Read Ebook: Histoire de Flandre (T. 3/4) by Kervyn De Lettenhove Joseph Marie Bruno Constantin Baron

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 179 lines and 32539 words, and 4 pages

And first as to shields and their treatment.

The form of a shield is in itself entirely arbitrary and void of meaning. Although it varied from time to time, this was simply a matter of fashion, like the shape of an arch or the pattern of a window. Such changes must not, however, be overlooked, for it would be absurd in actual practice to use an ornate shield of the style of the fifteenth or sixteenth century for a lion of the thirteenth century type, or to fill a shield of early form with charges characteristic of a later date.

During the twelfth century shields were more or less kite-shaped, like those that were actually used, but in the thirteenth century they began to be shorter and straighter across the top. Good examples of this type may be found on seals. In the aisles behind the quire of Westminster abbey church, the beautiful shields in the spandrels of the wall arcade, of a date not later than 1259, retain their rounded upper corners. The next form, with the upper corners square , came into vogue in the second half of the thirteenth century, and has continued always in use. Owing to the elastic way in which its curves can be slightly altered when required, it may safely be adopted in general practice. In the earliest examples the curves begin at the top, or just below, but later on they were so struck as to increase the area of the lower part of the shield in order to make more room for the charges. In some fourteenth century instances the sides continue straight nearly to the bottom, so that the shield is practically an oblong with rounded lower corners, like the shields of the royal arms on our coinage to-day . A tendency in the same direction is not uncommon throughout the fifteenth century. About the middle of the same century the fashion began to prevail, alongside the other, of representing a man's arms on the same irregularly shaped shield that he was wont to carry in the jousts. This is as wide at the bottom as the top, with its outline worked into curves, and has on the dexter, or right-hand side as borne, a deep notch for the lance to rest in during tilting; the top and bottom of the shield are often subdivided into three or more lobes or shallow curves. Good examples occur on seals and monuments, and some of the Garter stall-plates. Shields of a more ornate form are occasionally to be met with, like an example on a brass at Stoke Poges of the date 1476, with graceful leaf-work curling over at the top and bottom. Shields similarly ornamented occur on the doorway of a citizen's house now built into the Guildhall at Norwich .

In the simpler forms the field of a shield in painted representations is invariably shown flat; but in carvings, and occasionally on seals, a slight convexity, or even concavity, is often met with, the artistic advantages of which it is unnecessary to enlarge upon. In some of the later ornate forms, like those described above, the incurved or engrailed edge is accompanied by a field worked with a series of ridges and furrows . The effect of this may be good, but there is a danger of carrying it to excess and so injuring the appearance of the charges. If the shield be well covered by the bearings on it, it is generally better to use one of simple form than one with an irregular outline and ridged surface; but there is, of course, no reason why both forms should not be used concurrently in architectural or other works, as they sometimes were of old.

The same principle as the ridging of a shield to relieve the plain surface was also applied to the ordinaries upon it. An early example may be seen upon the tomb of queen Eleanor at Westminster, which has the bends in the shields of Ponthieu ridged along the middle line. The shield borne by Brian FitzAlan in his effigy at Bedale has the alternate bars of his arms treated in the same way. Another instance may be seen on the effigy of Sir Richard Whatton at Whatton, Notts, in which a bend, though charged, is ridged. The shields on the tomb of Guy lord Bryen at Tewkesbury furnish typical later examples, while during the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries instances are as common as the curved and ridged shields described above, especially as regards crosses and saltires, as at St. Albans, the George Inn at Glastonbury , and elsewhere.

In monumental effigies the shield borne by a knight often has a convex or rounded surface , and in late fifteenth century and Tudor architecture otherwise flat shields sometimes have the middle swelled out, as on dean Gunthorpe's oriel at Wells, in a manner very popular in Renaissance work.

A reference to a number of good ancient examples of heraldic shields or banners will disclose the care that has been taken to occupy the field, as far as possible, with whatever is placed upon it . A lion or an eagle, for instance, will have the limbs and extremities so spread out as to fill every available space; and the same will be found in every group or combination of objects capable of arrangement or extension.

Even with most unpromising combinations, or a group that cannot be extended or modified at all, or with a single charge like a fleur-de-lis, or ordinary such as a bend, , pale, or cheveron , a judicious adjustment of proportions, or some equally common-sense method, enabled a medieval artist to make his shield look well.

