Animals and Monsters
Among the forms that are characteristically heraldic the Lion, the
symbol of courage, power and magnanimity, is most prominent and typical.
[Illustration: FIG. 81.
Thirteenth Century.]
[Illustration:
FIG. 82. FIG. 83.
Device Seals. Thirteenth Century.]
It has already been mentioned that the earliest heraldic lion, followed
the Eastern examples with considerable fidelity, as may be seen by
comparing the lions of the early MSS., such as Fig. 81, with those of
the textiles which were the product of Oriental looms, and of such as
were set up in Sicily with Oriental workmen in the twelfth century.
These early examples were drawn broadly and simply as was fitting
to the material in which they were expressed, and their shape and
proportion approached that of nature. The lion of the early seals, such
as Figs. 82 and 83, present the same characteristics. The former seal
is that of Alexander First in the twelfth century, and the latter that
of Henry, son of Swanus de Denehy, in the thirteenth. The attenuation
which became so characteristic a feature of the animals in later work
arose from the necessity of clear definition of the object which was
to serve as a distinctive badge that would be visible at a distance
and when in motion, as has been already pointed out. The device was
intended to be easily read under the various conditions of use, and
in complying with those conditions the early draughtsman well proved
that splendid sense of design which distinguished him. To this end the
object was drawn as large as the containing space would fairly permit,
and its form was attenuated so as to allow the ground to show through
in due proportion to complete the necessary clearness of definition. A
figure thus treated became a symbol, rather than a representation of
the intended creature, but was, nevertheless, in the best instances,
full of character, vigour and vitality; that is to say, the qualities
that were attributed to the animal, not its mere form, were the object
of expression. The placing of the beasts in the shield and their
proportion to it is always satisfactory at this time, and suggests that
too much care cannot be taken in trying to attain a similar excellence
in present work, but by expressing qualities rather than by copying
forms. Of the examples of lions of various periods, Fig. 84 is taken
from the seal of Henry de Percy, 1300. Figs. 85 and 86, a lion rampant
and passant guardant respectively, are from the enamelled arms on the
tomb of Edward III in Westminster Abbey. Fig. 87 is from a fifteenth
century shield of stained glass that is now in the Victoria and Albert
Museum.
[Illustration: FIG. 84.--End of Twelfth Century.]
[Illustration: FIG. 85.--Late Fourteenth Century.]
[Illustration: FIG. 86.--Later Fourteenth Century.]
[Illustration: FIG. 87.--Fifteenth Century.]
The exact proportion which charges should bear to the field cannot,
of course, be stated with accuracy, there being no ready means of
measurement, even if such were desirable, and it must necessarily
remain a matter for artistic perception to find the just mean between
crowding a space and failing to fill it. It is evident also that the
proportion would be modified by circumstances, such as the character of
the charge (whether condensed or dispersed), and also to some extent
by colour, with regard to the respective effects of light on dark or
dark on light as affecting apparent size. It may, however, be suggested
that the charges should be insisted upon to the fullest extent that is
compatible with the general style of the design, the field remaining of
such weight that the Scottish quarter of the Royal Banner, for example,
if seen as a mass at a distance, will tell as gold rather than red. And
after all is said, the actual balance must be left to the decision of
the trained eye.
When strong outline filled in with colour is the method of working, due
allowance must be made for the tendency of the line to become merged in
the darker of the two tinctures; and the object will therefore need to
be drawn slightly larger or smaller accordingly.
There are also illusions of an optical nature that are produced by
certain combinations of lines. If, for instance, three pallets are
charged upon a chevron, it will be found that the middle one must be
appreciably wider than those beside it if the three are to appear
equal. Fig. 88 shows this, though the fact is more clearly appreciable
in a drawing on a larger scale.
[Illustration: FIG. 88.]
The Pose of the Animals must be carefully observed as being of the
utmost heraldic importance, and must in the main be adhered to with
complete fidelity. To neglect in this respect is due much of the bad
heraldry which too often vitiates otherwise good work.
In the early days of the science, when the bearings were few, the
nature of the creature was, no doubt, sufficient for the intended
purpose, for there would be no other near with which to confuse it, and
the pose was probably dictated by the form of the space that the animal
was required to fill, but when it became necessary to distinguish
between different bearers of the same animal, pose assumed a special
significance and therefore became one of the principal means of
heraldic distinction.
Of the two principal poses, rampant and passant, the former is more
suitable to upright spaces and the latter to horizontal ones. When
however a passant lion has to fill an upright space, such as a canton
or a quarter of a shield, or a rampant lion to fill a horizontally
flattened one such as the second quarter of the Royal Standard when it
is constructed in accordance with Admiralty measurements difficulties
occur. One such problem occurs in the arms of Cambridge University,
Gules a cross Ermine between four lions of England, a Bible fesswise of
the field clasped and garnished Or (Fig. 89).
[Illustration: FIG. 89.--Arms of the University of Cambridge. Panel in
copper silvered and oxidized. G. W. Eve.]
It was the rampant position that was considered the typical leonine
one, however, and therefore it was that the lions of England were
called leopards in early times: not that they differed in their
relation to the natural form, but simply that they were not in the
understood leonine posture. It will be seen from the example (Fig.
90) that rampant signifies an upright pose with all the legs separated
in a suggestion of vigorous rage. This arrangement of the limbs is
heraldically essential, for when the hind legs are placed together the
position is called _salient_ or leaping (Fig. 91). With regard to the
heads of animals, it must be understood that in heraldry the normal
position is in profile, and then it requires no special mention in
the blazon. If, however, the blazon is, for example, a lion rampant
guardant, the head is turned until it looks straight out of the shield
at the spectator (Fig. 92). _Regardant_ is when the head is turned
still farther so that it looks backward over the shoulder (Fig. 93).
In some early works the term regardant is used in the same sense as
guardant, full faced, but the position first described is what is now
understood by the term.
[Illustration: FIG. 90.--Rampant.]
[Illustration: FIG. 91.--Salient.]
[Illustration: FIG. 92.--Rampant Guardant.]
[Illustration: FIG. 93.--Rampant Regardant.]
The tail of the rampant lion, which in early examples was elaborated
into a highly ornamental appendage, is usually held in an erect
position, but there is no heraldic reason why it should not occupy any
other position which the shape of the field might render desirable.
It seems to have been always believed that the rage of a lion was
indicated by the agitation of the tail, and Leigh, writing in the
sixteenth century, says: “When the lion is angry, first he beateth the
earth and then his own backe with his taile.” On the other hand, it is
now asserted by wild beast tamers that a lion is most dangerous when
his tail assumes the rigidity of an iron bar and possibly the first
draughtsman to depict the Howard or the Percy lion, in his well-known
and now stereotyped attitude with the tail extended horizontally, was
aware of this.
It is sometimes said that the tail passing between the legs constitutes
a definite heraldic variation, but this is extremely unlikely. The
term ascribed to it of “coward” is much too dangerous to have been
intentionally borne on a shield which symbolically stood for its owner,
except with some other symbol in a position of superiority, such as
the eagle over the dragon in the Guelph arms. Most probably it was one
of the trivial inventions by which the later heraldic writers sought
to fix and give meaning to an accidental and unessential detail.
There are numerous instances of this free treatment of the tail when
there could be no possible heraldic intention, and in every case it
is apparent that some difficulty in arrangement was overcome, as in
both the Great Seals for Scotland of Charles I the lion supporter has
the tail between the legs, and it is not possible to consider this a
Scottish joke, though the animal looks singularly mild and cheerful.
However this may be, the tail may certainly go anywhere outside the
legs. A lion’s tail may be double or forked, and in that case the
blazon says _double queued or queue forchée_. Both terms mean the same
thing, for the double tail issues from but one root. In rare instances
it is twisted into a knot, and is then said to be nowed.
Although the lion has been conventionalized, more or less, into
a pattern, and his positions are always the subject of careful
regulation, he is still susceptible of considerable variation of pose,
within heraldic limits, based on the facts of anatomical structure; so
that while the possibilities of animal movement are observed, it may
be designed to cover its field pattern-wise whatever the shape of the
shield may be, and at the same time retain great vitality and power.
The effort to express vigorous action without suggesting progression
out of the space is not easy perhaps, but the contrary effect is very
ludicrous, as is often apparent in modern mural decorations that are
based on heraldic motives, rampant lions seeming to be walking placidly
up a wall in a procession of their fellows.
The _lion passant_ is depicted with all the limbs separated and the
right forepaw raised (Fig. 94), and when its head is full faced,
affrontée, it is passant guardant, the position of the lions in the
Royal arms of England, viz. Gules three lions passant guardant in pale
Or. The most frequent error in rendering this coat is the turning the
heads in profile, and it cannot therefore be too often insisted upon
that lions so treated are not “lions of England” at all.
