IP x^'^^<^ ^r^^^. l^. ->^t. 5^ i^^-jp^m y>' 1l^^9^^^ l^AS- Digitizedby the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from Microsoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/completeguidetohOOfoxdrich OiF THE : UNIVERSITY PLATE I. THE ROYAL ARMS. A COMPLETE GUIDE TO ; ;v i ■ HERALDRY BY -''Ja^' ARTHUR CHARLES FOX-DAVIES OF LINCOLN'S INN, BARRIsi^ER-AT-LA\i^ AUTHOR OF "the ART OF HERALDRY"" EDITOR OF "armorial FAMILIES," ETC. ETC. ILLUSTRATED BY NINE PLATES IN COLOUR AND NEARLY 800 OTHER DESIGNS, MAINLY FROM DRAWINGS BY GRAHAM JOHNSTON HERALD PAINTER TO THE LYON COURT LONDON T. G. & E. G. JAGK 16 HENRIE'rTA STREET, W.C. AND EDINBURGH 1909 f7 0£/f£fi^i CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE Introduction . ix ^I. The Origin of Armory i ' II. The Status and the Meaning of a Coat of Arms in Great Britain . . . . . . .19 III. The Heralds and Officers of Arms . . . .27 IV. Heraldic Brasses ........ 49 V. The Component Parts of an Achievement . . -57 VI. The Shield .60 VII. The Field of a Shield and the Heraldic Tinctures 67 VIII. The Rules of Blazon 99 IX. The so-called Ordinaries and Sub-Ordinaries . .106 X. The Human Figure in Heraldry . . . -158 XI. The Heraldic- Lion 172 XII. Beasts 191 XIII. Monsters 218 XIV. Birds 233 XV. Fish .253 XVI. Reptiles 257 XVII. Insects .......... 260 XVIII. Trees, Leaves, Fruits, and Flowers . . . .262 XIX. Inanimate Objects 281 XX. The Heraldic Helmet . . . . , . * 3^3 vii 192522 viii CONTENTS CHAP. pj^Gj. XXI. The Crest 326 XXII. Crowns and Coronets 350 XXIII. Crest Coronets and Chapeaux . . , -370 XXIV. The Mantling or Lambrequin .... 383 XXV. The Torse or Wreath 402 XXVI. Supporters 407 XXVII. The Compartment 441 XXVIII. Mottoes 448 XXIX. Badges 453 XXX. Heraldic Flags, Banners, and Standards . .471 XXXI. Marks of Cadency 477 XXXII. Marks of Bastardy 508 XXXIII. The Marshalling of Arms ..... 523 XXXIV. The Armorial Insignia of Knighthood . . -561 XXXV. The Armorial Bearings of a Lady . . .572 XXXVI. Official Heraldic Insignia 580 XXXVII. Augmentations of Honour ..... 589 XXXVIII. Ecclesiastical Heraldry ..... 600 XXXIX. Arms of Dominion and Sovereignty . . .607 XL. Hatchments ........ 609 XLI. The Union Jack 611 XLII. " Seize-Quartiers " 618 Index , . 623 ' .. Of THE UNIVERSITY OF ^UFORNVh: INTRODUCTION Too frequently it is the custom to regard the study of the science of Armory as that of a subject which has passed beyond the limits of practical politics. Heraldry has been termed *' the shorthand of History/' but nevertheless the study of that shorthand has been approached too often as if it were but the study of a dead language. The result has been that too much faith has been placed in the works of older writers, whose dicta have been accepted as both unquestionably correct at the date they wrote, and, as a consequence, equally binding at the present day. Since the *^ Boke of St. Albans " was written, into the heraldic portion of which the author managed to compress an unconscionable amount of rubbish, books and treatises on the subject of Armory have issued from the press in a constant succession. A few of them stand a head and shoulders above the remainder. The said remainder have already sunk into oblivion. Such a book as '' Guillim " must of necessity rank in the forefront of any armorial bibliography ; but any one seeking to judge the Armory of the present day by the standards and ethics adopted by that writer, would find himself making mistake after mis- take, and led hopelessly astray. There can be very little doubt that the ** Display of Heraldry " is an accurate representation of the laws of Armory which governed the use of Arms at the date the book was written ; and it correctly puts forward the opinions which were then accepted concerning the past history of the science. There are two points, however, which must be borne in mind. The first is that the critical desire for accuracy which fortunately seems to have been the keynote of research during the nineteenth century, has produced students of Armory whose investigations into facts have swept away the fables, the myths, and the falsehood which had collected around the ancient science, and which in their prepos- terous assertions had earned for Armory a ridicule, a contempt, and a disbelief which the science itself, and moreover the active practice of the science, had never at any time warranted or deserved. The desire to gratify the vanity of illustrious patrons rendered the mythical tradi- tions attached to Armory more difficult to explode than in the cases of those other sciences in which no one has a personal interest in up- X INTRODUCTION holding the wrong ; but a study of the scientific works of bygone days, and the comparison, for example, of a sixteenth or seventeenth century medical book with a similar work of the present day, will show that all scientific knowledge during past centuries was a curious conglomera- tion of unquestionable fact, interwoven with and partly obscured by a vast amount of false information, which now can either be dismissed as utter rubbish or controverted and disproved on the score of being plausible untruth. Consequently, Armory, no less than medicine, theo- logy, or jurisprudence, should not be lightly esteemed because our pre- decessors knew less about the subject than is known at the present day, or because they believed implicitly dogma and tradition which we our- selves know to be and accept as exploded. Research and investigation constantly goes on, and every day adds to our knowledge. The second point, which perhaps is the most important, is the patent fact that Heraldry and Armory are not a dead science, but are an actual living reality. Armory may be a quaint survival of a time with different manners and customs, and different ideas from our own, but the word " Finis " has not yet been written to the science, which is still slowly developing and altering and changing as it is suited to the altered manners and customs of the present day. I doubt not that this view will be a startling one to many who look upon Armory as indissolubly associated with parchments and writings already musty with age. But so long as the Sovereign has the power to create a new order of Knighthood, and attach thereto Heraldic insignia, so long as the Crown has the power to create a new coronet, or to order a new ceremonial, so long as new coats of arms are being called into being, — for so long is it idle to treat Armory and Heraldry as a science incapable of further development, or as a science which in recent periods has not altered in its laws. The many mistaken ideas upon Armory, however, are not all due to the two considerations which have been put forward. Many are due to the fact that the hand-books of Armory professing to detail the laws of the science have not always been written by those having com- plete knowledge of their subject. Some statement appears in a text- book of Armory, it is copied into book after book, and accepted by those who study Armory as being correct ; whilst all the time it is absolutely wrong, and has never been accepted or acted upon by the Officers of Arms. One instance will illustrate my meaning. There is scarcely a text-book of Armory which does not lay down the rule, that when a crest issues from a coronet it must not be placed upon a wreath. Now there is no rule whatever upon the subject ; and instances are frequent, both in ancient and in modern grants, in which coronets have been granted to be borne upon wreaths ; and the wreath should INTRODUCTION • xi be inserted or omitted according to the original grant of the crest. Conse- quently, the so-called rule must be expunged. Another fruitful source of error is the effort which has frequently been made to assimilate the laws of Armory prevailing in the three different kingdoms into one single series of rules and regulations. Some writers have even gone so far as to attempt to assimilate with our own the rules and regulations which hold upon the Continent. As a matter of fact, many of the laws of Arms in England and Scotland are radically different ; and care needs to be taken to point out these differences. The truest way to ascertain the laws of Armory is by deduction from known facts. Nevertheless, such a practice may lead one astray, for the number of exceptions to any given rule in Armory is always great, and it is sometimes difficult to tell what is the rule, and which are the exceptions. Moreover, the Sovereign, as the fountain of honour, can over-ride any rule or law of Arms ; and many exceptional cases which have been governed by specific grants have been accepted in times past as demonstrating the laws of Armory, when they have been no more than instances of exceptional favour on the part of the Crown. In England no one is compelled to bear Arms unless he wishes ; but, should he desire to do so, the Inland Revenue requires a payment of one or two guineas, according to the method of use. From this voluntary taxation the yearly revenue exceeds ^^70,000. This affords pretty clear evidence that Armory is still decidedly popular, and that its use and display are extensive ; but at the same time it would be foolish to suppose that the estimation in which Armory is held, is equal to, or approaches, the romantic value which in former days was attached to the inheritance of Arms. The result of this has been — and it is not to be wondered at — that ancient examples are accepted and extolled beyond what should be the case. It should be borne in mind that the very ancient examples of Armory which have come down to us, may be examples of the handicraft of ignorant individuals ; and it is not safe to accept unquestioningly laws of Arms which are deduced from Heraldic handicraft of other days. Most of them are correct, because as a rule such handicraft was done under supervision ; but there is always the risk that it has not been ; and this risk should be borne in mind when estimating the value of any particular example of Armory as proof or contradiction of any particular Armorial law. There were " heraldic stationers " before the present day. A somewhat similar consideration must govern the estimate of the Heraldic art of a former day. To every action we are told there is a reaction ; and the reaction of the present day, admirable and commend- able as it undoubtedly is, which has taken the art of Armory back to the style in vogue in,_past centuries, needs to be kept within intelligent xii INTRODUCTION bounds. That the freedom of design and draughtsmanship of the old artists should be copied is desirable ; but at the same time there is not the slightest necessity to copy, and to deliberately copy, the crudeness of execution which undoubtedly exists in much of the older work. The revulsion from what has been aptly styled '^the die-sinker school of heraldry " has caused some artists to produce Heraldic drawings which (though doubtless modelled upon ancient examples) are grotesque to the last degree, and can be described in no other way. In conclusion, I have to repeat my grateful acknowledgments to the many individuals who assisted me in the preparation of my " Art of Heraldry," upon which this present volume is founded, and w^hose work I have again made use of. The very copious index herein is entirely the work of my pro- fessional clerk, Mr. H. A. Ken ward, for which I offer him my thanks. Only those who have had actual experience know the tedious weariness of compiling such an index. A. C FOX-DAVIES. 23 Old Buildings, Lincoln's Inn, W.C. A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY CHAPTER I THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY RMORY is that science of which the rules and the laws govern the use, display, meaning, and knowledge of the pictured signs and emblems appertaining to shield, helmet, or banner. Heraldry has a wider meaning, for it comprises every- thing wdthin the duties of a herald ; and whilst Armory undoubtedly is Heraldry, the regulation of cere- monials and matters of pedigree, which are really also within the scope of Heraldry, most decidedly are not Armory. Armory " relates only to the emblem's and devices. " Armoury " relates to the weapons themselves as weapons of warfare, or to the place used for the storing of the weapons. But these distinctions of spelling are modern. The word '' Arms," like many other words in the English language, has several meanings, and at the present day is used in several senses. It may mean the weapons themselves ; it may mean the limbs upon the human body. Even from the heraldic point of view it may mean the entire achievement, but usually it is employed in reference to the device upon the shield only. Of the exact origin of arms and armory nothing whatever is defi- nitely known, and it becomes difficult to point to any particular period as the period covering the origin of armory, for the very simple reason that it is much more difficult to decide what is or is not to be admitted as armorial. 2 :A. .COMPLIETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Until 'comparatively -recently heraldic books referred armory in- diffefeptly lo •the! Jribfes/of Israel, to the Greeks, to the Romans, to the Assyrians and the SaxonS V'and we are equally familiar with the ^^ Lion of Judah " and the ^' Eagle of the Caesars." In other directions we find the same sort of thing, for it has ever been the practice of semi-civilised nations to bestow or to assume the virtues and the names of animals and of deities as symbols of honour. We scarcely need refer to the totems of the North American Indians for proof of such a practice. They have reduced the subject almost to an exact science ; and there cannot be the shadow of a doubt that it is to this semi-savage practice that armory is to be traced if its origin is to be followed out to its logical and most remote beginning. Equally is it certain that many recognised heraldic figures, and more particularly those mythical creatures of which the armorial menagerie alone has now cognisance, are due to the art of civilisations older than our own, and the legends of those civihsa- tions which have called these mythical creatures into being. The widest definition of armory would have it that any pictorial badge which is used by an individual or a family with the meaning that it is a badge indicative of that person or family, and adopted and re- peatedly used in that sense, is heraldic. If such be your definition, you may ransack the Scriptures for the arms of the tribes of Israel, the writings of the Greek and Roman poets for the decorations of the armour and the persons of their heroes, mythical and actual, and you may annex numberless << heraldic " instances from the art of Nineveh, of Babylon, and of Egypt. Your heraldry is of the beginning and from the begin- ning. It is fact, but is it heraldry ? The statement in the ^' Boke of St. Albans " that Christ was a gentleman of coat armour is a fable, and due distinction must be had between the fact and the fiction in this as in all other similar cases. Mr. G. W. Eve, in his '' Decorative Heraldry," alludes to and illus- trates many striking examples of figures of an embryonic type of heraldry, of which the best are one from a Chaldean bas-relief 4000 B.C., the earliest known device that can in any way be called heraldic, and another, a device from a Byzantine silk of the tenth century. Mr. Eve qertainly seems inclined to follow the older heraldic writers in giving as wide an interpretation as possible to the word heraldic, but it is significant that none of these early instances which he gives appear to have any relation to a shield, so that, even if it be conceded that the figures are heraldic, they certainly cannot be said to be armorial. But doubtless the inclu- sion of such instances is due to an attempt, conscious or unconscious, on the part of the writers who have taken their stand on the side of great antiquity to so frame the definition of armory that it shall include everything heraldic, and due perhaps somewhat to the half unconscious THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 3 reasoning that these mythical animals, and more especially the peculiarly heraldic positions they are depicted in, which nowadays we only know as part of armory, and which exist nowhere else within our knowledge save within the charmed circle of heraldry, must be evidence of the great antiquity of that science or art, call it which you will. But it is a false deduction, due to a confusion of premise and conclusion. We find certain figures at the present day purely heraldic — we find those figures fifty centuries ago. It certainly seems a correct conclusion that, therefore, heraldry must be of that age. But is not the real conclusion, that, our heraldic figures being so old, it is evident that the figures originated long before heraldry was ever thought of, and that instead of these mythical figures having been originated by the necessities of heraldry, and being part, or even the rudimentary origin of heraldry, they had existed for other reasons and purposes — and that when the science of heraldry sprang into being, it found the whole range of its forms and charges already existing, and that none of these figures owe their being to heraldry ? The gryphon is supposed to have originatedy as is the double-headed eagle, from the dimidiation of two coats of arms re- sulting from imxpalement by reason of marriage. Both these figures were known ages earlier. Thus departs yet another of the little fictions which past writers on armory have fostered and perpetuated. Whether the ancient Egyptians and Assyrians knew they were depicting mythical animals, and did it, intending them to be symbolical of attributes of their deities, something beyond what they were familiar with in their ordinary life, we do not know ; nor indeed have w^e any certain know- ledge that there have never been animals of which their figures are but imperfect and crude representations. But it does not necessarily follow that because an Egyptian artist drew a certain figure, which figure is now appropriated to the peculiar use of armory, that he knew anything whatever of the laws of armory. Further, where is this argument to end ? There is nothing peculiarly heraldic about the lion passant, statant, dormant, couchant, or salient, and though heraldic artists may for the sake of artistic appearance distort the brute away from his natural figure, the rampant is alone the position which exists not in nature ; and if the argument is to be applied to the bitter end, heraldry must be taken back to the very earliest instance which exists of any representation of a lion. The proposition is absurd. The ancient artists drew their lions how they liked, regardless of armory and its laws, which did not then exist ; and, from decorative reasons, they evolved a certain number of methods of depicting the positions of e.g, the lion and the eagle to suit their decorative purposes. When heraldry came into existence it came in as an adjunct of decoration, and it necessarily followed that the whole of the positions in which the 4 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY craftsmen found the eagle or the lion depicted were appropriated with the animals for heraldry. That this appropriation for the exclusive purposes of armory has been silently acquiesced in by the decorative artists of later days is simply proof of the intense power and authority which accrued later to armory, and which was in fact attached to any- thing relating to privilege and prerogative. To put it baldly, the dominating authority of heraldry and its dogmatic protection by the Powers that were, appropriated certain figures to its use, and then defied any one to use them for more humble decorative purposes not allied with armory. And it is the trail of this autocratic appropriation, and from the decorative point of view this arrogant appropriation, which can be traced in the present idea that a griffin or a spread eagle, for ex- ample, must be heraldic. Consequently the argument as to the antiquity of heraldry which is founded upon the discovery of the heraldic creature in the remote ages goes by the board. One practical instance may perhaps more fully demonstrate my meaning. There is one figure, probably the most beautiful of all of those which we owe to Egypt, which is now rapidly being absorbed into heraldry. I refer to the Sphinx. This, whilst strangely in keeping with the remaining mythical heraldic figures, for some reason or other escaped the exclusive appro- priation of armorial use until within modern times. One of the earliest instances of its use in recognised armory occurs in the grant to Sir John Moore, K.B., the hero of Corunna, ,and another will be found in the augmentation granted to Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane, K.B. Since then it has been used on some number of occasions. It cer- tainly remained, however, for the late Garter King of Arms to evolve from the depths of his imagination a position which no Egyptian sphinx ever occupied, when he granted two of them as supporters to the late Sir Edward Malet, G.C.B. The Sphinx has also been adopted as the badge of one of his Majesty's regiments, and I have very little doubt that now Egypt has come under our control the Sphinx will figure in some number of the grants of the future to commemorate fortunes made in that country, or lifetimes spent in the Egyptian services. If this be so, the dominating influence of armory will doubtless in the course of another century have given to the Sphinx, as it has to many other objects, a distinctly heraldic nature and character in the mind of the ^' man in the street " to which we nowadays so often refer the arbitra- ment between conflicting opinions. Perhaps in the even yet more remote future, when the world in general accepts as a fact that armory did not exist at the time of the Norman Conquest, we shall have some interesting and enterprising individual writing a book to demonstrate that because the Sphinx existed in Egypt long before the days of Cleopatra, heraldry must of necessity be equally antique. THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 5 I have no wish, however, to dismiss thus Hghtly the subject of the antiquity of heraldry, because there is one side of the question which I have not yet touched upon, and that is, the symboHsm of these ancient and so-called heraldic examples. There is no doubt whatever that symbolism forms an integral part of armory ; in fact there is no doubt that armory itself as a whole is nothing more or less than a kind of symbolism. I have no sympathy whatever with many of the ideas con- cerning this symbolism, which will be found in nearly all heraldic books before the day of the late J. R. Planch^, Somerset Herald, who fired the train which exploded then and for ever the absurd ideas of former writers. That an argent field meant purity, that a field of gules meant royal or even martial ancestors, that a saltire meant the capture of a city, or a lion rampant noble and enviable qualities, I utterly deny. But that nearly every coat of arms for any one of the name of Fletcher bears upon it in some form or another an arrow or an arrow-head, because the origin of the name comes from the occupation of the fletcher, who was an arrow-maker, is true enough. Symbolism of that kind will be found constantly in armory, as in the case of the foxes and foxes' heads in the various coats of Fox, the lions in the coats of arms of Lyons, the horse in the arms of Trotter, and the acorns in the arms of Oakes ; in fact by far the larger proportion of the older coats of arms, where they can be traced to their real origin, exhibit some such derivation. There is another kind of symbolism which formerly, and still, favours the introduction of swords and spears and bombshells. into grants of arms to military men, that gives bezants to bankers and those connected with money, and that assigns woolpacks and cotton-plants to the shields of textile merchants ; but that is a sane and reasonable symbolism, which the reputed symbolism of the earlier heraldry books was not. It has yet to be demonstrated, however, though the belief is very generally credited, that all these very ancient Egyptian and Assyrian figures of a heraldic character had anything of symbolism about them. But even granting the whole symbolism which is claimed for them, we get but little further. There is no doubt that the eagle from untold ages has had an imperial symbolism which it still possesses. But that symbolism is not necessarily heraldic, and it is much more probable that heraldry appropriated both the eagle and its symbolism ready made, and together : consequently, if, as we have shown, the existence of the eagle is not proof of the coeval existence of heraldry, no more is the existence of the symbolical imperial eagle. For if we are to regard all symbolism as heraldic, where are we either to begin or to end ? Church vestments and ecclesiastical emblems are symbolism run riot ; in fact they are little *else : but by no stretch of imagination can these be 6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY considered heraldic with the exception of the few (for example the crosier, the mitre, and the pallium) which heraldry has appropriated ready made. Therefore, though heraldry appropriated ready made from other decorative art, and from nature and handicraft, the whole of its charges, and though it is evident heraldry also appropriated ready made a great deal of its symbolism, neither the earlier existence of the forms which it appropriated, nor the earlier existence of their symbolism, can be said to weigh at all as determining factors in the consideration of the age of heraldry. Sloane Evans in his ^' Grammar of Heraldry " (p. ix.) gives the following instances as evidence of the greater antiquity, and they are worthy at any rate of attention if the matter is to be im- partially considered. " The antiquity of ensigns and symbols may be proved by reference to Holy Writ. " I. * Take ye the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, after their families, by the house of their fathers, with the number of their names. . . . And they assembled all the congregation together on the first day of the second month ; and they declared their pedigrees after their families, by the house of their fathers, according to the number of the names, from twenty years old and upward. . . . And the children of Israel shall pitch their tents, every man by his own camp, and every man by his own standard, throughout their hosts' (Numbers i. 2, 18, 52). "2. ' Every man of the children of Israel shall pitch by his own standard, with the ensign of their father's house ' (Numbers ii. 2). " 3. ' And the children of Israel did according to all that the Lord commanded Moses : so they pitched by their standards, and so they set forward, every one after their families, according to the house of their fathers ' (Numbers ii. 34)." The Latin and Greek poets and historians afford numerous instances of the use of symbolic ornaments and devices. It will be sufhcient in this work to quote from ^schylus and Virgil, as poets ; Herodotus and Tacitus, as historians. iESCHYLUS. {Sepfem cofitra Thebas.) The poet here introduces a dialogue between Eteocles, King of Thebes, the women who composed the chorus, and a herald (Ktjpv^)^ which latter is pointing out the seven captains or chiefs of the army of Adrastus against Thebes ; distinguishing one from another by the em- blematical devices upon their shields. I. Tydeus. (" Toiai^v aDrwv, — vvktos o^^aA/xos TrpiTrei." — Lines 380-386.) "... Frowning he speaks, and shakes The dark crest streaming o'er his shaded helm In triple wave; whilst dreadful ring around The brazen bosses of his shield, impress'd , THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY With his proud argument : — ' A sable sky Burning with stars ; and in the midst full orb'd A silver moon ; ' — the eye of night o'er all, Awful in beauty, forms her peerless light." 2. Capaneus. (« "Exet S€ o-^/xa,— nPH2i2 nOAIN."— Lines 428-430.) " On his proud shield portray'd : ' A naked man Waves in his hand a blazing torch ; ' beneath In golden letters — ' I will fire the city.' " 3. Eieoclus. (" ''Ecr)(r^/xaTtcrTat, — TrvpyoifiaTiDV," — Lines 461-465.) "... No mean device Is sculptured on his shield : * A man in arms. His ladder fix'd against the enemies' walls, Mounts, resolute, to rend their rampires down ; * And cries aloud (the letters plainly mark'd), ' Not Mars himself shall beat me from the Tow'rs.' " 4. Hippomedon. ("*0 (rr)fjLaTOvpyo<; — (fio/Sov fiXkiroiv" — Lines 487-494.) "... On its orb, no vulgar artist Expressed this image : ' A Typhseus huge, Disgorging from his foul enfounder'd jaws. In fierce effusion wreaths of dusky smoke. Signal of kindling flames ; its bending verge With folds of twisted serpents border'd round.' With shouts the giant chief provokes the war. And in the ravings of outrageous valour Glares terror from his eyes . . ." 5. Parthenopczus. (" 'Ov [i.-i]V oLKOfXTracrTOs — tairreixBaL BeA>;-" — Lines 534-540.) "... Upon his clashing shield. Whose orb sustains the storm of war, he bears The foul disgrace of Thebes : — ' A rav'nous Sphynx Fixed to the plates : the burnish'd monster round Pours a portentous gleam : beneath her lies A Theban mangled by her cruel fangs : ' — 'Gainst this let each brave arm direct the spear." 6. Amp hi ar cms. (" Toiav^ 6 jxdvTLS, — /SXacrTOLveL fSovXevfiaTa." — Lines 587-591.) " So spoke the prophet ; and with awful port Advanc'd his massy shield, the shining orb Bearing no impress, for his gen'rous soul Wishes to be, not to appear, the best ; And from the culture of his modest worth Bears the rich fruit of great and glorious deeds." A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY 7. Polynices. (""Exci Se — ra ^evprjfxaTa." — I.ines 639-646."^ "... His well-orb'd shield he holds, New wrought, and with a double impress charg'd : A warrior, blazing all in golden arms, A female form of modest aspect leads, Expressing justice, as th' inscription speaks, • ' Yet once more to his country, and once more To his Paternal Throne I will restore him ' — Such their devices . . ." VIRGIL. I. (" Atque hie exultans — insigne decorum." — Lib. ii. lines 386-392.) " Choraebus, with youthful hopes beguil'd, ^ Swol'n with success, and of a daring mind, This new invention fatally design'd. ' My friends,' said he, * since fortune shows the way, ^ 'Tis fit we should the auspicious guide obey. For what has she these Grecian arms bestowed, But their destruction, and the Trojans' good ? Then change we shields, and their devices bear : Let fraud supply the want of force in war. They find us arms.' — This said, himself he dress'd In dead Androgeos' spoils, his upper vest. His painted buckler, and his plumy crest." 2. ("Post hos insignem — serpentibus hydram." — Lib. vii. lines 655-^8.) " Next Aventinus drives his chariot round The Latian plains, with palms and laurels crown'd. Proud of his steeds, he smokes along the field ; His father's hydra fills his ample shield ; A hundred serpents hiss about the brims ; The son of Hercules he justly seems. By his broad shoulders and gigantic limbs." 3. (Sequitur pulcherrimus Astur — insigne paternae." — Lib. x. lines 180-188.) • " Fair Astur follows in the wat'ry field, Proud of his manag'd horse, and painted sjaield. Thou muse, the name of Cinyras renew, And brave Cupavo follow'd but by few ; Whose helm confess'd the lineage of the man, And bore, with wings display'd, a silver swan? ^ Love was the fault of his fam'd ancestry. Whose forms and fortunes in his Ensigns fly." ^ THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 9 HERODOTUS. •'^ I. C//^, §171. (** Kai (TcfiL Tpi^a e^evp-qfiara tykvero — ra crrjfirji'a iroieea-dai."^ " And to them is allowed the invention of three things, which have come into use among the Greeks : — For the Carians seem to be the first who put crests upon their helmets and sculptured devices upon their shields." • ^^ ' 2. Calliope^ § 74. (" '0 BeTcpos rcov Xoyiov — €Triorj[iov ayKvpavJ*) " Those who deny this statement assert that he (Sophanes) bare on his shield, as a device, an anchor." TACITUS. (T/ig Anna/s.—lAh. i.) I. ("Tum redire paulatim — in sedes referunt." — Cap. 28.) " They relinquished the guard of the gates ; and the Eagles and other Ensigns, which in the beginning of the Tumult they had thrown together, were now restored each to its distinct station." • Potter in his '* Antiquities of Greece " (Dunbar's edition, Edin- burgh, 1824, vol. ii. page 79), thus speaks of the ensigns or flags {(TT]iuL€ia) used by the Grecians in their military affairs : " Of these there were different sorts, several of which were adorned with images of animals, or other things bearing peculiar relations to the cities they belong to. The Athenians, for instance, bore an owl in their ensigns (Plutarchus Lysandro), as being sacred to Minerva, the protectress of their city ; the Thebans a Sphynx {idem Pelopidas, Corneliijs Nepos, Epaminondas), in memory of the famous monster overcome by Qi^dipus. The Persians paid divine honours to the sun, and therefore represented him in their ensigns " (Curtius, lib. 3). Again (in page 150), speaking of the ornaments and devices on their ships, he says : '* Some other things there are in the prow and stern that deserve our notice, as those ornaments wherewith the extremities of the ship were beautified, commonly called aKpovea (or vewv KopcomSeg), in Latin, Corymbi, The form of them sometimes ifepresented helmets, sometimes living creatures, but most frequently was winded into a round compass, whence they are so commonly named Corymbi arid Coronce. To the aKpoa-roXia in the prow, answered the acpyaa-Ta in the stern, which were often of an orbicular figure, or fashioned like wings, to which a little shield called acnriSeiov, or ao-TnSla-Ktjf was frequently aifixed ; sometimes a piece of wood was erected, whereon rrobons of divers colours were hung, and served instead of a flag to cj^stinguish the ship. Xi/wV/cof was so called from X^i/, a Goose, whose io A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY figure it resembled, because geese were looked on as fortunate omens to mariners, for that they swim on the top of the waters and sink not. Hapacrrjuiov was the flag whereby ships were distinguished from one another ; it was placed in the prow, just below the arroXog, being sometimes carved, and frequently painted, whence it is in Latin termed pictura, representing the form of a mountain, a tree, a JJower, or any other thing, wherein it was distinguished from what was called hifela, or the safeguard of the ship, which always represented some one of the gods, to whose care and protection the ship was recom- mended ; for which reason it was held sacred. Now and then we find the tutela taken for the Hapaa-rnxov, and perhaps sometimes the images of gods might be represented on the flags ; by some it is placed also in the prow, but by most authors of credit assigned to the stern. Thus Ovid in his Epistle to Paris : — * Accipit et pictos puppis adunca Decs.' * The stern with painted deities richly shines.* " The ship wherein Europa was conveyed from Phoenicia into Crete had a bull for its flag, and Jupiter for its tutelary deity. The Boeotian ships had for their tutelar god Cadmus, represented with a dragon in his hand, because he was the founder of Thebes, the principal city of Boeotia. The name of the ship was usually taken from the flag, as appears in the following passage of Ovid, where he tells us his ship re- ceived its name from the helmet painted upon it : — * Est mihi, sitque, precor, flavse tutela Minervae, Navis et k picta casside nomen habjt.' * Minerva is the goddess I adore, And may she grant the blessings I implore ; The ship its name a painted helmet gives.* " Hence comes the frequent mention of ships called Pegasi, ScyllcBy Bulls, Rams, Tigers, &c., which the poets took liberty to represent as living creatures that transported their riders from one country to another ; nor was there (according to some) any other ground for those known fictions of Pegasus, the winged Bellerophon, or the Ram which is reported to have carried Phryxus to Colchos." To quote another very learned author : '< The system of hiero- glyphics, or symbols, was adopted into every mysterious institution, for the purpose of concealing the most sublime secrets of religion from the prying curiosity of the vulgar ; to whom nothing was exposed but the beauties of their morality." (See Ramsay's "Travels of Cyrus," lib. 3.) "The old Asiatic style, so highly figurative, seems, by what we find of THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY ii its remains in the prophetic language of the sacred writers, to have been evidently fashioned to the mode of the ancient hieroglyphics ; for as in hieroglyphic writing the sun, moon, and stars were used to represent states and empires, kings, queens, and nobility — their eclipse and ex- tinction, temporary disasters, or entire overthrow — fire and flood, desola- tion by war and famine ; plants or animals, the qualities of particular persons, &c. ; so, in like manner, the Holy Prophets call kings and empires by the names of the heavenly luminaries ; their misfortunes and overthrow are represented by eclipses and extinction ; stars falling from the firmament are employed to denote the destruction of the nobility ; thunder and tempestuous winds, hostile invasions ; lions, bears, leopards, goats, or high trees, leaders of armies, conquerors, and founders of empires ; royal dignity is described by purple, or a crown ; iniquity by spotted garments ; a warrior by a sword or bow ; a power- ful man, by a gigantic stature ; a judge by balance, weights, and measures — in a word, the prophetic style seems to be a speaking hieroglyphic' " It seems to me, however, that the whole of these are no more than symbolism, though they are undoubtedly symbolism of a high and methodical order, little removed from our own armory. Personally I do not consider them to be armory, but if the word is to be stretched to the utmost latitude to permit of their inclusion, one certain conclu- sion follows. That if the heraldry of that day had an orderly existence, it most certainly came absolutely to an end and disappeared. Armory as we know it, the armory of to-day, which as a system is traced back to the period of the Crusades, is no mere continuation by adoption. It is a distinct development and a re-development ab initio. Undoubtedly there is a period in the early development of European civilisation which is destitute alike of armory, or of anything of that nature. The civilisa- tion of Europe is not the civilisation of Egypt, of Greece, or of Rome, nor a continuation thereof, but a new development, and though each of these in its turn attained a high degree of civilisation and may have separately developed a heraldic symbolism much akin to armory, as a natural consequence of its own development, as the armory we know is a development of its own consequent upon the rise of our own civilisation, nevertheless it is unjustifiable to attempt to establish con- tinuity between the ordered symbolism of earlier but distinct civilisations, and our own present system of armory. The one and only civilisation which has preserved its continuity is that of the Jewish race. In spite of persecution the Jews have preserved unchanged the minutest details of ritual law and ceremony, the causes of their suffering. Had heraldry, which is and has always been a matter of pride, formed a part of their distinctive life we should find it still existing. Yet the fact remains 12 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY that no trace of Jewish heraldry can be found until modern times. Consequently I accept unquestioningly the conclusions of the late J. R. Planche, Somerset Herald, who unhesitatingly asserted that armory did not exist at the time of the Conquest, basing his conclusions princi- pally upon the entire absence of armory from the seals of that period, and the Bayeux tapestry. The family tokens {man) of the Japanese, however, fulfil very nearly all of the essentials of armory, although considered heraldically they may appear somewhat peculiar to European eyes. Though perhaps never forming the entire decoration of a shield, they do appear upon Fig. I. — Kiku-non- hana-mon. State Mon of Japan. Fig. 2. — Kiri-nion. Mo n of the Mikado. Fig. 3. — Awoi-mon. A/on of the House of Minamoto To- kiigawa. Fig. 4. — Mon of the House of Mina- moto Ashikava. Fig. 5. — Tomoye. Mon of the House of Arina. weapons and armour, and are used most lavishly in the decoration of clothing, rooms, furniture, and in fact almost every conceivable object, being employed for decorative purposes in precisely the same manners and methods that armorial devices are decoratively made use of in this country. A Japanese of the upper classes always has his mon in three places upon his kimono^ usually at the back just below the collar and on either sleeve. The Japanese servants also wear their service badge in much the same manner that in olden days the badge was worn by the servants of a nobleman. The design of the service badge occupies the whole available surface of the back, and is reproduced in a miniature form on each lappel of the kimono. Unfortunately, like armorial bear- ings in Europe, but to a far greater extent, the Japanese mon has been greatly pirated and abused. THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 13 Fig. I, ^* Kiku-non-hana-mon/' formed from the conventionalised bloom {hana) of the chrysanthemum, is the mon of the State. It is formed of sixteen petals arranged in a circle, and connected on the outer edge by small curves. Fig. 2, " Kiri-mon/' is the personal mon of the Mikado, formed of the leaves and flower of the Paulowna tmperialis, conventionally treated. Fig. 3, '' Awoi-mon," is the mon of the House of Minamoto Toku- gawa, and is composed of three sea leaves {Asarum). The Tokugawa Fig. 6,— Double eagle on a coin {drachtna) under the Ortho- gide of Kaifa Na9r Edin Mahmud, 1217. Fic. 7. — Device of the Mameluke Emir Toka Timur, Gover- nor of Rahaba, 1350. Fig. 8.— Lily on the Bab-al-Hadid gate at Damascus. Fig. 9. — Device of the Emir Arkatay (a band between two keys). Fig. 10. — Device of the Mameluke Emir Schaikhu. Fig. II.— Device of Abu Abdallah, Mohammed ibn Na9r, King of Granada, said to be the builder of the Al- hambra (1231-1272). reigned over the country as Shogune from 1603 until the last revolution in 1867, before which time the Emperor (the Mikado) was only nomi- nally the ruler. Fig. 4 shows the mon of the House of Minamoto Ashikaya, which from 1336 until 1573 enjoyed the Shogunat. Fig. 5 shows the second mon of the House of Arina, Toymote, which is used, however, throughout Japan as a sign of luck. The Saracens and the Moors, to whom we owe the origin of so many of our recognised heraldic charges and the derivation of some of our terms {e.g. ^' gules," from the Persian gul^ and " azure " from the Persian lazurd) had evidently on their part something more than the rudiments of armory, as Figs. 6 to 1 1 will indicate. 14 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY One of the best definitions of a coat of arms that I know, though this is not perfect, requires the twofold qualification that the design must be hereditary and must be connected with armour. And there can be no doubt that the theory of armory as we now know it is governed by those two ideas. The shields and the crests, if any decoration of a helmet is to be called a crest, of the Greeks and the Romans undoubt- edly come within the one requirement. Also were they indicative of and perhaps intended to be symbolical of the owner. They lacked, however, heredity, and we have no proof that the badges we read of, or the decorations of shield and helmet, were continuous even during a single lifetime. Certainly as we now understand the term there must be both continuity of use, if the arms be impersonal, or heredity if the arms be personal. Likewise must there be their use as decorations of the implements of warfare. If we exact these qualifications as essential, armory as a fact and as a science is a product of later days, and is the evolution from the idea of tribal badges and tribal means and methods of honour applied to the decoration of implements of warfare. It is the conjunction and association of these two distinct ideas to which is added the no less important idea of heredity. The civilisation of England before the Conquest has left us no trace of any sort or kind that the Saxons, the Danes, or the Celts either knew or practised armory. So that if armory as we know it is to be traced to the period of the Norman Conquest, we must look for it as an adjunct of the altered civilisation and the altered law which Duke William brought into this country. Such evidence as exists is to the contrary, and there is nothing that can be truly termed armorial in that marvellous piece of cotemporaneous workmanship known as the Bayeux tapestry. Concerning the Bayeux tapestry and the evidence it affords, Wood- ward and Burnett's *' Treatise on Heraldry," apparently following Planch^'s conclusions, remarks : ^^ The evidence afforded by the famous tapestry preserved in the public library of Bayeux, a series of views in sewed work representing the invasion and conquest of England by William the Norman, has been appealed to on both sides of this contro- versy, and has certainly an important bearing on the question of the antiquity of coat-armour. This panorama of seventy-two scenes is on probable grounds believed to have been the work of the Conqueror's Queen Matilda and her maidens ; though the French historian Thierry and others ascribe it to the Empress Maud, daughter of Henry III. The latest authorities suggest the likelihood of its having been wrought as a decoration for the Cathedral of Bayeux, when rebuilt by William's uterine brother Odo, Bishop of that See, in 1077. 'T^^ exact corre- spondence which has been discovered between the length of the tapestry THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 15 and the inner circumference of the nave of the cathedral greatly favours this supposition. This remarkable work of art, as carefully drawn in colour in 1818 by Mr. C. Stothard, is reproduced in the sixth volume of the Vetusta Momimenta ; and more recently an excellent copy of it from autotype plates has been published by the Arundel Society. Each of its scenes is accompanied by a Latin description, the whole uniting into a graphic history of the event commemorated. We see Harold taking leave of Edward the Confessor ; riding to Bosham with his hawk and hounds ; embarking for France ; landing there and being captured by the Count of Ponthieu ; redeemed by William of Nor- mandy, and in the midst of his Court aiding him against Conan, Count of Bretagne ; swearing on the sacred relics to recognise William's claim of succession to the English throne, and then re- embarking for England. On his return, we have him recounting the incidents of his journey to Edward the Confessor, to whose funeral obsequies we are next introduced. Then we have Harold receiving the crown from the English people, and ascending the throne ; and William, apprised of what had taken place, consulting with his half- brother Odo about invading England. The war preparations of the Normans, their embarkation, their landing, their march to Hastings, and formation of a camp there, form the subjects of successive scenes ; and finally we have the battle of Hastings, with the death of Harold and the flight of the English. In this remarkable piece of work we have figures of more than six hundred persons, and seven hundred animals, besides thirty-seven buildings, and forty-one ships or boats. There are of course also numerous shields of warriors, of which some are round, others kite-shaped, and on some of the latter are rude figures, of dragons or other imaginary animals, as well as crosses of different forms, and spots. On one hand it requires little imagination to find the cross paUe and the cross botonnee of heraldry prefigured on two of these shields. But there are several fatal objections to regarding these figures as incipient armory, namely that while the most prominent persons of the time are depicted, most of them repeatedly, none of these is ever represented twice as bearing the same device, nor is there one instance of any resemblance in the rude designs described to the bear- ings actually used by the descendants of the persons in question. If a personage so important and so often depicted as the Conqueror had borne arms, they could not fail to have had a place in a nearly con- temporary work, and more especially if it proceeded from the needle of his wife." Lower, in his ^^ Curiosities of Heraldry," clinches the argument when he writes : '^ Nothing but disappointment awaits the curious armorist who seeks in this venerable memorial the pale, the bend, and 1 6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY other early elements of arms. As these would have been much more easily imitated with the needle than the grotesque figures before alluded to, we may safely conclude that personal arms had not yet been introduced/' The ^^ Treatise on Heraldry" proceeds: <^The Second Crusade took place in 1147 ; and in Montfaucon's plates of the no longer extant windows of the Abbey of St. Denis, representing that historical episode, there is not a trace of an armorial ensign on any of the shields. That window was probably executed at a date when the memory of that event was fresh ; but in Montfaucon's time, the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Science heroique was matter of such moment in France that it is not to be believed that the armorial figures on the shields, had there been any, would have been left out." Surely, if anywhere, we might have expected to have found evidence of armory, if it had then existed, in the Bayeux Tapestry. Neither do the seals nor the coins of the period produce a shield of arms. Nor amongst the host of records and documents which have been pre- served to us do we find any reference to armorial bearings. The intense value and estimation attached to arms in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, which has steadily though slowly declined since that period, would lead one to suppose that had arms existed as we know them at an earlier period, we should have found some definite record of them in the older chronicles. There are no such references, and no coat of arms in use at a later date can be relegated to the Conquest or any anterior period. Of arms, as we know them, there are isolated examples in the early part of the twelfth century, perhaps also at the end of the eleventh. At the period of the Third Crusade (1189) they were in actual existence as hereditary decorations of weapons of warfare. Luckily, for the purposes of deductive reasoning, human nature remains much the same throughout the ages, and, dislike it as we may, vanity now and vanity in olden days was a great lever in the determination of human actions. A noticeable result of civilisation is the effort to suppress any sign of natural emotion ; and if the human race at the present day is not unmoved by a desire to render its ap- pearance attractive, we may rest very certainly assured that in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries this motive was even more pronounced, and still yet more pronounced at a more remote distance of time. Given an opportunity of ornament, there you will find ornament and decoration. The ancient Britons, like the Maories of to-day, found their opportunities restricted to their skins. The Maories tattoo them- selves in intricate patterns, the ancient Britons used woad, though history is silent as to whether they were content with flat colour or gave their preference to patterns. It is unnecessary to trace the art of THE ORIGIN OF ARMORY 17 decoration through embroidery upon clothes, but there is no doubt that as soon as shields came into use they were painted and decorated, though I hesitate to follow practically the whole of heraldic writers in the statement that it was the necessity for distinction in battle which accounted for the decoration of shields. Shields were painted and decorated, and helmets were adorned with all sorts of ornament, long before the closed helmet made it impossible to recognise a man by his facial peculiarities and distinctions. We have then this underlying principle of vanity, with its concomitant result of personal decora- tion and adornment. We have the relics of savagery which caused a man to be nicknamed from some animal. The conjunction of the two produces the effort to apply the opportunity for decoration and the vanity of the animal nickname to each other. We are fast approaching armory. In those days every man fought, and his weapons were the most cherished of his personal possessions. The sword his father fought with, the shield his father carried, the banner his father followed would naturally be amongst the articles a son would be most eager to possess. Herein are the rudiments of the idea of heredity in armory ; and the science of armory as we know it begins to slowly evolve itself from that point, for the son would natu- rally take a pride in upholding the fame which had clustered round the pictured signs and emblems under which his father had warred. Another element then appeared which exercised a vast influence upon armory. Europe rang from end to end with the call to the Crusades. We may or we may not understand the fanaticism which gripped the whole of the Christian world and sent it forth to light the Saracens. That has little to do with it. The result was the collection together in a comparatively restricted space of all that was best and noblest amongst the human race at that time. And the spirit of emulation caused nation to vie with nation, and individual with individual in the performance of illustrious feats of honour. War was elevated to the dignity of a sacred duty, and the implements of warfare rose in esti- mation. It is easy to understand the glory therefore that attached to arms, and the slow evolution which I have been endeavouring to in- dicate became a concrete fact, and it is due to the Crusades that the origin of armory as we now know it was practically coeval through- out Europe, and also that a large proportion of the charges and terms and rules of heraldry are identical in all European countries. The next dominating influence was the introduction, in the early part of the thirteenth century, of the closed helmet. This hid the face of the wearer from his followers and necessitated some means by which the latter could identify the man under whom they served. What more natural than that they should identify him by the decora- 3 1 8 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY tion of his shield and the ornaments of his helmet, and by the coat or surcoat which he wore over his coat of mail ? This surcoat had afforded another opportunity of decoration, and it had been decorated with the same signs that the wearer had painted on his shield, hence the term <' coat of arms." This textile coat was in itself a product of the Crusades. The Crusaders went in their metal armour from the cooler atmospheres of Europe to the in- tolerable heat of the East. The surcoat and the lambrequin alike protected the metal armour and the metal helmet from the rays of the sun and the resulting discomfort to the wearer, and were also found very effective as a preventative of the rust resulting from rain and damp upon the metal. By the time that the closed helmet had de- veloped the necessity of distinction and the identification of a man with the pictured signs he wore or carried, the evolution of armory into the science we know was practically complete. CHAPTER II THE STATUS AND THE MEANING OF A COAT OF ARMS IN GREAT BRITAIN IT would be foolish and misleading to assert that the possession of a coat of arms at the present date has anything approaching the dignity which attached to it in the days of long ago ; but one must trace this through the centuries which have passed in order to form a true estimate of it, and also to properly appreciate a coat of arms at the present time. It is necessary to go back to the Norman Conquest and the broad dividing lines of social life in order to obtain a correct know- ledge. The Saxons had no armory, though they had a very perfect civilisation. This civilisation William the Conqueror upset, introducing in its place the system of feudal tenure with which he had been familiar on the Continent. Briefly, this feudal system may be described as the partition of the land amongst the barons, earls, and others, in return for which, according to the land they held,they accepted a liabiHty of military service for themselves and so many followers. These barons and earls in their turn sublet the land on terms advantageous to themselves, but nevertheless requiring from those to whom they sublet^ the same military service which the King had exacted from themselves proportionate with the extent of the sublet lands. Other subdivisions took place, but always with the same liability of military service, until we come to those actually holding and using the lands, enjoying them subject to the liability of military service attached to those particular lands. Every man who held land under these conditions — and it was impossible to hold land without them — was of the upper class. He was nohilis or knowfiy and of a rank distinct, apart, and absolutely separate from the remainder of the population, who were at one time actually serfs, and for long enough afterwards, of no higher social position than they had enjoyed in their period of servitude. This wide distinction between the upper and lower classes, which existed from one end of Europe to the other, was the very root and foundation of armory. It cannot be too greatly insisted upon. There were two qualitative terms, '^ gentle " and '^ simple," which were applied to the upper and lower classes respectively. Though now becoming archaic and obsolete, the terms ^' gentle " and ^' simple " 19 20 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY are still occasionally to be met with used in that original sense ; and the two adjectives " gentle " and '' simple/' in the everyday meanings of the words, are derived from, and are a later growth from the original usage with the meaning of the upper and lower classes ; because the quaUty of being gentle was supposed to exist in that class of life referred to as gentle, whilst the quality of simplicity was supposed to be an attribute of the lower class. The word gentle is derived from the Latin word gens {gentilis), meaning a man, because those were men who were not serfs. Serfs and slaves were nothing accounted of. The word '' gentle- man " is a derivative of the word gentle, and a gentleman was a member of the gentle or upper class, and gentle qualities were so termed because they were the qualities supposed to belong to the gentle class. A man was not a gentleman, even in those days, because he happened to possess personal qualities usually associated with the gentle class ; a man was a gentleman if he belonged to the gentle or upper class and not otherwise, so that ^^ gentleman " was an identical term fbr one to whom the word nobilis was applied, both being names for members of the upper class. To all intents and purposes at that date there was no middle class at all. The kingdom was the land ; and the trading com- munity who dwelt in the towns were of little account save as milch kine for the purposes of taxation. The social position conceded to them by the upper class was little, if any, more than was conceded to the lower classes, whose life and liberties were held very cheaply. Briefly to sum up, therefore, there were but the two classes in existence, of which the upper class were those who held the land, who had military obligations, and who were noble, or in other words gentle. Therefore all who held land were gentlemen ; because they held land they had to lead their servants and followers into battle, and they themselves were personally responsible for the appearance of so many followers, when the King summoned them to war. Now we have seen in the previous chapter that arms became necessary to the leader that his followers might distinguish him in battle. Consequently all who held land having, because of that land, to be responsible for followers in battle, found it necessary to use arms. The corollary is therefore evident, that all who held lands of the King were gentlemen or noble, and used arms ; and as a consequence all who possessed arms were gentlemen, for they would not need or use arms, nor was their armour of a character upon which they could display arms, unless they were leaders. The leaders, we have seen, were the land-owning or upper class ; therefore every one who had arms was a gentleman, and every gentleman had arms. But the status of gentlemen existed before there were coats of arms, and the later inseparable connection between the two was an evolution. The preposterous prostitution of the word gentleman in these latter THE STATUS OF A COAT OF ARMS 21 days is due to the almost universal attribute of human nature which declines to admit itself as of other than gentle rank ; and in the eager desire to write itself gentleman, it has deliberately accepted and or- dained a meaning to the word which it did not formerly possess, and has attributed to it and allowed it only such a definition as would enable almost anybody to be included within its ranks. The word gentleman nowadays has become meaningless as a word in an ordinary vocabulary ; and to use the word with its original and true meaning, it is necessary to now consider it as purely a technical term. We are so accustomed to employ the word nowadays in its un- restricted usage that we are apt to overlook the fact that such a usage is comparatively modern. The following extract from ''The Right to Bear Arms " will prove that its real meaning was understood and was decided by law so late as the seventeenth century to be '' a man entitled to bear arms " : — *' The following case in the Earl Marshal's Court, which hung upon the definition of the word, conclusively proves my contention : — *'*2i5/ November 1637. — W. Baker, gent, humbly sheweth that having some occasion of conference with Adam Spencer of Broughton under the Bleane, co. Cant., on or about 28th July last, the said Adam did in most base and opprobrious tearmes abuse your petitioner, calling him a base, lying fellow, &c. &c. The defen- dant pleaded that Baker is noe Gentleman, and soe not capable of redresse in this court. Le Neve, Clarenceux, is directed to examine the point raised, and having done so, declared as touching the gentry of William Baker, that Robert Cooke, Clarenceux King of Arms, did make a declaration loth May 1573, under his hand and scale of office, that George Baker of London, sonne of J. Baker of the same place, Sonne of Simon Baker of Feversham, co. Cant., was a bearer of tokens of honour, and did allow and confirm to the said George Baker and to his posterity, and to the posterity of Christopher Baker, these Arms, &c. &c. And further, Le Neve has received proof that the petitioner, William Baker, is the son of William Baker of Kingsdowne, co. Cant., who was the brother of George Baker, and son of Christopher aforesaid.' The judgment is not stated. (The original Confirmation of Arms by Cooke, loth May 1573, may now be seen in the British Museum. — Genealogist iov 1889, p. 242.)" It has been shown that originally practically all who held land bore arms. It has also been shown that armory was an evolution, and as a consequence it did not start, in this country at any rate, as a ready-made science with all its rules and laws completely known or promulgated. There is not the slightest doubt that, in the earliest infancy of the science, arms were assumed and chosen without the control of the Crown ; and one would not be far wrong in assuming that, so long as the rights accruing from prior appropriation of other people were respected, a landowner finding the necessity of arms in battle, was originally at liberty to assume what arms he liked. That period, however, was of but brief duration, for we find as early 22 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY as 1390, from the celebrated Scrope and Grosvenor case, (i) that a man could have obtained at that time a definite right to his arms, (2) that this right could be enforced against another, and we find, what is more important, (3) that the Crown and the Sovereign had supreme control and jurisdiction over arms, and (4) that the Sovereign could and did grant arms. From that date down to the present time the Crown, both by its own direct action and by the action of the Kings of Arms to whom it delegates powers for the purpose, in Letters Patent under the Great Seal, specifically issued to each separate King of Arms upon his appoint- ment, has continued to grant armorial bearings. Some number of early grants of arms direct from the Crown have been printed in the Genea- logical Magazine^ and some of the earliest distinctly recite that the reci- pients are made noble and created gentlemen, and that the arms are given them as the sign of their nobility. The class of persons to whom grants of arms were made in the earliest days of such instruments is much the same as the class which obtain grants of arms at the present day, and the successful trader or merchant is now at liberty, as he was in the reign of Henry VIII. and earlier, to raise himself to the rank of a gentleman by obtaining a grant of arms. A family must make its start at some time or other ; let this start be made honestly, and not by the appropriation of the arms of some other man. The illegal assumption of arms began at an early date ; and in spite of the efforts of the Crown, which have been more or less continuous and repeated, it has been found that the use of <^ other people's " arms has continued. In the reign of Henry V. a very stringent proclamation was issued on the subject ; and in the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and her successors, the Kings of Arms were commanded to make perambulations throughout the country for the purpose of pulling down and defacing improper arms, of recording arms properly borne by authority, and of compelling those who used arms without authority to obtain authority for them or discontinue their use. These perambulations were termed Visitations. The subject of Visitations, and in fact the whole subject of the right to bear arms, is dealt with at length in the book to which re- ference has been already made, namely, <' The Right to Bear Arms." The glory of a descent from a long line of armigerous ancestors, the glory and the pride of race inseparably interwoven with the inheritance of a name which has been famous in history, the fact that some arms have been designed to commemorate heroic achievements, the fact that the display of a particular coat of arms has been the method, which society has countenanced, of advertising to the world that one is of the upper class or a descendant of some ancestor who performed some glorious deed to which the arms have reference, the fact that arms themselves are the very sign of a particular descent or of a particular THE STATUS OF A COAT OF ARMS 23 rank, have all tended to cause a false and fictitious value to be placed upon all these pictured emblems which as a whole they have never possessed, and which I believe they were never intended to possess. It is because they were the prerogative and the sign of aristocracy that they have been coveted so greatly, and consequently so often assumed improperly. Now aristocracy and social position are largely a matter of personal assertion. A man assumes and asserts for himself a certain position, which position is gradually and imperceptibly but continuously increased and elevated as its assertion is reiterated. There is no par- ticular moment in a man's life at the present time, the era of the great middle class, at which he visibly steps from a plebeian to a patrician standing. And when he has fought and talked the world into conced- ing him a recognised position in the upper classes, he naturally tries to obliterate the fact that he or ^' his people " were ever of any other social position, and he hesitates to perpetually date his elevation to the rank of gentility by obtaining a grant of arms and thereby admitting that before that date he and his people were plebeian. Consequently he waits until some circumstance compels an application for a grant, and the consequence is that he thereby post-dates his actual technical gentility to a period long subsequent to the recognition by Society of his position in the upper classes. Arms are the sign of the technical rank of gentility. The posses- sion of arms is a matter of hereditary privilege, which privilege the Crown is willing should be obtained upon certain terms by any who care to possess it, who live according to the style and custom which is usual amongst gentle people. And so long as the possession of arms is a matter of privilege, even though this privilege is no greater than is consequent upon payment of certain fees to the Crown and its officers ; for so long will that privilege possess a certain prestige and value, though this may not be very great. Arms have never possessed any greater value than attaches to a matter of privilege ; and (with singularly few exceptions) in every case, be it of a peer or baronet, of knight or of simple gentleman, this privilege has been obtained or has been regularised by the payment at some time or other of fees to the Crown and its officers. And the only difference between arms granted and paid for yesterday and arms granted and paid for five hundred years ago is the simple moral difference which attaches to the dates at which the payments were made. Gentility is merely hereditary rank, emanating, with all other rank, from the Crown, the sole fountain of honour. It is idle to make the word carry a host of meanings it was never intended to. Arms being the sign of the technical rank of gentility, the use of arms is the advertise- ment of one's claim to that gentility. Arms mean nothing more. By 24 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY coronet, supporters, and helmet can be indicated one's place in the scale of precedence ; by adding arms for your wife you assert that she also is of gentle rank ; your quarterings show the other gentle families you represent ; difference marks will show your position in your own family (not a very important matter) ; augmentations indicate the deeds of your ancestors which the Sovereign thought worthy of being held in especial remembrance. By the use of a certain coat of arms, you assert your descent from the person to whom those arms were granted, confirmed, or allowed. That is the beginning and end of armory. Why seek to make it mean more ? However heraldry is looked upon, it must be admitted that from its earliest infancy armory possessed two essential qualities. It was the definite sign of hereditary nobility and rank, and it was practically an integral part of warfare ; but also from its earliest infancy it formed a means of decoration. It would be a rash statement to assert that armory has lost its actual military character even now, but it certainly possessed it undiminished so long as tournaments took place, for the armory of the tournament was of a much higher standard than the armory of the battlefield. Armory as an actual part of warfare existed as a means of decoration for the implements of warfare, and as such it certainly continues in some slight degree to the present day. Armory in that bygone age, although it existed as the symbol of the lowest hereditary rank, was worn and used in warfare, for purposes of pageantry, for the indication of ownership, for decorative purposes, for the needs of authenticity in seals, and for the purposes of memorials in records, pedigrees, and monuments. All those uses and purposes of armory can be traced back to a period coeval with that to which our certain knowledge of the existence of armory runs. Of all those usages and purposes, one only, that of the use of armorial bearings in actual battle, can be said to have come to an end, and even that not entirely so ; the rest are still with us in actual and extensive existence. I am not versed in the minutiae of army matters or army history, but I think I am correct in saying that there was no such thing as a regular stand- ing army or a national army until the reign of Henry VIII. Prior to that time the methods of the feudal system supplied the wants of the country. The actual troops were in the employment, not of the Crown, but of the individual leaders. The Sovereign called upon, and had the right to call upon, those leaders to provide troops ; but as those troops were not in the direct employment of the Crown, they wore the liveries and heraldic devices of their leaders. The leaders wore their own devices, originally for decorative reasons, and later that they might be distinguished by their particular followers : hence the actual use in battle in former days of private armorial bearings. And even yet the THE STATUS OP A COAT OF ARMS 25 practice is not wholly extinguished, for the tartans of the Gordon and Cameron Highlanders are a relic of the usages of these former days. With the formation of a standing army, and the direct service of the troops to the Crown, the liveries and badges of those who had formerly been responsible for the troops gave way to the liveries and badges of the Crown. The uniform of the Beefeaters is a good example of the method in which in the old days a servant wore the badge and livery of his lord. The Beefeaters wear the scarlet livery of the Sovereign, and wear the badge of the Sovereign still. Many people will tell you, by the way, that the uniform of a Beefeater is identical now with what it was in the days of Henry VIII. It isn't. In accordance with the strictest laws of armory, the badge, embroidered on the front and back of the tunic, has changed, and is now the triple badge — the rose, the thistle, and the shamrock — of the triple kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Every soldier who wears a scarlet coat, the livery of his Sovereign, every regiment that carries its colours, every saddle-cloth with a Royal emblem thereupon, is evidence that the use of armory in battle still exists in a small degree to the present day ; but circumstances have altered. The troops no longer attack to the cry of '^ A Warwick ! a Warwick ! " they serve His Majesty the King and wear his livery and devices. They no longer carry the banner of their officer, whose servants and tenants they would formerly have been ; the regiment cherishes instead the banner of the armorial bearings of His Majesty. Within the last few years, probably within the lifetime of all my readers, there has been striking evidence of the manner in which circumstances alter everything. The Zulu War put an end to the practice of taking the colours of a regiment into battle ; the South African War saw khaki substituted universally for the scarlet livery of His Majesty ; and to have found upon a South African battlefield the last remnant of the armorial practices of the days of chivalry, one would have needed, I am afraid, to examine the buttons of the troopers. Still the scarlet coat exists in the army on parade : the Life Guards wear the Royal Cross of St. George and the Star of the Garter, the Scots Greys have the Royal Saltire of St. Andrew, and the Gordon Highlanders have the Gordon crest of the Duke of Richmond and Gordon ; and there are many other similar instances. There is yet another point. The band of a regiment is maintained by the officers of the regiment, and at the present day in the Scottish regiments the pipers have attached to their pipes banners bearing the various personal armorial bearings of the officers of the regiment. So that perhaps one is justified in saying that the use of armorial bearings in warfare has not yet come to an end. The other ancient usages of armory exist now as they existed in the earliest times. So that it is 26 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY foolish to contend that armory has ceased to exist, save as an interest- ing survival of the past. It is a living reality, more widely in use at the present day than ever before. Certainly the military side of armory has sunk in importance till it is now utterly overshadowed by the decorative, but the fact that armory still exists as the sign and adjunct of hereditary rank utterly forbids one to assert that armory is dead, and though this side of armory is also now partly overshadowed by its decorative use, armory must be admitted to be still alive whilst its laws can still be altered. When, if ever, rank is finally swept away, and when the Crown ceases to grant arms, and people cease to use them, then armory will be dead, and can be treated as the study of a dead science. CHAPTER III THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS THE Crown is the Fountain of Honour, having supreme control of coat-armour. This control in all civilised countries is one of the appanages of sovereignty, but from an early period much of the actual control has been delegated to the Heralds and Kings of Arms. The word Herald is derived from the Anglo-Saxon — here, an aimy, and wald, strength or sway — though it has probably come to us from the German word Herold. In the last years of the twelfth century there appeared at festal gatherings persons mostly habited in richly coloured clothing, who delivered invitations to the guests, and, side by side with the stewards, superintended the festivities. Many of them were minstrels, who, after tournaments or battle, extolled the deeds of the victors. These individuals were known in Germany as Garzune, Originally every powerful leader had his own herald, and the dual character of minstrel and messenger led the herald to recount the deeds of his master, and, as a natural consequence, of his master's ancestors. In token of their office they wore the coats of arms of the leaders they served ; and the original status of a herald was that of a non- combatant messenger. When tournaments came into vogue it was natural that some one should examine the arms of those taking part, and from this the duties of the herald came to include a know- ledge of coat-armour. As the Sovereign assumed or arrogated the control of arms, the right to grant arms, and the right of judgment in disputes concerning arms, it was but the natural result that the per- sonal heralds of the Sovereign should be required to have a knowledge of the arms of his principal subjects, and should obtain something in the nature of a cognisance or control and jurisdiction over those arms ; for doubtless the actions of the Sovereign would often depend upon the knowledge of his heralds. The process of development in this country will be more easily understood when it is remembered that the Marshal or Earl Marshal was in former times, with the Lord High Constable, the first in milt' tary rank under the King, who usually led his army in person, and to 27 28 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the Marshal was deputed the ordering and arrangement of the various bodies of troops, regiments, bands of retainers, &c., which ordering was at first facilitated and at length entirely determined by the use of various pictorial ensigns, such as standards, banners, crests, cogni- sances, and badges. The due arrangement and knowledge of these various ensigns became first the necessary study and then the ordinary duty of these officers of the Marshal, and their possession of such knowledge, which soon in due course had to be written down and tabulated, secured to them an important part in mediaeval life. The result was that at an early period we find them employed in semi- diplomatic missions, such as carrying on negotiations between contend- ing armies on the field, bearing declarations of war, challenges from one sovereign to another, besides arranging the ceremonial not only of battles and tournaments, but also of coronations, Royal baptisms, marriages, and funerals. From the fact that neither King of Arms nor Herald is mentioned as officiating in the celebrated Scrope and Grosvenor case, of which very full particulars have come down to us, it is evident that the con- trol of arms had not passed either in fact or in theory from the Crown to the officers of arms at that date. Konrad Griinenberg, in his Wappencodex ("Roll of Arms"), the date of which is 1483, gives a representation of a helmschau (literally helmet-show), here reproduced (Fig. 12), which includes the figure of a herald. Long before that date, however, the position of a herald in England was well defined, for we find that on January 5, 1420, the King appointed William Bruges to be Garter King of Arms. It is usually considered in Eng- land that it would be found that in Germany armory reached its highest point of evolution. Certainly German heraldic art is in advance of our own, and it is curious to read in the latest and one of the best of German heraldic books that " from the very earliest times heraldry was carried to a higher degree of perfection and thoroughness in England than elsewhere, and that it has maintained itself at the same level until the present day. In other countries, for the most part, heralds no longer have any existence but in name." The initial figure which appears at the commencement of Chapter I. represents John Smert, Garter King of Arms, and is taken from the grant of arms issued by him to the Tallow Chandlers' Company of London, which is dated September 24, 1456. Long before there was any College of Arms, the Marshal, after- wards the Earl Marshal, had been appointed. The Earl Marshal is now head of the College of Arms, and to him has been delegated the whole of the control both of armory and of the College, with the ex- ception of that part which the Crown has retained in its own hands. Fig. 12. — Helmschan or Helmet-Show. (From Konrad Griinenberg's Wappencodex zu Mimchen.) End of fifteenth century. OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 29 After the Earl Marshal come the Kings of Arms, the Heralds of Arms, and the Pursuivants of Arms. The title of King of Arms, or, as it was more anciently written. King of Heralds, was no doubt originally given to the chief or principal officer, who presided over the heralds of a kingdom, or some principal province, which heraldic writers formerly termed marches; or else the title was conferred upon the officer of arms attendant upon some par- ticular order of knighthood. Garter King of Arms, who is immediately attached to that illustrious order, is likewise Principal King of Arms, and these, although separate and distinct offices, are and have been always united in one person. Upon the revival and new modelling of the Order of the Bath, in the reign of George the First, a King of Arms was created and attached to it, by the title of Bath King of Arms ; and King George III., upon the institution of the Hanoverian Guelphic Order of Knighthood, annexed to that order a King of Arms, by the appellation of Hanover. At the time of the creation of his office, Bath King of Arms was given Wales as his province, the intention being that he should rank with the others, granting arms in his own province, but he was not, nor was Hanover, nor is the King of Arms of the Order of St. Michael and St. George, a member (as such) of the corporation of the College of Arms. The members of that corporation considered that the gift of the province of Wales, the jurisdiction over which they had previously possessed, to Bath King was an infringement of their char- tered privileges. The dispute was referred to the law officers of the Crown, whose opinion was in favour of the corporate body. Berry in his Encyclopcedia Heraldka further remarks : *< The Kings of Arms of the provincial territories have the titles of Clarenceux and Norroyy the jurisdiction of the former extending over the south, east, and west parts of England, from the river Trent southwards ; and that of the latter, the remaining part of the kingdom northward of that river. Kings of Arms have been likewise assigned other provinces over different kingdoms and dominions, and besides Ulster King of Arms for Ireland, and Lyon King of Arms for Scotland, others were nominated for particular provinces abroad, when united to the Crown of England, such as Aquitainey AnjoUj and Guyenne^ who were perhaps at their first creation intended only for the services of the places whose titles they bore, w^hen the same should be entirely subdued to allegiance to the Crown of England, and who, till that time, might have had other provinces allotted to them, either provisionally or temporarily, within the realm of England. There were also other Kings of Arms, denominated from the duke- doms or earldoms which our princes enjoyed before they came to the throne, as Lancaster^ Gloucester^ Richmond^ and Leicester^ the thr^ first 30 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY iiaving marches, or provinces, and the latter a similar jurisdiction. Windsor, likewise, was a local title, but it is doubtful whether that officer was ever a King of Arms. Marche also assumed that appellation, from his provincial jurisdiction over a territory so called. But although anciently there were at different periods several Kings of Arms in England, only two provincial Kings of Arms have, for some ages, been continued in office, viz. Clarenceux and Norroy, whose provinces or marches are, as before observed, separated by the river Trent, the ancient limits of the escheaters, when there are only two in the kingdom, and the jurisdiction of the wardens of the forests. Norroy is considered the most ancient title, being the only one in England taken from the local situation of his province, unless Marche should be derived from the same cause. The title of Norroy was anciently written Norreys and Norreisy King of Arms of the people residing in the north ; Garter being styled Roy des Anglois, of the people, and not d'Angleterre, of the kingdom, the inhabitants of the north being called Norreys^ as we are informed by ancient historians. It appears that there was a King of Arms for the parts or people on the north of Trent as early as the reign of Edward I., from which, as Sir Henry Spelman observes, it may be inferred that the southern, eastern, and western parts had principal heralds, or Kings of Arms, al- though their titles at that early age cannot now be ascertained. Norroy had not the title of King till after the reign of Edward II. It was appropriated to a King of Heralds, expressly called Rex Norroy^ Roy d'Armes del North^ Rex Armorum del Northy Rex de Northy and Rex Norroy du North; and the term Roy Norreys likewise occurs in the Pell Rolls of the 22nd Edward III. ; but from that time till the 9th of Richard II. no farther mention is made of any such officer, from which it is probable a different person enjoyed the office by some other title during that interval, particularly as the office was actually executed by other Kings of Arms, immediately after that period. John Oiharlakey Marche King of Arms, executed it in the 9th of Richard II., Richard del Briiggy Lancaster King of Arms y ist Henry W ,y2i^^ Ashwelly Boys, and Tindaly successively Lancaster Kings of Arms, until the end of that monarch's reign. Edward IV. replaced this province under a King of Arms, and re- vived the dormant title of Norroy, But in the Statute of Resumptions, ^ "Norreys and Surreis, that service aught the kyng, With horse and harneis at Carlele, made samning." See Langtoft's Chronicle treating of the Wars of Edward I. against the Scots. " Bot Sir John de Waleis taken was, in a pleyne, Throgh Spring of Norreis men that were certeyn." Ibid., Australes se Norensibus opposuerunt. M. Oaris, under the year 1237. THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 31 made ist Henry VII., a clause was inserted that the same should not extend io John Moore^ otherwise Norroyy chief Herald King of Arms of the north parts of this realm of England, so appointed by King Edward IV, by his Letters Patent, bearing date 9th July, in the eighteenth year of his reign. It has since continued without interruption. Falcon King of Arms seems the next who had the title of King con- ferred upon him, and was so named from one of the Royal badges of King Edward III., and it was afterwards given to a herald and pursui- vant, under princes who bore the falcon as a badge or cognisance, and it is difficult to ascertain whether this officer was considered a king, herald, or pursuivant. Froissart in 1395 calls Faucon only a herald, and in 1364 mentions this officer as a King of Arms belonging to the King of England ; but it is certain that in the i8th Richard II. there was a King of Arms by that appellation, and so continued until the reign of Richard III., if not later ; but at what particular period of time the officer was discontinued cannot be correctly ascertained. Windsor has been considered by some writers to have been the title of a King of Arms, from an abbreviation in some old records, which might be otherwise translated. There is, however, amongst the Pro- tections in the Tower of London, one granted in the 49th Edward III. to Stephen de IVindesore, Heraldo Armorum rege dido, which seems to favour the conjecture, and other records might be quoted for and against this supposition, which might have arisen through mistake in the entries, as they contradict one another. Marche seems the next in point of antiquity of creation. ; but although Sir Henry Spelman says that King Edward IV. descended from the Earls of Marche, promoted Marche Herald to be a King of Arms, giving him, perhaps, the marches for his province, it is pretty clearly ascer- tained that it was of a more early date, from the express mention of March Rex Heraldorum and March Rex Heraldus in records of the time of Richard II., though it may be possible that it was then only a nominal title, and did not become a real one till the reign of Edward IV., as mentioned by Spelman. Lancaster King of Arms was, as the same author informs us, so created by Henry IV. in relation to his own descent from the Lancastrian family, and the county of Lancaster assigned to him as his province ; but Edmondson contends *'that that monarch superadded the title of Lancaster to that of Norroy, or King of the North, having, as it may be reasonably conjectured, given this province north of Trent, within which district Lancaster was situated, to him who had been formerly his officer of arms, by the title of that dukedom, and who might, according to custom, in some instances of former ages, retain his former title and surname of heraldship, styling himself Lancaster Roy d'Armes del North." 32 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Leicester King of Arms was a title similar to that of Lancaster ^ and likewise a creation to the same Sovereign, Henry IV., who was also Earl of Leicester before he assumed the crown, and was given to a person who was before that time a herald. It appears that Henry Grene was Leicester Herald^ 9th King Richard II., and in the 13th of the same reign is called a Herald of the Duke ofGuyen and Lancaster y but prior to the coronation of Henry IV. he was certainly a King of Heralds, and so styled in a privy seal dated antecedent to that ceremony. A similar instrument of the tenth year of that monarch's reign also mentions Henry Greney otherwise Leicester King of Arms. As it is evident that, during the reign of Henry IV., Lancaster King of Arms has under that title the province of the north, Mr, Edmondson, with good reason, supposes that the southern province, or part of that which is now under Clarenceux, might at that time be under this Leicester-, especially as the title of Clarenceux was not in being till after the 3rd of Henry V., when, or soon after, the title of Leicester m\^i have become extinct by the death of that officer ; for although Leicester King of Arms went over into France with Henry V. in the third year of his reign, yet he is not mentioned in the constitutions made by the heralds at Roan in the year 1419-20. Clarenceuxj the next King of Arms in point of creation, is a title generally supposed to have been taken from Clarey in Suffolk, the castle at that place being the principal residence of the ancient Earls of Here- ford, who were, from thence, though very improperly, called Earls of Clarey in the same manner as the Earls of Pembroke were often named Earls of Strigoil and Chepstow; the Earl of Hampshire, Earl of Winchester ; the Earl of Derby, Earl ofTuttebury; the Earl of Sussex, Earl of Chichester y &c. King Edward III. created his third son Lionel Duke of Clarence^ instead of the monosyllable Clare (from his marriage with the grand- daughter of the late Earl), but Lionel dying without issue male, Henry IV. created his younger son Thomas Duke of ClarencCy who being slain without issue 9th of Henry V., the honour remained in the Crown, until King Edward IV. conferred it upon his own brother. Mr. Sand- ford tells us that Clarence is the country about the town, castle, and honour of Clarcy from which duchy the name of Clarenceux King of Arms is derived. Spelman, however, contends that it is a mistake in attri- buting the institution of Clarenceux to King Edward IV. after the honour of Clarence devolved as an escheat to the Crown upon the untimely death of his brother George, as he found William Horsely called by this title in the reign of Henry V. and also Roger Lygh, under King Henry VI. ; and it is conjectured that the office of Clarenceux King of Arms is not more ancient than the reign of Edward III. Gloucester Heraldy frequently mentioned by historians, was originally THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 33 the herald of the great Humphry, Duke of Gloucester, of whom mention is made upon record in the loth of Henry VI. ; and Richard, brother to Edward IV., who was created Duke of Gloucester, is said to have had a herald by that title during the reign of his brother, and who was attendant as such at the funeral of that monarch. In a manuscript in the Ashmolean collection, it is stated that Richard Champnay attended as Gloucester King of Arms at the coronation of Richard III. upon the 7th July following his usurpation of the crown ; but it appears by more authentic record that this Richard Champnay was, by the style and title of Herald of Arms, on the i8th September, in the first year of his usurpation, by patent created a King of Arms and Principal Herald of the parts of Wales, by the style and title of Gloucester, giving him licence and authority to execute all and singular that by law or custom in former times belonged to the office of King of Arms. It is supposed that the office ceased upon his death, which in all probability took place before that of the usurper. Richmond King of Arms, — A herald called Richmond is frequently mentioned, as well belonging to the Crown as of the nobility. But the records of the reign of King Henry VII., who had before his elevation to the throne been Earl of Richmond, contain many entries of Richmond King of Arms; but although somewhat vague in the description, suffi- ciently bear out the conjecture that Henry VII., previous to his corona- tion, created a new King of Arms by the title of Richmond^ although no regular patent of creation has ever been found. Sir Henry Spelman informs us that, in addition to the two Kings of Arms for the two Heraldic provinces bounded north and south by the river Trent, there were also two provincial kings for the dominions of our Sovereign in France, styled Guyenne and Agincourt (omitting Aquitaine and Anjou, which were certainly in being at the same time), and another for Ireland by that name, altered by King Edward VI. into Ulster, Ireland King of Arms first occurs upon record 6th Richard II., anno 1482, mentioned by Froissart, where he is called Chandos le Roy d' Ireland. A regular succession of officers, by the title of Ireland King of Arms, continued from that time till the reign of King Edward IV., but from the death of that monarch till the creation of Ulster by Edward VI. it is uncertain whether the title existed, or what became of the office. Edward VI. altered the title of Ireland King of Arms into that of Ulster, or rather considered it as a new institution, from the words of his journal : ^< Feb. 2. There was a King of Arms made for Ireland, whose name was Ulster^ and his province was all Ireland ; and he was the fourth King of Arms, and the first Herald of Ireland." The patent passed under the Great Seal of England. Guyenne, a part of Aquitaine, in France, a province belonging to c 34 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the British Crowii; gave title not only to a King of Arms, but to a herald likewise, and Sir Henry Spelman dates its creation in the time of Edward I., although it is somewhat doubtful, and thought to be in the reign of Edward III. Guyenne Herald appears upon record during the reign of Henry VI., and though Kings of Arms were frequently styled heralds in old records, it is more than probable both offices were in exist- ence at the same time. From the time of Edward IV. no such officers belonging to the Crown of England seem to have been continued, and it is doubtful whether they ever held in constant succession from their first creation. Aquitainef which included what were afterwards called Guyenne, Xantoigne, Gascoigne, and some islands, gave title to a King of Heralds as early as the reign of Edward III., and it is conjectured to have been an officer belonging to the Black Prince, who had the principality of Aquitaine given to him by his father ; but although this officer is men- tioned in the reign of Richard II. and 3rd of Henry V., no record occurs after the latter period. Agincourt was also a title conferred upon a herald, in memory of that signal victory ; and lands were granted to him for life, 6th Henry v., as mentioned by Sir Henry Spelman ; but whether the office was. continued, or any particular province assigned to this officer, cannot be ascertained. Anjou King of Arms was likewise an officer of King Henry VI., and attendant upon John, Duke of Bedford, when Regent of France, who assumed the title of Duke of Anjou. But upon the death of the Duke of Bedford, this officer was promoted to Lancaster King of Arms ; and in all probability the title of Anjou, as a King of Heralds, was dis- continued. Volant also occurs upon record in the 28th Edward III., and Vaillanty le Roy Vaillant Heraudy and le Roy Vaillandy are likewise mentioned in 1395. Henry V. instituted the office of Garter King of Arms ; but at what particular period is rather uncertain, although Mr. Anstis has clearly proved that it must have taken place after the 22 nd May, and before the 3rd September, in the year 141 7. Stephen Martin Leake, Esq., who filled the office, sums up its duties in the following words : *^ Garter was instituted by King Henry V., A.D. 141 7, for the service of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, which was made sovereign within the office of arms over all other officers, subject to the Crown of England, by the name of Garter King of Arms of Eng- land. In this patent he is styled Principal King of English Arms, and Principal Officer of Arms of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, and has power to execute the said office by himself or deputy, being an herald. By the constitution of his office, he must be a native of Eng- THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 35 land, and a gentleman bearing arms. To him belongs the correction of arms, and all ensigns of honour, usurped or borne unjustly, and also to grant arms to deserving persons, and supporters to the nobility and Knights of the Bath ; to go next before the sword in solemn proceed- ing, none interposing, except the constable and marshal ; to administer the oath to all the officers of arms ; to have a habit like the registrar of the order ; baron's service in the court ; lodgings in Windsor Castle ; to bear his white rod with a banner of the ensigns of the order thereon before the Sovereign ; also when any lord shall enter the Parliament chamber, to assign him his place, according to his dignity and degree ; to carry the ensign of the order to foreign princes, and to do, or pro- cure to be done, what the Sovereign shall enjoin, relating to the order ; with other duties incident to his office of principal King of Arms, for the execution whereof he hath a salary of one hundred pounds a year, payable at the Exchequer, and an hundred pounds more out of the revenue of the order, besides fees." Bath King of Arms was created nth George I., in conformity with the statutes established by His Majesty for the government of the Order of the Bath, and in obedience to those statutes was nominated and created by the Great Master of the Order denominated Bath^ and in Latin, Rex arntorum Honoratissimi Ordinis Militaris de Balneo, These statutes direct that this officer shall, in all the ceremonies of the order, be habited in a white mantle lined with red, having on the right shoulder the badge of the order, and under it a surcoat of white silk, lined and edged with red ; that he shall wear on his breast, hanging to a golden chain about his neck, an escocheon of gold, enamelled with the arms of the order, impaling the arms of the Sovereign, crowned with the Imperial crown. That at all coronations he shall precede the com- panions of the order, and shall carry and wear his crown as other Kings of Arms are obliged to do. That the chain, escocheon, rod, and crown, shall be of the like materials, value, and weight, with those borne and used by Garter Principal King of Arms, and of the like fashion, the before specified variations only excepted : and that besides the duties required of him in the several other articles of the statutes, he shall diligently perform whatever the Sovereign or Great Master shall further command. On the 14th January 1725, His Majesty was further pleased by his Royal sign-manual, to erect, make, constitute, and ordain the then Bath King of Arms, Gloucester King of Arms, and principal Herald of the parts of Wales, and to direct letters patent to be made out and pass the Great Seal, empowering him to grant arms and crests to persons residing within the dominions of Wales, either jointly with Garter, or singly by himself, with the consent and at the pleasure of the Earl Marshal, or his deputy for the time being, and for 36 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the future that the office of Gloucester should be inseparably annexed, united, and perpetually consolidated with the office of Bath King of Arms, of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, and Gloucester King of Arms, and principal Herald of the parts of Wales. And also that he, for the dignity of the order, should in all assemblies and at all times have and take place and precedency above and before all other provincial Kings of Arms whatsoever." This armorial jurisdiction, however, was subsequently, as has been previously explained, annulled. Concerning the heralds Berry remarks : *' In former ages, when honour and chivalry were at their height, these officers were held in great estimation, as appears by the ceremonies which attended their creations, which was by the Sovereign himself or by special commission from him, and, according to Gerard Leigh, was after the following manner : The King asked the person to be so created whether he were a gentleman of blood or of second coat-armour ; if he was not, the King gave him lands and fees, and assigned him and his heirs proper arms. Then, as the messenger was brought in by the herald of the province, so the pursuivant was brought in by the eldest herald, who, at the prince's command, performed all the ceremonies, as turning the coat of arms, setting the manacles thereof on the arms of the pursuivant, and putting about his neck the collar of SS, and when he was named, the prince himself took the cup from the herald, which was gilt, and poured the water and wine upon the head of the pursuivant, creating him by the name of our herald, and the King, when the oath was administered, gave the same cup to the new herald. Upton sums up the business of a herald thus : That it was their office to create under officers, to number the people, to commence treaties of matrimony and of peace between princes, to visit kingdoms and regions, and to be present at martial exploits, &c., and they were to wear a coat of their master's arms, wearing the same in conflicts and tournaments, in riding through foreign countries, and at all great entertainments, coronations of kings and queens, and the solemnities of princes, dukes, and other great lords. In the time of King Richard II. there belonged to the King of Arms and heralds the following fees, viz. : at the coronation of the King, a bounty of ;£ioo ; when the King first displayed his banners, ICG marks ; when the King's son was made a knight, 40 marks ; when the prince and a duke first display their banners, ;£2 ; if it be a marquis, 20 marks ; if an earl, £10 ) if a baron, 5 marks of silver crowns, of 15 nobles; and if a knight bachelor, newly made a banneret, 3 marks, or 10 nobles ; when the King is married, the said Kings of Arms and heralds to have £^0 ; when the Queen has a child THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 37 christened, a largess at the Queen's pleasure, or of the lords of the council, which was sometimes ;£ioo, and at others loo marks, more or less ; and when she is churched, such another largess ; when princesses, duchesses, marchionesses, countesses, and baronesses have a child christened, and when they are churched, a largess suitable to their quality and pleasure ; as often as the King wears his crown, or holds Royal state, especially at the four great festivals of Christmas, Easter, Whitsuntide, and All Saints, to every one of the three Kings of Arms present when the King goes to the chapel to mass, a largess at the King's pleasure ; when a maiden princess, or daughter of a duke, marquis, earl, or baron is married, there belongs to the said Kings of Arms, if present, the upper garment she is married in ; if there be a combat within lists, there belong to the Kings of Arms, if present, and if not to the other heralds present, their pavilions ; and if one of the combatants is vanquished, the Kings of Arms and heralds who are present shall have all the accoutrements of the person so vanquished, and all other armour that falls to the ground ; when subjects rebel, and fortify any camp or place, and afterwards quit the same, and fly, without a battle, there appertain to the said Kings of Arms and heralds who are present all the carts, carriages, and tools left behind ; and, at New Year's Tide, all the noblemen and knights of the court used to give the heralds New Year's gifts. Besides the King's heralds, in former times, divers noblemen had heralds and pursuivants, who went with their lords, with the King's heralds, when attending the King. The fees of the King's heralds and pursuivants of arms have since varied, and, besides fees upon creations of peers, baronets, and knights, they have still donations for attendance at court upon the festivals of Christmas, Easter, Whitsuntide, All Saints, and St. George's Day ; fees upon installation of Knights of the Garter and Bath, Royal marriages, funerals, public solemnities, &c., with small salaries paid from the Exchequer ; but their ancient fees from the nobility, upon certain occasions, have been long discontinued, and their principal emolument arises from grants of arms, the tracing of genealogies, and recording the same in the Registers of the College of Arms." The present heralds are six in number, viz. : — Windsor Heraldy which title was instituted 38th of Edward III., when that monarch was in France. Chester Herald^ instituted in the same reign. Richmond Herald^ instituted by King Edward IV. Somerset Herald y instituted by King Henry VIII. about the time when that monarch created his son Henry Fitzroy Duke of Somerset. York Herald, instituted by King Edward III. in honour of his son, whom he created Duke of York. 38 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Lancaster Heraldj also instituted by Edward III. when he created his son Duke of Lancaster. The heralds were first incorporated as a college by Richard III. They were styled the Corporation of Kings, Heralds, and Pursuivants of Arms. Concerning Pursuivants of Arms, Berry remarks that these officers, who are the lowest in degree amongst officers of arms, " were, as the name implies, followers, marshals, or messengers attendant upon the heralds. Pursuivants were formerly created by the nobility (who had, likewise, heralds of arms) with great ceremony in the following manner. One of the heralds, wearing his master's coat, leading the person to be created pursuivant by the left hand, and holding a cup full of wine and water in his right, came into the presence of the lord and master of him who was to be created, and of whom the herald asked by what name he would have his pursuivant called, which the lord having mentioned, the herald then poured part of the wine and water upon his head, caUing him by the name so assigned to him. The herald then took the coat of his lord, and put it over his head athwart, so that part of the coat made for the arms before and behind, and the longer part of it on both sides of the arms of the person created, and in which way the pur- suivant was always to wear it. This done, an oath of fidelity was ad- ministered to the new-made pursuivant, and the ceremony concluded." This curious method of the wearing of the tabard by a pursuivant has long since been discontinued, if indeed it was ever generally adopted, a point on which I have by no means been able to satisfy myself. The appointment of heralds and pursuivants of arms by the nobility has long been discontinued, and there are now only four pursuivants belonging to the College of Arms, viz.: — Rouge-CroiXf the first in point of antiquity of creation, is so styled from the red cross of St. George, the Patron Saint of England. Blue-Mantle f so called by King Edward III., in honour of the French coat which he assumed, being blue. Rouge- Dragon y so styled from the red dragon, one of the supporters of the Royal arms of King Henry VII. (who created this pursuivant), and also the badge of Wales, and PortculliSf also instituted by Henry VII., and so named from that badge, or cognisance, used by him. The duties of a pursuivant are similar to those of a herald ; he assists in all public processions, or ceremonies, such as Royal marriages, funerals, installations, &c., and has certain fees for attendance upon such occasions. Pursuivants likewise receive fees upon creations of peers, baronets, and knights, and also donations for attending court upon the principal festivals of Christmas, Easter, Whit-Sunday, All > F a O tJ3 ^^ "- C! c J! ^ is THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 39 SaiiitS; and St. George's Day, and a small salary payable out of the Exchequer. They wear a tabard of damask silk, embroidered with the Royal arms, like the heralds, but no collar of SS. Of the Heraldic Executive in Scotland, Lyon King of Arms (Sir James Balfour Paul), in his book ** Heraldry in relation to Scottish History and Art," writes : ^^ At one period the Lyon was solemnly crowned at his inauguration, and vested with his tabard and baton of office." The ceremony was a very elaborate one, and is fully described by Sir James Balfour in a MS., now in the Advocates' Library. There is also an account of the coronation of Sir Alexander Durham, when Laurie, the minister of the Tron Kirk, preached from the text, ^' What shall be done to the man whom the king delighteth to honour ? " The crown was of gold, and exactly similar to the Imperial crown of Scotland, save that it had no jewels. Now the Lyon's crown is the same as the English King of Arms. The crown is only worn at Royal coronations. At that of Charles L at Edinburgh in 1633, the Lyon carried the vessel containing the sacred oil. In addition to his strictly armorial appoint- ment, the Lyon is also a King of Arms of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle. Heralds and pursuivants formed an important part from very early times not only of the Royal Household, but also of those of the higher nobility, many of whom had private heralds. Of these officers there is a very full list given by Dr. Dickson in the preface to the Lord Treasurer's Accounts. Of heralds who were or ultimately became part of the King's Household we meet with Rothesay, Marchmont, Snowdon, Albany, Ross, and Islay ; Ireland, Orkney, and Carrick are also men- tioned as heralds, but it is doubtful whether the first and last were ever more than pursuivants. Of the latter class of officers the following were in the Royal establishment : Carrick, Bute, Dingwall, Kintyre, Ormonde, Unicorn ; but we also find Aliszai or Alishay, Dragance, Diligens, Montrose, Falkland, Ireland, Darnaway, Garioch, Ettrick, Hales, Lindsay, Endure, Douglas, and Angus. Of the latter Garioch was created by James IV. for his brother John, Earl of Mar ; Hailes in 1488, when Lord Hailes was made Earl of Both well ; while Lindsay and Endure were both evidently attached to the Lindsay family, as were Douglas and Angus to the noblemen whose titles they bore. In 1403 Henry IV. of England granted a pursuivant under the title of Shrewsbury to George, Earl of March, for services rendered at the battle of that name, but we do not find that the office was continued. In Scotland heralds appear at an early date, though none are men- tioned as attending the coronation of Alexander III. in 1249; nor is there any account of any such officers accompanying that sovereign when he did homage to Edward I. at Westminster in 1278. In the next 40 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY century, however, armorial bearings were quite well known in Scotland, and there is an entry in the Exchequer Rolls on loth October 1337 of a payment of ^32, 6s. Scots for the making of seventeen armorial banners, and in 1364 there is another to the heralds for services at the tournaments ; while William Petilloch, herald, has a grant from David II. of three husbandlands in Bonjedward, and Allan Fawside gets a gift of the forfeited estate of one Coupland, a herald {temp. Edward Baliol)/ The first mention of a herald, under his official designation, which I have met with in our records occurs in 1365, when there is a confirma- tion under the Great Seal by David II. of a charter by Dugal M^Dowille to John Trupour or Trumpour ^^ nunc dido Carrie heraldo." Sir James Balfour tells us that the Lyon and his heralds attended the coronation of Robert II. at Holyrood on 23rd May 1371, but whether or not this is true — and I have not been able to verify it — it is certain that a Lyon Herald existed very shortly after that date, as in the Exchequer Rolls mention is made of the payment of a certain sum to such an officer in 1377 ; in 1379 Froissart says that a herald was sent by Robert II. to London to explain that the truce had been infringed without his will and against his knowledge, and on 8th April 1381 a warrant was issued in London for a licence to ^' Lion Heraud " of the King of Scots, authorising him to take away a complete suit of armour which he had bought in that city. It is not, however, till 1388 that we find Lyon accorded the Royal style. In that year a payment is made '^ Leoni regi heraldorum," but at the audit following the battle of Otterburn he is called defundus, which suggests that he had been slain on that well-fought field. The Lyon appears in several embassies about this period both to England and France, and one Henry Greve, designed in the English Issue Rolls as '^ King of Scottish Heralds," was at the Tower of London in 1399, either at or immediately after the coronation of Henry IV. From 1391 onwards there is frequent mention of one Douglas, *^ Herald of the King," and in 1421 he is styled ^^ Lyon Herald." Of the German officers of arms they, like the English, are divided into three classes, known as Wappenkonige, Heroldcy and Persevanten, These, like our own officers, had peculiar titles ; for example Suchenwirt (an Austrian ducal herald), Lub-den Frumen (a Lichtenstein pursuivant), Jerusalem (a herald of the Limmer Palatinate), Romreich (an Imperial herald). About the middle of the sixteenth century, the official names of the heralds fell into disuse ; they began to make use of their ancestral names with the title of Edel and Ehrenvest (noble and honourable), but this did not last long, and the heralds found themselves thrown back * Robertson's Index to " Missing Charters." THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 41 into the old ways, into which the knightly accoutrements had already wandered. The official dress of an officer of arms as such in Great Britain is merely his tabard (Figs. 13, 14, 15). This garment in style and shape has remained unchanged in this country from the earliest known period of which representations of officers of arms exist ; but whilst the tabard itself has remained unaltered in its style, the arms thereupon have constantly changed, these always being the arms of the Sovereign for the time being. The costume worn with the tabard has naturally been subject to manychanges, but it is doubtful if any attempt to regulate such costume was ever officially made prior to the reign of Queen Victoria. The tabard of a pur- suivant is of damask silk ; that of a herald, of satin ; and that of a king of arms, of velvet. The initial letter on page i is a portrait of John Smert, Garter King of Arms, and is taken from the grant of arms to the Tallow Chandlers' Company, dated 24th September 1456. He is there represented as wearing be- neath his tabard black breeches and coat, and a golden crown. But Fig. 15 is actually a representation of the first Garter King of Arms, William Bruges, appointed 5th January 1420. He is represented as carrying a white staff, a practice which has been recently revived, white wands being carried by all the heralds at the public funeral of the Right Hon. W. E. Glad- stone. In Germany the w^ands of the heralds were later painted with the colours of the escut- cheons of the Sovereign to whom they were attached. There was until recently no official hat for an officer of arms in England, and confirmation of this is to be found in the fact that Dallaway mentions a special licence to Wriothesley Garter giving him permission to wear a cap on account of his great age. Obviously, however, a tabard requires other clothing to be worn with it. The heralds in Scotland, until quite recently, when making public proclamations were content to appear in the ordinary elastic- side boots and cloth trousers of everyday life. This gave way for a brief period, in which Court dress was worn below the tabard, but now, as in England, the recognised uniform of a member of the Royal Household is worn. In England, owing to the less frequent cere- monial appearances of the heralds, and the more scrupulous control Fig. 15. — William Bruges, the first Garter King of Arms, appointed 5th January 1420. (From an illuminated MS. in the Museum at Oxford.) 42 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY which has been exercised, no such anachronisms as were perpetuated in Scotland have been tolerated; and it has been customary for the officers of arms to wear their uniform as members of the Sovereign's Household (in which uniform they attend the levees) beneath the Fig. i6.— a Herald. {Temp. Hen. VHI.) tabard when making proclamations at the opening of Parliament or on similar occasions. At a coronation and at some other full State ceremonies they wear knee-breeches. At the late ceremony of the coronation of King Edward VII.; a head-dress was designed for the officers of arms. These caps are of black velvet embroidered at the THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 43 side with a rose, a thistle, or a harp, respectively for the English, Scottish, and Irish officers of arms. A great deal of confusion has arisen between the costume and the functions of a Herald and a Trumpeter, though the confusion has been confined to the minds of the uninitiated and the theatrical stage. The Fig. 17.— a State Trumpetef. {Temp. Hen. VIII.) whole subject was very amusingly dealt with in the Genealogical Magazine in an article by Mr. G. Ambrose Lee, Bluemantle, and the illustrations which he gives of the relative dresses of the Heralds and the Trumpeters at different periods (see Figs. 16-19) are interesting. Briefly, the matter can be summed up in the statement that there never was a Trumpeter who made a proclamation, or wore a tabard, and there never was a Herald who blew a trumpet. The Trumpeters nearly 44 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY always accompanied the Heralds to proclaim their presence and call attention to their proclamation. In France the Heralds were formed into an incorporation by Charles VI. in 1406, their head being Mountjoye, King of Arms, with ten heralds and pursuivants under him. It will be noticed that this incorporation is earlier than that of the College of Arms in England. Fig. 18. — A State Trumpeter and a Herald at the coronation of James I. The Revolution played havoc with the French Records, and no College of Arms now exists in France. But it is doubtful whether at any time it reached the dignity or authority which its English counterpart has enjoyed in former times. Fig. 20 represents a French Herald of the early part of the fifteenth century. It is taken from a representation of the Rally of the Parisians against King Charles VI. in 141 3, to be found in a MS. edition of Froissart, formerly in the Royal Library at Paris. All the heralds and Kings of Arms (but not the pursuivants) wear the curious collar of SS about which there has been so much discussion. THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 45 The form has remained unchanged, save that the badge is the badge for the time being of the Sovereign. The heralds have their collars of SS of silver, whilst those of a King of Arms are of silver gilt, and the latter have the further distinction that a portcullis is introduced on each shoulder. The heralds and Kings of Arms usually place these collars round their shields in representations of their arms. Collars of SS are also worn by Serjeants-at-Arms, and by the Lord Chief Justice. The English Heralds have no equivalent badge to that which the Fig. 19. — Peace proclaimed at the Royal Exchange after the Crimean War. Scottish Heralds wear suspended from their necks by a ribbon. In Ireland both Heralds and Pursuivants wear a badge. In addition each King of Arms has his crown ; the only occasion, however, upon which this is worn being at the ceremony of a coro- nation. The crown is of silver gilt, formed of a circle upon which is inscribed part of the first verse of the 51st Psalm, viz. "Miserere mei Deus secundum magnam misericordiam tuam " : the rim is surmounted of sixteen leaves, in shape resembling the oak-leaf, every alternate one being somewhat higher than the remainder. Nine of these leaves are shown in a representation of it. The cap is of crimson satin, closed at the top by a gold tassel, and turned up with ermine. Garter King of Arms has a baton or " sceptre " of silver gilt, about two feet in length, the top being of gold, of four sides of equal height, 46 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY but of unequal breadth. On the two larger sides are the arms of St. George impaling the Sovereign's, and on the two lesser sides the arms of St. George surrounded by the Garter and motto, the whole ensigned with an Imperial crown. This *^ sceptre" has sometimes been placed in bend behind the arms of Garter King. Lyon King of Arms has a baton of blue enamel with gold extremities, the baton being powdered with roses, thistles, and fleurs- de-lis. Lyon (Sir James Balfour Paul) in his ^^ Heraldry in relation to Scottish History and Art," remarks that this is one of the few pieces of British official regalia which is still adorned with the ancient ensigns of France. But know- ing how strictly all official regalia in Eng- land is required to have the armorial devices thereupon changed, as the Royal arms and badges change, there can be very httle doubt that the appearance of the fleur-de-lis in this case is due to an oversight. The baton happens to be that of a former Lyon King of Arms, which really should long since have been discarded and usually placed in saltire Fig. 20.- -A French Herald of the early part of the fifteenth century. a new one substituted. Two batons are behind the arms of Lyon King of Arms. Ulster King of Arms has a staff of office which, however, really belongs to his office as Knight Attendant on the Most Illustrious Order of St. Patrick. The Scottish Heralds each have a rod of ebony tipped with ivory, THE HERALDS AND OFFICERS OF ARMS 47 which has been sometimes stated to be a rod of office. This, however, is not the case, and the explanation of their possession of it is very simple. They are constantly called upon by virtue of their office to make from the Market Cross in Edinburgh the Royal Proclamations. Now these Proclamations are read from printed copies which in size of type and paper are always of the nature of a poster. The Herald would naturally find some difficulty in holding up a large piece of paper of this size on a windy day, in such a manner that it was easy to read from ; consequently he winds it round his ebony staff, slowly unwind- ing it all the time as he reads. Garter King of Arms, Lyon King of Arms, and Ulster King of Arms all possess badges of their offices which they wear about their necks. The badge of Garter is of gold, having on both sides the arms of St. George, impaled with those of the Sovereign, within the Garter and motto, enamelled in their proper colours, and ensigned with the Royal crown. The badge of Lyon King of Arms is oval, and is worn suspended by a broad green ribbon. The badge proper consists on the obverse of the effigy of St. Andrew bearing his cross before him, with a thistle be- neath, all enamelled in the proper colours on an azure ground. The reverse contains the arms of Scotland, having in the lower parts of the badge a thistle, as on the other side ; the whole surmounted with the Imperial crown. The badge of ^' Ulster " is of gold, containing on one side the cross of St. Patrick, or, as it is described in the statutes, ^' The cross gules of the Order upon a field argent, impaled with the arms of the Realm of Ireland," and both encircled with the motto, " Quis Separabit," and the date of the institution of the Order, mdcclxxxiii. The reserve ex- hibits the arms of the office of Ulster, viz. : " Or, a cross gules, on a chief of the last a lion of England between a harp and portcullis, all of the first," placed on a ground of green enamel, surrounded by a gold border with shamrocks, surmounted by an Imperial crown, and sus- pended by a sky-blue riband from the neck. The arms of the Corporation of the College of Arms are : Argent, a cross gules between four doves, the dexter wing of each expanded and inverted azure. Crest: on a ducal coronet or, a dove rising azure. Supporters : two lions rampant guardant argent, ducally gorged or. The official arms of the English Kings of Arms are : — Garter King of Arms. — Argent, a cross gules, on a chief azure, a ducal coronet encircled with a garter, between a lion passant guardant on the dexter and a fleur-de-lis on the sinister all or. Clarenceux King of Arms, — Argent, a cross gules, on a chief of the second a lion passant guardant or, crowned of the last. 48 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Norroy King of Arms. — Argent, a cross gules, on a chief of the second a Hon passant guardant crowned of the first, between a fleur-de-Hs on the dexter and a key on the sinister of the last. Badges have never been officially assigned to the various Heralds by any specific instruments of grant or record ; but from a remote period certain of the Royal badges relating to their titles have been used by various Heralds, viz. : — Lancaster, — The red rose of Lancaster ensigned by the Royal crown. York, — The white rose of York en soleil ensigned by the Royal crown. Richmond. — The red rose of Lancaster impaled with the white rose en soleil of York, the whole ensigned with the Royal crown. Windsor. — Rays of the sun issuing from clouds. The four Pursuivants make use of the badges from which they derive their titles. The official arms of Lyon King of Arms and of Lyon Office are the same, namely : Argent, a lion sejant full-faced gules, holding in the dexter paw a thistle slipped vert and in the sinister a shield of the second ; on a chief azure, a St. Andrew's cross of the field. There are no official arms for Ulster's Office, that office, unlike the College of Arms, not being a corporate body, but the official arms of Ulster King of Arms are : Or, a cross gules, on a chief of the last a lion passant guardant between a harp and a portcullis all of the field. CHAPTER IV HERALDIC BRASSES By Rev. WALTER J. KAYE, Junr., B.A., F.S.A., F.S.A. Scot. Member of the Monumental Brass Society^ London; Honorary Member of the Spalding Gentlemeiis Society; Author of ^^ A Brief History of Gosberton, in the County of Lincoln^ MONUMENTAL brasses do not merely afford a guide to the capricious changes of fashion in armour, in ecclesiastical vest- ments (which have altered but little), and in legal, civilian, and feminine costume, but they provide us also with a vast number of admirable specimens of heraldic art. The vandal and the fanatic have robbed us of many of these beautiful memorials, but of those which survive to our own day the earliest on the continent of Europe marks the last resting-place of Abbot Ysowilpe, 1231, at Verden, in Hanover. In England there was once a brass, which unfortunately disappeared long ago, to an Earl of Bedford, in St. Paul's Church, Bedford, of the year 1208, leaving 1277 as the date of the earliest one. Latten (Fr. laiton), the material of which brasses were made, was at an early date manufactured in large quantities at Cologne, whence plates of this metal came to be known as cullen (Koln) plates ; these were largely exported to other countries, and the Flemish workmen soon attained the greatest proficiency in their engraving. Flemish brasses are usually large and rectangular, having the space between the figure and the marginal inscription filled either by diaper work or by small figures in niches. Brasses vary considerably in size : the matrix of Bishop Beaumont's brass in Durham Cathedral measures about 16 feet by 8 feet, and the memorial to Griel van Ruwescuere, in the chapel of the Lady Superior of the Beguinage at Bruges, is only about I foot square. Brazen effigies are more numerous in England in the eastern and southern counties, than in parts more remote from the continent of Europe. Armorial bearings are displayed in a great variety of ways on monu- mental brasses, some of which are exhibited in the rubbings selected for illustration. In most cases separate shields are placed above and below the figures. They occur also in the spandrils of canopies and 49 D 50 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY in the shafts and finials of the same, as well as in the centre and at the angles of border-fillets. They naturally predominate in the memorials of warriors, where we find them emblazoned not only on shield and pennon but on the scabbard and ailettes, and on the jupon, tabard, and cuirass also, while crests frequently occur on the tilting-helm. In one case (the brass of Sir Peter Legh, 1527, at Winwick, co. Lancaster) they figure upon the priestly chasuble. Walter Pescod, the merchant of Boston, Lincolnshire, 1398, wears a gown adorned with peascods — a play upon his name ; and many a merchant's brass bears his coat of arms and merchant's mark beside, pointing a moral to not a few at the present day. The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries witnessed the greatest profusion in heraldic decoration in brasses, when the tabard and the heraldic mantle were evolved. A good example of the former remains in the parish church of Ormskirk, Lancashire, in the brass commemorating a member of the Scarisbrick family, c, 1500 (Fig. 21). Ladies were accustomed at this time to wear their husband's arms upon the mantle or outer garment and their own upon the kirtle, but the fashion which obtained at a subsequent period was to emblazon the husband's arms on the dexter and their own on the sinister side of the mantle (Fig. 22). The majority of such monuments, as we behold them now, are destitute of any indications of metals or tinctures, largely owing to the action of the varying degrees of temperature in causing contraction and expansion. Here and there, however, we may still detect traces of their pristine glory. But these matters received due attention from the engraver. To represent or, he left the surface of the brass un- touched, except for gilding or perhaps polishing ; this universal method has solved many heraldic problems. Lead or some other white metal was inlaid to indicate argent^ and the various tinctures were supplied by the excision of a portion of the plate, thereby forming a depression, which was filled up by pouring in some resinous substance of the re- quisite colour. The various kinds of fur used in armory may be readily distinguished, with the sole exception of vair {argent and azure), which presents the appearance of a row of small upright shields alter- nating with a similar row reversed. The earliest brass extant in England is that to Sir John D'Aubernoun, the elder (Fig. 23), at Stoke D'Abernon, in Surrey, which carries us back to the year 1277. The simple marginal inscription in Norman- French, surrounding the figure, and each Lombardic capital of which is set in its own matrix, reads : ^' Sire : John : Daubernoun : Chivaler : Gist : Icy : Deu : De : Sa : Alme : Eyt : Mercy : " ^ In the space * Here lieth Sir John D'Aubernoun, knight. On his soul may God have mercy. HERALDIC BRASSES SI between the inscription and the upper portion of the figure were tw^o small shields, of which the dexter one alone remains, charged with the Fig. 22. — Brass of Margaret (daughter of Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland), second wife of Henry, 1st Earl of Cumberland, in Skipton Parish Church. Arms : On the dexter side those of the Earl of Cum- berland, on the sinister side those of Percy. Fig. 21. — Brass in the Scarisbrick Chapel of Ormskirk Church, co. Lanes., to a member of the Scaris- brick family of that name. Arms: Gules, three mullets in bend be- tween two bendlets engrailed argent. (From a rubbing by Walter J. Kaye.) arms of the knight : ^* Azure, a chevron, or." Sir John D'Aubernoun is represented in a complete panoply of chain mail — his head being protected by a coif de maillesy which is joined to the hauberk or mail 52 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY shirt, which extends to the hands, having apparently no divisions for the Fig. 23, — Brass of Sir John D'Aubernoun at Stoke D'Abernon. Arms : Azure, a chevron or. (From a rubbing by Walter J. Kaye.) Fig. 24. — Brass of Sir Roger de Trumpington at Trumpington. Arms : Azure, crusilly and two trumpets palewise or. (From a rubbing by Walter J. Kaye.) fingers, and being tightened by straps at the wrists. The legs, which are not crossed, are covered by long chausses, or stockings of mail, pro- HERALDIC BRASSES 53 tected at the knees hy poleyns ov genouilleresoi citir bouilli vlchXy ornamented Fig. 25.— Brass of Sir Robert de Septvans in Chartham Church. mw Fig. 26.— Brass of Sir William de Aldeburgh at Aldborough, Yorks. Arms: Azure, a fesse argent between three cross crosslets or. (From a rubbing by Walter J. Kaye.) by elaborate designs. A surcoat, probably of linen, depends from the shoulders to a little below the knees, and is cut away to a point above 54 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the knee. This garment is tightly confined (as the creases in the sur- coat show) at the waist by a girdle, and over it is passed a gutge whereto the long sword is attached. " Pryck " spurs are instep, and the feet lion, whose mouth lower portion of a fixed to the rest upon a grasps the lance. The lance bears a pennon charged with a chevron, as also is the small heater-shaped shield borne on the knight's left arm. The whole composition measures about eight feet by three. Heraldry figures more pro- minently in our second illustra- tion, the brass to Sir Roger de Trumpington, 1289 (Fig. 24). This fine effigy lies under the canopy of an altar-tomb, so called, in the Church of St. Michael and All Angels, Trumpington, Cam- bridgeshire. It portrays the knight in armour closely resembling that already described, with these ex- ceptions : the head rests upon a huge heaumef or tilting - helm, attached by a chain to the girdle, and the neck is here protected from side -thrusts by ailettes or oblong plates fastened behind the shoulders, and bearing the arms of Sir Roger. A dog here re- places the lion at the feet, the lance and pennon are absent, and the shield is rounded to the body. On this brass the arms not only occur upon the shield, but also upon the ailettes, and are four times repeated on the scabbard. They afford a good example of *^ canting " arms ; *^ Azure, crusilly and two trumpets palewise or, with a label of five points in chief, for difference." It is interesting also to notice that the engraver had not Fig. 27. — Brass of Elizabeth Knevet. HERALDIC BRASSES 55 completed his task; for the short horizontal lines across the dexter side of the shield indicate his intention of cutting away the surface of the field. Sir Robert de Setvans (formerly Septvans), whose beautiful brass may be seen at Chartham, Kent, is habited in a surcoat whereon, to- gether with the shield and ailettes, are seven winnowing fans — another instance of canting arms (Fig. 25). This one belongs to a somewhat later date, 1307. Our next example is a mural effigy to Sir William de Aldeburgh, c. 1360, from the north aisle of Aldborough Church, near Boroughbridge, Yorkshire (Fig. 26). He is attired like the " veray parfite gentil knight" of Chaucer, in a bascinet or steel cap, to which is laced the camail or tippet of chain mail, and a hauberk almost concealed by a jupon^ whereon are emblazoned his arms : '' Azure, a fess indented argent, between three crosslets botony, or." The first crosslet is charged with an annulet, probably as a mark of cadency. The engraver has omitted the indenture upon the fess, which, however, appears upon the shield. The knight's arms are protected by epaulieresy brassartSy coules, and vambraces; his hands, holding a heart, by gauntlets of steel. An elaborate baldric passes round his waist, from which are suspended, on the left, a cross-hilted sword, in a slightly ornamented scabbard ; on the right, a misericorde, or dagger of mercy. The thighs are covered by cuisses — steel plates, here deftly concealed probably by satin or velvet secured by metal studs — the knees by genouilleresy the lower leg by jambesy which reveal chausses of mail at the interstices. Sollerets, or long, pointed shoes, whereto are attached rowel spurs, complete his outfit. The figure stands upon a bracket bearing the name ^* Will's de Aldeburgh." The parish church of Eastington, Gloucestershire, contains a brass to Elizabeth Knevet, which is illustrated and described by Mr. Cecil T. Davis at p. 117 of his excellent work on the '* Monumental Brasses of Gloucestershire." ^ The block (Fig. 27), which presents a good example of the heraldic mantle, has been very kindly placed at my dis- posal by Mr. Davis. To confine our description to the heraldic portion of the brass, we find the following arms upon the mantle : — ^'Quarterly, i. argent, a bend sable, within a bordure engrailed azure (Knevet); 2. argent, a bend azure, and chief, gules (Cromwell) ; 3. chequy or and gules, a chief ermine (Tatshall) ; 4. chequy or and gules, a bend ermine (De Cailly or Clifton); 5. paly of six within a bordure bezante ... 6. bendy of six, a canton . . ." ^ A coat of arms occurs also at each corner of the slab : '* Nos. i and 4 are on ordinary shields, and 2 and 3 on lozenges. Nos. i and * *' Monumental Brasses of Gloucestershire," by C. T. Davis. London : PhiIlimore& Co., 1899. * The arms are quoted by Mr. Davis from Bigland's ** Gloucestershire," p. 5 39. 56 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY 3 are charged with the same bearings as are on her mantle. No. 2, on a lozenge, quarterly, i. Knevet ; 2. Cromwell ; 3. Tatshall; 4. Cailli ; 5. De Woodstock ; 6. paly of six within a bordure; 7. bendy of six, a canton ; 8. or, a chevron gules (Stafford) ; 9. azure, a bend cottised be- tween six lioncels rampant, or (de Bohun). No. 4 similar to No. i, with the omission of 2 and 3." In later times thinner plates of metal were employed, a fact which largely contributed to preclude much of the boldness in execu- tion hitherto displayed. A prodigality in shading, either by means of parallel lines or by cross-hatching, also tended to mar the beauty of later work of this kind. Nevertheless there are some good brasses of the Stuart period. These sometimes consist of a single quadrangular plate, with the upper portion occupied by armorial bearings and emblematical figures, the centre by an inscription, and the lower portion by a representation of the deceased, as at Forcett, in the North Riding of Yorkshire. Frequently, however, as at Rotherham and Rawmarsh, in the West Riding of the same county, the inscription is surmounted by a view of the whole family, the father kneeling on a cushion at a fald-stool, with his sons in a similar attitude behind him, and the mother likewise engaged with her daughters on the opposite side, while the armorial insignia find a place on separate shields above. * -> /^ CHAPTER V THE COMPONENT PARTS OF AN ACHIEVEMENT WE now come to the science of armory and the rules governing the display of these marks of honour. The term ^^ coat of arms," as we have seen, is derived from the textile garment or " surcoat " which was worn over the armour, and which bore in em- broidery a duplication of the design upon the shield. There can be very little doubt that arms themselves are older than the fact of the surcoat or the term ^^ coat of arms." The entire heraldic or armorial decoration which any one is entitled to bear may consist of many things. It must as a minimum consist of a shield of arms, for whilst there are many coats of arms in existence, and many still rightly in use at the present day, to which no crest belongs, a crest in this country cannot lawfully exist without its complementary coat of arms. For the last two certainly, .and probably nearly three centuries, no original grant of personal arms has ever been issued without it containing the grant of a crest except in the case of a grant to a woman, who of course cannot bear or transmit a crest ; or else in the case of arms borne in right of women or descent from women, through whom naturally no right to a crest could have been transmitted. The grants which I refer to as exceptions are those of quarterings and impalements to be borne with other arms, or else exemplifications following upon the assumption of name and arms which in fact and theory are regrants of previously existing arms, in which cases the regrant is of the original coat with or without a crest, as the case may be, and as the arms theretofor existed. Grants of impersonal arms also need not include a crest. As it has been impossible for the last two centuries to obtain a grant of arms without its necessarily accompanying grant of crest, a decided distinction attaches to the lawful possession of arms which have no crest belonging to them, for of necessity the arms must be at least two hundred years old. Bearing this in mind, one cannot but wonder at the actions of some ancient families like those of Astley and Pole, who, lawfully possess- ing arms concerning which there is and can be no doubt or question, yet nevertheless invent and use crests which have no authority. One instance and one only do I know where a crest has }iad a 57 58 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY legitimate existence without any coat of arms. This case is that of the family of Buckworth, who at the time of the Visitations exhibited arms and crest. The arms infringed upon those of another family, and no sufficient proof could be produced to compel their admission as borne of right. The arms were respited for further proof, while the crest was allowed, presumably tentatively, and whilst awaiting the further proof for the arms ; no proof, however, was made. The arms and crest remained in this position until the year 1 806, when Sir Buckworth Buckworth-Herne, whose father had assumed the additional name of Heme, obtained a Royal Licence to bear the name of Soame in addition to and after those of Buckworth-Herne, with the arms of Soame quarterly with the arms of Buckworth. It then became necessary to prove the right to these arms of Buckworth, and they were accordingly regranted with the trifling addition of an ermine spot upon the chevron ; consequently this solitary instance has now been rectified, and I cannot learn of any other instance where these exceptional circumstances have similarly occurred ; and there never has been a grant of a crest alone unless arms have been in existence previously. Whilst arms may exist alone, and the decoration of a shield form the only armorial ensign of a person, such need not be the case ; and it will usually be found that the armorial bearings of an ordinary commoner consist of shield, crest, and motto. To these must naturally be added the helmet and mantling, which become an essential to other than an abbreviated achievement when a crest has to be displayed. It should be remembered, however, that the helmet is not specifically granted, and apparently is a matter of inherent right, so that a person would not be in the wrong in placing a helmet and mantling above a shield even when no crest exists to surmount the helmet. The motto is usually to be found but is not a necessity, and there are many more coats of arms which have never been used with a motto than shields which exist without a crest. Sometimes a crt-de-guerre will be found instead of or in addition to a motto. The escutcheon may have sup- porters, or it may be displayed upon an eagle or a lymphad, &c., for which particular additions no other generic term has yet been coined save the very inclusive one of ^^ exterior ornaments." A coronet of rank may form a part of the achievement, and the shield may be encircled by the ^' ribbons " or the ^' circles " or by the Garter, of the various Orders of Knighthood, and by their collars. Below it may depend the badge of a Baronet of Nova Scotia, or of an Order of Knighthood, and added to it may possibly be what is termed a com- partment, though this is a feature almost entirely peculiar to Scottish armory. There is also the crowning distinction of a badge ; and of all armorial insignia this is the most cherished, for the existing badges COMPONENT PARTS OF AN ACHIEVEMENT 59 are but few in number. The escutcheon may be placed in front of the crosiers of a bishop, the batons of the Earl Marshal, or similar orna- ments. It may be displayed upon a mantle of estate, or it may be borne beneath a pavilion. With two more additions the list is com- plete, and these are the banner and the standard. For these several features of armory reference must be made to the various chapters in which they are treated. Suffice it here to remark that whilst the term ^' coat of arms " has through the slipshod habits of English philology come to be used to signify a representation of any heraldic bearing, the correct term for the whole emblazonment is an " achievement," a term most frequently employed to signify the whole, but which can correctly be used to signify anything which a man is entitled to represent of an armorial character. Had not the recent revival of interest in armory taken place, we should have found a firmly rooted and even yet more slipshod declension, for a few years ago the habit of the uneducated in styling anything stamped upon a sheet of note-paper " a crest," was fast becoming stereotyped into current acceptance. CHAPTER VI THE SHIELD THE shield is the most important part of the achievement, for on it are depicted the signs and emblems of the house to which it appertains ; the difference marks expressive of the cadency of the members within that house ; the augmentations of honour which the Sovereign has conferred ; the quarterings inherited from families which are represented, and the impalements of marriage ; and it is with the shield principally that the laws of armory are concerned, for everything else is dependent upon the shield, and falls into comparative insignificance alongside of it. Let us first consider the shield itself, without reference to the charges it carries. A shield may be depicted in any fashion and after any shape that the imagination can suggest, which shape and fashion have been accepted at any time as the shape and fashion of a shield. There is no law upon the subject. The various shapes adopted in em- blazonments in past ages, and used at the present time in imitation of past usage — for luckily the present period has evolved no special shield of its own — are purely the result of artistic design, and have been determined at the periods they have been used in heraldic art by no other consideration than the particular theory of design that has happened to dominate the decoration, and the means and ends of such decoration of that period. The lozenge certainly is reserved for and indicative of the achievements of the female sex, but, save for this one exception, the matter may be carried further, and arms be depicted upon a banner, a parallelogram, a square, a circle, or an oval ; and even then one would be correct, for the purposes of armory, in describing such figures as shields on all occasions on which they are made the vehicles for the emblazonment of a design which properly and originally should be borne upon a shield. Let no one think that a design ceases to be a coat of arms if it is not displayed upon a shield. Many people have thought to evade the authority of the Crown as the arbiter of coat-armour, and the penalties of taxation imposed by the Revenue by using designs without depicting them upon a shield. This little deception has always been borne in mind, THE SHIELD 6i for we find in the Royal Warrants of Queen Elizabeth commanding the Visitations that the King of Arms to whom the warrant was addressed was to '' correcte; cumptroUe and refourme all mann' of armes, crests, cognizaunces and devices unlawfuU or unlawfully usurped, borne or taken by any p'son or p'sons within the same p'vince cont^ry to the due order of the laws of armes, and the same to rev'se, put downe or otherwise deface at his discrecon as well in coote armors, helmes, standerd, pennons and hatchmets of tents and pavilions, as also in plate Jewells, pap', parchement, wyndowes, gravestones and monuments, or elsewhere wheresoev' they be sett or placed, whether they be in shelde, schoocheon, lozenge, square, rundell or otherwise howsoev' cont^rie to the autentiq' and auncient lawes, customes, rules, privileges and orders of armes." The Act 32 & 33 Victoria, section 19, defines (for the purpose of the taxation it enforced) armorial bearings to mean and include <' any armorial bearing, crest, or ensign, by whatever name the same shall be called, and whether such armorial bearing, crest, or ensign shall be registered in the College of Arms or not." The shape of the shield throughout the rest of Europe has also varied between wide extremes, and at no time has any one particular shape been assigned to or peculiar to any country, rank, or condition, save possibly with one exception, namely, that the use of the cartouche or oval seems to have been very nearly universal with ecclesiastics in France, Spain, and Italy, though never reserved exclusively for their use. Probably this was an attempt on the part of the Church to get away from the military character of the shield. It is in keeping with the rule by which, even at the present day, a bishop or a cardinal bears neither helmet nor crest, using in place thereof his ecclesiastical mitre or tasselled hat, and by which the clergy, both abroad and in this country, seldom made use of a crest in depicting their arms. A clergyman in this countrj^, however, has never been denied the right of using a crest (if he possesses one and chooses to display it) until he reaches episcopal rank. A grant of arms to a clergyman at the present day depicts his achievement with helmet, mantling, and crest in iden- tical form with those adopted for any one else. But the laws of armory, official and amateur, have always denied the right to make use of a crest to bishop, archbishop, and cardinal. At the present day, if a grant of arms is made to a bishop of the Established Church, the emblazonment at the head of his patent con- sists of shield and mitre only. The laws of the Church of England, however, require no vow of celibacy from its ecclesiastics, and con- sequently the descendants of a bishop would be placed in the position of having no crest to display if the bishop and his requirements were 62 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY alone considered. So that in the case of a grant to a bishop the crest is granted for his descendants in a separate clause, being depicted by itself in the body of the patent apart from the emblazonment '^ in the margin hereof/' which in an ordinary patent is an emblazonment of the whole achievement. A similar method is usually adopted in cases in which the actual patentee is a woman, and where, by the limitations attached to the patent being extended beyond herself, males are brought in who will bear the arms granted to the patentee as their prono- minal arms. In these cases the arms of the patentee are depicted upon a lozenge at the head of the patent, the crest being depicted separately elsewhere. Whilst shields were actually used in warfare the utilitarian article largely governed the shape of the artistic re- presentation, but after the fifteenth century the latter gradually left the beaten track of utility and passed wholly into the cognisance of art and design. The earliest shape of all is the long, narrow shape, which is now but seldom seen. This was curved to protect the body, which it nearly covered, and an interesting example of this is to be found in the monumental slab of champlev^ enamel, part of the tomb of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou (Fig. 28), the ancestor of our own Royal dynasty of Plantagenet, who died in the year 1 150. This tomb was formerly in the cathedral of Le Mans, and is now in the museum there. I shall have occasion again to refer to it. The shield is blue ; the lions are gold. Other forms of the same period are found with curved tops, in the shape of an inverted pear, but the form known as the heater-shaped shield is to all intents and purposes the earliest shape which was used for armorial purposes. The church of St. Elizabeth at Marburg, in Hesse, affords examples of shields which are exceedingly interesting, inasmuch as they are Fig. 28. — Taken from the tomb of Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou. THE SHIELD 63 original and contemporary even if only pageant shields. Those which now remain are the shields of the Landgrave Konrad {d. 1 241) of Thuringia and of Henry of Thuringia {d. 1298). The shield of the former (see Fig. 29) is 90 centimetres high and 74 wide. Konrad was Landgrave of Thuringia and Grand Master of the Teutonic Order of Knighthood. His arms show the lion of Thuringia barry of gules and Fig. 29. — Shield of the Landgrave Koniad of Thuringia (died 1241). argent on a field of azure, and betw^een the hind feet a small shield, with the arms of the Teutonic Order of Knights, The only remains of the lion's mane are traces of the nails. The body of the lion is made of pressed leather, and the yellow claws have been supplied with a paint-brush. A precious stone probably represented the eye. The making and decorating of the shields lay mostly in the hands of the herald painters, known in Germany as Schiltery who, in addition to attending to the shield and crest, also had charge of all the riding paraphernalia, because most of the articles comprised therein were 64 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY heraldically decorated. Many of these shield-workers' fraternities won widespread fame for themselves, and enjoyed great consideration at that time. Thus the ^' History of a Celebrated Painters' Guild on the Lower Rhine " tells us of costly shields which the shield-workers of Paris had supplied, 1260, &c. Vienna, too, was the home of a not unimportant shield-workers' guild, and the town archives of Vienna contain writings of the fifteenth century treating of this subject. For instance, we learn that in an order of St. Luke's parish, June 28, 1446, with regard to the masterpiece of a member of the guild — '^ Item, a shield-worker shall make four new pieces of work with his own hand, a jousting saddle, a leather apron, a horse's head-piece, and a jousting shield, that shall he do in eight weeks, and must be able to paint it with his own hand, as Knight and man-at-arms shall direct." The shield was of wood, covered with linen or leather, the charges in relief and painted. Leather plastic was very much esteemed in the early Middle Ages. The leather was soaked in oil, and pressed or beaten into shape. Besides piecing and leather plastic, pressed linen (linen dipped in chalk and Hme) was also used, and a kind of tempera painting on a chalk background. After the shield was decorated with the charges, it was frequently strengthened with metal clasps, or studs, particularly those parts which were more especially exposed to blows and pressure. These clasps and nails originally had no other object than to make the shield stronger and more durable, but later on their nature was misunderstood ; they were treated and used as genuine heraldic charges, and stereotyped into hereditary designs. The long strips with which the edge was bound were called the '* frame " {Schild- gestel[)y the clasps introduced in the middle of the shield the " buckle " or '^ umbo " (see on Fig. 28), from which frequently circularly arranged metal snaps reached the edge of the shield. This latter method of strengthening the shield was called the '' Buckelris," a figure which was afterwards frequently employed as a heraldic charge, and is known in Germany by the name of Lilienhaspel (Lily-staple) or Glevenrad, or, as we term it in England, the escarbuncle. In the second half of the fourteenth century, when the tourna- ment provided the chief occasion for the shield, the jousting-shield, called in Germany the Tartsche or Tartscher^ came into use, and from this class of shield the most varied shapes were gradually developed. These Tarfschen were decidedly smaller than the earlier Gothic shields, being only about one-fifth of a man's height. They were concave, and had on the side of the knight's right hand a circular indentation. This was the spear-rest, in which to place the tilting-spear. The la.ter Fig. 30. THE SHIELD 65 art of heraldic decoration symmetrically repeated the spear-rest on the sinister side of the shield, and, by so doing, transformed a useful fact into a matter of mere artistic design. Doubtless it was argued that if indentations were correct at one point in the outline they were correct at another, and when once the actual fact was departed from the imagination of designers knew no limits. But if the spear- rest as such is introduced into the outline of a shield it should be on the dexter side. Reverting to the various shapes of shield, however, the degeneration is explained by a remark of Mr. G. W. Eve in the able book which he has recently published under the title of ^^ Decorative Heraldry," in which, alluding to heraldic art in general, he says (p. 235) : — '^ With the Restoration heraldry naturally became again con- spicuous, with the worst form of the Renaissance character in full sway, the last vestiges of the Gothic having disappeared. Indeed, the contempt with which the superseded style was regarded amounted to fanaticism, and explains, in a measure, how so much of good could be relinquished in favour of so weak a successor." Later came the era of gilded embellishments, of flowing palms, of borders decorated with grinning heads, festoons of ribbon, and fruit and flowers in abundance. The accompanying examples are repro- duced from a book. Knight and Rumley's " Heraldry." The book is not particularly well known to the public, inasmuch as its circulation was entirely confined to heraldic artists, coach-painters, engravers, and die-sinkers. Amongst these handicraftsmen its reputation was and is great. With the school of design it adopted, little or no sympathy now exists, but a short time ago (how short many of those who are now vigorous advocates of the Gothic and mediaeval styles would be startled to realise were they to recognise actual facts) no other style was known or considered by the public. As examples of that style the plates of Knight and Rumley were admittedly far in advance of any other book, and as specimens of copperplate engraving they are superb. Figs. 30, 31, and 32 show typical examples of escutcheons from Knight and Rumley ; and as the volume was in the hands of most of the heraldic handicraftsmen, it will be found that this type of design was constantly to be met with. The external decoration of the shield was carried to great lengths, and Fig. 3 1 found many admirers and users amongst the gallant " sea-dogs " of the kingdom. In fact, so far was the idea carried that a trophy of military weapons was actually granted by patent as part of the supporters of the Earl of Bantry. Fig. 30, from the same source, is the military equivalent. These plates are interesting as being some of the examples from which most of the heraldic handicraft of a recent period was adapted. The E 66 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY official shield eventually stereotyped itself into a shape akin to that shown in Fig. 32, though nowadays considerable latitude is permitted. For paintings which are not upon patents the design of the shield rests with the individual taste of the different officers of arms, and recently some of the work for which they have been responsible has reached a high standard judged even by the strictest canons of art. In Scotland, until very recently, the actual workmanship of the emblazonments which were issued from Lyon Office was so wretchedly poor that one is hardly justified in taking them into consideration as a type. With the advent into office of the present Lyon King of Arms (Sir James Balfour Paul), a complete change has been made, and both the workmanship and design of the paintings upon the patents of grant and matricula- tion, and also in the Lyon Register, have been examples of everything that could be desired. CHAPTER VII THE FIELD OF A SHIELD AND THE HERALDIC TINCTURES THE shield itself and its importance in armory is due to its being the vehicle whereon are elaborated the pictured emblems and designs which constitute coat-armour. It should be borne in mind that theoretically all shields are of equal value, saving that a shield of more ancient date is more estimable than one of recent origin, and the shield of the head of the house takes precedence of the same arms when differenced for a younger member of the family. A shield crowded with quarterings is interesting inasmuch as each quartering in the ordinary event means the representation through a female of some other family or branch thereof. But the real value of such a shield should be judged rather by the age of the single quartering which represents the strict male descent male upon male, and a simple coat of arms without quarterings may be a great deal more ancient and illustrious than a shield crowded with coat upon coat. A fictitious and far too great estimation is placed upon the right to display a long string of quarterings. In reality quarterings are no more than accidents, because they are only inherited when the wife happens to be an heiress in blood. It is quite conceivable that there may be families, in fact there are such families, who are able to begin their pedigrees at the time of the Con- quest, and who have married a long succession of noble w^omen, all of the highest birth, but yet none of whom have happened to be heiresses. Consequently the arms, though dating from the earliest period at which arms are known, would remain in their simple form without the addition of a solitary quartering. On the other hand, I have a case in mind of a marriage which took place some years ago. The husband is the son of an alien whose original position, if report speaks truly, was that of a pauper immigrant. His wealth and other attributes have placed him in a good social position ; but he has no arms, and, as far as the world is aware, no ancestry whatever. Let us now consider his wife's family. Starting soon after the Conquest, its descendants obtained high posi- tion and married heiress after heiress, and before the commencement of this century had amassed a shield of quarterings which can readily be proved to be little short of a hundred in number. Probably the number 67 68 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY is really much greater. A large family followed in one generation, and one of the younger sons is the ancestor of the aforesaid wife. But the father of this lady never had any sons, and though there are many males of the name to carry on the family in the senior line and also in several younger branches, the wife, by the absence of brothers, happens to be a coheir; and as such she transmits to her issue the right to all the quarter- ings she has inherited. If the husband ever obtains a grant of arms, the date of them will be subsequent to the present time ; but supposing such a grant to be obtained, the children will inevitably inherit the scores of quarterings which belong to their mother. Now it would be ridiculous to suppose that such a shield is better or such a descent more enviable than the shield of a family such as 1 first described. Quarterings are all very well in their way, but their glorification has been carried too far. A shield which displays an augmentation is of necessity more honourable than one without. At the same time no scale of precedence has ever been laid down below the rank of esquires ; and if such pre- cedence does really exist at all, it can only be according to the date of the grant. Here in England the possession of arms carries with it no style or title, and nothing in his designation can differentiate the posi- tion of Mr. Scrope of Danby, the male descendant of one of the oldest families in this country, whose arms were upheld in the Scrope and Grosvenor controversy in 1390, or Mr. Daubeney of Cote, from a Mr. Smith, whose known history may have commenced at the Foundling Hospital twenty years ago. In this respect English usage stands apart, for whilst a German is *^ Von " and a Frenchman was ^^ De," if of noble birth, there is no such apparent distinction in England, and never has been. The result has been that the technical nobility attach- ing to the possession of arms is overlooked in this country. On the Continent it is usual for a patent creating a title to contain a grant of the arms, because it is recognised that the two are inseparable. This is not now the case in England, where the grant of arms is one thing and the grant of the title another, and where it is possible, as in the case of Lord St. Leonards, to possess a peerage without ever having obtained the first step in rank, which is nobility or gentility. The foregoing is in explanation of the fact that except in the matter of date all shields are equal in value. So much being understood, it is possible to put that consideration on one side, and speaking from the artistically technical point of view, the remark one often hears becomes correct, that the simpler a coat of arms the better. The remark has added truth from the fact that most ancient coats of arms were simple, and many modern coats are far from being worthy of such a description. THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 69 A coat of arms must consist of at least one thing, to wit, the <* field." This is equivalent in ordinary words to the colour of the ground of the shield. A great many writers have asserted that every coat of arms must consist of at least the field, and a charge, though most have mentioned as a solitary exception the arms of Brittany, which were simply '' ermine." A plain shield of ermine (Fig. 33) was borne by John of Brittany, Earl of Richmond {d. 1399), though some of his predecessors had relegated the arms of Brittany to a ^' quarter ermine" upon more elaborate escutcheons (Fig. 61). This idea as to arms of one tincture was, however, exploded in Woodward and Burnett's "Treatise on Heraldry," where no less than forty different examples are quoted. The above-mentioned writer continues : " There is another use of a plain red shield which must not be omitted. In the full quartered coat of some high sovereign princes of Germany — Saxony (duchies), Brandenburg (Prussia), Bavaria, Anhalt — appears a plain red quartering ; this is known as the Bhit Fahne or Regalien quarter, and is indicative of Royal pre- rogatives. It usually occupies the base of the shield, and is often diapered." Fig. 33.— Arms of John But in spite of the lengthy list which is quoted (^P Montfort, other- in Woodward and Burnett, the fact remains that Duke of Brittany ami only one British instance is included. The family ^^^^ °( Richmond. ; . , •' (From his seal.) of Berington of Chester (on the authority of Har- leian manuscript No. 1535) is said to bear a plain shield of azure. Personally I doubt this coat of arms for the Berington family of Chester, which is probably connected with the neighbouring family in Shropshire, who in later times certainly used very different arms. The plain shield of ermine is sometimes to be found as a quartering for Brittany in the achievement of those English families who have the right to quarter the Royal arms ; but I know of no other British case in which, either as a quartering or as a pronominal coat, arms of one tincture exist. But there are many coats which have no charge, the distinctive device consisting of the partition of the shield in some recognised heraldic method into two or more divisions of different tinctures. Amongst such coats may be mentioned the arms of Waldegrave, which are simply : Party per pale argent and gules ; Drummond of Megginch, whose arms are simply : Party per fess wavy or and gules ; and the arms of Boyle, which are : Per bend embattled argent and gules. The arms of Berners — which are : Quarterly or and vert — are another example, as are the arms of Campbell (the first quarter in the Duke of Argyll's achievement), which are : Gyronny or and sable. 70 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY The coat bendy argent and gules, the ancient arms of Talbot, which are still borne as a quartering by the Earl of Shrewsbury, Waterford, and Talbot ; and the coat chequy or and azure, a quartering for Warren, which is still borne by the House of Howard, all come within the same category. There are many other coats of this character which have no actual charge upon them. The colour of the shield is termed the field when it consists of only one colour, and when it consists of more than one colour the two together compose the field. The field is usually of one or more of the recognised metals, colours, or furs. The metals are gold and silver, these being termed '^ or " and '* argent." The colours, which are really the '^ tinctures," if this word is to be used correctly, are : gules (red), azure (blue), vert (green), purpure (purple), and (in spite of the fact that it is not really a colour) black, which is known as sable. The metal gold, otherwise *' or," is often represented in emblazon- ments by yellow : as a matter of fact yellow has always been used for gold in the Register Books of the College of Arms, and Lyon Office has recently reverted to this practice. In ancient paintings and em- blazonments the use of yellow was rather more frequent than the use of gold, but gold at all times had its use, and was never discarded. Gold seems to have been usually used upon ancient patents, whilst yellow was used in the registrations of them retained in the Offices of Arms, but I know of no instance in British armory in which the word yellow has been used in a blazon to represent any tint distinct from gold. With regard to the other metal, silver, or, as it is always termed, '^ argent," the same variation is found in the usage of silver and white in representing argent that we find in yellow and gold, though we find that the use of the actual metal (silver) in emblazonment does not occur to anything like the same extent as does the use of gold. Pro- bably this is due to the practical difficulty that no one has yet discovered a silver medium which does not lose its colour. The use of aluminium was thought to have solved the difficulty, but even this loses its bril- liancy, and probably its usage wall never be universally adopted. This is a pity, for the use of gold in emblazonments gives a brilliancy in effect to a collection of coat-armour which it is a pity cannot be ex- tended by an equivalent usage of silver. The use of silver upon the patents at the College of Arms has been discontinued some centuries, though aluminium is still in use in Lyon Office. Argent is therefore usually represented either by leaving the surface untouched, or by the use of Chinese white. I believe I am the first heraldic writer to assert the existence of the heraldic colour of white in addition to the heraldic argent. Years ago THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 71 I came across the statement that a white label belonged only to the Royal Family, and could be used by no one else. I am sorry to say that though I have searched high and low I cannot find the authority for the statement, nor can I learn from any officer of arms that the existence of such a rule is asserted ; but there is this curious confir- mation that in the warrants by which the various labels are assigned to the different members of the Royal Family, the labels are called white labels. Now the label of the Prince of Wales is of three points and is plain. Heraldry knows nothing of the black lines which in drawing a coat of arms usually appear for the outline of a charge. In older work such lines are absent. In any case they are only mere accidents of draughtsmanship. Bearing this in mind, and bearing in mind that the sinister supporter of the Prince of Wales is a unicorn argent, how on earth is a plain label of argent to be depicted there- upon ? Now it is necessary also that the label shall be placed upon the crest, which is a lion statant guardant or, crowned with the coronet of the Prince, and upon the dexter supporter which is another golden lion ; to place an argent label upon either is a fiat violation of the rule which requires that metal shall not be placed upon metal, nor colour upon colour ; but if the unicorn is considered argent, which it is, it would if really depicted in silver be quite possible to paint a white label upon it, for the distinction between white and silver is marked, and a white label upon a gold lion is not metal upon metal. Quite recently a still further and startling confirmation has come under my notice. In the grant of a crest to Thomas Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham, the coronet which is to encircle the neck of the leopard is distinctly blazoned argent, the label to which he is previously said to have had a just hereditary right is as distinctly blazoned white, and the whole grant is so short that inadvertence could hardly be pleaded as an explanation for the distinction in blazon. Instances of an official exemplification of coats of arms with labels are not un- common, because the label in some number of families, for example Courtenay and Prideaux-Brune and Barrington, has become stereotyped into a charge. In none of these cases, however, is it either argent or white, but instances of the exemplification of a coat of arms bearing a label as a mark of cadency are, outside the members of the Royal Family, distinctly rare ; they are necessarily so, because outside the Royal Family the label is merely the temporary mark of the eldest son or grandson during the lifetime of the head of the house, and the necessity for the exemplification of the arms of an eldest son can seldom occur. The one circumstance which might provide us with the opportunity is the exemplification consequent upon a change of name and arms by an eldest son during the lifetime of his father ; but 72 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY this very circumstance fails to provide it, because the exemplification only follows a change of arms, and the arms being changed, there no longer exists the necessity for a mark of cadency ; so that instances of the official use of a label for cadency are rare, but of such as occur I can learn of none which has received official sanction which blazons the label white. There is, however, one coat which is said to have a label argent as a charge, this is the coat of Fitz- Simon, which is quoted in Papworth, upon the authority of one of the Harleian Manuscripts, as follows : Sable, three crescents, in chief a label of two drops and in fess another of one drop argent ; and the same coat of arms is recorded in a funeral Fig. 34.— Armorial bear- entry in Ulster's Office. The label is not here Ea?l''o"^Unctln^^S ^^rmed white, and it is peculiar that we find it 1311): Or, a lion ram- of another colour in another coat of Fitz-Simon hrseaio'^"'^* ^^'''"' (azure, a lion rampant ermine, a label of four point gules). Of other colours may be mentioned purpure (purple). This in English heraldry is a perfectly well recognised colour, and though its use is extremely rare in comparison with the others, it will be found too frequently for it to be classed as an exception. The earliest instance of this tincture which I have met with is in the coat of De Lacy (Fig. 34). The Roll of Caerlaverock speaks of his " Baniere ot de un cendall saffrin, O un lion rampant porprin," whilst MS. Cott. Calig. A. xviii. quotes the arms : ^^ De or^ a un lion rampaund de pourpre'^ The Burton coat of the well-known Shropshire family of Lingen-Burton is : Quarterly purpure and azure, a cross en- grailed or between four roses argent. The Irish baronets of the name of Burton, who claimed descent from this family, bore a very similar coat, namely : Per pale azure and purpure, a cross engrailed or between four roses argent. Two other colours will be found in nearly all text-books of English armory. These are murrey or sanguine, and orange or tenne. The exact tint of murrey is between gules and purpure ; and tenne is an orange-tawny colour. Theyare both ^^stains," and were perhaps invented by the old heralds for the perpetration of their preposterous system of abatements, which will be found set out in full in the old heraldry books, but which have yet to be found occurring in fact. The subject of abatements is one of those pleasant little insanities which have done so much to the detriment of heraldry. One, and one only, can be said THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 73 to have had the slightest foundation in fact ; that was the entire reversal of the escutcheon in the ceremony of degradation following upon attainder for high treason. Even this, however, was but temporary, for a man forfeited his- arms entirely by attainder. They were torn down from his banner of knighthood ; they were erased in the records of the College of Arms ; but on that one single occasion when he was drawn upon a hurdle to the place of his execution, they are said to have been painted reversed upon paper, wliich paper was fastened to his breast. But the arms then came to an end, and his descendants possessed none at all. They certainly had not the right to depict their shield upside down (even if they had cared to display such a mon- strosity). Unless and until the attainder was reversed, arms (like a title) were void ; and the proof of this is to be found in the many regrants of arms made in cases where the attainder has remained, as in the instances of the Earl of Stafford and the ancestor of the present Lord Barnard. But that any person should have been supposed to have been willing to make use of arms carrying an abatement is preposterous, and no instance of such usage is known. Rather would a man decline to bear arms at all ; and that any one should have imagined the existence of a person willing to advertise himself as a drunkard or an adulterer, with variations in the latter case according to the personality of his partner in guilt, is idiotic in the extreme. Consequently, as no example of an abatement has ever been found, one might almost discard the " stains " of murrey and tenne were it not that they were largely made use of for the purposes of liveries, in which usage they had no such objectionable meaning. At the present day scarlet or gules being appropriated to the Royal Family for livery purposes, other people possessing a shield of gules are required to make use of a different red, and though it is now termed chocolate or claret colour by the utilitarian language of the day, it is in reality nothing more than the old sanguine or murrey. Of orange-tawny I can learn of but one livery at the present day. I refer to the orange-tawny coats used by the hunt servants of Lord Fitzhardinge, and now worn by the hunt servants of the Old Berkeley country, near London. Apropos of this it is interest- ing to note the curious legend that the " pink " of the hunting field is not due to any reasons of optical advantage, but to an entirely different reason. Formerly no man might hunt even on his own estate until he had had licence of free warren from the Crown. Consequently he merely hunted by the pleasure of the Crown, taking part in what was exclusively a Royal sport by Royal permission, and for this Royal sport he wore the King's livery of scarlet. This being the case, it is a curious anomaly that although the livery of the only Royal pack recently in existence, the Royal Buck Hounds, was scarlet and gold, the Master 74 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY wore a green coat. The legend may be a fallacy, inasmuch as scarlet did not become the Royal livery until the accession of the Stuarts ; but it is by no means clear to what date the scarlet hunting coat can be traced. There is, however, one undoubted instance of the use of sanguine for the field of a coat of arms, namely, the arms of Clayhills of Inver- gowrie,! which are properly matriculated in Lyon Register. To these colours German heraldry has added brown, blood-red (this apparently is different from the English sanguine, as a different hatching has been invented for it), earth-colour, iron-grey, water-colour, flesh-colour, ashen-grey, orange (here also a separate hatching from the one to represent tenn6 has been invented), and the colour of nature, ue. '' proper." These doubtless are not intended to be added to the list of heraldic tinctures, but are noted because various hatchings have been invented in modern times to represent them. Mr. Woodward, in Woodward and Burnett's '^ Treatise on Heraldry," alludes to various tinctures amongst Continental arms which he has come across. '' Besides the metals, tinctures, and furs which have been already described, other tinctures are occasionally found in the Heraldry of Continental nations ; but are comparatively of such rarity as that they may be counted among the curiosities of blazon, which would require a separate volume. That of which I have collected instances is Cendree^ or ash colour, which is borne by (among others) the Bavarian family of Ashua, as its amies parlantes : Cendree, a mount of three conpeaiix in base or. " Brundtrey a brown colour, is even more rare as a tincture of the field ; the Mieroszewsky in Silesia bear, ^ de Brundtrey A cross patee argent supporting a raven rising sable^ and holding in its beak a horseshoe proper, its points towards the chief,'* , " Bleu-celeste, or bleu du del, appears occasionally, apart from what we may term ^ landscape coats.' That it differs from, and is a much lighter colour than, azure is shown by the following example. The Florentine CiNTi (now CiNi) bear a coat which would be numbered among the armes fausses, or a enquerir : Per pale azure and bleu-celeste, an estoile counter changed J' " Amaranth or columbine is the field of a coat (of which the blazon is too lengthy for insertion in this place) which was granted to a Bohemian knight in 170 1." Carnation is the French term for the colour of naked flesh, and is often employed in the blazonry of that country. * The arms of Clayhills of Invergowrie : Parted per bend sanguine and vert, two greyhounds courant bendwise argent. Mantling gules doubled argent ; and upon a wreath of the liveries is set for crest, an arm holding an Imperial crown proper ; and in an cscroU over the same, this motto, " Corde et animo." Matriculated in Lyon Office circa 1672. THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 75 Perhaps mention should here be made of the EngHsh term '' proper." Anything, aUve or otherwise, which is depicted in its natural colours is termed ^' proper," and it should be depicted in its really correct tones or tints, without any attempt to assimilate these with any heraldic tincture. It will not be found in the very ancient coats of arms, and its use is not to be encouraged. When a natural animal is found existing in various colours it is usual to so describe it, for the term " proper " alone would leave uncertainty. For instance, the crest of the Lane family, which was granted to commemorate the ride of King Charles II. behind Mistress Jane Lane as her servant, in his perilous escape to the coast after the disastrous Battle of Worcester, is blazoned "a strawberry roan horse, couped at the flanks proper, bridled sable, and holding between the feet an Imperial crown also proper." Lord Cowper's supporters were, on either side of the escutcheon, " a light dun horse proper, with a large blaze down the face, the mane close shorn except a tuft on the withers, a black list down the back, a bob tail, and the near fore-foot and both hind feet white." Another instance that might be quoted are the supporters of Lord Newlands, which are : ** On either side a dapple-grey horse proper, gorged with a riband and suspended therefrom an escutcheon gules, charged with three bezants in chevron." The crest of the family of Bewes, of St. Neots, Cornwall, is : ^' On a chapeau gules, turned up ermine, a pegasus rearing on his hind legs of a bay colour, the mane and tail sable, winged or, and holding in the mouth a sprig of laurel proper." There are and were always many occasions in which it was desired to represent armorial bearings in black and white, or where from the nature of the handicraft it was impossible to make use of actual colour. But it should always be pointedly remembered that unless the right colours of the arms could be used the tinctures were entirely ignored in all matters of handicraft until the seventeenth century. Various schemes of hatchings, however, were adopted for the purpose of in- dicating the real heraldic colours when arms were represented and the real colours could not be employed, the earliest being that of Francquart in Belgium, area 1623. Woodward says this was succeeded by the systems of Butkens, 1626 ; Petra Sancta, 1638 ; Lobkowitz, 1639 ; Gelenius ; and De Rouck, 1645 ; but all these systems differed from each other, and were for a time the cause of confusion and not of order. Eventually, however, the system of Petra Sancta (the author of Tesserce Gentilitid) superseded all the others, and has remained in use up to the present time. Upon this point Herr Str5hl in his Heraldischer Atlas remarks : ''The system of hatching used by Marcus Vulson de la Colombiere, 1639, in the course of time found acceptance everywhere, and has 76 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY maintained itself in use unaltered until the present day, and these are shown in Fig. 35, only that later, hatchings have been invented for brown, grey, &c. ; which, however, seems rather a superfluous enrich- ing." None of these later creations, by the way, have ever been used in this country. For the sake of completeness, however, let them be mentioned (see Fig. 36): a, brown ; b, blood-red ; c, earth-colour; dy iron-grey ; ^, water-colour ; /, flesh-colour ; g, ashen-grey ; h, orange ; or. argent gules. azure. Fig. 35. sable. vert, purpure. and /, colour of nature. In English armory '< tenn^ " is represented by a combination of horizontal (as azure) lines with diagonal lines from sinister to dexter (as purpure), and sanguine or murrey by a combina- tion of diagonal lines from dexter to sinister (as vert), and from sinister to dexter (as purpure). The hatchings of the shield and its charges always accommodate themselves to the angle at which the shield is placed, those of the ', 'I'l'i'i ' ' 'i» ' 1,1 I I I I I I I I • ' • V I I I I I t!i!i:i!t! TifirE l^IlT # S-Ki I I I liji I ' t • I ' I • M •I* I* I ' I* I lililiiiii g 6 I. Fig. 36. crest to the angle of the helmet. A curious difficulty, however, occurs when a shield, as is so often the case in this country, forms a part of the crest. Such a shield is seldom depicted quite upright upon the wreath. Are the tincture lines to follow the angle of the smaller shield in the crest or the angle of the helmet ? Opinion is by no means agreed upon the point. But though this system of representing colours by ^^ hatching " has been adopted and extensively made use of, it is questionable whether THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 77 it has ever received official sanction, at any rate in Great Britain. It certainly has never been made use of in any qfficmi record or document in the College of Arms. Most of the records are in colour. The re- mainder are all without exception " tricked," that is, drawn in outline, the colours being added in writing in the following contracted forms : "0,"or <'or," for or; '^ A," ^'ar," or ^' arg," for argent; ^'G," or " gu," for gules ; " Az," or " B " (for blue, owing to the likelihood of confusion between *^ ar " and *' az," " B " being almost universally used in old trickings), for azure ; *' S," or *^ sa," for sable ; " Vt " for vert, and " Purp " for purpure. It is unlikely that any change will be made in the future, for the use of tincture lines is now very rapidly being discarded by all good heraldic artists in this country. With the rever- sion to older and better forms and methods these hatchings become an anachronism, and save that sable is represented by solid black they will probably be unused and forgotten before very long. The plain, simple names of colours, such as red and green, seemed so unpoetical and unostentatious to the heralds and poets of the Middle Ages, that they substituted for gold, topaz ; for silver, pearl or " meer- gries " ; for red, ruby ; for blue, sapphire ; for green, emerald ; and for black, diamond or " zobel " (sable, the animal, whence the word ^< sable "). Let the following blazonment from the grant of arms to Modling bei Wien in 1458 serve as example of the same : " Mit namen ain Schilt gleich getailt in fasse, des ober und maister tail von Rubin auch mit ainer fasse von Berlein, der under thail von grunt des Schilts von Schmaragaden, darinneain Pantel von Silber in Rampannt " — (///. *' Namely, a shield equally divided in fess, the upper and greater part of ruby, also with a fess of pearl, the under part of the field of the shield of emerald, therein a panther of silver, rampant ") ; that is, '^ Per fess gules and vert, in chief a fess argent, in base a panther rampant of the last." Even the planets, and, as abbreviations, their astronomical signs, are occasionally employed : thus, the sun for gold, the moon for silver, Mars for red, Jupiter for blue, Venus for green, Saturn for black, and Mercury for purple. This aberration of intellect on the part of mediaeval heraldic writers, for it really amounted to Uttle more, had very little, if indeed it had any, English official recognition. No one dreams of using such blazon at the present time, and it might have been entirely disre- garded were it not that Guillim sanctions its use ; and he being the high priest of English armory to so many, his example has given the system a certain currency. I am not myself aware of any instance of the use of these terms in an English patent of arms. The furs known to heraldry are now many, but originally they were only two, ^* ermine " and *^ vair." Ermine, as every one knows, is of 78 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY white covered with black spots, intended to represent the tails of the animal. From ermine has been evolved the following variations, viz. ermines, erminois, pean, and erminites. ^' Ermines " is a black field with white ermine spots (the French term for this is conire-hermtHy the German, gegen-hermelin), A gold background with black ermine spots is styled erminois, and pean is a black gromid with gold ermine spots. Planche mentions still another, as does Parker in his *' Glossary of Heraldry," namely, ^^ erminites," which is supposed to be white, with black ermine spots and a red hair on each side of the spot. I believe there is no instance known of any such fur in British armory. It is not mentioned in Strohl's ^^ Heraldic Atlas," nor can I find any foreign instance, so that who invented it, or for what purpose it was invented, I cannot say ; and I think it should be relegated, with abatements and the seize quartiers of Jesus Christ, to the category of the silly inventions of former heraldic writers, not of former heralds, for I know of no ofhcial act which has recognised the existence of erminites. The German term for erminois is gold-hermelhiy but there are no distinctive terms either in French or German heraldry for the other varieties. Thus, erminois would be in French blazon : d'or, seme d'hermines de sable ; pean would be de sable, seme d'hermines d'or. Though ermine is always nowadays represented upon a white background, it was sometimes de- picted with black ermine spots upon a field of silver, as in the case of some of the stall plates of the Knights of the Garter in St. George's Chapel at Windsor. Ermine spots are frequently to be found as charges. For instance, in the well-known coat of Kay, which is : '^ Argent, three ermine spots in bend between two bendlets sable, the whole between as many crescents azure." As charges two ermine spots figure upon the arms recently granted to Sir Francis Laking, Bart., G.C.V.O. The ermine spot has also sometimes been used in British armory as the difference mark granted under a Royal Licence to assume name and arms when it is necessary to indicate the absence of blood relationship. Other instances of the use of an ermine spot as a charge are : — Or, on two bars azure, as many barrulets dancett^ argent, a chief indented of the second charged with an ermine spot or (Sawbridge). Argent, a chevron between three crows sable, in each beak an ermine spot (Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph, 1680 ; Lichfield, 1692 ; and Worces- ter, 1700-17). Argent, a fess gules between three ermine spots sable (Kilvington). Argent, two bars sable, spotted ermine, in chief a lion passant gules (Hill, CO. Wexford). The earliest form in which ermine was depicted shows a nearer approach to the reality of the black tail, inasmuch as the spots above the tail to which we are now accustomed are a modern variant. Fig. 37.— Arms of Wil- liam de Ferrers, Earl of Derby {d. 1247) : *' Scutum variatum auro & gul." (From MS. Cott. Nero, D. i.) THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 79 V/hen a bend is ermine, the spots (like all other charges placed upon a bend) must be bendwise ; but on a chevron, saltire, &c., they are drawn upright. The other variety of fur is <'vair." This originated from the fur of a kind of squirrel (the ver or vair, differently spelt ; Latin varus), which was much used for the lining of cloaks. The animal was bluey-grey upon the back and white underneath, and the whole skin was used. It will be readily seen that by sewing a number of these skins together a result is obtained of a series of cup -shaped figures, alternating bluey-grey and white, and this is well shown in Fig. 28, which shows the effigy upon the tomb of Geoffrey Planta- genet. Count of Anjou, where the lining of vair to his cloak is plainly to be seen. The word seems to have been used independ- ently of heraldry for fur, and the following curious error, which is pointed out in Parker's ^' Glossary of the Terms used in Heraldry," may be noted in passing. The familiar fairy tale of Cinderella was brought to us from the French, and the slippers made of this costly fur, written, probably, verre for vaire) were erroneously translated ^^ glass " slippers. This was, of course, an impossible material, but the error has always been repeated in the nursery tale-books. In the oldest records vair is repre- sented by means of straight horizontal lines alternating with horizontal wavy or nebuly lines (see Fig. 37), but the cup- shaped divisions therefrom resulting hav- ing passed through various intermediate forms (see Fig. 38), have now been stereotyped into a fixed geometrical pattern, formed of rows of ear-shaped shields of alternate colours and alternately reversed, so depicted that each reversed shield fits into the space left by those on either side which are not reversed (see Fig. 39, k). The accompanying illustration will show plainly what is intended. In some of the older designs it was similar to that shown in the arms of the Earl Ferrers, Earl of Derby, 1254-65, the sketch (Fig. 38) being taken from almost contemporary stained glass in Dorchester Church, Oxon.; whilst sometimes the divi- FiG. 38. — Arms of Robert de Ferrers, Earl of Derby (1254-1265). (From stained glass in Dorchester Church.) 8o A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY sion lines are drawn, after the same manner, as nebuly. There does not seem to have been any fixed proportion for the number of rows of vair, as Fig. 40 shows the arms of the same Earl as represented upon his seal. The palpable pun upon the name which a shield vaire supplied no doubt affords the origin of the arms of Ferrers. Some families of the name at a later date adopted the horseshoes, which are to be found upon many Farrer and Ferrers shields, the popular assumption being that they are a reference to the ^' farrier " from whom some would derive Fig. 40.— Arms of Robert de Ferrers, Earl of Derby (1254-1265). (From his seal.) Fig. 41. — Arms of William de Ferrers, Earl of Derby : Vaire, or, and gules, a bordure argent, charged with eight horseshoes sable. (From a drawing of his seal, MS. Cott. Julius, C vii.) the surname. Woodward, however, states that a horseshoe being the badge of the Marshalls, horseshoes were assumed as armes parlantes by their descendants the Ferrers, who appear to have borne : Sable, six horseshoes argent. As a matter of fact the only one of that family who bore the horseshoes seems to have been William de Ferrers, Earl of Derby (d. 1254), as will be seen from the arms as on his seal (Fig. 41). THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 8i His wife was Sybilla, daughter of William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke. His son reverted to the plain shield of vair6, or, and gules. The arms of the Ferrers family at a later date are found to be : Gules, seven mascles conjoined or, in w^hich form they are still borne by Ferrers of Baddesley Clinton ; but whether the mascles are corruptions of the horseshoes, or whether (as seems infinitely more probable) they are merely a corrupted form of the vair6, or, and gules, it is difficult to say. Personally I rather doubt whether any Ferrers ever used the arms : Argent, six horseshoes sable. The early manner of depicting vair is still occasionally met with in foreign heraldry, where it is blazoned as Vair ond6 or Vair ancien. The family of Margens in Spain bears : Vair ond6, on a bend gules three griffins or ; and Tarragone of Spain : Vair ond^, or and gules. German heraldry seems to distinguish between wolkenfeh (cloud vair) and wogenfeh (wave vair ; see Fig. 39, n). The former is equivalent to vair ancient, the latter to vair en point. The verbal blazon of vair nearly always commences with the metal, but in the arrangement of the panes there is a difference between French and English usage. In the former the white panes are generally (and one thinks more correctly) represented as forming the first, or upper, line ; in British heraldry the reverse is more usually the case. It is usual to depict the white panes of ordinary vair with white rather than silver, though the use of the latter cannot be said to be incorrect, there being precedents in favour of that form. When an ordinary is of vair or vairy, the rows of vair may be depicted either horizontally or following the direction of the ordinary. There are accepted precedents for both methods. Vair is always blue and white, but the same subdivision of the field is frequently found in other colours ; and when this is the case, it is termed vairy of such and such colours. When it is vairy, it is usually of a colour and metal, as in the case of Ferrers, Earls of Derby, above referred to ; though a fur is sometimes found to take the place of one or other, as in the arms of Gresley, which are : " Vair6 gules and ermine." I know of no instance where vair6 is found of either two tnetals or of two colours, nor at the same time do I know of any rule against such a combination. Probably it will be time enough to discuss the contingency when an instance comes to light. Gerard Leigh mentions vair of three or more tinctures, but instances are very rare. Parker, in his ''Glossary," refers to the coat of Roger Holthouse, which he blazons: ''Vairy argent, azure, gules, and] or, en point." The Vair of commerce was formerly of three sizes, and the dis- tinction is continued in foreign armory. The middle or ordinary F 82 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY size is known as Vair; a smaller size as Menu-vair (whence our word '< miniver ") ; the largest as Beffroi or Gros vair, a. term which is used in armory when there are less than four rows. The word Beffroi is evidently derived from the bell-like shape of the vair^ the word Beffroi being anciently used in the sense of the alarm-bell of a town. In French armory, Beffroi should consist of three horizontal rows ; Vair^ of four ; Menu'vair^ of six. This rule is not strictly observed, but in French blazon if the rows are more than four it is usual to specify the number ; thus Varroux bears : de Vair de cinq traits, Menu-vair is still the blazon of some families ; Banville de Trutemne bears : de Menu-vair de six tires; the Barons van Houthem bore: de Menu-vair^ au franc quartter de gueules charge de trois maillets d'or. In British armory the foregoing distinctions are unknown, and Vair is only of one size, that being at the discretion of the artist. When the Vair is so arranged that in two horizontal rows taken together, either the points or the bases of two panes of the same tincture are in apposition, the fur is known as Counter Vair {Contre Vair) (see Fig. 39, /). Another variation, but an infrequent one, is termed Vair in Pale, known in German heraldry as Pfahlfeh {Vair appointe or Vair en pal ; but if of other colours than the usual ones, Vaire en pal). In this all panes of the same colour are arranged in vertical, or palar, rows (Fig. 39, m), German heraldry apparently distinguishes between this and Sturzpjahlfehy or reversed vair in pale. Vair in Bend (or in bend-sinister) is occasionally met with in foreign coats; thus Mignia- NELLI in Italy bears : Vaire dor et dazur en bande ; while Vaire en barre (that is, in bend-sinister) dor et de sable is the coat of PiCHON of Geneva. ! " Vair en pointe " is a term applied by Nisbet to an arrangement by which the azure shield pointing downwards has beneath it an argent shield pointing downwards, and vice versa, by which method the result- ing effect is as shown in Fig. 39, n. The German term for this is Wogenfeh, or wave vair. Fig. 39, 0, shows a purely German variety — Wechselfeh, or alternate vair; and Fig. 39, />, which is equivalent to the English vair6 of four colours, is known in German armory as Buntfeh, i.e, gay-coloured or checked vair. Ordinary vair in German heraldry is known as Eisenhut-fehy or iron hat vair. On account of its similarity, when drawn, to the old iron hat of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (see Fig. 42), this skin has received the name of Eisenhiitlein (little iron hat) from German heraldic students, a name which later gave rise to many incorrect interpretations. An old charter in the archives of the chapter-house of Lilienfield, in Lower Austria, under the seal (Fig. 43) of one Chimrad Pellifex, 1329, proves that at that time vair was so styled. The name of Pellifex (in THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 83 German Wildwerker, a worker in skins, or furrier) is expressed in a punning or canting form on the dexter side of the shield. This Conrad the Furrier was Burgomaster of Vienna 1340-43. A considerable number of British and foreign families bear Vair only ; such are Ferrers and Gresley, above mentioned ; Varano, Dukes de Camerino ; Vaire and Vairiere, in France ; Veret, in Switzerland ; Gouvis, Fresnay (Brittany) ; De Vera in Spain ; Loheac (Brittany) ; Varenchon (Savoy) ; Soldanieri (Florence). Counter vair is borne by Loffredo of Naples ; by BoucHAGE, Du Plessis Angers, and Brotin, of France. Hellemmes of Tournay uses : de Contre vair^ a lac otice de gueules brochante sur le tout. Mr. Woodward, in his <* Treatise on Heraldry," writes : *^ Two Fig. 43. — Seal of Chini- FiG. 42. ""^^ Pellifex, 1329. curious forms of Vair occasionally met with in Italian or French coats are known as Plumete and Papelonne. In Plumete the field is apparently covered with feathers. Plumete dargent et dazur is the coat of Ceba (note that these are the tinctures of Vair) ; SOLDONIERI of Udine, Plumete au natural (but the SOLDONIERI of Florence bore : Vaire argent and sable with a bordure chequy or and azure) ; Tenremonde of Brabant : Plumete or and sable. In the arms of the SCALTENIGHI of Padua, the Benzoni of Milan, the GiOLFiNi, Catanei, and Nuvoloni of Verona, each feather of the plumete is said to be charged with an ermine spot sable. The bearing of Papelonne is more frequently found ; in it the field is covered with what appear to be scales, the heraldic term papelonne being derived from a supposed resemblance of these scales to the wings of butterflies ; for example the coat of MoNTi : GuleSf papelonne argent, DONZEL at Besan^on bears : Papelonne d'or et de sable. It is worthy of note that Donze of Lorraine used : Gules, three bars wavy or. The Franconis of Lausanne are said to bear : de Gueules papelonne d argent y and on a chief of the last a rose of the first y but the coat is otherwise blazoned : Vaire gules and or, &c. The coat of Arquin- VILLIERS, or Hargenvilliers, in Picardy, of d'Hermine papelonne de 84 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY guetdes (not being understood, this has been blazoned ^* seme of caltraps "). So also the coat of Chemille appears in French books of blazon indifferently as : dOr papelonne de gueules : and dOr seme de chausse-trapes de guQules. GUETTEVILLE DE GUENONVILLE is Said to bear : d Argent seme de chausse-trapes de sable^ but it is more probable that this is simply d Argent papelonne de sable. The Barisoni of Padua bear : Or, a bend of scaleSj bendwise argent, on each scale an ermine spot sable, the bend bordered sable. The Alberici of Bologna bear : Papelonne of seven rows, four of argenty three of or ; but the Alberghi of the same city : Papelonne of six rows, three of argent, as many of gules. The connection with vaire is much clearer in the latter than in the former. Cambi (called Figliam- BUCHi), at Florence, carried : d Argent, papelonne de gueules; MONTi of Florence and Sicily, and Ronquerolles of France the reverse. No one who is familiar with the licence given to themselves by armorial painters and sculptors in Italy, who were often quite ignorant of the meaning of the blazons they depicted, will doubt for a moment the statement that Papelonnd was originally a corruption from or perhaps is simply ill-drawn Vair." Potent, and its less common variant Counter Potent, are usually ranked in British heraldic works as separate furs. This has arisen from the writers being ignorant that in early times Vair was frequently depicted in the form now known as Potent (see Fig. 39, q), (By many heraldic writers the ordinary Potent is styled Potent-counter- potent, When drawn in the ordinary way, Potent alone suffices.) An example of Vair in the form now known as Potent is afforded by the seal of Jeanne de Flandre, wife of Enguerrand IV. (De Courcy) ; here the well-known arms of CoURCY, Barry of six vair and gules, are depicted as if the bars of vair w^ere composed of bars of potent (Vree, Genealogie des Comtes de Flandre), In a Roll of Arms of the time of Edward I. the Vair resembles Potent (-counter-potent), which Dr. Perceval erroneously terms an *' invention of later date." The name and the differentiation may be, but not the fact. In the First Nobility Roll of the year 1297, the arms of No. 8, Robert de Bruis, Baron of Brecknock, are : Barry of six, Vaire ermine and gules, and azure. Here the vair is potent; so is it also in No. 19, where the coat of INGELRAM DE Ghisnes, or Gynes, is : Gules, a chief vair. The same coat is thus drawn in the Second Nobility Roll, 1299, No. 57. Potent, like its original Vair, is always of argent and azure, unless other tinctures are specified in the blazon. The name Potent is the old English word for a crutch or walking-staff. Chaucer, in his description of " Elde " {i,e, old age) writes : " So olde she was, that she ne went A fote, but it were by potent." THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 85 And though a potent is a heraldic charge, and a cross potent a well- known variety of that ordinary, " potent " is usually intended to indi- cate the fur of blue and white as in Fig. 39, q. It is not of frequent usage, but it undoubtedly has an accepted place in British armory, as also has " counter-potent,"which, following the same rules as counter- vair, results in a field as Fig. 39, r. The German terms for Potent and counter-potent are respectively Sturzkruckenfeh and gegensturzkruckenfeh. German heraldry has evolved yet another variant of Potent, viz. Verschobenes Gegensturzkriickenfeh {i.e. displaced potent-counter-potent), as in Fig. 39, s. There is still yet another German heraldic fur which is quite unknown in British armory. This is called Kurschy otherwise " Vair bellies," and is usually shown to be hairy and represented brown. Possibly this is the same as the Pliimete to which Mr. Woodward refers. Some heraldic writers also speak of varry as meaning the pieces of which the vair is composed ; they also use the terms vairy cuppy and vairy /assy for poierU-counter-po/enf, perhaps from the drawings in some instances resembling cups; that is a possible meaning of iassa. It may be said that all these variations of the ancient vair arise from mere accident (generally bad drawing), supplemented by over refinement on the part of the heraldic writers who have described them. This gene- ralisation may be extended in its application from vair to many other heraldic matters. To all intents and purposes British heraldry now or hitherto has only known vair and potent. One of the earliest rules one learns in the study of armory is that colour cannot be placed upon colour, nor metal upon metal. Now this is a definite rule which must practically always be rigidly observed. Many writers have gone so far as to say that the only case of an in- fraction of this rule will be found in the arms of Jerusalem : Argent, a cross potent between four crosslets or. This was a favourite windmill at which the late Dr. Woodward tilted vigorously, and in the appendix to his ''Treatise on Heraldry " he enumerates some twenty-six instances of the violation of the rule. The whole of the instances he quoted, however, are taken from Continental armory, in which these exceptions — for even on the Continent such armesfausses are noticeable exceptions — occur much more frequently than in this country. Nevertheless such exceptions do occur in British armory, and the following instances of well-known coats which break the rule may be quoted. The arms of Lloyd of Ffos-y-Bleiddied, co. Cardigan, and Danyrallt, CO. Carmarthen, are : " Sable, a spearhead imbrued proper between three scaling-ladders argent, on a chief gules 2l castle of the second." Burke, in his '' General Armory," says this coat of arms was granted to Cadifor ap Dyfnwal, ninth in descent from Roderick the Great, Prince of Wales, by his cousin the great Lord Rhys, for taking the castle of 86 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Cardigan by escalade from the Earl of Clare and the Flemings in 1 1 64. Another instance is a coat of Meredith recorded in Ulster's Office and now inherited by the Hon. Richard Edmund Meredith, a judge of the Supreme Court of Judicature of Ireland and a Judicial Commissioner of the Irish Land Commission. These arms are : '^ Gules, on a chevron sabkf between three goats' heads erased, as many trefoils or." An instance of comparatively recent date will be found in the grant of the arms of Thackeray. A little careful research, no doubt, would produce a large number of English instances, but one is bound to admit the possibility that the great bulk of these cases may really be instances of augmentation. Furs may be placed upon either metal or colour, as may also any charge which is termed proper. German heralds describe furs and natural colours as amphibious. It is perfectly legitimate to place fur upon fur, and though not often found, numbers of examples can be quoted ; probably one will suffice. The arms of Richardson are : Sable, two hawks belled or, on a chief indented ermine, a pale ermines, and three lions' heads counterchanged. It is also correct to place ermine upon argent. But such coats are not very frequently found, and it is usual in designing a coat to endeavour to arrange that the fur shall be treated as metal or colour according to what may be its back- ground. The reason for this is obvious. It is correct, though unusual, for a charge which is blazoned proper, and yet depicted in a recognised heraldic colour, to be placed upon colour ; and where such cases occur, care should be taken that the charges are blazoned proper. A charge composed of more than one tincture, that is, of a metal and colour, may be placed upon a field of either ; for example the well- known coat of Stewart, which is : Or, a fess chequy azure and argent ; other examples being : Per pale ermine and azure, a fess wavy gules (Broadbent) ; and : Azure, a lion rampant argent, debruised by a fess per pale of the second and gules (Walsh) ; but in such coats it will usually be found that the first tincture of the composite charge should be in opposition to the field upon which it is superimposed. For in- stance, the arms of Stewart are : Or, a fess chequy azure and argent, and to blazon or depict them with a fess chequy argent and azure would be incorrect. When an ordinary is charged upon both metal and colour, it would be quite correct for it to be of either metal, colour, or fur, and in such cases it has never been considered either exceptional or an infraction of the rule that colour must not be placed upon colour, nor metal upon metal. There is one point, however, which is one of these little points one has to learn from actual experience, and which 1 believe has never yet been quoted in any handbook of heraldry, and that is, that this rule must be thrown overboard with regard to THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 87 crests and supporters. I cannot call to mind an instance of colour upon colour, but a gold collar around the neck of an argent crest will con- stantly be met with. The sinister supporter of the Royal achievement is a case in point, and this rule, which forbids colour upon colour, and metal upon metal, only holds with regard to supporters and crests when the crest or supporter itself is treated as a field and charged with one or more objects. The Royal labels, as already stated, appear to be a standing infraction of the rule if white and argent are to be heraldically treated as identical. The rule is also disregarded entirely as regards augmentations and Scottish cadency bordures. So long as the field is party, that is, divided into an equal number of pieces (for example, paly, barruly, or bendy, or party per bend or per chevron), it may be composed of two metals or two colours, because the pieces all being equal, and of equal number, they all are parts of the field lying in the same plane, none being charges. Before leaving the subject of the field, one must not omit to mention certain exceptions which hardly fall within any of the before-mentioned categories. One of these can only be described by the word " land- scape." It is not uncommon in British armory, though I know of but one instance where the actual field itself needs to be so described. This is the coat of the family of Franco, the paternal ancestors of Sir Massey Lopes, Bart., and Lord Ludlow. The name was changed from Franco to Lopes by Royal Licence dated the 4th of May 1831. Whether this coat of arms originated- in an English grant, or whether the English grant of it amounts to no more than an attempt at the registration of a previously existing or greatly similar foreign coat of arms for the name of Franco, I am unaware, but the coat certainly is blazoned : ^Mn a landscape field, a fountain, therefrom issuing a palm-tree all proper." But landscape has very extensively been made use of in the aug- mentations which were granted at the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth centuries. In these cases the augmentation very generally consisted of a chief and thereon a representation either of some fort or ship or action, and though the field of the augmenta- tion is officially blazoned argent in nearly every case, there is no doubt the artist was permitted, and perhaps intended, to depict clouds and other " atmosphere " to add to the verisimilitude of the picture. These augmentations will be more especially considered in a later chapter, but here one may perhaps be permitted to remark, that execrable as we now consider such landscape heraldry, it ought not to be condemned in the wholesale manner in which it has been, because it was typical of the over elaboration to be found in all art and all artistic ideas of the period in which we find it originating. Heraldry and heraldic art have 88 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY always been a mirror of the artistic ideas prevalent at equivalent periods, and unless heraldry is to be wholly relegated to consideration as a dead subject; it is an anachronism to depict an action the date of w^hich is well known (and which date it is desired to advertise and not conceal) in a method of art belonging to a different period. In family arms the case is different, as with those the idea apparently is always the con- cealment of the date of nobility. The ** landscape " variety of heraldry is more common in Germany than with us, and Strohl writes : ^' Of very little heraldic worth are the old house and home signs as they were used by landed pro- prietors, tradesmen, and artisans or workmen, as indicative of their possessions, wares, or productions. These signs, originally simply out- line pictures, were later introduced into heraldic soil, inasmuch as bourgeois families raised to the nobility adopted their house signs as heraldic charges upon their shields." There are also many coats of arms which run : "In base, a repre- sentation of water proper," and one of the best instances of this will be found in the arms of Oxford, though for the sake of preserving the pun the coat in this case is blazoned : " Argent, an ox gules passing over a ford proper." Similar instances occur in the arms of Renfrew, Queensferry, Leith, Ryde, and scores of other towns. It has always been considered permissible to represent these either by an attempt to depict natural water, or else in the ancient heraldic way of representing water, namely " barry wavy argent and azure." There are many other coats of arms which are of a similar character though specifically blazoned " barry wavy argent and azure." Now this representation of water in base can hardly be properly said to be a charge, but perhaps it might be dismissed as such were it not that one coat of arms exists in Scotland, the whole of the field of which is simply a representation of water. Unfortunately this coat of arms has never been matricu- lated in Lyon Register or received official sanction ; but there is no doubt of its ancient usage, and were it to be now matriculated in conformity with the Act of 1672, there is very little doubt that the ancient characteristic would be retained. The arms are those of the town of Inveraray in Argyllshire, and the blazon of the coat, according to the form it is depicted upon the Corporate seal, would be for the field : " The sea proper, therein a net suspended from the dexter chief and the sinister fess points to the base ; and entangled in its meshes five herrings," which is about the most remarkable coat of arms I have ever come across. Occasionally a " field," or portion of a field, will be found to be a representation of masonry. This may be either proper or of some metal or colour. The arms of the city of Bath are : " Party per fesse THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 89 embattled azure and argent, the base masonry, in chief two bars wavy of the second ; over all, a sword in pale gules, hilt and pommel or." P'The arms of Reynell are : ^' Argent, masoned sable, a chief indented of the second." SEME The use of the term '' seme " must be considered before we leave the subject of the field. It simply means ^* powdered with " or ^< strewed with" any objects, the number of the latter being unlimited, the purpose being to evenly distribute them over the shield. In depicting anything seme, care is usually taken that some of the charges (with which the field is seme) shall be partly defaced by the edges of the shield, or the ordinary upon which they are charged, or by the superior Fig. 44. — Arms of John, Lord De la V^arr {d. 1398). (From MS. Ashm. 804, iv.) Fig. 45. — Arms of John, Lord Beaumont, K.G. {d. 1396). From his Garter Plate : i and 4, Beaumont ; 2 and 3, azure, three garbs or (for Comyn). Fig. 46. — Arms of Gil- bert Umfraville, Earl of Kyme {d. 142 1). (From Harl. MS. 6163.) charge itself, to indicate that the field is not charged with a specific number of objects. There are certain special terms which may be noted. A field or charge seme of fleurs-de-lis is termed ^^ sem6-de-lis," but if seme of bezants it is bezants, and is termed plat(^ if sem6 of plates. A field seme of billets is billetty or billette, and when sem6 of cross crosslets it is termed crusilly. A field or charge sem6 of drops is termed goutt^ or gutty. Instances of coats of which the field is sem6 will be found in the arms of De la Warr (see Fig. 44), which are : Gules, crusilly, and a lion rampant argent ; Beaumont (see Fig. 45) : Azure, seme-de-lis and a lion rampant or ; and Umfraville (see Fig. 46) : Gules, sem6 of crosses flory, and a cinquefoil or. The goutte or drop occasionally figures (in a specified number) as a charge ; but such cases are rare, its more frequent use being to show 90 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY a field seme. British heraldry alone has evolved separate names for the different colours, all other nations simply using the term *' goutt6 " or '* gutte," and specifying the colour. The terms we have adopted are as follows : For drops of gold, '^ gutte-d'or " ; silver, " gutt^-d'eau " ; for gules, ^' gutt6-de-sang " ; azure, '* gutt6-de-larmes " ; vert, '^ gutt^- d'huile " ; and sable, '^ gutt^-de-poix." The term seme must not be confused with diapering, for whilst the objects with which a field is seme are an integral part of the arms, diapering is a purely artistic and optional matter. DIAPERING The diapering of armorial emblazonments is a matter with which the Science of armory has no concern. Diaper never forms any part of the blazon, and is never officially noticed, being considered, and very properly allowed to remain, a purely artistic detail. From the artistic point of view it has some importance, as in many of the earliest in- stances of handicraft in which armorial decoration appears, very elaborate diapering is introduced. The frequency with which diapering is met with in armorial handicraft is strangely at variance with its absence in heraldic paintings of the same periods, a point which may perhaps be urged upon the attention of some of the heraldic artists of the present day, who would rather seem to have failed to grasp the true purpose and origin and perhaps also the use of diaper. In stained glass and enamel work, where the use of diaper is most frequently met with, it was introduced for the express purpose of catching and breaking up the light, the result of which was to give an enormously increased effect of brilliance to the large and otherwise flat surfaces. These tricks of their art and craft the old handicraftsmen were past masters in the use of. But no such purpose could be served in a small painting upon vellum. For this reason early heraldic emblazonments are seldom if ever found to have been diapered. With the rise of heraldic engraving amongst the ** little masters " of German art, the opportunity left to their hands by the absence of colour naturally led to the renewed use of diaper to avoid the appearance of blanks in their work. The use of diaper at the present day needs to be the result of careful study and thought, and its haphazard employment is not recommended. If, as Woodward states (an assertion one is rather inclined to doubt), there are some cases abroad in which the constant use of diapering has been stereotyped into an integral part of the arms, these cases must be exceedingly few in number, and they certainly have no' counterpart in the armory of this country. Where for artistic reasons THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 91 diapering is employed, care must always be taken that the decorative form employed cannot be mistaken for a field either charged or seme. PARTITION LINES If there is one subject which the ordinary text-books of armory treat in the manner of classification adapted to an essay on natural history or grammar, with its attendant rigidity of rule, it is the subject of partition lines ; and yet the whole subject is more in the nature of a set of explanations which must each be learned on its own merits. The usual lines of partition are themselves well enough known ; and it is hardly necessary to elaborate the different variations at any great length. They may, however, be enumerated as follows : Engrailed, embattled, indented, invecked or invected, wavy or undy, nebuly, dancett^, raguly, potent^, dovetailed, and urdy. These are the lines which are recognised by most modern heraldic text-books and generally recapitulated ; but we shall have occasion later to refer to others which are very well known, though apparently they have never been included in the classification of partition lines (Fig. 47). Engrailed^ as every one knows, is formed by a continuous and concurrent series of small semicircles conjoined each to each, the sharp points formed by the con- junction of the two arcs being placed outwards. This partition Hne may be employed for the rectilinear charges known as <' ordinaries " or " sub-ordinaries." In the bend, pale, pile, cross, chief, and fess, when these are described as engrailed the enclosing lines of the ordinary, other than the edges of the shield, are all composed of these small semicircles with the points turned outwardsy and the word ^^ outwards " must be construed as pointing away from the centre of the ordinary when it is depicted. In the case of a chief the points are turned down- wards, but it is rather difficult to describe the use of the term when used as a partition line of the field. The only instance I can call to mind where it is so employed is the case of Baird of Ury, the arms of this family being : Per pale engrailed gules and or, a boar passant counterchanged. In this instance the points are turned towards the sinister side of the shield, which would seem to be correct, as, there being no ordinary, they must be outwards from the most important position affected, which in this case undoubtedly is the dexter side of the shield. In the same way ^' per fess engrailed " would be presum- ably depicted with the points outwards from the chief line of the shield, that is, they would point downwards ; and I should imagine that in ^^ per bend engrailed " the points of the semicircles would again be placed inclined towards the dexter base of the shield, but I may be wrong in these two latter cases, for they are only supposition. This 92 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY point, however, which puzzled me much in depicting the arms of Baird of Ury, I could find explained in no text-book upon the subject. The term invected or invecked is the precise opposite of engrailed. ENGRAILED. INVECTED. C. J B II 18 II I EMBATTLED. D. AA/V\AA/VV\ INDENTED. DANCETTY WAVY ^^ (deep) NEBULY (SHAIXOW) RAGULY J. r* 'n r" *n r- ^ r* »i i-* ^ r^ "i C POTENTE. K. ZSTZYZXZYZSTZXZ dovetailed. L. .mmmmtm FLORY COUNTER-FLORY RAYONNE. Fig. 47. — Lines of Partition. It is similarly composed of small semicircles, but the points are turned inwards instead of outwards, so that it is no more than the exact reverse of engrailed, and all the regulations concerning the one need to be observed concerning the other, with the proviso that they are reversed. THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 93 The partition line embattled has certain peculiarities of its own. When dividing the field there can be no difficulty about it, inasmuch as the crenellations are equally inwards and outwards from any point, and it should be noted that the term << crenelle " is almost as often used as *' embattled." When, however, the term describes an ordinary, certain points have to be borne in mind. The fess or the bar embattled is drawn with the crenellations on the upper side only, the under edge being plain unless the ordinary is described both as ^< embattled and counter-embattled." Similarly a chevron is only crenellated on the upper edge unless it is described as both embattled and counter- embattled, but a pale embattled is* crenellated on both edges as is the cross or saltire. Strictly speaking, a bend embattled is crenellated upon the upper edge only, though with regard to this ordinary there is much laxity of practice. I have never come across a pile embattled ; but it would naturally be embattled on both edges. Some writers make a distinction between embattled and bretessed, giving to the former term the meaning that the embattlements on the one side are opposed to the indentations on the other, and using the term bretessed to signify that embattlements are opposite embattlements and indenta- tions opposite indentations. I am doubtful as to the accuracy of this distinction, because the French term bretess^ means only counter- embattled. The terms indented and dancette need to be considered together, because they differ very little, and only in the fact that whilst indented may be drawn with any number of teeth, dancette is drawn with a limited number, which is usually three complete teeth in the width of the field. But it should be observed that this rule is not so hard and fast that the necessity of artistic depicting may not modify it slightly. An ordinary which is indented would follow much the same rules as an ordinary which was engrailed, except that the teeth are made by small straight lines for the indentations instead of by small semicircles, and instances can doubtless be found of all the ordinaries qualified by the term indented. Dancette, however, does not lend itself so readily to general application, and is usually to be found applied to either a fess or chief, or occasionally a bend. In the case of a fess dancette the indentations on the top and bottom lines are made to fit into each other, so that instead of having a straight band with the edge merely toothed, one gets an up and down zig-zag band with three complete teeth at the top and three complete teeth at the bottom. Whilst a fess, a bar, a bend, and a chief can be found dancette, I do not see how it would be possible to draw a saltire or a cross dancette. At any rate the resulting figure would be most ugly, and would appear ill-balanced. A pile and a chevron seem equally impossible, though there does not 94 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY seem to be the like objection to a pale dancette. An instance of a bend dancette is found in the arms of Cuffe (Lord Desart), which are : Argent; on a bend dancette sable, plain cotised azure, three fleurs-de- lis, and on each cotise as many bezants. JVavy or undy, which is supposed to have been taken from water, and nebulyf which is supposed to be derived from clouds, are of course lines which are well known. They are equally applicable to any ordinary and to any partition of the field ; but in both cases it should be noticed by artists that there is no one definite or accepted method of depicting these lines, and one is quite at liberty, and might be recommended, to widen out the indentations, or to increase them in height, as the artistic requirements of the work in hand may seem to render advisable. It is only by bearing this in mind and treating these lines with freedom that really artistic work can sometimes be produced where they occur. There is no fixed rule either as to the width which these lines may occupy or as to the number of indentations as compared with the width of the shield, and it is a pity to introduce or recognise any regulations of this character where none exist. There are writers who think it not unlikely that vaire and barry nebuly were one and the same thing. It is at any rate difficult in some old repre- sentations to draw any noticeable distinctions between the methods of depicting barry nebuly and vair. The line raguly has been the subject of much discussion. It, and the two which follow, viz. potent^ and dovetailed, are all comparatively modern introductions. It would be interesting if some enthusiast would go carefully through the ancient Rolls of Arms and find the earliest occurrences of these terms. My own impression is that they would all be found to be inventions of the mediaeval writers on heraldry. Raguly is the same as embattled, with the crenellations put upon the slant. Some writers say they should slant one way, others give them slanting the reverse. In a pale or a bend the teeth must point upwards ; but in a fess I should hesitate to say whether it were more correct for them to point to the dexter or to the sinister, and I am inclined to consider that either is perfectly correct. At any rate, whilst they are usually drawn inclined to the dexter, in Woodward and Burnett they are to the sinister, and Guillim gives them turned to the dexter, saying, ''This form of line I never yet met with in use as a partition, though frequently in composing of ordinaries referring them like to the trunks of trees with the branches lopped off, and that (as I take it) it was intended to represent." Modern heraldry supplies an instance which in the days of Mr. Guillim, of course, did not exist to refer to. This instance occurs in the arms of the late Lord Leighton, which were : *' Quarterly per fesse raguly or and gules, in the second and THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 95 third quarters a wyvern of the first." It is curious that Guillim, even in the edition of 1724, does not mention any of the remaining terms. Dovetailed in modern armory is even yet but seldom made use of, though I can quote two instances of coats of arms in which it is to be found, namely, the arms of Kirk, which are : '< Gules, a chevron dovetailed ermine, on a chief argent, three dragons' heads couped of the field ; " and Ambrose : ^' Azure, two lions passant in pale argent, on a chief dovetailed of the last, a fleur-de-lis between two annulets of the first." Other instances of dovetailed used as a line of partition will be found in the case of the arms of Farmer, which are : " Per chevron dovetailed gules and argent, in chief two lions' heads erased of the last, and in base a salamander in flames proper ; " and in the arms of Fenton namely : " Per pale argent and sable, a cross dovetailed, in the first and fourth quarters a fleur-de-lis, and in the second and third a trefoil slipped all countercharged." There are, of course, many others. The term potente, as will be seen from a reference to Fig. 47, is used to indicate a line which follows the form of the division lines in the fur potent. As one of the partition lines potent^ is very rare. As to the term tirdyj which is given in Woodward and Burnett and also in Berry, I can only say I personally have never come across an instance of its use as a partition line. A cross or a billet urdy one knows, but urdy as a partition line I have yet to find. It is significant that it is omitted in Parker except as a term applicable to a cross, and the instances and variations given by Berry, ^' urdy in point paleways " and " contrary urdy," I should be much more inclined to consider as variations of vair ; and, though it is always well to settle points which can be settled, I think urdy and its use as a partition line may be well left for further consideration when examples of it come to hand. There is one term, however, which is to be met with at the present time, but which I have never seen quoted in any text-book under the heading of a partition line ; that is, <' flory counter-flory," which is of course formed by a succession of fleurs-de-lis alternately reversed and counterchanged. They might of course be blazoned after the quota- tion of the field as '* per bend " or '< per chevron " as the case might be, simply as so many fleurs-de-lis counterchanged, and alternately reversed in a specified position ; but this never appears to be the case, and consequently the fleurs-de-lis would appear to be essentially parts of the field and not charges. I have sometimes thought whether it would not be more correct to depict "per something" flory and counter-flory without completing the fleurs-de-lis, simply leaving the alternate tops of the fleurs-de-lis to show. In the cases of the illustrations which have come under my notice, however, the whole fleur-de-lis is depicted, and as an instance of the use of the term may be mentioned the arms of 96 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Dumas, which are : " Per chevron flory and counter-flory or and azure, in chief two Hons' gambs erased, and in base a garb counterchanged." But when the term flory and counter-flory is used in conjunction with an ordinary, e,g. a fess flory and counter-flory, the half fleurs-de-Hs, only alternately reversed, are represented on the outer edges of the ordinary. I think also that the word ^^ arched" should now be included as a partition line. I confess that the only form in which I know of it is that it is frequently used by the present Garter King of Arms in designing coats of arms with chiefs arched. Recently Garter has granted a coat with a chief double arched. But if a chief can be arched I see no reason why a fesse or a bar cannot equally be so altered, and in that case it undoubtedly becomes a recognised line of partition. Perhaps it should be stated that a chief arched is a chief with its base line one arc of a large circle. The diameter of the circle and the consequent acuteness of the arch do not appear to be fixed by any definite rule, and here again artistic requirements must be the controlling factor in any decision. Elvin in his "Dictionary of Heraldic Terms" gives a curious assortment of lines, the most curious of all, perhaps, being indented embowed, or hacked and hewed. Where such a term origi- nated or in what coat of arms it is to be found I am ignorant, but the appearance is exactly what would be presented by a piece of wood hacked with an axe at regular intervals. Elvin again makes a difference between bretessed and embattled-counter-embattled, making the em- battlement on either side of an ordinary identical in the former and alternated in the latter. He also makes a difference between raguly, which is the conventional form universally adopted, and raguled and trunked, where the ordinary takes the representation of the trunk of a tree with the branches lopped ; but these and many others that he gives are refinements of idea which personally I should never expect to find in actual use, and of the instances of which I am unaware. I think, however, the term *^ rayonnej' which is found in both the arms of OTiara and the arms of Colman, and which is formed by the addition of rays to the ordinary, should take a place amongst lines of partition, though I admit I know of no instance in which it is employed to divide the field. METHODS OF PARTITION The field of any coat of arms is the surface colour of the shield, and is supposed to include the area within the limits formed by its out- line. There are, as has been already stated, but few coats of a single colour minus a charge to be found in British heraldry. But there THE FIELD OF A SHIELD 97 are many which consist of a field divided by partition lines only, of which some instances were given on page 69. A shield may be divided by partition lines running in the direction of almost any ^^ ordinary," in which case the field will be described as 1 or •* per cnevn Per fess m. CKC. It may be : Fig. 48 Per bend „ 49 Per bend sinister „ 50 Per pale . '. ;, 51 Per chevron i ,, 52 Per cross n 53 (though it should be noted that the more usual term em ployed for this is << quarterly ") Per saltire . Fig. 54 But a field cannot be '* per pile " or ^' per chief," because there is no other way of representing these ordinaries. Fig. 48.— Per fess. Fig. 49.— Per bend. Fig. 50. — Per bend sinister. Fig. 51. — Per pale. Fig. 52. — Per chevron. Fig. 53. — Per cross or quarterly. A field can be composed of any number of pieces in the form of the ordinaries filling the area of the shield, in which case the field is said to be ^^ barry " (Figs. 55 and 56), <^ paly " (Fig. 57), ^^ bendy " (Fig. 58), <' chevronny " (Fig. 59), &c., but the number of pieces must be specified. G 98 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Another method of partition will be found in the fields " cheeky " (or " chequy ") and lozengy ; but these divisions, as also the foregoing, will be treated more specifically under the different ordinaries. A field Fig. 54. — Per saltire. Fig. 55.— Barry. Fig. 56. — Barry nebuly. Fig. 57 Fig. 58.— Bendy. Fig. 59. — Chevronny. which is party need not necessarily have all its lines of partition the same. This peculiarity, however, seldom occurs except in the case of a field quarterly, the object in coats of this character being to pre- vent different quarters of one coat of arms being ranked as or taken to be quarterings representing different families. CHAPTER VIII THE RULES OF BLAZON THE word '' Blazon " is used with some number of meanings, but practically it may be confined to the verb ^^ to blazon/' which is to describe in words a given coat of arms, and the noun '' blazon," which is such a description. Care should be taken to differentiate between the employment of the term '< blazon " and the verb '^ to emblazon," which latter means to depict in colour. It may here be remarked, however, that to illustrate by the use of outline with written indications of colour is termed "to trick," and a picture of arms of this character is termed " a trick." The term trick has of late been extended (though one almost thinks improperly) to include representations of arms in which the colours are indicated by the specified tincture lines which have been already referred to. The subject of blazon has of late acquired rather more import- ance than has hitherto been conceded to it, owing to an unofficial attempt to introduce a new system of blazoning under the guise of a supposed reversion to earlier forms of description. This it is not, but even if it were what it claims to be, merely the revival of ancient forms and methods, its reintroduction cannot be said to be either ex- pedient or permissible, because the ancient practice does not permit of extension to the limits within which more modern armory has de- veloped, and modern armory, though less ancient, is armory equally with the more ancient and simpler examples to be found in earlier times. To ignore modern armory is simply futile and absurd. The rules to be employed in blazon are simple, and comparatively few in number. The commencement of any blazon is of necessity a description of the field, the one word signifying its colour being employed if it be a simple field ; or, if it be composite, such terms as are necessary. Thus, a coat divided ** per pale " or *' per chevron " is so described, and whilst the Scottish field of this character is officially termed ^* Parted " [per pale, or per chevron], the English equivalent is " Party," though this 99 loo A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY word in English usage is more often omitted than not in the blazon which commences " per pale," or ^* per chevron/' as the case may be. The description of the different colours and different divisions of the field have all been detailed in earlier chapters, but it may be added that in a '' party " coloured field, that colour or tincture is mentioned first which occupies the more important part of the escutcheon. Thus, in a field *' per bend," " per chevron," or '^ per fess," the upper portion of the field is first referred to ; in a coat *' per pale," the dexter side is the more important ; and in a coat '' quarterly," the tinctures of the ist and 4th quarters are given precedence of the tinctures of the 2nd and 3rd. The only division upon which there has seemed any un- certainty is the curious one '^ gyronny," but the correct method to be employed in this case can very easily be recognised by taking the first quarter of the field, and therein considering the field as if it were simply '^ per bend." After the field has been described, anything of which the field is sem6 must next be alluded to, e.g, gules, seme-de-lis or, &c. The second thing to be mentioned in the blazon is the principal charge. We will consider first those cases in which it is an ordinary. Thus, one would speak of ^^ Or, a chevron gules," or, if there be other charges as well as the ordinary, *' Azure, a bend between two horses' heads or," or ^' Gules, a chevron between three roses argent." The colour of the ordinary is not mentioned until after the charge, if it be the same as the latter, but if it be otherwise it must of course be specified, as in the coat : ^^ Or, a fess gules between three crescents sable." If the ordinary is charged, the charges thereupon, being less important than the charges in the field, are mentioned subsequently, as in the coat : " Gules, on a bend argent between two fountains proper, a rose gules between two mullets sable." The position of the charges need not be specified when they would naturally fall into a certain position with regard to the ordinaries. Thus, a chevron between three figures of necessity has two in chief and one in base. A bend between two figures of necessity has one above ana one below. A fess has two above and one below. A cross between four has one in each angle. In none of these cases is it necessary to state the position. If, however, those positions or numbers do not come within the category mentioned, care must be taken to specify what the coat exactly is. If a bend is accompanied only by one charge, the position of this charge must be stated. For example : ^^Gules, a bend or, in chief a crescent argent." A chevron^ with four figures would be described : '* Argent, a chevron between three escallops in chief and one in base sable," though it would be equally correct to say : " Argent, a chevron THE RULES OF BLAZON loi between four escallops, three in chief and one in base sable." In the same way we should get : ''Vert, on a cross or, and in the ist quarter a bezant, an estoile sable ; " though, to avoid confusion, this coat would more probably be blazoned : '' Vert, a cross or, charged with an estoile sable, and in the first quarter a bezant." This example will indicate the latitude which is permissible if, for the sake of avoiding confusion and making a blazon more readily understandable, some deviation from the strict formulas would appear to be desirable. If there be no ordinary on a shield, the charge which occupies the chief position is mentioned first. For example : '' Or, a lion rampant sable between three boars' heads erased gules, two in chief and one in base." Many people, however, would omit any reference to the position of the boars' heads, taking it for granted that, as there were only three, they would be 2 and i, which is the normal position of three charges in any coat of arms. If, however, the coat of arms had the three boars' heads all above the lion, it would then be necessary to blazon it : '' Or, a lion rampant sable, in chief three boars' heads erased gules." When a field is seme of anything, this is taken to be a part of the field, and not a representation of a number of charges. Consequently the arms of Long are blazoned : '' Sable, sem6 of cross crosslets, a lion rampant argent." As a matter of fact the sem6 of cross crosslets is always termed crusilly, as has been already explained. When charges are placed around the shield in the position they would occupy if placed upon a bordure, these charges are said to be '' in orle," as in the arms of Hutchinson : '' Quarterly, azure and gules, a lion rampant erminois, within four cross crosslets argent, and as many bezants alternately in orle ; " though it is equally permissible "to term charges in such a position ''an orle of [e.g. cross crosslets argent and bezants alternately]," or so many charges " in orle " (see Fig. 60). If an ordinary be engrailed, or invected, this fact is at once stated, >the term occurring before the colour of the ordinary. Thus : " Argent, on a chevron nebuly between three crescents gules, as many roses of the field." When a charge upon an ordinary is the same colour as the field, the name of the colour is not repeated, but those charges are said to be " of the field." It is the constant endeavour, under the recognised system, to avoid the use of the name of the same colour a second time in the blazon. Thus : " Quarterly, gules and or, a cross counterchanged between in the first quarter a sword erect proper, pommel and hilt of the second ; in the second quarter a rose of the first, barbed and seeded of the third ; in the third quarter a fleur-de-lis azure ; and Fig. 6o. — Arms of Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke : ' ' Baruly ar- gent and azure, an orle of martlets gules." (From his seal.) 102 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY in the fourth quarter a mullet gold" — ^the use of the term "gold" being alone permissible in such a case. Any animal which needs to be described, also needs its position to be specified. It may be rampant, segreant, passant, statant, or trippant, as the case may be. It may also sometimes be necessary to specify its position upon the shield, but the terms peculiarly appropriated to specific animals will be given in the chapters in which these animals are dealt with. With the exception of the chief, the quarter, the canton, the flaunch, and the bordure, an ordi- nary or sub-ordinary is always of greater import- ance, and therefore should be mentioned before any other charge, but in the cases alluded to the remainder of the shield is first blazoned, before attention is paid to these figures. Thus we should get : " Argent, a chevron between three mullets gules, on a chief of the last three cres- cents of the second ; " or " Sable, a lion rampant between three fleurs- de-lis or, on a canton argent a mascle of the field ; " or " Gules, two chevronels between three mullets pierced or, within a bordure engrailed argent charged with eight roses of the field." The arms in Fig. 6i are an interesting example of this point. They are those of John de Bretagne, Earl of Richmond {d. 1334), and would properly be blazoned: '' Chequy or and azure, a bordure gules, charged with lions passant guardant or (^ a bordure of England '), over all a canton (sometimes a quarter) ermine." If two ordinaries or sub-ordinaries appear in the same field, certain discretion needs to be exercised, but the arms of Fitzwalter, for example, are as follows : " Or, a fess between two chevrons gules." When charges are placed in a series following the direction of any ordinary they are said to be '* in bend," " in chevron," or " in pale," as the case may be, and not only must their position on the shield as regards each other be specified, but their individual direction must also be noted. A coat of arms in which three spears were placed side by side, but each erect, would be blazoned : " Gules, three tilting-spears palevv^se in fess ; " but if the spears were placed horizontally, one above the other, they would be blazoned : <' Three tilting-spears fesswise in pale," Fig. 61. — The arms of John de Bretagne,. Earl of Richmond. THE RULES OF BLAZON 103 because in the latter case each spear is placed fesswise, but the three occupy in relation to each other the position of a pale. Three tilting- spears fesswise which were not in pale would be depicted 2 and i. When one charge surmounts another, the undermost one is mentioned first, as in the arms of Beaumont (see Fig. 62). Here the lion rampant is the principal charge, and the bend which debruises it is consequently mentioned afterwards. In the cases of a cross and of a saltire, the charges when all are alike would simply be described as between four objects, though the term " cantonned by " four objects is sometimes met with. If the objects are not the same, they must be specified as being in the ist, 2nd, or 3rd quarters, if the ordinary be a cross. If it be a saltire, it will be found that in Scotland the charges are mentioned as being in chief and base, and in the ^' flanks." In England they would be described as -being ill pale and in fess if the alternative charges are the same ; if not, they would be described as in chief, on the dexter side, on the sinister side, and in base Fig. 62. — Arms of John de * ' . Beaumont, Lord Beau- When a specified number of charges is mont {d. 1369) : Azure, immediately followed by the same number of seme-de-iis and a Hon J J , rampant or, over all a charges elsewhere disposed, the number is not bend gobony argent and repeated, the words '' as many " being substituted ^uies. (From his seal.) instead. Thus : *' Argent, on a chevron between three roses gules, as many crescents of the field." When any charge, ordinary, or mark of cadency surmounts a single object, that object is termed " de- bruised " by that ordinary. If it surmounts everything^ as, for instance, *' a bendlet sinister," this would be termed " over all." When a coat of arms is ^^ party " coloured in its field and the charges are alternately of the same colours transposed, the term counterchanged is used. For example, '* Party per pale argent and sable, three chevronels between as many mullets pierced all counterchanged." In that case the coat is divided down the middle, the dexter field being argent, and the sinister sable ; the charges on the sable being argent, whilst the charges on the argent are sable. A mark of cadency is mentioned last, and is termed " for difference " ; a mark of bastardy, or a mark denoting lack of blood descent, is termed " for distinction." ; Certain practical hints, which, however, can hardly be termed rules, were suggested by the late Mr. J. Gough Nicholls in 1863, when writing in the Herald and Genealogist, and subsequent practice has since conformed therewith, though it may be pointed out with advantage that these suggestions are practically, and to all intents and purposes, X I ? 4 F 6 c^ 8 y° B 104 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the same rules which have been observed officially over a long period. Amongst these suggestions he advises that the blazoning of every coat or quarter should begin with a capital letter, and that, save on the occur- rence of proper names, no other capitals should be employed. He also suggests that punctuation marks should be avoided as much as possible, his own practice being to limit the use of the comma to its occurrence after each tincture. He suggests also that figures should be omitted in all cases except in the numbering of quarterings. When one or more quarterings occur, each is treated separately on its own merits and blazoned entirely without reference to any other quartering. In blazoning a coat in which some quarter- ings (grand quarterings) are composed of several coats placed sub-quarterly, sufficient distinction is afforded for English purposes of writing or printing if Roman numerals are employed to indicate the grand quarters, and Arabic figures But in speaking such a method would need to be in accordance with the Scottish practice, which Fig. 63.— a to B, the chief; C to D, the base ; A to C, dexter side ; B to D, sinis- ter side. A, dexter chief; B, sinister chief ; C, dexter base; D, sinister base, i, 2, 3, chief; 7, 8, 9, base; 2, 5,8, pale; 4, 5, 6, fess; 5, fess point. a the sub-quarters. somewhat modified describes grand quarterings as such, and so alludes to them. The extensive use of bordures, charged and uncharged, in Scotland, which figure sometimes round the sub-quarters, sometimes round the grand quarters, and sometimes round the entire escutcheon, causes so much confusion that for the purposes of blazon- ing it is essential that the difference between quarters and grand quarters should be clearly defined. In order to simplify the blazoning of a shield, and so express the position of the charges, the Jield has been divided into pomfs, of which those placed near the top, ^'^' ^' and to the dexter, are always considered the more important. In heraldry, dexter and sinister are determined, not from the point of view of the onlooker, but from that of the bearer of the shield. The diagram (Fig. 63) will serve to explain the plan of a shield's surface. If a second shield be placed upon the fess point, this is called an inescutcheon (in German, the <^ heart-shield "). The enriching of the shield with an inescutcheon came into lively use in Germany in the course of the latter half of the fifteenth century. Later on, further points of honour were added, as the honour point (a, Fig. 64), and the nombril point (b. Fig. 64). These extra shields laid upon the others should correspond as much as possible in shape to the chief shield. If between the inescutcheon and the chief shield still another be inserted, THE RULES OF BLAZON 105 it is called the *' middle shield/' from its position, but except in Anglicised versions of Continental arms, these distinctions are quite foreign to British armory. In conclusion, it may be stated that although the foregoing are the rules which are usually observed, and that every effort should be made to avoid unnecessary tautology, and to make the blazon as brief as possible, it is by no manner of means considered officially, or unoffici- ally, that any one of these rules is so unchangeable that in actual practice it cannot be modified if it should seem advisable so to do. For the essential necessity of accuracy is of far greater importance than any desire to be brief, or to avoid tautology. This should be borne in mind, and also the fact that in official practice no such hide- bound character is given to these rules, as one is led to believe is the case when perusing some of the ordinary text-books of armory. They certainly are not laws, they are hardly '' rules," perhaps being better described as accepted methods of blazoning. CHAPTER IX THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES AND SUB-ORDINARIES A RMS, and the charges upon arms, have been divided into many /-\ fantastical divisions. There is a type of the precise mind -*" -^ much evident in the scientific writing of the last and the pre- ceding centuries which is for ever unhappy unless it can be dividing the object of its consideration into classes and divisions, into sub- classes and sub-divisions. Heraldry has suffered in this way ; for, oblivious of the fact that the rules enunciated are impossible as rigid guides for general observance, and that they never have been complied with, and that they never will be, a '^ tabular " system has been evolved for heraldry as for most other sciences. The '* precise " mind has applied a system obviously derived from natural history classification to the principles of armory. It has selected a certain number of charges, and has been pleased to term them ordinaries. It has selected others which it has been pleased to term sub-ordinaries. The selection has been purely arbitrary, at the pleasure of the writer, and few writers have agreed in their classifications. One of the foremost rules which former heraldic writers have laid down is that an ordinary must con- tain the third part of the field. Now it is doubtful whether an ordi- nary has ever been drawn containing the third part of the field by rigid measurement, except in the solitary instance of the pale, when it is drawn " per fess counterchanged," for the obvious purpose of dividing the shield into six equal portions, a practice which has been lately pursued very extensively owing to the ease with which, by its adoption, a new coat of arms can be designed bearing a distinct re- semblance to one formerly in use without infringing the rights of the latter. Certainly, if the ordinary is the solitary charge upon the shield, it will be drawn about that specified proportion. But when an attempt is made to draw the Walpole coat (which cannot be said to be a modern one) so that it shall exhibit three ordinaries, to wit, one fess and two chevrons (which being interpreted as three-thirds of the shield, would fill it entirely), and yet leave a goodly proportion of the field still visible, the absurdity is apparent. And a very large proportion of the classi- fication and rules which occupy such a large proportion of the space in the majority of heraldic text-books are equally unnecessary, con- xo6 THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 107 fusing, and incorrect, and what is very much more important, such rules have never been recognised by the powers that have had the control of armory from the beginning of that control down to the present day. I shall not be surprised to find that many of my critics, bearing in mind how strenuously I have pleaded elsewhere for a right and proper observance of the laws of armory, may think that the fore- going has largely the nature of a recantation. It is nothing of the kind, and I advocate as strenuously as I have ever done, the com- pliance with and the observance of every rule which can be shown to exist. But this is no argument whatever for the idle invention of rules which never have existed ; or for the recognition of rules which have no other origin than the imagination of heraldic writers. Nor is it an argument for the deduction of unnecessary regulations from cases which can be shown to have been exceptions. Too little re- cognition is paid to the fact that in armory there are almost as many rules of exception as original rules. There are vastly more plain ex- ceptions to the rules which should govern them. On the subject of ordinaries, I cannot see wherein lies the difference between a bend and a lion rampant, save their difference in form, yet the one is said to be an ordinary, the other is merely a charge. Each has its special rules to be observed, and whilst a bend can be engrailed or invected, a lion can be guardant or regardant ; and whilst the one can be placed between two objects, which objects will occupy a specified position, so can the other. Each can be charged, and each furnishes an excellent example of the futility of some of the ancient rules which have been coined concerning them. The ancient rules allow of but one lion and one bend upon a shield, requiring that two bends shall become bendlets, and two lions lioncels, whereas the in- stance we have already quoted — the coat of Walpole — has never been drawn in such form that either of the chevrons could have been con- sidered chevronels, and it is rather late in the day to degrade the lions of England into unblooded whelps. To my mind the ordinaries and sub-ordinaries are no more than first charges, and though the bend, the fess, the pale, the pile, the chevron, the cross, and the saltire will always be found described as honourable ordinaries, whilst the chief seems also to be pretty universally considered as one of the honour- able ordinaries, such hopeless confusion remains as to the others (scarcely any two writers giving similar classifications), that the utter absurdity of the necessity for any classification at all is amply demon- strated. Classification is only necessary or desirable when a certain set of rules can be applied identically to all the set of figures in that particular class. Even this will not hold with the ordinaries which have been quoted. io8 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY A pale embattled is embattled upon both its edges ; a fess em- battled is embattled only upon the upper edge ; a chief is embattled necessarily only upon the lower ; and the grave difficulty of distinguish- ing "per pale engrailed" from ^^per pale invected " shows that no rigid rules can be laid down. When we come to sub-ordinaries, the confusion is still more apparent, for as far as I can see the only reason for the classification is the tabulating of rules concerning the lines of partition. The bordure and the orle can be, and often are, engrailed or embattled ; the fret, the lozenge, the fusil, the mascle, the rustre, the flanche, the roundel, the billet, the label, the pairle, it would be practically impossible to meddle with ; and all these figures have at some time or another, and by some writer or other, been included amongst either the ordinaries or the sub-ordinaries. In fact there is no one quality which these charges possess in common which is not equally possessed by scores of other well-known charges, and there is no particular reason why a certain set should be selected and dignified by the name of ordinaries ; nor are there any rules relating to ordi- naries which require the selection of a certain number of figures, or of any figures to be controlled by those rules, with one exception. The exception is to be found not in the rules governing the ordinaries, but in the rules of blazon. After the field has been specified, the princi- pal charge must be mentioned first, and no charge can take precedence of a bend, fess, pale, pile, chevron, cross, or saltire, except one of them- selves. If there be any reason for a subdivision those charges must stand by themselves, and might be termed the honourable ordinaries, but I can see no reason for treating the chief, the quarter, the canton, gyron, flanche, label, orle, tressure, fret, inescutcheon, chaplet, bordure, lozenge, fusil, mascle, rustre, roundel, billet, label, shakefork, and pairle, as other than ordinary charges. They certainly are purely heraldic, and each has its own special rules, but so in heraldry have the lion, griffin, and deer. Here is the complete list of the so-called ordinaries and sub-ordinaries : The bend ; fess ; bar ; chief ; pale ; chevron ; cross ; saltire ; pile ; pairle, shakefork or pall ; quarter ; canton ; gyron ; bordure ; orle ; tressure ; flanche ; label, fret ; in- escutcheon ; chaplet ; lozenge ; fusil ; mascle ; rustre ; roundel ; billet, together with the diminutives of such of these as are in use. With reference to the origin of these ordinaries, by the use of which term is meant for the moment the rectilinear figures peculiar to armory, it may be worth the passing mention that the said origin is a matter of some mystery. Guillim and the old writers almost universally take them to be derived from the actual military scarf or a representation of it placed across the shield in various forms. Other writers, taking the surcoat and its decoration as the real origin of coats of arms, derive THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 109 the ordinaries from the belt, scarf, and other articles of raiment. Planche, on the other hand, scouted such a derivation, putting forward upon very good and plausible grounds the simple argument that the origin of the ordinaries is to be found in the cross-pieces of wood placed across a shield for strengthening purposes. He instances cases in which shields, apparently charged with ordinaries but really strengthened with cross-pieces, can be taken back to a period long anterior to the existence of regularised armory. But then, on the other hand, shields can be found decorated with animals at an equally early or even an earlier period, and I am inclined myself to push Planche's own argument even farther than he himself took it, and assert unequivocally that the ordinaries had in themselves no particular symbolism and no definable origin whatever beyond that easy method of making some pattern upon a shield which was to be gained by using straight lines. That they ever had any military meaning, I cannot see the slightest foundation to believe ; their suggested and asserted symbolism I totally deny. But when we can find, as Planch^ did, that shields were strengthened with cross-pieces in various direc- tions, it is quite natural to suppose that these cross-pieces afforded a ready means of decoration in colour, and this would lead a good deal of other decoration to follow similar forms, even in the absence of cross-pieces upon the definite shield itself. The one curious point which rather seems to tell against Planche's theory is that in the earliest *^ rolls " of arms but a comparatively small proportion of the arms are found to consist of these rectilinear figures, and if the ordi- naries really originated in strengthening cross-pieces one would have expected a larger number of such coats of arms to be found ; but at the same time such arms would, in many cases, in themselves be so palpably mere meaningless decoration of cross-pieces upon plain shields, that the resulting design would not carry with it such a com- pulsory remembrance as would a design, for example, derived from lines which had plainly had no connection with the construction of the shield. Nor could it have any such basis of continuity. Whilst a son would naturally paint a lion upon his shield if his father had done the same, there certainly would not be a similar inducement for a son to follow his father's example where the design upon a shield were no more than different-coloured strengthening pieces, because if these were gilt, for example, the son would naturally be no more in- clined to perpetuate a particular form of strengthening for his shield, which might not need it, than any particular artistic division with which it was involved, so that the absence of arms composed of ordi- naries from the early rolls of arms may not amount to so very much. Still further, it may well be concluded that the compilers of early rolls no A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY of arms, or the collectors of the details from which early rolls were made at a later date, may have been tempted to ignore, and may have been justified in discarding from their lists of amis, those patterns and designs which palpably were then no more than a meaningless colouring of the strengthening pieces, but which patterns and designs by subsequent continuous usage and perpetuation became accepted later by certain families as the '^ arms " their ancestors had worn. It is easy to see that such meaningless patterns would have less chance of survival by continuity of usage, and at the same time would re- quire a longer continuity of usage, before attaining to fixity as a definite design. The undoubted symbolism of the cross in so many early coats of arms has been urged strongly by those who argue either for a symbol- ism for all these rectilinear figures or for an origin in articles of dress. But the figure of the cross preceded Christianity and organised armory, and it had an obvious decorative value which existed before, and which exists now outside any attribute it may have of a symbolical nature. That it is an utterly fallacious argument must be admitted when it is remembered that two lines at right angles make a cross — probably the earliest of all forms of decoration — and that the cross existed before its symbolism. Herein it differs from other forms of decoration {e,g, the Masonic emblems) which cannot be traced beyond their symbolical existence. The cross, like the other heraldic rectilinear figures, came into existence, meaningless as a decoration for a shield, before armory as such existed, and probably before Christianity began. Then being in existence the Crusading instinct doubtless caused its frequent selec- tion with an added symbolical meaning. But the argument can truthfully be pushed no farther. THE BEND The bend is a broad band going from the dexter chief corner to the sinister base (Fig. 65). According to the old theorists this should contain the third part of the field. As a matter of fact it hardly ever does, and seldom did even in the oldest examples. Great latitude is allowed to the artist on this point, in accordance with whether the bend be plain or charged, and more particularly according to the charges which accompany it in the shield and their disposition thereupon. " Azure, a bend or," is the well-known coat concerning which the historic controversy was waged between Scrope and Grosvenor. As every one knows, it was finally adjudged to belong to the former, and a right to it has also been proved by the Cornish family of Carminow. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES iii A bend is, of course, subject to the usual variations of the lines of partition (Figs. 66-75). A bend compony (Fig. 76), will be found in the arms of Beaumont, and the difference between this (in which the panes run with the bend) Fig. 66. — Bend engrailed. Fig. 68.— Bend embattled Fig. 69.— Bend embattled counter-embattled . Fig. 70. — Bend raguly. Fig Bend dovetailed. Fig. 72. — Bend indented. Fig. ys. — Bend dancette. and a bend barry (in which the panes are horizontal, Fig. 77), as in the arms of King/ should be noticed. A bend wavy is not very usual, but will be found in the arms of Wallop, De Burton, and Conder. A bend raguly appears in the arms of Strangman. 1 Armorial bearings of Sir Henry Seymour King, K.C.I. E. : Quarterly, argent and azure, in the second and third quarters a quatrefoil of the first, over all a bend barry of six of the second, charged with a quatrefoil also of the first, and gules. 112 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY When a bend and a bordure appear upon the same arms, the bend is not continued over the bordure, and similarly it does not surmount a tressure (Fig. 78), but stops within it. A bend upon a bend is by no means unusual. An example of this will be found in a coat of Waller. Cases where this happens need to be carefully scrutinised to avoid error in blazoning. Fig. 74. — Bend wavy. Fig. 75. — Bend nebuly, Fig. tj. — Bend barry. Fig. 78.— Bend within tressure. Fig. 79.— Bend lozengy. A bend lozengy, or of lozenges (Fig. 79), will be found in the arms of Bolding. A bend flory and counterflory will be found in the arms of Fellows, a quartering of Tweedy. A bend chequy will be found in the arms of Menteith, and it should be noticed that the checks run the way of the bend. Ermine spots upon a bend are represented the way of the bend. Occasionally two bends will be found, as in the arms of Lever : Argent, two bends sable, the upper one engrailed {vide Lyon Register — escutcheon of pretence on the arms of Goldie-Scot of Craigmore, 1868) ; or as in the arms of James Ford, of Montrose, 1804: Gules, two bends vaire argent and sable, on a chief or, a greyhound courant sable between two towers gules. A different form appears in the arms of Zorke or Yorke (see Papworth), which are blazoned : Azure, a bend argent, impaling argent, a bend azure. A solitary instance of three bends (which, however, effectually proves that a bend cannot Fig. So.— Bendlets. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 113 occupy the third part of the field) occurs in the arms of Penrose, matriculated in Lyon Register in 1795 as a quartering of Cumming- Gordon of Altyre. These arms of Penrose are : Argent, three bends sable, each charged with as many roses of the field. A charge half the width of a bend is a bendlet (Fig. 80), and one half the width of a bendlet is a cottise (Fig. 81), but a cottise cannot exist alone, inasmuch as it has of itself neither direction nor position, but is only found accom- panying one of the ordinaries. The arms of Harley are an example of a bend cottised. Bendlets will very seldom be found either in addition to a bend, or charged, but the arms of Vaile show both these peculiarities. A bend will usually be found between two charges. Occasionally it will be found between four, but more frequently between six. In none of these cases is it necessary to specify the posi- tion of the subsidiary charges. It is presumed that the bend separates them into even numbers, but their exact position (beyond this) upon the shield is left to the judgment of the artist, and their disposition is governed by the space left available by the shape of the shield. A further presump- tion is permitted in the case of a bend between three objects, which are presumed to be two in chief and one in base. But even in the case of three the position will be usually found to be specifically stated, as would be the case with any other uneven number. Charges on a bend are placed in the direction of the bend. In such cases it is not necessary to specify that the charges are bendwise. When a charge or charges occupy the position which a bend would, they are said to be placed " in bend." This is not the same thing as a charge placed '^ bendwise " (or bendways). In this case the charge itself is slanted into the angle at which the bend crosses the shield, but the position of the charge upon the shield is not governed thereby. When a bend and chief occur together in the same arms, the chief will usually surmount the bend, the latter issuing from the angle between the base of the chief and the side of the shield. An instance to the contrary, however, will be found in the arms of Fitz-Herbert of Swynnerton, in which the bend is continued over the chief. This instance, however (as doubtless all others of the kind), is due to the. Fig. 81. — Bend cottised. Fig. 82. — Bend sinister. 114 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY use of the bend in early times as a mark of difference. The coat of arms, therefore, had an earlier and separate existence without the bend, which has been superimposed as a difference upon a previously existing coat. The use of the bend as a difference will be again referred to when considering more fully the marks and methods of indicating cadency. A curious instance of the use of the sun's rays in bend will be found in the arms of Warde-Aldam.^ The bend sinister (Fig. 82), is very frequently stated to be the mark of illegitimacy. It certainly has been so used upon some occasions, but these occasions are very few and far between, the charge more frequently made use of being the bendlet or its derivative the baton (Fig. 83). These will be treated more fully in the chapter on the marks of illegitimacy. The bend sinister, which is a band running from the sinister chief corner through the centre of the escutcheon to the dexter base, need not necessarily indicate bastardy. Naturally the popular idea which has originated and become stereotyped concerning it renders its appearance extremely rare, but in at least two cases it occurs without, as far as I am aware, carrying any such meaning. At any rate, in neither case are the coats '* bastardised " versions of older arms. These cases are the arms of Shiff- ner : '* Azure, a bend sinister, in chief two estoiles, in like bend or ; in base the end and stock of an anchor gold, issuing from waves of the sea proper ; " and Burne-Jones : ^' Azure, on a bend sinister ar- gent, between seven mullets, four in chief and three in base or, three pairs of wings addorsed purpure." No coat with the chief charge a single bendlet occurs in Pap worth. A single case, however, is to be found in the Lyon Register in the duly matriculated arms of Porterfield of that Ilk : ^' Or, a bendlet between a stag's head erased in chief and a hunting-horn in base sable, garnished gules." Single bendlets, however, both dexter and sinister, occur as ancient difference marks, and are then sometimes known as ribands. So described, it occurs in blazon of the arms of Abernethy : *^ Or, a lion rampant gules, debruised of a ribbon sable," quartered by Lindsay, Earl of Crawford and Balcarres ; but here again the bendlet is a mark Fig. 83.— Baton sinister. ^ Armorial bearings of William Warde-Aldam, Esq. : Quarterly, I and 4, party per fesse azure and ermine, in the sinister chief and dexter base an eagle displayed or, in the dexter canton issuant towards the sinister base seven rays, the centre one gold, the others argent (for Aldam) ; 2 and 3 (for Warde). THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 115 of cadency. In the Gelre Armorml, in this particular coat the ribbon is made '< engrailed/' which is most unusual^ and which does not appear to be the accepted form. In many of the Scottish matriculations of this Abernethy coat in which this riband occurs it is termed a '< cost," doubtless another form of the word cottise. When a bend or bendlets (or, in fact, any other charge) are raised above their natural position in the shield they are termed " enhanced " (Fig. 84). An instance of this occurs in the well-known coat of Byron, viz. : '' Argent, three bendlets enhanced gules," and in the arms of Manchester, which were based upon this coat. When the field is composed of an even number of equal pieces divided by lines following the angle of a bend the field is blazoned Fig. 84. — Bendlets enhanced. Fig. 85.— Pale. Fig. 86. — Pale engrailed. '< bendy" of so many (Fig. 58). In most cases it will be composed of six or eight pieces, but as there is no diminutive of ** bendy," the number must always be stated. THE PALE The pale is a broad perpendicular band passing from the top of the escutcheon to the bottom (Fig. 85). Like all the other ordinaries, it is stated to contain the third part of the area of the field, and it is the only one which is at all frequently drawn in that proportion. But even with the pale, the most frequent occasion upon which this proportion is definitely given, this exaggerated width will be presently explained. The artistic latitude, however, permits the pale to be drawn of this proportion if this be convenient to the charges upon it. Like the other ordinaries, the pale will be found varied by the different lines of partition (Figs, 86—94), The single circumstance in which the pale is regularly drawn to contain a full third of the field by measurement is when the coat is " per fess and a pale counterchanged." This, it will be noticed, divides the shield into six equal portions (Fig. 95). The ease with which, by ii6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the employment of these conditions, a new coat can be based upon an old one which shall leave three original charges in the same position, and upon a field of the original tincture, and yet shall produce an entirely different and distinct coat of arms, has led to this particular form being constantly repeated in modern grants. Fig. 87.— Pale invecked. Fig. 88.— Pale embattled. Fig. 89.— Pale raguly. Fig. 90.— Pale dovetailed. Fig. 91. — Pale indented. -Fig. 92. — Pale wavy. Fig. 93. — Pale nebuly. Fig. 94. — Pale rayonne. Fig. 95. — Pale per fesse counter changed. The diminutive of the pale is the pallet (Fig. 96), and the pale cottised is sometimes termed " endorsed." Except when it is used as a mark of difference or distinction (then usually wavy), the pallet is not found singly ; but two pallets, or three, are not exceptional. Charged upon other ordinaries, particularly on the chief and the chevron, pallets are of constant occurrence. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 117 When the field is striped vertically it is said to be ^' paly " of so many (Fig. 57). The arms shown in Fig. 97 are interesting inasmuch as they are doubtless an early form of the coat per pale indented argent and gules, which is generally described as a banner borne for the honour of Hinckley; by the Simons de Montfort, Earls of Leicester, father and son. In a Roll temp. Henry III., to Simon the younger is ascribed Fig. 96.— Pallets. Fig. 97. — The arms of Amaury de Montfort, Earl of Gloucester ; died before 1 2 14. (From his seal.) Fig. 98. — Arms of Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester; died 1265. (From MS. Cott., Nero, D.I.) Fig. 99. — Fess. Fig. 100. — Fess engrailed. Fig. ioi. — Fess invecked. *' Le Banner party endentee dargent & de goules," although the arms of both father and son are known to have been as Fig. 98: <^ Gules, a lion rampant queue-fourch^e argent." More probably the indented coat gives the original Montfort arms. THE FESS The fess is a broad horizontal band crossing the escutcheon in the centre (Fig. 99). It is seldom drawn to contain a full third of the area of the shield. It is subject to the lines of partition (Figs. 100-109). JS^. ii8 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY A curious variety of the fess dancette is borne by the Shropshire family Plowden of Plowden. They bear ; Azure, a fess dancette, the upper points terminating in fleurs-de-lis (Fig. no). A fess couped (Fig. in) is found in the arms of Lee. Fig. I02. — Fess embattled. Fig. 103. — Fess embattled counter-embattled. Fig. 104. — Fess raguly. sAAAAAA/ WS/WW AAA Fig. 108. Fig. 109. — Fess nebuly. Fig. iio. — The arms of Plowden. -Fess wavy. The "fess embattled" is only crenellated upon the upper edge; but when both edges are embattled it is a fess embattled and counter- embattled. The term bretesse (which is said to indicate that the battle- ments orf the upper edge are opposite the battlements on the lower edge, and the indentations likewise corresponding) is a term and a dis- tinction neither of which are regarded in British armory. X THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 119 A fess wreathed (Fig. 112) is a bearing which seems to be almost peculiar to the Carmichael family, but the arms of Waye of Devon are an additional example, being : Sable, two bars wreathed argent and gules. I know of no other ordinary borne in a wreathed form, but there seems no reason why this peculiarity should be confined to the fess. It is a fixed rule of British armory that there can be only one fess upon a shield. If two figures of this character are found they are termed bars (Fig. 113). But it is hardly correct to speak of the bar as Hni Fig. III. — Fess couped. Fig. 112. — Fess wreathed. Fig. 113.— Two Bars. Fig. 114. — Bars embattled. Fig. 115. — Bars engrailed. Fig. 116. — Bars invecked. a diminutive of the fess, because if two bare only appear on the shield there would be little, if any, diminution made from the width of the fess- when depicting the bars. As is the case with other ordinaries, there is much latitude allowed to the artist in deciding the dimensions, it being usually permitted for these to be governed by-the charges upon the fess or bars, and the charges between which these are placed. Bars, like the fess, are of course equally subject to all the varying lines of partition (Figs. 11 4-1 18). The diminutive of the bar is the barrulet, which is half its width and double the width of the cottise. But the barrulet will almost in" variably be found borne in pairSy when such a pair is usually known as a <^ bar gemel " and not as two barrulets. Thus a coat with four barrulets i2o A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY would have these placed at equal distances from each other ; but a coat with two bars gemel would be depicted with two of its barrulets placed closely together in chief and two placed closely together in base, the disposition being governed by the fact that the two barrulets com- prising the '^ bar gemel " are only 07te charge. Fig. 119 shows three bars gemel. There is theoretically no limit to the number of bars or bars gemel which can be placed upon the shield. In practical use, however, four will be found the maximum. A field composed of four, six, eight, or ten horizontal pieces of equal width is '^ barry of such and such a number of pieces," the number being always specified (Figs. 55 and 56). A field composed of an equal number of horizontally shaped pieces, when these exceed ten in number, is termed " barruly " of such and such a number. The term barruly is also sometimes used for ten pieces. If the Fig. 117. — Bars raguly. Fig. 118. — Bars dovetailed. Bars gemel. number is omitted " barry " will usually be of six pieces, though sometimes of eight. On the other hand a field composed of five, seven, or nine pieces is not barry, but (e.g.) two bars, three bars, and four bars respectively. This distinction in modern coats needs to be carefully noted, but in ancient coats it is not of equal importance. Anciently also a shield '^ barry " was drawn of a greater number of pieces (see Figs. 120, 121 and 122) than would nowadays be employed. In modern armory a field so depicted would more correctly be termed '^ barruly." Whilst a field can be and often is barry of two colours or two metals, an uneven number of pieces must of necessity be of metal and colour or fur. Consequently in a shield e.g. divided into seven equal horizontal divisions, alternately gules and sable, there must be a mistake somewhere. Although these distinctions require to be carefully noted as regards modern arms, it should be remembered that they are distinctions evolved by the intricacies and requirements of modern armory, and ancient arms were not so trammelled. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 121 A field divided horizontally into three equal divisions of e.g, gules, sable, and argent is theoretically blazoned by British rules ^^ party per fess gules and argent, a fess sable." This, however, gives an exag- gerated width to the fess which it does not really possess with us, and the German rules, which would blazon it ^' tierced per fess gules, sable, and argent," would seem preferable. A field which is barry may also be counterchanged, as in the arms Fig. 120. — Arms of William de Valence, Earl of Pembroke {d. 1296) ; Barruly azure and argent, a label of five points gules, the files depending from the chief line of the shield, and each file charged with three lions passant guardant or. (From MS. Reg. 14, C. vii.) Fig. 123. — Barry, per chevron counter-changed. Fig. 121. — Arms of Laurence de Hastings, Earl of Pem- broke {,d. 1348) ; Quarterly, I and 4, or, a maunch gules (for Hastings) ; 2 and 3, barruly argent and azure, an orle of martlets (for Valence). (From his seal.) Fig. 124. — Barry-bendy. ( ?()(") a ^s^ ^^i^^i:^ SZ^ w^ ^^ DZ2 Fig. 122. — Arms of Edmund Grey, Earl of Kent (^. 1489) : Quarterly, I and 4, barry of six, argent and azure, in chief three torteaux (for Grey) ; 2 and 3, Hastings and Valence sub-quarterly. (From his seal, 1442.) Fig. 125. — Paly-bendy. of Ballingall, where it is counterchanged per pale ; but it can also be counterchanged per chevron (Fig. 123), or per bend dexter or sinister. Such counterchanging should be carefully distinguished from fields which are '' barry-bendy " (Fig. 124), or '^paly-bendy" (Fig. 125). In these latter cases the field is divided first by lines horizontal (for barry) or perpendicular (for paly), and subsequently by lines bendy (dexter or sinister). 122 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY The result produced is very similar to ^Mozengy" (Fig. 126), and care should be taken to distinguish the two. Barry-bendy is sometimes blazoned ^^fusilly in bend/' whilst paly- bendy is sometimes blazoned "fusilly in bend sinister," but the other terms are the more accurate and acceptable. *^ Lozengy " is made by use of lines in bend crossed by lines in Fig. 127. — Chevron. Fig. 128. — Chevron engrailed. vy W Fig. 129. — Chevron invecked. Fig. 130. — Chevron em- battled. Fig 131. — Chevron embattled and counter-embattled. bend sinister (Fig. 126), and '* fusilly " the same, only drawn at a more acute angle. THE CHEVRON Probably the ordinary of most frequent occurrence in British, as also in French armory, is the chevron (Fig. 127). It is comparatively rare in German heraldry. The term is derived from the French word chevron, meaning a rafter, and the heraldic chevron is the same shape as a gable rafter. In early examples of heraldic art the chevron will be found depicted reaching very nearly to the top of the shield, the angle contained within the chevron being necessarily more acute. The chevron then attained very much more nearly to its full area of one- third of the field than is now given to it. As the chevron became accompanied by charges, it was naturally drawn so that it would allow of these charges being more easily represented, and its height became THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 123 less whilst the angle it enclosed was increased. But now, as then, it is perfectly at the pleasure of the artist to design his chevron at the height and angle which will best allow the proper representation of the charges which accompany it. Fig. 132. — Chevron indented. Fig. 133. — Chevron wavy. Fig. 135. — Chevron raguly. Fig. 136. — Chevron dovetailed. Fig. 137. — Chevron doubly cottised. The chevron, of course, is subject to the usual lines of partition (Figs. 128-136), and can be cottised and doubly cottised (Fig. 137). It is usually found between three charges, but the necessity of modern differentiation has recently introduced the disposition of four charges, three in chief and one in base, which is by no means a happy invention. An even worse disposition occurs in the arms of a certain family of Mitchell, where the four escallops which are the principal charges are arranged two in chief and two in base. Ermine spots upon a chevron do not follow the direction of it, but in the cases of chevrons vair, and chevrons chequy, authoritative examples can be found in which the chequers and rows of vair both do, and do not, conform to the direction of the chevron. My own preference is to make the rows horizontal. A chevron quarterly is divided by a line chevronwise, apparently Fig. 138. — Chevron quarterly. 124 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY dividing the chevron into two chevronels, and then by a vertical Hne in the centre (Fig. 138). A chevron in point embov^^ed will be found in the arms of Trapaud quartered by Adlercron (Fig. 139). A field per chevron (Fig. 52) is often met with, and the division line in this case (like the en- closing lines of a real chevron) is subject to the usual partition lineS; but how one is to determine the differentiation between per chevron engrailed and per chev- ron invecked I am uncertain, but think the points should be upwards for engrailed. The field when entirely com- posed of an even number of chevrons is termed ^' chevronny " (Fig- 59)- The diminutive of the chev- ron is the chevronel (Fig. 140). Chevronels ^< interlaced " or ^'braced" (Fig. 141), will be found in the arms of Sirr. The chevronel is very seldom rnet with singly, but a case of this will be found in the arms of Spry. A chevron '' rompu " or broken is depicted as in Fig. 142. Fig. 139. — Armorial bearings of Rodolph Lade- veze Adlercron, Esq . : Quarterly, i and 4, argent, an eagle displayed, wings inverted sable, langued gules, membered and ducally crowned or (for Adlercron) : 2 and 3, argent, a chevron in point embowed between in chief two mullets and in base a lion rampant all gules (for Trapaud), Mantling sable and argent. Crest : on a wreath of the colours, a demi-eagle dis- played sable, langued gules, ducally crowned or, the dexter wing per fess argent and azure, the sinister per fess of the last and or. Motto: ** Quo fata vocant." THE PILE The pile (Fig. 143) is a triangular wedge usually (and unless otherwise specified) issu- ing from the chief. The pile is subject to the usual lines of partition (Figs. 1 44-1 51). The early representation of the pile (when coats of arms had no secondary charges and were nice and simple) made the point nearly reach to the base of the escutcheon, and as a consequence it naturally was not so wide. It is now usually drawn so that its upper edge occupies very nearly the whole of the top line of the escutcheon ; but THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 125 the angles and proportions of the pile are very much at the discretion of the artist, and governed by the charges which need to be intro- duced in the field of the escutcheon or upon the pile. A single pile may issue from any point of the escutcheon except Fig. 141. — Chevronels braced. Fig. 142. — Chevron rompu Fig. 143. — Pile. Fig Pile engrailed. Fig. 145. — Pile invecked. Fig. 146. — Pile embattled. Fig. 147. — Pile indented. Fig. 148. — Pile wavy. the base ; the arms of Darbishire showing a pile issuing from the dexter chief point. A single pile cannot issue in base if it be unaccompanied by other piles, as the field would then be blazoned per chevron. Two piles issuing in chief will be found in the arms of Holies, Earl of Clare. When three piles, instead of pointing directly at right angles to the line of the chief, all point to the same point, touching or nearly touching 126 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY at the tips, as in the arms of the Earl of Huntingdon and Chester or in the arms of Isham/ they are described as three piles in point. This term and its differentiation probably are modern refinements, as with the early long-pointed shield any other position was impossible. The arms of Henderson show three piles issuing from the sinister side of the escutcheon. A disposition of three piles which will very frequently be found in modern British heraldry is two issuing in chief and one in base (Fig. 152). Piles terminating in fleurs-de-lis or crosses pat^e are to be met with, and reference may be made to the arms of Poynter and Dickson- Foynder. Each of these coats has the field pily counter-pily, the points ending in crosses form^e. An unusual instance of a pile in which it issues from a chevron Fig. 149. — Pile nebuly. Fig. 150. — Pile raguly. Fig. 151. — Pile dovetailed. will be found in the arms of Wright, which are : " Sable, on a chevron argent, three spear-heads gules, in chief two unicorns' heads erased argent, armed and maned or, in base on a pile of the last, issuant from the chevron, a unicorn's head erased of the field." THE SHAKEFORK The pall, pairle, or shakefork (Fig. 153), is almost unknown in English heraldry, but in Scotland its constant occurrence in the arms of the Cunninghame and allied families has given it a recognised position among the ordinaries. As usually borne by the Cunninghame family the ends are couped and pointed, but in some cases it is borne throughout. The pall in its proper ecclesiastical form appears in thei arms of the Archiepiscopal Sees of Canterbury, Armagh, and Dublin. Though * Armorial bearin^^s of Ishara : Gules, a fesse wavy, and in chief three piles in point also wavy, the points meeting in fesse argent. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 127 in these cases the pall or pallium (Fig. 154), is now considered to have no other heraldic status than that of an appropriately ecclesiastical charge upon an official coat of arms, there can be very little doubt that originally the pall of itself was the heraldic symbol in this country of an archbishop, and borne for that reason by all archbishops, in- cluding the Archbishop of York, although his official archiepiscopal coat is now changed to : *^ Gules, two keys in saltire argent, in chief a royal crown or." The necessity of displaying this device of rank — the pallium — Fig. 152.— Three piles, two in chief and one in base. Fig. 153.— Shakefork. Fig. 154. — Ecclesiastical pallium. .^K^ UkA,>^ Fig. 155. — Cross. Fig. 156. — Cross engrailed. Fig. 157. — Cross jnvecked. Upon a field of some tincture has led to its corruption into a usual and stereotyped *' charge." THE CROSS The heraldic cross (Fig. 155), the huge preponderance of which in armory we of course owe to the Crusades, like all other armorial charges, has strangely developed. There are nearly four hundred varieties known to armory, or rather to heraldic text-books, and doubtless authenticated examples could be found of most if not of them all. But some dozen or twenty forms are about as many as will be found regularly or constantly occurring. Some but not all of the varieties of the cross are subject to the lines of partition (Figs. 1 56-1 6 1), 128 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY When the heraldic cross was first assumed with any reason beyond geometrical convenience, there can be no doubt that it was intended to represent the Sacred Cross itself. The symbolism of the cross is older than our present system of armory, but the cross itself is more ancient than its symbolism. A cross depicted upon the long, pointed shields of those who fought for the Cross would be of that shape, with the elongated arm in base. But the contemporary shortening of the shield, together with the introduction of charges in its angles, led naturally to the arms of the UL uuau Fig. 158.— Cross embattled. Fig. 159. — Cross indented. Fig. 160. — Cross raguly. x^ Csn^ FiG^-^j^x — Cross dovetailed. A Fig. 162. — Passion Cross. FiG. 163. — Cross Calvary. cross being so disposed that the parts of the field left visible were as nearly as possible equal. The Sacred Cross, therefore, in heraldry is now known as a '< Passion Cross" (Fig. 162) (or sometimes as a *^ long cross "), or, if upon steps or '* grieces," the number of which needs to be specified, as a ''Cross Calvary" (Fig. 163). The crucifix (Fig. 164), under that description is sometimes met with as a charge. The ordinary heraldic cross (Fig. 155) is always continued through- out the shield unless stated to be couped (Fig. 165). Of the crosses more regularly in use may be mentioned the cross botonny (Fig. 166), the cross flory (Fig. 167), which must be dis- tinguished from the cross fleurette (Fig. 168) ; the cross moline, PLATE 111. ARMS OF THE DUKE OF ARGYLL. ARMS OF SIR WILLIAM GORDON GUMMING, BT. THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 129 (Fig. 169), the cross potent (Fig. 170), the cross pat^e or formee (Fig.^ 171); the cross patonce (Fig. 172), and the cross crosslet (Fig.' 173)- Of other but much more uncommon varieties examples will be found of the cross parted and fretty (Fig. 174), of the cross pat^e Fig. 164. — Crucifix. Fig. 167. — Cross flory. FiG.^ 170. — Cross potent. Fig. 165. — Cross couped. Fig. 168. — Cross fleurette. Fig. 169. — Cross moline. Fig. 171. — Cross patee (or formee). Fig. 172. — Cross patonce. quadrate (Fig. 175), of a cross pointed and voided in the arms of Dukinfield (quartered by Darbishire), and of a cross clech^ voided and pomett6 as in the arms of Cawston. A cross quarter-pierced (Fig. 176) has the field visible at the centre. A cross tau or St. Anthony's Cross is shown in Fig. 177, the real Maltese Cross in Fig. 178; and the Patriarchal Cross in Fig. 179. I 130 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Whenever a cross or cross crosslet has the bottom arm elongated and pointed it is said to be '' fitched " (Figs. i8o and i8i), but when a point is added at the foot e.g. of a cross pat^e, it is then termed "fitchee at the foot" (Fig. 182). Of the hundreds of other varieties it may confidently be said that a Fig. 173. — Cross crosslet. Fig. 174. — Cross parted and fretty. Fig. 175. — Cross patee quadrate. Fig. 176. — Cross quarter- pierced. Fig. 177. — Cross Tau. ^ Fig. 179.— Patriarchal Cross. Fig. 180. — Cross crosslet fitched. Fig. 181. — Cross patee fitched. large proportion originated in misunderstandings of the crude drawings of early armorists, added to the varying and alternating descriptions applied at a more pliable and fluent period of heraldic blazon. A striking illustration of this will be found in the cross botonny, which is now, and has been for a long time past, regularised with us as a distinct variety of THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 131 constant occurrence. From early illustrations there is now no doubt that this was the original form, or one of the earliest forms, of the cross crosslet. It is foolisTi to ignore these varieties, reducing all crosses to a few original forms, for they are now mostly stereotyped and accepted ; but at the same time it is useless to attempt to learn 1'%' ^^ _rnau rfnm- jTBoi. "^ S^ S^ Fig. 182. — Cross patee fitched at foot. Fig. 183.— Crusilly. Fig. 184. — Saltire. Fig. 185. — Saliire engrailed. Fig. i86. — Saltire invecked. Fig. 187. — Saltire embattled. them, for in a lifetime they will mostly be met with but once each or thereabouts. A field seme of cross crosslets (Fig. 183) is termed crusilly. THE SALTIRE The saltire or saltier (Fig. 184) is more frequently to be met with in Scottish than in English heraldry. This is not surprising, inasmuch as the saltire is known as the Cross of St. Andrew, the Patron Saint of Scotland. Its form is too well known to need description. It is of course subject to the usual partition lines (Figs. 185-192). When a saltire is charged the charges are usually placed conform- ably therewith. The field of a coat of arms is often per saltire. When one saltire couped is the principal charge it will usually be 132 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY found that it is couped conformably to the outline of the shield ; but if the couped saltire be one of a number or a subsidiary charge it will be found couped by horizontal lines, or by lines at right angles. The saltire has not developed into so many varieties of form as the cross, and {e.g,) a saltire botonny is assumed to be a cross botonny placed saltire ways, but a saltire parted and fretty is to be met with (Fig. 193). THE CHIEF The chief (Fig. 194), which is a broad band across the top of the shield containing (theoretically, but not in fact) the uppermost third Fig, Fig. 190. — Saltire nebuly. Fig. 191. — Saltire raguly. Fig. 192. — Saltire dovetailed. Fig. 193. — Saltire parted and fretty. of the area 6f the field, is a very favourite ordinary. It is of course subject to the variations of the usual partition lines (Figs. 195-203). It is usually drawn to contain about one-fifth of the area of the field, though in cases where it is used for a landscape augmentation it will usually be found of a rather greater area. The chief especially lent itself to the purposes of honourable aug- mentation, and is constantly found so employed. As such it will be referred to in the chapter upon augmentations, but a chief of this character may perhaps be here referred to with advantage, as this will THE SO-CALLED ORDINARIES 133 indicate the greater area often given to it under these conditions, as in the arms of Ross-of-Bladensburg (Plate II.). Knights of the old Order of St. John of Jerusalem and also of the modern Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem in England display above their personal arms a chief of the order, but this will be Fig. 194. — Chief. Fig. 195. — Chief engrailed. Fig. 196. — Chief invecked. aaaaaaa Fig. 197. — Chief embattled. Fig. 198. — Chief indented. s^zsxszs^ Fig. 200. — Chief wavy. Fig. 201. — Chief nebuly. Fig. 202. — Chief raguly. dealt with more fully in the chapter relating to the insignia of knight- hood. Save in exceptional circumstances, the chief is never debruised or surmounted by any ordinary. The chief is ordinarily superimposed over the tressure and over the bordure, partly defacing them by the elimination of the upper 134 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY part thereof. This happens with the bordure when it is a part of the original coat of arms. If, however, the chief were in existence at an earUer period and the bordure is added later as a mark of difference, the bordure surrounds the chief. On the other hand, if a bordure exists, even as a mark of difference, and a chief of augmen- tation is subsequently added, or a canton for distinction, the chief or the canton in these cases would surmount the bordure. Similarly a bend when added later as a mark of difference sur- mounts the chief. Such a case is very unusual, as the use of the bend for differencing has long been obsolete. Fig. 203, tailed. -Chief dove- AAA fw" L v J N / N ^ ^ V Fig. 204. — Arms of Peter de Dreux, Earl of Rich- mond ("t <_^ — '~"^^ Fig. 727.