Another point that may be noticed in all old work is that in shields containing several similar objects no two are exactly alike. If the charges be, for example, three roses or three roundels or three lions , two will be placed in the upper and the third in the lower part of the shield. But the latter will often be somewhat larger than the others, and these, in turn, will differ slightly the one from the other as they do in nature. So, too, in a case like the three leopards of the King of England, whether displayed on shield or in banner, no two are exactly alike, but each differs somewhat from another in pose or in size . Even when the same charge is repeated many times, like the fleurs-de-lis in the old arms of France, any possible chance of mechanical monotony is avoided by a trifling variation in the shape of each, as in the shield of the King of France in the early series at Westminster .

Another fact is that in the old work lines and curves are hardly ever quite true, but drawn by hand instead of with pen or compasses. The modern artist, on the contrary, usually draws his lines and curves with mechanical precision; his charges are exact copies one of another; the fact that they do not fill the field is to him quite unimportant, and the final result is that under no circumstances will his work look well. Even in old stencilling a pleasing effect never seen in modern work of the kind was produced through a not too rigid adherence to a regularity of application.

Another cause of the bad effect of much modern heraldry is the unnecessary adherence to the rules laid down in some of the textbooks and manuals as to the relative widths of ordinaries and subordinaries. The old heralds certainly did not fetter themselves with such shackles. A cheveron, a bend, a fesse, or a cross was drawn of the best proportion to look well . If charged it would be wider than when plain. If placed between charges it was drawn narrower, if itself uncharged, and thus took its proper relative position with regard to the size and arrangement or the charges. So, too, with a border; if uncharged or merely gobony or engrailed, it was drawn very narrow, and even if charged it was not allowed much greater width . It thus never unduly encroached upon the field or other contents of the shield, and yet remained an artistic addition in itself. The curious bordering known as the tressure, which is almost peculiar to Scotland, and familiar to us through its occurrence in the shield of our Sovereign, is drawn sufficiently narrow in all good examples to leave ample room for the ramping lion it fences in, and its frieze of fleurs-de-lis is formed of a good number of flowers, instead of the eight considered sufficient in the royal arms of to-day. Even a chief, if necessary, was enlarged from the 'less than one-third of the shield' of to-day to the one-half of it, or even more, as may be seen in some of the examples of the arms of the monastery in the abbey church of Westminster, or in those of the town of Southampton.

The origin and growth of these combinations, which actually are perfectly lawful and proper, and yet often quite accidental, can easily be illustrated by a few typical examples.

These arms of St. Edward were used for a time duly 'differenced' in conjunction with his own quarterly arms by Henry of Lancaster, afterwards King Henry IV, and are impaled with those of his wife, Mary de Bohun, on his seal as duke of Hereford. Artistically the lop-sided effect so produced is quite unhappy.

Many fifteenth century shields show forth, by the simple quartering of a man's arms with those of his wife or his mother, his succession or summons as a lord of parliament, or his inheritance of great estates.

But this simplicity was gradually destroyed when the added quartering was itself quartered, as in the arms of Richard Nevill earl of Salisbury , or the quarterings were all different, as in the case of Humphrey Stafford duke of Buckingham. When but a year old he succeeded his father as earl of Stafford, and on his mother's death he became earl of Buckingham, Hereford, Northampton, Essex, and Perche! These dignities are duly displayed in the quarterings of his arms on his seal, as follows: 1. The quartered arms of his mother, for the earldom of Buckingham. 2. Bohun of Hereford. 3. Bohun of Northampton. 4. Stafford .

About 1433 Margaret, daughter of Richard Beauchamp earl of Warwick, was married to John Talbot earl of Shrewsbury, and she thereupon had a beautiful seal engraved, with two large shields or arms hung side by side by their straps from a ragged staff, the badge of her father's house . This charming composition is, however, quite spoilt through the complicated treatment of the shields. One of these bears the arms of husband and wife conjoined, the other those of the lady's father. The earl of Warwick's shield is a quartered one of Beauchamp and Newburgh, with a small superimposed scutcheon. The earl of Shrewsbury's arms also consisted of four quarters, to which his wife added her four , and thus made a patchwork of eight.

A more remarkable and equally accidental case may be illustrated by the brass of Sir Humphrey Bourchier in the abbey church of Westminster.

It is moreover well to remember that in the majority of cases there is not the least need in actual work to produce a great many quarterings in a shield. In numerous examples, especially in the sixteenth century and later, they were assumed merely for display, and to reduce them to a reasonable few is often a most desirable thing.