[Illustration: FIG. 94.--Passant.]
[Illustration: FIG. 95.--Statant.]
The shield at Canterbury that is ascribed to Edward the Black Prince
has been already described as a most satisfactory example, which is in
brilliant contrast to the modern instances wherein the lions occupy a
central column in a broad field with a wide blank space at either side
of them. This perhaps arose from a mis-reading of the words “in pale”
of the blazon, which were perhaps taken to mean “in place of a pale,”
whereas they mean “in the direction of a pale,” i.e. one over the other
but without lateral limits other than those of the field. Passant
regardant has the head looking backwards as in rampant regardant. The
lion statant (Fig. 95) stands on all four feet, and may be statant
guardant or statant regardant, according to the position of the head as
before mentioned.
Sejant is in the position of Fig. 96 and couchant that of Fig. 97.
[Illustration: FIG 96..--Sejant.]
[Illustration: FIG. 97.--Couchant.]
The expression of vigour is the most important individual quality to
strive after in the treatment of heraldic animals, the line of the back
and loins may be made to express lithe strength, and power be suggested
by the massive shoulder, with the powerful fore-leg tapering to the
wide-stretched and vigorous paw. Dignity and life should be in the pose
of the leonine head and mane, and broad harmonious effect in the whole
treatment. The widely spread toes were sometimes very much exaggerated,
as in the Arms of John of Eltham (Fig. 98), but in character and
drawing were much nearer the natural facts than the foot of a quiescent
lion might lead one to imagine. This may be seen on a small scale in
the domestic cat when she stretches her leg with her claws protruding.
When the lions of the later Gothic type lost the vigorous qualities
of the earlier examples the toes lost their power and became like
radiating leaf-forms.
[Illustration: FIG. 98.--Arms of Prince John of Eltham.
Westminster Abbey.]
The setting-on of the tail may also help the expression of vigorous
life, its junction with the body being well marked instead of being
allowed to flow softly out of the line of the back. This is well
shown in Dürer’s lion at Fig. 99, that splendid example of the best
kind of Renaissance heraldry whose fine drawing, well-balanced design
and beautiful technique have caused its frequent instance as a striking
work of heraldic art. The illustration is reproduced from the very
fine impression in the National Art Library at the Victoria and Albert
Museum.
Both these examples are excellent for their good decorative
distribution, the former shield being probably the best extant instance
of that necessary quality.
In the lions of various periods it will be seen how the type altered
from time to time, from that of the thirteenth century MSS., which
possesses a considerable amount of a natural leonine shape, through the
attenuated beast of the later mediaeval period down to the Renaissance
form in its two somewhat dissimilar styles: that of Germany, from which
modern German heraldry is derived, which shows a strong survival of
Gothic influence; and that of Italy, from which appears to have been
drawn the heraldry of the rest of Europe until the still recent Gothic
revival here.
In modern German heraldry the lions have become so over-elaborated that
in many instances the prevalent effect is one of fluffiness. Too much
is made of the hair, especially in the legs, which are sometimes much
more suggestive of the well-feathered legs of a dorking fowl than of
the clean and powerful, though hairy, limb of a lion; and with the lost
suggestion of vital energy goes any symbolic dignity that it expresses.
[Illustration: FIG. 99.--The Coat of Arms with a Cock. A. Dürer.]
The later Italian heraldry and the style which followed it ultimately
dispensed with attenuation in the animals together with most of
the other decorative qualities of the hated Gothic, and the efforts
at naturalistic representation resulted in forms which at a little
distance became mere undistinguishable blobs, to the complete defeat
of the object of their existence. The rampant lions became tame
and therefore ludicrous in the upright pose which, deprived of any
suggestion of rage and strength becomes meaningless, while in what
may be called the decorative treatment the suggestion of the creature
and of its attributed qualities in a broad and simple way sanctions
an arrangement which makes for decorative distribution as well as for
symbolic expressiveness. Vigour also makes for the dignity that is an
important consideration in serious design, for when once a ludicrous
suggestion is attached to a thing it becomes inseparable from it.
Probably the most frequent accompaniment of such want of vigour is the
production of a feebly human expression which inevitably suggests the
connexion with it of some trivial or ludicrous phrase. Now the grinning
jaws of the early lions are never imbecile.
