill, the other with the lions of Longespee in virtue of his earldom of Salisbury (pl. [XXII] B). Henry of Lancaster (afterwards King Henry IV) as earl of Derby, etc. (c. 1385) flanks his arms and crested helm with two ostrich feathers entwined with a scroll with the scripture souvereyne (pl. [XXIV] C), and others of the royal house similarly used ostrich feathers of other forms. Edward V as prince of Wales in 1471 flanked his arms with two scrolled ostrich feathers standing on large York roses. Thomas duke of Exeter (1416) placed a swan on either side of his armorial achievement, and William lord Lovel and Holand (1423) a hanging lock (pl. [XXIII] A); while Sir John Pelham (c. 1430) flanked his crest with his buckle badge (pl. [XXIII] B). On the fine seal of Thomas lord Roos of Hamlake or Helmsley (1431-64) his peacock crest is flanked by two large flowering plants, perhaps hemlocks (pl. [XXIII] E).

PLATE XXII.—Quasi-supporters.

• A Thomas lord Despenser, before 1397.
• B Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury, 1429.

PLATE XXIII.—Shields accompanied by badges.

• A William lord Lovel and Holand, 1423.
• B Sir John Pelham, c. 1430.
• C Hugh de Veer, 1301.
• D Aver de Rocheford, c. 1330.
• E Thomas lord Roos of Hamlake, 1431.

By the third quarter of the fourteenth century the combination of supporters with shields of arms surmounted by crested helms had become fully established, and henceforth the number of beautiful and instructive examples is so great that it is unnecessary to do more than illustrate a typical series (figs. [117]-[121]). It will be seen from these that in seals the majority of the supporters are upholding the heavy helm and its crest, and not the shield that hangs below it; probably on account of the nature of the design. The supporters, too, usually form pairs, and it goes without saying that every variety of creature is made to serve. Sometimes they are composed of badges, like the falcons on crooked billets used by William lord Zouch (pl. [XXIV] A), or the similar birds with 'words' coupled with oak leaves and the letter t that appear on a seal of Sir John Falstaff used in 1456 (pl. [XXIV] B). William lord Botraux, in a seal used in 1426, has his armorial ensigns flanked by two buttresses (Fr. botreaux); while John lord Talbot and Furnival (1406) has two talbots (fig. [122]), and George duke of Clarence (1463) the black bulls of Clare (fig. [123]).

Fig. 117. Seal of Edmund Mortimer earl of March and Ulster, 1400, with rampant leopard supporters.

Fig. 118. Seal of Sir William Windsor, 1381, with eagle supporters.

Fig. 119. Seal of William de la Pole duke of Suffolk, 1448.

Fig. 120. Seal of John Nevill lord Montagu, 1461.

Fig. 121. Seal of William lord Hastings, c. 1461.

Fig. 122. Seal of John lord Talbot and Furnival, 1406.

Fig. 123. Seal of George duke of Clarence and lord of Richmond, 1462, with black bulls of Clare supporting his crested helm.

PLATE XXIV.—Shields accompanied by badges.

• A William lord Zouch, 1430.
• B Sir John Falstaff, in 1456.
• C Henry of Lancaster earl of Derby, 1385.

Where the supporters differ it is usually the case that they represent more than one dignity. Thus on one of his seals (fig. [124]) Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick (1401) used as such for supporters two muzzled bears hugging ragged staves, but on a later seal (1421) as earl of Warwick and of Albemarle the supporters are a bear and a griffin (fig. [125]). So, too, his successor in the title of earl of Warwick, Richard Nevill, on a fine seal (c. 1451-2) has two muzzled bears for supporters, but on a later seal (c. 1460) as earl of Warwick and Salisbury his supporters are a Warwick bear and a Montagu griffin (fig. [69]). Edmund Beaufort duke of Somerset on his seal for the town of Bayeux (c. 1445) (fig. [126]) has on one side his own eagle supporter, and on the other a spotted dog-like beast with a crown about his neck; and Richard duke of York and earl of March on his seal as governor of France and Normandy in 1436 has for supporters the York falcon and the white lion of March. On the stall-plate of John Beaufort duke of Somerset and earl of Kendal his arms are supported by a Somerset crowned eagle and a mysterious beast called a yale,[8] behind each of which stands an ostrich feather with the quill gobony of blue and silver.

Fig. 124. Seal of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, 1401.

Fig. 125. Seal of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick and of Albemarle and lord Despenser, 1421.

Fig. 126. Seal of Edmund duke of Somerset for the town of Bayeux, c. 1445.

It is not necessary here to cite the various supporters borne by the Kings of England, but it may suffice to point out that since the union of the crowns of England and Scotland one of the royal supporters has always been a lion for England and the other a unicorn for Scotland.

In seals of married ladies in which their arms are accompanied by supporters, one often represents the husband and the other the lady's family.

Thus Joan Holand, daughter of Thomas earl of Kent, and wife of Edmund of Langley duke of York, has (after 1393) her husband's half of her impaled shield supported by the falcon of York, and her own half by her father's hind with its crown collar. Cecily Nevill, the wife of Richard duke of York and earl of March, and mother of King Edward IV, has the shield on her fine seal ensigned by a falcon of York and supported by a stag with crown-collar and chain and by a lion of March (fig. [127]). The even more splendid seal of Elizabeth Wydville, queen-consort of King Edward IV, shows as her supporters the lion of March and a lean spotted beast not unlike an otter, collared and chained (pl. [XXV]). The lady Margaret Beaufort, on the other hand, ensigns on both her seals her paternal arms of Beaufort with the Somerset eagle and uses for her supporters a pair of yales (pls. [XXVI], [XXX]).

PLATE XXV.—Arms with crown and supporters of Elizabeth Wydville, queen of Edward IV.

PLATE XXVI.—Arms, supporters, and badges of the Lady Margaret Beaufort, 1455.

Fig. 127. Seal of Cecily Nevill, wife of Richard duke of York and mother of King Edward IV, 1461.

It is of course all-important that supporters should be shown standing upon something solid, and not on so precarious a footing as the edge of a motto or forked scroll. One of the beautiful armorial groups with the supporters of King Henry VII in King's college chapel at Cambridge (fig. [128]) shows how effectively and yet unobtrusively this may be done. In the splendid panel at New Hall in Essex with the crowned arms, etc. of King Henry VIII his dragon and greyhound supporters stand in a bush of roses and pomegranates (fig. [189]); and in the well-known glass at Ockwells the supporters have fields full of flowers to stand on.

Fig. 128. Arms and supporters, a dragon and a greyhound, of King Henry VII in King's college chapel at Cambridge.

Besides the more or less regular use of supporters just described, there are a number of curious and irregular ways of supporting shields. These deserve special attention, not only from their value in showing how delightfully heraldry used to be played with, but as precedents for similar variety of treatment at the present day, when supporters so-called often do not support anything. Over the doorway, for example, of the National Portrait Gallery in London the 'supporters' of the royal arms are merely a pair of cowering beasts at the base of the shield.

Quite an early instance of playful treatment is furnished by the seal of Roger Leybourne (ob. 1284). This has a small banner standing behind the shield, which is hung on a tree with side branches; one of these supports the crested helm, and the other ends in a bunch of leaves (pl. [XI] A).

Thomas lord Holand and Wake (c. 1353) has within a traceried panel a tree standing in a rabbit warren and supporting his crowned helm with its huge bush of feathers. Hanging on either side are two shields, one with beautiful diapering of his lordship of Wake, the other (originally) of his lordship of Holand (pl. [XXVII] A).

PLATE XXVII.—Methods of arranging shields.

• A Thomas lord Holand and Wake, c. 1350.
• B Margaret Beauchamp, wife of John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury, after 1433.

Thomas of Woodstock duke of Gloucester, son of Edward III, used from about 1385 a lovely seal with the stock of a tree standing within a paling and surrounded by water on which float two chained Bohun swans, for his wife Eleanor Bohun; from the tree hangs a large shield of the duke's arms, with his crested helm above, and from two side branches are suspended diapered shields of the earldom of Hereford (azure two bends, one gold, the other silver), also in reference to his Bohun marriage.

Margaret daughter of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, and wife of John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury and Waterford, in her fine shield (after 1433) suspends by their straps her father's shield and the impaled shield of her husband and herself from the ragged staff of her father's house (pl. [XXVII] B).

Thomas Holand earl of Kent used in 1398 a seal bearing his badge of a white hind with a crown for a collar, reclining under a tree, and with the shield of his arms hanging round its neck (pl. [XVIII] B).

In the fourteenth century seal of the mayoralty of Calais a boar has a cloak tied about his neck and flying upwards banner-wise to display the arms of the town, which were barry wavy with a crowned (?) leopard rampant (fig. [129]). A similar treatment occurs on the half-florin of King Edward III, which has for device a crowned sitting leopard with a cloak about his neck with the royal arms.

Fig. 129. Seal of the mayoralty of Calais.

On one of his seals as regent of France (1422-35) John duke of Bedford has an eagle standing with one leg upon his badge, the root of a tree, and holding in its other claw a shield of his arms.

William lord Fitz Hugh (1429) and of Marmion shows on his seal his quartered shield ensigned by his helm and crest, which was apparently a lion's head. The rest of the beast is somewhat incongruously squatting behind the shield and has the paws thrust out on each side to grasp two banners of arms that complete the composition (pl. [XXVIII] A).

A similar pair of banners appears on the seal of Walter lord Hungerford, which has the shield 'supported' by two Hungerford sickles, and surmounted by the crested helm, with flanking banners of the arms of the lordships of Heytesbury and Hussey (fig. [130]).

Fig. 130. Seal of Walter lord Hungerford with banners of Heytesbury and Hussey or Homet, c. 1420.

PLATE XXVIII.—Examples of banners of arms.

• A William lord FitzHugh (1429) and of Marmion.
• B Margaret lady Hungerford and Botreaux, 1462.

Banners also figure prominently on the charming seal of Margaret lady of Hungerford and Botreaux (1462) (pl. [XXVIII] B). She was the daughter of William lord Botreaux and Margaret Beaumont, and wife of Sir Robert Hungerford, who died in 1459. The seal shows the lady in her widow's dress 'sitting upon her knees' in a garden, and reading from a book some words which are inscribed on a scroll about her head. Overshadowing her are two large banners of impaled arms: one of Hungerford and Botreaux, upheld by a lion; the other of Botreaux and Beaumont, upheld by a griffin.

On many late thirteenth and early fourteenth century seals it was not uncommon to represent ladies holding up shields of arms. A delightful example that may be cited is that of Emmeline FitzGerald, and wife of Stephen Longespee, who is upholding her father's shield in her right and her husband's in her left hand. Below each shield is a leopard of England to show her husband's close relationship to the royal house, and on each side of her is a long sword. She died in 1331 (pl. [XXIX] B).

A few cases occur where a man himself acts as the supporter of his arms. One of the shields of Henry Percy earl of Northumberland (1377) shows him in armour, standing behind a large shield of Percy which he supports with his left hand. His right is upon the hilt of a sword with the belt wrapped about it, and against his left shoulder rests a banner with the Percy lion. The earl appears in similar fashion in another of his seals as lord of Cockermouth (1393). In this the shield is quarterly of Percy and Lucy, and is grasped as before by his left hand, while the right holds up a pennon charged with his badge of a crescent (pl. [XXIX] A).

It must suffice to quote one last piece of playfulness, a seal of Richard duke of York and earl of March and Ulster (ob. 1460) as justice-in-eyre of the forests. This has his shield of arms suspended about the neck of a York falcon, and enclosed by the horns of a buck's head in base, in reference to his office. Upon the buck's horns are fixed two small hands for the duke's earldom of Ulster (pl. [XXIX] C).

PLATE XXIX.—Ways of upholding shields.

• A Henry Percy earl of Northumberland, 1377.
• B Emmelin FitzGerald, wife of Stephen Longespee, c. 1250.
• C Richard duke of York, as Justice in Eyre of Forests, ob. 1460.

[8] For a full account of the yale or eale see papers in the Archæological Journal, lxviii, 173-199. The adoption of the beast by the duke of Somerset has not yet been explained, but it may be for his earldom of Kendal and partly be a rebus (Kend-eale).

[CHAPTER IX]
BANNERS OF ARMS

The Royal Banner of Arms; the Banner of the Arms of the City of London; Shapes of Banners; Sizes of certain Banners; Upright versus Long Banners; Advantages of the upright form; Banners with Achievements of Arms; Modern Use of Banners.

Representations of banners constantly occur in medieval pictures (fig. [131]); and, as has been shown above, they are not infrequent upon seals.

Fig. 131. Knights with banners, from an illumination in Royal MS. 19 B XV in the British Museum.

Every one is familiar with the banner of the royal arms that betokens the presence of the King, and with our splendid national banner known as the Union Jack. The banner with the arms of the city that is flown above the Mansion House when the lord mayor is in residence is familiar to Londoners, and the citizens of Rochester are equally accustomed to see the banner of their city flying on Sundays and holidays from the great tower of their castle. Let a banner once be regarded in the light of a rectangular shield and its fitness to contain armorial bearings immediately becomes apparent. The King's banner is now always miscalled 'the royal standard,' even in official language, though heraldically it is not a standard at all, but simply a banner.

Medieval banners at first were oblong in shape, and set upright with a longer side next the staff. In the late thirteenth century pictures formerly in the painted chamber in the palace of Westminster the banners borne by the knights were more than twice as tall as they were broad. The same proportion survives even in the famous pictorial pageant of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, drawn about 1493;[9] but the majority of the banners therein shown have a height one and three-quarter times the width, which is better for the display of heraldry. This is also the proportion of the banners on William lord Hungerford's seal (fig. [132]), but the banners with impaled arms on lady Hungerford's seal are nearly square (fig. [133]). On the monument in Westminster abbey church of Lewis lord Bourchier (ob. 1431) the large quartered banners at the ends, upheld by lions and eagles, are slightly less than a square and a half in area, and admirably proportioned for displaying arms (fig. [134]). The banner of King Edward IV, 'which also hung over his grave' in St. George's chapel in Windsor castle, is described as of 'Taffaty, and thereon painted quarterly France and England; it had in breadth three foot four inches, besides a Fringe of about an inch broad, and in depth five foot and four inches, besides the Fringe.'[10] Ashmole, in his description of the banners hung above the stalls of the Knights of the Garter, states (in 1672) that 'the fashion of the Soveraign's and all the Knight-Companions Banners are square; but it doth no where appear to us, of what size their Banners anciently were; yet in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, we find them two yards and a quarter long, and a yard and three quarters broad, beside the Fringe (which is made of Gold or Silver and Silk, of the colours in the Wreath) and thereon are wrought or beaten upon Taffaty-Sarcenet, double-Sarcenet, or rich Taffaty, with fine Gold and Colours, on both sides, the paternal Coat of the Knights Companion, together with his Quarterings, or so many of them as he please to make use of, wherein Garter is to take care that they be warrantly marshalled.... These Banners of Arms are fixed to the end of long Staves, painted in Oyl, formerly with the Colours of the Wreath, but now Red.'[11]

Fig. 132. Seal of Walter lord Hungerford with banners.

Fig. 133. Part of the seal of Margaret lady Hungerford, with impaled banner held up by a lion.

Fig. 134. Tomb of Lewis Robsart lord Bourchier, K.G. (ob. 1431), in Westminster abbey church, with banners of arms upheld by supporters.

The remark here as to the quarterings, in view of the comments upon them in an earlier page of this book, is interesting, but it is more important to note that both the banner of King Edward IV, and those of the Knights of the Garter in Queen Elizabeth's time, were of similar proportions to those on the Bourchier monument.

The fact is that the heraldic draughtsmen of even this late period were fully as aware as their predecessors of the difficulty of drawing arms in a banner that exceeded the width of a square, and they also appreciated the greater advantage of an area that was narrower than that figure.

The longer form of banner may be tolerated for so simple a combination as the Union Jack, or even for such of its component parts as the cross of St. Andrew or the saltire of St. Patrick, but it is rarely possible so to arrange heraldry upon it as to look well, and even the cross of St. George looks better upright thus

than

when extended unduly horizontally.

In the King's banner as at present borne it is practically impossible to draw the arms artistically, or with a proper balancing relation of field and charge (fig. [135]). The leopards of England may be so outrageously lengthened and attenuated as nearly to fill the quarters allotted to them, but it is impracticable to display properly the upright form of the ramping lion of Scotland or to expand horizontally the Irish harp. In the banner, too, of the lord mayor of London as used on the Mansion House to-day, the sword of St. Paul in the quarter can only be drawn of the comparative size of Sir William Walworth's dagger, which it is in consequence so absurdly mistaken to be.

Fig. 135. The King's banner or 'royal standard' as now borne.