It is difficult without knowledge of individual cases to lay down any definite rules for dealing with quarterings, but there can be no question that in general a shield looks best without any at all. In the case of a man with a compound name or title, who represents more than one family or dignity, it would be legitimate to add a quartering on that account, but only of the actual arms of the family or dignity represented. It is however so hard to draw a line or to restrain the wishes of clients that the fifteenth century example of Henry duke of Buckingham should ever be borne in mind.

As soon as the principle of hereditary descent of armorial bearings became established, the necessity arose of making some slight difference between the arms of a father and those borne by his sons. This was usually done by adding to the paternal arms such more or less unobtrusive device as a label, or narrow border, or a small charge like a crescent or a molet.

Differencing with labels was likewise extended to crests, and a good example may be seen on the monument of Edward prince of Wales at Canterbury , as well as in fig. 139.

In modern heraldry the label is often drawn unduly wide, with short and ugly wedge-shaped pieces hanging from or sticking on to it, and sometimes it does not even extend to the sides of the shield. The result is that instead of its being a comparatively unobtrusive addition to the arms the label becomes unduly conspicuous and void of all artistic effect.

The old way of differencing by the addition of a crescent, molet, or similar device was generally carried out in quite an artistic fashion on account of the care taken to place the device agreeably, a favourite position being on the principal ordinary or charge of the arms.

One of the most difficult differences an artist has to contend with to-day is the silver scutcheon with a red hand which is placed upon the arms of baronets. Its position of course varies, and may often be altered with advantage, and it looks all the better if drawn not unduly large and with a simple heater-shaped shield. But some artists wisely leave it out altogether.

In the case of all devices introduced as differences it will generally be found advisable to draw them to a somewhat smaller scale than the charges already in the arms.

Some of the finest diapered shields in carved work occur in the spandrels of the splendid monument of the lady Eleanor Percy in Beverley minster . Good instances are to be found on seals, and a number of these are here illustrated in order to show the proper treatment of diapering.

It is of course to be borne in mind that diapering is merely a surface decoration, and it must not on any account be emphasized by any difference of colour from that of the field or ordinary it relieves, nor must it be treated with such prominence as to render it liable to be mistaken for a charge or charges.

Diapering can be represented effectively in embroidered work by the use of flowered or patterned damasks, as may be seen in the banners in St. Paul's cathedral church in the chapel of the Order of St. Michael and St. George.

THE SHIELD AND ITS TREATMENT

Armorial Bearings of Ladies; Use of Lozenges and Roundels as variant forms of Shields; Arms of Men on Lozenges; Combinations of Shields with Lozenges and Roundels of Arms on Seals and in Embroideries.

Before leaving the subject of the shield a few words must be written about the armorial bearings of ladies.

It has always been the practice for the daughters of a house to bear, without difference or alteration, the arms of their father. This practice has been departed from only in quite modern times, by the addition of distinctive labels to the arms borne by our princesses. To the manner in which married ladies have arranged or 'marshalled' their arms reference will be made later, but it is necessary here to call attention to the fact that it has been customary for a long time to place the arms of widows and single ladies upon shields that are lozenge-shaped. A good early example is that from the monument in Westminster abbey church of Frances Brandon duchess of Suffolk , shown in fig. 51.

This singularly inconvenient form of shield, upon which it is often impossible to draw the arms properly, began to be used early in the fourteenth century.

It was not, however, used for or restricted to the arms of ladies, since the evidence of seals shows that it was at first used to contain the armorial bearings of men. There can likewise be little doubt that it and the roundel, which was also charged with arms, were contemporaneously invented by the seal engravers as variants from the ordinary form of shield; and it is interesting to note that the majority of the examples occur on seals which have a background or setting of elaborate tracery.

The roundel seems to have originated in the covering of the entire field of a circular seal with the arms of its owner, such as the leopards of England which are so disposed in a counterseal of Edward of Carnarvon as prince of Wales. Two seals of John of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, engraved probably in 1372, show a similar treatment: the one bearing his arms impaling, and the other his arms impaled with, those of Castile and Leon . The former commemorates his marriage with Constance of Castile, and the latter the duke's claim in right of his wife to the kingdom of Castile itself.

One of the lesser seals appended to the Barons' Letter, that of Robert FitzPain, is an oval filled with the owner's arms .

