The Curiosities of Heraldry Part 6

[Ill.u.s.tration: Modern Arms.]

Fishes, as borne in arms, have recently been made the subject of an able, most interesting, and beautifully ill.u.s.trated volume.[101] In my _en pa.s.sant_ survey of the ensigns of armory it will suffice to remark that the _dolphin_ takes the same rank among heraldric fishes as the lion occupies among quadrupeds, and the eagle among birds; after him the _pike_, _salmon_, _barbel_, and _trout_ hold an honourable place, and even the _herring_ and _sprat_ are not deemed too mean for armory. Neither have sh.e.l.l-fish been overlooked: the _escallop_ in particular, from its religious a.s.sociations, has always been a special favourite.

AMPHIBIA, REPTILES, and INSECTS sometimes occur, particularly _toads_, _serpents_, _adders_, _tortoises_, _scorpions_, _snails_, _gra.s.shoppers_, _spiders_, _ants_, _bees_, and _gad-flies_. It is singular that such despised and noxious creatures as the scorpion and the toad should have been adopted as marks of honour; yet such, in former times, was the taste for _allusive_ arms that the Botreuxes, of Cornwall, relinquished a simple antient coat in favour of one containing three toads, because the word 'botru' in the Cornish language signified a toad!

The HUMAN FIGURE and its parts are employed in many arms. The arms pertaining to the bishopric of Salisbury contain a representation of "our blessed Lady, with her son in her right hand and a sceptre in her left."

The arms of the see of Chichester are the most singular to be found in the whole circle of church heraldry. They are blazoned thus: 'Azure, _Prester-John_ hooded, sitting on a tomb-stone; in his sinister hand an open book; his dexter hand extended, with the two fore-fingers erect, all or; _in his mouth_ a sword, fessewise, gules, hilt and pommel or, the point to the sinister.'[102] Prester or Presbyter-John, the person here represented, was a fabulous person of the middle ages, who was imagined to sway the sceptre of a powerful empire _somewhere_ in the East, and who must have been a very long-lived personage, unless he was _reproduced_ from time to time like the phoenix of antiquity. Many writers, during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, make mention of him.

Sir John Maundevile describes his territory, which, however, he did not visit. That country, according to his statement, contained rocks of adamant,[103] which attracted all the ships that happened to come near them, until the congeries appeared like a forest, and became a kind of floating island. It also abounded in popinjays or parrots as "plentee as gees," and precious stones large enough to make "plateres, dissches, and cuppes." "Many other marveylles been there," he adds, "so that it were to c.u.mbrous and to long to putten it in scripture of bokes." He describes the Emperor himself as "cristene," and believing "wel in the Fadre, in the Sone, and in the Holy Gost," yet, in some minor points, not quite sound in the faith. As to his imperial state, he possessed 72 provinces, over each of which presided a king; and he had so great an army that he could devote 330,000 men to guard his standards, which were "3 crosses of gold, fyn, grete and hye, fulle of precious stones." It is related of Columbus that he saw on one of the islands of the West Indies, which he then apprehended to be a part of the continent of Asia, a grave and sacred personage whom he at first believed to be Prester-John. This incident serves to show that the existence of this chimerical being was credited even so lately as the close of the fifteenth century, although Roger Bacon, in the thirteenth, doubted many of the tales related of him--"de quo tanta fama solebat esse, et multa falsa dicta sunt et scripta."[104] The best account of him is to be found in the work of Matthew Paris, the monk of St. Albans, who wrote before the year 1250. Marco Polo also mentions him in his travels.[105]

p.o.r.ny places him in Abyssinia under the t.i.tle of _Preter cham_, or 'prince of the worshippers,' while Heckford[106] considers him a priest and one of the followers of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople in the fifth century.

_Kings_ and _bishops_ occur as charges; but rarely. The heads of Moors and Saracens are more common, and belong to the category of trophies, having originated, for the most part, during the Crusades. The arms of the Welsh family of Vaughan are 'a cheveron between three children's heads ...

enwrapped about the necks with as many snakes proper.' "It hath beene reported," saith old Guillim, "that some one of the ancestors of this family was borne with a snake about his necke: _a matter not impossible_, but yet very unprobable!" Besides heads, the armorial shield is sometimes charged with arms and legs, naked, vested, or covered with armour, hands, feet, eyes, hearts, winged and unwinged, &c. The coat of Tremaine exhibits three arms (et tres ma.n.u.s!) and that of the Isle of Man, three legs, as here represented. Of the former, Guillim remarks, "these armes and hands conjoyned and clenched after this manner may signify a treble offer of revenge for some notable injurie." If we might be jocular upon so grave a subject as armory, we should consider the second coat a happy allusion to the geographical position of the island between the three kingdoms of England, Ireland, and Scotland, as if it had run away from all three, and were kicking up its heels in derision of the whole empire![107]