— John, Duke of Bedford, third son or Henry IV. : France and England quarterly, a label of five points, the two dexter ermine, the three sinister azure, charged with three fleurs-de-lis or. (From MS. Add. 18,850.) Fig. 728. — Jasper Tudor, Duke of Bedford : France and Eng- land quarterly, a bordure azure, charged with martlets or. (P>om his seal.) Although uncle of Henry VH., Jasper Tudor had no blood descent whatever which would entitle him to bear these arms. His use of them is very remarkable. ■..1 1 / n 1 1 . .' W- Fig. 729. — Thomas de Beaufort, Earl of Dorset, brother of John, Earl of Somerset (Fig. 724) : France and England quarterly, a bordure compony ermine and azure. (From his Gar- ter plate.) of their Royal Highnesses the Duchess of Fife, the Princess Victoria, and the Queen of Norway, still bearing the label of five points indicative of their position as grandchildren of the sovereign, which of course they were when the warrants were issued in the lifetime of the late Queen Victoria. In spite of the fact that the warrants have no hereditary limitation, I am only aware of two modern instances in which a warrant has been issued to the son of a cadet of the Royal House who had previously received a warrant. One of these was the late Duke of Cambridge. Fig. 730. —John of The warrant was issued to him in his father's Gaunt, Duke of Lan- lifetime, and to the label previously assigned to ('ancle'nt)and'Engknd his father a sccond label of three points gules, to quarterly, a label of be bomc dircctly bclow the othcr, was added. three points ermine _,, ,, ,1 j r 1 • • rj. j (z>. each point charged The Other case was that or his cousm, afterwards with three ermine ^ukg of Cumberland and King of Hanover. In his ^^^' case the second label, also gules, was charged with the white horse of Hanover. The label of the eldest son of the heir-apparent to the English throne is not, as might be imagined, a plain label of five points, but the plain label of three points, the centre point only being charged. The late Duke of Clarence charged the centre point of his label of MARKS OF CADENCY 497 three points with a cross couped gules. After his death the Duke of York rehnquished the label of five points which he had previously borne, receiving one of three, the centre point charged with an anchor. In every other case all of the points are charged. The following examples of the labels in use at the moment will show how the system now exists : — Prince of Wales, — A label of three points argent. Princess Royal (Louise, Duchess of Fife). — A label of five points argent, charged on the centre and outer points with a cross of St. George gules, and on the two others with a thistle proper. Princess Victoria. — A label of five points argent, charged with three roses and two crosses gules. Princess Maud (H.M. The Queen of Norway). — A label of five points argent, charged with three hearts and two crosses gules. The Duke of Edinburgh (Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha). — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a cross gules, and on each of the others an anchor azure. His son, the here- ^—^^^^^^^j^ ditary Prmce of Saxe-Coburg and L \ /^\ / *" \ /^\ / ^\ Gotha, who predeceased his father. Fig. 731.— Label of the late hereditary i_ 1 i_ 1 r 12 • X XI- Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. bore a label of live pomts, the ^ first, third, and fifth each charged with a cross gules, and the second and fourth each with an anchor azure (Fig. 731). The Duke of Connaught, — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with St. George's cross, and each of the other points with a fieur-de-lis azure. The late Princess Royal (German Empress). — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a rose gules, and each of the others with a cross gules. The late Grand Duchess of Hesse. — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a rose gules, and each of the others with an ermine spot sable. Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein, — A label of three points, the centre point charged with St. George's cross, and each of the other points with a rose gules. Princess Louise (Duchess of Argyll). — A label of three points, the centre point charged with a rose, and each of the other two with a canton gules. Princess Henry of Battenberg, — A label of three points, the centre point charged with a heart, and each of the other two with a rose gules. The late Duke of Albany, — A label of three points, the centre point charged with a St. George's cross, and each of the other two with a heart gules. 2 I 498 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY The Dukes of Cambridge. — The first Duke had a label of three points argent; the centre point charged with a St. George's cross, and each of the other two with two hearts in pale gules. The warrant to the late Duke assigned him the same label with the addition of a second label, plain, of three points gules, to be borne below the former label. The first Duke of Cumberland, — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a fleur-de-lis azure, and each of the other two points with a cross of St. George gules. Of the foregoing recently assigned labels all are borne over the plain English arms (i and 4 England, 2 Scotland, 3 Ireland), charged with the escutcheon of Saxony, except those of the Dukes of Saxe- Coburg and Gotha, Cambridge, and Cumberland. In the two latter cases the labels are borne over the latest version of the arms of King George III., i,e. with the inescutcheon of Hanover, but, of course, neither the electoral bonnet nor the later crown which surmounted the inescutcheon of Hanover was made use of, and the smaller inescut- cheon bearing the crown of Charlemagne was also omitted for the children of George III., except in the case of the Prince of Wales, who bore the plain inescutcheon of gules, but without the crown of Charle- magne thereupon. The labels for the other sons and daughters of King George III. were as follows : — 77?^ Duke of York. — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a cross gules. The Duke of York bore upon the in- escutcheon of Hanover an inescutcheon argent (in the place occupied in the Royal Arms by the inescutcheon charged with the crown of Charlemagne) charged with a wheel of six spokes gules, for the Bishopric of Osnaburgh, which he possessed. The Duke of Clarence (afterwards William IV.). — A label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a cross gules, and each of the others with an anchor erect azure. The Duke of Kent had his label charged with a cross gules between two fleurs-de-lis azure. The Duke of Sussex. — The label argent charged with two hearts in pale gules in the centre point between two crosses gules. The Princess Royal (Queen of Wiirtemberg). — A rose between two crosses gules. The Princess Augusta. — A like label, charged with a rose gules between two ermine spots. The Princess Elizabeth (Princess of Hesse-Homburg). — A like label charged with a cross between two roses gules. The Princess Mary (Duchess of Gloucester). — A like label, charged with a rose between two cantons gules. MARKS OF CADENCY 499 The Princess Sophia. — A like label, charged with a heart between two roses gules. The Princess Amelia. — A like label, charged with a rose between two hearts gules. The Duke of Gloucester (brother of George III.). — A label of five points argent, charged with a fleur-de-lis azure between four crosses gules. His son (afterwards Duke of Gloucester) bore an additional plain label of three points during the Hfetime of his father. The Royal labels are placed across the shield, on the crest, and on each of the supporters. The crest stands upon and is crowned with a coronet identical with the circlet of any coronet of rank assigned in the same patent ; the lion supporter is crowned and the unicorn supporter is gorged with a similar coronet. It may perhaps be of interest to note that no badges and no motto are ever now assigned in these Royal Warrants except in the case of the Prince of Wales. F.-M. H.S.H. Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, the Consort of H.R.H. the Princess Charlotte (only child of George IV.), received by warrant dated April 7, 181 8, the right '< to use and bear the Royal Arms (without the inescocheon of Charlemagne's crown, and without the Hanoverian Royal crown) differenced with a label of five points argent, the centre point charged with a rose gules, quarterly with the arms of his illustrious House [' Barry of ten sable and or, a crown of rue in bend vert '], the Royal Arms in the first and fourth quarters." By Queen Victoria's desire this precedent was followed in the case of the late Prince Consort, the label in his case being of three points argent, the centre point charged with a cross gules, and, by a curious coincidence, the arms of his illustrious House, with which the Royal Arms were quartered, were again the arms of Saxony, these appearing in the second and third quarters. Quite recently a Royal Warrant has been issued for H.M. Queen Alexandra. This assigns, upon a single shield within the Garter, the undifferenced arms of His Majesty impaled with the undifferenced arms of Denmark. The shield is surmounted by the Royal crown. The supporters are : (dexter) the lion of England, and (sinister) a savage wreathed about the temples and loins with oak and supporting in his exterior hand a club all proper. This sinister supporter is taken from the Royal Arms of Denmark. Abroad there is now no equivalent whatever to our methods of differencing the Royal Arms. An official certificate was issued to me recently from Denmark of the undifferenced Royal Arms of Denmark certified as correct for the " Princes and Princesses " of that country. But the German Crown Prince bears his shield within a bordure gules, and anciently in France (from which country the English system was 500 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY very probably originally derived) the differencing of the Royal French Arms for the younger branches seems to have been carefully attended to, as has been already specified. Differencing in Scotland is carried out on an entirely different basis from differencing in England. In Scotland the idea is still rigidly preserved and adhered to that the coat of arms of a family belongs only to the head of the family for the time being, and the terms of a Scottish grant are as follows : '< Know ye therefore that we have devised and do by these presents assign ratify and confirm to the said and his descendants with such congruent differences as may hereafter be matriculated for them the following ensigns armoriaV Under the accepted interpretation of Scottish armorial law, whilst the inherent gentility conferred by a patent of arms is not denied to cadets, no right to make use of arms is conceded to them until such time as they shall elect to matriculate the arms of their ancestor in their own names. This point has led to a much purer system of heraldry in Scotland than in England, and there is far less heraldic abuse in that country as a result, because the diflferences are decided not haphazardly by the user himself, as is the case in England, but by a competent officer of arms. Moreover the constant occasions of matriculation bring the arms fre- quently under official review. There is no fixed rule which decides ipse facto what difference shall be borne, and consequently this decision has retained in the hands of the heraldic executive an amount of con- trol which they still possess far exceeding that of the executive in England, and perhaps the best way in which to state the rules which hold good will be to reprint a portion of one of the Rhind Lectures, delivered by Sir James Balfour Paul, which is devoted to the point : — ** I have said that in Scotland the principle which limited the number of paternal coats led to a careful differencing of these coats as borne by the junior branches of the family. Though the English system was sometimes used, it has never obtained to any great extent in Scotland, the practice here being generally to difference by means of a bordure, in which way many more generations are capable of being distinguished than is possible by the English method. The weak point of the Scottish system is that, whilst the general idea is good, there is no definite rule whereby it can be carried out on unchanging lines ; much is left to the discretion of the authorities. *' As a general rule, it may be stated that the second son bears a plain bordure of the tincture of the principal charge in the shield, and his younger brothers also bear plain bordures of varying tinctures. In the next generation the eldest son of the second son would bear his father's coat and bordure without change ; the second son would have the bordure engrailed ; the third, invected ; the fourth, indented, MARKS OF CADENCY 501 and so on, the other sons of the younger sons in this generation differencing their father's bordures in the same way. The junior members of the next generation might have their bordures parted per pale, the following generations having their bordures parted per fess and per saltire, per cross or quarterly, gyronny or compony, that is, divided into alternate spaces of metal or colour in a single trace — this, however, being often in Scotland a mark of illegitimacy — counter- compone or a similar pattern in two tracts, or chequy with three or more tracts. '< You will see that these modifications of the simple bordure afford a great variety of differences, and when they are exhausted the expedient can then be resorted to of placing on the bordures charges taken from other coats, often from those of a maternal ancestor ; or they may be arbitrarily assigned to denote some personal characteristic of the bearer, as in the case of James Maitland, Major in the Scots regiment of Foot Guards, who carries the dismembered lion of his family within a bordure wavy azure charged with eight hand grenades or, significant, I presume, of his military profession. '< You will observe that, with all these varieties of differencing we have mentioned, the younger branches descending from the original eldest son of the parent house are still left unprovided with marks of cadency. These, however, can be arranged for by taking the ordinary which appears in their father's arms and modifying its boundary lines. Say the original coat was * argent, a chevron gules,' the second son of the eldest son would have the chevron engrailed, but without any bordure ; the third, invected, and so on ; and the next generations the systems of bordures accompanying the modified chevron would go on as before. And when all these methods are exhausted, differences can still be made in a variety of ways, e.g. by charging the ordinary with similar charges in a similar manner to the bordure as Erskine of Shiel- field, a cadet of Balgownie, who bore : ' Argent, on a pale sable, a cross crosslet fitch^e or within a bordure azure ' ; or by the introduction of an ordinary into a coat which had not one previously, a bend or the ribbon (which is a small bend) being a favourite ordinary to use for this purpose. Again, we occasionally find a change of tincture of the field of the shield used to denote cadency. ^^ There are other modes of differencing which need not be alluded to in detail, but I may say that on analysing the earlier arms in the Lyon Register, I find that the bordure is by far the most common method of indicating cadency, being used in no less than 1080 cases. The next most popular way is by changing the boundary lines of an ordinary, which is done in 563 shields ; 233 cadets difference their arms by the insertion of a smaller charge on the ordinary and 195 on 502 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the shield. A change of tincture, including counterchanging, is carried out in 155 coats, and a canton is added in 70 cases, while there are 350 coats in which two or more of the above methods are used. From these figures, which are approximately correct, you will see the relative frequency of the various modes of differencing. You will also note that the original coat of a family can be differenced in a great many ways so as to show the connection of cadets with the parent house. The drawback to the system is that heralds have never arrived at a uniform treatment so as to render it possible to calculate the exact relationship of the cadets. Much is left, as I said, to the discretion of the officer granting the arms ; but still it gives considerable assistance in determining the descent of a family." The late Mr. Stodart, Lyon Clerk Depute, who was an able herald, particularly in matters relating to Scotland, had elaborated a definite system of these bordures for differencing which would have done much to simplify Scottish cadency. Its weak point was obviously this, that it could only be applied to new matriculations of arms by cadets ; and so, if adopted as a definite and unchangeable matter of rule, it might have occasioned doubt and misunderstanding in future times with regard to many important Scottish coats now existing, without reference to Mr. Stodart's system. But the scheme elaborated by Mr. Stodart is now accepted as the broad basis of the Scottish system for matricula- tions (Fig. 732). In early Scottish seals the bordures are to so large an extent en- grailed as to make it appear that the later and present rule, which gives the plain bordure to immediate cadets, was not fully recognised or adopted. Bordures charged appear at a comparatively early date in Scotland. The bordure compony in Scotland and the bordure wavy in England, which are now used to signify illegitimacy, will be further considered in a subsequent chapter, but neither one nor the other originally carried any such meaning. The doubtful legitimacy of the Avondale and Ochiltree Stewarts, who bore the bordure compony in Scotland, along with its use by the Beauforts in England, has tended latterly to bring that difference into disrepute in the cadency of lawful sons — yet some of the bearers of that bordure during the first twenty years of the Lyon Register were unquestionably legitimate, whilst others, as Scott of Gorrenberry and Patrick Sinclair of Ulbester, were illegitimate, or at best only legitimated. The light in which the bordure compony had come to be regarded is shown by a Royal Warrant granted in 1679 to John Lundin of that Ilk, allowing him to drop the coat which his family had hitherto carried, and, as descended of a natural son of William the Lion, to bear the arms of Scotland within a bordure compony argent and azure. I MARKS OF CADENCY 503 The bordure counter-compony is assigned to fifteen persons, none of them, it is beHeved, of illegitimate descent, and some expressly said ■ to be ^' lineallie and lawfulie descended " from the ancestor whose arms they bore thus differenced. The idea of this bordure having been at any time a mark of bastardy is a very modern error, arising from a confusion with the bordure compony. rin conclusion, attention needs to be pointedly drawn to the fact CZZj ^^ ^J LTJ m fO| [Qj FQ Fig. 732. — The scheme of Cadency Bordures devised by Mr. Stodart. to presume cadency from proved instances of change. Instead of merely detailing isolated instances of variation in a number of different families, the matter may be better illustrated by closely following the successive variations in the same family, and an instructive instance is met with in the case of the arms of the family of Swinton of that Ilk. This is peculiarly instructive, because at no point in the descent covered by the arms referred to is there any doubt or question as to the fact of legitimate descent. ^ Claiming as they do a male descent and inheritance from Liulf the ^ftson of Edulf, Vicecomes of Northumbria, whose possession before I 504 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY iioo of the lands of Swinton is the earliest contemporary evidence which has come down to us of landowning by a Scottish subject, it is unfortunate that we cannot with authority date their armorial ensigns before the later half of the thirteenth century. Charters there are in plenty. Out of the twenty-three earliest Scottish writings given in the National MSS. of Scotland, nine, taken from the Coldingham documents preserved at Durham, refer to the village and lands of Swinton. Among these are two con- firmations by David I., i.e. before 1153; of Swin- ton <* in hereditate sibi et heredibus " to '* meo militi Hernulfo " or " Arnolto isti meo Militi," the first of the family to follow the Norman fashion, and adopt the territorial designation of de Swinton ; while at Durham and elsewhere, Cospatric de Swinton and his son Alan and grandson Alan appear more than eighty times in charters before i2c;o. Fig. 733.— Seal of Alan de -^ . -i. • x j.-ii x n x Swinton, c. 127 1. But it IS not till wc comc to c. 1 27 1 that we find a Swinton seal still attached to a charter. This is a grant by a third Alan of the Kirk croft of Lower Swinton to God and the blessed Cuthbert and the blessed Ebba and the Prior and Monks of Coldingham. The seal is of a very early form (Fig. 733), and may perhaps have belonged to the father and grandfather of the particular Alan who uses it. Of the Henry de Swinton who came next, and who swore fealty to Edward the First of England at Berwick in 1296, and of yet a fourth Alan, no seals are known. These were turbulent days throughout Scotland: but then we find a dis- tinct advance ; a shield upon a diapered ground, and upon it the single boar has given place to the three boars' heads which afterwards became so common in Scotland. Nisbet lends his authority to the tradition that all the families of Border birth who carried them ^^ _q 1 f — Gordon, Nisbet, Swinton, Redpath, Dunse, he men- Henry de Swin- tions, and he might have added others — were originally ^°^' ^^'^^' of one stock, and if so, the probabiHty must be that the breed sprung from Swinton. This seal (Fig. 734) was put by a second Henry de Swynton to one of the family charters, probably of the date of 1378, which have lately been placed for safe keeping in the Register House in Edinburgh. His successor, Sir John, the hero of Noyon in Picardy, of Otter- burn, and Homildon, was apparently the first of the race to use MARKS OF CADENCY 505 supporters. His seal (Fig. 735) belongs to the second earliest of the Douglas charters preserved at Drumlanrig. Its date is 1389, and Sir John de Swintoun is described as Dominus de Mar, a title he bore by right of his marriage with Margaret, Countess of Douglas and Mar. This probably also accounts for his coronet, and it is interesting to note that Fig. 735. — Seal of Sir John de Swinton, 1389. Fig. 736. — Seal of Sir John de Swinton, 1475- Fig. 737.— Seal of Robert Swin- ton, of that Ilk, 1598. the helmet, coronet, and crest are the exact counterpart of those on the Garter plate of Ralph, Lord Basset, in St. George's Chapel at Windsor. It is possibly more than a coincidence, for Froissart mentions them both as lighting in France ten to twenty years earlier. Of his son, the second Sir John, ^' Lord of that Ilk," we have no seal. His lance it was that overthrew Thomas, Duke of Clarence, the brother of Henry V., at Beauge in 1421, and he fell, a young man, three years later with the flower of the Scottish army at Verneuil ; but in 1475 his son, a third Sir John, uses the iden- tical crest and shield which his descendants carry to this day (Fig. 736). John had become a common name in the family, and the same or a similar seal did duty for the next three genera- tions ; but in 1598 we find the great-great- grandson, Robert Swinton of that Ilk, who represented Berwickshire in the first regularly constituted Parliament of Scotland, altering the character of the boars' heads (Fig. 737). He would also appear to have placed upon the chevron something which is difficult to decipher, but is probably the rose so borne by the Hepburns, his second wife having been a daughter of Sir Patrick Hepburn of Whitecastle. Whatever the charge was, it disappeared from the shield (Fig. 738) erected on the outer wall of Swinton Church by his second son and eventual heir, Sir Alexander, also member for his native county ; but Fig. 738. — Arms of Swinton. (From Swinton Church, 163-.) 5o6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the boars' heads are turned the other way, perhaps in imitation of those above the very ancient effigy of the first Sir Alan inside the church. Sir Alexander's son, John Swinton, <' Laird Swinton " Carlyle calls him, wrecked the family fortunes. According to Bishop Burnet he was '' the man of all Scotland most trusted and employed by Crom- well," and he died a Quaker, excommunicated and forfeited. To the circumstance that when, in 1672, the order went out that all arms were to be officially recorded, he was a broken man under sentence that his arms should be '' laceret and delete out of the Heralds' Books," .^1^^ Fig. 739. -Bookplate of Sir John Swinton of that Ilk, 1707. Fig. 740. — Bookplate of Archibald Swinton of Kimmerghame. we probably owe it that until of late years no Swinton arms appeared on the Lyon Register. Then to come to less stirring times, and turn to book-plates. His son, yet another Sir John of that Ilk, in whose favour the forfeiture was rescinded, sat for Berwickshire in the last Parliament of Scotland and the first of Great Britain. His bookplate (Fig. 739) is one of the earliest Scottish dated plates. His grandson. Captain Archibald Swinton of Kimmerghame, county Berwick (Fig. 740), was an ardent book collector up to his death in 1804, and Archibald's great-grandson, Captain George C. Swinton (Fig. 741), walked as March Pursuivant in the procession in West- minster Abbey at the coronation of King Edward the Seventh of MARKS OF CADENCY 507 England in 1902, and smote on the gate when that same Edward as First of Scotland claimed admission to his castle of Edinburgh in 1903. Fig. 741, — Bookplate of Captain George S. wSwinton, March Pursuivant of Arms. The arms as borne to-day by the head of the family, John Edulf Blagrave Swinton of Swinton Bank, a lieutenant in the Lothians and Berwickshire Imperial Yeomanry, are as given (Plate IV.). CHAPTER XXXII MARKS OF BASTARDY IT has been remarked that the knowledge of ^^ the man in the street " is least incorrect when he knows nothing. Probably the only heraldic knowledge that a large number possess is summed up in the assertion that the heraldic sign of illegitimacy is the *^ bar sinister." No doubt it is to the novelists — who, seeking to touch lightly upon an unpleasant subject, have ignorantly adopted a French collo- quialism — that w^e must attribute a great deal of the misconception which exists concerning illegitimacy and its heraldic marks of indica- tion. I assert most unhesitatingly that there are not now and never have been any unalterable laws as to what these marks should be, and the colloquialism which insists upon the " bar sinister " is a curiously amusing example of an utter misnomer. To any one with the most rudimentary knowledge of heraldry it must plainly be seen to be radically impossible to depict a bar sinister, for the simple reason that the bar is neither dexter nor sinister. It is utterly impossible to draw a bar sinister — such a thing does not exist. But the assertion of many writers with a knowledge of armory that " bar sinister " is a mistake for <* bend sinister " is also somewhat misleading, because the real mistake lies in the spelling of the term. The " barre sinistre " is merely the French translation of bend sinister, the French word '* barre " meaning a bend. The French '* barre " is not the English " bar." In order to properly understand the true significance of the marks of illegitimacy, it is necessary that the attempt should be made to transplant oneself into the environment when the laws and rules of heraldry were in the making. At that period illegitimacy was of little if any account. It has not debarred the succession of some of our own sovereigns, although, from the earliest times, the English have always been more prudish upon the point than other nations. In Ireland, even so late as the reign of Queen Elizabeth, it is a striking genealogical difficulty to decide in many noble pedigrees which if any of the given sons of any person were legitimate, and which of the ladies of his household, if any, might be legally termed his wife. J In Scotland we find the same thing, though perhaps it is not quite so 508 MARKS OF BASTARDY 509 blatant to so late a date, but considering what are and have been the Scottish laws of marriage, it is the fact or otherwise of marriage which has to be ascertained ; and though in England the legal status was recognised from an earlier period, the social status of the illegitimate offspring of a given man depended little upon the legal legitimacy of birth, but rather upon the amount of recognition the bastard received from his father. If a man had an unquestionably legitimate son, that son undoubtedly succeeded ; but if he had not, any technical stain upon the birth of the others had little effect in preventing their succession. A study of the succession to the Barony of Meinill clearly shows that the illegitimate son of the second Lord Meinill succeeded to the estates and peerage of his father in preference to his legitimate uncle. There are many other analogous cases. And when the Church juggled at its pleasure with the sacrament of marriage — dispensing and annulling or recognising marriages for reasons which we nowadays can only term whimsical — small wonder is it that the legal fact, though then admitted, had little of the importance which we now give to it. When the actual fact was so little more than a matter at the personal pleasure of the person most concerned, it would be ridiculous to suppose that any perpetuation of a mere advertisement of the fact would be con- sidered necessary, whilst the fact itself was so often ignored ; so that until comparatively recent times the Crown certainly never attempted to enforce any heraldic marks of illegitimacy. Rather were these enforced by the legitimate descendants if and when such descendants existed. The point must have first arisen when there were both legitimate and illegitimate descendants of a given person, and it was desired to make record of the true line in which land or honours should descend. To effect this purpose, the arms of the illegitimate son were made to carry some charge or alteration to show that there was some reason which debarred inheritance by their users, whilst there remained those entitled to bear the arms without the mark of distinction. But be it noted that this obligation existed equally on the legitimate cadets of a family, and in the earliest periods of heraldry there is little or no distinction either in the marks employed or in the character of the marks, which can be drawn between mere marks of cadency and marks of illegitimacy. Until a comparatively recent period it is abso- lutely unsafe to use these marks as signifying or proving either legiti- mate cadency or illegitimacy. The same mark stood for both, the only object which any distinctive change accomplished, being the distinction which it was necessary to draw between those who owned the right to the undifferenced arms, and owned the land, and those who did not. The object was to safeguard the right of the real pos- 5IO A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY sessors and their true heirs, and not to penalise the others. There was no particular mark either for cadency or for illegitimacy, the distinctions made being dictated by what seemed the most suitable and distinctive mark applicable to the arms under consideration. When that much has been thoroughly grasped, one gets a more accurate understanding of the subject. One other point has to be borne in mind (and to the present generation, which knows so well how extensively arms have been improperly assumed, the statement may seem startling), and that is, that the use of arms was formerly evidence of pedigree. As late as the beginning of the nineteenth century evidence of this character was submitted to the Committee of Privileges at the hearing of a Peerage case. The evidence was admitted for that purpose, though doubt (in that case very properly) was thrown upon its value. Therefore, in view of the two foregoing facts, there can be very little doubt that the use of armorial marks of bastardy was not invented or instituted y nor were these marks enforced, as punishment or as a disgrace. It is a curious instance how a careful study of words and terms employed will often afford either a clue or confirmation, when the true meaning of the term has long been overlooked. The official term for a mark of cadency is a " difference " mark, i.e, it was a mark to show the difference between one member of a family and another. The mark used to signify a lack of blood rela- tionship, and a mark used to signify illegitimacy are each termed a " mark of distinction," i.e, a mark that shall make something plainly '* distinct." What is that something? The fact that the use of the arms is not evidence of descent through which heirship can be claimed or proved. This, by the way, is a patent example of the advantage of adherence to precedent. The inevitable conclusion is that a bastard was originally only required to mark his shield sufficiently that it should be distinctly apparent that heirship would never accrue. The arms had to be distinct from those borne by those members of the family upon whom heirship might devolve. The social position of a bastard as '' belonging " to a family was pretty generally conceded, therefore he carried their arms, sufficiently marked to show he was not in the line of succession. This being accepted, one at once understands the great variety of the marks which have been employed. These answered the purpose of distinction, and nothing- more was demanded or necessary. Con- sequently a recapitulation of marks, of which examples can be quoted, would be largely a list of isolated instances, and as such they are useless for the purposes of deduction in any attempt to arrive at a correct conclusion as to what the ancient rules were. In brief, there were no MARKS OF BASTARDY 511 rules until the eighteenth, or perhaps even until the nineteenth century. The only rule was that the arms must be sufficiently marked in some way. This is borne out by the dictum of Menestrier. Except the label, which has been elsewhere referred to, the earliest marks of either cadency or illegitimacy for which accepted use can be found are the bend and the bordure ; but the bend for the purpose of illegitimacy seems to be the earlier, and a bend sup erimpos ed over a shield remained a mark of illegitimate cadency until a comparatively late period. This bend as a difference naturally was originally de- picted as a bend dexter, and as a mark of legitimate cadency is found in the arms of the younger son of Edmund Crouchback, Earl of Lan- caster, before he succeeded his elder brother. There are scores of other similar instances which a little research will show. Whether the term '' left-handed marriage " is the older, and the sinister bend is derived therefrom, or whether the slang term is derived from the sinister bend, it is perhaps not necessary to inquire. But there is no doubt that from an early period the bend of cadency, when such cadency was illegitimate, is frequently met with in the sinister form. But concurrently with such usage instances are found in which the dexter bend was used for the same purpose, and it is very plainly evident that it was never at that date looked upon as a penalty, but was used merely as a distinction y or for the purpose of showing that the wearer was not the head of his house or in possession of the lordship. The territorial idea of the nature of arms, which has been alluded to in the chapter upon marks of cadency, should be borne in mind in coming to a conclusion. Soon after the recognition of the bend as a mark of illegitimacy we come across the bordure ; but there is some confusion with this, bordures of all kinds being used indiscriminately to denote both legitimate and illegitimate cadency. There are countless other forms of marking illegitimacy, and it is impossible to attempt to summarise them, and absolutely impossible to draw conclusions as to any family from marks upon its arms when this point is under discussion. To give a list of these instances would rather seem an attempt to deduce a rule or rules upon the point, so I say at once that jthere was no recognised mark, and any plain distinction seems to have been ac- cepted as sufficient ; and no distinction whatever was made when the illegitimate son, either from failure of legitimate issue or other reason, succeeded to the lands and honours of his father. Out of the multitude^ of marks, the bend, and subsequently the bend sinister, emerge as most / frequently in use, and finally the bend sinister exclusively ; so that it has come to be considered, and perhaps correctly as regards one \ period, that its use was equivalent to a mark of illegitimacy in England^ 512 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY But there has always remained to the person of bastard descent the right of discarding the bastardised coat, and adopting a new coat of arms, the only requirement as to the new coat being that it shall be so distinct from the old one as not to be liable to confusion therewith. And it is a moot point whether or not a large proportion of the in- stances which are tabulated in most heraldic works as examples of marks of bastardy are anything whatever of the kind. My own opinion is that many are not, and that it is a mistake to so consider them ; the true explanation undoubtedly in some — and outside the Royal Family probably in most — being that they are new coats of arms adopted as new coats of arms, doubtless bearing relation to the old family coat, but sufficiently distinguished therefrom to rank as new arms, and were never intended to be taken as, and never were bastardised examples of formerly existing coats. It is for this reason that I have refrained from giving any extensive list such as is to be found in most other treatises on heraldry, for all that can be said for such lists is that they are lists of the specific arms of specific bastards, which is a very different matter from a list of heraldic marks of illegitimacy. Another objection to the long lists which most heraldic works give of early instances of marks of bastardy as data for deduction lies in the fact that most are instances of the illegitimate children of Royal personages. It is singularly unsafe to draw deductions, to be applied to the arms of others, from the Royal Arms, for these generally have laws unto themselves. The bend sinister in its bare simplicity, as a mark of illegitimacy, was seldom used, the more frequent form being the sinister bendlet, or even the diminutive of that^^ the cottise. There is no doubt, of course, that when a sinister bend or bendlet debruises another coat that that is a bastardised version of an older coat, but examples can be found of the sinister bend as a charge which has no reference whatever to illegitimacy. Two instances that come to mind, which can be found by reference to any current peerage, are the arms of Shiffner and Burne-Jones. Certainly in these cases I know of no illegitimacy, and neither coat is a bastardised version of an older existing coat. Anciently the bendlet was drawn across arms and quarterings, and an example of a coat of arms of some number of quarterings debruised for an illegitimate family is found in the registration of a Talbot pedigree in one of the Visitation Books. As a mark of distinction upon arms the bend sinister for long past has fallen out of use, though for the purpose of differencing crests a bendlet wavy sinister is still made use of, and will be again presently referred to. Next to the bend comes the bordure. Bordures of all kinds were used for the purposes of cadency from practically the earliest periods MARKS OF BASTARDY 513 of heraldic differencing. But they were used indiscriminately, as has been already stated, both for legitimate and illegitimate cadency. John of Gaunt, as is well known, was the father of Henry IV. and the ancestor of Henry VII., the former being the issue of his legitimate wife, the latter coming from a son who, as one of the old chroniclers puts it, ''was of double advowirie begotten," But, as every one knows, John of Gaunt's children by Catherine Roet or Swynford were legitimated by Act of Parliament, the Act of Parliament not excepting the succession to the Throne, a disability later introduced in Letters Patent of the Crown when giving a subsequent confirmation of the Act, but which, nevertheless, they could not overrule. But taking the sons of the latter family as legitimate, which (whatever may have been the moral aspect of the case) they were undoubtedly in the eyes of the common law after the passing of the Act referred to, they existed concurrently with the undoubtedly senior descendants of the first marriage of John of Gaunt with Blanche of Lancaster, and it was necessary — whether they were legitimate or not — to distinguish the arms of the junior from the senior branch. The result was that as legitimate cadets, and not as bastards, the arms of John of Gaunt were differenced for the line of the Dukes of Somerset by the addition of the bordure compony argent and azure — the livery colours of Lancaster. It is a weird position, for these colours were derived from the family of the legitimate wife. The fight as to whether these children were legitimate or illegitimate was, of course, notorious, and a matter of history ; but from the fact that they bore a bordure compony, an idea grew up both in this country and in Scotland also from the similarity of the cases of the doubtful legitimacy of the Avondale and Ocniltree Stewarts, who both used the bordure compony, that the bordure compom^was a sign of illegitirnacy, whereas in both countries at an earlier period it un- doubtedly was accepted as a mark of legitimate cadency. As a mark of bastardy it had subsequently some extensive use in both countries, and it still remains the only mark now used for the purpose in Scottish heraldry. Whether it was that it was not considered as of a fixed nature, or whether it was that it had become notorious and unacceptable, it is difficult to say, though the officers of arms have been blamed for making a change on the assumption that it was the latter. Some writers who clamour strongly for the penalising of bastard arms, and for the plain and recognisable marking of them as such (a position adopted rather vehemently by Woodward, a singularly .erudite heraldic writer), are rather uncharitable, and at the same time rather lacking in due observation and careful consideration of ancient ideas 2 K 514 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY and ancient precedents. That the recognised mark has been changed at different periods, and as a consequence that to a certain extent the advertisement it conveys has been less patent is, of course, put down to the ^^ venaUty " of mediaeval heralds (happily their backs are broad) by those who are too short-sighted to observe that the one thing an official herald moves heaven and earth to escape from is the making of a new precedent ; and that, on the score of signs of illegitimacy, the official heralds, when the control of arms passed into their hands, found no established rule. So far from having been guilty of venality, as Woodward suggests, they have erred on the other side, and by having worked only on the limited number of precedents they found they have stereotyped the advertisement, and thereby made the situation more stringent than they found it. We have it from biblical sources that the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the children unto the third and fourth generations, and this spirit has undoubtedly crept into the views of many writers, but to get into the true perspective of the matter one needs to consider the subject from the point of view of less prudish days than our own. I have no wish to be misunderstood. In these days much heraldic reviewing of the blatant and baser sort depends not upon the value of the work performed, a point of view which is never given a thought, but entirely upon the identity of the writer whose work is under review, and is largely composed of misquotation and misrepresentation. It may perhaps be as well, therefore, to state that I am not seeking to condone illegitimacy or to combat present opinions upon the point. I merely state that our present opinions are a modern growth, and that in the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, when the fundamental principles of heraldry were in the making, it was not considered a disgrace to have an illegitimate son, nor was it considered then that to be of illegitimate birth carried the personal stigma that came later. At any rate, the fact remains that a new mark was called into being in England about the year 1780 when in a grant to Zachary to quarter the arms of Sacheverell, from which family he was in the female line illegitimately descended, the bordure wavy was first met with as a sufficient and proper mark of illegitimacy. The curious point is that before that date in Scotland and in England the bordure wavy possessed nothing of this character, and to the present day the bordure wavy in Scotland is undoubtedly nothing more than a legitimate mark of legitimate cadency, for which mark Mr. Stodart provides a place in the scheme of differencing which he tabulated as the basis of cadency marks in Scotland (Fig. 732). Since that date the bordure wavy has MARKS OF BASTARDY 515 remained the mark which has been used for the purpose in England, as the bordure compony has remained the mark in Scotland. Bearing in mind that the only necessity was some mark which should carry sufficient distinction from the arms of the family, it follows, as a natural consequence of human nature, that as soon as any parti- cular mark became identified with illegitimacy (after that was considered to be a stigma), that mark was quietly dropped and some other sub- stituted, and no one should be surprised to find the bordures wavy and compony quietly displaced by something else. If any change is to be made in the future it is to be hoped that no existing mark will be adopted, and that the marks in England and Scotland shall not conflict even if they do not coincide. The bendlet sinister, however, survives in the form of the baton sinister, which is a bendlet couped placed across the centre of the shield. The baton sinister, however, is a privilege which, as a charge on a shield, is reserved, such as it is, for Royal bastards. The latest instance of this was in the exemplification of arms to the Earl of Munster and his brothers and sisters early in the nineteenth century. Other surviving instances are met with in the arms of the Duke of St. Albans and the Duke of Grafton. Another privilege of Royal bastards is that they may have the baton of metaly a privilege which is, accord- ing to Berry, denied to those of humbler origin. According to present law the position of an illegitimate person heraldically is based upon the common law of the country, which practically declares that an illegitimate child has no name, no parentage, and no relations. The illegitimacy of birth is an insuper- able bar to inheritance, and a person of illegitimate birth inherits no arms at all, the popular idea that he inherits a right to the arms subject to a mark of distinction being quite incorrect. He has none at all. There has never been any mark which, as a matter of course and of mere motion, could attach itself automatically to a shield, as is the case with the English marks of difference, e.g, the crescent of the second son or the mullet of the third. This is a point upon which I have found mistaken ideas very frequently held, even by those who have made some study of heraldry. But a very little thought should make it plain that by the very nature of the fact there cannot be either a recognised mark, compulsory use, or an ipse facto sign. Illegitimacy is negative, not positive — a fact which many writers hardly give sufficient weight to. If any one of illegitimate birth desires to obtain a right to arms he has two courses open to him. He can either (not disclosing the fact of his illegitimacy, and not attempting to prove that he is a descendant of any kind from any one else) apply for and obtain a new grant of 5i6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY arms on his own basis, and worry through the College the grant of a coat as closely following in design that of the old family as he can get, which means that he would be treated and penalised with such alterations (not ^* marks of distinction ") as would be imposed upon a stranger in blood endeavouring to obtain arms founded upon a coat to which he had no right. The cost of such a proceeding in England is\^76, I OS., the usual fees upon an ordinary grant. The alternative course is simple. He must avow himself a bastard, and must prove his paternity or maternity, as the case may be (for in the eye of the law — common and heraldic — he bears the same relation, which is nil, and the same right to the name and arms, which is nil, of both his father and his mother). Illegitimacy under English law affords one of the many instances in which anomalies exist, for, strange as the statement is, a bastard comes into the world without any name at all. Legally, at birth a bastard child has then no name at all, and no arms. It must subsequently acquire such right to a name (whatever right that may amount to) as user of and reputation therein may give him. He inherits no arms at all, no name, and no property, save by specific devise or bequest. The lack of parents operates as a chasm which it is impossible to bridge. It is not a case of a peculiar bridge or a faulty bridge ; there is no bridge at all. Names, in so far as they are matters of law, are subject to canon law ; at any rate, the law upon the subject, such as it is, originated in canon law, and not in statute or common law. Canon law was made, and has never since been altered, at a time when surnames were not in existence. A bastard no more inherits the surname of the mother than it does the surname of its father ; and the spirit of petty officialism, so rampant amongst the clergy, which seeks to impose upon a bastard nolens volens the surname of its mother, has no justification in law or fact. A bastard has precisely as little right to the surname of its mother as it has to the surname of its father. Obviously, however, under the customs of our present social life, every person must have a surname of one kind or another ; and it is here that the anomaly in the British law exists, inasmuch as neither statute nor canon law pro- vide any means for conferring a surname. That the King has the prerogative, and exercises it, of conferring or confirming surnames is, of course, unquestioned, but it is hardly to be supposed that the King will trouble himself to provide a surname for every illegitimate child which may be born ; and outside this prerogative, which probably is exercised about once a year, there is no method provided or definitely recognised by the law to meet this necessity. To obviate the difficulty, the surname has to be that which is conferred upon the child by MARKS OF BASTARDY 517 general custom ; and as an illegitimate child is in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred brought up by its mother, it is usually by the same custom which confers the surname of its owner upon a dog in so many parts of the country that a bastard child gets known by its mother's surname, and consequently has that surname conferred upon it by general custom. The only names that an illegitimate child has an inalienable right to are the names by which it is baptized ; and if two names are given, and the child or its guardians elect that it should be known only by those baptismal names, and if common repute and general custom, as would be probable, uses the last of those names as a surname, there is no legal power on earth which can force upon the child any other name ; and if the last of the baptismal names happens to be its father's surname, the child will have an absolute right to be known only by its Christian names, which to all intents and purposes will mean that it will be known by its father's surname. In the same way that an illegitimate child inherits no surname at all, it equally inherits no arms. Consequently it has no shield upon which to carry a mark of bastardy, if such a mark happened to be in existence. But if under a will or deed of settlement an illegitimate child is required to assume the name and arms of its father or of its mother^ a Royal Licence to assume such name and arms is considered to be necessary. It may be here noted that voluntary applications to assume a name and arms in the case of an illegitimate child are not entertained unless it can be clearly shown (which is not always an easy matter) what the parentage really was. It will be noticed that I have said he will be required to prove his paternity. This is rigorously insisted upon, inasmuch as it is not fair to penalise the reputation of a dead man by inflicting upon him a record of bastard descendants whilst his own life might have been stainless. An illegitimate birth is generally recorded under the name of the mother only, and even when it is given, the truth of any statement as to paternity is always open to grave suspicion. There is nothing, therefore, to prevent a person asserting that he is the son of a duke, whereas his real father may have been in a very plebeian walk in life ; and to put the arms of the duke's family at the mercy of any fatherless person who chose to fancy a differenced version of them would be manifestly unjust, so that without proof in a legal action of the actual paternity, or some recognition under a will or settlement, it is im- possible to adopt the alternative in question. But if such recognition or proof is forthcoming, the procedure is to petition the Sovereign for a Royal Licence to use (or continue to use) the name desired and to bear the arms of the family. Such a petition is always granted, on 5i8 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY proper proof of the facts, if made in due form through the proper channels. The Royal Licence to that effect is then issued. But the document contains two conditions, the first being that the arms shall be exemplified according to the laws of arms '< with due and proper marks of distinction," and that the Royal Licence shall be recorded in the College of Arms, otherwise *^ to be void and of none effect." The invariable insertion of this clause puts into the hands of the College one of the strongest weapons the officers of arms possess. Under the present practice the due and proper marks of distinction are, for the arms, a bordure wavy round the shield of the most suitable colour, according to what the arms may be, but if possible of some colour or metal different from any of the tinctures in the arms. The crest is usually differenced by a bendlet sinister wavy, but a pallet wavy is sometimes used, and sometimes a saltire wavy, couped or otherwise. The choice between these marks generally depends upon the nature of the crest. But even with this choice, the anomaly is frequently found of blank space being carefully debruised. Seeing that the mark of the debruising is not a tangible object or thing, but a mark painted upon another object, such a result seems singularly ridiculous, and ought to be avoided. Whilst the ancient practice certainly appears to have been to make some slight change in the crest, it does not seem to have been debruised in the present manner. There are some number of more recent cases where, whilst the existing arms have been charged with the necessary marks of distinction, entirely new, or- very much altered crests have been granted without any re- cognisable <^ marks of distinction." There can be no doubt that the bendlet wavy sinister upon the crest is a palpable penalising of the bearer, and I think the whole subject of the marks of bastardy in the three kingdoms might with advantage be brought under official con- sideration, with a view to new regulations being adopted, A bendlet wavy sinister is such an absolute defacement of a crest that few can care to make use of a crest so marked. It carries an effect far beyond what was originally the intention of marks of distinction. A few recent bastardised exemplifications which have issued from Ulster's Office have had the crest charged with a baton couped sinister. The baton couped sinister had always hitherto been confined to the arms of Royal bastards, but I am not aware of any Royal crest so bastardised. Of course no circumstances can be conceived in which it is necessary to debruise supporters, as under no circumstances can these be the subject of a Royal Licence of this character, except in a possible case where they might have been granted as a simple augmentation to a man and his descendants, without further limitation. I know of no bastardised version consequent upon such a grant. MARKS OF BASTARDY 519 Supporters signify some definite honour which cannot ordinarily survive illegitimacy. The bordure wavy is placed round the pronominal arms only, and no right to any quarterings the family may have enjoyed previously is conferred, except such right to a quarterly coat as might ensue through the assumption of a double name. Quartering is held to signify representation which cannot be given by a Royal Licence, but a quartering of augmentation or a duplicate coat for the pronominal name which had been so regularly used with the alternative coat as to constitute the two something in the nature of a compound coat, would be exemplified <^ all within a bordure wavy." Each illegitimate coat stands on its own basis, and there is a well-known instance in which a marriage was subsequently found to be illegal, or to have never taken place, after which, I believe, some number of brothers and sisters obtained Royal Licences and exemplifications. The descendants of one of the brothers will be found in the current Peerage Books, and those who know their peerage history well will recognise the case I allude to. All the brothers and sisters had the same arms exemplified, each with a bordure wavy of a different colour. If there were de- scendants of any of the sisters, those descendants would have been entitled to quarter the arms, because the illegitimacy made each sister an heiress for heraldic purposes. This is a curious anomaly, for had they been legitimate the descendants would have enjoyed no such right. In Scotland the mark of illegitimacy for the arms is the bordure compony, which is usually but not always indicative of the same. The bordure counter-compony has been occasionally stated to have the same character. This is hardly correct, though it may be so in a few isolated cases, but the bordure chequy has nothing whatever of an illegitimate character. It will be noticed that whilst the bordure compony and the bordure counter-company have their chequers or " panes," to use the heraldic term, following the outline of the shield, by lines parallel to those which mark its contour, the bordure chequy is drawn by lines parallel to and at right angles to the palar line of the shield, irrespective of its outline. A bordure chequy must, of course, at one point or another show three distinct rows of checks. The bastardising of crests even in England is a comparatively modern practice. I know of no single instance ancient or modern of the kind in Scottish heraldry, though I could mention scores of achievements in which the shields carry marks of distinction. This is valuable evidence, for no matter how lax the official practice of Scottish armory may have been at one period, the theory of Scottish armory far more nearly approaches the ancient practices and rules of heraldry 5^o A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY than does the armory of any other country. That theory is much nearer the ideal theory than the English one, but unfortunately for the practical purposes of modern heraldic needs, it does not answer so well. At the present day, therefore, a Scottish crest is not marked in any way. Most handbooks refer to a certain rule which is supposed to exist for the differencing of a coat to denote illegitimacy when the coat is that of the mother and not the father, the supposed method being to depict the arms under a surcoat, the result being much the same as if the whole of the arms appeared in exaggerated flaunches, the remainder of the shield being left vacant except for the tincture of the surcoat. As a matter of fact only one instance is known, and consequently we must consider it as a new coat devised to bear reference to the old one, and not as a regularised method of differencing for a particular set of circumstances. In Ireland the rules are to all intents and purposes the same as in England, with the exception of the occasional use of a sinister baton instead of a bendlet wavy sinister upon the crest. In Scotland, where Royal Licences are unknown, it is merely necessary to prove paternity, and rematriculate the arms with due and proper marks of distinction. It was a very general idea during a former period, but subsequently to the time when the bend and bendlet sinister and the bordure were re- cognised as in the nature of the accepted marks of bastardy, and when their penal nature was admitted, that whatever mark was adopted for the purpose of indicating illegitimacy need only be borne for three genera- tions. Some of the older authorities tell us that after that length of time had elapsed it might be discarded, and some other and less objec- tionable mark be taken in its place. The older writers were striving, consciously or unconsciously, to reconcile the disgrace of illegitimacy, which they knew, with heraldic facts which they also knew, and to reconcile in certain prominent families undoubted illegitimacy with unmarked arms, the probability being that their sense of justice and regard for heraldry prompted them to the remark that some other mark of distinction ought to be added, whilst all the time they knew it never was. The arms of Byron, Somerset, Meinill, and Herbert are all cases where the marks of illegitimacy have been quietly dropped, entire reversion being had to the undifferenced original coat. At a time when marks of illegitimacy, both in fact and in theory, were nothing more than marks of cadency and difference from the arms of the head of the house, it was no venality of the heralds, but merely the acceptance of current ideas, that permitted them to recognise the undifferenced arms for the illegitimate descendants when there were no legitimate owners from whose claim the arms of the others needed • MARKS OF BASTARDY 521 to be differentiated, and when lordships and lands had lapsed to a bastard branch. To this fact must be added another. The armorial control of the heralds after the days of tournaments was exercised through the Visitations and the Earl Marshal's Court. Peers were never subject to the Visitations, and so were not under control unless their arms were challenged in the Earl Marshal's Court by the rightful owner. The cases that were notorious are cases of the arms of peers. The Visitations gave the officers of arms greater control over the arms of Commoners than they had had theretofore, and the growing social opinions upon legitimacy and marriage brought social obser- vances more into conformity with the technical law, and made that technical law of no inheritance and no paternity an operative fact. The result is that the hard legal fact is now rigidly and rightly insisted upon, and the claim and right to arms of one of illegitimate descent depends and is made to depend solely upon the instruments creating that right, and the conditions of ^' due and proper marks of distinc- tion " always subject to which the right is called into being. Nowadays there is no release from the penalty of the bordures wavy and compony save through the avenue of a new and totally different grant and the full fees payable therefor. But, as the bearer of a bordure wavy once remarked to me, '' I had rather descend illegitimately from a good family and bear their arms marked than descend from a lot of nobodies and use a new grant." But until the common law is altered, if it ever is, the game must be played fairly and the conditions of a Royal Licence observed, for the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children. Although I have refrained from giving any extended list of bas- tardised coats as examples of the rules for indicating illegitimacy, reference may nevertheless be made to various curious examples. The canton has occasionally been used. Sir John de Warren, a natural son of John, Earl of Surrey, Sussex, and Warenne {d, 1347), bore a canton of the arms of his mother, Alice de Nerford ['' Gules, a lion rampant ermine "], over the chequy shield of Warren. A similar instance can be found in modern times, the arms of Charlton of Apley Castle, CO. Salop, being bastardised by a sinister canton which bears two coats quarterly, these coats having formerly been quarterings borne in the usual manner. The custom of placing the paternal arms upon a bend has been occasionally adopted, but this of course is the creation of a new coat. It was followed by the Beauforts before their legitimation, and by Sir Roger de Clarendon, the illegitimate son of the Black Prince. The Somerset family, who derived illegitimately from the Beauforts, Dukes of Somerset, first debruised the Beaufort arms by OF THE 522 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY a bendlet sinister, but in the next generation the arms were placed upon a wide fess, this on a plain field of or. Although the Somersets, Dukes of Beaufort, have discarded all signs of bastardy from their shield, the version upon the fess was continued as one of the quarterings upon the arms of the old Shropshire family of Somerset Fox. One of the most curious bastardised coats is that of Henry Fitz-Roy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset, illegitimate son of Henry VIH. This shows the Royal Arms within a bordure quarterly ermine and counter-compony or and azure, debruised by a baton sinister argent, an inescutcheon quarterly gules and vaire, or and vert [possibly hinting at the Blount arms of his mother, barry nebuly or and sable], over all a lion rampant argent, on a chief azure a tower between two stags' heads caboshed argent, attired or. CHAPTER XXXIII THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS THE science of marshalling is the conjoining of two or more coats of arms upon one shield for the purpose of indicating sovereignty, dominion, alliance, descent, or pretension, accord- ing to recognised rules and regulations, by the employment of which the story of any given achievement shall be readily translatable. The methods of marshalling are (i) dimidiation, (2) impalement, (3) quartering, (4) superimposition. Instances of quartered shields are to be met with possibly before impalements or dimidiation. The earliest attempt at anything like a regularised method of procedure to signify marriage was that usually males quartered the arms of their wives or ancestresses from whom they acquired their lands ; whilst impaled coats were to all - intents and purposes the armorial bearings of married women, or more frequently of widows who took an immediate interest in their husbands' property. This ancient usage brings home very forcibly the former territorial connection of arms and land. The practice of the husband impaling the wife's arms, whether heiress or not, probably arose near the close of the fifteenth century. Even now it is laid down that the arms of a wife should not in general be borne upon the husband's banner, surcoat, or official seal. But impalement as we now know it was preceded by dimidiation. Dimidiation, which was but a short-lived method, was effected by the division of the shield down the centre. On the dexter side was placed the dexter half of the husband's arms, and on the sinister side was placed the sinister half of the wife's arms. With some coats of arms no objection could be urged against the employment of this method. But it was liable to result {e.g. with two coats of arms having the same ordinary) in the creation of a design which looked far more like one simple coat than a conjunction of two. The dimidiation of ^^ argent, a bend gules " and '* argent, a chevron sable " would simply result in a single coat '' argent, a bend per pale gules and sable." This fault of the system must have made itself manifest at an early period, for we soon find it became customary to introduce about two-thirds of 523 • 524 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the design of each coat for the sake of demonstrating their separate character. It must soon thereafter have become apparent that if two- thirds of the design of a coat of arms could be squeezed into half of the shield there was no valid reason why the whole of the design could not be employed. This therefore became customary under the name of impalement; and the practice has ever since remained with us. Few examples indeed of dimidiation are to be met with, and as a practical method of conjunction, the practice was chiefly in vogue during the earlier part of the fourteenth century. Occasionally quartered coats were dimidiated, in which case the first and third quarters of the husband's coat were conjoined with the second and fourth of the wife's. As far as outward appearance went, this practice resulted in the fact that no distinction existed from a plain quartered coat. Thus the seal of Margaret of Bavaria, Countess of Holland, and wife of John, Count de Nevers, in 1385 (afterwards Duke of Burgundy), bears a shield on which is apparently a simple instance of quartering, but really a dimidiated coat. The two coats to the dexter side of the palar line are : In chief Burgundy-Modern ('' France-Ancient, a bordure compony argent and gules "), and in base Burgundy-Ancient. On the sinister side the coat in chief is Bavaria ('< Bendy-lozengy argent and azure ") ; and the one in base contains the quartered arms of Flanders ('' Or, a lion rampant sable ") ; and Holland ('< Or, a lion rampant gules ") ; the lines dividing these latter quarters being omitted, as is usually found to be the case with this particular shield. Certain examples can be found amongst the Royal Arms in Eng- land which show much earlier instances of dimidiation. The arms of Margaret of France, who died in 13 19, the second queen of Edward I., as they remain on her tomb in Westminster Abbey, afford an example of this method of conjunction. The arms of England appear on the dexter side of the escocheon ; and this coat undergoes a certain amount of curtailment, though the dimidiation is not com- plete, portions only of the hindmost parts of the lions being cut off by the palar line. The coat of France, on the sinister side, of course does not readily indicate the dimidiation. Boutell, in his chapter on marshalling in '' Heraldry, Historical and Popular," gives several early examples of dimidiation. The seal of Edmond Plantagenet, Earl of Cornwall (d, 1300), bears his arms (those of Richard, Earl of Cornwall, and King of the Romans) dimidiating those of his wife, Margaret de Clare. Here only the sinister half of his bordure is removed, while the Clare coat (" Or, three chevrons gules ") is entirely dimidiated, and the chevrons are little distinguishable from bends. Both coats are dimidiated in other examples mentioned THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 525 by Boutell, viz. William de Valence and his wife, and Alianore Mon- tendre and her husband Guy Ferre. On the seal of Margaret Campbell, wife of Alexander Napier, in 153 1, the shield shows upon the dexter side the arms of Lennox, and on the sinister the dimidiated coat (the sinister half of the quartered arms) of Campbell and Lorn. This results in the galley of Lorn being in chief, and the Campbell gyrons in base. An early and interesting Irish example of this kind of marshalling is afforded by a dimidiated coat of Clare and Fitzgerald, which now figures on the official seal of the Provosts of Youghal (Clare : " Or, three chevrons gules." Fitzgerald : " Argent, a saltire gules, with a label of five points in chief "). Both these coats are halved. They result from the marriage of Richard Clare, Earl of Hertford, with Juliana, daughter and heir of Maurice Fitzgerald, feudal lord of Inchi- quin and Youghal. An even more curious case of dimidiation comes to light in the arms formerly used by the Abbey of St. Etienne at Caen, in which the arms of England and those attributed to the Duchy of Normandy (^^ Gules, two lions passant guardant or ") w^ere dimidiated, so that in the former half three of the fore- quarters of the lions appear, while in the sinister half only two of the hind-quarters are represented. Dimidiation was not always effected by conjunction down the palar line, other partition lines of the shield being occasionally, though very rarely, employed in this manner. Certain curious (now indivisible) coats of arms remain which undoubtedly originated in the dimidiation of two separate coats, e,g, the arms of Yarmouth, Sandwich, Hastings, Rye, and Chester. In all cases some Royal connection can be traced which has caused the Royal Arms of England to be conjoined with the earlier devices of fish, ships, or garbs which had been employed by the towns in question. It is worth the passing thought, however, whether the conjoined lions and hulks used by the Cinque Ports may not originally have been a device of the Sovereign for naval purposes, or possibly the naval version of the Royal Arms (see page 182). One other remainder from the practice of dimidiation still survives amongst the presently existing rules of heraldry. It is a rule to which no modern authoritative exception can be mentioned. When a coat within a bordure is impaled with another coat, the bordure is not con- tinued down the centre of the shield, but stops short at top and bottom when the palar line is reached. This rule is undoubtedly a result of the ancient method of conjunction by dimidiation, but the curious point is that, at the period when dimidiation was employed and during the period which followed, some number of examples can be 526 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY found where the bordure is continued round the whole coat which is within it. The arms of man and wife are now conjoined according to the following rules : — If the wife is not an heraldic heiress the two coats are impaled. If the wife be an heraldic heir or coheir, in lieu of impalement the arms of her family are placed on an inescutcheon superimposed on the centre of her husband's arms, the inescutcheon being termed an escutcheon of pretence, because /wr^ uxoris she being an heiress of her house, the husband ** pretends " to the representation of her family. * For heraldic purposes it therefore becomes necessary to define the terms heir and heiress. It is very essential that the point should be thoroughly understood, because quarterings other than those of aug- mentation can only be inherited from or through female ancestors who are in themselves heirs or coheirs (this is the true term, or, rather, the ancient term, though they are now usually referred to colloquially as heiresses or coheiresses) in blood, or whose issue subsequently become in a later generation the representatives of any ancestor in the male line of that female ancestor. A woman is an *' heir " or '^ heiress " (i) if she is an only child ; (2) if all her brothers die without leaving any issue to survive, either male or female ; (3) she becomes an heiress '* in her issue," as it is termed, if she die leaving issue herself if and when all the descendants male and female of her brothers become absolutely extinct. The term " coheir " or ** coheiress " is employed in cases similar to the foregoing when, instead of one daughter, there are two or more. No person can be ^^ heir " or " coheir " of another person until the latter is dead, though he or she may be heir-apparent or heir-presump- tive. Though the word " heir " is frequently used with regard to material matters, such usage is really there incorrect, except in cases of intestacy. A person benefiting under a will is a legatee of money, or a devisee of land, and not an heir to either. The table on page 527 may make things a little clearer, but in the following remarks in- testacy is ignored, and the explanations apply solely to heirship of blood. Charles in the accompanying pedigree is, after 1800, heir of David. Thomas is heir-apparent of Charles, being a son and the eldest born. He dies v.p. (vita patris, i.e. in the lifetime of his father) and never becomes heir. A daughter can never become an heir-apparent, as there is always, during the lifetime of her father, the possibility of a son being born. Mary, Ellen, and Blanche are coheirs of Thomas their father, whom they survive, and they are also coheirs of their grandfather Charles, to whom they succeed, and they would properly in a pedigree be described as both. They are heirs-general of Thomas, Charles, and David, and, being the heirs of the senior line, they are S5f Us I oj-^ >. m CtS O V J, W CO ^ Ik ." o ^ O = CS S *3 ^O VO 3 t3.2§B«|-SS = 2 is ^1 X!