One of the earliest examples of arms on a lozenge is on a seal of Thomas Furnival, who died in 1279, and another but little later is furnished by the seal of William de Braose, appended to a deed of either 1282 or 1314 at Magdalen College, Oxford .

That of William Paynel, appended to the Barons' Letter, also has his arms on a lozenge .

The first seal of a lady in which lozenges of arms occur is probably that of Joan, daughter of Henry count of Barre and Eleanor daughter of King Edward I, who married, in 1306, John de Warenne earl of Surrey . This has five lozenges arranged in cross: that in the middle has her husband's checkers, those on each side her father's barbels, etc. and those above and below the three leopards of England. The lady's descent from King Edward is further shown by the castles and lions of his consort Eleanor of Castile.

Contemporary with Parnel Bensted's seal are two others in which roundels are used instead of lozenges. Both are traceried seals of Elizabeth daughter of Gilbert of Clare earl of Gloucester, and Joan daughter of King Edward I and Queen Eleanor of Castile. She was thrice married: first, about 1306 to John of Burgh, son of Richard earl of Ulster; secondly to Theobald lord Verdon; and thirdly to Roger lord d'Amory, who died in 1322.

One of these seals has in the middle, in a shield, Elizabeth's own arms of Clare impaling Burgh within a black border bedewed with tears. Above and below are roundels of Clare, and on either side other roundels of Verdon and d'Amory. In the interspaces are the castles and lions of Castile and Leon .

The other seal is similarly arranged, but has in the middle a large shield of d'Amory, between roundels of arms of the lady's other husbands above and below, and of Clare for her father or herself on either side. The interspaces again contain castles and lions .

Four other early seals of great artistic merit displaying roundels may also be described, especially since they are apparently the work of the same engraver. They are filled with tracery, consisting of a triangle enclosing a circle, which contains a large shield, with cusped circles on its sides containing roundels or devices.

The first is for Mary de Seynt-Pol, who married in 1322 Aymer of Valence earl of Pembroke . The shield bears the dimidiated arms of husband and wife; on a roundel in base are the arms of her mother; and higher up are roundels of England and France, out of compliment to King Edward II and Queen Isabel.

The second is for John de Bohun earl of Hereford, and has a large shield of Bohun with roundels also of Bohun. It was probably engraved in 1322, and before the earl's marriage in 1325 .

The third is for Richard FitzAlan earl of Arundel , who succeeded to the vast Warenne estates in 1347. It has in the middle a shield of FitzAlan, and about it three roundels with the checkers of Warenne.

The fourth is for Hugh Courtenay earl of Devon or his son Hugh . The shield displays the arms of Courtenay and in each of the outer circles is a sexfoil .

To these examples may be added a fifth of about the same date, for Henry Sturmy or Esturmy, lord of the forest of Savernake. This has the Sturmy shield in the middle, between two roundels of the Hussey arms, and a third roundel above with the tenure horn of Savernake Forest .

Other seals that may be quoted in illustration of the indiscriminate use of shields, roundels, and lozenges during the fourteenth century are those of: Juliana, daughter of Thomas Leybourne, and wife of John lord Hastings , with a shield of Hastings impaling Leybourne, encircled by six lozenges of arms indicative of other alliances and descents, derived from the fact of the lady having been married thrice; Elizabeth de Multon, wife of Walter Bermyngham, with the shield of Bermyngham surrounded by six roundels of other arms; Maud, daughter of Bartholomew Badlesmere, and wife in 1336 of John de Vere earl of Oxford , with a shield of Vere between lozenges of Clare, Badlesmere , Clare with label , and FitzPayn ; Maud, daughter of Henry earl of Lancaster, married first to William of Burgh earl of Ulster, and secondly to Sir Ralph Ufford , with lozenges of Lancaster above and Chaworth below, and shields of Burgh and Ufford ; Sybil, daughter of William Montagu earl of Salisbury and Katharine Graunson, with shield of FitzAlan with a label, for her husband Sir Edmund of Arundel, second son of Edmund FitzAlan earl of Arundel, between lozenges of Montagu and Graunson ; and Elizabeth, widow of Sir Gilbert Elsefield, with a lozenge of Elsefield between four roundels of other arms .

Impression attached to a deed in the British Museum, 1350-1.

Alice, wife of Thomas of Heslerton, has on her seal a large lozenge of the arms of Heslerton within a quatrefoil, outside of which are four small banners of arms with martlets between.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet