ECCLESIASTICAL HERALDRY
Ecclesiastical heraldry has nothing like the importance in British armory
that it possesses elsewhere. It may be said to consist in this country
exclusively of the official arms assigned to and recorded for the
archiepiscopal and episcopal sees, and the mitres and crosiers which are
added to the shields, and a certain number of ecclesiastical symbols which
occur as charges. In Pre-Reformation days there were, of course, the many
religious houses which used armorial emblems, but with the suppression of
the monasteries these vanished. The cardinal's hat was recognised in former
days, and would still be officially certified in England as admittedly
correctly displayed above the arms of a Roman cardinal. But the curious and
intricate development of other varieties of the ecclesiastical hat which
will be found in use in all other European countries is not known to
British armory. Nor has the English College of Arms recognised the
impersonal arms of the Catholic communities. Those arms, with and without
the ecclesiastical hats, play a conspicuous part in Continental heraldry.
It is difficult to assign a proper value or a definite status to the arms
of the abbeys and other religious houses in this country in Pre-Reformation
times. The principal, in fact the only important sources of information
concerning them are the impressions of seals which have come down to us.
Many of these seals show the effigies of saints or patrons, some show the
impersonal arms of the religious order to whose rule the community
conformed, some the personal arms of the official of the moment, others the
personal arms of the founder. In other cases arms presumably those of the
particular foundation or community occur, but in such cases the variations
in design are so marked, and so often we find that two, three, or more
devices are used indifferently and indiscriminately, that one is forced to
arrive at the conclusion that a large proportion of the devices in use,
though armorial in character, had no greater status than a temporary
existence as seal designs. They distinctly lack the unchanging continuity
one associates with armorial bearings. But whatever their status may {601}
once have been, they have now completely passed out of being and may well
be allowed to rest in the uncertainty which exists concerning them. The
interest attaching to them can never be more than academic in character and
limited in extent. The larger abbeys, the abbots of which were anciently
summoned to Parliament as Lords of Parliament, appear to have adhered
rather more consistently to a fixed device in each case, though the
variations of design are very noticeable even in these instances. A list of
them will be found in the _Genealogical Magazine_ (vol. ii. p. 3).
The suppression of the monasteries in this country was so thorough and so
ruthless, that the contemporary instances of abbatical arms remaining to us
from which deduction as to armorial rules and precedents can be made are
singularly few in number, but it would appear that the abbot impaled the
arms of his abbey on the dexter side of his personal arms, and placed his
mitre above the shield.
The mitre of an abbot differed from that of a bishop, inasmuch as it had no
labels--or _infulæ_--depending from within it. The Abbot used a crosier,
which doubtless was correctly added to his armorial bearings, but it is
found in pale behind the shield, in bend, and also two in saltire, and it
is difficult to assert which was the most correct form.
The crosier of an abbot was also represented with the crook at its head
curved inwards, the terminal point of the crook being entirely contained
within the hook. The point of a bishop's, on the other hand, was turned
outwards at the bottom of the crook. The difference is said to typify the
distinction between the confined jurisdiction of the abbot--which was
limited to the abbey and the community under his charge--and the more open
and wider jurisdiction of the bishop. Although this distinction has been
much disputed as regards its recognition for the actual crosiers employed,
there can be no doubt that it is very generally adhered to in heraldic
representations, though one hesitates to assert it as an absolute rule. The
official arms for the archiepiscopal and episcopal sees are of some
interest. With the single exception of York, the archiepiscopal coats of
arms all have, in some form or another, the pallium which forms part of an
archbishop's vestments or insignia of rank, but it is now very generally
recognised and conceded that the pallium is not merely a charge in the
official coat for any specified jurisdiction, but is itself the sign of the
rank of an archbishop of the same character and status as is the mitre, the
pallium being displayed upon a shield as a matter of convenience for
artistic representation. This view of the case has been much strengthened
by the discovery that in ancient instances of the archiepiscopal arms of
York the pallium is found, and not the more modern coat of the crown and
keys; but whether the pallium is {602} to be still so considered, or
whether under English armorial law it must now be merely ranked as a charge
in an ordinary coat of arms, in general practice it is accepted as the
latter; but it nevertheless remains a point of very considerable interest
(which has not yet been elucidated) why the pallium should have been
discarded for York, and another coat of arms substituted.
The various coats used by the archbishops of England and Ireland are as
follows:--
_Canterbury._--Azure, an episcopal staff in pale or, and ensigned with a
cross patée argent surmounted of a pall of the last, charged with four
crosses formée fitchée sable, edged and fringed or.
_York._--Gules, two keys in saltire argent, in chief a Royal crown or.
_Armagh._--Azure, an episcopal staff argent, ensigned with a cross patée
or, surmounted by a pallium of the second, edged and fringed or, charged
with four crosses formée fitchée sable.
_Dublin._--The arms of this archbishopric are the same as those of Armagh,
only with five crosses charged on the pallium instead of four.
The arms of the episcopal sees have no attribute at all similar to the
charge of the pallium in the coat of an archbishop, and are merely so many
different coats of arms. The shield of every bishop and archbishop is
surmounted by his mitre, and it is now customary to admit the use of the
mitre by all persons holding the title of bishop who are recognised as
bishops by the English law.
This, of course, includes Colonial and Suffragan bishops, retired bishops,
and bishops of the Episcopal Churches in Scotland and in Ireland. It is a
moot point whether the bishops of the Episcopal Churches in Ireland and in
Scotland are entitled to make use of the official arms formerly assigned to
their sees at a period when those Churches were State-established; but,
looking at the matter from a strictly official point of view, it would not
appear that they are any longer entitled to make use of them.
The mitres of an archbishop and of a bishop--in spite of many statements to
the contrary--are exactly identical, and the mistaken idea which has of
late years (the practice is really quite a modern one) encircled the rim of
an archbishop's mitre with the circlet of a coronet is absolutely
incorrect.
There are several forms of mitre which, when looked upon as an
ecclesiastical ornament, can be said to exist; but from the heraldic point
of view only one mitre is recognised, and that is of gold, the labels being
of the same colour. The jewelled variety is incorrect in armorial
representations, though the science of armory does not appear to have
enforced any particular _shape_ of mitre.
The "several forms" of the mitre--to which allusion has just been {603}
made--refer to the use in actual practice which prevailed in
Pre-Reformation England, and still holds amongst Roman Catholic bishops at
the present day. These are three in number, _i.e._ the "precious"
(_pretiosa_), the gold (_auriferata_), and the simple (_simplex_). The two
former are both employed at a Pontifical Mass (being alternately assumed at
different parts of the service); the second only is worn at such rites as
Confirmation, &c.; while the third (which is purely of white linen) is
confined to Services for the Dead, and on Good Friday. As its name implies,
the first of these is of cloth of gold, ornamented to a greater or less
degree with jewels, while the second--though likewise of cloth of gold--is
without any design or ornament. The short Gothic mitre of Norman days has
now given place to the modern Roman one, an alteration which, with its
great height and arched sides, can hardly perhaps be considered an artistic
improvement. Some individual Roman Catholic bishops at the present day,
however (in England at any rate), wear mitres more allied to the Norman and
Gothic shape.
The past fifteen or so years have seen a revival--though in a purely
eclectic and unofficial manner--of the _wearing_ of the mitre by Church of
England bishops. Where this has been (and is being) done, the older form of
mitre has been adhered to, though from the informal and unofficial nature
of the revival no rules as to its use have been followed, but only
individual choice.
At the recent Coronation, mitres were _not_ worn; which they undoubtedly
would have been had this revival now alluded to been made authoritatively.
All bishops and archbishops are entitled to place two crosiers in saltire
behind their shields. Archbishops of the Roman Catholic Church have
continuously placed in pale behind their shields what is known as the
archbishop's cross. In actual practice, the cross carried before an
archbishop is an ordinary one with one transverse piece, but the heraldic
archiepiscopal cross is always represented as a double cross, _i.e._ having
two transverse pieces one above the other. In the Established Church of
England the archiepiscopal cross--as in the Roman Catholic Church--is the
plain two-armed variety, and though the cross is never officially
recognised as an armorial attribute and is not very frequently met with in
heraldic representations, there can be no doubt that if this cross is used
to typify archiepiscopal rank, it should be heraldically represented with
the double arms. The actual cross borne before archbishops is termed the
provincial cross, and it may be of interest to here state that the Bishops
of Rochester are the official cross-bearers to the Archbishops of
Canterbury.
To the foregoing rules there is one notable exception, _i.e._ the Bishop
{604} of Durham. The Bishopric of Durham, until the earlier part of the
nineteenth century, was a Palatinate, and in earlier times the Bishops of
Durham, who had their own parliament and Barons of the Palatinate,
exercised a jurisdiction and regality, limited in extent certainly, but
little short in fact or effect of the power of the Crown. If ever any
ecclesiastic can be correctly said to have enjoyed temporal power, the
Bishops of Durham can be so described. The Prince-Bishops of the Continent
had no such attributes of regality vested in themselves as were enjoyed by
the Bishops of Durham. These were in truth kings within their bishoprics,
and even to the present day--though modern geographies and modern social
legislation have divided the bishopric into other divisions--one still
hears the term employed of "within" or "without" the bishopric.
The result of this temporal power enjoyed by the Bishops of Durham is seen
in their heraldic achievement. In place of the two crosiers in saltire
behind the shield, as used by the other bishops, the Bishops of Durham
place a sword and a crosier in saltire behind their shield to signify both
their temporal and spiritual jurisdiction.
The mitre of the Bishop of Durham is heraldically represented with the rim
encircled by a ducal coronet, and it has thereby become usual to speak of
the coronetted mitre of the Bishop of Durham; but it should be clearly
borne in mind that the coronet formed no part of the actual mitre, and
probably no mitre has ever existed in which the rim has been encircled by a
coronet. But the Bishops of Durham, by virtue of their temporal status,
used a coronet, and by virtue of their ecclesiastical status used a mitre,
and the representation of both of these at one and the same time has
resulted in the coronet being placed to encircle the rim of the mitre. The
result has been that, heraldically, they are now always represented as one
and the same article.
It is, of course, from this coronetted mitre of Durham that the wholly
inaccurate idea of the existence of coronet on the mitre of an archbishop
has originated. Apparently the humility of these Princes of the Church has
not been sufficient to prevent their appropriating the peculiar privileges
of their ecclesiastical brother of lesser rank.
A crest is never used with a mitre or ecclesiastical hat. Many writers deny
the right of any ecclesiastic to a crest. Some deny the right also to use a
motto, but this restriction has no general acceptance.
Therefore ecclesiastical heraldry in Britain is summed up in (1) its
recognition of the cardinal's hat, (2) the official coat of arms for
ecclesiastical purposes, (3) the ensigns of ecclesiastical rank above
alluded to, viz. mitre, cross, and crosier. {605} Ecclesiastical
heraldry--notably in connection with the Roman Church--in other countries
has, on the contrary, a very important place in armorial matters. In
addition to the emblems officially recognised for English heraldry, the
ecclesiastical hat is in constant use.
The use of the ecclesiastical hat is very general outside Great Britain,
and affords one of the few instances where the rules governing heraldic
usages are identical throughout the Continent.
This curious unanimity is the more remarkable because it was not until the
seventeenth century that the rather intricate rules concerning the colours
of the hats used for different ranks and the number of tassels came into
vogue.
Other than the occasional recognition of the cardinal's hat in former days,
the only British official instance of the use of the ecclesiastical hat is
met with in the case of the very recent matriculation of arms in Lyon
Register to Right Rev. Æneas Chisholm, the present Roman Catholic Bishop of
Aberdeen. I frankly admit I am unaware why the ecclesiastical hat assigned
to the bishop in the official matriculation of his arms has ten tassels on
either side. The Continental usage would assign him but six, and English
armory has no rules of its own which can be quoted in opposition thereto.
Save as an acceptance of Roman regulations (Roman Holy Orders, it should
not be forgotten, are recognised by the English Common Law to the extent
that a Roman Catholic priest is not reordained if he becomes an Anglican
clergyman), the heraldic ecclesiastical hat of a bishop has no existence
with us, and the Roman regulations would give him but six tassels.
The mitre is to be met with as a charge and as a crest, for instance, in
the case of Barclay and Berkeley ["A mitre gules, labelled and garnished
or, charged with a chevron between ten crosses patée, six and four argent.
Motto: 'Dieu avec nous'"]; and also in the case of Sir Edmund Hardinge,
Bart., whose crests are curious ["1. of honourable augmentation, a hand
fesswise couped above the wrist habited in naval uniform, holding a sword
erect surmounting a Dutch and a French flag in saltire, on the former
inscribed "Atalanta," on the latter "Piedmontaise," the blade of the sword
passing through a wreath of laurel near the point and a little below
through another of cypress, with the motto, 'Postera laude recens;' 2. a
mitre gules charged with a chevron argent, fimbriated or, thereon three
escallops sable."]
The cross can hardly be termed exclusively ecclesiastical, but a curious
figure of this nature is to be met with in the arms recently granted to the
Borough of Southwark. It was undoubtedly taken from the device used in
Southwark before its incorporation, though as there were many bodies who
adopted it in that neighbourhood, it is difficult to assign it to a
specific origin. {606}
Pastoral staves and passion-nails are elsewhere referred to, and the
figures of saints and ecclesiastics are mentioned in the chapter on "The
Human Figure."
The emblems of the saints, which appear to have received a certain amount
of official recognition--both ecclesiastical and heraldic--supply the
origin of many other charges not in themselves heraldic. An instance of
this kind will be found in the sword of St. Paul, which figures on the
shield of London. The cross of St. Cuthbert, which has been adopted in the
unauthorised coat for the See of Newcastle-on-Tyne, and the keys of St.
Peter, which figure in many ecclesiastical coats, are other examples. The
lilies of the Virgin are, of course, constantly to be met with in the form
of fleurs-de-lis and natural flowers; the Wheel of St. Catharine is
familiar, and the list might be extended indefinitely. {607}