|^ 03 CO T" o ,_SH 3 O r S M « Oil-! > « c^ 5|| s.S'Sfi Ill's a».2 m^ W°°2 g^ C (U H> On I .t! "^ S "2 ^.2 ch n >> ill w rj *j 4> 00 ,T fc >, « 9> > 03 o5_r a G V S c3 t£ n a "S > -- -= ^ 3C C-.2 o >>"S >; S".-:: c4 £ ° . !?-: iT^ s 5i s «^ "^ « «fJ^'S2oc = « «! 2 ^ -c *^ « M^ 00 o S O S h, fe 0_ M-^ t*C 1-^ 5 ■-- 3 a •" ♦^ » ^'S 22::: ^-»^ ggS'S^'S'S'S So g 3.2 -g-g cj C.2 fa s^t^ «*« O 2^S|g3o|g ri:§^3 . g Q) e (u-s C2 O ^ 00 oj 00 6 o - o o c ^ 2 a «ogfo H ; o ~ ^ § 03 O p; o 2 cs " ►j _ mo C O a'S s^ o .-I »« . -till pq ^t-SS.S I ^25 O 9j .S£ 2s:slss3t5g" 2s^::='*o=:s*iO sam^^SS""^.^® ^ .^H ^H >r ^ O r^ ^ "t^ M «M 2&1^25t:^^ §tp-sag|^^a *i!--^® V U 09 "T »o ,2j3 -3.2 y o a °§§ 1^s| a *-( 'S • goo a>X5j2 ^ ,- 5 00 T* s 0) a o w * « 2 S S S o a xi 2 o o* a n ■§«§ "a*:5a III- I? W 2 a o . ►5"a.5l a «) 2 t»,-S 0) a W«2a pa u c -b) d> -^aogi '-Sol^l S j; 'S S^ ♦^ 5a « £ MOO «5 *- 'S a a, j^oo O , eS a^ 1^ 00 ^ W 00 no c8^ 528 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY heirs-general or coheirs-general of their house. David being possessed of the barony *' by writ " of Cilfowyr, it would " fall into abeyance " at the death of Charles between Jthe three daughters equally. In Scotland Mary, Ellen, and Blanche would be termed '* heirs portioners," and Mary, being an heiress and the eldest born in the direct and senior line, would be termed the ^' heir of line." David being possessed of an ancient Scottish peerage not limited to males (the Earldom of Edinburgh), Mary, the heir of hne, would at once succeed in her own right as Countess of Edinburgh on the death of her grandfather Charles. If the family were an untitled Scottish family entitled to supporters, these would descend to Mary unless they had been specifically granted with some other limitation. At the death of Thomas in 1830 Edmond becomes heir male apparent, and at the death of his father in 1840 Edmond becomes heir male of his house until his death. David having been created a peer (Duke of London) with remainder to the heirs male of his body, Edmond succeeded as Duke of London at the death of Charles in 1840. Grace and Muriel are coheirs of Edmond after his death. They are not either coheirs or heirs-general of Charles, in spite of the fact that their father was his heir male. At the death of Charles in 1840, when Edmond succeeded as heir male, John succeeded as heir male presumptive to Edmond. He was not heir-apparent, because a son might at any moment have been born to Edmond. An heir- apparent and an heir-presumptive cannot exist at the same time, for whilst there is an heir-apparent there cannot be an heir-presumptive. John succeeded as heir male of his house, and therefore as Duke of London, in 1850, at the death of his elder brother Edmond; but, though John was the '* heir male " of his said elder brother, he was not his " heir " (Grace and Muriel being the coheirs of Edmond), nor was he the " heir male of the body " of Edmond, not being descended from him. John, however, was '< heir male of the body " of Charles. George is heir-apparent of John until his death in 1870, when George succeeds as ^' heir " of his father and heir male of his house, and con- sequently Duke of London. At his death in 1880 Dorothy becomes the " sole heir," or, more properly, the <' sole heir- general," of her father George ; but his kinsman Robert becomes his '^ heir male," and therefore Duke of London, in spite of the fact that there was a much nearer male relative, viz. a nephew, Arthur, the son of his sister. Robert also becomes the heir male of the body of Owen and heir male of his house, and as such Duke of London. He would also be generally described as the heir male of the body of David. At the death of Dorothy in 1885 her coheirs were her aunt Alice and her cousin Arthur equally, and though these really were the coheirs THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 529 of Dorothy (the claims of Alice and Annie being equal, and the rights of Annie having devolved upon Arthur), they would more usually be found described as the coheirs of George or of John. Annie was never herself really a coheir, because she died before her brother, but " in her issue " she becarrie the coheir of Dorothy, though she would, after 1885, be usually described as ^*in her issue " a coheir of George, or possibly even of John, though this would be an inexact description. Arthur was heir of his mother after 1870, heir of his father after 1872, and heir-apparent of his father before that date; after 1885 he is a coheir of Dorothy, and after 1887 sole heir of Dorothy and sole heir of Alice. He would also be usually described as heir-general of George, and heir-general of John. Let us suppose that John had married Edith Torkington, an English baroness (sua jure) by writ (Baroness Neville), who had died in 1862. At that date the barony would have descended to her eldest son George until his death in 1880, when Dorothy, stw jure^ would have succeeded. At her death in 1885 the barony would have fallen into abeyance between Alice and Arthur. At the death of Alice in 1887 the abeyance would be at an end, and the barony in its entirety would have devolved upon Arthur, who would have enjoyed it until at his death in 1888 the barony would have again fallen into abeyance between Maria, Jane, and Hannah equally. It is not unlikely that Her Majesty might have <^ determined the abey- ance," or " called the barony out of abeyance " (the meanings of the terms are identical) in favour of Maria, who would consequently have enjoyed the barony in its entirety. At her death in 1889 it would again fall into abeyance between Jane and Hannah. At Jane's death in 1890 Hannah became sole heir, and the abeyance came to an end when Hannah succeeded to the barony. At her death it would pass to her aunt Lilian. Hannah would usually be described as " coheir and subsequently sole heir of " Arthur. If the Baroness Neville had been possessed of an ancient Scottish Peerage (the Earldom of Torkington) it would have passed undividedly and in full enjoyment to the heir of line, i.e, in 1862 to George, 1880 to Dorothy, 1885 to Alice, 1887 to Arthur, 1888 to Maria, 1889 to Jane, 1890 to Hannah, and 1896 to Lilian, the last (shown on the pedigree) in remainder. Lilian does not become an heiress until 1896, when the whole issue of her brother becomes extinct. Irene and Isabel never become heirs at all. Robert, as we have seen, became heir male of his house and Duke of London in 1880. At his death (1896) Harriet becomes sole heir of Robert, but at her death in 1897 his niece Ada, the only child of his younger brother Philip, who had predeceased him, would be usually referred to as heir of Robert, whilst Cecil is heir male of his house. 2 L 530 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY When the term " of the body " is employed, actual descent from that person is signified, e.g, Arthur after 1885 is ^^ collateral " heir-general of Dorothy, but " heir-general of the body " of Edith Torkington. An * Jones to bring in Robinson and the arms of Smith to bring in Robinson and Jones to your own Brown achievement. You can use Brown only : or quarterly, i and 4, Brown ; 2 and 3, Smith : or I and 4, Brown; 2. Smith ; 3. Jones : or quarterly, i. Brown ; 2. Smith; 3. Jones; 4. Robinson; but you are «o/ entitled to quarter: I and 4, Brown ; 2. Jones ; 3. Robinson, because Smith, which brought in Jones and Robinson, has been omitted, and there was never a match between Brown and Jones. Quarterings signifying nothing beyond mere representation are not compulsory, and their use or disuse is quite optional. So much for the general rules of quartering. Let us now consider certain cases which require rules to themselves. It is possible for a daughter to be the sole heir or coheir of her mother whilst not being the heir of her father, as in the following imaginary pedigree : — \st wife (an heiress). ^nd wife. Mary Conyers=John Darcy= Margaret Fauconbero. I I |— I I Joan (only daughter), THOMAS. Henry. heir of her mother but not of her father. 550 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY In this case Joan is not the heir of her father, inasmuch as he has sons Thomas and Henry, but she is the heir of her mother and the only issue capable of inheriting and transmitting the Conyers arms and quarterings. Joan is heir of her mother but not of her father. The husband of Joan can either impale the arms of Darcy as having married a daughter of John Darcy, or he can place upon an escutcheon of pretence arms to indicate that he has married the heiress of Conyers. But it would be quite incorrect for him to simply place Conyers in pretence, because he has not married a Miss Conyers. What he must do is to charge the arms of Conyers with a dexter canton of the arms of Darcy and place this upon his escutcheon of pretence.^ The children will quarter the arms of Conyers with the canton of Darcy and inherit likewise all the quarterings to which Mary Conyers suc- ceeded, but the Conyers arms must be always thereafter charged with the arms of Darcy on a canton, and no right accrues to the Darcy quarterings. The following curious, but quite genuine case, which was pointed out to me by the late Ulster King of Arms, presents a set of cir- cumstances absolutely unique, and it still remains to be decided what is the correct method to adopt : — xst wife. znd wife. Lady Mary, dau. and coheir = William St. Lawrence, = Margaret, dau. of of Thomas Bermingham, Earl of Louth. Married 1777, died 1793- 2nd Earl of Howth. William Burke. Three other daughters and coheirs of their mother. Thomas St. Lawrence, 3rd Earl of Howth. Other issue. Lady Isabella St. Lawrence, 2nd = William Richard Annesley, dau. and coheir of her mother, but not heir of her father, therefore entitled to transmit the arms of Bermingham with those of St. Lawrence on a canton. First wife of Earl Annesley. Married 1803, died 1827. 3rd Earl of Annesley. :Priscilla, 2nd dau. of Hugh Moore. William, 4th Earl of Annesley. Hugh, 5th Earl of Annesley. Lady MARY Annesley, only child and =■ Willi am John M'Guire of Rostrevor, sole heir of her mother and coheir of her grandmother, but not heir of her father or of her grandfather. She is therefore entitled to transmit the arms of Bermingham with St. Lawrence on a canton plus Annesley on a canton. Married 1828. How the arms of Bermingham are to be charged with both St. Lawrence and Annesley remains to be seen. I believe Ulster favoured * Arms borne on a sinister canton suggest illegitimacy. THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 551 two separate cantons, dexter and sinister respectively, but the point did not come before him officially, and 1 know of no official decision which affords a precedent. The reverse of the foregoing affords another curious point when a woman is the heir of her father but not the heir of her mother : — John Smith=Mary Jones. xst husband. \ 2nd husband. y-7 John Williams= Ethel Smith, = Henry Roberts. I only child and I heir. I I I Alice Williams, = Arthur Ellis. Edward Roberts, only child and heir of John Williams. Theodore Ellis, who claims to quarter : I and 4, Ellis ; 2. Williams ; 3. Smith. heir of his mother. Issue. It is officially admitted (see the introduction to Burke's '* General Armory ") that the claim is accurately made. The process of reason- ing is probably thus. John Williams places upon an escutcheon of pretence the arms of Smith, and Alice Williams succeeds in her own right to the arms of her mother because the latter was an heiress, and for herself is entitled to bear, as would a son, the arms of the two parents quarterly ; and having so inherited, Alice Williams being her- self an heiress, is entitled to transmit. At any rate Arthur Ellis is entitled to impale or place upon his escutcheon of pretence Williams and Smith quarterly. To admit the right for the descendants to quarter the arms Arthur Ellis so bore is no more than a logical pro- gression, but the eventual result appears faulty, because we find Theodore Ellis quartering the arms of Smith, whilst the representation of Smith is in the line of Edward Roberts. This curious set of cir- cumstances, however, is rare in the extreme. It frequently happens, in devising a scheme of quarterings, that a person may represent heiresses of several families entitled to bear arms, but to whom the pedigree must be traced through an heiress of another family which did not possess arms. Consequently any claim to quarterings inherited through the non-armorial heiress is dormant, and the quarterings must not be used or inserted in any scheme drawn up. It is always permissible, however, to petition for arms to be granted to be borne for that non-armorial family for the purpose of introducing the quarterings in question, and such a grant having been made, the dormant claim then becomes operative and the new coat is introduced, followed by the dormant quartering in precisely the same manner as would have been the case if the arms granted had always existed. Grants of this character are constantly being obtained. 552 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY When a Royal Licence to assume or change name and arms is granted it very considerably affects the question of quartering, and many varying circumstances attending these Royal Licences make the matter somewhat intricate. If the Royal Licence is to assume a name and arms in lieu of those previously used, this means that for everyday use the arms are changed^ the right to the old arms lapsing except for the purpose of a scheme of quarterings. The new coat of arms under the terms of the Royal Licence, which requires it first '^to be ex- emplified in our Royal College of Arms, otherwise this our Royal Licence to be void and of none effect," is always so exemplified, this exemplification being from the legal point of view equivalent to a new grant of the arms to the person assuming them. The terms of the Royal Licence have always carefully to be borne in mind, particularly in the matter of remainder, because sometimes these exemplifications are for a limited period or intended to devolve with specified property, and a Royal Licence only nullifies a prior right to arms to the extent of the terms recited in the Letters Patent of exemplification. In the ordinary way, however, such an exemplification is equivalent to a new grant affecting all the descendants. When it is assumed in lieu, for the ordinary purpose of use the new coat of arms takes the place of the old one, but the right to the old one remains in theory to a certain extent, inasmuch as its existence is necessary in any scheme of quartering to bring in any quarterings previously inherited, and these cannot be displayed with the new coat unless they are preceded by the old one. Quarterings, however, which are brought into the family through a marriage in the generation in which the Royal Licence is obtained, or in a subsequent generation, can be displayed with the new coat without the interposition of the old one. If the Royal Licence be to bear the name of a certain family in lieu of a present name, and to bear the arms of that family quarterly with the arms previously borne, the quarterly coat is then exemplified. In an English or Irish Royal Licence the coat of arms for the name assumed is placed in the first and the fourth quarters, and the old paternal arms figure in the second and third. This is an invariable rule. The quarterly coat thus exemplified becomes an indivisible coat for the new name, and it is not permissible to subsequently divide these quarterings. They become as much one coat of arms as '^ azure, a bend or " is the coat of arms of Scrope. If this quarterly coat is to be introduced in any scheme of quarterings it will only occupy the same space as any other single quartering and counts only as one, though it of course is in reality a grand quartering. In devising a scheme of quarterings for which a sub-quarterly coat of this character exemplified under a Royal Licence is the pronominal coat, that sub- THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 553 quarterly coat is placed in the first quarter. Next to it is placed the original coat of arms borne as the pronominal coat before the Royal Licence and exemplified in the second and third sub- quarters of the first quarter. When here repeated it occupies an entire quarter. Next to it are placed the whole of the quarterings belonging to the family in the order in which they occur. If the family whose name has been assumed is represented through an heiress that coat of arms is also repeated in its proper position and in that place in which it would have appeared if unaffected by the Royal Licence. But if it be the coat of arms of a family from whom there is no descent, or of whom there is no representation, the fact of the Royal Licence does not give any further right to quarter it beyond its appearance in the pronominal grand quartering. The exact state of the case is perhaps best illustrated by the arms of Reid-Cuddon. The name of the family was originally Reid, and representing an heiress of the Cuddons of Shaddingfield Hall they obtained a Royal Licence to take the name and arms of Cuddon in addition to the name and arms of Reid, becoming thereafter Reid-Cuddon. The arms were exemplified in due course, and the achievement then became : Quarterly, I and 4, Reid-Cuddon sub-quarterly, 2. the arms of Reid, 3. the arms of Cuddon. In Scotland no such thing as a Royal Licence exists, the matter being determined merely by a rematriculation following upon a voluntary change of name. There is no specified order or position for the arms of the different names, and the arrangement of the various quarterings is left to be determined by the circumstances of the case. Thus in the arms of Anstruther-Duncan the arms of Anstruther are in the first quarter, and the matter is always largely governed by the importance of the respective estates and the respective families. In England this is not the case, because it is an unalterable rule that the arms of the last or principal surname if there be two, or the arms of the one surname if that be the case when the arms of two families are quartered, must always go in the ist and 4th quarters. If three names are assumed by Royal Licence, the arms of the last name go in the ist and 4th quarters, and the last name but one in the second quarter, and of the first name in the third. These cases are, however, rare. But no matter how many names are assumed, and no matter how many original coats of arms the shield as exemplified consists of, it thereafter becomes an indivisible coat. When a Royal Licence is issued to an illegitimate person to bear the name and arms of another family, no right is conferred to bear the quarterings of that family even subject to difference marks. The Royal Licence is only applicable to whatever arms were the pro- nominal coat used with the name assumed. Though instances cer- 554 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY tainly can be found in some of the Visitation Books and other ancient records of a coat with quarterings, the whole debruised by a bendlet sinister, notably in the case of a family of Talbot, where eight quarters are so marked, the fact remains that this practice has long been de- finitely considered incorrect, and is now never permitted. If a Royal Licence is issued to an illegitimate woman the exemplification is to herself personally, for in the eyes of the law she has no relatives ; and though she may be one of a large family, her descendants are entitled to quarter the arms with the marks of distinction exemplified to her because such quartering merely indicates the representation of that one woman, who in the eyes of the law stands alone and without relatives. In the case of a Royal Licence to take a name and arms subject to these marks of distinction for illegitimacy, and in cases where the arms to be assumed are a sub-quarterly coat, the mark of distinction, which in England is now invariably a bordure wavy, will surround both quarterings, which remain an indivisible coat. If an augmentation is granted to a person whose pronominal coat is sub-quarterly, that augmentation, whatever form it may assume, is superimposed upon all quarterings. Thus a chief of augmentation would go across the top of the shield, the four quarters being displayed below, and the whole of this shield would be only one quartering in any scheme of quartering. An inescutcheon is superimposed over all. If the augmentation take the form of a quartering, then the pro- nominal coat is a grand quartering, equivalent in size to the augmenta- tion. If a person entitled to a sub-quarterly coat and a double name obtains a Royal Licence to bear another name and arms, and to bear the arms he has previously borne quarterly with those he has assumed, the result would be : Quarterly, i and 4, the new coat assumed, quarterly 2 and 3, the arms he has previously borne sub-quarterly. But it should be noticed that the arrangements of coats of arms under a Royal Licence largely depends upon the wording of the document by which authority is given by the Sovereign. The wording of the document in its terms is based upon the wording of the petition, and within reasonable limits any arrangement which is desired is usually permitted, so that care should be taken as to the wording of the petition. A quartering of augmentation is always placed in the first quarter of a shield, but it becomes indivisible from and is depicted sub-quarterly with the paternal arms ; for instance, the Dukes of Westminster for the time being, but not other members of the family, bear as an augmentation the arms of the city of Westminster in the ist and 4th quarters of his shield, and the arms of Grosvenor in the 2nd and 3rd, but this coat of Westminster and Grosvenor is an indivisible sub- THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 555 quarterly coat which together would only occupy the first quarter in a shield of quarterings. Then the second one would be the arms of Grosvenor alone, which would be followed by the quarterings pre- viously inherited. If under a Royal Licence a name is assumed and the Royal Licence makes no reference to the arms of the family, the arms for all purposes remain unchanged and as if no Royal Licence had ever been issued. If the Royal Licence issued to a family simply exem- plifies a single coat of arms, it is quite wrong to introduce any other coat of arms to convert this single coat into a sub-quarterly one. To all intents and purposes it may be stated that in Scotland there are still only four quarters in a shield, and if more than four coats are introduced grand quarterings are employed. Grand quarterings are very frequent in Scottish armory. The Scottish rules of quartering follow no fixed principle, and the constant rematriculations make it impossible to deduce exact rules ; and though roughly approximating to the English ones, no greater generalisation can be laid down than the assertion that the most recent matriculation of an ancestor governs the arms and quarterings to be displayed. A royal quartering is never subdivided. In combining Scottish and English coats of arms into one scheme of quartering, it is usual if possible to treat the coat of arms as matri- culated in Scotland as a grand quartering equivalent in value to any other of the English quarterings. This, however, is not always possible in cases where the matriculation itself creates grand quarterings and sub-quarterings ; and for a scheme of quarterings in such a case it is more usual for the Scottish matriculation to be divided up into its component parts, and for these to be used as simple quarterings in succession to the English ones, regardless of any bordure which may exist in the Scottish matriculation. It cannot, of course, be said that such a practice is beyond criticism, though it frequently remains the only practical way of solving the difficulty. Until comparatively recent times, if amongst quarterings inherited the Royal Arms were included, it was considered a fixed, unalterable rule that these should be placed in the first quarter, taking precedence of the pronominal coat, irrespective of their real position according to the date or pedigree place of introduction. This rule, however, has long since been superseded, and Royal quarterings now take their position on the same footing as the others. It very probably arose from the misconception of the facts concerning an important case which doubtless was considered a precedent. The family of Mowbray, after their marriage with the heiress of Thomas de Brotherton, used either the arms of Brotherton alone, these being England differenced 556 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY by a label, or else placed them in the first quarter of their shield. Consequently from this precedent a rule was deduced that it was permissible and correct to give a Royal quartering precedence over all others. The position of the Mowbrays, Dukes of Norfolk, as Earls Marshal no doubt led to their own achievement being considered an exemplary model. But it appears to have been overlooked that the Mowbrays bore these Royal Arms of Brotherton not as an inherited quartering but as a grant to themselves. Richard II. apparently granted them permission to bear the arms of Edward the Confessor impaled with the arms of Brotherton, the whole between the two Royal ostrich feathers (Fig. 675), and consequently, the grant having been made, the Mowbrays were under no necessity to display the Mowbray or the Segrave arms to bring in the arms of Brotherton. A little later a similar case occurred with the Stafford family, who became sole heirs-general of Thomas of Woodstock, and consequently entitled to bear his arms as a quartering. The matter appears to have been settled at a chapter of the College of Arms, and the decision arrived at was as follows : — Cott, MS.f TittiSf C. i. foL 404, in handwriting of end of sixieenth century, [An order made for Henry Duke of Buckingham to beare the Armes of Thomas of Woodstock alone without any other Armes to bee quartered there- with. Anno 13 E 4.] Memorandum that in the yeare of the Reigne of our Soveraign Lord King Edward the iiij*^ the Thurtein in the xviij''" day of ffeverir, it was concluded in a Chapitre of the office of Armes that where a nobleman is descended lenyalle Ineritable to iij. or iiij. Cotes and afterward is ascended to a Cotte neir to the King and of his royall bloud, may for his most onneur here the same Cootte alone, and none lower Coottes of Dignite to be quartered therewith. As my Lord Henry Duke of Buckingham, Eirll of Harford, Northamton, and Stafford, Lord of Breknoke and of Holdernes, is assended to the Coottes and ayer to Thomas of Woodstoke, Duke of Glocestre and Sonne to King Edward the third, hee may beire his Cootte alone. And it was so Concluded by [Claurancieulx King of Armes, Marche King of Armes, Gyen King of Armes, Windesor Herauld, Fawcon Herauld, Harfford Herald]. But I imagine that this decision was in all probability founded upon the case of the Mowbrays, which was not in itself an exact precedent, because with the Staffords there appears to have been no such Royal grant as existed with the Mowbrays. Other instances at about this period can be alluded to, but though it must be admitted that the rule existed at one time, it has long since been officially over- ridden. A territorial coat or a coat of arms borne to indicate the possession of a specific title is either placed in the first quarter or borne in pre- THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 557 tence ; see the arms of the Earl of Mar and Kellie. A singular instance of a very exceptional method of marshalling occurs in the case of the arms of the Earl of Caithness. He bears four coats of arms, some being stated to be territorial coats, quarterly, dividing them by the cross engrailed sable from his paternal arms of Sinclair. The arms of the Earls of Caithness are thus marshalled: '< Quarterly, i. azure, within a Royal tressure a ship with furled sails all or." For Orkney : '^ 2 and 3, or, a lion rampant gules." For Spar (a family in possession of the Earldom of Caithness before the Sinclairs) : *' 4. Azure, a ship in sail or, for Caithness " ; and over all, dividing the quarters, a cross en- grailed ^' sable," for Sinclair. The Barons Sinclair of Sweden (so created 1766, but extinct ten years later) bore the above quartered coats as cadets of Caithness, but separated the quarters, not by the engrailed cross sable of Sinclair, but by a cross pat^e throughout ermine. In an escutcheon en surtout they placed the Sinclair arms : << Argent, a cross engrailed sable " ; and, as a mark of cadency, they surrounded the main escutcheon with ^' a bordure chequy or and gules." This arrangement was doubtless suggested by the Royal Arms of Denmark, the quarterings of which have been for so many centuries separated by the cross of the Order of the Dannebrog : " Argent, a cross pat^e throughout fimbriated gules." In imitation of this a con- siderable number of the principal Scandinavian families use a cross pat^e throughout to separate the quarters of their frequently com- plicated coats. The quarterings in these cases are often not indicative of descent from different families, but were all included in the original grant of armorial bearings. On the centre of the cross thus used, an escutcheon, either of augmentation or of the family arms, is very frequently placed en surtout. The main difference between British and foreign usage with regard to quartering is this, that in England quarterings are usually employed to denote simply descent from an heiress, or representation in blood ; in Scotland they also implied the possession of lordships. In foreign coats the quarterings are often employed to denote the possession of fiefs acquired in other ways than by marriage {e.g, by bequest or pur- chase), or the jus expedationts, the right of succession to such fiefs in accordance with certain agreements. In foreign heraldry the base of the quartered shield is not unfre- quently cut off by a horizontal line, forming what is known as a Champagne, and the space thus made is occupied by one or more coats. At other times a pile with curved sides runs from the base some distance into the quartered shield, which is then said to be ente en point, and this space is devoted to the display of one or more quarterings. The definite and precise British regulations which have grown up on the 558 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY subject of the marshalling of arms have no equivalent in the armorial laws of other countries. Very rarely quartering is affected per saltire^ as in the arms of Sicily and in a few coats of Spanish origin, but even as regards foreign armory the practice is so rare that it may be disregarded. The laws of marshalling upon the Continent, and particularly in Germany, are very far from being identical with British heraldic practices. The British method of impaling two coats of arms upon one shield to signify marriage is abroad now wholly discarded, and two shields are Fig. 762. — Arms of Hans Fig. 761. — Arms of Hans Wolf von Bibelspurg and his Wolf von Bibelspurg. wife Catherina Waraus married in 1507 at Augsburg. invariably made use of. These shields are placed side by side, the dexter shield being used to display the man's arms and the sinister those of the woman's family. The shields are tilted towards each other (the position is not quite identical with that which we term accoll6). But — and this is a peculiarity practically unknown in England — the German practice invariably reverses the charges upon the dexter shield, so that the charges upon the two shields ^' respect " each other. This per- haps can be most readily understood by reference to Figs. 762 and 763. The former shows the simple arms of Von Bibelspurg, the latter the same coat allied Fig. 764. ^ith another. But it should be noted that letters or words, if they appear as charges upon the shield, are not reversed. This reversing of the charges is by no means an uncommon practice in Germany for other purposes. For instance, if the arms of a State are depicted surrounded by the arms of provinces, or if the arms of a reigning Sovereign are grouped within a bordure of the shields of other people, the charges on the shields to the dexter are almost invariably shown in reflection regarding the shield in the centre. This practice, resting only on what may be termed ^' heraldic courtesy," dates back to very early times, and is met with even in Rolls of Arms where the shields are all turned to face the centre. Such a system was adopted in Siebmacher's << Book of Arms." But what the true position of the as ©© Fig. 765. THE MARSHALLING OF ARMS 559 charges should be when represented upon a simple shield should be determined by the position of the helmet. It may be of interest to state that in St. George's Chapel at Windsor the early Stall plates originally set up were all disposed so that helmets and charges alike faced the High Altar. The conjunction of three coats of arms in Ger- many is effected as shown in Fig. 764. Although matrimonial alliance does not in Germany entail the conjunction of different coats of arms on one shield, such conjunction does occur in German heraldry, but it is comparable (in its meaning) with our rules of quartering and not with our rules of impalement. No such exact and definite rules exist in that country as are to be met with in our own to determine the choice of a method of conjunction, nor to indicate the significance to be presumed from whatever method may be found in use. Personal selection and the adaptability to any particular method of the tinctures and the charges themselves of the coats to be conjoined seem to be the determining factors and the existing territorial attributes of Germa armory have a greater weight in marshalling than the principle of heirship which is now practically the sole governing factor in British heraldry. One must therefore content one- self with a brief recital of some of the various modes of conjunction which have been or are still practised. These include impalement per pale or per fess (Fig. 765) and dimidia- tion (Fig. 766), which is more usual on the Continent than it ever was in these kingdoms. The subdivision of the field, as with ourselves, is most frequently adopted; though we are usually confined to quartering, German armory knows no such restrictions. The most usual subdivisions are as given in Fig. 767. The ordinary quartered shield is met with in Fig. 768, which represents the arms of Elector and Archbishop of Treves (1567— his personal arms of Eltz ('^ Per fess gules and a demi-lion issuing or ") are quartered with the of his archbishopric, "Argent, a cross gules." of conjunction is superimposition, by which the shield takes the form of an ordinary imposed Arms of Loschau or Lexaw, of Augsburg. ts I — I 1 I — I — I Fig. y62. Fig. 768. — Arms of the Elector and Archbishop of Treves. James III., Von 1 581), in which argent, in chief impersonal arms Another method design of the one Eltz, Fig. 769. Fig. 770. , , 560 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY upon the other (Fig. 769). A curious method of conjoining three coats is by engrafting the third in base (Fig. 770). The constant use of the inescutcheon has been already referred to, and even early English armory igs. 706 and 710) has examples of the widespread Continental practice (which obtains largely in Spanish and Portuguese heraldry) of surrounding one coat with a bordure of another. The German method of conjunction by incorporation has been frequently pleaded in British heraldry, in efforts to account for ancient arms, but with us (save for occasional use for cadency differencing at an early and for a limited period) such incorporation only results in and signifies an originally new coat, and not an authorised marshalling of existing arms of prior origin and authority. The German method can best be explained by two examples. Let us suppose a coat '< per fess argent and gules," with which another coat ^^ gules, a fleur-de-lis argent," is to be marshalled. The result would be ** per fess argent and gules, a fleur-de-lis counterchanged." With smaller objects a more usual method would duplicate the charges, thus '< per bend argent and azure," and ^* argent, a star of six points azure " would result in " per bend argent and azure, two stars of six points counterchanged" (Fig. 771). CHAPTER XXXIV THE ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD IT hardly falls within the scope of the present work to detail or discuss the various points concerning the history or statutes of the different British Orders of Knighthood, and still less so of the Foreign Orders. The history of the English Orders alone would make a bulky volume. But it is necessary to treat of the matter to some limited extent, inasmuch as in modern heraldry in every country in Europe additions are made to the armorial achievement whenever it is desired to signify rank in any of the Orders of Knighthood. Though a large number of the early Plantagenet Garter Stall plates date as far back as the year 1420, it is evident that nothing in the armorial bearings with which they are emblazoned bears any relation to the order of knighthood to which they belonged until the year 1469 or thereabouts, when Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, was elected a Knight of the Garter. His Stall plate, which is of a very exceptional style and character, is the first to bear the garter encircling the shield. It is curious to notice, by the way, that upon the privy seal of the Duke of Burgundy, which shows the same arms depicted upon his Garter plate, the shield is surrounded by the collar, from which depends the badge of the Order of the Golden Fleece, so that it is highly pro- bable that the custom of adding marks of knighthood to a shield came to us from the Continent. The next Garter plate, which shows the garter around the shield, is that of Viscount Lovel, who was elected in 1483 ; and the shield of the Earl of Derby, who was elected in the same year, also is encircled by the Garter. The Garter itself encir- cling the shields of knights of that order remained the only mark of knighthood used armorially in this country for a considerable period, though we find that the example was copied in Scotland soon afterwards with regard to the Order of the Thistle. At the commencement of the present Lyon Register, which dates from the year 1672, the arms of the King of Scotland, which are given as such and not as the King of England and Scotland, are described as encircled by the collar of the Order of the Thistle. This probably was used as the equiva- lent of the garter in England, for we do not find the collar of the 561 2 N 562 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Garter, together with the garter itself, or the ribbon circle of the Thistle, together with the collar of that order, until a much later period. The use of collars of knighthood upon the Continent to encircle coats of arms has been from the fifteenth century very general and extensive ; examples are to be found at an earlier date ; but the encircling of arms with the garter carrying the motto of the order, or with the ribbon (which is termed the circle) and motto of any other order is an entirely English practice, which does not appear to have been copied in any other country. It, of course, arose from the fact that the actual garter as worn by the knight of the order carried the motto of the order, and that by representing the garter round the shield, the motto of the order was of necessity also added. The Lyon Register, however, in the entry of record (dated 1672), states that the shield is ^^ encircled with the Order of Scotland, the same being composed of rue and thistles having the image of St. Andrew with his crosse on his brest y^'unto pendent," and it is by no means improbable that occasional instances of the heraldic use of the collar of the garter might be discovered at the same period. But it is not until the later part of the eighteenth century that it obtained anything like a regular use. During the Hanoverian period it became customary to encircle the shield first with the garter, and that in its turn with the collar of the order whenever it was desired to display the achievement in its most complete style ; and though even then, as at the present day, for less elaborate representations the garter only was used without the collar, it still remains correct to display both in a full emblazonment of the arms. An impetus to the practice was doubtless given by the subdivision of the Order of the Bath, which will be presently referred to. In speaking of the garter, the opportunity should be taken to protest strongly against the objectionable practice which has arisen of using a garter to encircle a crest or shield and to carry the family motto. No matter what motto is placed upon the garter, it is both bad form and absolutely incorrect for any one who is not a Knight of the Garter to use a garter in any heraldic display. But to tabulate the existing practice the present rules as to the display of the arms of knights of the different orders are as follow : — A Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter encircles his escut- cheon by a representation of the garter he wears. This is a belt of dark blue velvet edged with gold and ornamented with a heavy gold buckle and ornament at the end. It carries the motto of the Order, " Honi soit qui mal y pense," in gold letters of plain Roman char- acter. Anciently the motto was spelled <^ Hony soit qy mal y pense," as may be noticed from some of the early Garter plates, and the style ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD 563 of the letter was what is now known as ^' Old English." The garter is worn buckled, with the end tucked under and looped in a specified manner, which is the method also adopted in heraldic representations. It is quite permissible to use the garter alone, but a Knight of the Order is allowed to add outside the garter the representation of the collar of the order. This is of gold, consisting of twenty-six buckled garters enamelled in the correct colour, each surrounding a rose, the garter alternated with gold knots all joined up by chain links of gold. From the collar depends the ^' George," or figure of St. George on horseback encountering the dragon, enamelled in colours. In heraldic representations it is usual to ignore the specified number of links in the collar. A Knight of the Garter as such is entitled to claim the privilege of a grant of supporters, but as nowadays the order is reserved for those of the rank of earl and upwards, supporters will always have a prior existence in connection with the peerage. Knights of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle are entitled to surround their arms with a plain circle of green edged with gold and bearing the motto in gold letters, " Nemo me impune lacessit." They are also entitled to surround their arms with the collar of the order, which is of gold, and composed of sprigs of thistle and rue (Andrew) enamelled in their proper colours. From the collar the badge (the figure of St. Andrew) depends. Knights of the Most Illustrious Order of St, Patrick are entitled to surround their arms by a plain circle of sky-blue edged with gold, bearing the motto, ^^ Quis Separabit. mdcclxxxiii," as enamelled on the star of the order. This is encircled by the collar of the order, which is of "gold, composed of roses and harps alternately, tied together with knots of gold, the said roses enamelled alternately, white leaves within red and red leaves within white ; and in the centre of the said collar shall be an Imperial crown surmounting a harp of gold, from which shall hang the badge." Knights of the Thistle and St. Patrick are entitled as such to claim a grant of supporters on payment of the fees, but these orders are nowadays confined to peers. The Most Honourable Order of the Bath, — Knights of the Bath, who have existed from a remote period, do not appear as such to have made any additions to their arms prior to the revival of the order in 1725. At that time, similarly to the Orders of the Garter and the Thistle, the order was of one class only and composed of a hmited number of knights. Knights of that order were then distinguished by the letters K.B., which, it should be noted, mean Knight of the Bath, and not Knight Bachelor, as so many people now imagine. There is nobody at the present time who is entitled to use these letters. Upon those 564 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY of the Bath plates which now remain in the chapel of Henry VII. in Westminster Abbey, no instance will be found in which the collar is represented outside the circle, which is pretty good evidence that although isolated examples may possibly be found at an earlier date, it was not the usual custom up to the end of the eighteenth century to encircle a shield with a collar of knighthood. These Knights of the Bath (K.B.), as they were termed, surrounded their escutcheons with circlets of crimson edged with gold, and bearing thereupon the motto of the order, "Tria juncta in uno," in gold letters. Although at that time it does not appear that the collar of the order was ever employed for armorial purposes, instances are to be found in which the laurel wreath surrounded the circlet with the motto of the order. In the year 18 15, owing to the large number of officers who had merited reward in the Peninsular Campaign, it was considered neces- sary to largely increase the extent and scope of the order. For this purpose it was divided into two divisions — the Military Division and the Civil Division — and each of these were divided into three classes, namely, Knights Grand Cross (G.C.B.), Knights Commanders (K.C.B.), and Companions (C.B.). The then existing Knights of the Bath became Knights Grand Cross. The existing collar served for all Knights Grand Cross, but the old badge and star were assigned for the civil division of the order, a new pattern being designed for the military division. The number of stalls in Henry VII.'s Chapel being limited, the erection of Stall plates and the display of banners ceased ; those then in position were allowed to remain, and still remain at the present moment. Consequently there are no Stall plates to refer to in the matter as precedents since that period, and the rules need to be obtained from other sources. They are now as follows : A Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath surrounds his arms with the circlet as was theretofore the case, and in addition he surrounds the circlet by his collar, from which depends the badge (either military or- civil) of the division to which he belongs. The collar is really for practical purposes the distinguishing mark of a Knight Grand Cross, because although as such he is entitled upon payment of the fees to claim a grant of supporters, he is under no compulsion to do so, and comparatively but few avail themselves of the privilege. All Knights of the Bath, before the enlargement of the order, had supporters. A Knight Grand Cross of the military division encircles his arms with the laurel wreath in addition, this being placed outside the circlet and within the collar of the order. The collar is composed of gold having nine Imperial crowns and eight devices of the rose, the thistle, and shamrock issuing from a sceptre placed alternately and enamelled in ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD 565 their proper colours, the links being connected with seventeen knots enamelled white. The badges of the military and civil divisions differ considerably. Knights Commanders of the Bath have no collar and cannot claim a grant of supporters, but they encircle their shields with the circlet of the order, suspending their badge below the shield by the ribbon from which it is worn. Knights Commanders of the military division use the laurel wreath as do Knights Grand Cross, but no members of any class of the civil division are entitled to display it. Companions of the order (C.B.) do not use the helmet of a knight as does a G.C.B. or a K.C.B. ; in fact, the only difference which is permissible in their arms from those of an undistinguished commoner is that they are allowed to suspend the badge of a C.B. from a ribbon below their shields. They do not use the circlet of the order. Certain cases have come under my notice in which a military C.B. has added a laurel wreath to his armorial bearings, but whether such a practice is correct I am unaware, but I think it is not officially recognised. The Most Exalted Order of the Star of India (like the Order of the Bath as at present constituted) is divided into three classes, Knights Grand Commanders, Knights Commanders, and Companions. Knights Grand Commanders place the circlet of the order around their shields. This is of light blue inscribed with the motto, " Heaven's light our guide." This in its turn is surrounded by the collar of the order, which is composed of alternate links of the Indian lotus flower, crossed palm-branches, and the united red and white rose of England. In the centre of the collar is an Imperial crown from which depends the badge of the order, this being an onyx cameo of the effigy of her late Majesty Queen Victoria within the motto of the order, and sur- mounted by a star, the whole being richly jewelled. The surrounding of the shield by the circlet of the order doubtless is a consequence and follows upon the original custom of the armorial use of the garter, but this being admitted, it is yet permissible to state that that practice came from the Continent, and there is little reason to doubt that the real meaning and origin of the custom of using the circlet is derived from the Continental practice which has for long been usual of dis- playing the shield of arms upon the star of an order of knighthood. The star of every British order — the Garter included — contains the circlet and motto of the order, and it is easy to see how, after depicting the shield of arms upon the star of the order, the result will be that the circlet of the order surrounds the shield. No armorial warrant upon the point is ever issued at the creation of an order ; the thing follows as a matter of course, the circlet being taken from the star to surround the shield without further authorisation. Upon this point 566 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY there can be no doubt, inasmuch as the garter which surrounds the shield of a K.G. is in all authoritative heraldic paintings buckled in the peculiar manner in which it is worn and in which it is depicted upon the star. The Star of the Thistle shows the plain circlet, the Star of St. Patrick the same, and the arms of a Knight of St. Patrick afford a curious confirmation of my contention, because whilst the motto of the order is specified to be, *'Quis separabit," the circlet used for armorial purposes includes the date (MDCCLXXXIII.) as shown upon the star. The Order of the Bath, again, has a plain circlet upon the star, and the badges and stars of the military knights have the laurel wreath represented in heraldic drawings, the laurel wreath being absent from the stars and the shields of those who are members of the civil division. Now with regard to the Order of the Star of India the motto on the star is carried upon a representation of a ribbon which is tied in a curious manner, and my own opinion is that the circlet used to surround the shield of a G.C.S.I. or K.C.S.I. should (as in the case of the garter) be represented not as a simple circlet like the Bath or Thistle, but as a ribbon tied in the curious manner represented upon the star. This tying is not, however, duplicated upon the badge, and possibly I may be told that the circlet and its use are taken from the badge and not from the star. The reply to such a statement is, first, that there is no garter upon the badge of that order, there is no circlet on the badge of the Thistle, and the circlet on the badge of St. Patrick is surrounded by a wreath of trefoils which in that case ought to appear round the shield of a K.P. This wreath of trefoils is absent from the K.P. star. Further, no Companion of an Order is permitted to use the Circlet of the Order, whilst every Companion has his badge. No Companion has a star. Though I hold strongly that the circlet of the Star of India should be a ribbon tied as represented on the star of the order, I must admit I have never yet come across an official instance of it being so represented. This, however, is a point upon which there is no definite warrant of instruction, and is not the conclusion justifiable that on this matter the officers of arms have been led into a mistake in their general practice by an oversight and possible unfamiliarity with the actual star ? A Knight Grand Commander is entitled to claim a grant of supporters on payment of the fees. A Knight Commander encircles his shield with the circlet of the order and hangs his badge from a ribbon below, a Companion of the Order simply hangs the badge he wears below his shield. The Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George. — This order again is divided into three classes — Knights Grand Cross, Knights Commanders, and Companions. Knights Grand Cross place the circlet of the order and the collar with the badge around their shields, ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD 567 and, like other Knights Grand Cross, they are entitled to claim a grant of supporters. The circlet of the order is of blue edged with gold, and bearing in gold letters the motto of the order, '^ Auspicium melioris aevi." The collar is composed alternately of lions of England, of Maltese crosses, and of the ciphers S.M. and S.G., and having in the centre an Imperial crown over two lions passant guardant, each hold- ing a bunch of seven arrows. At the opposite point of the collar are two similar lions. The whole is of gold except the crosses, which are of white enamel, and the various devices are linked together by small gold chains. Knights Commanders of the Order encircle their shields with a similar circlet of the order, and hang their badges below. A Companion simply suspends his badge from a ribbon below his shield. The Most Eminent Order of the Indian Empire, — This order is divided into three classes — Knights Grand Commanders, Knights Commanders, and Companions. Knights Grand Commanders and Knights Com- manders encircle their shields with the circlet of the order, which is of purple inscribed in letters of gold, with the motto of the order, " Imperatricis auspiciis." The collar of the order, which is used by the Knights Grand Commanders, in addition to the circle, is composed of elephants, lotus flowers, peacocks in their pride, and Indian roses, and in the centre is an Imperial crown, the whole being linked together by chains of gold. Knights Commanders suspend their badges from their shields. Companions are only permitted to suspend their badges from a ribbon, and, as in the cases of the other orders, are not allowed to make use of the circlet of the order. The Royal Victorian Order is divided into five classes, and is the only British order of which this can be said. There is no collar belonging to the order, so a G.C.V.O. cannot put one round his shield. Knights Grand Cross surround their shields with the circlet of the order, which is of dark blue carrying in letters of gold the motto, '* Victoria." Knights Commanders and Commanders also use the circlet, with the badge suspended from the ribbon. Members of the fourth and fifth classes of the Order suspend the badge which they are entitled to wear below their shields. The '' Victorian Chain " is quite apart from the Victorian Order, and up to the present time has only been conferred upon a very limited number. It apparently exists by the pleasure of His Majesty, no statutes having been ordained. The Distinguished Service Order, the Imperial Service Order, and the Order of Merit are each of but one class only, none of them con- ferring the dignity of knighthood. They rank heraldically with the Companions of the other Orders, and for heraldic purposes merely confer upon those people entitled to the decorations the right to sus- 568 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY pend the badges they wear below their shields or lozenges as the case may be, following the rules observed by other Companions. The Victoria Cross, the Albert Medal, the Edward Medal, the Conspicuous Service Cross, the Kaisar-i-Hind Medal, the Royal Red Cross, the Volunteer Officers' Decoration, the Territorial Decoration, and the Decoration of the League of Mercy all rank as decorations. Though none confer any style or precedence of knighthood, those entitled to them are permitted to suspend representations of such decorations as are enjoyed below their shields. The members of the Orders of Victoria and Albert and of the Crown of India are permitted to display the badges they wear below their lozenges. Some people, notably in the early part of the nineteenth century, adopted the practice of placing war medals below the escutcheons amongst other decorations. It is doubtful, however, how far this practice is correct, inasmuch as a medal does not technically rank as a decoration or as a matter of honour. That medals are *' decorations " is not officially recognised, with the exception, perhaps, of the Jubilee medal, the Diamond Jubilee medal, and the Coronation medal, which have been given a status more of the character of a decoration than of simple medals. The Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem in England does not rank with other orders or decorations, inasmuch as it was initiated without Royal intervention, and carries no precedence or titular rank. In 1888, however, a Royal charter of incorporation was obtained, and the distribution of the highest offices of the order in the persons of the Sovereign, the Prince of Wales, and other members of the Royal Family has of late years very much increased its social status. The Order is, however, now recognised to a certain extent, and its insignia is worn at Court by duly appointed authority. The Crown is gradually acquiring a right of veto, which will probably eventu- ally result in the order becoming a recognised honour, of which the gift lies with the Crown. In the charter of incorporation, Knights of Justice and Ladies of Justice were permitted to place as a chief over their arms the augmentation anciently used by knights of the English language of the original Roman Catholic Celibate Order. The chief used is : " Gules, charged with a cross throughout argent, the cross embellished in its angles with lions passant guardant and unicorns passant alternately both or," as in the cross of the order. The omission, which is all the more inexplicable owing to the fact that Garter King of Arms is the officer for the order, that the heraldic, provisions of this charter have never been conveyed, as should have been the case, in a Royal Warrant to the Earl Marshal, has caused some ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD 569 confusion, for the officers of the College of Arms, when speaking officially, decline to admit the insignia of the order in any official em- blazonment of arms. Lyon King of Arms has been less punctilious. Knights of Justice, Knights of Grace, and Esquires of the Orders all suspend the badges they wear from a black watered-silk ribbon below their shields (Fig, 334), and Ladies of Justice and Ladies of Grace do the same below their lozenges. The arms of members of the Order are frequently depicted superimposed upon the Cross. By the Statutes of the Order Knights of Justice were required to show that all their four grandparents were legally entitled to bear arms, but so many provisions for the exercise of discretion in dispensing with this requirement were at the same time created that to all intents and purposes such a regulation might never have been included. Some of the Knights of Justice even yet have no arms at all, others are themselves grantees, and still others would be unable to show what is required of them if the claims of their grandparents were properly investigated. It should perhaps be stated that supporters, when granted to Knights Grand Cross as such, are personal to themselves, and in the patents by which they are granted the grant is made for life only, no hereditary limitation being added. Any person in this country holding a Royal Licence to wear the insignia of any foreign order is permitted to adopt any heraldic form, decoration, or display which that order confers in the country of origin. Official recog- nition exists for this, and many precedents can be quoted. The rules which exist in foreign countries concerning heraldic privileges of the knights of different orders are very varied, and it is impos- sible to briefly summarise them. It may, how- ever, be stated that the most usual practice is to display the shield alone in the centre of the star (Fig. 772). As with us, the collars of the orders ^^ fh^f S^Zrifo^Tef j; are placed around the shields, and the badges the Knights Hospitallers depend below, but the use of the circlet carrying °' '^^ ^'^'' ""^ ^^^'^' the motto of the order is exclusively a British practice. In the case of some of the Orders, however, the official coat of arms of the order is quartered, impaled, or borne in pretence with the personal arms, and the cross pat^e of the Order of the Dannebrog is to be met with placed in front of a shield of quarterings, the charges thereupon appearing in the angles of the cross. I am not sure, however, that the cases which have come under my notice should not be rather considered 570 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY definite and hereditary grants of augmentation, this being perhaps a more probable explanation than that such a method of display fol- lowed as a matter of course on promotion to the order. The Grand Masters of the Teutonic Order quarter the arms of that order with those of their families. The Knights of the Order of St. Stephen of Tuscany bear the arms of that order in chief over their personal arms. Fig. 772 represents the manner in which a " Bailli-profes " (Grand Cross) of the real Catholic and Celibate Order of St. John of Malta places the chief of the order on his shield, the latter being imposed upon a Maltese star (this being white) and the badge of the order depending below. The *' Knight-profes " does not use the chief of the order. In the German Protestant Order of Malta (formerly Bailiwick of Brandenburg) the Commendatores place the shield of their arms upon the Cross of Malta. The Knights of Justice (^* Richts- ritter ") on the contrary assume the cross upon the shield itself, whilst the Knights of Grace suspend it from the bottom of the shield. The members of the ancient Order of La Cordeliere formerly encircled their lozenges with a representation of the Cordeliere, which formed a part of their habit ; and the officers of the Ecclesiastical Orders frequently surround their escutcheons with rosaries from which depend crucifixes. Whether this latter practice, however, should be considered merely a piece of artistic decoration, or whether it should be regarded as an ecclesiastical matter or should be included within the purview of armory, I leave others to decide. By a curious fiction, for the origin of which it is not easy to definitely account, unless it is a survival of the celibacy required in certain orders, a knight is not supposed to share the insignia of any order of knighthood with his wife. There is not the slightest doubt that his own knighthood does confer upon her both precedence and titular rank, and why there should be any necessity for the statement to be made as to the theoretical position has long been a puzzle to me. Such a theory, however, is considered to be correct, and as a consequence in modern times it has become a rigid rule that the arms of the wife of a knight must not be impaled upon a shield when it is displayed within the circlet of an order. No such rule existed in ancient times, and many instances can be found in which impaled shields, or the shield of the wife only, are met with inside a repre- sentation of the Garter. In the warrant recently issued for Queen Alexandra the arms of England and Denmark are impaled within a Garter. This may be quite exceptional and consequent upon the fact that Her Majesty is herself a member of the Order. Nevertheless, the modern idea is that when a Knight of any Order impales the arms of his wife, he must use two shields placed accoU^, the dexter ARMORIAL INSIGNIA OF KNIGHTHOOD 571 surmounting the sinister (Fig. 745). Upon the dexter shield is re- presented the arms of the knight within the circlet, or the circlet and collar, as the case may be, of his order ; on the sinister shield the arms of the knight are impaled with those of his wife, and this shield, for the purpose of artistic balance, is usually surrounded with a meaningless and inartistic floral or laurel wreath to make its size similar to the dimensions of the dexter shield. The widow of a knight of any Order is required at present to immediately discontinue the use of the ensigns of that Order, and to revert to the plain impaled lozenge which she would be entitled to as the widow of an undecorated gentleman. As she retains her titular rank, such a regulation seems absurd, but it undoubtedly exists, and until it is altered must be conformed to. Knights Grand Cross and Knights Commanders, as also Knights Bachelors, use the open affronts helmet of a knight. Companions of any order, and members of those orders which do not confer any precedence or title of knighthood, use only the close profile helmet of a gentleman. A Knight Bachelor, of course, is at liberty to impale the arms of his wife upon his escutcheon without employing the double form. It only makes the use of the double escutcheon for Knights of Orders the more incomprehensible. Reference should also be made to the subject of impalement, which will be found in the chapter upon Marshalling. CHAPTER XXXV THE ARMORIAL BEARINGS OF A LADY BEARING in mind that armory was so deeply interwoven with all that was best in chivalry, it is curious that the armorial status of a woman should have been left so undefined. A query as to how a lady may bear arms will be glibly answered for her as maid (Fig. 749) and as widow (Figs. 750, 751, and 752) by the most elementary heraldic text-book. But a little consideration will show how far short our knowledge falls of a complete or uniform set of rules. Let what is definitely known be first stated. In the first place, no woman (save a Sovereign) can inherit, use, or transmit crest or motto, nor may she use a helmet or mantling. All daughters, if un- married, bear upon a lozenge the paternal arms and quarterings of their father, with his difference marks. If their mother were an heiress, they quarter her arms with those of her father. In England (save in the Royal Family, and in this case even it is a matter of presumption only) there is no seniority amongst daughters, and the difference marks of all daughters are those borne by the father, and none other. There are no marks of distinction as between the daughters them- selves. In Scotland, however, seniority does exist, according to priority of birth ; and, though Scottish heraldic law provides no marks of cadency as between sister and sister, the laws of arms north of the Tweed recognise seniority of birth in the event of a certain set of circumstances arising. In Scotland, as doubtless many are aware,, certain untitled Scottish families, for reasons which may or may not be known, have been permitted to use supporters to their arms. When the line vests in coheirs, the eldest born daughter, as heir of line, assumes the sup- porters, unless some other limitation has been attached to them. Scottish supporters are peculiar things to deal with, unless the exact terms of the patent of grant or matriculation are known. The lozenge of an unmarried lady is frequently surmounted by a true lover's knot of ribbon, usually painted blue (Fig. 749). It has no particular meaning and no official recognition, though plenty of official 57a THE ARMORIAL BEARINGS OF A LADY 573 use, and practically its status is no more than a piece of supposedly artistic ornament. Concerning the law for unmarried ladies, therefore, there is neither doubt nor dispute. A widow bears arms upon a lozenge, this showing the arms of her late husband impaled with those of her own family (Fig. 750), or with these latter displayed on an escutcheon of pretence if she be an heir or coheir (Fig. 751). The other state in the progress of life in which a lady may hope or expect to find herself is that of married life. Now, how should a married lady display arms ? Echo and the text-books alike answer, '^ How ? " Does anybody know ? This " fault," for such it undoubtedly is, is due to the fact that the laws of arms evolved themselves in that period when a married woman was little accounted of. As an un- married heiress she undoubtedly was a somebody ; as a widowed and richly-jointured dowager she was likewise of account, but as a wedded wife her identity was lost, for the Married Women's Property Act was not in existence, nor was it thought of. So completely was it recog- nised that all rights and inheritance of the wife devolved of right upon the husband, that formerly the husband enjoyed any peerage honours which had descended to the wife, and was summoned to Parliament as a peer in his wife's peerage. Small wonder, then, that the same ideas dominated the rules of armory. These only provide ways and methods for the husband to bear the wife's arms. This is curious, because there can be no doubt that at a still earlier period the practice of impalement was entirely confined to women, and that, unless the wife happened to be an heiress, the husband did not trouble to impale her arms. But a little thought will show that the two are not at variance, for if monuments and other matters of record are ignored, the earliest examples of impalement which have come down to us are all, almost without exception, examples of arms borne by widows. One cannot get over the fact that a wife during coverture had practically no legal status at all. The rules governing impalement, and the con- junction of the arms of man and wife, as they are to be borne by the husband, are recited in the chapter upon Marshalling, which also details the ways in which a widow bears arms in the different ranks of life. Nothing would be gained by repeating them here. It may be noted, however, that it is not considered correct for a widow to make use of the true lover's knot of blue ribbon, which is sometimes used in the case of an unmarried lady. A divorce puts matters in statu quo ante. There still remains, however, the question of the bearing of arms in her own right by a married woman under coverture at the present day. 574 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY The earliest grant of arms that I can put my hands upon to a woman is one dated 1558. It is, moreover, the only grant of which I know to one single person, that person being a wife. The grant is decidedly interesting, so I print it in full : — *' To ALL AND SINGULAR as well kinges heraldes and officers of armes as nobles gentlemen and others which these presents shall see or here Wyllyam Hervye Esquire otherwise called Clarencieux princi- pall heralde and kinge of armes of the south-east and west parties of England fendith duecomendacons and greting fforasmuch as auncientlye ffrom the beginnynge the valyant and vertuous actes off excellent parsons have ben comended to the worlde with sondry monumentes and remembrances off theyr good desertes among the which one of the chefist and most usuall hath ben the beringe of figures and tokens in shildes called armes beinge none other thinges then Evidences and demonstracons of prowes and valoure diverselye distributed accordinge to the quallyties and desertes of the parsons. And for that Dame Marye Mathew daughter and heyre of Thomas Mathew of Colchester in the counte of Essex esquire hath longe contynued in nobylyte she and her auncestors bearinge armes, yet she notwithstandinge being ignorant of the same and ffor the advoydinge of all inconvenyences and troubles that dayleye happeneth in suche cases and not wyllinge to preiudyce anye person hath instantlye requyred me The sayde Clarencieux kinge of armes accordinge to my registers and recordes To assigne and sett forthe ffor her and her posterite The armes belong- ing and descendinge To her ffrom her saide auncesters. In considera- con whereof I have at her ientle request assigned geven and granted unto her and her posterite The owlde and auncient armes of her said auncesters as followeth. That is to saye — partye per cheveron sables and argent a Lyon passant in chefe off the second the poynt goutey ^ of the firste as more plainly aperith depicted in this margent. Which armes I The Saide Clarencieux kinge of Armes by powre and authorite to myne office annexed and graunted By the Queenes Majesties Letters patentes under The great Seale of England have ratefyed and confirmed and By These presentes do ratefye and confyrme unto and for the saide dame marye Mathew otherwise called dame Mary Jude wiffe to Sir Andrew Jude Knight late Mayor and Alderman off London and to her posterite To use bear and show for evermore in all places of honour to her and theyr wourshipes at theyr Lybertie and pleasur without impediment lett or interupcon of any person or persons. <* In witness whereof the saide Clarencieux Kinge of Armes have signed these presentes with my hand and sett thereunto The Seale off ; * Gutte-de-poix. THE ARMORIAL BEARINGS OF A LADY 575 myne office and The Seale of myne armes geven at London The x*** daye off October in the Yeare of owre Lord Godd 1558 and in the ffourth and ffifth yeares off the reignes off owre Souereignes Lorde and Layde Phellip and Marye by the grace of God Kinge and Queene of England france both cycles Jerusalem Irland deffendors of the faythe Arche- dukes of Austrya Dukes of Burgoyne myllain & braband erles of has- purgic; Flanders and Tyrrell. "W. Hervey als Clarencieux *^ King of Armes. "Confirmation of Arms to Dame Mary Mathew, 'otherwise called Dame Marye Jude, wyfTe to Sir Andrew Jude, Knight, Late Lord Mayor and Alderman off London/ 1558." In this grant the arms are painted upon a shield. The grant was made in her husband's lifetime, but his arms are not impaled there- with. Evidently, therefore, the lady bears arms in her own righty and the presumption would seem to be that a married lady bears her arms without reference to her husband, and bears them upon a shield. On the other hand, the grant to Lady Pearce, referred to on an earlier page, whilst not blazoning the Pearce arms, shows the painting upon the patent to have been a lozenge of the arms of Pearce, charged with a baronet's hand impaled with the arms then granted for the maiden name of Lady Pearce. On the other hand, a grant is printed in vol. i. of the Notes to the '^ Visitation of England and Wales." The grant is to Dame Judith Diggs, widow of Sir Maurice Diggs, Bart., now wife of Daniel Sheldon, and to Dame Margaret Sheldon, her sister, relict of Sir Joseph Sheldon, Knight, late Alderman, and sometime Lord Mayor of the City of London, daughters and coheirs of Mr. George Rose, of Eastergate. The operative clause of the grant is : '' do by these Presents grant and assign to y*" said Dame Judith and Dame Margaret the Armes hereafter mentioned Viz^ : Ermine, an Eagle displayed Sable, membered and beaked Gules, debruised with a Bendlet Compone Or and Azure, as in the margin hereof more plainly appears depicted. To be borne and used for ever hereafter by them y^ said Dame Judith Diggs and Dame Margaret Sheldon, and the descendants of their bodies respec- tively, lawfully begotten, according to the Laws, Rules and practice of Armes." In each case it will be noted that the sisters were respectively wife and widow of some one of the name of Sheldon ; and it might possibly be supposed that these were arms granted for the name of Sheldon. There seems, however, to be very little doubt that these are the arms for Rose. The painting is, however, of the single coat of Rose, and one is puzzled to know why the arms are not painted in 576 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY conjunction with those of Sheldon. The same practice was followed in the patent which was granted to Nelson's Lady Hamilton. This patent, which both heraldically and historically is excessively interest- ing, was printed in full on p. i68, vol. i. of the Genealogical Magazine. The arms which in the grant are specifically said to be the arms of Lyons (not of Hamilton) are painted upon a lozenge, with no reference to the arms of Hamilton. In each of these cases, however, the grantee of arms has been an heiress, so that the clause by which the