MARSHALLING OF ARMS
Arms of husband and wife; Dimidiating; Impaling;
'Scutcheons of Pretence; Impalement with Official Arms;
Arms of ladies; Heraldic Drawing; Mottoes; Use and Misuse
of the Garter; Lettering and Mottoes.
In gathering up for practical consideration some of the points already
discussed, as well as others that are suggested by them, something may
first be said on the ways of combining the arms of husband and wife.
This was done originally by simply setting them side by side, a plan
which of course may still be followed whenever it is thought desirable.
For a short time during the latter part of the thirteenth and beginning
of the fourteenth century the arms of husband and wife were combined in
one shield by the curious device of halving or 'dimidiating' them, by
joining the half of the one to the opposite half of the other, as in the
arms of Aymer of Valence and Mary de Seynt Pol, still borne (since
1347) by the lady's foundation of Pembroke college at Cambridge. Owing
however to the many inconveniences which this plan involved, it was soon
exchanged for the more simple way of 'impaling' or placing the entire
arms of both parties side by side in one shield (fig. 146 and pls. VIII
C, XVIII A, B), a practice that has continued ever since, except when
the wife is an heiress. In that case the lady's arms are usually drawn
upon a smaller shield and placed upon the middle of the husband's arms
(pl. V A). This ugly and most inconvenient plan, though of considerable
antiquity, might very well be amended by the more ancient way of
quartering the arms together, as is still done by the children of the
heiress. For rules for the combination of the arms of a husband who has
married two or more wives, or the cumbrous regulations as to quartering,
the student may, if he wishes, consult the various manuals of heraldry.
[Illustration: FIG. 146. Shield of Bryen impaling Bures, from a brass in
Acton church, Suffolk.]
When a man is a member of any Order, such as the Garter or the Bath,
only his own arms should be encircled by the insignia of the Order.
Exceptions to this rule can of course be found, but it is otherwise a
general one that ought strictly to be followed. Bishops are entitled to
bear their personal arms only impaled with those of their bishopstool or
cathedral church, and the same rule applies to deans, heads of colleges,
and regius professors (like those at Cambridge) who have official arms.
The chancellor of a University presumably may impale its arms with his
own.
It has already been shown that the arms of ladies, all through the
medieval period, were borne in precisely the same way as their fathers'
or their husbands', that is, upon a shield, lozenge, or roundel, and
that the present inconvenient restriction to a lozenge did not come into
use much before the middle of the sixteenth century, when heraldry and
heraldic art were already on the down-grade. The present custom seems to
be for the arms of married ladies to be borne upon shields, and of
widows and spinsters upon lozenges. From the artistic standpoint it
would certainly be desirable, whenever it is thought advisable, to
revert to the freedom of pre-Elizabethan times.
Enough has already been said as to the elasticity of drawing shields,
helms, crests, and mantlings, and as to the proper use of supporters,
but a few words may be added as to the proper way of drawing the various
creatures that are used in heraldry.
Since heraldry is a survival of what was once a living thing, it is
clear that if modern work is to look well, animals and birds ought to be
drawn in a more or less conventional manner (figs. 148, 149). Some, such
as elephants, dogs, falcons, etc. may be drawn almost directly from
nature; but others, especially lions, if so represented, would
manifestly be unfit to consort with the leopards, the wivers, the
griffins, the two-headed eagles, and other delightful creatures of the
early heralds which they borrowed from the bestiaries. The conventional
treatment should not, however, be carried to excess, nor should natural
forms be too closely copied. Here, as in other matters connected with
heraldry, a comparative study of good ancient examples will soon show
what are the best types to follow.
[Illustration: FIG. 147. Lion with a forked tail, from a brass at
Spilsby in Lincolnshire, 1391.]
[Illustration: FIG. 148. Shield with three pheasants, from a brass at
Checkendon, Oxon, 1404.]
[Illustration: FIG. 149. Shield of the arms of Sir Humphrey Littlebury,
from his effigy at Holbeach in Lincolnshire, _c._ 1360, with fine
examples of heraldic leopards.]
It would be an advantage, too, if artists would revert to the old ways
of representing the furs known as ermine and vair. The ancient ermine
tails did more or less resemble the actual tail of an ermine, but the
modern object with its three dots above has no likeness to it whatever
(fig. 150). So too with regard to vair, which represents the skins of
grey squirrels, the modern treatment of it as rows of angular eighteenth
century shields is far removed from the conventional forms of the real
skins seen in the best old work (fig. 151).
[Illustration: FIG. 150. Early and modern versions of ermine-tails.]
[Illustration: FIG. 151. Early and modern versions of vair.]
It has already been pointed out that there are no strict rules as to the
particular shades of colour allowable in heraldry, and it is one of the
surprises of the student to find what dull and cold tones were anciently
used that yet look quite right. The apparently bright reds, for example,
of the enamel in the early stall-plates at Windsor are actually
brick-colour, and the apparent fine blues a cold grey; but their
combination with gilding and silvering makes all the difference in the
ultimate beautiful rich effect.
