BADGES
The exact status of the badge in this country, to which it is peculiar, has
been very much misunderstood. This is probably due to the fact that the
evolution of the badge was gradual, and that its importance increased
unconsciously. Badges do not formerly appear to have ever been made the
subjects of grants, and the instances which can be referred to showing
their control, or attempted control, by the Crown in past times are _very
rare indeed_. As a matter of fact, the Crown seems to have perhaps
purposely ignored them. They are not, as we know them, found in the
earliest times of heraldry, unless we are to presume their existence from
early seals, many of which show isolated charges taken from the arms; for
if in the cases where such charges appear upon the seals we are to accept
those seals as proofs of the contemporary existence of those devices as
heraldic badges, we should often be led into strange conclusions.
There is no doubt that these isolated devices which are met with were not
only a part of the arms, but in many cases the _origin_ of the arms.
Devices possessing a more or less personal and possessive character occur
in many cases before record of the arms they later developed into can be
traced. This will be noticed in relation to the arms of Swinton, to which
reference is made elsewhere. If these are badges, then badges go back to an
earlier date than arms. Such devices occur many centuries before such a
thing as a shield of arms existed.
The _Heraldic Badge, as we know it_, came into general use about the reign
of Edward III., that is, the heraldic badge as a separate matter having a
distinct existence in addition to concurrent arms, and having at the same
time a distinctly heraldic character. But long before that date, badges are
found with an allied reference to a particular person, which very possibly
are rightly included in any enumeration of badges. Of such a character is
the badge of the broom plant, which is found upon the tomb of Geoffrey,
Count of Anjou, from which badge the name of the Plantagenet dynasty
originated (Plantagenet, by the way, was never a personal surname, but was
the name of the dynasty). {454}
It is doubtful, however, if at that early period there existed much if
indeed any opportunity for the use of heraldic badges. At the same time, as
far back as the reign of Richard I.--and some writers would take examples
of a still more remote period--these badges must have been occasionally
depicted upon banners, for Richard I. appears to have had a dragon upon one
of his banners.
These banner decorations, which at a later date have been often accepted as
badges, can hardly be quite properly so described, for there are many cases
where no other proof of usage can be found, and there is no doubt that many
such are instances of no more than banners prepared for specific purposes;
and the record of such and such a banner cannot necessarily carry proof
that the owner of the banner claimed or used the objects depicted thereupon
as personal badges. If they are to be so included some individuals must
have revelled in a multitude of badges.
But the difficulty in deciding the point very greatly depends upon the
definition of the badge; and if we are to take the definition according to
the manner of acceptance and usage at the period when the use of badges was
greatest, then many of the earliest cannot be taken as coming within the
limits.
In later Plantagenet days, badges were of considerable importance, and
certain characteristics are plainly marked. They were never worn by the
owner--in the sense in which he carried his shield, or bore his crest; they
were his sign-mark indicative of ownership; they were stamped upon his
belongings in the same way in which Government property is marked with the
broad arrow, and they were worn by his servants. They were worn not only by
his retainers, but very probably were also worn more or less temporarily by
adherents of his party if he were big enough to lead a party in the State.
At all times badges had very extensive decorative use.
There was never any fixed form for the badge; there was never any fixed
manner of usage. I can find no fixed laws of inheritance, no common method
of assumption. In fact the use of a badge, in the days when everybody who
was anybody possessed arms, was quite subsidiary to the arms, and very much
akin to the manner in which nowadays monograms are made use of. At the same
time care must be taken to distinguish the "badge" from the "rebus," and
also from the temporary devices which we read about as having been so often
adopted for the purpose of the tournament when the combatant desired his
identity to be concealed. Modern novelists and poets give us plenty of
illustrations of the latter kind, but proof of the fact even that they were
ever adopted in that form is by no means easy to find, though their
professedly temporary nature of course militates against {455} the
likelihood of contemporary _record_. The rebus had never an heraldic
status, and it had seldom more than a temporary existence. A fanciful
device adopted (we hear of many such instances) for the temporary purpose
of a tournament could generally be so classed, but the rebus proper has
some device, usually a pictorial rendering of the name of the person for
whom it stood. In such a category would be included printers' and masons'
marks, but probably the definition of Dr. Johnson of the word rebus, as a
word represented by a picture, is as good a definition and description as
can be given. The rebus in its nature is a different thing from a badge,
and may best be described as a pictorial signature, the most frequent
occasion for its use being in architectural surroundings, where it was
constantly introduced as a pun upon some name which it was desired to
perpetuate. The best-known and perhaps the most typical and characteristic
rebus is that of Islip, the builder of part of Westminster Abbey. Here the
pictured punning representation of his name had nothing to do with his
armorial bearings or personal badge; but the great difficulty, in dealing
with both badges and rebuses, is the difficulty of knowing which is which,
for very frequently the same or a similar device was used for both
purposes. Parker, in his glossary of heraldic terms, gives several typical
examples of rebuses which very aptly illustrate their status and meaning.
