The Curiosities of Heraldry Part 27

Appendix A.

DIFFERENCES.

A few remarks upon this interesting branch of Heraldry have been made at p. 43 et seq. This subject is ably discussed by Wyrley, Camden, Dallaway, and others, in their published works, but the following treatise, I have good reason to believe, has never before appeared in print. It is the production of Sir Edward Dering, a representative of the great family of that name in Kent: the author, who enjoyed the friendship of Sir William Dugdale, was knighted 22 Jan. 1618, and created a Baronet 1st Feb. 1626.

The only copy of this essay I have seen occurs in a copy of the Visitation of Kent, 1619, transcribed from a MS. of Peter Le Neve, by Hasted, the Kentish Historian, and now in the possession of Mr. J. R. Smith.

"VARIATIONS OF THE ARMS IN THE FAMILY OF DERING, BY SIR EDWARD DERING, KNT. AND BART.

The differences of Arms by adding small and minute figures as of Crescents, Mullets, Martlets, etc. is neither antient nor could be so: For 300 years since every man of note and family carried in the wars his shield carved and coloured, and his armour painted suitable, and his coat of arms to cover his armour embroidered of the same; besides the caparison of his horse, if so be he served on horseback; you shall have it by example as follows:--

[A rude sketch of a bra.s.s of a man in armour with his surcoat of arms is here given, and beneath it--

"This was copied from Pluckley Church, from the gravestone of John Dering, Esq., who dyed August 1550."]

The use of all this art was to distinguish and notify the party, and soe his valorous atchievements might be seen and known, when his face was not.

The further off and the easier this view could be made, the better; for that concurred to the end for which these signs were taken. Now these petty variations were not to be seen, but when near at hand, requiring a clear light and near approach to make them, and so consequently, the bearers of them, discoverable.

In the last battle fought by the famous Earl of Warwicke for K. Henry 6th against K. Edward the 4th, the day grew hopefull for Warwick by the valor of the Earl of Oxford: Oxford's soldiery had his star, or rather mullet, embroidered on their coats--K. Edward's men, saith Speed, the sun; but it was indeed a little white rose, with the rayes of the sun-beams pointing round about it. The day was overcast and foggy; Oxford had made such impression upon the Yorkists, that many fled from the field at Barnet to London, giving out the news that the day was Warwick's. Warwick, intending to perfect the victory over that part of K. Edward's army, came up to Oxford, when, the light being dull with mists, rendered Oxford's badge as big as the king's, the difference in form and colours being but little; so that Warwick's men by mistake let fly at those of Oxford. They seeing Warwick's ragged staff and bear making havock at their backs, whilst they were pressing forward on K. Edward's sun-beams, not knowing or guessing the cause and Error, cryed out, "Treason! Treason! we are all betrayed."

Hereupon the Earl of Oxford, with 800 men fled the field, and the Yorkists prevailed, with the death of the great Warwick and his brother the Marquis of Montacute.

Other examples have been two; in Wyrley one, of the two Baliols--the other of the French Lord of Chine, who laying up the Lord Courcy's banner, the English of Sir Hugh Calvely's company, reputing them friends, were thereby unfortunately slain, and the Lord Courcy had thereupon dishonour spoken of him, though absent as far as Austrich.

"This Chine did raise Lord Courcy's fair Devise, Which was 6 Bars of vairy and of red; This way the same or difference small so nice And slender that 'mongst them they error bred, Which now were either taken slain or fled.

All men of younger house which banners bear Should have their difference glist'ning large and fair."

_Capital de Bur_, p. 151.

These minute differences, as they were antiently dangerous and insufficient, so in manner as they are now used they were then unknown; neither is there art enough by any of our heralds' rules, though much refined of late, to guide one so as to know which of the Crescent-bearers was the uncle or which the nephew, and for Crescent upon Crescent, Mullet upon Mullet, etc. in a pedigree of no great largeness, perspective-gla.s.ses and spectacles cannot help you; but you must have Lyncean eyes, or his that could write Homer's Iliads, and fold them into a nutsh.e.l.l.

There was an elder way of differencing in former ages, and very good, though at no time regularly prescribed, yet it was much practised, as by bordures, bars, bends, chiefs, etc. and something upon special motives of relinquishing the whole devise and a.s.suming another; all which are eminently known in the families of Nevil, Howard, Berkeley, Beauchamp, Stafford, Chaworth, Latymer, Grey and Ba.s.sett, Willoughby, etc. You shall have an example of two in Kent leaving the chevron-bearers in imitation of the great Lords of Clare and Criol, the ten variations and imitations of Leyborne's Lions; and of Sandwich's indentings in like number, I will here instance in Say and Cobham.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Sir Wm. de Say.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Sir R. de Huntingfield.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Sir Ibron de Huntingfield.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Sir Alex. de Cheney.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: ... Huntingfield.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Sir Ralph de Perington.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: St. Nicholas.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Parrocke[318]]

There are more examples, but these are in Kent.

Now for an instance in the family of Cobham.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Wm. de Pluckley, Brother of John de Cobham.

John de Cobham Brother of Wm. de Pluckley.]

[Sidenote: _Vide Book of Differences_, p. 177.]

Henry Cobham, great grandchild of this John, and Joane, da. and heir of de Bokeland.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

John de Cobham, son of Henry and Joane Bokeland, put his father's fleurs de lizs upon his mother's cheveron, and had issue three sons, who did each const.i.tute a several family, and varied their arms.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Henry Cobham, the eldest son, married Joane, sister and heir of Step{n} de Pencester.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: John, the 2d son, to whom his father gave the manor of Cobham, and from whom the Lords Cobham descended.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Reginald, the 3d, de Orkesden, from whom the Cobhams of Sterborough are descended.]

This Henry by the great heir, his wife, was father of three sons, who all of them followed the copy of their Mother's Arms, whereof

[Ill.u.s.tration: 1. Stephen de Cobham, Lord of Shorne, who leaving the paternal coat, took his Mother's Arms.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: 2. John de Toneford, where he dwelt, a place in Chartham.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: 3. Stephen de Cobham, father of Henry, Lord of Dunstall.]

This elder Stephen was father of Sir John de Cobham of Rundale, and of Robert de Cobham, which Sir John was father of Sir Thomas Cobham de Rundale, and of John de Hever, who had the manor of Hever, and thence his name.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Robert de Cobham.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: John de Hever of Hever.]

John de Cobham, aforesaid, who bore the three lions on his cheveron, was father of Henry Lord Cobham, and of John Cobham de Blackburg, in co.

Devon. Henry Lord Cobham was father of Henry Lord Cobham and of Thomas Cobham, of Chafford in Kent. This Henry Lord Cobham was father of John Lord Cobham and of Thomas Cobham, owner of Belunele and Pipards-clive, who had issue two sons, Thomas and Henry; now all these younger Cobhams varied their Arms as under.

[Ill.u.s.tration: John Cobham de Blackburg.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Thos. Cobham de Chafford.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Thos. Cobham de Belunele.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Henry Cobham de Pypard's Clive.[319]]