One thing that ought to be most scrupulously avoided in all modern
heraldic decoration is the indicating of the gilding and colouring by
the pernicious 'dot-and-dash' system. This is all very well as a kind of
shorthand in one's own notes or memoranda, but it is utterly destructive
of artistic effect if applied in actual work. Ancient shields in relief
were no doubt invariably painted, like those still to be seen behind the
quire at Westminster; but let any one try to imagine the fine series at
York or St. Albans scored and pecked to indicate the colour and gilding.
If the heraldic carvings are not to be painted, at any rate do not let
their surfaces be disfigured. They may always be relieved by diapering.
The treatment of mottoes may not, at first sight, seem to fall within
the scope of this work, but actually it is one of very real importance.
There is much to be said for the theory that mottoes are derived from
the war cries of early times, and hence their frequent association with
the crest worn upon the helm. Reference has already been made to
examples upon seals and other authorities. The association of a motto
with a shield only was not common anciently, and when it is so found it
is generally placed on a scroll, like the well-known examples on the
tomb of Edward prince of Wales at Canterbury (fig. 85). In later times,
when shields began to be encircled by the Garter of the famous Order
(fig. 152), mottoes were often arranged about the shield in a similar
way.
[Illustration: FIG. 152. The Garter, from the brass of Thomas lord
Camoys, K.G. at Trotton in Sussex.]
There was however always this very important and noteworthy difference
and distinction, that the buckled band now so commonly used for mottoes
was anciently never allowed for any but the motto of the Order of the
Garter. Other mottoes were written on a band which was fastened in a
different way, or merely disposed Garter-wise round the shield.
The earliest known representation of the Garter is on a singular lead or
pewter medallion (fig. 153) commemorative of Edward prince of Wales,
first Prince of the Order, now in the British Museum. In this the prince
is kneeling bare-headed before a personification of the Holy Trinity,
with his gloves on the ground before him, and an angel standing behind
him and holding his crested helm. The whole is enclosed by a buckled
band inscribed ~hony soyt ke mal y pense~, with a cloud overlapping its
upper margin, from which issues an angel holding down the prince's
shield of arms.
[Illustration: FIG. 153. Pewter medallion with Edward prince of Wales,
now in the British Museum.]
It has been customary from within a few years of the foundation of the
Order in 1348 for the Knights-Companions to encircle their personal arms
with the Garter.
In a wardrobe account of King Edward III, from 14th February 1349-50 to
30th September 1351, payments are entered for the making 'of two
pencells of sindon _de Triple_, each having in the midst a Garter of
blue sindon with a shield within the same Garter of the King's arms
quartered, and beaten throughout the field with eagles of gold'; but
representations of such a usage are hard to find. A good early example
is afforded by the monumental brass at Trotton in Sussex of Thomas lord
Camoys (_ob._ 1419) (fig. 154).
[Illustration: FIG. 154. Shield of arms (_a chief and three roundels on
the chief_) encircled by the Garter, from the brass of Thomas lord
Camoys (_ob._ 1419).]
In illustration of the care above referred to of distinguishing the
Garter motto from any other, two concrete examples may be cited: one on
the brass at Constance of Robert Hallam bishop of Salisbury (_ob._
1416), where the King's arms are encircled by the Garter, and the
bishop's own arms by an open scroll with a scripture (fig. 155); the
other on the west porch of the cathedral church of Norwich, where the
arms of King Henry VI have the Garter about them, and the arms of the
builder of the porch, bishop William Alnwick (1426-36), are surrounded
by a scroll with his motto.
[Illustration: FIG. 155. Shields encircled by the Garter and a scroll,
from the brass of Bishop Hallam (_ob._ 1416) at Constance.]
This distinction was carefully borne in mind when the insignia of
British Orders, other than that of the Garter, were devised, and in
every case their mottoes are displayed on plain and not buckled bands.
In the Albert Medal for Bravery, however, the encircling motto has been
most improperly placed on a buckled band like the Garter, and the people
who supply 'heraldic stationery' are notorious offenders in the same
direction.
The lettering of a motto must of course depend upon the circumstances of
its use. Nothing looks so well as the so-called 'old-English' or small
black-letter, especially if the height of the words is as nearly as
possible the same as the width of the band or scroll, and the capitals
are not unduly prominent; but the form of capital known as Lombardic is
always preferable to those of the black-letter alphabet. When capitals
alone are used, fanciful types should be avoided; a good Roman form such
as is often found in Tudor inscriptions being far better. If the motto
to be set about a shield is a short one it can often be extended
conveniently, if necessary, by a judicious use of ornamental devices
like roses or other flowers between the words. The ends of scrolls with
mottoes have a more satisfactory appearance if shown partly curled up
and partly pulled out spirally than if forked and waved, as may so often
be seen nowadays. Scrolls always look better if not bordered or edged in
any way, but this does not apply to the narrow bounding line that may be
necessary in enamelled work.
[Illustration: FIG. 156. Royal arms of King Henry VII within the Garter,
of English work, from the King's tomb by Torregiano at Westminster.]
[Illustration: FIG. 157. Arms of St. George within the Garter, from the
brass of Sir Thomas Bullen, K.G. earl of Wiltshire and Ormond, 1538, at
Hever in Kent.]