At Lincoln College at Oxford, and on other buildings connected with Thomas
Beckynton, Bishop of Bath and Wells, will be found carved the rebus of a
beacon issuing from a tun. This is found in conjunction with the letter T
for his Christian name, Thomas. Now this design was not his coat of arms,
and was not his crest, nor was it his badge. Another rebus which is found
at Canterbury shows an ox and the letters N, E, as the rebus of John Oxney.
A rebus which indicates Thomas Conyston, Abbot of Cirencester, which can be
found in Gloucester Cathedral, is a comb and a tun, and the printer's mark
of Richard Grifton, which is a good example of a rebus and its use, was a
tree, or graft, growing on a tun. In none of these cases are the designs
mentioned on any part of the arms, crest, or badge of the persons
mentioned. Rebuses of this character abound on all our ancient buildings,
and their use has lately come very prominently into favour in connection
with the many allusive bookplates, the design of which originates in some
play upon the name. The words "device," "ensign," and "cognisance" have no
definite heraldic meaning, and are used impartially to apply to the crest,
the badge, and sometimes to the arms upon the shield, so that they may be
eliminated from consideration. There remains therefore the crest and the
badge between which to draw a definite line of distinction. The real
difference lay in the method of use, though there is usually a difference
of form, {456} recognisable by an expert, but difficult to put into words.
The crest was the ornament upon the helmet, seldom if ever actually worn,
and never used except by the person to whom it belonged. The badge, on the
other hand, was never placed upon the helmet, but was worn by the servants
and retainers, and was used right and left on the belongings of the owner
as a sign of his ownership. So great and extensive at one period was the
use of these badges, that they were far more generally employed than either
arms or crest, and whilst the knowledge of a man's badge or badges would be
everyday knowledge and common repute throughout the kingdom, few people
would know that man's crest, fewer still would ever have seen it worn.
It is merely an exaggeration of the difficulty that we are always in
uncertainty whether any given device was merely a piece of decoration
borrowed from the arms or crest, or whether it had continued usage as a
badge. In the same way many families who had never used crests, but who had
used badges, took the opportunity of the Visitations to record their badges
as crests. A notable example of the subsequent record of a badge as a crest
is met with in the Stourton family. Their crest, originally a buck's head,
but after the marriage with the heiress of Le Moigne, a demi-monk, can be
readily substantiated, as can their badge of the drag or sledge. At one of
the Visitations, however, a cadet of the Stourton family recorded the
sledge as a crest. Uncertainty also arises from the lack of precision in
the diction employed at all periods, the words badge, device, and crest
having so often been used interchangeably.
Another difficulty which is met with in regard to badges is that, with the
exception of the extensive records of the Royal badges and some other more
or less informal lists of badges of the principal personages at different
periods, badges were never a subject of official record, and whilst it is
difficult to determine the initial point as to whether any particular
device is a badge or not, the difficulty of deducing rules concerning
badges becomes practically impossible, and after most careful consideration
I have come to the conclusion that there were never any hard and fast rules
relating to badges, that they were originally and were allowed to remain
matters of personal fancy, and that although well-known cases can be found
where the same badge has been used generation after generation, those cases
may perhaps be the exception rather than the rule. Badges should be
considered and accepted in the general run as not being matters of
permanence, and as of little importance except during the time from about
the reign of Edward III. to about the reign of Henry VIII. Their principal
use upon the clothes of the retainers came to an end by the creation of the
standing army, the beginning of which can be traced to the reign of Henry
VIII., and as badges never had any ceremonial use to perpetuate {457} their
status, their importance almost ceased altogether at that period except as
regards the Royal family.
Speaking broadly, regularised and _recorded_ heraldic control as a matter
of operative fact dates little if any further back than the end of the
reign of Henry VIII., consequently badges originally do not appear to have
been taken much cognisance of by the Heralds. Their actual use from that
period onwards rapidly declined, and hence the absence of record.
Though the use of badges has become very restricted, there are still one or
two occasions on which badges are used as badges, in the style formerly in
vogue. Perhaps the case which is most familiar is the broad arrow which is
used to mark Government stores. It is a curious commentary upon heraldic
officialdom and its ways that though this is the only badge which has
really any extensive use, it is not a Crown badge in any degree. Although
this origin has been disputed it is said to have originated in the fact
that one of the Sydney family, when Master of the Ordnance, to prevent
disputes as to the stores for which he was responsible, marked everything
with his private badge of the broad arrow, and this private badge has since
remained in constant use. One wonders at what date the officers of His
Majesty will observe that this has become one of His Majesty's recognised
badges, and will include it with the other Royal badges in the warrants in
which they are recited. Already more than two centuries have passed since
it first came into use, and either they should represent to the Government
that the pheon is not a Crown mark, and that some recognised Royal badge
should be used in its place, or else they should place its status upon a
definite footing.
Another instance of a badge used at the present day in the ancient manner
is the conjoined rose, thistle, and shamrock which is embroidered front and
back upon the tunics of the Beefeaters and the Yeomen of the Guard. The
crowned harps which are worn by the Royal Irish Constabulary are another
instance of the kind, but though a certain number of badges are recited in
the warrant each time any alteration or declaration of the Royal Arms
occurs, their use has now become very limited. Present badges are the
crowned rose for England, the crowned thistle for Scotland, and the crowned
trefoil and the crowned harp for Ireland; whilst for the Union there is the
conjoined rose, thistle, and shamrock under the crown, and the crowned
shield which carries the device of the Union Jack. The badge of Wales,
which has existed for long enough, is the uncrowned dragon upon a mount
vert, and the crowned cyphers, one within and one without the Garter, are
also depicted upon the warrant. These badges, which appear on the
Sovereign's warrant, are never assigned to any other member of the Royal
Family, of whom {458} the Prince of Wales is the only one who rejoices in
the possession of officially assigned badges. The badge of the eldest son
of the Sovereign, as such, and not as Prince of Wales, is the plume of
three ostrich feathers, enfiled with the circlet from his coronet. Recently
an additional badge (on a mount vert, a dragon passant gules, charged on
the shoulder with a label of three points argent) has been assigned to His
Royal Highness. This action was taken with the desire to in some way
gratify the forcibly expressed wishes of Wales, and it is probable that,
the precedent having been set, it will be assigned to all those who may
bear the title of Prince of Wales in future.
The only instances I am personally aware of in which a real badge of
ancient origin is still worn by the servants are the cases of the state
liveries of the Earl of Yarborough, whose servants wear an embroidered
buckle, and of Lord Mowbray and Stourton, whose servants wear an
embroidered sledge. The family of Daubeney of Cote still bear the old
Daubeney badge of the pair of bat's wings; Lord Stafford still uses his
"Stafford knot." I believe the servants of Lord Braye still wear the badge
of the hemp-brake, and those of the Earl of Loudoun wear the Hastings
maunch; and doubtless there are a few other instances. When the old
families were becoming greatly reduced in number, and the nobility and the
upper classes were being recruited from families of later origin, the
wearing of badges, like so much else connected with heraldry, became lax in
its practice.
The servants of all the great nobles in ancient days appear to have worn
the badges of their masters in a manner similar to the use of the royal
badge by the Yeomen of the Guard, although sometimes the badge was
embroidered upon the sleeve; and the wearing of the badge by the retainers
is the chief and principal use to which badges were anciently put. Nisbet
alludes on this point to a paragraph from the Act for the Order of the
Riding of Parliament in 1681, which says that "the noblemen's lacqueys may
have over their liveries velvet coats with their badges, _i.e._ their
crests and mottoes done on plate, or embroidered on the back and breast
conform to ancient custom." A curious survival of these plates is to be
found in the large silver plaques worn by so many bank messengers. Badges
appear, however, to have been frequently depicted semé upon the lambrequins
of armorial achievements, as will be seen from many of the old Garter
plates; but here, again, it is not always easy to distinguish between
definite badges and artistic decoration, nor between actual badges in use
and mere appropriately selected charges from the shield.
The water-bougets of Lord Berners, the knot of Lord Stafford, popularly
known as "the Stafford knot"; the Harington fret; the ragged staff or the
bear and the ragged staff of Lord Warwick (this {459} being really a
conjunction of two separate devices); the Rose of England, the Thistle of
Scotland, and the sledge of Stourton, the hemp-brake of Lord Braye wherever
met with are readily recognised as badges, but there are many badges which
it is difficult to distinguish from crests, and even some which in all
respects would appear to be more correctly regarded as coats of arms.
It is a point worthy of consideration whether or not a badge needs a
background; here, again, it is a matter most difficult to determine, but it
is singular that in any matter of _record_ the badge is almost invariably
depicted upon a background, either of a standard or a mantling, or upon the
"field" of a roundel, and it may well be that their use in such
circumstances as the two cases first mentioned may have only been
considered correct when the colour of the mantling or the standard happened
to be the right colour for the background of the badge.