arms are limited to the descendants does not help. An instance of a grant to a man and his wife, where the wife was not an heiress, is printed in " The Right to Bear Arms " ; and in this case the painting shows the arms impaled with those of the husband. The grant to the wife has no hereditary limitations, and presumably her descendants would never be able to quarter the arms of the wife, no matter even if by the extinction of the other issue she eventually became a coheir. The fact that the arms of man and wife are herein granted together prevents any one making any deduction as to what is the position of the wife alone. There was a patent issued in the year 1784 to a Mrs. Sarah Lax, widow of John Lax, to take the name and arms of Maynard, such name and arms to be borne by herself and her issue. The painting in this case is of the arms of Maynard alone upon a lozenge, and the crest which was to be borne by her male descendants is quite a separate painting in the body of the grant, and not in conjunction with the lozenge. Now, Mrs. Maynard was a widow, and it is mani- festly wrong that she should bear the arms as if she were unmarried, yet how was she to bear them ? She was bearing the name of Lax because that had been her husband's name, and she took the name of Maynard, which presumably her husband would have taken had he been alive ; she herself was a Miss Jefferson, so would she have been entitled to have placed the arms of Jefferson upon an escutcheon of pre- tence, in the centre of the arms of Maynard ? Presumably she would, because suppose the husband had assumed the name and arms of Maynard in his lifetime, he certainly would have been entitled to place his wife's arms of Jefferson on an escutcheon of pretence. On March 9, 1878, Francis Culling Carr, and his second wife, Emily Blanche, daughter of Andrew Morton Carr, and niece of the late Field-Marshal Sir WiUiam Maynard Gomm, G.C.B., both assumed by Royal Licence the additional surname and arms of Gomm. Neither Mr. nor Mrs. Carr-Gomm appear to have had any blood descent from the Gomm family ; consequently the Gomm arms were granted to both husband and wife, and the curious part is that they were not identical, the marks (showing that there was no blood relationship) being a THE ARMORIAL BEARINGS OF A LADY 577 canton for the husband and a cross crosslet for the wife. In this case the arms were impaled. One is puzzled to know why the grant to the wife was necessary as well as the grant to the husband. In 1865 Mrs. Massy, widow of Hugh Massy, assumed the name and arms of Richardson in lieu of Massy. Mrs. Massy was the only child of Major Richardson Brady, who had previously assumed by Royal Licence the arms of Brady only. The painting upon the patent is a lozenge, bearing the arms of Massy, and upon an escutcheon of pretence the arms of Richardson. Of course, the arms of Mrs. Massy, as a widow, previously to the issue of the Royal Licence were a lozenge of the arms of Massy, and on an escutcheon of pretence the arms of Brady. A few years ago a Grant of Arms was issued to a Mrs. Sharpe, widow of Major Sharpe. The arms were to he home hy herself and the descendants of her late husband, and by the other descendants of her husband's father, so that there is no doubt whatever that these were the arms of Sharpe. I have no idea who Mrs. Sharpe was, and I do not know that she possessed any arms of her own. Let us presume she did not. Now, unless a widow may bear the arms of her late husband on a lozenge, whether she has arms to impale with them or not, how on earth is she to bear arms at all ? And yet the grant most distinctly was primarily to Mrs. Sharpe. After the death of General Ross, the victor of Bladensburg, a grant of an augmentation was made to be placed upon the monu- ment to the memory of the General (Plate II.). The grant also was for the augmentation to be borne by his widow during her widowhood. But no mention appears of the arms of Mrs. Ross, nor, as far as I can ascertain, was proof officially made that Mrs. Ross was in her own right entitled to arms ; consequently, whether she really was or was not, we may assume that as far as the official authorities officially knew she was not, and the same query formulated with re- gard to the Sharpe patent holds good in this case. The painting on the patent shows the arms upon a shield, and placed above is a helmet surmounted by the crest of augmentation and the family crest of Ross. So that from the cases we have mentioned instances can be found of the arms of a wife upon a shield alone, and of a widow having arms depicted upon a lozenge, such arms being on different occasions the impaled arms of her husband and herself, or the arms of herself alone or of her husband alone ; and we have arms granted to a wife, and depicted as an impalement or upon a lozenge. So that from grants it seems almost impossible to deduce any decided and unquestionable rule as to how wife or widow should bear a coat of arms. There is, 2 o 578 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY however, one other source from which profitable instruction may be drawn. I refer to the methods of depicting arms upon hatchments, and more particularly to the hatchment of a married woman. Now a hatchment is strictly and purely personal, and in the days when the use of such an article was an everyday matter, the greatest attention was paid to the proper marshalling of the arms thereupon. There are so many varying circumstances that we have here only space to refer to the three simple rules, and these uncomplicated by any exceptional circumstances, which governed the hatchments of maid, wife, and widow. In the first case, the hatchment of an un- married lady showed the whole of the background black, the paternal arms on a lozenge, and this suspended by a knot of blue ribbon. In the hatchment of a widow the background again was all black, the arms were upon a lozenge (but without the knot of ribbon), and the lozenge showed the arms of husband and wife impaled, or with the wife's in pretence, as circumstances might dictate. The hatchment of a wife was entirely different. Like the foregoing, it was devoid, of course, of helmet, mantling, crest, or motto ; but the background was white on the dexter side (to show that the husband was still alive), and black on the sinister (to show the wife was dead). But the im- paled arms were not depicted upon a lozenge, but upon a shield, and the shield was surmounted by the true lover's knot of blue ribbon. I have already stated that when the rules of arms were in the making the possibility of a married woman bearing arms in her own right was quite ignored, and theoretically even now the husband bears his wife's arms for her upon his shield. But the arms of a man are never depicted suspended from a true lover's knot. Such a display is distinctly feminine, and I verily believe that the correct way for a married woman to use arms, if she desires the display thereof to be personal to herself rather than to her husband, is to place her husband's arms impaled with her own upon a shield suspended from a true lover's knot, and without helmet, mantling, crest, or motto. At any rate such a method of display is a correct one, it is in no way open to criticism on the score of inaccuracy, it has precedent in its favour, and it affords a very desirable means of distinction. My only hesitation is that one cannot say it is the only way, or that it would be '^ incorrect " for the husband. At any rate it is the only way of drawing a distinction between the ^^ married " achievements of the husband and the wife. The limitations attached to a lady's heraldic display being what they are, it has long been felt, and keenly felt, by every one attempting heraldic design, that artistic treatment of a lady's arms savoured almost of the impossible. What delicacy of treatment can possibly be added to the hard outline of the lozenge ? The substitution of curvilinear for THE ARMORIAL BEARINGS OF A LADY 579 straight lines in the outline, and even the foliation of the outline, goes but a little way as an equivalent to the extensive artistic opportunities which the mantling affords to a designer when depicting the arms of a man. To a certain extent, two attempts have been made towards pro- viding a remedy. Neither can properly claim official recognition, though both have been employed in a quasi-official manner. The one consists of the knot of ribbon ; the other consists of the use of the cordeliere. In their present usage the former -is meaningless and practically senseless, whilst the use of the latter is radically wrong, and in my opinion, little short of imposture. The knot of ribbon, when employed, is usually in the form of a thin streamer of blue ribbon tied in the conventional true lover's knot (Fig. 749). But the imbecility and inconsistency of its use lies in the fact that except upon a hatchment it has been denied by custom to married women and widows, who have gained their lovers ; whilst its use is sanctioned for the unmarried lady, who, unless she be affianced, neither has nor ought to have any- thmg whatever to do with lovers or with their knot. The women who are fancy-free display the tied-up knot ; women whom love has fast tied up, unless the foregoing opinion as to the correct way to dis- play the arms of a married lady which I have expressed be correct, must leave the knot alone. But as matters stand heraldically at the moment the ribbon may be used advantageously with the lozenge of an unmarried lady. With reference to the cordeliere some writers assert that its use is optional, others that its use is confined to widow ladies. Now as a matter of fact it is nothing whatever of the kind. It is really the insignia of the old French Order of the Cordeliere, which was founded by Anne of Bretagne, widow of Charles VIII., in 1498, its member- ship being confined to widow ladies of noble family. The cordeliere was the waist girdle which formed a part of the insignia of the Order, and it took its place around the lozenges of the arms of the members in a manner similar to the armorial use of the Garter for Knights of that Order. Though the Order of the Cordeliere is long since extinct, it is neither right nor proper that any part of its insignia should be adopted unaltered by those who can show no connection with it or membership of it. CHAPTER XXXVI OFFICIAL HERALDIC INSIGNIA THE armory of all other nations than our own is rich in heraldic emblems of office. In France this was particularly the case, and France undoubtedly for many centuries gave the example, to be followed by other civilised countries, in all matters of honour and etiquette. If English heraldry were entirely destitute of official heraldic ensigns, perhaps the development elsewhere of this branch of armory might be dismissed as an entirely foreign growth. But this is far from being the case, as there are some number of cases in which these official emblems do exist. In England, however, the instances are governed by no scale of comparative importance, and the appearance of such tokens can only be described as capricious. That a more extended usage might with advantage be made no one can deny, for usage of this character would teach the general public that armory had a meaning and a value, it would increase the interest in heraldry, and also assist greatly in the rapidly increasing revival of heraldic knowledge. The existence of these heraldic emblems would manifestly tend towards a revival of the old and interestingly excellent custom of regularly setting up in appropriate public places the arms of those who have successively held various offices. The Inns of Court, St. George's Chapel, the Public Office at the College of Arms, and the halls of some of the Livery Companies are amongst the few places of import- ance where the custom still obtains. And yet what an interesting memorial such a series always becomes ! The following list may not be entirely complete, but it is fairly so as far as France is concerned, and I think also complete as to England. The following are from the Royal French Court : — The High Constable of France : Two swords held on each side of the shield by two hands in armour issuing from the clouds. 77?^ Chancellor: In saltire behind his arms two great maces, and over his helmet a mortier or cap sable crossed by two bands of gold lace and turned up ermine ; thereon the figure of a demi-queen as an emblem of France, holding a sceptre in her right hand and the great seal of the kingdom in her left. 580 OFFICIAL HERALDIC INSIGNIA 581 The Marshal: Two batons in sallire behind the arms aziirc; seme-de-Hs or. The Admiral: Two anchors in saltire behind the arms, the stocks of the anchors in chief azure, seme-de-Hs or. The General of the Galleys : Two anchors in saUire behind the arms. Vice-Admiral : One anchor in pale behind the arms. Colonel-General of the Infantry : Under his arms in saltire six flags, three on each side, white, crimson, and blue. Colonel of the Cavalry : Over the arms four banners of the arms of France, fringed, &c., two to the dexter and two to the sinister. Grand Master of the Artillery : Two field-pieces of ordnance under the arms, one pointing to the dexter and one to the sinister. The Superintendent of the Finance : Two keys imperially crowned and endorsed in pale, one on each side of the arms, the dexter or, the sinister argent. Grand Master of the Household to the King: Two grand batons of silver gilt in saltire behind the arms. Grand Almoner : Under his arms a blue book, on the cover the arms of France and Navarre within the Orders of St. Michael and the Holy Ghost, over the Orders the Crown. Grand Chamberlain : Two keys, both imperially crowned or, in saltire behind the arms endorsed, the wards-in-chief. Grand Esquire : On each side of the shield a royal sword erect, the scabbard azure, seme-de-lis, hilt and pommel or, the belts folded round the scabbard azure, sem^-de-lis or. Grand Pannetier, who by virtue of his office had all the bakers of Paris under his jurisdiction, and had to lay the king's cover at his table, bore under his arms a rich cover and a knife and fork in saltire. Grand Butler or Cupbearer : On each side of the base of the shield, a grand silver flagon gilt, with the arms of the King thereon. Gamekeeper to the King : Two bugle-horns appending from the ends of the mantling. Grand Falconer: Two lures appending from the ends of the mantling. Grand Wolf-hunter: On each side of the shield a wolf's head caboshed. Captain of the Kings Guards : Two small batons sable, headed gold, like a walking-cane. Captain of the Hundred Swiss Guards: Two batons in saltire sable, headed argent, and under the arms two black velvet caps with feathers. First Master of the Household : Under his arms two batons in saltire. Grand Carver to His Majesty : Under his arms a knife and fork in saltire proper, the handles azure, sem6-de-lis or. 582 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Grand Provost of the Household: Under his arms two Roman fasces or, corded azure. Grand Quartermaster : A mace and battle-axe in saltire. Captain of the Guards of the Gate: Two keys in pale, crowned argent, one on each side the arms. The President of the Parliatnent : On his helmet a black cap with two bands of gold lace. Under the Empire (of France) the Vice-Connetable used arms holding swords, as had been the case with the Constable of the Kingdom, but the swords were sheathed and seme of golden bees. The Grand Chamberlain had two golden keys in saltire, the bows thereof enclosing the imperial eagle, and the batons of the Marechaux de French were sem6 of bees instead of fleurs-de-lis. The Pope bears a cross with three arms, an archbishop one with two arms, a bishop one with a single arm. Besides this, two crossed keys appertain to the Pope, the golden key to bind, in bend dexter, the silver key to loose, in sinister bend. British archbishops and bishops will be presently referred to. Ecclesiastical princes, who were at the same time sovereign territorial princes, bore behind their shield a pedum or pastorale (crosier), crossed with the sword of penal judicature. A bishop bears the crosier with an outward bend, an abbot with an inward bend, thus symbolising the range of their activity or dominion. The arch and hereditary offices of the old German Empire had also their own attributes ; thus the ^^ Erztruchsess," Lord High Steward (Palatinate- Bavaria), bore a golden Imperial globe, which arose from a misinterpretation of the double dish, the original attribute of this dignity. The Lord High Marshal of the Empire (Saxony) expressed his office by a shield divided '^ per fess argent and sable," bearing two crossed swords gules. The Hereditary Standard- bearer (Wiirtemberg) bore : " Azure, a banner or, charged with an eagle sable " ; the Lord High Chamberlain (Brandenburg) : '^ Azure, a sceptre or," while the Hereditary Chamberlain (Hohenzollern) used: '^ Gules, two crossed sceptres or." In Italy the Duca de Savelli, as Marshal of the Conclave, hangs on either side of his shield a key, the cords of which are knotted beneath his coronet. In Holland Admirals used the naval Crown, and added two anchors in saltire behind the shield. In Spain the Admirals of Castile and of the Indies placed an anchor in bend behind the shield. The instances I am aware of which have official sanction already in this country are as stated in the list which follows : — I have purposely (to make the list absolutely complete) included OFFICIAL HERALDIC INSIGNIA 583 insignia which may possibly be more properly considered ensigns of rank, because it is not particularly easy always to distinguish offices from honours and from rank. The Kmgs 0/ England {George I. to William IV.), as Arch Treasurers of the Holy Roman Empire, bore : Upon an inescutcheon gules, in the centre of the arms of Hanover, a representation of the Crown of Charlemagne. An Archbishop has : (i) His official coat of arms, which he impales (placing it on the dexter side) with his personal arms ; (2) his mitre, which, it should be noted, is the same as the mitre of a Bishop, and not having a coronet encircling its band ; (3) his archiepiscopal staff (of gold, and with two transverse arms), which is placed in pale behind his escutcheon ; (4) two crosiers in saltire behind the escutcheon. It is curious to note that the pallium which occurs in all archiepiscopal coats of arms (save that of York) is now very generally conceded to have been more in the nature of an emblem of the rank of Archbishop (it being a part of his ecclesiastical costume) than a charge in a con- crete impersonal coat of arms for a defined area of archiepiscopal jurisdiction. In this connection it is interesting to observe that the Archbishops of York anciently used the pallium in lieu of the official arms now regularly employed. A Bishop has: (i) His official coat of arms, (2) his mitre, (3) two crosiers in saltire behind his escutcheon. The Bishop of Durham has : (i) His official coat of arms, (2) his coronetted mitre, which is peculiar to himself and (which is another privi- lege also peculiar to himself alone) he places a sword and a crosier in saltire behind his arms. Reference should also be made to the chapter upon Ecclesiastical Heraldry. A Peer has: (i) His coronet, (2) his helmet of rank; (3) his supporters, (4) his robe of estate. A Scottish Peer has, in addition, the ermine lining to his mantling. A Baronet of Englandy of Ireland, of Great Britain, or of the United Kingdom has: (i) His helmet of rank, (2) his badge of Ulster upon an inescutcheon or canton (argent, a sinister hand erect, couped at the wrist gules). A Baronet of Nova Scotia has : (i) His helmet of rank, (2) his badge (an orange tawny ribbon, whereon shall hang pendent in an escutcheon argent, a saltire azure, thereon an inescutcheon of the arms of Scotland, with an imperial crown over the escutcheon, and encircled with this motto, '^ Fax Mentis Honestae Gloria," pendent below the escutcheon). A Knight of the Garter has: (i) His Garter to encircle the shield, (2) his collar and badge, (3) supporters. The Prelate of the Order of 584 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the Garter (an office held by the Bishops of Winchester) is entitled to encircle his arms with the Garter. The Chancellor of the Order of the Garter encircles his arms with the Garter. Formerly the Bishops of Salisbury always held this office, but in 1836 when the county of Berks (which of course includes Windsor, and therefore the chapel of the order) was removed from the Diocese of Salisbury to the Diocese of Oxford, the office of Chancellor passed to the Bishops of Oxford. The Dean of Windsor, as Registrar of the Order, displays below his shield the ribbon and badge of his office. A Knight of the Thistle has : (i) The ribbon or circlet of the order, (2) his collar and badge, (3) supporters. The Dean of the Chapels Royal in Scotland, as Dean of the Order, used the badge and ribbon of his office. A Knight of St, Patrick has : (i) The ribbon or circlet of the order, (2) his collar and badge, (3) supporters. The Prelate of the Order of St. Patrick was as such entitled to encircle his escutcheon with the ribbon or circlet of that order, from which his official badge depends. The office, of course, came to an end with the disestablishment of the Irish Church. It was held by the Archbishops of Armagh. The Chancellor of the Order of St. Patrick is as such entitled to encircle his escutcheon with the ribbon or circlet of that order, from which his official badge depends. This office, formerly held by the Arch- bishops of Dublin, has since the disestablishment been enjoyed by the Chief Secretaries for Ireland. The Deans of St. Patrick's were simi- larly Registrars of the Order, and as such used the badge and ribbon of their office. Knights Grand Cross or Knights Grand Commanders of the Orders of the Bath, the Star of India, St. Michael and St. George, the Indian Empire, or the Victorian Order, have: (i) The circlets or ribbons of their respective Orders, (2) their collars and badges, (3) their helmets of degree, (4) supporters, if they incUne to pay the fees for these to be granted. Knights Commanders of the aforesaid Orders have : (i) The circlets or ribbons of their respective Orders, (2) their badges pendent below the shield, (3) their helmets of degree. Commanders of the Victorian Order have: (i) the circlet of the Order, (2) the badge pendent below the shield. Companions of the aforesaid Orders, and Members of the Victorian Order, as also Members of the Distinguished Service Order, the Im- perial Service Order, the Order of Merit, the Order of Victoria and Albert, the Order of the Crown of India, and those entitled to the Victoria Cross, the Albert Medal, the Edward Medal, the Conspicuous Service Cross, the Kaisar-i-Hind Medal, the Royal Red Cross, the OFFICIAL HERALDIC INSIGNIA 585 Volunteer Officers' Decoration, the Territorial Decoration, and the Decoration of the League of Mercy, are entitled to suspend their respective decorations below their escutcheons. The officers of these orders of knighthood are of course entitled to display their badges of office. The Dean of Westminster is always Dean of the Order of the Bath. Knights Grand Cross and Knights Commanders of the Bathj if of the Military Division^ are also entitled to place a wreath of laurel round their escut- cheons. Knights of Justice of the Order of the Hospital of St, John of Jerusalem in England are entitled to place upon their escutcheons a chief of the arms of the Order (gules, a cross throughout argent, embellished in the angles with a lion guardant and a unicorn, both passant or). Knights of Grace and other Members of the Order suspend whatever badge they are entitled to wear below their shield from a black watered-silk ribbon. [Some members of the Order display their arms upon the Cross of the Order, as was done by Knights of the original Order, from which the present Order is copied, but how far the practice is sanc- tioned by the Royal Charter, or in what manner it is controlled by the rules of the Order, I am not aware.] The Lord High Constable of England is entitled to place behind his escutcheon two batons in saltire similar to the one which is delivered to him for use at the Coronation, which is now the only occasion when the office is enjoyed. As the office is only held temporarily, the existing privilege does not amount to much. The Lord High Constable of Scotland is entitled to place behind his escutcheon, in saltire, two silver batons tipped with gold at either end. The arms of the Earl of Errol (Hereditary Lord High Constable of Scotland) have only once, at an early period, been matriculated in Lyon Register, and then without any official insignia, but there can be no doubt of the right to the crossed batons. The Lord High Chamberlain of Scotland (\ am not sure this office still exists) : Two golden keys in saltire behind the escutcheon. The Earl Marshal and Hereditary Marshal of England places two batons of gold tipped with sable in saltire behind his arms. \^A Deputy Earl Marshal places one similar baton in bend behind his shield.] The Earl Marischal of Scotland (until the office was extinguished by attainder) placed saltirewise behind his shield two batons gules, sem6 of thistles, each ensigned on the top with an Imperial Crown or. The Hereditary Marshal of Ireland (an office for long past in abeyance) used two batons in saltire behind his arms. According to 586 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY MS. Harl. 6589, f. 39 : '^ Les armes des office du Mareschall d'lreland sont de Goulz et cinque fucelles bendes d' Argent." These certainly do not appear to be the personal arms of those who held the office, but there is other record that some such coat was used. The Hereditary Lord Great Seneschal of Ireland (the Earl of Shrews- bury) places a white wand in pale behind his escutcheon. The Duke of Argyll places in saltire behind his arms: (i) In bend dexter, a baton gules, seme of thistles or, ensigned with an Imperial Crown proper, thereon the crest of Scotland (as Hereditary Great Master of the Household in Scotland) ; (2) in bend sinister, a sword proper, hilt and pommel or (as Hereditary Justice-General of Scot- land) {vide Plate III.). The Master-General of the Ordnance (by warrant of King Charles II.), bears on each side of his arms a field-piece. The Lord Justice-Clerk of Scotland places two swords in saltire behind his shield. The Lord Chief -Justice of England encircles his arms with his Collar of SS. The Walker Trustees place behind their shield two batons in saltire, each ensigned with a unicorn salient supporting a shield argent, the unicorn horned or, and gorged with an antique crown, to which is affixed a chain passing between the fore-legs and reflexed over the back of the last, for the office of Heritable Usher of the White Rod of Scotland, now vested in the said Trustees. Before the recent Court of Claims the claim was made to exercise the office by deputy, and such claim was allowed. The Master of the Revels in Scotland has an official coat of arms : Argent, a lady rising out of a cloud in the nombril point, richly ap- parelled, on her head a garland of ivy, holding in her right hand a poignard crowned, in her left a vizard all proper, standing under a veil or canopy azure garnished or, in base a thistle vert. Serjeants-at-Arms encircle their arms with their Collars of SS. Garter King of Arms has: (i) His official coat of arms (argent, a gules, on a chief azure, a ducal coronet encircled with a Garter, between a Hon passant guardant on the dexter, and a fieur-de-lis on the sinister, all or) ; (2) his crown ; (3) his Collar of SS (the collar of a King of Arms differs from that of a Herald, inasmuch as it is of silver-gilt, and on each shoulder a portcullis is inserted) ; (4) his badge as Garter pendent below his shield. His sceptre of silver-gilt has been sometimes placed in bend behind his escutcheon, but this has not been regularly done. The practice has, however, been reverted to by the present Garter. Lyon King of Arms has : (i) His official coat of arms (argent, a lion sejant, erect and affronts gules, holding in his dexter paw a thistle OFFICIAL HERALDIC INSIGNIA 587 slipped vert, and in the sinister a shield of the second, on a chief azure a St. Andrew's cross — {.e. a saltire — of the field) ; (2) his crown ; (3) two batons, representing that of his office in saltire behind his shield, these being azure sem6 of thistles and fleurs-de-lis or, tipped at either end with gold ; (4) his Collar of SS ; (5) his triple chain of gold, from which depends his badge as Lyon King of Arms. Ulster King of Arms has : (i) His official coat of arms (or, a cross gules, on a chief of the last a lion of England between a harp and a portcullis, all of the first) ; (2) his crown ; (3) his Collar of SS ; (4) his two staves in saltire behind the shield ; (5) his chain and badge as Ulster King of Arms ; (6) his badge as Registrar of the Order of St. Patrick. Clarenceux King of Arms has : (i) His official coat of arms (argent, a cross gules, on a chief of the second a lion passant guardant or, crowned of the last) ; (2) his crown ; (3) his Collar of SS. Norroy King of Arms has : (i) His official coat of arms (argent, a cross gules, on a chief of the second a lion of England passant guardant or, crowned with an open crown, between a fleur-de-lis on the dexter and a key on the sinister of the last) ; (2) his crown ; (3) his Collar of SS. Bath King of Arms has: (i) His crown ; his Collar of SS. I am not aware that any official arms have been assigned to Bath up to the present time ; but if none exist, there would not be the slightest difficulty in obtaining these. An English Herald encircles his shield with his Collar of SS. A Scottish Herald is entitled to do the same, and has also his badge, which he places below the escutcheon pendent from a ribbon of blue and white. An Irish Herald has his Collar of SS, and his badge suspended from a sky-blue ribbon. An Irish Pursuivant has a similar badge. The Regius Professors {or " Readers ") in the University of Cambridge y for " Phisicke," '^ Lawe," '^ Devinity," ^< Hebrew," and " Greke," have official arms as follows (see grant by Robert Cooke, Clarenceux, 1590, Genealogical Magazine^ vol. ii. p. 125): — Of Phisicke : Azure, a fesse ermines (? ermine) between three lozenges or, on a chief gules a lion passant guardant of the third, charged on the side with the letter M sable. Crest : on a wreath or and azure, a quin- quangle silver, called " simbolum sanitatis." Mantling gules and argent. OfLaive : Purpure, a cross moline or, on a chief gules, a lion passant guardant of the second, charged on the side with the letter L sable. Crest : on a wreath <' purple and gold," a bee volant or. Mantling gules and argent. Of Devinity : Gules, on a cross ermine, between four doves argent, 588 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY a book of the first, the leaves or, charged in the midst with the Greek letter (Theta) sable. Crest : on a wreath '' silver and gules," a dove volant argent, with an olive-branch vert in his beak. Mantling gules, double argent. 0/ Hebrew : Argent, the Hebrew letter T\ (Tawe) sable, on a chief gules, a lion passant guardant or, charged on the side with the letter H sable. Crest : on a wreath ^^ silver and sables," a turtle-dove azure. Mantling gules, double argent. Of Greke : Per chevron argent and sable, in chief the two Greek letters A (Alpha) and Q (Omega) of the second, and in base a *' cicado " or grasshopper of the first, on a chief gules, a lion passant guardant or, charged on the side with the letter G sable. Crest : on a wreath " silver and sables," an owl argent, legs, beak, and ears or. Mantling gules and argent. The following insignia of office I quote subject to the reservation that I am doubtful how far they enjoy official sanction : — The Lord Chancellor of England: Two maces in saltire (or one in pale) behind the shield and the purse containing the Great Seal below it. The Lord Great Chamberlain of England : Two golden keys in saltire ; and The Lord Chamberlain of the Household: A golden key in pale behind the shield. At Exeter the Dean, Precentor, Chancellor, and Treasurer have used official arms impaled with their own insignia. These were : — The Dean : Azure, a stag's head caboshed and between the horns a cross pat^e fitchee argent. The Precentor : Argent, on a saltire azure a fleur-de-lis or. The Chancellor: Gules, a saltire argent between four crosslets or. l^he Treasurer: Gules, a saltire between four leopards' heads or. The Dean of the Chapel Royal, Savoy, may perhaps employ the complicated coat of the chapel to impale his personal arms, placing the escutcheon on the breast of an eagle sable, crowned or. Many English Deaneries claim to possess arms which presumably the occupant may use to impale his own coat with, after the example of the Dean of Exeter. Such are London, Winchester, Lincoln, Salisbury, Lichfield, Durham, which all difference the arms of the see with a letter D of gold or sable. St. David's reverses the tinctures of the arms of the see. Norwich and Carlisle carry : Argent, a cross sable. Canterbury : Azure, on a cross argent the monogram X sable. York dififerences the arms of the see by changing the crown into a mitre, and adding three plates in flanks and base. CHAPTER XXXVII AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR OF all heraldic distinctions the possession of an augmentation of honour is the one most prized. The Sovereign is of course the fountain of honour, and though ordinary grants of arms are made by Letters Patent under the hands and seals of the Kings of Arms, by virtue of the powers expressly and specifically conferred upon them in the Letters Patent respectively appointing them to their offices, a grant of arms is theoretically a grant from the Crown. The privilege of the possession of arms in the ordinary event is left in the discretion of the Earl Marshal, whose warrant is a condition precedent to the issue of a Grant. Providing a person is palpably living in that style and condition of life in which the use of arms is usual, subject always to the Earl Marshal's pleasure and discretion, a Grant of Arms can ordinarily be obtained upon payment of the usual fees. The social status of present-day grantees of arms is considerably in advance of the status of grantees in the Tudor period. An augmentation of arms, however, is on a totally and entirely different footing. It is an especial mark of favour from the Sovereign, and the effective grant is a Royal Warrant under the hand and Privy Seal of the Sovereign. The warrant recites and requires that the augmentation granted shall be exemplified and recorded in the College of Arms. Augmentations have been less frequently conferred in recent years than was formerly the case. Technically speaking, a gift of arms by the Sovereign direct where none previously existed is not an augmentation, though one is naturally inclined to include such grants in the category. Such an example is met with in the shield granted to Colonel Carlos by King Charles to commemorate their mutual adventures in the oak tree (^* Or, issuing from a mount in base vert, an oak tree proper, over all on a fess gules, three Imperial crowns also proper") (Plate II.). There are many gorgeous legends relating to augmentations and arms which are said to have been granted by William the Conqueror as rewards after the Battle of Hastings. Personally I do not believe in a single one. There was a certain augmentation borne by the Dodge family, which, if it be correct, dates from the thirty-fourth year of Edward I., but whether this be authentic it is impossible to say. Most 583 590 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY people consider the alleged deed of grant a forgery, and if this be so, the arms only exist by right of subsequent record and the question of augmentation rests upon tradition. The curious charge of the woman's breast distilling drops of milk to typify the nourishment afforded to the king's army is at any rate most interesting (Plate VI.). The earliest undoubted one in this country that I am aware of dates from the reign of Edward III. Sir John de Pelham shared in the glory of the Battle of Poictiers, and in the capture of the French King John. To commemorate this he was granted two round buckles with thongs. The Pelham family arms were '* Azure, three pelicans argent," and, as will be seen, these family arms were quartered with the buckles and thongs on a field gules as an augmentation. The quarterly coat forms a part of the arms both of Lord Chichester and of Lord Yarborough at the present day, and <^ the Pelham buckle " has been the badge of the Pelham family for centuries. Piers Legh fought with the Black Prince and took the Count de Tanquervil prisoner at the Battle of Crecy, '< and did valiantly rere and advance the said princes Banner att the bataile of Cressy to the noe little encouragement of the English army," but it was not until the reign of Queen Elizabeth that the augmentation to commemorate this was granted. The Battle of Flodden was won by the Earl of Surrey, afterwards the Duke of Norfolk, and amongst the many rewards which the King showered upon his successful Marshal was the augmentation to his arms of '* a demi-lion pierced in the mouth with an arrow, depicted on the colours for the arms of the Kingdom of Scotland, which the said James, late King of Scots, bore." According to the Act of Parlia- ment under which it was granted this augmentation would seem now to belong exclusively to Lord Mowbray and Stourton and Hon. Mary Petre, but it is borne apparently with official sanction, or more likely perhaps by official inadvertence, by the Duke of Norfolk and the rest of the Howard family. The Battle of Agincourt is referred to by Shakespeare, who puts these words into King Henry's mouth on the eve of that great battle (Act iv. sc. 3) : — **We few, we happy few, we band of brothers For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile, This day shall gentle his condition." There is actual foundation in fact for these lines. For in a writ couched in very stringent and severe terms issued by the same king in after years decreeing penalties for the improper assumption and use of false arms, specific exception is made in favour of those <' who bore AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR 591 arms with us at the Battle of Agincourt." Evidently this formed a very extensive kind of augmentation. The reign of Queen Elizabeth furnishes an interesting example of the gift of a complete coat in the case of Sir Francis Drake, who had been using the arms of another family of the same name. The representative of that family complained to the Queen that Sir Francis, whom he styled an upstart, should take such liberties with his arms ; whereupon the Queen said she would give Sir Francis arms which should outrival those of his namesake. At least, such is the legend, and though the arms themselves were granted by Clarenceux King of Arms, and I have not yet found any Royal Warrant indicating that the grant was made by specific Royal command, it is possible the story is correct. The arms are : " Sable, a fess wavy between two stars argent. Crest : a ship under reef, drawn round a terrestrial globe with a cable by a hand issuing from clouds all proper " (Plate VI.). The stars upon the shield are the two pole stars, and the wavy band between them typifies Drake's voyage round the world, as does also the peculiar crest in which the Divine hand is shown guiding his ship around the globe. At the Battle of Naseby Dr. Edward Lake fought bravely for the King, and in the service of his Majesty received no less than sixteen wounds. At the end of the battle, when his left arm was useless, he put the bridle of his horse between his teeth and still fought on. The quartering of augmentation given to him was : ^* Gules, a dexter arm embowed in armour holding in the hand a sword erect all proper, thereto affixed a banner argent charged with a cross between sixteen escutcheons of the field, on the cross a lion of England." The sixteen shields upon the banner typify his sixteen wounds. After the Commonwealth was established in England, Charles II. made a desperate effort to regain his crown, an effort which culminated in his disastrous defeat at the Battle of Worcester. The King escaped through the gate of the city solely through the heroic efforts of Colonel Newman, and this is kept in remembrance by the inescutcheon of augmentation, viz. : '* Gules, a portcullis imperially crowned or." Every one has heard how the King was accompanied in his wanderings by Colonel Carlos, who hid with him in the oak tree at Boscobel. Afterwards the king accompanied Mistress Jane Lane on horseback as her servant to the coast, whence he fled to the Continent. The reward of Colonel Carlos was the gift of the entire coat of arms already referred to. The Lanes, though not until after some years had passed and the King had come back to his own again, were granted two remarkable additions to their family arms. First of all '^ the canton of England " (that is, the arms of England upon a canton) was added 592 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY to their shield. They are the only family to whom such an honour has been given, and a most curious result has happened. When the use of armorial bearings was taxed by Act of Parliament the Royal Arms were specially exempted, and on account of this canton the Lane family claimed and obtained exemption from the tax. A few years later a crest was granted to them, namely, a strawberry-roan horse, ^^couped at the flanks," holding in its feet the Royal crown (Plate II.). It was upon a horse of this colour that the King and Mistress Lane had escaped and thereby saved the crown. Mr. Francis Wolfe, of Madeley, who also was a party to the escape, received the grant of an inescutcheon gules charged with a lion of England. Another family which bears an augmentation to commemorate King Charles' escape is Whitgreave. The reign of Queen Anne produced in the Duke of Marlborough one of the finest generals the world has ever seen ; and in the Battle of Blenheim one of its greatest victories. The augmentation which commemorates this is a shield bearing the cross of St. George and in the centre a smaller shield with the golden lilies of France. In the year 1797 the Battle of Camperdown was fought, when Admiral Duncan defeated the Dutch Fleet and was created Lord Camperdown. To his family arms were added a naval crown and a representation of the gold medal given by George III. to Lord Cam- perdown to commemorate his victory. The arms of Nelson are most interesting, inasmuch as one version of the arms carries two separate and distinct augmentations. It is not, however, the coat as it was granted to and borne by the great Admiral himself. After the Battle of the Nile he received the aug- mentation on the chief, a landscape showing the palm-tree, the dis- abled ship, and the battery in ruins. The one crest was the plume of triumph given to the Admiral by the Sultan Selim III., and his second crest, which, however, is not a crest of augmentation, was the stern of the Spanish ship San Josef, After his death at the Battle of Trafalgar his brother was created Earl Nelson, and a second augmentation, namely, a fess wavy sable with the w^ord '' Trafalgar " upon it in gold letters, was added to the arms. This, however, has since been, discontinued, except by Lord Bridport, who quarters it, w^hilst the Nelson family has reverted to the arms as they were borne by the great Admiral. After the death of Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar, Lord Colling- wood took command, and though naval experts think that the action of Collingwood greatly minimised the number of prizes which would have resulted from the victory, Lord Collingwood received for an augmentation a chief wavy gules, thereon the lion of England, navally AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR 593 crowned, with the word << Trafalgar " above the lion. He also received an additional crest, namely, the stern of his ship, the Royal Sovereign^ between a wreath of oak on the one side and a wreath of laurel on the other. The heroic story of the famous fight between the Shannon and the Chesapeake has been often told. Captain Broke sent in a challenge to the Chesapeake to come out and fight him, and, though a banquet was prepared by the Mayor of Boston for that evening '< to meet the English officers," Captain Broke defeated the Chesapeake in an engage- ment which only lasted a very short time. He was granted an ad- ditional crest, namely, an arm holding a trident and issuing from a naval crown, together with the motto, *' Saevumque tridentem servamus." General Ross fought and won the Battle of Bladensburg, and took the city of Washington, dying a few days afterwards. The story is that the family were offered their choice of a baronetcy or an augmentation, and they chose the latter. The augmentation (Plate H.), which was specially granted with permission for it to be placed upon the monument to the memory of General Ross, consists of the arm holding the flag of the United States with a broken flag-staff which will be seen both on the shield itself, and as an additional crest. The shield also shows the gold cross for previous services at Corunna and in the Peninsula. The family were also given the surname of ^^ Ross-of- Bladensburg." The capture of Cura^oa by Admiral Sir Charles Brisbane, K.C.B., is commemorated by the representation of his ship passing between the two Dutch forts ; and by the additional crest of an arm in a naval officer's uniform grasping a cutlass. Admiral Sir Robert Otway, for his distinguished services, was granted : ** On a chief azure an anchor between two branches of oak or, and on the dexter side a demi-Neptune and on the sinister a mermaid proper," to add to his shield. Admiral Sir George Pocock, who captured Havannah, was given for an aug- mentation : " On a chief wavy azure a sea-horse " (to typify his naval career), between two Eastern crowns (to typify his services in the East Indies), with the word *' Havanna," the scene of his greatest victory. Sir Edward Pellew, who was created Viscount Exmouth for bom- barding and destroying the fort and arsenal of Algiers, was given upon a chief a representation of that fort, with an English man-of-war in front of it, to add to his arms. It is interesting to note that one of his supporters, though not a part of his augmentation, represents a Christian slave, in memory of those in captivity at Algiers when he captured the city. There were several augmentations won at the Battle of Waterloo, 2 P OF THE IMIV/FDQITV 594 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY and the Waterloo medal figures upon many coats of arms of Waterloo officers. Colonel Alexander Clark-Kennedy, with his own hand, captured the French Eagle of the 105th French Regiment. For this he bears a representation of it and a sword crossed upon a chief over his arms, and his crest of augmentation is a demi-dragoon holding the same flag. Of the multitude of honours which were showered upon the Duke of Wellington, not the least was his augmentation. This was a smaller shield to be superimposed upon his own, and charged with those crosses of St. George, St. Andrew, and St. Patrick, which we term " the Union Jack." Sir Edward Kerrison, who distinguished himself so greatly in the Peninsula and at Waterloo, was granted a sword with a wreath of laurel and representations of his medals for Orthes and Waterloo, and, for an additional crest, an arm in armour holding a banner inscribed ^* Peninsula." Sir Thomas Munro, who will be long remembered as the Governor of Madras, was rewarded for his capture of Badamy by a representation of that hill-fort in India. The augmentation of Lord Keane is very similar, being a representation of the Fortress of Ghuznee in Afghanistan, which he captured. Other instances of a similar character are to be found in the arms of Cockburn-Campbell and Hamilton-Grace. The arms of Lord Gough are most remarkable, inasmuch as they show no less than two distinct and different augmentations both earned by the same man. In 18 16, for his services in the Peninsula, he re- ceived a representation of the Spanish Order of Charles III., and on a chief the representation of the Fortress of Tarifa, with the crest of the arm holding the colours of his own regiment, the 87th, and a French eagle reversed and depressed. After his victories in the East, par- ticularly at Goojerat, and for the subjugation and annexation of the Punjab, he was granted, in 1843, an additional quartering to add to his shield. This has the Lion of England holding up the Union Jack below the words *^ China " and ^^ India." The third crest, which was then granted to him, shows a similar lion holding the Union Jack and a Chinese flag. Sir George Pollock, ^' of the Khyber Pass," Bart., earned everlasting fame for himself in the first Afghan War, by forcing the Khyber Pass and by the capture of Cabul. For this he was given an Eastern crown and the word " Khyber " on a chief as well as three cannon upon a canton, and at the same time he was granted an additional crest — a lion holding an Afghan banner with the staff thereof broken. With him it seemed as if the practice of granting augmentations for military services had ceased. Lord Roberts has none, neither has Lord Wolseley. But recently the old practice was reverted to in favour of Lord Kitchener. His family arms were : '^ Azure, a chevron cottised AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR 595 between three bustards/' and in the centre chief point a bezant ; with a stag's head for a crest ; but for <' smashing the KhaHfa " he has been given the Union Jack and the Egyptian flag with the staves encircled by a coronet bearing the word ^' Khartoum," all on a pile superimposed over his family arms. He also received a second crest of an elephant's head holding a sword in its trunk issuing from a mural crown. At the conclusion of the South African War a second augmentation was granted to him, this taking the form of a chief. Two other very interesting instances of augmentation of arms are worthy of mention. Sir Ralph Abercromby, after a distinguished career, fought and won the Battle of Aboukir Bay, only to die a few days later on board H.M.S. Foudroyant of his wounds received in the battle. But long before he had fought and conquered the French at Valenciennes, and in 1795 had been made a Knight of the Bath. The arms which are upon his Stall plate in Westminster Abbey include his augmentation, which is an arm in armour encircled by a wreath of laurel supporting the French Standard. Sir William Hoste gained the celebrated victory over the French fleet off the Island of Lissa in 181 1, and the augmentation which was granted was a representation of his gold medal hanging from a naval crown, and an additional crest, an arm holding a flag inscribed with the word ^' Cattaro," the scene of another of his victories. Peace has its victories no less than war, but there is generally very much less fuss made about them. Consequently, the augmenta- tions to commemorate entirely pacific actions are considerably fewer in number. The Speke augmentation has been elsewhere referred to, and reference may be made to the Ross augmentation to commemorate the Arctic exploits of Sir John Ross. It is a very common idea that arms were formerly to be obtained by conquest in battle. Like many other heraldic ideas, there is a certain amount of truth in the idea, from which very erroneous generali- sations have been made. The old legend as to the acquisition of the plume of ostrich feathers by the Black Prince no doubt largely accounts for the idea. That legend, as has been already shown, lacks foundation. Territorial or sovereign arms doubtless would be subject to conquest, but I do not believe that because in battle or in a tournament a outrance one person defeated another, he therefore became entitled to assume, of his own motion, the arms of the man he had vanquished. The proposition is too absurd. But there is no doubt that in some number of historic cases his Sovereign has subsequently conferred upon the victor an augmentation which has closely approximated to the arms of his victim. Such cases occur in the arms of the Clerkes, Barts., 596 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY of Hitcham, Bucks, who bear : ^' On a sinister canton azure, a demi- ram salient of the first, and in chief two fleurs-de-Hs or, debruised by a baton," to commemorate the action of Sir John Gierke of Weston, who captured Louis D'Orleans, Duke of Longueville, at Borny, near Terouenne, 5 Henry VII. The augmentation conferred upon the Duke of Norfolk at the battle of Flodden has been already referred to, but the family of Lloyd of Stockton, co. Salop, carry a remarkable augmen- tation, inasmuch as they are permitted to bear the arms of Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham, to commemorate his recapture by their ancestor after Lord Cobham's escape from the Tower. Augmentations which have no other basis than mere favour of kings, or consanguinity to the Royal Family, are not uncommon. Richard II., who himself adopted the arms of St. Edward the Confessor, bestowed the right to bear them also upon Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk (Fig. 675)' No difference was added to them in his Fig. 773. — Arms of Robert i • u • al i ui +u de Vere, Duke of case, which IS the more remarkable as they were Ireland and Earl of bornc by the Duke impaled with the arms of Oxford : Quarterly, I and t- i i t j.i. ir- r j ^u 4 (of augmentation), England. In 1 397 the Kmg conferred the same azure, three crowns or, ^j-j^s upon Tohn dc Holland, Dukc of Exeter, withm a bordure argent ; , . ^. it rr»i 2 and 3, quarterly gules differenced by a label argent, and upon 1 homas and or, in the first ^^ Holland, Duke of Surrey, within a bordure quarter a mullet argent. ' -' ' . ,. , ermme. Richard II. seems to have been mchned to the granting of augmentations, for in 1386, when he created the Earl of Oxford (Robert de Vere) Duke of Ireland, he granted him as an augmentation the arms of Ireland ('' Azure, three crowns or ") within a bordure argent (Fig. 773). The Manners family, who were of Royal descent, but who, not being descended from an heiress, had no right to quarter the Royal Arms, received the grant of a chief ^' quarterly azure and gules, in the first and fourth quarters two fleurs-de-lis, and in the second and third a lion passant guardant or." This precedent might well be followed at the present day in the case of the daughters of the Duke and Duchess of Fife. It was adopted in the case of Queen Victoria Eugenie of Spain. The Waller family, of Groombridge, co. Kent, one of whom, Richard Waller, captured Charles, Duke of Orleans, at the battle of Agincourt, received as an augmentation the right to suspend from the crest (^' On a mount a walnut-tree proper ") an escutcheon of the arms of that Prince, viz. : " Azure, three fleurs- de-lis or, a label of three points argent." Lord Polwarth bears one of the few augmentations granted by William III., viz. : ''An inescut- cheon azure charged with an orange ensigned with an Imperial crown AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR 597 all proper," whilst the titular King James III. and VIII. granted to John Graeme, Earl of Alford, a coat of augmentation, viz. : " The Royal Arms of Scotland on the field and cross of St. Andrew counter- changed," the date of the grant being 20th January 1734. Sir John Keith, Earl of Kintore, Knight Marischal of Scotland, saved the regalia of Scotland from falling into the hands of Cromwell, and in return the Keith arms (now quartered by Lord Kintore) were augmented with *^ an inescutcheon gules, a sword in bend sinister surmounted by a sceptre in bend dexter, in chief an Imperial crown, the whole within an orle of eight thistles." The well-known augmentation of the Seymour family : " Or, on a pile gules, between six fleurs-de-lis azure," is borne to commemorate the marriage of Jane Seymour to Henry VIII., who granted augmentations to all his wives except Catharine of Aragon and Anne of Cleves. The Seymour family is, however, the only one in which the use of the augmen- tation has been continued. The same practice was followed by granting the arms of England to the Consort of the Princess Caroline and to the late Prince Consort. See page 499. The frequent grant of the Royal tressure in Scotland, probably usually as an augmentation, has been already referred to. King Charles I. granted ^^^- 774--Device from the chief of the ^ ^1 -r^ 1 /• TT- 11 . . ** Prussian Sword Nobihty." to the Earl of KmnouU as a quartermg of augmentation : " Azure, a unicorn salient argent, armed, maned, and unguled or, within a bordure of the last charged with thistles of Scot- land and roses gules of England dimidiated." The well-known augmen- tation of the Medicis family, viz. : ** A roundle azure, charged with three fleurs-de-lis or," was granted by Louis XII. to Pietro de Medicis. The Prussian Officers, ennobled on the i8th of January 1896, the twenty- fifth anniversary of the foundation of the new German Empire, bear as a device a chief purpure, and thereupon the Prussian sceptre and a sword in saltire interlaced by two oak-branches vert (Fig. 774). The late Right Hon. Sir Thomas Thornton, G.C.B., received a Royal Licence to accept the Portuguese title of Conde de Cassilhas and an augmentation. This was an inescutcheon (ensigned by his coronet as a Conde) ^' or, thereon an arm embowed vested azure, the cuff gold, the hand supporting a flagstaff therefrom flowing the Royal Standard of Portugal." The same device issuing from his coronet was also granted to him as a crest of augmentation. Sir Woodbine Parish, K.C.H., by legislative act of the Argentine Republic received in 1839 a grant of 598 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the arms of that country, which was subsequently incorporated in the arms granted to him and registered in the Heralds' College in this country. He had been Consul-General and Charge d'Affaires at Buenos Ayres, 1823-1832 ; he was appointed in 1824 Plenipotentiary, and concluded the first treaty by which the Argentine Republic was formally recognised. Reference has been already made (page 420) to the frequent grant of supporters as augmentations, and perhaps mention should also be made of the inescutcheons for the Dukedom of Aubigny, borne by the Duke of Richmond and Gordon, and for the Duchy of Chatelherault, borne by the Duke of Abercorn. Possibly these should more properly be ranked as territorial arms and not as augmentations. A similar coat is the inescutcheon borne by the Earl of Mar and Kellie for his Earldom of Kellie. This, however, is stated by Woodward to be an augmentation granted by James VI. to Sir Thomas Erskine, one of several granted by that King to commemorate the frustration of the Gowrie Plot in 1600. The Marquess of Westminster, for some utterly inexplicable reason, was granted as an augmentation the right to bear the arms of the city of Westminster in the first quarter of his arms. Those who have rendered very great personal service to the Crown have been some- times so favoured. The Halford and Gull (see page 250) aug- mentations commemorate medical services to the Royal Family, and augmentations have been conferred upon Sir Frederick Treves and Sir Francis Laking in connection with His Majesty's illness at the time of the Coronation. The badges of Ulster and Nova Scotia borne as such upon their shields by Baronets are, of course, augmentations. Two cases are known of augmentations to the arms of towns. The arms of Derry were augmented by the arms of the city of London in chief, when, after its fearful siege, the name of Derry was changed to Londonderry to commemorate the help given by the city of London. The arms of the city of Hereford had an azure bordure seme of saltires couped argent added to its arms after it had successfully withstood its Scottish siege, and this, by the way, is a striking example of colour upon colour, the field of the coat being gules. There are many grants in the later part of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries recorded in Lyon Register which at first sight appear to be augmentations. Perhaps they are rightly so termed, but as the additions usually appear to be granted by the Lyon without specific Royal Warrants, they are hardly equivalent to the English ones issued during the same period. Many ordinary grants made in England which have borne direct reference to particular achievements of the grantee have been (by the grantees and their descend- AUGMENTATIONS OF HONOUR 599 ants) wrongly termed augmentations. A rough and ready (though not a certain) test is to imagine the coat if the augmentation be removed, and see whether it remains a properly balanced design. Few of such coats will survive the test. The additions made to a coat to make it a different design, when a new grant is founded upon arms improperly used theretofore, are not augmentations, although spoken departures from the truth on this detail are by no means rare. CHAPTER XXXVIII ECCLESIASTICAL HERALDRY ECCLESIASTICAL heraldry has nothing like the importance in British armory that it possesses elsewhere. It may be said to consist in this country exclusively of the ofBcial arms assigned to and recorded for the archiepiscopal and episcopal sees, and the mitres and crosiers which are added to the shields, and a certain number of ecclesiastical symbols which occur as charges. In Pre- Reformation days there were, of course, the many religious houses which used armorial emblems, but with the suppression of the monasteries these vanished. The cardinal's hat was recognised in former days, and would still be officially certified in England as admittedly correctly displayed above the arms of a Roman cardinal. But the curious and intricate development of other varieties of the ecclesiastical hat which will be found in use in all other European countries is not known to British armory. Nor has the English College of Arms recognised the impersonal arms of the Catholic communities. Those arms, with and without the ecclesiastical hats, play a conspicuous part in Continental heraldry. It is difficult to assign a proper value or a definite status to the arms of the abbeys and other religious houses in this country in Pre- Reformation times. The principal, in fact the only important sources of information concerning them are the impressions of seals which have come down to us. Many of these seals show the effigies of saints or patrons, some show the impersonal arms of the religious order to whose rule the community conformed, some the personal arms of the official of the moment, others the personal arms of the founder. In other cases arms presumably those of the particular foundation or community occur, but in such cases the variations in design are so marked, and so often we find that two, three, or more devices are used indifferently and indiscriminately, that one is forced to arrive at the conclusion that a large proportion of the devices in use, though armorial in character, had no greater status than a temporary existence as seal designs. They distinctly lack the unchanging continuity one associates with armorial bearings. But whatever their status may 690 ECCLESIASTICAL HERALDRY 6oi once have been, they have now completely passed out of being and may well be allowed to rest in the uncertainty which exists concerning them. The interest attaching to them can never be more than academic in character and limited in extent. The larger abbeys, the abbots of which were anciently summoned to Parliament as Lords of Parliament, appear to have adhered rather more consistently to a fixed device in each case, though the variations of design are very noticeable even in these instances. A list of them will be found in the Genealogical Magazine (vol. ii. p. 3). The suppression of the monasteries in this country was so thorough and so ruthless, that the contemporary instances of abbatical arms remaining to us from which deduction as to armorial rules -and precedents can be made are singularly few in number, but it would appear that the abbot impaled the arms of his abbey on the dexter side of his personal arms, and placed his mitre above the shield. The mitre of an abbot differed from that of a bishop, inasmuch as it had no labels — or infulce — depending from within it. The Abbot used a crosier, which doubtless was correctly added to his armorial bearings, but it is found in pale behind the shield, in bend, and also two in saltire, and it is difficult to assert which was the most correct form. The crosier of an abbot was also represented with the crook at its head curved inwards, the terminal point of the crook being entirely contained within the hook. The point of a bishop's, on the other hand, was turned outwards at the bottom of the crook. The differ- ence is said to typify the distinction between the confined jurisdiction of the abbot — which was limited to the abbey and the community under his charge — and the more open and wider jurisdiction of the bishop. Although this distinction has been much disputed as regards its recognition for the actual crosiers employed, there can be no doubt that it is very generally adhered to in heraldic representations, though one hesitates to assert it as an absolute rule. The official arms for the archiepiscopal and episcopal sees are of some interest. With the single exception of York, the archiepiscopal coats of arms all have, in some form or another, the pallium which forms part of an arch- bishop's vestments or insignia of rank, but it is now very generally recognised and conceded that the pallium is not merely a charge in the official coat for any specified jurisdiction, but is itself the sign of the rank of an archbishop of the same character and status as is the mitre, the pallium being displayed upon a shield as a matter of convenience for artistic representation. This view of the case has been much strengthened by the discovery that in ancient instances of the archiepiscopal arms of York the pallium is found, and not the more modern coat of the crown and keys ; but whether the pallium is 6o2 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY to be still so considered, or whether under English armorial law it must now be merely ranked as a charge in an ordinary coat of arms, in general practice it is accepted as the latter ; but it nevertheless remains a point of very considerable interest (which has not yet been elucidated) why the pallium should have been discarded for York, and another coat of arms substituted. The various coats used by the archbishops of England and Ireland are as follows : — Canterbury, — Azure, an episcopal staff in pale or, and ensigned with a cross pate6 argent surmounted of a pall of the last, charged with four crosses formee fitchee sable, edged and fringed or. York. — Gules, two keys in saltire argent, in chief a Royal crown or. Armagh, — Azure, an episcopal staff argent, ensigned with a cross patee or, surmounted by a pallium of the second, edged and fringed or, charged with four crosses formee fitchee sable. Dublin. — The arms of this archbishopric are the same as those of Armagh, only with five crosses charged on the pallium instead of four. The arms of the episcopal sees have no attribute at all similar to the charge of the pallium in the coat of an archbishop, and are merely so many different coats of arms. The shield of every bishop and archbishop is surmounted by his mitre, and it is now customary to admit the use of the mitre by all persons holding the title of bishop who are recognised as bishops by the English law. This, of course, includes Colonial and Suffragan bishops, retired bishops, and bishops of the Episcopal Churches in Scotland and in Ireland. It is a moot point whether the bishops of the Episcopal Churches in Ireland and in Scotland are entitled to make use of the official arms formerly assigned to their sees at a period w^hen those Churches were State-established ; but, looking at the matter from a strictly official point of view, it would not appear that they are any longer entitled to make use of them. The mitres of an archbishop and of a bishop — in spite of many statements to the contrary — are exactly identical, and the mistaken idea which has of late years (the practice is really quite a modern one) encircled the rim of an archbishop's mitre with the circlet of a coronet is absolutely incorrect. There are several forms of mitre which, when looked upon as an ecclesiastical ornament, can be said to exist ; but from the heraldic point of view only one mitre is recognised, and that is of gold, the labels being of the same colour. The jewelled variety is incorrect in armorial representations, though the science of armory does not appear to have enforced any particular shape of mitre. The " several forms " of the mitre — to which allusion has just been ECCLESIASTICAL HERALDRY 603 made — refer to the use in actual practice which prevailed in Pre- Reformation England, and still holds amongst Roman Catholic bishops at the present day. These are three in number, i.e, the ^^ precious " {pretiosd)y the gold {auriferata)y and the simple {simplex). The two former are both employed at a Pontifical Mass (being alternately assumed at different parts of the service) ; the second only is worn at such rites as Confirmation, &c. ; while the third (which is purely of white Hnen) is confined to Services for the Dead, and on Good Friday. As its name implies, the first of these is of cloth of gold, ornamented to a greater or less degree with jewels, while the second — though likewise of cloth of gold — is without any design or ornament. The short Gothic mitre of Norman days has now given place to the modern Roman one, an alteration which, with its great height and arched sides, can hardly perhaps be considered an artistic improvement. Some individual Roman Catholic bishops at the present day, however (in England at any rate), wear mitres more allied to the Norman and Gothic shape. The past fifteen or so years have seen a revival — though in a purely eclectic and unofficial manner — of the wearing of the mitre by Church of England bishops. Where this has been (and is being) done, the older form of mitre has been adhered to, though from the informal and unofficial nature of the revival no rules as to its use have been followed, but only individual choice. At the recent Coronation, mitres were not worn ; which they un- doubtedly would have been had this revival now alluded to been made authoritatively. All bishops and archbishops are entitled to place two crosiers in saltire behind their shields. Archbishops of the Roman Catholic Church have continuously placed in pale behind their shields what is known as the archbishop's cross. In actual practice, the cross carried before an archbishop is an ordinary one with one transverse piece, but the heraldic archiepiscopal cross is always represented as a double cross, i.e. having two transverse pieces one above the other. In the Estab- lished Church of England the archiepiscopal cross — as in the Roman Catholic Church — is the plain two-armed variety, and though the cross is never officially recognised as an armorial attribute and is not very frequently met with in heraldic representations, there can be no doubt that if this cross is used to typify archiepiscopal rank, it should be heraldically represented with the double arms. The actual cross borne before archbishops is termed the provincial cross, and it may be of interest to here state that the Bishops of Rochester are the official cross-bearers to the Archbishops of Canterbury. To the foregoing rules there is one notable exception, i.e, the Bishop 6o4 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY of Durham. The Bishopric of Durham, until the earlier part of the nineteenth century, was a Palatinate, and in earlier times the Bishops of Durham, who had their own parHament and Barons of the Palatinate, exercised a jurisdiction and regality, limited in extent certainly, but little short in fact or effect of the power of the Crown. If ever any ecclesiastic can be correctly said to have enjoyed temporal power, the Bishops of Durham can be so described. The Prince-Bishops of the Continent had no such attributes of regality vested in themselves as were enjoyed by the Bishops of Durham, These were in truth kings within their bishoprics, and even to the present day — though modern geographies and modern social legislation have divided the bishopric into other divisions — one still hears the term employed of '' within " or ** without " the bishopric. The result of this temporal power enjoyed by the Bishops of Durham is seen in their heraldic achievement. In place of the two crosiers in saltire behind the shield, as used by the other bishops, the Bishops of Durham place a sword and a crosier in saltire behind their shield to signify both their temporal and spiritual jurisdiction. The mitre of the Bishop of Durham is heraldically represented with the rim encircled by a ducal coronet, and it has thereby become usual to speak of the coronetted mitre of the Bishop of Durham ; but it should be clearly borne in mind that the coronet formed no part of the actual mitre, and probably no mitre has ever existed in which the rim has been encircled by a coronet. But the Bishops of Durham, by virtue of their temporal status, used a coronet, and by virtue of their ecclesiastical status used a mitre, and the representation of both of these at one and the same time has resulted in the coronet being placed to encircle the rim of the mitre. The result has been that, heraldically, they are now always represented as one and the same article. It is, of course, from this coronetted mitre of Durham that the wholly inaccurate idea of the existence of coronet on the mitre of an archbishop has originated. Apparently the humility of these Princes of the Church has not been sufficient to prevent their appropriating the peculiar privileges of their ecclesiastical brother of lesser rank. A crest is never used with a mitre or ecclesiastical hat. Many writers deny the right of any ecclesiastic to a crest. Some deny the right also to use a motto, but this restriction has no general acceptance. Therefore ecclesiastical heraldry in Britain is summed up in (i) its recognition of the cardinal's hat, (2) the official coat of arms for ecclesiastical purposes, (3) the ensigns of ecclesiastical rank above alluded to, viz. mitre, cross, and crosier. ECCLESIASTICAL HERALDRY 605 Ecclesiastical heraldry — notably in connection with the Roman Church — in other countries has, on the contrary, a very important place in armorial matters. In addition to the emblems officially re- cognised for English heraldry, the ecclesiastical hat is in constant use. The use of the ecclesiastical hat is very general outside Great Britain, and affords one of the few instances where the rules governing heraldic usages are identical throughout the Continent. This curious unanimity is the more remarkable because it was not until the seventeenth century that the rather intricate rules concerning the colours of the hats used for different ranks and the number of tassels came into vogue. Other than the occasional recognition of the cardinal's hat in former days, the only British official instance of the use of the ecclesiastical hat is met with in the case of the very recent matriculation of arms in Lyon Register to Right Rev. -^neas Chisholm, the present Roman Catholic Bishop of Aberdeen. I frankly admit I am unaware why the ecclesiastical hat assigned to the bishop in the official matriculation of his arms has ten tassels on either side. The Continental usage would assign him but six, and English armory has no rules of its own which can be quoted in opposition thereto. Save as an acceptance of Roman regulations (Roman Holy Orders, it should not be forgotten, are recognised by the English Common Law to the extent that a Roman Catholic priest is not reordained if he becomes an Anglican clergyman), the heraldic ecclesiastical hat of a bishop has no existence with us, and the Roman regulations would give him but six tassels. The mitre is to be met with as a charge and as a crest, for instance, in the case of Barclay and Berkeley [^^ A mitre gules, labelled and garnished or, charged with a chevron between ten crosses pat^e, six and four argent. Motto : ' Dieu avec nous ' "] ; and also in the case of Sir Edmund Hardinge, Bart, whose crests are curious [*' i. of honourable augmentation, a hand fesswise couped above the wrist habited in naval uniform, holding a sword erect surmounting a Dutch and a French flag in saltire, on the former inscribed ^' Atalanta," on the latter " Piedmontaise," the blade of the sword passing through a wreath of laurel near the point and a little below through another of cypress, with the motto, ^ Postera laude recens ; ' 2. a mitre gules charged with a chevron argent, fimbriated or, thereon three escallops sable."] The cross can hardly be termed exclusively ecclesiastical, but a curious figure of this nature is to be met with in the arms recently granted to the Borough of Southwark. It was undoubtedly taken from the device used in Southwark before its incorporation, though as there were many bodies who adopted it in that neighbourhood, it is difficult to assign it to a specific origin. 