Were, however, the King's arms (see frontispiece) and those of his city of London placed on upright oblong or even square banners, all difficulties of drawing them would be avoided, and from appearing to be glaring examples of mean modern heraldry they would forthwith become fine pieces of artistic decoration.

A close approximation to the better way of displaying the King's arms is illustrated by the lately adopted banners of Queen Mary and Queen Alexandra, both of which show the Sovereign's arms impaling those of his consort. The King's arms are thus restricted to half the usual length of the present 'royal standard,' that is, to a square, and so can be drawn with less waste space on either side of the charges.

Whatever be their shape, banners, like shields, ought as a rule to be covered completely with the heraldry, like the banners of the Knights of the Garter at Windsor (which, though modern, are quite good in this respect) and those of more recent institution of the Order of St. Michael and St. George in St. Paul's cathedral church.

Examples are not lacking, even in the fifteenth century, of banners charged with regular heraldic achievements instead of arms, and quite an interesting series may be found among the Windsor stall-plates. Two small oblong plates of Sir Peter Courtenay and Henry lord FitzHugh are practically complete banners of their arms, but Walter lord Hungerford (after 1426) displays his arms, with helm, crest, and mantling, upon a dull black banner with fringed gold border attached to a writhen gilded staff (fig. [136]). Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury (c. 1436) (fig. [137]), John earl of Shrewsbury (c. 1453), John lord Tiptoft (c. 1461), and several others have their arms, etc. on plain gold-coloured fringed banners, but Richard lord Rivers (c. 1450), Thomas lord Stanley (c. 1459), and George duke of Clarence (c. 1461) have the field worked all over with decorative scroll-work. Sir John Grey of Ruthin (c. 1439) also displays his arms on an undoubted banner with black ground and gold fringe and staff (fig. [138]), and William lord Fauconberg (c. 1440) on a banner with the field bendy of blue and silver, with a gold fringe and staff. It is not improbable that several other quadrangular stall-plates with coloured grounds represent banners. Edmund of Langley duke of York has the field paly of three pieces of silver, green, and black; John duke of Bedford (1422-3) has a ground party blue and silver, and Thomas duke of Exeter (c. 1422) a ground all black. John duke of Somerset (c. 1440) has the field of his plate bendy of silver, red, and green, with a gilded border of scrolled leaves; and Walter lord Mountjoy (c. 1472) disposes the same three colours in vertical stripes.

Fig. 136. Stall-plate, as a banner, of Walter lord Hungerford, after 1426.

Fig. 137. Stall-plate, as a banner, of Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury, c. 1436.

Fig. 138. Stall-plate, as a banner, of Sir John Grey of Ruthin, c. 1439.

Two similar displays of heraldic achievements are to be found in a manuscript at the Heralds' College.[12] In one of these the arms, etc. of Sir Richard Nanfant (ob. 1506-7) are painted upon a quadrangular field party of blue and green. In the other the impaled shield of Sir Richard and his dame, upheld by an angel, is painted upon a ground having the upper three-fourths red and the fourth part pale pink.[13]

In modern practice there is no conceivable reason why banners for the display of arms should not be more widely adopted; not only as banners proper, to fly upon a staff, but in decorative art, such as painting, sculpture, and embroidery. Both the Royal Society and the Society of Antiquaries regularly notify their existence in Burlington House by displaying banners of their arms over their apartments, and their example is one that might be followed by other corporations entitled to bear arms. On the use of banners by individuals it is unnecessary to enter after the useful series of examples and usages thereof already noted.

The curious flags known as standards, which were in use during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, seem to have been borne simply for display in pageants or at funerals. For decorative purposes they are most effective, and as they were anciently borne by men of every degree down to and including esquires, they might with much advantage from the artistic standpoint again be devised and brought into use.

A standard (fig. [139]) was a long narrow flag with the lower edge horizontal, and the upper gradually descending from the staff to the extremity, which was split into two rounded ends. A compartment next the staff always contained the arms of St. George. The rest of the ground not infrequently was formed of two, three, or four horizontal stripes of the livery colours of the owner, and divided into three sections by two slanting bands with his word, reason, or motto. Upon the section next to the St. George's cross was generally displayed the principal beast or other device of the bearer and in later times the crest on a torse, while the other sections and the field in general were powdered with badges or rebuses. The whole was fringed of the livery colours.