With regard to the strong characterization that is required valuable
lessons may be learnt from the lions of the Assyrian bas-reliefs,
one of which is represented here (Fig. 100). The accentuation of the
principal muscular forms and masses is very striking, and presents
suggestions of a method that lends itself well to the expression
of heraldic character. It is not, of course, intended to import an
Assyrian lion bodily into the shield, or that the Assyrian style should
be visible in the resulting work, but only that the method should be
studied and applied as a special means to a definite end.
[Illustration: FIG. 100.--Lion from Assyrian Bas-relief.]
The degree of detail and the amount of its elaboration will depend on
the size and general character of the work. Sometimes mere outline will
suffice, though on a larger scale or in other conditions it would look
empty. Thence to complete modelling embraces a wide field of choice
in which to find methods suitable to all purposes. Under ordinary
conditions a simple broad treatment is much to be desired, definition
being obtained by few but accurately placed lines, such as those of
ribs and loins in the body, and of brow, jaw and mane in the head.
The degree of relief of charges should, of course, stop short of any
suggestion of detachment from the field. This might seem too obvious
for remark, but an example to the contrary, a large, and in many
respects beautiful, work in coloured leather was recently to be seen in
which, the arms of the Medici being the principal motive, the charges
appeared to be suspended in front of the shield from which they seemed
to be so distant as to cast full round shadows.
In adjusting a rampant lion or other beast to its field a skeleton
sketch of the main lines of distribution may be usefully employed as a
guide in first blocking out the animal, in the same way that similar
diagrammatic forms are sometimes used in figure composition. On this
the figure will be drawn, the head being thrown well back and the
hindmost leg being brought towards the centre line so as to help the
spacing in the dexter base of the shield.
Care should be taken not to make the higher of the forelegs too short,
or the value is lost of the strong forward reach from the shoulder,
which expresses the action while it helps the distribution.
In posing animals on a shield it must never be forgotten that not only
is a pattern being arranged but that it is made with the body and limbs
of a supposedly living thing.
Fig. 101 is one of the methods that suggest themselves, and passant
lions may be spaced in a similar way (Fig. 102).
[Illustration: FIG. 101.]
[Illustration: FIG. 102.]
A lion’s claws and tongue, of which he is _armed_ and _langued_
respectively, are gules except when he or the field is of that
tincture, and in either of the latter cases he is armed and langued
azure, as in the Royal coat of Scotland. This is taken as of course,
and need not be mentioned in the blazon, though it very often is.
Demi-lions are usually demi-lions rampant, and in this form they were
largely used as crests, which will be discussed later on. They are
depicted as severed low down at the loins, and the tail is retained in
most cases, though not always. When, as a charge, they are in contact
with a line of an ordinary, as though arising from it, they must be
described in the blazon as _issuant_.
Demi-lions passant or passant guardant are of more rare occurrence, the
latter generally in conjunction with another object, as in the arms
ascribed to the Cinque Ports on the seal of Sandwich (Fig. 103), where
the demi-lions are joined to the hulls of ships. This evidently arose
from the joining together by dimidiation or halving of two separate
coats, viz. the Arms of England with one of local allusion: Az. three
hulls of ships Or. By a similar method were evolved the Arms of the
city of Chester, wherein the lions of England are conjoined with the
wheatsheaves of the Earldom.
[Illustration: FIG. 103.--Seal of Sandwich (Mayor’s Seal).]
Among the separate parts of animals used alone or in repetition a
lion’s head is a frequent charge, and it follows the general rule of
being represented in profile unless otherwise described. The lion’s
leg, called a jamb, is also separately used as a charge, the tail being
likewise thus employed. It must be remarked, that whenever a separate
part of an animal is used as a charge the method of its severance must
be carefully distinguished, whether _couped_, cleanly cut off, or
_erased_, roughly torn away. In the latter case the erasure generally
consists of three points or tufts, though not necessarily of that exact
number so long as the erasure is sufficiently marked. It may, however,
be noted here that a demi-lion as a crest is considered to be couped
unless it is otherwise described, the junction with the helm usually
disappearing within the torse that encircles it at that point.
Animals that can neither be described as actual nor purely imaginary
are the so-called “heraldic” tiger and “heraldic” antelope, which have
little apparent relation to their natural namesakes, but were perhaps
evolved in the effort of an early artist to realize the wonderful
description of some marvellous traveller. They have a family likeness,
however, in their armed snouts and in their leonine tails, the latter
being an appendage with which the mediaeval artist was fond of
finishing off his creatures in default of more accurate information.
The poses of the lion are followed in a general way by other animals,
both natural and “heraldic”; but in many instances the attitudes are
called by different names for different creatures, a practice that
was usual in mediaeval times, and also has its present examples, such
as that two partridges are a brace and two hounds a couple, which
need hardly be further specified. The Stag, emblematic of speed and
sport rather than of combative virtues, has a special set of terms,
which were naturally borrowed in part from those used in hunting. Thus
he is “_at gaze_” when standing with his head affrontée, but when
he stands with his head in profile he is _statant_ like any other
beast; _springing_ when in the salient position, _trippant_ when he
is walking, _at speed_ when running, and when couched he is _lodged_,
and so he must be described in the blazon. His antlers, which are
called _attires_, must, if they are of a different colour, be carefully
mentioned and also his hoofs in a similar case, e.g. Azure a stag
trippant Arg. attired and unguled (i.e. hoofed) Or.
A distinction is made between the stag and other horned animals in that
the latter are said to be _armed_ with their horns, as in the crest of
the Duke of Bedford, a goat statant Arg. armed Or.
Horses and other maned animals, real and imaginary, are _crined_ of
their manes. Thus, the supporters of the Goldsmiths Company (Fig.
104) are unicorns or, armed, crined and hoofed arg. (in some examples
purpure). This treatment of the Goldsmiths’ arms was designed,
like those of the Grocers Company at p. 64, to harmonize with early
eighteenth century decorations. The unicorn has a horse’s head and
body with the legs and cloven hoofs of a stag. Its twisted horn issues
from the middle of its forehead, and its tail is that of a lion, the
foregoing examples which have horses’ tails being extremely rare
exceptions to the general rule.
[Illustration: FIG. 104.--The Arms of the Goldsmiths Company of London.
Cartoon for mural decoration. Geo. W. Eve.]
[Illustration: Portion of a Pageant Car, with Heraldic Monsters. By
Albert Dürer.]
[Illustration: Griffin from the Triumphal Arch of the Emperor
Maximilian I. Dürer.]
Of other imaginary animals the Griffin or Gryphon is probably the
best known next to the unicorn, seeing that its name is that which
is popularly applied to most non-natural beasts. Evidently derived
from one of those creatures by which early eastern art expressed the
conjunction of various attributes, it came, like many other monsters,
to be implicitly believed in as an actual beast until a comparatively
late date. Thus Gerard Leigh has something to say of griffins which
“bear great enmity to man and horse, though the man be armed and on
horseback yet they take the one with the other quite from the ground
and carry them clean away. I think they are of great hugeness,” he goes
on, “for I have a claw of one of their paws which should show them to
be as big as two Lyons!” In another place Leigh refuses to believe
something that he had heard because he “had not seen the proof thereof”!
The griffin is half eagle and half lion, the head forepart and wings
being those of an eagle and the rest of the body with the hind legs and
tail are leonine. The head of a griffin has ears, and these serve to
distinguish it from that of an eagle when it is used alone.
A curious variety of griffin, borne by the Marquis of Ormonde, is
wingless, has two horns on its head and groups of rays issuing from
its body, and is termed a male-griffin, for some inscrutable reason. It
should be noted that the term for a griffin in a rampant position is
_segreant_, all other poses being described in the ordinary way.
The treatment of the composite animals naturally followed that of the
creatures which entered into their composition, while the Dragons, more
purely imaginary creatures, have suggestions of a snakelike character
in their scales and annulations.
In continental heraldry the dragon has but one pair of legs and behind
them the body diminishing into a snakelike tail, which sometimes
terminates in a barbed end. This form we term a Wyvern, reserving the
word dragon for the four-legged variety.
The conception of a dragon varied greatly, the prevailing
characteristic in many instances being a hard scaliness somewhat
suggestive of the Chinese and other oriental types. In other examples
greater sinuosity and a more leathery texture is apparent, recalling
to mind the idea of the “loathly worm” of some of the mediaeval dragon
legends. As a symbol of evil, terrible but overcome, it is associated
with St. George and with St. Michael, and also appears, with more
personal allusion, in the well-known device of the Guelphic faction in
their contest with the Ghibellines.
[Illustration: Arms of the City of London. Wallis. 1677.]
[Illustration: Wyvern (so-called “Dragon”)
From Paradin, “Devices Heroiques,” 1557.]
[Illustration: Privy Seal of Henry VIII.]