6o6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY Pastoral staves and passion-nails are elsewhere referred to, and the figures of saints and ecclesiastics are mentioned in the chapter on ^'The Human Figure." The emblems of the saints, which appear to have received a certain amount of official recognition — both ecclesiastical and heraldic — supply the origin of many other charges not in themselves heraldic. An instance of this kind will be found in the sword of St. Paul, which figures on the shield of London. The cross of St. Cuthbert, which has been adopted in the unauthorised coat for the See of New- castle-on-Tyne, and the keys of St. Peter, which figure in many ecclesiastical coats, are other examples. The lilies of the Virgin are, of course, constantly to be met with in the form of fleurs-de-lis and natural flowers ; the Wheel of St. Catharine is familiar, and the list might be extended indefinitely. CHAPTER XXXIX ARMS OF DOMINION AND SOVEREIGNTY ROYAL arms in many respects differ from ordinary armorial bear- ings, and it should be carefully borne in mind that they stand, • not for any particular area of land, but for the intangible sovereignty vested in the rulers thereof. They are not necessarily, nor are they in fact, hereditary. They pass by conquest. A dynastic change which introduces new sovereignties introduces new quarterings, as when the Hanoverian dynasty came to the throne of this country the quartering of Hanover was introduced, but purely personal arms in British heraldry are never introduced. The personal arms of Tudor and Stewart were never added to the Royal Arms of this country. The origin of the English Royal Arms was dealt with on page 172. *' Gules, three lions passant guardant in pale or," as the arms of Eng- land, were used by Kings John, Henry III., Edward I., and Edward II. The quartering for France was introduced by Edward III., as ex- plained on page 274, and the Royal shield : Quarterly i and 4, France, ancient (azure, sem6-de-lis or) ; 2 and 3, England (gules, three lions passant guardant in pale or), was in use in the reigns of Edward III., Richard II. (who, however, impaled his arms with those of St. Edward the Confessor), and Henry IV. The last-mentioned king about 141 1 reduced the number of fleurs-de-lis to ihreCf and the shield remained without further change till the end of the reign of Edward VI. Queen Mary did not alter the arms of this country, but during the time of her marriage with Philip of Spain they were always borne impaled with the arms of Spain. Queen Elizabeth bore the same shield as her predecessors. But when James I. came to the throne the arms were : *< Quarterly i and 4, quarterly i. and iiii. France, ii. and iii. England ; 2. Scotland (or, a lion rampant within a double tressure flory and counterflory gules) ; 3. Ireland (azure, a harp or, stringed argent)." The shield was so borne by James I., Charles I., Charles II., and James II. When William III. and Mary came to the throne an inescutcheon of the arms of Nassau (" Azure, billetty and a lion rampant or ") was 607 6o8 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY superimposed upon the Royal Arms as previously borne, for William III., and he impaled the same coat without the inescutcheon for his wife. At her death the impalement was dropped. After the Union with Scotland in 1707 the arms of England ('^ Gules, three lions," &c.) were impaled with those of Scotland (the tressure not being continued down the palar line), and the impaled coat of England and Scotland was placed in the first and fourth quarters, France in the second, Ireland in the third. At the accession of George I. the arms of Hanover were introduced in the fourth quarter. These were : '^ Tierced in pairle reversed, I. Brunswick, gules, two lions passant guardant in pale or ; 2. Lune- berg, or, seme of hearts gules, a lion rampant azure ; 3. (in point), Westphalia, gules, a horse courant argent, and on an inescutcheon (over the fourth quarter) gules, the crown of Charlemagne (as Arch Treasurer of the Holy Roman Empire). At the union with Ireland in 1801 the opportunity was taken to revise the Royal Arms, and those of France were then discontinued. The escutcheon decided upon at that date was : ^^ Quarterly, i and 4, England ; 2. Scotland ; 3. Ireland and the arms of Hanover were placed upon an inescutcheon." This inescutcheon was surmounted by the Electoral cap, for which a crown was substituted later when Hanover became a kingdom. At the death of William IV., by the operation of the Salic Law, the crowns of England and Hanover were separated, and the inescutcheon of Hanover disappeared from the Royal Arms of this country, and by Royal Warrant issued at the beginning of the reign of Queen Victoria the Royal Arms and badges were declared to be : I and 4, England ; 2. Scotland ; 3. Ireland. The necessary alteration of the cyphers are the only alterations made by his present Majesty. The supporters date from the accession of James I. Before that date there had been much variety. Some of the Royal badges have been already alluded to in the chapter on that subject. The differences used by various junior members of the Royal Family will be found in the Chapter on Marks of Cadency. CHAPTER XL HATCHMENTS A CUSTOM formerly prevailed in England, which at one time was of very considerable importance. This was the setting up of a ■ hatchment after a death. No instances of hatchments of a very early date, as far as I am aware, are to be met with, and it is probably a correct conclusion that the custom, originating rather earher, came into vogue in England during the seventeenth century and reached its height in the eighteenth. It doubtless originated in the carrying of ceremonial shields and helmets (afterwards left in the church) at funerals in the sixteenth century, and in the earlier practice of setting up in the church the actual shield of a deceased person. The cessation of the ceremonial funeral, no doubt, led to the cult of the hatchment. Hatchments cannot be said even yet to have come entirely to an end, but instances of their use are nowadays extremely rare, and since the early part of the nineteenth century the practice has been steadily declining, and at the present time it is seldom indeed that one sees a hatchment m use. The word ^' hatchment " is, of course, a corrup- tion of the term ^^ achievement," this being the heraldic term implying an emblazonment of the full armorial bearings of any person. The manner of use was as follows. Immediately upon the death of a person of any social position a hatchment of his or her arms was set up over the entrance to his house, which remained there for twelve months, during the period of mourning. It was then taken down from the house and removed to the church, where it was set up in perpetuity. There are few churches of any age in this country which do not boast one or more of these hatchments, and some are rich in their possession. Those now remaining — for example, in St. Chad's Church in Shrewsbury — must number, 1 imagine, over a hundred. There does not appear to have been any obligation upon a clergyman either to permit their erection, or to allow them to remain for any specified period. In some churches they have been discarded and relegated to the vestry, to the coal-house, or to the rubbish-heap, whilst in others they have been carefully preserved. The hatchment was a diamond-shaped frame, painted black, and 609 2 Q 6io A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY enclosing a painting in oils upon wood, or more frequently canvas, of the full armorial bearings of the deceased person. The frame was usually about five feet six in height, and the rules for the display of arms upon hatchments afford an interesting set of regulations which may be applied to other heraldic emblazonments. The chief point, however, concerning a hatchment, and also the one in which it differs from an ordinary armorial emblazonment, lay in the colour of the groundwork upon which the armorial bearings were painted. For an unmarried person the whole of the groundwork was black, but for a husband or wife half was black and half white, the groundwork behind the arms of the deceased person being black, and of the surviving partner in matrimony white. The background for a widow or widower was entirely black. CHAPTER XLI THE UNION JACK By Rev. J. R. CRAWFORD ORDERS in Council and other official documents refer to this flag as the Union Flag, The Union Jack, Our Jack, The King's Colours, and the Union Banner, which last title precise Heraldry usually adopts. In patriotic songs it is toasted as " The Red, White, and Blue," whilst in the Services men affectionately allude to it as ^^ the dear old duster." But Britons at large cling to the title which heads this chapter ; to them it is ^^ The Union Jack." Why Union ? Obviously because it unites three emblems of tutelar saints on one flag, and thereby denotes the union of three peoples under one Sovereign. It is the motto ^' Tria junda in Uno " rendered in bunting. Why Jack ? Two theories are propounded, one fanciful, the other probable. Some say '^ Jack " is the anglicised form of '' Jacques," which is the French signature of James I., in whose reign and by whose command the first Union Flag was called into being. Against this at least three reasons may justly be urged : (i) The term ^^Jack" does not appear — so far as we can discover — in any warrant referring to the Jacobean Flag of 1606. It is rather in later documents that this term occurs. (2) If the earliest Union Flag be a ^^Jack'^ just because it is the creation of James, then surely it follows that, to be consistent, later Union Flags, the creations of later sovereigns, should have borne those Sovereigns' names ; for example The Union Anne, The Union George I (3) The English way of pronouncing " Jacques " is not, and probably never '^2i?> Jacky but Jaikes. The other, and more feasible theory, is as follows : The term ^^ Jaque " (e.g. jaque de mailles) was borrowed from the French and referred to any jacket or coat on which, especially, heraldic emblems w^ere blazoned. In days long prior to those of the first Stuart king, mention is made of **to]^gtt$ cotes toitJj retr crosses toorn Sg sljsjjpesmen anti mm of tjje cette of 3E01Tll0tx/' from which sentence we learn that the emblem of the nation's tutelar saint was (as in yet earlier Crusaders' days) a fighter s emblem. When such emblem or emblems were transferred to a flag, 611 6i2 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the term Jaque may well, in course of time, have been also applied to that flag, as previously to the jacket. Glance now at the story of those Orders in Council which created the various Union flags. The very union of the two kingdoms of England and Scotland seems to have accentuated the pettier national jealousies, so that Southrons annoyed Northerners by hoisting the St. George above the St. Andrew, and the Scotchmen retaliated by a species of tu quoque. The King sought to allay these quarrels by creating a British, as other than a purely English or Scottish, flag. But let the Proclamation speak for itself. *' By the King. " WhereaSy some differences hath arisen between Our subjects of South and North Britaine travelling by Seas, about the bearing of their Flagges : For the avoiding of all contentions hereafter, Wee have, with the advice of our Councill, ordered : That from henceforth all our Subjects of this Isle and Kingdome of Great Britaine, and all our members thereof, shall beare in their main-toppe the Red Crosse, commonly called St, Georges Crosse, and the White Crosse, commonly called St, Andrew's Crosse^ joyned together according to the forme made by our heralds, and sent by Us to our Admerall to be published to our Subjects: and in their fore-toppe our Subjects of South Britaine shall weare the Red Crosse onely as they were wont, and our Subjects of North Britaine in their fore-toppe the White Crosse onely as they were accustomed.*' — 1606. This attempt at conciliating differences deserved but did not win success. *' The Kings Owne Shipps " deemed themselves slighted, since all vessels were treated alike in this matter, and so persistent was the agitation that at last, in Charles I.'s reign (1634), another Proclamation was issued ^* for the honour of Oure Shipps in Oure Navie Roy all, whereby those ships alone had the right of hoisting ^^ the Union Flagge." The days of the Commonwealth brought another change, for with the King the King's Flag disappeared. The Protector caused two new flags to be made, viz. The Great Union (a flag little used, however, although it figured at his funeral obsequies), and which may be thus blazoned: Quarterly i and ^, The St, George; 2. The St, Andrew; 3. azure, a harp or, for Ireland ; over all on an inescutcheon of pretence, sable, a lion rampant or, for the Protector's personal arms, and The Commonwealth Ensign, which latter Parliament treated as the paramount flag. The most interesting features of this flag are that it was of three kinds, one red, one white, one blue, and that Ireland but not Scotland had a place on its folds. When the King came to PLATE IX. ST GEORGE'S CROSS. ST ANDREW'S CROSS. THE UNION JACK. ST PATRICK'S CROSS. Z\^ UNION FLAG OF ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND. THE UNION JACK 613 his own again yet another change was witnessed. By this Proclama- tion ships in the Navy were to carry The Union, and all merchantmen The SL George, whilst these latter vessels were also to wear '^ The Red Ensign with the St, George, on a Canton," Passing on, we reach the days of Queen Anne, who as soon as the union of the two Parliaments was accomplished, issued a famous Proclamation often quoted. Suffice it here to outline its effect. The two crosses of St, George and St, Andrew were — as the Treaty of Union had agreed should be — ^^ conjoyned in such a manner as we should think fit" ; and what that manner was is *' described on the margent" in the shape of a sketch. But further, in place of the St. George being placed on the canton of the Red Ensign of Charles II. (itself the Xy III ■■■ HI IIHI! XRaHjjA r,. Swc^isK. J^H 2=LLllnl'^= Fig. 775. *w*5 Commonwealth Ensign, minus the harp) the Proclamation ordered the *' Union " as a canton, and finally this new Red Ensign was confined to the merchant ships, whilst ^' Our Jack " was reserved for the use of the Navy, unless by particular warrant. Thus things continued until the union of Ireland with England and Scotland. The Proclamation referring to this Act of Union closes with the Herald's verbal blazon of the full Union Flag : — << The Union Flag shall be Azure, the Crosses Saltire of St. Andrew and St, Patrick, Quarterly per saltire, countercharged Argent and Gules, the latter fimbriated of the second, surmounted by the Cross of St. George of the third, fimbriated as the Saltire." Thus the Union, as displayed in bunting, was perfected. Our Union Flag is very remarkable, even amongst the flags of Christendom, both as a blending of crosses, and crosses only, and also as an emblem of the union of two or more countries. Yet it is not unique, for the flags of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway have a somewhat similar story to tell. The last two countries separated at 6 14 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY different dates from Denmark, and then together formed a United Scandinavian Kingdom. In separating, they each took to themselves a separate flag, and again, in uniting, they called into being a Union Banner. How they treated these changes Fig. 775 will illustrate. Notwithstanding these acts of union both Scandinavians and Britons have had, and we still have, differences over these Union Flags. Whilst, however, they based their protests on the sentiment of inde- pendence, we ground our grumblings on questions of heraldic pre- cedence, and of the interpretation of verbal blazons. Leaving our neighbours to settle their differences, let us examine our own. Take the subject of precedence. Very early in the flag's history, Scotsmen were indignant because the o m iu fie Clle*t. Fig. 776.— The Union Flag of 1707. St. Andrew was not placed over the St. George. All kinds of variations have been suggested to lessen this crux of precedence, but such attempts must plainly be in vain. Do what you will, some kind of precedence is unavoid- able. The St GeorgCf then, as representing the para- mount partner, occupies the centre of the flag, whilst the St, Andrew, as senior in partnership to the St. Patrick, is placed above the St. Patrick^ in the first quarter^ although throughout it is counterchanged. The words in italic are important, for when the order is reversed, then that particular flag is flying upside down. The mode of procedure in creating flags has been much the same from one reign to another. Briefly it is this : The Sovereign seeks the advice of, and receives a report from, the Lords of the Privy Council. These councillors are ^^ attended by the King of Arms and Heralds, with diverse drafts prepared by them!* A decision being arrived at, an Order in Council, followed by a Royal Proclamation, makes known the character of the flag. In both Order and Proclamation it is usual to make reference to the verbal blazon, and to ^^ the form made by our heralds'' Thus there are three agents recognised — (i) the Sovereign, the fountain of all honours ; (2) the heralds, who authori- tatively blazon, outline, and register all achievements ; and (3) the naval authority, as that in which are vested the duty and the power of seeing the actual bunting properly made up and properly flown. THE UNION JACK 615 In keeping with this, the general mode of procedure, the Proclama- tions demand our attention. The Proclamation of James (1606). A high official of the College of Arms informs us that neither verbal blazon nor drawing of the first Union Flag is extant. On the other hand, in the Proclamations of 1707 and 1801 we have both blazon and drawing. The blazon has already been given of ^^ the 1 80 1 flag (which is the one most needing a verbal blazon), and the drawings of both flags we here produce (Figs. 776 and 777). These drawings — though slightly reduced in these pages — are u^-^^u« /A most careful copies of the (l^y<>/fiim.i signed copies supplied to us by the official already alluded to. In forwarding them he writes : '' They are not drawn to scale;" and he adds, further on, ^^ they are exactly the same size as recorded in our books," So then we have, in these two drawings, the heralds' interpretation, at the time J of their own verbal blazon. Now comes the Admiralty part of the work. In the Admiralty Regulations we have a '^ Memo- randum relative to the origin of the Union Flag in its present form" In this there is a brief history of the changes made in the flag from time to time, with quotations from the warrants, together with the verbal blazon AND two coloured drawings (Figs. 778 and 779). The Admiralty has also appended to the Memorandum the following interesting and ingeniously worked out Table of Proportions^ adapted for a flag 1 5 feet by 7 J feet. Presumably this table forms the basis upon which all Union Flags are made up under Admiralty supervision : — /- trn-Xm Fig. 777. — The Union Flag of 1801. The + of The of ft. in. {Two'^3e;s,Veach '. i } together J { j ^}j ( St. Andrew -^ 09J The student of heraldry will observe that this table is based on the proportions of the Ordinaries and Sub-Ordinaries figuring on the flag, as those proportions are regulated by EngHsh Rules of Armory. These rules give a cross as ^y a saltire as ^, a fimbriation about -^^ of 6i6 A COMPLETE GUIDE TO HERALDRY the flag's width. By the way, we notice here, yet only to dismiss it as hypercritical, the objection taken to the employment (in the verbal blazon of 1801) of the term ^^ fimbriated!' To our mind this objection seems a storm in a teacup. Further, it is always admissible in armory to lessen the size of charges when these crowd a field, and although we are fully aware that the laws of armory are not always nor all of them applied to flags, yet there is sufficient evidence to show that the heralds and the Admiralty did recognise the cases of shields and flags ^ to be somewhat analogous. But there are two features in The Admiralty pattern which cannot but arrest the attention of all those who have made a study of armory. The one is that the sub-ordinaries, i,e. the fimbriations, have different proportions given to them, although they are repeti- tions of the same sub-ordi- nary, and also seem guarded against such treatment by the very wording of the blazon, and by the practice usual in such cases. And the other is that, after counterchanging the sal- tires, the St. Patrick is attenuated by having its Fig. 778.— Admiralty Pattern of 1707 Flag. Fig. 779.— Admiralty Pattern of 180 1 Flag. fimbriation taken off its own field, instead (as the common custom is) off the field of the flag. All Warrants dealing with flags provide for their being flown at sea (Queen Anne's Proclamation is apparently the first that adds '' and land''), and gradually reserve for the Royal Navy — or fighting ships — the honour of alone bearing the Union Jack. The accompanying diagram shows at a glance the changes made by the several Proclama- tions. The latest word on this subject is '^ The Merchant Shipping (Colours) Act of Queen Victoria, 1894." This Acts sets forth among other things that — (i) ^^ The red ensign usually worn by merchant ships y without any defacement or modification whatsoever , is hereby declared to be the proper national colours for all ships and boats belonging to any British subject, except in the case of Her Majesty's ships or boats, or in the case of any other ship or boat for the time being allowed to wear any other national colours in THE UNION JACK 617 pursuance of a warrant from Her Majesty or from the Admiralty, {2) If any distinctive national colours except such red ensigny or except the Union Jack with a white border j or if any colours usually worn by Her Majesty's shipSy 597 1 crown and seal, 355; Privy seal, 467; sup- porters, 225 Hepburn arms, 266 ; Sir Patrick, 505 Herald, 27, 28, 29, 32, 37, 38, 40, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47 ; cos- tume of, 43 ; King of Arms, 31 ; tabard of, 41 ; English, insignia of, 587 ; Irish, in- signia of, 587 ; Scottish, in- signia of, 587 ; incorporated, 38 ; wear, 44 ; and pursuivants, 39 "Heraldic Atlas," 75, 78 Heraldic courtesy, 558 Heraldry, age of, 3 ; antiquity of| 5 ; o"gin of> 3 " Heraldry of Continental Na- tions," 74 Herbert, 520 Hereford, city of, 598 ; Bishop of, arms, 276; Earls of, ^2 ; Earls of, badge, 410; Earl of, Richard Clare, 525 Hermon, crest, 339 Heme, 248 Herodotus, 6, 9 Heron, 247 ; as supporters, 440 Herring, 255 Herring-net, 150 Herschel, Sir Wm., arms, 297 Herschell, Lord, supporters, 442 Hesilrige orHazlerigg,arms,266 Hesse, 62 ; Duke of, 400 ; Grand Duchess of, late, label, 497 Hesse-Homburg, Princess of, label, 498 Heyworth, arms, 217 Hieroglyphics, 10, il Hill, arms, 268, 280 Hilton, supporters, 421 Hinckley, 117 Hind, 208, 209 Hindlip, Lord, supporters, 205 Hippogriff, 232 Hippomedon, 7 Hippopotamus, 217 Hobart, arms, 295 Hobson, arms, 241 Hodsoll, arms, 294 Hoghton, De, 207; supporters, 421 Hohenzollern, flag of, 476 Holderness, Earls of, supporters, 436 Holdick-Hungerford, crest, 299 Holland, Countess of, Margaret of Bavaria, seal, 524 Hollis, 125 Hollist, arms, crest, 277 Holly, 265 ; branches, 265 ; leaves, 266 Holthouse, Roger, arms of, 81 Holy Roman Empire, 237, 413; Arch Treasurers of, 608 Holy Trinity, emblem of, 473 Holyrood, 40 Hone, 412 Honour, augmentations of, 60, 132 ; marks of, 57 Hood, Lord, supporters, 229 Hooded, 242 Hook, Theodore, motto, 45 1 Hope, crest, 294 Hope, St. John, 280, 402 Horse, 200 ; as supporter, 437 ; in arms, 5 Horsely, William, 32 Horseshoes, 80 Hose, arms, 293 Hoste, Sir William, augmenta- tion, 595 Houldsvvorth, arms, 264 Household, First Master of the, insignia of, 581 ; Lord Chamberlain of the, insignia of, 588 Hove, town of, arms, 301 Howard, 70; Lord, badge, 469 Howth, Earl of, supporters, 436 Huddersfield, town of, 213 Plulley, arms, 280 Human figures, 158, 432; head, 158 Humbert I., 411 ; IL, seal, 408 Hundred Swiss Guards, Captain of the, insignia of, 581 Hungary, crown, 351 Hungerford, crest, 299 ; Lord, Garter plate, 374; Heytesbury, K.G. , Lord, Sir Walter Hun- gerford, arms, crest, mantling, 387 Hunter, 204 Hunter-Weston, arms, 424 Huntingdon, Lord, supporters, 186; Earl of, 125, 143 Hurst, arms, 296 Hurt, 151 Hussey, arms, 388 ; crest, 171, 293 Hutchinson, arms, loi Huth, arms, 277, 293 Hutton, arms, 153, 290 Hybrids, 224 Hydra, 227 Hyena, 438 Ibex, 210, 230 Iceland, arms, 255 Ilchester, Earl of, arms, 197 ; town of, 295 Illegitimacy, 344, 502, 515; mark of, 114, 136, 139, 140, 481, 501, 554; Royal Licence, 553, 554; difference marks, 492 ; sign of, 508 Impalement, 57, 140, 144, 524, 531, 534, 536, 550, 558 Imperial Crown, 46, 47, 144 ; Service Order, 567 ; members of, insignia of, 584 Impersonal arms, $/ In armour, 171 In base, 103 In bend, 102, 113 In chevron, 102 In chief, 103 In fess, 103 In full chase, 204 In full course, 204 In his pride, 246 In its piety, 242 In orle, loi In pale, 102, 103 Inchiquin and Youghal, feudal lord, 525 INDEX Indented, 91, 93, 96 India, Order of the Crown of, members of, insignia of, 568, 584 ; emblem of, 271 ; Lotus- flower, 470 Indian Empire, Most Eminent Order of the, 567, 584 Inescutcheon, 108, 137, 138, 418, 419, 541 ; addition of an, 483 ; within an, 141 Infantry, Colonel-General of the, insignia of, 581 Ingelram De Ghisnes, arms, 84 Inheritance, 145 Inner Temple, arms, 203 Innes, crest, 265 Innes, Cosmo, 415 Invecked or Invected, 91 Inveraray, 88 ; burgh of, 255 Inverarity, crest, 265, 270 Inverness, arms, 158; Royal Burgh of, arms, supporters, 430; town of, supporters, 217 Inverted, 223, 23$ Ireland, 29, 33, 39 ; badge, 457, crest, 468 ; crests, 520 ; crest of, 373 ; Duke of, augmenta- tion, 596 ; heralds in, 45 ; helmet, 325 ; King of Arms, 33 ; mottoes in, 448 ; national badge, 267 ; pursuivants in, 45 ; shamrock, 470 j sup- porters in, 421 Ireland, badge, 267 ; Chief Secretaries for, insignia of, 584 ; Hereditary Lord Great Seneschal of, insignia of, 586 ; Hereditary Marshal of, in- signia of, 585 Irene, Empress, 351 Iron hat vair, 82 Iron-grey, 74, y^ Irvine, 266 Irvine or Irwin, 265, 266 Isham, arms, 126 Islay, 39 Isle of Man, 171 Islip, rebus, 455 Italian differences, 482 Italy, 61, 82 Italy, State of, 475 Iveagh, Lord, supporters, 442 Jack, 255 Jackson, arms, 246 Jamaica, supporters, 429 Jambes, 55 James I., 439, 446, 607, 608, 61 1 ; seal, 475 James II., 409, 467, 607 ; State Crown, 356 James HI., 270, 597 ; arms, 559 James IV., 39, 145 James V., 145, 357 635 James VL, 357, 598 Janssen, Bart., arms, 280 Japanese tokens, 12 Javelin, 285 Jean, Dauphin, seal, 411 Jedburgh, arms of, 166, 20Q Jefferson, Miss, 576 Jeffrey, Lord, 426 Jejeebhoy, Bart., Sir Jamsetjee, crest, 247 Jellopped, 246 Jenkinson, crest, 202 Jennings, arms, 293 Jerningham, crest, 242 ; badge, 288 Jerusalem, arms of, 40, 85 Jervis, arms, 250 Jervoise, arms, 284 Jessant-de-lis, 193, 275 Jess and Jessed, 241 Jessel, crest, 239 Jeune, crest, 209 Jezierski, Counts, arms, 298 Joass, arms, 301 Jocelyn, arms, 287 Joerg, Von Pauli, 162 John, King, 607 ; seal, 173 Johnson, Dr. 455 Johnston, 207 ; Graham, 176, 397 ; crest, 286 Johnstone, arms, 292 Joicey, Lord, supporters, 437 Joiners' Livery Company, sup- porters, 433 Jonson, crest, 339 Jorger, 162 Joscelin, crest, 242 Joseph III., Emperor, 413 Joslin, arms, 287 Jousting-shield, 64; helm, 311 Jude, Dame Marye, grant to, 574. 575 Jungingen, arms, 301 Jupiter, 10, TJ Jupon, 55 Justice, 164; Knights of, 568, 570; Ladies of, 568 Justinian, 350, 351 Kaisar-i-Hind Medal, 568; in- signia of those entitled to, 584 Kay, arms of, 78 Kaye, Rev. Walter J. , 5 1 Keane, Lord, augmentation, 594 Keates, 195 Kekitmore, arms, 281 Kelly, arms, 282 Kemsley, crest, 438 Kenneth III,, 165, 415 Kenney, crest, 375^ 3 7 3 Kent, 55 ; Duke of, label, 498 ; Earl of, Thomas Holland, seal, 410; badge, 467; Fair Maid of, Joan, badge, 467 Kerrison, Sir Edward, augmen- tation 594 636 Kersey, crest, 268 Kevilioc, arms, 278 Keys, 291 Keythongs, 195 Killach, arms, 266 Kilmarnock, town of, arms, sup- porters, 430 Kilvington, 78 Kimono, 12 King, 267 King of Arms, 22, 27. 28, 29, 61 J crown of, 45 j crown or coronet of, 368 Kingdom, Constable of the, in- signia of, 582 King's flag, 472 ; livery, 73 ; favour of, augmentations, 596; gamekeeper to the, insignia of, 581 ; Grand Master of the Household to the, insignia of, 581 ; Guards, Captain of the, insignia of, 581 Kinloss, Baroness, arms, 534 Kinnaird, Lord, supporters, 433 Kinnoull, Earl of, 425 ; aug- mentation, 597 Kintore, Earl of, augmentation, 597 ; crest, 165 Kiku-non-hana-mon, 13 Kiri-mon, 13 Kirk, arms, 95 Kirkcaldy, Royal Burgh of, 160 Kirk wood, 291 Kitchener, Lord, augmentation, 348 ; arms, 594 ; Viscount, supporter, 217 Knevet, Elizabeth, 55 Knight, arms, 286; impales arms of wife, 570 ; widow of, 533 ; bachelor, wife of, 531 ; helmet of, 319 •'Knight and Rumley's Her- aldry," 65 Knighthood, 561 ; banner of, 73 ; Order of, 29 ; Companion of any Order of, impaling, 5 3 1 Knights of any Order, widow of, 570 Knights Bachelor, impaling, 571 ; helmet of, 571 ; Com- manders, helmet of, 571 ; in- signia of, 584; Grand Cross, helmet of, 571 ; supporters to, 569 Knill, arms, 291 Knots, 469 Koh-i-noor, 361 Kursch, 85 La Cordeliere, Order of, 570 La Dolce, 195 La Tour du Pin, 254 La Warr, motto, 450 Label, 71, 108, 154, 155, 380, 479, 482, 483, 487, 488, 494 Lacy, de, 72 INDEX Ladies, supporters to, 424 Lady, armorial bearings of, 572 ; arms of, 146 Lady, colours of, 403 Lady's sleeve, 403 Lady, unmarried, arms, 533 Laird, compartment, 446 Laiterberg, arms, 285 Lake, Dr. Edward, augmenta- tion, 591 Laking, Bart., G.C.V.O., Sir Francis, 78 Lamb, 211, 212 Lambel, 154 Lambert, 268 ; crest, 228, 229 Lambeth, arms, 271 Lambrequin, 18, 383,401,402 ; badges on, 458 Lamplugh, C.E., crest, 339 Lancaster, 29, 50 ; badge of, 48; Henry of, 410, 480; Herald, 38 ; King of Arms, 30, 31. 32, 34; Earl of, Edmund Cruchback, 511; Earl of, Thomas, 480 ; County Council, seal, 467 ; Duke of, 38 ; motto, 466 ; Duchy of, 253 ; Duchy of, seals, 467, 475 ; town of, arms, 275 ; livery colours, 513 ; Roy d'Armes del North, 31 Lance, 54, 285 Land, conditions held under, 19 Landgrave, Konrad, 63 Landscape, 87 ; augmentation, 132; coats, 74 Landschaden, crest, 384 Lane, crest, 75, 201, 298 ; arms, 181, 136 ; Sir Thomas, 201 ; Mistress Jane, 75, 201, 591 Lanesborough, Lord, supporter, 438 Langridge, arms, 226 n Langton, crest, 226 , Lanigan-O'Keefe, 166 Lantern, 301 Lanyon, 137 Lapwing, 249 Lark, 249 Laiham, 412 Latimer, Lord, 485 ; arms, crest, mantling, 387 Laurel, 265 ; branches, 265 ; leaves, 266 ; tree, 263 Laurie, 39 ; arms, 288 Lausanne, 83 Law, arms, 246; "Law and Practice of Heraldry in Scot- land," 427, 447 Lax, Mrs. Sarah, 576 Le Corbeau, 2^8 Le Fitz, 1 50 Le Grosvenor, see Grosvenor Le Mans, Cathedral of, 62 Le Moyne, crest, 341 Le Neve, Sir Wm., 166 Le Strange, Styleman, supporter, 436 Lead, 50 League of Mercy, decoration of the, 568 ; insignia of those entitled to, 584 I^eake, Stephen Martin, 34 Leaves, 266 Leconfield, Lord, supporters, 436 Lee, 43, 118 Leeds, arms, 249; Duke of, supporter, 436 Lees, arms, 290 Leeson, arms, 294 Leg, 171 Leg-Irons, 301 Legg, 171 Legge, arms, 209 Legged, 242, 244, 249 Legh, 50 ; augmentation, 590 Leicester, 29, 32 ; Earls of, 32, 267, 314, 485 ; Earls of, Simons de Montfort, 117; King of Arms, 32 ; town of, arms, 267 Leigh, arms, 285 ; General, 403 ; Gerard, 36, 81 ; town of, 290 Leighton, Lord, 94 Leinster, Duke of, supporters, 215, 620 Leipzic, town library of, 306 Leith, 88 ; town of, arms, 159 Leland, 143, 152 Leman, Sir John, crest, 263 Lemon-tree, 263 Lempriere, 428 Lennox, 525 Leon, arms, 188 Leopard, 11, 71, 172, 173, 1 74, 192, 218, 227 ; face, 275 Leopard-lionne, 173 Leopold, Markgrave, seal, 237 Lerwick, 294 Leslie, arms, 412; crest, 165 ; motto, 450 Lestrange, 485 Lethbridge, Sir Roper, 272 ; arms, 282 Lever, arms, 112 Leveson-Gower, arms, 266 Lewis, arms, 286, 291 Licence, 7^ Lichfield, 78 ; Dean of, 588 Lichtenstein, 40 Liebreich, arms, 214 Life Guards, 25 Lighthouse, 301 Lilford, Lord, arms, 190 Lilienfield, 82 Lilienhaspel, 64 Lilley, arms, 271 Lilly, arms, 271 Lily, 271, 273 Lily-staple, 64 Lincoln College, Oxford, 445 ; Earl of, William de Roumare, 485 ; Dean of, 588 ; Sees of, 160 Lincoln's Inn, Hall of, 414 Linden leaves, 266, 316 Lindsay, 39, 114; crest, 246; Sir David, 144, 415 Lindwurm, 225 Lines, 91, 96, 117, 119, 123, 124, 501 Lingen, crest, 269 ; arms, 72 Linlithgow, 163 ; burgh of, 204 Linz, 308 Lion Heraud, 40 Lion, William the, 502 Lion-leoparde, 173 Lionced, 187 Lioncels, 174 Lioness, 188 Lionne, 187 Lions, II, 54, 108, 1 72-181, 432 ; as supporter, 434 Lippe, Prince of, crests, 343 Lipton, Bart., crest, 265 Liskeard, 155 ; seals, 275 Lisle, Baroness, 541 Lismore, Lord, arms, 262 Liverpool, Earl of, crest, 348 ; town of, supporters, 429 Livery, 73 ; colours, 386, 404, 474 ; crests, 463, 464 Livingstone, arms, 271 Lizards, 259, 407 Llanday-Burratt, arms, 278 Lloyd, 78, 167, 265, 285 ; arms, 85, 185 ; augmentation, 596 ; quarterings, 545 Lobkowitz, 75 Lobster, 255 Loch, Lord, arms, 294 Lockhart, arms, 291 Locomotives, 301 Loder-Symonds, arms, 254 Lodged, 208 Loffredo, 83 Loggerheads, 193 Lombardy, iron crown of, 351 London, city of, seal, 329 ; arms, 325, 329. 330; crest, 330; supporters, 330, 437 ; Dean of, 588 ; Lord Mayor of, 382 ; Gazette, 365 Londonderry, arms, 166; town of, augmentation, 598 Long, arms, loi Long cross, 128 Longueville, Duke of, Louis D'Orleans, 596 Longueville, Count de, arms, crest, torse, mantling, 388, 404 Lopes, Bart., 87 Lopus, Dr., arms, 263 Lorraine, 83, 188 ; arms, 240 Lothian, Earl of, 480 INDEX Lotus-flower, 271 Loudoun, Earl of, badge, 458 Louis VIL, seal, 273 ; signet, 274 Louis VIIL, seal and counter- seal, 274 Louis XL, seals, 400 Louis XII., 597 Louis XVI., 395 Lovel, Viscount, Garter plate, 561 ; Torse, arms, 404 ; mant- ling, 390 Lovett, 196 Low, arms, 196, 276 Lowdell, 226 Lower, 417 Lower Austria, 82 Lownes, 227 Lowther, arms, 153 Lozenge, 60,98, 108, 112, 122, 146, 546; arms on, 532, 572 Lub-den Frumen, 40 Lucas, 255 Lucerne, supporter, 409 Lucy, 255 Ludlow, Lord, 87; arms, 469 Lumley, arms, 249 Lumsden, arms, 255 Lundin, John, 502 Luneberg, 608 Lupus, 276 Lurgan, Lord, crest, 381 Luttrell, Sir Geoffrey de, effigy, 329 ; supporters, 421 Lygh, Roger, 32 Lympago, 186 Lymphad, 58, 294, 412 Lynch, crest, 197 Lynx, 197 Lyon King of Arms, 29, 39, 46, 47, 66, 142, 323, 390, 568 ; arms of, 548, 568 ; crown of, 368 Lyon Office, 185, 204, 213 ; grants of, supporters by, 420 Lyveden, Lord, supporter, 437 M'Cammond, 202 M'Carthy, crest, 259 M'Dowille, Dugal, 40 M'Larty, arms, 282 Macara, arms, 261 Macleod, crest, 207 MacDermott, 267 Macdonald, 294 Macfarlane, compartment, 446 Macfie, 294 ; arms, 286 Macgregor, 166 Mackenzie, 445, 446 Mackerel, 256 Mackesy, arms, 286 Maclachlan, supporters, 428 MacLaurin, arms, 290 MacMahon, arms, 243 MacMurrogh - Murphy, arms, 263 637 Maconochie, arms, 255 ; Well- wood, supporters, 434 Macpherson, Cluny, supporters, 428, 434 Madden, arms, 242 Maddock, 165 Maddocks, arms, 286 Madras, University of, 192, 272 ; Governor of, 594 Magnall, arms, 286 Magpie, 250 Mahon, arms, 243 Mahony, crest, 376 Mailly, Gilles de, arms, 484 Maintenance, cap of, 378 Mainwaring, crest, 203 ; Eller- ker-Onslow, crest, 226, 348 Maitland, arms, 180, 282; Major, James, 501 Major, arms, 285 Malcolm, Bart., crest, 293 Malet, Sir Edward, G.CB., supporters, 4, 228 Mallerby, arms, 266 Mallory, 393, 403 Malta, Cross of, 129, 570; German, Protestant Order of, 570; Star, 570 Maltravers, arms, 149, 150 Man in armour, 433 ; at-arms, 64; head, 167; lion, 171, 186, 229; tiger, 186, 232; and wife, arms, 533 ; grant to, 576 Manchester, 115 Mandeville, 134 Manners, grant, 596 Mansergh, arms, 294; crest, 226 Mantegre, 232 Manticora, 232 Mantle, 399 ; of estate, 59 Mantling, 384, 393, 394, 397, 398, 400 ; badges on, 389 ; colours of, 386; royal, 391 ; rules for the colour of, 392 Maories, 16 Maple-leaf, 266 ; tree, 263 Mar, Earl of, 39 Mar and Keliie, Earl of, 541, 598 ; arms, 557 ; supporters, 223 Marburg, 62 March, 31, 39 ; White Lion of, 469 ; Herald, 3 1 ; King of Arms, 30 Marches, 29, 30 Marchioness, robe or mantle, 366 ; coronet, 366 Marchmont, 39 Mare, 203 Margens, arms, 81 Marigold, 272 Marindin, arms of, 211 Mariners, 10 Market Cross, Edinburgh, 47 638 Markham, arms, 190 Marlborough, Duke of, 413, 541 ; augmentation, 592 ; supporters, 226,438; Duchess of (Henrietta), 413 Marquess, coronet, 366, 367, 375 ; robe or mantle of, 365, 367 Marriage, impalements to indi- cate, 60, 540; signify, 523 Mars, y-j Marshal of the Empire, Lord High, insignia of, 582 Marshal's, Earl, order concern- ing robes, coronets, &c., 365, 366 Marshall, 27, 28, 202 ; crest, 166; badge of, 80; the in- signia of, 581 Marshalling, 138, 523-560 Martin, motto, 450 Martlet, 243, 244, 245, 488 Marwood, crest, 211 Mary, 155; Queen, 357, 607; badge, 276 Maryborough, town of, arms, 275 Marylebone, 271 ; crest, 160 Mascle, 108, 147, 150; field, 148 Mascles, 81 Mask, 198 Mason, arms, 180; crest, 228 Mason's College, 1 80, 228 Massey, Mrs., 577 Mastiff, 204 Matheson, 378 Mathew, Dame Marye, grant to, 574. 575 Matilda, Queen, 14 Matriculation, 145, 536 Maud, the Empress, 141, 173 Mauerkrone, 368 Maule, crest, 226 Maunch, 292, 403 Maundeville, Sir John, 223 Mauritanian, 168 Mawdsley, arms, 298 Maxwell, arms, 216 Maynard, 576 Meath, Earl of, supporters, 437 Mecklenburg - Schwerin, Duke of, 400; crests, 343 Medicis, Pietro de, augmenta- tion, 597 Meeking, arms, 265 Meergries, jy Meinill, 520; Barony of, 509 Melbourne, University of, 164 Melles, 262 Melrose Abbey, 409 Melusine, 171, 228 Membered, 238 Memorials, 537 Menetrier, 318, 407, 477 INDEX Menteith, arms, 112; Earl of, 412 ; label, 480 Menu-vair, 82 Menzies, Bart., supporters, 433 Mercers' Livery Company, arms, 168 Merchant Adventurers' Com- pany, supporters, 429 Mercury, yy Meredith, arms, 86 Merit, Order of, 567 ; members of, insignia of, 584 Merlette, 245 Mermaid, 171, 228; as sup- porters, 445 Merman, 171, 227 Mertz, crest, 384 Messarney, arms, 277 Metal, 70 ; baton of, 515 Metcalfe, 207 Methods of blazoning, 104 Methuen, Lord, 413 Midas' head, 229 Middlemore, crest, 280 Middlesex, arms, 287 Mieroszewsky, 74 Mignianelii, arms, 82 Mikado, 13 Milan, 83 ; Duchy of, arms, 257 Military men, grants to, 5 Mill-rind or Fer-de-moline, 293 Milner, 287 ; Viscount, suppor- ters, 217,436 Minamoto Ashikaya, 13 Minamoto Tokugawa, 1 3 Miniver, 82 Minshull, Sir Robert, 166 Minutoli, arms, 188 Mirandola, Princes and Dukes of, mantling, 400 Mirrors, 293 Mitchell, arms, 123 Mitchell-Carruthers, crest, 163 Mitford, arms, 217 Mitre, 6, 61, 602 Moir, 168 Mole, 217 Molesworth, 138 Molette, 296 Mon, 12, 13 Monastery, 282 Monbocher, de, Bertrand, 289 Money-Kyrle, 216 ; quarterings, 546 Montagu, arms, 147 Montagu, K.G., Marquess of, Garter plates, 540 Montagu, Lord, 485 Montague, Lord, crest, 344 Montefiore, arms, 262 Montendre, Alianore, 525 Montfaucon, 16 Montfort, De, 268 ; Simon de, 268 ; badge, 469 Montgomery, arms, 275 ; Vis- count, supporters, 416 Monti, 84 ; arms, 83 Montravel, Comte Tardy de, arms, 263 Montrose, 39, 112; burgh of, arms, 270; Royal Burgh, arms, crest, mantling and compartment, 444 Monumental brasses, 49 Monypenny, arms, 164, 254 Moon, 1 1, yy Moorcock, 249 Moore, arms, 217, 292; crest, 249; Sir John, K.B., grant to, 4 ; John, 31 ; Sir John W., lyz Moorhen, 246 Moors, 13 Mount-Stephen, Lord, arms, 263 Mountain-Ash, 263 Mountjoye, 44 ; Lord (Sir Walter Blount), arms, crest, mantling, 388 Moray, Earls of, arms, 290 Moreau, Philip, 401 Moresby, crest, 210 Morfyn, 229 Morgan, Sylvanus, 143 Morion, 293, 315, 351 Mornay, De, arms, 185 Morris, William, 395, 396 Morse, 186; crest, 166 " Morte d' Arthur, " 333, 403 Mortimer, arms, 137 ; Edmund, seal, 417 Morton, Earl of, supporters, 433; Earl of, Douglas, crest, 199 Moseley arms, 298 Moss, Sir H. E., arms, 298 Moiion, arms, 215 Motto, 58, 448, 474 Mowbray, 555, badges, 465 ; supporters, 416; and Stourton, Lord, 152, 590; badge, 458; supporters, 437; "Trente Deux Quartiers, " 619 Mule, 224, 438 Mullet^^.^46r295, 488, 515 Mun, Marquis of, arms, 298 Mundegumbri, de, John, seal, 275 Munro, Sir Thomas, 594 Munster, Earl of, 5 1 5 ' Muntz, arms, 245 Mural crown, or coronet, 368, 370, 376 Murfyn, 229 Murray, arms, 484 Murrey, 72, y6 Muschamp, 261 Musinion, 231 Musselburgh, town of, arms, 281 Naiant, 186, 253; embowed, 254 Nairne, arms, 157 Naissant, 190 Naked flesh, 74 Names, bastards', 516 Napier, Alexander, 525 ; Lord, 145,446 Naples, 83 Napoleon, 238, 260; L, mant- ling, 400 Narcissus flowers, 271 Narwhal, 219 Nassau, arms of, 107 National Bank of Scotland, 160 National flag, 471 Nature, colour of, 74, 75, yG Naval crown, or coronet, 369, 370, 177 Navarre, arms, 284; Kingof,483 Naylor, Sir George, 356 Nebuly, 80, 91, 94 Needlemakers' Company, sup- porters, 434 Nelson, Admiral, augmentations, 592 ; Earl, augmentation, 592 ; town of, arms, 266 Nenuphar-leaf, 266 Neptune, 164 Nerford, de, Alice, arms, 521 Nevers, de. Count, John, 524 Nevil, 206 ; crest, 341 ; of Raby, arms, 485 New Galloway, town of, sup- porter, 437 Newcastle-on-Tyne, See of, 606 Newdigate, 190 Newlands, Lord, supporters, 75 Newman, 541 ; arms, 189; Colonel, augmentation, 591 Newnes, Sir George, Bart., 215 Newton, Lord, 541 Nicholson, crest, 374 Nicholas, Sir Harris, 464 Nightingale, Bart., arms, 270 Ninth son, 488 Nisbet, 82,238,415,418,446, 458, 504 Nobility, arms as a sign of, 22 Nombril, 104 Norfolk, Duke of, 5 56 ; (Thomas Mowbray), 596; Duke of, augmentation, 590, 596; Duke of (Thomas Howard), badge, 469 Normandy, Duke of, John, seal, 408 ; Duchy of, arms, 525 Normandy, Marquess of, sup- porters, 437 North British Borneo Company, supporters, 429 Northumberland, Earl of, 143 ; Earl of, badge, 469 ; Duke of (Percy), arms, 147 ; crest, 183 Northumbria, Vicecomes of, 503 Norroy King of Arms, 29, 30, 3 1 , 48 ; arms and insignia of, 587 Norway, flag of, 613 INDEX Norway, H.M. Queen of, label, 496, 497 Norwich, 588 ; city of, suppor- ters, 444 Nottingham, town of, supporters, 429 ; Earl of, Thomas, Earl Marshal, crest, 71, 341 Nova Scotia, 58 ; Baronets of, 137, 418; badges of, 598 ; insignia of, 583 No wed, 257 Nude figures, 165 Nugent, Bart., 227; supporter, 438 Nlirnberg, city of, arms, 439 ; German National Museum at, 316 Nuvoloni, 83 Oak, 265 ; branch, 265 ; leaves, 266 ; slips, 265 ; tree, 262 Oakes, arms of, 5 Oakham, town of, 202 Oban, town of, 294 Obelisk, 293 Oberwappen, 335 O'Connor, Don, supporters, 421 Odo, 14, 15 O'Donovan, supporters, 421 Oesel, 163 OflFice, rod of, 47 Officer of Arms, official dress of, 41 Official arms, impalement, 535 Official insignia, 581; regalia, 46 Ogilvie, compartment, 446 O'Gorman, supporters, 421 Ogress, 151 O'Hara, arms, 96 Okapi, 438 O'Keefe, Lanigan, 257, 378 Oldham, 249 Olive-tree, 263 O'Loghlen, 165 Omens, 10 Ondozant, 256 Opinicus, 231, 438 Or, 50, 70 Orange, 72, 7Z, 74» 76, 151, 276; tawny ribbon, 137 Orders of Knighthood, 58 ; of St. John of Jerusalem, 133 Ordinary, 91, 93, 97, 102, 106, 107, 108, 146, 155, 156,483 Ordnance, Master-General of the, insignia of, 586 O'Reilly, supporters, 421 Orkney, 39 Orle, 108, 141, 142 ; gemel, 142 Orleans, Duke of, 434, 596 ; arms, 486, 487 ; Duchess Charlotte Elizabeth of, seal, 486 Ormonde, 39 ; knot, 469 ; Earls of, 195 639 Ormsby-Hamilton, crest, 171 Ormskirk, 50 Ory, arms, 258 Oryx, 436 Ost-Friesland, Reitbergs, Princes of, 229 Osprey, 240 Ostrich, 243 ; feathers, badge, 450 Oswald, 165 Otharlake, John, 30 Otter, 215 Otterburn, Moir of, 168 Otway, arms, 228 ; supporters, 420 ; Sir Robert, 593 Ounce, 193 Outram, supporters, 192, 436 Oval, 61 Over-all, 103 Owen, arms, 265 Ownership, badge as a sign of, 456 Owl, 249 Ox, 207 Oxford, arms of, 88; Bishops of, insignia of, 584; city of, 207 ; city of, arms, 205 ; city of, supporters, 216; Lincoln College at, 455 ; University of, 299 Ox-yokes, 415, 416 Padua, 83, 84 Painters, Stainers, and Coach- makers, Companies of, war- rant, 375 Pairle, 108, 126, 139 Pale, 107, 108, 115, 126; cottised, 1 16 ; dancetle, 93 ; embattled, 93, 108 ; lozengy, 146 Pale wise, 102 Palisado Coronet, 378 Pall, 108 Pallet, 116 Pallium, 6, 127 Palm, 265 ; branch, 265 ; tree, 263 Palmer's Staff", 290 Palmetto-trees, 263 Paly, 87, 97, 117, 121 ; bendy, 121 Panes, 519 Pannetier, Grand, insignia of, 581 Panther, 193, 195, 223 Papacoda, 188 Papelonne, 83 Papillon, arms, 261 Papingoes, 264 Papyrus plant, 266 Paris, arms of, 260, "^^76 Paris, Matthew, 143 Parish, Sir Woodbine, K.C.H., 597 Parker, 78,79, 81,95,371,45s X 640 Parkin-Moore, 277 Parkyns, Bart., crest, 277 Parliament, opening of, 42 ; President of the, insignia of, 852 Parrot, 249 Parted, 99 Parteneck, Bavarian family of, 481 Parthenopseus, 7 Partition, 94; lines, 91, no, 131, 132, I34> i35» 139. 141, 150. 52S» 543; lines, chang- ing, 483 ; methods of, 96 Party, 87, 99 ; badge, 268 Paschal lamb, 2 1 2 Passant, 102, 201, 213, 226 Passion Cross, 128 ; nails, 293 Patent, 68 Paton, Sir Noel, crest, 239 Patriarchal cross, 129 Paul, Sir James Balfour, 39, 40, 46, 66, 390, 415, 500 Paw, 190 Paynter, 155 Peacock, 246 Pean, 78 Pearce, Lady, 575 Pear-tree, 263 ; pears, 276 Pearl, Tj Pearson, arms, 296 Peascod, 468 Pease, crest, 376 Peebles, arms, 255 Peer, carriage of, 399 ; coronet, 379 ; helmet, 303, 382 ; im- paling, 532 ; insignia of, 583 ; mantling of, 391 ; order con- cerning robes, coronets, &c., of, 365 ; sons of, supporters, 423, 424 ; supporters, 422 ; widow of, 5 34 ; widow of, supporters, 423, 424 " Peerage and Baronetage," 321 Peeress, 536 ; after marriage, 534 ; by creation, arms, 533 ; in her own right, 532 Peeresses, robes or mantles, 366 ; supporters, 422 Peewhit, 249 Pegasus, 10, 202, 203, 220, 232 ; as supporter, 437 Peke, Edward, 204 Pelham, Sir John de, 590 ; arms, augmentation, 590 ; badge, 590 Pelican, 242 Pellet, 151 Pellew, Sir Edward, 593 Pelts or Hides, 293 Pemberton, 299 Pembridge, Sir Richard, helm, 308 Pembroke, Earl of, 32, 480, 48 1 ; Earl of, badge, 469 Penhellicke, arms, 261 INDEX Penned, 251 Pennon, 54 Penrose, arms, 113 Per bend, 87, 95, 97; sinister, 97 ; chevron, 87, 95, 97; chief, 97 ; cross, 97, 1 34 ; fess, 97, 139 ; pale, 97, 139 ; engrailed, 108 ; invected, 108 ; pile, 97 ; saltire, 97, 131. 137 Perceval, Dr., 84 Percy, Henry, seal, 411 Perring, Bart., arms, 276 Perrins, arms, 276 Perry, arms, 276 Perryman, arms, 276 Persevanten, 40 Perth, Earl of, 204, 284; com- partment, 446; city of, 145 ; arms, 414; county of, sup- porters, 429 Pery, arms, 148 Pescod, Walter, 50 Petilloch, William, 40 Petre, Lord, 590 Pfahlfeh, 82 Pfirt, 417 Pharamond, arms of, 273 Pheasant, 250 Pheons, 283 Philip I., seal, 273 Philip II., seal, 274 Philippa, Queen, 464 Phillips, 205 Phoenix, 230, 240, 291 Physiologus, 194 Picardy, 83 Pichon, arms, 32 Pick, 298 Pictorial ensigns, 82 Picts, 165 Pigott, arms, 298 Pike, 255 Pile, 91, 93, 107, 108, 124, 126 Pilkington, crest of, 167 ; motto, 451 Pillars of Hercules, 416 Pilter, arms, 285, 293 Pily, 126 Pimpernel flower, 268 Pineapple, 276, 277 Pine-cone, 277 Pink, Ti Pirie, arms, 276 Pirrie, arms, 202 Pitcher, 289; arms, 294 Pittenweem, town of, 162 Pixley, crest, 293 Planche, 5,12, 14, 78, 109, 150, 240, 275. 485 Planets, yj Planta genista, badge, 468 Plantagenet, 62 Plants, II Plasnes, Dame de, Jeanne, seal, 408 Plasterers* Company, supporters, 438 Plate, 151 Plates, 153 Platt-Higgins, 255 Player, arms, 272 Plough, 298 Plover, 249 Plowden, 118 Plumete, 83, 85 Plummets, 293 ; Pocock, augmentation, 593 Points, 104 Pole, 57 Poleyns, 53 Pollock, augmentations, 594 Polwarth, Lord, arms, 276 ; augmentation, 596 Pomeis, 151 Pomegranate, 264, 276 Pomeranians, 224 Ponthieu, Count of, 1 5 ; Joanna of, seal, 543 Pontifex, crest, 295 Pope, His Holiness the, insignia of, 291, 582 Popinjay, 249 Poplar-tree, 264 Porcupine, 217 Portcullis, 38, 45, 284 ; badge, 468 Porter, arms, 287 Porterfield, 114 Portland, Duke of, supporters, 436 Portobello, burgh of, 285 Portsmouth, Earl of, supporters, 437 Portugal, crests, 343 ; Royal Standard of, 597 ; Royal Arms of, 482; marks of cadency, 482 Potent, 84, 85 ; potente, 91, 94, 95 ; counter-potent, 84, 85 Potier, arms, 231 Potter, 9 Potts, 193 Poulett, Earl, supporters, 433 Powdered with, 89 Poynter, 126 Prankhelme, 316 Pranker-Helm, 309, 316 Prawns, 256 Precedence, 68 Precentor, insignia of, 588 Preed, arms, 258 Pretence, escutcheon of, 138, 531. 532 Prevost, supporters, 420 Price, 169 Prideaux-Brune, 71 Primrose, 268, 272 ; Viscount, 145 ; of Dalmenie, 146 • • Prince Arthur's Book," 409 Prince of Wales, supporters, 71 Princes, helmets of, 318; eccle- siastical, insignia of, 582 Principal King of Arms, 34 Pringle, arms, 300 Prism, 294 Private person, flag of, 474 Proclamation, 47 Procter, arms, 293 Professors, Regius, arms, 587 Proper, 74, 75, 170, 243, 244, 246 Provand, crest, 298 Provost of the Household, Grand insignia of, 582 Prussia, King of, 400 ; kingdom of, 475 ; supporters, 433 ; officers of, 597 Prussian flag, 476 Public buildings, flags, 473 Puckberg, arms, 289 Pudsey, borough of, 290 Pugin, 397 Pujolas, arms, 211 PuUici, arms, 261 Pulver Turme, 189 Purfled, 171 Purple, II, 70 Purpure, 70, 76; fretty or, 149 Pursuivant, 40, 45 ; badges, 48 clothes, 39 ; creation, 38 duties of, 38 ; fees, 3.7.. 3^ tabard of, 41 ; Irish insignia of, 587 Pursuivant of Arms, 28, 29, 150 Puttkammer, Barons von, 224 Pyke, 255 Pyne, arms, 277 Pyramid, 293 Pyrton or Peryton, arms, 263 QUAIN, Bart., arms, 272 ; crest, 374 Quarter, 102, 108, 134, 540 Quarterings, 57, 98, 104, 542, 543 ; augmentation takes the form of, 554; augmentation, superimposed on, 554; im- portance attached to, 67 ; omitting, 549 ; order of, 548 Quarterly, 97, 139 Quartermaster, Grand, insignia of, 582 Quatrefoil, 266, 267 ; double, 488 Queensberry, Marquess of, 145 Queensferry, 88; town of, 164 " Quentin Durward," 258 Queue-fourche, 175 Quinces, 277 Quincy, De, 154 ; arms, 147 Rabbit, 214 Radford, arms, 186 Radiometer, 294 Raglan, Lord, supporter, 194 ; 437 INDEX Raguly, 9 1 , 94, 96 Raikes, 224 Rainbow, 294 Raised in benediction, 169 Ram, 10, 211 ; head, 213; as supporters, 437 Rampant, 102, 172, 213, 226 Ramsay, 10 Kamsden, arms, 213 Ramsey, arms, 211 Ramsey, de, Lord, supporters, 437 Ramsgate, arms, 182, 301, 369 Randies, arms, 214; crest, 217 Ranfurly, 141 Raphael, arms, 272 Rashleigh, arms, 281 Rat, 217 Ratton, arms, 217 Raven, 248 Ravenna, 351 Ravissant, 197 Rawlinson, Bart., crest, 378 Rawmarsh, 56 Rawson, arms, 282 Rawtenstall, 207 Raynor, arms, 226 Rayonne, 96 Reade, crest, 280 Reading, town of, arms, 168 Rebus, 454 Records, erased from, 73 Red, 70, "jy Red deer, 208 Red dragon, 38, 225 Red ensign, 471 Red shield, another use of the plain, 69 Reed, E. T., 258 Reeds, 280 Reem, 219 Regarding, 187 Regent of France, 34 Reider, 162, 164 Reinach, Counts, 188 Reindeer, 208, 209 Reid-Cuddon, 553 Rendel, Lord, 196 Renfrew, 88 Renty, arms, 283 Respecting, 187 Rethel, arms, 410 Reynell, arms, 89 Rhinoceros, 217, 219 Rhodes, 166 Rhys, Lord, 85 Rhys ap Griffith, 341 Ribbons, 58, 115, 137 Richard, Zi Richard I., 174, 306; badge, 468 ; banner, 454 ; crest, 327 ; seal, 329 Richard II., 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 466, 556, 596, 607; badge, 410 ; white hart, 467 641 L Richard III., 33, 38 ; badge, .469 Richardson, arms, 86, 203, 577 Richmond, 29 ; badge of, 48 ; Earl of, 33 ; Earl of, John of Brittany, arms of, 69, 102, 134, 188 ; Herald, 37 ; King of Arms, 33 Richmond and Gordon, Duke of, 25, 598 ; and Somerset, Duke of, Henry Fitz-Roy, 521 Richtsritter, 570 Ridley, 207 " Right to Bear Arms," 21, 22 Rinach, arms, 188 Ringed, 207 Ripon, Marquess of, crest, 298 Rise, arms, 277 Rising, 235, 236, 245 Ritchie, 213 Rivers, Lord, Sir Richard Wyd- ville. Torse, arms, 404 ; Garter plate, 135 Rjevski, 250 Roach, 255 Robe of Estate, 167 Robert II., coronation of, 40 Roberton, arms, 293 Roberts, 213; Sir Abraham, G.C.B., 297 Robertson, 197,438 ; crest, 228; compartment, 446 Robertson-Glasgow, arms, 263 Robes, Order concerning, 365 Robinson, Bishop, 256 Robson's, 356 Rochdale, town of, arms, 266 Roche, arms, 255 Rochefort, arms, 270 Rocheid, 168, 299 Rochester, Bishops of, 603 Rocke, arms, 289 Rod of office, 47 Rodd, 166; arms, 267 Roderick the Great, 85 Rodolph II., 413 Roebuck, 208 Roman Catholic Bishop, 603 ; Empire, Holy, Arch Treasures of, insignia of, 583 ; numerals, 104; royal diadem, 351 Rompu, 124 Romreich, 40 Ronquerolles, 84 Rook, 248 Rose, 269, 488 ; George, 575 ; badge, 271 ; leaves, 266 ; en- soliel, 468 Rosebery, Earl of, 145 ; arms, 272 Rosmead, Lord, supporters, 431 Ross, 39 ; Earl of, 412 ; General, augmentation, 577, 593 ; Sir John, augmentation, 595 ; Countess of, Euphepia, seal, 412 ; See of, 164 2 S 642 Ross-of-Bladensburg, 474, 593 ; arms, 133 ; grant to, 374 Rotherham, 56 Rothesay, 39 Rothschild, supporters, 429 Rouck, De, 75 Rouge-Croix, 38 ; -Dragon, 38 Rouillon, Oliver, seal, 417 Roumania, State of, 475 Roundel, 108, 151, 153 Rousant, 246 Rowe, arms, 260 Rowel spurs, 55 Royal Arms, 144, 174, 181, 182, 225, 274,343,358,365,372, 401,479, 522, 525 ; augmen- tation, 145 ; badges, 31 ; crest, 174, 183, 343, 344, 359> 372, 380; escutcheon, 142; supporters, 87, 430; motto, 452 ; quartering, 555 ; house, 145 ; household, 39 ; mantle, 225 ; shield, 144 ; tressure, 145, 146 Royal Buck Hounds, T}^ Royal family, 71, 154, 250, 391 ; arms, 173; badges, 470; members of, coronets, 364 ; warrants, 494 ; labels, 87, 494, 497; position of, 499; livery, ']i ;. mantling, 392 Royal favour, marks of, 422 Royal licence, 58, 78, ij, 136, 342, 344,345,346,413,429, 434. 517. 518, 519, 552,555. 569 Royal Navy, 471 Royal prerogatives, 69 Royal Proclamations, 47 Royal Red Cross, 568 ; insignia of those entitled to, 584 Royal Warrants, 61, 181, 363, 372, 413, 414, 420, 421, 444 ; coronet assigned by, 368 Rubische, Dr. Heinrich, arms, 435 Ruby, T7 Rudolstadt, supporters, 433 Ruspoli, arms, 264 Russia, state of, 475 Rustre, 108, 148 Rutherford, Lords, 425 Rutherglen, crest, 160 Ruthven, William, seal, 416; Barony of, supporters, 437 Ruthyn, Sir John Grey de, 392 Ryde, 88 ; arms, 294 Rye, 525 ; arms, 278 Ryland, arms, 299 Sable, 70, 77, 83, 90 Sacheverell, 214, 514 Sachsen, 234 Sackville, crest, 376 Sacred Cross, 128 INDEX Saffron-Flower, 272 Sagittarius, 171, 228, 229 Saints, emblems of, 606 Salamander, 230 Salient, 213 Salis, De, supporters, 429 Salisbury, Earl of, Richard Nevill, arms, 485; arms, crest, mantling, 388 ; Bishops of, 584 ; See of, 160 Sailed or sallet, 312 Salmon, 255, 439 Saltire, 5, 93, 103, 107, 108, 131, 135; botonny, 132; couped, 131 ; parted, 132 Saltire ways, 132 Salvesen, arms, 293 Samson, 163 Samuel, arms, 260 ; Bart, crest, 339 Samuelson, arms, 240 Sandeman, 164 Sandford, 32, 358 Sand-Glass, 301 Sandwich, 525 ; arms, 182 Sanglier, 198 Sanguine, 72, 7^ Sapphire, 77 Saracens, 13, 17 Saturn, 77 Satyr, 171, 229 Satyral, 171, 229 Saumerez, De, 428 Savage, 165, 433 ; Sir John, badge, 469 Savelli, Duca de, as Marshal of the Conclave, insignia of, 582 Savoy, 83 Sawbridge, arms of, 78 Saxe-Altenburg, Duke of, 401 ; Dukedom of, 475 ; Grand Duke of, crests, 343 Saxe-Coburg, Prince Leopold of, 499 Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, late Duke of, 541 ; Duke of, crests, 343 ; Dukes of, 541 ; label, 497 ; Prince of, label, 497 Saxe-Meiningen, Grand Duke of, crests, 343 Saxe - Meiningen - Hildburghau- sen, Duke of, 401 Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, Duke of, 400 Saxony, 69 ; King of, 400 ; King of, crests, 343 ; Dukes and Duchesses of, 541 Scabbard, 54 Scala, Veronese Princes della, arms, 285 Scale, armour, 171 Scales, 83 Scaling-ladders, 285 Scaltenighi, arms, 83 Scandinavia, 323 Scarf, 109 Scarisbrick, 50 Scarsdale, Lord, supporter, 442 Sceptre, 45, 298 Schafhausen, supporters, 409 Schallern, 312 Schiffskrone, 369 Schildbuden, 432 Schildgestell, 64 Schildwachter, 432 Schilter, 63 Schleswig - Holstein, Princess Christian, label, 497 Schomberg, crest, 377 Schwartzburg- Rudolstadt, Prince of, crest, 343 Schwartzburg - Sondershausen, Prince of, crests, 343 ; sup- porters, 433 Schwazer Bergbute, Society of the, 234 Schweidnitz, town of, 223 Schweig, supporters, 409 Schwenkel, 476 Scissors, 301 Sconce, arms, 282 Scot, John, 145 Scotland, 29, 103, 138 ; arms of, 143, 162,475 ; Royal arms of, 163, 418; badge, 457; bordures in, 502 ; crests, 342 ; Royal crest, 185; Royal crown, 372; crown of, 357; differencing in, 139, 500; helmet, 325; heralds in, 42; King of, 144. ; King of, arms, 143 ; illegitimacy marks, 519; laws concerning the use of supporters, 424 ; mantling of Peers, 391 ; mottoes in, 448 ; National Bank of, arms, 271, 417; Patron Saint of, 131; quarterings in, 546 ; re-mat- riculation, 347 ; shields in, 66; supporters, right to bear in, 422 ; thistle of, 470 ; Earl Marischal of, insignia of, 585 ; Hereditary Great Master of the Household in, insignia of, 586; Hereditary Justice- General of, insignia of, 586 ; Lord High Chamberlain of, insignia of, 585 ; Lord High Constable of, insignia of, 585 ; Lord Justice-Clerk of, insignia of, 586 ; Master of the Revels in, arms, 168; insignia of, 586 Scots Greys, 25 Scott, arms, 280 ; of Gorren- berry, 502; of Thirlstane, 446 ; Sir Walter, 258, 357 Scott-Gatty, 17,1, 195, 265 ; crest, 250 Scottish bordure, 138, 139; cadency, 141 ; cadency bor- dures, 87; crests, 520; field, 99 ; Heralds, 39, 46 ; Heralds, King of, 40; Parliament, 143 ; patents, crests, mantling, 394; Peer, insignia of, 583 ; practice, 104 ; practice, sup- porters, 423 ; regiments, 25 ; seals, 407 ; wife, impalement, 536 Scrope, 68 ; and Grosvenor, 22, 28, 68, no, 478, 481 ; sup- porters, 421 Scruby, 176 Scudamore, arms, 286 Scymitar, 287 Scythes, 298 Sea, 88 Sea-dogs, 65, 205 ; as sup- porters, 437 ; dragon, 226 ; eagle, 241 ; griffin, 224, 232 ; horse, 202, 232 ; leaf, 13, 266 ; lions, 186; as suppor- ters, 436 ; monkey, 230 ; stag, 210, 232 ; unicorn, 219 ; urchins, 256; wolf, 230 Seal, 316,403, 502 ; head, 215 ; compartment appears on, 445 Seax, 287 Seccombe, 272 Seckau, chapter of, 309 Second shield, 104; son, differ- ence mark, 488 Seeded, 275 ; or, 269 S^fton, Lord, crest, 247 Segrave, arms, 486 ; John, seal, 417, 480 Segreant, 102, 223, 416 Seize-Quartiers, 618-622 Sejant, 214 Selim HI., Sultan, 592 Seme, 89, loi, 153, 155 ; de-lis, 89, lOI Serjeants-at-Arms, 45 ; insignia of, 586 Serpent, 257 Service badge, 1 2 Service Cross, Conspicuous, those entitled to, insignia of, 5671 584 Seton, 166, 427, 447 ; of Mounie, 215 ; Capt. Robert, 446 ; church of, 409 Setvans, Sir Robert de, 55 Seventh son, 488 Sewell, arms, 260 Seymour, arms, 239; crest, 240; augmentation, 597 ; Jane, marriage, 597 Shaftesbury, Earl of, 206 Shakefork, 108, 126 Shakerley, Bart., 214 Shakespeare, arms, 285 Shamrock, 267 Shape of shield, 61 Sharpe, grant to, 577 Shearer, arms, 298 Sheaves, 26$ INDEX Sheep, 211 Sheepshanks, 212 Sheffield, town of, supporters, 429 Sheldon, Dame Margaret, arms, 575 Sheldrake, 246 Sherard, Lord, supporters, 437 Shetland ponies as supporters. Shield, 60, 104 ; of peace, 446 ; colour of is termed, 70, 250; divided by, 97 ; encircled by, 58 ; earliest shape, 62 ; ground of, 69 ; of gules, T}, ; hatching of, 76 ; in Scotland, 66 ; made of, 64; no ordinary on, loi ; pageant, 63 ; shape of, 61, 62 Shiffner, 512; arms, 114 Ship, 294 ; ornaments and de- vices, 9 Shirley, 134 Shogune, 13 Shoveller, 246 Shrewsbury, 39; arms, 193; Earl of, 541, 586; Earl of, quartering, 70 ; Earls of, crest, 341 ; Earls of Talbot, 175; Earl of Talbot, crest, 183 Shrimps, 256 Shuttle, 290 Shuttleworth, arms, 290 Sicily, 84 ; Jerusalem, Ditke of Anjou, Rene, 318 Sidney, crest, 217 Siebmacher, 224, 320, 558 Sigismund, Emperor, 234 Silesia, 74 ; arms, 224 Sillifant, crest, 259 Silver, 70, jj^ 90 ; ingots of, 292 ; use of, 70 Sinclair, Baron, arms, 557 ; Patrick, 502 Sirr, arms of, 124 Sissinks, arms, 229 Sixth son, 488 Skeen, arms, 197 Skeet, 261 Skeleton, 166 Skull, 171 Slack, crest, 258 Sledge, 456 Slipped, 265, 267, 269 ; leaved, 269 Slips, 265 Smallshaw, arms, 270 Smert, John, 28, 41 Smith, 68, 202, 288 ; arms, 289 ; crest, 245 Smith-Cunningham, 426 Smitheman, arms, 238 Smyth, arms, 272 Snail, 258 Sneds, 298 643 Sneyd, arms, 298 Snowdon, 39 Sodor and Man, 160, 285 Soldanieri, arms, 83 Soles, 256 Sollerets, 55 Soluthurn, supporters, 409 Somers, crest, 263, 293 Somerscales, arms, 261 Somerset, 5 20 ; Duke of, Henry Fitzroy, 37 ; Duke of, John Beaufort, Garter plate, 416, arms, 466 ; Dukes of, 5 1 3 > Herald, 37, 620 Sophia, Princess, label, 499 Soudan, de la Tran, K.G. , Sir Bermond Arnaud de Presac, arms, crest, mantling, 387 Southampton, arms, 270 ; city of, arms, crest, supporters and compartment, 445 Southwark, borough of, 605 Southwell, See of, 160; Vis- count, supporters, 437 Soutiens, 407 Sovereign, helmet of, 318 Sovereign's Privy Seals, 467 ; grand-children of, coronets, 363 ; sons and daughters or brothers and sisters of a, coro- nets of, 363 Spain, 61, 81, 83 ; crests, 343 j marks of cadency, 482 ; Queen Victoria Eugenie of, 1 39, 474, 596 ; Philip of, 607 J quarter- ings of, 543 Sparlings, 256 Spear and spear-head, 285 Specified, number, 89 Speke, crest and supporters, 217 ; augmentation, 420, 595 Spelman, Sir Henry, 30, 31, 32, ZZ, 34 Spener, 324, 481 Spenser, 221 Sphinx, 4, 9, 171, 228 Spider, 261 Spikes, 223 Spokes, arms, 291 Springbok, 208, 217; as sup- porters, 436 Sprot, 255 Spry, arms, 124 Spur-nowels, or Spur-revels, 286, 296 Spurs, 54, 286 Squirrel, 214, 430 SS, collar of, 44 St. Adrian, 162 St. ^gidius, 162 St. Albans, Boke of, 2 ; Duke of, 515; monastery, 143 St. Andrew, 47, 160, 162, 614 St. Andrew, Saltire of, 25 ; Cross of, 131; flag of, 472 644 St. Anthony's Cross, 129 St. Asaph, Bishop of, 78 St. Aubin, cloister of, 228 St. Boniface, 164 St. Britius, 160 St. Bryse, 160 St. Catherine, wheel of, 473, 606 St. Columba, 162 St. Cricq, Comtes de, arms, 281 St, Cuthbert, cross of, 606 St. David's, 588 St. Denis, 165, 220, 473 ; Abbey of, 16, 219 St. Duthacus, 162 St. Edmund, cross and martlets of, 473 St. Edward, 360 St. Edward the Confessor, 596, 607 ; arms, 244 St. Edward's Crown, 358 St. EHzabeth, 62 St. Etheldreda, 298 St. Etienne, Abbey of, 525 St. George, 162, 614 ; arms of, 46 ; banner of, 471 ; Cross of, 25, 38 ; flag of, 472 ; Chapel, 78, 149, 505; stall plates, 559 St. Giles, 162 St. Helens, borough of, arms, 292 St. Ives (Cornwall), arms, 264 St. John the Baptist, 165 St. John of Jerusalem, Order of the Hospital of, 568 ; Knights of Justice of the Order, insignia of, 585 St John of Malta, Celibate Order of, 569 St. Kentigern, 163 St. Lawrence, 550 St. Leonards, Lord, 68 St. Mark, 185, 186, 220 St Martin, 162, 164 St. Mary, lily of, 473 ; the Virgin, College of, arms, 271 St. Maur, arms, 239 St. Michael, 162, 163 ; and All Angels, 54 ; St George, Most Distinguished Order of, 29, 566, 584 St. Mungo, 163 St. Neots, 75 St. Ninian, 162 St Oswald, Lord, supporters, 437 St. Patrick, 614 ; Order of, 46 ; Knights of, rules, 563 ; sup- porters, 563 ; insignia of, 584 ; Order of Prelate of the, insignia of, 584; Deans of, insignia of, 584; Chancellor of, insignia of, 584 St. Patrick, flag of, 473 St. Paul, 164; sword of, 473, 606 INDEX St. Peter, emblem, 291 ; keys of, 473, 606 St. Petersburg, 351 St. Stephen of Tuscany, Knights of the, 569 St. Vincent, Lord, crest, 377 Stable, arms, 277 Stafford, 56 ; crest, 246 ; knot, 469 ; Earl of, 71 Stafford, Earl of, supporters, 461 ; Earl of. Sir Humphrey Stafford, arms, crest, mant- ling, 388 J Lord, badge, 458 ; crest, 374 Stags, 208, 432 Stains, 72, 73 Stalbridge, Lord, 345 Standard, 28, 59, 474 ; badges upon, 464 ; bearer (Wurtem- burg), hereditary insignia of, 582 Standish, arms, 289 Staniland, arms, 286 Stanley, 209 ; Lord, badge, 240, 469 ; Torse, arms, 404 Staple, 302 Stapleton, Sir Miles, K.G., arms, crest, mantling, 387 Stapylton, supporters, 421 Starckens, 163 Star of India, Most Exalted Order of the, 565, 584 Stars, 1 1, 295 Statant, 102, 172, 213, 226 State liveries, badges on, 464 Statute of Resumptions, 30 Steamer, 294 Stephen, coins, 354 Stephen de Windesore, 3 1 Sterling, William, seal, 417 Steuart, Bart., crest, 375 Steward, Lord High, insignia of, 582 Stewart, arms, 86; crest, 164; of Ochiltree, 502, 513 Stilwell, crest, 246 Stirling - Maxwell, supporters, 431 Stirrups, 286 Stoat, 215 Stockfish, 255 Stockings, 293 Stocks of Trees, 264 Stodart, 144, 145, 502, 514 Stoke-Lyne, Lord of the Manor, arms, 413 Stones, 286 Storey, 256 Stork, 247, 440 Stothard, C, 15 Stourton, arms, 152, 153, 294; badge as a crest, 456 ; barony of, supporters, 205 ; crest, 341, 385 ; Lord, supporters, 437 ; seal, 153 Strange, arms of, 175 Strangman, 1 1 1 Strathcona, Lord, crest, 263 ; arms, 216 Stratheden, Baroness, late, 533 Stratherne, Countess of, Muriel, seal, 410 Strigoil and Chepstow, Earls of, 32 Struan, 197 Stuart-French, arms, 254 Stuart-Menteith, 414 Stubbs, arms, 264 Stukele, arms, 277 Sturgeon, 256 Sturzkriickenfeh, 85 Sturzpfahlfeh, 82 Styleman, arms, 222 Styria, arms, 194, 417 Sub-ordinaries, 91, 102, 106, 107, 108, 155, 156; complete list of, 108 ; sub-quarters, 104, 544 Suchenwirt, 40 Suffolk, 32; Duke of, William de la Pole, badge, 469 ; Garter plate, 372 Sugar-cane, 263 Sun, 1 1, 77 ; burst, badge, 468, 469 ; in splendour, 296 Sunflower, 272 Superimposed, 86, 554 Supporters, 58, 86, 158, 162, 164, 165, 166, 185, 186,193. 201, 204, 209, 213, 215, 216, 217,225, 227, 286,319, 346, 407,411,412,413,414,415, 416,428,475, 519, 532,533, 564, 572; the first, 432;, differencing on, 492 ; crested, 417; by prescriptive right, 421 ; in England, right to bear, 419 ; honourable, 446 ; origin of, 417; position of, 430; single, 410 Surcoat, 18, 57, 108 Surgeons, College of, arms, 167 Surrey, 50 ; Duke of (Thomas de Holland), bordure, 596 ; Earl of, augmentation, 590 Sussex, Duke of, label, 498 ; Earl of, 32 Sutton, arms, 258 Swaby, crest, 245 Swallow, 244, 245 Swan, 245 Swanne, Adam Fitz, 467 Swansea, Lord, crest, 349 Sweetland, arms, 263 Swindon, arms, crest, 301 Swinton, 503, 504; arms, 453 ; crest, 199 ; supporters, 425 ; Henry de, seal, 504 ; Captain Archibald, 506 ; Captain George C, 506; Sir John de, 505 ; John Edulf Blagrave Laird, 506 ; arms, 50/ > Robert, 505 Switzerland, 83 Sword, 5, II, 286 Svvynnerton, 113 Sydenham, arms, 211 Sykes, 207 ; arms, 151, 280 Symbolism, 5, 11 Symonds-Taylor, arms, 254 Syphium-plant, 272 Tabard, 41 "Table Book," 413 Tacitus, 6, 9 Tain, Royal Burgh of, 162 Talbot, 175, 203, 204, 554; arms of, 70 ; Earl of, 70 ; Lord, crest, 341 Tallow Chandlers' Company, 41 ; arms, 28 ; crest, 165 Tamworth, seals, 275 Tancred, crest, 263 Tankerville, Earl of (Bennet), arms, 1 89 ; (Sir John Grey), Torse, arms, 404 Tannenvels, arms, 188 Tarieton, crest, 374 Tarn or loch, 294 Tarragone, arms, 81 Tarsell, arms, 277 Tartsche, or Tartscher, 64 Tassa, 85 Tasselled Hat, 61 Tatshall, 55 Taunton, 278 Taylor, 193 Tea- plant, 266 Teck, Duke of, 187 Teesdale, arms, 271 Telescope, 297 Temperance, 164 Temple, 282 Temple - Nugent - Brydges- Chandos-Grenville, crests, 348 Templer, arms, 282 Tenants, 407 Tenne, 72, 74, 76 Tenremonde, arms, 83 Teutonic Order, 63 ; Masters of the, 569 Teviot, Viscount (Livingstone), 276 Thackeray, 165 ; arms, 86 Thebes, King of, 6 Theme, arms, 266 Theodosia, Empress, 351 Thierry, 14 Third son, 488 Thistle, 270 ; Order of the, 271, 561 ; Knight of the, insignia of, 584; Knights of the, rules, 563 ; supporters, 563 Thorndyke, crest, 261 Thornhill, crest, 168 Thornton, arms, 250, 263, 597 ; supporters, 250 INDEX Thunderbolt, 295 Thuringia, 63 Thurston, crest, 295 Tichborne, supporters, 421 Tiger, 191 ; as supporters, 436 Tigress, 192 Tilting-helm, 54 Tinctures, 70, 476, 483, 502 ; change of, 483 Tindal, 30 Tityron, 231 Tjader, 250 Toad, 258 Tobacco - Pipe Makers, the Company of, arms, 265 Todmorden, town of, arms, 293 Tokugawa, 13 Toledo, arms of, 298 Tollemache, arms, 149 Topaz, 77 Topsell, 221 Torches, or Firebrands, 287 Torphichen, Lord, arms, 271 Torrington, Lord, supporters, 442 Torse, 2S7, 402, 403, 406 ; colours of, 404 Torteau, i 5 1 Tortoise, 217 Tournament helmet, 311 Tournay, 83 Tournebu, Pierre de, supporter, 411 Tourney, 333 Towers, 282, Z76 Towns, rules as to supporters, 429 Toymote, 13 Trafford, De, crest, 1 67 ; mottoes, 451 Transposed, 103 Trapaud, 124 Trappe, arms, 283 Trasegnies, arms, 188 Trayner, arms, 293 Treacher, arms, 261 Treason, 73 Treasurer, insignia of, 588 " Treatise on Heraldry," 14, 16, 69, 74, 318, 399, 407, 410 Trees, 1 1, 94, 262, 407 Trefoil, 266 Tregent, arms, 261 ; crest, 228 Trelawney, arms, 266 Trutemne, Banvillede, arms, 82 Trente Deux Quartiers, 619 Tresmes, Dues de, supporters, 231 Tressure, 108, 112, 133, 142, 143, 146 Trevelyan, arms, 2O1 ; sup- porters, 254 Treves, Bart., 232 ; arms, 292 ; augmentation, 598 Treves, Elector and Archbishop of, 559 64s Trick, 77, 99 Tricorporate, 180 Triple- towered, 282 Trippant, 102, 208 Trist, crest, 241 Triton, 227 Trononnee, 186 Trotter, arms of, 5 Trotting, 201 Trout, 255 Troutbeck, arms, 255 Trumpeter, costume of, 43 Trumpington, Sir Roger de, 54 Trunk of a tree, 264 Trunked, 96 Trupour, or Trumpour, John, 40 Trussing, 242 Trussley, 214 Truth, 164 Tuam, See of, arms, 160 Tucker, Stephen, 620 Tudor, Royal House, badge, 284 Tulips, 272 Tuns, 301 Tunstall, arms, 299, 404 Tupper, 428 Turbots, 256 Turner, arms, 302 Turnierkragen, 479 Turnip, 268 Tuttebury, Earl of, 32 Tweedy, 249 Tynes, 209 Tynte, crest, 222 Tyrol, 234 Tyrrell, crest, 200, 247 Tyrwhitt, 249 ; arms, 249 Tyson, crest, 287 Udine, 83 Udney, 204 Ulster, canton of, 136, 137; King of Arms, 29, 33, 46, 47, 421 ; badges of, 598 ; arms and insignia of, 587 ; official arms of, 48 ; office, 72, 86, 180, 267,416,439 Umbo, 64 Umfraville, 89 ; arms, 268 Undy, 91 Unguled, 207 Unicorn, 39, 202, 219, 220r 221, 232 United Kingdom, Royal Arms, compartment, 444 Union Banner, 611, 614, 615 Union Jack, 471, 611 Unmarried lady, lozenge of, 572 Unter-Walden, supporter, 409 Uphaugh, Duppa de, arms, 284 Upton, 36 Urbino, Duke of, Frederick, 392 ; mantling, 388 Urcheon, 216 Urdy, 91, 95 ; at the foot, 155 Utermarch, arms, 266 646 Vaile, 113, 207 Vaillant, 34 Vair, 50, 77, 79, 81, 84; ap- pointe, 82 ; in bend, 82 ; bellies, 85 ; onde, 81 ; en pal, 82 ; in pale, 82 Vaire, 79, 81, 94; corrupted form of, 81 ; en pal, 82 Vairpiere, 83 Valence, De, 155 ; William, 525 Vallary, Coronet, 378 Vambraced, 171 Vambraces, 45 Van Eiden, Sir Jacob, 145 Van Houthem, Barons, arms, 82 Van Schorel, 163 Vane, arms, 171, 293 Varano, 83 Varenchon, 83 Varroux, arms, 82 Varry, tassy, 85 ; cuppy, 85 Varus, 79 Vase, 288 Vaughan, 169 Vavasseur, arms, 284 Veitch, arms, 207 Venus, 77 Vera, De, 83 Verden, 49 Verdon, arms, 149 Verdun, Alix de, 410 Vere, arms, 1 34, 296 Verelst, crest, 214 Veret, 83 Verhanrimes, 200 Vernon, motto, 45 1 Verona, 83, 163 Verre, 79 Verschobenes, 85 Vert, 70, 76^ 90 Veruled, 292 Vervelled, 241 Vesci, de, Viscount, supporters, 433 . Vesentina, 163 Vesili's, Andreas, 439 Vested, 170 Vestments, 5 Vice-Admiral, insignia of, 581 Vice-Conn^table, insignia of, 582 Victoria, Queen, 41, 358, 361, 364, 421, 488, 496; seal, 475 ; Cross, 567 ; those en- titled to the, insignia of, 584 ; Princess, label,' 496, 497 ; and Albert, Order of, members of, insignia of, 584 Victorian Order, Royal, 567 ; insignia of, 584 Victory, 164 Viennois, Dauphin de, Charles, supporter, 411 Vigilance, 247, 286 Vine, 264 Virgil de Solis, 144 INDEX Virgin Mary, 159 ; lilies of the, 6o5 Virolled, 292 Visconti, arms, 257 Viscountess robe or mantle, 366; coronet, 366 Viscounts,robe or mantle of, 365 , Z67 ; coronet of, 365, 368 Visitations, mottoes in, 449 Vivian, crest, 166 Vohlin, arms, 41 1 Void, 7Z Voiders, 150 Vol, 240 Volant, 34, 245 ; en arriere, 266 Volunteer Officer's Decoration, 568 ; insignia of, 584 " Von," German, 68 Von Burtenback, Captain Sebas- tian Schartlin(Schertel), arms, 185 Von Dalffin, GraufF, arms, 254 Von Fronberg, Herr, 203 Von Lechsgemiind, Count Hein- rich von, seal, 195 Von Pauli, 164 Vree, 84 Vulned, 187, 242 Vulture, 24 1 Vyner, Sir Robert, 358 Wade, crest, 217 Wake, knot, 469 Wakefield, crest, 217 Wakefield, town of, arms, 275 Waldeck-Pyrmont, Prince of, crests, 343 Waldegrave, arms of, C9 ; Lord, arms, 252 Wales, badge of, 38, 225,^457 ; Herald of, 33, 36 ;^ruddy dragon of, 225 ; Prince of, 85, 254, 486 ; coronet, 363 ; badge, 225, 458 ; label, 497 ; mantling, 391, 392 ; Princess of, coronet, 363 Walker, arms, 281 ; Sir Edward, 358 ; Trustees, insignia of, 586 Walkinshaw, arms, 262 Wallenrodt, Counts, arms, 288 Waller, 112; arms, 266; crest, 253, 434; Sir Jonathan Wathen, supporters, 433 ; Richard, augmentation, 596 Wallop, III Walnut-leaves, 266 ; tree, 263 Walpole, 106 Walrond, arms, 207 Walsh, 86 Wands, 41 W^andsworth, 294 Wappen und Stammbuch, 185 Wappenbuch, 203, 224, 234 W^appencodex, 28 Wappenkonige, 40 Wappenrolle, von Zurich, 188 Warde-Aldam, arms, 114, 275 Wareham, arms, 275 Warnecke's, 176 Warren, 70; Sir John de, 521 ; William de, arms, 486 ; Mantling, 389 Warrington, town of, 174; arms, 288 Warwick, Lord, 458 ; Earls of, differences, 484 ; Earl of, Richard Beauchamp, 541 ; Earl of, Waleran, 484 ; 'Earl of, Thomas, 4S4 ; and Albe- marle, Earl of, Richard Beau- champ, 540 Water, 88, 94 ; colour, 74, 76; bougets, 299 Waterford, supporters, 245 ; Earl of, 70 ; Marquess of, supporters, 433 ; city of, supporters, 439 Waterlow, arms, 298 Watermen and Lightermen's Livery Co., supporters, 439 Watkin, Bart, arms, 261 Watney, crest, 205 Watson-Taylor, supporters, 420 Wattled, 227, 246 Wave, vair, 81 Wavy, 91, 116; or undy, 94 Waye, arms, 1 1 9 Weasel, 215 Wechselfeh, 82 Weir wolf, 171, 229 Welby, Lord, 196 Weldon, Sir Anthony, 164 Wellington, Duke of, 541 ; Duke of, augmentation, 594 Wells, 294 Welsh dragon, 225 ; arms, 545 Were, arms, 290 West Riding, 56 Westbury,.arms of, 188 Westcar, crest, 217 Westmeath, Earl of, supporters, 227, 438 Westminster, Dukes of, arms, 554; crest, 345; Marquess of, augmentation, 598 ; city of, arms, 554; Abbey, 284, 524, 543 ; Dean of, 585 Westphalia, 608 ; arms, ^o\ Westworth, arms, 296 Whale, 245, 253, 256 Whalley, arms, 245 Wharton, 292 Wheat, 278 Wheel, 302 Whelks, 256 Whitby, arms, 258 White, supposed to be, 78 ; en- sign, 471 ; ermine spots, 78 ; label, 71 ; staff, 41 White-Thomson, arms, 270 Whitgreave, crest, 298 ; aug- mentation, 592 Widow, arms, 146, 533, 573 Wiergman, 164 ' Wife, impalements, 53S» 536, 537. 538 Wigan, crest, 263, 295 Wilczek, Count Hans, 316 Wild cat, 195 Wildenvels, arms, 188 Wildmen, 433 Wildwerker, 83 Wilkinson, 256 Wilson, 196 William I., 15, 354, 355 William II., seal, 354 William III., 276, 596, 607 William IV., 412, 608 j State Crown, 356 Williams, arms, 181 Williams - Drummond, Bart., supporters, 433 Wilioughby, 282 Winchester, Bishops of, insignia of, 584 ; Dean of, 588 ; Earl of, 32, 148 ; Earl of, Seiher de Quincy, 147 f Marquesses of, 379 ; Captain Peter, arms, 264 Windsor, 30, 31,78, 149; badge of, 48 ; Henry of, 469 ; Dean of, insignia of, 584; Herald, ^y ; Castle Bookplates, 183; Library, 372 Wingate, arms, 284 Winged, 286 Winged ape, 215; lions, 436; "Stags, 209 Winlaw, 255 ; motto, 451 Winnowing fans, 55 Winterstoke, Lord, supporters, 437 Winwick, 50 Wogenfeh, 81, 82 Wolf, 196 Wolf-hunter, Grand, insignia of, 581 INDEX j Wolfe, 181, 541 ; crest, 298 ; Francis, 196, 592 Wolkenfeh, 81 Wolseley, arms, 204 ;Lord, 195, 204, 594 Wolverhampton, town of, arms, 284, 291 Woman, grant to a, 57,62, 574; illegitimate. Royal Licence, 554 ; married, arms, 534 Wood, 165 ; late Sir Albert, 264 ; crests granted, 339 ; Sir William, 349 Woodbine-leaves, 266 Woodman, 433 Wood-pigeon, 244 Woodstock, borough of, arms, 264 Woodstock, De, 56; Thomas of, 494 Woodward, 14, 75, 80, 83, 85, 90, 136, 150, 162, 185, 188, 197,200, 50,253,254.255, 261, 318, 324. 343. 399. 405, 467, 469, 513, 514, 598; and Burnett, 69, 74, 94. 95, 407; arms, 261, 266 Woollan, 292 Wool pack, 5 Worcester, 78 Wordsworth, 287 " Workes of Armorie," 489 Worms, Baron de, supporters, 444 Wortford, arms, 266 Wreath, 157 Wright, 126 Wriothesley, 41 Wursters, arms, 200 Wurtemburg, supporters, 187; Queen of, label, 498 Wyatt, arms, 287 Wylcote, Sir John, brass, 389 Wyndham, crest, 291 647 Wyndham - Campbell - Pleydell- Bouverie, crests, 348 Wynn, Sir Watkin Williams, 198 Wyon, 353 Wyvern, 186, 225, 226, 227; as supporters, 437, 438 Xantoigne, 34 Yacht, 294 Yarborough, Earl of, 205, 590; badge, 288, 458; supporter, 437 Yarmouth, 525 ; arms, 182 Yeates, 255 Yeatman- Biggs, arms, 141 Yellow, 70 Verburgh, crest, 242 Yeropkin, 250 Yockney, arms, 266 Yonge, crest, 222 York, 588 ; Archbishop of, 127 ; arms, 297, 601, 602; pallium, 583 ; Cardinal, 359 ; Herald, 37 ; badge of, 48 ; Duke of, 37, 488 ; Duke of, label, 498 ; Duke of (Edward), seal, 466 ; blazing sun of, badge, 468 ; white rose of, badge, 468 ; and Lancaster, badges, 468 Yorke, 112; crest, 215 Youghal, Provosts of, seal, 525 Young, Sir Charles, crest, 226, 348 Zachary, 514 Zebra, 217, 438 Zobel, 77 Zoe, Queen, 351 Zorke, 1 1 2 Zorn, crests, 344 Zug:, supporters, 409 Zurich, 384 ; supporter, 409 ; Wappenrolle, 397 THE END OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ^LIFORN\hs Printed by Ballantyne, Hanson &' Co. Edinburgh Cf London LOAN DEPT. j^j This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate,r( —^ #^ __ ^J0ec6j fo nEC'D UD — DEC 1 1196) ,4^ < ■ -?n'D V-P VxSC --:^ JUL6 ^^ ^\ HECD LD SEP 5 1962 4J«'63W4D JAN 2 1 1963 7^un6 30l BZC-D '-^ Juw7 • v'bSNlF REC'P LP ^m NOV 7 'b-3 -7 PM ,^ 2Jan'64DW !>>^aJ LD 21A-50m-8,'61 (Cl795sl0)476B General Library University of California Berkeley LD 21A-40rn-4.'63 (D6471sl0)476B General Library University of California Berkeley '^WM^^^ UNIVERSITY OF CAU^RNIA LIBRARY i^ r^.-*^ ■^■^iiPPPIB^W i^ V!'-