Badges are most usually met with in stained glass upon roundels of some
colour or colours, and though one would hesitate to assert it as an actual
fact, there are many instances which would lead one to suppose that the
background of a badge was usually the livery colour or colours of its then
owner, or of the family from which it was originally inherited. Certain is
it that there are very few contemporary instances of badges which, when
emblazoned, are not upon the known livery colours; and if this fact be
accepted, then one is perhaps justified in assuming all to be livery
colours, and we get at once a ready explanation on several points which
have long puzzled antiquaries. The name of Edward "the Black Prince" has
often been a matter of discussion, and the children's history books tell us
that the nickname originated from the colour of his armour. This may be
true enough, but as most armour would be black when it was unpolished, and
as most armour was either polished or dull, the probabilities are not very
greatly in its favour. Though there can be found instances, it was not a
usual custom for any one to paint his armour red or green. Even if the
armour of the prince were enamelled black it would be so usually hidden by
his surcoat that he is hardly likely to have been nicknamed from it. It
seems to me far more probable that black was the livery colour of the Black
Prince, and that his own retainers and followers wore the livery of black.
If that were the case, one understands at once how he would obtain the
nickname. The nickname is doubtless contemporary. A curious confirmation of
my supposition is met with in the fact that his shield for peace was:
"Sable, three ostrich feathers two and one, the quill of each passing
through a scroll argent." There we get the undoubted badge of the ostrich
feather, which was originally borne singly, depicted upon his livery
colour--black. {460}
The badges represented in Prince Arthur's Book in the College of Arms (an
important source of our knowledge upon the subject) are all upon
backgrounds; and the curious divisions of the colours on the backgrounds
would seem to show that each badge had its own background, several badges
being only met with upon the same ground when that happens to be the true
background belonging to them. But in attempting to deduce rules, it should
be remembered that in all and every armorial matter there was greater
laxity of rule at the period of the actual use of arms as a reality of life
than it was possible to permit when the multiplication of arms as paper
insignia made regulation necessary and more restrictive; so that an
occasional variation from any deduction need not necessarily vitiate the
conclusion, even in a matter exclusively relating to the shield. How much
more, then, must we remain in doubt when dealing with badges which appear
to have been so largely a matter of personal caprice.
It is a striking comment that of all the badges presently to be referred to
of the Stafford family, each single one is depicted upon a background. It
is a noticeable fact that of the eighteen "badges" exemplified as belonging
to the family of Stafford, nine are upon parti-coloured fields. This is not
an unreasonable proportion if the fields are considered to be the livery
colours of the families from whom the badges were originally derived, but
it is altogether out of proportion to the number of shields in any roll of
arms which would have the field party per pale, or party in any other form
of division. With the exception of the second badge, which is on a striped
background of green and white, all the party backgrounds are party per
pale, which was the most usual way of depicting a livery in the few records
which have come down to us of the heraldic use of livery colours, and of
the eighteen badges, no less than eight are upon a parti-coloured field of
which the dexter is sable and the sinister gules. Scarlet and black are
known to have been the livery colours of Edward Stafford, Duke of
Buckingham, who was beheaded in 1521. The arms of the town of Buckingham
are on a field per pale sable and gules.
With regard to the descent of badges and the laws which govern their
descent still less is known. The answer to the question, "How did badges
descend?" is simple: "Nobody knows." One can only hazard opinions more or
less pious, of more or less value. It is distinctly a point upon which it
is risky to be dogmatic, and we must wait for the development which will
follow the recent revival of the granting of standards. As cases occur for
decision precedents will be found and disclosed. Whilst the secrecy of the
records of the College of Arms is so jealously preserved it is impossible
to speak definitely at present, for an exact and comprehensive knowledge of
exact and {461} authoritative instances of fact is necessary before a
decision can be definitely put forward. Unless some officer of arms will
carefully collate the information which can be gleaned from the records in
the College of Arms which are relevant to the subject, it does not seem
likely that our knowledge will advance greatly.
The grant of supporters to the Earl of Stafford, as under, is worthy of
attention.
"To all and singular to whom these Presents shall come, John Anstis Esq^r
Garter principal King of Arms, sends greeting, Whereas his late Majesty
King James the Second by Letters Patents under the Great Seal, did create
Henry Stafford Howard to be Earl of Stafford, to have and hold the same to
him and the heirs males of his body; and for default thereof to John and
Francis his Brothers and the heirs males of their bodies respectively,
whereby the said Earldom is now legally vested in the right Hon^{ble}
William Stafford Howard Son and Heir of the said John; And in regard that
y^e said Henry late Earl of Stafford omitted to take any Grant of
Supporters, which the Peers of this Realm have an indisputable Right to use
and bear, the right Hon^{ble} Henry Bowes Howard Earl of Berkshire Deputy
(with the Royal Approbation) of his Grace Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk
Earl Marshall and Hereditary Marshall of England hath been pleased to
direct me to grant to the said right Hon^{ble} William Stafford Howard Earl
of Stafford the Supporters formerly granted to y^e late Viscount Stafford,
Grandfather to the said Earl; as also to order me to cause to be depicted
in the Margin of my said Grant y^e Arms of Thomas of Woodstock Duke of
Gloucester quartered with the Arms of the said Earl of Stafford, together
with the Badges of the said Noble Family of Stafford: Now these presents
Witness that according to the consent of the said Earl of Berkshire
signified under his Lordship's hand and seal I do by the Authority and
power annexed to my Office hereby grant and assign to y^e said Right
Honourable William Stafford Howard Earl of Stafford, the following
Supporters which were heretofore borne by the late Lord Viscount Stafford,
that is to say, on the Dexter side a Lion Argent, and on the Sinister Side
a Swan surgiant Argent Gorged with a Ducal Coronet per Pale Gules and sable
beaked and membered of the Second; to be used and borne at all times and
upon all occasions by the said Earl of Stafford and the heirs males of his
body, and such persons to whom the said Earldom shall descend according to
the Law and Practice of Arms without the let or interruption of any Person
or Persons whatsoever. And in pursuance of the Warrant of the said Earl of
Berkshire, The Arms of Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Gloucester, as the same
are on a Plate remaining in the Chapel of S^t George within y^e Castle of
Windsor, set up there for his Descendant the Duke of Buckingham {462} are
depicted in the margin, and quartered in such place and manner as the same
were formerly borne by the Staffords Dukes of Buckingham, together with
Eighteen badges belonging to the said most ancient and illustrious Family
of Stafford, as the same are represented in a Manuscript remaining in the
College of Arms (Fig. 674). In Witness whereof I the said Garter have
hereto subscribed my Name and affixed the Seal of my Office this First Day
of August Anno Domini 1720.
"JOHN ANSTIS Garter
"Principal King of Arms."
[Illustration: FIG. 674.--The Stafford Badges as exemplified in 1720 to
William Stafford Howard, Earl of Stafford.]
{463}
It may be of interest to call attention to the fact that in this
exemplification the Royal Arms are displayed before those of Stafford. On
the face of it, the document--as far as it relates to the badges--is no
more than a certificate or exemplification, in which case it is undoubted
evidence that badges descend to the heir-general as do quarterings; but
there is the possibility that the document is a re-grant in the nature of
an exemplification following a Royal Licence, or a re-grant to remove
uncertainty as to the attainder. And if the document--as far as its
relation to the badges goes--has any of the character of a grant, it can
have but little value as evidence of the descent of badges. It is
remarkable that it is absolutely silent as to the future destination of the
badges. The real fact is that the whole subject of the descent and
devolution of badges is shrouded in mystery. Each of the badges (Fig. 674)
is depicted within a circle adorned with a succession of Stafford knots, as
is shown in the one instance at the head. Five of these badges appear upon
a well-known portrait of Edward, Duke of Buckingham. The fact that some of
these _badges_ are really crests depicted upon wreaths goes far as an
authority for the use of a crest upon livery buttons for the purposes of a
badge.
In ancient days all records seemed to point to the fact that badges were
personal, and that though they were worn by the retainers, they were the
property of _the head_ of the family, rather than (as the arms) of the
whole family, and though the information available is meagre to the last
degree, it would appear probable that in all cases where their use by other
members of the family than the head of the house can be proved, the
likelihood is that the cadets would render feudal service and would wear
the badge as retainers of the man whose standard they followed into battle,
so that we should expect to find the badge following the same descent as
the peerage, together with the lands and liabilities which accompanied it.
This undoubtedly makes for the inheritance of a badge upon the same line of
descent as a barony by writ, and such a method of inheritance accounts for
the known descent of most of the badges heraldically familiar to us.
Probably we shall be right in so accepting it as the ancient rule of
inheritance. But, on the other hand, a careful examination of the "Book of
Standards," now preserved in the College of Arms, provides several examples
charged with marks of cadency. But here again one is in ignorance whether
this is an admission of inheritance by cadets, or whether the cases should
be considered as grants of differenced versions to cadets. This then gives
us the badge, the property in and of which would descend to the
heir-general (and perhaps also to cadets), whilst it would be used (if
there were no inherited right) in token of allegiance or service, actual,
quasi-actual, {464} or sentimental, by the cadets of the house and their
servants; for whilst the use of the cockade is a survival of the right to
be waited on and served by a soldier servant, the use of a badge by a cadet
may be a survival and reminder of the day when (until they married
heiresses and continued or founded other families) the cadets of a house
owed and gave military service to the head of their own family, and in
return were supported by him.
From the wording of the recent grants of badges I believe the intention,
however, is that the badge is to descend of right to all of those people on
whom a right to it would devolve if it were a quartering.
The use of badges having been so limited, the absence of rule and
regulation leaves it very much a matter of personal taste how badges, where
they exist, shall be heraldically depicted, and perhaps it is better to
leave their manner of display to artistic requirements. The most usual
place, when depicted in conjunction with an achievement, is on either side
of the crest, and they may well be placed in that position. Where they
exist, however, they ought undoubtedly to be continued in use upon the
liveries of the servants, and the present practice is for them to be placed
on the livery buttons, and embroidered upon the epaulettes or on the
sleeves of state liveries. Undoubtedly the former practice of placing the
badge upon the servants' livery is the precursor of the present vogue of
placing crests upon livery buttons, and many heraldic writers complain of
the impropriety of placing the crest in such a position. I am not sure that
I myself may not have been guilty in this way; but when one bears in mind
the number of cases in which the badge and the crest are identical, and
when, as in the above instance, devices which are undoubtedly crests are
exemplified as and termed badges, even as such being represented upon
wreaths, and even in that form granted upon standards, whilst in other
cases the action has been the reverse, it leaves one under the necessity of
being careful in making definite assertions.
Having dealt with the laws (if there ever were any) and the practice
concerning the use and display of badges in former days, it will be of
interest to notice some of those which were anciently in use.
I have already referred to the badge of the ostrich feathers, now borne
exclusively by the heir-apparent to the throne. The old legend that the
Black Prince won the badge at the battle of Crecy by the capture of John,
King of Bohemia, together with the motto "Ich dien," has been long since
exploded. Sir Harris Nicolas brought to notice the fact that among certain
pieces of plate belonging to Queen Philippa of Hainault was a large
silver-gilt dish enamelled with a black escutcheon with ostrich feathers,
"vuo scuch nigro cum pennis de {465} ostrich," and upon the strength of
that, suggested that the ostrich feather was probably originally a badge of
the Counts of Hainault derived from the County of Ostrevaus, a title which
was held by their eldest sons. The suggestion in itself seems probable
enough and may be correct, but it would not account for the use of the
ostrich feathers by the Mowbray family, who did not descend from the
marriage of Edward III. and Philippa of Hainault. Contemporary proof of the
use of badges is often difficult to find. The Mowbrays had many badges, and
certainly do not appear to have made any very extensive use of the ostrich
feathers. But there seems to be very definite authority for the existence
of the badge. There is in one of the records of the College of Arms (R. 22,
67), which is itself a copy of another record, the following statement:--
"The discent of Mowbray written at length in lattin from the Abby booke of
newborough wherein Rich 2 gaue to Thomas Duke of norff. & Erle Marshall the
armes of Saint Edward Confessor in theis words:
"Et dedit eidem Thome ad pertandum in sigillo et vexillo quo arma S^{ti}
Edwardi. Idcirco arma bipartata portavit scil' 't Sci Edwardi et domini
marcialis angliæ cum duabus pennis strutionis erectis et super crestam
leonem et duo parva scuta cum leonibus et utraq' parto predictorum
armorum."
[Illustration: FIG. 675.--The arms granted by King Richard II. to Thomas de
Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, and showing the ostrich feather badges.]
Accompanying this is a rough-tricked sketch of the arms upon which the
illustration (Fig. 675) has been based. Below this extract in the College
Records is written in another hand: "I find this then {466} in ye chancell
window of Effingham by Bungay in the top of the cot window with Mowbraye &
Segrave on the side in glass there."
Who the writer was I am unaware. He appends a further sketch to his note,
which slightly differs. No helmet or crest is shown, and the central shield
has only the arms of Brotherton. The feathers which flank it are both
enfiled below the shield by one coronet. Of the smaller shields at the
side, the dexter bears the arms of Mowbray and the sinister those of
Segrave. Possibly the Mowbrays, as recognised members of the Royal Family,
bore the badge by subsequent grant and authorisation and not on the simple
basis of inheritance.
An ostrich feather piercing a scroll was certainly the favourite badge of
the Black Prince and so appears on several of his seals, and triplicated it
occurs on his "shield of peace" (Fig. 478), which, set up under the
instructions in his will, still remains on his monument in Canterbury
Cathedral. The arms of Sir Roger de Clarendon, the illegitimate son of the
Black Prince, were derived from this "shield for peace," which I take it
was not really a coat of arms at all, but merely the badge of the Prince
depicted upon his livery colour, and which might equally have been
displayed upon a roundle. In the form of a shield bearing three feathers
the badge occurs on the obverse of the second seal of Henry IV. in 1411. A
single ostrich feather with the motto "Ich dien" upon the scroll is to be
seen on the seal of Edward, Duke of York, who was killed at the battle of
Agincourt in 1415. Henry IV. as Duke of Lancaster placed on either side of
his escutcheon an ostrich feather with a garter or belt carrying the motto
"Sovereygne" _twined around_ the feather, John of Gaunt used the badge with
a chain laid along the quill, and Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, used it with
a garter and buckle instead of the chain; whilst John Beaufort, Duke of
Somerset, placed an ostrich feather on each side of his shield, the quills
in his case being compony argent and azure, like the bordure round his
arms.
[Illustration: FIG. 676.--Seal of King James II. for the Duchy of
Lancaster.]
There is a note in Harl. MS. 304, folio 12, which, if it be strictly
accurate, is of some importance. It is to the effect that the "feather
silver with the pen gold is the King's, the ostrich feather pen and all
silver is the Prince's (_i.e._ the Prince of Wales), and the ostrich
feather gold the pen ermine is the Duke of Lancaster's." That statement
evidently relates to a time when the three were in existence
contemporaneously, _i.e._ before the accession of Henry IV. In the reign of
Richard II. there was no Prince of Wales. During the reign of Edward III.
from 1376 onwards, Richard, afterwards Richard II., was Prince of Wales,
and John of Gaunt was Duke of Lancaster (so cr. 1362). But John of Gaunt
used the feather in the form above stated, and to find a Duke of Lancaster
_before_ John of Gaunt we must go {467} back to before 1360, when we have
Edward III. as King, the Black Prince as Prince, and Henry of Lancaster
(father-in-law of John of Gaunt) as Duke of Lancaster. He derived from
Henry III., and like the Mowbrays had no blood descent from Philippa of
Hainault. A curious confirmation of my suggestion that black was the livery
colour of the Black Prince is found in the fact that there was in a window
in St. Dunstan's Church, London, within a wreath of roses a roundle per
pale sanguine and azure (these being unquestionably livery colours), a
plume of ostrich feathers argent, quilled or, enfiled by a scroll bearing
the words "Ich dien." Above was the Prince's coronet and the letters E. &
P., one on each side of the plume. This was intended for Edward VI.,
doubtless being erected in the reign of Henry VIII. The badge in the form
in which we know it, _i.e._ enfiled by the princely coronet, dates from
about the beginning of the Stuart dynasty, since when it appears to have
been exclusively reserved for the eldest son and heir-apparent to the
throne. At the same time the right to the display of the badge would appear
to have been reserved by the Sovereign, and Woodward remarks:--
"On the Privy Seals of our Sovereigns the ostrich feather is still employed
as a badge. The shield of arms is usually placed between two lions sejant
guardant addorsed, each holding the feather. On the Privy Seal of Henry
VIII. the feathers are used without the lions, and this was the case on the
majority of the seals of the Duchy of Lancaster. On the reverse of the
present seal of the Duchy the feathers appear to be ermine."
[Illustration: FIG. 677.--Badge of King Henry II.]
[Illustration: FIG. 678.--Badge of Edward IV.]
Fig. 676 shows the seal of James II. for the Duchy of Lancaster. The seal
of the Lancashire County Council shows a shield supported by two talbots
sejant addorsed, each supporting in the exterior paw an ostrich feather
semé-de-lis. It is possible that the talbots may be intended for lions and
the fleurs-de-lis for ermine spots. The silver swan, one of the badges of
King Henry V., was used also by Henry IV. It was derived from the De
Bohuns, Mary de Bohun being the wife of Henry IV. From the De Bohuns it has
been traced to the Mandevilles, Earls of Essex, who may have adopted it to
typify their descent from Adam Fitz Swanne, _temp._ Conquest. Fig. 33 on
the same plate is the white hart of Richard II. Although some have traced
this badge from the white hind used as a badge by Joan, the Fair Maid of
Kent, the mother of Richard II., it is probably a device punning upon his
name, "Rich-hart." Richard II. was not the heir of his mother. The heir was
his half-brother, Thomas Holand, Earl of Kent, who _did_ use the badge of
the hind, and perhaps the real truth is that the Earl of Kent having the
better claim to the hind, Richard was under the necessity of making an
alteration which the obvious pun upon his {468} name suggested. There is no
doubt that the crest of Ireland originated therefrom. The stag in this case
was undoubtedly "lodged" in the earliest versions, and I have been much
interested in tracing the steps by which the springing attitude has
developed owing to the copying of badly drawn examples.
Amongst the many Royal and other badges in this country there are some of
considerable interest. Fig. 677 represents the famous badge of the
"broom-cod" or "planta genista," from which the name of the dynasty was
derived. It appears to have been first used by King Henry II., though it
figures in the decoration of the tomb of Geoffrey, Count of Anjou.
"Peascod" Street in Windsor of course derives its name therefrom. The
well-known badges of the white and red roses of York and Lancaster have
been already referred to, and Fig. 678, the well-known device of the
"rose-en-soliel" used by King Edward IV., was really a combination of two
distinct badges, viz. "the blazing sun of York" and the "white rose of
York." The rose again appears in 679, here dimidiated with the pomegranate
of Catharine of Aragon. This is taken from the famous Tournament Roll (now
in the College of Arms), which relates to the Tournament, 13th and 14th of
February 1510, to celebrate the birth of Prince Henry.
[Illustration: FIG. 679.--Compound Badge of Henry VIII. and Catharine of
Aragon. (From the Westminster Tournament Roll.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 680.--Badge of Richard I.]
[Illustration: FIG. 681.--Two badges of Henry VII., viz. the "sun-burst"
and the crowned portcullis.]
Richard I., John, and Henry III. are all said to have used the device of
the crescent and star (Fig. 680). Henry VII. is best known by his two
badges of the crowned portcullis and the "sun-burst" (Fig. 681). The
suggested origin of the former, that it was a pun on the name Tudor (_i.e._
two-door) is confirmed by the motto "Altera securitas" which was used with
it, but at the same time is rather vitiated by the fact that it was also
used by the Beauforts, who had {469} no Tudor descent. Save a very
tentative remark hazarded by Woodward, no explanation has as yet been
suggested for the sun-burst. My own strong conviction, based on the fact
that this particular badge was principally used by Henry VII., who was
always known as Henry of Windsor, is that it is nothing more than an
attempt to pictorially represent the name "Windsor" by depicting "winds" of
"or." The badge is also attributed to Edward III., and he, like Henry VII.,
made his principal residence at Windsor. Edward IV. also used the white
lion of March (whence is derived the shield of Ludlow: "Azure, a lion
couchant guardant, between three roses argent," Ludlow being one of the
fortified towns in the Welsh Marches), and the black bull which, though
often termed "of Clarence," is generally associated with the Duchy of
Cornwall. Richard III., as Duke of Gloucester, used a white boar.
The Earl of Northumberland used a silver crescent; the Earl of Douglas, a
red hart; the Earl of Pembroke, a golden pack-horse with collar and traces;
Lord Hastings bore as badge a black bull's head erased, gorged with a
coronet; Lord Stanley, a golden griffin's leg, erased; Lord Howard, a white
lion charged on the shoulder with a blue crescent; Sir Richard Dunstable
adopted a white cock as a badge; Sir John Savage, a silver unicorn's head
erased; Sir Simon Montford, a golden lily; Sir William Gresham, a green
grasshopper.
[Illustration: FIG. 682.--Badge of the Duke of Suffolk.]
[Illustration: FIG. 683.--Badge of Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk.]
[Illustration: FIG. 684.--Stafford Knot.]
[Illustration: FIG. 685.--Wake or Ormonde Knot.]
[Illustration: FIG. 686.--Bourchier Knot.]
[Illustration: FIG. 687.--Heneage Knot.]
Two curious badges are to be seen in Figs. 682 and 683. The former is an
ape's clog argent, chained or, and was used by William de la Pole, Duke of
Suffolk (d. 1450). Fig. 683, "a salet silver" (MS. Coll. of Arms, 2nd M.
16), is the badge of Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk (d. 1524). Various
families used knots of different design, of which the best known is the
Stafford knot (Fig. 684). The wholesale and improper appropriation of this
badge with a territorial application has unfortunately caused it to be very
generally referred to as a "Staffordshire" knot, and that it was the
personal badge of the Lords Stafford is too often overlooked. Other badge
knots are the Wake or Ormonde knot (Fig. 685), the Bourchier knot (Fig.
686), and the Heneage knot (Fig. 687).
{470}
The personal badges of the members of the Royal Family continued in use
until the reign of Queen Anne, but from that time forward the Royal badges
obtained a territorial character; the rose of England, the thistle of
Scotland, and the shamrock of Ireland. To these popular consent has added
the lotus-flower for India, the maple for Canada, and in a lesser degree
the wattle or mimosa for Australia; but at present these lack any official
confirmation. The two first named, nevertheless, figured on the Coronation
Invitation Cards. {471}