[Ill.u.s.tration]

The VEGETABLE KINGDOM has furnished its full quota of charges. We have whole trees, as the _oak_, _pine_, _pear-tree_, &c.; parts of trees, as _oak-branches_, and _starved_ (_i.e._ dead) _branches_, trunks of trees, generally raguly or k.n.o.bbed; leaves, as _laurel_, _fig_, _elm_, _woodbine_, _nettle_, and _holly_; fruit, as _pomegranates_, _apples_, _pears_, _pine-apples_, _grapes_, _acorns_, and _nuts_; flowers, as the _rose_, _lily_, _columbine_, _gilliflower_, &c.; corn, as stalks of wheat and rye, and particularly _garbs_ (Fr. gerbes) or wheatsheaves; to which some add _trefoils_, _quatrefoils_, and _cinquefoils_, and the bearing familiar to all in the arms of France, and called the _Fleur-de-lis_.

Respecting the _trefoil_, there can be little doubt, as Mr. Dallaway observes, that it was borrowed from the foliated ornaments of antient coronets, which again were imitations of the natural wreath. The shamrock, which is identical with the trefoil, is the national badge of Ireland. Of the quatre and cinquefoils "almost any conjecture would be weakly supported. Amongst the very early embellishments of Gothic architecture are quatrefoils, at first inserted simply in the heads of windows, between or over the incurvated or elliptical points of the mullions, and afterwards diversified into various ramifications, which were the florid additions to that style."[108] These terms are common to both architecture and heraldry, but from which of the two the other adopted them must remain in doubt.

The non-heraldric reader will be surprised to learn that the ident.i.ty of the _fleur-de-lis_ with the iris or 'royal lily' has ever been called in question; yet it has been doubted, with much reason, whether an ornamented spear-head or sceptre be not the thing intended. The Boke of S. A. informs us that the arms of the king of France were "certainli sende by an awngell from heuyn, that is to say iij flowris in maner of swerdis in a felde of asure, the wich certan armys ware geuyn to the forsayd kyng of fraunce in sygne of euerlasting trowbull, and that he and his successaries all way with bataill and swereddys (swords) shulde be punyshid!" Those who imagine the bearing to be a play upon the royal name of Loys or Louis decide in favour of the flower. Upton calls it '=flos gladioli=.'[109] Perhaps it was made a flower for the purpose of a.s.similating it to the English rose; certainly all our a.s.sociations, historical and poetical, would tell in favour of its being such; and such it was undoubtedly understood to be in the time of Chaucer, who says of Sire Thopas,

"Upon his crest he bare a tour (tower), And therein stiked a _lily flour_."

Leigh seems to entertain no doubt of its belonging to the vegetable kingdom; for in his notice of this charge he particularly describes the flower and the root of the iris. Mr. Montagu, in his recent 'Guide to the Study of Heraldry,' thinks the arguments of M. de Menestrier "in favour of the iris so strong as _almost_ to set the question at rest."[110]

[Ill.u.s.tration]

Those who advocate the spear-head view of the question, bring forward the common heraldric bearing, _a leopard's head jessant de lis_, i. e. thrust through the mouth with a fleur-de-lis, which pa.s.ses through the skull as represented in the above cut. "There cannot," as Dallaway says, "be a more absurd combination than that of a leopard's head producing a lily, while the idea that it was typical of the triumph after the chase, when the head of the animal was thrust through with a spear and so carried in procession," seems perfectly consistent. Still the query may arise 'how is it that the head of no other animal, the wolf or boar for instance, is found represented in a similar manner?'

The little band surrounding the _pieces_ of which the fleur-de-lis of heraldry is composed is a.n.a.logous to nothing whatever in the flower, while it does strongly resemble the forril of metal which surrounds the insertion of a spear-head into its staff or pole. After an attentive consideration of both hypotheses, I have no hesitation in affirming that the fleur-de-lis is _not_ the lily. This is shown, not from the occurrence of lilies in their proper shape in some coats, and that of the heraldric _lis_ in others, (for such a variation might have been accidentally made by the incorrect representations of unskilful painters,) but from the fact that both lilies and lis are found in one and the same coat--that of Eton College.[111]

[Ill.u.s.tration]

The Tressure surrounding the lion in the royal arms of Scotland is blazoned 'fleury and counter-fleury,' that is, having fleurs-de-lis springing from it, both on the outer and inner sides. The fabulous account of the tressure is that it was given by Charlemagne to Achaius, king of Scotland in the year 792, in token of alliance and friendship. Nisbet says, "The Tressure Flowerie encompa.s.ses the Lyon of Scotland, to show that he should defend the Flower-de-lisses, and _these to continue a defence to the Lion_."[112]

Now, although we must discard this early existence of the Scottish ensigns, it is by no means improbable that the addition of the tressure was made in commemoration of some alliance between the two crowns at a later date. But the _defence_ which a bulwark of lilies could afford the king of beasts would be feeble indeed! Yet, upon the supposition that the fleur-de-lis is intended for a spear-head, such an addition would be exceedingly appropriate, as forming a kind of chevaux-de-frise[113] around the animal.

This doubtful charge may serve as a turning point between 'things naturall' and 'things artificiall.' Among the latter, crowns, sceptres, orbs, caps of maintenance, mantles of state, and such-like insignia may be first named. According to Dame Julyan Berners, _crowns_ formed part of the arms of King Arthur--"iij dragonys and over that an other sheelde of iij crownys." Mitres, crosiers, &c. occur princ.i.p.ally, though not exclusively, in church heraldry. From attention in the first instance to the 'arts liberall' came such charges as books, pens, ink-horns, text-letters, as =A='s, =T='s and =S='s, organ-pipes, hautboys, harps, viols, bells, &c.

The 'arts mechanicall' furnish us with implements of agriculture, as ploughs, harrows, scythes, wheels, &c. The _Catherine Wheel_ Dallaway takes for a cogged, or denticulated mill-wheel, with reference to some feudal tenure, but it seems rather ungallant to rob the female saint of the instrument of her pa.s.sion, while St. Andrew and St. George are allowed to retain theirs in undisturbed possession. Manufactures afford the wool-comb, the spindle, the shuttle, the comb, the hemp-break, &c. Among mechanical implements are included pick-axes, mallets, hammers, plummets, squares, axes, nails, &c. Architecture furnishes towers, walls, bridges, pillars, &c. From the marine we have antient ships, boats, rudders, masts, anchors, and sails. From field-sports come bugle (that is bullock) horns, bows, arrows, pheons or fish-spears, falcons' bells, and lures, fish-hooks, eel-spears, nets of various kinds, and bird-bolts. The bird-bolt was a small blunt arrow, with one, two, or three heads, used with the crossbow for shooting at birds. Hence the adage of '=The fool's Bolt is soon shot=,' applied to the hasty expression or retort of an ignorant babbler. John Heywood versifies the proverb thus:

"A foole's bolte is soone shot, and fleeth oftymes fer; But the foole's bolte and the mark c.u.m few times ner."[114]

From sedentary games are borrowed playing-tables, dice, chess-rooks, &c.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

War has naturally supplied heraldry with a numerous list of charges, as banners, spears, beacons, drums, trumpets, cannons, or chamber-pieces, 'murthering chain-shot,' burning matches (of rope), portcullises, battering-rams, crossbows, swords, sabres, lances, battle-axes, and scaling-ladders; also shields, generally borne in threes, helmets, morions, gauntlets, greaves (leg armour), horse-trappings, bridles, saddles, spurs, horse-shoes, shackles, _c.u.m multis aliis_. Many of these, though disused in modern warfare, will require no explanation, but a few others whose use is less obvious may be added, as _swepes_, _caltraps_, and _water-bowgets_.

The _swepe_, sometimes called a _mangonel_, and as such borne in the canting arms of Magnall, was a war-engine, used for the purpose of hurling stones into a besieged town or fortress; a species of balista.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Murthering chain-shot.]

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

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

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

In the celebrated lampoon upon Richard, king of the Romans, who was obliged, at the battle of Lewes, to take refuge in a windmill, the following lines occur:

"The Kynge of Alemaigne wende to do full wel, He saisede the mulne for a castel; With hare sharpe swerdes he ground the stel, He wende that the sayles were _mangonel_!"[115]

The _caltrap_ was a cruel contrivance for galling the feet of horses. It was made of iron, and so constructed that, however it might fall, one of its four sharp points should be erect. Numbers of them strewed in the enemy's path served to r.e.t.a.r.d the advance of cavalry, and a retreat was sometimes secured by dropping them in the flight, and thus cutting off the pursuit. Its etymology is uncertain, cheval-trap and _gall_-trap have been suggested with nearly equal claims to probability.

Water-bowgets, or budgets, date from the Crusades, when water had often to be conveyed across the sandy deserts from a great distance. They are represented in various grotesque forms as--

[Ill.u.s.tration]

so that it is a matter of curiosity to know in what manner they were carried. Leigh and others call them _gorges_; but the charge properly known by that name is a whirlpool, as borne in the armes parlantes of the family of Gorges.

The _mullet_, a star-like figure, has been taken to represent the rowel of a spur; but a doubt of this derivation of the charge may be suggested, as the spur of the middle ages had no rowel, but consisted of one sharp spike. Some of the old heralds considered mullets as representations of falling stars--"exhalations inflamed in the aire and stricken back with a cloud"--which, according to Guillim, are sometimes found on the earth like a certain jelly, and a.s.suming the form of the charge. The substance alluded to bears the name of star-jelly. In the Gentleman's Magazine for 1797, are several communications on this subject, in which there is a great contrariety of opinion, some of the writers contending that it is an animal substance, while others consider it a vegetable. As it is usually found in boggy grounds, Dr. Darwin deemed it a mucilage voided by herons after they have eaten frogs, and Pennant attributed it to gulls. The antient alchemists called it the flower of heaven, and imagined that from it they could procure the universal menstruum; but all their researches ended in discovering that by distillation it yielded some phlegm, volatile salt, and empyreumatic oil.[116]

Personal costume, although mixed up with the very earliest of heraldric devices, furnishes scarcely any regular charges. Excepting shoes, caps, and body-armour, the _maunch_ is almost the only one derived from this source. This charge, a familiar example of which occurs in the arms of the n.o.ble family of Hastings, represents an antient fashion of sleeve worn soon after the Conquest, but of such an extravagant form that Leigh blazons it a _maunch-maltale_, a badly-cut sleeve; and certainly the example given by him fully justifies the use of that epithet. The taste for a long pendulous addition to the cuff of the sleeve forms one of the most curious features of the female costume of the twelfth century.

According to Brydson, the maunch was a distinguished "favour" bestowed on some knights, being part of the dress of the lady or princess who presented it.

The woodcut (no inappropriate _tail-piece_ for the present chapter) delineates several antient forms of this article. Well may Master Leigh remark, "Of thinges of antiquitee growen out of fashion this is one."

[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 1, Leigh; 3, 4, from Planche's Hist. Brit. Cost.; 2, Arms of Hastings, from the tomb of W. de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, Westminster Abbey.

=Mangys be called in armys a sleue.= _Boke S. A._]

CHAPTER IV.

Chimerical Figures of Heraldry.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

"Manye merveylles there ben in that regioun."

_Sir John Maundevile._

The days of the Crusaders were the days of romance. "From climes so fertile in monsters as those through which these adventurers pa.s.sed,"

observes Dallaway, "we cannot wonder that any fiction was readily received by superst.i.tious admirers, whose credulity nothing could exhaust." The narrations of those warriors who had the good fortune to revisit their native lands were eagerly seized upon by that new cla.s.s of literary aspirants, the Romance writers, by means of whose wonder-exciting productions, giants, griffins, dragons, and monsters of every name, became familiarized to all. For ages the existence of these products of a "gothick fancy" was never called in question. The early travellers, such as Marco Polo and our own renowned Sir John Maundevile, pandered to the popular taste, and what those chroniclers of 'grete merveyles' reported in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was religiously believed in the sixteenth, and hardly questioned even in the seventeenth. In the early part of this period, indeed, it can scarcely be expected that the mult.i.tude at least should have been disabused of the delusion, when the existence of witchcraft was considered an essential part of the common creed,--when a learned herald, like Guillim, could write a tirade against "divellish witches that doe worke the destruction of silly infants, and also of cattel,"--and when the supreme magistrate of these realms could instigate the burning of deformed old women, and write treatises upon "Daemonology," which, among other matters, taught his loyal and undoubting subjects that these maleficae were wont to perform their infernal pranks by means of circles, some of which were _square_, and others _triangular_! It was reserved for the advancing light of the eighteenth century to break the spell, and scatter these monsters to the winds. This, however, was not to be done at once; for our grandfathers, and even our fathers, gathered their knowledge of popular _natural_ history from a book which contained minute descriptions of the _dragon_, 'adorned with cuts' of that remarkable hexapede, for the edification of its admiring readers!

Under the category of Heraldric Monsters the following deserve especial notice:--